Mr Speaker: Order. On 1 December 2021, I informed hon Members that I received a letter on 30 November 2021 at 2247 hours from the Member for Sengkang GRC Ms Raeesah Khan resigning her seat in Parliament. In accordance with clause (2)(c) of Article 46 of the Constitution, the seat of the Member became vacant with effect from 2247 hours on 30 November 2021.
I also wish to place on record that hon Members were informed on 10 November 2021 that pursuant to Standing Order No 102, I had nominated Mr Zaqy Mohamad to the Committee of Privileges, to take the place of Mr Masagos Zulkifli, on the matter of a complaint made against former Member for Sengkang GRC, Ms Raeesah Khan. Mr Zaqy Mohamad will serve as a Member of the Committee until the Committee has reported upon the matter referred to it.
Order. Questions for Oral Answer. Mr Yip Hon Weng.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on COVID-19 Treatments, Vaccination Efficacy and Roll-out for Children and Booster Jabs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"1 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether children who are eligible for COVID-19 vaccination but whose parents do not approve of their vaccination, have their medical bills covered by the Government if they contract COVID-19; and (b) whether unvaccinated children have to be subjected to vaccination-differentiated safe management measures in schools and shared spaces in public.
2 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry can provide an update on (i) Singapore’s ability to cope with increasing number of infections arising from the COVID-19 Omicron variant, (ii) the breakdown, by country of origin, for imported COVID-19 Omicron cases and (iii) the strategies to mitigate imported cases.
3 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Health with regard to containing the Omicron variant of COVID-19 (a) whether the Ministry has assessed a need for more vaccination doses after the booster jab; and (b) how does the Ministry plan to utilise the anti-viral pills as part of its strategy.
4 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry is continuing with its efforts to engage Singaporeans and Permanent Residents who refuse to be vaccinated and to educate them on the benefits of vaccination.
5 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for Health (a) whether he can provide an update on the COVID-19 vaccination rate of those eligible for vaccination aged 18 and below; and (b) whether COVID-19 vaccination will be made a requirement for participation in group activities in schools and educational institutions.
6 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Health (a) how many Singaporeans and Permanent Residents (PRs) respectively are deemed to be medically ineligible for COVID-19 vaccination; and (b) excluding these persons, how many Singaporeans and PRs respectively remain unvaccinated as of December 2021.
7 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Health in view of the emergence of the COVID-19 Omicron variant globally and subsequent tightening of border measures, what are the key quantitative or qualitative metrics and thresholds that the Government will consider before making a decision for domestic reopening plans to be rolled back and safe management measures tightened.
8 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the Ministry’s strategy in containing the spread of the Omicron variant of COVID-19; (b) what measures should Singaporeans expect to be taken; and (c) how will these measures differ from previous measures implemented to contain the spread of the Delta variant or COVID-19 virus generally.
9 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the expected impact on ICU utilisation based on the Ministry’s modelling for the COVID-19 Omicron variant; (b) at what ICU utilisation rate will hospitals begin to defer non-urgent clinical services; (c) what is the number of healthcare workers working in ICUs currently as compared to December 2020; and (d) what permanent changes have been made to increase healthcare capacity and, in particular, ICU capacity and scalability since (i) the start of the pandemic and (ii) the start of 2021.
10 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) whether there are plans to offer non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to children in the age groups of five to 11, and 12 to 18; and (b) if so, when can these vaccines be expected.
11 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Health what is the impact from the emergence of the COVID-19 Omicron variant on the plans for Singapore to live with COVID-19 as an endemic disease, in terms of the timelines for reopening the economy and permitting more social and cultural activities involving the gatherings of people.
12 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry has plans to apply vaccination-differentiated measures to children aged between five and 11.
\tThe Minister for Health (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Speaker, Sir, as the first Member to speak in the first Parliamentary Sitting of the year, may I just wish all Members and Speaker a good 2022 ahead.
Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, may I address Question Nos 1 to 12 and also written Question Nos 34 to 38 in the Order Paper, please?
Mr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Mr Speaker, Sir, Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary and Minister Chan Chun Sing will then address another set of questions on child vaccination. May I request that we deliver our replies and then all three of us take supplementary questions together, please?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Thank you. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore just weathered a significant COVID-19 transmission wave caused by the Delta variant which is still active in many parts of the world. By working together, making collective sacrifices to restrain our social interactions, watching out for one another and implementing sound policies, we have overcomed perhaps the most difficult part of the pandemic.
As of now, our hospital situation is stable, with 11 COVID-19-related ICU cases. Most activities have resumed and we are meeting up with friends and loved ones. Our society has become much more resilient to COVID-19 than before. This is an important milestone.
But a new Omicron wave is upon us. If we work together, we can ride through the wave. Once we have done so, we will be even more resilient than now and even more prepared to live with COVID-19.
When Omicron first burst onto the global scene, we immediately introduced measures, such as restricting travel from affected countries in Africa, enhancing testing for all travellers, isolating cases in hospitals and reinstating stringent contact tracing and quarantine for Omicron infections. These measures will not stop Omicron from taking root and spreading in Singapore, given its high transmissibility. However, they have helped to delay its emergence, giving us precious time to understand it better and to prepare ourselves.
The characteristics of Omicron have now become clearer. This is what we know today. There are three key points.
First, local and overseas evidence shows that it is far more transmissible than the Delta variant. We must expect a wave that could be a few times larger than the Delta wave. So, if Delta infections reached a sustained incidence of about 3,000 cases a day, Omicron could perhaps reach 10,000 to 15,000 cases a day or even more. Cases are likely to double every two to three days. So, once cases start to rise steeply, within a couple of weeks, we may see 3,000 Omicron cases a day.
Second, there has been consistent international evidence showing that Omicron infections are less severe than Delta. The incidence of hospitalisation and severe illness is lower and there are also indications that any hospital stays are also shorter. Indeed, the clinical outcomes, particularly the number of people who become severely ill or die, are much more important than the top line number of infection cases.
Mr Speaker, Sir, may I show a couple of slides on screen, just to illustrate this clearly?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please. [A slide was shown to hon Members. Please refer to Annex 1.]
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Thank you. This graph describes the situation in South Africa. The blue line shows number of infections. Members can see three humps, reflecting the three waves that they have gone through: the first is Beta, then Delta in the middle, and the latest, the tallest is Omicron. And it is plotted against the scale on the left axis. The grey part for the top graph shows hospitalisations, plotted against the scale on the right axis. And so, Members can see that in the latest wave, the number of hospitalisations is proportionately lower than the previous two waves.
The bottom graph is even more stark. The red area shows number of deaths, plotted against a separate scale on the right axis. Members can see that during the Omicron wave, the red area is actually very small; number of deaths is, proportionately, much lower than the previous two waves.
The next slide is a similar analysis but now, it is for the UK. Members can see a similar pattern, proportionately fewer hospitalisations and fewer deaths.
A study by health authorities in South Africa showed that 4.9% of cases were admitted to hospitals during the Omicron wave, compared to 13.7% during the Delta wave. Among the patients admitted to hospital during the Omicron wave, they were 73% less likely to have severe disease. In the UK, the risk of being admitted to hospital or emergency care with Omicron was about half that of Delta. Data from Denmark also showed that about 0.8% of Omicron cases were hospitalised, lower than the 1.2% rate of hospitalisation among cases infected with other variants.
This has also been borne out by our own local experience. In Singapore, we have recorded 4,322 Omicron infections so far, including 308 seniors aged 60 and above. Eight of the 4,322 needed oxygen supplementation, and all of them have been taken off oxygen after a short few days. None required ICU care as yet. In comparison, if these 4,322 infections had instead been caused by Delta, we would expect 50 to 60 patients needing oxygen supplementation, ICU care or to die.
However, we should be careful in interpreting these observations. It is early days and the circumstances of each country are different. South Africa, for example, has a young population and a high level of natural immunity, even though their vaccination coverage is low. The UK has both high levels of vaccination and natural immunity, and this current Omicron outbreak is riding on the back of a protracted Delta outbreak, which worsens clinical outcomes. Further, Omicron transmits much faster and infects more people. So, even if a small percentage of infected individuals falls very sick, because of the large base of infections, it can still lead to many people needing ICU care or die.
The third thing we have found out about Omicron is that vaccines, especially boosters, retain substantial protection against severe disease. Indeed, the most recent studies in the UK found that for vaccinated individuals, the risk of hospitalisation for Omicron is reduced by 72%, compared to the unvaccinated. With a booster shot, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation is estimated to be 88%.
Currently, Omicron has spread to over 130 countries and has become the dominant strain in many places. Hence, we lifted the suspension of flights from affected African countries and aligned the healthcare protocols between Omicron and other COVID-19 variants.
Members would like to know our strategy in responding to the Omicron wave.
Given that it is less severe than the Delta variant and vaccines still work against it, our key objective remains, which is, to live with COVID-19 as an endemic disease. Then, we can lead life as normally as possible and continue to build a bright future for Singapore and our children. That includes not locking down our borders, which will inflict tremendous pain on families, workers, businesses and also the mental well-being of many people. In any case, a severe lock-down strategy will likely delay but not prevent the inevitability of Omicron finding its way into our community.
There are two factors working in our favour. First, a high percentage of our population is vaccinated, and more are getting their boosters every day. Second, unlike many European countries which have to contend with a double whammy of a concurrent Delta and Omicron wave, we have only recently gone through a Delta wave. We are not likely to have to ride through two rapidly rising infection waves.
In recent days, our overall local infection number is creeping up, to a few hundred a day, with Omicron accounting for about 40% of all cases. Given the transmissibility of Omicron, we expect the numbers to rise steeply in the coming weeks and Omicron will become the dominant variant within a few weeks.
The responses that we have developed against Delta will continue to be relevant against Omicron, with some adjustments. And there are three responses, essentially.
First, vaccination and boosters remain key. In countries where Omicron has spread, the unvaccinated and under-vaccinated are still the most prone to falling seriously ill when infected.
Mr Dennis Tan asked for a breakdown of COVID-19 deaths. There were 802 such deaths in 2021, of whom 555 were not fully vaccinated. Although the unvaccinated is a small proportion of our population, they contributed to 70% of the deaths in 2021. The remaining 247 were vaccinated with a range of locally available vaccines.
I am going to read out some crude incidence rates but, be mindful we are calculating these based on quite a small sample of 247 deaths of individuals who are vaccinated. They are as follows: 79 deaths per 100,000 for non-fully vaccinated persons overall; 11 deaths per 100,000 for those vaccinated with Sinovac; 7.8 per 100,000 for Sinopharm; 6.2 per 100,000 for Pfizer-BioNTech and one per 100,000 for Moderna. These rates are only indicative. As I mentioned, the sample size is small and they also do not account for other factors which may affect mortality, such as the age and timing of vaccination.
Around 132,000 individuals aged 18 and above remain unvaccinated, while around 300 persons are medically ineligible. We will continue to try to convince those who are medically eligible to get vaccinated, through their primary care physicians, public messaging and the media. But, as Members would appreciate, as the number gets smaller, it is also harder and harder to convince them.
For those who are homebound, our Mobile Vaccination Teams can visit their homes to vaccinate them.
Over the past months, we have managed to vaccinate well over 90% of every eligible age group. It is quite an achievement. We are especially happy to see that among seniors aged 60 to 69, and 70 and above, 96% and 95% have been fully vaccinated respectively. As for those aged 12 to 19 years, 95% are fully vaccinated. For the even younger ones aged five to 11, we have just started vaccinating them. The response has been good and operations smooth.
At this time, only the Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty vaccine is authorised for use in ages below 18 years. We will continue to closely monitor the availability of other non-mRNA vaccines that are approved for use in children.
At the same time, our vaccine booster programme is gathering pace. About 46% of our population has received their boosters. We have recently brought some 900,000 individuals aged 18 to 29 into the booster programme, of whom 700,000 are already eligible to receive their boosters today. Our booster coverage will continue to expand over the month of January. We have also set a validity period for full vaccination status of 270 days, as a strong signal to our population, \"Please get your boosters promptly\".
As to whether there is a need for further booster shots – fourth shot, fifth shot – it is too early to tell. Today, Israel is the only country that has authorised a fourth dose for non-immunocompromised individuals.
For an endemic infectious disease like influenza, we can draw some inference from there. This virus mutates frequently, so, people receive vaccinations every year to protect themselves against it, without many problems or the need for disruptive border closures and social restrictions each time there is an influenza infection wave. It is a possible future scenario when we live with COVID-19 as an endemic disease.
MOH and the Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination (EC19V) will continue to monitor local and international data on the durability of protection from vaccine boosters and the evolution of the virus to assess the need for further vaccinations.
The second response: we continue to enhance our healthcare capacity. We have made preparations to ramp up capacity and manpower of the Home Recovery Programme, Community Treatment Facilities (CTFs) and public hospitals. We stand ready to provide up to 350 ICU beds, 2,000 isolation beds and 4,000 CTF beds for COVID-19 cases with a couple of weeks’ notice. Particularly, for hospital ICU capacity, existing single rooms and isolation rooms can be repurposed into additional ICU beds when required. Medical equipment and consumables are ready. Manpower is always a limiting factor, but ICU staff has increased by 12% over the past year to about 1,800 now and we have trained or are training about 500 more staff to assist with ICU operations.
Anti-viral medications for COVID-19 have been used to treat vulnerable patients who are at high risk of falling severely ill. When authorised for use and made available in Singapore, these oral anti-viral medications will be important additions to the range of COVID-19 therapeutic agents already in use locally. We have signed or are negotiating supply agreements for these medications but, unfortunately, I am not at liberty to release details due to confidentiality obligations in these contracts.
Outside of the hospitals, we will be enhancing our health protocols to right-site patients, so that hospital resources go to those who need them most. The MTF has recently announced our partnership with primary care doctors to care for patients who are recovering at home after being tested positive with Antigen Rapid Tests, under what we termed Protocol 2. This will help them safely recover and return to normal activities as soon as possible.
I should caution Members against thinking that coping with a transmission wave successfully is a matter of recruiting more healthcare workers and building more ICU facilities. Our objective is not to have more people falling very sick and admitted to ICU but, in fact, to avoid it.
Hence, we size our emergency healthcare capacity based on what is sustainable and practical. Bearing in mind this is a crisis of a generation, the capacity needed cannot be provided within our redundancy provision and ICU-trained staff do not just increase multi-fold overnight or even over a few months. Hence, we have tried to temper the infection numbers through safe management measures and exercising self-restraint in our social interactions.
So, vaccinations, expansion of healthcare capacity and safe management measures, the three must work in tandem and we must strike a balance among the three factors. We cannot, for example, over-liberalise, remove all social restrictions, let infections rise uncontrollably and leave the healthcare system to bear the consequences. Neither do we swing to the other extreme: protect the healthcare system at all costs, go for a zero-COVID-19 strategy and lock down our borders and society which will cause tremendous suffering to our people.
How the three factors balance off one another is a matter of judgement, depending on the pandemic situation. It will be too rigid to set metrics and parameters to trigger social restrictions, as we need to respond flexibly and appropriately to the twists and turns that the pandemic situation may take.
This brings us to the third response, which is safe management measures. In recent months, instead of imposing across-the-board social restrictions, we introduced more vaccination-differentiated safe management measures (VDS). This is because unvaccinated individuals are at far higher risk of falling severely ill. This group has consistently taken up two-thirds of our ICU beds, throughout the pandemic. By restricting their social interactions, we protect them against infections and serious illnesses and taking up hospital resources. The rest of society who have been vaccinated can also then live life more normally.
However, there are, presently, no plans to introduce VDS for children aged 12 and below in community, public, preschool and school settings. This is due to a combination of reasons, namely, children are less likely to develop severe illnesses when infected and we want to preserve as much as possible universal access to holistic education for children. Minister Chan will explain further.
For now, children aged 12 and below who are Singapore Citizens, Permanent Residents or Long-Term Pass Holders and did not travel recently will continue to have their COVID-19 medical bills fully covered by the Government. This is regardless of their vaccination status.
So, in general, while we have a strict VDS system in place, to enable society to carry on normal lives as much as possible while protecting the unvaccinated, the rules are much less strict on children, based on the reasons I have explained earlier.
Members asked if we are likely to tighten up social activities because of the Omicron wave. When the Delta wave subsided late last year, we refrained from being too jubilant and over relaxing restrictions. That would have been a mistake. We kept our masking requirements, we did not allow night entertainment to restart, we kept group sizes at five. So, it is the MTF’s hope that we can ride through the Omicron wave with the current safe management measures posture. If we have to tighten the restrictions, it will be as a last resort and when our healthcare system is under severe pressure.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that just as we have ridden through the Delta wave with unity and resolve, we will be able to do so again with the Omicron wave. Omicron is a different enemy, but we are much better prepared and much more resilient than before. And after the Omicron wave passes, which it will, we would have taken another huge step towards living with COVID-19. Singapore will be one of the best and safest places to live in on Earth.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines on Younger Children and Decision to Extend Vaccination to Them","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"13 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Health with the US Food and Drug Administration granting emergency authorisation to the COVID-19 vaccine by Pfizer-BioNTech for children aged five to 11 years (a) whether the Ministry will bring forward its proposed vaccination for children below 12 years of age; and (b) in the past one year, how many children below 12 years of age (i) were infected (ii) have recovered and (iii) are still hospitalised, respectively.
14 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether any local research is being done on possible side effects of mRNA COVID-19 vaccinations for children aged five to 11; (b) what are the protocols in place to manage any potential short- and long-term post-vaccination side effects in children, especially that of heart inflammation; and (c) whether children are covered under the Vaccine Injury Financial Assistance Programme for COVID-19 Vaccination (VIFAP).
15 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the potential risks or side effects of taking COVID-19 vaccination for persons (i) between ages 12 and 18 and (ii) ages below 12; (b) whether the Government will consider not mandating vaccination for these groups of persons until more is known about the possible risks or side effects of the vaccination on them; and (c) whether there are plans to offer Sinovac or Sinopharm vaccines for children.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 13 through to 15, please?
Mr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, my response will also be addressing questions on similar topics filed by Ms Hany Soh, Dr Wan Rizal1 and Mr Sharael Taha for 11 January 2022.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) commenced COVID-19 vaccinations using the paediatric formulation of Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty vaccine on 27 December 2021, starting with older children and with a plan to progressively expand the programme to include younger children, which has now happened. The take-up so far has been encouraging. As of 7 January, about 123,000 children aged five to 11 have received at least one dose of the vaccine or booked their vaccination appointments.
In 2021, there were 15,540 children below the age of 12 who were infected with COVID-19, of which 3,145 had ever been in a hospital or a COVID-19 facility. Fortunately, as of 8 January 2022, none of these children remained hospitalised. Although fewer children have been seriously ill with COVID-19 compared to adults, there is still a risk of them becoming seriously ill or developing severe COVID-19 complications, such as Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C). Since mid-October 2021, we have observed several serious cases of COVID-19 in children, with some requiring intensive care.
This is why it is important for children aged five to 11 to take up the COVID-19 vaccination. The Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccination for children has been assessed by HSA and our own Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination (EC19V) to be safe. The assessment is corroborated by international data.
In the United States of America, where about 8.7 million doses had been administered to children as of 19 December 2021, most of the adverse events reported were not serious and no safety concerns have been raised; 2.4% of the children experienced serious adverse events, such as fever, vomiting, myocarditis and seizures. The incidence of myocarditis, which is what many parents are most concerned about, is about one in a million doses. The children reported with myocarditis following vaccination had either recovered or were recovering at the time of the report. Vaccination will allow our children to be protected against the disease and reduce the likelihood of infecting others, including vulnerable or elderly family members. On the other hand, the incidence of myocarditis among individuals aged 12 to 17 infected with COVID-19, is about 45 per 100,000 infections. [Please refer to “Clarification by Minister for Health”, Official Report, 10 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 44, Clarification section.]
So, Members can see that the risk is much lower with the immunisation and, hence, the benefits are much greater.
To facilitate the vaccination of younger children, 15 designated paediatric vaccination centres (VCs) located island-wide are being progressively stood up. All 15 VCs will be manned by medical personnel trained in paediatric care and staff experienced in administering vaccinations for children.
To provide greater convenience for parents or guardians with more than one child or ward, from 10 January 2022, all accompanying siblings of a child with an appointment from Mondays to Thursdays can walk in for their vaccination without a prior appointment. MOH has also worked closely with MOE and the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) to organise webinars with parents to address common concerns on the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine.
Currently, there are no recommendations for children to receive booster shots. If introduced, MOH will continue to ensure that families with children are able to access vaccination services in a convenient manner.
As of 7 January 2022, MOH has not received any report of serious adverse events or myocarditis from vaccination in children in Singapore since the rollout of the national vaccination programme to children aged five to 11. We will continue to monitor this closely.
We assure parents that all our designated paediatric VCs are equipped with paediatric monitoring and resuscitation equipment, and the medical personnel are trained to manage any on-site emergencies arising from allergic reactions. Most side effects experienced by children after vaccination have been mild, such as injection site pain, fatigue and fever, which typically resolve in a few days. Members have asked if children are covered by VIFAP, and the answer is yes, as long as they are Singapore Citizens, Permanent Residents or long-term pass holders.
At present, only the Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine is authorised for use in children aged below 18. Special exemptions are made for those aged 12 to 17 who are not medically eligible for the Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine to receive the Sinovac-CoronaVac vaccine under a dedicated public health programme. MOH will work with the EC19V to review if the dedicated public health programme should be extended to children aged five to 11 who are medically ineligible to complete the Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine based on further studies on the safety and effectiveness of Sinovac-CoronaVac vaccine.
\tAmong those aged 12 to 19, less than 4% remain unvaccinated. As of 6 January 2022, there are 14,097 individuals between the ages of 12 to 19 who are unvaccinated, of which, only 14 are medically ineligible for the Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine.
COVID-19 vaccination is an important national effort in our fight against the pandemic. Vaccination for children aged five to 11 will help to protect more members of our society from the risk of developing severe illness from COVID-19 infections and further minimise the risk of community spread. We strongly encourage all parents, all guardians, to allow their children who are medically eligible to please take up the vaccine when offered to them.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : To ask the Minister for Health with regard to COVID-19 vaccination for children (a) what is the progress of the vaccination exercise; (b) what are the efforts to encourage a higher take-up rate; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider setting up children-only vaccination centres, especially for preschool and lower Primary children, that may provide a more child-friendly environment."],"footNoteQuestions":["13","14","15"],"questionNo":"13-15"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Vaccination for Primary School Students and Possibility of Vaccination-differentiated Measures for Preschools and Primary Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"16 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education what are the Ministry’s plans to seamlessly execute COVID-19 vaccination for Primary school children without disrupting national examinations, school examinations, co-curricular activities and other classroom time and attendance.
17 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Education (a) whether vaccination-differentiation measures will be adopted in preschools and schools with regard to children aged five to 11 who have not undergone COVID-19 vaccination; and (b) what support will be given to those young children (and their families) who have to miss school should they develop any adverse reaction to the vaccination.
18 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Education whether vaccination will be made a requirement for eligible children in order for them to attend school in person.
The Minister for Education (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 16, 17 and 18 together, please?
Mr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, there are, currently, no plans to make COVID-19 vaccination a requirement for physical attendance in our preschools or primary schools. The focus at this point in time is to ensure our students are well-protected against COVID-19 as we begin vaccination for those aged five to 11. We have seen an encouraging start to the vaccination exercise for our children. We will continue to work with our parents to achieve a high vaccination rate so that it would be possible to resume as many school activities as possible in the coming months. The pace, extent and approach towards resuming these school activities would depend on various factors, including vaccination rates as well as the overall national posture.
Students whose vaccination appointments are during school hours, as well as those feeling unwell from vaccination, will be excused from school. Schools will help students catch up on missed lessons and work. We strongly encourage parents to get their child vaccinated as early as possible to keep our children, families and the wider community safe and resilient against COVID-19.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, I have two supplementary questions.
The first pertains to a subject I believe that was covered both by the Minister for Health and the Minister for Education. This concerns the apprehension some parents have over the administration of mRNA vaccines for their children. These parents anecdotally are not anti-vax per se. Some of them may have taken the mRNA vaccine on their own, but the concern is really a visceral one, that is, about the long-term effects, the fact that this vaccine is referred for emergency approvals and so forth, even though I think some have been granted FDA approval, Pfizer-BioNTech specifically.
To that extent, will the Ministry of Health (MOH) allow such parents to wait until non-mRNA traditional protein-based vaccines are approved for their children's inoculation, so as to give them more choices and to assuage their concerns?
The second question follows. I understand that one such non-mRNA vaccine company, Novavax, submitted data for approval under Singapore's Pandemic Special Access Route (PSAR) on 22 November. The Director of Medical Services confirmed a few days ago, on 5 January, that he was very optimistic Novavax would be authorised as a non-mRNA booster. My question is, if Novavax or any other non-mRNA vaccine maker has submitted data for the authorisation for use for children above the age of 12, and, if so, when can these vaccines be expected to be introduced in the National Vaccination Programme?
Just a very short follow-through on that: with regard to the point made by the Minister for Health on the 270 days that are required, the limit before you take a booster and then to be recognised still as being vaccinated, would there be some flexibility to allow Novavax at least to get on this programme and to allow more individuals to then be considered fully vaccinated?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Thank you. I can fully appreciate parents' concern about mRNA vaccines for children. They will be concerned about the long-term effects and whatever side effects there may be. Just a few facts. The children's vaccine, Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty, has gone through extensive clinical trials. And during the clinical trials, it was proven and shown to be safe and effective.
Specifically, myocarditis, which is what most parents are concerned about in children, it occurred. Currently, there are about 8.5 million already vaccinated in the US and the incidence rate is about one in a million. And as Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary mentioned, we have to balance this against the downside of getting infection. If you are infected, the chances of myocarditis are 45 in a million and also other effects, such as MIS-C, which can make the child really sick. [Please refer to “Clarification by Minister for Health”, Official Report, 10 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 44, Clarification section.] And we have seen a handful, one or two a week, when Delta was at its peak and they are admitted to ICU. Thankfully, all of them recovered.
So, there is a good track record of safety and efficacy for the children's vaccine. On the other hand, for children who are infected with COVID-19, while, generally, children are more resilient, we have seen cases of myocarditis and MIS-C. So, it is a pandemic crisis. We do have to weigh those costs and benefits.
I do have to add one more fact, which is that, for the children's vaccine, it is a diluted form. They are not taking the same adult vaccine. Pfizer-BioNTech, for example, is one-third the dose of an adult's.
So, these are the facts and parents will have to make the right decision. As of now, we are quite encouraged that many parents are coming forward and the paediatric vaccination exercise is actually gathering pace, and many parents are coming forward to protect their children.
On the question of Novavax, it is being assessed by the Health Sciences Authority (HSA). We need to let the scientists do their work. I think we should consider putting it into our National Vaccination Programme. We have always wanted a good portfolio of mRNA and non-mRNA vaccines. But, as for the timing, I think it may take a while more, including for delivery, plus another process for assessing whether it is suitable for children, there is another set of data, another set of trials. So, I do not know how long it would take.
In the meantime, Omicron is upon us, highly transmissible, and we do not want to rule out that even a small percentage of children can get very sick; we might be looking at a significant absolute number. So, I would suggest, as Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary has advised, get your child vaccinated with mRNA, given the circumstances. It is not perfect, but I think, given the circumstances, cause and benefits, the right thing to do now is to get your child vaccinated as quickly as possible.
Likewise, for the 270 days, I can understand what the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting – whether we should wait for Novavax. But again, Omicron is upon us. While I hope we have the luxury of time to wait for a non-mRNA vaccine to be available, but, with the impending Omicron wave, I think we should act quickly and, therefore, we set the validity period of 270 days.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, I thank the Ministers and the Senior Minister of State for their replies. My supplementary question is for Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary. Some young children may have undetected medical conditions and, especially allergies, if their parents do not send them for non-mandatory medical reviews. As such, I wish to ask whether MOH would advise all young children to undergo a medical review before going ahead with the COVID-19 vaccination. This is similar to how some adults with underlying medical conditions are advised to get clearance from the doctor in the early stages of the vaccination drive.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank the Member for his question. The answer is partly in the last line that he stated, which is, that we took that approach in the early stages of the adult vaccination drive because, at that time, the amount of data that we had was less and the amount of experience that we had was less. Now we know a lot more about both the disease as well as the vaccination, including in children.
So, the approach for children is not so different from adults. If they have an underlying condition – and there is a list that the doctor will know about it – then some review needs to happen. But if the child is otherwise healthy, then the recommendation is to proceed with the COVID-19 vaccination.
The issue of allergies is slightly different in that, for any drug, you cannot necessarily tell whether an allergy will happen or not happen on the basis of prior underlying conditions. Hence, the team at the site of the vaccination is trained to then detect and deal with the rare allergies that do happen. And again, our experience with COVID-19 is, it does not happen any differently from other vaccinations that we are giving to children on a regular basis.
So, the short answer to the Member's question whether all children should go for medical review prior to COVID-19 is \"no\".
\tMr Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Thank you, Sir. I have got two supplementary questions. The Government has been encouraging the use of ART swabbing to prevent the spread of viruses. However, in many situations, self-reporting of ART results is not allowed. Instead, people are required to conduct the test only at approved testing centres, which not only costs more but is more inconvenient. Can we move to a regime where people are trusted to accurately report the ART results, just like how it is done in schools and, indeed, here in Parliament? This will reduce the cost for many people and make administrative procedures at events more efficient.
Second question: there is a tendency for some activities to be prohibited, even though the transmission risk is low. Can the lead agencies issue more specific advisories to organisations based on the actual prevailing risk of viral spread, so that we move closer on the path towards normalcy?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Thank you for those suggestions. Relying on individuals to self-report ART results, this, as Mr Gerald Giam has acknowledged, is actually in place. It is not quite in Parliament because you do get informed by an SMS that you are negative. But there are many settings where we do rely on self-reporting. Workplace, for example, a lot of meetings, events you go to, you do a self-test.
We have an entire protocol, what we call a protocol tool, that is based on self-testing – that you self-test and, if you are positive, you stay home for 72 hours. After that, daily tests and only when you are negative, you come out. It is totally an honesty-based system. If you are negative, you come out; and if you are positive, you stay at home.
So, the answer is, yes, we very much support what Mr Gerald Giam has said, and it is already in place. Can we do more? We are doing more. You will notice that, recently, MOH announced that we are now working with general practitioners (GPs) and primary care-providers. Previously, we could see a primary care-provider or a GP and when you say you are sick, he can only prescribe you a PCR test, which will be taken to a lab and reported by the lab. But now, he can also prescribe you an ART test. Essentially, he can trigger Protocol 2.
So, we are moving in that direction. And I must say that, to overcome this crisis, it is really not just the Government, but it requires the cooperation, civic-mindedness and sense of self-responsibility of every individual in our population.
\tThe next question is more specific: rules on different settings. That is what we have been doing, too. If the Member has any specific suggestion on specific settings, we would be happy to hear them and we are constantly tweaking them. But just one word of caution. Sometimes, when you tweak more, it becomes more complicated and people do compare: \"Why is it for this setting I am allowed to do this? Why is it for that setting I am not allowed?\" And you start to have invidious comparisons and people start to get confused. So, we are also very mindful to keep rules as simple as possible because simplicity is an essential ingredient for people to exercise self-responsibility. What they do not understand, they cannot self-enforce.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Foo Mee Har.
\tMs Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me start by wishing Speaker \"Happy Birthday!\"
\tMr Speaker: Thank you.
\tMs Foo Mee Har: Mr Speaker, I have two questions for the Minister for Health. One is regarding a question that I raised in my Parliamentary Question (PQ), which is yet to be answered. With quite a significant proportion of Omicron coming from imported cases, I had asked the Minister for a breakdown by country of origin of imported COVID-19 Omicron cases. So, if the Minister for Health could shed some light on that.
My second question relates to his answer that boosters have shown to increase protection against infection and severe illness, including Omicron, substantially; whether MOH will contemplate imposition of booster jab as a requirement for VTL travellers, beyond the current requirement of two jabs only and that would be deemed as vaccinated. So, whether we will bump up the requirement to a booster jab.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: I must apologise to the Member. I did not mean to drop her question but it will be addressed by Minister Iswaran later in the next set of questions, especially on the specific breakdown on the number of imported cases.
As for booster jabs, it is a serious issue that the Member has raised because we do know that two doses do not last forever. The European Union (EU) has already implemented a guideline which is similar to ours: nine months' validity or 270 days. So, I think the world will converge towards some form of validity, I believe, and, naturally, this will become a requirement in due course. That is my conjecture.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Darryl David.
\tMr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just have one supplementary question for the Minister for Education. I thank the Minister for confirming earlier that there will be no vaccination-differentiated measures for children in schools who do not get vaccinated.
My question, however, is whether there should be activities beyond school, perhaps, say, if and when the National School Games should commence or if there are national-level sporting or athletic activities that will involve children aged five to 11, would there be possibly vaccination-differentiated measures implemented then. For example, would there be a position that might say if young children are not vaccinated or not fully vaccinated, they would not be allowed to participate in these events?
I ask also primarily because, sometimes, the results of these events for the children – the timings, their performances and so on, especially for those in Primary 6 this year – could be relevant and important in the application for secondary schools under Direct School Admission (DSA).
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may, let me explain our thinking at this point in time. Of course, I caveat that by saying that whatever our considerations current at this point in time will, subsequently, have to take into account the prevailing national posture and also the development of the virus and its mutation.
At this point in time, we would very much like to have all our children be able to attend school and participate in as many of the core activities as much as possible. Having said that, of course, there are also activities beyond the core curriculum that may pose a higher risk to our students. And for those higher-risk activities, we will then have to consider if differentiated measures will be required.
For example, at this point in time, we have already put in place some additional measures for some of these activities that the students are participating in, and these apply to our secondary, Junior College (JC) and Millenia Institute (MI) students. Just to give an example. Today, if they do team sports under the pilot, only the fully vaccinated students who have taken an onsite ART will be allowed to participate in team sports in groups of up to 10. For some other students who are participating in the band or the choir, they would also have to take some other additional measures to safeguard themselves and their fellow participants.
So, this is how we will go about considering the participation of our students in some of these particularly higher-risk activities in the sense that they have a higher-risk of transmission. But as far as possible, we would like to have our students participate in the core curriculum all together because this adds to their overall social emotional development beyond their academic development.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
\tMr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just have one supplementary question which is, essentially, the PQ that I asked. Given what we know about COVID-19 today over the last one, two years of experience, may I ask if the Government would consider publishing the key quantitative and qualitative matrix and thresholds before decisions are made to change the safe management measures?
I do understand the need to be nimble. But, basically, having that decision-making framework and matrix published would actually help businesses and consumers to have greater confidence and clarity and, certainly, better than the situation where some people feel a certain sense of nervousness whenever the Multi-Ministry Task Force (MTF) holds a press conference, especially those in F&B businesses which are most affected by the dine-in rules.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: The Member reiterated his question, but I may have to reiterate my answer. As alluded to in the Member's supplementary question as well, we also do not want to be too rigid in setting the parameters or trigger points, for example, if we cross this, therefore, it will shut down from five to two and so on and so forth.
I think there are so many twists and turns in this pandemic, we would rather be a bit more nimble and to be able to adapt.
But we take the Member's point, and we have always adopted this position that we do not go for \"Freedom Day\", neither do we go for zero COVID-19. We want to strike a balance, preserve the healthcare capacity; at the same time, allow people to live life as normally as possible, businesses to be able to operate and survive. Each time we make a decision, we do explain why. We do show all the data – hospitalisation, ICU and so on and so forth – to give the full rationale, with numbers, why we decide that way. So, I also hope that, over time, people will begin to understand what our key considerations are, even though we may not be able to pinpoint trigger points.
I should say that, ultimately, it is not about the numbers that cause all this uncertainty. It is a fact that we are in the middle of a pandemic and our society, for two years, we were not entirely ready in the first year in terms of our resilience. Last year, we were much better, and I do believe that, in 2022, we will be even better and that is most important. Remember, in 2020, when we faced a wave – it was hardly a wave, it was just clusters – we went into circuit breaker. Last year, in 2021, when we faced a wave, we went into what we called \"Phase Two (Heightened Alert)\". Group size was down to two. Restaurants did not close towards the end of the year, but they operated with dine-in group size of two. Hopefully, this year, we can ride through waves with a much more liberal posture and that is how we keep on improving. And that is most important to our businesses.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Xie Yao Quan.
\tMr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two questions for the Minister for Health, and this is with regard to averting a testing crunch that we see around the world amidst an Omicron-driven wave.
My first question is, in the event of such a wave, how do we plan to avoid a run on testing facilities in our healthcare system for people who are keen to get a test – either PCR or ART – and this includes, of course, primary care providers that the Minister has mentioned in his answer, but also, importantly, emergency departments? How do we avoid a run on healthcare facilities for people who are keen to get a test ordered?
The second question is about self-testing. How do we plan to ensure an adequate supply of ART kits to keep prices of these kits steady?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: On the second question first, to keep prices steady and affordable, I think competition helps, choices help. So, we are constantly on the lookout for kits that are effective as well as lower priced. In that way, we bring them in and, recently, we have done so – FlowFlex, for example, is below $5 – and we will continue to be on the lookout. There have been many kits out there that claim to be cheaper but are not as effective. So, HSA does not approve all of them just unquestioningly. And we will continue to do that.
As to the Member's question on how to prevent a run on testing facilities, number one, is to try as much as possible to plan ahead, have supply agreements signed, stock up. This is what we have been doing. And we will continue to monitor the situation, bearing in mind that we have seen in other countries where there has been a run.
Second, a run happens when people panic. So, to prevent a run, do not make people panic. Omicron can be scary, it can go up a few times, it can be 10,000 cases, 15,000 cases a day. That is why we are telling the people now that it can reach that level. That is why we started what we called \"Protocols 1, 2, 3\", specifically Protocol 2, which sensitises people to self-test, self-report and self-discipline. And we have extended this now to GPs to also trigger Protocol 2. That way, I think people are sensitised to \"when I need a test, what do I do after a test?\" And when people know what they need to do, they do not panic, there is much less chance of a run on any testing facility.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Leong Mun Wai.
\tMr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to ask the Minister for Education to confirm again, although I think he might have said so just now, that the VDS measures will not be applied to children below 12 years old for as long as it is and maybe at least until the non-mRNA vaccines are available for the kids. Because there is a strong request from the parents that, at least, there should be more choices for vaccines and the VDS measures will not be applied to the children. I also received feedback from residents that some teachers have already practised VDS measures in schools. So, can the Minister confirm whether the teachers are practising that or if any officers in the schools are practising that, that it is against the Government's policy at the moment?
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, can I seek a clarification from Mr Leong Mun Wai and further information on which schools and what VDS measures have which teachers been practising, please?
\tMr Leong Mun Wai: Mr Speaker, the residents who have given feedback to me are on my WhatsApp messages. Can I refer to the messages and then I give a reply later?
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would really appreciate if Mr Leong Mun Wai could give me the information on which teacher in which school has practised what VDS measures so that we can take the feedback seriously and then, look into the necessary follow-up, if possible.
\t
\t
Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may just repeat my answer in case Mr Leong Mun Wai was not around when I answered this just now. My specific answer was that, at this point in time, we have no plans on applying any VDS in our schools and that is because of the reasons that I have mentioned. We want, as far as possible, for our students to be able to participate in the core curriculum, in the school activities. For certain selected activities that may be deemed of higher risk, we may consider applying specific measures for them.
And I have raised two very specific examples. One, for example, of students participating in the playing of wind instruments or the choir; and two, students participating in sports activities that may require physical contact or close physical contact. I also caveated my explanation by saying that, of course, we will have to look at the overall national posture and how the virus will continue to evolve for us to adjust our policies accordingly.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
\tMs Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. I have a clarification for the Minister for Health regarding the COVID-19 statistics that he cited earlier and also, in general, statistics reported by the Government. I have come across cases of individuals who did self-testing by ART and, they were positive. But they did not report themselves to the authorities or to any clinics.
With home recovery now as the default response to any positive COVID-19 test, does Minister agree that the risk of unreported cases is, actually, quite high? And to that extent, we need to be quite careful when we look at the official statistics recorded by the Ministry.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: I take the Member's point. In every country, they also have a concept of what they call \"ascertainment rate\", which is, of the underlying cases, how many are uncovered and reported. And every country knows that it cannot be 80%, 90% or 100%. Especially when you have a Delta wave or Omicron wave that is highly transmissible, you do want people to take self-responsibility, take care of themselves, isolate themselves and, in these cases, they may not be reported. So, they do happen in every country.
To think about it, when we face an endemic disease, whether it is chicken pox or influenza, we cannot report every case and that is what endemicity means, which is, many people get it, many people are able to recover without it being officially reported. That is part and parcel of endemicity.
But notwithstanding that, testing remains important for us, first, to exercise self-responsibility; second, to have a sense of what is the prevalence of the virus in the community. And we continue to do quite a fair number of tests: over 20,000 PCR tests a day; over 150,000 ART tests a day. Some self-monitored, not reported, but many are. That will always give us a consistent measure of the prevalence of the virus in the community. And we will continue to do so in a practical way.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Jumpstart Aviation Sector, Ensure Success of Singapore AirShow 2022 and Extend Vaccinated Travel Lanes in Face of Rise in COVID-19 Omicron Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"19 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the risks of airflow-related COVID-19 transmissibility at Changi Airport buildings given what we know about the Omicron variant transmission capabilities; and (b) what other enhanced measures can be taken to protect all our airport workers, both frontline and non-frontline.
20 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Transport in relation to the COVID-19 Omicron variant virus, what key global and domestic indicators are being monitored to assess the need to change our border measures and adjustments to both the Vaccinated Travel Lanes, their land capacity, flight sales caps and allocated quotas; and (b) what is the 2022 outlook for our regional air and maritime hubs.
21 Ms Poh Li San asked the Minister for Transport whether additional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests will be required several days after arrival into Singapore for Vaccinated Travel Lane (VTL) travellers, especially for those arriving from countries with high incidence of COVID-19 Omicron cases, in case the first PCR test upon arrival into Singapore does not pick up the infection.
22 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Transport whether the freeze on new bus and flight ticket sales for the Vaccinated Travel Lane (VTL) is necessary as Singapore moves towards treating the COVID-19 disease as endemic.
23 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Transport (a) how often does Changi Airport undergo studies of the presence, viability and infectivity of COVID-19 virus in its built environment, including in the air and on surfaces which members of the public or staff may come into contact with; (b) whether these studies are revisited when COVID-19 novel variants arise around the world with higher transmissibility, such as Delta and Omicron; and (c) when was this last studied.
24 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport in light of the spread of the Omicron variant of COVID-19 (a) how does the Ministry review its border control measures for air travel with all countries as well as Vaccinated Travel Lane (VTL) and non-VTL travel with Malaysia, with the view to striking a meaningful balance between allowing travel to continue while minimising the risk of COVID-19 spread during travel; and (b) what measures can be expected from the Ministry in the coming weeks.
25 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the reasons for limiting Vaccinated Travel Lane (VTL) flights to only specific airlines; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider including more airlines, especially low-cost carriers, as well as more flights during festive periods like Chinese New Year and Hari Raya, to ensure that lower-cost options are available to those who need to travel.
26 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Transport with regard to the effort to jumpstart the Singapore economy in 2022 and to gain momentum in the aviation sector (a) whether the Ministry is taking any steps to ensure the continued growth and success of Singapore’s aviation industry; (b) if so, what are these steps; and (c) what are the additional efforts undertaken to ensure the success of the Singapore AirShow in 2022.
\tThe Minister for Transport (Mr S Iswaran): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 19 to 26 together, please?
\t \tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr S Iswaran: I will also address questions raised by Mr Seah Kian Peng1 and Mr Gan Thiam Poh for the Sittings on 11 and 12 January.
Sir, over the past two years, the Ministry of Transport MOT) and the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) have worked closely with the Ministry of Health (MOH) and other Government agencies to reopen our borders in a careful and calibrated manner.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Dennis Tan have asked how we have reviewed our border measures in light of the Omicron variant, including what global and domestic indicators we monitor to inform our measures. Essentially, it is a composite of both domestic and external factors. Let me elaborate in the context of what we have done over the past several months.
In September last year, with a substantial proportion of the Singapore population vaccinated, we launched the Vaccinated Travel Lanes (VTLs). Two months later, on 26 November, the World Health Organization (WHO) designated Omicron as a \"Variant of Concern\". Then, scientists around the world were still trying to ascertain Omicron's transmissibility and virulence relative to Delta and the efficacy of existing vaccines against this new variant. As a precautionary move, based on reports of the spread of Omicron in Sub-saharan Africa, we restricted the entry and transit of non-residents from Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe from 28 November; and from Ghana, Malawi and Nigeria from 5 December. Residents returning from these countries were subjected to a 10-day Stay-Home Notice (SHN) at dedicated facilities. We halted the expansion of the VTL scheme and deferred the launch of the already-announced VTLs to Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. We also decided to maintain the daily quota for VTL (Air) travellers at 10,000, rather than increase it to 15,000, as we had earlier intended.
On 22 December, given the rapid and global spread of the Omicron variant, we froze the sale of new VTL flight and bus tickets for entry into Singapore from 23 December 2021 to 20 January 2022. We also imposed a 50% limit on the daily number of VTL travellers from 21 January this year.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan has asked whether this freeze was necessary, given our approach of living with COVID-19. As I have outlined, the freeze was part of a series of calibrated moves informed by the latest public health risk assessment as well as developments around the world. It was essential to balance the need to manage the risk of imported Omicron cases while minimising disruption to travellers who had already made VTL bookings to enter Singapore.
Ms Foo Mee Har had asked earlier about the breakdown of imported cases for Omicron. In summary, about 2,600 cases were imported. The key sources were the United States at 16%, United Kingdom at 16% and India at 11%. This broadly corresponds to the VTL traveller volume and, as most Members will appreciate, it is also influenced by the incidence of Omicron in these countries. I would add that, of the composition of this figure, less than 10% were actually short-term visitors. So, the bulk is actually Singapore Citizens (SCs), Permanent Residents (PRs) and long-term visit pass (LTVP) holders who are returning to Singapore from overseas.
Ms Poh Li San, Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about the additional enhanced measures for VTL travellers. In the first week of December 2021, in consultation with MOH, we introduced additional supervised self-administered antigen rapid tests (ARTs) for VTL travellers on Day Three and Day Seven after arrival. This is on top of the pre-departure and on-arrival test requirements. VTL travellers were also required to undergo self-administered ARTs on Days Two, Four, Five and Six of their arrival before going about their daily activities. Those who test positive are required to undergo a confirmatory PCR test. So, basically, pre-departure, on arrival and then from Day Two to Day Seven, there is daily ART self-administered, but on Days Three and Seven, they have to do it under supervision. And these have to be reported and, if there is a positive ART result, then they go for a PCR test.
Collectively, these adjustments to our border and other measures have allowed us time to study and better understand the Omicron variant, to strengthen our defences, including our healthcare capacity, and to get more people vaccinated and boosted, as we have heard. We will continue to work closely with MOH to regularly review our border measures. As part of learning to live with the virus and its variants, we must press on with our efforts to restore our connectivity with the world while safeguarding public health. Our goal is to restore quarantine-free travel with more countries and regions, as allowed for by the public health assessment.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about the additional measures to protect airport workers from Omicron. Since 2 December 2021, we have enhanced the personal protective equipment (PPE) and testing protocols. All frontline airport workers are now placed on a seven-day PCR Rostered Routine Testing (RRT) regime. For higher-risk frontline airport workers, an employer-supervised ART was introduced on the third day in addition to their seven-day PCR RRT. Further, all Singapore aircrew arriving from affected regions are required to undergo an on-arrival PCR test and post-arrival PCR tests on Days Three and Seven. These protocols will be adjusted, as they have in the past, in accordance with the latest public health risk assessments.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Dr Tan Wu Meng asked about airflow and COVID-19 transmissibility at the airport. Since the onset of the pandemic, Changi Airport Group (CAG) has progressively upgraded the air ventilation system at the airport. For instance, CAG has upgraded the filters in the air-conditioning and mechanical ventilation (ACMV) system to Merv-14 filters, which are able to remove about 85% of particles of 0.3 to 1.0 micron in size. In other words, they can filter out particles smaller than the size of a respiratory particle containing the COVID-19 virus. With the emergence of the more transmissible Delta variant in May last year, CAAS, CAG, MOH, the National Environment Agency (NEA) and the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) conducted an airflow study to identify spaces at the airport where ventilation and filtration could be further stepped up. Since then, 350 High Efficiency Particulate Absorbing (HEPA) portable air purifiers have been installed throughout the airport terminals at locations, such as staff canteens, rest areas and health screening stations. These HEPA air purifiers are also used in hospitals, and they help to reduce the risk of airborne transmission of COVID-19. Since September last year, CAG has also installed ultraviolet-C (UV-C) sanitation equipment in the airport terminal air-conditioning systems to provide an additional layer of defence.
Mr Dennis Tan, Mr Leon Perera, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Shawn Huang asked about upcoming VTL moves and the outlook for our air and maritime hubs in 2022.
Our maritime hub has weathered the COVID-19 crisis relatively well, with container throughput at our port likely to reach an all-time high in 2021. Maritime businesses also continued to establish and expand operations here. We expect the favourable outlook for trade and shipping to continue in 2022. According to industry projections, global seaborne trade is expected to grow 3.5% in 2022, slightly below the estimate of 3.6% last year. We are working with our tripartite partners to seize these opportunities, continue growing our maritime sector and create more good jobs for Singaporeans.
On the other hand, air travel is expected to take several years to recover to pre-pandemic levels. Notwithstanding this, we remain confident of the long-term potential of air travel and are resolutely committed to working with Changi Airport Group and airline partners to rebuild and reclaim Singapore's status as an international air hub. Compared to 3% at the start of 2021, passenger traffic at Changi increased to about 15% of pre-COVID-19 levels by the end of December 2021, largely aided by our VTL schemes. A study by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) and Oxford Economics has projected international passenger volume at the end of 2022 to recover to about 55% of 2019 levels, which is up from about 20% at the end of last year. Therefore, barring unexpected setbacks like Omicron, we anticipate further recovery in 2022.
\t
To Mr Leon Perera’s question, we do not restrict any airline from applying to operate VTL flights; the overall quota of inbound VTL travellers is allocated to airlines based on the plans they submit to CAAS. Low-cost carriers, such as Scoot, AirAsia and Jetstar Asia, already operate VTL flights from Malaysia. Scoot also operates VTL flights from Thailand and the Republic of Korea, Australia and Germany. Mr Perera also asked if we would allow more VTL flights during festive periods. You have heard from the MTF and also in today's session in Parliament, we closely monitor the demand for VTL flights and will regularly review the VTL quotas, always taking into consideration the prevailing public health assessment.
Mr Shawn Huang asked about our plans for the Singapore Airshow in 2022. The Singapore Airshow is one of the world’s leading airshows that bring together aerospace and defence leaders and key decision makers to conduct business and forge partnerships. The event organiser, Experia Events Pte Ltd, has announced that Singapore Airshow 2022 will go ahead from 15 to 18 February, for trade visitors only. To ensure the success of Singapore Airshow 2022, our Government agencies are working closely with the organiser on the public health protocols to facilitate its safe and smooth execution, including ensuring the safe entry of international trade attendees and safe management measures at the event.
As part of living with COVID-19, we must shift to a new setting that will enable us to stay connected to the world. It is essential that we press on with our mission to reopen our borders. The VTL scheme is a useful pathfinder for us to establish, test and build confidence in safe reopening to vaccinated travellers. Ultimately, we want to work towards quarantine-free travel for all vaccinated travellers.
Singapore’s global connectivity is critical to our economic competitiveness and the livelihoods of our people. It underpins our status as an international business centre and global trading hub. Over the past two years, the Government has provided significant support to preserve core capabilities in this strategic sector and to help them tide over this crisis. We will continue to work closely with our aviation stakeholders to rebuild a safe and sustainable Changi aviation hub.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister for his comprehensive answers. I have two supplementary questions.
First, in relation to a Nikkei article on 4 December, I quote Indonesia's Deputy Minister of State-owned Enterprises, Mr Kartika Wirjoatmodjo, mentioning in parliament about Kualanamu Airport, which they are actually looking to operate in Indonesia's North Sumatra region. He said, \"Kualanamu can be a base to reduce dominance of Changi and KLIA\" and that GMR Airports group has committed 56 trillion rupiahs or $3.8 billion to support the expansion. My first supplementary question (SQ) is in relation to that. And the Minister mentioned and elaborated on the aviation hub outlook. Can the Minister share what are the risks of our regional partners trying to gain a foothold in our aviation sector in terms of its growth and hub status as well? That is the first question.
Second, I am heartened to hear that CAAS is working to improve the airport ventilation rates, especially in a built environment. But the airport phase is key and I hope we can continue to enhance the airport phase's cleanliness, filters and airflows. My question is in relation to transport passenger volume. If we are going to grow it further forward, what measures can we take to enhance it even more because, definitely, with Changi Airport, we want to enhance the transit passenger volume even further as well.
\tMr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his questions. First, on the reports that he has cited, I do not think I can speak with authority on the specific plans that the Indonesian government or, for that matter, any other government or regional players have. But let me start by saying that Changi is no stranger to competition. We have always had to compete with a whole variety of regional hubs. And there will continue to be new hubs that will emerge. Therefore, it is critical that we work at the system level with all the partners – whether it is Changi Airport Group, airline partners, SATS and other ground handlers, the unions and, certainly, the Government agencies, including CAAS. It is important that we mount a systemic response to preserve our competitiveness as an international aviation hub.
Central to that, in terms of looking ahead, I think that it will be underpinned by two key factors. The first is to emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic in a manner that is safe and robust so that travellers, airlines and, indeed, the general population, have the confidence that air travel can, in fact, continue in a safe manner and that Changi is one of the places that they can travel through with utmost confidence. That is key.
That is what we are working towards. So, throughout the last 12 to 18 months, for all the airport players here in the aviation cluster, basically, it has been a Herculean effort because we have had to invert the operating model in Changi. A civilian airport, in general, is designed for an experience, for passengers to interact and we have had to reverse that logic and start to look at segmentation, testing and all kinds of other necessary protocols to protect health, but it means the travel experience is diminished.
But we are committed, as I have said earlier, to reclaiming and rebuilding our status as an international aviation hub. And our VTLs have helped us to raise volumes to about 15% or so of pre-COVID-19 levels by the end of last year and, based on both global projections and our own anticipation, we should be able to do better this year. But how much and how fast are really a function of the environment. And we need to always prioritise the public health assessment.
I would add that, beyond safe recovery, the longer-term competitive proposition of Changi will also rest on sustainability. And that is something that CAAS is working on with all the partners. That will also be an important competitive differentiator for us going forward.
The Member's second point was on passenger volumes and, if we want to increase passenger volumes, what would it entail. I think it is fair to say that the current protocols, whilst necessary, do impose a limit on how much we can grow within the current set of formulations. So, we will have to work with our health authorities and the aviation partners to ascertain how much flexibility we have, going forward, and what are the possible rate-limiting steps or aspects that we need to reconfigure so that we can go for the next bound of growth in terms of passenger volumes in Changi. And that is an effort that is currently being undertaken by MOT with CAAS and all our partners.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I thank the Minister for his answer. I would like to draw reference to a Parliamentary Question (PQ) I filed early in July 2021 about detection of COVID-19 in the built environment because better sensing of virus in the air and on surfaces may help us to find new vulnerabilities ahead of new clusters. I have an SQ for the Minister for Transport.
The Minister has spoken about what has been done to clean the air filtration better, to try and sterilise surfaces better with UVC. But can I ask the Minister how are we evaluating the effectiveness of these measures? Are we checking whether there is viral detectability in the ambient air? Are we checking for detectable virus on surfaces that members of the public or members of staff may come into contact with?
And if I may put a second SQ to MOT, can the Minister confirm that there is ongoing attention to making sure that existing security protocols in the airport also interlink safely with safe management measures? So, for example, where staff are required to have their faces validated against photo IDs, that this is done in a way that does not undermine the safe management processes against COVID-19.
\tMr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, if I may take the second question first and thanking the Member for raising these matters. Our highest priority is protecting the health and welfare of our frontline airport workers because, without them, the airport will not be able to function. So, we have undertaken a whole series of steps to ensure that our workers are protected to the best of our ability. And that is why I mentioned, specifically, the moves we have made with respect to personal protective equipment, or PPEs, and we have heightened them. In almost all the settings, they now wear N95 masks, for example, apart from the usual garb.
I would add that we have also the testing protocols that we have enhanced. All of these, on the one hand, ensure a higher level of safety for our workers. But I must also emphasise that it also means additional inconveniences and challenges. So, it is a constant recalibration, taking into account the risks, whilst we also focus on the welfare of the workers. So, the short answer to the Member's question is, of course, SMMs are our top priority and, when it comes to aspects like facial IDs and so on, all the necessary protocols are put in place and, if there is evidence that we need to do more, we will do more. But I just wanted to highlight to Members – and I have been engaged in conversations with the union leaders and so on – that every one of these moves does impose a real human burden, which we have to take into account.
On the first point on detection and how we continue to monitor, CAAS and Changi Airport are not the specialists in this area. But they are fully committed to protecting the environment to the best of their ability. In some ways, I think Changi Airport or its surrounding facilities are not too different from many commercial building settings and so on. This flow of people is from different sources and there are all kinds of activities and convergences.
\t
First, we will be informed by the general settings and requirements and make sure that these are observed rigorously. Second, we are also working with, as I have said, MOH, NEA and BCA. These are specialised agencies that have important perspectives that then informs the measures that we can take in Changi Airport, as necessary. So, let me assure Members that it is something that we are watching and monitoring closely and we will continue to take all necessary steps to protect the health and safety of our workers.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ong Ye Kung.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : To ask the Minister for Transport with the rising number of imported COVID-19 Omicron cases over local cases, whether the Ministry is considering more restrictions on the number of visitors and flights that are allowed into Singapore."],"footNoteQuestions":["19","20","21","22","23","24","25","26"],"questionNo":"19-26"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Minister for Health","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for Health (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Speaker, Sir, just now, in reply to a question delivered by Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary, he mentioned that the incidence of myocarditis amongst young people is 45 per million and, during the supplementary questions, I referred to the same number. [Please refer to \"Assessment of Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines on Younger Children and Singapore's Decision to Extend Vaccination to Younger Children\" and \"Vaccination for Primary School Students and Possibility of Vaccination-differentiated Measures for Preschools and Primary Schools\", Official Report, 10 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 44, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
We now realise the number is inaccurate. It is actually 10 times less. What we said was 10 times less. It is actually 450 cases of myocarditis per million infections of COVID-19 on young people. This is in the preprint and the number is actually disproportionately weighted towards males. And the age group is actually 12 to 17, to be specific, and not below 12. I thought I would make that clarification.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Findings in Academic Freedom Survey 2021 by AcademiaSG","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"27 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Education whether the Government plans to (i) look into the survey findings of the Academic Freedom Survey 2021 published by AcademiaSG, notably that faculty who said they work on \"politically sensitive\" topics are more likely to feel constrained in their ability to research or engage the public, compared to those whose work are not \"politically sensitive\" and (ii) take steps to improve the state of academic freedom, especially in respect of Singapore studies and women academics, whom the survey reported as being more likely to feel constrained.
\tThe Second Minister for Education (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, our Autonomous Universities (AUs) are committed to safeguarding academic freedom for their faculty and students. Doing so has allowed them to attract top talent as well as to create new knowledge, innovate and contribute to Singapore's development over the past decades. The quality of education and research done by AUs is also well-regarded internationally.
With regard to the Academic Freedom Survey by AcademiaSG, the authors of the survey have noted that the response rate was only about 10%, that is, about 198 out of 2,061 contacted academics in the social sciences, humanities, business and law schools at the National University of Singapore (NUS), the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), the Singapore Management University (SMU), the Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) and the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) replied to the survey. Among the 10% who responded, only a minority reported significant concerns about academic freedom in Singapore. I would, therefore, advise some caution in generalising the findings from the survey as representative of how all academics in Singapore feel. Academics in AUs have been able to teach, engage in discourse, research and publish on a wide range of topics, including domestic politics, race, religion and gender issues. It would be unfair to our academics to assume that they self-censor or feel inhibited.
The AUs' work on Singapore studies is evidence that academics do not shy away from \"politically sensitive\" topics. The NUS' Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences has a public listing of more than 8,000 Singapore-related publications, with more being added over time. This includes titles, such as \"Is the People's Action Party Here to Stay?\" by Singh, 2019, and \"Super-diversity and the Bio-politics of Migrant Worker Exclusion in Singapore\" by Goh, 2019. Such works contribute to public discourse on governance and public policy and also inform the teaching curriculum.
MOE has also funded projects on topics that may be considered sensitive, under the competitive grants. Many researchers in AUs also work with Government agencies to study complex issues. Examples include integration of bi-national families in Singapore, coping strategies among low-income households and the development of racial attitudes during early childhood. These projects, in turn, can be used or adapted as teaching materials for the students.
Many of these projects are led by female researchers. So, it would be unfair to our academics, including female academics, to assume that they self-censor or feel inhibited.
\tMr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. Introduction of Government Bills. Minister for Trade and Industry.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 33-34, 36-43, 45-50, 53-55, 57-58, 61, 64-65, 67-69, 71-72, 77, 80, 82-83, 85-88, 90, 92-93, 96-100, 102-109, 111, 114-122 and 124-128 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. The remaining Questions have been postponed to a later Sitting of Parliament or withdrawn.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Economic Expansion Incentives (Relief from Income Tax) (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Economic Expansion Incentives (Relief from Income Tax) Act 1967\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Gan Kim Yong); 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":"Hijacking of Aircraft and Protection of Aircraft and International Airports (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Hijacking of Aircraft and Protection of Aircraft and International Airports Act 1978\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Minister for Transport (Mr S Iswaran); 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":"Administration of Muslim Law (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Administration of Muslim Law Act 1966 and to make a related amendment to the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures for Solemnisation and Registration of Marriages) Act 2020 (Act 23 of 2020)\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Minister for Social and Family Development and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M); 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":"Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Ms Sun Xueling) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Social and Family Development, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
The Women's Charter was enacted in 1961 and is a key piece of legislation. Over the past six decades, it has institutionalised the rights and responsibilities of men and women in marriage and ensured the welfare and protection of women in Singapore.
The Women's Charter upholds our overarching principles towards marriage and divorce. These are, for marriage, that marriage is the cornerstone of family formation and, thus, the significance of the solemnisation and registration of marriages must be emphasised; the institution of marriage must be protected by ensuring that all marriages contracted here are genuine. And, for divorce, our first priority is to save marriages, but where divorce is inevitable, we must foster therapeutic justice to bring about healing so that the family can move on. We strive to reduce acrimony and ensure child-centricity in the proceedings, including parental responsibility and cooperative co-parenting post-divorce.
However, we recognise that we can do more to strengthen the institution of marriage and safeguard the welfare of children in the event of divorce. We have engaged citizens and stakeholders extensively on the divorce process, especially on the proposed divorce by mutual agreement of the irretrievable breakdown of marriage. We started this since 2020, when we convened a Citizen Panel involving more than 150 divorcees over a four-month period, many of whom bravely shared their marriage and divorce experiences with us, so that we can understand what they went through and make the necessary changes in our law and policies. We also engaged social work practitioners, community and religious leaders, and law practitioners, academics and other stakeholders.
Furthermore, as part of the year-long, nationwide Conversations on Singapore's Women’s Development last year, as well as through the Alliance for Action to Strengthen Marriages and Family Relationships that I lead, our citizens and other stakeholders have given us feedback on strengthening marriages and supporting families undergoing divorce.
Having reviewed this feedback, we propose to: one, enhance the marriage process and strengthen safeguards to protect the institution of marriage; two, strengthen therapeutic justice in the divorce process and ensure those affected by divorce are supported; and three, ensure the Women's Charter remains up to date. Let me elaborate.
The first category of proposals aims to enhance the marriage process to provide convenience to couples looking to start on their marriage journey. These changes are in line with the digital transformation of Singapore. And we are also looking to update the necessary safeguards to ensure that the institution of marriage is not abused.
Currently, to marry under the Women's Charter, most steps, from pre-solemnisation to solemnisation, must be completed in-person. However, the recent COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that there are circumstances in which this may be difficult. Certain aspects of the process, such as the verification of documents, can also be digitalised.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will, therefore, introduce the new \"Our Marriage Journey\" portal this year, which will enable couples to conveniently complete all pre-solemnisation steps online. Changes to the current marriage process include, first, the repeal of the existing section 17 by clause 10. Under the existing section 17, parties who intend to marry must submit a statutory declaration of certain matters, for example, that the parties are not prevented by law from marrying. A statutory declaration must be made in person before a Commissioner for Oaths. With the repeal of section 17, instead of a statutory declaration, parties will only make a declaration in the prescribed form online. The contents of the declaration and the consequences of a false declaration will be similar to that for the statutory declaration required today.
Clause 19 repeals the current section 31, which requires signed and sealed copies of hard copy marriage certificates to be issued. The new section 30 will no longer require hard copy certificates, and digital certificates will be issued instead.
Clause 15 also introduces a new section 24 to empower the Registrar and licensed solemnisers to solemnise marriages via video-link in Singapore should couples choose to do so. This was first introduced during the circuit breaker in May 2020 as a temporary option under the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) for Solemnisation and Registration of Marriages Act 2020. Clause 43 will repeal this Act and clause 15 will make this a permanent option under the Women's Charter. Nonetheless, couples may still hold their solemnisations in-person and, indeed, most couples prefer this option as the solemnisation is a significant and momentous occasion and couples often wish to celebrate with their loved ones in-person.
Lastly, clause 10 introduces a new section 15 to allow the Notice of Marriage to be cancelled where the Registrar is satisfied that there is good reason to do so.
As a safeguard, where there are concerns, such as an individual lacking mental capacity or marriages of convenience, the couple may not perform the declaration online or the Registrar of Marriages may decide not to permit any couple to solemnise their marriage via video-link. Such couples would have to appear in-person.
The marriage process is significant and should continue to reflect the solemnity of the marriage contract. Hence, we will continue to provide couples with a ceremonial marriage certificate for keepsake. The \"Our Marriage Journey\" portal will also: (a) provide information and resources on marriage preparation; (b) provide an online Marriage Questionnaire tool to help couples prepare for their next step; (c) recommend and facilitate sign-ups for suitable Marriage Preparation Programmes; and (d) provide push notifications of online marriage tips to couples in their first year of marriage.
We recognise the important roles solemnisers play in the marriage journey of couples. Many licensed solemnisers develop good relationships with the couples and have a wealth of helpful tips. We are therefore piloting the \"Journey with You\" initiative, referred to as JOY, in short, which will enable licensed solemnisers to mentor newlyweds in the first year of marriage. We launched the one-year pilot in December 2021 with 20 selected solemnisers. Through this, we aim to create a Community of Practice for licensed solemnisers to share best practices. Many couples also complete pre-marital counselling courses with their religious organisations. Through the Alliance for Action to Strengthen Marriages and Family Relationships, religious organisations are stepping forward to do more to prepare young couples for marriage and to mentor them.
Another set of marriage-related proposals involves updating safeguards to ensure that the institution of marriage is not abused. We want to ensure that the Registry of Marriages can continue to perform due diligence in all applications for marriage by satisfying itself that parties have the capacity to marry and are entering into a marriage willingly and in good faith.
Currently, non-residents who are not Singapore Citizens or Permanent Residents, including those with no nexus to Singapore, can marry here, as long as at least one party has been present in Singapore for 15 days preceding the filing of the Notice of Marriage. Going forward, we will impose stricter requirements for such persons to marry here. We do not want to become a marriage hub for marriages where neither party has any nexus to Singapore, as it could compromise ROM's ability to carry out its due diligence and, inadvertently, undermine the significance of marriage.
Clause 10 of the amendment Bill introduces section 18, of which subsection (1)(c) provides that where any party is not a Singapore Citizen or Permanent Resident, the Minister may prescribe the length of stay required by at least one party in Singapore before they can be allowed to marry. We intend to prescribe that at least one party must have been physically present in Singapore for 31 continuous days. This would prevent couples, where both parties are on Short-Term Visit Passes which are valid for up to 30 days, from marrying here. Nonetheless, for exceptional cases, the Registrar will be empowered to waive this requirement should he or she be satisfied that there is good reason to do so.
We also want to restrict the persons who can obtain information from the State Marriage Register. Clauses 18 and 19 will amend the existing section 27 and existing section 180 of the Women's Charter, to allow the Minister to make rules on the provision of copies or extracts from the Register. Information from the Register contains personal particulars of the parties, including their NRIC numbers, and we wish to prevent the misuse of such information.
Separately, individuals will still retain two free online searches within a 12-month period, or may opt for a paid search, to enquire whether a person is married. These searches will show if there is a marriage record for the party in question and the date of marriage, with the name and NRIC of the spouse redacted. This search function will remain available to all and is not limited only to couples intending to marry.
Next, clause 15 will repeal the existing section 24 and replace it with a new section 23, to allow religious ceremonies to be conducted before, on or after solemnisation. Unlike when the Women's Charter was first enacted, the general public is now aware that parties must go through the solemnisation process to be married in the eyes of the law. The Registry of Marriages has also received appeals to allow the religious ceremony to take place before or during the solemnisation and, so, we wish to remove unnecessary restrictions.
Lastly, clause 40 repeals and re-enacts the existing section 180A to introduce new safeguards for licensed solemnisers by according them protection from personal liability if they had acted in good faith and with reasonable care.
I will now move on to the next category of proposals, which pertains to divorce. These proposals seek to amend the law on divorce in line with the aims of therapeutic justice in the divorce process and enhance support for those undergoing divorce.
In November 2017, MSF, MinLaw and FJC formed the Committee to Review and Enhance Reforms in the Family Justice System, or the RERF Committee, in short. The RERF Committee made its recommendations, aimed at further strengthening the family justice system and submitted its report in September 2019. The RERF's aspiration was the adoption of therapeutic justice in the family justice system. In the context of family justice and couples undergoing divorce, therapeutic justice is a \"lens of care\" that seeks to help distressed families move forward in a more positive way. It seeks not to position parties as adversaries in Court, but as problem-solvers, collaborating to seek solutions that will facilitate healing, restoration and the recasting of a move that is positive in the future. We are proposing to effect these recommendations through the Women's Charter amendments.
Today, under the Women's Charter, divorcing parties must prove the sole ground for divorce, which is the \"irretrievable breakdown of the marriage\" before a divorce is granted. To do this, they may cite one or more of the existing five facts. There are three fault-based facts of adultery, desertion and unreasonable behaviour, and two non-fault facts of separation of three years with consent and of four years without.
To better understand how to incorporate therapeutic justice in the divorce process, we engaged more than 150 divorcees and other stakeholders closely involved and acquainted with the divorce process on their experiences.
I would like to tell you a story shared during one of our engagements. Jane, which is not her real name, shared the pain that she went through during her divorce three years ago. Initially, she and her ex-husband had wanted to settle their divorce amicably. However, they had to pinpoint each other's faults to prove that their marriage had broken down irretrievably and this led to many quarrels and worsened their relationship. While Jane admitted that there were faults on both sides, she wished there was an option to allow them to acknowledge they were jointly responsible rather than blame each other.
In fact, in our engagements with social service practitioners and several religious organisations, they had also shared that they had worked in earnest and as best as they could with couples, but there were instances where the couples were just unable to reconcile. In such cases, where there are children involved in the marriage, the marriage is no longer a matter just between the couple. Children are innocent parties involved in an unfortunate situation, and we must try as much as possible to minimise their exposure to the pain and conflict that often accompany divorce.
However, with the current divorce regime, we have found that where parties agree on the divorce, having to cite one of the existing facts may force parties to point fingers at each other as they cite reasons to prove one of the three fault-based facts or dredge up past hurts to prove the facts. This can cause the child to be caught in the middle as allegations of misdeeds are being made by either or both of their parents against the other.
If parties were to cite separation as a fact so as to avoid blaming each other, they have to put their lives on hold for three to four years, which can be harmful to the couple and their children as the relationship between the couple would likely be tense and unstable during the period of separation. Many divorcees we spoke to shared that until the divorce is final, they could not focus on their children, though they wanted to.
Hence, in line with the Family Justice Courts' approach of therapeutic justice, clause 29 repeals the current section 95 and enacts a new section 95A, to introduce divorce by mutual agreement of the irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a sixth fact that parties may cite to show that their marriage has irretrievably broken down. This aims to reduce acrimony in divorce and better allow the family to heal and move on. Irretrievable breakdown of the marriage will remain the sole ground for divorce.
Under the new section 95A(1)(f) and subsection (6)(a), parties may rely on this sixth fact if they mutually agree that the marriage has broken down irretrievably, but this is not a simple \"handshake\" of a mutual agreement to divorce. Instead, parties will submit to the Court: the reasons leading them to conclude that their marriage has irretrievably broken down; the efforts made to reconcile; and considerations given to the arrangements to be made in relation to their children and financial affairs.
Subsection (6)(b) also states that the Court must consider the stated matters in deciding whether to order further mediation, counselling or family support programmes. This may happen if the Court finds the required submission is insufficient or believes there is a possibility of reconciliation. Lastly, subsection (6)(c) states that the Court must reject any agreement if the Court considers that reconciliation is reasonably possible.
We, therefore, envisage that the key aspects of divorce by mutual agreement to be:
(a) joint responsibility, where unlike fault-based facts, parties may cite reasons where they take joint responsibility for the breakdown of their marriage. For example, they may cite deep-seated differences in values.
(b) reconciliation, as efforts to reconcile are explicitly required and the Court can order interventions and must reject any agreement if it concludes that reconciliation is reasonably possible.
(c) joint consideration of post-divorce arrangements to set parties into the right frame to jointly consider their children and financial affairs so as to reduce tension at the ancillary matters stage, where the issues of the children, division of matrimonial assets and maintenance are discussed and better ensure positive outcomes post-divorce.
I will now elaborate more on the test under divorce by mutual agreement.
First, parties must agree that their marriage has broken down irretrievably and explain the reasons leading them to conclude this. They must state attempts they have made at reconciliation and they must state considerations they have given to the arrangements to be made for their financial affairs and children post-divorce. A bare agreement without reasons is not enough. Also, as with agreements in other contexts, parties must be acting voluntarily, have the requisite knowledge of the terms and intend to enter into the agreement.
Second, beyond what generally constitutes an agreement in other contexts, the Court will reject the agreement if there remains a reasonable possibility that parties might reconcile. This is a parties-centric test, assessed based on the circumstances of each individual case. The reasons given by parties will inform the assessment. For instance, in cases where previous efforts at reconciliation were few and insufficient, where reasons provided on the breakdown of the marriage appear vague and arbitrary and where parties do not seem entirely certain of their decision, the Court may choose not to accept the agreement.
The sufficiency or otherwise of the parties' reasons will inform the Court's assessment as to whether there remains a reasonable possibility of reconciliation. Whether there is such a possibility is a factual question in each case. As a parties-centric test, the possibility of reconciliation does not require the Court to impose an external, objective test for whether the marriage has broken down. At the same time, it permits the Court to weed out sham or frivolous agreements or cases where the parties are seeking a divorce for collateral reasons. We leave it to the Court to apply the test in actual cases and to develop the case law in this area.
If the Court believes there is a reasonable possibility of reconciliation, it can send the parties for mediation, counselling and family support programmes. In some cases, this might salvage the marriage. In other cases, this would confirm there truly is no longer a reasonable possibility of reconciliation.
There may be concerns that parties who wish to rely on divorce by mutual agreement (DMA) may request their lawyers to frame the Court documents in a manner that suggests that they have tried their best to reconcile, although this may not be true.
Divorce lawyers must, therefore, continue to behave ethically, provide proper advice in line with the principles of therapeutic justice and continue to uphold their duties as officers of the Court and to assist in the administration of justice.
A fundamental mindset shift is necessary within the divorce process, where parties are not positioned as adversaries. They are part of a family unit and, while they have ended their marriage, they will always be family to their children. The focus should be on promoting healing and transitioning into the next phase with dignity. All involved in the divorce process must embrace this mindset shift, especially divorce lawyers, who are, often, closest to the parties in the process.
More must be done to foster healing in the relationship. Therefore, we are exploring amending terms, such as \"defendant\" and \"plaintiff\", to less adversarial terms. We are considering the feasibility of amending these terms under separate legislation.
I would like to emphasise that DMA will not lead to a quick and easy divorce. The sole ground of divorce remains, which is, the irretrievable breakdown of marriage. All safeguards of the divorce framework today will continue to apply, including the three-year time bar on filing for divorce and the three-month period before the divorce is finalised. The Court also retains the power to refuse to grant a divorce if it would not be just and reasonable.
Second, within the DMA framework itself, there are safeguards. Parties must explain the basis for their mutual agreement on the irretrievable breakdown of their marriage, what attempts they have made at reconciliation and what considerations they have in regard to their financial affairs and children.
The Court has the power to order parties to attend mediation, counselling and family support programmes. This will help filter out cases where reconciliation is still reasonably possible. The Court has the power to reject an agreement to divorce if there remains a reasonable possibility of reconciliation.
I should also point out that entering into a marriage of convenience is an offence. Thus, given the safeguards, parties to a sham marriage will find it difficult to obtain a divorce through DMA.
There may be concerns that a vulnerable spouse may be coerced into agreeing to divorce under DMA. This is not a new concern or one specific to DMA as a vulnerable spouse could, today, already be coerced into agreeing to the divorce. We rely, primarily, on family lawyers to prevent such cases. In addition, the Mandatory Parenting Programme, or MPP, which is a mandatory pre-filing programme for parents that I will elaborate on later, can act as a safeguard against this as the counsellor may identify and assist such spouses.
I would also like to point out that DMA does not absolve either party from their responsibilities in providing maintenance to their child or spouse if the Court makes such an order.
I would also like to highlight that DMA is different from the type of \"no-fault\" divorce in other jurisdictions where parties are not required to take responsibility for the breakdown of the marriage. Unlike in other jurisdictions, DMA will require parties to state the reasons that have led them to conclude that their marriage has irretrievably broken down. In doing so, parties would have to jointly take responsibility for the breakdown of the marriage. One party also cannot, unilaterally, divorce the other. Therefore, the DMA framework strikes a balance between two principles: one, that marriage is a public institution and divorce is a serious matter; and, two, when a marriage has truly broken down, the law should permit a divorce without creating unnecessary acrimony.
I will now move on to the other divorce-related proposals.
For parents in the process of a divorce, we want to support them in co-parenting effectively. Currently, where a party with minor children files for divorce on the standard track, that is, without having reached an agreement with his/her spouse on the reason for divorce or ancillary matters, he or she must attend MPP. The same applies to a party who has been served with divorce papers on the standard track and wishes to file a counterclaim. However, parties who agree on the divorce and all ancillary matters and, thus, file for divorce on the simplified divorce track, do not, currently, need to attend MPP.
However, MSF's 2020 Study on Co-Parenting Styles showed that regardless whether respondents reported an uncontested or contested divorce, the proportion of divorcees who reported practising cooperative co-parenting among uncontested and contested divorces are similar. Hence, we will amend the Women's Charter (Parenting Programme) Rules to extend MPP to all parents with minor children on the simplified divorce track.
MPP encourages parents to make informed decisions that prioritise the well-being of their children and helps parents understand the importance of co-parenting and the practical issues arising from a divorce. MPP will be enhanced to focus more on co-parenting and provide personalised information for parents. This would include self-assessments and information on where to seek timely support.
We recognise that there may be other caregivers involved in the child's life, such as grandparents, and clause 38 introduces a new section 139I to empower the Court to advise that such key related persons participate in necessary programmes as well.
MSF remains committed to saving marriages where possible. For couples who decide to work on their marriage while attending MPP, they could choose to attend marital counselling services provided by FAM@FSC. If couples are of the same faith and are open to marital counselling provided by religious organisations, they may opt for counselling provided by such organisations. We will work with interested religious organisations which wish to be involved.
I would like to mention Sarah, who is in her 20s and wishes to remain anonymous, who had reached out to MSF to share her experience as a child of divorce. She remembers standing outside a lawyer's office as her mother told her to tell her father that he will never see her again if he does not turn up. At the young age of eight, she was often made the middle person, passing messages between her parents. She felt distressed and unsafe, yet was afraid to reach out for help. She emphasised the need to better support children of divorced parents through counselling and check-ins to address these problems early.
Currently, MSF has the Children-in-Between Programme to support parents and children impacted by divorce. It is a group programme comprising parental and child components. For children, the programme educates them on positive ways to cope with their parents' divorce and skills to share their feelings. However, out of about 6,500 children affected by divorce annually between 2016 and 2020, fewer than 200 attend the Children-in-Between programme annually.
The divorce process should prioritise the best interest of the child and ensure that children are supported. Therefore, clause 36 introduces a new section 132A to allow the Court to advise parents to secure the child's attendance at the Programme for Children at any stage of the proceedings or after the final judgment has been granted if the Court thinks that this would be beneficial.
The Programme for Children emphasises and encompasses a range of possible support for children, including an assessment of the needs of the child and specific interventions, such as group programmes, counselling or psychological services. The assessment would be used to make recommendations to parents on suitable interventions. Interventions of varying intensity will be available to address the differing needs.
If the Court's advice is not complied with, the Court will have the discretion to make any order as it deems fit and, in relevant cases, may take the non-compliance of the parents into consideration in making custody, care and control and access orders, among other relevant factors, in determining the welfare of the child.
Next, I will share our proposals to enhance the child access order enforcement regime. Currently, where there is non-compliance with a child access order, the only recourse for the access parent is to commence committal proceedings or apply for care and control orders pertaining to the child to be varied. However, this can be a difficult and time-consuming process and it may be some time before the access parent is able to gain access.
Therefore, clause 35 enacts section 126B to provide a range of measures for the enforcement of child access orders. The Court may order: (a) the care and control parent to grant the access parent additional access to the child to make up for the access denied; (b) the care and control parent to compensate the access parent for expenses incurred as a result of the breach of order; (c) both parties and the child, or any of them, to attend counselling, mediation, therapeutic or educational programmes or family support programmes; (d) the care and control parent to enter into a bond to ensure future compliance with the order; and (e) as a last resort, imprisonment or a fine for the care and control parent.
We understand that there are divorced parents who struggle to gain access to their children. We sympathise with this and trust that these new measures will go somewhat to help address this. Nonetheless, we would like to reiterate that, in such issues, it is in the child's best interest for parents to resolve these issues through effective communication and mutual understanding and legal measures should be a last resort.
Lastly, for the divorce-related proposals, I will share our proposals to enhance the maintenance enforcement regime. We are considering the feasibility of taking these up under other legislation.
During our engagements with stakeholders, issues were raised regarding the current maintenance enforcement processes. We received feedback that (a) these processes are time- and resource-intensive for wives, ex-wives and mothers who tend to be on the receiving end of the payment of maintenance; (b) the current adversarial Court processes are challenging for applicants who are mostly litigants-in-person; and (c) there is a need to distinguish between respondents who cannot pay and those who will not pay, to provide different interventions to address the underlying issues for the two groups.
We recognise that maintenance enforcement processes can be further enhanced and MSF is working with MinLaw and the Family Justice Courts to study how to provide more efficient and effective enforcement of maintenance orders and minimise repeat enforcement. This includes adopting an inquisitorial approach in hearing enforcement applications, streamlining procedures and strengthening deterrence against non-payment.
Beyond legal and procedural reforms, we will also continue to link those that cannot pay to support.
I will now move on to the amendments to update the more archaic portions of the Women's Charter.
Part 6 of the Women's Charter, currently, sets out the specific rights of a married woman, such as the right to hold and dispose of property, and states that she is liable for her own debts, contracts and wrongs.
These specific rights reflect the historical development of married women's rights. Under the old common law, women ceased to have any independent legal personality upon marriage and, therefore, could not make contracts and hold property and so on.
In the UK, this began to change in the late 1800s, with law reforms that gave married women the same rights as married men. The provisions in Part 6 can be traced back to these law reforms, which were made incrementally over many years.
Things are different today. There is no doubt that a married woman is and should be the equal of a married man, not just in specific areas or for specific purposes, but as a general principle. This principle is enshrined in the new section 50(1), which provides that the rights, privileges, powers, capacities, duties and liabilities of a married woman are the same as those of a married man, unless otherwise provided for in any written law.
Separately, we are also taking the opportunity to completely abolish some archaic concepts in this area of the law.
The Government is committed to building an inclusive and fair society where every Singaporean, both men and women, have full and equal opportunities to contribute to our society. Singapore women have made tremendous progress since our Independence in 1965. Our women's standing in society has risen steadily, attaining higher education levels which are on par with men, and more women are participating in the workforce. This move to update the Women's Charter is also symbolic of how far we have come in terms of women's development.
Even as we recognise the significant progress made, we can continue do more.
Feedback from the Conversations on Singapore Women’s Development shows that deep-seated attitudes and mindsets about gender stereotypes persist and the belief and aspirations for marriage and families remain strong. The Government will continue to empower, protect and uplift our women in the workplace and in their caregiving roles and, especially, in protecting them from harm and violence. In particular, in line with the Taskforce on Family Violence's recommendations, we will enhance the protection against family violence in a separate Bill by the end of this year.
Let me now conclude. The amendments we have proposed attempt to: first, make the marriage process more couple-centric and update the safeguards; two, strengthen the divorce process by incorporating therapeutic justice into the process and ensuring those impacted by the divorce are supported; three, update the provisions and terminology in the Women’s Charter to abolish archaic concepts that no longer reflect the progress of women today.
Government efforts and legislative levers can only go so far. We must work together as a society to effect change. The Alliance for Action to Strengthen Marriages and Family Relationships will harness ground-up initiatives and galvanise a whole-of-society response to ensure that strong families remain as the basic building block of our society. With that, Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Mr Speaker, Sir, today’s debate follows your own moving of the Bill in 2016.
The amendments are, in the main, to allow both men and women to make decisions about marriage, divorce and family and then, for laws to make these decisions binding. That is to say, the amendments play little part in telling the parties what the decision should be; they merely make it easier for such decisions to have the force of law.
Overall, there are many commonsense elements in the Women’s Charter amendments, but I feel I ought to still lay them out simply here, so that it puts my additional requests to the Minister in perspective.
First, we feel that family and marriage in Singapore ought to be protected and strengthened. This has been the case for many years and is something that most of us support. So, we should make it easy for people to get married, whether the signifier is online or not. The key is the intent.
I am also strongly supportive of allowing religious ceremonies as part of the process. For many of us who believe in matters beyond the earthy, binding ourselves to a partner has a deeply spiritual dimension. Reminding ourselves of this, in a public, open and memorable manner is a strong commitment device.
Second, that no one goes into a marriage looking for divorce. But having decided to do so, one should be helped along, as much as possible, by the administration of the process. In this, the amendments provide a smoothening of the path, once decisions have been made.
I am not sure of the term “therapeutic justice” when referring to the amendments allowing for “divorce by mutual agreement”. To me, this is not about justice but about the freedoms to enter into a contract and the exit clauses which we can choose to exercise. Whatever the name, I support this move which, I think, accords respect and dignity to both parties.
Like marriage, divorce is seldom a bloodless, contractual, dry process. I am sure we all know of friends, colleagues, residents whose marriage did not work out and they decide to part ways – some on good terms, some rather acrimonious. Whatever the case, while we cannot take the emotions out of it entirely, we can and should reduce the bureaucratic pain as much as possible.
The third element, also commonsensical, is less often discussed. Having decided to part ways, we have decided, in terms of custody, to be “child-centric”. I fully agree with this. I wonder, however, if we ought to take a closer look at provisions for parents, especially mothers, in employment matters. That is to say, ensure that parents, who now have to take care of separate households, will be able to do so.
We must recognise that divorce is a major life stressor for the individuals involved, permanently affecting workplace livelihoods and family structures. Sir, you would know that I have, in this Chamber over the past 15 years, spoken on the issues and challenges facing single mothers. You have, too, many times.
Divorce proceedings should consider the livelihood concerns of single mothers and how they can be supported. I ask for us to consider how to better support such single mothers. For example, can we ask for Court-ordered interventions, such as mediation and counselling, to include employment advice and assistance for women who are unemployed at the point of divorce?
I also call for better flexible work support for employees at all life stages, especially mothers with caregiving duties, and career development for back-to-work women.
Both these points have, over the years, been made by NTUC and fellow labour Members. We should review the existing Tripartite Standard for Flexible Work Arrangements or consider other support systems or policies for employers to help their employees better manage their work-life needs through flexible work options.
Work and marriage may seem quite far apart in terms of legislation but, in reality, one impacts the other. Flexible work arrangements have suddenly come upon us in force, due to the pandemic. We have seen how such work arrangements benefit so many of us, especially for working mothers, so that they can fulfil all the roles which they desire, with minimal impact on their career development.
Wearing the hat of an employer, it would be remiss of me to assume no one takes advantage of work-from-home (WFH) arrangements. I think all of us have seen the very small minority who could be not working from home but skiving from home. It is important that we do not jettison such WFH arrangements for fear of abuse by this small minority. We could, for example, deter such behaviour by ensuring that they are sanctioned in the same way as all HR violations. After all, this is COVID-19 and we are already in 2022.
The Women’s Charter was a document written in the 1960s at a time when the fight for equality was nascent and the problems more severe. Today, as what Minister of State Sun Xueling has said, Singaporean women stand shoulder to shoulder with Singaporean men on many issues. But today, as with yesterday, we still have some way to go in ensuring equal respect and eradicating violence and bias.
So, I would like to ask the Minister to consider that the support for work, with dignity and in a fulfilling job, as single parents, be written into the amendments so as to allow each one of us, women and men, to live fully whatever life choices we make. Sir, I support the amendments.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I declare that I am a lawyer with a firm that practises family law; however, the contents of this speech reflect my own views on the Bill.
In this debate, I wish to make a few comments on the provisions relating to divorce, in particular, the introduction of a provision allowing divorce by mutual agreement or DMA.
Clause 29 of the Bill introduces a new fact that can be relied upon to file for a divorce: that the marriage has broken down due to the spouses' agreeing that there has been an irretrievable breakdown. The new section 95A will add this new fact to the existing facts for divorce which centre around adultery, unreasonable behaviour, desertion and separation. In order to rely on this new fact, the spouses must enter into an agreement in writing, stating their reasons for concluding that the marriage has broken down, what efforts they have made to reconcile and what considerations they have given to the arrangements concerning their financial affairs and any child of the marriage.
Sir, in principle, I am supportive of the inclusion of DMA. This will empower the parties to a marriage to decide for themselves whether their marriage has failed, as they are probably the best-placed parties to assess whether they can continue to maintain the marriage.
Currently, the potentially acrimonious nature of divorce proceedings can be traumatic. To illustrate, in my past professional work, I have seen how the children of the marriage can be pressured by one parent to give evidence against the other parent in a bid to prove that the other parent was an unreasonable or irresponsible person. The scars on the family from divorce are undeniable. If the amendment in this Bill can reduce the acrimony and emotional toll on the divorcing family, I support that rationale fully.
Earlier, the Minister of State explained in some detail how the DMA provisions will work. Nevertheless, I wish to seek two clarifications about this change.
First, to what extent can the parties override the traditional grounds for divorce? The new fact of mutual agreement broadens the possibility of divorce beyond the conventional grounds. For the conventional grounds, the law imposes time requirements which need to be satisfied. For instance, for adultery and unreasonable behaviour, the Women's Charter has always required that the offended spouse must not have continued to live with the offending spouse for more than six months after the last incident. This is to show that the offended spouse finds it unreasonable to continue living with such behaviour from the offending spouse. As for the fact of desertion, the offending spouse must have abandoned the other party for a continuous period of two years or more. As for using separation as a fact of divorce, the period required is that either of the spouses have lived apart for at least four years, or for at least three years where the other spouse consents to the divorce.
With the introduction of DMA, it seems to me that parties can agree to divorce where the situations could have come under the traditional grounds but the usual timeframes have not been met. For instance, if the spouses have been living apart, they can agree to divorce if they have been separated for much shorter periods than three years; say, for just six months. To this end, I wonder if retaining the provision for divorce on three years' separation with consent makes sense, as it may be redundant to insist on three years once the parties have agreed to divorce.
Since the purpose of allowing mutual agreement is to do away with onerous requirements of the traditional grounds, the parties can override what was required previously and set their own personal threshold for concluding that their marriage has failed. Some will have lower thresholds.
Is there a risk then that divorce would become too easy? On this question, I do note that there is no change to the requirement that one cannot, generally, file for divorce until after three years of marriage. I agree that this requirement should be preserved. Nevertheless, with the introduction of DMA, the requirements for divorce have arguably been relaxed. Should we then expect an increase in divorce rates?
My second clarification on DMA is how the rights of the spouses and children will be safeguarded. The proposed section 95(6) provides that the spouses must enter any agreement with certain requirements which include spelling out what considerations they have given to sorting out their financial affairs and any child of the marriage. I am concerned about the risk that the parties may enter into an agreement which is unfair to one spouse or not in the best interest of the children. This could well happen when the spouses have unequal bargaining power or when one spouse has legal representation and the other does not. In this regard, I do acknowledge the point made by the Minister of State earlier that this can also happen in other types of divorce, not just DMA.
But specifically, regarding DMA, I have this clarification: if the Court comes across an agreement that is clearly one-sided or detrimental to the children, am I right to assume that the Court may still endorse DMA, but rewrite the arrangements regarding finances and children? In my view, it is critical for the Court to play a watchdog role for any vulnerable parties.
Finally, before I end, I would like to speak briefly on the issue of enforcement of Court Orders for maintenance payments. As Members of Parliament, we do come across single parents who are frustrated and demoralised by having to file repeated applications to Court to get ex-spouses to pay up. These efforts incur legal costs and may require multiple Court attendances without any tangible outcome. I also understand that when there are arrears in maintenance payments, it is not uncommon that the defaulting parent will be allowed to pay the arrears in instalments, placing further hardship on the other parent to find ways to pay bills and feed the children. If the defaulting parent defaults again, the onus is on the innocent parent once again to take out further enforcement proceedings.
Although not covered in this Bill, I note that there are plans by the Government to provide a more efficient and effective means to enforce maintenance orders and to minimise the need for repeat enforcement. It was stated in the Ministry's press release of 1 November on this Bill that the Government is looking into making enhancements to the enforcement of maintenance orders under another law, the Family Justice Act, which will be tabled some time this year. And earlier, the Minister of State confirmed this as well.
This is a welcome announcement. It is absolutely necessary to reduce the burden on the parent who is simply seeking to obtain for themselves and their children what is due from an ex-spouse.
I look forward to studying the upcoming changes, which, hopefully, will strengthen support for single parents and secure children's rights.
Mr Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Mr Speaker, Sir, the major change to the Women's Charter Bill would be the addition of a sixth fact as grounds for divorce – that both husband and wife mutually agree on the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.
I fully support this on the basis that this might be less damaging to the emotional well-being of any children involved and goes some way towards protecting the children.
Currently, when it comes to the paying of maintenance post-divorce, the onus is usually on the man to maintain his ex-wife and children. However, times have changed. Over the years, the issue of gender-neutral maintenance has been raised in this House many times.
There are more men who choose to stay at home to look after the children and the household these days. According to MOM's Labour Force in Singapore Report, there were about 1,500 stay-at-home fathers in 2017, an increase of 700 from a decade earlier. An in-depth study of some of these fathers found that most of them made the choice because their wives were earning more than them.
Indeed, in a double-income household, women may be earning more than their husbands. What happens in the case of a divorce? While men were previously not allowed to seek maintenance, amendments were earlier made to the Women's Charter in 2016 to allow ill, disabled or ex-husbands to seek maintenance from their ex-wives if they are incapacitated, unable to support themselves.
But it is now 2022 and perhaps we can make further progress in moving towards gender-neutral arrangements for maintenance. In many countries, including the United States, Australia, Canada and many European countries, men can claim maintenance from their wives. In Britain, spousal maintenance is paid by the man or woman with the higher income to the one with the lower income.
In 2014, The Straits Times reported an instance of a man who was ordered to pay $70,000 in maintenance to his former wife despite the fact that he was retired, she earned more than him and he paid the mortgage of their marital home. It may be timely for us to re-examine if we should further level the playing field to ensure that our maintenance laws reflect the changes in society and are fair to both parties. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me continue in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, the current amendment to the Women's Charter is mainly focused on the adjustment of the divorce proceedings by adding the sixth fact as grounds for divorce to the existing five, namely, both husband and wife can mutually agree that the marriage has broken down irretrievably, or \"divorce by mutual agreement\", (DMA) in short.
We also understand that the Family Justice Courts has been simplifying divorce proceedings since 2015 to allow couples who want to divorce to do so after they have reached an agreement on the divorce, together with all the ancillary matters. Currently, about 60% of the divorce cases have been filed through the simplified procedures.
Many people feel that once the Bill is passed, most of the divorcing couples will file for divorce on grounds of DMA. In other words, divorce will become easier. With the amendment, I hope that the divorce rate here in Singapore will not increase significantly, resulting in more single-parent families.
In China, when divorce laws were relaxed in 2003, couples can divorce without going to court. As a result, the divorce rate increased significantly. As a result, the Chinese government had to tighten the divorce laws in 2021.
Therefore, I urge that when examining the grounds for divorce filed by couples, judges do not grant a divorce easily just because both parties have agreed that their marriage has broken down irretrievably. We hope that the judges will lean towards requiring divorcing couples to undergo counselling.
On another note, when the Women's Charter was amended in 2016, Mr Speaker, who was then Minister for Social and Family Development, stressed that MSF would appoint maintenance officers to enforce maintenance orders more effectively.
However, during my Meet-the-People Sessions, many single parents still fret over claiming maintenance. Currently, single parents have to go to different agencies in person to verify their documents before they can apply to Court to enforce the maintenance order. Therefore, I hope that MSF can further simplify the procedures, especially in light of the COVID-19 situation, to make it easier for single parents to receive maintenance from their ex-spouse.
(In English): Mr Speaker, notwithstanding the above concerns, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Mariam Jaafar.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Like many Members of this House, I was brought up to believe that marriage is a beautiful thing – something to be protected. But like the Members who have spoken before me and most family law practitioners and women's groups, I support the proposal that providing a less adversarial, more amicable path for divorce and settlement of disputes, without the need to blame either party for adultery, desertion or unreasonable behaviour, will help to reduce conflict during a most difficult time, especially for those with less resources to lawyer up. This will help parties to move on with their lives and the lives of any children involved.
Where children are involved, understanding and acting in the best interests of the child are the most important things. I do not think that the requirement to allege fault does anything to protect the sanctity of the institution of marriage or improve the lot of the child.
Having said that, there are two aspects of the Bill that are crucial to providing important safeguards in light of the proposed amendments.
First, as described in Parts 3 and 4 of the Bill, the provisions related to pre-agreement on matters related to parenting and finances, counselling, mediation, programmes for children, family support programmes and reconciliation. These are all very important safeguards against the criticism that the Bill makes divorce too easy. More importantly, it is in the best interests of the family. In the US, studies have shown that in about 10% of divorces, both parties are often open to efforts to reconcile and, recently, in the UK, the same percentage, 10% of divorce proceedings started, are averted with counselling. Indeed, stronger processes for counselling and mediation pre-marriage as well as before and after a divorce must also go hand in hand with the current proposals in this Bill.
Second, as described in Part 5, are the broader enforcement powers granted to the Court over custody and child access orders. Of all the foundations upon which we build our lives, family is the most important and we are moved to recognise that kids need their moms and their dads to raise them. Society needs their moms and dads to raise them.
We have all heard of parents, men and women, who have shirked their responsibilities as parents after divorce. But we have also heard of parents, again men and women, though notably more men, who want nothing more than to remain a core part of their child's life but are prevented from doing so.
One of my residents did not see his son for eight years, during which he fought in Court for his access rights at great cost to his finances and his career. And he is the fortunate one. He now has access and a good relationship with his teenage son. But I have other residents who are still fighting, who are alienated from their kids, where once a loving relationship existed.
To that end, I have a few questions and suggestions for the Minister's consideration.
One, will the Government allocate more funding and resources to counselling and mediation services to provide trained help for couples, especially vulnerable couples, during the divorce process but also prior to marriage and at the point where they face marriage difficulties, where a marriage might yet be saved?
Two, should there not be a minimum time period for the proceedings to allow proper reflection, consideration and reconciliation? This should not prevent applications for interim support, injunctions or family violence orders, and voluntary counselling and mediation should continue as planned. Further, has the Minister considered making it a requirement for divorcing couples to take a parenting education course – perhaps this is the MPP referred to by the Minister of State – but including information on reconciliation or to take it even further, making counselling and mediation mandatory?
Three, regardless of the grounds for divorce, should there be a minimum period – say, six months to a year – after the final judgment and orders, during which counsellors and mediators check in on the parties to ensure both parents and children are coping well and that the orders are being adhered to?
Four, there is, in some quarters, a perception that the system is biased against men and there is a limited range of support services for men. At this point, I want to recognise the millennial men, who, I think, take on a much more equal role in parenting than their predecessors and are often very close to their children. When things do not work out between the couple, they want to keep that bond. I believe that, for the most part, all services are equally available to men and women. But what is the Government doing to address this perception?
Five, fighting for access to their children is a costly affair that spans years for affected parents. But as my resident told me, when it comes to your child, you will fight all the way, even if it drains your finances, even if you have to represent yourself, which is sub-optimal. Notwithstanding the provisions on enforcement of access orders, can more funds be allocated to legal aid and means tests relaxed so as to increase legal assistance to vulnerable parents?
Six, will the Government undertake a review of the definition of parental alienation, which is currently not tracked, to ensure it can be tracked and to facilitate reforms to protect the rights, interests and physical, mental and financial health of alienated parents and, by extension, their children?
Seven, finally, given that no area of law matters to more people than family law, will the Government consider the establishment of mandatory accreditation, standards and monitoring processes, including complaints mechanisms and ongoing professional development and training requirements for family consultants, counsellors and all family law professionals, including judges, also in the areas of family violence and child abuse, unconscious bias, parental alienation dynamics, engaging and communicating with children and disability awareness?
Notwithstanding the above, I would like to thank MSF for continuing to update the Women's Charter and continuing to advocate for women and children's issues. I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Lim Biow Chuan.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, I declare my interest as a lawyer whose practice involves matrimonial law.
There are two parts of this Bill which I wish to speak on. First is clause 35, which talks about the enhancement of enforcement powers relating to access to a child.
Clause 35 of the Bill introduces new sections 126A and 126B to the Women's Charter. These two sections seek to enhance the enforcement powers of the Court relating to custody and child access orders.
In principle, I agree with the provisions of section 126A of the Bill. However, I would caution that before making any order to the bailiff to seize a child, the Court should consider taking action against the parent who is in breach of the custody order. Seizure of a child, especially if the child is of a tender age, must be done in a sensitive manner so as not to cause any emotional trauma to the child who is caught in the dispute between the parents.
I also support the provisions of section 126B. This new provision will allow an aggrieved parent legal powers to enforce his or her right of access to the child.
I believe that most matrimonial lawyers would have come across cases where one party who was granted access to his or her own child, referred to in the Bill as Party X, had faced difficulties trying to gain access to that child. Sometimes, this is because the other parent, referred to as Party Y, feels that depriving Party X to access is a way of getting back at Party X. And Party Y feels that by not allowing the ex-spouse to see the child, he or she is punishing Party X.
There are also cases where Party Y may threaten to prevent Party X from seeing the child unless Party X concedes to the demands of Party Y. In other words, the child is used as a negotiating tool to compel Party X to back down.
Sir, situations like these cannot be acceptable because it hurts the innocent child caught in a fight between parents. The child should not be used as a negotiating pawn in disputes between two warring spouses. Any parent who chooses to breach the child access order would have to face the consequences.
I also support granting powers to the Court to order Parties X, Y and the child to attend compulsory counselling so that all involved parties can understand that it is in the best interest of the child to grow up with both parents who love and care for the child. This is better than having a child grow up resenting and hating an absent parent who has been deprived of access.
Many matrimonial lawyers would have also come across cases where one parent tries to poison the mind of the child against the other parent by constantly saying negative things about that parent without care and control. In such cases, providing the Court with the power to order the parents to attend educational programmes and for the child to attend therapeutic programmes or family support programmes is an option that would mitigate the toxic effect of the poisoning of the child’s mind.
So, I have two queries about clause 35.
First, the new section 126B(3)(e) provides power to the Court to sentence a defaulting parent to a fine or imprisonment term. In my view, where a parent in default is recalcitrant, the Court’s power to impose a fine or sentence to incarceration will serve as a strong deterrent not to disobey a Court order. However, Sir, I am mindful that there may be occasions when an older child may refuse to see the other parent due to previous negative experiences of being physically or emotionally abused. Or that child may witness his Parent Y being abused by Parent X. Hence, if the child grew up filled with anger against that abusive parent, he may resist any order for access granted to the parent who was abusive.
In situations like this, I hope that a judge hearing such enforcement applications will exercise discretion to interview the child or appoint a counsellor for the child to hear the child’s point of view before making any order of fine or imprisonment. I hope that the Court will be able to discern the circumstances where an access order may not be practical due to an abusive parent. We should not allow an abusive or vindictive parent to abuse the legal process and commit the other parent to jail.
Second, on clause 35, may I ask the Minister of State whether we have enough counsellors to help divorcing parents deal with the issue of access? Counselling can be a long-drawn process and, with about 7,000 divorces every year, these counsellors will be stretched if there are not enough trained counsellors to share the workload. When the Family Courts introduced the compulsory Mandatory Parenting Programme (MPP), I thought that MPP would have counsellors who can help couples think through the process before applying for divorce. However, I was told that MPP is a short session to advise the applicant on the need to make provisions for the child of the marriage.
I am certainly glad to hear the Minister of State say that MPP would be enhanced to provide more support to couples thinking of divorce. Sir, I urge the Ministry to provide more resources to counsellors so that we can do more to assist couples who are contemplating divorce to review their options and also assess the potential impact on the child before proceeding.
Sir, next, I wish to express my concern about clause 29 of the Bill which introduces a new section 95A(1)(f). This new section provides a new ground for parties to apply for a divorce if Parties X and Y agree that the marriage has broken down irretrievably – what is described by MSF as divorce by mutual agreement, or DMA. In 2016, the then Minister for Social and Family Development summed up the Government's policy as follows: “Singapore is our home for family. Strong families are, and must remain, the basic building blocks of our society. In the coming years, my Ministry will continue to strengthen fundamental family relationships and support vulnerable families.”
Sir, if you find this familiar, this speech was made by you when you were then the Minister for Social and Family Development. My understanding of a family in Singapore is that it constitutes a married couple with children and they form the usual family structure in Singapore. Thus, if the Government's policy is to have strong families which are the building blocks of society, then I submit that the Government must do more to promote the institution of marriage so as to strengthen the parties’ commitment to marriage.
A marriage is a serious commitment by two parties to enter into a union with each other. In most marriage vows, each party will, minimally, undertake or pledge to the other that they will love, comfort, honour the other party in sickness and in health so long as they both shall live.
Any couple who has been married for several years will share that it requires much effort by both parties to make a marriage work. Even for happy marriages, there will always be the inevitable quarrels or disputes over finances, lifestyle, upbringing of children and even relationship issues involving the in-laws. And these will shake a marriage.
My concern is whether the new section 95A(1)(f) will make it easier for couples who cannot work out their disputes to take the easy way out and apply for divorce based on mutual agreement. In a written response by the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) in June last year, NCCS expressed concern that “some couples may see the amicable divorce option as providing an easy exit that will allow them to run away from their problems without having to assign blame. Thus, instead of trying to find solutions to their problems as a couple that have pledged their lifelong commitment to each other, that husband or wife may simply decide to end their marriage.” Sir, I share the same concern as NCCS.
I am not anti-divorce. I recognise that, sometimes, despite the best efforts, marriages do not work out for a variety of reasons. In such cases, the law should allow couples to exit from an unhappy marriage.
The current laws recognise that when marriages do not work, parties can file for divorce because the marriage has broken down irretrievably. Currently, there are five possible grounds which constitute irretrievable breakdown of marriage. Three of these grounds are what divorce lawyers commonly call “fault” divorces: adultery, unreasonable behaviour and desertion for a period of two years. These are factors causing the irretrievable breakdown in marriage: a party's adultery, a party's unreasonable behaviour or a party's desertion. The other two grounds are what we call “no fault” divorces which are based on separation for a period of three years with consent or separation for four years even without consent. It is the period of living separate and apart which causes the marriage to breakdown.
Some Members of this House may recall that in the 1970s, parties applying for divorce based on separation were required to live separate and apart for an even longer period of seven years. So, over these years, there have been changes to make divorce easier by shortening the separation period. Thus, in actual fact, parties can divorce without apportioning fault, except that they need to wait the statutory period of three years or four years.
In 2015, the Courts had introduced the Simplified Track for divorce where parties who are able to agree on the terms of divorce and the ancillary matters can have their divorce application dealt with expeditiously. Thus, for parties who wish to settle their divorce cases quickly, the Simplified Track divorce is already an option where parties have to be less acrimonious if they want their divorce to proceed smoothly. They still need to cite one of the five grounds when they file for the divorce. But most parties will come to a compromise on the grounds of divorce. The Straits Times reported on 8 November last year that Simplified Track divorce accounts for 60% of the divorce applications filed.
For cases where parties are unable to agree and wish to contest the divorce, the Courts would, usually, call both parties down for what we call a status conference where the judge would invite parties to review their position whether to have an acrimonious contested divorce. Frequently, both parties will, eventually, accept that if the marriage has broken down, then a contested divorce will not serve anyone’s interest.
This is because, within a divorce, it basically means that the parties remain married, even though they have undergone a contentious divorce hearing, and that does not make sense.
Sir, the current divorce rates in Singapore have remained fairly constant at about an average of 7,424 cases per year for the last five years. Last year, there were 6,959 divorces and 22,651 registered marriages. And the year before, there were 7,623 divorces, with 25,434 marriages.
Given the above facts and circumstances, may I ask Minister of State why is there a need to introduce this new clause to allow divorce by mutual agreement, or DMA? What is the change in circumstances that triggered the need for the introduction of this provision? Does the Government not acknowledge that a divorce may have serious consequences for the children? Some years back, MCCY, as it then was, used to produce pamphlets on divorce: \"Before you Divorce\", \"Divorce\" and \"How to Survive Children and Divorce\". And these pamphlets highlighted the real issues about divorce. One particular pamphlet stood out to me – this is it, for Members of the House who are interested – and this pamphlet says: “At some time in a marriage, problems will arise. Some of these problems seem intractable, others do not. For the problems that seem intractable, people often think that divorce is the answer.\" And it concluded with the words \"Think Again\".
\"Think Again\". So, this pamphlet is available to parties who wanted to file for divorce at the time and it really urged couples thinking of divorce to \"Think Again\". May I ask the Minister of State whether she would agree that allowing a divorce based on mutual agreement may, inadvertently, undermine the marriage vow and parties’ commitment to the institution of marriage? A vow to commit to a marriage can now simply be revoked by mutual agreement to divorce.
Has the Government made any study of the experience in other countries which allow divorce by mutual consent? NCCS cited a study that said that after the first “no-fault divorce” was adopted in California, there was a persistent decline in marriage rates, accompanied by more single parenthood and cohabitation. Would allowing DMA result in an increase in divorce rates? What if this amendment does, in actual fact, result in divorce applications going up by a large number in the next few years? Would there be more single parenthood? How would the Government then try to arrest the increase in divorce numbers because it may be impossible to turn back the change?
In the media release by MSF, the Government cited that there was strong feedback against having to cite fault against the other party and having to dredge up the past just to prove the facts. However, section 95A(6) still requires parties to state in writing the reasons leading X and Y to conclude that their marriage has irretrievably broken down and their efforts made to reconcile. When parties have to cite the reasons for concluding that the marriage has broken down irretrievably, it will be inevitable that there would be some accusations against the other. I also hope that the Government is cognisant that DMA does not mean that there will not be acrimonious litigation. Parties could still fight tooth and nail regarding custody, care and control over the children. They will still fight over the division of assets and maintenance.
Sadly, Sir, divorce is a very emotional process where parties frequently feel betrayed and the acrimony is always there. Sometimes, where parties acknowledge that no one is at fault but they nevertheless want a divorce due to incompatibility or for whatever reason, the advice that can be given to them is to live separate and apart and meet the legal criteria for divorce based on three years or four years separation. Sometimes, parties may want a divorce due to misunderstandings, failure to communicate, quarrels over issues which they feel emotional about. In situations like these, separation may allow parties time to cool down, to review their reasons for wanting a divorce.
That separation may not always lead to reconciliation between the parties. But a divorce does have a massive impact on the parties, especially when young children are involved. If parties are open to attending marital counselling during the separation to help them work out their differences, sometimes, the marriage may be salvaged.
The Government has to strike a balance between making it too difficult for parties in failed marriages to get a divorce versus making it too easy for couples to give up their commitment and call it quits when they encounter difficulties in their marriage. I seek the Government's assurance that we are not taking the latter approach. I would like to ask the Minister of State to assure Members of this House that the Government is committed to promoting and strengthening marriages between couples and that the Government has no intent to allow couples to give up on their marriage too easily. We can do more to build up the institution of marriage in Singapore.
Mr Speaker: Dr Shahira Abdullah.
Dr Shahira Abdullah (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I would like to express my support of this Bill. I am happy that the amendments reflect the importance of the institution of marriage.
As someone who is newly married, of course, my hope is that it does not end in divorce. Before my marriage, I also attended a pre-marriage course in the hopes that it would prepare me better for the greater responsibilities that would come. At the same time, I do acknowledge that marriage may sometimes fail despite the best efforts from both parties. The new section inserted for marriages that have \"irretrievably broken down\" is a good step forward to make the divorce process less acrimonious for parties involved, particularly if there are children already in the marriage.
There are worries on whether it will make the divorce process easier. On the contrary, the current safeguards, such as having to be married for at least three years before filing for divorce, as well as a three-month period before the divorce is finalised, are there. In addition, couples will have to show that they have tried to reconcile and the efforts they have made to settle their children and financial affairs after their divorce. The Court is also able to reject the couple's application if it is deemed that reconciliation is possible. Such couples will have to go through further mediation and counselling.
What this section strives to achieve though is to avoid dragging out the divorce process for couples who are already trapped in an unhappy marriage and are aiming for a peaceful resolution but are just waiting for the legal processes to go through. In addition, this also aims to protect the children's interests. By not needing to state the fault of a divorce and to prove or disprove allegations and thereby causing further tensions, children may be spared the trauma of such experiences. This will help children of divorce to better adapt and cope with the divorce process.
I am, therefore, also happy that MSF has also decided to introduce programmes for the children of divorces and to expand the groups of people who have to attend family support programmes. Divorce may have a traumatising effect on all parties involved, especially children, and even then, not just those in the immediate family.
This step allows families to be better supported throughout the whole process, placing importance on their mental well-being and, hopefully, ensuring that the divorce process has a reduced impact on other aspects of their lives.
Community and religious organisations also have a part to play to assist in the mediation and counselling processes as faith-based teachings can also be tapped on to achieve the best outcomes for suitable couples. Therefore, I actually hope that these resources will also be tapped on to offer marital and divorce counselling support and that the positive changes here will also be extended to Muslim marriages, though they are not administered by the Women's Charter but by AMLA.
All in all, I do believe that the underlying intention is to strengthen marriages and to mitigate the negative effects of divorce and, for that, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, in all that this life has to offer, finding love and getting married is often seen as a major milestone, if not the pinnacle, of one's adulthood. The institution of marriage is one of the oldest practices that has been established since the birth of human civilisation, yet the notion of romantic love as the motivating force for marriage only goes as far back as the Middle Ages and the American and French revolutions. But for much of human history prior, couples were brought together for practical reasons and not because they fell in love. Even in the 20th century and within our very own Pioneer Generation, arranged marriages were not an uncommon theme among Singaporeans. Perhaps, on reflection, it seems that our understanding and experience of romantic marriages are of a much lesser degree and, consequently, our principles and laws governing such marriages, likewise, see a need for finetuning and revision.
In a marriage founded on love, self-fulfilment and companionship, it becomes plausible that a marriage could cease when individuals fall out of love or if ones' needs and expectations are not met in a marriage – the former cannot exist without the latter. As a society, we strive to nurture and preserve the sacred union of a couple. Yet, as we recognise that the dissolution of marriage has become more common in today's day and age, this Parliament, as leaders of society, must look to invest time and effort to understand not only the struggles of divorce, but also to provide the requisite support individuals need in the aftermath of such a decision. It is for this reason that the Labour Movement welcomes the amendments to the Women's Charter as we look not only to enhancing marriage processes but, more importantly, providing greater support for couples through divorce programmes for parents and kin in the midst of the proceedings.
To make the decision to terminate an unsatisfying marriage signifies a major turning point in an individual's life. And I can only imagine the major turbulences and disorientations one might experience being thrust out of their comfort zones and being confronted with intense uncertainty and inconsistency.
Along with the heavy emotional distress and anxiety one faces during the different points of one's divorce journey, individuals going through a divorce are also faced with many tangible and financial issues, often expected to single-handedly formulate ways to deal with post-divorce adjustments in areas of housing and childcare.
These struggles were made real to me when I came across the personal stories of my constituents, some of whom had felt much loneliness and despair when it came to the dissolution of their marriages. One of my constituents came out of a troubled, abusive marriage and faced immense difficulty as she had to find the balance taking care of her two young children, who were traumatised by their parents' difficult relationship, and looking for a job as she sought to provide for her children and family.
Many other constituents have come to look for me for help with their housing after their marriages were dissolved, marital homes sold and they and their children unceremoniously faced with worries about having no roofs over their heads. Many a time, my divorced female constituents have no savings, have not been in formal employment for a while and are facing the complex conundrum of securing a job, finding the financials to purchase a new family home, securing the well-being of their children and also tending to their raw feelings of a dissolved marriage.
In the early stages of parenthood, the ability to financially support one's family is often of immediate and significant importance. The Labour Movement has recognised a need to provide support in this area. Our union leaders – both men and women – have frequently voiced the need to extend employment support for single mothers who require help securing jobs after a divorce.
Since 2009, when Mdm Halimah Yacob launched the \"We Care for U\" project to help single mothers find work, the NTUC has made a concerted effort to render aid to single mothers to find work through women-focused job fairs done with the e2i as well as our LearningHUB. The NTUC Women and Family (WAF) unit also works with the larger Labour Movement Family, such as NTUC's SME unit, to promote flexi-work arrangements and work-life harmony practices that support women in the workplace.
Earlier this year, the Women and Family unit also piloted the Women Supporting Women mentorship to unite women union and grassroot leaders to provide career guidance and advice to women in the community. Through this programme and the networks of our union leaders, many single mothers have been able to connect with job opportunities and build up their confidence of coming back to work.
Although these efforts have been made, our experience with newly-single mothers reflects the need to continue striving to provide support for single mothers as they navigate a new chapter in their lives. The current amendments to expand the legal remit of our Courts to prescribe programmes for children and family support during divorce proceedings are most welcomed. But I hope that such efforts would also be extended to newly-single mothers who could very well benefit from Court-ordered interventions to be provided with counselling for employment, financial and housing assistance.
Furthermore, this responsibility to provide support does not rest solely on the shoulders of our Courts, as employers play an important role in facilitating an environment that welcomes our newly-single mothers. I call on the Government to seek better flexible work support for employees at all life stages but, particularly mothers with dependants. An enhancement of our existing Tripartite Standard for Flexible Work Arrangements could be a great step in looking to provide special assistance for single mothers who bear the sole responsibility of providing for their children and dependants.
Many single mothers have also told me that they would love greater work flexibility to allow them time to send their children to and fro from school. If the school is near their workplaces or homes, it would be a much-welcomed relief as well. It, hence, becomes clear that specialised assistance goes beyond employment alone as the greater availability and accessibility of dependable and perhaps even prioritised support networks, such as childcare centres and after-school programmes for single mothers, become more important. Providing these networks allows for divorced mothers greater assurance that their family is taken care of and, in turn, granting them peace of mind to maximise what they do in the workplace. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Today, marriage is no longer a matter between two families, but a relationship built on the foundation of love between two persons. However, in the past, most marriages were arranged by parents. The Chinese used to say that marriage is by the order of parents and the words of the matchmaker, and that married women are like water poured away. Because of this thinking, many women are aggrieved in the process of divorce or suffer in life after divorce.
We must not turn a blind eye to these problems. Once again, we would like to call for more understanding and ways to provide social protection and support to divorced women. It is for this reason that we must provide better and more reasonable divorce laws for divorce cases through this amendment to the Women's Charter.
When a woman is dragged down by an unsuitable or even unsafe marriage and ends up in divorce, it is not difficult for us to imagine the physical and mental sufferings that decades of ups and downs can bring to her. However, they face not just these problems. Financial issues, social discrimination, bread-and-butter issues and children’s education will come in tandem.
We do not know if a marriage or divorce is a path apart or a rebirth, but our laws can support these women. I wish our women well.
(In English): If marriage is seen as one of life's major milestones, then a divorce and its proceedings should be accorded the same, if not greater understanding. Although divorce may bring about unfavourable repercussions, such a choice should not result in lifelong calamity but rather a fresh start and new beginnings. The provision of livelihood options and its surrounding support mechanisms, such as caregiving support to divorced women and parents, are an important key to this fresh start. Although more can be done, the current amendments to the Women's Charter are a step in the right direction. My concerns notwithstanding, I support this Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Ng Ling Ling.
Ms Ng Ling Ling (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Speaker, I would like to start my speech with a quote from the American author and journalist, Mignon McLaughlin: \"A successful marriage requires falling in love many times, always with the same person\".
Marriage is a lifelong commitment between two individuals who intend to be in a legally-binding union and share a life together. According to the latest Statistics on Marriages and Divorces in Singapore, the annual average number of marriages fell in the last five years from 27,635 to 26,255, compared to the period between 2011 and 2015. Similarly, there is a slight decrease in the annual average number of divorces from 7,439 to 7,424, compared to the previous five-year period. It is, however, heartening to know that the figure for divorce for 2020 was 6,959, the lowest since 2006.
In Singapore, the guiding principle has always been that family is the first line of care and support. Hence, policy and legislative amendments relating to marriages and marital dissolutions can have a deep impact on our social fabric. Therefore, I would like to focus my speech on raising three considerations on the Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill to ensure: one, civil marriages will continue to be upheld and conducted with solemnity; and, two, women and children will be protected in the event of a divorce.
Firstly, I understand that section 24 of the Women's Charter is to be re-enacted to permit remote solemnisation in certain circumstances, providing video-link solemnisations as a permanent option. In addition, new provisions will be included in the amendment to allow for the pre-solemnisation process to be completed online.
I am supportive of MSF's wider effort to promote the digitalisation and enhancement of convenience of the marriage process. However, I am concerned that virtual solemnisation might dilute the significance of marriages.
In the lives of many newlyweds, solemnisation is an important ceremony for family members to witness and be part of the joy in celebrating their union together. An example of diluted significance of marriages for the purpose of convenience can be found in Nevada, United States. Las Vegas, in the city of Nevada, is known to have a booming wedding industry. Wedding-related tourism accounts for nearly US$2 billion of the city's annual US$58 billion tourism industry and generates about 18,000 jobs. One of the reasons for its booming industry is the convenience to get married, such as drive-through wedding services and 24-hour chapels to solemnise couples. Similarly, this has also impacted the divorce rate in Nevada, which has one of the highest divorce rates in the United States, with a rate of nearly 21 divorces per 1,000 married women in 2019.
I would like to seek clarification from MSF on how we can ensure that the digitalisation or solemnisation for convenience will not send the wrong signal to newlyweds that marriage can be conveniently entered into without considering the long-term commitment and devotion needed to create a happy and successful marriage.
Secondly, MSF intends to introduce a sixth fact of \"divorce by mutual agreement (DMA) of the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage\" in the amendment by repealing and re-enacting section 96 and inserting a new section 95A. In the amendment, the new section 95(3) stated that a Court \"must dismiss an application if it is not satisfied that the marriage has irretrievably broken down and there remains a reasonable possibility that the parties might reconcile\". There could, however, be situations where a spouse, who has higher financial control and power over the other, coerces the dependant spouse into mutual agreement to divorce but not out of that spouse's own will. In such situations, how will the Court be able to determine if the mutual agreement of the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage may not be out of their own volition of one of the parties? Are there any safeguards that MSF will make to recommend to the Court that the marriage is still reconcilable?
Lastly, the Women Charter is also amended to mandate for all divorcing parents with minor children to attend the Mandatory Parenting Programme (MPP) before they can file for divorce. In my interactions with residents who are going through divorces, they often share the emotional difficulties that they faced during the proceedings and worry about the impact that their divorce has on their children, especially when the other party refuses to cooperate and allow for a smooth divorce process. I have a resident who once sought my help and shared with me how her ex-husband was missing through most part of the divorce proceedings and was only contactable before the final judgment for divorce is delivered by the Court. In such cases where the marriage has become acrimonious and one of the parties refuses to attend MPP to proceed with the divorce proceedings, will the other half be stuck in the marriage and unable to move on? I would also like to ask what happens if the couple is going through a family violence situation and the perpetrator is not willing to attend MPP? How can MSF ensure that the divorce proceedings will continue and the victim can receive closure to move on in life?
Mr Speaker, it is important to strengthen marriages in creating a cohesive family environment for the next generation to model after. As far as possible, conditions need to be created to allow couples to reconcile amid family disputes and marriage breakdowns. It is inevitable that divorces can occur and families possibly broken apart. It is my belief that there must then be therapeutic justice incorporated in divorce proceedings, in which acrimony and hostility during these proceedings would not be aggravated and the children's best interest is prioritised. Although couples can no longer be husbands and wives, they continue to be parents and role models for their children. Therefore, it is important that the amendments to the Women's Charter allow couples to have closure and move on with their separate lives, while continuing to be the pillar of support for the children that they would likely have to raise jointly. Mr Speaker, notwithstanding my considerations raised, I support the amendment Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim: Mr Speaker, Sir, I declare that I am a practising lawyer, though my practice is not primarily within the matrimonial arena. I do stand in support of this Bill and welcome the amendments to better support our children and families undergoing divorce proceedings in our family justice system.
My speech will be focused on two areas: first, on children and family support programmes; and second, on child access orders.
I welcome the changes which focus on the best interests of the child of the marriage and place importance on therapeutic justice and counselling as steps in the right direction to prevent acrimonious and protracted litigation which may cause greater divisions and rifts in relationships between parents and child.
The children and family support programmes, including counselling, that are envisaged in these amendments would assist with the emotional aspects of dealing with the outcome of orders, particularly in cases involving the relocation of a child. However, this is something that is not unfamiliar or new within the Family Justice System and I draw the experience and lessons from the Administration of Muslim Law Act amendments back in 2017 and the practice of the Syariah Court in this regard. In Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In early 2017, MCCY sought public feedback on the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) amendment Bill. Various community groups provided their views and recommendations, including AMP, which, through RIMA, conducted a focus group discussion (FGD) to collate feedback among various stakeholders and interested individuals. I was involved in the discussions.
The AMLA amendments at that time, among other things, firstly, enshrined a more “child-centric” approach during proceedings and allowed the Courts to refer parties for counselling or a family support programme. Secondly, it requires divorcing parties to attend counselling or any other specified activity before commencement of divorce proceedings.
In divorce proceedings before the Syariah Court, parties are required to attend the Marriage Counselling Programme before they can file an application for divorce. The Registration for the Marriage Counselling Programme must be submitted at the Syariah Court.
Pursuant to section 46A of AMLA, couples who are contemplating divorce are required to attend and complete the Marriage Counselling Programme. The objective of the Marriage Counselling Programme is to assist the couples to explore reconciliation and, if the marriage cannot be saved, the counsellors will facilitate an amicable divorce instead. The Marriage Counselling Programme will be conducted by an agency appointed by the Syariah Court.
In addition, if parties have a child below 21 years old, they must also complete a Parenting Programme during the Marriage Counselling Programme to discuss post-divorce co-parenting plans at the Marriage Counselling Programme. This is to make the divorce process less adversarial and help parties to consider the children’s interests and welfare when making decisions that will inevitably affect their children.
After the divorce, before parties are allowed to collect the Divorce Certificate, if they have at least one child below 21 years old, they must undergo a family support programme known as “Parenting PACT” to help them better understand the impact of parental divorce on children. It also equips them with healthy co-parenting and self-care strategies and provide information on available support resources. These are the mandatory programmes within the divorce process before the Syariah Court.
Additionally, if parties have a child aged between six and 14, they are encouraged to attend the Children-in-Between programme with their child. This programme is free and conducted by the Divorce Support Specialist Agencies which are appointed by MSF. It aims to equip parents with co-parenting skills to promote parental cooperation so as to reduce harmful parental conflicts that are likely to have adverse effects on their child. The programme is also aimed at helping their child to be equipped with self-coping skills to help him or her cope with any stress and deal with the impact of the divorce.
Although the Children-in-Between programme is voluntary, where necessary, the Syariah Court may order parties and their child to attend the programme during or after the divorce proceedings.
In summary, while the current amendments that we are debating today do not impact the divorce proceedings in the Syariah Court, from the Syariah Court's lessons and experience and from past amendments, it is a good step to make children-centric programmes and counselling part and parcel of our family justice process.
As such, I welcome the amendments to the Women’s Charter presently.
(In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, with this, I have some clarifications
In relation to divorces under the Family Justice Courts (FJCs), what is the rationale for not making the child's completion of a programme for children mandatory? I ask this because it is already mandatory under section 50(3A) of the Women's Charter that divorcing parents with any child below 21 have to attend counselling or mediation sessions at the FJCs.
The 2020 data also shows that couples who were married for five to nine years accounted for the largest share, 29.4%, of all divorces. This is the same for both civil and Muslim divorces. There is, thus, a great likelihood that this segment of couples would have younger children as well. As such, these children may benefit from attending such programmes. I heard from the Minister of State just now at the Second Reading opening speech that around 200 children undergo such programmes. That is less than 5% of the 6,000 or so affected children whose parents are undergoing divorce proceedings.
I, thus, make two proposals in this regard which are akin to the Syariah Court experience that I have shared earlier.
First, perhaps counselling and attendance of programme for children should be made mandatory either before the commencement of FJC proceedings or before the final judgment or divorce certificate can be issued or collected. This may nip in the bud any acrimonious or protracted divorce litigation which may be detrimental to the children.
Second, for couples with at least one child aged between six and 14, perhaps counselling and such programmes should be made mandatory for the same reasons as earlier stated. In relation to the programmes for children, the proposed new section 132A defines \"programmes for children\" as any programme carried out to help a child handle the impact of a divorce or judicial separation. May I ask what are the types of programme for children are envisaged? Can the Minister perhaps provide examples, with reference to already existing programmes?
In this regard, I also make two separate proposals. Given the utility of such programmes and the need to develop human capital with the necessary expertise, perhaps a national professional body can be tasked to oversee training and provide such programmes across the board. This facilitates harmonisation and uniform standards of counselling and the building up of cross-training, sharing of expertise and experiences for cases between both FJC and SYC. This is useful, especially in cases of inter-faith or inter-ethnic marriages, where, apart from the parties, that is, the parents or the children, the prescribed persons like the grandparents or other caregivers may also come from different backgrounds, faiths or cultures.
A second proposal perhaps is for greater collaboration and cooperation within the law schools, Law Society of Singapore and lawyers to inculcate, within the Bar, the importance of therapeutic justice and a child-centric approach towards divorces in our family justice system.
In respect of access orders, I welcome the amendments to help expand the Court's enforcement powers in relation to custody orders and child access orders. The COVID-19 pandemic has, inevitably, impacted custodial rights over children. We have seen how the parent with care and control decided to unilaterally suspend, halt or restrict the other parent's visitation rights during this pandemic.
I have some concerns, however, on the amendments.
Under the new section 126A, the Court is empowered to direct the bailiff to restore a child to the physical custody of a parent or other person. Such order or direction, I think, should be used sparingly and reserved for the most egregious of cases. For example, where access orders have been breached on numerous occasions or where, despite the wishes of the child, the parent refused to give access to the other parent. For young children, the experience of being taken, whether forcibly or otherwise, from the physical custody of one person to another, can be very traumatic.
In this regard, I have a few questions. What are the guidelines and safeguards to ensure the safety and prevention of trauma on the child during the exercise of such powers? Would the relevant officers and agencies also be trained to be more trauma-informed and sensitive to such situations?
Next, under the new section 126B, the Court has powers to enforce a child access order, including ordering make-up access and imprisonment. If I may ask the Minister, in respect of make-up access orders, would this be determined with the best interest of the child in mind, before such orders are made? I ask this because there may be other limitations, such as the child's other commitments and her or his own rest periods. Would there be an objective assessment before determination, for example, that a social welfare report be commissioned?
And in respect of the punitive punishment aspect, as stated, the parent in breach can be fined up to $20,000 or jailed up to 12 months or both. In this regard, usually, such breaching parent is the one with the care and control of the child. Hence, would not a jail term be effectively disruptive to the care of the child? In such an instance, who would take care of the child and who would effectively have care and control then? Would it be better to empower the Courts to order a variation of the care and control order, that is, a reversal of the care and control, instead of a jail term?
Notwithstanding the clarifications and proposals, Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, parting ways with someone you used to love or perhaps still love may not be an easy process. When a child is involved, it could get even harder.
Going through a divorce is an emotionally draining period and we should do our best to help fellow Singaporeans. We should make sure our policies do not make the divorce process more acrimonious.
The proposed amendments to the Women's Charter are a step in the right direction. They modernise our marriage processes, allow for no-fault divorces and expand divorce support programmes. They acknowledge the reality that marriage, despite our best hopes and efforts, may break down. In such situations, our laws should help everyone affected, especially the children, to move on. But I hope we can do more, much more, and I have three suggestions to make.
My first suggestion is with regard to parents with shared care and control. Couples know that if they get shared care and control of their child, they will have to fight each other for who gets to list their child as occupiers in their application for a HDB flat; essentially, who gets subsidised public housing. If one party gets sole care and control, then he or she is guaranteed this subsidised housing.
Is it in the best interest of the child for their parents to have a more acrimonious divorce? We know that having a roof over one's head is essential and is perhaps one of the biggest worries following a divorce, especially for the lower income.
Sir, will the Government consider working with the Family Courts and changing its policies to provide children of such parents with less housing instability? We know that our Courts are increasingly ordering divorced parents to have shared care and control. Such orders have almost doubled in recent times, comprising 9.5% of Court judgments in 2020, up from 5.6% in 2016. As mentioned, HDB requires such parents to obtain mutual consent from the other parent before listing their child as an occupier in an HDB flat application. This creates three problems, all of which are bad for the children.
First, during divorce proceedings, parents may fight more aggressively for sole care and control to secure their right to apply for a subsidised HDB flat.
Second, after divorce, parents may continue fighting over this issue of mutual consent.
Third, when one parent refuses to grant consent, the other parent and their child may be stuck in housing instability. This affects the child's material and emotional well-being.
I know those with difficulties can appeal. Since 2016, HDB has granted 13 out of 20 such appeals and approved another seven rental flat applications related to shared care and control cases. But allowing appeals does not solve any of the above three problems. Our policies may still create tension, conflict and instability as a default for children in such cases. I have three proposals for fixing this policy.
First, the Ministry should work with the Family Courts to enable the Courts to settle the question of mutual consent at the stage of divorce. If both parents reach an agreement, it should be stated in the Matrimonial Property Plan and reflected in the divorce judgment. If they do not, each parent should present their reasons to the judge, who can make an order on which parent gets to list the child as an occupier. This is not overly intrusive, as judges already settle property matters during divorce proceedings, such as by dividing the matrimonial property. Divorce rulings also already decide on custody, care and control and division of matrimonial assets, which are equally contentious. So, why not housing?
Second, HDB should drop its requirement for mutual consent as long as the other parent already owns private property.
Third, HDB should automatically allow parents to list the child as an occupier if both parents are of lower income.
These proposals will help avoid adding housing instability to the children of divorced parents.
My second suggestion is about the \"Children-in-Between\" programme. It is an exceptionally good programme that provides counselling and support for children whose parents are undergoing divorce. I raised this previously and am again calling for the Ministry to consider making it mandatory for all children whose parents are undergoing a divorce. In the past few years, many people undergoing divorce have approached me for help, and many are in tears as they share their painful journey. Often, I see their child, at times, a very young child, hugging their parents, comforting them and providing tissues to wipe their tears. The children step up, but I often wonder if they truly understand what is happening to mummy and daddy and whether we are providing them with enough help during this very confusing, painful and distressing period for someone who is so young.
Sir, my proposal is that the Court should, by default, order that all children of divorced parents participate in the \"Children-in-Between\" programme. Parents can appeal to opt out. Currently, and unfortunately, less than 2% of children affected by divorce attend this programme. We should do a lot more to make this number as close to 100% as possible.
My final suggestion is about renaming the Women's Charter. When the Women's Charter was enacted in 1961, it was instrumental in protecting the rights of women. Today's amendments ensure that the Charter continues to do so, including by clarifying the rights and duties of husbands and wives. As we modernise this law, we should also consider making its name more appropriate. My proposal is that we rename it to the Family Charter. This is for three reasons.
First, the bulk of this law protects not just women but men and children as well. This is true of the existing law. But it is also true of today's amendments. No-fault divorces, children support programmes and modernised marriage solemnisations are all good not just for women but also for families in general.
Second, bundling family- and children-specific laws under a Women's Charter has the unintentional effect of suggesting that women have some unique place in raising children. It runs against everything else this Government is saying that men need to contribute equally at home, that employers should not treat women and mothers differently. I know the Government does not mean to send this message, but that is what it looks like. This is bad for women, and it is bad for families.
Third, there is a rising, incorrect sentiment that the Women's Charter is bad for men. Research by AWARE and Quilt.AI found that one of the main narratives in online misogyny is that \"men are unprotected by the law.\" The problem is summed up by one of the examples cited in the research: \"Where is the Men's Charter?\" Undoubtedly, we know these voices are wrong. But renaming the Women's Charter to accurately describe its scope can help defuse the anger.
I am aware that Part 11 and other provisions of the Charter are specific to crimes related to women. We can move them to the relevant criminal statutes, such as the Penal Code.
Let me be clear. Renaming the Women's Charter does not mean we have achieved the goal of gender equality. Data and stories make clear that there is still a painful inequality in everything, from attitudes to affluence. The renaming would help reshape minds, but it would not be enough by itself. We will continue to need changes in laws and mindsets to make progress on the road towards gender equality.
In summary, my points today are: one, that the Ministry should make flat applications easier for parents with shared care and control; two, the Ministry should mandate the Children-in-Between Programme for children with divorced parents; and three, that we rename the Women's Charter to the Family Charter. Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, societal views on relationships and marriages change over time. As such, marriage and divorce laws ought to be updated accordingly. With the new no-fault divorce policy, we follow in the footsteps of countries like Australia, Canada, China and Sweden. England and Wales will also adopt this no-fault approach this coming April.
This approach is increasingly advocated due to the widespread consensus that a contentious divorce has grave negative implications on children. In serious cases, it causes post-traumatic stress disorder. Subsequently, when no blame is ascribed, parties involved in the divorce can also move on with their lives.
Despite its growing prevalence, no-fault divorce remains controversial. This is largely attributed to the common belief among naysayers that it will erode the sanctity of marriage and lead to a breakdown of the family unit. Considering this, I wish to raise three issues.
First, Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government must ensure that the no-fault divorce policy will not be misconstrued as an easy way out of an unfulfilling marriage. Many Members today have spoken about this. The Ministry has also shared about the safeguards in place to prevent this from happening.
Marriage is a blissful time. When vows are exchanged, couples look forward to spending the rest of their lives with their partners. Couples in Singapore must commit to marriage for at least three years before any sort of divorce is allowed, barring exceptional circumstances. For at least one party in a marriage to consider divorce, especially when there are children in the picture, it may signify that there were irreconcilable differences. Whether this is factual, the Court's assessment of the relationship and further intervention would come in handy.
Thus, I urge the Government to share more details about the assessment process. Will it involve professionals in family affairs, such as marriage counsellors, therapists, mediators as well as social workers who work with family and children? How long would the process take from the time that divorce is filed until there is a conclusion? Can the couple appeal if the Court rejects their request for a no-fault divorce?
Mr Speaker, Sir, as with all problems, prevention is better than cure. If we can identify potential problems early, couples may be better prepared to deal with them and ameliorate any consequences. My suggestion is to normalise marriage counselling and make it more accessible to all. I am heartened that many religious leaders have expressed support to help strengthen marital ties and resolve marital disputes. MSF, likewise, provides free marital counselling. Last November, a new Strengthening Families Programme was launched, where 10 Family Service Centres will offer specialised services to address issues related to marriage, finances and parenting.
That said, there remains a stigma among some that seeking counselling is a sign of failure. I have a resident who wanted to get marital counselling. However, her husband was of the opinion that her concerns are too trivial and that seeing a counsellor was embarrassing and deemed as a waste of time. Unfortunately, marital problems may be analogous to cancer. If your signs are not detected and addressed early and when they snowball, the situation becomes implacable or terminal. We must do more to destigmatise the shame and trivialisation often associated with marriage problems so that more would take a proactive approach to seek professional help.
As we expand outreach and improve our family and marriage support services, the demand for resources will grow. Do we have sufficiently trained professionals to cater to a projected growing demand? What is the average waiting time to seek family counselling under MSF and to get follow-up appointments? Is there remedial action if the couple does not attend subsequent counselling sessions?
Mr Speaker, Sir, my last point is on ensuring continued and improved counselling support for parties in acrimonious marriages and contested divorces.
I wish to propose that the Government consider extending mandatory counselling to pre-divorce couples. Under existing policies, there is a mandatory parenting programme for couples with children under 21 years old. In Sweden, a couple filing for divorce may obtain family advice to resolve cohabitation conflicts and, conceivably, avoid divorce. Should divorce be inevitable, the family advice service would help to alleviate the conflict to make it possible for the parents to operate together in a parental role. This service is provided by the municipal and county councils, religious bodies and other private individuals.
I would like to propose for pre-divorce counselling sessions to apply even for couples without children.
The mandatory parenting programme, presently, only applies when there is a child from the marriage. It will be beneficial for every couple, with or without children, to go for mandatory pre-divorce counselling before they can file for a no-fault divorce. This is to establish that, indeed, the reasons leading to divorce were untenable but mutually agreed – that no one would be held accountable for the divorce.
Pre-divorce counselling sessions should involve professionals in relationship and marriage matters. The focus should be on the couple themselves, separate from assets and children. Interactions with the couple during the counselling session would enable professionals to develop a comprehensive assessment on both parties' attitudes and whether there is hope for reconciliation. If, indeed, there is not, they can proceed with counselling on how to move on with childcare, asset division and other implications related to divorce.
Couples in a hostile relationship could greatly benefit from professional counselling that is targeted at improving their mental and emotional well-being. With a healthy mindset, both parties can then work together to seek fairer outcomes from the dissolution of marriage and move on with their lives.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, the implementation of a no-fault divorce must be accompanied by policies and processes to facilitate the amicable parting of ways. This is with the aim of reversing the breakdown or making the process less acrimonious for all, especially the children, if a dissolution is inevitable.
I know of a Mr A who was in an unhappy marriage with his wife. They had attended marriage counselling but to no avail. As such, they are looking forward to the passing of the new no-fault divorce law so that they can divorce civilly and move on, without waiting for another three years. They have children and hope to co-parent them but have some disagreements over shared custody as well as the allocation of assets and resources. They have no wish to take the matter to Court. They agreed that some form of pre-divorce counselling to help them navigate the financial and emotional implications of their decisions would be helpful. With appropriate guidance, the estranged couple would, hopefully, come to an agreement. Their children would enjoy a healthy childhood under their co-parenting.
While it is meaningless to trap people in unhappy marriages, we must continue to encourage the preservation of healthy and happy marriages. Pre-marital counselling is, currently, widely practised and accepted. The next step is to normalise marital counselling and encourage couples to seek professional help at the early onset of problems. This is all a part of improving communication and strengthening relationships. We must set aside the necessary resources to achieve this. I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to start with the amendments to enhance the marriage processes.
First, on the digitalisation of marriage certificates. I would like to know if the digital versions apply to both civil and religious marriage ceremonies. For religious ceremonies, will the issuers of the certificates be the churches or temples? Not all religious organisations have the digital security resources of Government agencies. In addition, I am concerned about the vulnerability of the IT systems. Thus, I hope the Government can help the religious organisations not only secure digital resources but also ensure safeguards are in place to prevent online theft of these sensitive information.
Second, how will digitally-registered marriages be reflected in our Singpass? Presently, under the family tab in Singpass, one can see the marriage certificate number but no indication of the identity of the spouse, which may be important in proving family relationships in emergencies. I feel that including a partly-masked name or NRIC number is equally important.
Marriage is a very happy occasion. Solemnisers, in journeying with couples in the preparation of the ceremony, very often, become very close friends. It is important, therefore, that solemnisers be equipped with counselling skills to help the couples they are marrying. Courses are optional but I would suggest that they be made mandatory.
As a previous solemniser myself, some of the couples had turned to me after their weddings for advice when they encountered marital issues. However, I was not trained and could only share my own personal experience. I would, therefore, recommend that solemnisers undergo training and be updated on the assistance programmes available so that they can be a source of emotional support and point couples who seek their help to the appropriate agencies.
Next, on divorce processes.
I support the introduction of a sixth fact of \"divorce by mutual agreement of the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage\", or DMA, for short.
All families want marriages to work but not all will be able to see them through. Under this fact, efforts to reconcile will have to be submitted to the Court. This is a well-intentioned clause but I am concerned that it could make things worse, especially in marriages where there are children. We should be careful about imposing this condition, which might add tension to an already unhappy and strained household.
In addition, the focus in such situations tends to be on helping the younger children. Children mature very quickly these days and young teens can sense what is going on in their parents' relationship. Unfortunately, they are usually not mature enough to handle all the negative impact and some may even blame themselves.
I, therefore, urge the Ministry to put more effort to support these children. Engage and counsel them, even the older ones. Their voices should be heard, and more can be done to ensure that they receive assistance for mental health during and after this very stressful transition period. Sir, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] When couples are processing their divorces, the agencies’ focus tends to be on helping the younger children tide over this difficult transition.
These days, children mature quite quickly, and young teens can sense what is going wrong in their parents’ relationship. Unfortunately, they are usually not mature enough to handle all the negative impact by themselves and some may even blame themselves.
I urge the Ministry to do its best to support these children, engage and counsel them, even the older ones. Their feelings and thoughts should also be heard. The Ministry can do more to ensure they receive assistance for mental health during and after this very stressful transition period.
(In English): Sir, I would like to conclude with my support for the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Gan Thiam Poh. Ms Carrie Tan
Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, the name \"Women's Charter\" has given many the impression that it only benefits women. In reality, the Charter protects some men, women and children from exploitation within the family. My colleague, Member of Parliament Louis Ng, spoke on this earlier and I would like to reiterate the same point. We can still do more to promote gender equality and also address the erroneous impression that the Women's Charter protects only women's rights when what it aims to do is to protect the rights of individuals, pertaining to families.
My speech will focus on the matters around divorce. And I speak as someone who had been married before, had an annulment and is currently dating a partner who was divorced with two lovely sons. And I speak because I believe that we can re-imagine life post-divorce and that second chances can be better. I support the current amendments to make divorce less acrimonious to protect the well-being of all parties involved and to enable better post-divorce emotional healing for all parties, especially for children.
Hence, my first request is the change in the name of the \"Women’s Charter\" to \"Family Charter\". In the spirit of enabling better healing from the pain and trauma of divorce, renaming the Charter would send an important signal to reduce the animosity seen too often in divorce proceedings.
Firstly, it would correct the prevailing impression that family law in Singapore favours women over men. This common misconception that there is a statute that protects women against men, gives divorce a \"zero-sum\" tone that induces a fear-based and defensive approach. Hence, the mindset that divorce cases must be \"fought\", and that someone must win and someone will lose.
In line with making divorces less acrimonious, renaming the Charter to Family Charter can reduce the acrimony and forge a more collaborative approach to negotiating divorce settlements. And I said the word \"collaborative\". The aim of divorce proceedings should and must be to ensure all parties’ well-being post-divorce and not of anyone winning or losing. For that, the spirit of collaboration should and can exist even when someone breaks up, when one seeks to ensure the well-being, especially that of the children’s.
My hon colleague Mr Lim Biow Chuan mentioned earlier a variety of ways children are caught between acts of vengefulness by parents against each other. With the change in name to Family Charter, no gender’s rights or interest is placed above another's. Husbands would have less reason to perceive that the system is against them. Defensive or retaliatory behaviours stemming from acrimony, mounted whichever way by husband or wife, can cause undue suffering and, most unfairly, to children who have to witness the ill-feelings between their parents. The emotional trauma and wounds on children from divorce can have long-lasting impact, as an MSF report has shown last year. Since the intention behind the Charter is to protect people, families and children, the intention must be seen through by taking into account the perceptions that can arise from its name.
My second point is on the maintenance of children and the ex-spouse, and I believe it should go both ways. Husbands should be entitled to apply for maintenance from their wives where the circumstances are necessary and appropriate, both during and after marriage. In 2016, the Women’s Charter was amended to allow husbands to apply for maintenance from their wives if they are sick or incapacitated. We can go beyond that, to allow for husbands to apply for maintenance from wives, if the distribution of labour between the spouses during marriage favoured the earning potential of the wife to be realised instead of the husband’s.
In the past, it may have been the predominant phenomenon that men were the primary breadwinners and that women were the primary caregivers. However, times are changing rapidly. In our current efforts to uplift women and help women fulfil their career aspirations, I have championed the ungendering of care as a key tenet to free up women’s bandwidth from an overburden of care responsibilities.
As a feminist, I believe there should be no double standards. If women expect men to pull their weight in domestic and caregiving chores in order to free us up to pursue our career aspirations, it follows logically that in cases where a woman earns much more than her husband and the husband has been taking on more of the domestic responsibilities, husbands should also be able to access maintenance after divorce. This will send a strong signal and provide actual reassurance to men that their well-being and rights, too, are protected should their roles at home be shifted vis-à-vis their wives.
In fact, for the clauses around “offences against women and girls”, we will do well to reword them to be gender neutral. After all, not only women and girls get hurt. Men can be victims of violence, too, whether in domestic settings or in wider contexts. I have come across cases during my Meet-the-People Sessions where husbands suffer physical abuse from violent wives, as well as mental abuse through emotional blackmail and threats. However, these are rarely reported due to the stigma around men showing their vulnerability.
I will share here a quote in Mandarin from one of my residents. He said: “政府只要保护女人，这个没有错。可是谁会聆听我们的心声。” or “The Government wants to protect the women; it is not wrong. But who is going to listen to the men's voices?\"
To truly protect families, men deserve protection equally and clauses should provide for that, even if the number of occurrences of men being victims are significantly lower than women.
Finally, we should reduce unnecessary time and stress where possible on divorce proceedings. At the risk of sounding utilitarian – and my intention is not to undermine the sanctity of marriage but to take a pragmatic view – we must note that couples are getting married at older ages now, compared to 40 years ago. The average Singaporean man gets married three years later and the average Singaporean woman five years later. Much time is spent and wasted because the current Charter only allows couples to apply for divorce after three years of marriage. And this is precious time lost for those who find out after getting married and living together that they are not the right lifelong partners for each other.
I understand the perspective that marriages need to be worked at and differences need time to be worked through for marriages to work out, and I agree with Mr Lim Biow Chuan's views that we should not offer an easy cop-out. However, there are also cases where individuals may find out intolerable issues about their spouses only after marriage, such as chronic infidelity, a tendency towards violence that surfaces only after the honeymoon period, or a history of debilitating financial debt that renders a marriage unreasonably difficult.
While there currently is a clause that allows for \"exceptional hardship\" for divorce before three years is up, it is open to subjective interpretation. Those contemplating divorce while suffering in a marriage would be caught deliberating what would be considered or not considered \"exceptional hardship\". What would be helpful would be a non-exhaustive list of factors or considerations of what would constitute exceptional hardship or depravity to serve as a guide for the Courts and also for those experiencing suffering within their marriages within the first three years.
In cases where the individuals in the marriage have irreconcilable differences, a three-year window of futile attempts at reconciliation is precious time lost that holds individuals back from pursuing a more fulfilled life. I recognise that it is a difficult matter to choose and decide on, whether we should mandate time for the couples to work things out in order to \"save marriages\" or allow people to move on and to pursue the possibility of more workable marriages. Some data would be helpful, and we should look into data on how successful the deed of separation has been in achieving reconciliation. What numbers of marriages get successfully salvaged and turned around after the deed of separation period? If the data shows that most of them end in divorce anyway, I recommend the time bar for divorce be reduced to one year for all couples.
In conclusion, I summarise my three recommendations for the amendment Bill in addition to the current ones: one, to change the name of the Women’s Charter to Family Charter to see through its intention of protecting the rights of both women and men in the context of family matters; two, for maintenance applications to be allowed for both men and women without condition of incapacity or disability if the domestic role is undertaken more by the husband; and three, for the time bar of three years’ marriage for divorce to be reviewed and reduced to one year should the trend of futility in reconciliation be shown in relevant data.
Notwithstanding these, which I hope can be considered in future amendments, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.00 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.39 pm until 4.00 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.00 pm.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Speaker, Sir, one of the most significant changes to the Act is the introduction of the new section 95, divorce by mutual agreement of the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, or DMA, in short.
I welcome this amendment which I feel will help reduce the agony and bitterness during the difficult process of divorce, since neither party will have to provide evidence of each other's faults. Hopefully, the couple can channel most of their energy and resources to moving forward or, in the case where there are children, making suitable new arrangements to care for them. I believe that this section may even be a lifesaver in preventing some couples' situations from escalating, which could, potentially, cause harm to themselves or their children. The process of separating and breaking up a family is so stressful and emotional. There had been cases in the past where one or both parties inflict physical harm on each other or their kids. This situation is to be avoided at all costs and the risk of confrontational exchanges must be minimised.
There is a provision for the Registrar to have the discretion to require any couple to perform any pre-solemnisation step in person where there may be concerns, such as suspected marriages of convenience. Unfortunately, there has been quite a number of foreigners who abuse the system and marry for convenience to stay or work, sometimes illegally, in Singapore. The Ministry must continue to review our measures to deter those who want to marry for convenience. The penalties must be suitably set at levels which will be effective deterrents.
Not only are such illegal partnerships undermining our institution of marriage, but they are also often linked to criminal and vice activities which damage the fabric of our society. I would like to ask how many of such cases of marriages of convenience have we had in the past 10 years and how many have been involved in illegal sex activities. With that, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to speak on this Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill. I would, first, like to declare that I am a practising lawyer and a member of the Law Society's Family Law Committee 2022.
According to the Holmes and Rahe Stress Scale, divorce is one of the most stressful events in one's life, second only to the death of a loved one. This finding is unsurprising as part of the divorce process involves parties coming before the Family Court to end their marriage and address how their most private family affairs will be restructured.
More often than not, the contentious divorce proceedings can prove to be emotionally-charged events for embroiled parties, overriding rational thinking and clouding judgements. Unfortunately, the children are usually not spared from the effects and stresses of their parents' divorce, even though they are the most innocent parties in these matters. There are ways to make the entire divorce process less strenuous and minimally impactful for our little ones if everyone is on the same page.
As what the Presiding Judge of the Family Justice Courts, Justice Debbie Ong, has shared in her workplan speech in 2020, the Family Justice Courts and the Family Justice Community will be co-creating a renewed vision of family justice, informed by the principles of therapeutic justice. It is the hope that our collective efforts would help to engender a mindset shift in the community. The resolution of family disputes need not be an adversarial one but should be focused on solutions.
I, therefore, speak in support of this amendment Bill as I am hopeful that several of the changes that will be brought about by the passing of this Bill would encourage parties to work out their marital differences, lessen the acrimony of Court proceedings and foster parties' cooperation towards co-parenting their children post-divorce.
This will be beneficial to the affected children as studies have shown that the level of acrimony during a divorce proceeding has a perceptible impact on a child's well-being. Children should not be expected to take sides and be caught in a conflict of loyalty. Instead, they should continue to be embraced by both parents with love and attention, regardless of their respective marital status.
John Bowlby's Attachment Theory asserts the notions that children need warm, consistent and responsive caregivers to form secure attachments. Interruptions and interferences in the attachment-formation years can have long-lasting impact resulting in insecure attachment styles.
We often hear of stories of parental alienation, where a parent would refuse the other party from having access to the child as a result of hatred, or as a retaliation to deprivation of maintenance by the other party. There are also situations where the child has rejected one parent's request for contact so as to appease the other parent whom they are residing with. The new section 126B, in relation to the enforcement of child access orders, empowers the Court to order, inter alia, the parties to attend therapeutic programmes or counselling in the hope that the hostilities between parents can be better managed and that the child is spared from choosing sides.
I believe that these sessions will take place at the Divorce Support Specialist Agencies (DSSAs). In this regard, I wish to seek clarifications on whether there are any fees applicable and payable by parties for participation in such sessions. Currently, the supervised exchange or supervised visitation programmes ordered by the Court to take place at DSSAs are free of charge for the first three Court orders.
From the fourth Court order onwards, however, the parties will have to pay for such services at DSSAs. Visitations which will be supervised by a counsellor on a Saturday at the DSSA will cost $240 per hour.
There are, presently, seven family service centres and DSSAs located across Singapore. By the end of FY2022, there will be 10 regional centres available to support families in need. In view of the increased support, would the Ministry consider increasing the number of complimentary sessions for parties to carry out supervised access at the DSSAs? Would the social service agencies also be able to provide more hand-holding services to closely monitor the education and welfare of the children during and after their parents' divorce so as to prevent the possibility of delinquency and other potential social complications?
As what Mr Lim Biow Chuan has shared earlier in his speech, in order to file for divorce in Singapore, one has to, first, persuade the Court that the marriage has irretrievably broken down by citing one of the facts, either fault-based or non-fault-based, as set out in section 95A of the Women's Charter.
Currently, parties who are unable to fulfil the requirements to file for divorce based on the non-fault-based facts are, nevertheless, required to cite facts blaming the other spouse as the cause of the breakdown of the marriage even when both are cordial about ending the marriage in the first place. The new amendment, which introduces the sixth fact, termed divorce by mutual agreement of the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, may be a new solution to those parties who are in mutual agreement to dissolve the marriage.
Under the new fact, couples are to take joint responsibility for the breakdown of the marriage and will have to include, among other reasons, the reasons for the marital breakdown in their submissions to the Court. In this regard, I hope the Ministry can elaborate on what types of reasons are deemed as acceptable to substantiate that the marriage has irretrievably broken down under the new sixth fact.
I understand that the Minister of State has shared earlier that parties may cite examples of their deep-seated differences so as to substantiate this fact. In this regard, I hope that the particulars to be mentioned to support this fact need not require parties to set out each other's misdeeds as that will require them to rehash their marital disputes all over again. In my opinion, this does not assist in reducing the acrimony between the parties.
Moreover, I do hope that parties should avoid attributing the children as the reason for the breakdown of the marriage. Children should not be made to feel that they are the cause of their parents' divorce. As mentioned earlier, divorce does have long-term effects on children. Social science research has shown that feelings of guilt, abandonment and shame have adverse impact on a child's physical and mental health development.
Under the new sixth fact, the parties will also have to show efforts at marital reconciliation. I support the inclusion of this requirement, especially when children are involved.
During the Family Justice Practice Forum 2020, Miss Audrey Siew, then director of the Family Support Division of MSF, shared that an intergenerational study was conducted in 2020 to examine the long-term impact of divorce on children. Compared to children whose parents were not separated, children from divorced families are less likely to complete University, may earn comparatively lower salaries and are more inclined to remain single and are predisposed to divorce if they are married by the age of 35.
Apart from illustrating the reconciliation efforts, the parties will also need to set out the considerations that they have made for their children and the financial affairs in their submissions to the Court when filing under the sixth fact. In this regard, can the Ministry clarify if this means that this fact can be relied upon only when the divorce is filed under the Simplified Track where parties have agreed on all issues relating to the divorce and the ancillary matters?
There are situations where a divorce filed in an acrimonious manner, for example, on the basis of the defendant's unreasonable behaviour or adultery, has since seen both parties subsequently undergo mediation at the Family Justice Courts, during which marital reconciliation was explored, but failed. However, these parties have, in turn, reached an amicable global settlement on the divorce and ancillaries through mediation. In this case, could the Courts allow the divorce to be proceeded with on an uncontested basis on an amended claim under the sixth fact?
There is a Chinese saying: 家家有本难念的经 — every family has its own challenges. Families which are involved in litigation often come with complex needs and issues. Underlying many of these family disputes are non-legal-related concerns. As such, I echo the need for collaborative, holistic and multidisciplinary interventions to be used to address the families' underlying dysfunctions and emotional needs whenever possible. More importantly, we should prevent the children from feeling distressed while in the midst of their parents' divorce proceedings, bearing in mind that such an adverse experience can have a lasting negative impact on their lives, lasting far into adulthood.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, notwithstanding my request for clarifications and suggestions, I stand in support of this amendment Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill, which seeks to improve marriage processes for couples and incorporate therapeutic justice elements into the divorce proceedings. However, I have some clarifications and suggestions.
Sir, MSF has proposed a major amendment to the divorce process, by introducing a sixth fact of divorce by mutual agreement of the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, or DMA, for short.
Sir, DMA is, essentially, a \"no-fault divorce\", which enables couples to take joint responsibility for the breakdown of their marriage. The rationale for introducing such a concept, as explained by MSF, arose from feedback from divorcees that having to cite one of the current fault-based facts as the reason for divorce dredges up unhappy memories and can cause the divorce proceedings to turn acrimonious, thus making it detrimental to the emotional well-being of their children. In essence, however, it can be argued that DMA makes the divorce process easier.
Sir, as a Catholic, I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I was taught that marriages are meant to be sacred and lasting. The divorce process should not be made too easy as we want couples to work through their problems that will, inevitably, crop up in any marriage. Major challenges, such as struggling to care for their first-born who refuses to stop crying in the middle of the night or coping with the financial squeeze that couples with young children and elderly parents to care for, are par for the course. These are everyday marital problems, and we should provide couples with the tools to resolve communication issues, instead of making divorce a simple, straightforward, easy solution.
However, as a grassroots leader and former Police officer, I have also seen cases of how being trapped in an unhappy marriage can be damaging on a person's well-being – emotionally, mentally and, at times, even physically. That is why, despite my personal view on marriage, I can understand and appreciate the reason for the introduction of DMA.
But that being said, we should do more to intervene upstream to help strengthen marriages, so that we can prevent relationships from deteriorating to the point where couples have to contemplate divorce. For example, MSF could make marriage preparation courses more extensive and, I would even argue, mandatory. Before I got married, my wife-to-be and I had to attend the Marriage Preparation Course conducted by the Church. The course, which comprised six sessions, taught us the fundamentals of a healthy marriage and equipped us with tools to work out our differences in a constructive way.
While there are marriage preparation programmes on the market, most seem to emphasise on how couples can be equipped with the right tools in as little time as possible, with some courses taking just two weekends. I wonder if this is truly sufficient to prepare two distinct individuals to live together for the rest of their lives.
Currently, MSF only mandates marriage preparation courses if the marriage involves someone below the age of 21. I would suggest that a comprehensive marriage preparation programme be put together and for marrying couples of all ages to be strongly encouraged to participate.
Sir, another suggestion on how we can do more upstream to strengthen marriages is to have regular check-ups on the health of our marriages, particularly newer marriages. Many of us go for a regular health check-up, sometimes yearly, sometimes once every two years. Why not have a regular check-up for our marriages, too?
According to a report from MSF, which tracked 29 cohorts of marriages between 1987 and 2015, more divorces are happening during the earlier years of a couple's marriage, with the highest proportion of couples ending their marriages between years five and 10. Why is this so? Is it linked to certain key life moments that changed the dynamics of the relationship? I hope that MSF could make marriage therapy more affordable and accessible, so that we can help couples take stock of their relationships and strengthen their marriages. Perhaps, we could go a step further and subsidise marriage therapy for couples who are between their fifth to 10th year of marriage, since it seems to be the critical period where marriages are vulnerable, and divorce cases are at their highest.
Mr Speaker, in the unfortunate event that the marriage does genuinely break down and divorce becomes a real option on the table, we should still try our best to mend the relationship. And this could be done through mandatory pre-divorce counselling programmes. Currently, pre-divorce counselling is only mandatory for parents with minor children before they file for divorce and is designed to encourage divorcing couples to make informed decisions to prioritise the well-being of their children. Can MSF consider mandatory pre-divorce counselling for all couples who cite unreasonable behaviour as the reason for their divorce and, in future, the couples who cite DMA as a reason for the divorce?
Sir, we should also better support single mothers who may need help in securing jobs or finding jobs that will allow them to support themselves and their children. In cases where the wife was a homemaker, it can be difficult for them to re-enter the workforce easily as their skillsets may not be updated. In this regard, NTUC has been working with our affiliated unions, the Employment and Employability Institute and NTUC Learning Hub, to support single mothers by bringing employment and training opportunities to them. I encourage all single mums who need help returning to the workplace to turn to the Labour Movement for support.
Single mothers also have less familial support when it comes to caregiving and will require more support in helping them balance their careers and caregiving duties. In Radin Mas, we partnered Singapore Manufacturing Federation (SMF) to launch the Jobs Closer to Home Programme in 2021 to help mothers with caregiving responsibilities find jobs that are closer to home, so that they can balance work and their roles as a mother and caregiver. This has helped some single mothers in my constituency to gain meaningful employment and I hope this can be scaled up nationally.
I would also like to call on Action for Alliance on Work-Life Harmony to look at how companies can implement more flexible work arrangements specifically catered to single parents, so that we can help them to be the best parent that they can be to their children.
Finally, we also need to take steps to strengthen the institution of marriage against couples who seek a divorce merely in name, for monetary or other benefits. For example, when the most recent round of property cooling measures was introduced by MND, there emerged some online chatter advising and encouraging couples seeking to own multiple properties to decouple and divorce in name just to avoid the Additional Buyers' Stamp Duties!
The proposed additions to section 95 of the Women's Charter will allow for couples to divorce by mutual agreement and I worry that this will become a loophole for sham divorces. How would the Ministry identify such cases and are there penalties that will arise as a result of such fake divorces?
In conclusion, the proposed amendments to the Women's Charter are aimed at making divorce proceedings less acrimonious and help ex-couples co-parent better. But it has also made divorce easier, inadvertently eroding the sanctity of marriage. We should do more upstream to help strengthen marriages and prevent relationships from breaking down, through mandatory and extensive marriage preparation programmes and make marriage therapy, marriage counselling cheaper and more accessible. Sir, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Sun Xueling.
Ms Sun Xueling: Mr Speaker, I thank Members for the robust debate, the pertinent issues raised and their support for the Bill. Important issues have been raised by Members regarding the proposals and the very institutions of marriage and family in Singapore.
Let me first reiterate our core beliefs regarding marriage and divorce, which our proposed amendments intend to strengthen. Marriage is the cornerstone of family formation in our society. We must protect the institution of marriage by ensuring the significance of the solemnisation and registration of marriages and that marriages contracted here are genuine.
Divorce must be a last resort. Our first priority is to save marriages where possible. Where there is no alternative but divorce, our aim is to help families heal and move on. Reducing acrimony and promoting child-centricity in divorce are key.
The Women's Charter is a significant Act, enacted in 1961. Ms Carrie Tan and Mr Louis Ng proposed renaming the Women's Charter to the Family Charter. We will not be doing so in today's amendments as, if we look at the provisions on marriage and divorce, the provisions are gender-neutral and do not discriminate in favour of men or women.
The Women’s Charter sets out how family and family relationships should be managed. To quote Prof Leong Wai Kum, School of Law, SUSS, \"the Women's Charter promulgated the idea of marriage as an equal cooperative partnership of different efforts\". The Women's Charter also provides for protection of women and girls in the areas of vice, prostitution activities for which there is good reason for this distinction as women are disproportionately affected. And while Singapore women today are better educated with better employment opportunities, there are still vulnerable women who require the protection of the Women's Charter.
Moving on to the issues regarding the marriage-related proposals, in reviewing the marriage processes under the Women's Charter, we sought to achieve two key things.
Firstly, we sought to enhance the marriage process to provide greater convenience to couples. The amendments will enable us to take the marriage process online via the \"Our Marriage Journey\" portal later this year.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh raised concerns of marriages of convenience, and I assure Members that the Registry of Marriages will continue to perform due diligence. If there are concerns, the declaration would be performed in-person or via video-link, instead of online, and the Registrar may decide not to permit solemnisation via video-link.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked how many marriages of convenience we have seen and how many have been involved in vice activities. Between 2014 and 2021, there have been 388 individuals convicted for engaging in or arranging such marriages. We do not track if they have engaged in vice activities.
Ms Joan Pereira asked if the digital certificates would apply to both civil and religious ceremonies and who would issue the digital certificates. Digital certificates would apply to all solemnisations and will be issued by the Registrar of Marriages.
Ms Ng Ling Ling voiced concerns that digitalising the solemnisation may downplay its significance. We understand her concerns. Hence, couples may choose to hold their solemnisation in-person. Indeed, we have seen that most couples still prefer to hold their solemnisations in-person. In addition, while a digital marriage certificate will be issued, a hardcopy ceremonial marriage certificate will also be provided as a keepsake. Through the \"Our Marriage Journey\" portal, we will continue to emphasise the importance of the solemnisation.
Second, we sought to update the necessary safeguards to ensure that the institution of marriage is not abused and continues to be protected. Beyond legislative amendments, upcoming initiatives also boost our efforts to strengthen marriages and families. We have brought together stakeholders, community partners and Singaporeans to co-create and implement solutions through the launch of the Alliance for Action to Strengthen Marriages and Family Relationships last year. We have also woven support for couples into the marriage process.
Mr Melvin Yong suggested more can be done to encourage couples to attend marriage preparation courses, including by making it mandatory. The \"Our Marriage Journey\" portal will recommend and encourage couples to sign up for such courses. However, it is only mandatory where one party is below the age of 21, as the dissolution rates for such marriages are relatively higher. Nonetheless, we strongly encourage all couples to attend marriage preparation programmes and we provide rebates of $140 for couples to attend the 12-hour PREP workshop, or $70 for supported programmes offered by the community.
I also agree with Ms Joan Pereira that it is important that solemnisers are equipped with counselling skills. We have started a pilot initiative, Journey with You, referred to as JOY, in short, which enables licensed solemnisers to mentor newlyweds in the first year of marriage. They will undergo training and are provided referral resources.
Let me move on now to the issues raised on the divorce proposals. I am glad that there is consensus among Members on several areas.
First, as raised by many Members, divorce is and must be a last resort. Where possible, we aim to save the marriage and help couples resolve their issues.
I agree with Mr Yip Hon Weng that couples should be encouraged to seek counselling early, before marital issues worsen. Where there is no other option apart from divorce, we aim to help couples to heal, and we also ensure that the welfare of the children is protected.
Mr Melvin Yong brought up the worrying trend of more recent cohorts divorcing earlier. He asked why such a trend has emerged. We believe that this is due, in part, to higher expectations of marital satisfaction and greater stressors in the early years of marriage, especially as more couples are dual income and they juggle career and parenthood. This is a trend not just emerging in Singapore but it has been apparent in many parts of the world for some time.
Therefore, as raised by Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, our commitment is to protect the marriage and save it where possible. But we must do more, beyond legislation. The legislative amendments must be seen in totality with non-legislative initiatives which will help couples resolve issues at all stages of their relationship. When stresses begin to emerge, we have marital and family counselling under the FAM@FSC to help families resolve issues early.
Mr Melvin Yong suggested that marriage therapy be made more accessible and affordable. Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked if there are sufficient trained professionals to cater to demand, what the average waiting time is for appointments and if there is remedial action if the couple do not attend subsequent counselling sessions. Ms Mariam Jaafar similarly asked about funding and resources for such services. I would like to say that by the end of this year, there will be 10 FAM@FSCs across the island that can support couples facing marital and familial stress and they will be well-equipped to manage the projected demand. In terms of waiting time, parties will be contacted by the agency within a week.
As these counselling sessions are voluntary, there is no remedial action that can be taken by the Ministry or FAM@FSC should the couple not choose to continue. Nonetheless, if counselling is ordered by the Court, then, in the case of non-compliance, the Court may make any further orders as it deems fit, including staying proceedings until parties have attended counselling.
If couples are not able to resolve their issues and are contemplating divorce, we are also working on a Family Assist portal which will provide couples with links to marital counselling and allow reflection and also information so that couples can make an informed decision.
Finally, should couples choose to proceed with divorce, within the divorce process, couples are given opportunities to resolve their issues and to u-turn on their decision.
Mr Yip Hon Weng had asked if the Ministry will consider mandating pre-divorce counselling for couples citing DMA. Ms Mariam Jaafar raised similar points on requiring divorcing couples to take parenting education courses and making counselling mandatory. With the amendments, all divorcing couples with minor children must attend MPP before filing for divorce. At MPP, counsellors may assess the couple's suitability for reconciliation and refer them for further support.
Mr Melvin Yong asked if this pre-divorce counselling could be extended to those who cite unreasonable behaviour. We agree it is good to do so but our priority at this point is to extend MPP to all divorcing couples with minor children, regardless of the fact they cite. We will explore extending pre-divorce counselling further at a later stage.
I also fully agree with Dr Shahira Abdullah that religious organisations can play an important role in mediation and counselling and parties may choose to opt for counselling by religious organisations if they are of the same faith. I would like to thank Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim for sharing the Syariah Court's experience with implementing the Marriage Counselling Programme. Indeed, it is through learning from the Syariah Court's positive experience that we have decided to introduce pre-divorce counselling.
Members also agree that it is key that families are supported throughout the divorce process.
On the Programme for Children, Ms Joan Pereira raised the importance to support all children, including the older ones. We fully agree and, as part of MPP, the counsellor would encourage parents to sign their children up for suitable programmes.
To Mr Louis Ng and Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim's queries on why the Programme for Children is not mandatory, what the types of interventions under the Programme for Children are and whether there can be a national body to harmonise programmes for all children affected by Muslim and civil divorce, I would first like to assure Members, such as Dr Shahira Abdullah, who also brought up the need for Muslim marriages to be supported, that MSF and MCCY work closely together to ensure that the programmes offered to all children affected by divorce are similar.
In addition, the Programme for Children is also available to children affected by Muslim divorce. There is, therefore, no need for a separate body to oversee this.
The Programme for Children covers various component items. It includes an assessment of the needs of the child, counselling, psychological services as well as specific evidence-based programmes, such as Children-in-Between.
MSF had considered mandating all minor children whose parents are undergoing divorce to attend a programme to help them cope better with the divorce. However, we believe that parents, even as they undergo divorce, must still assume primary responsibility for their children's well-being rather than have the Government mandate a programme for their children. We are also mindful that mandating counselling for all children may also cause additional stress and that not all children may be ready for the programme.
Lastly, on the issue of child access enforcement, I agree with Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim that children should not be used as a negotiating tool in their parents' quarrels and those who breach access orders must face consequences. Both Members also brought up the need for enforcement orders to be made judiciously, especially in the case of a term of imprisonment.
I assure Members that the Court will take all aspects of the case into account in making its orders, including whether the child had refused access to the parent, and a term of imprisonment is intended to be imposed only on egregious cases of non-compliance. The Court may reverse the grant of care and control to the access parent if it is in the best interest of the child to do so. On orders to make-up access, as with all orders related to the child, the Court will make this order taking into consideration the best interest of the child.
For parties with counselling orders, FAM@FSCs and DSSAs will work closely with the Courts to support them on issues faced with access. The 10 FAM@FSCs set up by the end of this year will be able to manage the expected caseload.
However, we have also heard different views raised by Members, particularly on whether we should make the divorce process more expeditious or whether doing so could lead to easier divorces and erode the institution of marriage.
I fully agree with Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Melvin Yong that a balance must be struck between making it too difficult for couples to divorce and making it too easy to give up their commitment.
Beyond non-legislative efforts to strengthen the family and upstream measures to help families facing stress, we also want to ensure that the divorce process affords parties opportunities to save their marriage and u-turn on their decision, and that the divorce process, even with the introduction of DMA, is not made easier nor faster.
For this reason, the safeguards to ensure the decision to divorce – that it is a considered one – remain. These include: (a) the three-year minimum marriage period before a divorce can be filed; (b) a minimum three-month period before divorce is finalised; and (c) that the existing five facts for parties remain for parties who prefer to rely on them.
The divorce process also remains largely the same no matter which fact is cited, including DMA. In fact, citing DMA requires further submissions to the Court: (a) the reasons leading parties to conclude that their marriage has irretrievably broken down; (b) the efforts made by parties to reconcile; and (c) considerations given to the arrangements to be made in relation to the parties' children and financial affairs.
It is also for this reason that we will not be reducing the three-year minimum marriage period before a divorce can be filed, as Ms Carrie Tan has suggested. The three-year minimum period is an important safeguard to ensure that couples do not enter or exit a marriage lightly. The first year of marriage is often not an easy one, given the many transitions and adjustments for couples. The three-year minimum period will, thus, allow couples sufficient time to adjust, seek help and overcome difficulties, rather than simply leave the marriage just because things are difficult. If they truly wish to pursue divorce, the three-year minimum period will also allow them sufficient time to consider their decision carefully and also make attempts at reconciliation.
Nonetheless, where there are legitimate reasons where a party may need to exit the marriage before the three-year minimum marriage period is up, the Women's Charter allows for that. In cases of exceptional hardship or depravity, parties may seek the Court's permission to file for divorce before the three-year minimum marriage period is up. However, where parties have made and failed at every effort to save their marriage and have no other option left but divorce, then there is a need and a place for DMA, in cases where parties agree on the divorce, to reduce acrimony.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked why DMA is needed when the separation fact allows couples to divorce without apportioning fault. Divorcees who have filed for divorce on the simplified divorce track have shared with us in our engagements that though they had agreed on the divorce and ancillary matters, having to cite a fault-based fact did dredge up pain and hurt and the hurt deepened when parties read the affidavits from each other. They expressed how they wanted instead to be able to take joint responsibility for the marital breakdown instead of citing fault. They also told us that they found it difficult to rely on the separation fact as they felt that their lives were put on hold during the separation period and they could not move on. This was not good for their well-being.
It was also not good for their children's well-being because, try as they might, they admitted they could not focus on their children until the divorce was finalised. In the meantime, the children were exposed to the tensions in their relationship during the separation. DMA, therefore, allows such couples to jointly take responsibility for the breakdown of the marriage and heal and to move on from the divorce.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan raised concerns as to whether DMA would effectively reduce acrimony, given parties must submit the reasons leading them to conclude the marriage has irretrievably broken down and they may disagree on matters concerning their children and finances. It is inevitable that, in certain cases, even with DMA, the couple will still face acrimony in the divorce process. However, providing the option for parties to jointly take responsibility rather than pinning the blame solely on one party would more likely set the frame and mindset for a less acrimonious and conflictual process. Thereafter, when parties proceed to the ancillary discussion, they are more likely to do so without the resentment of either having to bear full blame for the divorce or the pain of having to dredge up past hurts. Having jointly taken responsibility for the breakdown of the marriage, they can begin ancillary discussions more amicably.
I would like to emphasise again and assure Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Yip Hon Weng that DMA differs from the no-fault divorce that we see in other jurisdictions.
Unlike other overseas regimes where parties are not required to prove that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, or where the filing for divorce by one party is sufficient to prove the marriage has irretrievably broken down, DMA is a sixth fact to prove the sole ground of divorce and it is done through an agreement that cites: one, reasons for the breakdown; two, efforts at reconciliation; and three, considerations for children and financial matters.
One party cannot unilaterally divorce the other. Some jurisdictions have removed the ability for a party to contest the proceedings. Under the Women’s Charter, the defendant is able to file a defence against a divorce application, irrespective of the fact cited.
I would also like to assure Ms Sylvia Lim that we do not expect the number of divorces to increase significantly with the introduction of DMA. Spikes or long-term increase in divorce rates occur when the regime switches from fault-based to non-fault-based. We had made this transition in 1980 from a purely fault-based regime to a hybrid regime with no-fault grounds and we had introduced a Simplified Divorce Track in 2015. We saw no significant increase in divorce then.
Members also raised queries on the divorce-related proposals. Regarding the details of DMA, Ms Hany Soh asked what reasons are acceptable to substantiate that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. This could include reasons, such as a deep-seated difference in values, and the intention is to avoid reasons that point blame only at one party, and children should not be cited as the reason for divorce. In fact, as Dr Shahira Abdullah has pointed out, one of the aims of DMA is to spare children the pain of having their parents make, prove and disprove allegations against each other’s misdeeds, so children are better able to cope with the divorce.
Ms Ng Ling Ling asked how the Court would assess if a marriage is still reconcilable and whether MSF would be able to make recommendations to the Court. Mr Yip Hon Weng similarly asked if the assessment would involve professionals in family matters. Ms Sylvia Lim expressed concerns about whether DMA would lower the threshold for divorce, compared to the other five facts. Ultimately, the legal test for the granting of the divorce is the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. There are, currently, five facts with their own respective requirements. DMA is a broad ground, but parties will still have to meet the threshold of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. If parties cite evidence relating to one of the five established facts, but do not quite meet the prescribed requirements, it remains open to the Court to grant the divorce on the grounds of DMA. But before doing so, the Court will have to assess the facts carefully, bearing in mind that a divorce cannot be granted under DMA if there is a reasonable possibility of reconciliation.
The Court will have to carefully consider whether or not to depart from the requirements of one of the five established facts, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case. DMA is a different fact on which you can obtain a divorce, but it is not an easier fact.
The Court will have to assess the agreement based on the matters set out in the statement of particulars submitted by parties to the Court, which contains the three requirements needed by DMA, and make an assessment that the efforts detailed suffice to satisfy the parties-centric test that parties have made best efforts and have done all things necessary to attempt reconciliation. This is not present in the current five facts, including forced separation with or without consent. All these represent a paradigm shift that is different from, but not necessarily easier than, the current five facts. Over time, the Courts will develop case law on DMA. In all cases, parties have to meet the three-year time bar before they can apply for divorce. A party who relies on DMA will thus not necessarily be able to obtain a divorce sooner than a party who relies on adultery, desertion or unreasonable behaviour. It all depends on the facts.
For couples with minor children, they will have to attend MPP at the DSSA or FAM@FSC before filing for divorce or filing a counterclaim when served with divorce papers. We will enhance MPP to encourage couples to consider reconciliation, if possible. For couples who are open to reconciliation, a counsellor can help to support them through this process and, otherwise, the couple may proceed to divorce should they wish to do so. At the point of filing, should the Court assess that reconciliation is still a reasonable possibility, the Court may refer the couple for counselling at DSSA or FAM@FSC. After counselling, parties may continue with the divorce process should they choose to do so.
Ms Joan Pereira similarly raised concerns on the submission of efforts to reconcile to the Court. In particular, Ms Pereira was concerned that this would add tension to an already strained relationship. The premise of DMA is to allow divorcing couples to come together and help a broken relationship without further strain. We expect that couples who cite DMA would have discussed their issues and how to resolve the dissolution of the marriage in an amicable manner. It is for this reason that the fact is founded on mutual agreement. If there is no consensus on all matters, it is highly unlikely that the couple would opt for this fact. The application, therefore, gives the couple space to discuss, communicate and resolve all issues, including reconciliation efforts, before presenting this application by mutual agreement to the Court.
To Ms Hany Soh’s query on whether DMA may only be cited on the Simplified Track and if divorces filed citing another fact can later be allowed to proceed on an amended claim under DMA, we envisage that most parties who cite DMA would file on the Simplified Track. However, DMA is not limited only to the Simplified Track, and those on the standard track may choose to cite DMA as well. As for whether parties who originally cited another fact can later be allowed to amend their claim and cite DMA, parties can apply for leave to amend the claim, subject to fulfilling the requirements of the Family Justice Rules.
Ms Mariam Jaafar asked about a minimum time period for the proceedings to allow for reflection. Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked how long the process will take from the time divorce is filed and if the couple can appeal the Court’s decision. The average duration taken depends on the track that the divorce application proceeds on. For couples who contest the divorce or ancillary matters, the duration varies and could take some time. For couples who divorce on the Simplified Track, the time taken from filing to the grant of the interim judgment is approximately six to 12 weeks. Thereafter, there would be another minimum period of three months to the final judgment.
We envisage that couples who cite DMA would likely file for divorce on the Simplified Track, but citing DMA instead of the existing five facts would not change the duration in any way. As for appeals, as this is a consent application, it is unlikely that there should be an appeal. And should one party change their mind, they can apply to set aside the grant of the Interim Judgment.
Regarding Ms Mariam Jaafar's suggestion for a minimum period after the divorce is finalised for counsellors to check in on couples to ensure that they are coping well, any family that has issues with the divorce or its impact can seek post-divorce support at the FAM@FSCs and DSSAs.
Ms Ng Ling Ling asked how the Court will ensure that the agreement under DMA is entered out of the parties' own volition. Ms Sylvia Lim also asked if the Court would act as a watchdog, in cases of vulnerable spouses who may be coerced into agreeing into a divorce under DMA and to unfavourable terms under the divorce relating to their children and their financial affairs. As I have said earlier, we rely on family lawyers to prevent such cases. In addition, the mandatory parenting programme or MPP, which I have been referring to, is a mandatory pre-filing programme for parents and this can act as a safeguard against such instances, as the counsellor may identify and assist such spouses. Indeed, for an agreement to be made under DMA, the Court must, among other things, assess that parties are acting voluntarily and have the requisite knowledge of the terms.
Members also raised queries on other aspects of the divorce process. Mr Melvin Yong asked about the penalties that may be imposed on parties should they be found to have divorced for financial benefits, such as to own multiple properties without additional buyers’ stamp duties.
I assure Members again that DMA does not make it easier for parties to get a divorce. In fact, parties who choose to go on DMA have to satisfy the Court that there is no reasonable possibility of reconciliation. Lawyers must also do their part to ensure that divorces are genuine and their clients are not intending to enter into a divorce just in name.
Ms Ng Ling Ling asked where one party refuses to attend MPP, whether the other party would be hindered from proceeding with the divorce, such as in cases of family violence, where the perpetrator may be unwilling to attend. In a case where one party refuses to attend MPP, the other party will still be able to proceed with the filing of the divorce after they have themselves completed MPP. As for the perpetrator, he or she must attend the MPP if he or she wishes to file a counterclaim to put forth his or her points relating to the divorce and ancillary matters to the Court. DSSAs and FAM@FSCs will also refer parties for support if they disclose experiences with family violence.
Regarding the issue of child access enforcement, I would like to assure Ms Hany Soh that should parties be ordered to take part in therapeutic programmes or counselling at the DSSAs or FAM@FSCs, they will not incur any fees. As to increasing the number of complimentary sessions for parties to carry out supervised access at DSSAs, there are no plans to do so as the intention is to foster a sense of responsibility in parents in managing their own relationship to co-parent effectively, by requiring them to contribute a sum for supervised access. Supervised Exchange and Supervised Visitation is intended as an interim measure to help parents work towards independent access.
I would also like to assure Members that should any parent face issues of access to their children, they are able to seek help at the FAM@FSCs and DSSAs. As Ms Mariam Jaafar has pointed out, there is no difference in services offered to men and women.
As for increased legal assistance to parents, the means test is reviewed at regular intervals, every five years or so, with the last amendment to means testing done in 2019. MinLaw will continue to review the means test regularly in order to ensure that less privileged persons who need legal help continue to get it. The Legal Aid Bureau also has a merits test in order to ensure that legal aid is not given for frivolous, unmeritorious claims. Thus, it is not just about ensuring that those who need it get legal help for access matters but that the manner in which they conduct the case and the merits of their position in the case are reasonable. For access matters, Court litigation should very much be the last resort.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim and Mr Lim Biow Chuan also raised concerns regarding the provision to allow the Court to direct the bailiff to restore a child to the physical custody of a person in whose custody, or care and control, the child is placed. The Courts will only order the bailiff’s assistance in cases where their presence is absolutely necessary, and not in all cases. To safeguard the child’s well-being, the bailiff will be accompanied by the applicant, usually the other parent. Where required, the bailiff is also empowered to activate Auxiliary Police Officers for support. It is pertinent to note that the same powers exist in the Guardianship of Infants Act and are available to all parents and guardians of a child. This proposal seeks to extend the same relief to parents who have divorce, nullity or judicial separation proceedings.
On the issue of maintenance enforcement, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Ang Wei Neng noted that the current maintenance enforcement process can be further enhanced. As I have said so earlier, MSF is working with MinLaw and the Family Justice Courts to study how to provide more efficient and effective enforcement of maintenance orders and to minimise repeat enforcement. We are considering the feasibility of taking up these amendments under a separate legislation.
Ms Carrie Tan and Mr Ang Wei Neng also raised the issue of allowing maintenance applications to be made for husbands, without the condition of incapacity. We had considered this. However, while women are in a much better position today than they were many years ago, we recognise that, even today, in a marriage, it is more likely for a wife to give up her career to care for her family, while her husband continues working. And this means that post-divorce, women tend to be financially more vulnerable.
The current provision, therefore, provides maintenance for the parties who tend to be more financially vulnerable post-divorce – women and incapacitated men. While we want to move towards gender-neutrality, those who are more vulnerable must be protected. In any case, the Courts refrain from granting high 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 that will meet the financial needs of the wife until she can secure for herself some form of employment and adjust to her post-divorce situation.
The issue of parental alienation was also brought up by Ms Mariam Jaafar. We do not think that there is a need to define the term \"parental alienation\" in order to ensure that those who are impacted by it are supported. Rather, parents who believe that they are victims of parental alienation are encouraged to seek help for themselves and their children at FSCs or DSSAs. And if such methods fail, parents may consider legal recourse.
Mr Speaker: Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Time Limit for Minister of State's Speech","subTitle":"Suspension of Standing Orders","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, as the Minister of State's time limit for her speech is approaching its end, may I move the following? May I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 48(8) to remove the time limit in respect of Minister of State Sun Xueling's speech?
Mr Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of the hon Members present to so move?
[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]
[(proc text) With the consent of Mr Speaker and the general assent of Members present, question put and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, that the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 48(8) in respect of Minister of State Sun Xueling's speech. – [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":"Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Ms Sun Xueling: We also recognise that there may be those impacted by divorce that require even more support, given the challenges of caregiving.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling, Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Seah Kian Peng brought up the issue of support for mothers who may be unemployed during the divorce. With the proposed amendments, all parents with minor children must attend MPP before they file for divorce. MPP covers several areas, including co-parenting and the impact of divorce on parties' financial status and living arrangements. If employment support or financial support is needed, the MPP counsellor would refer the parties for employment or financial assistance.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Mr Seah Kian Peng also asked about support for parents with caregiving responsibilities, including greater flexible work support and other policies for better work-life harmony. MOM introduced the Tripartite Advisory on Flexible Work Arrangements (FWAs) and Tripartite Standard on FWAs in 2017 and, subsequently, the Tripartite Standard on Work-Life Harmony in 2021, which guides employers on how to offer FWAs to their employees and provides recognition to employers who do so. MOM will continue to work with the tripartite partners to strengthen the provision of FWAs and other work-life practices.
In August 2021, MSF also set up an Alliance for Action to Strengthen Marriages and Family Relationships. One of the focal areas is on \"Support for Single Parents\", which aims to enable single parents to better care for their children and raise their families through strengthening the ecosystem of support around them. The Alliance for Action will work with community partners to strengthen support for single parents. And this includes childcare, employment and socioemotional support, facilitating support networks for single parents and developing a one-stop portal to help single parents access programmes and community resources more easily.
Mr Louis Ng brought up the issue of access to HDB flats for divorcees with shared care and control of their children and made several suggestions. I thank him for those suggestions.
Under current HDB policy, all individuals are only allowed to be listed in one HDB flat application. At the same time, divorcees with shared care and control of children have an equal right to list their children in their flat application. HDB is not in a position to determine which parent can exercise the right to do so, and thus requires divorced parents to try to come to an agreement, in the first instance, before listing their child in a flat application.
I agree with Mr Ang Wei Neng that we must support those who face difficulties. For those who are unable to reach an agreement with their ex-spouse or have low income and have no other housing options, HDB can exercise flexibility to waive the requirement on a case-by-case basis, to ensure that both parties have options to provide housing for themselves and their children.
For cases where the ex-spouse has bought a private property after the divorce, they may still wish to list the child in a future flat application. As such, HDB will review each case individually and will not be able to waive the mutual agreement requirement as a blanket policy.
HDB will also not require the Court order to state which parent is allowed to list the child as an \"essential occupier\" as orders pertaining to a child are made with the overarching principle of the child's best interest. When determining issues pertaining to a child's welfare, the Court order focuses on rebuilding relationships and for parents to focus on the future with their children, instead of specific orders laying down conditions, such as the one referred to.
As far as possible, we want to encourage divorced parents to work through issues cooperatively and harmoniously outside of the Court system. This is especially pertinent in cases where there is shared care and control as it is not ideal for parents with shared care and control to seek or rely on Court orders to lay down all matters and details pertaining to care of their children and arrangements after divorce. Instead, they should be working on co-parenting cooperatively in the child's best interest. Those awarded share and control must also, when they applied for it, truly be able to divide the care and control of the child equally and be able to cooperate to do so.
Nonetheless, we recognise that there may be cases where parents are unable to reach an agreement despite their best efforts. In such cases, they can approach HDB to discuss their options.
As Ms Mariam Jaafar has raised, the area of family law is an important one, one that often most impacts people and their families. It is for this reason that our proposed amendments seek to strengthen therapeutic justice in the family justice system, and we are working with FJC to include monitoring standards, processes and complaints.
Nonetheless, the various professions involved in the process are subject to their respective codes of practice.
If passed in Parliament, we expect all the marriage-related amendments and some of the divorce-related amendments to come into effect in the latter half of this year, while others, such as DMA, would come into effect in 2023, to allow time for the Courts, lawyers, social service agencies and other parties to be ready.
In conclusion, our families are the key building blocks of society, and we must do what we can to ensure that they are protected and strengthened. I believe that, viewed holistically, these proposed amendments to the Women's Charter relating to marriage and divorce, will strengthen the institution of marriage and support families should they have to pursue divorce as a last resort. I thank everyone who had provided feedback during our engagements and who made the proposals presented here today possible. Beyond legislation, it is truly the efforts of the community that will make a difference to those impacted by a divorce.
I also urge experienced couples to do their part to actively mentor and counsel younger couples in their social circles or religious organisations, bolstering the efforts of licensed solemnisers under the JOY initiative. I also encourage passionate individuals and ground-up groups to partner MSF's Alliance for Action to organise family activities, programmes to strengthen marriages and family relationships. I am also excited to be working with Families for Life, a ground-up movement to build strong and resilient families in Singapore.
However, we also recognise that more can be done to enhance protection against violence, and we will be proposing amendments in a separate Bill by the end of this year to implement the recommendations of the Taskforce on Family Violence. With that, I thank Members for the valuable input and support for this Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.
Mr Speaker: Are there any clarifications? Mr Lim Biow Chuan.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to thank the Minister of State for her clarifications. It has given me much assurance of the Government's commitment to the institution of marriage. If I may clarify, if DMA is not accepted by the Court, the Minister of State had said that the Court can direct parties for counselling.
However, my understanding is that counselling requires parties to agree and, if the couple refuses to attend counselling, what does that mean for the Court's directions? Will it be mandatory? Will it be compulsory? Or does it mean that the parties would then have to file for divorce based on the other grounds under section 95A of the Bill?
My experience is that most couples, by the time they come to see a lawyer, are unwilling to consider counselling. And it gives them great pain to have to revisit that decision; what more if the Court has to redirect them to go for counselling.
Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for his clarification. If the Court had directed the parties to go for counselling, it would have meant that, in their application for DMA, they had not satisfied the requirements under DMA. As such, if the parties would still want to continue with their divorce applications, then they will have to cite a different fact.
Mr Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh: Mr Speaker, I have one quick clarification in relation to MPP. I understand from the Minister of State that it will be made compulsory for all divorcing parents with minor children. Can I check whether this plan is also intending to extend to those whose children have already attained the age of 21 but actually suffer from mental or physical disability? Because, currently, when you file a proposed parenting plan, it actually applies to those parents with this kind of family settings.
Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for her clarification. Indeed, for children who would benefit from having their parents go for MPP, and, if they have exceeded the age limit of 21, the parents can similarly do so.
Mr Speaker: Ms Mariam Jaafar.
Ms Mariam Jaafar: I thank the Minister of State for her clarifications and many of them have addressed some of my concerns. I still have a lingering concern in the area of enforcement of access and parental alienation. Because the lived experience of my residents is that leaving it to FSC has not addressed the issues for them. And, of course, the legal recourse is very expensive and long drawn-out, which is why I had also raised the question on legal aid. So, I hope that, at some point, MSF will assess again a framework for parental alienation.
But I have one clarification on the use of enforcement of access. Will this apply to divorces that have already been approved, even if it is multiple years? Parents who feel that they have not been given due access to their children right now, will they be able to now go to Court and get their orders for access approved when their kids may say that they do not want to see them because they have been conditioned by the other spouse to actually break relationships with the previous spouse?
Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for her clarification. On the last point that the Member raised, the Court will have to consider what is in the best interest of the child. They will have to take into account the full facts of the case. I understand where the Member is coming from. But the starting point of the Court has to be that it is in the best interest of the child.
So, we hope, with the current updates to how access is provided, that this would ensure more expeditious redress for parents who face issues of access.
Ms Mariam Jaafar: So, I would just like to confirm: the enforcement powers proposed will apply to divorces that have already been finalised in the past and not only to new divorces going forward.
Ms Sun Xueling: Yes, that is correct.
Mr Speaker: Ms Carrie Tan.
Ms Carrie Tan: Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for her clarifications. I would just like to speak on the point in her response about allowing husbands to seek maintenance, that, currently, it is a very small number and not the norm.
In the interest of developing and uplifting women, I would like to seek the Ministry's consideration that in order to create a mainstreaming, we must start with the right signals. And perhaps to encourage more men to take on an equal role domestically, we may need this legislative safeguard to then nudge different behaviours. I think that this would aid the cause for women to be unburdened from an over-proportion of care responsibilities and to encourage men to take up more of a role in the home as a participating father and spouse.
So, would the Minister of State like to comment on whether we can expedite the consideration of this so that we can expedite the accelerating of a different future, in mainstreaming men's equal role domestically?
Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for her clarification. There are many ongoing efforts and non-legislative ones to encourage the mainstreaming of the roles of the father and the mother, like what the Member has suggested. For instance, MOE, in its Character Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum talks about the roles that different family members play and they encourage children and students not to have stereotyped views on what a father and mother's roles should be. So, I would encourage the Member to look at these efforts holistically.
Important lessons and initiatives also have to start very young when it comes to framing the views that society has towards what the roles of fathers and mothers should be. So, I would encourage the Member to look beyond legislative amendments.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Ms Sun Xueling]. (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":"Gambling Duties Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
The Gambling Duties Bill will consolidate the laws on the levy and collection of duties on lawful betting and lotteries. These laws are currently contained within the Betting and Sweepstake Duties Act, or BSDA, and the Private Lotteries Act, or PLA. The consolidated Act will provide for common tax administration, enforcement powers and penalties across the duties on betting and sweepstakes and private lotteries.
The BSDA was enacted in 1950. Since then, we have made improvements in our tax administration and enforcement. The last significant BSDA amendments made were in 2005 but relating to duties and not enforcement or administration. So, this Bill harmonises the tax administration and enforcement provisions between the BSDA and the PLA and aligns the tax administration and enforcement for the gambling duties, with other tax Acts administered by IRAS.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
Let me illustrate with two examples.
For tax administration, the Commissioner of Betting Duties, currently, does not have the power to refund overpaid betting and sweepstake duties, even though that is provided for overpaid private lotteries duty and other taxes administered by IRAS. Clause 19 of the Bill will now provide for the Commissioner of Gambling Duties to do so.
For enforcement of the betting and sweepstake duties, the Commissioner of Betting Duties, currently, may not enter or search premises. However, he may do so for private lotteries duty and all other taxes administered by IRAS. So, clause 25 of the Bill provides for the Commissioner of Gambling Duties to similarly enter and search premises for the enforcement of betting and sweepstake duties.
The Bill also harmonises, for gambling duties, what constitutes an offence; and raises the fines and penalties for the gambling duties which have remained unchanged since the 1950s. Again, let me illustrate with some examples.
Today, for betting and sweepstake duties, it is not a specific offence for a taxpayer to file an incorrect statement. If any prosecution is to take place for false filing of returns for betting and sweepstake duties, we rely on general criminal law, as in the Penal Code, which has a penalty designed to apply generally. On the other hand, the filing of incorrect returns for private lotteries duty and casino tax has each been made a specific offence. Likewise, for the filing of incorrect returns in connection with other taxes, like income tax or GST. So, this Bill proposes that the filing of an incorrect statement for betting and sweepstake duties will be a specific offence with a penalty that is consistent with similar specific offences in the other tax laws.
For example, the fines in BSDA and PLA are, currently, not aligned for the same offences. For failing to file a return, a betting operator could face a fine of up to $500 and a private lottery promoter could face a fine of $1,000. The same offence in the Income Tax Act and GST Act attracts a fine of up to $5,000. This Bill proposes that, for gambling duties, the fine for non-filing of returns will be up to $5,000, aligned with the Income Tax Act and GST Act.
Clauses 27, 28, 29 and 30 of the Bill ensure similar penalty structures across gambling taxes and that the quanta of penalties and fines are commensurate with similar offences in other tax Acts administered by IRAS.
As a related amendment, clause 46 of the Bill makes amendments to the Casino Control Act. I will explain the amendments for the casino tax, and Minister of State Alvin Tan will speak later on the revisions to the exclusivity period and divestment restrictions.
Currently, gross gaming revenue is subject to casino tax rates of 5% for premium gaming and 15% for mass gaming. These rates are not to be changed until after 28 February 2022.
In April 2019, the Government announced the introduction of a tiered casino tax structure from 1 March 2022 with higher tax rates than today and a new 10-year moratorium, subject to the casino operator meeting certain development targets.
For premium gaming, the first $2.4 billion of gross gaming revenue per year will be taxed at 8% and the rest at 12%. For mass gaming, the first $3.1 billion of gross gaming revenue per year will be taxed at 18% and the rest at 22%.
If the casino operator fails to satisfactorily meet its development targets, a flat rate of 12% for premium gaming and 22% for mass gaming will apply instead.
So, clause 46 of the Bill provides for these amendments.
Finally, we will make consequential amendments to the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore Act for IRAS to establish a system providing for the electronic service of notices and documents by IRAS on taxpayers, or by taxpayers on IRAS, in connection with the administration of tax legislation administered by IRAS. This will facilitate digitalisation of tax administration. These amendments are found in clause 48 of the Bill. Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Gambling Duties Bill, which aims to consolidate legislation for the levy and collection of taxes on lawful bettings.
I just have three questions. Would the Minister share what has been the average annual gross revenues from local and foreign visitors respectively in premium gaming and mass gaming during the pre-COVID-19 pandemic and in the past two years? What has been the average gaming revenue per local visitor and for each foreign visitor in both premium and mass gaming pre-COVID-19 and in the past two years? What about the expected completion of the two integrated resorts' extension and projected increase in revenue with the expansion and the increase in economic contribution, including all related supporting industries?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Mr Deputy Speaker, the Gambling Duties Act will be a new Act in our legislation although, as I understand from the Bill and from the Minister, that much of the content is not new per se and seeks to largely consolidate the law on levy and collection of duties on lawful betting and lotteries, make related amendments to the Casino Control Act and casino licences through the Betting and Sweepstake Duties Act and make consequential amendments to certain other Acts.
My speech today will focus largely on the related amendments to the Casino Control Act, which I believe to be the most significant change within this Bill. But I will, first, speak broadly about the issue of problem gambling as well as gambling duties in Singapore.
Speak of gambling and some of the images that appear in my mind are the advertisements run by the National Council on problem gambling featuring the 2012 TV commercial where a man was asking his daughter for her piggy bank and saying, \"One more try and I will give it all back\". Or the other advertisement featuring Andy, whose father bet all his savings on Germany.
All these advertisements were the subject of numerous light-hearted parodies and spoofs, especially after Germany won the World Cup in 2014. The issue of problem gambling and the social ills associated with it are a serious one that deserves our utmost priority whenever the topic of gambling is discussed. To this end, while there may be visible economic benefits from the investment and expansion of the two new Integrated Resorts (IRs), we should always bear in mind the less visible social costs and risks of negative externalities associated with an expanded gambling scene in Singapore.
I recognise that casino entry levies have been raised in 2019, and this has resulted in visits made by Singapore Citizens and PRs falling to 2.7% of the adult population in FY2019 from 4% in FY2018. As a result of COVID-19, however, I wonder if and how much did visitorship increase as a result of border restrictions. Further, to those at higher risk of problem gambling, the higher entry levy could instead spur them to raise their bets to cover the additional cost of entry.
So, I do hope that the Government will continue to tighten the safeguards not just against casino visitorship for locals, but to other forms of gambling as well, particularly online gambling. I have been receiving weekly SMSes and WhatsApp messages inviting me to online casinos, for example, and I am sure a number of Members would have as well. And just last month, the news about three brothers operating an illegal gambling syndicate that collected a weekly revenue of at least $1 million suggests that urgent action needs to be taken to address the shadow gambling scene in Singapore as well.
Moving on to the legalised aspects of things, gambling or betting taxes, alongside tobacco and liquor excise duties, play a not insignificant role in the Government's operating revenues over the years. In absolute terms, I note that betting taxes for FY2019, which is prior to the onset of COVID-19, account for $2.6 billion in Government revenues. Even with the onset of COVID-19, with suspension of betting activity during the circuit breaker period and the sharp fall in tourist arrivals affecting visitorship, the estimated FY2020 betting tax revenue was at $1.8 billion. This is larger than the contribution from tobacco excise duties of $1.2 billion in FY2019 and $1.4 billion in FY2020.
In the Budget Statement last year, the Government shared that betting taxes are estimated to increase by a significant 30.4% to $2.4 billion in FY2021. Yet, at the same time, revenues from betting taxes have been relatively range-bound over the past decade, with contributions from betting taxes not too different in FY2010 at about $2.3 billion. In fact, I observe that the relative share of betting taxes to the Government's operating revenues has broadly been declining over the last 20 years, from close to 6% of revenues in FY2002 to 3% of revenues in FY2021.
Given the social objective of avoiding excessive consumption of areas, such as betting, tobacco and liquor, I strongly believe that there is room for betting taxes to be raised. I recognise, of course, that part of the consequential amendments to this Bill is the raising of casino taxes, a point which I will revisit shortly in my speech. I note that the last time betting duty rates on lotteries were raised was more than seven years ago in July 2014, from 25% to 30% of gross bets. Would the Government consider raising betting duty rates and other associated gambling duty rates in the near-term in this regard?
I will next touch on amendments to the Casino Control Act, the most notable of which, in my view, is the raising of casino tax rates, which are slated to take effect from 1 March 2022. I am supportive of the raising of casino tax rates and my first question is: what are the Government's expectations of the additional revenues from higher casino taxes, not just in the next financial year, but over the next decade?
I ask this because, back when the two IRs were awarded, the Government had committed not to raise the casino tax for at least 15 years. As we are coming to the end of the moratorium in February 2022, the Government will also be providing a moratorium on the new casino tax rates, this time, for a 10-year period. As such, I believe the Government would, presumably, have conducted a comprehensive assessment as to the effect of the higher casino tax rates, as this rate cannot be changed in the next decade.
Therefore, a second related question is whether the Government can share its key considerations and deliberations before finally arriving at the current tiered casino tax rates of 8% and 12% of the gross gaming revenue (GGR) for premium gaming and 18% and 22% for mass gaming respectively. The recency of COVID-19 and the significant curtailment of visitor arrivals into Singapore could lead some quarters to question the sustainability of the higher casino tax rates, in the sense of whether or not the tax rate increase could place an onerous burden on the two casino operators, amidst ongoing uncertainties, given the effects of COVID-19. But if we take a step back, I would argue that higher casino tax rates are not only long overdue but could have room to grow in future.
I am reminded of the buzz that surrounded the opening of the two IRs back in 2010, which have, no doubt, enhanced Singapore's position as a tourist destination and the two operators have also done well for themselves, surprising many back in those days, given how both IRs have achieved success very early on in their operations.
According to an article in My Paper in June 2010, the late Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew shared that Marina Bay Sands will probably take three to seven years to reach a capacity that can help spur Singapore's tourism and convention industries. The late Mr Sheldon Adelson, former Chairman of Las Vegas Sands, however, said that Minister Mentor Lee was being a little too pessimistic and the property would be up and running at full speed the next year.
Mr Adelson was proven right in the end and, I believe, even surpassed his own expectations. He shared in a statement in 2011 that Marina Bay Sands (MBS) had generated over US$1 billion of adjusted property EBITDA in just its first 12 months of operation, which is a record not only for any property in the history of Sands, but a record for any property in the history of the industry.
Fast forward to today, I estimate that both IRs have, over the period from 2010 to 2020, generated a cumulative EBITDA of more than S$30 billion – more than double the $15 billion that they have invested in 2006, and counting. Both properties continue to generate strong earnings and cash flow today, which will, in all likelihood, recover alongside Singapore's tourism industry.
Macau, the largest gaming market globally, imposes a special gaming tax of 35% of GGR, amidst other fixed and variable premiums payable, while also requiring operators to contribute a further percentage of GGR to utilities designated by the Macau government. In this context, could there have been room for our casino tax rates to be higher? This, considering also the strong profitability of both IRs, where the recent impact from COVID-19 notwithstanding, both IRs have, historically, generated 40% to 50% EBITDA margins since their opening.
As a reference point using Sands, given that it has operations across Macau, Singapore, as well as Las Vegas, I estimate that, in pre-COVID-19 FY2019, Sands enjoyed the highest EBITDA margins in Singapore at 54%, compared to 36% in Macau and 26% in the US.
The third point I would like to raise in relation to the Casino Control Act is related to a Parliamentary Question (PQ) I filed in November where I had asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, given COVID-19 disruptions to the hospitality industry, whether there are any changes to the timeline investment commitment and nature of the S$9 billion combined investment commitment by the two IRs. Back in 2019, the Government noted that, in view of the substantial investment of $9 billion by the two IRs and to provide business certainty, the Government had agreed to extend the exclusivity period for the two casinos to end 2030, if no other casinos are to be introduced during this period,
Minister Gan Kim Yong shared in a reply to my PQ that the IRs remain committed to delivering on their expansion plans, but both have indicated that there will be potential delays in the completion of their projects. That much is clear, given Sands has shared that they may not be able to meet the target 2025 completion deadline they had previously indicated, even though completion was only required by April 2027; while Genting Singapore had announced in early 2021 that it would delay development of its RWS 2.0 expansion project until 2022.
While COVID-19 has, indeed, created significant disruptions and delays for the construction industry, how much leeway is the Government prepared to give the two IRs? Are there any revisions to the Government's required completion dates and what sort of timeline would be deemed reasonable?
I am sure, for Singaporeans looking forward to the new attractions and the IRs themselves alike, regulatory clarity and certainty on key deadlines would be much appreciated, not least because a flat tax rate will be applied if the IRs fail to meet their investment commitments.
Last but not least, with casino taxes set to rise, how much of the increased revenues from our raised casino taxes would be diverted towards efforts to mitigate the negative social effects of the continued existence of gambling establishments in this country? I would also humbly suggest that perhaps a fixed percentage or absolute amount of gambling revenues could be dedicated towards gambling safeguards and rehabilitation of problem gamblers.
I also note that in the 2019 press statement, it was revealed that the IRs will conduct a joint study with MSF to understand upstream preventive technologies and options available to promote responsible gaming among all gamblers. What has been the findings of this study, what measures will be introduced following the study and will the report be shared with the public?
All in all, I do support the rise in casino tax rates, though I believe there is still upside room to go when it comes to raising taxes, especially given the social objective of avoiding its excessive consumption. And I hope the Government will consider the points raised in my speech.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill will consolidate the laws on duties for lawful forms of gambling. I have three points of clarifications to raise.
My first point is on the remission of gambling duties. The new section 12(1) provides for the remission of gambling duties when the gambling duties are incompatible with the purposes of the Act. Can the Minister clarify under what circumstances will gambling duties be considered incompatible with the purposes of the Act? Further, the Minister may delegate the exercise of his or her powers in relation to remission to a Commissioner or public officer. Can the Minister clarify if there are limits to the categories of public officers to whom the Minister's powers can be delegated?
My second point is on the amount of penalty tax that can be imposed on outstanding gambling duties. The new section 14(2) limits the amount of penalty tax that can be imposed to 50% of the amount of gambling duties outstanding. I agree that the amount of penalty tax should not be excessive for an individual. That said, can the Minister share what enforcement tools are available to the Ministry for the recovery of gambling duties if these remained unpaid even after the maximum amount of penalty tax has been reached? Can the Minister also share what softer measures are available for the Ministry to work with an indebted individual to meet his or her debts?
My final point is the effect of the present Bill on Singapore's public policy on gambling. The position of Singapore's public policy on gambling has been scrutinised in a series of Court of Appeal cases, including Liao Eng Kiat vs Burswood Nominees Ltd and Poh Soon Kiat vs Desert Palace Incorporated.
While the cases concerned the enforcement of gambling debts which were incurred abroad, a relevant issue considered in these cases is the local policy position on gambling. In those cases, the Court had also considered local legislation on gambling, including the Gaming Act, Casino Control Act and Common Gaming Houses Act.
Can the Minister clarify if the consolidation of laws on levies and collection of duties on lawful betting and lotteries have any effect on the public policy position on gambling in Singapore? If so, how should the Government's position on gambling be understood?
In summary, I hope the Minister can shed light on my clarifications relating to the remission of gambling duties, the imposition of penalty taxes and Singapore's public policy on gambling. Sir, notwithstanding my clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Gambling Duties Bill is introduced with the intention of improving the consistency of tax administration and enforcement across gambling-related taxes.
With the unprecedented roll-out of various assistance schemes, free vaccination drives and increased healthcare burden amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, many Singaporeans have come to acknowledge the importance of having adequate Government revenue and savings in our reserves. There is also greater scrutiny of the Government's fiscal policies on how monies are spent and on the sources of income. Detailed bookkeeping is, thus, paramount. It helps to minimise discrepancies and misappropriation of funds. It is part of good governance. I appreciate the details on short levying, erroneous funding and overpayment in the various sections, as well as the recovering and refunding of shortfalls. I have four queries on the Bill.
First, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, will the active detection and enforcement of actions against underpayments and other discrepancies require significantly more manpower and resources? How will the Ministry ensure that IRAS is able to cope with the additional responsibilities? How does IRAS fulfil the complex requirements of bookkeeping and following up with discrepancies? Are there plans to deploy smart technology to support their operations? If so, are there safeguards to ensure that such information will only be used for the purposes of collection of gambling duties and that the data is not compromised?
Second, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, how will this Bill affect Singapore Sweep retailers and vendors? My main concern is for the small-time vendors and franchisees who sell Big Sweep and lottery tickets in the heartlands. Would the amendments to the tax administration scheme require any action on their part? Can the Ministry clarify whether this tax is already incorporated into the costs that they incurred from obtaining the selling rights and tickets from Singapore Pools? How will this affect them, especially with regard to their earnings?
Third, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, how much more revenue does IRAS project to earn, following the implementation of the Bill?
Lastly, we need to be mindful of the costs involved as a result of the Bill changes. A concern is that costs may be wasted on applications for assessment, reassessment of liability and appeals, based on similar facts from earlier cases. Furthermore, decisions and appeals made publicly available may allow appellants to discern whether to appeal, if the said appellants are made aware of previous decisions and facts hitherto. As such, will information of the appeals and decisions by the Commissioner or the Minister be published and made publicly available?
The Bill is silent as to the costs against assessment, reassessment of liability and appeal. In this connection, would cost consequence against the taxable person be necessary to prevent frivolous applications?
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, all these queries notwithstanding, I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister of State Alvin Tan.
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, let me touch on the provisions of the Bill pertaining to the Casino Licence Exclusivity Period.
When the IRs were first introduced, we provided an exclusivity period of 10 years, during which the Government would not introduce any other casinos. This was necessary as the IRs had made substantial investments and needed some business certainty.
In 2019, the two IRs committed around S$9 billion in investments to build new world-class tourism and MICE facilities. Marina Bay Sands (MBS) will introduce a state-of-the-art entertainment arena which would host world-class performances and an iconic new tower comprising hotel and rooftop attractions. There will also be additional MICE space to host exhibitions and conventions.
Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) will expand Universal Studios Singapore by almost 20% with two new themed zones – Minion Park and Super Nintendo World – and create a new Singapore Oceanarium. It will also redevelop its waterfront promenade and introduce a driverless transport system along the Sentosa Boardwalk to improve accessibility into Sentosa. These investments will enhance the attractiveness and tourism appeal of Singapore, amid stronger competition for travellers post-pandemic. Singaporeans can also look forward to more lifestyle and entertainment options.
To Mr Gan Thiam Poh's question on the potential increase in economic contribution, based on our initial projections, the IRs' expansions are expected to contribute S$500 million annually to GDP in a steady state. The expansions will also create up to 5,000 new jobs directly and benefit local businesses, especially in the construction and services sector.
As an example, last week, I witnessed the launch of the Resorts World Sentosa and the National University of Singapore (NUS) Living Laboratory project. The living lab brings together NUS' capabilities as a leading global research institute and RWS' strengths as a world-class tourism destination. The project focuses on biodiversity and energy conservation and will help preserve and restore our natural heritage. This is in line with our Singapore Green Plan 2030 and Sentosa Development Corporation's plans to transform Sentosa into a carbon-neutral destination by 2030. Again, it will, in turn, enhance Sentosa's appeal as a tourism and conservation destination.
These are hefty investments and a further extension of the exclusivity period was required, as the casino is a small but essential part of the IR in that it makes the larger development and slew of activities which I mentioned earlier financially viable. The duration of the exclusivity period was arrived at after considering factors, such as what the parties could offer, the social impact, competitive dynamics and what the IRs deemed necessary from a financial viability viewpoint.
Clause 46(1) amends section 41 of the Casino Control Act to introduce this exclusivity period. Clause 46(2) amends section 42 of the Casino Control Act to reflect this updated exclusivity period.
For the new attractions and facilities in the expanded IRs to remain commercially viable, the Government also announced in April 2019 that the IRs would be allowed to have additional gaming machines and the option to purchase additional Approved Gaming Area, or AGA. However, even if the IRs fully utilised their options, AGA, as a proportion of total floor area, would be reduced from 3.2% to 2.4%. This is because non-gaming areas will expand by a much larger amount.
As a pre-emptive measure to minimise the social impact of problem gambling, the Government raised the casino entry levies for Singaporeans and Permanent Residents by 50% in April 2019.
In response to Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Louis Chua's questions on the expected completion of the two IR expansions, the IRs remain committed to the expansion plans. However, with the disruption that COVID-19 has had on the construction industry, both IRs have indicated that there will be potential delays in the completion of their projects. And this is not altogether surprising or unique to this project or this industry. COVID-19 has impacted construction timelines, both locally and globally. As the COVID-19 situation continues to evolve and, in fact, is evolving, and the IRs' expansions are complex multi-year projects, the full extent of the delay is not yet clear.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the IRs' expansion aims to provide new world-class tourism and MICE facilities. This will enhance Singapore's tourism appeal, provide more entertainment options and jobs for Singaporeans and benefit local businesses. To this end, clauses 46(1) and 46(2) of the Gambling Duties Bill make amendments to the Casino Control Act related to the exclusivity period.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Lawrence Wong.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Members Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Louis Chua and Mr Louis Ng for their support for the Bill. Let me address their comments and queries in turn.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked whether the Bill will create significant additional resourcing needs for IRAS. It will not. First, the Bill consolidates and streamlines laws that are, currently, contained within the BSDA and PLA. So, many of these functions are already performed by IRAS today. Second, where there are new functions like electronic serving of notices, or the ability to enter and search premises for the enforcement of betting and sweepstake duties, these functions are not new to IRAS. IRAS, currently, performs these functions for the other taxes that it administers and has the requisite capabilities.
Mr Yip Hong Weng also asked if IRAS has plans to use smart technology to support its operations. IRAS already does this and will continue to do so. The consequential amendment to the IRAS Act in this Bill to provide for an electronic service system paves the way for e-services for betting and casino operators and private lottery promoters. More generally, IRAS is developing new artificial intelligence applications to enhance and automate key processes for the taxes that it administers. IRAS will continue to improve on its administration and enforcement to keep it efficient and effective. In fact, fiscal year 2020, across all taxes, IRAS has kept its cost of collection low, at less than one cent for every dollar of tax revenue collected.
Mr Louis Ng asked what enforcement tools are available to IRAS for the recovery of unpaid gambling duties and where the maximum penalties have already been reached. He also asked what softer measures are available for an indebted individual to meet his tax obligations. The taxpayers for the three types of betting taxes – casino tax, private lotteries duty and betting and sweepstake duties – are business providers of gaming and, generally, not individuals acting in their individual capacity. So far, these taxpayers have been compliant. If the need arises to recover unpaid betting taxes, the tools available for IRAS include suing the taxpayer or appointing someone who holds money for the taxpayer, such as a bank, to pay the sum to the Commissioner. If an individual is indebted, IRAS will explore a payment arrangement with the indebted individual to meet his or her debts.
As to Mr Yip Hon Weng's suggestion to require an appellant to pay costs to prevent frivolous applications for assessment, reassessment of liability and appeals, such frivolous applications are not an issue, currently, for betting taxes. So, we do not charge taxpayers who apply to IRAS for revising their tax assessments.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked how we protect taxpayer data. Clause 43 of the Bill ensures that all taxpayer data collected by IRAS for the gambling duties will be regarded as secret and confidential. A corresponding provision already exists in most other tax Acts. It is an offence to share confidential information except in certain specified circumstances. Authorised persons who are granted access to taxpayer data are required to make and subscribe to a declaration of secrecy. Even without a specific confidentiality provision, taxpayer income information is protected by the common law duty of confidentiality, the Official Secrets Act and the data protection regime under the Public Sector (Governance) Act.
Mr Louis Ng asked about the remission of gambling duties. This pertains to clause 12(1) of the Bill which provides for remission when the gambling duties are incompatible with the purposes of the Act.
This Ministerial power to remit taxes is a provision that is present in other existing tax Acts like the GST Act, the Income Tax Act, the Property Tax Act and the Stamp Duties Act. So, it is a generic provision that we have in our tax Acts. While it is unlikely that such remission power will be invoked for gambling duties, we have, nevertheless, provided for this remission power for gambling duties in the remote event that such an unforeseen situation should arise.
Now, let me touch on the broader impact of the Bill.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked whether small-scale vendors and franchisees, especially those who sell Big Sweep and lottery tickets in the heartlands, will be affected. The changes only affect the betting operator or the private lottery promoter, rather than retailers. For the individual retailers, the amendments do not require any additional action on their part and, because there is no change in the rates of duty, the amendments will also not impact their earnings.
Mr Louis Chua asked if the Government would consider a raising of betting taxes, particularly with regard to sweepstakes and private lotteries. These are not being contemplated as part of this Bill. There is no change that we are proposing for now, but we will continue to review the betting tax regime, as we do for other taxes on a regular basis. Our objective is to ensure that betting taxes are high enough to manage gambling demand and, at the same time, that operators and promoters can compete effectively against illegal gambling operators.
I turn now to Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Gan Thiam Poh's questions on the revenue collection associated with the changes in this Bill.
On the casino tax, Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about the gaming revenue from local and foreign visitors for premium and mass gaming. We do not collect data on the proportion of casino tax from local and foreign visitors. This is because casino tax does not differentiate between whether the individual concerned is a local or a foreigner.
I am unable, unfortunately, to share the details of casino tax collections. As there are only two casinos in Singapore, the Government is unable to disclose the amount of casino tax revenue or the breakdown between premium and mass gaming. Casino tax revenue is included under a broader classification of betting taxes which also includes taxes from lotteries, horse and sports betting and fruit machines. The total revenue from all betting taxes was $2.6 billion in FY2019 and $1.8 billion in FY2020. The numbers are still being finalised for FY2021 but we do not expect them to recover to pre-COVID-19 levels in the short term.
As for Mr Gan Thiam Poh's question on the projected increase in revenue with the expansion and increase in economic contribution, I believe this has been covered by Minister of State Alvin Tan when he talked about the expected economic benefits of IRs in his speech. The increase in tax revenue would depend on how well the IRs do after their additional investments.
Finally, in response to Mr Louis Ng's query, this Bill consolidates the existing laws on the levy and collection of taxes on lawful betting and lotteries but it does not impact what Singapore's public policy position on gambling is. We have, on multiple occasions, articulated our approach towards problem gambling and this position remains unchanged.
Mr Louis Chua also asked about resources to address this and I would like to assure him that the Government will ensure that sufficient resources are set aside to deal with problem gambling.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I believe I have addressed Members' concerns and questions and I beg to move.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Are there any clarifications? Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like to ask both the Minister and Minister of State about the overall prognosis and relevance of the physical IR business model. I have several reasons for asking.
Number one is, with COVID-19, whether endemic or pandemic, there is a lot less travel, especially in business travel. So, I wanted to know, in terms of jobs created and the MICE industry and tourism management expertise that we were supposed to acquire as a result of the IR policy – how has this physical IR model actually benefited the Singapore economy.
The second is that we all know that there is a rapid rise of online gambling. And I wanted to ask the Minister how the gambling duties for this rapidly rising source of gambling revenue are collected and whether more attention is applied to the space of online gambling because, actually, over the last 10 to 15 years, a lot of things have changed, in fact.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister of State Alvin Tan.
Mr Alvin Tan: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Ms Denise Phua for her question. This is with regard to the overall tourism strategy and our strategy with regard to MICE. I would say that, as Members are aware, the tourism sector, be it the aviation sector or the associated sectors, have been hard hit by COVID-19 due to travel restrictions and safe management measures (SMMs). But that does not mean that we should hold back or not invest in our tourism capabilities and capacity for the long run. This is because the tourism landscape, as I mentioned earlier, is getting competitive and we must position ourselves for when tourism upticks, for when regular travel resumes and for when events, such as MICE, tourism, start to resume some form of normalcy.
Last year, we were preparing the tourism and MICE sectors for such an eventuality and, so, we undertook four MICE pilots and those pilots went well. This puts us on a strong footing.
With regard to the IR expansions, these are also necessary, as the Member noted earlier, to put the IRs in a good position as a tourism enabler for Singapore in the long run. And that is why the IRs are expanding. And most of the offerings are catered towards tourism and developing this capability for when tourism and travel resume. And we must be prepared to take that uplift and we must be prepared to carry that wind when it comes.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Lawrence Wong.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Deputy Speaker, in response to the query from Ms Denise Phua on online gambling, indeed, the trend is moving more towards online gambling. However, our concern is not about the regulated space but over the illegal space. And if technology continues to make it easier for people to gamble anywhere and everywhere, then such illegal online gambling may continue to grow. I think Mr Louis Chua also highlighted this in his speech.
I think a fuller exposition on all the safeguards that the relevant authorities have put into this is probably worth a separate airing, not related to this Bill, because this comes under various agencies, including MHA. But I would assure the Member that the Government pays close attention to this and we continue to keep a close watch to monitor the issue of problem gambling, including problem gambling online.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Lawrence Wong]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exempted Business","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the proceedings on the business set down on the Order Paper for today be exempted at this day's Sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No 2.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah.] (proc text)]
[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Second Minister for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
The Corporate Registers (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill covers four sets of amendments to the Companies Act and the Limited Liability Partnerships Act. Two sets of amendments introduce new requirements. The other two clarify existing requirements.
These amendments will strengthen Singapore's corporate governance regime and affirm our commitment to combating money laundering, terrorism financing and other threats to the integrity of the international financial system.
The amendments will also bring us into closer alignment with the international standards set by the Financial Action Task Force, or FATF, of which Singapore is a member. FATF is an inter-governmental organisation that sets international standards to prevent global money laundering and terrorism financing and the harm that is caused to financial ecosystems and society at large.
MOF and the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA) sought views from the public on the draft Bill in July last year and have taken in the feedback received where relevant and feasible. I thank the contributors for their inputs.
Let me start by setting out the two new requirements that will be introduced, via amendments to the Companies Act and the Limited Liability Partnerships Act.
Today, the Companies Act already requires companies to maintain a Register of members or shareholders.
In certain situations, a shareholder may hold shares on behalf of another person. In such a situation, the person holding the shares is known as the nominee shareholder, while the person for whom the shares are held is known as the nominator.
Our Acts today do not require the nominator to be identified, as he or she is not the shareholder on record. However, as the nominee shareholder typically acts on the instructions of the nominator, the lack of transparency on the identity of these persons who actually control the shares is an area of concern internationally.
The first set of amendments today aims to address these concerns and align our legislation with FATF recommendations, by requiring both local and foreign companies in Singapore to, first, keep a non-public register of nominee shareholders and their nominators; and second, to update their register within seven days of being informed by the nominee. This will ensure that nominators, who are effectively controllers of a company, are properly identified, in line with the international standards.
With this amendment, nominee shareholders will also be required to inform the company of their nominee status and their nominators in a timely manner.
These amendments are provided for in clause 2(i) of the Bill.
The second set of amendments introduces new requirements in relation to the identification of registrable controllers, for local and foreign companies and LLPs.
Today, companies and LLPs are already required to maintain a Register of Registrable Controllers. These are individuals or corporate entities that have a significant interest in or significant control over the company or LLP.
However, there have been situations where a company or LLP claims to have no registrable controllers with significant interest or control.
Under the new requirement, companies and LLPs which are unable to identify a registrable controller who has a significant interest in or significant control over the company or LLP will be required to identify all individuals with executive control over the company or LLP as registrable controllers. Individuals with executive control are the chief executive officers (CEOs) and directors or partners who exercise executive control over the daily or regular affairs of the company or LLP through a senior management position.
This will enhance the transparency of beneficial ownership and control of companies and LLPs in Singapore, by ensuring that a registrable controller is identified for all companies and LLPs, in line with international expectations.
Clauses 2(e) and 3(c) of the Bill provide for this amendment.
Aside from these two sets of amendments, this Bill also seeks to clarify the timelines for local and foreign companies to update their various registers.
The third set of amendments requires local companies to update their Register of Nominee Directors within seven days of receiving information from their nominee directors.
Local companies are already required to maintain a Register of Nominee Directors, reflecting their status as a nominee director and the particulars of their nominator. However, no timeframe is specified for local companies to update their register when there is a change in particulars of the nominee director or their nominator. Specifying a seven-day time limit for this provides clarity on the expected timeline and will ensure that the register is updated in a timely manner. Clause 2(f) of the Bill provides for this amendment.
Finally, the fourth set of amendments specifies a 30-day timeframe for foreign companies to update their Register of Members.
Foreign companies are already required to keep a Register of Members at their Singapore branch, but, currently, there is no timeframe specified as to when updates must be made when there is a change in their members' particulars. This amendment will, similarly, provide clarity to the foreign companies on the timeline expected for updating their register.
We have allowed a longer timeframe for foreign companies to give them sufficient time to contact their members who may be based overseas and to update their register. Clause 2(a) of the Bill provides for this amendment.
The proposed amendments in this Bill on the new registers to be maintained and the clarification of the timelines within which the various registers must be updated will strengthen Singapore's regime on the transparency and beneficial ownership of companies and LLPs. Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill gives effect to the Financial Action Task Force's recommendations on the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing. Preventing the illicit movement of funds is key to Singapore's role as a respected international financial hub and I am glad we are taking steps to strengthen our protections. I have three points of clarification.
First, can the Minister clarify the reasons why directors with executive control and the CEO must be listed in the register if no registrable controller is identified? Why are these two groups specifically listed? Does this mean that no other person can have executive control and is not relevant to be disclosed in the register? Further, this requirement seems repetitive, given that the information about directors and CEOs are already filed with ACRA.
Second, can Minister provide more clarity on the definition of \"nominee shareholders\"? What would be necessary before someone is considered \"accustomed\"? The amendment states that the nominee must also receive dividends on behalf of the principal shareholder. Is it sufficient that there is an agreement for the nominee to receive dividends, or must there be an actual distribution into the hands of the nominee? If it is the latter, this creates a problem where it is impossible to clarify nominee status for companies that do not issue dividends.
Third and finally, can the Ministry share how it will support small businesses in complying with these new regulations? The new regulations apply not only to multinational corporations or financial institutions but also small local businesses. For small businesses, these rules can be complex and require proportionally larger costs to comply with. How will the Ministry support our small businesses to ensure these regulations do not unfairly burden them?
In summary, I seek clarification on three things: the need to list directors or CEOs in the register, the definition of nominee shareholders and the ways the Ministry will support small businesses in complying with the new regulations. Sir, notwithstanding my clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Corporate Registers (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill seeks to amend certain laws relating to the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing. The proposed amendments are a result of recommendations made by the inter-governmental body, known as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). These amendments concern administrative requirements applicable to companies in Singapore.
Sir, the Bill is a step in the right direction for Singapore as it underlines our commitment to being a responsible global player in financial services, one that is committed to a transparent, rules-based, global order and, hence, able to derive economic benefits from that order. My speech will support the Bill but raise questions and suggestions.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Singapore is committed to the global effort to combat transnational crime as a member of FATF and a founder member of the Asia Pacific Group on Money Laundering. The Singapore Government's stated aims have been to detect, deter and prevent money laundering and terrorism financing and to protect the integrity of its financial system from illegal activities and elicit fund flows.
Singapore has continued, I note, to make progress to address the technical compliance deficiencies identified in the latest 2019 FATF Mutual Evaluation Report, or MER. As a result of this progress, Singapore has been re-rated on several Recommendations, that is, Nos 3, 23, 24 and 25. Take, for instance, the amendment of the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act, which came into effect in April 2019. The increase in fines through these Acts were considered sufficiently dissuasive in the said MER, which led Singapore to be re-rated as compliant with Recommendation 3, bringing Singapore closer to its goal of deterring money laundering and terrorist financing activities.
However, Singapore has not addressed all the identified deficiencies and several areas for improvement still exist. In order to strengthen Singapore's measures to fight money laundering and terrorism financing, the Corporate Registers (Amendment) Bill is necessary to keep Singapore's legal regime aligned with FATF's standards and recommendations.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have three broad points to make on this Bill. The first point concerns the different timelines for local and foreign companies in updating their registers of key personnel. The amendment Bill, if passed, will result in local companies having to update their register of nominee directors within seven days, instead of the 14 days under section 173A of the Companies Act, while foreign companies may update their register of members within 30 days.
The Bill originally intended that foreign companies should update the register of members within 14 days. However, during the public consultation phase, the feedback was that this would be a challenge for foreign companies, especially if they have more than 50 members. While the feedback suggested that companies should be given 14 to 28 days, MOF and ACRA further extended the deadline to 30 days, stating that this would be aligned with the requirements in section 372 of the Companies Act. In other words, this feedback was accepted in the spirit of harmonising timelines in existing legal provisions. Indeed, this is a commendable, reasonable and consistent approach that avoids imposing multiple timelines and requirements on foreign companies.
However, feedback to amend requirements for local companies for consistency with existing legislation was not received in the same way. The amendment Bill, currently, intends for local companies to update their information on nominee directors and shareholders within seven days. With that being said, feedback from the consultation proposed that local companies should be given 14 days instead, as this would be line with section 173A of the Companies Act – which will really require a company to provide updates regarding changes to any appointment of directors, chief executive officer, secretaries, auditors and others within the period of 14 days. However, this feedback was not accepted. The implication is that local companies now have two timelines to follow: seven days to update particulars for nominee, directors; and 14 days for particulars of all other key personnel.
This begs the following question: what is the basis for requiring that local companies must update their information and nominee directors within a seven-day period when there is already an existing requirement to update information on various key position holders within 14 days? Should this provision be accepted by this House, there would be two timelines for local companies, in contrast to foreign companies being uniformly subject to one timeline.
The hon Minister Indranee Rajah stated earlier in her Second Reading speech that foreign companies may need more time to contact overseas stakeholders, directors, but local companies may also have some directors residing overseas, either on a long-term basis or who may be overseas at the relevant time. So, I am wondering why the timelines for both local and foreign companies cannot be harmonised.
Sir, my second point relates to the Government's plans to improve compliance with the other FATF recommendations. Singapore has made great progress in implementing Recommendation 24 on Transparency and Beneficial Ownership of Legal Persons through an amendment to the Companies Act in 2017 and further amendments in this Corporate Registers Bill before us. Singapore has strengthened its compliance with Recommendation 24 where Singapore was rated as \"largely compliant\".
However, Sir, the remaining other FATF recommendations which Singapore was found to be only \"partially compliant with\" are Recommendations 22, 28 and 35. Recommendation 22 concerns the application of customer due diligence and record-keeping requirements to designated non-financial businesses and professions (DNFBPs), such as the gambling and legal Industries. Recommendation 28 is about subjecting the aforementioned DNFBPs to regulatory and supervisory framework regarding anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing measures. Recommendation 35 relates to the available range of sanctions to do with parties that have failed to abide by anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing measures.
Given that it is ostensibly the goal of this Bill to counter money laundering and terrorism financing concerns and recognising the increasingly sophisticated methods employed to launder money and finance terror activities, how does the Government intend to improve compliance with these three FATF Recommendations 22, 28 and 35?
Sir, finally, I would like to raise some questions about the clarification of certain terms contained in the amendment Bill. These terms include \"individuals with executive control\", \"executive control\", and \"accustomed\". In their document published in response to key feedback received for this Bill, MOF and ACRA have stated that such terms are \"to be clarified\". As such, could the Minister advise when MOF and ACRA intend to provide such clarifications? I ask this, considering the need to avoid business uncertainty. Can such guidance be expected shortly upon the Bill's passage or coming into force?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Second Minister Indranee Rajah.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank Mr Louis Ng and Mr Leon Perera for speaking on the Bill and for their support. Mr Louis Ng raised three points of clarification, which I will address in turn.
First, Mr Louis Ng asked about the rationale for identifying CEOs and directors with executive control to be listed in the Register of Registrable Controllers, if a company is unable to identify a registrable controller. As I had explained in my speech earlier, there have been situations where a company claimed to have no registrable controllers with significant interest or control. Currently, such companies would not be required to enter any particulars into the register of controllers.
The intent of the Register of Registrable Controllers is to increase the transparency of natural persons who have beneficial ownership and control of companies. In situations where no registrable controllers are identified, persons with executive powers within the company are effectively exercising control. It is, therefore, necessary to include these persons in the Register if no other controller can be identified.
Mr Louis Ng also asked if it is necessary to provide particulars of the CEO and the directors in the register of registrable controllers when ACRA may already have the information in other registers.
The reality is that a company can have many directors, but not all of them exercise executive control over the company. The purpose of the new requirement is to ensure that companies identify the directors and CEOs with executive control, so that the beneficial owners are properly identified.
Next, let me address Mr Louis Ng's clarification on the definition of a nominee shareholder.
A shareholder is considered to be a nominee if he fulfils the following two criteria in respect of the shares that he holds.
First, he is accustomed to, or under an obligation, to vote in accordance with the instructions of any other person. The word \"accustomed\" suggests some degree of habit – meaning that there must be some consistent pattern of behaviour of the nominee shareholder voting in accordance with the instructions or wishes of any other person – and occasional instances of such behaviour would not be sufficient to constitute \"accustomed\".
The second criterion is that he or she receives dividends on behalf of his or her nominator. Practically, it would suffice if the nominee is expected to receive the dividends on behalf of the nominator, even if the dividends are not eventually distributed.
Our amendments are in line with FATF. I would also add that public companies listed in Singapore and their shareholders will not be subject to this new requirement, as provided for in the Fourteenth Schedule of the Companies Act.
Lastly, Mr Louis Ng asked about the compliance cost of the new requirements and the support that Government will put in place. To be clear and, as mentioned in my speech earlier, out of the four sets of amendments in this Bill, two are clarifications on timelines and only two are new requirements.
The new requirement to maintain a Register of Nominee Shareholders is unlikely to materially increase compliance costs, especially if the small businesses do not have nominee arrangements. Moreover, the responsibility on the company is only to maintain such a register, based on declarations by nominee shareholders. Companies will not be required to send notices to check if shareholders are nominees.
The other new requirement is to identify individuals with the executive control of a company or LLP to be listed in the Register of Registrable Controllers, if they are unable to identify a registrable controller.
Again, this is unlikely to increase compliance cost. I would also like to highlight that these new requirements will only apply to companies and LLPs. Small businesses that are set up as sole proprietorships or general partnerships will not be impacted by them.
The Government will help companies and LLPs to comply with the new requirements. ACRA will issue a Guidance on the new requirement of maintaining a Register of Nominee Shareholders. The Guidance will contain detailed instructions to clarify and explain the new requirements. For example, it will provide details on how a nominee shareholder and nominator can be identified and include a model template to support the maintenance of the register.
ACRA will also update the existing Guidance on the Register of Registrable Controllers for companies and LLPs to provide clarity on how these entities can identify persons with executive control as registrable controllers.
Mr Leon Perera had a number of questions. The first one, I believe, relates to the different timeframes.
The 30-day timeframe for foreign companies to update the Register of members is consistent with section 372 of the Companies Act, which requires foreign companies to update any changes in their particulars in ACRA's registers within 30 days. This also provides sufficient time for foreign companies to contact members who are located overseas and update the Register which is located in the registered office in Singapore.
In comparison, local companies are to update the Register of Nominee Directors within seven days of being informed of any changes by the nominee director. This provides sufficient time for local companies to update the register whilst ensuring that the registers are updated in a timely manner.
The general principle, really, is of the underlying assumption that if it is a local director, then it will be easier to contact the relevant persons and to do the updating.
This is not something which is particularly unique or startling, for the simple reason that there are many types of deadlines where more time is given to foreign companies, simply because they need to contact people who are overseas.
The second item that he raised was about items where we are partially compliant, rather than fully compliant. The answer is that we continually review our regulations and our practices to make sure that we are in line with international practices. Some things may take a little bit more time while some things need to be studied. So, for example, this latest set of amendments are a result of our review coming out of previous comments. So, it is a work in progress. But I think the Member can be assured that we will continue to work towards greater transparency and making sure that we are in alignment with international frameworks.
Finally, Mr Louis Ng asked when Guidance will be given on certain definitions. That will be done as soon as reasonably practicable.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I think that answers the questions and I beg to move.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Any clarifications?
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That at its rising today, Parliament do stand adjourned to Tuesday, 11 January 2021, at 12.00 pm.\" – [Mr Zaqy Mohamad]. (proc text)]
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 Deputy Speaker: Ms Hazel Poa.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, my family and I are fully vaccinated and not affected by the Vaccination-differentiated Safe Management Measures, or VDS. However, I watch with concern the latest VDS measures. With effect from 15 January, the unvaccinated will not be allowed to go back to their workplace even if they tested negative. I am particularly disturbed by this latest measure that puts the livelihoods of the unvaccinated at risk.
Many Singaporeans are similarly concerned and anxious. Former Singaporean tennis player, Jaime Wong, started a petition on this issue on 1 January 2022. She was a national tennis champion and represented Singapore in many international competitions, including SEA Games and the International Tennis Federation Fed Cup.
In her petition, she shared that, with effect from 15 January, she would no longer be able to continue her profession as a tennis coach nor enter the tennis school that she started because she is unvaccinated. This petition has garnered over 6,000 signatures. It is heartening to note that amongst them are fully vaccinated Singaporeans acting out of concern for the livelihoods of the unvaccinated.
We aspire to be an inclusive society. This means that we need to accept differences, not just differences in race, language, religion or culture but also differences in opinions and views. We need to respect decisions that may be different from ours. What is the justification for preventing the unvaccinated from returning to their workplace? It is not for fear of infecting others, because vaccination does not stop the transmission of COVID-19.
The risk is, therefore, mainly to themselves, not others. They bear the brunt of their decision not to be vaccinated. I understand that the Government is concerned about the health of the 52,000 unvaccinated employees. But I also believe that these 52,000 people are, at least, as concerned about their own health and safety as the Government is, if not more so.
They must have strong reasons, based on their own individual circumstances and personal medical history, for sticking to their decision not to vaccinate, despite the VDS measures that had been progressively put in place, placing various restrictions on their movements and activities. To them, the risk, or cost, of vaccination must have been significant. This latest measure that threatens their livelihood would just place them between a rock and a hard place.
There are many legitimate questions on the vaccines that are as yet unanswered. For example, what are the long-term effects? What are the effects of repeated jabs administered every six months? Harbouring doubts about vaccination is not unreasonable.
When faced with a situation that is relatively new and where there are many gaps in our knowledge and information, it is always a good idea to keep an open mind, treat current knowledge with caution and not be too absolute in our measures because new knowledge could emerge later to prove us wrong. A good example would be the Government's stand on masks in the initial stage of the pandemic. Let us learn from that experience.
Japan has a policy of no discrimination against the unvaccinated and they achieved a vaccination rate of 79% of their population versus our 87%. So, yes, our VDS probably pushed up our vaccination rate by a few percentage points, but there is the question of degree and the law of diminishing returns.
It is often said that punishment must fit the crime. The same principle should apply to non-criminal actions as well. The consequences that we seek to impose should fit the action. In making the choice between the risk of COVID-19 infection and the risk of adverse effects of vaccination and, where the risk falls primarily on themselves, is the loss of livelihood a befitting penalty? This ban on the unvaccinated returning to their workplace and, thus, risking their livelihoods, is too harsh. Even though the Government has asserted that every effort will be made to enable them to work from home, this is not always practical for every job affected. The new measure is essentially “licence to terminate”.
And what is the expected benefit of imposing such a strong measure? Even without this latest measure, on 5 December 2021, we achieved a vaccination rate of 96% of the eligible population then.
With the threat of loss of livelihood, will we achieve 97%, 99%? Will the number of daily COVID-19 cases drop from 840 to 830?
Government policies are made based on macro considerations and statistics designed to benefit the majority. Just as there are exceptions to every rule, there will always be a small group which would be adversely affected. While it is understandable that Government policies cannot possibly cater to every single individual, we can, at least, recognise the existence of exceptions and leave room for them. Do not put them between a rock and a hard place.
The Government has revealed that there are 52,000 unvaccinated employees. What is the number of unvaccinated self-employed persons or gig workers? What is the breakdown by age and industry? How many of them are expected to lose their jobs? Has the Government studied the impact on these 52,000 unvaccinated employees and an unknown number of unvaccinated SEPs before making its decision? They are not mere statistics; they have elderly parents, they have children.
For those who lose their current jobs because they are unvaccinated, what is the likelihood of them finding another? Measures that threatened livelihoods should never be taken lightly. They may become marginalised if they are unable to regain employment. The prospect of an impending GST hike does not help matters.
Throughout the pandemic, the Government has taken great pains to keep our borders and our economy open, even at the risk of importing COVID-19 cases. For the sake of economic gains, the Government has chosen to manage the health risk. Please now extend the same consideration to the unvaccinated, recognise the importance to them of keeping their livelihood and allow them to manage their health risk.
What is the risk of overwhelming our healthcare system by allowing the 52,000 unvaccinated employees to return to their workplace?
Earlier today, the Minister for Health shared that the unvaccinated comprise two-thirds of the ICU cases. This is presumably based on a period of time when our vaccination rate was lower and the proportion of unvaccinated people in the population higher. Based on MOH's statistics, our vaccination rate reached 50% on 18 July 2021. Therefore, for the bigger part of 2021, more than half of our population was unvaccinated.
While it is undeniable that the unvaccinated are more prone to serious cases, attributing the high number of unvaccinated cases of ICU or death in 2021 to the current small number of unvaccinated is misleading. These are not ratios we can use to project into the future.
Focusing on the 52,000 unvaccinated employees, I do not have the information that will allow me to get a good estimate of the expected number that will fall seriously ill. For example, the age breakdown of the unvaccinated is a key piece of information. However, as a ballpark figure would help form a clearer picture by indicating the order of magnitude, I have used whatever limited information I can find to arrive at a rough estimate.
Assuming the number of daily cases to be 800 out of a population of 5.5 million, applying that proportion to the 52,000 unvaccinated employees gives us 7.6 cases.
MOH's COVID-19 statistics from 1 May to 15 December 2021 showed that, amongst the unvaccinated, the percentage of COVID-19 cases requiring ICU ranged from 0.051% to 0.53% for those aged 20 to 49, 2.4% for those aged 50 to 59 and 7.2% for those aged 60 to 69.
The 52,000 unvaccinated employees are working age. So, assuming that most of them are below the age of 60, I used the ICU rate of 2.4%, which is the highest rate amongst those under 60. Applying the rate of 2.4% on the 7.6 cases gives us 0.18 case requiring ICU per day.
If the number of cases were to double to 1,600 per day, that would give us 0.36 cases requiring ICU. If the number of daily cases reaches 3,000, that would give us 0.68 ICU cases, bearing in mind that Omicron is expected to be more infectious but less severe, as shared by Minister for Health earlier today.
I would be happy to receive more accurate figures from MOH. However, based on what I currently see, there does not appear to be any basis to fear that allowing the unvaccinated to return to the workplace would overwhelm our ICU facilities.
We urge the Government to rescind the ban on the unvaccinated returning to their workplace from 15 January and continue with the current arrangement of using testing as the means to control the spread of COVID-19.
Vaccination-differentiated safe management measures (VDS) on children. The vaccination of children aged five to 11 started in December last year, with only the mRNA option. There are differing schools of thought on COVID-19 vaccinations and even more so for the vaccination of children, with several medical doctors publicly opposing it. The unanswered question on the long-term effects of mRNA vaccines is even more relevant for children who have another 70 to 80 years ahead of them.
Parents are, understandably, uncertain and anxious. Making the decision on behalf of their children is more stressful than making decisions for themselves. Heavy on their minds is whether VDS will be imposed on their children.
In light of the fact that COVID-19 is milder in children, can the Government commit to not imposing VDS on children for at least another year to give parents more time to digest new information, monitor developments and perhaps wait for more vaccination options to become available?
At this point in time, is the Government able to give an indicative timeline for the assessment of inactivated virus vaccines, like Sinovac, for children and the required conditions for approval? This information will be helpful for parents making their decisions on the vaccination of their children.
In conclusion, we urge the Government to rescind the ban on the unvaccinated returning to the workplace from 15 January and commit to not imposing VDS on children for at least another 12 months.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Member for her speech on matters related to VDS.
The Member raised several points for clarification, including the removal of the concession to allow unvaccinated workers to return to the workplace with a negative Pre-Event Test (PET) result and also her queries relating to extension of VDS to children.
Earlier today, the Minister for Health had responded to questions from Members. He highlighted our threefold response in living with COVID-19: vaccination and boosters, bolstering our healthcare capacity and calibrating our SMMs. Each is important in our response to Omicron and in ensuring that, in the longer term, we can resume our normal lives as far as possible.
Our experience over the past few months shows that VDS will enable us to continue our path of safe and calibrated reopening whilst, at the same time, minimising the risk of hospitalisation to preserve healthcare capacity, in particular, limited hospital and ICU resources.
It is important to note that non-fully vaccinated persons who are infected with COVID-19 are more than seven times more likely to become critically ill in ICU, compared to those who are fully vaccinated – 0.5% of cases versus 0.07% – and 12 times – 1.7% of cases versus 0.14% – more likely to die.
Among seniors aged 60 and above, the incidence of fully vaccinated and non-fully vaccinated cases who are critically ill in the ICU are 1.9 and 35.9 per 100,000 population respectively. The incidences of fully vaccinated and non-fully vaccinated seniors who died are 0.3 and 8.2 per 100,000 population respectively.
As a result, throughout the pandemic, we find that two-thirds of our ICU beds are occupied by individuals who are unvaccinated. They are also more likely to be administered therapeutics, which are not cheap. So, although a small proportion of our population, they take up a disproportionate amount of medical and hospital resources and contribute to a significant amount of workload of our hospital staff. These are not mere statistics. It is actual resources being drained because of people who fall ill because of COVID-19.
The basis for VDS is, therefore, twofold.
First, by putting restrictions on their social activities, we protect the unvaccinated by preventing them from being overly exposed to the virus. The Member earlier said, well, it is just for them, right? But that is not true because the second point is that, if fewer unvaccinated people get infected, we preserve our hospital capacity whilst allowing the rest to carry on normal activities as much as possible.
Let me now elaborate on these points, including how VDS contributes to our safe reopening and transition to living with COVID-19.
To set the context, the emergence of the Delta variant in May 2021 required quick action to be taken to contain the numerous outbreaks of clusters in the community and to minimise the risk of our healthcare capacity being overwhelmed. The Multi-Ministry Task Force (MTF) thus decided to significantly tighten our SMMs, resulting in a move to Phase Two (Heightened Alert) in May 2021.
At the same time, we further ramped up our vaccination efforts, resulting in improved vaccination rates, particularly among seniors. Members will remember that our vaccination programme kicked off one year ago in early January 2021. By 9 August 2021, 72% of our entire population had completed their full regimen or received two doses of COVID-19 vaccines, with 81% receiving at least one dose.
With this high level of vaccination coverage and through our collective efforts as a nation to comply with the strict Phase Two (Heightened Alert) measures, the daily number of COVID-19 cases fell to double digits. The MTF thus restarted the process of resuming more economic and social activities through a calibrated risk-based approach aimed to protect the unvaccinated whilst not placing further strains on our healthcare system. We thus introduced VDS for selected premises, activities and events from 10 August 2021.
Through VDS, we eased measures for those who are fully vaccinated rather than hold everyone back in order to reduce the risk to the unvaccinated.
Fully vaccinated persons have good protection against the virus and are at lower risk of becoming dangerously ill if infected with COVID-19. This would mean that they would not strain our resources. So, vaccination is still a very important and powerful measure in the many things that we are doing to protect our community from COVID-19.
We resumed dining in F&B establishments for groups of up to five vaccinated persons, with exemptions for children aged 12 and below. We also allowed significant increases in event sizes, such as congregational and worship services, live performances and MICE, up to 500 persons, as long as all attendees were fully vaccinated.
Unvaccinated individuals, on the other hand, need to be more prudent in interacting with larger groups of people, especially in mask-off settings, which are high-risk. Hence, the strict measures will continue to apply to them. It will not matter if they are tennis coaches; the virus does not discriminate because it will impact you more severely if you are unvaccinated.
With access to premises, activities and events being brought under the VDS framework, the hope was that this would also encourage the unvaccinated to get their vaccination so that they can participate in the community and society safely.
Despite our cautious approach to reopening, the heightened transmissibility of the Delta variant resulted in new clusters emerging by end August 2021. This put great pressure on our healthcare system. The number of cases was sustained at 3,000 per day, as mentioned by Minister Ong Ye Kung earlier, and, the serious cases, who had to be seen in hospitals, resulted in 100 to 170 cases occupying ICU beds each day.
Sixty-six percent of ICU patients were unvaccinated or partially vaccinated individuals. They took up scarce medical resources, which are needed for others who are very sick individuals, including those with non-COVID-19 conditions who require expensive therapeutics.
To stabilise the situation, we had to roll out revised healthcare protocols and tighten our SMMs again. But we were able to allow more activities to continue during this Stabilisation Phase, compared to the earlier Phase Two (Heightened Alert) period due to VDS. VDS has also allowed us to safely resume more activities even after we exited the Stabilisation Phase on 22 November 2021.
With more social interactions taking place over the year-end holidays, case numbers did not see a surge. We now face a prospect of another surge of cases due to the Omicron variant.
We are in a better position than before, as our vaccination coverage has improved greatly over the past few months to 87% of our entire population completing their full regimen, with 89% receiving at least one dose. But we need to decide whether we want to tighten up all our SMMs again, which would affect the lives and livelihoods of both the vaccinated and unvaccinated, or do we calibrate our measures so that we only tighten up for those who are unvaccinated and who would be more likely to impose strains on our healthcare system.
These decisions are not taken lightly. We need to calibrate; we need to balance.
Further adjustments to our VDS policies have thus been made to ready us for these potential increases in cases as well as to allow us to better understand the nature of the Omicron variant and its differences from the Delta variant. These include the removal of the concession for unvaccinated individuals to produce a negative Pre-Event Test (PET) result prior to participating in a VDS event or activity and the reduction of the exemption period for recovered persons to enter VDS settings from 270 days to 180 days.
Through VDS, we hope to keep the unvaccinated individuals protected from infection whilst allowing the rest of society to continue with their normal activities.
In line with our overall reopening approach, the MTF announced the introduction of the Workforce Vaccination Measures (WVM), which required that, from 1 January 2022, unvaccinated individuals who were medically eligible for vaccination would be required to produce a negative PET result before entering the workplace so as to mitigate the risks of workplace transmission. The MTF subsequently announced on 14 December 2021 that up to 50% of those who can work from home will be allowed to return to the office from 1 January 2022 as we would be in a better position to ease the current default work-from-home posture with the WVM in place.
However, we have seen the emergence of a more transmissible Omicron variant, which, with the Delta variant, significantly raises the risk of contracting COVID-19, compared to a year ago. To strengthen our protection against a large wave of cases locally and to keep our workplace safe, the MTF announced that, from 15 January 2022, unvaccinated workers, barring those medically ineligible, will not be able to return to the workplace even with a negative PET result.
As of 2 January 2022, there were about 48,000 employees who had not taken any vaccine dose. This is a reduction from the 52,000 reported on 19 December 2021, as we have seen more employees coming forward to get vaccinated. Among the unvaccinated employees, those aged 30 to 39 form the largest group at 16,000. Whilst a negative PET is an indicator that the person is not infected with COVID-19, the unvaccinated individual has no protection against the virus. And if you think about it, if all the 48,000 get COVID-19, it would, indeed, impact on our healthcare system.
This decision was taken in consideration of many different factors and in consultation with many different stakeholders. This move was supported by the tripartite partners who recognised the public health imperative of vaccination and the urgency to sustain business activity to protect livelihoods. A fully vaccinated workforce would be able to operate more safely and sustainably.
We still allow employees who are certified medically ineligible for vaccines under the National Vaccination Programme (NVP) to return to the workplace, given that they constitute only 0.3% – a very small proportion – of unvaccinated workers. However, whilst such employees are exempted from WVM, MOM and the tripartite partners have guided employers to give special consideration, such as allowing them to work from home, if they are able to do so, and redeploying them to suitable jobs which can be done from home, if such jobs are available.
From the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, we had adopted a special approach to fully cover the costs of COVID-19 medical treatment for Singapore Citizens, Permanent Residents and Long-Term Pass Holders (SC/PR/LTPHs) who had not recently travelled. This special approach was intended to avoid financial considerations adding to the public uncertainty and concern when COVID-19 was an emergent and unfamiliar disease.
Today, the vaccines have since become widely administered and there is sufficient evidence that they confer protection to reduce the risk of serious illness and death. Those aged above 12 who remain unvaccinated by choice have decided to do so despite knowing that this places them at a higher risk of requiring costly inpatient care, which adds to the strain on our healthcare system. The special treatment of the Government fully covering the costs of COVID-19 medical treatment will, therefore, not apply to this group. This will also be the case for individuals aged above 18 who do not come forward for their booster within 270 days or nine months from their last dose.
Depending on the severity of the patient's condition and the type of COVID-19 facility where care is rendered, the bill size would vary, but these patients who are unvaccinated by choice may still tap on the regular healthcare financing arrangement to help pay for their bills, where applicable. While the median bill size for COVID-positive patients receiving treatment in acute hospitals who require both ICU care and COVID-19 therapeutics is estimated to be about $25,000, access to means-tested Government subsidies and MediShield Life coverage can reduce the bill to about $2,000 to $4,000 for eligible Singaporeans in subsidised wards. SCs and PRs may also use their MediSave balance to help fund any remaining post-subsidy amount, subject to the claim limits that apply.
With regard to extending VDS to children in the community, public, preschool and school settings, there are, presently, no plans to do so for those aged 12 and below.
The focus at this time is to ensure our children are well-protected as we begin vaccination for those aged five to 11, using the paediatric doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech/Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine. We will, periodically, review our policies as the extension of the national COVID-19 vaccination programme to children aged five to 11 progresses.
Earlier today, we had also addressed concerns that were raised by Members. And we acknowledge that these are some legitimate concerns that parents may have. But given all the facts we have and in the current situation that we are facing, it is still highly encouraged for parents to bring their children if they are eligible for the vaccination.
In summary, increasing population immunity through vaccinations and boosters, reinforced with VDS, has been integral to our COVID-19 response in protecting the vulnerable and ensuring that our healthcare system can cope with the incoming Omicron wave, as well as any future infection waves. Singapore is now in a better position to achieve our goal of being a COVID-19 resilient nation.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Yes, is it a clarification? We have got just a few minutes for clarification, Ms Hazel Poa.
Ms Hazel Poa: I have explained earlier in my speech why we cannot apply the two-thirds ICU statistics to the current situation because of the changing vaccination rate. The data in 2021 is based on a case where, for the first half of 2021, more than 50% of the population was unvaccinated. Therefore, it is not reasonable to apply those statistics to the current small number of unvaccinated.
So, I presume that in implementing this strong measure which risks 48,000 livelihoods, MOH must have done studies on what is the impact, specifically on the number of expected job loss versus the additional burden on the hospital ICU utilisation. Can the Parliamentary Secretary provide us with the statistics for this?
Ms Rahayu Mahzam: Mr Deputy Speaker, I was not earlier privy to the questions that the Member was going to ask in terms of the specific numbers, so, I do not have specific data. But I do have some points to respond to the Member's queries.
One, I think even if you are looking at 48,000 of the workers that are now currently unvaccinated and just talking about 1% of them, that is already a high number and that is already going to tax our ICU bed capacity. So, that is one. We are actually just looking at how, even with that small number, it is going to impact and tap on scarce resources which could very well be deployed for other needs within the community.
Two, in terms of studying the implication on them, I appreciate that there will be concerns. But we are also talking about the whole of nation. We are talking about economic stability, the normal way of life that everyone else craves for. We need to consider also how the economy will be impacted by just this small number taxing on our healthcare system and, because of these numbers, we then have to adjust and calibrate our SMMs. All these are done to balance.
For those who are able to go out and are better protected, they then are able to have access to different things. But for those who are then at-risk of getting COVID-19 and having severe illnesses, I think there have to be implications on the consequences that we have to accept and appreciate and, therefore, make a decision, calibrating all these needs and not talking about just one group, and a small group at that.
Ms Hazel Poa: I think it is quite hypothetical using the 1% on the 48,000 —
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Hazel Poa, I am afraid the 30 minutes allocated for the Adjournment Motion has lapsed. Order.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 7.09 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":"Impact of COVID-19 on Resignation and Recruitment of Healthcare Professionals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health (a) how many (i) nurses and (ii) allied health professionals left the public sector in 2021 broken down quarterly; (b) how these numbers compare with the preceding three years; and (c) how many nurses and allied health professionals (i) remain employed in Singapore in a professional healthcare capacity, (ii) remain employed but outside the healthcare sector, (iii) are in Singapore but have stopped working or (iv) have left Singapore, respectively.
34 Mr Abdul Samad asked the Minister for Health with regard to the 1,500 healthcare workers who resigned in the first half of 2021 (a) what is the breakdown by age, job title and years of experience; and (b) whether there were efforts to convince them to stay on when such resignation notice was initiated.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: About 1,500 doctors, nurses and allied health professionals had resigned from our public healthcare institutions in the first half of 2021, which was a 4% resignation rate. Full year data for 2021 is not yet available. But if we do a simple extrapolation and assume 3,000 resignations for the year, this means roughly an 8% attrition rate for these groups. We expect that the data for the second half of the year will show an improvement, as it usually does with new inflow.
As for the overall public healthcare workforce in 2018 and 2020, the resignation numbers were 4,600 and 3,700 respectively. So, resignations were, generally, on a downward trend before 2021.
Members have asked for a breakdown of the resignations by age. Amongst the 1,500 nurses, allied health professionals and doctors from our public healthcare institutions who resigned in the first half of 2021, more than half of them were aged 30 to 39 years, a quarter were aged 20 to 29 years and the rest were 40 and above. This is roughly in line with the age profile of our public healthcare workforce.
Members also asked if the resigned staff stayed in the wider healthcare sector. Based on self-declarations of registered nurses and allied health professionals, 90% were employed in the healthcare sector and less than 1% were employed in other sectors. The remaining were either not working or overseas at the time.
As for recruitment, the number of newly recruited nurses and allied health professionals was on the uptrend from 1,900 in 2018 to 2,300 in 2020 and we have been experiencing a net inflow and growing of the public healthcare workforce.
However, for the first half of 2021, the number of new recruits was about 1,300, slightly below the number of resignations. MOH is working closely with our public healthcare institutions to shore up recruitment, for both local and foreign staff, to augment the healthcare workforce.
The COVID-19 crisis has stressed the system tremendously. But because of our vaccination programme, SMMs and collective cooperation and the trust we place in one another, the healthcare system was not overwhelmed. Some of our good foreign staff were poached by other countries, some resigned, and recruitment of nurses, especially foreign nurses, has been challenging due to the strong international demand.
That is the reality of the situation caused by the pandemic. The market for nursing manpower is now subject to global competition. That is why we have always emphasised on the need to protect our healthcare system and our healthcare workforce, and not subject them to excessive stress and demands.
And our population has responded, by getting their vaccinations and boosters and bear with the SMMs to reduce transmission. We all deeply appreciate the work of our healthcare workers during the pandemic crisis, and our healthcare workers, in turn, are grateful for the cooperation of our population to protect our healthcare system.
We do not take the position that let us open up all activities and let the healthcare system bear the brunt of it. Nor do we protect the healthcare system at all costs and subject the country to a severe social and border lockdown. Our ability to take a middle path approach is the hallmark of a high-trust society.
To retain staff better, our public healthcare institutions have stepped up their outreach to staff on the well-being and support measures available to them. This includes counselling services, staff helplines and peer support programmes.
When presented with a resignation notice, supervisors will speak with the staff to understand the reasons for leaving and discuss if there are other ways in which the institution might be able to render support. This includes encouraging staff to take a period of leave to attend to personal matters, offering part-time or other flexible work arrangements or exploring alternative jobs within the cluster.
However, there may still be instances whereby, after exploring various options, the staff may still prefer to resign. In such cases, the public healthcare institutions would respect their wishes.
MOH will continue with our efforts to recruit and build up a local core within our healthcare workforce to meet our future needs by improving the awareness of the professions and growing the local training pipelines for both fresh graduates and mid-career entrants. MOH has also put in place measures to better retain our healthcare workers, such as through salary enhancements over the years to ensure that our public healthcare institutions’ pay remains competitive.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Supporting Mental Well-being of Healthcare Professionals amidst COVID-19 Pandemic","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"36 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Health (a) how many healthcare workers have engaged counselling services, helplines for employees and peer support programmes that are intended to support healthcare workers and look after their well-being to-date; and (b) what more can be done to encourage healthcare workers to come forward to seek support.
37 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Health what more will be done to support the mental well-being of healthcare workers, particularly to prevent depression and self-harm.
38 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Health (a) whether there are specific policies and programmes in place to reduce the burnout rates and improve mental health among healthcare workers working in the public healthcare system, particularly given the prolonged pandemic; and (b) if so, what are these policies and programmes.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Public healthcare workers in our healthcare clusters have access to professional counselling services, including counselling clinics and helplines, as well as peer support schemes and networks. In 2019, such services were used around 330 times. This increased to around 890 in 2020 and 1,080 in 2021.
There is rising awareness of support measures available and the increase in utilisation indicates a need to support the mental well-being of healthcare staff better. Organisations, such as the healthcare clusters, have also increased efforts, such as well-being offices, staff well-being committees, as well as planning and implementing new and enhanced mental wellness strategies for their staff.
Campaigns have been launched to raise awareness of mental health issues and to encourage help-seeking behaviours. Surveys are conducted regularly to better understand staff morale, resilience and capacity to cope with adversity. New training programmes on mental wellness have been made mandatory for all public healthcare staff. Meanwhile, self-care and recharge programmes will continue to be conducted on a regular basis to ensure that staff have sufficient rest.
Our Public Healthcare Institutions (PHIs) have introduced new technology-supported initiatives, such as online self-assessment tools and artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, such as Wysa and BotMD. These assist staff to seek help early and prevent further deterioration of their mental well-being. Whistle-blowing avenues, such as in-house or third-party feedback channels, are available for public healthcare staff to raise their concerns on the mental well-being and safety of their colleagues or themselves.
There are avenues for staff who require a listening ear or professional counselling. Peer-support networks, such as department well-being champions, have been expanded to cover all staff groups. Professional counselling services and helplines are available, with some offering extended hours.
MOH will continue to work with PHIs to advocate for mental health and support mental wellness initiatives and encourage help-seeking behaviours amongst healthcare staff.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Highest Daily Rainfall in 2020 and 2021, and Cost of Heavy Downpours to Properties","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what was the highest daily rainfall experienced in 2020 and 2021 respectively; and (b) what were the damage to public and private properties that resulted from the heavy downpours.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Based on records from the Meteorological Service Singapore, the highest daily rainfall recorded in 2020 and 2021 was 185.2 millimetres (mm) on 29 January 2020 and 247.2 mm on 24 August 2021 respectively.
The 29 January 2020 rainfall did not result in any known flash floods.
The 24 August 2021 rainfall was also the highest daily total rainfall ever recorded for the month of August. This was almost 40% higher than the previous record set in August 1983. More than the average monthly August rainfall fell in western Singapore within three hours. The intense rain resulted in localised flash floods at two locations, namely, along Dunearn Road between Sime Darby Centre and Binjai Park with a flood depth of about 400 mm, and along Cashew Road leading to Upper Bukit Timah Road with a flood depth of about 150 mm. These localised flash floods lasted around 40 minutes at Dunearn Road and 30 minutes at Cashew Road.
Mr Melvin Yong asked about the damage to properties that resulted from the heavy downpours. PUB does not have such data.
As climate change brings about more extreme weather scenarios, we are likely to see more flash floods from intense rain. PUB will continue to strengthen our forecasting and sensing capabilities and implement cost-effective measures to minimise flood risks.
Notwithstanding, managing flood risks requires our collective efforts. I strongly encourage members of the public to make use of the communication channels that PUB offers to obtain up-to-date and accurate information on heavy rain alerts and flood warnings. These channels include PUB’s newly-launched Telegram channel, as well as the myENV Mobile App and LTA’s Expressway Monitoring Advisory System. Property owners in flood-prone areas can also take measures to protect their properties. These include adding structural measures, such as humps and flood barriers. PUB will continue to offer advice and loan equipment, such as portable flood barriers and sandbags, to property owners as needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Contributions to Global Efforts to Combat COVID-19","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) to what extent has Singapore contributed thus far towards combating COVID-19 globally and regionally, whether through COVAX or other multilateral or bilateral initiatives; and (b) what further contributions will Singapore make internationally towards combating COVID-19 in 2022.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: Although we are a small country, Singapore recognises the need to contribute to the global fight against COVID-19. The pandemic requires all countries to play their part so that we can all emerge from the pandemic sooner and more resilient as a global community. The fact remains that in dealing with a global pandemic, no one is safe until everyone is safe.
For this reason, we have continued to support global and regional efforts to tackle COVID-19. Singapore has been a member on WHO’s Executive Board for a three-year term since May 2019, and we have contributed to the COVAX Advance Market Commitment and the COVID-19 ASEAN Response Fund. We were an early supporter of vaccine multilateralism and coalesced support for the COVAX Facility, co-founding the Friends of the COVAX Facility group with Switzerland. MOH's Chief Health Scientist, Prof Tan Chorh Chuan, is Singapore’s representative on the COVAX Shareholders’ Council. Until the end of 2021, he also served as one of three Council representatives on the COVAX Market Sensitive Decisions Committee, which reviews proposed agreements with vaccine manufacturers to ensure reasonableness, acceptable level of reputation risks and availability of resources. We are a member of the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator Facilitation Council, in our capacity as Chair of the Forum of Small States, where we have worked to ensure that the perspectives of small states are taken into account.
Members would also be aware of the Singapore Government’s contributions of vaccines to countries in our region in their times of need. In July 2021, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced that Singapore would donate our vaccine allocation under the COVAX initiative to other countries. The Prime Minister further announced in October 2021 that Singapore had contributed our allocation of vaccines under the COVID-19 ASEAN Response Fund to other ASEAN Member States. We have shared vaccines, procured under the COVAX initiative, with our neighbours, including 122,400 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine with the Riau Islands province, and we have plans to further donate vaccine doses to neighbouring countries.
In addition to donating vaccines under the COVAX initiative, we have provided 100,000 doses of the Moderna vaccine to Brunei; 20,000 doses of the Sinovac vaccine and 100,000 doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine to Johor. We also entered into mutually beneficial dose sharing arrangements with Australia, Thailand and Brunei, where we sent 500,000 doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine to Australia, 122,400 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine to Thailand and 100,000 doses of the Moderna vaccine to Brunei in September 2021. So far, we have received the same number of doses back from Australia to support our booster programme.
We have contributed in other ways beyond the supply of vaccines. For example, the Singapore Government sent more than 500 tonnes of liquid oxygen to Indonesia through our “Oxygen Shuttle” Programme and donated 200,000 diagnostic tests and 500,000 nasopharyngeal swabs to Thailand, as well as 200,000 Antigen Rapid Test kits to Vietnam. We worked with the Singapore Red Cross to distribute 200 oxygen concentrators to affected communities in Myanmar and contributed US$100,000 through the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on disaster management (AHA Centre) to the people of Myanmar when they faced a surge in COVID-19 cases. A Singapore nominee, former SCDF Assistant Commissioner Lee Yam Ming, has been elected and is serving as Executive Director of the AHA Centre since August 2021. Under his leadership, the AHA Centre has already facilitated the provision of humanitarian aid to the people of Myanmar.
In addition to assisting fellow ASEAN countries, we airlifted a consignment of 256 urgently needed oxygen cylinders to India and contributed medical supplies to fellow small island states, such as Fiji and Palau. We continue to share best practices and information on the virus, including sharing the source code of TraceTogether publicly, which have helped several countries develop their own contact tracing applications.
During the pandemic, we remained committed to maintaining our openness as a major logistics, transportation and energy hub. Our air and sea ports remained open to minimise global supply disruptions and ensure the uninterrupted flow of critical supplies, such as vaccines, medicines and food, which not only benefited Singapore but other countries as well. We also did not prohibit the export or transhipment of any goods through Singapore, including medical supplies in high demand, like N-95 respirators. Changi Airport’s continued operation has helped to facilitate the repatriation of many Singaporeans and students and enabled thousands of passengers to return home using Singapore as a transit point. Our efforts to keep our air and sea ports open despite COVID-19 will prevent the loss of strategic capabilities and our hard-earned position as a reliable transport hub. As a global maritime hub, we have also helped to vaccinate port workers and ship crew. Such moves have helped the countries in the region and beyond not only procure essential supplies during the pandemic but also ensured that we can all make a smoother recovery from it.
The above is just a snapshot of the assistance and support Singapore has rendered to our friends and partners during this critical and challenging period. Singapore remains fully committed to support the global fight against COVID-19. The WHO Director-General has called for 2022 to be the year when we end the acute stage of the pandemic. Singapore will work towards this goal by controlling the pandemic at home and, with our partners and international organisations, to strengthen the global health architecture and build pandemic preparedness and resilience. We are working with WHO and relevant partners, including through our Executive Board membership, to strengthen urban health emergency preparedness. This includes taking into account pandemic control in urban development, ensuring social support, continuity of education and synergising finance and health needs.
It might be tempting in these times, especially with the spread of the Omicron variant, to turn inwards, but we must never forget that Singapore’s continued prosperity is dependent on our ability to maintain our openness and relevance to the international community. I am proud that we have not shied away from contributing, within our means, to the global fight against the pandemic.
Many Singapore-based private sector entities and other civil society organisations have also played their part and I would like to thank them for flying our flag high.
We will continue to work with ASEAN and the international community, including through our work in WHO workstreams, such as the Working Group on Pandemic Preparedness and Response, to ensure that the global health architecture is fit for purpose and future-ready. COVID-19 will not be the last pandemic that the world will face and we must be ready to face future crises and pandemics when they arise. Singapore will continue to do our part to help make sure that this remains so.
41 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider allowing singles to purchase HDB resale flats from the Prime Location Public Housing (PLH) scheme so as to build a more inclusive community.
42 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development with regard to the Prime Location Public Housing (PLH) model (a) whether singles will eventually be allowed to buy new or resale PLH flats; and (b) if so, what are the key considerations before current restrictions imposed on singles are adjusted.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Prime Location Public Housing (PLH) model is designed with the objective of keeping public housing in prime locations affordable and inclusive for Singaporeans.
The eligibility criterion for buyers of a new PLH flat or a typical Build-To-Order (BTO) flat is the same. However, in order to keep PLH flat prices affordable for a wide range of Singaporeans, new PLH flats will be priced with additional subsidies, on top of the substantial subsidies already provided for BTO flats. Beyond the initial purchase, we also want to ensure that the prices of these flats remain within reach of Singaporeans when the PLH flats are sold subsequently on the open market.
Without policy intervention, resale prices of PLH flats would likely increase beyond the reach of many Singaporeans. We will, therefore, require buyers of a PLH flat on the resale market to meet the prevailing BTO eligibility criteria, to ensure affordability and accessibility over a longer period of time while managing the demand for the limited supply of PLH flats. Singaporeans are familiar with the means-tested conditions in our BTO eligibility criteria which cover a broad range of Singaporean households. Today, more than eight in 10 Singaporeans are eligible to buy a subsidised flat.
As the PLH model is a new model restricted to prime areas, there will not be many flats launched under this model in the initial phase and, therefore, it is necessary at present to set guidelines for priority. Applying the BTO eligibility criteria gives priority to Singaporean families, who may need more space because they have bigger households. They include singles who can form a family unit with their parent(s), or single sibling(s) whose parents have passed on. These singles are eligible to buy a BTO flat from HDB and will, similarly, be able to buy a resale PLH flat in future.
The PLH model is very new. We will continue to review it over time to ensure it meets the needs of different population segments.
While our public housing policies support the marriage and parenthood aspirations of Singaporeans, we also recognise the housing needs and aspirations of singles who wish to have a place of their own. We have expanded the range of housing options available to singles over the years. Today, single Singapore Citizens aged 35 and above can buy resale flats of any size and in any location, including those in existing HDB estates within prime locations that are not launched under the PLH model. To put this in context, a large majority of the resale housing stock, or over a million flats, will be available for singles to purchase in about 15 years at the same time that the first batch of PLH flats reach the open market. First-timer singles also have the option of buying a new 2-room flexi flat from HDB in the non-mature estates. Eligible first-timer singles can also qualify for the various housing grants to assist them in their flat purchase.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Free and Confidential Counselling Services for Social Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry will look into ensuring social workers are provided with counselling services similar to the confidential and free counselling service administered by the Law Society of Singapore (LSS) in conjunction with its partner company for members of LSS.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Member has also filed a question on the availability of compassionate leave for social workers who have encountered particularly stressful events in the course of their casework for a subsequent Sitting. I will address both questions in this reply.
Social Service Agencies (SSAs), including those that run Family Service Centres (FSCs), determine their own staff welfare and leave policies. While MSF and the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) do not mandate or monitor the leave policies across SSAs, SSAs, generally, offer compassionate leave as part of their staff benefits. At the same time, NCSS promulgates best practices related to compensation and staff welfare, as well as offer experts as mentors to human resource practitioners in SSAs.
We recognise that the nature of work in the social service sector can take its toll and social service professionals may encounter particularly stressful events in the course of their work. To safeguard their mental well-being and give them an opportunity to recharge, MSF and NCSS have put in place several initiatives, including the National Care Hotline (NCH) and Sabbatical Leave Scheme (SLS). The NCH provides emotional and psychological support to those affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, including professionals working in social services. The SLS is available to individuals with at least five years of direct work experience in their respective professional fields. It offers up to 10 weeks of paid leave so that they can recharge themselves, and a Professional Advancement Sponsorship to refresh their professional competencies.
MSF and NCSS have also been engaging SSAs to raise awareness on the importance of organisational support for their employees’ mental well-being and to develop a culture of self-care. We have conferred with social work leaders on balancing staff well-being with maintaining service delivery standards, particularly during this period of high workload and uncertainty brought on by the pandemic. SSAs are mindful of the need to support their employees’ mental well-being and have undertaken various initiatives. For example, during the start of the circuit breaker, AWWA established a care team of social workers and psychologists, for their staff to dial in to and seek support from. The Dyslexia Association of Singapore (DAS) also conducted mindfulness and counselling programmes for their employees, to provide advice, resources and training to improve their mental well-being.
In addition, social service professionals can access self-care and coping strategies, through subsidised courses offered by the Social Service Institute (SSI) under NCSS. NCSS also offers a range of schemes and initiatives that SSAs can tap on to strengthen their human resource practices and capabilities. These include the People Practice Consultancy (PPC), Organisation Development Journey (ODJ) and the Transformation Support Scheme (TSS). Apart from these schemes, SSAs can tap on various other grants under the VWOs-Charities Capability Fund (VCF). The Community Capability Trust (CCT) will open for applications from April 2022 and will build upon our existing efforts to further support SSAs to achieve organisational excellence.
Furthermore, to complement the staff welfare benefits offered by SSAs and to emphasise the importance of the well-being of our social service practitioners, NCSS launched the Caring for Social Service Professionals Scheme in May 2021. The scheme provides co-funding of up to 90% (capped at $2,000 per SSA) for SSAs to offer professional counselling services to their staff. To date, 63 SSAs, which employ over 12,000 professionals, are on board the scheme.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cases of Unauthorised Sale of Personal Data Investigated by Personal Data Protection Commission in Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"45 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) in the past five years, how many cases of unauthorised sale of consumers’ personal data did the Personal Data Protection Commission investigate; and (b) of the investigated cases, how many were successfully prosecuted.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Over the last five years, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) has investigated three cases of alleged data breaches involving unauthorised sales of personal data.
Out of these, two cases were found to be in breach of the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) for failing to notify and obtain consent from individuals before selling their personal data to third parties for telemarketing purposes. One of the cases involved a company which was fined $48,000. The other involved an individual who was fined $6,000. Both were directed to cease their actions and rectify their data protection practices. A third case involving a company was investigated but no breach was found. The company was advised on how to improve its data collection practices and how to communicate its privacy policy to users more effectively.
PDPC takes a firm stance against the unauthorised sale of personal data, so as to safeguard against harms to the public, such as identity theft and unsolicited calls. Organisations purchasing contact lists must do their due diligence to ensure that the sale is authorised and that the data is sufficiently accurate and updated for their purposes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Government's Purchase Agreements for New COVID-19 Anti-viral Drugs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Health with regard to the COVID-19 anti-viral drugs Paxlovid and Molnupiravir (a) whether the Government (i) has signed a purchase agreement for Paxlovid and (ii) is considering to sign further purchase agreements for Molnupiravir; (b) what is the number of courses purchased for each of these drugs; (c) what stage of HSA’s evaluation process is Paxlovid currently at; and (d) what is the expected timeline for approval for use of Paxlovid in Singapore.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: MOH has signed an agreement with MSD Pharma (Singapore) Pte Ltd to purchase Molnupiravir and is in advanced discussions with Pfizer Pte Ltd, Singapore, to purchase Paxlovid. Both are oral anti-virals for treating COVID-19 patients. We are unable to disclose the number of courses purchased or under discussion, due to contractual obligations on confidentiality.
Pfizer has submitted a Pandemic Special Access Route (PSAR) application for Paxlovid to the Health Sciences Authority (HSA). HSA has commenced its review of the data to ensure that it meets the requirements for quality, safety and efficacy for interim authorisation before it is approved for use in Singapore.
MOH will continue to monitor the development of COVID-19 therapeutics, including their effectiveness against prevailing COVID-19 variants, and purchase promising candidates to ensure Singapore has access to safe and effective COVID-19 treatments.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Curbs on Migrant Worker Flows into Singapore and Impact on Business Growth, Costs and Inflation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"47 Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what are the current entry quotas of migrant workers in the construction, marine shipyard and process sectors and the food and beverage sectors who are allowed to enter Singapore daily; (b) on average, how many of these migrant workers enter Singapore daily; and (c) how do these numbers compare with those in the period before the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of ratios.
48 Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked the Minister for Manpower what are the upcoming measures to help our industries cope with the shortage of workers that is expected to continue into 2022.
49 Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked the Minister for Manpower in view of rising inflation rates and the potential further tightening of border restrictions due to the recent surge in COVID-19 Omicron cases, whether there will be further measures to alleviate manpower cost pressures on businesses.
Dr Tan See Leng: We resumed entry approvals on 10 August 2021 for fully-vaccinated services sector workers; and on 15 October 2021 for construction, marine shipyard and process (CMP) sector workers to enter Singapore from 1 November 2021. A monthly average of 10,000 S Passes and Work Permit Holders (WPHs) from the services sector and 18,000 from the CMP sectors entered in November and December 2021, compared to a monthly average of 2,000 and 3,000 respectively between May and October 2021 when travel restrictions and tightened entry approvals were in place. We did not monitor the arrivals before the COVID-19 pandemic, as there were no entry restrictions then.
To help firms in the CMP sectors which need their workers urgently, there are ongoing initiatives in the industries to bring in workers safely with tightened end-to-end safe management processes.
The Government has also been working closely with the sectors to retain workers in Singapore, in order to address firms’ manpower challenges. For instance, MOM allowed a one-time renewal for CMP WPHs who did not meet the renewal criteria and worked with the Singapore Contractors Association Ltd to introduce a retention scheme for construction WPHs whose employments are terminated but who wish to continue working in Singapore.
In light of the increased manpower costs faced by the CMP sectors due to the evolving COVID-19 situation, the Government has recently extended the Foreign Worker Levy (FWL) rebate of $250 per month to March 2022 for all CMP WPHs. In addition, the Government has extended the FWL waiver for migrant workers (MWs) in all sectors for their entry Stay Home Notice period till December 2022. We will continue to closely monitor the situation and review whether a further extension of these measures will be necessary.
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for firms to redouble their efforts to increase productivity through digitalisation and automation, diversify their foreign workforce and reduce their reliance on lower-skilled foreign manpower. This is necessary for our firms to improve their resilience in the long term. We will continue to support our firms to transform. We are also supporting firms to strengthen their local hiring by redesigning jobs to make them more attractive to local workers and tapping on a wider pool of jobseekers. We encourage firms to move from a “plug-and-play\" approach to hiring to a “plug-train-and-play” approach. Many firms have been successful in making use of the support under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package to hire and reskill mid-career jobseekers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Recent Revisions to Total Debt Servicing Ratio on Ability of First-time Buyers to Own Homes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for National Development whether the recent revisions on the total debt servicing ratio will impair the ability of first-time owners to own their homes.
Mr Desmond Lee: The adjustments to the total debt servicing ratio (TDSR) threshold was part of a package of cooling measures introduced in December last year to promote a sustainable property market, housing affordability and financial prudence.
Specifically, the tightened TDSR threshold aims to protect home buyers and ensure that they can continue to service their mortgages over the medium term. This is because interest rates are likely to rise in 2022 and beyond and a combination of rising property prices and higher interest rates will risk a significant increase in mortgage costs for buyers. The tighter TDSR threshold will encourage financial prudence among home buyers.
The vast majority of first-time home buyers are unlikely to be affected by the tightening of the TDSR threshold from 60% to 55%. HDB home buyers are already subject to the stricter mortgage service ratio (MSR) of 30%, which was not changed in the latest round of cooling measures. The tightened TDSR will encourage prospective first-time owners of private properties to right-size their intended purchases and mortgages, without overstretching themselves, so that they can better service their debt obligations.
To complement the cooling measures which are targeted at moderating demand, we will increase the supply of private and public housing. We will ramp up BTO supply to launch up to 23,000 flats per year in 2022 and 2023, an increase of 35% from the 17,000 flats in 2021. For private housing, we will have around 2,800 units on the Confirmed List for the Government Land Sale (GLS) programme in the first half of 2022, with another 3,700 units on the Reserve List. This is a 40% increase for the Confirmed List from the previous GLS programme in the second half of 2021. We will step up supply even further if demand remains strong.
Taken together, the suite of demand and supply measures will help to support a stable and sustainable property market in the medium-term, and ensure that housing remains affordable and accessible to all Singaporeans, especially for those planning to purchase their first home.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Recent Total Debt Servicing Ratio Revision and Other Cooling Measures on First-time Buyers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"53 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for National Development with the revisions to the total debt servicing ratio (TDSR) threshold and the loan‐to‐value (LTV) limit for loans (a) how will such changes affect young Singaporeans’ ability to own their first HDB flat or private property; and (b) whether this will result in an even longer wait for their first HDB flat or private property.
54 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for National Development in light of the decreases in the loan-to-value limit from 90% to 85% for HDB loans and the total debt servicing ratio from 60% to 55% (a) what is the assessed impact on first-time HDB BTO buyers, especially young couples, gig economy workers and the self-employed, who will now have to set aside more cash to purchase a home; (b) whether there are plans to assist these first-time buyers; and (c) whether there will be concessions for individuals with special circumstances, such as single parents.
Mr Desmond Lee: The adjustments to the total debt servicing ratio (TDSR) threshold and loan-to-value (LTV) ratio for HDB-granted loans were part of a package of cooling measures introduced in December last year to promote a sustainable property market, housing affordability and financial prudence.
Specifically, the tightened TDSR threshold aims to protect home buyers and ensure that they can continue to service their mortgages over the medium term. This is because interest rates are likely to rise in 2022 and beyond and a combination of rising property prices and higher interest rates will risk a significant increase in mortgage costs for buyers. The tighter TDSR threshold will encourage financial prudence among home buyers.
The vast majority of first-time home buyers are unlikely to be affected by the tightening of the TDSR threshold from 60% to 55%. HDB home buyers are already subject to the stricter mortgage service ratio (MSR) of 30%, which was not changed in the latest round of cooling measures. The tightened TDSR will encourage prospective first-time owners of private properties to right-size their intended purchases and mortgages, without overstretching themselves, so that they can better service their debt obligations.
The reduction in the LTV limit for HDB housing loans from 90% to 85% is not expected to significantly affect first-timers taking an HDB loan. First-timers receive generous grants for their HDB flat purchase. They are also required to use all their CPF Ordinary Account savings, except for up to $20,000 per buyer, when they buy their flat. The significant grants, coupled with the use of CPF savings, reduce the loan amount that HDB first-timers need to take. In fact, more than nine out of 10 buyers who took an HDB housing loan in 2020 had an LTV of 85% or less and would not be affected by the reduction in the LTV limit. They include young couples, gig economy workers and the self-employed. Looking more specifically at households with an income of $7,000 or less, only 1% would be affected. For reference, $7,000 is half the current income ceiling of $14,000 for families to purchase a subsidised flat.
To complement the cooling measures which are targeted at moderating demand, we will increase the supply of private and public housing. We will ramp up BTO supply to launch up to 23,000 flats per year in 2022 and 2023, an increase of 35% from the 17,000 flats in 2021. For private housing, we will have around 2,800 units on the Confirmed List for the Government Land Sale (GLS) programme in the first half of 2022, with another 3,700 units on the Reserve List. This is a 40% increase for the Confirmed List from the previous GLS programme in the second half of 2021. We will step up supply even further if demand remains strong.
Taken together, the suite of demand and supply measures will help to support a stable and sustainable property market in the medium term and ensure that housing remains affordable and accessible for all Singaporeans, especially for those planning to purchase their first home.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Resolving COVID-19-related Disruptions to Entry and Hiring of Migrant Domestic Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"55 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to the hiring of migrant domestic workers (MDWs) in Singapore (a) whether the backlog of MDWs’ entry into Singapore has been cleared; and (b) whether the costs of hiring new and transferred MDWs have stabilised or reduced over the past two months.
Dr Tan See Leng: The backlog of migrant domestic workers or MDWs’ entry into Singapore has been cleared.
The average monthly salary of MDWs has remained fairly stable in the last two months. With the easing of the border control measures and the resulting revisions to Stay Home Notice (SHN) requirements in Singapore, the total upfront cost of hiring a new MDW has fallen slightly. For example, employers can save on the SHN cost if their houses have suitable space for their MDWs to serve the SHN, instead of doing it in a local hotel.
MOM will continue to monitor the MDW inflow and hiring costs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessment on Use of Nuclear Energy and Update on Nuclear Safety Research and Education Programme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what have been the activities and achievements of the Nuclear Safety Research and Education Programme (NSREP) in the past five-year funding period; (b) how many talents have been groomed under the Nuclear Education and Training Fund; (c) whether the NSREP is exploring safe nuclear energy technologies for our own use; and (d) what are the plans for the next tranche of funding.
58 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the energy crunch has resulted in any change to the Government’s stand on using nuclear energy; and (b) what is the Government’s response to Indonesia’s plans to build a nuclear power plant after 2025 to support national energy demand.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The global energy landscape has been undergoing a transition from coal and oil to natural gas and renewable energy, such as solar and wind and other low-carbon energy solutions, such as nuclear energy and hydrogen. The recent global energy crunch has also highlighted the importance for the energy transition to be managed carefully to avoid major disruptions to consumers as well as, more importantly, to ensure our energy resilience and security.
Singapore has outlined our commitments to achieving a low-carbon energy future as part of the Singapore Green Plan 2030 and our Long-term Low Emissions Development Strategy. Towards this goal, we have been exploring solutions to decarbonise the grid. These include (a) accelerating solar deployment; (b) working towards importing electricity; and (c) exploring low-carbon energy solutions such as hydrogen, geothermal energy and carbon capture utilisation and storage (CCUS).
We have been monitoring developments in nuclear energy, especially improvements in the safety of new nuclear technologies. Advanced nuclear reactor technologies and designs, such as Small Modular Reactors, Generation IV and fusion reactors, are being developed globally and have the potential to be much safer than many of the plants that are in operation today. However, many of them are still in the R&D phase and have not begun commercial operations.
The National Research Foundation (NRF) established the Nuclear Safety Research and Education Programme (NSREP) in 2014, which set up a centre of excellence for nuclear safety capability building, the Singapore Nuclear Research and Safety Initiative (SNRSI). Through the Analytical Laboratories for the Measurement of Environmental Radioactivity (ALMERA) network, SNRSI has developed internationally recognised capabilities, including the ability to detect the identity and quantity of radioactive material in the environment to the precision and accuracy expected of member labs. In addition, SNRSI is developing capabilities in the safety analysis of different reactor designs, which will help us better understand global developments in these technologies.
In the last five years, SNRSI has awarded 24 scholarships for postgraduate studies in areas related to nuclear energy. The next tranche of funding will focus on building up a talent pool in nuclear policy, science and safety and to study new reactor designs as they become available.
As a responsible member of the international community, Singapore also actively supports international efforts to strengthen the global nuclear safety and security architecture. We work closely with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and with other ASEAN Member States in the ASEAN Network of Regulatory Bodies on Atomic Energy (ASEANTOM) to build up our knowledge of nuclear safety, to contribute towards strengthening regional preparedness to respond to a potential nuclear emergency.
Our future energy mix will depend on advancements in low-carbon technologies and collaborations and trading of low-carbon energy across borders. Any decision to deploy new energy technologies will need to be considered against the technology’s safety and reliability, affordability and environmental sustainability. We must also continue to step up our efforts to enhance energy efficiency across all sectors and encourage energy conservation by consumers. The Government will continue to monitor developments in nuclear energy and, when the technology is available and safe, consider its feasibility for Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Courage Fund Eligibility for COVID-19-positive Lower-income Persons Recovering at Home","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in view of the updated COVID-19 protocols to self-test and recover at home, whether individuals who are self-isolated and unable to work after receiving a positive antigen rapid test result but are not subjected to an Isolation Order, Quarantine Order, mandatory Leave of Absence, Stay-Home Notice or hospitalisation, are still eligible to apply for the Courage Fund for lower-income households.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Courage Fund (TCF) scheme for lower-income households assists lower-income households which experienced protracted income loss due to COVID-19. Under the current eligibility criteria, individuals who are self-isolated after receiving a positive Antigen Rapid Test (ART) result but are not subjected to an Isolation Order (IO), Quarantine Order (QO), mandatory Leave of Absence (LOA), Stay-Home Notice (SHN) or hospitalisation due to contracting COVID-19, are not eligible for assistance.
Based on the current COVID-19 protocols, these individuals are required to self-isolate for at least 72 hours and can leave their homes once they have a negative ART result. They are not eligible for assistance under TCF as their self-isolation period is likely to be short and they are unlikely to experience protracted income loss, which the TCF is intended to provide assistance for. On the other hand, individuals who have contracted COVID-19 and are placed on the Home Recovery Programme or brought to a care facility will be eligible for assistance under TCF. These individuals need to serve a mandatory isolation period of 10 or 14 days under an IO, which could affect their income more.
We understand that there may be households who are unable to qualify for TCF assistance under the current eligibility criteria but are in need of financial support. These groups can reach out to us via the ComCare hotline at 1800-222-0000 or approach our Social Service Offices for assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Waiting Times for First and Follow-up Appointments to See Mental Health Professionals at Government Facilities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the current average waiting times to seek a first appointment and follow-up appointment with a mental healthcare professional at any Government healthcare facility; and (b) whether the current alternative forms of support have been effective in helping patients faced with long waiting times to stay on track for their treatment.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: At the public hospitals, the median waiting time for a new subsidised appointment to see a psychiatrist was 34 days in 2020. The reported median waiting time for a new subsidised appointment with a psychologist was 32 days in 2020. Public hospitals employ a triage system to ensure that patients are seen in a timely manner based on the urgency of their condition. The interval for follow-up reviews varies from patient to patient and is based on the healthcare professional’s assessment of the patient and their needs.
Patients with mental health conditions can also receive care from primary care doctors, who are able to manage conditions, such as depression and anxiety, in the community. In the polyclinics, patients with mental health conditions will be cared for by a multi-disciplinary team comprising doctors, nurses and psychologists.
In addition to in-person consultations at hospitals, IMH offers teleconsultations to stable patients for outpatient reviews to facilitate easy access to care. There are also community-based care and support services, such as the community outreach teams and community intervention teams, which persons with mental health challenges can tap on. These teams have reached out to over 383,000 persons to provide mental health information and support, and 63% of clients who had completed care by the intervention teams have reported improvement in their quality of life.
Beyond the scheduled mental health appointments at healthcare facilities, persons in need of mental health care support, including crisis care, can access various mental health and counselling helplines operated by social service agencies, support groups and hospitals. Some of these include the National CARE Hotline, Samaritans of Singapore (SOS) 24-hour crisis hotline, IMH’s Mental Health Helpline and so on. There are also online resources available to support and empower individuals in mental health and self-care. For example, on mindline.sg, individuals can understand their state of emotional well-being via a self-assessment tool and access mental health resources and self-help tools on the website.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Updated COVID-19 Border Restrictions on Cruises and Merchant Ships","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"65 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether cruises and merchant ships stopping at our ports will be impacted by new border restrictions driven by the COVID-19 Omicron variant; (b) whether any Omicron cases have been detected among incoming ships at our ports; and (c) whether the Ministry will review the current safety measures and testing protocols at our ports.
Mr S Iswaran: The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) has put in place safety measures in our port to reduce the risk of spread of the virus into and within Singapore and to safeguard the well-being of maritime personnel. For example, companies require MPA’s approval for shore-based personnel to board vessels that have called at or received sign-on crew from higher-risk countries within 14 days prior to their arrival in Singapore.
To date, no Omicron cases have been detected on ships calling at the Port of Singapore.
Since November 2020, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) has only allowed cruise ships to sail out of Singapore if they start and end their sailings in Singapore, with no stops elsewhere.
We will continue to review our measures for the maritime sector in line with MOH’s approach for frontline workers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Take-up Rates of Internal Combustion Engine and Electric Vehicles, and Changes to Energy Grid to Support EVs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"67 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for Transport in view of the Government's effort to push for electric vehicle (EV) transition (a) what are the respective take-up rates of internal combustion engine vehicles and EV to date; and (b) what changes will be made to the energy grid system in areas where current capacity is insufficient to support EV chargers.
Mr S Iswaran: In 2021, electric vehicles (EVs) comprised 3.8% of all new car registrations in Singapore, compared to 0.2% in 2020.
To support EV charging, consumer electrical infrastructure supporting residential carparks, such as consumer switch rooms and substations, will be upgraded progressively. Over 1,000 switch rooms and 900 substations will need to be upgraded to enable the deployment of EV chargers to support a predominantly EV population by 2040, under our vision for a 100% cleaner energy vehicle fleet. LTA is working with EMA and HDB to assess the pace and extent of upgrades needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Capacity at Crematoria to Meet Demand","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"68 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether there have been recent occasions of insufficient capacity at NEA’s crematoria to meet demands for cremation; (b) what plans does NEA have to increase capacity at its crematoria to deal with increased demands; and (c) whether NEA will explore more environmentally-friendly ways to cremate bodies with a view to reducing the release of carbon dioxide produced upon cremation and use of energy for the process.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The Mandai Crematorium, which is managed by NEA, has sufficient capacity to meet current demand. NEA has handled intermittent higher demand for cremation by adding additional cremation time slots at Mandai Crematorium. While we add capacity in the near term through operational adjustments, we are constructing a second crematorium in Mandai, which will be operational by 2024, to increase our long-term capacity.
NEA performs regular maintenance on its cremators to ensure serviceability and efficiency of the cremation process. We will continue to study new technologies and other means to improve energy efficiency and reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reduction of Annual Childcare Leave from Six Days to Two When Child Turns Seven","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"69 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Prime Minister (a) whether there are any updates on the rationale for reducing the amount of childcare leave from six days to two days when a child turns seven years old; and (b) whether the Government is reviewing this, especially for working parents who are essential or frontline workers and are unable to work from home.
Ms Indranee Rajah (for the Prime Minister): We recognise that parents need continued support to care for their children even after they turn seven years old. This is why we had extended childcare leave provisions in 2013 to provide two days of childcare leave per parent per year, for parents with children aged seven to 12. Those with children aged below seven continue to have six days of childcare leave per year, as children of a younger age require relatively more care from parents. These childcare leave provisions are in addition to their annual leave entitlements.
We take a practical approach in supporting working parents’ caregiving needs, balancing these with the manpower and operational needs of employers, to avoid affecting parents’ employability. As mentioned in my earlier replies to Mr Louis Ng’s Parliamentary Questions on childcare leave, a more sustainable approach would be for employers to adopt progressive workplace practices, such as flexible work arrangements (FWAs), to better support parents.
Other than working from home, FWAs also include flexi-time and flexi-load, which could help parents with their caregiving responsibilities. For example, although frontline workers often have to be physically present in their workplaces, employers can stagger the start and end times of their shifts or enable shifts to be shared by multiple workers. We will continue to work with stakeholders to promote family-friendly workplace practices so that employees can better manage their work and family commitments.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Limits for Healthcare Workers Such As Maximum Number of Hours Worked and Call-backs Allowed, and Mandating Guaranteed Time-off","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"71 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry will consider implementing for healthcare workers (i) a minimum and maximum number of hours worked in a week, (ii) a maximum number of call backs for those on leave or time-off and (iii) a guaranteed leave or time-off; and (b) how does the Ministry strike a balance between managing manpower resources for spikes in COVID-19 cases and allowing employees to go on leave.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The broad terms of employment for unionised public healthcare staff are set out in Collective Agreements negotiated between each of the public healthcare clusters and the Healthcare Services Employees’ Union. These agreements are renegotiated and updated every two to three years.
Staff who are covered under the Collective Agreements have a stipulated maximum of 38 to 42 hours per week, depending on whether the worker is engaged in shift work. Any work hours in excess of these would be entitled to overtime pay. Staff are also entitled to a given number of rest days within their work-rest cycle and also to paid annual leave.
For junior doctors employed by MOH Holdings (MOHH), the Singapore Medical Council (SMC), MOH and the Specialists Accreditation Board (SAB) have guidelines on working hours, rest days and night calls and so on to ensure the well-being of junior doctors. One of the guidelines stipulates that, when averaged out over a month, the total work hours per week of junior doctors should not exceed 80 hours. Departments are required to comply with these guidelines for residents and medical officers. These guidelines aim to balance the well-being of junior doctors with their training requirements. Like other employers, MOHH is responsible for providing paid annual leave to its employees, including junior doctors.
The Ministry does not impose a hard cap on the number of working hours and number of call-backs or enforce mandatory taking of annual leave. As the recent COVID-19 surge has shown, there will be times when there are exigencies of service that public healthcare clusters need to manage.
To strike a balance between maintaining sufficient manpower reserves for COVID-19 work and allowing staff to take time off, public healthcare clusters are encouraged to allow staff to rest and recharge by taking days off whenever possible. About two thirds of staff in our public healthcare institutions were able to clear their annual leave. Only less than one-third could not fully clear their accumulated leave in 2021. When there is a need to manage workload during surges, clusters have hired additional manpower and reduced non-urgent and non-life-threatening care treatments. MOH has also worked on measures, such as redeploying swabbers, who have been freed up after the change in testing protocols to public healthcare institutions, calling for more volunteers to join the SG Healthcare Corps and tapping on the private healthcare sector.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Abuse of Public Healthcare Workers and Measures to Protect Them","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"72 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Health (a) since January 2021, how many cases of abuse of public healthcare workers have been reported; (b) whether there is a rising trend and, if so, what could have contributed to this; and (c) what has been done to protect healthcare frontliners from unjustified behaviour against them.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The number of abuse and harassment cases reported within the Public Healthcare Institutions (PHIs) have increased over the last four years. The cases increased from about 1,080 in 2018, to 1,200 in 2019, and 1,300 in 2020. As of end November 2021, there have been about 1,400 abuse and harassment cases reported. Over the same period, the number of cases of abuse or harassment of public healthcare workers while on duty that were reported to the Police, under section 6 of the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA), has also similarly risen from 40 in 2018 to 68 in 2021.
Possible reasons for the rising trend could be the increase in number of patients seen in the PHIs, coupled with rising expectations from patients and their family members for high quality care and service from healthcare staff. COVID-19 safety precautions, such as hospital visitation limits, may also have resulted in heightened frustration for a handful of patients’ families.
Staff are equipped with preventive and mitigation strategies to manage abuse and harassment. These include recognising high-risk situations and exercising care to maintain good communication with patients and their family members to reduce the risk of interactions escalating to abuse and harassment. Prominent signages are displayed at various touchpoints to remind patients and their family members about the culture of mutual respect in the hospitals. PHIs have established escalation processes for frontline healthcare staff who face abuse and harassment. These include notifying their immediate superiors, referring these cases to security officers on-site or reporting the incident to the Police, if warranted. MOH and PHIs adopt a zero-tolerance policy towards abuse and harassment of healthcare staff and will take action against persons who abuse and harass our staff. Public healthcare staff who are on duty will receive enhanced protection under section 6 of POHA.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Barring Individuals on Self-Exclusion Order and Family Exclusion Order from Placing Bets at Singapore Pools Outlets","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"77 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether individuals who are under both Self-Exclusion Order and Family Exclusion Order under the Casino Control Act can also be barred from placing bets at Singapore Pools outlets.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The casino exclusion regime under the Casino Control Act comprises Self-Exclusion, Family Exclusion, Third Party Exclusion and Exclusion by Law. The exclusion regime is a key social safeguard for gambling.
Three out of these four types of exclusions, namely, (a) Family Exclusion; (b) Third Party Exclusion; and (c) Exclusion by Law, bar individuals under the respective Exclusion Orders from fruit machine rooms at private clubs and placing bets online with Singapore Pools.
Fruit machine gambling is similar to casino gambling while online betting with Singapore Pools enables continuous play, so they pose higher risks to affected individuals when there is excessive gambling.
Currently, the exclusion from fruit machine rooms and Singapore Pools online betting is imposed via the conditions for operating the gambling services. The Government intends to formalise this in the new Gambling Bill.
Self-Exclusion is voluntary and individuals can apply to be excluded from casinos, fruit machine rooms and/or online betting with Singapore Pools. This aims to help individuals regulate their own gambling behaviour.
The exclusion regime does not apply to Singapore Pools’ physical outlets. Punters need to make their way to the outlets to place bets. The opening hours of these outlets are also limited. There are also other social safeguards in place to mitigate the risks of problem gambling. For example, the use of credit is prohibited and there are restrictions on advertising and promotion.
Another consideration is that exclusion from Singapore Pools’ physical outlets may drive more gambling underground. Illegal gambling can pose a greater social harm to the individuals and their families, as well as law and order concerns.
MSF will continue to work closely with MHA and CRA to minimise the risks of problem gambling and gambling-related social harms.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mitigating Cumulative Impact of Inflationary Pressures from General and Specific Price Increases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"80 Mr Derrick Goh asked the Minister for Finance in view of the higher-than-expected inflation of 3.8% reported for November 2021, what actions are taken to further mitigate the cumulative impact of inflationary pressures stemming from general and specific price increases, including higher expected borrowing costs on households and businesses, for the middle- to lower-income Singaporeans and small businesses.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Derrick Goh asked about mitigating the impact of higher expected borrowing costs on households and businesses.
Mortgages form the bulk of most households’ liabilities. Measures put in place before the recent rise in inflation had ensured that household balance sheets were in a relatively healthy position. Credit measures, including the total debt servicing ratio, or TDSR, which was tightened recently, ensure that households borrow prudently and can continue to service their mortgages over the medium term.
For businesses, the Temporary Bridging Loan Programme (TBLP) and MAS’ Singapore Dollar (SGD) Facility for Enterprise Singapore loans will be available till March 2022. This combination of support measures has helped eligible SMEs to borrow at lower interest costs than even pre-pandemic levels. TBLP loans are offered at fixed interest rates, capped at 5% per annum. The Government will monitor the situation closely to ensure businesses continue to have access to credit.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Factors for Higher-than-expected Inflation in 2021 and Possibility of Measures to Dampen Rise","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"82 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the forward-looking inflation indicators that are monitored by the Ministry; (b) based on these indicators, what are the key contributors to the rise in inflation in 2021; (c) what is the latest inflation outlook for 2022; and (d) what measures will the Ministry take to dampen any rise in inflation in 2022.
83 Mr Derrick Goh asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in view of the higher than expected inflation of 3.8% reported for November 2021 (a) whether the Government will be changing its inflation projection for full year 2022; and (b) what are the projected estimate, direction and key drivers of the latest projection.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: These questions will be answered by my reply to Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Saktiandi Supaat for the next Sitting. [Please refer to \"Reasons for Recent Rise in Costs and Measures to Help Singaporeans Cope\", Official Report, 11 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 45, 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":"Circumstances Requiring Enforcement of Special Covenants 2(1) and 2(2) in HDB’s Lease Agreements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"85 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development in view of the Government’s efforts to reduce disamenities in HDB estates (a) under what circumstances will HDB cite or use special covenants 2(1) and 2(2) of the Memorandum of Lease to HDB’s lease agreement in their enforcement efforts; and (b) how many times has HDB cited or enforced these covenants respectively for each year in the last three years and for what types of breach.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Special Covenants 2(1) and 2(2) of the HDB Memorandum of Lease generally set out the acts and uses that are not permitted in HDB flats, in order to maintain a high-quality living environment for all residents. The majority of these Special Covenants relate to building safety and integrity, as well as fixtures within the flat.
In the past three years, HDB has not enforced Special Covenants 2(1) and 2(2) of the Memorandum of Lease. Enforcing the Covenants in the Memorandum of Lease entails compulsory acquisition of the flat, and HDB exercises this right only as a last resort as this is a harsh measure that is not undertaken lightly. HDB’s approach is, therefore, to contemplate enforcement of the Special Covenants in instances where the breaches are serious, for example, for unauthorised renovations where there is a safety risk to residents of the block.
For issues relating to disamenities and disputes between neighbours, neighbours should first come together to try to resolve the matter amicably. If this does not work, agencies will advise the affected neighbour to seek mediation. In intractable cases, the affected neighbour may file a case with the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal (CDRT). If the respondent is shown to have caused unreasonable interference to the affected neighbour, then CDRT may make a range of orders against the respondent, including requiring the respondent to cease or refrain from carrying out certain acts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on AI-backed Smart Traffic Light Control System for Public Roads","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"86 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry can provide an update on LTA's Cooperative and Unified Smart Traffic System (CRUISE) project involving the development of the next generation of a smart traffic light control system leveraging on artificial intelligence to deal with real-time traffic situations.
Mr S Iswaran: Our current traffic light system is an adaptive system which can adjust traffic light timings based on traffic flow.
LTA has been working with A*STAR’s Institute for Infocomm Research (I2R) on the CoopeRative and UnIfied Smart Traffic SystEm (CRUISE) project. The project will trial the use of artificial intelligence and multi-sensor data integration across multiple traffic junctions, to achieve further efficiency in road network operations. If successful, this could form the basis of our next generation smart traffic light control system.
With laboratory simulation and controlled testing completed in 2020, LTA is now conducting trials along Corporation Road and Boon Lay Way to gather data. These trials had been planned to commence in end 2020, but the timelines were pushed back to May 2021 due to the impact of COVID-19.
The project is still in its early R&D phase. The algorithms would have to be refined using collected data, before progressing to further controlled testing and expanded on-site trials. The project would also need to clear robust and rigorous testing to ensure safety and performance before large-scale implementation can be considered.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Inclusion of Mental First Aid Responder and Other Practical Skills in BizSAFE Workplace Training","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"87 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Manpower whether Singapore’s workplace safety and health system will incorporate mental health and the addition of practical skills, such as mental first aid responder, within the bizSAFE training framework so that all companies are better prepared to handle the evolving needs of our workforce.
Dr Tan See Leng: Our workplace safety and health (WSH) system already incorporates the area of mental health and well-being.
We continue to enhance the WSH system to place more emphasis on workplace health, including mental health. For example, the WSH Council has enhanced the audit requirements for bizSAFE to make it explicit that companies need to consider personal health risk factors and psychosocial hazards when conducting risk assessments. These include assessing how mental health affects safety at work and how work affects workers’ mental health.
To support companies to update their approaches, the WSH Council has expanded the Code of Practice on Risk Management to provide clearer guidance. For example, organisations should consider organising mental health talks to educate employees on self-care tips and conducting periodic surveys of employees' mental well-being. Examples of how to mitigate risks to mental well-being have been incorporated into bizSAFE training, following the enhanced Code of Practice.
There is also a range of existing support within the WSH Council’s Total WSH Programme. This includes the iWorkHealth tool, which is an online, self-administered psychosocial health assessment tool that helps companies and their employees to identify common workplace stressors, as part of workplace health risks and hazards.
We thank the Member for his suggestion on mental health first responder training. It will be incorporated into the Total WSH programme for all companies to tap on.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Grassroot Leaders Who were Convicted Appointed by People’s Association","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"88 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) for each year from 2001 to 2021, what is the number of grassroots leaders appointed by the People’s Association (PA) who were convicted of a crime; and (b) whether the Government has plans to tighten up the eligibility requirement for PA grassroots leaders.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Grassroots leaders (GRLs) come from all walks of life and volunteer their time, effort and resources in an effort to make Singapore a better home for all. Since the People’s Association was set up over six decades ago, GRLs have played an integral role in building and serving our communities, often quietly and behind-the-scenes.
GRLs are part of the fabric of our community. They help to promote a diverse, united and resilient society and also connect the Government and the people by explaining Government policies and often serve as the hands and legs which close the last mile in policy communications and delivery.
The work of our GRLs can be done effectively because of the trust which GRLs have built up over the years with the community, incrementally, over time, both through good times and bad. Many of them are active and on the ground on a daily basis. They meet with and see residents. Over time, their work contributes to our racial harmony and social cohesion and also serve a larger national purpose.
This reservoir of trust and goodwill is also what has enabled us to respond effectively as one Singapore during crises, such as SARS in 2003 and, most recently, COVID-19. When the pandemic hit us, GRLs stepped up to look after our residents, sometimes at risks to their own personal well-being.
Members will know that throughout our fight against COVID-19, GRLs were constantly active on the ground, reaching out to residents, in tandem with our national responses. GRLs and volunteers disseminated important information to residents, worked on the frontlines supporting nationwide COVID-19 operations, such as mask distribution, the roll out of TraceTogether and helping our people with vaccination at Community Vaccination Centres.
GRLs also played an invaluable role in helping our people, particularly those who were more acutely impacted due to the pandemic, through these challenging times. They worked with community and corporate partners to distribute food, daily essentials, and vouchers, which helped to defray household expenses for low-income families and assisted to process Temporary Relief Fund (TRF) applications of Singaporeans who lost their jobs during the pandemic. Many of them also volunteered to provide help for persons under quarantine and those serving Stay-Home Notices and Home Recovery Programme (HRP) despite personal risks to themselves. With the help of GRLs and volunteers, we have distributed more than 92,000 WeCare packs to households with residents on HRP. And as we speak, GRLs continue to be active as we prepare for the possibility of a next wave of heightened COVID-19-positive cases due to Omicron.
Members will recall that when we started our national vaccination campaign, there was, initially, some hesitancy among people, especially seniors. Our GRLs went from door-to-door to reach out and explain and also encourage residents to get vaccinated and help address and dispel misinformation surrounding vaccinations. These vaccination outreach efforts allowed us to lend further assistance to seniors who were staying alone or residents who needed help. In 2021, through the support of 14,000 GRLs and volunteers, we were able to reach out to over 300,000 seniors.
These efforts have contributed greatly to the high rates of vaccination that we have today. This is possible, in no small part, because residents, by and large, trust our GRLs. This relationship is a precious one, cultivated over time, and should not be taken for granted.
But in singling out GRLs as a group, the premise of the Member’s question not only does a disservice to the work of 40,000 GRLs and thousands more who came before, it also undermines the very trust that GRLs have painstakingly built up with residents over many years. There is no basis to contend that GRLs are disproportionately more involved in criminal activity than any other group in society.
As leaders in the community, we expect GRLs to conduct themselves in a manner that befits their standing and role in the community. There are, therefore, sound processes and due diligence in place when it comes to the appointment of GRLs, and we constantly review the appointment system to ensure that there is sufficient rigour. For instance, before GRLs join the grassroots organisations and are appointed to leadership positions, they will serve as observers for a period of time and are given a direct and hands-on assessment on their suitability for appointment into the GROs as full-fledged GRLs. We make the best judgement of a person before the appointment is made. But that is not to say that the system, or, indeed, any system, can predict in advance who might then run afoul of the law subsequently.
In those cases where GRLs are accused of crimes and it undermines his or her ability to perform their roles, they might be suspended from active involvement in the grassroots organisations or be immediately removed from all grassroots appointments if they are subsequently convicted.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Subsidies for Purchase of Smoking Cessation Aids","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"90 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry provides any subsidies for individuals to purchase smoking cessation aids.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question will be answered by my reply to Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang for the next Sitting. [Please refer to \"Number of Singaporeans Who Have Given Up Smoking in Past Two Years and Proposal to Consider Total Ban on Sale of Tobacco Products\", Official Report, 11 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 45, 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":"Number of Youths Caught after Legal Smoking Age Was Raised to 21 Last Year","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"92 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) since the minimum legal smoking age was raised to 21 last year, how many youths have been caught smoking illegally; (b) what support did they receive to quit smoking; and (c) following New Zealand's move to ban smoking for future generations, whether the Ministry will reconsider the tobacco-free generation proposal with the goal of eliminating smoking in future generations of Singaporeans.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question will be answered by my reply to Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang for the next Sitting. [Please refer to \"Number of Singaporeans Who Have Given Up Smoking in Past Two Years and Proposal to Consider Total Ban on Sale of Tobacco Products\", Official Report, 11 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 45, 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":"Effectiveness of Plain Packaging and Graphic Health Warnings on Cigarette Packs in Reducing Smoking Rates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"93 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Health with regard to reducing cigarette smoking prevalence (a) how effective has the introduction of plain packaging and enlarged graphic health warnings been; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider additional measures, such as further increasing the excise duty for tobacco products or introducing a lifetime ban on cigarette sale to young persons below a certain age, similar to New Zealand’s plan to introduce legislation to eliminate smoking for the next generation.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question will be answered by my reply to Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang for the next Sitting. [Please refer to \"Number of Singaporeans Who Have Given Up Smoking in Past Two Years and Proposal to Consider Total Ban on Sale of Tobacco Products\", Official Report, 11 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 45, 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":"Targets for Reducing Smoking Rate in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"96 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has any target to bring down the smoking rate in Singapore in the (i) mid term of three years and (ii) long term of five and 10 years; and (b) if so, what are the steps being taken to achieve this reduction.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question will be answered by my reply to Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang for the next Sitting. [Please refer to \"Number of Singaporeans Who Have Given Up Smoking in Past Two Years and Proposal to Consider Total Ban on Sale of Tobacco Products\", Official Report, 11 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 45, 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":"High-rise Littering Cases in 2021 that Remain Unsolved","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"97 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) from January to October 2021, what is the number of high-rise littering cases reported to NEA that remain unsolved as the surveillance cameras are unable to capture good vantage points to identify the culprits; and (b) from January 2021 to date, how many of such culprits have been successfully identified through surveillance camera deployment and other methods.
98 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment with regard to the high-rise littering cases reported to NEA in the second half of 2021 (a) what is the number of cases that remain unsolved despite the presence of surveillance cameras in the vicinity and other enforcement measures; (b) whether the number of cases has increased, compared to the same period in 2020; and (c) whether the Ministry will be rolling out any new enforcement measures in 2022.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: When there is persistent high-rise littering feedback at a block of HDB flats, NEA will work with the Town Council to first issue advisories to residents. Should the issue persist, surveillance cameras with video analytics will be deployed.
From January to October 2021, there was a 20% decrease in high-rise littering feedback received by NEA, compared to the same period in 2020. NEA deployed surveillance cameras over 2,200 times at more than 1,400 blocks. Surveillance cameras could not be deployed at 87 blocks due to the lack of suitable vantage points. From the deployments from January to October 2021, close to 2,000 acts of high-rise littering were captured and enforcement action successfully taken against close to 1,000 offenders. About 300 more residential units are, currently, under investigation.
While we have laws to deter high-rise littering, it is also important to shape community norms to deter high-rise littering. Since 2020, NEA has been placing standees displaying information on ongoing surveillance or localised statistics on offenders caught at the HDB blocks with persistent littering feedback, to deter such acts. Town Councils also display posters jointly produced by the Municipal Services Office at HDB blocks, highlighting the environmental and social consequences of high-rise littering.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Further Help for Residents Seeking Relief from Second-hand Cigarette Smoke","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"99 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what are the avenues available to residents who wish to seek alleviation from second-hand cigarette smoke coming from their neighbours; (b) whether the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal has been effective in resolving such related disputes; and (c) whether there are other new efforts the Government is looking into.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: To assist residents affected by second-hand cigarette smoke arising from neighbours smoking in their homes, agencies receiving the feedback will first issue a Joint Advisory on Smoking in Homes to residential units reported to be emitting second-hand smoke. The joint advisory informs residents that their neighbours have been affected by second-hand smoke and urges smokers to be more considerate to their neighbours in where they smoke. Under the Community Dispute Management Framework (CDMF), residents can seek help from community leaders or the Community Mediation Centre for mediation to resolve the issue amicably. Should disputes remain unresolved, they can file a claim with the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal (CDRT) as a last resort.
Between January 2019 and November 2021, 50 claims relating to excessive smoke, such as cigarette smoke, were filed with CDRT. Of these claims, 41 were resolved amicably as of 30 November 2021, that is, they were withdrawn, discontinued or granted consent orders. CDRT made an order in 13 of these cases.
The Government is also actively looking out for new potential solutions. The Municipal Services Office (MSO), with the support of HDB, had earlier called for and is, currently, evaluating proposals from enterprises for innovative solutions to address second-hand tobacco smoke from neighbouring homes.
This complements the ongoing broader efforts by an interagency committee to review CDMF to better promote neighbourliness and minimise disputes.
The issue of second-hand tobacco smoke wafting from neighbouring homes can be avoided if smokers are more considerate and stop smoking at home or quit smoking altogether. The Health Promotion Board (HPB) has developed print and online resources to raise awareness on second-hand tobacco smoke and its harmful health effects and encourage smokers to quit smoking. Smokers who are looking for support to quit can join HPB’s \"I Quit\" programme, which offers smokers a range of smoking cessation interventions ranging from phone counselling and face-to-face counselling, to support via text messages.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Locations and Factors to Consider in Siting of Public Rental Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"100 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry factors in proximity of public rental housing locations to MRT stations in its planning for rental housing development; and (b) what are the considerations that currently go into the planning and decisions for the locations of public rental flats.
Mr Desmond Lee: Public rental housing is planned as part of the overall public housing supply and is built together with sold flats in Build-To-Order (BTO) projects on sites that are ready for development. These sites may be within existing towns or in new development areas which HDB develops progressively. While it is not always possible to build rental housing near MRT stations, all public housing projects are designed to ensure that residents have good access to local amenities and services, regardless of flat type.
When planning for new public rental flats, we also consider the need to provide a range of locations for rental tenants to choose from and balance the mix of flat types across towns. To ensure that public housing remains inclusive, new public rental flats will also be built in the same blocks as sold flats and included in future projects launched under the Prime Location Housing (PLH) model, where possible.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Average Weekly Consumption of Mobile Games","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"102 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Communications and Information in view of the proliferation of mobile gadgets and accessibility to mobile games (a) whether the Ministry has data on the average weekly consumption, in terms of time and money spent respectively, on mobile games for those (i) aged seven to 12, (ii) aged 13 to 18 and (iii) under the age of 35; and (b) whether the Ministry has conducted any consumption impact studies for the current consumption levels.
Mrs Josephine Teo: MCI does not have specific data or studies on consumption of time and money spent on mobile games.
The Government monitors global trends and, if necessary, will undertake local studies to better understand specific issues. We also encourage parents to take an active role in monitoring and guiding the activities of children, to help them cultivate healthy habits and personal responsibility.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Public Consultation Activities for Singapore’s Post-2023 Carbon Tax Level","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"103 Prof Koh Lian Pin asked the Minister for Finance what are the ongoing and planned public consultation activities for seeking the views of businesses and the people on Singapore’s post-2023 carbon tax level and trajectory.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Our agencies have been consulting the public on the carbon tax review over the past six months, as part of engagements under the Singapore Green Plan 2030. The conversations have touched on the need for a higher carbon tax and the trade-offs involved in our green transition. In the lead-up to Budget 2022, the public can also provide their feedback through platforms, such as REACH and the People’s Association (PA).
The Government is engaging businesses on the potential impact of a higher carbon tax and how we can support them in the shift towards lower-carbon operations and the pursuit of green growth opportunities. We are also speaking to other stakeholders, such as environment groups, on the green transition.
Feedback received from these consultations will be taken into consideration in the carbon tax review. The Government will announce the revised post-2023 carbon tax level at Budget 2022.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Result from Government's Five-year Effort against Diabetes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"104 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the main reasons that the Ministry’s five-year effort against diabetes has not managed to reduce the disease’s prevalence; and (b) whether the Ministry will implement new measures to prevent the rates from worsening, such as through public education.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The War on Diabetes is a multi-year effort. With longer life expectancy and an ageing population, the incidence of diabetes will increase. Hence, while the recent National Population Health Survey showed an increase in the crude prevalence of diabetes from 8.8% in 2017 to 9.5% in 2020, after adjusting for the ageing effect of the population, the age-standardised prevalence of diabetes has remained stable over the same period at 7.9%. There is some progress in blunting a hitherto increasing trend.
However, obesity amongst children is rising, which is not a good sign. There are many possible contributory factors to this – a sedentary lifestyle, change of diet in the younger population and the effects of COVID-19. These are issues which we will have to tackle.
Ultimately, there needs to be a change in lifestyles, involving a healthier diet, being physically active, regular screening to detect pre-diabetes and timely intervention are key to preventing diabetes. To that end, the Health Promotion Board (HPB) has been mounting promotional campaigns, encouraging an active lifestyle. We are implementing mandatory nutrition labels for less healthy pre-packaged sugar sweetened beverages and encouraging individuals to come forward for regular screening.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Necessity of TraceTogther SafeEntry Requirement Given New Protocols for COVID-19-positive Patients","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"105 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Health in view of the latest protocols for COVID-19-positive patients, whether the requirement for using the TraceTogether application to gain access to malls, shops or eating outlets is still necessary.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: MOH will regularly review the relevance of existing rules and requirements, including TraceTogether and SafeEntry. We want to keep rules and requirements simple and make life as normal as possible.
To protect unvaccinated persons who remain at higher risk of severe disease, verification checks into venues or activities where vaccination-differentiated safe management measures are in force are necessary. Today, TraceTogether and Safe Entry are very efficient tools to allow us to do that. So, they are still needed, as part of our public health response.
The data generated helps to identify and alert close contacts of COVID-19 cases through Health Risk Warnings and identify the locations of infection clusters and settings with a higher risk of transmission. These are useful in setting safe management rules.
Hence, as of now, we plan to keep both systems.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Employees Re-employed Upon Reaching Statutory Retirement Age by Industry and Job and Salary Levels","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"106 Mr Abdul Samad asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to eligible workers who were not offered re-employment after reaching the statutory minimum retirement age in the past five years (a) what is the breakdown of the sector or industry that the workers were in; and (b) what is the profile of these workers, such as their position as professionals, managers and executives as against a rank and file worker.
107 Mr Abdul Samad asked the Minister for Manpower (a) with regard to workers who turned 62 years old, what is the proportion of these workers who have been offered re-employment for each year in the past five years; (b) of these workers who had accepted re-employment, whether there was any reduction in their salary or benefits and, if so, what is the average reduction in their salary or benefit; and (c) how many instances are there where the contract of the re-employed workers have been terminated mid-way.
Dr Tan See Leng: Each year, over 90% of eligible resident employees1 who wished to continue working were offered re-employment at age 62. Of those who accepted re-employment, nearly all continued in the same job, either on their existing contracts without a specific end date, or a shorter renewable contract. The rest were re-employed in a different job. Amongst those re-employed in the same job, more than 95% did not experience any cuts to basic wage and benefits. The 5% who experienced wage cuts saw a median decrease of about 10%.
The incidence of non-offer was highest in financial and insurance services, information and communications, and manufacturing. Where re-employment is not offered, employers are required to pay an Employment Assistance Payment to help the workers tide over while they find new employment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Refers to eligible private sector resident employees."],"footNoteQuestions":["106","107"],"questionNo":"106-107"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regulatory Framework and Licensing Regime for Facilities Management Firms to Encourage Good Standards","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"108 Mr Raj Joshua Thomas asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry plans to introduce a regulatory framework and licensing regime for facilities management firms to ensure good standards and compliance in the sector.
Mr Desmond Lee: BCA requires buildings to be well-maintained in order to ensure public safety. This includes imposing duties on facilities management (FM) firms that have been appointed to take charge of the maintenance of a building façade. For example, facilities management firms that are the appointed agents of building owners are required to ensure that the exterior features of a building remain securely fixed to the building.
To raise the standards of facilities management firms, BCA has worked closely with the Singapore International Facilities Management Association (SIFMA) to establish accreditation schemes for firms and FM professionals. These schemes can help buyers make better-informed choices when procuring FM services. BCA will continue to work closely with the industry to encourage more firms and professionals to be accredited under these schemes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessment of Parental Alienation Trend in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"109 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in light of the lack of data on parental alienation due to the lack of a specific definition or classification of parental alienation (a) whether the Ministry tracks how widespread this issue is; (b) if so, how; and (c) what are the avenues for parents who feel that they are victims of parental alienation to seek assistance.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: MSF does not track the incidence or prevalence of parental alienation due to the lack of a specific definition or classification.
Parents who believe that they are victims of parental alienation are encouraged to seek counselling or mediation to resolve the dispute and reach an amicable solution. If such methods fail, parents may consider legal recourse. If there is an existing Court order on child access, they may seek legal advice on available options if the order has been breached. If there is no existing Court order, they may apply for interim child access.
In either case, the Court may also order the child to attend the Supervised Exchange or Supervised Visitation Programme at an appointed Strengthening Families Programme @ Family Service Centre, or FAM@FSC. The programme facilitates families to work towards independent child access through effective co-parenting.
Parents who require support can approach the FAM@FSCs or the Divorce Support Specialist Agencies. These agencies provide counselling services and programmes for divorcing and divorced families, including programmes on co-parenting, in the best interests of their children.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of COVID-19 Healthcare Award to Outsourced Workers in Patient Care Areas","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"111 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health whether the definition of \"all staff of public healthcare institutions\" mentioned in the 5 November 2021 speech for the COVID-19 Healthcare Award includes outsourced workers in patient-facing roles and patient care areas.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: As announced on 5 November 2021, the COVID-19 Healthcare Award (CHA) is intended to cover workers from outsourced service providers. However, there are many types of outsourced workers, including some who come into the hospital premises on an ad hoc basis to perform specific tasks. Hence, the general rule is to extend CHA to the outsourced workers whose primary workplace is the premises of public healthcare institutions (PHIs) and serve alongside permanent staff and play an integral part in keeping our publicly-funded healthcare services running smoothly.
Hence, there will be recognition given to outsourced staff who are directly contracted by the PHIs and publicly-funded Community Care Organisations (CCOs) to provide on-site services. MOH is working with the PHIs and CCOs on the amount, eligibility criteria and implementation details, and the employers of these outsourced staff will be informed in due course.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Include Proper Refuse Disposal Clause in HDB Lease Agreements and Renovation Permits","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"114 Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry can consider the insertion of a clause in the HDB lease agreement/renovation permit that “all domestic refuse must be disposed of via the bin chute (be it within the flat or at the common bin chute provided) and that sealing up of the bin chute within a flat/erection of any fixtures and fittings which obstructs the use of the bin chute within a flat is strictly disallowed”.
Mr Desmond Lee: All HDB flats are provided with refuse chutes, either located within the units or at the common area, for use by residents to dispose of household or domestic waste. These refuse chutes should be left unsealed.
However, there are instances where residents dispose of their domestic waste at bins placed at the void decks of the blocks, or even outside of the bins, instead of using the refuse chutes. This could cause inconvenience and nuisance to others.
As such behaviour appears to be limited to a small group, MND prefers to work with Town Councils to educate residents on the proper use of bin chutes, rather than insert a clause in the HDB lease agreement or renovation permit that all domestic refuse must be disposed of via the bin chute, and to prohibit the sealing of the bin chute. Nonetheless, we are prepared to consider stronger measures if public education proves insufficient.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Divorces in Syariah Court that Resulted in Shared Care and Control of Children","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"115 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Social and Family Development and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) what is the percentage of divorces in the Syariah Court that has resulted in shared care and control of the children; and (b) for all cases resulting in shared care and control, what is the proportion of these cases which have complaints or appeals being filed in Court or to a Government agency related to frictions arising from policies affecting such families, such as subsidised housing, in the (i) Family Justice Courts and (ii) Syariah Courts.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Syariah Court’s mission is to save marriages, settle divorces amicably and deliver just outcomes. The Syariah Court has support services for divorcing couples and their minor children. These support services, such as the Marriage Counselling Programme, are premised on taking a child-centric approach towards handling divorce cases to safeguard the paramount interest and well-being of children affected by divorce and encourage co-parenting, regardless of which parent has the care and control of the child.
Today, the information on shared care and control for Muslim divorces is captured under individual Court orders and will take time to manually collate. Nonetheless, the Syariah Court is embarking on efforts to digitalise its processes and, over time, such data will be captured in digital form, making it easier to generate statistics.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Students Admitted to Secondary Schools through Annual Direct School Admission Exercises","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"116 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Education (a) how many students have been admitted into Secondary schools under the 2021 Direct School Admission (DSA) exercise; and (b) from 2018 to 2020, what is the number of (i) DSA applications and (ii) students admitted through DSA, respectively.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Direct School Admission for Secondary Schools (DSA-Sec) provides an avenue, besides the PSLE, for students to gain direct entry to Secondary schools. Students are admitted via DSA-Sec based on achievements, interest and passion for their talent area, as well as their potential and personal qualities. It is part of MOE’s efforts to broaden the definition of merit, give more emphasis to holistic education and to develop diverse strengths and potential of our students.
DSA-Sec has grown in popularity as MOE has made moves over the years to make it more accessible to students. Applications rose significantly between 2018 and 2019 with the introduction of the centralised DSA portal, from 18,000 applications in 2018 to about 29,000 in 2019. This increase in applications has been sustained, with 30,500 applications in 2020 and 31,400 in 2021. Correspondingly, the number of unique applicants also rose from 9,000 in 2018 to 12,100 in 2021.
More students have been admitted via DSA-Sec, from about 7% or 3,000 students of the 2019 Secondary 1 cohort to close to 10% or 3,700 students of the 2022 Secondary 1 cohort.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Vaccination against Pneumococcal Pneumonia and Other Diseases for Seniors to Reduce Strain on Healthcare System","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"117 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider rolling out vaccinations against pneumococcal pneumonia and other prevalent diseases to seniors for protection against these diseases and to ease the strain on the healthcare system.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The National Adult Immunisation Schedule (NAIS) provides national-level guidance on important vaccinations for persons aged 18 and older. Under the NAIS, all persons aged 65 and above are recommended to get the pneumococcal and influenza vaccinations to reduce the risks of infection and disease-related complications. They are also recommended to receive other vaccinations, such as varicella (chickenpox), if they have not been previously vaccinated or lack evidence of past infection or immunity
All Singaporeans who meet the criteria in NAIS are eligible for vaccination subsidies at both CHAS GP clinics and polyclinics. MOH has been working with stakeholders, such as the Health Promotion Board, to increase the uptake of these vaccines, especially the influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations, by seniors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Help to Alleviate Impact on Elderly and Disabled Commuters when Public Bus Services are Re-routed or Discontinued","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"118 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether LTA has conducted any studies on the effects of additional bus transfers on the elderly or disabled commuters that are brought about by the re-routing and withdrawal of bus services; and (b) how does LTA assist elderly or disabled commuters who are faced with additional transfers, following the changes to bus services, including those living along Bedok Reservoir Road.
Mr S Iswaran: When amending bus routes, LTA does its best to enable commuters to complete their journeys on public transport with minimal inconvenience, while balancing operational and financial considerations.
For example, with the shortening of Service 22 and Service 66 which used to ply Bedok Reservoir Road, Service 65 was retained and adjusted so that commuters would continue to have a bus connection between the central areas and Tampines. LTA also increased the frequency of Service 228 during the morning peak, for commuters who travel between Bedok Reservoir Road and Bedok Interchange.
Service ambassadors are also deployed at key bus stops along the amended routes on the first few days of implementation to guide commuters, including the elderly. They assist commuters and advise them on the most efficient travel route to reach their destinations.
LTA and the Public Transport Council have also worked with the operators to promote a more inclusive and caring commuter culture in our public transport system to complement the above measures. This includes growing the Caring Commuter Champion volunteer corps to educate members of the public to assist vulnerable commuters, including the elderly and people with disabilities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Move to Allow Donning of Hijab for Healthcare Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"119 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry can provide an update on the implementation of tudung wearing at work among healthcare workers; and (b) how has the response been from the healthcare workers after the implementation.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Since 1 November 2021, female Muslim public healthcare staff, if they wish to do so, can wear the tudung as an add-on to their uniforms. After two months, and as of end December 2021, about 20% of female Muslim uniformed staff have begun wearing the tudung. Some staff have chosen not to do so, while some others may be considering. We respect the decision of each individual.
Hospitals have put in place clinical guidelines and communicated them to staff, to ensure adherence to the infection control requirements for the safety of patients and staff. Staff who choose to wear the tudung have also undergone refitting for N95 masks. Thus far, feedback from both Muslim and non-Muslim staff has been generally positive, with Muslim staff expressing appreciation for this change, and patients respecting the wishes of the nurses. Some staff have also received compliments from patients on their neat and professional attire with their tudung.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increase in Resale HDB Flat Prices in Last Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"120 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development in the past five years, what has been the increase in resale HDB prices per square foot, excluding resale of flats under the Design, Build and Sell Scheme.
Mr Desmond Lee: Based on resale flat transactions registered from January 2017 to September 2021, excluding those sold under the Design, Build and Sell Scheme, the median HDB resale flat price, on a per square metre basis, decreased by about 2% from 2017 to 2019, and increased by about 16% from 2019 to 2021. Over the past five years, this represented an increase of about 14%. The median HDB resale flat price per square metre was $4,260 in 2017; $4,189 in 2018; $4,172 in 2019; $4,345 in 2020 and $4,839 in 2021.
The recent increase in resale prices can be attributed to a broad-based increase in demand for housing, supported by the current low interest rate environment. On 15 December 2021, the Government announced a set of measures to cool the private residential and HDB resale markets and will continue to monitor the housing market conditions closely to ensure that Singaporeans have access to affordable public housing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Applications for Medical Ineligibility for COVID-19 Vaccines","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"121 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Health (a) how many applications for a certificate of medical ineligibility for COVID-19 vaccines have been received to date; and (b) of these, how many (i) are supported by private doctors and (ii) are approved to date.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: As of 2 January 2022, around 300 individuals have been certified to be medically ineligible for COVID-19 vaccines either by private or public doctors and reported to MOH.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Additional Support for Persons Caring for Family Members with Dementia","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"122 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Health what are the additional measures that the Ministry will be taking to support families with dementia family members in the face of our ageing population in the next 10 to 20 years.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: MOH adopts a multi-pronged approach to dementia care. This includes raising awareness of dementia, expanding care capacity and capabilities in the community and hospitals and supporting caregivers of persons living with dementia.
First of all, to support persons living with dementia and their caregivers after the initial diagnosis, the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) and Social Service Agencies (SSAs) have set up community outreach teams and community intervention teams. They conduct public outreach and education to raise awareness of dementia and conduct interventions to provide timely support. We have also rolled out 14 Dementia-Friendly Communities to create a conducive environment for persons living with dementia and their caregivers to live well in the community. This is achieved by raising dementia awareness and providing more dementia-friendly services, among other measures.
Next, to increase the accessibility of care services, MOH has set up dementia clinics in polyclinics so that persons living with dementia can receive medical care near their homes. We have also increased the number of Dementia Day Care places, over a five-year period, between 2015 and 2020.
Lastly, we provide caregivers of persons living with dementia with respite care options through senior centres and nursing homes. For instance, the Night Respite pilot offers overnight respite for caregivers of persons living with dementia with behavioural and sleep issues. Families also receive financial support to defray long-term care costs. This includes subsidies for medical care and eldercare services, disability grants and insurance schemes. MOH will continue to review the dementia support required for our ageing population.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Opt-in Default Cooling-off Period for Cross-border Fund Transfers of Large Amounts to Prevent Fraud","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"124 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has considered instituting mandatory or default opt-in cooling-off periods of a short duration for large, potentially anomalous transactions involving cross-border fund transfers, to allow for fund recovery in cases where victims become aware of the fraudulent nature of the scam relatively soon after they are perpetrated.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): MAS takes the issue of scams involving online banking accounts very seriously and is working actively with other Government agencies and the banking industry to address the problem.
There has been a rising number of such scams and frauds. Most recently, many customers of one of our local banks were tricked into divulging their Internet banking credentials to scammers, who were then able to siphon funds out of the customers’ bank accounts. The banks have been issuing repeated warnings on their digital platforms about such scams, but the scams have become more sophisticated and more bank customers have fallen prey.
We are coordinating our efforts to address this growing threat through the Inter-Ministry Committee on Scams. One key area of progress has been the strengthening of funds recovery for victims of such scams. The Singapore Police Force (SPF) works with banks in Singapore to freeze, within one day, domestic bank accounts receiving scam monies.
As was implied in the question from Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, the freezing of overseas accounts is more challenging as it involves agencies in different jurisdictions. But, of late, there has been some progress in this area. For example, between June and December 2021, through strong information-sharing and collaboration by SPF and its international law enforcement counterparts, 16 transnational syndicates perpetrating job scams, Internet love scams and impersonation scams were busted by the Royal Malaysian Police and the Hong Kong Police Force. I understand that MHA will be providing more information on the efforts by the Inter-Ministry Committee on Scams and on SPF’s initiatives, in response to the Parliamentary Question by Mr Christopher de Souza scheduled for the 11 January Sitting.
Notwithstanding progress on these fronts, we are deeply concerned with the recent uptrend in online scams and the financial losses suffered by unsuspecting customers. MAS is working with banks and payment institutions to explore additional measures to mitigate the risk of scams, without impairing the speed and convenience of payments that customers expect and would want for legitimate transactions. A cooling-off period is among the measures we have been considering, to see if it could be a practical way to avoid certain types of scams.
We are also exploring other measures even further upstream in the chain of transactions, including lowering default transaction limits and notification thresholds, and enhancing fraud surveillance systems to detect and block anomalous transfers more promptly. There will also be a public consultation on the recommended measures, to provide clarity on the responsibilities of financial institutions and consumers to protect e-payments, as well as liability apportionment principles in the event of fraudulent transactions.
The tactics employed by scammers will continue to grow in sophistication. Each of us has to exercise utmost caution when transacting online. Never pursue online deals that appear too good to be true. Never click on unverified links. Never divulge your Internet banking credentials or passwords to anyone. Closely monitor transaction notifications so that any unauthorised payments are reported early enough to increase the chances of recovery. We can address the scourge of scams if all of us are on guard and play our part.
125 Prof Koh Lian Pin asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether environmental impact assessments are being considered for the study on geothermal energy in the Sembawang hot spring and other potential sites in Singapore.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Energy Market Authority (EMA) is currently working with researchers from the Nanyang Technological University to carry out exploratory studies on Singapore’s geothermal potential. The research team plans to drill two boreholes, which are similar to the boreholes drilled for soil investigation works for construction activities, and conduct subsurface surveys1 so as to estimate the geothermal resource potential.
The research team is in the process of seeking the necessary approvals. As part of the process, the research team will undergo an in-depth consultation with technical agencies to determine if environmental studies or mitigating measures are needed.
If the exploratory studies yield promising results, EMA may conduct further studies to determine the viability of deploying geothermal systems in Singapore. Such studies will likewise undergo in-depth consultations with the relevant technical agencies, as required. If found to be feasible, geothermal energy could serve as an additional source of indigenous clean energy, besides solar, and support Singapore in meeting our climate change goals.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The research team will conduct subsurface surveys and computer modelling studies to obtain information about subsurface structures and estimate the geothermal resource potential. Sensors, such as seismometers and gravimeters, will be deployed for these subsurface surveys. Seismic and gravimetric surveys are geophysical techniques used for subsurface characterisation, for example, distribution of major rock units and their tectonics, and information about the Earth’s crust."],"footNoteQuestions":["125"],"questionNo":"125"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implication of New Protocol for PCR Test Results for Recovered COVID-19 Patients","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"126 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Health whether the protocol that disregards active polymerase chain reaction test results for recovered COVID-19 individuals, as long as their cycle threshold (CT) values are sufficiently high, is also applied to newly-detected (and especially asymptomatic) cases which may be at the beginning or tail end of their infection.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The cycle threshold (CT) value indicates the viral load of the patient being tested. However, unlike internal body scans or blood tests which are clinical tests with reported results, a CT value is technical laboratory parameter, with calibrated cut-offs for positive results, that is not routinely reported to patients.
Doctors can disclose the CT value and discuss its clinical significance with patients. In most situations, the CT values do not affect the clinical management of a COVID-19-positive case. The risk profile and severity of symptoms of the patient are more important.
A recovered patient and a newly-infected person may both test positive and register high CT values, that is, low viral load, but the interpretation is entirely different and needs to take into account the clinical context. For a recovered patient, it is most likely that he is still shedding small amounts of dead viral fragments. For a newly-infected person, it is most likely that his infection has been detected early and the viral load is likely to increase in a few days, when he will become more infectious. Hence, the clinical management in these two scenarios cannot be similar just because the patients register a similar CT value.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Hawker Centre Plans for Choa Chu Kang Town Centre","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"127 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment what is the status of the hawker centre plans announced in Choa Chu Kang Town Centre, including the prescribed location and estimated completion dates of the design development or construction stages of the same.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The planned hawker centre at Choa Chu Kang Town Centre will be part of a new mixed-use development. Construction of the mixed-use development, including the hawker centre, will commence after Phase 1 of the Jurong Region Line works, which is projected by LTA to be completed in 2027. Agencies are, currently, studying the development plans and will provide further updates when ready.
Choa Chu Kang residents can also look forward to the new hawker centre in the nearby Yew Tee Integrated Development, which is projected to be completed in 2027.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Policies for Public Officers Speaking to Media or Posting on Social Media in Their Personal Capacity","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"128 Mr Raj Joshua Thomas asked the Prime Minister (a) what are the policies and procedures regarding public officers speaking to the press or posting on social media in their personal capacity; (b) whether the Public Service Commission specifically proscribes public officers from speaking to the press or posting on social media in their personal capacity on topics related to their official appointments and, if not, whether it will consider doing so; and (c) whether there have been instances of disciplinary action taken against public officers who have not followed the prescribed policies and procedures.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): Officers should uphold the integrity and reputation of the Public Service at all times and not behave in a way that will bring the Public Service into disrepute or undermine public confidence in the Service.
There is no restriction against officers publicly sharing their personal interests and experiences, such as their hobbies, in their personal capacity. In general, officers may also comment on current affairs and issues of general interest on their private social media accounts with their friends and loved ones.
There are code of conduct rules that public officers have to abide by when it comes to public communication. Officers should not speak to the media or post on social media in their personal capacity on issues relating to their own agencies or policies that they have been involved in without seeking the permission of their Permanent Secretary. In addition, the rules also prohibit public officers from commenting on party politics or on issues that may affect national defence, internal security, social cohesion and/or foreign policy, unless they are authorised by their Permanent Secretary or heads of agencies.
In the last five years, the Public Service Commission has taken disciplinary action against officers who have breached the conduct rules in this area.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Family and Education Section of Personal Profile in Singpass","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Prime Minister with regard to one’s personal profile in SingPass, what are the reasons for (i) the inclusion of only children but not spouses or parents under the Family section, as details of spouses or parents can also be used to prove family relationships in emergencies and (ii) reflecting only the details of GCE \"O\" and \"A\" Level results under the Education section but not the highest level of formal education achievement.
Mr Teo Chee Hean (for the Prime Minister): The Singpass profile allows users to view their personal information and provides a trusted digital identity for secure transactions. We will add data to the user profile if there is demand for such data fields, where such data has accurate and complete digitalised records and where there are fewer concerns over data privacy.
We have not yet included details of spouses or parents, given the potential sensitivities. When displaying the personal information of another adult, it is typical for consent to be sought. Automatic inclusion of such information presumes consent, even if relations are estranged. There could also be changes in personal details, for example, name change, that individuals prefer to keep private. Such considerations would have to be addressed first.
As for digital education records, more will be included in the Singpass profile as they become available. At the time of the current implementation, the national General Certificate of Education Ordinary “O”, Normal “N” and Advanced “A” Level records have been digitalised. We are looking into how the records from our local Polytechnics and Universities can also be progressively digitalised.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Full-time NSmen Who Suffered Service-related Injuries and Compensation Received in Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Defence for the past five years (a) what is the number of full-time NSmen who (i) suffered service-related injuries, (ii) received compensation for service-related injuries suffered during their full-time NS; and (b) what is the amount of compensation paid to NSmen who suffered service-related injuries during their full-time NS.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: From 2016 to 2020, just less than 500, or about 1.5% of each cohort sustained service-related injuries. The majority of injuries were minor, with full recovery after treatment. Of these, about 150 NSFs were eligible for compensation. The amounts of compensation vary considerably, depending on the type of injury. Higher compensations were awarded to four NSFs who suffered fractures with residual disability or loss of function. One of these was injured due to a car accident while on the way to camp but was covered under our compensation schemes.
Compensation schemes for service-related injuries are tiered to address different circumstances and severity of injury. The basic tier in the form of Group Term Life and Group Personal Accident insurance policies provides the widest coverage. MINDEF purchases these policies for all Servicemen for a baseline payout, should any of them suffer permanent disability while in service. In addition to compensation amounts provided by this group insurance scheme, additional amounts are provided by MINDEF, depending on the severity and circumstances related to the injury.
Medical treatment for all service-related injuries is fully funded, whether within SAF medical facilities or public healthcare institutions, and includes outpatient treatment costs. If the injury results in discharge from service or requires prolonged medical or hospitalisation leave, further compensation is provided.
The total compensation amounts from these various schemes for service-related injuries take reference from civilian schemes, principally the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA). For the same injury, the compensation received by NSFs would be more. For example, for permanent disability arising from service-related injuries sustained due to military operations or training, the total compensation provided is at least two times that for permanent disability compensation under WICA.
We are mindful that no amount of compensation would fully make up for the contributions and sacrifices of our Servicemen. To ensure that our injured Servicemen and their families are well cared for, MINDEF also provides other forms of support on a case-by-case basis depending on their needs, including counselling, emotional support and assistance with medical and other arrangements.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Insurance Fraud and Efforts to Combat Such Fraud","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Home Affairs regarding insurance fraud in Singapore (a) whether the Ministry can provide an update on the situation and the Police’s action to combat such fraud; (b) whether there has been an uptrend over the past three years; (c) how do the Police and the General Insurance Association of Singapore (GIA) jointly combat such fraud; and (d) how does the Ministry deal with industry professionals who knowingly collude with fraudsters to file fraudulent insurance claims.
Mr K Shanmugam: Insurance fraud, typically, involves the submission of fraudulent and inflated claims or the submission of duplicate claims to multiple insurers.
Over the past three years, the number of reports of insurance fraud has increased, from 20 in 2018, to 71 in 2020. The increase is largely attributed to an increase in reports of fraudulent health insurance claims – these increased from five reports in 2018 to 32 reports in 2020. This sharp increase is due to a single case where 22 reports were lodged against an Indonesian national who submitted multiple fraudulent medical insurance claims. He was arrested in February 2020 in Singapore and, in September 2020, was sentenced to three years and two months’ imprisonment.
The Police works with partner agencies and industry stakeholders, such as the General Insurance Association of Singapore (GIA), to investigate and combat insurance fraud. The Specialised Fraud Insurance Branch within the Commercial Affairs Department is part of the Insurance Fraud Committee chaired by GIA, which shares information, crime trends and best practices relating to the detection and prevention of insurance fraud.
For example, when SPF receives reports of new variants of insurance fraud, it will alert GIA and insurers to review safeguards and conduct more stringent checks to verify the authenticity of claims. In addition, SPF also provides information on possible characteristics of fraudulent insurance claims to refine GIA’s Fraud Management System which was implemented in 2017. This system enhances the detection and analysis of potential fraudulent and duplicate claims through data analytics.
In addition, MAS expects all insurers and insurance intermediaries to have in place a robust fraud risk management framework commensurate with the size and complexity of their operations. MAS carries out regular reviews and on-site inspections of insurers to identify control gaps, including areas which may increase susceptibility to fraud. Where such control gaps exist, insurers are required to promptly address these findings and put in place remedial actions.
Individuals who file, or collude with fraudsters to file, fraudulent insurance claims can be charged with one of the cheating-related offences under sections 417 to 420 of the Penal Code, which carry maximum imprisonment terms of between three and 10 years. Industry professionals may also be subject to additional regulatory penalties. For example, MAS has issued Prohibition Orders against former insurance agents who were involved in fraudulent activities and dishonest conduct under the Financial Advisers Act and the Insurance Act.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Police Officers' Interaction with Victims of Sexual Misconduct","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what training do Police officers go through to ensure that they are trained to interact with victims of sexual misconduct; (b) whether there have been any official complaints lodged against them on their interaction with victims of sexual misconduct; (c) if so, what has been the outcome of these complaints; and (d) whether there is any data on the number of such complaints against Police officers in other countries and how is the performance of our Police officers when compared against such data.
Mr K Shanmugam: Investigation Officers (IOs) assigned to handle sexual crime cases are trained on victim management skills to minimise re-traumatising victims during interviews. In addition, all Police officers undergo regular training on how to manage victims with sensitivity.
Whenever a complaint is made against the Singapore Police Force (SPF), it will be investigated. So far, the majority of complaints have been found to be not substantiated. Where the complaints have been substantiated, SPF has taken action against the errant officer(s). SPF will also learn from these incidents and take steps to improve on processes and systems to minimise similar incidents from recurring.
MHA does not keep track of the data on the number of complaints against Police officers on their interaction with victims of sexual misconduct in other countries.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Singaporeans Who Renounced Their Citizenship over Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many Singaporeans renounced their citizenship over the past three years; (b) what proportion are naturalised Singapore Citizens; and (c) whether the annual renunciation rate has increased amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mr K Shanmugam: Over the past three years, an average of 1,480 citizens per year renounced their Singapore Citizenship (SC). Of these, 21% were naturalised SCs. The annual renunciation rate of citizens has remained low at under 0.1% of the citizen population. We had not seen an increase in renunciation rate during the COVID-19 pandemic.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Debtors Committed by Court to Civil Prison in Past 10 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Law in the past 10 years ending on 31 December 2021, how many debtors were committed by a Court to civil prison under section 6(1), 6(3) or 15(1) of the Debtors Act on the ground of inability to pay their respective judgment debts or failure to furnish security for appearance in Court in relation to civil proceedings against them.
Mr K Shanmugam: Such orders are not specifically tracked. A manual review of data in the Courts’ e-Litigation system on a best-efforts basis showed no records of any orders for committal to civil prison under the Debtors Act under section 6(1), 6(3) or 15(1) from 2013 to date.
Data on applications made under the Debtors Act prior to 2013 is not readily available.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Commercial Malls Providing Designated Collection Points or Parking Lots for Delivery Riders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Ministry has data on the number of commercial malls in Singapore that provide designated drop-off and pick-up collection points for delivery orders and, if so, what is the number.
8 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Ministry has data on the number of commercial malls in Singapore that provide designated parking lots with at least 20 minutes' grace period for delivery riders to collect their orders and, if so, what is the number.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: MTI does not track the number of commercial malls in Singapore that provide designated drop-off and pick-up points or designated parking lots for delivery riders. Increasingly, more malls see value in facilitating the work of delivery riders. This includes implementing designated pick-up points to facilitate deliveries and setting up dedicated mall entry queues for delivery riders for Safe Entry and vaccination-differentiated safe management measures (VDS) checks. Some malls also extended the grace periods for parked vehicles during the Heightened Alert phases to allow delivery riders to park temporarily while collecting orders.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Electricity Generated from Coal and Average Capacity Utilisation of Coal Generation Capacity in Last 10 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in each of the last 10 years, what is the (i) electricity generation capacity of coal in megawatts (MW) (ii) total amount of electricity generated from coal and (iii) average capacity utilisation of coal generation capacity, in Singapore.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore has only one plant that uses coal, the Tembusu Multi-Utilities Complex (TMUC), which produces electricity and steam using a mix of clean coal (that is, low-ash and low sulphur) and biomass to reduce the overall carbon intensity of the plant.
The generation capacity of TMUC is 133.5MW. On average, the plant generated 588.9 gigawatt hour (GWh) of electricity annually from coal since its commissioning in 2013, or around 1% of Singapore’s power generation capacity in the same period.
As the plant uses a mix of fuels, it is not possible to isolate the average capacity utilisation only for coal. The average capacity utilisation of the overall plant capacity for TMUC from 2013 to 2020 is 66%.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Hard-selling of Packages by Retailers Targeted at Seniors and Measures in Place","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether there has been an increase in the number of reported incidents of hard-selling of packages by retailers targeted at seniors; (b) if so, what enforcement measures are in place to ensure that retailers do not engage in such hard-selling activities; and (c) for retailers issued with warnings from the Consumers Association of Singapore, whether the Ministry will consider mandating cooling-off clauses for packages offered by these retailers.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The number of complaints made to the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) involving pressure sales tactics targeted at seniors has remained around 80 annually.
Pressure sales tactics are an unfair practice under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act. Retailers who engage in such unfair practices may be investigated by the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) and subject to an injunction order under the Act. MTI will continue to keep a close watch on the trends in pressure selling and review regularly whether additional measures, such as mandating cooling-off clauses in certain circumstances, are needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentage of Current GDP and Economic Growth in 2020 and 2021 Attributable to Real Estate Sector","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what percentage of the current GDP can be attributed to real estate and its peripheral services; and (b) what percentage of the economic growth of Singapore in 2020 and 2021 is attributed to the growth in the real estate sector.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The real estate sector1 accounted for 3% of Singapore's nominal GDP in 2020. It contributed -0.5 percentage point to the -5.4% contraction in 2020 and 0.3 percentage point to the 7.2% growth in real GDP in 20212.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The real estate sector comprises real estate activities with own or leased property (for example, activities of real estate developers, operators of serviced apartments, lessors of food courts and coffee shops and so on) and real estate activities on a fee or contract basis (for example, activities of real estate agencies, real estate appraisers and valuers, town councils and so on).","2 : The figures for 2021 are based on advance GDP estimates for the fourth quarter of 2021."],"footNoteQuestions":["11"],"questionNo":"11"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Economic and Business Impact of Hosting Bloomberg New Economy Forum 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what is the economic and business impact of Singapore’s hosting of the Bloomberg New Economy Forum 2021.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Bloomberg New Economy Forum 2021 was an important event for Singapore as it brought together over 300 leading global CEOs, current and former Government leaders, and thought leaders and experts to discuss solutions to address pertinent global issues in finance, trade, climate change, cities and health. The Forum affirmed Singapore’s status as a leading business hub and supported the business development efforts of Singapore companies that participated in it.
The Forum also benefited our tourism sector, which has been hard-hit by COVID-19. It generated around S$1.2 million of tourism receipts across four days and was widely covered by local and international media. As one of the first physical global Meetings, Incentives, Conventions and Exhibitions (MICE) events held in Singapore amidst COVID-19, it successfully piloted COVID-19 safe approaches for MICE events. More importantly, the event demonstrated Singapore’s capability in conducting large-scale international MICE events safely despite the challenges posed by the pandemic. This benefits Singapore’s competitiveness as a leading MICE destination and paves the way for Singapore to host other globally significant MICE events.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Appointment of More Bus Operators to Support Vaccinated Travel Lane Initiative between Malaysia and Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Don Wee asked the Minister for Transport whether more bus operators can be appointed to support the Vaccinated Travel Lane (Land) initiative between Malaysia and Singapore.
Mr S Iswaran: As part of the effort to restore connectivity between Singapore and Malaysia, the Vaccinated Travel Lane Land (VTL-Land) was launched on 29 November 2021. VTL-Land has enabled residents and workers on both sides of the Causeway to reunite with their families, while taking into consideration the public health situation in both countries.
Transtar Travel Pte Ltd (Transtar) and Handal Indah Sdn Bhd (also known as Causeway Link) were appointed by Singapore and Malaysia respectively to operate VTL-Land bus services as a start.
Transtar was a suitable choice as the Singapore-designated bus operator to start off the implementation of the VTL-Land bus service, as it has more than 20 years of experience in operating cross-border bus services between Singapore and Malaysia. It also has a ready online system for travellers to purchase bus tickets, operation facilities at Larkin Sentral Bus Terminal and a fleet of buses that could meet the operational requirements for VTL-Land.
Singapore and Malaysia will continue to monitor the situation and review the transport options under VTL-Land, including potentially appointing more bus operators, to operate VTL-Land bus services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"COVID-19 Omicron Variant's Impact on Vaccinated Travel Lanes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Transport whether he can provide an update on how the COVID-19 Omicron variant is impacting Vaccinated Travel Lanes.
Mr S Iswaran: We started the Vaccinated Travel Lane (VTL) scheme in September 2021 and, by end November, had progressively expanded the scheme to 27 countries. On 26 November 2021, the World Health Organization designated the Omicron variant as a Variant of Concern. In response, we halted the expansion of the VTL scheme to more countries and deferred the launch of the VTL scheme to Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as a precautionary move. We also decided to maintain the daily quota of VTL (Air) travellers at 10,000 rather than increase it to 15,000 as we had earlier intended.
On 22 December 2021, given the rapid and global spread of the Omicron variant, we froze the sale of new VTL flight and bus tickets for entry into Singapore from 23 December 2021 to 20 January 2022. We have also imposed a 50% limit on the daily number of VTL travellers from 21 January 2022. These were calibrated moves that balanced the need to manage the risk of imported Omicron cases while minimising disruption to travellers who had already made VTL bookings to enter Singapore.
In addition, we tightened the testing regime for VTL travellers. Besides the pre-departure and on-arrival COVID-19 tests, VTL travellers are required to undergo daily self-administered Antigen Rapid Tests (ARTs) on Days 2 to 7 of their arrival in Singapore, and those who test positive are required to undergo a confirmatory Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test. Whilst these enhanced measures may have caused some inconvenience for travellers, they were necessary to give us valuable time to study and understand the Omicron variant and to strengthen our defences, including enhancing our healthcare capacity and getting more people vaccinated and boosted.
International evidence indicates that the Omicron variant, while more transmissible, is less severe, and vaccination, especially with boosting, continues to provide good protection from severe illness. For now, MOH’s assessment is that the enhanced testing regime and limits on the number of VTL arrivals are sufficient to manage the public health risk. We will continue to work closely with MOH to regularly review our border measures and protocols.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Pre-arrival PCR Tests and Need to Reinstate Stay-home Notice or Quarantine Order","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Transport (a) how effective have pre-arrival polymerase chain reaction tests been at detecting COVID-19 infections before an incoming traveller under the Vaccinated Travel Lane (VTL) enters the community; (b) whether there have been any cases of VTL travellers failing to comply with the enhanced testing regime; and (c) whether reinstatement of Stay-Home Notice or Quarantine Order will be considered should the number of COVID-19 Omicron cases escalate.
Mr S Iswaran: All travellers who enter Singapore under the Vaccinated Travel Lanes (VTLs) undergo an on-arrival test (OAT) and are required to self-isolate until they produce a negative OAT result. OAT has been effective in identifying COVID-19-positive individuals and isolating them before they interact with the community. As of 31 December 2021, more than 220,000 VTL-Air and VTL-Land travellers had entered Singapore, of whom less than 1% were found to be COVID-19-positive based on their OAT results and were isolated according to the prevailing public health protocols.
With the emergence of Omicron, the testing regime for travellers arriving via VTLs has been enhanced to reduce the risk of spread of Omicron in Singapore. From 7 December 2021, arriving VTL travellers have been required to perform daily self-administered Antigen Rapid Tests (ARTs) on Days 2 to 7 of their arrival in Singapore. Travellers are required to upload their test results on Days 2, 4, 5 and 6. On Days 3 and 7, they undergo supervised self-administered ARTs at Combined Test Centres or Quick Test Centres and the results are automatically uploaded to MOH’s database. Those who test positive are contacted to undergo a confirmatory Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test.
Travellers who do not submit their test results or attend their supervised tests are contacted and reminded to do so. The overall compliance rate for the VTL testing regime has been about 99%.
MOH’s current assessment is that the enhanced testing regime and limits on the number of VTL arrivals are sufficient to manage the public health risk and there is no need to reintroduce Stay-Home Notice for VTL travellers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Safety at Traffic Junctions where Discretionary Right Turns are Replaced with Red Amber Green Signals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Transport how has the replacement of discretionary right turns with Red Amber Green (RAG) signals improved road and pedestrian safety at the respective traffic junctions where these new signals have been deployed.
Mr S Iswaran: Discretionary right turns help to optimise traffic flow as motorists are able to execute the turn when there is no conflicting pedestrian or vehicular traffic. This is particularly useful at junctions with low traffic. However, for junctions where there is a higher risk of accidents, LTA has been progressively introducing Red Amber Green (RAG) signals. Such junctions that have been installed with RAG signals have seen a decrease of about 40% in accidents involving right turns.
Besides RAG signals, LTA also enhances junction safety through other initiatives, such as appropriate road markings, lighted road studs, integrated pedestrian countdown timers and signs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Serious Accidents Involving Cyclists on Roads and Park Connectors in Last Five Years and Effectiveness of Safety Regulations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Transport (a) how many serious accidents involving cyclists happened on roads and park connectors in the last five years from 2017 to 2021; and (b) whether regulations on speed limit and safety standards have helped to improve the safety of biking.
Mr S Iswaran: From 2017 to 2021, there was an average of about 560 serious accidents each year involving cyclists on roads, and about 90 serious accidents each year on shared paths, that is, cycling paths in towns and park connectors island-wide.
Over the years, LTA has introduced various regulations to promote the safe use of bicycles and power-assisted bicycles on roads and paths. These include speed limits of 25 kilometres per hour on cycling paths and 10 kilometres per hour on footpaths, which were last revised in 2018. It is difficult to assess the direct impact of each regulation on safety outcomes. But, taken holistically, together with regular education campaigns and enforcement efforts, the number of serious accidents per year has remained relatively stable, notwithstanding the increasing popularity of cycling in recent years. LTA will continue to step up education and enforcement efforts, to strengthen knowledge of and compliance with safe cycling practices. At the same time, we urge all road and path users to continue to play their part to use our shared spaces in a responsible manner.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enforcement Tickets Issued Against Delivery Riders/Drivers for Illegal Parking in Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Transport (a) in each of the past three years, how many enforcement tickets have been issued against delivery riders/drivers for illegal parking; and (b) of these enforcement tickets, how many are summonses issued for illegal parking within close proximity to commercial malls.
Mr S Iswaran: LTA does not distinguish vehicles by their intended use when illegal parking offences are detected. The total number of notices of traffic offence issued for illegal parking against motorcycles, vans and lorries, which are typically used for deliveries, was 59,990 in 2019, 41,132 in 2020, and 53,499 in 2021 (from January to November 2021). The locations recorded on these notices are, generally, based on the road nearest to where the offences were detected and not their proximity to commercial malls or other buildings.
Illegal parking causes disamenities and safety risks. The agencies are monitoring the ground situation closely and will engage commercial malls where necessary to address the varying needs of different users, including those of delivery riders/drivers, while minimising parking disamenities. This includes encouraging mall operators to provide adequate temporary parking lots for deliveries.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Vehicle Owners Who Benefited from Electric Vehicle Early Adoption Incentive Since Its Launch","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Transport (a) since its launch on 1 January 2021, how many vehicle owners have benefited from the Electric Vehicle Early Adoption Incentive (EEAI); and (b) how much has the EEAI cost the Government thus far.
Mr S Iswaran: As of end 2021, 1,636 electric cars and taxis registered since 1 January 2021 benefited from the Electric Vehicle Early Adoption Incentive (EEAI). Overall, the proportion of electric cars and taxis registered has increased from ~0.2% in 2020 to ~4.4% in 2021.
The rebates given under the EEAI scheme in 2021 are about $30 million.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Electric Vehicle Chargers Installed in 2021 and Expected Number to be Installed from 2022 to 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the total number of electric vehicle (EV) chargers installed in 2021; and (b) what is the expected number of EV chargers that will be installed progressively over 2022-2025.
Mr S Iswaran: There are around 2,200 electric vehicle (EV) charging points in Singapore today, of which, around 300 were installed by commercial operators in the past year. In 2022, there will be more than 600 charging points deployed at public carparks under the joint LTA-URA pilot tender, in addition to charging points in other locations like private residences, malls and petrol stations.
LTA will continue to monitor EV adoption trends and accelerate the deployment of our EV-charging network where necessary to meet our 2030 target of 60,000 charging points islandwide.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Electric Cars Sold in Last Six Months and Plans to Set Up Electric Charging Stations and Reskill Automotive Industry","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Transport (a) in the last six months, how many electric cars have been sold and what percentage of total cars sold have been electric cars; (b) whether the current plan to provide electric chargers in public buildings is able to meet the forecasted demand; (c) what plans are in place to assist private buildings to set up electric charging stations; and (d) whether plans are in place to begin reskilling the automotive industry and the petrol station staff to prepare them for the electric vehicle growth.
Mr S Iswaran: In the second half of 2021, there were 1,400 new electric car registrations, comprising 7.2% of total new car registrations during this period.
We have plans to deploy 60,000 charging points by 2030, of which 40,000 will be at public carparks and 20,000 at private premises. To do this, we will progressively deploy EV charging points in HDB carparks based on available electrical capacity and upgrade electrical infrastructure where necessary. We assess that this will be adequate to meet expected EV charging demand in aggregate based on the projected EV population, since a typical electric car user will only require a full charge roughly once a week. That said, we recognise that there may be some parking locations with strong charging demand. We will work with EV charging operators to develop solutions for such locations. We will also review and update our charging point deployment plans based on actual adoption rates.
There is strong interest among private building owners today to install EV charging points in commercial developments like retail malls and petrol stations. The Government is also facilitating deployment of EV chargers at non-landed private residences through the EV Common Charger Grant.
Our transition to EVs will require our automotive workforce to pick up new skills that can be applied to EVs and EV charging systems. Although this is a medium-term transition, the Government is already working with industry partners to step up support for our workers. For example, the Singapore Motor Workshop Association Training Academy, supported by Enterprise Singapore (ESG), Workforce Singapore (WSG) and JTC Corporation (JTC), will train at least 1,000 automotive workshop technicians over the next three years to maintain EVs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact on Food Security from Closure of Senoko Fishery Port and Future Disruptions at Jurong Fishery Port","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what is the risk assessment in terms of impact on food security with regard to the impending closure of Senoko Fishery Port; and (b) what measures are planned in case of future disruptions to fish sourcing operations at Jurong Fishery Port.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: In June 2020, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) announced plans to close the Senoko Fishery Port (SFP) by 2023. Consolidation with Jurong Fishery Port (JFP) would allow trade buyers to purchase wholesale seafood conveniently at a single location.
COVID-19 has brought to the fore the importance of building further resilience in our supply chains. During the two-week temporary closure of JFP in July 2021, SFA and Enterprise Singapore (ESG) responded quickly to facilitate distributors and supermarkets to activate alternative arrangements. A small number of traders switched to SFP for their supply and some sourced from alternative suppliers. We also had sufficient stocks of frozen seafood. The combination of measures allowed our supply of fish and seafood to remain stable.
SFA is reviewing its plans for the fishery ports. SFA’s ongoing consultancy study on the future infrastructure needs to support the fresh food wholesale and distribution in Singapore is expected to be completed in 2022.
SFA continues to ensure tight safe management measures at key food supply nodes to enhance the resilience of our wholesale sector, including the fishery ports. We have limited entry to authorised visitors with entry passes, put in place a Rostered Routine Testing Regime for tenants and workers and have clearly demarcated zones to prevent intermingling of foreign vessel workers and foreign truck drivers with local tenants and workers. SFA has also worked with associations and tenants to finetune their contingency plans and made alternative distribution sites available.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Provide Financial Support for Bereaved Families to Offset Elevated COVID-19-Related Funeral Expenses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment in view of elevated costs for COVID-19-related funeral expenses, whether the Ministry is exploring providing some additional financial support for bereaved families to offset these costs.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Funeral expenses would vary, depending on the desired funeral arrangements for the deceased and preferences of their family. Some additional funeral expenses may be incurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, due to requirements, such as personal protective equipment to protect funeral staff who handle the bodies of deceased COVID-19 patients deemed to still be infectious.
There are avenues for bereaved families to seek financial support from the public and people sectors. For example, family members may approach Social Service Offices for support for funeral expenses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Resumption of In-person Co-curricular Activities and Varying Group Sizes for Team Sports Training in Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Education whether variations can be made to group sizes of team sports CCAs so as to allow for the resumption of these activities, such as training in groups of five and playing five-a-side instead of eleven-a-side for team sports, such as hockey and football.
25 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Education (a) whether there are plans for the resumption of in-person co-curricular activities (CCAs) in schools, such as uniformed groups and school military bands; and (b) whether inter-school competitions in respect of these CCAs can resume in 2022.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: In-person co-curricular activities (CCAs) have resumed since 10 November 2021 for Secondary schools, Junior Colleges and Centralised Institute (Sec/JCCI) with safe management measures (SMM) aligned to the national posture. These include CCAs from all four categories: (a) uniformed groups; (b) physical sports; (c) visual and performing arts; (d) club and societies.
With the resumption of CCA training sessions within SMMs, there are plans to resume related events, such as the National School Games (NSG) and the Singapore Youth Festival Arts Presentation (SYF AP) for Sec/JCCI students in 2022. For team sports CCAs, variations will be made to group sizes by modifying the games format for CCA trainings and NSG competitions. For example, hockey can be modified and played as a four-a-side competition instead of the usual eleven-a-side game. The modifications will provide student athletes with good development opportunities and competition experience while ensuring their safety and well-being. As part of a pilot since 10 November 2021, some Sec/JCCIs have resumed team sports CCA training in groups of a maximum of 10 participants, allowing students to start their preparations for the modified games format in NSG competitions.
For Primary schools, although in-person CCA can resume from 4 January 2022, MOE will take a more cautious approach when planning to resume NSG and other inter-school events, in view of the students’ vaccination status.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans for Teachers and Students to be More Equipped to Deal with Online Harms","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Education whether there are plans to equip teachers and enhance the curriculum in schools for students to be more equipped from a young age to deal with online harms, such as hypersexualisation of women and girls on social media and predatory online behaviour.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: MOE’s Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum has been refreshed and is being progressively implemented from 2021. The refreshed curriculum gives further emphasis on developing in our students healthy self-esteem and positive self-identity. Through the CCE lessons, our students are taught about personal safety and how to recognise and protect themselves from sexual abuse, both online and offline.
For example, Primary students are taught online dangers and how they can proactively protect themselves. They are also made aware of the laws that protect them. In Secondary schools, students learn more about online risks, such as cyber flashing, as well as dealing with relationships and differentiating between healthy relationships and sexual grooming. At the Secondary and pre-University levels, students are also taught to evaluate their self-perception, calibrate unhealthy expectations on themselves and develop positive self-worth. In doing so, students recognise the importance of having a sense of healthy self-esteem that is not unduly affected by external influences, such as social media.
Students also learn to look out for one another, both online and offline, and to seek help from trusted adults, such as their parents, teachers and school counsellors should they or their friends require support or guidance on well-being issues. This includes issues, such as online harassment and online grooming.
Teachers, school counsellors and student welfare officers are trained to look out for signs of distress in students so as to support them where necessary. MOE also trains dedicated key personnel in schools who look after student well-being to strengthen supportive peer network and manage cyber issues.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Tertiary Students from Institute of Technical Education, Polytechnics and Universities Holding Part-time Jobs while Studying Full-time","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry has data on the estimated number of tertiary students from the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), Polytechnics and Universities, who hold part-time jobs while studying full-time.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: MOE does not track whether students from the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) hold part-time jobs while studying full-time. Students are not required to report this information to their IHLs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessable Income and Personal Income Tax Paid by Singapore Citizens, Permanent Residents and Foreigners in Past 30 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Finance whether the Ministry can provide data, as an annual time series, on the respective amounts of assessable income for (i) Singapore Citizens (ii) Permanent Residents and (iii) foreigners, with a breakdown by amount of personal income tax paid by each of these three categories, for the past 30 years.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The requested information spans three decades and we are unable to provide such a long time series of data. But for the Year of Assessment (YA) 2021, Singapore Citizens accounted for about 61% of total assessable income (AI) and contributed about 51% of total Personal Income Tax (PIT). Permanent Residents accounted for about 15% of total AI and contributed about 17% of total PIT. Foreigners accounted for about 24% of AI and contributed about 32% of PIT.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Financial Aid for Beneficiaries who are Foreign Nationals or Foreign-based Institutions and Organisations in FY2020","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Finance (a) whether any funds for Budget expenditure items, such as Social Transfers to Individuals, Transfers to Institutions and Organisations, Special Transfers Excluding Top-ups to Endowment and Trust Funds, as well as expenditures from Endowment and Trust Funds, are given to beneficiaries who are foreign nationals or foreign-based institutions and organisations; and (b) if so, how much was given to them for FY2020, respectively.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Government’s overarching priority is to enable our people and businesses to grow and thrive, and our policies are designed to benefit Singapore and Singaporeans.
This is reflected in our spending, including the various transfers and expenditures from endowment and trust funds. For example, the Government provides transfers, such as service and conservancy charges (S&CC) rebates for Singaporean households to support families in managing their household expenses, and the Workfare Income Supplement to uplift lower-wage Singaporeans. Another example is the Edusave Grant that is provided to every school to enhance the quality of teaching and learning, whose benefits are enjoyed by the entire school community, the vast majority of whom are Singaporeans.
In some instances, in order to benefit Singaporeans, we may have to disburse the funds to Singapore-registered foreign companies. In the case of the Jobs Support Scheme, for example, payouts were made to employers in FY2020, including foreign-owned companies located in Singapore, to encourage retention of local workers amid economic uncertainty from the COVID-19 pandemic.
As we do not track the beneficiaries of all our schemes, we do not have the detailed breakdown requested.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Study on whether Cooperative Co-parenting is Easier with Sole Care and Control or Shared Care and Control","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry has conducted a study on whether cooperative co-parenting is easier with sole care and control or shared care and control; (b) if so, what are the results of the study; (c) whether the Ministry intends to conduct such a study if it has not done so; and (d) if not, why not.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: In 2020, MSF conducted a Study on Co-Parenting Styles (Co-Parenting Study), which found that the cooperative co-parenting style is associated with positive child outcomes, such as fewer child behavioural and emotional problems and better school learning behaviour, compared to parallel co-parenting and single parenting.
The Co-Parenting Study did not cover whether it is easier to practise cooperative co-parenting with sole or shared care and control. However, the study found that among those who practise the cooperative co-parenting style, 80% were awarded sole care and control and 19% were awarded shared care and control.
There are no conclusive findings on the benefits of shared care and control both locally and overseas. Hence, MSF does not intend to conduct a study specifically on whether cooperative co-parenting is easier with sole or shared care and control. Instead, MSF will continue to support all divorced parents to practise cooperative co-parenting in the best interests of their children, regardless of whether they were awarded sole or shared care and control.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Supply and Demand for Infant Care and Childcare Places in Sengkang in Past Five Years and New Ones Planned","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) in each of the last five years in Sengkang, what is (i) the respective number for infant care and childcare places that are available, (ii) the enrolment rate for such places and (iii) the average waiting time for enrolment; and (b) what is the expected number of (i) new preschools in Sengkang by 2023 and (ii) new infant care and childcare places, respectively.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Over the last five years, the number of infant care places in Sengkang has grown by over 80% from 570 in 2017 to 1,050 in 2021. Childcare places in Sengkang have grown by nearly 60% from 7,700 in 2017 to 12,200 in 2021. Such growth is significantly higher than the overall increase nationally in infant care places (50%) and childcare places (30%).
Between 2017 and 2021, the average enrolment rates for infant and childcare services in Sengkang were about 68% and 83% respectively. This is slightly higher than the national average of about 67% and 77% for infant and childcare services respectively.
Parents may register interest in a preschool via the Preschool Search Portal (PSP), ECDA’s online self-help search portal launched in 2019. While we strongly encourage all parents to use the PSP, this is voluntary and some parents may also directly contact their chosen preschools. Based on parents who have registered interest on PSP over the past two years, the waiting times in Sengkang for infant care and childcare places range between a few weeks and a few months.
There is a range of factors that affect waiting time. For instance, parents may have to wait longer if they prefer to send their children to specific centres. In addition, parents may register their interest early without an immediate need for places as they have alternative arrangements, such as home-based care. Parents can also register their interest for multiple centres at the same time, regardless of whether their child is currently enrolled in a preschool.
That said, the increase in infant and childcare places over the years has helped address families’ preschool needs. Over the past five years, the number of unenrolled children whose parents have registered for interest in an infant or childcare place in Sengkang has decreased by about 60% – from 930 in 2017 to 380 children in 2021, which constitutes less than 2% of all families with infants and children of preschool age in Sengkang.
Providing access to quality, affordable infant and childcare remains a key priority for the Government. We will continue to increase capacity, where needed, to meet demand for early childhood services, especially in new estates like Punggol and Sengkang, which tend to have many young families. By the end of 2022, ECDA plans to develop another four preschools in Sengkang, which will provide 60 more infant care places and 400 more childcare places. These preschools will be built in accessible locations, such as in community centres, and in tandem with future new Build-To-Order (BTO) housing developments, so that they can be operational in time to meet parents’ needs. This does not include additional infant care places which may be developed by other preschool operators to meet local demand.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Average Waiting Time for ECDA-Approved Infant Care Places and Plans to Increase Number","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the average waiting time for Early Childhood Development Agency-approved infant care places; and (b) whether there are plans to increase the number of infant care places to better support working mothers.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Parents may register interest in a preschool for their infants via the Preschool Search Portal (PSP), ECDA’s online self-help search portal launched in 2019. While we strongly encourage all parents to use PSP, this is voluntary and some parents may also directly contact their chosen preschools. Based on parents who have registered interest on PSP over the past year, the waiting times for infant care places range between a few weeks and a few months.
There is a range of factors that affect waiting time. For instance, parents may have to wait longer if they prefer to send their children to specific centres. In addition, parents may register their interest early without an immediate need for places as they have alternative arrangements, such as home-based care. Parents can also register their interest for multiple centres at the same time, regardless of whether their child is currently enrolled in a preschool.
Providing access to quality, affordable infant and childcare remains a key priority for the Government. We will continue to increase capacity, where needed, to meet demand for early childhood services. By the end of 2022, ECDA will develop an additional 1,000 infant care places offered by anchor operators, mainly in Planning Areas with upcoming HDB developments for new families. This does not include additional infant care places which may be developed by other preschool operators to meet local demand.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Increase Density of Student Care Facilities and Issuance of Permits to Meet Potential Demand in New Estates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether there are plans to meet potential demand in new estates with many young families, such as Sengkang and Punggol, by (i) increasing the density of student care facilities, such as community‐ and school‐based student care, and (ii) increasing the issuance of permits for private after‐school care facilities.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Student care centres (SCCs), including those in all Primary schools, provide after-school-hours care and supervision to children from seven to 14 years old. Setting up an SCC does not require a permit from MSF. SCC operators may register with MSF if they wish to administer the Student Care Fee Assistance (SCFA) scheme, which subsidises the student care fees for children from lower-income families. Today, around 400 SCCs are registered with MSF as SCFA administrators.
Registered SCCs currently provide around 48,000 student care places. Overall, SCC enrolment is below SCC capacity in all towns, including in Sengkang and Punggol, although there may be a wait list for particular SCCs. We encourage parents to enrol their children in nearby SCCs if they are not able to immediately secure places in particular SCCs. MSF works with MOE to monitor the demand for SCC places and will facilitate the expansion of capacity where necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efficacy of Vaccinations against New COVID-19 Variants and Plans to Reduce Restrictions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"34 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the additional measures being taken in light of the COVID-19 Omicron variant; and (b) whether such measures will impact plans to reduce restrictions on group sizes for dining out and employees returning to the workplace.
35 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health in light of local and international data indicating that COVID-19 booster shots provide some protection against new COVID-19 variants and the increasing possibility of new variants that are highly transmissible appearing every few months, whether all persons will be encouraged to take booster shots every six months.
36 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Health with regard to the number of deaths in Singapore due to COVID-19 in 2021 (a) how many were fully vaccinated at the time of infection; and (b) of the deceased who were fully vaccinated, what is the breakdown in numbers of those who received vaccines from (i) Pfizer-BioNTech, (ii) Moderna, (iii) Sinovac, (iv) Sinopharm and (v) other vaccines to be specified.
37 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Health whether vaccination-differentiated measures will be imposed on children.
38 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Health (a) whether hospitals will be able to cope with the possible surge of infections due to the emergence of the COVID-19 Omicron variant; and (b) what are the measures and steps taken to ensure that processes and protocols remain efficient.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: These questions for written answers have been addressed by oral reply to Question Nos 1 to 12 on the Order Paper for 10 January 2022.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Overseas Singaporeans Affected by Temporary Suspension of Vaccinated Travel Lanes and Returning by Non-VTL Options","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Health whether Singaporeans who are currently overseas and affected by the temporary suspension of Vaccinated Travel Lanes (VTL) will be able to benefit from the Quarantine Order (QO) Allowance Scheme and Leave of Absence/Stay-Home Notice (SHN) Support Programme if they return by non-VTL options and are unable to work due to being placed on SHN or QO.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: All returning Singaporeans are eligible for the Quarantine Order (QO) Allowance if they were issued a QO and meet the eligibility criteria. Those returning from Category II, III and IV countries are required to serve isolation under a Stay-Home Notice (SHN) and will be issued a QO if they are identified as close contacts of a confirmed COVID-19 case.
The Leave of Absence/SHN Support Programme, introduced in early 2020, is not applicable if the LOA/SHN began on or after 7 April 2020.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Migrant Workers Infected with COVID-19 in 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"40 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health in 2021, what percentage of migrant workers who were infected with COVID-19 (i) had no or mild symptoms, (ii) required oxygen supplementation in general wards, (iii) were in the intensive care unit and (iv) died, respectively.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Among migrant workers (Employment Pass, S Pass and Work Permit holders) infected with COVID-19 reported between 1 January 2021 and 27 December 2021, 99.9% had no or mild symptoms, 0.11% required oxygen supplementation, 0.021% were in the intensive care unit and 0.0042% passed away from complications due to COVID-19 infection. The data is based on the worst-ever condition of each COVID-19 case.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Integrated Development Comprising Polyclinic, Dialysis Centre and Nursing Home at Jalan Damai","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry remains on track to deliver the integrated development comprising a polyclinic, dialysis centre and nursing home at Jalan Damai by 2024.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The proposed integrated development at Jalan Damai, comprising the new Kaki Bukit Polyclinic, kidney dialysis centre and nursing home was first announced in November 2019 to be completed by 2025.
However, we estimate that the completion will be delayed by one year to 2026. This is because additional time is needed to improve the design of the new polyclinic for better infection disease control. This will ensure that the new polyclinic can be future-proofed against new pandemics.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Outsourced Workers in Patient-facing Roles or Patient Care Areas at Public Healthcare Institutions Diagnosed with COVID-19 since Its Onset","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"42 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health (a) since the onset of COVID-19, how many and what proportion of outsourced workers in patient-facing roles or patient care areas at public healthcare institutions have been diagnosed with COVID-19; (b) how does this risk profile compare with (i) workers with comparable job descriptions who are not outsourced and (ii) the overall cohort of workers in patient-facing roles or patient care areas at public healthcare institutions.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: For direct hire doctors, the proportion infected1 ranges from 1% to 2%, while, for nurses, it ranges from 2% to 4%. For outsourced doctors and nurses, the proportion infected is close to 0%.
For direct hire administrative and ancillary staff, the proportion infected ranges from 3% to 5%. For outsourced administrative and ancillary staff, the proportion infected ranges from 3% to 6%, with the exception of NUH, CGH, KTPH and IMH2, where the proportion infected among outsourced staff was higher, ranging from 7% to 10%. For these institutions, the higher proportion infected was largely due to disease clusters among housekeepers and maintenance staff. These are jobs that are predominantly outsourced and there are very few workers in our institutions with comparable job descriptions.
In general, the risk of infection for cleaners and equivalent job roles, such as housekeepers, is higher than that of the general community due to the nature of their work, such as removing rubbish and cleaning contaminated bedsheets. In addition, there was spread among housekeepers and maintenance staff due to lapses in compliance to safe management measures in staff rest areas. MOH has since worked with institutions to ensure appropriate use of personal protective equipment and reinforce safe management measures within the rest areas for staff in the public healthcare institutions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Proportion of infected staff is calculated based on data from public acute hospitals only from 1 January 2020 to 30 December 2021.","2 : Refers to National University Hospital (NUH), Changi General Hospital (CGH), Khoo Teck Puat Hospital (KTPH) and Institute of Mental Health (IMH)."],"footNoteQuestions":["42"],"questionNo":"42"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Long-term Symptoms of COVID-19 and Available Financial Support","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"43 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Health whether vaccinated persons who are infected with COVID-19 and who still face long-term symptoms of COVID-19 or “Long COVID” will have their medical expenses covered by the Government and, if so, for how long.
44 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider implementing official guidance on best practices for diagnosing and treating patients facing long-term symptoms of COVID-19 or “Long COVID” and the available subsidies or support from specialised treatment centres for such patients.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: \"Long COVID\" is not a distinct medical condition or a formal diagnosis and refers to persons who have lingering symptoms of COVID-19 infection. Such patients with persisting symptoms would be assessed and monitored by their physicians and, where needed, referred for specialist care. We have also issued guidance on the approach to patients with persistent symptoms after recovering from COVID-19, as part of broader COVID-19 clinical management guidelines.
For vaccinated Singapore Citizens, Permanent Residents and Long-Term Pass Holders (SCs/PRs/LTPHs) who have recovered from acute COVID-19 infection, but continue to remain symptomatic, MOH provides coverage for follow-up Specialist Outpatient Clinic (SOC) visits for up to 90 days post-discharge, if the follow-up is required on public health grounds. In these visits, monitoring and/or retesting would be done to ensure that patients are no longer infectious. If other types of post-COVID-19 care is required, patients will continue to have access to the regular healthcare financing coverage, such as Government subsidies, MediShield Life and MediSave where applicable, to help pay for their bills. Should there be affordability issues, they may also be assisted by prevailing financial assistance schemes, such as the use of MediFund, if eligible.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Number of Seniors Aged 60 and Above who Passed Away Alone at Home in Past Five Years and Expected Trend","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"45 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Minister for Health (a) in the past five years, what is the annual number of seniors aged 60 years and above who passed away alone at home; (b) whether the number of such cases is expected to increase in the future; and (c) if so, how does the Ministry intend to address and mitigate this trend.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: In 2020, about 10% or 88,000 Singapore residents aged 60 and above lived alone1. We do not track the proportion who passed away alone at home.
The Government works with various stakeholders to ensure that seniors, especially those at risk of social isolation, are adequately supported to age in place. Since May 2021, MOH has been rolling out the Eldercare Centre (EC) service model, which provides seniors’ activity, befriending, care and other services for seniors. Befrienders proactively reach out to seniors who require social support through regular home visits and check-in calls.
To complement the efforts of the ECs, the Silver Generation Office (SGO) reaches out to seniors islandwide. Silver Generation Ambassadors (SGAs) conduct targeted outreach to seniors, including those who live alone or are frail. SGO will also refer seniors in need to Social Service Offices and Family Service Centres for care and support services.
These initiatives keep vulnerable seniors visible and connected within the community and ensure they receive help as needed. Building communities of care is a whole-of-society effort. We need community partners, Government agencies and fellow Singaporeans to work together so that our seniors can age well and leave well.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The data provided on residents aged 60 years and above living alone refer to one-person households. A one-person household would refer to a person living alone or a person living with others but having his own food or other essential arrangements for living."],"footNoteQuestions":["45"],"questionNo":"45"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on TraceTogether Usage for Contact Tracing and Entry into Public Spaces","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"46 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the extent to which contact tracing is still being conducted through TraceTogether; and (b) whether the use of TraceTogether, apart for proof of COVID-19 vaccinated status, is still necessary for entry into public spaces.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question for written answer has been addressed by my reply to Question No 105 on the Order Paper for 10 January 2022.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Current Capacities and Utilisation Rates of Long-term Care Services and Plans to Allocate More Resources to Nursing Homes due to Ageing Population","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"47 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Health (a) whether he can provide an update on the respective current capacities and utilisation rates of long-term care services, such as nursing homes, centre-based care and home-based care; and (b) whether the Ministry assesses the need for more resources to be allocated to nursing homes in particular, given the expected demand due to our ageing population.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: As at end-2020, there were approximately 16,300 nursing home beds, 8,200 day care places and 10,000 home care places. The utilisation rates for these long-term care services were about 90%, 52% and 57% respectively.
There is, currently, sufficient capacity for these long-term care services to support the needs of our population. We monitor capacity and utilisation rates regularly and adjust capacity plans accordingly to address changing care needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Projected Impact on Healthcare Sector in View of Survey Reporting Quarter of Workers Intending to Quit Their Jobs in First Half of 2022","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"48 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Health in view of the recent survey reporting that nearly a quarter of workers intend to quit their jobs in first half of 2022 (a) what is the projected impact for the healthcare sector; and (b) what are the plans to address this impact.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question for written answer has been addressed by my reply to Question Nos 33 to 35 on the Order Paper for 10 January 2022.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Children Aged 12 and Above who Remain Unvaccinated Against COVID-19","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"49 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) how many children in Singapore aged 12 and above remain unvaccinated from COVID-19, broken down by (i) age group, (ii) race, (iii) whether citizen, Permanent Resident or foreigner and (iv) employment status; and (b) of those who are still unvaccinated, how many are medically ineligible for vaccination, broken down by the same categories.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question for written answer has been addressed by oral reply to Question Nos 13 to 15 on the Order Paper for 10 January 2022.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Availability of Over-the-counter Therapeutic Drugs for COVID-19 Treatment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"50 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Health (a) whether HSA intends to make available any therapeutic drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 over the counter; and (b) if so, what are the drugs that are currently under evaluation for this purpose.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: A medicine could be made available over the counter without a doctor’s prescription if the ailment it treats can be self-diagnosed and the medicine is safe and appropriate for self-use without healthcare professional supervision.
All medicines presently authorised for the treatment of COVID-19 are Prescription-only Medicines to be used under medical supervision and monitoring. Most of these medicines need to be injected into patients. The oral medicines carry potential risks of serious side effects and interactions with other medicines. Hence, a medical assessment by a doctor is needed, first, to confirm the diagnosis of COVID-19, and to then weigh the benefits and risks of initiating a given medicine for the specific patient, taking into account any pre-existing medical conditions. This is to ensure that the treatment is safe and suitable for the patient and that the risks of any adverse effects are minimised.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trained Medical Personnel to Explain Nature of Polymerase Chain Reaction Cycle Threshold (CT) Values to COVID-19 Patients and Release CT values to Patients","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"51 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Health (a) whether medical personnel are trained to explain the nature of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) cycle threshold (CT) values to COVID‐19 patients; and (b) whether it is in the standard operating procedures not to release the CT values to the COVID‐19 patients when such values are conveniently available in the lab test reports.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question for written answer has been addressed by my reply to Question No 126 on the Order Paper for 10 January 2022.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress and Plans in Supporting Mental Health of Staff and Residents in Nursing Homes and Related Facilities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"52 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Health in light of the safe management measures and the higher stress from dealing with COVID-19, what is the Ministry’s progress and plans in supporting the mental health of staff and residents in nursing homes and other related facilities.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: MOH and the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) work closely with residential care homes, or Homes, such as nursing homes, to support the socioemotional well-being of their staff and residents during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
Providers regularly check in on their staff’s well-being and provide support to help them cope with stress as well as provide gestures of appreciation for their contributions. Peer support programmes and staff counselling services were also stepped up.
Providers also stepped up their use of technology to support their residents’ socioemotional needs, especially when face-to-face visits were suspended. For instance, providers helped residents to connect with their loved ones via video-conferencing on a regular basis. Residents also enjoy virtual activities, such as online programmes organised by partners, including National Heritage Board and Mandai Wildlife Reserves.
As part of the transition towards COVID-19 resilience, we have resumed face-to-face visits for fully vaccinated or medically ineligible residents and visitors and we are piloting recreational activities outside of the Homes in a safe manner. For example, in December 2021, approximately 110 seniors participated in trishaw rides around their neighbourhood, as part of a pilot with Cycling Without Age, Singapore. Small group activities for residents, including volunteer-led ones, have also resumed, subject to prevailing safe management measures.
We will continue to work closely with providers to monitor and introduce timely measures to enhance residents' and staff's well-being.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Ensure Companies Engage Licensed IT vendors to Minimise Risk of Data Breaches and Leaks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"53 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Communications and Information what measures are in place to ensure that companies which engage third- or fourth-party IT vendors select those that are licensed and certified by the Ministry so as to minimise the risk of data breaches and leaks.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) obliges all companies to protect the personal data they manage or process.
The Government has put in place trustmark certifications to help companies better identify IT vendors with strong data and cyber security practices. The Data Protection Trustmark (DPTM), overseen by the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA), recognises companies with sound policies and practices to protect the personal data they manage and use it responsibly. IMDA’s DPTM covers more than 66 million personal data records held by 76 companies. This includes over 16 million records held by 30 companies certified from the ICT sector. Additionally, the Cyber Security Agency will launch the SG Cyber Safe Trustmark later this year to recognise companies with sound cybersecurity practices.
While companies are not required to engage certified vendors, we strongly encourage it. To further aid companies, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) has issued guidelines to help them evaluate the data protection policies and practices of potential IT vendors, enabling companies to make more informed choices.
To enhance the security posture of companies and IT vendors, the Government has put in place measures, such as regular cybersecurity advisories via SingCERT, to help businesses mitigate cybersecurity risks expeditiously.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reasons for Disallowing Singles to Purchase Resale Flats under Prime Location Public Housing Model","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"54 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Minister for National Development what are the reasons for disallowing singles from purchasing resale flats under the Prime Location Public Housing model.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Prime Location Public Housing (PLH) model is designed with the objective of keeping public housing in prime locations affordable and inclusive for Singaporeans.
To keep PLH flat prices affordable for a wide range of Singaporeans, new PLH flats will be priced with additional subsidies, on top of the substantial subsidies already provided for BTO flats. Beyond the initial purchase, we also want to ensure that the prices of these flats remain within reach of Singaporeans when the PLH flats are sold subsequently on the open market.
Without policy intervention, resale prices for PLH flats would likely increase beyond the reach of many Singaporeans. We will, therefore, require buyers of a PLH flat on the resale market to meet the prevailing BTO eligibility criteria, to ensure affordability and accessibility over a longer period of time while managing the demand for the limited supply of PLH flats. Singaporeans are familiar with the means-tested conditions in our BTO eligibility criteria which cover a broad range of Singaporean households. Today, more than eight in 10 Singaporeans are eligible to buy a subsidised flat.
As the PLH model is a new model restricted to prime areas, there will not be many flats launched under this model in the initial phase and, therefore, it is necessary at present to set guidelines for priority. Applying the BTO eligibility criteria gives priority to Singaporean families, who may need more space because they have bigger households. This includes singles who can form a family unit with their parent(s), or single sibling(s) whose parents have passed on. These singles are eligible to buy a BTO flat from HDB and will, similarly, be able to buy a resale PLH flat in future.
The PLH model is very new. We will continue to review it over time to ensure it meets the needs of different population segments.
While our public housing policies support the marriage and parenthood aspirations of Singaporeans, we also recognise the housing needs and aspirations of singles who wish to have a place of their own. We have expanded the range of housing options available to singles over the years. Today, single Singapore Citizens aged 35 and above can buy resale flats of any size and in any location, including those in existing HDB estates within prime locations that are not launched under the PLH model. To put this in context, a large majority of the resale housing stock, or over a million flats, will be available for singles to purchase in about 15 years at the same time that the first batch of PLH flats reach the open market. First-timer singles also have the option of buying a new 2-room Flexi flat from HDB in the non-mature estates. Eligible first-timer singles can also qualify for the various housing grants to assist them in their flat purchase.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Feedback Received on Noise from 24-hour Gymnasium Located at Void Decks of HDB Blocks and Actions Taken","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"55 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for National Development (a) for 2020 and the first half of 2021, what is the number of feedback received by HDB on noise coming from gymnasiums located at void decks of HDB residential blocks and operating on a 24-hour basis; (b) whether HDB did conduct a survey or feasibility studies on having such entities operating at HDB void decks; and (c) what actions are being taken to mitigate this issue.
Mr Desmond Lee: There has been a growing demand for accessible fitness facilities in the heartlands as more residents are working from home and exercising for a healthier lifestyle. Currently, there are 46 gymnasiums operating in HDB commercial premises, of which 17 (or 0.1% of the total number of HDB shops) are located in blocks with flats above.
HDB shop owners or tenants who intend to operate a gymnasium are required to seek HDB’s prior approval. Operators are expected to minimise potential disamenities which may arise from gymnasium operations, for example, fully air-condition the premises and implement other measures, such as sound-proofing, to minimise vibration or noise nuisance.
Between January 2020 and June 2021, HDB received five complaints about noise nuisance from gymnasiums located in blocks with flats above. These complaints were isolated cases involving two gymnasium units. HDB has since engaged the gymnasiums to take active measures to address the noise nuisance, such as adjusting hours of operations and putting in place systems to monitor the noise level, and no further complaints have been received thus far. If HDB receives persistent feedback on nuisance from gymnasiums, HDB may revoke the approval for gymnasium operations. This approach allows us to strike a balance between maintaining a good living environment and providing residents with convenient access to facilities that they enjoy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Redevelop Former Bedok Town Secondary School and Min Xin Primary School Sites Along Bedok North Street 3","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"56 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for National Development whether there are redevelopment plans for the former Bedok Town Secondary School and Min Xin Primary School sites located along Bedok North Street 3.
Mr Desmond Lee: The former Min Xin Primary School and former Bedok Town Secondary School sites at Bedok North Street 3 are zoned Residential in the Master Plan 2019 and safeguarded for future residential developments. Government agencies are, currently, working on future plans for the site and will share more information with the public when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Three Most Frequently Visited Parks and Plans to Develop More Coastal Parks for Recreation and Gathering","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"57 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry has conducted surveys to determine which are the three most frequently visited parks and what are their respective attractions; and (b) whether there are plans to develop more coastal parks for recreation and gathering.
Mr Desmond Lee: NParks conducts a biennial Park Usage and Satisfaction Survey to understand park usage patterns and preferences. Based on the survey conducted in early 2021, park users indicated that they visited East Coast Park, Jurong Lake Gardens and Bukit Timah Nature Reserve most frequently. The naturalistic landscapes and overall ambience at these parks were cited as some of their most attractive features.
As part of our efforts to transform Singapore into a City in Nature, NParks is expanding our network of parks, including those situated along the coast. In the future, Singaporeans can look forward to more of such parks, such as Lim Chu Kang Nature Park, Mandai Mangrove and Mudflat Nature Park, and Khatib Bongsu Nature Park. These efforts will provide Singaporeans with greater access to spaces for sensitive, nature-based recreation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Projected Average Waiting Time for HDB BTO Projects and Measures to Reduce Waiting Time in View of Prolonged COVID-19 Situation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"58 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for National Development in light of the COVID-19 Omicron variant virus resulting in re-intensified border restrictions and supply disruptions (a) whether the Ministry can provide an update on the projected average waiting time for HDB BTO projects that are in progress or have yet to commence; and (b) whether the Ministry is able to go beyond existing measures to reduce the waiting time for new HDB flats should the COVID-19 situation prolong or worsen due to the Omicron variant.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Government is watching the progress of Build-to-Order (BTO) projects very closely and has leaned forward to ensure that projects are completed as planned or with as little delay as possible. In 2021, about 14,500 HDB flats were delivered. This number is more than a 50% increase over the 9,400 flats handed over in 2020 and higher than the 13,500 units delivered in pre-pandemic 2019.
The waiting times for BTO projects launched in the past two years have, generally, ranged from three to five years. This is similar to the waiting times for BTO projects launched in pre-COVID times. For ongoing projects, after factoring in delays due to COVID-19 of about six to 12 months beyond their original Estimated Completion Dates (ECDs), we expect that most flat buyers will be able to move into their new homes within four to five years after booking their flats, barring any further unforeseen circumstances.
For the upcoming BTO launch in February 2022, we expect the waiting times to range between 2.5 and 5.5 years.
We are monitoring the global COVID-19 pandemic closely, including the new Omicron variant, and have rolled out extensive assistance measures to minimise any potential disruption to BTO projects. To ensure an adequate supply of manpower, HDB has supported firms to recruit more workers from various countries in a safe and controlled manner. HDB has also leaned forward to co-share the increase in foreign manpower costs. This is in addition to the extensive Government support that has been provided to the construction sector, such as advance payments, sharing of prolongation costs, and foreign worker levy rebates.
The Government will continue to monitor the market situation and the global COVID-19 situation closely to ensure that the flat supply remains responsive to the housing needs of the population.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Market Value of Future BTO Flats from High Demand and Prices of HDB Resale Flats and Ensuring Affordability for All Singaporeans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"59 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the current high demand and prices for HDB resale flats will have a knock-on effect on the market value of future HDB BTO flats; and (b) if so, how can affordability be ensured for all Singaporeans.
Mr Desmond Lee: All new HDB flats are priced below the market. When pricing new flats, HDB first establishes their market value by considering the prices of comparable resale flats nearby as well as the individual attributes of the flats and prevailing market conditions. To derive the selling prices, HDB then applies a significant subsidy to the assessed market values to ensure that new flats are affordable to those buying their first home. In addition, eligible first-timer flat buyers can also enjoy the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG) of up to $80,000, which provides further support to lower- and middle-income families buying their first home. For resale flats, the Government provides housing grants of up to $160,000 to ensure resale flats remain affordable for eligible first-timer families.
With these generous subsidies and grants, both new and resale flats have remained affordable. Over the past three years, the mortgage servicing ratio (MSR), which is the proportion of monthly income used to service mortgage instalment payments, has remained at about 23% or below for both new and resale flat buyers taking an HDB housing loan, on average. This means that buyers, generally, require little or no cash outlay in servicing the payments for their flats as their mortgage loans can be paid using their CPF contributions.
To meet the demand for HDB flats, HDB has offered about 17,100 BTO flats in 2021. HDB will ramp up the flat supply by 35% over the next two years and launch up to 23,000 BTO flats per year in 2022 and 2023. Looking ahead, HDB is prepared to launch up to 100,000 flats in total from 2021 to 2025, if needed, subject to prevailing demand. The Government has also implemented a set of measures to cool the private and public housing markets on 16 December 2021, to ensure that homes remain affordable over time.
MND/HDB remain committed to keeping public housing affordable and accessible to support the homeownership aspirations of Singaporeans and will continue to monitor housing market conditions closely.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Land Parcels in Sengkang, Jalan Kayu and Punggol Reserved for HDB development and Potential Supply of Public Housing in These Areas","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"60 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there are land parcels in Sengkang, Jalan Kayu and Punggol that are reserved for HDB development; and (b) if so, what is the potential supply of public housing in these areas.
Mr Desmond Lee: HDB works closely with URA and other agencies to plan and review the land use in HDB towns. Sengkang and Punggol have been progressively developed since the 1990s. As at 31 March 2021, there are about 122,000 HDB flats that are completed in Sengkang (including Jalan Kayu) and Punggol.
Based on the gazetted Master Plan 2019, there are parcels of land zoned as \"residential\" within Sengkang and Punggol which have not been developed yet, such as parts of Sengkang Fernvale area and the western and eastern parts of Punggol. These parcels are safeguarded for future residential developments, which include private housing and community facilities.
Government agencies are reviewing the plans for these specific areas and will share more information when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plan to Build HDB flats at Seletar Next to Punggol","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"61 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development whether there is a plan to build HDB flats at Seletar next to Punggol.
Mr Desmond Lee: Based on the gazetted Master Plan 2019, the land at Seletar is predominantly used for Seletar Airport as well as various construction and industrial uses. It contains sites zoned \"Airport\", \"Reserve Site\", \"Business 2\", \"Utility\" and \"Commercial\".
While there are, currently, no parcels of land zoned \"Residential\" within Seletar, we regularly review our land-use plans to take into consideration evolving trends and changing needs of our population.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Outcome of Objections or Representations Submitted by Members of Public Regarding Bukit Brown in Draft Master Plan 2013","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"62 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether, pursuant to section 10(2b) of the Planning Act and Rule 6(1) of the Planning (Master Plan) Rules, objections or representations submitted by members of the public regarding Bukit Brown in the Draft Master Plan 2013 were ruled as frivolous; (b) if not, why was no hearing or public inquiry held before the gazetting of the 2014 Master Plan; and (c) whether such hearings can be made public.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Government regularly seeks and receives public feedback on development plans through various channels, including the exhibition process for amendments to the Master Plan. All feedback from the different channels is carefully studied and incorporated into our plans, where feasible.
This was also done in the case of Bukit Brown. Based on public feedback received after plans on Lornie Highway were announced, LTA revised the design to incorporate a viaduct for a section of the road at higher cost, so as to further mitigate the impact on the existing cemetery and natural environment. On feedback received during the exhibition period for the Draft Master Plan 2013, then-Minister for National Development Khaw Boon Wan had stated in response to a similar Parliamentary Question in July 2014 that we had considered all feedback received and, where feasible, these had been incorporated into our plans.
The Government has continued to take on board public feedback, including ways to commemorate the history and heritage of Bukit Brown. Since 2014, we have been working together with stakeholders from heritage groups on various projects, such as the documentation of Bukit Brown artefacts. NHB also, recently, supported a project by Singapore Heritage Society to produce 3D scans of unearthed artefacts.
We will continue to carefully review public feedback and partner stakeholders to shape our development plans to strike a careful balance between protecting our built and natural heritage and developing our city to meet the needs of current and future generations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Lower, Median and Upper Quartile Prices of New HDB Flats Before and After Subsidies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"63 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for National Development for each year in the past three years, what are the lower, median and upper quartile prices of new HDB flats before and after subsidies, with a breakdown by first-time and repeat buyers.
Mr Desmond Lee: All flat buyers enjoy a housing subsidy when they buy a new Build-to-Order (BTO) flat, as HDB applies a significant subsidy to the assessed market value of the flat and prices the flat below the market. In addition, eligible first-timers can enjoy the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG) of up to $80,000, which provides further support to lower- and middle-income families buying their first home.
The prices of new HDB flats have remained relatively stable over the past three years. Between 2019 and 2021, the prices of new HDB flats bought by first-timer Singaporean families are tabulated below.
The flat purchase price remains the same whether buyers are first- or second-timer families. However, to prioritise housing grants and subsidies for first-timer families and to ensure a fair allocation of limited fiscal resources, second-timers pay a resale levy which reduces the total amount of subsidy that they enjoy when they purchase a second subsidised flat.
The Government will continue to monitor the housing market conditions closely and ensure that Singaporeans have access to affordable public housing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Lower, Median and Upper Quartile Prices of Resale HDB Flats Before and After Subsidies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"64 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for National Development for each year in the past three years, what are the lower, median and upper quartile prices of resale HDB flats before and after subsidies, with a breakdown by first-time and repeat buyers.
Mr Desmond Lee: HDB resale flats are transacted at prices mutually agreed upon between flat sellers and buyers. Eligible first-timer families who buy a resale flat can enjoy up to $160,000 in housing grants, comprising a CPF Housing Grant of up to $50,000, an Enhanced CPF Housing Grant of up to $80,000 and a Proximity Housing Grant (PHG) of up to $30,000.
Between 2019 and 2021, the prices of resale HDB flats bought by Singaporean first-timer families are tabulated below.
While second-timer families do not receive the CPF Housing Grant and Enhanced CPF Housing Grant, they may be eligible to enjoy a PHG of up to $30,000 and/or a Step-Up CPF Housing Grant of $15,000.
The Government will continue to monitor the housing market conditions closely and ensure that Singaporeans have access to affordable public housing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of First-time HDB Home Buyers by New and Resale Flats in Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"65 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for National Development for each year in the past three years, how many first-time HDB home buyers bought (i) new flats and (ii) resale flats, respectively.
Mr Desmond Lee: The number of first-timer families who bought new and resale flats in the past three years is tabulated below.
66 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for National Development (a) for each year in the past three years, how many HDB housing loan applications have been unsuccessful; (b) what are the reasons they have been unsuccessful; and (c) what is the breakdown of the number of these unsuccessful applications by the different reasons.
Mr Desmond Lee: From 2019 to 2021, HDB received about 61,000 applications on average each year for an HDB Loan Eligibility Letter. Of these applications, an average of about 4,600, or 7.5% of all applications, were unsuccessful each year.
About half of the applications were unsuccessful as the applicants were unable to fulfil HDB’s credit assessment criteria. For instance, applicants may not have met the minimum employment period. The remaining applications were unsuccessful either because the applicants were ineligible for an HDB housing loan or ineligible to purchase an HDB flat. For instance, they may have already taken two HDB housing loans or their household income may have exceeded the income ceiling.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on SolarNova Programme and Plans to Install Solar Photovoltaic Panels on All HDB Block Rooftops","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"67 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether HDB intends to install solar photovoltaic (PV) panels on all HDB block rooftops, where feasible; (b) of the towns where the SolarNova programme has been rolled out, what percentage of HDB rooftops have solar PV panels installed; and (c) to what extent has the SolarNova programme mitigated the recent spikes in electricity prices.
Mr Desmond Lee: HDB strives to install solar panels on as many HDB blocks as possible, subject to factors, such as the availability of roof space and whether the roofs are free from any shading effects. To date, HDB has called or awarded tenders for a total solar capacity of about 330 megawatt-peak (MWp), covering about 7,000 HDB blocks, and installation has been completed on around 2,700 of these blocks, or close to 40% of the total number of committed blocks. Solar panels for the remaining HDB blocks will be progressively installed in batches over the next two to three years.
HDB will continue to call more tenders for the installation of solar panels on HDB rooftops across Singapore in the coming years, as well as employ higher efficiency panels to optimise the use of HDB rooftop space.
Solar energy generated is first used to power common services in HDB estates, such as lifts and lights. Any excess solar energy will be channelled to the grid. Town Councils managing these HDB blocks will enter into a service agreement with the solar vendor to pay for the solar energy consumed, at a preferential rate not higher than the retail electricity tariff rate. This may help the Town Councils in mitigating the rising cost of energy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Development Plan for Open Land between Tampines Expressway, Loyang Avenue and Blocks 143 and 149 of Pasir Ris Street 11","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"68 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for National Development what is the development plan for the open land between Tampines Expressway, Loyang Avenue and Blocks 143 and 149 of Pasir Ris Street 11.
Mr Desmond Lee: The site bounded by Tampines Expressway, Loyang Avenue and Blocks 143 and 149 of Pasir Ris Street 11 is zoned Residential in the Master Plan 2019 and safeguarded for future residential developments. Government agencies are currently working on future plans for the site and will share more information with the public when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regulation of Unregistered Non-profit or Charitable Ground-up Community Groups to Protect Donors and Beneficiaries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"69 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether the Ministry monitors ground-up community groups with initiatives positioned as having non-profit or charitable objectives but which are not officially registered as such; and (b) if so, how does the Ministry ensure that such groups are sufficiently regulated to protect the interests of donors and beneficiaries of such groups.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Community groups play a crucial role in society. Ranging from small, informal groups of volunteers, to larger, registered entities that are professionally managed, community groups respond to social needs in the community and have the potential to build bridges and unite people through their work. We are heartened to see society coming together and initiating projects to serve the community. This kampung spirit is commendable and should be encouraged.
The ground-up community groups that Mr Sitoh Yih Pin mentioned are usually informal, small in scale and run by volunteers. MCCY has worked with many such groups to support their efforts through funding and other resources. As they and their efforts grow in scale, we encourage organisations to do more to maintain accountability and put in place stronger governance structures to ensure that their activities and resources continue to be well-managed, to deliver sustained impact. This includes seeking registration with the appropriate authorities and subjecting themselves to the regulatory regime which promotes transparency and strong governance.
The Commissioner of Charities (COC)’s Office plays an important role in upholding trust between charities and the public, and the regulation of the charity sector serves to promote a well-governed sector which has the trust and confidence of the public. Organisations that are set up for exclusively charitable purposes are required to be registered under the Charities Act. The COC’s Office registers charities only when the applicants are able to meet registration requirements, such as having objects which are exclusively charitable. Applicants that lack substantive activities and do not demonstrate their ability to exercise proper control and management of the organisation will be rejected.
In supporting charitable efforts, including ground-up community groups serving charitable objectives, collaborators, donors and funders should be discerning and check for registration details. If the organisation appears to be a charitable one, members of the public can check for the organisation’s information on the Charity Portal. Donors and members of the public are advised to practise caution when working with or donating to unregistered organisations.
Aside from registration, charitable fundraising is similarly regulated. Anyone, including businesses, organisations and individuals, conducting fundraising appeals in Singapore for charitable, benevolent or philanthropic purposes are regulated by COC under the Charities (Fund-raising Appeals for Local and Foreign Charitable Purposes) Regulations 2012. This includes fundraising appeals for in-kind donations. The Regulations spell out the duties and obligations of fundraisers, which include disclosure of clear and accurate information; proper management and usage of donations; as well as keeping accounting records of donations received and disbursed.
If there is reason to believe that a fund-raiser has violated any of the fundraising regulations, the COC’s Office will look into the matter. Where there is misconduct in any fundraising appeal, COC can act to protect donors by invoking his powers to suspend, restrict or prohibit the conduct of the appeal.
The COC’s Office adopts a risk-based regulatory approach to ensure good stewardship and public accountability while not stifling the growth of philanthropic acts. We want to encourage a democracy of deeds where Singaporeans can actively participate in building a caring and cohesive society. To retain public confidence in the sector, organisations should also do their part in ensuring that their operations are well-run and remain accountable to their donors and beneficiaries while delivering their charitable purposes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts to Mitigate Possible Long-term Socioeconomic Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic Resulting in Widespread Insecurity and Anxiety among Youths","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"70 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth in light of the possible long-term negative socioeconomic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in widespread insecurity and anxiety among youths around the world (a) what are the lessons learnt from past crises that can be applied to our youths in today’s context; and (b) how is the Ministry preparing to mitigate the possible long-term negative outcomes stemming from our current generation of youths who may be more cynical and cautious.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Our youths have faced multiple challenges and stressors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Concerns over future uncertainty, job security and COVID-19’s impact on their financial resources have contributed to insecurity and anxiety among some youths.
We are supporting our youths during this trying period. On the job front, we have rolled out a range of job, training and skills upgrading initiatives to help our youths stay confident about their future.
Youths can take up a range of job and training opportunities under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package (SGUJS). An additional $5.4 billion was set aside in 2021 to support the hiring of 200,000 locals through the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) and provide 35,000 traineeships, attachments and training opportunities this year for jobseekers to pick up industry-relevant skills that can ensure their employability. For graduates who may not be able to secure a job straightaway, the SGUnited Traineeships provide them with traineeship opportunities hosted by companies. These traineeship opportunities provide them with valuable industry-relevant experience and help them to build up their skillsets and networks while receiving an allowance.
NYC’s complementary YouthTech Programme and Youth Corps Internship Scheme provide youths with a greater diversity of traineeship and internship opportunities in the social and community sectors. As of October 2021, over 800 youths had benefited from both these programmes.
Graduates of the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) from the Class of 2020 and 2021 also benefited from the free Continuing Education and Training courses offered by their alma maters, the IHLs’ virtual career fairs and enhanced career guidance services and job placement support.
Fresh graduates facing difficulties in their job searches can refer to the Career Starter Programme by Workforce Singapore, which provides tailored career resources and personalised career coaching.
Beyond the initial stages of education, youths can continue upgrading their skills through initiatives supported by SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG). They can use their SkillsFuture Credit and tap the SkillsFuture Work-Study Programmes (WSPs) at various levels, that is, certificate, diploma, post-diploma and degree programmes, to acquire work-relevant skills and help them transition into the workforce. MOE and SSG will scale up WSPs as a mainstream pathway and aim to make these programmes available to 12% of each age cohort by 2025.
Youths with entrepreneurial aspirations can also take advantage of Enterprise Singapore’s (ESG) Startup SG. This unifies efforts to support our vibrant startup ecosystem. Youths can benefit from programmes, such as Startup SG Founder, which provides mentorship and seed capital for first-time entrepreneurs. ESG also has an extensive network of Accredited Mentor Partners (AMP) to provide budding entrepreneurs with mentorship, learning programmes, networking contacts and potential funding.
We are also working closely with our youths to safeguard and enhance their mental health and well-being, which have taken a toll during the pandemic. The Government, schools and healthcare institutions provide services, and partner community organisations have come together to roll out initiatives to strengthen our youths’ mental well-being and resilience, so they can thrive in this challenging environment and beyond.
To better coordinate these efforts, the Interagency Taskforce on Mental Health and Well-being, chaired by Dr Janil Puthucheary, Senior Minister of State for Health, is developing a national strategy and action plan on mental health and well-being. This includes measures to strengthen support for youths.
Past crises, like SARS, showed that we need to build a strong social compact to weather such national challenges. To this end, the Government has been working with our youths and citizens to strengthen their commitment to our society, community and nation. As such, in spite of the COVID-19 pandemic, our youths have demonstrated passion, drive and proactiveness in supporting others.
Through our Youth Corps Singapore (YCS), our youth volunteers have supported food charities, such as Willing Hearts, with food packing and meal service to vulnerable communities. YCS volunteers also helped with TOUCH Community Services’ Meals-on-Wheels programme, delivering lunch and dinner meals to home-bound seniors living alone. Our SG Cares Volunteer Centres have also been working closely with our partners in the SG Cares Community Networks to channel support towards community mental wellness initiatives in the respective towns.
Our youths have also initiated their own ground-up movements to support vulnerable groups in the community. For example, when schools transitioned to home-based learning, not all students had a laptop or Wi-Fi at home. ReadAble, a youth volunteer group that runs weekly reading classes for children living in Jalan Kukoh, sourced for donated laptops to needy families from their own networks.
Our youths are our future. And our Government is committed to supporting them and helping them thrive during this pandemic and beyond.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Redemption of Community Development Council Vouchers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"71 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth since the launch of the Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers scheme on 13 December 2021 (a) how many Singaporean households have claimed their $100 CDC vouchers; (b) what is the total value redeemed; (c) how many Singaporean households requested for their CDC vouchers to be printed; and (d) how is the Government reaching out to households that have not claimed their vouchers, especially residents who are not technologically savvy.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The five Community Development Councils (CDCs) launched the $130 million CDC Vouchers Scheme on 13 December 2021 to thank Singaporeans for their sense of solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic and to support hawkers and heartland merchants affected by the pandemic. Up to 1.3 million Singaporean households will each receive $100 in CDC vouchers which can be spent at the participating hawkers and heartland merchants. This Scheme is part of the $900 million Household Support Package announced in Budget 2021.
We are heartened by the keen response from Singaporean households who have claimed their CDC vouchers thus far. Within one month of the launch of the scheme, more than three-quarters of the 1.3 million Singaporean households have successfully claimed their vouchers and over $28 million worth of vouchers have been spent. This speedy response was also possible because of the use of the digital platform for claims and spending. Feedback from merchants indicates that the CDC vouchers have boosted their businesses significantly.
To ensure all Singaporean households can enjoy the benefits of the CDC Vouchers Scheme, help is readily available at Community Centres/Clubs (CCs). Seniors without family members to help them claim their CDC vouchers, residents without smartphones or those who are digitally less savvy, may go to their nearest Community Centre/Club (CC) for assistance to claim the digital vouchers and/or request for the CDC vouchers to be printed.
Besides the CCs, assistance to guide residents in claiming the CDC vouchers is also available at selected Residents’ Committee (RC)/Residents’ Network (RN) Centres located in areas with a higher concentration of elderly persons. In addition, Digital Ambassadors at the SG Digital community hubs found in selected CCs and public libraries island-wide are at hand to assist residents in this area.
Further, our grassroots volunteers who reach out to residents and seniors in their ongoing community engagement efforts are also able to offer assistance. The Silver Generation Ambassadors will guide seniors in claiming the vouchers or direct them to the nearest CCs for help. To reach out to as many Singaporean households as possible, we are continuing to publicise the CDC Vouchers Scheme on digital display panels at HDB lift landings, newspaper print ads and the CDCs’ social media channels.
To encourage and make it easier for Singaporean households to spend their vouchers, the five CDCs recently launched the CDC Vouchers Merchants Go Where online search function on 23 December 2021 in partnership with Government Technology Agency (GovTech). With this, Singaporeans can now easily find the CDC Voucher Scheme participating hawkers and heartland merchants nearest to them. This complements our other efforts to identify these participating outlets with the use of decals and displaying banners in areas where clusters of participating businesses are located, as well as tapping on social media channels. The CDC Vouchers Merchants Go Where listing is also updated regularly.
Since its launch, feedback from residents and participating hawkers and heartland merchants on the CDC Voucher Scheme has been positive. Residents have benefited from the ease and convenience of claiming and spending their digital vouchers and merchants have welcomed the seamless and responsive digital interface for sales.
We wish to thank all Singaporeans for their support and participation in the CDC Vouchers Scheme.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Median Income of Visual and Performing Artistes in 2019, 2020 and 2021 and Efforts to Further Develop Local Arts Industry","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"72 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what is the median income of a visual and performing artiste in 2019, 2020 and 2021; (b) what is the outlook for the arts scene in 2022; and (c) what are the efforts undertaken to further develop the local arts industry.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: According to the latest data from MOM, the median monthly income of workers in the arts, entertainment and recreation sector was between $3,800 and $4,100 from 2018 to 20201. Data for 2021 will be released by MOM once available.
Our arts community has shown resilience, creativity and innovation in their response to the challenges brought about by COVID-19, presenting their works and engaging audiences in novel and interesting ways. Through the $75 million Arts and Culture Resilience Package (ACRP), MCCY and the National Arts Council (NAC) have worked with our arts practitioners and organisations to safeguard livelihoods, retain capabilities and develop new ones. Many Singaporeans were able to continue to enjoy and experience arts events despite the pandemic.
The outlook for the arts scene in 2022 is a cautiously optimistic one. We hope to see the arts sector lock in the gains made over the last two years. These include reaching new digital audiences, creating new arts experiences and business solutions and building capabilities to accelerate the adoption of technology, especially with the growth of audience demand online. Based on NAC’s COVID-19 Arts Consumption Survey (2020-2021), about eight in 10 digital arts consumers responded that they would continue online consumption after the pandemic. MCCY and NAC will continue to work closely with arts practitioners and organisations to transform the way they work and to resume a wider variety of arts activities – both digital and in-person – as we grow more resilient against COVID-19. We look forward to renewed vibrancy in our arts, with enhanced offerings for all Singaporeans as we move into 2022.
MCCY and NAC will continue to develop the arts sector in partnership with the community, as well as the public and private sectors. Key areas of focus include:
(a) Growing audience development and engagement efforts through signature arts events and touchpoints in the neighbourhoods. NAC Arts and Culture Nodes, together with community partners, will bring year-round arts experiences to Singaporeans across the island.
(b) Developing diverse capabilities of arts workers, including the self-employed, with an emphasis on digital competency.
(c) Creating spaces for experimentation, innovation and incubation of works that connect with audiences. For example, NAC is partnering the Singapore Land Authority to set up pilot arts sandboxes in Kampong Java.
(d) Boosting long-term sustainability of the arts sector and strengthening private giving to the arts, such as through the Sustain the Arts (stART) Fund launched by NAC in January 2021 and the Cultural Matching Fund.
NAC has been consulting broadly for the next iteration of Our SG Arts Plan and will be hosting public engagement sessions over the next few months. These engagement sessions will gather views and test ideas for the future development of the arts in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Source: 2018-2020, Comprehensive Labour Force Survey, Manpower Research & Statistics Department, MOM"],"footNoteQuestions":["72"],"questionNo":"72"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Workers Dropping Out of Re-employment or Retired Before Reaching Maximum Statutory Re-employment Age","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"73 Mr Abdul Samad asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to eligible workers who were offered and had accepted re-employment after reaching the statutory minimum retirement age in the past five years (a) how many of these workers had dropped out of re-employment and had to retire early before reaching the maximum statutory re-employment age; and (b) how long will their CPF retirement savings last, compared to their average life expectancy.
Dr Tan See Leng: Well over 90% of resident employees1 who wished to continue working were offered and had accepted re-employment at age 62. This percentage is consistently over 90% for residents reaching each of the subsequent re-employment ages as well.
With respect to how long CPF savings can last, all members, regardless of their employment status, can benefit from CPF LIFE which provides them with monthly payouts, no matter how long they live. Members are automatically included in CPF LIFE if they meet certain criteria. Members who are not automatically included can opt into CPF LIFE. For those with low incomes during their working years and now have less in their retirement, the Government provides quarterly cash supplements under the Silver Support Scheme.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Refers to eligible private sector resident employees."],"footNoteQuestions":["73"],"questionNo":"73"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Annual Leave Taken by Caregivers in Public Sector for Eldercare from 2015 to 2020 and Survey on Need for Eldercare Leave","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"74 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the average number of days of annual leave that is taken by married and single caregivers in the public sector for eldercare from 2015 to 2020; (b) whether any survey has been conducted on the need for eldercare leave on top of flexible work arrangements amongst working caregivers; and (c) if so, what are the comparative results of this survey against findings from any other earlier surveys.
Dr Tan See Leng: Civil servants are not required to declare reasons for their utilisation of annual leave. To further support officers’ eldercare needs, if any, civil servants are entitled to two days of Parent Care Leave in addition to their annual leave provisions. Between 2015 and 2020, close to half of civil servants utilised Parent Care Leave. Amongst them, the average utilisation per officer was 1.5 to two days per year. Utilisation was broadly similar across married and single officers.
MOM does not have survey data on the need for eldercare leave on top of flexible work arrangements (FWAs) amongst working caregivers. Nevertheless, in focus group discussions conducted by MOH in 2018, working caregivers provided feedback that they preferred FWAs to leave provisions, as FWAs provided them greater flexibility and sustainability in meeting their caregiving needs.
As such, the tripartite partners have been stepping up efforts to increase access to FWAs. From 2014 to 2019, the proportion of employers who offered at least one formal FWA on a regular and sustained basis rose from 47% to 53%. As employers and workers adapt to the pandemic, the proportion of employers who did so in 2020 further increased to close to eight in 10, and we expect many employers will continue to do so as FWAs become a more accepted way of working.1
We will continue to review and enhance our efforts to entrench and strengthen the practice of FWAs to help employees, including caregivers of the elderly, manage both their work and caregiving responsibilities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Source: Conditions of Employment Survey and Supplementary Survey on Quality Workplaces, Manpower Research and Statistics Department, MOM"],"footNoteQuestions":["74"],"questionNo":"74"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Long-term Effects of Expectations of Work Availability and Longer Working Hours on Mental Well-being of Employees on Work-from-home Arrangements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"75 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry has data on whether employees on work-from-home arrangements have been affected by expectations of work availability and longer working hours; (b) if so, what are the long-term effects on the mental well-being of employees; and (c) whether the Ministry has any plans to address this issue.
Dr Tan See Leng: Work-from-home (WFH) arrangements have become widespread given the pandemic. WFH is a form of flexible work arrangement (FWA) which can support employees to better manage their work and personal responsibilities, but there are, indeed, possible downsides which need to be managed. Based on qualitative data, these include concerns about longer hours and burnout due to blurring of work-life boundaries.
MOM and the tripartite partners have taken steps to address the potential impact of WFH on employees’ mental well-being. The Tripartite Advisory on Mental Well-being was introduced in 2020, and one of the key recommendations within was for employers to set reasonable expectations of after-hours work communications, such as not requiring employees to respond to non-urgent work-related messages and emails after-hours. MOM also encourages employers to make use of iWorkHealth, a free online psychosocial health assessment tool launched in 2021 for employers to regularly assess their employees’ mental well-being and identify common stressors. Employers who put in place recommended work-life support to enable employees to better balance their work and personal commitments are recognised through the Tripartite Standard on Work-Life Harmony.
The tripartite partners have also formed the Alliance for Action on Work-Life Harmony to develop tools and resources to help employers improve work-life harmony for their employees and we are sustaining this momentum by growing and equipping a community of Work-Life Ambassadors who will continue to support these efforts at their workplaces.
MOM encourages employers to continue to sustain the provision of FWAs post-pandemic, while ensuring employees’ well-being and work productivity are not compromised. We also urge employees to proactively communicate with employers on expectations while on FWAs, take ownership of their well-being and seek help if required.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Gross Monthly Income of Full-Time Employed Residents for Each Decile for Past 30 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"76 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry can provide data on the gross monthly income from work of full-time employed residents for each decile, as an annual time series, for the past 30 years.
Dr Tan See Leng: MOM publishes the gross monthly income from work of full-time employed residents in June at the 20th and 50th percentile on an annual basis. This allows us to track whether the incomes of lower-wage workers are keeping pace with the median income growth.
In addition, we also publish annual data on the number of full-time employed residents by gross monthly income bands, from below $500 to $20,000 and over. This provides a more granular distribution of full-time employed residents across finer income bands.
The time series for both datasets from 1996 to 2020 is available on the MOM website. In the Labour Force in Singapore 2020 report, this is in Table 19, Table 27 and Chart 40.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Workplace Grievances and Discrimination because of Increased Family Responsibilities and Caregiving Duties in Last Two Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"77 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether there is data on the number of cases in which employees have made reports of workplace grievances and discrimination because of their increased family responsibilities and caregiving duties during the pandemic for the last two years; and (b) if so, how many of them are women.
Dr Tan See Leng: Between 2020 and 2021, the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices received an annual average of about 14 reports relating to discrimination due to marital status and family responsibilities. This is similar to that received between 2017 and 2019. Of the reports received in the last two years, about 80% were reported by women, lower than 95% between 2017 and 2019.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Profile of Employees Still Unvaccinated against COVID-19","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"78 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to the estimated 52,000 employees in Singapore who are still unvaccinated against COVID-19 (a) what is the breakdown by (i) age group and (ii) job type; and (b) whether there is any estimate on how many of these employees are pregnant women.
Dr Tan See Leng: As of 2 January 2022, there were about 48,000 employees who had not taken any vaccine dose. The breakdown of such employees by age group is provided in Table 1 below. MOM does not have the breakdown by job type.
MOM does not have data on the number of unvaccinated employees who are pregnant. MOH has issued clear public health advice, strongly encouraging pregnant employees to be vaccinated as soon as possible because delaying vaccination puts them at higher risks of complications should they contract COVID-19. Pregnant employees who have concerns over vaccination should consult their obstetricians to discuss benefits and risks.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Raise Awareness and Capture Female Talent Pool to Augment Workforce and Challenges Faced","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"79 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry has ongoing plans to raise awareness and capture female talent pool to augment the workforce; and (b) what are some of the challenges faced in the process of doing so.
Dr Tan See Leng: With an ageing and plateauing population, it is important that we enable all residents to participate in the workforce.
Women tend to still shoulder a heavier share of domestic responsibilities, even though men are starting to do more. To help more women join the workforce, we must support both men and women in managing their work and caregiving responsibilities and enable a more even sharing of the caregiving load. As such, we encourage employers to adopt flexible work arrangements (FWAs) and other work-life harmony practices and recognise those who do so through the Tripartite Standards on (a) FWAs, (b) Work-Life Harmony as well as (c) Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs. We also launched the Alliance for Action on Work-Life Harmony last year, bringing together like-minded employers, union leaders and HR practitioners to develop tools and best practices to support better work-life harmony. Nearly eight in 10 employers provide at least one form of formal FWAs in 20201.
In addition, the Government is committed to enhancing the accessibility, affordability and quality of preschool, so that parents with young children can go to work with peace of mind. By around 2025, 80% of preschoolers will have a place in a Government-supported preschool. Over the medium term, the Government aims to lower fee caps for full-day childcare at Government-supported preschools so that working families will pay around the equivalent of Primary school fees plus after-school care fees, before means-tested preschool subsidies.
Women looking for support to return to the workforce can tap on Workforce Singapore’s (WSG) employment facilitation programmes and services as well as SkillsFuture Singapore’s training courses. Different programmes are available to address different needs. For example, the Career Trial allows the jobseeker and prospective employer to try each other out for a period of time, with an allowance paid by the Government, to assess job-fit. Career Conversion Programmes provide generous training and salary support for employers to hire mid-career locals who require some skills top-up. Jobseekers can approach WSG or NTUC’s Employment and Employability Institute for advice and assistance.
Through the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP), we also ensure that employers recruit and promote employees and jobseekers based on merit, regardless of irrelevant attributes, such as gender, marital status or family responsibilities. The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness is, currently, deliberating how the requirements in TGFEP can be enshrined in law to strengthen protection against discriminatory employment practices.
Our community partners and the business community have also introduced various initiatives to provide mentorship, networking and training opportunities to nurture women talent in various fields. Some examples include the NTUC Women Supporting Women Mentorship Programme, NTU’s Promotion of Women in Engineering, Research and Science programme and Dell’s Diversity Leadership Accelerator Programme.
Enabling women to participate in the workforce and realise their fullest potential requires a whole-of-society effort. As a result of our joint efforts with stakeholders and partners, our female employment rate2 has steadily increased over the past decade from 66.1% in 2010 to 73.2% in 2020. MOM will continue to work hand in hand with our tripartite partners and other stakeholders to support more women to participate in the workforce in their careers of choice.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Source: Conditions of Employment Survey, Manpower Research and Statistics Department, MOM. Formal FWAs are sustained, regular arrangements that include part-time work, flexi-time/staggered hours, formal tele-working, homeworking, job sharing and compressed work-week.","2 : Aged 25 to 64"],"footNoteQuestions":["79"],"questionNo":"79"}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[{"annexureID":2048,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex 1","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220110/annex-Annex 1.pdf","fileName":"Annex 1.pdf","sectionType":"OA","file":null}],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":5141,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ang Wei Neng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220110/vernacular-Ang Wei Neng Women Charter 10Jan2022.pdf","fileName":"Ang Wei Neng Women Charter 10Jan2022.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5142,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Yeo Wan Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220110/vernacular-Yeo Wan Ling Women Charter 10Jan2022 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Yeo Wan Ling Women Charter 10Jan2022 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5143,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220110/vernacular-10 Jan 2022 - Mr Zhul Rahim - Women's Charter.pdf","fileName":"10 Jan 2022 - Mr Zhul Rahim - Women's Charter.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5144,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Joan Pereira","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220110/vernacular-Joan Pereira Women Charter 10Jan2022 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Joan Pereira Women Charter 10Jan2022 -Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}