1 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry keeps track of the number of employees with remote working arrangements and the number of hours spent working remotely in the past year; (b) whether work-from-home (WFH) will become a permanent feature even as COVID-19 restrictions are relaxed; and (c) whether the Ministry will look into introducing new legislation to improve the welfare of WFH employees including barring employers from contacting employees about non-critical work matters outside of their contracted working hours.
2 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower as companies are encouraged to operate in a hybrid operating model to boost business resilience (a) how will the Ministry support employers to help their employees transit towards this model; and (b) how will the Government encourage organisational dexterity in local companies so that work projects based overseas can be managed remotely from Singapore.
3 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower whether, beyond the Tripartite Standards or Tripartite Guidelines, the Ministry intends to retain existing work-from-home legislation and make the right to work from home the new normal.
\tThe Minister of State for Manpower (Ms Gan Siow Huang) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer the first three Parliamentary Questions (PQs) filed by Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Louis Ng together?
\t\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMs Gan Siow Huang: COVID-19 has catalysed a transformation of workplace practices. Businesses have adapted well and successfully implemented work-from-home arrangements. SMEs can also tap on Government grants, such as the Productivity Solution Grant, to adopt suitable cloud-based digital solutions that can enable productive remote work arrangements for their employees.
In 2020, three in four employees worked in firms that provided some form of remote working. The number of hours spent on remote work would vary depending on businesses' and workers' needs and the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) does not track this.
We expect work-from-home arrangements to become a more mainstream option. Majority of employers said that they would allow their workers to continue to work-from-home for at least a quarter of the time. We should not rush into hasty legislation that unintentionally creates workplace rigidity that may impede our economic recovery at this time.
Our approach for workplace flexibility should be inclusive and not just about working from home. The 2019 Citizens' Panel on Work-Life Harmony highlighted the diverse needs of various sectors and jobs, such as the needs of frontline workers differing significantly from that of office workers. For example, work-from-home is not practical for work that most frontline workers perform. It is therefore critical that a holistic approach be taken to enable more workers' access to appropriate workplace flexibilities, be it flexi-load, flexi-time or flexi-place.
To this end, the tripartite partners have been reaching out to employers and unions to promote the Tripartite Standard on Flexible Work Arrangements. We had also formed the Alliance for Action (AfA) on Work-Life Harmony last year, involving community stakeholders such as employers, employees and HR professionals. The AfA created three Communities of Practice for the food services, manufacturing and finance sectors respectively, to exchange best practices and develop implementation resources that were suited to companies’ sectoral needs. For example, Communities of Practice panellists shared how staggered hours could still be offered to onsite production staff who required them to flexibly manage their personal responsibilities, such as childcare. The HR profession through the Institute of Human Resource Professionals also came together to develop the Playbook on Hybrid Workplaces. We are continuing this ground-up effort by growing a community of Work-Life Ambassadors to champion and support these efforts at their workplaces.
Even as work-from-home arrangements stabilise, we are mindful of the risks from blurred work-life boundaries. The Tripartite Advisory on Mental Well-being was introduced in 2020 and one of the key recommendations 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 certain hours. The AfA on Work-Life Harmony also developed an after-hours communications policy template to make it easier for companies to establish and communicate progressive after-hours communications practices.
The Government will continue to work with tripartite partners to expand the provision of flexible work arrangements in a sustainable manner.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir and I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Could I have two clarifications?
One, I am not asking for 100% compulsory work-from-home, but to legislate the right to work from home and also to give employers the right to reject for work-related reasons. So, for example, if there is a face-to-face meeting that day, then the employee would not be allowed to work from home.
Two, I do agree with the Minister of State. We should not jump into legislating things, but the fact is that we have been debating this right to work from home for quite a number of years in the House now, even in the pre-COVID-19 days. COVID-19 has shown that work-from-home is possible, so I am just wondering what is stopping MOM from legislating this right to work from home.
\tMs Gan Siow Huang: I thank the hon Member Mr Louis Ng for that question, a very thoughtful one. The number of workers with access to flexible work arrangements has increased steadily over the years. From 2014 to 2019, the proportion of employers who offered at least one formal flexible work arrangement on a regular and sustained basis, rose from 47% to 53%. During the pandemic crisis, work-from-home as a form of flexible work arrangement has also become more common.
The Member asked why do we not legislate the right to request for work-from-home. While the economy is showing signs of recovery and more employers and employees are more comfortable and used to the arrangement of work-from-home, there remain uncertainties. As we look at other countries that have introduced legislation to allow employees to request to work from home, it is uncertain as in the outcomes are rather mixed on whether legislation makes a substantial improvement in the work-life and the flexibility that employees have. After all, like the hon Member said, employers will also have the right to reject the request for work-from-home.
I think we have to take a practical approach towards this. I fully agree with the hon Member Louis Ng that legislation may not be the best solution. In fact, what I think we should focus is on enabling employers and employees with resources and with guides to help them implement work-from-home and flexible work arrangements in a practical and sustained manner.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): I thank the Minister of State for her reply. I have a similar supplementary question. I note that the Ministry does not want to impose rigidity in workplace arrangements. Can I ask what are the plans for the Ministry to enhance or update existing legislation like the Employment Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Work Injury Compensation Act and so on, to cover work-from-home situations and essentially, to cover the home as a workplace?
\tMs Gan Siow Huang: The Employment Act covers basic terms of employment such as timely payment of salary and leave benefits. The protections offered under the Employment Act are not location specific. So, whether an individual is working from home or working in the office or working in the factory, the Employment Act covers them.
As for workplace safety and health, as some Members might remember, last year, the WSH Council issued a bulletin to inform employers about risk assessment for work-from-home. There is a checklist that helps employers as well as employees identify hazards when they are working from home.
On the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA), we have also similarly clarified that regardless of whether an individual is working from home or working at the office or at the worksite, WICA applies. The key is about proving that the injury is incurred while a person is doing work and not performing non-work-related duties.
Mr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
\tMr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her replies. I have two supplementary questions. The first is the tripartite advisory has been launched for quite some time. How many companies have actually adopted some of the advice that we have put out on work-life harmony?
My second supplementary question relates to a commentary written by a Financial Times writer that was republished on CNA just this morning. It mentioned the disconnect between how bosses find workers to be less productive when telecommuting and workers themselves feeling that they are busier than ever. So, there is this disconnect. The writer argued that telecommuting makes workers busier simply because of the increased number of virtual meetings and having more internal coordination emails, work-related communications, but such additional work does not always translate to effective work outcomes.
I am of the view that we would need to come to a new social compact when it comes to such telecommuting work arrangements and reset expectations on what working hours are and what is productivity for those who work from home or those who adopt hybrid work arrangements.
So, can the Ministry study this issue in detail and provide recommendations on how workplaces can come to a consensus on such a new social compact and provide both employers and employees tools to manage the unique challenges posed by such telecommuting work arrangements? NTUC would be most happy to work with the Ministry on this.
\tMs Gan Siow Huang: I believe the hon Member Melvin Yong was referring to the Tripartite Standard on Flexible Work Arrangements and Tripartite Standard on Work-life Harmony.
The Tripartite Standard on Flexible Work Arrangements was introduced in 2017 and today, the number of companies that have adopted this Standard covers one in four employees in our workplaces. Actually, the progress has been steadily increasing and we are quite glad for that. Certainly, there is room for us to encourage more companies to come on board. For bigger companies, probably, the confidence is a lot higher because they have the capacity and the expertise to implement flexible work arrangements and work-from-home arrangements more satisfactorily. For small companies or SMEs, for example, there might be more help required. And that is where the resources that have been put out by the tripartite partners, the Alliance for Action on Work-life Harmony, will come in useful. We will encourage companies to take a look at them.
The Tripartite Standard on Work-life Harmony was introduced barely a year ago. I think we should give it some time for companies to take a look and also get our employees and unions to work with the employers to adopt this Standard.
The point about making further studies on how we should define productivity and how we need to safeguard employees from the ability to disconnect from work when they are working from home and not suffering burn-out, I think we have debated this last year. It is important that we take practical approach towards this. More studies would help us and help inform employers on what are the practical approaches and tools and norms that they should consider.
But I think we should be mindful that a single guide or a single solution may not suit every sector and may not suit every job out there. Even among employees, there are diverse needs. There are people who may find that work-from-home suits them very well but we also know of individuals who prefer not to work from home, maybe because the home environment is not as conducive, perhaps they feel that their own productivity is not as high when they are working from home rather than in an office environment which is specially prepared for them to be able to work, interact and take part in team work and team meetings with their fellow workers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reasons for Recent Rise in Costs and Measures to Help Singaporeans Cope ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in light of the higher-than-expected inflation rate in November 2021 (a) what is the Ministry’s assessment of the resulting impact on economic growth in 2022; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider working with the other Ministries to delay the increase in various statutory charges.
5 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the reasons for the recent rise in costs impacting consumers across many areas; and (b) what policies or measures will be put in place to manage the impact of these increases on consumers, especially lower-income households and those whose livelihoods have been impacted by disruptions caused by the current pandemic.
\tThe Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 4 and 5 in today's Order Paper by Mr Ang Wei Neng and Ms Jessica Tan; Written Question No 9 in today's Order Paper by Mr Saktiandi Supaat; as well as to take Parliamentary Question Nos 82 and 83 of yesterday's Order Paper by Mr Shawn Huang and Mr Derrick Goh?
\t\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Thereafter, Second Minister for Finance Ms Indranee Rajah will address Parliamentary Question Nos 6 and 7, as well as Written Question No 20 in today's Order Paper. Mr Speaker, may I request that we deliver our replies, which pertain to inflation and the Government's measures to mitigate its impact, and then, for us to take supplementary questions together thereafter, please?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will provide an overview of the drivers of inflation, the outlook ahead, as well as how inflation is being managed. The Second Minister for Finance will then address the questions relating to the Government's fiscal and household support measures.
Mr Speaker, Sir, today, several global factors are at work, behind the rise of inflation.
First, the world economic recovery has raised the demand for energy and pushed up global energy prices even as supply remains tight. Second, global food commodity inflation is climbing as global demand grows amid the supply constraints that is caused by climate change, weather-related disruptions and labour shortages in key food-producing countries. Third, supply bottlenecks in key global industries and transport hubs have exacerbated cost pressures, including higher logistics costs.
Hence, many countries are grappling with inflation. For instance, inflation in the US climbed to 6.8% on a year-on-year basis in November last year, its highest in 39 years. In the Eurozone, inflation in November 2021 was 4.9%, the highest in 25 years. In Asia, South Korea's inflation hit a decade-high of 3.8% in November.
As a small and open economy that imports most of our items, we are subject to these global economic forces as well. The rise in domestic inflation comes largely on the back of external inflation. Items like petrol, electricity and gas, as well as food prices and imported products are affected by the global drivers I have just described. In the third quarter of 2021, Singapore's CPI-All Items inflation averaged 2.5% on a year-on-year basis and rose to 3.8% in November 2021.
Besides global forces contributing to this northward trend, there are domestic factors at play too, for instance, accommodation and private transport costs. Car prices have been rising at a faster rate due to bigger reductions in the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) quotas and the continuing strong demand for cars. Due to construction delays brought on by COVID-19, the need for rental housing has edged up.
However, as accommodation costs comprise mainly of imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation and most Singaporeans live in owner-occupied homes and use public transport, these two factors are not likely to apply to all Singaporeans.
Hence, a more useful gauge of inflation which excludes these two items is the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Core Inflation rate, which is so far, lower than the headline inflation. While MAS Core Inflation has moved up from 0.4% year-on-year in the first half of 2021 to 1.1% in the third quarter of last year, and to 1.6% last November, it is still lower than the headline inflation of 2.5% and 3.8% over the same period.
Let me now turn to the outlook ahead, which several Members have asked about, including Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Derrick Goh. In the near term, Singapore is likely to continue to face external cost pressures. This is due to global energy prices remaining elevated and bottlenecks in global transportation, as well as supply-demand mismatches in various commodities and goods markets, which are likely to persist for a while. However, the Ministry of Trade and Information (MTI) and MAS expect these rises to be temporary and pressures to ease gradually over the course of the year. In particular, global oil prices should ease as production increases to catch up with demand.
On our domestic labour front, wage growth is likely to continue to improve as the demand for labour strengthens on the back of a continued pick-up in economic activity. The Government’s roll-out of Progressive Wage policies such as the expansion of the Progressive Wage Model to the retail sector would also support wages for lower-wage Singaporeans. At the same time, as the COVID-19 situation stabilises, consumer demand should improve.
With all these factors in mind, MAS Core Inflation is expected to increase in the first half of 2022, before easing in the later part of the year. For the full year, MAS Core Inflation could average within the upper half of the official forecast range of 1% to 2%. As for CPI-All Items inflation, it is projected to average 1.5% to 2.5% in 2022, following the 2.3% expected for 2021.
MTI and MAS will carefully monitor price trends over the next few months of the year closely, before revising the forecasts if necessary.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about the second-round effects of inflation and whether it will persist. MTI and MAS's assessment is that while household inflation expectations have risen slightly, they remain well-anchored. In particular, household expectations of inflation have remained below historical averages. Hence, MTI and MAS do not expect persistent, accelerating inflation.
Mr Shawn Huang asked about the forward-looking inflation indicators that are being monitored. Both MTI and MAS monitor a range of upstream cost indicators to form a forward-looking view of inflationary pressures in the economy. We closely follow external indicators like the global commodity prices reflected by the Brent crude oil benchmark, as well as international food commodity price indices and import prices. Domestic indicators consist of business cost measures such as resident wages and commercial rentals.
Mr Speaker, the Government understands and shares the concerns of fellow Singaporeans and businesses and households about the price increases and empathises with the cost pressures felt. While the small and open nature of our economy constrains how much we can shield Singaporeans from inflationary pressures, the Government will spare no effort to lessen its impact. We have put in place a multi-pronged strategy to mitigate inflationary pressures.
First, the Government is striving hard to keep the Singapore economy competitive, so that we keep creating good jobs for Singaporeans and to bring sustainable wage growth for Singaporeans. For example, before the pandemic, from 2014 to 2019, Singapore's economy was expanding by 3.1% per annum on average. In tandem with economic growth, the real median income of full-time employed residents and that is, after accounting for inflation, grew by 3.8% per annum over those five years I have cited earlier.
Even though the pandemic led to the economy contracting by 5.4% in 2020, it rebounded by 7.2% last year. The strong recovery has helped to ensure that resident workers enjoyed real wage growth in 2021, after accounting for inflation. Specifically, we note that in 2021, the real median income growth of full-time employed residents was positive, at 1.1%. For lower-income residents at the bottom 20th percentile, real income rose by a larger 4.6% last year.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about the potential impact of inflation on Singapore's economic growth this year. MTI's assessment is that Singapore's economic recovery remains on track, with the GDP expected to grow by 3% to 5% this year. This should continue to support recovery in the labour market in the year ahead.
Second, given the imported and domestic cost pressures, MAS tightened the monetary policy in October last year by shifting the trade-weighted Singapore dollar towards an appreciating path. Since then, the Singapore dollar has strengthened, which will help reduce the Singapore dollar cost of imports and shield Singaporeans from some of the external cost pressures. For instance, the Singapore dollar has appreciated significantly against the currencies of the country's major food sources over the longer term, and this has moderated the pass-through effects of external inflationary pressure.
Third, the Government carefully manages domestic supply-side constraints, such as the supply of industrial and commercial space, to help rein in business rental costs that may translate to higher consumer prices. During the pandemic, businesses received rental relief to cope with their rental costs. Additionally, policy measures, such as the Wage Credit Scheme, Jobs Support Scheme and Jobs Growth Incentive Scheme, have alleviated the labour outlay of businesses.
Fourth, the Government has been diversifying our food import sources and today, our food supplies come from more than 170 countries and regions from the world. This helps to ensure that the prices of our food supplies remain competitive and reduce our vulnerability to larger price fluctuations globally. Notably, while global food commodity prices surged by around 30% on a year-on-year basis between July and November 2021 based on the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organisation's Food Price Index, Singapore's domestic non-cooked food prices saw a far smaller increase of 1.6% over the same period. MTI and the various Ministries and agencies want to thank our industry partners, including our trade associations and key supermarket retailers who have been working closely with us, especially in the last two years, to diversify and secure alternate food sources for Singapore.
Fifth, the Government works closely with industry partners, including major retailers, to ensure that the prices of daily necessities and food items are competitive and affordable. Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked whether there are further plans to enhance cooperation with retailers this year on daily necessities and food items. Some retailers like NTUC FairPrice have helped to keep the prices of essential items affordable. It has extended its discount schemes for seniors and low-income families by another year to cover the whole of this year, 2022. This is estimated to result in more than S$11 million worth of savings for customers, covering Pioneer Generation and Merdeka Generation seniors, as well as the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) blue cardholders.
\t Another initiative is the Government's effort to work with the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) to onboard more retailers onto its Price Kaki app. The app is for consumers, and it promotes price transparency and helps consumers make informed choices by providing easy and timely comparisons of the prices of groceries and hawker food.
Last but not least, our sixth strategy. The Government provides targeted assistance to lower-income Singaporeans who need support for their basic living expenses through schemes such as the permanent GST Voucher scheme, Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC) rebates and the Public Transport Vouchers. The Second Minister for Finance will elaborate on these in her response.
Mr Speaker, Sir, let me conclude by assuring Singaporeans and businesses that the Government will spare no effort to keep our economy vibrant as well as to create good jobs and this will help continue to bring real wage growth for Singaporeans to meet their aspirations and their needs in the present, as well as the future.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Help Singaporeans Cope with Rising Inflation and Impact of Government's Fiscal Support for Businesses and Households on Inflation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Finance in light of inflation and rising costs (a) whether there are available fiscal resources in the upcoming Budget to further assist Singaporeans to cope with increased costs; (b) whether the proposed GST increase remains part of our strategy for fiscal sustainability; and (c) if so, what can be done to mitigate the impact of GST increase on Singaporeans, especially the lower income households and retirees.
7 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Finance (a) whether the economic policy involving billions of fiscal support to businesses and households is contributing to higher inflation; and (b) how will the market adjust when the support schemes taper off.
\tThe Second Minister for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah) (for the Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, in addition to the Parliamentary Questions (PQs) enumerated by Minister of State Ms Low Yen Ling, may I have your permission to answer the PQ by Mr Louis Chua that is scheduled for a subsequent Sitting as it touches on related subject matter?
\tMr Speaker: Please do.
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Minister of State Low Yen Ling has just provided an overview of the inflation outlook, including second-round inflation effects which Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about and the Government's overall approach to managing inflation. I would like in addition to emphasise the following two points.
First, while the inflation rate of 3.8% reported for November 2021 is high, a significant part of that 3.8% is accounted for by accommodation, mainly imputed rentals and private transport costs. However, most Singaporeans live in owner-occupied homes and use public transport. As such, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Core Inflation measure, which excludes accommodation and private transport costs, would more accurately reflect the actual inflation experienced by most Singaporeans. MAS Core Inflation was at 1.6% year-on-year in November 2021.
Second, a significant share of the recent rise in core prices is being driven by global factors. Higher energy prices have had an impact on utility bills, while global food prices and supply chain disruptions have affected prices of non-cooked food locally. The sharp rise in global energy and food prices is expected to be temporary and should subside as bottlenecks are resolved and supply improves to better meet demand.
That said, the Government understands the concerns of Singaporeans about these cost increases and empathises with the very real pressures felt by individuals and households. The Government has been working hard to help Singaporeans with these costs in a number of ways.
First, through our economic and fiscal strategies. Minister of State Low Yen Ling has given a comprehensive overview on how the Government keeps our economy competitive, ensures sustainable real wage growth, manages business costs and has allowed the Singapore dollar to strengthen to mitigate inflation. Second, the Government also directly helps Singaporeans with the cost of living.
As mentioned, two key drivers of core inflation are higher global fuel costs and food prices, leading to higher prices for utilities and groceries. The Government has been directly shielding the majority of Singaporeans from the full impact of the cost increases for these items and is continuing to do so.
To help with the cost of utilities, the Government provides quarterly GSTV U-Save rebates to Housing and Development Board (HDB) households as part of the permanent GST Voucher scheme. All eligible HDB households received a tranche of U-Save rebates this month. In Budget 2021, the Government provided an additional 50% of U-Save rebates for all U-Save recipients, which was paid out in April and July 2021.
This additional 50% on top of the permanent U-Save rebate has helped HDB households to substantially defray the cost of their utility bills. HDB 1- to 2-room households received $595 in U-Save rebates in FY2021, equivalent to about 4.5 to six months of their utility bills on average, even after the increase in the electricity tariff this month. HDB 3- and 4-room households received $535 and $475 in U-Save rebates, equivalent to three months and 1.5 months of their utility bills in FY2021 respectively.
To help households with daily expenses, especially food, the Government has given $100 in Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers to every Singaporean household in December 2021. In addition, Singaporeans living in HDB 1- to 2-room flats would also have received $100 in Grocery Vouchers in October 2021. These would help with the increased spending during the year-end and the New Year festive period. We have also begun distributing 600,000 Public Transport Vouchers of $30 each to help lower-income households amid the public transport fare adjustment. These payouts are over and above the regular GST Voucher – Cash payouts of up to $300, Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC) rebates of between 1.5 and 3.5 months, Silver Support of between $720 and $3,600 per year for seniors who had low incomes in their working years and Workfare Income Supplement of up to $4,000 per year in cash and CPF top-ups for lower-wage workers.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked whether we have the fiscal resources to help Singaporeans with the cost of living. I would like to assure Mr Liang that we will give priority in our fiscal plans to help Singaporeans manage. As we prepare for Budget 2022, we are assessing the situation carefully and reviewing the scope of household support measures.
Mr Louis Chua and Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about mitigating or delaying increases on fees charged by Ministries and Statutory Boards. The Government will do its best to keep costs and in turn, fees as low as possible, to provide the best value to the public. We froze fee increases in 2020 on account of the sudden COVID-19 crisis, but we cannot do so indefinitely. As fees are raised, we will continue to provide support to those who need it most. Our approach of running cost-efficient services and providing targeted help allows us to keep our total burden on businesses and households low.
Ms Foo Mee Har asked if our fiscal support contributed to higher inflation. The answer is no. The size of our fiscal injections in 2020 to 2021 were correctly sized to cushion the sharp fall in output during this crisis period. Much of our support over the last two years has been to relieve costs, through schemes such as the Jobs Support and Rental Support Schemes. These not only helped save jobs and incomes but also had less impact to inflation. As businesses and households adapted to living with COVID-19 and stabilised their revenues and incomes, we were able to taper off our fiscal support and shift the emphasis towards restructuring, transformation and growth.
On Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Ms Foo Mee Har's questions about the fiscal response going forward: we will continue to monitor economic conditions closely to ensure that businesses are adequately supported, especially in more adversely affected sectors and balance tapering off of relief with support for transformation and restructuring.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked if the proposed GST increase remains part of our strategy for fiscal sustainability; and if so, what can be done to mitigate the impact of the GST increase on Singaporeans, especially lower-income households and retirees. We need sound fiscal foundations, not just to provide support to households and businesses when needed, but also to meet our collective aspirations – affordable healthcare, quality education, and a safe and secure home – in a responsible and sustainable way. The GST together with our income and wealth taxes are important parts of a sound revenue structure that will enable us to provide care, support and a strong social compact. Even as we keep our finances on a sound and stable footing, we will ensure that our overall system of taxes and transfers remains a fair and progressive one.
We will also significantly mitigate the impact of the GST rate increase on Singaporeans through the Assurance Package. We have already set aside $6 billion for this Package to provide direct cash and other support to Singaporeans. Such support will effectively delay the impact of the GST rate increase by at least five years for the majority of Singaporean households. This means that for most households, the actual impact of the GST increase will only be felt five years after implementation. Lower-income households will receive more support under the Assurance Package and for this group, the impact of the GST rate increase will be pushed back by about 10 years.
To sum up: while global inflationary pressures have been a significant driver of the recent rise in core inflation, the Government has shielded and continues to shield Singaporean households from much of these price pressures. We will continue to review and improve ways to support Singaporeans, particularly lower-income households, seniors and those with greater needs.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Sir, my question is for Second Minister for Finance. Yes, we know that it is never a good time to raise taxes. Indeed, the Government has been helping Singaporeans to mitigate the cost of living with the various support measures. But given the series of cost increases that we have seen in recent months, with perhaps more to come and that we are still in this pandemic fighting mode, would the Government consider delaying the GST increases so as to avoid adding on to inflationary pressures?
\tMs Indranee Rajah: I thank Mr Liang for his question, which is, I think, a question on the minds of many Singaporeans. There are actually two distinct aspects of that question. One is, can we delay the date that GST takes effect? But the second and the much more important question is, can we delay the impact of that increase on Singaporeans?
For the first one, we had announced in Budget 2018 that we plan to raise the GST by two percentage points from 7% to 9%. And we said then that it would be some time from 2021 to 2025. We said the exact timing would depend on the state of the economy and how much our expenditures grow and how buoyant our existing taxes are. And we said all that before COVID-19. Then the pandemic came along. So, we then said in 2020, that the GST rate increase would not take place in 2021 and that was in direct recognition of the hardship that was felt by people because of the pandemic.
It is not something we can put off forever, but the exact timing is something that we have to think about. In deciding the timing for the GST hike, we are carefully considering the overall economic conditions. The economy is recovering steadily and barring fresh disruptions, it should grow in step with global economic recovery, and we expect GDP to grow by 3% to 5% in 2022.
But this brings me to the second question, which is the more important one, which is: irrespective of whatever date we may say that GST takes effect, can we delay the impact on Singaporeans? And the answer is that we have designed it such that, yes, we can delay the impact on Singaporeans through the Assurance Package. For the majority of Singaporeans, we will delay the impact on them effectively by five years and for the lower income, the impact on them will be delayed effectively for 10 years.
So, essentially, whatever the increase to the expenditure as a result of GST, the Assurance Package is designed to buffer them for that increase. The Government is directly supplementing them, so that they would not feel the impact. So, I just hope that Members will bear this in mind. The date that it takes effect and the date that the impact is felt are two separate things and we will continue to look out for the lower-income households and the majority of the middle-income households.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two supplementary questions. The first question is for Minister of State Low Yen Ling. What are the causes of the supply chain disruptions that affect Singapore particularly? Something that happens in the rest of the world may not affect us. Because she said that these disruptions may be temporary, does she foresee that these disruptions will ease in maybe the next one to three months, or will it be longer than three months?
The second question is, we note that some cost increases are those that we have to have, or for some of the services provided by the Government. But will the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) work with the Ministries to coordinate some of the increases which are within the control of the Government? For example, like revising the annual values of HDB flats which will actually lead to increase in property tax and also electricity prices which would affect the majority of people; even the coffeeshops are now using that as an excuse to increase prices for the drinks and more.
\tMs Low Yen Ling: I want to thank the Member Mr Ang Wei Neng for his two supplementary questions. Let me respond to the first one on supply chain. I thank him for the concern that he raised about the impact of global supply chain disruptions on our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and businesses, and thereby, affecting households and consumers. We certainly understand that these disruptions have made it harder for businesses, households and consumers. We all wish for things to get back to normal. However, earlier on in my speech, I also outlined the contributing factors. Lockdowns, labour shortages and transport bottlenecks around the world, because of the pandemic, have caused the disruption of production and also the delivery of goods. This has been exacerbated by the recent rebounding of the demand for goods as the COVID-19 situation is improving in many countries.
In response to his first supplementary question, there are some signs that the global supply bottlenecks are abating, with pressure on input prices easing and we are observing that the delivery delays are shortening. But we are cognisant that some of the supply chain issues such as the lack of production capacity for semi-conductor chips and port congestions are expected to take some time to be resolved. As such, it is likely that the supply chain disruptions will persist in the near term.
Having said that, I want to assure the Member Mr Ang and everyone in the House that for essential supplies including food and healthcare items, we have adopted a multi-pronged approach. First, import diversification. Second, beefing up our local production. Third, stockpiling. These supply chain resilient efforts are also supported by Singapore's strong air and sea connectivity, as well as supply chain management and logistic capabilities which will help to facilitate the efficient movement of goods.
For businesses, for industrial supplies, we have been working with our companies, SMEs, trade associations and industry associations to strengthen their Business Continuity Plans (BCPs) to better cope with possible supply chain disruptions. To this end, MTI, ESG and EDB stand committed to support our SMEs and local companies. If they are facing cashflow issues arising from supply chain challenges, ESG will continue to work with participating financial institutions to support them through the Enterprise Financing Scheme.
To turn to the next question, he asked about charges and so on, and then he also asked a question about annual value. I believe the Second Minister has responded to another Member about the statutory fees and charges. I will respond to his second supplementary question where he was alluding to profiteering. Let me assure him that MTI and the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) take a tough stance against profiteering. We keep a very close watch on prices. Specifically, MTI monitors general price movements through the Department of Statistics (DOS), the CPI Survey and where necessary, MTI also monitors the prices of specific goods.
If you recall, about 20 months ago between January and May 2020, there was a surge and very, very high demand for masks. During that period, MTI and CCCS swung into action, monitored the prices of the masks on a weekly basis. We took proactive actions and sought price information from e-commerce platforms. That certainly helped to shape the necessary behaviour by retailers and organisations.
So, I want to assure the Member that the Government is committed to ensuring that Singapore has a conducive and competitive business environment for companies to thrive and at the same time, a wide range of choices for our consumers. By equipping consumers with the Price Kaki app, consumers will be able to make an informed choice with regard to their purchase of goods and services.
Earlier, I mentioned our multi-pronged approach of import diversification, local production and stockpiling. This is critical because import diversification will ensure that Singapore enjoys a continuous supply of goods at competitive prices, even if any one of the sources is being disrupted. So, through this multi-pronged approach, this will help us to mitigate any supply shock-induced price fluctuations. We will continue to work very closely with trade associations and local companies to strengthen their Business Continuity Plans to better cope with possible supply chain disruptions.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Jessica Tan.
\tMs Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Thank you, Mr Speaker. My supplementary question is for the Minister of State Low Yen Ling. As we talk about rising costs, businesses are facing those rising costs which then translates to rising costs for the consumer. So, what is MTI doing to assist with the rising costs of businesses?
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to thank the Member Ms Jessica Tan for her very important question and want to assure her and everyone in the House that MTI, the Government and the various agencies monitor business costs closely. And I want to assure everyone in the House that support is at hand to support our businesses to mitigate cost pressures when needed.
First, in the area of cashflow, which is very critical now, the Government supports our businesses in need of additional loans to support their cashflow. Businesses can make use of the Temporary Bridging Loan (TBL) which provides additional working capital support of up to S$3 million for enterprises. TBL is available for our businesses at 70% Government risk share. From April to December 2021, more than 6,000 enterprises have benefited from the TBL. This amounted to S$1.8 billion worth of loans being catalysed. In addition, businesses that need funds for purposes like working capital, fixed assets, trade, projects, merger and acquisitions (M&As) can look to ESG's Enterprise Financing Scheme for assistance.
Second, the Government also provides support to businesses in cost components especially in the last two years, such as manpower costs and rental. For instance, the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS), the Wage Credit Scheme, the Jobs Growth Incentive Scheme and the Rental Support Scheme all helped our businesses, our SMEs, with their cashflow challenges during the pandemic.
To date, more than S$28 billion of JSS support has been disbursed since the scheme was introduced in February 2020.
Third, the Government will also continue to defray investment expenditure to help our SMEs to pivot and strengthen their capabilities. These include the enhanced financial support for capability development and productivity upgrading through grants such as the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) and also the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG). These grants will go some way to help our businesses transform and turn the current challenges into long-term opportunities.
Over the longer term, certain trends like climate change, and these are trends that may cause our companies to think about their strategies and their cost structure, businesses can look to the S$180 million Enterprise Sustainability Programme (ESP) recently launched by Minister Gan Kim Yong on 1 October. This ESP is designed to help our local SMEs build capability in sustainability, not just company-centric but also sectoral-centric. We will support the trade associations and chambers (TACs) to bring on board or to adopt sustainability standards across the sub-sectors or the whole sector. We will also take an ecosystem-wide approach in terms of financing – we launched the Green Financing shortly after the launch of ESP – as well as training and certification. All these are done to better position our local companies to help them to build capabilities in sustainability and seize new opportunities in the green economy.
The Government certainly strives to moderate business cost increases by managing domestic supply side constraints. For example, the Government ensures an adequate supply of industrial and commercial space to meet rising demand which will then help to relieve rental and price cost pressures that are faced by SMEs and businesses.
Members may recall the Rental Support Scheme announced by Minister Lawrence Wong. The Rental Support Scheme payouts in 2021 have also provided more than S$900 million of support benefiting over 40,000 tenants and owner occupiers.
So, I want to assure Ms Jessica Tan and the House that the Government will spare no effort to support our enterprises, especially our local SMEs. We continue to stand by our local SMEs, our businesses, to support them and help them emerge stronger than before.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Foo Mee Har.
\tMs Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have one supplementary question for the Second Minister for Finance. Sir, I acknowledge that there are wide-ranging Government assistance schemes, such as the CDC vouchers and transport vouchers that were mentioned, to help with the cost of living. But I would like to ask if the Government can put in place structural measures to provide long-term support to help with cost of living, instead of giving these one-off benefits every year.
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question. Actually, we already do that. We do not just give out one-off benefits. We have a lot in terms of structural support and let me explain our approach to it. The first thing is directed at incomes and earning a living. The second thing is essential areas. And then third, providing essential support for the low-income and elderly.
On the first one, the most sustainable way that we can help Singaporeans with the cost of living is to help them have good incomes. And how we help them to have good incomes is to ensure that they have good opportunities and good jobs. We have often heard that it is said, \"Oh, you must not pursue growth for growth's sake\". This Government does not pursue growth for growth's sake. This Government pursues growth because we want good jobs for people and we want them to have good incomes, and that will help them to manage not just the increase in cost of living but to be able to attain all the other things and aspirations that they want to achieve in life. So, we pay a lot of attention to growing the economy. And that is structural.
\t
\tThe second thing we do is we have structural schemes to uplift and supplement their incomes. This includes the Progressive Wage Model, as well as the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme.
In addition, we have broad-based structural support measures to help Singaporeans in essential areas, like education, healthcare and housing. Education, as we know, is heavily subsidised. Every Singaporean child could receive about $180,000 in education subsidies by the time he or she turns 16, including preschool subsidies, with more for those who come from less well-off backgrounds. And for healthcare, we have many schemes, such as CHAS, the Pioneer Generation Package and the Merdeka Generation Package. We also provide housing subsidies to keep HDB flats affordable, so eligible first-timer households buying a resale flat could enjoy up to about $160,000 in housing grants and around 80% of new HDB flat buyers have little or no cash outlay on their mortgage payments.
Then, in addition, we have other permanent schemes, like the GST Voucher, or the GST-V Scheme, Silver Support Scheme and ComCare. And then, on top of all of these permanent structural schemes, we do provide the one-off support, or schemes for a specific period to help people where there are specific hardships or problems which may continue for a few months, but after that they are able to manage on their own.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
\tMr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): I thank the Minister of State and the Second Minister for their response. I just have one supplementary question. I do recognise that inflation is a concern for everyone and it is something that is reflected in the lived experiences of all our residents.
If you look at what MAS has done from a monetary policy standpoint, they have tightened for the first time in the last three years. From a fiscal standpoint, I also note that back in 2006, the Government has put in place a freeze in fee increases for one year after the GST increase. This time round, if there were to be a GST increase, whether or not the Government will consider a similar freeze in the fee increase, which is similar to my original Parliamentary Question (PQ), as well as that asked by the Member Mr Ang?
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, the answer is as I had indicated in my original answer, which is that we will do our best, but we cannot defer fee increases forever. If and when we do have to have fee increases, we will do our best to ensure that Singaporeans are supported and buffered against such increases.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
\tAssoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, I wish to challenge the notion of Minister of State Low and Minister Indranee that inflation pressures are actually transitory and benign. Both of them cited how the latest 2021 November all items inflation rate was 3.8% and that is true when measured on a year-on-year basis. But if you look at all items analysed from the month-on-month basis, it is actually 6.2% and even if we use the average from the past three months, it is even higher at 7%.
If you measure other elements, where they have spoken about being more benign, actually if you net out accommodation, and this is for a year-on-year basis, you have a higher inflation rate at 4.1% or 4.2%, depending on how one measures such housing inflation. Transportation cost, which is the third largest component of household expenditure after food and housing, is actually 14.2% year-on-year in the latest data. And even if you look at food, the second largest component of household expenditures, while it is true that it is relatively lower at 1.9%, over the past three months, they have actually increased 2.8% on an annualised basis and 3.7% over the past month.
So, again, my point is not to throw out additional figures per se, but both of them mentioned one of the levers for controlling price inflation was the idea of real exchange rate appreciation. I will note that measures of our own trade-weighted real exchange rate show that the Singapore dollar has actually been depreciating since 2013 and at least in the latest data for 2020, this continued to be the case. So, I wonder whether there is going to be a more concerted effort at allowing real exchange rate appreciation as a broad-based approach to contain inflation pressures imported from aboard?
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I think that the short answer really is this. Neither Ms Low nor I suggested that everything is temporary. I think there is recognition that there are real cost pressures and there have been increases. So, some of it may be temporary, but whatever it is, we know that households are facing pressures and therefore this Government will do whatever it can to alleviate those pressures and the full impact of such cost increases on households and for individuals.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
\tMr Leon Perera (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, I just have two supplementary questions for Minister of State Ms Low Yen Ling. I think the core inflation rate is an average and inflation of course affects different demographic groups differently. So, I am wondering if MTI is studying and will publish CPI indicators for different demographic groups. For example, parents with young children will have expenditures on diapers and milk powder, which other demographic groups will not. Elderly people living alone, empty nesters will have certain healthcare expenditures and other groups will not. Is this being looked at because the inflation could be felt very differently, based on different demographic groups? I had an exchange with the then-Minister for MTI in 2018 in this House and the indication given was that MTI was looking at publishing these kinds of indicators, so I wanted an update on that.
The second question is, if I heard the Minister of State Ms Low correctly, she said that the Government's outlook is that inflation will pick up in the first half of 2022 this year and then it will ameliorate or go down a bit, in the second half. Is this outlook assuming that there is GST increase in the middle of the year, or it is assuming there is no GST increase? I just wanted to understand the assumption behind that expectation of that forecast.
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to thank the Member Mr Leon Perera for the two questions. On the first question, we monitor the CPI all items inflation based on different household income groups. That will allow us to also work with MOF to design the necessary targeted assistance for the relevant segments, based on household income. If I could use this opportunity to share with the House, in Q3 2021, the CPI all items inflation came in at 1.9% year-on-year for the lowest 20%; and 2.2% year-on-year for the middle 60%; and 3.0% year-on-year for the highest 20% income group.
This leads me to my next point. This shows that the households in the lowest 20% income group experienced lower inflation compared to the other income groups. And earlier on in my speech, I shared about the importance of monitoring indicators like the real wage growth, that is after accounting for inflation. And I also took the opportunity to specify that for the lower-income, they saw higher real wage growth last year, while we were still in the thick of COVID-19. In fact, I think Minister Lawrence and Minister Gan will say that we are still in the thick of the COVID-19 pandemic. And for the lower income, the real wage growth was, I cited, 4.6% for the year 2021.
His second question about the MAS core inflation, I may have read it very quickly, allow me to slowly read it out now. I cited the various factors driving global inflations and what are some of the contributing factors for domestic inflation. And I talked about the CPI all items inflation and then I cited the MAS core inflation. So, let me repeat: MAS core inflation is expected to increase in the first half of 2022, before easing in the later part of the year.
But having said that, we know that we are still in the thick of the COVID-19 pandemic, the situation is very fluid, is very volatile. We are a small and open economy, and we are exposed to a lot of developments in other parts of the world, including the key food producing countries. For the full year MAS Core Inflation, it could average within the upper half of the official forecast range of 1% to 2%.
Mr Speaker: Leader of the Opposition.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just two questions for the Minister of State Ms Low Yen Ling. I do thank her for her reply, which essentially was almost in pari materia vis-à-vis the measures to mitigate increasing cost of living with Minister Chan Chun Sing's 2018 Parliamentary reply.
My two questions pertain to two points of departure, arising from the supplementary questions that came up just now. One was a point that was made about anti-profiteering and Minister of State suggested that the Government looked very closely, for example, at the price of masks that were going up. Minister Chan, a few years ago, took a different approach, although it was with regard to a different item. It was with regard to coffee, coffee in the coffee shops. The approach then was relying on crowdsourcing platforms to address price increases, taking a step away from anti-profiteering-type committees. In view of the situation today, given the answer that Minister of State has shared, is the Government veering towards the formation of anti-profiteering committees as a way to track prices and how they affect our people on the ground?
The second question again is a pick-up from what Minister Chan shared as a way to combat inflation and this is in the case of businesses. This involved looking at meaningful ways and effective ways to lower regulatory costs, which include improving regulatory efficiencies, simplifying processes and removing unnecessary licences. I was listening to Minister of State's reply from the supplementary question asked by Member Ms Jessica Tan. In that regard, what has been the Government's progress on lowering regulatory costs for businesses as a way for combating inflation?
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition Mr Singh for his two questions. And I do not think there has been a departure between what I have cited and what Minister Chan had shared. I want to thank him and I want to also use this platform to reiterate again, the Government understands and shares Singaporeans' concerns about rising prices and inflation.
I also want to use this opportunity to assure everyone in the House that MTI, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) and all agencies will spare no effort in supporting Singaporeans and also households and businesses as we face this global specter of inflation. MTI and all economic agencies are also working very closely with MOF to mitigate the effects of inflation on businesses, households and also consumers.
On his first question, I cited a six-pronged approach, a multi-pronged approach because this will allow us to take a very comprehensive stance and engage with our SMEs, our trade associations and of course, at the same time, leveraging on our extensive network of FTAs to provide market access for companies. I cited the first strategy, which is working hard to keep our economy competitive, working hard to create good paying jobs that generate real wage growth for our Singaporeans. So, really, it is about providing conditions for our companies, especially our local SMEs to create good jobs with sustained income growth that outpaces inflation.
Because when companies raise their productivity, real wage growth will follow. When workers can attain real wage growth, they also have new skills to take on new jobs. This is where MTI schemes like the PSG and the EDG come in. And really, this is the whole notion of ITM 2.0 that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat has talked about: refreshing, strengthening our 23 Industry Transformation Maps to raise the innovation capacity of our SMEs across the 23 sectors, raising productivity and designing good jobs that are not just good jobs for today, but also jobs and skills for tomorrow; at the same time, supporting our local companies to expand their international footprint.
I had cited the mask example. This is just an example of how, when necessary, we will intervene in terms of monitoring prices. We are also making sure that we promote market competition. In addition to promoting market competition, it is also about lowering barriers to entry where possible, so that we can help Singaporeans enjoy competitive prices. Furthermore, I cited how we need to focus on diversifying our sources of supply, expanding our sources of food supply to more than 170 countries and regions across the world.
The Member also asked about Ms Jessica Tan's question. I want to use this platform to reiterate again that MTI and all our economic agencies are working very hard, in particular, in the last two years, to keep a lid on business cost increases and we do so by carefully managing our domestic supply side constraints.
And in terms of prices, coming back to it, we will continue to monitor prices and inflation very closely and we are prepared to adjust policies where necessary. We understand the concerns of businesses and Singaporeans and we will do whatever we can to mitigate the cost pressures that are being felt and the effects of inflation.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister of State and also Minister Indranee Rajah for explaining that inflation will be assessed not to be persistent and that lots have been done through fiscal and monetary support so far. I have two supplementary questions.
The first is whether the Government can assure Singaporeans that we can continue to monitor the situation and design targeted measures to help specific groups. That is my first supplementary question.
Second, we have been talking a lot about prices of essential items. An issue that I am very concerned about is interest rates, which would trickle down and cascade into prices eventually. Singapore is a price taker. We know that. We take in a lot of imported goods from abroad. But we are also a price taker for interest rates. In particular, with interest rates expected to rise in 2022 and beyond, what will be its impact, especially when we are also trying to emerge out in an endemic scenario, whether there will be any ramifications of rates going forward, especially in accommodation and so on?
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, on the question of whether we will continue to design targeted measures, the answer is yes, we are working hard on that for Budget 2022. We have been taking feedback. We are looking to see what we can do to support households and that is something that Members can look towards in Budget 2022.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Household Income and Per Capita Income Criteria for ComCare Assistance Given Rising Inflation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry is considering reviewing the household income and per capita income criteria for ComCare assistance in view of rising inflation against a backdrop of slower economic growth.
\tThe Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): Mr Speaker, ComCare provides assistance to low-income households for their basic living expenses. Households that need help to tide over temporary financial difficulty are provided with ComCare Short-to-Medium-Term Assistance (SMTA).
While there is an income eligibility criterion for ComCare SMTA, the criterion is not a hard threshold to qualify for assistance. Rather, our SSOs assess the needs of individuals and families holistically and exercise flexibility as needed to provide the necessary financial assistance and community support.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) reviews the ComCare eligibility criteria every two to three years. The last review was conducted in 2019, and we will review the ComCare eligibility criteria sometime this year.
Building an inclusive and caring society is a collective effort. The community plays an important role in partnering the Government in helping those in need. If anyone encounters a neighbour, friend or family member who needs support, they can call the ComCare hotline at 1800-222-0000 or refer them to the nearest SSO or Family Service Centre for assistance.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Edward Chia.
\tMr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for the reply. I have two supplementary questions.
I would like to ask the Minister what the considerations on the review period are. I think the Minister mentioned the last time it was reviewed was in 2019. Is the Minister exploring other ways of reducing the time lag between the review and cost of living increases for our lower-income households?
The second supplementary question is: for the short- and medium-term assistance periods, can the Ministry consider extending the periods to reduce the anxiety for many of our lower-income families?
\tMr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. The period concerned is not critical because it is just a guideline for us to set for our staff in order to qualify and, when they do not qualify, to look at other reasons how to bring them over if they need help from the community or the Government.
What is your other question, please? Sorry.
\tMr Edward Chia Bing Hui: It is whether the period of assistance can be extended to reduce anxiety because most of our residents do feel that three months sometimes is very short, and they are very concerned about extensions.
\tMr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: During this period, we have actually auto-extended SMTA a few times. If we need to do so, we will do it again. The period is to ensure that during normal times, we want to check on them that they are actually making effort maybe to look for jobs or have gotten better in their health condition. Therefore, that review period is necessary. However, there are also instances when we do extend it automatically when we need to. And for the last few periods during this COVID-19 crisis, we have been extending it beyond the three months and six months automatically.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Point-to-Point Sector Given Rising Petrol Prices and Slow Recovery in Passenger Numbers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Transport in view of the rising petrol prices, whether the Ministry has considered giving support to the point-to-point (P2P) sector to help defray such costs as the industry faces a slow start to passenger recovery.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Transport (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan) (for the Minister for Transport): The Government actively monitors the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the point-to-point (P2P) sector. Amid lower ridership, the Government has set aside more than $1 billion to provide broad-based as well as sector-specific support to the P2P drivers. Since February 2020, the Government has introduced the Point-to-Point Support Package (PPSP), Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme (SIRS) and multiple tranches of COVID-19 Driver Relief Fund (CDRF).
At Budget 2021, the Government raised the petrol duty as part of Singapore’s sustainability drive. To mitigate the financial impact of this on active P2P drivers with petrol vehicles, the Government provided road tax rebate of 15%, which is about $120, as well as additional petrol duty rebate of $360 in 2021 as offsets.
P2P ridership has steadily recovered from about 70% of pre-COVID-19 levels in October 2021 during the Stabilisation Period, to about 80% in December 2021. This has bolstered the incomes of our P2P drivers.
The Government currently has no plans to provide additional support to defray higher fuel costs which is the result of market forces of global supply and demand factors. We will continue to monitor the P2P sector and the demand for such services to ensure that drivers are coping well in this challenging period.
Mr Speaker: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
\tMs Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. Our P2P drivers have given feedback on the rising costs to their businesses, such as the impending GST hikes, in addition to what we had mentioned about the rising petrol cost. When was the last time meter and flag-down rates were revised, and would the Ministry and the Public Transport Council be looking at revising flag-down fares or fare structures for both the taxi and private hire services?
\tDr Amy Khor Lean Suan: Let me say that the Government does not regulate fares. In fact, for taxis, in 1998, we had deregulated the fares. So, taxi and Private Hire Car (PHC) operators have actually been making adjustments to their fares over the years. In fact, most recently, a PHC operator actually adjusted the fares last year. The operators are responsible for adjusting the taxi and PHC fares, taking into account prevailing market conditions. And I think they are best placed to do so, to better match the supply and demand of P2P services even as they take into account their own cost structures as well as, of course, ensuring that fares remain competitive, given the landscape.
This will also allow market forces to effectively respond in a timely manner and also encourage the service providers to improve their service offerings. In fact, there have been benefits to this approach. You can see that there is high vehicle availability during peak hours. What the Government does – it does not regulate fares – is that it requires the operators to provide the Public Transport Council advance notice of any fare adjustments. We also want to ensure that these fares are transparent, easy to understand, so that commuters can make an informed choice.
Additionally, what we have also done is to ensure that the P2P regulatory framework provides an open P2P market so that the taxi drivers are allowed to multi-home, instead of just driving exclusively for one operator. With regard to fuel cost, for instance, one of the ways really would be for them to do more ride hails and reduce the mileage clocked from plying the streets.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Singaporeans Who Have Given Up Smoking in Past Two Years and Proposal to Consider Total Ban on Sale of Tobacco Products ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Health (a) how many people gave up smoking in the past two years compared to the pre-COVID-19 pandemic figures; (b) whether this trend is in line with our target to reduce the smoking rate to 5% by 2035; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider a ban on cigarette sales to young Singaporeans born after 2012 that can result in the gradual phasing out of tobacco smoking altogether in Singapore.
11 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked \tthe Minister for Health (a) whether the Government will study the implementation of a ban on the sale of tobacco products to those born after a particular year, in addition to the current minimum legal age; (b) if so, what are the factors the Government will look into when determining whether to implement such a ban and when will the results of the study be announced; and (c) if not, why not.
12 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Health whether the Government will consider 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, reported on 9 December 2021.
13 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry intends to introduce a generational tobacco purchasing ban similar to that implemented by New Zealand; and (b) whether other measures are being studied to reduce rates of smoking in the general population.
14 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Health (a) for each year over the past five years, how much does smoking-related diseases cost the healthcare sector; (b) whether the Ministry will study New Zealand's ban on the sale of tobacco products to those born after a particular year; and (c) if so, when will the study be expected to be completed and results presented to the public.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, with your permission, can I take Question Nos 10 to 14 together, please?
\t\tMr Speaker: Yes. If you can try and keep your response succinct if possible.
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, smoking and second-hand smoke exposure are associated with at least 11 major medical conditions that accounted for about $180 million of healthcare cost in 2019. Our consistent policy approach has been to reduce our smoking rates and encourage smokers to quit.
We do not have comparable figures of the smoking quit rate in the past two years as requested by Dr Lim Wee Kiak. But our tobacco control measures have been successful. It has progressively reduced smoking prevalence rates from 11.8% in 2017 to 10.1% in 2020.
\t
The most effective has been tobacco tax. Several economic studies have reached a consensus that for every 10% increase in real price, there will be about a 3% to 5% decrease in overall tobacco consumption, a 3.5% reduction in young people taking up smoking and a total of about 3% to 5% reduction of new young people taking up smoking as well. [Please refer to \"\tClarification by Senior Minister of State for Health\t\", Official Report, 11 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue No 45, Corrections by Written Statement section.]
But it was last increased in 2018. So, with inflation and income increases, the tax burden gets eroded over time and we will have to continue to work with the Ministry of Finance (MOF) to review the tobacco tax rate.
In 2020, standardised packaging and enhanced graphic health warnings were required for all tobacco products sold here in Singapore to reduce the attractiveness of cigarettes. It is, however, still too early to evaluate the effectiveness of this measure.
We also progressively raised the minimum legal age for smoking from 19 years in 2019 to 21 years in January 2021. This aims to denormalise tobacco use among youth below the age of 21, restrict their access to tobacco products in their social circles and hence, reduce the likelihood of smoking initiation. It has contributed to a decline in smoking among younger adults aged 18 to 29 years, from 9.8% in 2017 to 8.8% in 2020.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) will be piloting a new smoking cessation programme where eligible individuals will be offered subsidised Nicotine Replacement Therapy that is complemented with counselling in public healthcare institutions.
Smokers who are looking for support to quit can also join HPB's I Quit Programme. It offers smokers a range of smoking cessation interventions, such as phone or face-to-face counselling, or frequent nudges via text messages to encourage participants to sustain their behaviours.
There have been several questions raised by Members of Parliament on New Zealand's recently announced cohort smoking ban. It is an attractive proposal, in that it prevents young people from taking up smoking while not putting too many restrictions on older smokers. Then, of course, as the years go by, more and more cohorts are smoking free.
MOH is open to studying such a policy. But we need to take into account a few considerations. First, in Singapore's case, young people are generally not taking up smoking, unlike the youths in many other countries. Our youths today no longer see smoking as glamorous and are aware of its harms.
Second, our bigger challenge amongst the young people here are e-cigarettes, which are still tobacco products and harmful to the users, despite its fruity flavours. It is, therefore, outrightly banned here in Singapore. But with e-commerce, they still find their way here. We will need to do more to enforce the current ban, to push back against the tide of popularity and increasing use. If vaping becomes entrenched amongst the younger population, it undoes all the progress we made on curbing smoking and will take an enormous effort over many years to curb its use.
Although New Zealand has announced a cohort smoking ban, it promotes vaping as an alternative to smoking. So, over time, the habit may well shift from smoking to vaping, which in itself is still harmful.
Third, the challenge with a cohort ban is in enforcement. For such a ban to be effective, we would need to introduce laws to penalise older persons who are not subject to the ban but for abetting offences such as supplying tobacco products to the affected cohorts. A similar proposal was discussed in Parliament in 2016 when amendments to the Tobacco (Control of Advertisements and Sale) Act were introduced and MOH explained the challenge of implementation and enforcement then.
Nevertheless, we remain open to the idea. New Zealand’s announced ban will be the first time a country will be implementing such a ban at the national level. We will study how New Zealand implements the ban, its effectiveness and how their experience could be applied here to Singapore.
My Ministry will continue to enhance our approach to tobacco control, through public education, provision of smoking cessation services, legislation and taxation. We will also study new measures to further reduce access to tobacco products and tackle vaping, particularly among our youths.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question time. Mr Leong Mun Wai, you have a Personal Explanation?
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 15-16, 22, 27-28, 30-31, 33-40, 43-56, 58, 60-71, 74-75, 77, 79-85, 87-89 and 91-97 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. The remaining Question 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":"Personal Explanation by Member","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity for me to respond to Minister Chan's query yesterday.
Dear Minister Chan, yesterday, I attempted to get assurance from your good self that children in schools will not be vaccination-differentiated. You may wish to know from ground feedback that many distressed parents are still trying to get reassurance from you and your Ministry, and to be very clear of your position. I see it as my duty as a parliamentarian to bring their valid concerns to this House. Yes, Minister Ong Ye Kung and yourself have given the assurance before —
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong, this is not to make another speech. You were meant to clarify the source of some of the feedback that you provided.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Yes, Mr Speaker, I will come to that very soon.
Mr Speaker: You will come to that, fairly immediately?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Yes.
Mr Speaker: Thank you.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: In spite of that, I sought to get your commitment of a more definite scenario that Vaccinated-differentiation Safe Management Measures (VDS) will not be considered for children at least until non-mRNA vaccines are available for children, which you have avoided to answer directly.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong, I am not going to repeat myself.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Yes, thank you.
Mr Speaker: You are here to clarify the source of the points that you made, not to make another speech.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Okay, yes. Point taken. The point I raised that some schools might have started practising VDS is based on a screenshot from a Telegram chatgroup, sgconcernedparents, sent by a Facebook friend. The relevant messages, among others, are as follows: one, \"Depends on school; my niece came back crying, saying her teacher scolded her for being unvaxxed\" —
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong, the question was about which school, where and so on. Do you have those details?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: I am going through the thing.
Mr Speaker: No. You are going through the thing, the question, which you said you would clarify and the question was about which school so that the Minister could follow up on the allegation that you have made or is it just a screenshot from some Telegram page?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Mr Speaker, can you let me finish the —
Mr Speaker: No, we are asking you to substantiate. We are giving you airtime to substantiate what you said yesterday. So, is that going to come out? Or are you just going to repeat —
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Okay, this information that I am going to say —
Mr Speaker: Or are you just going to repeat about the screenshot?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: I am going to repeat about the screenshot.
Mr Speaker: Do you know the source? Which school and so on?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: There is no mention of the school on the screenshot. But this is public information, on the public domain, sgconcernedparents, a chatgroup with close to 6,000 members. So, if the Ministry wants, they can contact the persons —
Mr Speaker: So, Mr Leong, there is no clarification from you therefore, is that right, as to which school and what specific circumstances?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: I have clarified where the information comes from.
Mr Speaker: Which is from a Telegram page.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Yes.
Mr Speaker: You have no idea what the school was? You have not verified whether that was true or not and so on?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Yes, I want to clarify that that is where I got my information, yes.
Mr Speaker: Okay. Ms Indranee Rajah.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, as Leader of the House, I would like to issue some salutary advice to the learned Member. I have, in this House before, spoken about the importance of being able to substantiate allegations that are made in this House and we have seen what happens when Members make allegations which cannot be substantiated or are irresponsible.
I wish to remind the Member exactly what transpired yesterday. The Member stood up and made an allegation that teachers in MOE were practising vaccination-differentiated measures. It is an allegation which is cast out there and besmirches teachers as a whole. Minister Chan Chun Sing stood up to ask for details of this allegation. And the reason why you provide details, if you are a responsible Member of Parliament, is because when you come to this Chamber and you are given a seat in this Chamber, you are expected to discharge your duties responsibly. When you make allegations against teachers and just cast it out there, you must be able to substantiate it.
And that is why Minister Chan asked, \"Please provide me with the details of which school and which teacher so that the Ministry of Education can follow up.\"
What we have seen today is Mr Leong Mun Wai coming here firstly, to grandstand and make broad allegations or broad speeches that have no bearing whatsoever on the details that were requested of him. We have seen that when you, Mr Speaker, requested him to provide those details, he prevaricated and evaded. And now, finally, we discover that the details cannot be forthcoming because he is referring to a Telegram chat where there are no details at all.
So, I just wish to conclude by reminding Members that they are given the privilege of speaking in this Chamber and that privilege must be exercised responsibly. And I hope that that is something that the Member will bear in mind.
Mr Speaker: Is the point taken, Mr Leong?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Mr Speaker, thanks. Can I ask the Minister —
Mr Speaker: I am asking you whether that point is taken.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: I want to ask one question.
Mr Speaker: I am asking you whether the point is taken. If you have no response to that, you can sit down. Thank you very much.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: No, I note the point but I have my question. Can I ask —
Mr Speaker: No, you have no question. Thank you. We are moving on.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Mr Speaker —
Mr Speaker: We are moving on. You can sit down.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: No, I want to ask what —
Mr Speaker: Order.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: — then what is feedback?
Mr Speaker: We proceed to read the Orders of the Day and Notice of Motions.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, can I have some time, please, to just understand. It is a point of order. I understand it started with a request for a Personal Explanation. Am I right to say that?
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong was asked to clarify the source of the points that he made.
Mr Pritam Singh: Yes, Sir, but I understand that it was on the basis of a Personal Explanation which is how you introduced the subject which Mr Leong then started to speak about. Can I confirm that Mr Leong put in a request under Standing Order 25 for a Personal Explanation? Can I confirm that?
Mr Speaker: The explanation was on the source or the points that he made yesterday.
Mr Pritam Singh: I understand. I am asking you, Sir, whether he followed the procedure under the Standing Orders?
Mr Speaker: He wrote to me with regards to making a clarification under a question that was asked by Minister Chan yesterday.
Mr Pritam Singh: So, he did not follow the —
Mr Speaker: He did not cite the specific issue of personal explanation but that is the category that I am putting it under.
Mr Pritam Singh: Thank you for that. I asked because when a Personal Explanation is made under Standing Order 25, you would actually receive the whole statement in full. So, the assumption was when you mentioned \"Personal Explanation\", you would have had sight of what Mr Leong was going to say. That is the only reason I am asking the question.
Mr Speaker: The content really was with regard to the clarification that he was supposed to have made as to the source of the point that he made.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monetary Authority of Singapore (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
1.43 pm
The Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Speaker, I am taking this Bill on behalf of the Senior Minister and Minister-in-charge of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
As Singapore’s central bank, MAS conducts monetary policy to maintain medium-term price stability which is necessary for sustained growth of the economy. MAS conducts monetary policy by managing the nominal effective exchange rate of the Singapore dollar, the S$NEER, within a policy band. When global financial or economic conditions cause the S$NEER to be subject to significant strengthening or weakening pressures that are inconsistent with domestic price stability, MAS may intervene in the foreign exchange market to sell or buy Singapore dollars, to keep the S$NEER within the policy band.
The Official Foreign Reserves (OFR) plays an important role in the MAS’ conduct of monetary policy and support of financial stability. It gives confidence in Singapore's exchange rate-centred monetary policy framework, particularly during periods of speculative pressure or financial crises, when MAS will need to use its OFR to purchase Singapore dollar to defend the exchange rate.
Conversely, in periods of appreciation pressures on the Singapore dollar, MAS can also sell Singapore dollar in exchange for foreign currency to keep the S$NEER within the policy band. When this happens, MAS accumulates foreign assets and its OFR grows. MAS invests the OFR mainly in safe and liquid assets, so as to ensure that the OFR is available at short notice when needed – for example, to fend off a speculative attack on the Singapore dollar which could potentially undermine confidence in the Singapore economy.
Singapore's excess of domestic savings over investments and persistent capital inflows – in part, reflecting Singapore's triple-A credit rating and the abundant liquidity in global financial markets – have meant strong appreciating pressures on the Singapore dollar. If left unchecked, the S$NEER will strengthen much more than necessary to keep inflation low and stable. As MAS intervened in the foreign exchange market to dampen appreciation pressures on the S$NEER, it has been steadily accumulating OFR beyond that which it estimates is required to fulfil its monetary policy and financial stability mandate.
The optimal amount of OFR that MAS estimates it needs is currently around 65% to 75% of GDP. There is no strict formula to determine this range, but it takes reference from a range of internationally used measures of reserve adequacy that recognise the foreign currency needs of our small open economy that is heavily dependent on trade and financial transactions with the rest of the world. MAS has assessed that this amount of OFR should be able to provide a sufficient buffer against severe crises in the global economy and financial markets.
Today, the stock of OFR has grown to S$566 billion, or about 111% of GDP as at the third quarter of 2021. It is significantly above the range which I just mentioned.
It would be inefficient for MAS to hold on to OFR beyond its needs, because returns on the OFR will be limited by MAS' relatively safer and more liquid investment posture as a central bank. Indeed, it is for this reason that GIC was set up in 1981 to invest OFR that was not needed by MAS in longer-term, high-yielding assets rather than in liquid but low-yielding assets.
The transfer of OFR from MAS to the Government for management by GIC has therefore been a long-standing practice. For example, in 2019, MAS announced a transfer to the Government of S$45 billion of OFR after reviewing the optimal amount of OFR needed.
To date, transfers of MAS' OFR to the Government have been facilitated through a corresponding reduction in the Government's Singapore dollar cash deposits with MAS. In other words, there is a reduction of assets on MAS' balance sheet, which is matched by a reduction of liabilities.
However, this transfer mechanism is increasingly facing constraints. This is mainly because MAS' accumulation of OFR has in recent years persistently outpaced the growth of Government's deposits with MAS, which are not growing as quickly due to smaller fiscal balances. For example, if we want to bring the current level of OFR to the upper end of the optimal range, or 75% of GDP, about S$185 billion of OFR will have to be eventually transferred to the Government. This is far in excess of the Government’s current deposits with MAS.
So, we need a new instrument to effect the transfer of assets from MAS to the Government for long-term investment management. To be clear, this transfer of assets does not increase the total size of the Government’s reserves. It is about shifting assets from MAS to the Government as part of long-term investment management by the GIC.
The Bill sets out legislative amendments that will introduce powers in the MAS Act for MAS to subscribe for a new type of non-marketable security issued by the Government solely to facilitate such transfers of OFR that is not needed for MAS' mandate. This new security is called Reserves Management Government Securities (RMGS). The amendments will allow MAS to subscribe for RMGS issued by the Government under the Government Securities Act (GSA), as consideration for OFR that is transferred to the Government for longer-term investment management by GIC.
In introducing this Bill, MAS and the Government have sought to ensure that MAS' ability to fulfil its mandate is not affected. Two sets of safeguards have therefore been proposed in both the MAS Act and the GSA to tightly circumscribe the conditions for MAS’ subscription of RMGS and the Government’s issuance of RMGS. I will provide further details about each set of safeguards.
The first set of safeguards seeks to robustly address potential misperceptions of monetary financing, in other words, MAS financing the Government's spending. Currently, MAS is already prohibited under the MAS Act from lending to the Government or subscribing for Government securities, apart from limited exceptions, such as to conduct monetary policy or to develop the bond market in Singapore.
Similarly, there are existing safeguards under the GSA today, where the Government’s proceeds from borrowing are accounted for in the Government Securities Fund and can only be used for investments.
Thus, borrowings by the Government in the form of RMGS, will not increase the amount available for spending by the Government.
The Bill will add safeguards in the MAS Act and the GSA to avoid any misperception that RMGS will constitute monetary financing of Government spending.
First, the Bill will empower MAS to subscribe for RMGS for the sole purpose of facilitating the transfer of OFR to the Government and MAS can do so only if the subscription does not compromise its objective of ensuring medium-term price stability.
Second, the Bill will require MAS to use only foreign assets to subscribe for RMGS; and correspondingly, the Government to accept only foreign assets in exchange, to be accounted for in the Government Securities Fund. This draws a clear and direct link between MAS’ RMGS subscription and the transfer of MAS’ OFR to the Government and eliminates the possibility that MAS as a central bank creates Singapore dollars to finance Government spending.
The Bill will introduce within the GSA a separate net issuance limit for RMGS, which will be S$580 billion. Of this amount, about S$185 billion represents the amount which MAS will have to transfer to the Government in phases to bring the level of OFR back to the optimal range. The bulk of the remainder is estimated based on the expected pace of OFR accumulation in future years.
The separate net issuance limit differentiates RMGS from other types of Government borrowings. Transfer amounts and hence RMGS issuance depends on the accumulation of OFR which is driven mainly by MAS' conduct of monetary policy. This, in turn, is affected by financial market factors that can be uncertain. Having a separate limit for RMGS will ensure that the planned issuances of other Government securities and Treasury Bills are not affected should the issuance of RMGS be higher than projected. Conversely, it will also avoid creating additional unintended borrowing space for other Government securities and Treasury Bills, should RMGS issuance be lower than expected.
For transparency, MAS will publish the outstanding RMGS amounts each month. The Government Financial Statements will also state the total gross issuance and total gross redemption of RMGS, in addition to the outstanding RMGS amount. So, that is the first set of safeguards.
A second set of safeguards will preserve MAS' access to sufficient OFR to fulfil its mandate of conducting monetary policy and ensuring financial stability.
The Bill sets out in the MAS Act that any subscription for RMGS can only be made for the purposes of transfer of OFR in excess of the amount MAS considers necessary for the conduct of monetary policy. MAS alone determines the amount of OFR required to meet its mandate and consequently, the amount of OFR which can be transferred to the Government. The Government plays no role in this decision. Consequently, MAS also determines the amount and timing of its RMGS subscriptions to effect transfers of OFR, and the Government cannot independently effect a transfer of OFR from MAS.
The Bill also sets out in the GSA that RMGS will be issued subject to such conditions as to repayment and redemption as may be agreed between MAS and the Government. These conditions will safeguard MAS' access to sufficient OFR to implement monetary policy and support financial stability.
For example, MAS will have the right to redeem RMGS before maturity at par, to meet its OFR needs in support of the conduct of monetary policy and financial stability. We expect that the optimal amount of OFR held by MAS will comfortably meet its needs under most circumstances. Hence, MAS' redemption of RMGS before maturity will likely be needed to supplement OFR only in a tail risk event. When MAS redeems RMGS at or before maturity, MAS will be repaid in foreign assets.
These conditions will ensure that the RMGS on MAS' balance sheet can readily support MAS' ability to fulfil its mandate if necessary.
In conclusion, Sir, this Bill will allow MAS to subscribe for RMGS issued by the Government for the sole purpose of facilitating continued transfers of MAS' OFR to the Government for longer-term investment by GIC. RMGS will enable such transfers to be sustained over the longer term.
While the Government will take on more debt as a result of RMGS, borrowing is not revenue and the introduction of RMGS does not increase what the Government can spend. The Government's approach towards borrowing remains unchanged – the Government's borrowings is for non-spending purposes with the exception of the recently introduced SINGA to finance spending on nationally significant infrastructure.
This Bill will also put in place safeguards to ensure that RMGS will not and cannot be used for Government spending, and that MAS will continue to have ready access to the transferred OFR to support MAS’ ability to fulfil its mandate as necessary.
Further, the nominal increase in Government debt through RMGS will be matched by an increase in assets, with no change in the Government’s net asset position. The Government continues to have a strong balance sheet with no net debt. RMGS does not change this, as all RMGS issuances are only used to facilitate transfers of assets for longer-term investments. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore has always been an attractive destination for foreign investments; both direct investments and financial investments.
In 2020, despite being an uncertain and challenging year, EDB was able to attract direct investment commitments of $17 billion, very much keeping up to the trajectory for inbound direct investments.
On the financial investments front, the Singapore dollar denominated equity and debt market assets continue to attract significant capital inflows as investors take comfort in our solid sovereign ratings, our strong economic fundamentals and political stability. Coupled with the country's net positive savings, our local dollar persistently faced strong appreciation pressures.
In order to manage the Singapore dollar within a tolerated trade-weighted band, MAS would often need to intervene in the foreign exchange markets to moderate the rise of the Singapore dollar and as a result, accumulate a growing size of foreign currency, known as the Official Financial Reserves (OFR).
To many jurisdictions, this would be an enviable position or a happy problem to manage. It demonstrates the international markets' confidence in the Singapore’s economy, the securities that we issued and the Singapore dollar.
While this may be a happy situation, we need to manage a couple of related issues. Firstly, how much of the OFR does MAS needs to conduct monetary operations effectively and to ensure price stability and markets stability? In excess of that OFR, what do we do with the accumulated OFR which are in foreign currencies? How can we derive decent returns from these accumulated funds?
Firstly, on how much of the OFR should MAS hold. The Minister has just mentioned that the MAS, as at November 2021, holds S$566 billion of OFR. This is quite a significant increase from the year before of S$479 billion in December 2020. That is an 18% increase.
The current level of OFR represents more than 100% of the size of Singapore's GDP. The Minister mentioned that it is about 110% or 111% of the GDP.
MAS determines that the optimal level of the OFR should be about 65% to 75% of Singapore's GDP. I suppose this takes into consideration the size and the daily turnover of the Singapore dollar traded in markets and the ability to buffer against large and sudden outflows of capital that could result in extreme volatility in the Singapore dollar exchange rate. To serve this function of managing extreme volatility, the OFR are kept in cash or high-quality liquid assets so that it can be drawn upon immediately when the need arises.
Whether in absolute amount or relative to the GDP or on a per capital basis, our OFR stock would be among the highest in the world. So, there are no real merits to further add to the stock of the OFR if the optimal level is already more than adequate to manage monetary operations and to tackle markets' tail risk events.
Besides, we also have two other pots of national reserves managed by GIC and Temasek, which could further shore up confidence and strength in Singapore's financial position.
While the OFR amount is regularly published, I would like to take this opportunity in this Second Reading to ask the Minister to share on the framework under which the OFR are managed. What are the liquidity and risk guidelines and is there a target return for MAS in managing the OFR? Also, how often does MAS review the optimal level of OFR to hold and do significant economic or market risk events such as a regional currency crisis immediately trigger upward adjustments of the OFR?
Sir, this Bill empowers MAS to subscribe to the RMGS issued by the Government in consideration for the OFR to be transferred to the Government and thereafter for GIC to manage. With this transfer, the excess OFR can be invested in portfolios with longer-term horizons and relatively more risky assets so as to achieve higher returns than what MAS can deliver.
This instituted transfer mechanism sharpened the clarity of the role between MAS, which primarily focuses on price stability; and GIC, which invests for longer tenures and take on higher risks for higher returns. So, on this aspect, I have two further questions for the Minister.
Would the excess OFR that is being transferred to GIC be managed as a segregated pot from the rest of the financial reserves that GIC manage? My second question is, would the returns from these excess reserves contribute to the annual NIRC?
As to whether the Government could use the RMGS proceeds to finance Government spending, I am satisfied that the current legislative safeguards, namely the GSA and the current amendments to the MAS Act, are adequate to prohibit that. In addition, the Constitution also requires the Government of the day to balance the budget over its term of Government. Sir, with that, I support the amendments.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (Amendment) Bill is complementary to the earlier Government Securities (Debt Market and Investment) Act, which was debated in this House late last year and on which I had previously spoken.
The present Bill introduces important institutional safeguards consistent with this Government's overall approach of designating different accounts for distinct financial functions that are designed to inhibit the purchase of Reverse Management Government Securities, or RMGS, for the purposes of either monetising Government expenditures or financing fiscal deficits. It also embeds several related amendments to the Government Securities Act.
As with the earlier legislation, the stipulations in this Bill are largely technical in nature. The Bill will allow the transfer of official foreign reserves, or OFRs, in excess of what is required by MAS for the conduct of monetary policy to the GIC for management. As long as we accept the premise that such excess reserve accumulation is reasonable, then their transfer to management by GIC is likely to be sound and potentially more efficient.
Mr Speaker, I am not opposed to this Bill, but I will offer some brief comments and questions about several aspects of the Bill proper before moving on to question the premise that our present status quo for reserve accumulation is reasonable.
MAS protocol currently adopts a threshold where OFRs in excess of 65% of GDP are regarded as excessive. I understand that this threshold is not established in law and is operationally determined. Yet clause 15A indicates a cap aggregate amount of $580 billion, which by article 144(a) of the Constitution, requires a Parliamentary resolution to overturn. I am not opposed to this, of course, but I am left wondering why such a specific limit would need to be hard-coded into the letter of the law since the functional use of RMGS purchases are, in any case, limited to reserve management purposes rather than fiscal expenditure.
One is also left to wonder how the 65% or, for that matter, the $580 billion threshold was determined. Would these two amounts be consistent at all times? After all, a 65% of GDP will continue to increase in absolute terms as the economy continues to grow whereas the dollar amount would not. Would this mean a need for periodic revisions to the $580 billion?
I would also add that since 2010, Singapore has been party to the Chiang Mai Initiative while the Federal Reserve has also extended temporary dollar financial swap facilities to Singapore since the Global Financial Crisis in 2008. Does the threshold already account for the additional extra liquidity available as a result of these swap arrangements?
Conversely, the abundant liquidity conditions currently in place resulting from large-scale asset purchases due to unconventional monetary policy operations such as quantitative easing appear globally to be steadily receding. The Federal Reserve Bank has already announced tapering operations, many central banks have already begun the process of low interest rate normalisation and markets already anticipate tighter liquidity conditions to set in around the middle of this year. Would the threshold be sufficient if we are no longer living in a world of abundant liquidity?
Sir, the meta-question that this Bill poses, however, should also, in my view, be asked – why are our foreign exchange rate reserves accumulating as rapidly as they are?
The official reason furnished by MAS in its explanatory brief accompanying this Bill, is that appreciation pressure on the Singapore dollar is the result of \"positive net saving and persistent capital inflows arising from abundant liquidity in global financial markets.\" But this only begs the question of why we appear to be resisting such appreciation pressure of which excess accumulation is but the consequence.
The standard explanation is that MAS is mandated to pursue an exchange rate policy aimed at mitigating the effects of excessive short-term volatility in the real economy. But minimising short-term volatility does not by any means preclude a steady appreciation – or depreciation, for their matter – over time.
Mr Speaker, emerging economies in the process of development exhibit exchange rates which, after correcting for inflation, tend to appreciate over time. This is especially the case for countries that have experienced rapid economic growth as Singapore has since Independence. Yet, remarkably, our real effective exchange rate – that is, the average rate relative to our major trading partners – while waxing and waning over the decades has remained remarkably close to the level that prevailed in 1970.
While we were still a middle-income country, this may have been a viable development strategy. However, in as much as we remain an open economy reliant on competitive exports, we must not forget that there is also a flip side to such exchange rate undervaluation. Not only does this drive up the cost of the intermediate goods our manufacturers use as inputs to production, it also indirectly impoverishes our consumers who must now face higher prices for the Nike shoes, Samsung TVs and Apple iPhones that we import from elsewhere.
This is all the more so in the current macroeconomic environment. Singapore's headline inflation rate, as we discussed earlier during Question Time, touched 3.8% in November, the highest in more than eight years.
Now, this should be unsurprising given how much of our goods and services are in fact imported and as the Minister of State Low Yen Ling as well as Minister Indranee mentioned, global inflation is likely to remain elevated due to a mix of supply constraints, tight labour markets in certain segments and heightened fuel prices. Indeed, both MAS and MTI have themselves acknowledged that this state of affairs is \"likely to continue in the near term\".
I am not, of course, the first to suggest that our real exchange rate may in fact be undervalued. In 2019, the US Treasury first placed Singapore on a watch list for currency manipulators, a position that it maintained in its latest iteration released in April last year. Other observers using more rigorous assessment criteria have posited the same thing. I would, at the very least, urge additional introspection and research by MAS on whether there is in fact a potential undervaluation of the Singapore dollar, and to publish and share with the public the results of such research. If so, perhaps the Government will consider whether a true gradual appreciation of the Singapore dollar – which would in turn indirectly mitigate much of the excess OFR problem that is a major motivation behind this Bill – might eventually be warranted, especially for an economy at our current stage of development.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, our huge national reserves are the pride of our nation. But few Singaporeans know the size of our reserves and how the reserves are accumulated, managed and spent.
The reserves are actually accumulated through a mechanism which operates on a few key principles put in place in the 1980s by the late Dr Goh Keng Swee. The mechanism essentially uses our large pool of domestic savings to soak up the foreign money that flows into Singapore because of its strategic position as a trade and financial centre of Southeast Asia since the late 19th century.
This mechanism has worked well and will put us in a strong financial position for generations to come. However, this MAS (Amendment) Bill that we are debating today will violate a key principle of this mechanism laid down by Dr Goh and runs the risk of compromising the mechanism altogether.
That principle stipulates that the Government must purchase foreign reserves from MAS with Government deposits, which is essentially the cash owned by the Government or the nation. As the amount of Government deposits equals the excess savings in our economy, the accumulation of foreign reserves is limited by the size of the excess savings as envisaged by Dr Goh.
However, this Bill opens up the possibility of the Government accumulating foreign reserves through simply getting MAS to print Singapore dollars. This is effected through clause 2 of this Bill, which deletes and substitutes section 23(6) of the MAS Act, to allow the MAS to subscribe to the Reserve Management Government Securities (RMGS) although section 23(5) states that MAS shall not directly subscribed for any securities issued by the Government or any public authority.
Hence, this is a major change in the conduct of a monetary policy. In layman's term, while MAS cannot do quantitative easing in the past, it can potentially do so – and I say potentially, not necessarily so – if this Bill is passed.
So, let us bear that in mind, as I proceed through my speech today. My speech today will start off with explaining the reserve accumulation process and the dangers of the RMGS and then ends with a call on the Government to be more transparent about our national reserves.
The reserve accumulation process. The Government, specifically MOF, oversees the reserve accumulation and management process, but it is the MAS and GIC which are the operating entities. MAS as central bank of Singapore has the power to print Singapore dollars as and when the need arises. MAS is also the banker for the Government, holding the nation's cash in the form of Government deposits. MAS buys and sells foreign currencies with Singapore dollars on the Foreign Exchange Market to manage the value of Singapore dollar. When foreign currencies are bought, they become the Official Foreign Reserves (OFR) of MAS.
Under our reserve management arrangement, MAS will keep OFR up to a stipulated amount for managing the Singapore dollar. The stipulated amount currently is about $325 billion. Foreign reserves in excess of the stipulated amount will be transferred to GIC. GIC is a 100% Government-owned investment company formed in 1981 to manage the excess foreign reserves as an endowment fund for Singaporeans.
Unlike the OFR, an endowment fund can invest in more long-term and risky investments to achieve a higher return. As substantial assets have been transferred to GIC over the years, GIC holds most of our national reserves. The balance is held by Temasek Holdings, which is not involved in the reserve accumulation process explained here. The OFR under MAS is also technically not considered part of our national reserves. Given our position as a financial centre of Southeast Asia, there is usually a net inflow of foreign money year after year. So, the MAS has ample opportunity to accumulate foreign reserves. The MAS can utilise the Government deposits or increase the supply of Singapore dollars to accumulate foreign reserves.
In the past, the foreign reserves were mainly accumulated using Government deposits. We have substantial Government deposits because it is actually our huge excess domestic savings, channelled into the public coffers through the CPF system and the structural Government surpluses derived from land sales and a whole range of indirect taxes and public services fee. Accordingly, the accumulation of reserves is limited by the amount of excess savings we have.
So, what do we do when the inflow of foreign money far exceeds the amount of the Government deposits or our excess savings? We can decide not to accumulate any more reserves or to continue accumulating. If we choose the former, then we will have to either allow our Singapore dollar to appreciate further or to implement new policies to control the inflow of foreign money.
If the Government wishes to continue accumulating foreign reserves, MAS will have to print new Singapore dollars since there is no Government deposits to pay for it. This seems to be the case in 2020 and 2021. When MAS probably increased the Singapore dollars to absorb the sudden surge in foreign money inflow. This in turn has caused the accelerated rise in property prices from 2022 to today.
The large foreign reserve increases in 2020 and 2021, amounting to more than $180 billion in total, pushed the OFR to $566 billion by end 2021, far exceeding the targeted OFR limit of $325 billion. So, the excess has to be transferred to GIC. However, under the present rule the foreign reserves cannot be transferred from MAS to GIC if the foreign reserves were not paid for by Government deposits.
The Government and MAS, a central bank, are independent operating entities, operationally. And the Government cannot take assets away from MAS without paying for it. As the Government has no money to pay, we are debating this Bill today to allow the Government to pay with an IOU. Hence, this Bill allows the Government to create a new class of IOU, called the Reserve Management Government Securities (RMGS) to pay for foreign reserves to be transferred from MAS to GIC.
This Bill does open up the possibility for the Government to pressure MAS to print more Singapore dollars to accumulate foreign reserves and then buy them over from MAS with RMGS. Needless to say, this runs the danger of a collapse in monetary and fiscal discipline, leading to hyperinflation potentially. Hence, we recommend that there should be a strict annual RMGS, issuance limit, annual limit incorporated into the Bill, as a new check to reduce the potential dangers described above.
The $580 billion limit for the RMGS proposed in the Bill is far too large and is not on an annual basis. So, the first question I want to ask is we appreciate all the safeguards that the Minister for Finance had explained just now about preventing monetisation of Government spending. However, can the Minister explain what is the difference between the monetisation that you are explaining and the fact that in 2020 and 2021, we have accumulated assets, additional assets of close to $200 billion and at the same time, on the other hand, we have been spending for the COVID-19 packages. So, is this not indirectly monetisation of Government spending?
Next, I shall touch on the transparency of our national reserves. The Government has always been unwilling to state officially the size of our national reserves; often citing national security as a reason. This reason, however, does not hold water. This is because the Government actually reports our country's financial position every year in a report entitled the Government Financial Statement (GFS). However, a few of us – busy and pressured Singaporeans – know of this report. Because yearly, up to 2020, only one hard copy of the report was available at the National Library. This report went online only after 2020 on SingStat.
On the other hand, we can assume that the intelligence agents of foreign countries would not have missed this piece of information. Thus, it is rational that the Government announces our national reserves, or at least the financial assets reported in the GFS in the mainstream media every year so that Singaporeans will get to know about it.
So, my second question is, does the Government still think that there is a need to keep our national reserves figures confidential?
According to the GFS for Fiscal Year 2020, the total financial assets managed by the Government and belonging to all Singaporeans have grown from $1.35 trillion in 2019 to $1.4 trillion in 2020. Our reserves have continued to increase in 2020 despite the largest drawdown of $53 billion in the history of our nation to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Our national reserves have continued to increase because we continue to accumulate new foreign reserves to the tune of about a $100 billion a year for 2020 and 2021, as explained just now. On top of that, we also earned net investment return of about $40 billion for each of those years. By my estimate, the total financial assets will increase further to $1.5 trillion in Fiscal Year 2021. Hence, it is puzzling, why the Government keeps insisting on raising more taxes when our foreign reserves are substantial, still increasing and earn good returns every year.
Mr Speaker, in conclusion, I would like to emphasise three points.
One, the Government should disclose the size of our national reserves to Singaporeans or at least confirm the information that is already made public. It should also account for the accumulation management and spending of the reserves.
Two, given our huge national reserves which are still growing and giving a good investment return, our country's financial position is healthy and there is no need to raise additional tax revenue through the GST. Many Singaporeans continue to ask me how about Government expenditures? So, many of them would like to know how the Government has spent the $100 billion for the COVID-19 packages. I will request the Government to submit a full report to Parliament during the Budget Debate on 18 February before it asks Singaporeans for more money through the GST hike.
Three, there is an economic cost in accumulating reserves too, as what Assoc Prof Jamus Lim also said just now. It is best to stick to Dr Goh's prudent style of reserve accumulation. Printing money to acquire foreign reserves, allowed under this Bill, will carry with it a big economic cost. Hence, if we really need this Bill, there should be at least an annual RMGS issuance limit incorporated into this Bill as a check on the Government. The proposed $580 billion limit currently provided in the Bill is far too large and is not an annual limit.
Mr Speaker, notwithstanding our concerns, we still support the Bill to give our Government maximum leeway in managing our financial affairs. But we request the Government to seriously take note of our concerns and not allow monetary and fiscal discipline to be weakened by this Bill.
Mr Speaker: Prof Hoon Hian Teck.
Prof Hoon Hian Teck (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, at one level, this Bill simply seeks to address a technical issue: to provide an alternative mechanism for the MAS to transfer to the Government the excess of Official Foreign Reserves (OFR) above the level that is required for it to perform its function of carrying out an exchange rate centred monetary policy to achieve price stability over the medium term. The OFR that are transferred to the Government is for long-term management by the GIC.
Currently, transfers of MAS OFR are mediated through a corresponding reduction in the Government's cash deposits held at MAS. However, with smaller fiscal balances in recent years, leading to a situation where the Government's cash deposits are not growing as rapidly as the MAS' accumulation of OFR, the current mechanism for transfer faces a constraint. The new mechanism proposed under the amendment Bill overcomes this constraint by providing for the transfer of the MAS OFR through a subscription to the Reserves Management Government Securities (RMGS) issued by the Government.
Two questions arise. What has caused MAS to systematically accumulate OFR over these decades? How do we prevent the perception that the new mechanism offers the Government the means to conduct money finance fiscal policy?
On the first question, Singapore's high private savings rate alongside the constitutional requirement that the Government must achieve at least budget balance over its term of office has meant that the country's holdings of net foreign assets – that is the excess of our gross assets over our gross liabilities – have steadily increased over the years. When the Government does run a budget surplus over its term of office, which it has, the public saving augments the stock of reserves and boosts the country's net foreign assets. Net foreign assets denominated in foreign currency, such as the US dollar, has higher real purchasing power when measured in terms of domestic GDP because some of the goods and services consumed by Singaporeans are non-traded.
And in the classroom, we give the favourite example of haircuts. Transport costs are too high to make it worthwhile to travel to another country to get a haircut, so haircuts become a non-tradable activity.
Through this channel, an increase in net foreign assets tends to be associated in statistical analysis with a depreciation of the real effective exchange rate. So, there is the nominal effective exchange rate of the Singapore dollar, that is, how many Singapore dollars to buy a US dollar in the foreign exchange market; and then, there is the real effective exchange rate, which really measures Singapore's general price level relative to the general price level of its trading partners when measured in the same currency. So, when Singapore's cost of living goes up, we have a real exchange rate appreciation. Correspondingly, when things are cheaper in Singapore, because haircuts are not tradable, we have a real exchange rate depreciation.
The channel I just refer to suggests that what you might call the valuation effect, tends to be negatively associated with our net foreign assets. Other channels, such as more rapid productivity growth in the manufacturing sector compared to the productivity growth in the non-traded goods sector, might exert pressures for a real exchange rate appreciation.
So, if you have the manufacturing sector able to robotise and so on, and its productivity goes up, whereas the non-traded sector, apart of the retail sector, which largely will be selling to only domestic customers and their productivity is not growing as much, then the fact that the manufacturing sector is experiencing higher productivity growth will push up the wage rate, but workers are free to move in the job between the factory and in the retail sector. So, there is an upward pressure in the retail sector, that is non-traded, also to pay as high a wage, whereas productivity has not gone up, so if unit labour costs goes up and therefore the non-traded good price tends to go up. And for that reason, this channel leads to a real exchange rate appreciation.
Another channel that can cause a real exchange rate appreciation is the rise of domestic investment, because a part of investment such as building infrastructure, tends to be non-tradable. And that rise in domestic investment also tends to raise the real effective exchange rate. That is a real appreciation.
So, there are all these factors that can cause the real exchange rate to go up or to go down.
Broadly speaking, a statistical analysis done with data quarterly from 1983 to 2018 has shown that, largely speaking, around about 1985, which was when Singapore experienced its recession, the real exchange rate was high. In other words, high appreciation. It somewhat declined down to the early 1990s and then began to rise again until the Asian Financial Crisis, came down again around to about 2005, and since then, has been rising.
Nevertheless, despite these forces that I have just mentioned that can cause real exchange rate appreciation or depreciation, with Singapore experiencing steady capital inflows, alluded to by Minister for Finance, including short-term capital inflows, has meant that the nominal effective exchange rate of the Singapore dollar has faced upward pressure to appreciate beyond the equilibrium real effective exchange rate. In other words, in the absence of the MAS intervention in the foreign exchange market, the Singapore dollar would tend to become overvalued.
In accordance with the MAS exchange rate monetary policy framework, its intervention in the foreign exchange market to dampen these pressures and keep the nominal effective exchange rate of the Singapore dollar within the policy band and conceptually that means trying to aim for what you think is the equilibrium real exchange rate, has led to a steady accumulation of OFR.
On to the second question. The explanatory brief put up by MAS at the First Reading of the amendment Bill has been at pains to make clear that there are safeguards to ensure that the new mechanism to be put in place does not lead to de facto money finance fiscal policy, that is, to let the central bank lend money to the Government to finance its spending and fiscal deficits. First, the amendment Bill requires that MAS can subscribe to RMGS solely for the purpose of facilitating the transfer of OFR and that its subscription does not compromise MAS' ability to achieve medium-term price stability.
Second, MAS will only be able to use its foreign currency asset to subscribe to RMGS. In other words, the RMGS cannot be used as a tool to print money to pay for Government spending. The safeguards in the MAS (Amendment) Bill will complement the existing safeguard in the Government Security Act under which the Government proceeds from borrowing, can only be used for investment and market development purposes.
Mr Speaker, Sir, the theory of economic policy suggests that there should be as many policy instruments as there are economic objectives and the application of the policy instruments to achieve these objectives should be based on their comparative advantage. Our being a small, open economy means that the management of the nominal exchange rate – I think that was very much in the thought of Dr Goh Keng Swee – serves well the purpose of achieving medium term price stability. And we have the record to show for it, because other than the spike of inflation in 1973 and a smaller spike in 1979 during the oil crisis, we largely have maintained very stable inflation rate, below 2% per annum.
Structural policy, such as the implementation of Industry Transformation Maps, helps to raise the economy's underlying rate of productivity growth. This in turn, contributes to growth of national income as a mature economy, because as a mature economy, it is not going to be capital deepening that will raise the standard of living. A large part of what would contribute to our steady growth of income will have to come from productivity growth. But with the growth of national income, we have an expansion of the tax base. Fiscal policy in setting the tax subsidy structure contributes to economic inclusion.
So, painting with a broad brush, we have three economic objectives: maintaining medium-term price stability, achieving an underlying economy wide productivity growth and facilitating economic inclusion with an assignment of three policy instruments: an exchange rate centred monetary policy, structural policy and fiscal policy respectively.
With this policy mix, we can continue to exercise fiscal prudence, ensuring that we have the fiscal resources to pay for our recurrent spending and thus free MAS to focus on its function of maintaining medium-term price stability without facing the pressure of monetary financing. Sir, I support the amendment Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Derrick Goh.
Mr Derrick Goh (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, the MAS (Amendment) Bill introduces the use of Reserves Management Government Securities (RMGS) to facilitate the management of Government reserves. These amendments will help in the deployment of reserves that are in excess of baseline Official Foreign Reserves (OFR) to optimise returns for Singapore. This is a good step to take as it will also reduce MAS' exposure to translation effects from its foreign currency holdings.
The introduction of new safeguards along with the amendments to the Government Securities Act will help ensure that RMGS will be solely used for the purpose of transferring OFR. The safeguards will provide assurance to the public that RMGS cannot be used for Government spending.
Given the above, I seek two clarifications from the Minister on this Bill.
One, today MAS has a stated position of maintaining OFR of at least 65% of GDP to which it deems sufficient to defend against speculative pressures. One can expect the exact percentage to be confidential and vary, depending on the conditions of the financial markets. If more RMGS is issued, on average one can expect higher investment but lower liquidity cushion to manage the Singapore dollar exchange rate in times of financial market stress. Conversely, if the size of RMGS is lower, the higher will be MAS' liquidity cushion.
As MAS being our central bank alone determines such levels independent of the Government, can Minister explain how this independence is maintained since MAS' board comprises largely of our Government Ministers who have roles and responsibilities on both sides?
Secondly, Minister Lawrence Wong earlier mentioned about the tail risk situations. Assuming a higher level of OFR is required to conduct monetary policy, it appears that MAS can redeem RMGS from the Government on demand. If so, can Minister explain how the mechanism ensures fairness between central bank, which may need more liquidity during periods when markets are under financial stress and the Government, or GIC, which has invested the RMGS funds in longer-term assets and may have to potentially sell assets under market stress conditions?
Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding the above clarifications, I support this Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, we have a happy problem of official foreign reserves (OFR) outpacing the growth of Government deposits in recent years, that we need to adjust our transfer mechanism through this Bill.
Putting aside the pandemic, Singapore could continue to have a high savings rate because of its tradition of prudent fiscal policy and the mandatory contributions all working Singaporeans make to their CPF accounts. Given Singapore’s positive net savings and persistent capital inflows, the nominal exchange rate often tends to appreciate more than is required to keep inflation low and stable.
MAS accumulates foreign assets on average in the process of managing the Singapore dollar within its policy band even as it sells foreign assets during times of stress on the Singapore dollar.
I would like to ask: what is the desired level of liquid assets which MAS should have in order to maintain the floating parity of the Singapore dollar? Should a sweeping mechanism be imposed so that excess reserves can be transferred to GIC once the OFR reaches a threshold, say 70%? Excess reserves should be managed by GIC as long-term investments and yield more returns. Thus, there is an opportunity cost when the transfer of reserves is delayed. How was the 65% threshold being derived and should it be reviewed or should the OFR be multiples of the highest annual outflow of capital which Singapore had experienced in the past decade?
I understand that MAS invests the OFR in a well diversified portfolio. Would the Minister share with the House how much of green bonds and green equities does it have in its portfolio? Can green investments be increased further? Can MAS invest in more green instruments, especially those which are issued in Singapore? Can the Reserves Management Government Securities (RMGS) be invested into green and sustainability-related instruments?
Were the official foreign reserves valued at cost or market price? I am confident that MAS' accounting conventions adopted conformed to international accounting practice.
It is important that the people know the approach taken to value Government assets. Valuations should be derived from prudent principles and not based on optimistic assumptions to inflate asset values.
Has MAS' investment approach been to invest its reserves for returns? Will it be reducing its holdings in US dollars and GBP and diversified into other currencies?
MAS seeks to smoothen wide fluctuations in the exchange rate by intervening in the currency markets, selling Singapore dollars if the currency is deemed to have appreciated too much or buying Singapore dollars if the currency has been beaten down too much. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Reserves management is a multi-objective and a multi-generational effort. The OFR serves as a buffer against bad times and as a Singapore dollar stabiliser. MAS, like Members in this House, are custodians of our reserves and we owe a duty of care and responsibility to the current and future generations of Singaporeans. I thank the MAS officers for their hard work in extracting the optimal yield while minimising risk.
(In English): I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill provides a much needed solution. Since 2016, foreign reserves managed by MAS have grown by an average of 11% each year, outpacing our GDP growth. MAS needs only a fraction of these reserves on hand to manage our domestic price stability. The rest of it would be better utilised by our GIC, our sovereign wealth fund, to maximise investment returns.
This Bill provides a framework for that transfer to happen. The framework delicately balances the need to maximise investment returns with the need to give MAS enough flexibility to maintain price stability. That said, I have four points of clarification.
My first point is on the definition of excess foreign reserves. Since 2019, MAS has said that it does not need more than 65% of GDP in foreign reserves to achieve its goal of maintaining medium-term price stability. Can the Minister share details on the reviews MAS has conducted in order to arrive at this calculation? What scenarios and factors did it consider? Given that the 65% has not changed in the past three years, can the Minister share how regularly MAS plans to review the amount of foreign reserves it needs?
In addition, does MAS envision the scope for this 65% to be further reduced and for a greater proportion to be channelled for GIC investments? This is given the fact that even in the worst months of the Asian Financial Crisis and the Global Recession, we saw very minimal, if any, decrease in foreign reserves managed by MAS. Of course, I understand future crises and currency speculation may demand unusually high amounts of foreign reserves to combat.
This brings me to my second point on worst-case scenarios.
In 2019, when MAS transferred $45 million to the Government for GIC to invest, MAS stated, \"In the event of an extreme adverse scenario, the foreign reserves held by the Government are also available to ensure that MAS operations are not compromised.\"
Can the Minister share how foreign reserves held by GIC and Temasek would be availed to MAS in the event of such an extreme adverse scenario? By design, GIC and Temasek's assets are less liquid and higher risk. So, it seems unclear how the amount of foreign currency envisioned as necessary in such an extreme scenario could become quickly available.
My third point is about the redemptions of the RMGS by MAS. Can the Minister explain what role will the Government play in setting conditions for the redemption of the RMGS by MAS? Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam had said that MAS will have \"sole discretion to redeem the RMGS for foreign assets before maturity and without penalty.\" Yet, section 15B(2) of the amended Act states that the Minister's agreement will be required in setting conditions surrounding a repayment and redemption of RMGS.
This seems to contradict the notion that MAS will have sole discretion. It opens the door for a future Minister to institute a penalty for early redemptions or, indeed, any other kind of condition. Can the Minister share why the Bill does not provide MAS with sole discretion on redeeming the RMGS prematurely and without penalty? What conditions does the Ministry expect to set in relation to the repayment and redemption of the RMGS?
My fourth and final point is about the $580 billion limit. Section 15A(2) of the amended Act limits the Government from accepting more than $580 billion of foreign reserves from MAS. Can the Minister share how it decided on $580 billion as the limit? What purpose does the cap serve? What are the principle and methodology by which the Government has set the $580 billion as the cap?
In summary, I hope the Minister can clarify how MAS reached its definition of excess foreign reserves, how liquid GIC and Temasek's foreign reserves are, what role the Government will play in constraining MAS' RMGS redemptions and how the $580 billion limit was determined.
Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill will empower MAS to subscribe for reserves management government securities, or RMGS, issued by the Government. RMGS will help to facilitate continued transfer of official foreign reserves, or OFR, to the Government for longer-term investment with GIC. The goal is to help to promote financial stability.
I wish to seek the Minister's clarification on some issues.
First, the optimal OFR amount needed to support MAS' mandate is currently defined as being at least 65% of GDP. I understand that MAS reviews this amount regularly. As it is a key threshold in this arrangement for the RMGS bond issuance, do we expect this threshold to change over time? If so, what are the key variables that may shift this ratio?
I note that there will be a separate RMGS issuance limit, which allows for greater transparency on RMGS proceeds and clearer segregation from other Government securities and treasury bills. Can the Minister share what is the RMGS limit and what is the maturity period or duration of the issued RMGS bonds?
The Government will accept only foreign assets in exchange for RMGS issuance to draw a clear and direct link between RMGS issuance and transfer of OFR. This is meant to be an additional safeguard against monetary financing. However, in the case where the OFR falls below 65%, there will be a need for intervention. MAS cannot sell its RMGS holdings to other entities unless the Minister for Finance consents. So, RMGS cannot be used to raise funds from the market. Can the Ministry clarify how rigorously this policy will be enforced and under what circumstances might the Minister give consent?
Next, how can RMGS be liquidated to meet the transfer of foreign reserves back to MAS for intervention purposes? If MAS redeems RMGS bond before maturity at par to meet OFR requirements and support the conduct of monetary policy, how much loss can the Government provision for?
Next, since the transactions would be denominated in other currencies, would this make us more vulnerable to foreign exchange risks? Taking the US currency, for example, will MAS be overly exposed to the US dollar holdings in its assets? Given the inclusion of RMGS item in the MAS balance sheet with the passing of this Bill, can I seek the Minister to share what are the plausible worst-case scenarios from both an accounting, fiscal and market perspectives involved in undertaking these RMGS issues in the MAS balance sheet?
My last question concerns the impact on net Singapore dollar liquidity. Would the accumulation of RMGS on the MAS balance sheet over time have any indirect effect on the liquidity of the Singapore dollar in the medium to long run? As we continue with \"leaning against the wind\" activity as part of our band basket and crawl managed float, will this new RMGS introduction affect our overall sterilisation activities and net liquidity flows into the financial system in the medium to long term?
In addition, MAS' total RMGS holdings will be published monthly for transparency. This is a good thing for financial analysts and the informed public who wish to have a more in-depth understanding of our financial situation. But can I clarify if there are plans to release higher frequency data going forward and, if so, will it reveal too much information to market participants and thus infer our foreign exchange intervention activities?
The specifications in the Bill are clearly spelt out to segregate RMGS from other Government securities and treasury bills. RMGS cannot be used to finance Government spending and neither can its proceeds be spent. So, it would not have any impact on our fiscal plans. Nonetheless, the current transfer mechanism faces constraints as the accumulation of official foreign reserves persistently outpaces the growth of Government deposits in recent years.
This would be righted with the new RMGS mechanism. However, it is important to correct misperceptions that the policy is about financing the Government's spending and fiscal deficits. Notwithstanding these clarifications, Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister Lawrence Wong.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Members of the House who have shared their views on the Bill and who have supported it. Members' comments and queries can be categorised into a bucket of different issues and I will address them in turn.
First, on MAS' management of the OFR. Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Louis Ng, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Don Wee have all asked questions about how the optimal amount of OFR is determined and how MAS reviews this.
MAS regularly reviews and updates the optimal amount of OFR for its needs. In its reviews, MAS uses a range of internationally used reserves adequacy measures within a general cost-benefit framework to assess the required amount of OFR.
From a benefits perspective, the OFR provides MAS with the means to protect the functioning and stability of the economy against shocks. So, MAS takes reference from historical episodes of such significant domestic and international disruptions to compute the OFR that is necessary to safeguard stability and confidence.
From the cost perspective, MAS recognises the opportunity cost of holding reserves in liquid financial instruments on its balance sheet in terms of the higher returns forgone, if these assets had not been invested in longer-term assets by GIC.
As Singapore's economic and financial linkages with global markets continue to expand and deepen, the OFR required should broadly keep in line with GDP and complement the structural factors underpinning Singapore's macroeconomic and financial soundness. Based on these considerations, MAS has, therefore, assessed that the OFR of 65% to 75% of GDP is adequate to meet its needs and OFR above this amount will then be transferred to the Government to be managed separately.
As we have repeatedly said, this is not a new idea. The point about transferring excess OFR to GIC for long-term management is not new at all. It is the very reason why GIC was set up in 1981. So, when Mr Leong Mun Wai talked about a departure from the principles that Dr Goh Keng Swee had set up – there is no departure. This is completely in line and consistent with the founding principles upon which we do reserves management.
There is also the question on the framework under which MAS manages the OFR.
MAS manages the OFR with the primary objectives of maintaining confidence in Singapore's exchange rate-based monetary policy framework and securing macroeconomic and financial stability. The key elements underpinning this OFR management framework are robust risk management, including an appropriate liquidity profile and a well-diversified asset allocation across geographies, asset classes and currencies. These elements serve to produce a resilient portfolio and safeguard the OFR's availability to support MAS' conduct of monetary policy.
Subject to these elements, MAS seeks to achieve good long-term returns on its OFR and that would include taking steps to manage longer-term risk like the impact of climate change. In that regard, MAS would look at a range of instruments including green instruments which Mr Don Wee had mentioned. Both the risk management approach and asset allocation are approved by the MAS Board and reviewed regularly.
Mr Don Wee also asked if MAS values the OFR at cost or market price. MAS publishes OFR data on a monthly basis and the published OFR is valued at cost. This reflects our conservative accounting approach as a central bank.
The next set of questions pertains to risks that RMGS may pose to MAS' operations and balance sheet. Mr Derrick Goh asked how MAS' autonomy can be ensured when subscribing for RMGS. Let me state very clearly. MAS has always been operating independently within the Government. MAS' principal objective of maintaining price stability is stipulated in the MAS Act. Under the law, MAS' Board of Directors is responsible for the policy and general administration of MAS' affairs and business, and in upholding the MAS Act, ensures that MAS conducts monetary policy to meet its price stability mandate.
With the introduction of RMGS, MAS continues to retain autonomy over monetary policy because it is MAS, not the Government, that initiates the subscription of RMGS. Furthermore, MAS can only subscribe for RMGS to facilitate the transfer of OFR beyond what it requires to conduct monetary policy and ensure financial stability. MAS would also have the right to redeem RMGS before maturity at par, to meet its OFR needs and carry out its mandate. So, these safeguards are all set out very clearly in the Act.
Mr Saktiandi asked about foreign exchange risks. RMGS transactions are between entities within the Government. At the whole-of-Government level, there is no change in our total foreign reserves and no additional exposure to foreign exchange risk.
For MAS, its subscription for RMGS will result in a change in assets from OFR denominated in foreign currency to RMGS denominated in Sing dollar. This reduces the exchange rate risk for MAS by lowering its foreign exchange exposure. Correspondingly, the exposure to currency fluctuations, along with the returns on investments, are in turn borne by the Government, inherently as part of its larger portfolio of investment placed with GIC.
Mr Saktiandi also asked if the accumulation of RMGS on MAS' balance sheet over time will affect the level of liquidity in the banking system and consequently, MAS' monetary operations. Basically, MAS' accumulation of RMGS on its balance sheet will not impact Sing dollar liquidity and by extension, MAS' sterilisation activities. This is because MAS uses only foreign assets to subscribe for RMGS and does not create or use Sing dollar in the process.
On the frequency of published data, MAS will publish its RMGS holdings on a monthly basis. This is aligned with the frequency for the publication of OFR data, which is in line with international standards.
I would like to assure Mr Saktiandi that the publication of RMGS data does not undermine the effectiveness of MAS' foreign exchange intervention operations. Changes in the OFR are influenced by other factors besides intervention operations and transfers to the Government. These include changes in the stock of Foreign Exchange swaps as part of MAS’ money market operations to manage liquidity in the banking system, investment gains or losses on the OFR and currency translation effects on the OFR.
In addition, data on Singapore's foreign exchange intervention operations is already separately disclosed. MAS publishes its net purchases of foreign exchange from intervention operations on a six-month aggregated basis, with a three-month lag from the end of the period.
So, this addresses questions relating to risks to the MAS.
The third set of questions is on the characteristics of RMGS, such as its maturity and early redemption features.
Mr Louis Ng and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim queried about the basis and purpose of the $580 billion issuance limit. In fact, they thought that there might not be a need for such a limit. On the other hand, Mr Leong Mun Wai suggested to tighten and have an annual limit.
As I explained in my earlier speech, the $580 billion limit is sized based on two factors: one, the amount of OFR that MAS currently needs to transfer to the Government to bring the level of OFR in MAS back to its optimal amount; and two, the expected pace of OFR accumulation in future years.
We have set this limit so that the Government can administer and monitor the size of the RMGS issuance. Having such a limit will provide transparency to Parliament, which serves as an additional layer of check. Yes, indeed, we could have done away with it completely but we thought that it would be prudent and will provide an additional layer of check for the Government to come back to Parliament to raise the limit should the need arise. Any such further increase to this limit will have to be justified by the Government and approved by Parliament and President.
Mr Saktiandi also asked about the maturity period for RMGS issuances. The purpose of issuing RMGS is to facilitate the transfer of OFR for longer-term investment. As such, all RMGS will be issued by the Government with a 20-year tenor, which is aligned with GIC's long-term investment horizon.
Mr Saktiandi noted that there may be periods where the OFR falls below the optimal range and may need to be topped up. He asked how RMGS could be liquidated to meet MAS’ needs and whether there may be circumstances under which MAS might transfer its RMGS holdings to other entities, with the consent of the Minister for Finance.
The answer to this is that the optimal amount of OFR which is, as I said, sized at 65% to 75% of GDP, is not an insignificant amount and is expected to meet MAS' needs comfortably under most circumstances. To date, there has not been a crisis where MAS' OFR has fallen below this threshold. So, MAS’ OFR will only need to be topped up in a highly unlikely crisis of unprecedented scale, or what we call a \"tail-risk event\".
Should such a situation arise, MAS will have the right to redeem the RMGS before maturity at par – meaning at full face value of the RMGS regardless of market conditions – to meet its OFR needs. When MAS redeems the RMGS, the Government will transfer an equivalent amount of foreign assets to MAS, supplementing the OFR on MAS’ balance sheet. With the Government standing fully behind all the RMGS, we do not envisage that MAS will need to transfer its RMGS holdings to other entities to raise funds from the market.
That is why clause 15B(2)(a) of the Bill, which Mr Saktiandi referred to, prohibits MAS’ transfers of RMGS holdings to other entities without consent from the Minister for Finance. This upholds the intent of the RMGS by restricting MAS’ transfers of RMGS holdings to other entities to very exceptional and extreme situations, as determined by the Minister. To be clear, even if such a transfer were to take place, the effectiveness of the proposed legislative safeguards including those to prevent monetary financing, would not be diminished, irrespective of the entities owning the RMGS.
I think there was also a question whether a future government can introduce conditions that compromise MAS’ ability to redeem RMGS and why the Bill does not provide for MAS with the sole discretion on redeeming the RMGS prematurely and why allow the Government to do so. I think Mr Louis Ng asked this.
The Government will not be able to compromise MAS’ ability to redeem RMGS. As I explained earlier, the terms for issuance of RMGS, including its conditions as to repayment and redemption, will need to be mutually agreed between MAS and the Government. Operationally, MAS and the Government will set the conditions to give MAS the right to redeem RMGS at par before maturity, meaning it can exercise this right at its discretion.
The Government may choose to redeem RMGS before maturity if it has excess Singapore dollar liquidity. Allowing the Government to do so does not compromise MAS. MAS will not be worse off because the amount of OFR held remains unchanged.
Several Members asked how RMGS will affect GIC’s investment and liquidity management, including the implications if RMGS is redeemed before maturity at par to meet MAS’ OFR needs and how the foreign reserves managed by GIC could be made available to MAS in such a scenario.
I would like to assure Members that the introduction of RMGS and its early redemption provision will have minimal impact on how GIC invests and manages its liquidity. The introduction of RMGS facilitates the transfer of OFR not needed by MAS to the Government for longer-term investment by GIC. As I said, the mechanism may be new but the transfers of such OFR is not new. In short, how GIC will invest the transferred OFR is not expected to deviate from existing practice because such transfers have been happening since the formation of GIC.
GIC manages the transferred OFR and other Government assets in accordance with its mandate given by the Government. As a long-term investor, GIC will look at long-term opportunities including sustainability opportunities and green investment opportunities, which several Members talked about.
The existing arrangement between MAS and the Government already ensures that foreign reserves held by the Government are available to support MAS’ operations if the need arises. The Government has in place processes to withdraw assets from GIC for various needs. Therefore, liquidity needs pertaining to RMGS are already catered for.
Even in the unlikely case where the redemption exceeds what had been catered for, the Government can still repay MAS with assets which qualify as OFR. So, there is no need for GIC to liquidate assets prematurely just to raise cash to repay MAS, in the event of early redemption.
Next, there was a question by Assoc Prof Lim on whether or not MAS deliberately keeps the exchange rate low for competitiveness reasons. Let me state quite categorically, MAS does not do that. MAS' aim is price stability over the medium term. We are quite clear that keeping the Singapore dollar artificially weak is unsustainable and not in Singapore's interest.
The real exchange rate, not the nominal but the real exchange rate, is the outcome of price adjustments in Singapore's economy relative to that in other partner economies. So long as monetary policy here is set pre-emptively with the objective of medium-term price stability, then the real exchange rate will in time be in line and appropriate to economic fundamentals. And we fully intend for that to be the case.
Mr Leong Mun Wai, besides some of the points which I had addressed, set out quite a number of points which I found quite puzzling. It is almost as though he had not read the full text of the Bill or listened to what I had said earlier. Because I had set out very clearly in my opening speech that there are all these various safeguards and provisions which ensure that there is no room for monetary financing with this new RMGS mechanism. This is not a major departure at all. This is simply a new mechanism to facilitate the transfer of excess OFR from MAS to the Government for long-term investments by GIC. Such transfers have been happening since 1981 when GIC was formed and continue till today except with a new mechanism called \"RMGS\".
I thank Prof Hoon for explaining this very clearly and I would urge Mr Leong to listen to Prof Hoon's explanations of why our OFR had increased in recent years due to MAS' intervention operations to dampen appreciation pressures on the Singapore dollar and why this is not at all monetary financing in the way he had imagined. We do not intend to do any form of monetary financing and there are safeguards in the Bill to ensure this does not take place. So, the hypothetical scenarios that Mr Leong had set out in his speech about hyperinflation, monetary financing, these will not arise.
Finally, let me talk about what all this means also for fiscal policy because there were various questions about this, including what Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked on whether the returns from the transferred OFR would contribute to Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC).
The transfers of OFR not needed by MAS to the Government, as enabled by RMGS, should have a slight positive impact on the NIRC over the long term. This is to be expected because GIC has a higher return-seeking portfolio than MAS. Having said that, this increase is not expected to be significant, at least in the short term. Under the Net Investment Returns Framework, or NIR Framework, changes in the net asset base are smoothed over time. Any longer-term returns would also take time to materialise.
Our medium- to long-term fiscal projections have already built in this practice of continuous transfers to get back to the optimal range and have accounted for the higher expected return from OFR being invested by GIC.
That said, it is also possible that we will face a structurally lower rate of return on our investments over the long term. This is due to the significant headwinds in the external environment, including elevated debt, moderation in growth, ageing populations and low productivity in many countries. We have explained this in this House on several occasions and it is consistent with reports by well managed long-term global funds.
Furthermore, investments come with risk and there will be volatility from time to time. There is no guarantee that NIRC will always be increasing every year.
At the same time, on the spending side, on the expenditure side, we do expect expenditures to go up. Just as a comparison from 2006 to 2010, our spending was about 15% of GDP. That is 2006 to 2010. A decade later, from 2016 to 2020, we are looking at 18% of GDP; 3% of GDP increase, which is about $15 billion.
And we do expect that to increase further in the coming years. So, we will have to continue to rely on both NIRC and other revenue measures to meet our growing fiscal needs. Having diverse sources of revenues will also give us the confidence to plan ahead for the long-term growth of Singapore. And I will elaborate on these issues in the coming Budget. This is not the occasion to talk about fiscal projections. I just wanted to give an explanation in response to the questions that were raised.
On transparency, a point that Mr Leong Mun Wai mentioned, in fact, a lot of information has already been put out in the public domain about how we manage reserves, about the different entities that look after our reserves – Temasek, GIC, MAS – their investment approaches. A lot of information is out there for serious analysts to understand how reserve management is done in Singapore and we will review and continue to see how we can put out more useful information to inform the public. But we do maintain the view that it is not in Singapore's interest to put out the full information on how much reserves we have. The reserves are ultimately a strategic asset against a whole range of emergency contingency scenarios. We can never predict what these scenarios will be.
It is not just about an economic or financial crisis. It could be a natural calamity. It could be a pandemic, as we have experienced. It could be war. It could be actions taken by a hostile external actor. A whole range of contingency scenarios and emergencies for which we will not know how much resources we need to respond.
So, we believe that it is still in our national interest to maintain this strategic asset, not to have to disclose everything fully, but to have some discretion on our part and to be able to use these resources decisively and effectively when such an emergency arises.
In summary, Sir, this Bill creates a more sustainable mechanism to facilitate MAS' transfer of OFR above what it requires to the Government for longer-term management by GIC. As I have repeatedly highlighted, safeguards will be put in place to circumscribe tightly the issuance and subscription of RMGS by the Government and MAS respectively, so that RMGS is used only for its intended purpose.
I would like to assure Members of the House that with the introduction of RMGS, MAS will continue to have access to sufficient OFR to meet its needs and that the Government's approach to borrowing has not changed and will remain prudent and disciplined. With this, I beg to move, Sir.
Mr Speaker: Clarifications? Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Thank you, Speaker. I have two questions for the Minister for Finance. One is, yes, we may not need to announce another number for our national reserves. But would he agree that every year, when the Government financial statements are published, the mainstream media should report our country's statement of assets and liabilities? Meaning, the $1.4 trillion of financial assets, for example, will be announced in the public. That is one question.
The second question is, can I ask what is the average rate of reserve accumulations in the past and what is the expected reserve accumulation going forward? Because when he described that this round, we probably have to transfer $200 billion, use up the RMGS limit, about $200 billion dollars to transfer the assets to GIC, we are still left with $380 billion. And he said that in a few years' time we will be accumulating – I mean, that is what I hear from what he said – that will be a lot of reserves to accumulate, you know? Another $380 billion. That is why I have suggested that we should reduce the limit. Okay, two questions.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, on the first question, MOF will put out all relevant information pertaining to the Budget and to the Government's financial position. I think it is for the media to decide what they want to report. And it is for analysts to also dive deeper into the statistics and to see if they want to produce analytical pieces around them.
But where the Government is concerned, we already put out a lot of information, as I mentioned, every year during the Budget, after the Budget. And we will continue to review what additional information we might put out that will be useful.
On the second point, we have set the limit, as I mentioned earlier, for the issuance of RMGS on two counts, looking at the amount that would have to be transferred over a period of time to get the present OFR to the optimal level and also, bearing in mind that there will be future accumulation in future years. No one can predict what rate this future accumulation will be, it will depend on so many conditions, for example, conditions in the financial markets. So, it can go either way because you may have appreciating pressures, you may have depreciating pressures, and MAS will have to intervene accordingly in order to maintain price stability.
But we have put in our best estimates and we think that $580 billion is a sensible figure for the next few years. Should that threshold be reached, then, as I mentioned, we will come back to Parliament to explain why we might need more, why we might have to raise the limit and it is for the Government to justify the case and for Parliament and President to approve. And so, this provides that additional check.
In fact, as I mentioned just now there were some calls from Assoc Prof Lim and Mr Louis Ng to say no limit is needed at all, because they understood the reasons why we are making this transfer, they know that it is sensible and they also appreciate that there are already sufficient safeguards in legislation that would not allow MAS or the Government to engage in monetary financing.
So, from that point of view, you might not even need a limit, but we talked through this and felt that it would be prudent to do so to provide an additional layer of check and that is why we have that figure in the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Speaker, I would still like to ask the Minister again. I am actually puzzled when he says that there is no departure from the current way we are doing things.
So, currently when we buy foreign assets, MAS buys foreign assets from the market, MAS uses Government deposits, right? So, if in the future, we do not have Government deposits, which I have explained in my speech, those are our excess savings, if in the future, our excess savings come down drastically and we do not have excess savings to buy the foreign reserves, MAS will have to buy the foreign reserves with Singapore dollars, right?
So, that will be a very different way of managing our monetary policy going forward. So, that is a major departure. Especially when he suggested a $580 billion limit, that means over the next few years — okay, let us say $380 billion left after the current transfer and you use it over five years, for example. Then, you will be talking about $70 billion accumulation of reserves every year. That is a big amount.
I do not know the number, but probably, currently, we are accumulating at about $30 to $50 billion a year, right? So, you say that we do not have the excess savings anymore and on top of that you are accumulating $70 billion, that is a big amount.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, I think Mr Leong is mistaken. The excess OFR that MAS accumulates or the OFR that is accumulated by MAS is primarily the result of MAS' intervention operations, particularly to manage the appreciation pressures on the Singapore dollar because of capital inflows. And when this happens, it accumulates foreign exchange.
Under present circumstances, without RMGS, MAS will transfer its excess OFR to the Government and there will be a corresponding reduction in Government deposits. That is today's mechanism. The excess OFR is MAS' excess OFR. But because the pace in which the Government deposits is accumulating has been quite slow because we are running smaller fiscal surpluses, they will not be able to do the corresponding reduction in Government deposits and that is why this new mechanism allows MAS to use its excess OFR to subscribe to RMGS.
In either case, it is MAS initiating the action. It is not Government initiating the action. It is MAS that initiates this action, this transfer of excess OFR. And in both cases, it is the excess OFR that MAS has accumulated through its intervention operations, that is transferred to the Government. In the first case, through a deposit transfer; in the second case through an RMGS instrument. But in both cases, it is a transfer of excess OFR to the Government, which will then be put to GIC for investment management over the long term.
That is why I said this process of transfer is not new. If you read the book that GIC recently published, you will see Dr Goh referring to monetary reserves and non-monetary reserves. Non-monetary reserves are the excess OFR that we are talking about which MAS has and then it transfers to the Government. In the first instance, through a transfer of Government deposits; in the second instance, through RMGS, which we are proposing.
The mechanism may be new, but the transfer of excess OFR is not new at all. It is something that we have been doing since 1981. And in that sense, is not a departure from our underlying philosophy and principles of reserve management.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Mr Speaker, pardon me, I would still like to ask the Minister for Finance. My understanding of how MAS operates in the market seems to be different from his. The issue is not about OFR. The issue is, when MAS accumulates foreign reserves, accumulates foreign assets, or now we can call foreign reserves, what does it use to buy the reserves in the first place, right?
In the past, we have excess savings. So, MAS has a lot of Government deposits on its balance sheet. So, it can use the Government deposit to buy the foreign reserves first; and then, it transfers over to GIC and reduces both the assets and liabilities at the same time.
But if you do not have enough Government security deposits on the balance sheet of MAS, then, when MAS accumulates the foreign currencies, or foreign reserves, what does MAS use? I would like to ask the Minister for Finance, what does MAS use to buy the foreign assets?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, I do not intend to engage in a very technical discourse here. I will just repeat my point. In both instances, MAS uses its excess foreign reserves, excess OFR. Like I said, in the first instance, it is done through a transfer of excess OFR and corresponding reduction in Government deposits; but in the second instance, we are proposing for MAS to use its excess OFR to subscribe to the RMGS. There is no creation of new money in this process.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Mr Speaker, this is not the right understanding of the process, you know. I can invite other Members in this House to comment on this. When MAS buys foreign assets from the market, MAS needs to pay for it. If there are no Government deposits to pay for it, MAS will have to print more Singapore dollars to pay for it. So, that will have a different effect on our economy. You cannot say there is no departure from the current way of monetary policy operations.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, I am happy to have other independent views because somehow Mr Leong does not believe me. I do not know how I can convince him otherwise that he is, indeed, mistaken. But he would have heard Prof Hoon explaining the mechanism quite clearly. There is no creation of new money in this process. MAS is using its excess OFR to subscribe to RMGS. It is not printing new monies. It is very clear. I have said it repeatedly: the safeguards are in legislation. I do not know how else I can persuade Mr Leong otherwise and if he prefers for a third party to express views, so be it. I am happy to have other voices share their opinions as well.
Mr Speaker: Would anyone else like to add some enlightenment to this discourse? If not, I will put the question for the Bill to now be read a Second time.
[(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":"Exchanges (Demutualisation and Merger) (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
3.33 pm
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Prime Minister, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
In 1999, the Exchanges (Demutualisation and Merger) Act (EDMA) was passed to facilitate the transfer of ownership of the Stock Exchange of Singapore (SES), the Singapore International Monetary Exchange (SIMEX) and the Securities Clearing and Computer Services (SCCS), to an integrated exchange, Singapore Exchange Ltd (SGX). The exchanges were demutualised and merged into a single non-member run entity. The essential aim was to put the integrated exchange in a stronger position to hold its own internationally and develop new growth opportunities.
Through this demutualisation process, members of the two exchanges, SES and SIMEX, received a fixed dollar amount of shares in SGX and the remaining SGX shares were issued to SEL Holdings Pte Ltd (SEL), a special purpose company designated under the EDMA. SEL placed out some of the SGX shares to new investors and retained the rest.
This portion of SGX shares that SEL retained, which I shall refer to as the \"Original SGX shares\", are currently held by SEL for the benefit of the Financial Sector Development Fund (FSDF). MAS set up FSDF in 1999 to support the development of Singapore as a financial centre. FSDF is controlled and administered by MAS, subject to the directions of the Minister-in-charge of MAS. The dividends and any proceeds in respect of the Original SGX Shares are channelled towards the FSDF to fund financial sector development initiatives in Singapore. These include initiatives which develop sector-wide capabilities and infrastructure, promote financial innovation, upgrade skills and expertise, and support financial education.
It should be highlighted that under the EDMA, SEL is not able to exercise or control the exercise of the voting rights attached to the SGX shares. This feature remains unchanged in the proposed amendments to the EDMA. This is important because it is not intended for MAS, in its capacity as FSDF’s administrator, to impinge on SGX’s capacity to make business decisions. This safeguard further enables MAS to play the roles as SGX's regulator and FSDF's administrator without conflict of interest.
SGX announced on 5 August 2021 that it would be implementing a scrip dividend scheme (SDS) to offer its shareholders the option to receive all or part of their dividend entitlement in SGX shares. SGX has explained that this scheme would allow shareholders to re-invest their cash dividends in SGX’s medium-term growth journey.
Currently, the EDMA allows SEL to receive new SGX shares where there is no election or choice on the part of the shareholders, such as when bonus shares are issued. However, it does not allow SEL the flexibility to elect to receive new SGX shares when these arise from corporate actions taken by SGX, such as scrip dividend schemes. Amending the EDMA will give SEL flexibility to elect to receive new SGX shares arising from SGX's corporate actions, where doing so is in line with FSDF’s interests.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I will now go through the broad areas of amendments in the Bill.
The Bill will allow SEL, with the Minister-in-charge's approval, to participate in SGX's corporate actions under which SEL may opt to receive additional SGX shares. For instance, SEL could elect to receive scrip dividends in SGX scrip dividend scheme (SDS), which it is unable to under the current EDMA.
The Bill will also provide that SGX shares acquired through such participation will be treated in the same manner as the Original SGX shares. In particular, consistent with the Original SGX shares: one, SEL will hold the new SGX shares for the benefit of the FSDF; two, SEL will not be allowed to transact with the new SGX shares without the prior approval of or direction from the Minister-in-charge of MAS; three, SEL will not be able to exercise the voting rights attached to the new SGX shares; and four, the dividends paid in respect of the new SGX shares and any proceeds in respect of any sale of the new SGX shares, less expenses incurred in the sale of the new SGX shares, will accrue to the FSDF.
Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill does not alter the basic objective of the Act, or SEL's purpose of supporting the FSDF. It only enables SEL to participate in corporate actions taken by SGX under which SEL may elect to receive new SGX shares. The new SGX shares will be treated the same way as the Original SGX shares. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the intent of this Bill, which is to enable SEL Holdings, as shareholder of SGX, to participate in corporate actions of the company such as receiving new shares as dividends.
It is logical, as that is the ownership rights of any shareholders of a listed company. However, what interest me on this Bill is the structure in which the shares of SGX are being held and how dividends are used to fund FSDF to support various initiatives set out in the MAS Act.
The EDMA came about because of the demutualisation and merger of the Stock Exchange of Singapore, SIMEX and SCCS. SEL is a special purpose vehicle designated to hold the SGX shares, specifically for the benefit of FSDF. And FSDF is set up to support the promotion of Singapore as a financial centre and is controlled and administered by MAS; subject to the directions of the Minister-in-charge of MAS.
Notwithstanding, Sir, I have a couple of questions for the Minister:
I can understand the historical context of this arrangement. But I want to ask the Minister of State if MAS still sees the continued need for SEL to be the largest shareholder of SGX; and as a result, the holdings of SGX shares would constitute a significant part of the investment for FSDF? Would FSDF be being better served with a more diversified portfolio and its interest to SGX reduced?
Secondly, may I use this opportunity of the Second Reading to ask the Minister of State also to share on the governance structure of FSDF; and also how often are the objectives, scope and outcomes of FSDF reviewed?
I thank the FSDF for being proactive in responding to the pandemic by launching the $125 million COVID-19 support package in 2020 to help the industry navigate through the crisis and enable the sector to emerge stronger.
Can I ask the Minister of State if the FSDF would also encourage donations or contributions from stakeholders such as financial institutions or industry professionals who have benefited from the development of the financial sector.
Sir, I want to declare my interest that I work in a financial institution which also benefited from the FSDF. Sir, with that, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, changes in the economies and capital markets the world over, triggered by COVID-19, have meant that stock markets, too, need to adapt to deal with disruption, and have to continually fight to stay relevant and attractive to investors. Indeed, a Business Times' article in September last year noted that in line with global trends, SGX has seen a flurry of privatisation offers in 2021. This has meant a decrease in the number of companies listed on the exchange, which is a cause for concern.
To add to the picture, some commentators have opined that there is a likelihood that money will start flowing to listings in emerging markets. They predict that emerging markets themselves may even go as far as to require domestic companies to list locally and to encourage foreign companies who are trying to raise capital within their borders to also list within that jurisdiction rather than look to capital markets in the more established markets such as New York, London, Hong Kong and even Singapore.
Yet, it has also not escaped the notice of many that there are growing concerns about whether SGX has become illiquid and uncompetitive, and that companies looking to widen their capital base would do better to look elsewhere. Indeed, of late, our homegrown success stories such as Grab and Razor have chosen to list oversees. All this has implications for SGX and the liquidity of our local capital markets as our success has historically relied on foreign entities being willing to fundraise by using our domestic market as a platform to access capital in the region.
Turning to the structure of SGX, the listed company itself, to which this Bill and its amendments relate, I note that the company's ownership structure is highly diversified, with many international shareholders from large asset managers like BlackRock and Schroders to pension funds like the Japanese government pension fund. The largest single shareholder remains SEL Holdings Pte Ltd with around 23% of shares, although I note as well that there is a restriction on the exercise of its voting rights attached to its shares.
While it is good that solid investors have indicated their willingness to invest in SGX, we must not be complacent about the competitiveness of our exchange and take this for granted. Set against this, I have a few clarifications that I wish to seek of the Minister of State.
Do the amendments allow subscription offers to be made to existing SGX shareholders? If so, where will funds come from in order for SEL to subscribe for any new SGX shares? Also, what is MAS' updated position relating to allowing shareholders to increase stakes above 5% and also if an offer is made by another stock exchange to acquire or merge with SGX?
While, historically, regulators have been somewhat cautious to allow super stock exchange mergers, as evidenced by, for example, the rejection of SGX's bid to acquire the Australian Stock Exchange over a decade ago, recent research into super stock exchanges appears to suggest that there need not be huge concerns about the exploitation of market power of these large exchanges. Admittedly, though, there may still be concerns of national interests when considering such merger and acquisition (M&A) activity relating to SGX itself.
Next, turning to the beneficiary of the SGX shares held by SEL. The beneficiary of these shares, old and new, is the Financial Sector Development Fund (FSDF). FSDF's objectives primarily relate to the promotion of Singapore as a financial centre and the development of our financial services industry. Would the Minister of State be able to give an update if there is any intention to expand the role or impact of the fund, given the potential increase in SGX shares held to its benefit?
Moving on to governance, by which I mean the governance of the board and also the dual role of MAS as both regulator and promoter.
What are the criteria applied to determining whether a director is sufficiently independent for sitting on the board of SEL? Could the Minister of State consider outlining a clear framework the various factors to be considered when appointing independent directors for SEL for the purposes of greater transparency and confidence?
As MAS has to both promote and grow the finance industry and also serve as regulator of the industry – in our case, of SGX and our capital markets – what are the processes and frameworks that are put in place to address any conflicts or perceived conflicts that may arise from this?
For example, in the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority was formed by the carving out of the former Financial Services Authority (FSA) in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis to be able to better focus as it serves its function as the regulator of the finance industry.
I would also like to seek greater clarity from the Minister of State about if and how the amendments to the Act will make it easier for the exchange to compete and stay relevant in the changing landscape, that it will not become moribund one day.
How would these ensure that our stock market and, by extension, our capital markets and finance industry remain competitive and attractive to investors who are increasingly looking for the next best thing to put their money in? What steps are our regulators and authorities taking to ensure the sustainability – and, thus, the likelihoods of many of our people employed in these industries – of our capital markets so that they remain healthy when we look to the long term? Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.20 pm so that we have more time to do research and figure out how the reserves are being used.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.50 pm until 4.20 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.20 pm.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Exchanges (Demutualisation and Merger) (Amendment) Bill.
The amendments would allow SEL Holdings Pte Ltd (SEL) as the special purpose company under the EDMA to strengthen itself by allowing it to hold Singapore Exchange Ltd (SGX) shares allotted and issued in connection with the demutualisation and merger for subsequent placements.
The Original SGX shares are also held for the benefit of the Financial Sector Development Fund (FSDF), which is an important vehicle in helping to promote Singapore as a financial hub. This fund has been assisting companies to upgrade and train their staff to meet the demanding skills in the financial services sector. More than that, this fund has also been deployed over the years to carry out research and development projects relating to this sector and develop infrastructure support. Can the Minister share with the House how well-received is its various grant schemes granted under FSDF this year, especially the Cybersecurity Capability Grant (CCG)? And are there also any institutions looking into blockchain technology and carbon credit exchanges which have tapped into any of the grants? And what are the measures to ensure our grant expenditures are aligned with FSDF’s objectives?
Even during the COVID-19 pandemic, FSDF launched a $125 million support package to sustain and strengthen capabilities in the financial services sector. The support package comprised new schemes to support digitalisation in smaller financial institutions and fintech firms. It also supported existing training and talent development programmes to support financial institutions, fintech firms and individuals within the financial services sector in navigating the economic downturn. This is so that Singapore could emerge stronger as a global financial centre in Asia. With the emergence of the Omicron variant and for future crises, I suppose FSDF would stand ready to support the financial sector if the need arises? And with the dent caused by the pandemic on our economy, has the FSDF expenditure changed? How many people took up FSDF’s training support schemes – financial training schemes and IBF training schemes as well as scholarships? Have there been changes in trends since the EDMA was introduced in 1999?
Mr Speaker, it can be seen that, with this amendment, FSDF can benefit from SGX's payouts to shareholders, such as allowing SEL to participate in SGX rights issues, to receive scrip dividends in SGX's scrip dividend schemes and participate in other SGX corporate actions. And the new SGX shares are to be treated the same way as the Original SGX Shares. SEL would, with the Minister’s approval, also have the option, like any other shareholders, to receive the dividends in scrip or in cash.
That leads me to my next question. What is the worst-case scenario if this Bill goes through? In what instances will the Minister not approve the SEL request and will there be an issue of liquidity for FSDF in the worst-case scenario, preferring cash to non-cash equivalents?
My other question relates to sources of funding for FSDF. The role in which FSDF plays in terms of grants and also talent capability building, as well as the sector’s leadership talent pipeline, will be pivotal for the financial sector's growth and development. Can I ask what other sources of funds feed into FSDF, beyond the SGX cash and scrip dividends and rights issues and others? And what is the breakdown of these other sources? If the other source is from investment income from the existing assets under management, how volatile is it? Are there future plans to further diversify the sources of funding for the FSDF?
SGX – and, for that matter, most countries’ capital market exchanges – continues to be a pivotal player in Singapore’s financial sector growth and development. It is important to ensure SGX's survival and also to ensure it remains competitive. Its ability to attract listings and provide liquidity for companies will, eventually, translate, in part, into SGX's profits and eventual contributions to FSDF annually and feed into the pool of funds already accumulated in the FSDF.
SGX is and remains an important financial vehicle for companies to raise capital through listing on the exchange. In doing so, it also offers opportunities for many retail investors, especially retirees who have some knowledge of the mechanics of stock trading, to try to add value to their savings. Companies use it to raise operating capital, while the investors use it with the hope to earn regular dividends and, hopefully, a rise in investment value. Over the years, SGX has grown in stature and is recognised as one of the leading markets in Asia. It has a market capitalisation of around US$678 billion in 2021.
Certainly, for SGX, the competition is great, for it has to contend with the regional markets, especially Hong Kong, as well as markets in Europe and particularly, in the US. There are also many other spin-offs from the running of a successful stock exchange as it creates countless jobs for the many listed companies, apart from the accountants, compliance staff as well as auditors, all of whom would be involved in the regulatory reporting process.
I note that SGX shares held by SEL are non-voting to enable MAS to play a dual role as SGX's regulator and FSDF's administrator, without conflicts of interests. But can the Minister share MAS' vision of how an exchange, such as SGX, can play a pivotal role in enhancing financial sector development and financial innovations, to drive Singapore’s long-term economic growth, especially given the challenges exchanges globally are facing currently, not only from direct competition, from regional exchanges, but also from technological disruption and various other ways of capital raising externally. After all, it eventually feeds as part of a stable source of fund into FSDF. Mr Speaker, Sir, on that note, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mr Speaker, I would like to express my support for the Exchanges (Demutualisation and Merger) Amendment Bill, henceforth, referred to as EDMA. This Bill is a timely response to the recent announcement by Singapore Exchange Ltd (SGX) to offer a scrip dividend scheme (SDS) to shareholders.
The current EDMA does not allow SEL, a special purpose company, to hold SGX shares for the benefit of Financial Sector Development Fund (FSDF), to elect to receive new SGX shares. This move to amend the EDMA will provide SEL with the flexibility to participate in SGX's corporate actions in a cost-effective manner and accord it the means to exercise rights similar to other shareholders of SGX. This legislative move is crucial to ensure that the core principles of EDMA and SEL are maintained, whilst allowing SEL, SGX's strategic investor, to support the exchange in strengthening its working capital position, with the option to retain cash with SDS.
It is in this spirit that I would like to seek the Minister of State's response on three areas of inquiry which, I believe, will better clarify the Bill’s impact.
Firstly, I would like to ask if SEL's option to elect for SGX scrip has any impact on the available cash flow for existing and future FSDF initiatives. Since its inception, FSDF allows MAS to support financial sector transformation and has provided strategic funding to support the development of Singapore as a global financial hub. It is critical that FSDF’s wide-ranging development initiatives, from skills upgrading, R&D to infrastructure development, must not be constrained in any way.
For instance, FSDF launched a $125 million support package in April 2020 to augment the growth of Singapore’s fintech sectors and accelerate digitalisation. In the same year, FSDF also enhanced the Financial Sector Technology and Innovation Scheme to boost our talent pipelines for Singaporeans into fintech.
Sir, I would like to add my interest as a professional working in the financial sector and benefiting from FSDF.
The point is FSDF’s income obtained from SGX shares came up to about $78 million in FY2020. On the other hand, it is worth noting that the expenditure for FSDF has increased to $247 million in the same financial year. I applaud the meritorious development projects that FSDF has been supporting over the years and urge MAS to continue investing strongly in the development of the Singapore financial sector.
However, given that we are not quite yet out of the woods as far as the pandemic is concerned, I would like to ask the Minister about the impact to SGX's cash dividend funding for FSDF initiatives with SDS. Apart from SGX dividends, what other sources of income does FSDF receive? How dependent is FSDF on SGX dividends, in order to maintain its portfolio of projects, both in the medium and long term?
My second inquiry focuses on the Bill's impact on SEL's influence on SGX. With the SDS, dominant shareholders, such as SEL, are in a position to potentially increase their stake over time should they elect to receive SGX shares whilst other investors may choose otherwise.
It is worth noting that for MAS to play a dual role as SGX's regulator and FSDF's administrator without conflict of interest, safeguards were in place at the time of EDMA's introduction. For example, SGX shares held by SEL are non-voting.
Despite such safeguards, the action of a dominant shareholder with non-voting interest can still indirectly influence shares performance by virtue of options in its dividend policy.
Efficient corporate governance can be achieved with the use of non-voting shares, provided that robust governance delineating voting and non-voting shares is in place to motivate actors to align with intended goals.
As at present, SGX shares held by SEL are still ambiguously classed despite the non-voting clause. For instance, these shares are still classed as ordinary shares that possess the possibility to be used for controlling interest purposes when sold to other investors upon approval by the Minister-in-charge. I would like to ask whether the introduction of a dual-class share option has been considered to provide greater clarity.
The introduction of scrip dividend further increases SEL's ability to amass a higher proportion of these ambiguously classed SGX shares. SEL's current stake in SGX is about 23%. What are the considerations to vary or maintain the shareholding of SGX shares under SEL with SDS? Furthermore, SEL's decision to elect scrip or cash dividend may invite unnecessary speculation, due to the perceived information asymmetry between dominant and minority shareholders. How will this issue be managed going forward?
Speaker, Sir, it is also rather counter-intuitive for a significant and strategic investor, such as SEL, to hold non-voting shares. How will the future of SGX be safeguarded if voting rights to direct the company do not rest with the largest and strategic investor? How will we safeguard the situation to prevent a group of SGX shareholders from forming a large enough segment of voting power and choose to exercise it in situations where they will move SGX in the wrong direction.
More broadly, this Bill also comes at a time when SGX has recently announced the introduction of Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) into the bourse. Market watchers expect SPACs to boost SGX’s position as a key financial hub in Asia, with SGX gaining from an overall higher valuation with the listing of tech-related and new economy companies. However, SPACs have also received mixed market reactions from institutional and retail investors alike, including the potential downsides and risks of SPACs to retail investors. What is the impact to SGX from an overall valuation of the Singapore market with the entry of SPACs? More specifically, would this have any bearings on SEL’s stake in SGX in the future? Notwithstanding the points above, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Alvin Tan.
Mr Alvin Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Members who have spoken on the Bill and for their support of its introduction. Let me first deal with the questions on safeguards and governance over FSDF before addressing the impact of electing to receive scrip dividends on FSDF’s ability to carry out its function.
Ms He Ting Ru and Ms Foo Mee Har had asked about safeguards over potential conflicts of interests when MAS both regulates SGX and also administers the FSDF. Ms Foo Mee Har had also asked whether more could be done to clarify the nature of SEL's holdings and if SEL could, inadvertently, influence the outcome of a scrip dividend exercise by signalling its intent.
First, on potential conflict of interest, MAS' independence as a regulator should not be affected. MAS does not derive any income or loss from SGX shares. Dividends from SGX shares are channelled to FSDF for the benefit of the financial sector as a whole. Further, even as SEL derives income from holding of SGX shares and this benefits the FSDF, SEL is not accorded voting rights for its SGX shares. The Bill has provided that this same safeguard on non-voting rights will also apply to new shares received. The non-voting nature of SEL’s shareholdings is disclosed in SGX’s financial statements. In addition, SEL has independent directors who owe a fiduciary duty to SEL. The directors are nominated by MOM, MTI and both public agencies have economic and manpower development mandates that are similar to the objectives of FSDF.
Next, regarding any SGX scrip dividend scheme, all shareholders would make their own assessments, taking into account their individual circumstances in deciding whether to elect for new shares in a scrip dividend scheme or not. Shareholders' decisions are, typically, not announced while the election period is ongoing.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked about the governance structure of FSDF and how MAS ensures that FSDF’s expenditures are aligned with FSDF's objectives.
MAS takes a rolling five-year view for planning of FSDF's grant expenditure. This is in view of the relatively long gestation period of most development initiatives, such as developing industry-wide infrastructure, developing local talent in emerging finance areas and promoting financial innovation and technologies. The Minister-in-charge of MAS approves the strategic allocation of FSDF's monies on a rolling five-year basis and based on that approved allocation, the Managing Director of MAS approves FSDF's annual budgets and MAS publishes FSDF's financial statements annually.
Grant schemes are developed and, periodically, also reviewed to ensure that the funding provided does, indeed, meet industry’s needs. In recent years, there has been an increase in FSDF's funding to support skills upgrading and reskilling initiatives and financial institutions' push to adopt financial technology and innovation.
Individual projects seeking FSDF's funding are also subject to robust governance and controls. To ensure the prudent usage of FSDF's funds, the fund is administered in compliance with MOF's guidance on grants governance, notwithstanding that FSDF is not funded by taxpayers' monies, given that it was set up using the proceeds from the demutualisation of privately-owned exchanges, which I described earlier.
Taken together, these measures help to ensure that FSDF's expenditure is aligned with FSDF's objectives and that the funds are used prudently.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat also asked about recent trends of FSDF's expenditure, how the pandemic has affected FSDF's expenditure and the take-up of specific FSDF-funded schemes, while Ms He Ting Ru also sought an update on the role of FSDF. FSDF currently supports a wide range of initiatives across talent development, technology and innovation. It also supports other initiatives on financial sector activities and consumer education.
Pre-COVID-19, FSDF's annual expenditures were within $90 million. In FY2020/2021, FSDF's annual expenditure increased to $247 million as new support schemes were launched to sustain and strengthen capabilities in our financial services and fintech sectors, amidst all of the COVID-19 disruptions. This includes the $125 million package that was launched in April 2020 alluded to by Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
As part of the support package, MAS increased course fee subsidies for relevant IBF courses and extended the subsidies to include local employees of fintech firms. As a result, we have seen a very strong response from financial institutions in tapping on the funding available to upskill and reskill their financial professionals. Training participation has increased significantly since the launch of enhanced support in April 2020. In fact, the level of training participation in the first 10 months of 2021 was already triple that, compared to the whole of 2019.
The FSDF also supports efforts in developing multiple pathways to build our pipeline of local financial sector talent. This has resulted in financial institutions committing in 2020 and 2021 to hire and to train close to 1,100 Singaporeans as part of their structured management associate programmes. In addition, the FSDF has also supported over 280 outstanding Singaporeans to acquire specialist skills through postgraduate studies in areas, such as data science, financial engineering and risk management.
As for the Cybersecurity Capability Grant (CCG) scheme, it aims to develop local cybersecurity talent in our financial services sector. How? By supporting financial institutions to set up or expand regional and specialised cybersecurity teams in Singapore. Since 2019, five financial institutions have tapped on this CCG to anchor their regional cybersecurity capabilities here in Singapore, generating 60 new cybersecurity positions here.
To Mr Saktiandi Supaat’s question on FSDF's support for nascent areas, such as blockchain technology and carbon credits, FSDF has, indeed, supported such projects where they have the potential to strengthen our competitive advantage as a financial centre.
Given that FSDF provides funding for a wide range of initiatives that support the development of Singapore as a global financial hub, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Ms Foo Mee Har have asked whether giving SEL the option to elect for scrip dividends, in lieu of cash, could constrain FSDF’s ability in supporting the financial sector going forward. Ms He Ting Ru has also asked how SEL would fund its participation in SGX subscription offers.
First, the decision for SEL to participate in SGX's scrip dividend scheme and the proportion of scrip dividend that SEL will elect for, as I mentioned earlier, will have to be approved by the Minister-in-charge of MAS, based on FSDF's expected financial needs over the medium term. Similarly, the decision for SEL to participate in subscription offers and how SEL funds its participation in any subscription offers, will also have to be approved by the Minister-in-charge of MAS.
Second, FSDF's current financial position is in fact strong. FSDF has tripled in size since its inception in 1999. This is so because MAS has been prudent in managing FSDF's total grant expenditure and especially because of the compounding effect of the returns on its investment of FSDF funds over the years. This has enabled FSDF to provide significant support to the financial sector, especially during the recent COVID-19 crisis period and FSDF is also geared up to meet potential future demands as the industry responds to new trends in digitalisation and sustainability. But should SEL choose to elect for scrip dividends, this should not adversely affect FSDF's ability to support the financial sector.
Next, Members were interested to understand how, in the absence of voting rights, FSDF is kept assured that the value of its holdings in SGX is upheld. In a related vein, Ms He and Mr Saktiandi had also asked about how SGX plans to keep up with competition and technological disruptions, given that the FSDF is partly funded by SGX's dividends and shares.
As I just mentioned, FSDF's fund size has tripled since its inception in 1999. MAS will continue to be disciplined in managing FSDF's grants and investing the surpluses in a diversified investment portfolio, so as to sustain FSDF's ability to support financial sector development initiatives over the long term.
On SGX's efforts to build and retain competitiveness, an area of interest by all of Members who have spoken on this Bill, please allow me to reply briefly at this point. SGX has made progress in its strategy to build a multi-asset exchange. In addition to the equities market that Mr Saktiandi had mentioned, SGX is a key bond listing venue in Asia and offers a strong suite of derivatives for risk hedging across a wide range of asset classes. So, you have equities, you have bonds, you have derivatives. In recent years, SGX has been building up its bond trading and FX capabilities and pursued initiatives to enhance connectivity, including the latest collaboration on an ETF Product Link with Shenzhen Stock Exchange.
But as Ms He and other Members mentioned earlier, SGX faces keen competition, not just regionally but also internationally from many different exchanges across the world. So, it will have to continually evolve its strategies, evolve all its offerings in response to the emerging competition, so that it is not standing still. They could include innovation, digitalisation efforts to streamline their processes and enhance efficiencies for the industry, harnessing new trends such as the growth in sustainable investing and building synergistic links with other exchanges.
Ms He also asked for MAS' position on allowing SGX shareholders to increase their stakes to be above 5%. MAS' position remains the same. MAS will allow suitable, strategic investors who can promote SGX's growth and development to acquire substantial stakes of 5% or more in SGX and such strategic investors must first seek MAS' approval.
Mr Speaker, Sir, to summarise once more, MAS seeks with this Bill to provide SEL the flexibility to receive new SGX shares, just as any other SGX shareholder can. This will also provide FSDF with an additional option to generate income for the fund. And this is important because the fund, FSDF, as I have mentioned, is to drive growth and create good jobs for Singaporeans in a very dynamic and fast-evolving financial sector in the coming years. With that, Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
Mr 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. – [Mr Alvin Tan]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
The Chairman: The citation year \"2021\" will be changed to \"2022\", as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement.
[(proc text) Clauses 1 to 5 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendment agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill 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":"Prisons (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second Time.\"
Sir, this Bill amends the Prisons Act to enhance community corrections by introducing the Employment Preparation Scheme, or EmPS and to facilitate the operations and administration of the Singapore Prison Service (SPS).
First, on enhancing community corrections. The period of incarceration is an opportunity to rehabilitate offenders, to minimise the possibility of re-offending after release. In my visits to the prisons and engagements with inmates and ex-offenders, I have come to see that rehabilitation, with strong community and family support, can be an effective means to prevent re-offending. This, in turn, enhances public safety.
SPS rehabilitates and prepares inmates for reintegration into society by providing programmes in prison to address their re-offending risks and needs, and equip them with relevant knowledge and skills. These programmes include psychology-based correctional programmes, family programmes, work programmes, skills training and religious programmes.
As Members may know, rehabilitation in prison alone is not enough. Research has shown that inmates will have better rehabilitation outcomes when rehabilitation in prison is complemented by community-based programmes. These programmes allow inmates to be closely supervised and supported while they apply the skills that they had learnt in prison.
Over the years, SPS has expanded community corrections. In 1985, the Prisons Act was amended to introduce the Work Release Scheme, or WRS. WRS allows inmates to work outside prison, under supervision, at the tail-end of their imprisonment sentence. In 2000, the Prisons Act was amended to provide for the Home Detention Scheme or HDS, which allows eligible inmates to serve the tail-end of their imprisonment sentence outside prison, such as at their residence. The intent is to facilitate their reintegration into society under strict conditions.
The Prisons Act was amended in 2014 to introduce the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme, or MAS. The MAS provides enhanced community support, counselling and case management, with tight supervision, to released inmates who are at a higher risk of re-offending or need more reintegration support. While on this scheme, supervisees need to comply with conditions such as curfew hours and electronic monitoring.
There have also been shifts in the drug rehabilitation regime. In 2019, a more calibrated approach was introduced for drug abusers to distinguish between abusers who have only consumed drugs and those who have concurrently committed other criminal offences. Prior to this policy change, drug abusers arrested for the third time onwards would be sentenced to imprisonment. Since 2019, such abusers who do not face any other concurrent criminal charge will instead undergo rehabilitation in the Drug Rehabilitation Centre, or DRC, run by SPS. As part of the DRC regime, suitable abusers can progress to be placed on community-based programmes.
With the implementation of these programmes, the number of inmates and ex-offenders on community corrections has increased over the years, from about 850 in 2011 to more than 3,400 in 2021.
The improvement in recidivism bears testimony to our rehabilitation and reintegration efforts. The two-year recidivism rate for inmates released in 2018 was 22%, down from 44% two decades ago. We have halved the recidivism rate. These results give us the confidence to introduce an improved work rehabilitation scheme, called the Employment Preparation Scheme, or EmPS, to enhance inmates' employability and reintegration.
The EmPS will replace the existing WRS. From 2016 to 2020, 997 inmates were emplaced on the WRS and 90% of them successfully completed the programme. The WRS only allows inmates to be released for work. Under the existing law, inmates on the WRS are unable to participate in educational or training activities. The new EmPS will allow inmates to undergo skills training and education in the community.
The EmPS will complement the work programmes and skills training provided by SPS and Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG) in prison. To provide for the EmPS, clause 21 inserts a new part 6B in the Prisons Act. Section 59K of the new part 6B allows the Commissioner of Prisons to release eligible inmates on the EmPS. Clause 25 repeals section 81 of the Prisons Act, which provides for the WRS.
The EmPS will adopt a step-down approach to gradually ease inmates back into the society. Emplacement starts with the in-camp phase where eligible and suitable inmates serve the tail-end of their imprisonment sentence in a work release centre administered by SPS. The inmates may work, upskill themselves through training, or pursue their education, outside prison during the day. They will return to reside at the work release centre in the evening. Inmates who show good progress during the in-camp phase will be permitted to move on to the weekend home leave phase, during which they can return to their place of residence during the weekends. If inmates continue to demonstrate good progress during the weekend home leave phase, they can return to their place of residence daily after work, classes or training, under the long home leave phase.
Inmates are eligible for the EmPS if they have served at least 14 days of imprisonment, and the Commissioner considers them suitable for the EmPS. Factors such as their progress and response to rehabilitation, family support and risk of re-offending will be considered.
All eligible inmates will be assessed by SPS for their suitability. All suitable cases will then be surfaced to an independent advisory committee appointed by the Minister for Home Affairs, which will review the cases and make its recommendations to the Commissioner. Clause 26 of the Bill provides for the establishment, function and procedure of this committee via regulations made pursuant to the Prisons Act. The Commissioner, taking into consideration the committee’s recommendation, may then emplace an inmate on the EmPS.
Inmates on the EmPS will be under SPS's supervision and will receive support for their reintegration.
Besides requiring the inmates to be employed, undergo skills training or education, inmates will be subjected to conditions such as electronic monitoring, mandatory reporting and curfew hours. These EmPS conditions are similar to the existing conditions for the HDS and External Placement Scheme, or EPS.
We will also introduce additional conditions for the EmPS, HDS and EPS to better facilitate SPS' administration of the schemes.
First, clauses 12, 17 and 21 insert two new conditions for inmates on the HDS, EPS and home leave phase of the EmPS. Specifically, inmates are not to consume any controlled drug or alcoholic beverage or use or inhale any intoxicating substance or possess any controlled drugs.
Second, clause 26 allows the Minister for Home Affairs to prescribe via regulations for inmates on these schemes to pay for the costs of goods and services incurred by them outside prison, such as food, transport and medical treatment. The cost of electronic monitoring would continue to be borne by SPS.
Inmates on these schemes are required to abide by all stipulated conditions. Under clause 21, if an inmate on the EmPS is suspected to have violated any condition or committed any offence, he may be recalled to prison pending SPS' inquiry. If found to have breached any condition or committed any offence, the inmate may have his emplacement order revoked.
Clauses 13, 14, 18 and 19 expand the scope of recall to prison and revocation of an emplacement order to include the commission of any offence, not just prison offences, by inmates on the HDS or EPS. This is to deter inmates from re-offending and allow SPS to take swift action against inmates who commit any offence.
If an inmate on the EmPS commits a prison offence and he is punished with confinement in a punishment cell or with forfeiture of his period of remission or both, SPS will have discretion in suspending the inmate's emplacement order. In contrast, it is mandatory under the current provisions for the HDS and EPS for SPS to suspend the inmate's emplacement order and recall him to prison. This could be disruptive to the inmate's reintegration, including his studies or work. Hence, clauses 15 and 20 align the provisions for all three schemes such that it is discretionary, not mandatory, to suspend the emplacement orders. This will allow a more calibrated approach to be taken based on the facts of the case.
Next, clauses 10, 12, 17 and 21 expand the means by which the Commissioner may notify persons on the MAS, HDS, EPS and EmPS of changes to the conditions that they are subject to. Presently, the law requires a written notification of changes to the conditions. To enhance administrative flexibility and efficiency, alternative means using SMS and other digital communications, will be introduced and these will be prescribed via regulations made pursuant to the Prisons Act.
Next, I will speak about the amendments facilitating SPS' operations and administration.
Today, inmates sentenced to imprisonment would generally be released after they have served two-thirds of their sentence, if they had displayed good conduct and behaviour in prison. When they are released, they will be issued with a Conditional Remission Order which will be valid until the end of their sentence. This period is also known as the \"remission period\".
Currently, section 50I(3) of the Prisons Act allows the Commissioner to delay the making of a remission order by up to two weeks. In other words, the inmate may be detained for up to two weeks into the remission period to carry out any outstanding Court-ordered punishment, typically caning. For avoidance of doubt, the Commissioner does not have the power to defer an inmate's release beyond the Court-imposed imprisonment sentence.
This two-week period may sometimes be insufficient as an inmate may file a Notice of Appeal within two weeks, or 14 days, after the date of the sentence.
Under section 327 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the caning ordered by the Court must not be carried out until after the expiration of the 14-day period for filing the Notice of Appeal. Hence, even if no Notice of Appeal is filed, the earliest that SPS will carry out the Court-ordered caning is after the 14-day period.
The Courts, at times, may backdate an imprisonment sentence with caning for an inmate who had served a period of remand as the remand period is counted towards the fulfilment of the sentence.
In such a scenario, an inmate may be due for release within 14 days of sentencing. SPS would then need to seek a Court order under section 326 of the Criminal Procedure Code to authorise the detention of the inmate for as long as it is reasonably necessary for the caning to be carried out. This is because, as I mentioned earlier, the Prisons Act currently allows an inmate's release to be delayed by up to two weeks only.
From 2017 to 2021, on average, there were nine inmates per year whose release was deferred by the Commissioner under section 50I(3) of the Prisons Act and four inmates per year whose detention was extended by the Court under section 326 of the Criminal Procedure Code in order to carry out any outstanding Court-ordered punishment. All the cases were due to the backdating of sentences.
Clause 9 allows the Commissioner to defer an inmate's release by up to three weeks to allow SPS sufficient time to carry out any Court-ordered punishment, without having to seek an order from the Court to extend the inmate's detention. SPS will release the inmate as soon as the caning has been carried out and he is certified fit for release. Again, for avoidance of doubt, the Commissioner does not have the power to defer an inmate's release beyond the Court-imposed imprisonment sentence.
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]
Next, clause 26 allows the Minister for Home Affairs to make additional regulations related to inmates' communications to uphold the security and good order of the prison.
Currently, there are no restrictions as to whether a person can publish or disseminate information obtained via any form of communication with an inmate. In addition, SPS can only withhold certain letters sent by or to inmates if they contain anything that affects the security or good order of the prison. From the security perspective, these are insufficient. We propose two amendments to improve the current security regime.
First, the Minister for Home Affairs may make regulations to require prescribed persons, or prescribed classes of persons to give an undertaking before they are permitted to communicate with an inmate. Persons who give this undertaking should not publish or disseminate, or cause to be published or disseminated, any information contained in any communication with an inmate that may firstly, affect the security or good order of the prison; or secondly, incite the commission of any offence.
Examples of information that may affect the security or good order of the prison include drawings of the prison layout, information related to the security installations of a prison and coded messages for starting a prison disturbance. An example of inciting the commission of any offence is instigating inmates to riot or harm another inmate or person.
Second, the Minister for Home Affairs may make regulations to redact or withhold any material in inmates' correspondence with any prescribed person, or prescribed classes of persons, that may: first, affect the security or good order of a prison; or second, incite the commission of any offence.
SPS has previously intercepted secret society-related messages in letters sent by or to inmates. Sometimes, the messages were sent in coded form. Such messages, if let through, could lead to clashes among inmates who are aligned to different secret societies and undermine the good order or security of the prison, or even incite acts of violence, such as causing hurt to another person outside prison.
The intent of allowing the Minister for Home Affairs to make such regulations is to maintain prison security and ensure the safe and secure custody of inmates. It is not the intent to curtail inmates' communication or prevent them from airing grievances. Bona fide communications will not be redacted or withheld.
For Members' information, there are various channels for inmates to provide feedback.
They can raise concerns to the Superintendent of the prison or any SPS officer. Inmates can also give feedback directly to members of the Board of Visiting Justices. Appointed by the Minister for Home Affairs, the Visiting Justices conduct unannounced inspections of the prisons and hear issues raised by inmates. These issues are documented, followed up by SPS and the outcomes will be reported back to the Board.
Next, clause 24 updates and provides clarity on prison offences by repealing and re-enacting sections 72 and 73 of the Prisons Act, which list minor and aggravated prison offences respectively.
For instance, clause 24 deletes two minor prison offences, \"idling or refusing to work or showing negligence in the performance of his allotted task\" and \"refusing to undergo medical treatment\". In practice, SPS does not enforce against these offences.
Work programmes in prison are voluntary in nature. If, after choosing to participate in a work programme, an inmate idles, refuses to work or is negligent in his work, he will simply be taken off the work programme, with no disciplinary action taken against him. Similarly, if an inmate refuses to undergo medical treatment and his medical condition or injury is serious, he will be conveyed to a hospital for further observation and treatment, with no disciplinary action taken against him.
With more inmates emplaced in the community over time, it is opportune to provide more clarity on applicable prison offences.
Clause 24 will specify that certain prison offences are not applicable when an inmate is serving his imprisonment sentence outside prison. An example of a prison offence that is not applicable to inmates who are not in prison would be tampering with prison locks.
Clause 24 will also specify prison offences for inmates who breach the conditions of the EmPS and EPS.
Currently, there are only prison offences prescribed in the Prisons Act for the HDS but not these two schemes. This amendment seeks to standardise the prison offences across these three community-based programmes.
Next, clause 25 provides prison officers with powers to compel the production of documents or information for investigating breaches of conditions and commission of prison offences.
Prison officers conduct inquiries to ascertain if a minor breach of a mandatory aftercare condition, a breach of any of the conditions of community-based programmes such as the HDS or EPS or a prison offence had been committed. There were instances where prison officers faced difficulties in obtaining pertinent information from external parties to ascertain if a breach had been committed – for example, CCTV footage to prove curfew breaches.
To bridge this gap, clause 25 empowers prison officers of and above the rank of Sergeant to require third parties to provide documents or information that are necessary for the inquiries into the breaches and prison offences. It is an offence if anyone, without reasonable excuse, fails to provide the required document or information.
Clause 27 inserts a related amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act, to grant prison officers similar powers to assist them in conducting inquiries into breaches of conditions of community-based programmes by DRC and Community Rehabilitation Centre inmates.
Next, clause 25 protects prison officers and Auxiliary Police Officers, or APOs, from liability for acts and omissions done in good faith and with reasonable care, under the Prisons Act.
In their daily duties, prison officers sometimes have to take calculated risks and make prompt decisions to maintain the safe and secure custody of inmates. For example, a prison officer escorting an inmate outside of prison, may use any weapon on any person or inmate who tries to force open a prison transport vehicle to facilitate an inmate's escape. In the course of preventing the escape, the prison officer's actions may cause injury to others or damage property.
Under the Prisons Act and Misuse of Drugs Act, APOs may also be employed by the Commissioner of Prisons to assist SPS in escorting and guarding inmates.
It is worth noting that it is explicitly stated that prison officers and APOs are protected from legal liability if they had acted in good faith and with reasonable care under the Misuse of Drugs Act. However, this is not the case for the Prisons Act, although they are protected under the common law defence of necessity.
To allow these officers to carry out their lawful duties with greater assurance, we will make this protection from liability explicit in the Prisons Act. This is in line with what is provided for Police officers in the Police Force Act and SCDF officers in the Civil Defence Act. To be clear, officers are not exempt from the ordinary process of law if they have abused their powers or are criminally negligent.
Next, we will update the terminology used in the Prisons Act.
Clause 7 replaces all references to \"leprosy\" with \"infectious disease\" in section 45(2) of the Prisons Act. This will allow the Minister for Home Affairs to direct the removal of any inmate suffering from any infectious disease, not just leprosy, to any hospital or any specified place for treatment. In practice, SPS does not discriminate against inmates with leprosy. All inmates with or suspected of having infectious diseases, including leprosy, have ample access to healthcare and treatment services.
Clause 2 updates the definition of \"juvenile\" by raising the upper age limit from below 16 years to below 18 years, to align it with the updated definition that was passed under the Children and Young Persons (Amendment) Act 2019.
Next, the Bill will grant administrative flexibility to SPS.
Clause 4 allows the Minister for Home Affairs to appoint more than one Deputy Commissioner of Prisons who can exercise and perform the Commissioner's powers, duties and functions. Currently, only one Deputy Commissioner of Prisons can be appointed under the Prisons Act.
Clause 4 also allows the Commissioner of Prisons to delegate any of his or her powers, duties and functions under any written law, instead of those under the Prisons Act only, to any of the Deputy Commissioners, Divisional Directors and Cluster Commanders. An example of the Commissioner’s powers under any written law is the appointment of day reporting officers under section 341(7) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Lastly, clause 3 allows the Minister for Home Affairs to appoint places as temporary lock-ups.
Currently, the Minister for Home Affairs may appoint lock-ups only at Police stations and Court houses, for the confinement of persons arrested, awaiting trial, remanded, or sentenced to an imprisonment term of up to a month.
In the event where there is a mass arrest, such as during a public order incident, it would be operationally expedient to hold all of the arrested persons in a centralised lock-up, rather than across multiple lock-ups. This would facilitate security, investigations and post-event actions, including prosecution. To ensure that we can call up additional capacity when needed, clause 3 allows the Minister for Home Affairs to appoint other places that are not Police stations or Court houses as temporary lock-ups for the confinement of persons.
The amendments in the Bill will help to improve inmates’ rehabilitation and reintegration outcomes and enable SPS to be more effective in carrying out its work. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Murali Pillai.
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mdm Deputy Speaker, Singapore is well-known for its no-nonsense attitude towards crime.
All Singaporeans expect that if one were to commit a crime, he or she will have to pay the price irrespective of one’s individual background. The force of deterrence is high because the application of justice is swift and sure. But the arm of the law is also one that reaches beyond the prison sentence. It aims to rehabilitate and welcome ex-prisoners back to society. It is a strong signal that we do not give up on those who have made mistakes.
The excellent work that Singapore Prison Service (SPS) officers do as \"Captains of Lives\" is perhaps not as well-known. In collaboration with its partners, SPS works to: enforce the safe and secure custody of prisoners; deliver evidence-informed rehabilitation programmes; and carry out effective community supervision of released offenders.
All these are to help prisoners find their way back to society, into families, friendship and work.
A testimony to the good work that SPS does lies with the fact, as said by the hon Minister of State just now, recidivism reported in SPS’ 2020 Annual Report stands at 22.1% and he mentioned that this is half the recidivism that was the case in the early 2000s. This is an all-time low!
These hard-earned results are due, in part, to a number of innovative steps that SPS has implemented over the years to help rehabilitate and reintegrate ex-offenders into our society. The hon Minister of State has outlined these steps which were taken over two decades, in particular. I will not repeat the steps that the hon Minister of State had said.
But what is clear is that prison is not mere punishment for wrongdoing. It is also the first step towards education, reconciliation and the acquisition of requisite skills and knowledge. This is to enable ex-offenders to become financially independent and confident of their abilities and then have fulfilling lives and careers. They will be able to re-assume their responsibilities for themselves and their families. They will have a chance to leave their chequered past behind, be reintegrated back with their families, society and make positive contributions to our country. With our help, they can rebuild their lives, step by courageous step.
This is a mission that requires stout-hearted support from everyone.
I am proud of my alma mater, NUS, whose professors interviewed a prison inmate, as part of its rigorous admission process and offered him a spot in its Law School. Today, that man is a litigation lawyer and both of us are fellow members of the same profession serving our country.
Employers must be open-minded in the same way. The main reason why I suggested in Parliament in 2020 that the $1 billion Jobs Growth Initiative (JGI), which sought to expand local hiring during the pandemic by providing wage support, be also extended to ex-offenders was because I was concerned that, with the shrinking economy then, employers may not offer our ex-offenders with fair chances of getting good employment. This, in turn, would have had a major impact on the rehabilitative process for our ex-offenders.
The Government adopted my suggestion and addressed the issue squarely. Between September 2020 and February 2021, a span of six months, almost 800 ex-offenders were employed through JGI. I am sure many more ex-offenders would have benefited since then from JGI, which was recently extended to March 2022. It is for the same reasons that I strongly support the Employment Preparation Scheme (EmPS) which is aimed at improving the employability of our prison inmates. I have studied the details of the scheme as set out in the Bill. They are well thought of.
Collectively, the measures provide a suite of levers to our SPS officers to ensure inmates stay the course so as to obtain skills and knowledge necessary to get good jobs while they are serving their sentences. It is by no means a simple matter, but the odds are good, so long as they put in the effort.
I have one question on the working of the EmPS. May I ask how the EmPS is proposed to be harmonised with existing schemes which are also targeted at inmates who are viewed to have good prospects for rehabilitation and reintegration back into our society? The schemes I have in mind are the Home Detention Scheme, Conditional Remission System and the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme. It seems likely that many inmates in these existing schemes will also want to benefit from the employability feature under EmPS.
Moving on to the other aspects of the Bill, I have a short query on clause 9 of the Bill which proposes to amend the existing section 50I of the Prisons Act such that the Commissioner is given three weeks, instead of the previous two weeks, to defer the making of the remission order. The hon Minister of State took some pains to explain the reasons why this amendment is being proposed and he made it clear that it is not suggested that the Commissioner would be able to extend the imprisonment term of the inmate beyond what is ordered by the Courts. I appreciate that.
The point I am concerned about is slightly different. The way the Remission Orders System works, there is a legitimate expectation on the part of the inmates that they would be released so long as they do not behave badly. So, they would get a one-third remission of the sentence. Given that state of play, the concern I have is whether there could be a possible conflict of interest that may arise when a Commissioner extends the period of time to issue the remission order such that there is, in a sense, a delay. I appreciate that the reason for this is because there is a need to carry out the corporal punishment. Under the Prisons Act, SPS has the ability to actually forfeit a period of remission of up to 180 days.
The Prisons Act also vests with SPS the power to restore any period of forfeited remission. We could, therefore, potentially have a situation where the Commissioner is asked to consider deferring the issuance of a remission order because there is insufficient time for the carrying out of corporal punishment on an inmate because of, amongst other reasons, SPS’ own decisions in relation to the remission period for the inmate.
Let me disabuse anybody of any notion that I am concerned about any abuse of power. That is not my point. My point is, structurally, we need to ensure that the Commissioner is not unwittingly put in a position of conflict of interest. So, that is my concern.
I do appreciate, in a sense, this is an inherited issue because Parliament passed the amendment giving the Commissioner the power to defer issuing the remission order by 14 days in 2014. I looked at the Hansard, I could not find the reason. Therefore, I would be indebted to the hon Minister of State if he could explain the matter.
Madam, please allow me to conclude. In 2014, the hon Member Mr Christopher de Souza, on the occasion of the Second Reading of the Prisons (Amendment) Bill then, recounted the lyrics of the well-known song, \"Tie a Yellow Ribbon Round the Old Oak Tree\" as being the inspiration for the Yellow Ribbon Project.
His speech has inspired me to, not to sing the song, but to recount the lyrics of a local song, “I Ain’t Giving Up” written by Mr Steven Joseph and performed by Mr Zulkifli Rahman, Mr Razif Haron and Mr Affandi Meskam. They were prison inmates. Talented musicians, they took the opportunity to learn music formally when they were serving sentence and pursued their dreams upon release. The chorus goes like this:
I ain't giving up up up
I'm gonna find my way
I ain't giving up up up
No matter what they say
For the love you've given
Won't need another reason
To ride on, fight on
And lead on, hey!
Their music is their story, and the stories and hopes of many more. I have a suggestion for the hon Minister for Defence. Please allow our talented ex-offenders to perform at NDP 2022. I know they will give any professional musician a run for their money. I also know that they will make Singaporeans rise to their feet.
Most importantly, this will be our nation’s signal to our prison inmates who have served their time that, as a community, we will do what it takes to support them in their rehabilitation and reintegration journey. So long as they do not give up, we too, do not give up, we too, will help each other to find our way back. I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied): Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Prisons (Amendment) Bill seeks to empower the Government to designate places as temporary prison lockups, introduces an employment preparation scheme, introduces restrictions on prisoners' correspondence and empowers the Government to require the cooperation of relevant persons for the investigation of prison offences among other things. I do not oppose the Bill but will raise some questions for clarification as well as a few suggestions.
Madam, I think most Singaporeans would agree that a prison regime is necessary for the deterrence of crime, among other purposes. Most of us would agree that prisoners should not be treated cruelly or inhumanely and that as a society, we should do our utmost to reintegrate ex-prisoners into the societal mainstream after they have paid their debt to society. My speech will be approaching this Bill from that perspective.
Firstly, I would like to speak on this Bill's introduction of an employment preparation scheme (EMPS), allowing prisoners to work in the community and take part in education and training for part of their sentence time. This is something that has been tried in other jurisdictions and it is not unknown here, since we previously had a Work Release Scheme. This is a step in the right direction. It helps to reintegrate prisoners into society when they are ultimately released. It helps them to build up some relevant skills and some form of financial cushion for that time and also helps provide local workers for our economy, hopefully enabling us to reduce some dependence on foreign workers, which is a positive thing, for reasons I have articulated in past speeches in this House, notably during the debate on CECA.
Firstly, I shall speak on company partnerships forged by SPS to operate EMPS. Such company partnerships should have a skilling element whilst at the same time, incorporating fair wages similar to traineeships, where workers are developed rather than being treated solely as sources of cheap labour. I would like to ask the Government if the screening criteria for company partnerships will take into consideration the ability of the prisoner to develop a skill that will enhance his or her employability even if that skill is the sort of skill one needs to do a trades job, a subject I spoke about in September last year in this House.
Next, community reintegration involves not just the economic aspect of living in the community. Can we also provide support services for after prison life? There are pastoral care services, especially with volunteers. Some of these pastoral care services are now provided by prison officers on rotation from enforcement duties in addition to the rehabilitation officers who are clearly already involved in pastoral care service.
Madam, can we take steps to ensure as far as feasible, that as many prison officers as possible, including junior ones, have opportunities to rotate out periodically from enforcement duties to do pastoral care? This could help build restorative relationships between inmates and officers, but may also help and I quote, \"may also help officers avoid the damage they experience by performing purely punitive functions\", to quote from a report on ex-prisoner reintegration around the world.
Madam, I am moving on to my next topic, ex-offenders may find it difficult to set up bank accounts and this may hinder their ability to find stable jobs. Anecdotally, it appears that they may still be issues being faced here, notwithstanding the collaboration between the SPS and POSB that was started in 2015 to facilitate the setting up of bank accounts by ex-offenders upon release from prison. Can similar collaborations be made with other banks?
Also, may I confirm if there are any legal impediments for ex-prisoners who have successfully established bank accounts to obtaining access to electronic payment platforms on their account, such as for example, NETS or PayNow, which are pretty much a ubiquitous feature of modern life for most of us?
Next, Madam, I would like to clarify some points relating to the EMPS. Work release schemes have been in existence since 1985. Since that time, so as to quantify and assess the link between these employment schemes and the welfare of prisoners, as well as recidivism rates post-release, has the Ministry been monitoring the following things.
Firstly, average per hour wages paid to inmates and how much of the wages are they allowed to take home. Some ex-inmates report that they are only able to use their work income to buy things within the prison, but I am not sure if this is indeed the case now.
Secondly, the impact of prison work programmes on inmates' finances after release.
Thirdly, the proportion of inmates who have participated in such schemes.
And fourthly, the impact of prison work programmes on recidivism.
There may be an argument for not paying our workers on such schemes a full salary as they would earn outside prison, which is part of the punitive aspect of imprisonment, but work programmes like the EMPS should be structured to ensure that: firstly, companies using prison labour are not unfairly benefiting from the low costs. We should recall that some of these inmates may have worked far higher paid jobs and already have skills that are highly valued outside the prison environment; and secondly, labour should come at a cost that is in some way, benchmarked to minimum wage equivalence, so that inmates have some sort of savings buffer when they leave.
They should not re-enter society at a huge financial disadvantage because this is a reason why many inmates commit crimes in the first place. In the US, a government-owned manufacturer using inmate labour, reportedly paid between $0.23 to $1.15 per hour, with its facilities operating 24 hours a day. We should avoid such extreme scenarios.
I would also like to ask the Minister of State, whether such prison work is covered under the Employment Act. And if not, would the Government consider introducing such protections by way of subsidiary legislation or by some other means? Such inmate workers may be at the risk of exploitation, given that they do not sign contracts of service.
Next, Madam, I would like to seek some clarifications regarding the eligibility criteria for employment under the new section 59 of the Act and this is something that the hon Minister of State, Dr Faishal Ibrahim, spoke about at some length.
Madam, it is unclear what the process for considering whether an inmate is illegible for the EMPS is like. Does an inmate apply or are all eligible inmates, that is, those who have served at least 14 days of imprisonment, automatically considered for this? MHA's press release, and I believe the hon Minister of State repeated this in his Second Reading speech, suggests the latter and specifies that the SPS will assess all eligible inmates and refers them to an independent advisory committee if they are assessed to be eligible. But there does not appear to be any appeal mechanism or review mechanism if the SPS decides that an inmate is not eligible for such a scheme and hence is not referred to the independent committee. Any decision by the SPS appears to be final.
What safeguards are there to ensure that these decisions are impartial and fair? Would the Ministry consider an alternative approach whereby all eligible cases, provided there is no prohibitive circumstance that can be clearly spelled out and filtered for, are automatically referred to the independent advisory committee for consideration for EMPS without the need for the SPS to refer prisoners to the committee as it were.
Next, one of the factors considered by the commissioner is the degree to which the inmate enjoys family support and this was reiterated earlier by the Minister of State. This factor is referred to in the first footnote of MHA's press release on this Bill. Does this prejudice inmates who unfortunately do not have sufficient family support in respect of being able to participate in employment preparation? Could more be done in ensuring that those who enjoy less family support be included in the EMPS as well?
For example, being allowed to stay in special shelters while participating in employment preparation and to be assigned mentors. It may be that inmates with less family support are, other things being equal, more at risk of unsuccessfully reintegrating into society than those with ample family support.
Madam, before I leave the subject of post-release reintegration, let me speak about training. Inmates currently have access to \"N\", \"O\" and \"A\" level courses alongside the Ngee Ann Polytechnic Diploma in Business Practice for International Supply Chain Management. Recently, I understand that SUSS has launched a part-time degree programme the prison inmates can participate in and there could be other educational and training programmes that they have access to as well.
I would like to ask the Government if we can expand this to other educational opportunities that are important for today's economy. For example, can prisoners be allowed to take part in Polytechnic diploma courses related to future-ready economic sectors, or to entrepreneurship and innovation? I would suggest that this could include courses offered by private companies to obtain certification in very specific types of skills, like coding, for example.
I would also like to ask the Government if inmates are able to take up these courses at subsidised rates.
Also, if they were to complete their studies and after release, secure a job and do not demonstrate recidivism for certain period of time, would the Government consider a scheme whereby their student debts or part of your student debts can be forgiven? Such a scheme would incentivise inmates to take up courses of study while in prison and may also play some role in reducing recidivism, given the substantial literature that suggests a link between criminal activity and financial distress.
And on that note, I would also like to suggest that financial literacy training should also be included in the training provided to ex-offenders before release to ensure better personal financial management, which I suspect could help lower recidivism rates. Perhaps MoneySense, the national financial education programme, could be brought in to play a role here.
All these measures are important in tackling recidivism.
Based on the reply to a Parliamentary Question for MHA that I filed in August last year, the five-year recidivism rate and – before I continue I should state that I think the hon Minister of State and the hon Member Mr Murali Pillai did refer to the two-year recidivism rate. But the five-year recidivism rate for the 2011 to 2015 release cohorts, were 43.1%, 43.2%, 41%, 41.3% and 41.7% respectively. Madam, these rates are far higher than the two-year recidivism rate, which was around 22% in 2018. As a society, there is still much to do to tackle the risk of recidivism.
Next, Madam, let me move on to some concerns and clarifications related to the new powers in this Bill enabling SPS to redact or withhold inmates' correspondence and curtailing what visitors can say publicly about their visits to the prison.
Section 84(2) gives the Minister for Home Affairs power to make regulations to impose a condition on prescribed persons to give an undertaking that it will not publish or disseminate or cause to be published or disseminated any information contained in any communication with an inmate that may affect the security or good order of the prison or incite the commission of any offence before they are allowed to visit or communicate with an inmate.
I would like to ask the Government how any visitor would know whether such information falls within the categories that I so specified until this information is published and they are found by the Minister to have published information that falls foul of these categories. Of course, they can take guidance from the examples of information listed in footnote 5 to the MHA press release and reiterated by Minister of State Dr Faishal Ibrahim, but that does not appear to be exhaustive.
Could the Minister of State provide more details of the kinds of information that would run afoul of this provision? Would the Minister of State also confirm that a visitor disseminating information that is factually correct and does not correspond to these categories of information, of which the examples have been given, would not run afoul of this provision? For example, factually correct information about a prisoner having suffered injuries. Can the Government also specify the penalties associated with such a prescribed person breaching the undertaking?
Madam, next, I shall touch on the new powers for the Minister to regulate and restrict correspondence between an inmate and any prescribed person. This provision gives the Minister for Home Affairs power to make regulations to redact or withhold inmates' correspondence that may affect the security or good order of prisons or incite the commission of any offence.
This provision appears to be in line with section 127A of the Prisons Regulations. Both this provision and section 127A provide that letters to prisoners may be withheld if they affect the security or good order of prisons. But this provision also goes further in providing for a new category of reasons whereby correspondence can be withheld, that is, withholding or redacting correspondence that could incite the commission of any offence.
Prima facie, this provision has implications for the freedom of speech of inmates. Freedom of speech is protected by Article 14 of the Singapore Constitution although as it stands, it is a qualified right. The Constitution provides that Parliament may by law impose such restrictions as it considers necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of Singapore or any part thereof, or in relation to the incitement to commit any offence. This provision confers on the Minister powers to make restrictions on inmates' correspondence that appears to be in line with the qualifications on the freedom of speech provided for in the Constitution, that is, security of the prison and incitement to commit offences.
But the question remains whether this provision is a proportionate response to the problem it seeks to solve. In this spirit, while I do not object to the provision in question, I would like to ask for more guidance as to how these powers will be used. Will actions under this provision target the kinds of information detailed in footnote 5 to the MHA press release, which seem very directly related to the commission of offences? Would the Ministry provide the assurance that information on genuine grievances a person may have that do not pose security risks would not be affected?
Next, this provision does not seem to provide an exception for letters written to a prisoner's legal advisor, unlike section 127A of the Regulations. I would like to ask if this provision is subject to the common law carve-out for legal advice privilege. My purpose in raising this point is not to argue that correspondence relating to, say, a planned prison breakout, for example, should be exempt from this provision if it is between a lawyer and his client. I do not think it should. But it would be useful if the Government can clarify the status of legal communication under this provision. For example, I think that if correspondence between an inmate and his lawyer is withheld, at the very least that fact should be conveyed to the prisoner and his/her lawyer.
And on that note, it is also unclear if prisoners will be notified if their letters are redacted or withheld and I would like to seek clarity on this point from MHA.
It is also unclear what is the review or appeal mechanism should the Minister exercise this power. Can a prisoner appeal against this decision? If so, what form would the appeals process take?
Lastly, I would also like to ask if, under this provision, the Government can intercept prisoner communication and convey part or all of the contents of the same to AGC to confer a legal advantage on the latter, even if it is unrelated to the commission of an offence as described in the language of the provision and in the MHA press release. I think the answer to my question must surely be no, as everything I have read about this Bill suggests, but I would like to have that answered all the same.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Ms Nadia Samdin.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. A few years ago, I was given the opportunity to engage with girls undergoing reformative training. A group of volunteers and I shared with them practical tips and life skills such as budgeting, how to go about applying for school or a job. And some of them shared how nobody had ever sat with them like that, listening to their thoughts, offering advice when appropriate and personalising next steps depending on what best suited them. When they came out, we would meet with our girls and all of them would express similar regrets and also new resolve – to change, to do better, both for themselves and their families. However, many feared that past decisions would continue to follow them like a stain caused by indelible ink throughout their lives.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, the sentencing principles of deterrence, proportionate punishment, prevention and rehabilitation hold different weight in the context of specific facts of each case. Offenders serve time after committing their wrongdoings, but often their families – spouses, parents, young children – are punished too. And this punishment can continue unless we unlock the second prison in society.
The Prisons (Amendment) Bill proposes mainly two categories of amendments, including enhancing community corrections for better rehabilitation and reintegration outcomes. I would like to start by affirming my support for the Employment Preparation Scheme, or EmPS, which aims to better enable our inmates to reintegrate into society and the workplace. In 2021, I have spoken about similar issues, such as assistance for inmates’ families and support for youth offenders, and I am heartened that more steps are being taken to enhance the rehabilitative process as it is a critical step in helping inmates – and their families – to reintegrate and in time contribute to society.
The expansion of the Work Release Scheme to also include educational and upskilling opportunities is important. Studies consistently show that education while carrying out one’s sentence improves an inmate’s post-release employment outcomes and reduces recidivism rates. To give an example, a 2013 study showed how participation in educational programmes increased the chances of employment of American inmates upon their release by 13% compared to their peers and are 43% less likely to recidivate compared to those who did not undergo the programme.
Similarly, in Australia, a 2018 study found that inmates who successfully completed vocational education and training programmes were 2.5 times more likely to remain out of prison after two years. The EmPS takes things one step further by allowing inmates to access educational opportunities they would otherwise not have been able to take advantage of while serving their sentence.
Our two-year recidivism rate has almost halved in 20 years to reach approximately 22%, although the five-year recidivism rate is higher. Singapore Prison Services (SPS) has also been expanding its rehabilitation efforts in recent years. From 2019 to 2020, there was a 42% increase in the number of inmates who underwent community-based rehabilitation and the completion rates for these programmes were over 90%. The EmPS underscores SPS’ commitment towards rehabilitation as a sentencing principle and will complement these efforts.
That said, I hope to seek some clarifications on the Bill.
First is with regard to the available opportunities under the EmPS. What kinds of jobs, education and upskilling programmes will be available to inmates? Do the nature of these jobs differ from those offered under the Work Release Scheme? How do we ensure that work environments are conducive for rehabilitation and minimise the chance of recidivism? Beyond just jobs, would these educational opportunities only be limited to vocational training, or will they also include academic programmes for those who may desire to do so? I hope that a broader scope of upskilling opportunities to keep pace with the workforce of the future would be considered.
Second is on eligibility and progression through the scheme. I note that the EmPS consists of three phases: the in-camp phase, the weekend home leave phase and the long home leave phase. What is the intended duration of each phase? If progress to the next phase is decided on a case-by-case basis, what are some of the criteria used in this decision?
With respect to the in-camp phase and work release centre, I understand that Institution S2 at the Selarang Park Complex, which is run by SPS, is currently the only facility designated as a work release centre. Will there be sufficient space for suitable offenders to participate in the programme, or will other spaces be created in due course?
In addition, one of the criteria mentioned in the Bill for eligibility of the programme is the level of family support an inmate has. Unfortunately, not all offenders have family support. And in fact, it could be poor familial ties which had caused them to offend in the first place. However, that does not mean that they do not have the heart, nor the will, to complete the programme. I hope that some flexibility, on a carefully considered case-by-case basis where deserving and appropriate, can be granted in the long home leave phase or other appropriate accommodation be considered.
Next, while enhancing the employment opportunities is important, staying employed, retaining employment and being relevant are just as important. I understand that the Yellow Ribbon Project does have career coaching, career guidance and job facilitation programmes but not all offenders may be aware of or know how to take up these support schemes meaningfully. Would the Government consider allocating resources for coaches, for example, for the medium-term to support these ex-offenders for an appropriate period of time after release? They can also help them with administrative and logistical matters such as registering for lost ICs or setting up bank accounts. This would increase the chances of job retention after placement and employment in the long run to provide stability for ex-offenders and their families.
In addition, some face financial difficulties or even debt from the day of release. Would there be any educational support stipends considered to support them as they take up opportunities under EmPS?
Lastly, while the EmPS might better equip inmates with workforce-ready skillsets, on its own, it cannot change employers and colleagues' perceptions of and sometimes prejudice against, ex-offenders. Unfortunately, stigma against ex-offenders remains prevalent.
The Singapore After-Care Association (SACA) published a study on ex-offenders who had participated in their Education Support Programme and completed higher education post-release. Respondents noted that their criminal record hindered them in all stages of employment. Of those that secured a job, many found that their positions and pay grade were less than commensurate with their educational qualifications. The work to manage negative societal attitudes is endless, but I do hope and urge those in and out of the House today, to address any personal prejudices that we might come across to help unlock the second prison.
I am very blessed to have a mixed pool of volunteers on the ground, some of whom have served their time, some of whom we met through the Yellow Ribbon Project actually and then decided to spend their time volunteering. Many share that in the past, it was always someone else visiting them and their families and that helped them along in their journeys. Allowing them to cultivate stronger ties with their neighbours and own communities on the ground gives them a chance to see things from a different perspective, make amends and to feel like they too can have purpose and help others. I am very grateful when they choose to step forward despite curious glances at tagging bracelets, difficult conversations about where they have been for the past few months and even more grateful when they manage to stay the course. I hope that society and more community organisations will give them a chance to become volunteers and in time, community leaders, perhaps, when it is possible to do so safely.
My last point on the Bill is regarding the amendment on regulations to redact or withhold inmates’ correspondence to maintain prison security. It is without a doubt vitally important for SPS to ensure the integrity and security of prison systems. However, I would like to ask about possible unintended consequences of this amendment. Inmates’ correspondence with family members and friends are already subject to scrutiny and from my understanding, inmates are restricted to sending out two letters or up to four emails in a month.
In the context of COVID-19, when face-to-face visits have been suspended from volunteers and family members, letters have been all the more important as a form of personalised communication between inmates and their families and as a pillar of support. For example, a pregnant mom trying to reach out to her husband who is an inmate, or a daughter in prison trying to find out more about her elderly ill parents. Would the processing time of written correspondence between inmates and their families be affected? I will continue in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill which steps up efforts to rehabilitate and reintegrate ex-inmates back into society. Through the EmPS, ex-inmates can enhance their skills and education for their future after being released from prison. This will open up more opportunities to explore other sectors of employment or education.
However, apart from them undergoing upskilling courses or seeking employment through EmPS, I am also concerned whether they are burdened by the lack of savings or money for expenses. Although family support is very important, we also recognise that not all ex-convicts have family support or enough savings for their daily expenses or to continue their education. In addition to our support towards the rehabilitation and integration efforts of inmates, can the Government also look at how they can be given some form of financial assistance and receive guidance after their release so that they do not face any hardship in their daily expenses?
(In English): Mdm Deputy Speaker, overall, I am heartened that this Bill equips inmates with more opportunities to upskill and seek meaningful employment. It also introduces practical measures to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of SPS’ operations. Notwithstanding the above clarifications, I believe that these amendments will bring about benefits to society as a whole. I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, employment is a critical part of an ex-offender’s integration journey into society. As such, The Employment Preparation Scheme (EmPS) is a step in the right direction. Besides rehabilitating them, it also helps to raise inmates’ employability, in line with our national upskilling endeavours. This new pool of trained employees will help to alleviate manpower shortages. I would like to raise four suggestions.
First, Mdm Deputy Speaker, there is the need to ensure participation from genuine employers for the programme to succeed. Potential employers should meet certain conditions, or provide a specific training plan and remuneration schedule to the Singapore Prison Service, or SPS.
Will there also be an appropriate industry body that accredits and matches potential employers? Ideally, these employers should meet relevant criteria or have a track record for rehabilitating and hiring ex-offenders. On the other hand, if the demands and requirements imposed on potential employers are too onerous, employers are unlikely to take part. It is important to establish a balance between the interests of employers and the participating ex-offenders.
New Zealand’s Release to Work Programme requires potential employers to satisfy a set of criteria, before they can be considered for placement with inmates undergoing rehabilitation. A myriad of factors will be taken into account, to ensure a good match between the workplace and the employee. Briefings and ongoing support for employers and staff are provided before and during the placement.
Will the Ministry or SPS likewise conduct similar placement assessments? Besides the employers, are the employees aware that they will be working with an inmate? Can employers count on our programme administrators for clear regulations and reliable support?
Support can also come in the form of training for employers and managers on working with ex-offenders. Ex-offenders tend to carry emotional baggage and carry a stigma. Some believe that they are constantly being judged. Unpleasant events, like being criticised by their supervisor or customer, can trigger adverse reactions or discourage them. Employers should have timely access to support from prison counsellors to help with such situations.
Employers who abuse the system or refuse to abide by the regulations are a potential concern. There are always errant employers who exploit the schemes. They may join the programme to benefit from the grants or positive publicity. On the flip side, they may not have a proper training plan or work arrangement for the participant. A first poor employment experience can be disheartening for inmates. It deprives them of a valuable integration opportunity. So, there should be regulations and penalties for errant employers.
Can the Ministry also clarify whether remuneration for inmates will be managed by SPS? Or will remuneration be paid by the employers to the prisoner directly? Does SPS allocate the upskilling and training opportunities, or do the eligible participants have to source for the opportunities themselves? Are there plans to engage more employers to come onboard? With the expansion of the programme, how will the additional costs and resources be defrayed?
Mdm Deputy Speaker, my second point is to request that prohibitions for EmPS participants be clearly specified. For EmPS to be successful, exemplary discipline of the participant inmate is important. I am glad that the Bill has drawn up very detailed conditions of the employment preparation order. With regards to clause 59M (2), the prohibitions in the said clause do not expressly mention vice activities, aside from drugs and alcohol. As a matter of deterrence, besides including the residual discretion of the Commissioner of Prisons to include conditions as the Commissioner deemed fit, it should be explicitly stated what participants are prohibited from doing. This is because some employers worry about vice and problematic behaviour, such as gangsterism and gambling among ex-offenders. This is especially if the participant inmates were formerly convicted of the said crimes. Having this clause will help allay their concerns. This is not to stigmatise the inmates, but to provide clarity and assurance to all involved parties.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, my third point is about allaying concerns from the public and minimising stigma from EmPS participants. While Singaporeans in general approve of second chances for ex-offenders who are rehabilitated, the \"Not in my back yard\" syndrome, or NIMBY, can be apparent in this case. Whilst some agree on the need to train and rehabilitate ex-offenders into society, that does not necessarily translate into willingness of oneself to attend classes or work in the same workplace with them. So, I seek clarification on whether participating inmates will attend classes together with the public? If so, will there be ways to remove identifiers associated with the participating inmates, such as not requiring the wearing of prison attire, or wearing electronic tracking devices at a spot where it is not visible?
Can the Government also clarify on the types of inmates who are eligible for EmPS? Do they include serious offences already set out in the Second Schedule of the Prisons Act (Cap 247) like drug trafficking, culpable homicide not amounting to murder, or sexual offences and other violent crimes?
I understand that all eligible inmates will be assessed by SPS for their suitability for the programme. There will be an independent advisory committee appointed by MHA to review the cases and make recommendations to the Commissioner. I believe that the eligible candidates would have proven themselves worthy. Nonetheless, can the Ministry assure the public that there is no risk of the inmate offending or causing harm while on EmPS? What steps will the Ministry take to mitigate such risks?
Sometimes, a person’s discrimination against others can stem from past trauma. For example, a former victim of sexual assault with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may feel unsafe to spend time in the same space as a convicted sex offender. This fear should be taken into consideration. This further drives the point of the difficulty and necessity to balance the needs of the public. De-identifying EmPS participants gives them a fair chance at rehabilitation, to prove themselves without societal stigma. Correspondingly, how will the Ministry seek to protect the needs of victims of crime and to navigate situations whereby halfway through the EmPS, a co-worker or classmate rejects the presence of the participating inmate?
Mdm Deputy Speaker, my last suggestion is to review the grace period for an inmate to receive punishment while servicing their sentence. Can the Ministry share how many cases of deferment to conduct punishments have occurred in the past? Is it not better to adjust the grace period so the prisoner receives the punishment during his incarceration, rather than extend his sentence? It is understood that such prisoners often have a grace period and their sentences are backdated, so there is no time to deal the punishment while they serve their sentence. However, durations of appeal can prolong the process, such that 21 days may not even be adequate.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I have met Yio Chu Kang residents at my Meet-the-People sessions who are ex-offenders. Employment and job search are top pain points for these residents. Wariness from employers, discrimination from the public and a lack of suitable skills are the key hurdles. The expanded EmPS would address some of these issues.
For it to be more effective and benefit more former inmates, it needs to attract genuine employers – employers who are keen to help ex-offenders and at the same time, employ them to grow their businesses. This can be done with a proper framework that formalises their obligations and access to support from SPS. It should clarify the prohibitions of participants under the EmPS, which would serve as deterrence and give employers added assurance of good behaviour. It should also take into consideration concerns from the public and minimise prejudice to give inmates a chance to prove themselves.
As we onboard more eligible employers and workplaces, I am hopeful that this will help increase the acceptance of ex-offenders into our society. I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. I stand in support of the Bill, which seeks to amend the Prisons Act to enhance community corrections and facilitate better operations and administration of the Singapore Prison Service (SPS).
Madam, let me begin by expressing my strong support for the introduction of the Employment Preparation Scheme, or EmPS for short, as it will help inmates gain the skills necessary to seek meaningful employment and, by extension, reduce our recidivism rates.
Currently, inmates at the tail-end of their sentence are allowed to work in the community under the Work Release Scheme (WRS), which helps to ease their transition into society under gainful employment. However, if these inmates have been in prison for a long period of time, they may find it hard to find a job as the job market would have evolved significantly. If this is left unaddressed, the skills mismatch would result in low employment rates. The proposed replacement of the WRS with the EmPS, will help reduce this skills mismatch and ease the transition of our ex-offenders into society through good employment.
However, despite our best efforts, there will still be those who re-offend, even if they are placed in proper jobs. I would like to know what is the recidivism rate among ex-offenders who were placed on WRS in the last five years and whether any analysis has been done on why they have re-offended? Are there any lessons that can be applied to EmPS to help further reduce recidivism rates?
Madam, we should also do more to help inmates reintegrate back to society, particularly those who have been in jail for some time. Technology has advanced by leaps and bounds. Ten years ago, the iPhone 5 has just gone into the market and its maximum storage of 64GB then felt more than sufficient. Today, we have the iPhone 13 with a whopping storage capacity of 1TB. Technologies such as mobile payments and 5G technology will seem foreign to inmates who have been incarcerated for a lengthy period.
Madam, we need to help inmates who will be returning to a – metaphorically speaking – completely new world than the one they knew before they entered prison. What are the efforts to help such prisoners reintegrate back into society? Can we have digital ambassadors to provide technology familiarisation sessions so that we can better prepare these inmates for the new environment outside of the prison?
Mdm Deputy Speaker, the economic disruptions brought about by COVID-19 has undoubtedly made the job market more challenging for ex-offenders, as industries transform with a fervent pace. The Labour Movement, through the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) and our Job Security Council, has been actively partnering the Yellow Ribbon Singapore to match ex-offenders with available jobs in the market.
In September 2021, there were 209 job openings for every 100 unemployed persons in Singapore, according to data from the MOM. There is certainly space for us to do more to help place ex-offenders into manpower-deficient sectors. However, certain jobs such as those in the security sector, or those that require approval from the Police to enter restricted areas such as our ports and the airport, are automatically excluded from ex-offenders due to their past convictions. I hope that the relevant authorities will continue to review such restrictions and exercise more flexibility so that we can help our ex-offenders access some of these jobs.
Ex-offenders have served their sentences. Let us reduce the stigma and not let their past actions continue to cast a shadow over their future.
In conclusion, the proposed amendments to the Prisons Act are timely as they will help to enhance community corrections and allow more inmates to gain meaningful employment upon their release. But I hope that more can be done to help ease ex-offenders’ transition into society and reduce the stigmatisation that they face, so that they will feel confident re-entering society and not fall back into a life of crime. Madam, I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Raj Joshua Thomas.
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas (Nominated Member): Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Prisons (Amendment) Bill will introduce, amongst other things, the Employment Preparation Scheme, or EmPS, which would allow offenders in prison to be released for employment or to participate in educational or occupational training programmes. This will supplement the current Community-based Programmes framework or CBPs and help ex-offenders improve their employability and facilitate their reintegration into society.
Madam, the statistics show that CBPs and similar reintegration efforts have played a big part in lowering the likelihood of re-offending. As reported by The Straits Times, offenders placed on CBPs in the period 2016 to 2018 had a 16% recidivism rate as compared to 26% for offenders who were not on such programmes. Therefore, we can expect that the new EmPS, together with the CBPs, will lead to a further reduction in recidivism.
Of course, it also bears stating that – as mentioned by the Minister of State and several hon Members who spoke before me – Singapore already has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world and the current two-year recidivism rate of 22% is one of the lowest we have ever had, although the five-year rates are higher. So, MHA and the Singapore Prisons Service really should be commended for not just sitting on their laurels but working to continually improve the system, including with this new EmPS, to try to further lower recidivism rates.
In particular, part 6B section 59K of the amended Act makes provision for inmates \"to participate, in any place outside the limits of the prison in which the prisoner is detained, in any educational or occupational training programme, or any other activity for the purpose of facilitating the prisoner to be gainfully employed, that may be specified in the order\" and follows with conditions stipulated in the Bill.
Madam, while recognising the relevance and the importance of the new EmPS, I have three points as regards the implementation of the programme.
First, section 59L of the amended Act sets out the Commissioner's considerations as regards whether an offender is suitable for employment preparation. On this, I hope that the SPS will adopt a liberal interpretation to the stipulations and that eventually, all but the most recalcitrant or unresponsive of offenders would be eligible for the EmPS and other reintegration schemes.
The reason for this is that incarceration terms inevitably end at some point and effort ought to be made for the rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders even if they have shown themselves to be unresponsive at first. In fact, it may well be that the offenders who need these schemes most are precisely those who appear less responsive as they may have the most difficulty reintegrating and the highest risk of re-offending.
Second, given our ageing population, the number of elderly ex-offenders returning to society will increase. Already, we can see based on data from the SPS that the number of convicted inmates aged 51 and above in the period 2012 to 2017 has increased by 70% and the number of inmates aged 60 years and above tripled over the same period.
Older offenders returning to society may face greater challenges trying to find employment. A study by the Singapore After-Care Association published in December 2018 found that elderly ex-offenders had difficulties finding employment upon their release. One of the reasons highlighted was their loss of motivation to go for courses or to upgrade their skills.
One of the study participants was quoted as saying and I read the quote verbatim, \"I don't have any skills, no qualifications, no license. Now, most classes are in English.\" Another thought is that \"I'm already at this age, just pass each day as it is, no motivation to upgrade.\"
In this connection, I urge the SPS and its partners to consider older inmates as a distinct group under the EmPS that may need to develop skills and have employment preparation specific to their age group. This could help avoid the sense of helplessness some of them feel once they are released, when they are faced with the real pressures of getting a job, being financially independent and, for some of them, having to support members of their family.
Finally, I would also like to suggest that another distinct group that ought to be administered in a differentiated manner – and this was also mentioned by the hon Member Melvin Yong – are offenders who have been in prison for an extended period of time. These inmates may need to be on such schemes for a longer period to catch up with skills and to be mentally prepared to return to the workplace.
Madam, to conclude, I am glad that MHA and SPS are taking further measures to assist offenders to rehabilitate and reintegrate. Our ex-offenders are also part of our Singapore core and we need to make this all-of-society effort to make sure none of us is left behind or left out.
Notwithstanding my clarifications and suggestions, I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Sharael Taha.
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. Singapore's two-year recidivism rate of 22.1% is one of the lowest in the world. We are second only to Norway and South Korea. This is an applaudable achievement and a testimony to the good work done by Singapore Prison Service.
Given our low penal recidivism rate, the Employment Preparation Scheme (EmPS) is a positive step in the right direction because it seeks to provide inmates better opportunities to reintegrate back to society as they will be allowed to undergo skills training and education as well as working within the community. With sufficient training and preparation at the tail-end of their sentences, inmates have better chances to be employed upon their release and ultimately, increasing the chances of successful reintegration back to society.
I stand in support of the Bill. However, I would like to seek clarification on a few matters.
Under the previous Work Release Scheme (WRS), inmates were given permission to leave prisons in order to work. What is the current number and percentage of inmates that are allowed to leave prisons under WRS and what is the absconder rate? How do we reduce it, keeping in mind the intent to have more inmates emplaced on the EmPS? What is the number and percentage of inmates that are expected to be on EmPS? Are there inmates with specific crimes that will not be allowed to be on EmPS? What are the guiding principles that help us ascertain which inmates are suitably ready to be emplaced on EmPS?
Given that we expect a larger number of inmates participating in this programme and that the administering is done on a case-by-case basis, we can expect that our prison officers will have an increased workload. Do we currently have sufficient resources to handle the increased load? What can we do now in order to ensure our rehabilitation officers are adequately supported as we take more steps towards our \"prisons without walls\" concept?
While we do want more of our inmates to be better prepared and ultimately reintegrate back to society, we must also be mindful not to tolerate any breaches of conditions by supervisees. Hence, the amendments also provide SPS officers with powers to obtain documents or information from third parties and this will be a required amendment to assist our SPS officers to investigate and make inquiries into breaches of conditions by supervisees.
The EmPS rests on the premise that inmates who are better prepared through training and upskilling can find meaningful employment once their sentence is over. Meaningful employment would help the ex-inmate reintegrate better and ultimately be accepted as a useful and contributing member of society.
How do we ensure the inmates experience good quality training that will lead to a higher chance of them landing a job after their sentences? Are the courses offered under EmPS limited and only available from specific training providers? If so, what are the types of training that will be made available to the supervisees and how do we choose our training provider partners for EmPS?
While we want to get suitable inmates prepared for their life post-sentence, we must also be mindful not to dishearten these individuals who are intending to change by exposing them to discrimination which will dampen their confidence to reintegrate through meaningful employment.
With that in mind, how do we ensure the staff and fellow trainees at the training centres are prepared to accept these individuals who are trying to turn over a new leaf? Are there counselling or career guidance sessions available to help our inmates deal with discrimination or stigmatisation?
With more and more training and jobs needing IT or digital skills, if the training or job emplacement requires the supervisees to have access to mobile devices, social media and access to computers, will these devices be provided for in prison? Is it a cause of concern if inmates have access to such devices? Will this affect the inmates' time they spend in prison?
Currently, many citizens can use their SkillsFuture Credit for training and upskilling. Can inmates placed on EmPS use their SkillsFuture Credit too?
Ultimately, we want relevant and updated training and reskilling for our inmates so that they will have a fair chance of landing a job post-sentence and hence increasing the likelihood that they will be meaningfully employed. We must ensure the quality of such training is of a suitable standard. Hence, it may also be useful if such training or reskilling is accredited or by the end of the training or reskilling programme, our inmates receive some form of certification to help them with future employability.
With the idea of future employability of our post-sentence inmates in mind, how can we get more employers to be part of the programme to work with the inmates? Ex-inmates face a tough time landing a job, even with proper skills and qualifications. Despite the best efforts of many inmates who want to turn over a new leaf, discrimination and stigmatisation remains a reality.
Can we better incentivise employers to consider employing ex-inmates? What can we do to encourage a more welcoming environment for ex-offenders in the workplace?
Can EmPS be used to address manpower shortages that we have in digital, manufacturing and engineering industry or even kickstart talent in a new industry, for example, the electric car repair industry? I believe this would certainly help our inmates be more future ready and hence, more likely to be meaningfully employed post-sentence. Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Although EmPs provides a golden opportunity for ex-offenders to seek employment and give back to society, we must not forget the important role of the family in reintegrating offenders back to society.
Families should encourage ex-offenders to participate in rehabilitation sessions so that they can use this opportunity to rebuild their lives. Indeed, EmPs is an opportunity that should be taken up because it will give ex-offenders time to upgrade themselves by acquiring new skills so that they have a better chance of getting a job after being released from prison.
Family support and encouragement are very important because many ex-offenders face a host of challenges as they try to reintegrate into society. Therefore, we should build a conducive environment for ex-offenders to better themselves and return as members of society who contribute to community and family.
Programmes such as FITRAH (Family and Inmates Through Care Assistance Haven) by the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) together with M3 aims to provide integrated and holistic support for offenders and their families – from in-care to aftercare.
Families will be connected to the necessary assistance network while their spouses who are in prison are given proper support with in-care services.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the volunteers from FITRAH and other related organisations for providing assistance to ex-offenders and their families.
(In English): In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, overall, I am in support of the amendments. However, for it to be effective, we need to ensure that SPS is adequately resourced; we have good quality training and trained training providers to enable the inmates to reintegrate through meaningful employment; we have strong support from employers in the right industries; we can ensure the inmate's family is supported, advised and counselled so that they can be the pillar of support for the inmates to reintegrate back to society; lastly and perhaps most crucially, we need to continue our efforts in getting society to accept these individuals who are intending to turn over a new leaf and be contributing members of our society.
That being said, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I am in support of the amendments to the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, the amendments in the Bill today will promote inmates’ rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
I previously shared in this House the inspirational stories I heard from ex-offenders and how “family” was the one word they used most frequently in their stories. I also spoke about how I strongly believe that strengthening family ties is important to improve the rehabilitation process for inmates. I am supportive of the amendments in this Bill, which not only sends a signal about the focus on rehabilitation, but also provides a concrete framework for achieving it.
I have three points of clarification.
My first point is about eligibility for employment preparation. The new section 59L provides that a prisoner is eligible to be released for employment preparation if the prisoner has served not less than 14 days. Can Minister clarify whether this 14-day period includes any time that has been spent in remand? Can Minister share at what stage of the imprisonment would the Commissioner assess a prisoner’s suitability for employment? Should a prisoner be initially assessed as unsuitable, when will the prisoner next be re-assessed?
My second point is about the categorisation of prison offences. The new sections 72 and 73 set out minor and aggravated prison offences. Each section includes broad, catch-all offences. For instance, it is a minor prison offence to carry out any “act, conduct, disorder or neglect to the prejudice of good order or discipline in the prison”. It is an aggravated prison offence to carry out any “gross act of misconduct or insubordination”.
But it is not clear that acts that are prejudicial to the good order or discipline in the prison are any less severe than acts of gross misconduct or insubordination. To help clarify the differences between minor and aggravated prison offences, can Minister provide examples of acts that would fall under the catch-all minor and aggravated prison offences? Can Minister also clarify if the Superintendent has final authority in determining whether the offences committed is a minor or aggravated prison offences and whether the Commissioner has the authority to disagree with the Superintendent’s categorisation of an offence as a minor or aggravated offence?
My third and final point is about exceptions to prison offences. The Ministry has said the new Employment Preparation Scheme will include an in-camp phase during which inmates may work or study outside prison during the day and return to reside at a “work release centre” in the evening.
Can Minister clarify if prison offences conducted at work, study and residence locations under the scheme would be deemed to be within prison? This is significant, as certain prison offences do not apply to prisoners serving their sentence outside prison.
Would it no longer be an aggravated prison offence for a prisoner to assault another prisoner while working together outside the prison under this scheme?
Can Minister also clarify why it is no longer a prison offence for a prisoner to carry out aggravated or repeated assault on any other prisoner, or wilfully causing themselves any illness, injury, or disability if a prisoner is outside of prison under the scheme?
In summary, I hope Minister can clarify my points on assessing a prisoner’s eligibility for employment preparation, determining the severity of prison offences and providing exceptions to prison offences. Madam, notwithstanding my clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. Every year, more than 10,000 ex-offenders complete their sentences and are released. Upon release, reintegration is the most crucial step and post-release employment is critical to the success of an ex-offender’s reintegration into society. The Employment Preparation Scheme can effectively facilitate this.
The proposed scheme is more comprehensive than the Work Release Scheme. Inmates will be able to equip themselves with relevant skillsets, enhancing their post-release employability. Retraining is especially crucial, especially considering the pandemic economy.
I will speak on two key areas: the structure of the scheme and the importance of a coordinated, holistic support framework.
On the scheme itself, I would like to highlight three points: the need to include as many inmates as possible under it, ensuring quality programmes and the provision of financial support for inmates under the scheme.
First, we must seek to include as many eligible inmates into the scheme as possible. Inmates are emplaced into the scheme through a two-tier selection process. SPS first surfaces suitable inmates. Thereafter, they are assessed by an independent advisory committee. I would like to ask what would be the tools used to assess the suitability of an inmate. For example, would the Singapore Prisons Short Risk Scale (SPSRS) be used? Would inmates be told of the assessment criteria so that they can work towards such a programme?
Could the Ministry also clarify at which stage are inmates eligible to be emplaced under this scheme? At section 59L(a) of the Bill, an inmate is eligible for the scheme when they have served at least 14 days of their sentence. However, it seems that inmates are generally emplaced on Community-based Programmes at the tail-end of their sentence.
Second, I believe that the long-term effectiveness of the scheme is dependent on the quality of preparation received by the inmates. The pandemic, coupled with the destruction of digitalisation, has accelerated growth and demise of many industries, jobs and skillsets. Upon release, some inmates may find themselves with skillsets that may not be practical or useful in this new economy. Skills audit and career counselling are then essential for successful training and placement. How can the Ministry work with organisations such as SSG and e2i to prepare inmates?
The success of training is very much dependent on placement. And a place-and-train scheme is often preferred because inmates would be training with a clear purpose. Could the Ministry develop pilot place-and-train sectors? The Labour Movement stands ready to work with tripartite partners to support such initiatives.
Thirdly, many ex-offenders need financial support upon release. Some would prefer to work rather than invest in training and education. However, the importance of reskilling must not be overlooked as it will place them in a better position to secure gainful employment. Could the Ministry provide training allowance to inmates who take up training and education programmes? This is especially important when the inmates can go home in phase two and three of the scheme.
Next, a coordinated, holistic support framework involving all stakeholders must be in place to ensure the long-term effectiveness of the scheme.
First, the success of the scheme is dependent on employers’ and workplace support. I would like to call on employers to maintain an open-mind and view ex-offenders as a potential pool of committed workers. Employers and the workplace must try to give a second chance to ex-offenders, accepting them as valued members of the workforce.
The number of employers registered with Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG) has been steadily increasing over the years. However, research has reflected that some inmates who are considered as PMETs were unable to find suitable vacancies commensurate with their qualifications. There is thus a pressing need to rope in more employers in different industries to join as partners of the scheme. The unions will lend our support to do so.
Secondly, the support rendered to inmates by the Government should continue for some time post-release to ensure that reintegration is successful. There may be scope to investigate enhancing the Jobs Growth Initiative (JGI) for ex-offenders. Could the Ministry consider enhancing the JGI or offering a one-off bonus when an employer hires an inmate upon their completion of the EmPS with the company? The continuity in employment post-release will ensure a smoother reintegration into society for ex-offenders. Perhaps, the JGI can be restructured for hires of ex-offenders, with the provision of Government support running for a longer period of time.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, I also wish to highlight the efforts of YRSG. Every year, YRSG assists more than 2,000 inmates with employment before release. The Labour Movement will continue to provide our support to their initiatives, because ex-offenders are and can be productive and committed workers. For example, since 2018, e2i has worked with YRSG to assist approximately 1,000 ex-offenders by developing training programmes and providing job matching opportunities for this pool of workers.
The long-term effectiveness of the scheme is dependent on the existence of a coordinated, holistic support framework at all levels. As a nation, giving ex-offenders second chances is not just about providing them with employment, but also believing in them and wholeheartedly accepting them as part of the community. Notwithstanding my clarifications and suggestions, I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Leader.
","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)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Prisons (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank the Members for their support for the Bill. Please allow me to address the questions and suggestions from the Members in turn.
First, on the Employment Preparation Scheme, or EmPS. I will first speak in Malay on family support, duration and criteria for the EmPS phases.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Sharael Taha said the family plays a critical role in an inmate's rehabilitation journey. Ms Nadia Samdin asked whether flexibility could be given to inmates lacking family support for the long home leave phase and the duration and criteria to progress through the phases for the EmPS.
I agree with Mr Sharael that strong family support can be a powerful source of motivation for an inmate to change. The Singapore Prison Service, or SPS, recognises this. Prior to emplacement on the EmPS, the inmate's family members will be briefed on the requirements of the scheme. Briefings like this will allow them to better understand the scheme and encourage the inmate in his reintegration.
Inmates who progress well during the in-camp phase can transit to the home leave phases. This will allow them to spend more time with their loved ones and gradually reconcile with their family. If an inmate faces any family issue, he may inform his Reintegration Officer who can arrange joint sessions involving the inmate, family members and the Reintegration Officer, to resolve the issue.
However, inmates assessed to be without strong family support will not progress to the home leave phases. This is because the lack of a supportive family structure may be detrimental to their reintegration. For these inmates, they will continue to reside at the Work Release Centre throughout the EmPS. SPS will still allow them time-off to spend with their loved ones.
The duration an inmate spends in each phase depends on the overall emplacement period on the EmPS and SPS's assessment of whether he is suitable to progress to the next phase. On average, the duration of the in-camp and weekend home leave phases ranges from two to four months each; followed by the long home leave phase for suitable inmates, for the remaining period until they are released.
SPS's assessment will take into account factors such as conduct and progress while on the EmPS, compliance with conditions and family support. SPS will also consider the inmate's attendance for work or classes, and feedback from his employers, trainers or teachers.
(In English): Mr Raj Joshua Thomas and Mr Desmond Choo asked if SPS can emplace as many eligible inmates on the EmPS as possible. Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about the eligibility for the EmPS in terms of offence committed and what can be done to mitigate the risk of re-offending. Mr Murali Pillai asked how the EmPS will complement the Home Detention Scheme (HDS), Conditional Remission System (CRS) and Mandatory Aftercare Scheme (MAS).
Our intention is to emplace as many inmates as possible on community-based programmes. As the rehabilitation of ex-offenders is one of our key missions, this is something that I can assure Members on. That said, we also need to put safeguards in place. The trade-off is slightly different for each scheme, depending on their objective and scheme structure. Let me explain.
The Second Schedule of the Prisons Act lists the offences that will disqualify an inmate from HDS. As the inmate will be serving his sentence in the community while on HDS, we also need to ensure public safety.
For EmPS, an inmate is not automatically disqualified just because he committed an offence in the Second Schedule. While SPS will generally not emplace such inmates on EmPS, we need some flexibility to exercise discretion for deserving cases. There could be inmates who have committed such offences who could benefit from EmPS, as pointed out by Mr Raj Joshua Thomas in his speech.
Every inmate considered for EmPS will be thoroughly screened and SPS will take into consideration their response to rehabilitation and conduct in prison as part of its assessment. Only when it is assessed that they do not present a significant threat to public safety will they be considered for emplacement. These cases will then be surfaced to an advisory committee for review and recommendation to the Commissioner of Prisons for emplacement on EmPS.
If emplaced on EmPS, the inmates will be under SPS’ close supervision. They will need to comply with strict conditions, such as electronic tagging, curfew and reporting to mitigate the risk of re-offending.
Mr Leon Perera asked if there is an appeal process. Yes, there is. The inmate can approach the Superintendent of the prison and approach the Board of Visiting Justices.
Mr Murali asked how the different programmes complement each other. There is some overlap between HDS and EmPS. Inmates on HDS will also benefit from employment, skills training or education. The key difference is that EmPS supports inmates who require more hand-holding. That is why EmPS has an in-camp phase at SPS’ Work Release Centre where they can be more closely supervised and supported.
The CRS and MAS serve slightly different objectives. They lean more towards preventing re-offending, rather than work placement. The CRS seeks to deter inmates from re-offending when they are released on remission. They are subject to a basic condition that they should not be convicted of an offence committed during the remission period and be sentenced to imprisonment. Those who are at a higher risk of re-offending or need more support, will also be subjected to the MAS, a structured aftercare regime, which I mentioned in my earlier speech. Persons on MAS may choose to work, upskill themselves or study. That said, all inmates will be offered assistance by YRSG, which can provide employment-related assistance to them.
Together, these schemes are complementary and offer different avenues to ease inmates’ reintegration and deter re-offending. An inmate may be emplaced on EmPS prior to his release and, subsequently, be subject to the CRS, and even MAS, after his release.
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas asked if inmates who are older or have spent a substantial period in prison could be emplaced on EmPS. As long as inmates are eligible and found suitable, they may be emplaced on EmPS, regardless of their age or time spent in prison.
Mr Louis Ng, Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Sharael Taha asked if the 14-day eligibility period for EmPS includes remand and at which stage inmates would be assessed for EmPS. Mr Desmond Choo asked what tools are used to assess an inmate’s suitability. Mr Leon Perera asked about the process before cases are surfaced to the advisory committee.
The 14-day period does not include time spent in remand. In practice, a person who is sentenced to imprisonment will, generally, serve more than 14 days in prison before he is emplaced on EmPS. While in prison, he will have to undergo programmes that address his re-offending risks before he is emplaced on any community-based programme.
Towards the tail-end of the inmate’s sentence, SPS will assess the inmates’ suitability for the community-based programmes. Factors, such as progress and response to rehabilitation, conduct in prison and reintegration plan, are taken into consideration. During the orientation briefing for newly admitted inmates and the inmates’ regular interviews by their Personal Supervisor, the inmates will be briefed and encouraged to take ownership of their rehabilitation and maintain good conduct. If an inmate is not found suitable for EmPS, SPS will prepare him to be directly released at the end of his sentence and may refer him to a social service agency for assistance.
Mr Yip Hon Weng suggested that the conditions for inmates on EmPS should prohibit vice activities. We agree. Inmates on EmPS will be prohibited from patronising places of ill-repute, such as brothels, nightclubs and massage parlours, among others. This falls under other conditions specified by the Commissioner of Prisons under the new sections 59M(1)(i) and 59M(2)(i). Currently, inmates emplaced on the Work Release Scheme (WRS) are already subject to this condition.
Members asked about the work, skills training and education opportunities while on EmPS.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about matching inmates with work and how skills training will be allocated to inmates. These are done by YRSG, which is a Statutory Board under MHA. Besides providing skills training, YRSG also provides employment-related assistance to inmates and ex-offenders.
Inmates are engaged to find out their interest in studies, work or skills training. As part of the employment-related assistance rendered to inmates, YRSG conducts career guidance sessions and matches inmates to jobs based on their skills qualifications and work experience. YRSG then engages suitable employers to interview and hire the inmates before their emplacement, or work with Continuing Education and Training (CET) Centres, to channel inmates for skills upgrading.
Ms Nadia Samdin sought clarifications on the nature of jobs offered to inmates under WRS and EmPS. Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked if there are plans to engage more employers. YRSG actively engages trade associations and chambers, industry stakeholders and employers to ensure adequate job opportunities for inmates upon their release. Currently, there are over 5,600 employers partnering YRSG to offer jobs to ex-offenders. Employers are predominantly from the Wholesale and Retail Trade, Manufacturing, Accommodation and Food Services industries. Both WRS and EmPS will allow the inmates to take on a variety of jobs. YRSG constantly looks out for new employers to come on board.
Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Sharael Taha asked if EmPS could address manpower shortages in certain sectors or supply manpower to emerging sectors. Mr Desmond Choo asked if place-and-train sectors could be developed. YRSG pays attention to the pockets of manpower shortages which offer good career prospects. Under YRSG’s Train and Place and Grow initiative, or TAP and Grow, YRSG partners employers, trade associations and training institutions to equip inmates with industry-specific skills. This facilitates the inmates’ recruitment into the relevant industries and growth in their new careers after their release.
To date, YRSG has partnered the Singapore Precision Engineering and Technology Association, Mediacorp, Singapore Logistics Association to set up precision engineering, media skills and logistics training academies in prison. These initiatives help to build inmates’ skills in prison which, we hope, will translate to good employment opportunities for them after they are released. YRSG will continue to look out for sectors with good employment and development opportunities for inmates. YRSG intends to explore a similar initiative to the place-and-train scheme, where inmates will be placed on jobs upon release and undergo training during their employment to upgrade their skills.
Mr Melvin Yong asked if the relevant authorities could review the hiring restrictions in certain sectors, such as the security sector. This is a balance between rehabilitation and public safety. For example, someone convicted of kidnapping would not be allowed to be a taxi driver. Different occupations and sectors have their specific considerations and thus restrictions on hiring ex-offenders. These restrictions are deemed necessary to protect the interests of the public. The agencies constantly review the criteria to find the most appropriate trade-off. Nonetheless, should an ex-offender face challenges in finding employment, YRSG will assist him in finding a suitable job.
Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Sharael Taha, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Ms Nadia Samdin asked how employers and inmates would be supported on EmPS to help inmates stay gainfully employed in the longer term. The Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) was introduced as an extraordinary, time-bound measure to expand local hiring amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. In September 2021, the Government extended the JGI until March 2022, with stepped down support levels. Employers who hired ex-offenders through YRSG, the Industrial and Services Co-operative Society (ISCOS), or halfway houses engaged by SPS, will automatically receive the JGI of up to $36,000 for these hires. The Government will take into account the labour market’s recovery in assessing the next steps for JGI after March 2022.
There are other ways in which we can support employers and inmates. Inmates who are working during EmPS will be assigned a Career Coach for up to 12 months. This support will continue after an inmate has completed his EmPS if his emplacement period is less than 12 months. The Career Coach provides support to help an inmate adapt to job demands and the workplace environment.
The employer is also supported by the Career Coach, who helps the inmate and employer understand each other’s expectations and perspectives.
The Career Coach engages the employer and the inmate's supervisor regularly and assists to resolve any work-related issues. In doing so, the employer can better understand any unique need of the inmate and adopt a more effective management style.
In partnership with the Institute for Human Resource Professionals, YRSG will be developing the coaching competencies of employers and supervisors through its Project Beyond Hiring initiative to help them develop and retain inmate or ex-offender employees better.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked if checks would be done on employers and whether there should be regulations and penalties for errant employers who exploit inmates. Mr Sharael Taha asked about the support available for inmates who face discrimination. Mr Leon Perera asked how companies will be selected and work conditions regulated to ensure fairness and worker dignity.
YRSG requires partnering employers to fulfil certain criteria. These include abiding by fair employment practices, providing CPF contributions for employees, adopting supportive work practices and providing market-relevant salaries, including aligning salaries with the Progressive Wage Model.
Employers partnering YRSG are aware of inmates' needs and most of them provide on-the-job training for the inmates. YRSG also encourages employers keep to fair and supportive work practices. If an employer is reported to treat employees unfairly because of their criminal records, YRSG may pause, or even cease the partnership with the employer. If an inmate experiences discrimination or biased treatment at work because of his criminal records, the Career Coach will engage both the inmate and employer to resolve the issue. If necessary, the Career Coach may also advise the inmate to seek help from the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP). More serious cases that may breach employment laws may be reported to MOM for investigation.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked if inmates' salaries will be managed by SPS. The employers will credit the remuneration directly into the inmates' bank accounts. To ensure that inmates without a bank account receive their wages, YRSG works with employers to make alternative arrangements, such as issuing salaries in cash cheques in the first month of employment, to give the inmates time to open a bank account.
Mr Desmond Choo asked if MHA could work with SkillsFuture Singapore, or SSG and e2i to upskill inmates. Ms Nadia Samdin and Mr Sharael Taha asked about the types of training and education that inmates on the EmPS may undergo. Mr Leon Perera asked how training value will be ascertained.
YRSG provides nationally accredited skills training to inmates and ex-offenders to facilitate their long-term career development and mobility. The training is aligned to Singapore's Skills Framework developed by SSG, to ensure that inmates are trained in market-relevant skills. YRSG is working with SSG to explore hosting some training classes on virtual platforms as an alternative to physical lessons.
YRSG also collaborated with e2i to host interviews between prospective employers and pre-release inmates on e2i's virtual portal. YRSG will also work with e2i to host workshops to equip inmates with CV-building and interview preparation skills.
Specific to the EmPS, YRSG will engage Approved Training Organisations, or ATOs and CET Centres to provide skills training for inmates on the scheme.
YRSG is curating a set of Critical Core Skills modules for inmates on the EmPS to help them better adapt to the workplace and enhance their employability. Formulated by SSG, the modules comprise 16 competencies that workplaces deem most essential. YRSG is currently exploring these modules with suitable partners and training providers.
These skills training assures employers that inmates are adequately prepared and qualified as per other workers and allows inmates to subsequently upskill as they progress in their respective careers. Other measures to ascertain training value would be through internalised and exhibited behaviour by the inmates, such as whether they successfully complete and obtain a pass grade for their training, are successfully hired by the employers and their subsequent performance on the job.
Inmates who are keen to pursue self-selected training or academic programmes after attending YRSG’s facilitated courses can do so at their own expenses, subject to SPS' approval. Inmates on the EmPS may also pursue education such as GCE \"N\" to \"A\" levels, diploma and degree courses, if they qualify for enrolment.
Mr Sharael Taha asked if inmates can use their SkillsFuture credits. Ms Nadia Samdin and Mr Desmond Choo asked inmates who undergo training and education will receive support such as allowances. Mr Leon Perera asked if inmates could benefit from subsidised rates for education fees.
Inmates who attend training courses arranged by YRSG are not required to pay for the training. There is a national subsidy of 70% to 90% for skills training provided by ATOs and CET Centres, and the remaining cost will be borne by YRSG. However, should an inmate wish to pursue further education after completing the YRSG-arranged courses, he will need to pay for the courses himself. If an inmate has financial difficulty in supporting his own training or education, he may choose to work under the EmPS, before embarking on skills training or education.
If need be, he may apply for the Yellow Ribbon Fund STAR Bursary or the Education Support Programme offered by the Singapore After-Care Association to support his education. Inmates from low-income households may also apply for various Government bursaries available, such as Higher Education Community Bursary or Higher Education Bursary to subsidise their education fees.
Meanwhile, key expenses such as accommodation and training are covered during inmates’ in-camp phase, which would ease their initial finances.
Mr Melvin Yong asked about the efforts to help inmates adapt to a society where the use of technology is increasingly prevalent. Mr Sharael Taha asked if inmates have access to electronic devices for training. Mr Leon Perera asked if ex-inmates face any impediments in accessing electronic payment services.
SPS and YRSG have programmes in place to help inmates prepare for a digitally advanced job market and society. In prison, inmates can use SPS-issued tablets to keep in touch with loved ones and pick up digital skills. Since 2019, YRSG has offered the \"SkillsFuture for Digital Workplace\" course for inmates serving their sentence in the community. The curriculum teaches the use of Internet banking and payments, e-communications platforms, Government e-services and basic cybersecurity. YRSG is also developing tiered training pathways for inmates to gain digital skills, which will commence in the second quarter of 2022.
Inmates are expected to have their personal mobile devices that are required for training or learning. If they cannot afford one, training providers could provide loaned devices for use. Other equipment such as laptops and computers would be provided by training providers. If an inmate requires assistance with e-payment services, his Reintegration Officer will guide him in accessing the services.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked if inmates on the EmPS would attend classes with the public and whether identifiers associated with inmates could be removed.
Inmates will attend classes with members of public and there will not be any identifiers. For those who wear an electronic tag on the ankle, they may choose to cover it with trousers or long skirt. SPS is currently developing a tracking device that resembles a digital watch which can be worn on the wrist. More discreet than the ankle tag, it reduces stigmatisation and boosts the inmates’ self-confidence.
Ms Nadia Samdin, Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked how co-workers and fellow classmates would accommodate the inmates and offer a conducive environment for rehabilitation. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked how the needs of victims of crime can be protected from the presence of an inmate.
Under the Yellow Ribbon Project, we aim to promote a more accepting society that is willing to offer ex-offenders a second chance to start afresh. Ultimately, the safety and security of society is best served when ex-offenders successfully rehabilitate and reintegrate into society as contributing members. We hope that employers, co-workers and classmates would give inmates and ex-offenders second chances.
Education, skills training and employment play a very important role in inmates' rehabilitation. The Government strives to strike a balance between protecting the public and providing ex-offenders the opportunity to live, work and learn in the same way as other members of society.
Besides enhancing inmates' employability, it is our hope that inmates can form positive pro-social networks, assimilate into society and reduce the chances of re-offending. We do not compel individuals to reveal their inmate or ex-offender status to avoid further stigmatisation. If there is feedback that an inmate had misbehaved in any way towards anyone, victim or not, SPS’ Reintegration Officer will look into the matter. If an inmate breaches any condition or commits any offence, he may be taken off the scheme.
Mr Melvin Yong asked about the recidivism rate of inmates on the WRS. Mr Sharael Taha asked about the WRS emplacement figures and how abscondment would be addressed. Ms Nadia Samdin, Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked if there are adequate resources catered for the EmPS.
About 200 inmates are emplaced on the WRS yearly. As of end 2021, there were 101 inmates on the scheme, forming about 3% of the convicted inmate population. In 2021, the number of inmates who absconded during their WRS averaged about two per month, or which is about 1.3% of the WRS population per month.
Based on the latest data, for inmates released from 2014 to 2018, the average two-year recidivism rate of inmates who had completed the WRS is 15% as compared to 24% for the general inmate population. Based on SPS’ experience, the stepdown approach of the WRS has been useful and it will continue to be a feature of the EmPS.
At present, we are not expecting any significant increase in the number of inmates emplaced on the EmPS because the criteria for emplacement on the EmPS is similar to those for the WRS. This applies to the abscondment numbers too.
SPS has measures in place to address abscondment. If there is any sign of possible relapse, SPS will first intensify its engagements with the inmate. The Reintegration Officer and Correctional Rehabilitation Specialist will arrange joint sessions involving the inmate, his family members and his Career Coach to address any issue. If an inmate absconds, SPS will work closely with the Police and CNB to re-arrest him.
In terms of resourcing and support, SPS's Reintegration Officers and Correctional Rehabilitation Specialists are equipped with the necessary skills to supervise and support inmates in the community. Where possible, SPS leverages technology to support its work.
For example, SPS will be adopting biometrics to monitor inmates on the home leave phases for curfew compliance. Today, SPS verifies inmates' compliance manually via phone calls or physical checks. By including a fingerprint authentication function in the monitoring unit that is temporarily installed at the inmates’ home, officers can more effectively confirm that the supervisees are at home by asking the supervisees to verify their identity via the fingerprint function.
SPS has no plans to expand the capacity at Institution S2, the Work Release Centre for the EmPS. MHA will work within its existing resources to implement the EmPS.
Mr Leon Perera suggested that prison officers have a chance to provide pastoral care to released inmates. This is already being done. They can be posted to the Community Corrections Command as Reintegration Officers, where as a Reintegration Officer, the prison officer will supervise and guide newly released inmates who are required to comply with mandatory aftercare conditions under the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, let me now turn to the questions on enhancing SPS's operations and administration. Mr Louis Ng asked for examples of minor and aggravated prison offences. He also asked if the Superintendent is the one who determines whether a prison offence is minor or aggravated.
An example of a minor offence is using another inmate’s e-letter account. An example of an aggravated offence is open defiance.
The Superintendent follows sections 72 and 73 in determining if a prison offence is minor or aggravated and may punish the inmate accordingly if the inmate is found guilty of the offence. There are checks and balances in place to ensure that inmates are dealt with appropriately for committing prison offences.
For instance, under section 71, if a Superintendent imposes punishment on an inmate who had committed an aggravated offence, the Superintendent is required to notify the Commissioner. The Commissioner may then confirm or vary the punishment imposed by the Superintendent. If the Commissioner does not agree with the punishment, she may direct a re-investigation into the case. There have been instances where an aggravated prison offence was reduced to a minor prison offence, after re-investigation.
Mr Louis Ng sought clarifications on the prison offences that would be applicable to inmates on the EmPS. If an inmate commits a prison offence such as quarrelling with or assaulting another inmate at his workplace, it will not be considered as “within prison”. Clause 24 of the Bill is clear on this. Such acts would be classified as breaches of the conditions of his EmPS order under section 72(1)(48). SPS will investigate and take appropriate disciplinary action against inmates who have committed such breaches.
If an inmate commits an aggravated assault outside prison, the case will be reported to the Police for criminal investigations.
SPS does not take disciplinary action against inmates who commit self-harm outside prison. Instead, SPS will provide the necessary assistance and interventions to address the supervisee’s self-harm tendencies.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked how many inmates have had their release deferred in order to carry out any outstanding Court-ordered punishment. As mentioned in my speech earlier, on average, there were nine inmates per year whose release was deferred by the Commissioner under section 50I(3) of the Prisons Act and four inmates per year whose detention was extended by the Court under section 326 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), in order to carry out outstanding Court-ordered punishment.
Mr Murali Pillai gave a scenario where the Commissioner of Prisons could be placed in a conflicted position. He said there could be a situation where the Commissioner is asked to consider deferring the issuance of a remission order because there is insufficient time for the carrying out the corporal punishment on an inmate because of, amongst others, SPS' own decisions in relation to the remission period for the inmate.
I would like to assure Mr Murali Pillai that this conflict would not arise. This is because the restoration and forfeiture of an inmate’s remission will not result in him serving less than two-thirds of his imprisonment sentence before remission is granted.
And because inmates must serve two-thirds of their imprisonment sentence before they can be considered for release under the CRS, this situation will not arise.
On the more fundamental question on whether the Commissioner of Prisons should continue to have the power to defer issuing the remission order, from our perspective, this arrangement to address operational issues has been working well and can be retained. And like what I explained earlier, there should not be a situation where the Commissioner is put in a conflicted position.
Mr Yip Hon Weng suggested that instead of increasing the period of deferment under section 50I(3) of the Prisons Act, we could review the 14-day period for filing a Notice of Appeal. The 14-day period is given to allow individuals, not limited to inmates alone, to have sufficient time to think if they wish to appeal against a judgement, order or sentence.
In the event that an appeal is filed, whether within the 14-day period or by invoking section 380(1) of the CPC, SPS will seek the Court’s direction on whether to release the inmate or to detain the inmate under section 326 of the CPC.
Mdm Deputy 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): Mdm Deputy Speaker, 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 Faishal Ibrahim's speech?
Mdm Deputy Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of the 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 Faishal Ibrahim'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":"Prisons (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Thank you. Both powers under section 50I(3) of the Prisons Act and section 326 of the CPC, serve to ensure justice takes its course. SPS will exercise such powers judiciously and no inmate’s release will be deferred by more than what is necessary for carrying out the Court-ordered punishment. This means that the inmate concerned will be caned at the earliest possible instance and released soonest thereafter.
Ms Nadia Samdin asked if the processing time of correspondence between inmates and their families would be affected.
The answer is no. This relates to the communication part. We do not foresee any changes to the processing time needed for written correspondence between inmates and their loved ones as the screening process will not be affected.
Mr Leon Perera asked about the checks and balances in place for the new regulations on inmates’ correspondence.
As I mentioned in my opening speech, correspondences will only be withheld when they undermine the security or good order of the prison or incite the commission of any offence.
Prison officers are mindful of the sensitivities involved in processing and screening inmates’ correspondence. While every attempt is made to preserve the confidentiality of inmates’ letters, any content with security implications will be surfaced for consideration by a superior officer, to decide if the letter should be withheld. He also asked how the prescribed persons would know if the information crosses the threshold. MHA is still reviewing the type of information that breaches the threshold. However, I had provided some clear examples in my speech earlier.
On another part, I would just like to share that the Prisons Act does not prescribe any punishment for breaching these provisions. We would also like to clarify that these amendments are not an attempt to stop inmates' communication and prevent them from speaking out about genuine grievances or give feedback. Based on the example provided by the hon Member, where an inmate communicates about his injuries suffered in prison, we will not withhold or redact such correspondence, unless it is assessed to affect the security or good order of the prison or incite the commission of an offence. Therefore, the context of the communication is important to the facts of the case.
So, when the correspondence written by an inmate is withheld, he will be informed and he will be given a letter-form to re-write his letter if he chooses to do so. An inmate will also be informed if any correspondence addressed to him is withheld. The inmate may ask his personal supervisor as to why the letter was withheld and the reason will be shared with the inmate.
On whether the new provisions on controls to inmates' correspondence will have specific carve-outs for any groups, including lawyers, the new provision on control of inmates' correspondence is intended to enable SPS to regulate information that affects the security or good order of the prison or incites the commission of a new offence. We do not intend to exempt any group or persons, including lawyers, from this provision.
Let me address the other issues raised by Members. Mr Leon Perera also asked if SPS could provide financial literacy courses. This is already being done as part of the pre-release programme. SPS also works with community partners to run enrichment programmes for inmates on the EmPS, including financial literacy programmes.
He also asked about if SPS could partner other banks, besides POSB, to set up bank accounts. We assessed that currently, this is sufficient, as POSB is commonly used. Having said that, we will monitor the demand and situation.
He also asked about the allowances and the salaries the inmates get. I would like clarify that there is a difference between work programmes in prison and work in the community. For work programmes in prison, they are given allowances. If they work in the community, YRSG will match the inmates to jobs that offer market-rate salaries.
He also asked if the Employment Act applies to inmates working on the EmPS. The answer is yes. So, when they are working in the community, they have a contract of service and share an employer-employee relationship with the company and thus, they are protected under the Employment Act.
He also asked one question that I have covered in my Malay speech, whereby he asked what about those inmates without family support. As I said in my Malay speech, inmates without strong family support may still be emplaced on the EmPS. However, they may not progress to the home leave phase. So, for these inmates, they can continue to reside at the Work Release Centre throughout EmPS.
So, we will do our best to give the opportunity to all eligible inmates because we believe that as part of the rehabilitation and reintegration process, the support from the family, community and employment is very important. I met many people who really have given very good support to what we are doing with regard to the EmPS and they realise that this will help to enhance the skills and the opportunities of the inmates.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, Members have also spoken extensively about the stigma that inmates and ex-offenders face. Mr Murali Pillai went a step further to suggest that talented ex-offenders be given a chance to perform at NDP 2022 and we thank him for his suggestion. We will continue to galvanise the community and employers to act together for second chances.
Through community-based programmes such as the EmPS, we hope that inmates have the opportunity to boost their work experience, improve their education, or deepen their skillsets. Eventually, these will help them to create long-term career development and mobility, allowing them to show that they are contributing individuals at work and to an accepting society.
Mr Perera mentioned about the five-year recidivism rate, which is about two times higher than the two-year recidivism rate. We agree that there is room for improvement, that is why we want to implement new programmes such as the EmPS to improve this rate. However, SPS and YSRG cannot do this alone over the longer timeframe. We need even stronger support from this House, families, the community and an accepting society. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: I was going to say that I thought that the Minister of State was very thorough, and we did not need clarification, but I see a hand. Mr Perera, please keep it short.
Mr Leon Perera: Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. I agree the Minister of State was very thorough and I do not intend to take up more of the House's time. In fact, all my points and questions have been raised, except one.
I just wanted to come back to one question I had at the end of my speech, which is on the powers that the Government now has to interdict correspondence or redact or review correspondence. I just wanted to ask for the Minister of State's assurance that whatever correspondence that an inmate has with his or her lawyer or even with other persons – that information, under our current laws and regulations, could never be and would not be used and relayed on to third parties, such as the AGC, for example, to confer some kind of legal advantage in the proceedings that follow.
I just wanted to get that assurance that that is not something that could possibly happen right now.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Madam, I would like to assure the Member that that will be so.
[(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. – [Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim.] (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 Parliament do now adjourn to 10.30 am tomorrow.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 7.35 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentage of Graduates who Completed SGUnited Traineeships and Yet Had Not Been Offered Permanent Employment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"15 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Manpower (a) to date, what is the percentage of graduates who successfully completed at least one SGUnited Traineeship Programme but has not been converted into permanent employment with the same company; (b) what are the reasons for not being converted; and (c) what recourse do these jobseekers have.
Dr Tan See Leng: The SGUnited Traineeship programme was introduced in March 2020 amidst a weak labour market to provide fresh graduates with traineeship opportunities that allow them to acquire industry-relevant experience and build up their skillsets and networks. As of end-November 2021, about 11,500 graduates have taken on SGUnited traineeships since the scheme was launched. With the economy showing signs of recovery, fewer graduates are participating in the scheme.
As at end-August 2021, 7,200 trainees have exited or completed their traineeships and based on latest available data, about 5,800 (81%) are employed: 3,500 (49%) employed by other companies and 2,300 (32%) employed by their host organisations.
The traineeships were designed to provide traineeship and working experience to as many fresh graduates as possible despite weak economic conditions, hosted by employers who had the capacity to train and provide employment opportunities. If we are with the expectation that host organisations were obligated to employ all their trainees, then we must accept the corollary, that they would not be able to offer so many traineeships during the most critical period of the crisis.
The reasons for a trainee not being converted into employment depends on the fit of each trainee to the job and the business situation and hiring needs of the host organisation. Trainees who are not employed by their host organisations will nevertheless have benefited from the traineeship experience, which boosts their employability. Taking recourse against host organisations will be against the spirit in which employers, job seekers and the Government came together to ensure that opportunities continue to exist despite the disruption to the labour market due to COVID-19.
For trainees who have not secured employment, Workforce Singapore (WSG) has proactively reached out to provide them with job search resources and information on job opportunities and upcoming job fairs. For trainees who require additional support, they can take up WSG’s career matching services including career coaching, employability workshops and networking sessions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Acceptance Rate for Professional Conversion Programme for Applicants from Different Age Groups and Educational Qualifications","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"16 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower in the last three years (a) what is the annual acceptance rate for the Professional Conversion Programme for (i) all applicants and (ii) applicants above 50 years old; (b) what proportion of graduates from the (i) SGUnited Skills Programmes (ii) Career Transition Programmes (iii) Career Conversion Programmes and (iv) Professional Conversion Programmes were later employed in full-time permanent jobs; and (c) what proportion of these graduates are employed in full-time, permanent jobs related to their Workforce Singapore-supported skills programme or attachment.
Dr Tan See Leng: The close to 100 Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs) are administered by different programme partners. Jobseekers apply through these programme partners or directly to the employer. Acceptance rates to CCPs are not a meaningful indicator as many jobseekers will apply for more than one job at a time, including CCP positions and other job vacancies. Instead, Workforce Singapore (WSG) monitors the number of jobseekers that have been hired through CCPs. Of the more than 23,000 CCP placements over the last three years, 27% were 50 years and older.
The Member asked about the conversion rate to full-time jobs for WSG-supported programmes under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package. WSG administers the SGUnited Traineeships and SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways programmes, which provide jobseekers with company-hosted traineeship, attachment and training opportunities in a weak labour market. These opportunities enable jobseekers to acquire work experience, skills and networks and put them in a stronger position to seize new job opportunities as the economy recovers. Not all trainees will be hired by their host organisations or even remain in the same sector.
The Member also mentioned the SGUnited Skills Programme, which is run by SkillsFuture Singapore and provides another option for jobseekers. It offers industry-relevant courses delivered by Continuing Education and Training Centres, including Institutes of Higher Learning. As of end-November 2021, about 14,900 individuals have participated in the programme. As this programme falls under the purview of MOE, the Member may wish to file a separate Parliamentary Question if he is keen to find out more about the effectiveness of the specific programme.
In closing, I would like to assure the House that WSG and SkillsFuture Singapore will continue to support all trainees in the various SGUnited Jobs and Skills programmes who require job search assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Enhance Cybersecurity to Counter State-backed Entities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"22 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what are the precautions that should be taken in Singapore’s cyberspace to protect the digital security of Singaporeans against cyberattacks by private firms allegedly at the behest of state actors and state-backed entities; and (b) what additional and updated steps are being taken to address the risk of such attacks in the wake of developments over the last six months.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The cyberspace is transnational and borderless. This means that cyberattacks can by conducted by anyone, from anywhere in the world. Regardless who the malicious actor is, putting in place cyber resilience measures to protect ourselves is key.
The year 2021 put cybersecurity under the spotlight with a spate of cyberattacks and serious vulnerabilities discovered around the world. The most recent event of concern being the Log4Shell vulnerability found in an open-source Java package that is widely used by software developers. When there are known incidents and vulnerabilities, the Cyber Security Agency (CSA) takes immediate steps to ensure that our Critical Information Infrastructure (CII) and enterprises are secure.
In the case of Log4Shell, CSA called for two emergency meetings with CII sectors to issue technical details and mitigation solutions, and heightened monitoring for unusual activity. Public advisories and alerts were issued; trade associations and chambers were also briefed on the urgency for enterprises to implement the mitigation measures.
To strengthen our cybersecurity, CSA encourages adopting a \"zero-trust\" posture. This comprises two key principles: first, do not trust any activity on your networks without first verifying it; and second, ensure constant monitoring and vigilance for suspicious activities. To raise standards, CSA is developing the CII Supply Chain Programme to ensure that CII owners and their vendors adhere to international best practices for supply chain risk management. At the same time, CSA also developed actionable cybersecurity toolkits and resources for businesses under the SG Cyber Safe Programme to improve their cyber defences. These toolkits and resources can be found on CSA’s website.
CSA has consistently advocated that the best defence against cyberattacks is a population that is vigilant and adopts good cyber practices. Businesses and organisations are responsible for their own cybersecurity and must take action to strengthen their posture. This includes regularly updating their software and systems, and practising incident response and business continuity plans to ensure that employees are well-prepared when incidents happen. Individuals should practise good cyber hygiene and stay vigilant against phishing links. We must all strengthen our defences to participate in the digital domain safely and securely.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Steps for Singaporeans and Migrant Workers to Ensure Donations to Charities Based Overseas Do Not Support Terrorism Financing","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Home Affairs what steps can a person take to ensure that his donation to charities based overseas are not used for terrorism financing activities especially if such checks are not readily available to, or can be reasonably taken by, the individual.
28 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether there are any other migrant workers who are suspected to be radicalised or financing terrorism; and (b) how can the public be educated to ensure that their donations are used for genuine charitable purposes and not used to finance terrorism, given that individuals transfer donations through online platforms.
Mr K Shanmugam: To address Mr Sharael Tara’s question, 10 migrant workers have been charged under the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act to date. The Police treats every terrorism financing case seriously. Any support for terrorism-related activities or entities, no matter the source or amount, threatens our national security.
Members of the public seeking to support charitable causes should exercise caution against donating to unverified charities or responding to unverified fund-raising appeals, both online and offline. It can be difficult to ascertain whether these charities, particularly those based overseas, are bona fide organisations. In addition, there is no certainty that the donations will be used for the publicised purpose.
Therefore, we urge donors to channel their donations through registered charities which are regulated by the Commissioner of Charities. If donors are keen to support foreign charitable causes, they may respond to appeals organised by these registered charities or entities that have obtained a fund-raising for foreign charitable purposes (FRFCP) permit from the Commissioner of Charities.
As more fundraising appeals move online, it is important for donors to be discerning with crowdfunding appeals. To create a safer giving ecosystem, the Commissioner of Charities had worked with key crowdfunding platforms in Singapore to develop an industry Code of Practice for Online Charitable Fund-raising Appeals. The Code sets out recommended best practices for crowdfunding platforms to be trusted intermediaries between donors and beneficiaries. I urge members of the public to be discerning when responding to online fundraising appeals and use crowdfunding platforms that have pledged commitment to the Code of Practice.
In addition, donors are strongly encouraged to exercise their own due diligence to ensure that their donations are used for genuine charitable purposes. Pose questions about what the donations will be used for, who the beneficiary of the fundraising is and how they can receive updates about the beneficiary. Check if the charities are bona fide. Donors can access the Charity Portal (www.charities.gov.sg) for more information on Safer-Giving and trusted crowdfunding platforms.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Tightened Total Debt Servicing and Loan-to-value Ratios on First-time Buyers' Ability to Own Homes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for National Development in light of the cooling measures for private residential and HDB resale markets announced on 15 December 2021 (a) what is the impact of the tightened total debt servicing ratio (TDSR) from 60% to 55% and lower loan-to-value (LTV) ratio for HDB loans from 90% to 85%, on first-time home buyers; and (b) whether home ownership is even more out of reach for young couples now.
31 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for National Development what is the impact assessment on first-time home buyers with the recent tightening of the loan-to-value limit and total debt servicing ratio.
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 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 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 LTV limit. This includes 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 for 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 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":"Annual Number of Discrimination-related Claims Filed with Employment Claims Tribunal","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower in the last five years (a) what is the annual number of discrimination-related claims that have been made before the Employment Claims Tribunal (ECT); (b) what is the breakdown of these claims by discrimination category; and (c) what is the (i) average and (ii) range of compensation awarded by the ECT in wrongful dismissal cases involving discrimination.
Dr Tan See Leng: The adjudication of wrongful dismissal claims under the Employment Act and Child Development Co-Savings Act was shifted from MOM to the Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) on 1 April 2019. Between 1 April 2019 and 31 December 2021, about 120 discrimination-related dismissal claims were lodged at the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM). Vast majority of these claims were resolved through mediation at TADM or at ECT’s case management conference.
As of 31 December 2021, only 12 claims proceeded for adjudication at the ECT, of which eight were dismissed, one withdrawn, one pending and an amicable settlement was reached in the remaining two cases. There was no adjudicated order for compensation granted in favour of the employee for wrongful dismissal due to discrimination.
Neither TADM nor the ECT classifies wrongful dismissal claims by the types of discrimination. Therefore, we are unable to provide the breakdown requested.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Specialised Mental Health and Whistle-blowing Support for Healthcare Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) what avenues of specialised mental health support are available to healthcare workers; (b) for each year from 2019 to 2021, how many healthcare workers have sought mental health support through these channels; and (c) what avenues do healthcare workers have for whistle-blowing or to raise their concerns for the mental well-being and safety of themselves or their colleagues.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question has been addressed by the written reply to Question Nos 36 to 38 for oral answer on the Order Paper for 10 January 2022. [Please refer to \"Supporting Mental Well-being of Healthcare Professionals amidst COVID-19 Pandemic and Preventing Burn-out\", Official Report, 10 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 44, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Attrition Rates in Public Healthcare System and Nurses and Allied Health Professionals Recruited for Public Sector in 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Health (a) in 2021, what were the attrition rates in the public healthcare system and the breakdown by job category, including frontline and non-frontline job categories; and (b) whether more can be done to recognise the contribution of public healthcare support workers who are not considered to be frontliners but are also exposed to risk in the performance of their duties, such as maintenance workers, with a view to reducing these attrition rates.
36 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Health (a) how many nurses and allied health professionals were recruited for the public sector in 2021 on a quarterly basis; and (b) how does this compare to 2020 and 2019.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: These questions have been addressed by the written reply to Question Nos 33 to 35 for oral answer on the Order Paper for 10 January 2022. [Please refer to \"Impact of COVID-19 on Resignation and Recruitment of Healthcare Professionals\", Official Report, 10 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 44, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore’s Doctor- and Nurse-to-population Ratios and Planned Manpower Increases in Public Healthcare System in Next Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Health (a) how Singapore’s doctor-to-population ratio and nurse-to-population ratio compares with other developed countries; and (b) whether the Ministry plans to increase the manpower capacity in the public healthcare system in the next five years.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Singapore's registered doctor-to-population ratio and nurse-to-population ratio in 2020 were 2.6 doctors and 7.4 nurses per 1,000 population respectively. These ratios are on par or higher than other advanced Asian economies like Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan. However, Japan has a significantly higher ratio for nurses, at 11.8, but it also has a much higher proportion of elderly in its population compared to Singapore.
However, our ratios are generally lower than western OECD countries. There are however many factors at play here, including clinical practices, operating environments, healthcare financing policies including the role of insurance and western advanced economies generally having more generous social welfare systems funded by higher taxes. All these factors contributed to higher demand and supply for healthcare services. We learn from all systems in the world, but our objective is not to blindly emulate the high ratios in the western system.
Nevertheless, due to our ageing demography and rising incidence of chronic illnesses, we expect the demand for healthcare to increase significantly. This will lead to a concomitant increase in national healthcare professional workforce, from 73,000 today to 93,000 by 2030.
Our bigger challenge, is not merely to increase manpower to meet demand, but to improve the health of our population and constantly evolve our model of care, to ensure we meet the healthcare needs of patients and keep costs affordable.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Building of Further Agri-tech and Urban Farm Clusters to Ensure Food Supply","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"38 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the Ministry will consider building further agri-tech and urban farm clusters to ensure food supply and that price disruptions are kept to a minimum.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Fluctuations of food prices in Singapore go beyond the size of local food supply. Multiple factors come into play, such as the freight and labour situation, seasonal weather changes, cost of feedstock and fertilisers, and global demand.
As Singapore currently imports more than 90% of its food supply, spanning across thousands of types ranging from staples like rice and wheat, to meat and dairy, it is unrealistic to expect to eliminate price fluctuations of all food types through local production, even if this is scaled up. Our local cost of food production is also higher in many cases than imported foods because of higher land and labour costs.
A better hedge against supply and price disruptions is import source diversification, complemented by local food production. We are working on increasing our local food supply for greater resilience. The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) has embarked on the holistic master-planning of the 390-hectare Lim Chu Kang area and will also launch new sea space tenders on leases. These efforts aim to raise the productivity of farms sited on Singapore’s scarce land and sea space. There are also high-tech farms in industrial spaces and urban farms on under-utilised rooftops of HDB multi-storey carparks, serving as additional sources.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Outlook for Aviation, Hospitality and Tourism Sectors Given Suspension of Vaccinated Travel Lanes and Rise of COVID-19 Omicron Variant","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) following the suspension of Vaccinated Travel Lane flights and bus tickets, what is the outlook for the aviation, hospitality and tourism industry; (b) with COVID-19 Omicron cases requiring quarantine, whether the Ministry foresees this as a reliable revenue source for hotels; and (c) whether the Ministry will step up measures to help companies pivot to other industries, diversify their service offerings or over time reduce reliance on sectors that involve travel.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: On 27 December 2021, MOH announced that Omicron cases will be treated like other variants of COVID-19, and that it would allow positive Omicron cases to recover at home or at community care facilities. Therefore, Stay-Home Notice (SHN) or isolation requirements on their own will not be a reliable revenue source for hotels.
While Omicron may have slowed the pace of recovery in the near term, the longer-term prospects for the aviation and tourism sectors remain good. The strong demand for Vaccinated Travel Lane (VTL) air tickets suggests that people want to travel for business or leisure.
The Government has provided significant support to help these sectors preserve their core capabilities and safeguard jobs. Besides broad-based measures such as the Jobs Support Scheme and Rental Support Scheme, we have provided targeted support for both the aviation and tourism sectors. This includes the OneAviation Support Package and the SingapoRediscovers Vouchers (SRV) scheme.
We will continue to help companies in these sectors transform and upgrade themselves so they can better capture opportunities when travel volumes resume. Companies in both sectors have received training support under the Enhanced Training Support Package, which provided enhanced Absentee Payroll funding rate and course fee subsidies to those who send their employees for selected training programmes. Companies are also receiving support to pursue transformation efforts to prepare for the recovery. Examples include the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore’s (CAAS) Aviation Development Fund and the Singapore Tourism Board’s (STB) Business Improvement Fund.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Amounts Involved in Cases of Misuse of COVID-19 Government Grants and Payouts Currently Under Investigation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) to date, what is the aggregate subject matter value of cases that have been subject to or are currently under investigation, involving abuse, misuse or fraudulent application of all COVID-19 Government grants and payouts; (b) how much of these monies have been recovered from the perpetrators of these acts; and (c) whether the Ministry will provide a dedicated whistle-blower channel to uncover more of such cases and set up a separate agency to investigate these cases.
Mr K Shanmugam: From March 2020 to December 2021, the Police received 57 reports involving the abuse or fraudulent application of COVID-19 government grants and payouts. Of these, investigations into 17 have concluded. For the remaining cases, investigations are still ongoing, or are pending AGC’s advice or completion of court proceedings.
The reports received by the Police involved government funds amounting to approximately $1.7 million. Not all $1.7 million had been disbursed. The amount disbursed was lower as the agencies had managed to detect the fraud early. Of the 17 reports for which investigations have concluded, these involved government funds amounting to approximately $68,000. Of this, about $31,000 had been disbursed and $7,000 had been recovered. We are unable to share how much had been disbursed for the remaining cases as the investigations are still ongoing.
To date, 42 persons have been arrested for their alleged roles in COVID-19 grant fraud. Eight of them have been convicted of cheating or forgery offences.
The Member asked if MHA would set up a separate agency to investigate these cases. This is not necessary. Within the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD), there is a team called the Public Institutional Fraud Division that investigates fraud in the public sector, including the abuse or fraudulent application of Government grants such as the COVID-19 grants.
The Member also asked whether MHA would provide a dedicated whistle-blower channel to uncover more of such cases. This is not necessary, as there are already channels. Anyone with information regarding the abuse or fraudulent application of COVID-19 grants can submit information online via the Police’s I-Witness e-service or make a police report. The public is familiar with these existing channels for reporting crimes. In addition, some of the agencies administering grants have also established channels to obtain information from the public on abuse or malpractices.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress by Various Alliances for Action to Address Key Emerging Stronger Themes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what progress has been made in the SG Together movement involving various Alliances for Action (AfAs) to address the key themes identified in the Singapore Together Emerging Stronger Conversations; (b) whether more needs to be done to inculcate the National Identity and Shared Values highlighted in the Emerging Stronger Conversations among Singaporeans; and (c) if so, what are the plans.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Singapore Together is a governance approach that involves the Government working with Singaporeans and Singaporeans working with one another, to build our shared future together. In that spirit, we launched the Emerging Stronger Conversations (ESCs) as we exited the circuit breaker in June 2020. The Conversations were a platform for Singaporeans to reflect on our COVID-19 experience, and our aspirations for a more resilient post-COVID-19 society. In February 2021, the Government published a report to take stock of the Conversations and feedback received from 17,000 Singaporeans from all walks of life. The report highlighted 15 key themes that were most discussed, including National Identity and Shared Values.
Conversations are an important starting point, but they must eventually lead to action that translates aspirations into reality through strong and sustained partnerships. To respond to Mr Gan’s question, 30 Singapore Together Alliances for Action (AfAs) have been formed to date. The AfAs are making steady progress on the key themes that emerged from the ESCs. These AfAs address issues which are important to what we stand for collectively as a nation.
For example, at the ESCs, many touched on building a more inclusive society and shared concerns that COVID-19 had accentuated the digital divide. As part of the AfA to Enhance Digital Readiness Skills and Literacy, Smart Nation Ambassadors from more than 50 business and community groups, as well as individual contributors, curated and launched programmes to help Singaporeans learn more about digital initiatives and emerging technology. These included lessons for seniors on how to use digital Government tools and lifestyle apps such as Singpass, ActiveSG and Zoom, and workshops for working adults to upskill and get a headstart to explore opportunities in the digital economy.
Creating a more compassionate and caring, resilient and inclusive society was another thread that came out very strongly during the Conversations. A number of AfAs speak to these issues.
The AfA on Emerging Needs and Volunteerism has three focus areas, each led by different SG Cares partners. The first focus area, led by RSVP Singapore, taps on the resources of different partners to help seniors learn digital skills and empower them to use technology in their daily life. The second focus area, led by Gift for Good1 in partnership with the SG Cares Volunteer Centres, seeks to better aggregate and match donations-in-kind to community needs at the town level using an online platform. The third focus area, led by the SG Cares Volunteer Centre @ Jurong East, aims to increase mental wellness support in the Yuhua community.
As part of the AfA on Corporate Purpose, some 40 businesses and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) leaders are co-developing a national blueprint for corporate purpose and social impact.
The AfA for Caregivers of Persons with Disabilities is working on self-care, mutual support and improving caregiver well-being.
The Mentoring AfA, co-led by the National Youth Council (NYC) and the Mentoring Alliance Singapore (MASg), is building a culture of mentoring in Singapore. The AfA works with the public, private and people sectors to involve youths to build this mentoring culture and provide mentoring opportunities to help our youths in navigate educational, career and life transitions. As of the end of September 2021, 166 organisations and individuals have pledged their support to build a mentoring culture in Singapore.
Our national policies will continue to respond and adapt to reflect what is important to Singaporeans. Some recent policy moves such as the expansion of the Progressive Wage Model and enhancements to Workfare payouts were shaped by Singaporeans’ aspirations for a more fair, caring and inclusive society.
On the theme of National Identity and Shared Values that Mr Gan highlighted, Singaporeans raised the need to share responsibility in helping one another, especially vulnerable groups such as low-income earners, seniors and persons with disabilities. I mentioned a number of AfAs formed on these themes earlier.
They also raised the need to cultivate and promote Singapore’s cultural resources. In this vein, our Arts and Heritage play an important role in cultivating our national identity and shared values through our cultural resources.
Our arts grow a Singaporean identity that is strong and distinctive, while remaining open and outward-looking. Our tangible and intangible heritage reflect our roots and shared milestones in our history. They strengthen our sense of belonging and are sources of pride and confidence for Singaporeans.
One such example that connects with all Singaporeans and reflects our multicultural identity is our Hawker Culture. Together with NEA and the Federation of Merchants' Associations, Singapore (FMAS), we worked closely with hawkers’ associations and representatives as well as the public and experts to successfully inscribe our Singapore Hawker Culture on the UNESCO list of intangible cultural heritage in December last year. As a living heritage that forms an integral part of our daily lives, we will continue to partner our citizens to promote and celebrate this intangible cultural heritage.
We also partnered citizens on their ideas to promote national identity through our Citizens’ Workgroup for National Symbols. The Workgroup gathered 47 Singaporeans from diverse backgrounds to review the use, governance and promotion of our National Symbols, including the National Flag, National Anthem and National Pledge. They, in turn, engaged around 1,500 other Singaporeans to formulate their recommendations.
The Workgroup’s recommendations will inform (a) the Government’s legislative review of the Singapore Arms and Flag and National Anthem (SAFNA) Act and Rules; as well as (b) non-legislative measures such as better public education on using the National Symbols respectfully.
Our youths also want to play a key role in building our nation. And we provide opportunities for them to do so. They can volunteer through Youth Corps Singapore and the People’s Association Youth Networks. They can also lead ground-up initiatives on issues they care about through our Youth Action Challenge and contribute to policymaking through our Youth Circles. By coming together through shared experiences in contributing to society and interacting with others from diverse backgrounds, our youths are building up our social cohesion and national identity.
These partnerships embody the spirit of Singapore Together. The concept of Singapore Together is a means through which we strengthen our National Identity and Shared Values. It allows us to express our sense of obligation towards one another as fellow citizens and to our nation. It is about building consensus and working together towards our shared future as a country. Singapore Together will always be a work in progress, requiring the commitment of each successive generation of Singaporeans.
We will continue to grow the ethos of Singapore Together and partner citizens and stakeholders to strengthen our National Identity and Shared Values, and build a more caring, confident and cohesive Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Gift for Good is an online platform that facilitates in-kind donations."],"footNoteQuestions":["43"],"questionNo":"43"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Discussions to Revive Singapore-Kuala Lumpur High Speed Rail Project","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport whether he can provide an update on the discussions with the Malaysian government to revive the Kuala Lumpur–Singapore High Speed Rail project.
Mr S Iswaran: As Malaysia had decided not to proceed with the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore High Speed Rail (HSR) project, it was consequently terminated after the project’s suspension period lapsed on 31 December 2020. We had stated then that Singapore would be willing to discuss any new proposal on a HSR from Malaysia in good faith, starting from a clean slate. Our position remains unchanged. Singapore has not received a new proposal from the Malaysian government on an HSR.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessing Link between Consumption of Anti-depressants and Suicide","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"45 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry is aware of any local studies that have examined the relationship between the consumption of anti-depressants and suicide, particularly among youths in Singapore; and (b) whether such risks are communicated to the parents of youths who are prescribed with anti-depressants.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: MOH is not aware of any local study examining the relationship between consumption of anti-depressants and suicide amongst youths in Singapore. There are overseas studies that have found an association between the consumption of anti-depressants and increased suicidal tendencies in children and adolescents. An association does not establish a causal link.
Nevertheless, before prescribing or dispensing such medication, doctors and pharmacists have to counsel youths and their caregivers on the potential risks, side effects and symptoms that may require immediate medical attention. Particularly during the first few weeks of starting or changing an anti-depressant, caregivers will be advised to closely monitor the patient for new or worsening thoughts of self-harm, suicidal ideation and unusual behaviours; and to seek medical advice immediately if these symptoms present.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Efforts to Strengthen Singapore Core at Workplaces on Companies' Ability to Fill Specialised Roles","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower with the initiatives to strengthen the Singaporean Core in the workforce and COVID-19 uncertainties that could have prompted some foreigners to leave (a) whether Singapore companies have reported greater difficulties in filling specialised roles in the past two years; (b) how can local companies position themselves as attractive places for global talent to work for; and (c) what are some upcoming initiatives to ensure Singapore remains attractive to global talent.
Dr Tan See Leng: Our labour market indicators suggest that over the past year, the market has tightened. While GDP grew 7.2% last year and local employment rose, total employment as at the third quarter of 2021 was still below that in 2019. The main reason for this is COVID-19 entry restrictions. When foreign workers leave Singapore, whether because their contracts end or they wish to go home to their families after an extended time apart, businesses have not been able to bring in replacements easily. MOM has been carefully monitoring the situation.
In the second half of 2021, the Government eased entry restrictions in a calibrated manner, balancing public health considerations and the needs of our economy. The net decline in the non-resident workforce has slowed in 2021 and saw a small net gain in November 2021. Barring unforeseen circumstances, we expect to hold the course, which will enable businesses to replenish their foreign workforce where there are shortages.
At the same time, we continue to support our businesses to strengthen their local workforce. We encourage businesses facing hiring challenges to relook at and refine their recruitment strategies. For instance, many businesses still prefer the \"plug-and-play\" approach, seeking experienced jobseekers who can hit the ground running. However, skills shortages in emerging areas often mean that demand outstrips supply, resulting in unfilled vacancies.
Through programmes such as the Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs), which provide training and salary support to businesses who hire and reskill mid-career individuals for new occupations with good long-term prospects, we are helping businesses to move towards a \"plug-train-and-play\" approach, hiring and upskilling mid-career individuals who may not have the experience, but have the aptitude and willingness to learn. Businesses can also tap on the SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programme to take on mid-career jobseekers via an attachment programme instead. Businesses who have participated in these programmes have found success in considering a wider pool of jobseekers, including mid-career individuals from other sectors and senior workers.
In addition, some vacancies take longer to fill because the wage or working conditions are not as attractive as other options available to jobseekers. Businesses may need to redesign the job role, or rethink their business model and operations, such as including flexible work arrangements.
The Member also asked what we are doing to ensure that Singapore remains attractive to complementary global talent. The Member would recall that we debated this extensively on two occasions in Parliament last year, where the House affirmed the need for Singapore to stay open and connected to the world to grow and prosper. The Government works hard to ensure that businesses and individuals continue to choose Singapore because of our openness, rule of law and consistency in policies. A key part of our strategy is to have a work pass regime designed to enable companies to access a diverse pool of foreign workers who can complement our local workforce to deliver good jobs for Singaporeans.
We continually update our foreign workforce policies to enable firms to bring in complementary foreign manpower. For example, given the global competition for tech talent, we introduced specific schemes such as Tech.Pass and Tech@SG to provide firms with greater access to specialised manpower in the tech sector. And as I mentioned last year, we are also exploring refinements to our Employment Pass framework to help us better achieve our objectives of a strong Singaporean core, complemented by a diverse foreign workforce, which I will provide more details on at a later stage.
Ultimately, our priority remains focussed on improving the livelihoods of Singaporeans; through the continued and sustainable growth of our economy and the creation of good jobs for Singaporeans. We will continue to update our policies to secure relevant job opportunities with good wages and prospects, and better lives for Singaporeans in a globalised and fast-changing economy.
47 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education with no formal exams for several levels of Primary school children, especially those in the lower Primary in 2021, how does the Ministry effectively assess the academic merit for the different categories of the Edusave Awards.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Edusave academic awards recognise and encourage students' hard work, good performance and improvements in their studies.
There are different types of Edusave academic awards. The academic criteria for the Edusave Merit Bursary (for Primary 3 to 6), Good Progress Award (for Primary 4 to 6) and Edusave Scholarships (for Primary 5 and 6) are based on students' performance in school-based assessments.
In 2021, the year-end examinations were cancelled for Primary 3 and 4 students to provide more time for teaching and learning due to disruptions from COVID-19. Students' eligibility for the Edusave awards was thus determined by their overall performance in school-based assessments that had already been conducted, such as weighted assessments and mid-year examinations.
For Primary 5 and 6 students, as their year-end examinations were unaffected, the computation of their eligibility for the Edusave Scholarships, Edusave Merit Bursary and Good Progress Award remained unchanged.
For Primary 1 and 2 students, MOE has removed all weighted assessments and examinations since 2019. The selection of students for the P1 and P2 Edusave Merit Bursary and P2 and P3 Good Progress Award is based on good conduct and consistent demonstration of good learning dispositions such as curiosity and resilience.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessing Students for Edusave Award for Achievement, Good Leadership and Service Given Minimal CCA Sessions in COVID-19 Pandemic","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education with minimal school co-curricular activity sessions in 2021, especially in Primary schools, how does the Ministry assess students for qualification for the Edusave Award for Achievement, Good Leadership and Service (EAGLES).
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Edusave Awards for Achievement, Good LEadership & Service (EAGLES) was introduced in 2001 to recognise our students' leadership qualities, service to community and schools, excellence in non-academic activities and good conduct.
To qualify for the award, students are required to meet a set of selection criteria reflective of the Co-Curriculum of their school. These include Co-Curricular Activities (CCAs), Learning for Life Programme (LLP) and other school-based non-academic programmes. Due to the diversity of school profiles and programmes, schools have full autonomy to nominate any student who meets their selection criteria.
In early 2021, key elements of school life resumed with safe management measures (SMMs) in place. For example, the National School Games was convened for selected sports and the Singapore Youth Festival Arts Presentation was completed for Secondary and Pre-University levels.
When Phase 2 (Heightened Alert) measures in May 2021 resulted in the suspension of some school activities, all schools took steps to ensure that their students’ learning and development was not unduly compromised. For example, some schools pivoted online by conducting eCCA or modular CCA by classes. In addition, schools continued to provide leadership opportunities and other student development programmes, aligned with prevailing SMM.
Schools have made adjustments to their school-based criteria to continue to recognise deserving students with the EAGLES award. For example, students were recognised for their leadership roles and involvement in Values in Action projects. These experiences, including students’ learning dispositions and development as observed by teachers, may be considered in the schools’ award selection process.
At the Primary school level, the proportion of EAGLES awardees has remained at 9% in 2021, similar to the proportion in 2020 and 2019.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Tight Labour Market on Wage Inflation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"49 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how is the talent war and tight labour market causing wage inflation; and (b) what is its impact on the sustainability of businesses.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The labour market in Singapore has tightened because of the economic recovery as well as border restrictions due to COVID-19. The seasonally-adjusted ratio of job vacancies to unemployed persons rose from 0.82 in December 2019 to 2.09 in September 2021.
Correspondingly, the nominal median income of full-time employed residents grew by 3.2% in 2021, reversing the decline of 0.6% in 2020.
Wage growth benefits our workers. However, for it to be sustainable for businesses, wage growth must be supported by productivity growth. To achieve this, we support businesses and workers in the following ways.
First, we help businesses transform and restructure to raise productivity via schemes such as the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) and Enterprise Development Grant (EDG). In view of COVID-19, we have also increased the Government’s support levels for PSG from 70% to 80% till March 2022. Firms can use the higher support levels to transform more quickly, especially in view of the tight labour market.
Second, we continue to invest in our workers’ skills through the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package. Agencies have rolled out initiatives such as Workforce Singapore’s (WSG’s) Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs), IMDA’s TechSkills Accelerator programme, as well as sector-specific reskilling initiatives in order to equip Singaporeans with new skills and abilities to move into emerging job roles such as Data Analysts and Advanced Biopharmaceutical Manufacturing Professionals.
Third, besides improving productivity for business sustainability, we also support our businesses with access to critical manpower. The Government regularly updates our foreign manpower policies to enable companies to access a diverse pool of manpower that help anchor high-value activities here and create good opportunities for Singaporeans. We also have specific schemes such as the Tech.Pass and Tech@SG to provide firms with access to specialised manpower in the technology sector.
Finally, we have been reopening our international borders in a calibrated manner, balancing public health considerations and the needs of our economy.
The Government will continue to monitor the labour market situation, as well as the wage growth of our workers and the productivity growth of our companies. We remain committed to supporting our businesses with the necessary manpower they need to grow and provide better outcomes for Singaporeans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Most Significant Economic Impact for Singapore in Next Two Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in view of the global supply chain disruption, continued labour challenges from overseas and high inflation rate, what will be the most significant economic impact for Singapore in the next two years.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to strong economic headwinds in many countries. Singapore was not spared, with our economy contracting by 5.4% in 2020. The Singapore economy has since rebounded on the back of the recovery in global demand and good progress in our vaccination programme. Based on advanced estimates, the economy expanded by 7.2% in 2021.
For 2022, the economy is expected to grow by 3% to 5%. There are opportunities in the global economy that can help us achieve this growth. For example, global merchandise trade is expected to grow in 2022. Further, the continued shift in global economic weight towards Asia puts us in a position of strength and gives Singapore businesses the opportunity to tap on Asia’s growth. In addition, digitalisation can lower entry barriers and facilitate entry into global markets. The global sustainability trend will also provide new opportunities in areas like carbon services and renewable energy.
At the same time, there are a number of downside risks that we need to pay attention to.
Externally, intensifying strategic competition between US and China and the continued rise in geopolitical tensions could narrow the markets our companies can tap on, or disrupt current trade. Singapore businesses will also continue to feel the impact of global supply chain disruptions from border and movement control, shortage of shipping capacity and port congestion. Other trends, including the growth of digitally-enabled remote work and continued movement restrictions due to COVID-19, could impact Singapore’s hub status and competitiveness.
Domestically, we are fast running up against resource constraints. Access to sufficient manpower with the right skills is a key challenge faced by businesses across many sectors, with movement restrictions due to COVID-19 exacerbating the shortage. In addition, as the world decarbonises, energy costs will also rise. These resource constraints may hamper growth and lead to a rise in business costs. Other imported cost pressures include supply-demand mismatches in various commodities and goods markets, as well as bottlenecks in global transportation, that are likely to persist for some time. In 2022, the CPI-All Items inflation is forecast to average between 1.5% and 2.5%, after coming in at a projected 2.3% in 2021.
On the other hand, some of these very same headwinds can offer opportunities for our workers and businesses. For example, we can position Singapore as a safe and resilient node in an unpredictable world and anchor activities for businesses looking to diversify from other markets. Resource constraints can also push us to develop solutions that serve global needs, in the same way we did for water.
Taking into consideration all these factors, there are three areas that Singapore needs to pay attention to in the next few years as we seek to ride on the opportunities, while at the same time mitigating the risks that we are faced with.
First, businesses need to continue to transform and restructure so that they can raise productivity and optimise their use of scarce resources like labour and carbon. For example, companies can tap on technology to automate their operations and become more efficient. At the same time, they also need to enhance their business resilience given the current unpredictable environment.
Next, businesses have to develop new business models to ride on key growth sectors and markets. The impact of digitalisation and push for greater sustainability will continue to widen and deepen across all sectors. These transformations will allow firms to seize new opportunities both at home and abroad.
Third, we must remain open to complementary talent and manpower from abroad that can help us to be globally competitive. We must guard against turning insular as Singapore’s ability to function as a business hub and create more opportunities for Singaporeans will be diminished if companies find it hard to access the talent needed to do business out of Singapore, compared to other locations worldwide.
At the same time, we must continue to develop our local workforce. One way to do this is to build on the human capital of the existing workforce by upskilling and training workers to take on new roles so that we can seize opportunities arising from our economic growth.
Singapore and Singaporeans have stayed ahead of our competition by remaining adaptable to changes in the world economy. We must continue to be nimble and upgrade to create growth and good jobs with fewer resources. The Government remains strongly committed to supporting businesses and workers to transform and seize new opportunities. Together, we can embrace the changes ahead and stay relevant and competitive in this rapidly changing economic operating environment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Income Ceiling for Public Rental Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for National Development in light of the increase in HDB flat resale prices and market rental rates, whether the Government will consider increasing the income ceiling for the Public Rental Scheme.
Mr Desmond Lee: HDB seeks to prioritise public rental flats for low-income families who are without family support and other housing options. It adopts a holistic and needs-based approach when assessing requests for public rental flats.
The income guideline of $1,500 is thus not a hard ceiling and no applicant will be rejected solely based on their income. All applicants will be assessed based on their households' circumstances, including their housing budget and options. Applicants who do not have other housing options will be assisted with a public rental flat.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Rejections for Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme Applications due to Exceeding of Salary Limits","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many applicants under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS) have been rejected since January 2019 because of their household incomes exceeding the $7,000 monthly household income limit; and (b) whether HDB plans to increase this limit given the delays in completion of many BTO projects due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mr Desmond Lee: In August 2021, HDB announced that it will increase the supply of PPHS flats by 800 units over the next two years, almost doubling the 840 flats under the scheme then. To give priority to families who are less able to afford alternatives such as renting a flat on the open market, the household income ceiling of $7,000 was introduced. As the PPHS supply remains limited, HDB has no plans to increase the income ceiling, which was only put in place recently.
From August to December 2021, HDB offered 150 PPHS flats to applicants. Over the same period, 85 appeals for PPHS from households whose income exceeded $7,000 were rejected, as there were no clear extenuating factors. Nevertheless, households with income above the income ceiling who have high monthly expenses for exceptional reasons, such as medical needs, may approach HDB if they need help with temporary housing. HDB will consider their applications on a case-by-case basis.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Summonses for Construction Site Noise Exceeding Permissible Limits","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"53 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) since January 2020, how many summonses for construction site noise exceeding permissible limits are issued; (b) what are the median, 75th and 95th percentile cumulative amount of such fines issued to a single construction site; and (c) how do these fines compare to the total developer profits accruing from the projects at such sites.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: From January 2020 to November 2021, 466 notices of composition and summonses were issued to 290 construction sites, less than 6% of the total, for exceeding the permissible noise limits stipulated in the Environmental Protection and Management Act. During the same period, the median, 75th and 95th percentile cumulative summonses issued to owners and/or occupiers of a single construction site for exceeding the noise limits were $10,500, $32,500 and $76,200 respectively. Less than 8% of summonses were issued to repeat offenders. We do not track developer profits from specific construction projects.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Incidence of Non-compliance with Regulatory Noise Limits at HDB BTO Construction Sites","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"54 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) for the past three months, what is the number of instances of non-compliance with regulatory noise limits detected by noise meters installed at the HDB BTO construction sites in Woodlands; (b) what is the breakdown by projects; and (b) what penalties have been imposed.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: From October to December 2021, NEA received 15 instances of feedback on construction noise from HDB Build-to-Order projects in Woodlands. Aside from one project for which investigations are ongoing, there were no instances of non-compliance with the permissible noise limits recorded by noise meters installed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Promote Low-sodium Diet amongst Singaporeans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"55 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the current national daily sodium consumption rate of consumers in Singapore; (b) what measures are being taken to help Singaporeans adhere to a low-sodium diet; (c) what are the plans in the pipeline to reduce the national salt intake of consumers; and (d) whether sodium taxes are being explored.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Based on the findings from the National Nutrition Survey 2018/19, Singapore residents consumed an average of 3.6g of sodium per day. This is about 1.5 teaspoons of salt. This is also more than the WHO recommendation for adults to consume less than 2g of sodium per day.
HPB has encouraged the reformulation of reduced-sodium alternatives for home use. This has contributed to a good variety of reduced-sodium products available in the market, ranging from pre-mixes, soy sauces and soup broths. Since 2018, HPB has also been offering grant support to sauce manufacturers, particularly those supplying into the food service sector, to reformulate their products to meet reduced-sodium guidelines through the Healthier Ingredient Development Scheme. Lower-sodium guidelines was introduced into the Whole-of-Government Healthier Catering policy in May 2021, which requires all caterers engaged by Government procuring entities to use lower-sodium ingredients for all cooking and food preparation.
HPB will expand the scope of its efforts to cover salt added during food preparation, which currently contributes more than half of sodium intake in our diet. We will also step up industry engagement to expand the supply and increase the uptake of healthier lower-sodium alternatives by F&B establishments. In addition, HPB will increase public education efforts to raise awareness on the need to reduce sodium in our diet and to generate demand for healthier options. More information will be shared when ready.
There are countries around the world that have imposed sodium taxes on processed foods that are high in sodium. These include Hungary, Mexico, Fiji and Tonga. MOH will study this, along with other fiscal and regulatory measures, to see how we can help reduce the sodium intake of Singaporeans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Youths Seeking Professional Help due to Unhealthy Coping Habits during COVID-19 Pandemic","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"56 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth as more youths turn to unhealthy coping habits such as excessive online gaming, drinking and shopping during the COVID-19 pandemic (a) whether the Ministry has data on the current number of youths who are receiving some form of professional help; and (b) what is the Ministry’s assessment of current specialised services in helping youths to overcome such addictions.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: COVID-19 has led to more challenges and stressors for youths. These have impacted their mental health and well-being. According to our National Youth Council’s (NYC) polls conducted from February to October 2021, one in five youths reported poor or very poor mental well-being1. The youths in the survey indicated that they were stressed about the COVID-19 situation and uncertain about their future. They continue to also be concerned about more enduring issues such as their studies and work-life balance for working youths.
We note that the findings from a survey conducted by TODAY2 showed that our youths are adopting a range of coping mechanisms during the pandemic. Miss Cheng referred to coping habits such as social media scrolling, excessive drinking and shopping. However, the findings show that the majority of youth respondents chose healthy coping mechanisms, such as exercising (53%), talking to loved ones (52%), starting a new hobby (40%) and being in nature and outdoors (36%).
The same TODAY survey indicated that the majority of youths are willing to seek professional help – about 66% of the respondents. This is encouraging and consistent with NYC's findings. Such help-seeking behaviour is reassuring, so that our youths can receive help in a timely manner.
Our youths can seek professional help from multiple avenues and have various options to suit their needs and situations. They can do so through healthcare institutions, services provided by community organisations, or community peer support.
First, the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) runs a National Addictions Management Service (NAMS) clinic to provide treatment for individuals, including youths, who face habit or impulse control and various addictions issues. This clinic saw about 290 and 230 patients, aged between 13 and 34, in 2019 and 2020, respectively.
Second, the Government also works closely with community partners to provide a range of professional services for youths to strengthen their mental health and well-being. Let me share some examples.
The Community Health Assessment Team (CHAT) set up by IMH conducts outreach and mental health assessments for youths between 16 and 30 years old. It also has a WebCHAT service for youths to seek help about mental health issues and conditions online.
In the community, there are Social Service Agencies (SSAs) that engage and develop youths through a range of healthy activities such as sports, performing arts and adventure activities. SSAs also provide a safe and conducive space via their drop-in centres to meaningfully engage youths through centre-based activities. Programmes such as The Grit Academy by Lakeside Family Services and the Experiential Learning and Mentoring Programme by Youth Guidance Outreach Services have continued to provide support to youths during the pandemic. Youth workers are also present to befriend these youths and mentor them.
There are online counselling services for youths. These include eC2 by Fei Yue Community Services and e-counselling services by Limitless. Family Service Centres (FSCs) also serve as a key community touchpoint to provide case management services for youths with personal or family issues, including emotional needs.
Where necessary, FSCs will refer youths to specialised services for concurrent support. The DigitalMINDSET programme provided by TOUCH Community Services is one example of such specialised services. This is a nine-month programme for youths aged 12 to 21 who have developed mental health issues from excessive gaming and device use.
Third, School Counsellors are trained by NAMS to support students with addiction issues and work with community partners to increase outreach to help our youths to develop healthy online habits.
Finally, there are also those who partner the Government to provide social and community support for youths.
To enable youths to seek support from fellow peers, Youth Corps Singapore (YCS) launched Project Re:ground, a Community Peer Supporter Programme in collaboration with HPB.
Through activities organised by YCS and People’s Association Youth Networks, youths can come together to contribute meaningfully to their communities and foster a healthy social and community-oriented spirit at the same time.
We are also moving upstream, through the Mentoring Alliance for Action (AfA) co-led by NYC and the Mentoring Alliance Singapore Limited (MASg). The AfA is expanding mentoring opportunities for youths so that more can benefit from support and guidance in order to navigate life’s challenges constructively.
The Interagency Taskforce on Mental Health and Well-being, chaired by Dr Janil Puthucheary, Senior Minister of State for Health is helping to pull many of these initiatives together at the national level. The task force is working with the Government and community groups to coordinate efforts on mental health and well-being.
Our youths are our future and our Government and partners in society are doing all we can to build an eco-system that can safeguard and strengthen our youths’ mental well-being and resilience. We are doing this so our youths can overcome the challenges of this pandemic, thrive beyond the pandemic and in turn, contribute to building the future of our society, community and nation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : NYC’s Monthly Youth Sentiment Tracker polled 1,001 youths aged between 15 and 34. Based on aggregated data from February - October 2021, 21% of youths reported that their state of mental well-being in the past month was very poor/ poor.","2 : The TODAY survey polled 1,066 respondents aged between 18 and 35 at the start of October 2021 about their views regarding various social issues, their goals and their sentiments about the pandemic."],"footNoteQuestions":["56"],"questionNo":"56"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Amounts Allocated to Enhance Employment and Employability for Youths with Special Needs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"58 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how much was allocated in 2020 and 2021 to enhance employment and employability for youths with special needs; (b) what are the outcomes of the expenditure and its schemes; and (c) whether there are further plans to enhance employment and employability of youths and adults with special needs and, if so, what are these.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: In the schooling years, the curriculum and customised programmes in Special Education (SPED) schools and Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) help to prepare students with special needs for employment. MOE closely partners SPED schools to provide a Vocational Education Curriculum that is kept relevant and is supported by dedicated training facilities and staff such as school-based job coaches who support students to develop skills through work experience in authentic workplaces and internships.
For work-capable students with more complex needs, the School-To-Work (S2W) Transition Programme provides customised training pathways and internship opportunities to help work-capable SPED graduates transit into employment. Youths with disabilities in IHLs also have access to internship and mentorship opportunities through the IHL Internship and RISE Mentorship Programme. The former allows participants to acquire first-hand workplace experiences, relevant industry knowledge and skills, while participants of the latter learn from their mentors and receive guidance on how to prepare for future employment.
In FY2020 and FY2021, a total budget of around $4.2 million was allocated to the S2W Transition, IHL Internship and RISE Mentorship programmes. In total, about 160 youths and students with disabilities benefited from these three programmes in FY2020. Figures for FY2021 are not yet available.
Apart from these schemes which are targeted at youths in schools, SG Enable works with various partners to support the employability and employment of all persons with disabilities. Between 2014 and 2020, under the Open Door Programme (ODP), more than 2,500 persons with disabilities received employment-related training and over 3,000 were placed into new jobs, through job placement and job support services.
Employers will also receive wage support through the Enabling Employment Credit (EEC). The EEC provides 20% wage support for employees with disabilities earning below $4,000 per month, capped at $400. Employers who hire persons with disabilities who had been out of the labour force for more than six months will receive an additional 10% wage subsidy for the first six months. Since the EEC was introduced in 2021, it has benefited more than 5,200 employers who collectively employed more than 8,600 Singaporeans with disabilities.
In response to the impact of the pandemic on the economy, MOM introduced the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) to expand local hiring. The JGI has supported employers to hire more than 2,400 persons with disabilities between September 2020 to May 2021. In September 2021, MOM announced that the JGI will be extended to March 2022. Employers who hire persons with disabilities between October 2021 and March 2022 will receive up to $36,000 in wage support.
We recognise that more can be done to support persons with disabilities to find gainful employment. Last year, the Third Enabling Masterplan’s Workgroup on Preparing Persons with Disabilities for the Future Economy released 10 recommendations centred on three themes – improving capabilities at all life stages, creating and sustaining new work opportunities and recognising and incentivising employers to hire persons with disabilities.
MSF has been working with its partners to implement the recommendations. Over the past year, we extended the S2W Transition Programme from one to two years to provide students with more support as they transition into employment. The Enabling Mark was also launched to benchmark and recognise organisations for their best practices and outcomes in disability-inclusive employment. Three new programmes under the National Jobs Council – Place-and-Train, Attach-and-Train, and Skills Development Programme – were also introduced to provide customised employment, traineeships and skills upgrading opportunities to support persons with disabilities amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Further initiatives will be implemented progressively over the next few years. The Government will also continue its efforts to support the employment of persons with disabilities in the next Enabling Masterplan 2030, where we will strengthen partnerships across sectors and involve persons with disabilities in co-creating solutions in a range of areas, including employment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics of Women Leaders in Technology and Innovation Sectors in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what are the current statistics of women leaders in the technology and innovation sectors in Singapore at the mid-management, senior management and board levels; and (b) what are the Ministry’s efforts in growing the women talent pipeline.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Singapore is believed to have one of the highest proportions of women in the tech workforce globally. While no established international comparisons exist, according to a report published by the Boston Consulting Group and the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) in 2020, women comprise 41% of our tech workforce, in contrast with the global average of 28%. In terms of women’s participation on boards of tech companies, the Council for Board Diversity reports that among those listed on the Singapore Exchange (SGX), the proportion has increased slightly from 12% in 2019 to 14% in June 2021.
The Government is committed to creating more opportunities for women in tech. Since 2019, IMDA has been working with industry and community partners under the SG Women in Tech movement. Most recently, we partnered Dell Technologies to launch the MentorConnect programme, which provides a platform for women to network and be mentored by industry leaders. IMDA has also partnered with the Singapore Computer Society on the SG100 Women in Tech List in 2020 and 2021, to profile women from diverse backgrounds and ages who are successful in tech-related careers. These role models inspire, motivate and mentor younger women in the industry, and help to challenge the false perception that men are more suited for careers in tech.
Beyond leadership opportunities, we also aim to transform mindsets and practices across the industry to ensure that women have equal access to the full range of opportunities in tech. Last year, we launched the SG Women in Tech Corporate Pledge initiative, which calls on companies to create better support systems for women in the workplace, especially for younger women pursuing a career in tech. In 2021 alone, 53 companies, including MNCs like Amazon, PayPal and Microsoft, and local unicorns like Razer and Shopee, have come on board with concrete measures to support women, such as coaching and mentorship programmes, as well as a commitment to fair hiring practices. These companies also contribute to widening our women talent pipeline through targeted outreach initiatives like Microsoft’s SG Codess platform for University students, and the DigiGirlz programme for Secondary school students, which help to nurture dreams of a future in tech from a younger age.
More than 120,000 people have been reached through our SG Women in Tech programmes. We will continue to review them, taking into consideration feedback raised at last year’s Conversations on Singapore Women’s Development, to further support our women’s career aspirations and help them fulfil their full potential. We will also ensure that opportunities in the tech industry remain open to wome and nurture women talent to be part of our digital economy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of Female Students in STEM Courses and Plans to Enrol More of Them","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Education given that the main contributing factor for gender pay gap in Singapore is occupational segregation (a) what are the top five courses in Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) which currently have the highest proportion of girls; and (b) what efforts are there in schools and IHLs to build students’ interest in growth sectors including science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).
62 Ms Poh Li San asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the proportion of female students who are enrolled in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) related disciplines in the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) in 2021; (b) whether there is data on the proportion of women currently working in STEM related industries in Singapore and, if so, what is the figure; and (c) what are the plans to encourage more women to take up education and careers in STEM related industries and to increase their representation in leadership roles.
63 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Education whether targets will be set for the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) to increase female enrolment in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) courses so as to boost the supply of female talent to the growing technology and innovation sector.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: In 2021, among students enrolled in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines at the Autonomous Universities (AUs), Polytechnics and ITE, close to four in 10 were female.
Across the IHLs, two of the top five courses with the highest proportion of female students are SUSS' degree programme and Ngee Ann Polytechnic’s diploma in Early Childhood Education. The remaining three courses are the ITE NITEC and Higher NITEC qualifications in Beauty and Wellness, and SIT's degree programme in Speech and Language Therapy.
According to the Comprehensive Labour Force Survey conducted by MOM, around one third of employed residents working in STEM jobs in 2020, were female. These included occupations in sectors such as Information and Communications Technology, Engineering and Healthcare.
Our approach is to encourage students, regardless of gender, to consider joining STEM courses and industries based on their interest and aptitude. All students take Mathematics and Science subjects in Primary and Secondary schools, and many to the highest level possible. The Applied Learning Programme (ALP), which more than half of our Secondary schools offer in STEM areas, further provides an applied hands-on approach to enable students to appreciate the relevance of their learning beyond the classroom, in community and STEM industry settings. National level competitions – such as the Singapore Science and Engineering Fair, National Robotics Competition and the Engineering Innovation Challenge – also encourage students to deepen and pursue their interests in STEM.
Students are encouraged to explore a variety of education and career pathways while countering gender stereotypes. We do this through our Character and Citizenship Education curriculum, and Career Guidance Counsellors who guide students to explore career sectors based on their interests and strengths. Our students also have access to career resources outside the school setting such as STEM career guidance webinars by the Advanced Remanufacturing and Technology Centre (ARTC), some of which feature women in Engineering.
At our IHLs, targeted efforts through career fairs and Open Houses help to raise students’ awareness of the range of STEM-related job opportunities and industries, and how they can apply their training in related fields after graduation. One example is NTU’s Women@NTU initiative, which aims to increase female participation in STEM fields and to leverage the importance of role models in influencing career choices of women in these fields. The initiative includes programmes to support early-career female researchers, mentorship networking platforms, seminars and workshops.
MOE also supports the Promotion of Women in Engineering, Research and Science (POWERS) Programme. Launched by President Halimah Yacob in March 2021 and driven by Women@NTU, the programme seeks to create a supportive ecosystem to build the next generation of women leaders in STEM. The POWERS programme also conducts research to address diversity barriers and provides education and skills training for career advancement in STEM for women.
MOE and the IHLs will continue to work with partners across the STEM ecosystem, to encourage more female students to take up courses and careers in STEM.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Gender Diversity on Boards of Singapore Public Listed Companies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry can provide an update on gender diversity on the boards of Singapore publicly listed companies; and (b) whether the Ministry compiles data of companies using formal search and nomination process for appointing female board directors.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Government is committed to enable every Singaporean, both men and women, to pursue their ambitions and reach their fullest potential. In conjunction with the Year of Celebrating SG Women, the Government had partnered with community partners to organise the Conversations on Singapore Women's Development. Feedback from the Conversations included supporting women’s career aspirations and seeing greater female representation in leadership roles, including on boards of organisations. Having more women on boards would bring different perspectives which would be useful to these organisations as they navigate today’s complex world.
MSF set up the Diversity Action Committee (DAC) in 2014, which was succeeded by the Council for Board Diversity (CBD) in 2019 comprising eminent corporate and public sector leaders as well as professionals. The CBD has been promoting a sustained increase of women on boards of (a) Top 100 listed companies listed on the Singapore Exchange; (b) statutory boards; and (c) Top 100 Institutions of a Public Character in Singapore. As of June 2021, the percentage of women on boards of the Top 100 listed companies is at 18%, more than doubled from 7.5% in 2014 prior to the start of DAC.
Based on a 2019 survey conducted by the Singapore Institute of Directors, about 17% of companies used executive search firms to identify potential board directors, while 98% used personal contacts of board members and management1. The CBD continues to expand a pipeline of board-ready women and reaches out to nominating committee chairs and members to recommend suitable female candidates with requisite skills or experience, based on the needs of the respective companies.
From 1 January 2022, SGX has implemented a new listing rule that requires companies to disclose their policies on board diversity, including gender diversity. This is a significant development that would further encourage greater female representation on boards.
Increasing the representation of women on boards requires a multi-stakeholder approach. MSF will continue to work with partners such as the CBD to sustain efforts to reduce barriers and encourage even more women to be appointed to boards so that women who aspire to be leaders in their fields can reach their fullest potential and our society can benefit from their perspectives and even greater contributions as board members.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The total amount is more than 100% as respondents could select multiple options."],"footNoteQuestions":["64"],"questionNo":"64"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Availability of Respite Care Places for Seniors with Short-term Care Needs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"65 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Health (a) how many respite care places are there currently in total to support caregivers and seniors with short-term care needs; (b) of the total number of places, how many are available; and (c) whether there has been an increase in demand over the last two years due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: There are various respite care options to support caregivers and seniors with short-term care needs. For example, caregivers can access respite care at senior care centres for a few hours in the day, or at nursing homes for seniors with higher care needs and who need round-the-clock care. As at end December 2021, we have over 450 respite care places.
Providers do not maintain places to wait for demand, but will activate places to meet service requests. The availability of respite care places is therefore fluid and providers are generally able to meet the demand. The take-up rate for respite care has decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic as caregivers may prefer to minimise the community exposure of their loved ones. MOH will continue to monitor the evolving needs of our ageing population.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Steps to Reduce Carbon Footprint of Data Centres in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"66 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the existing number and capacity in megawatts (MW) of data centres in Singapore; (b) whether the Government has concluded its review on the data centre industry; (c) if so, what are the Government’s expectation and limits for future growth in number and capacity; and (d) what measures are put in place to manage the resource footprint of the data centre industry in Singapore.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: As of 2021, there are more than 70 operational data centres (DCs) in Singapore with a total available IT capacity of about 1,000 megawatts (MW).
The Government embarked on a review of the DC industry in 2019 and had engaged the industry in the process. This review was necessary because while DCs are important enablers for the digital economy, they are also intensive users of resources and we had to find a way to manage the growth of DCs in a sustainable manner consistent with our climate change commitments.
This review was recently completed. EDB and IMDA will engage the industry soon to share more details and seek their feedback. While we continue to welcome DC investments, we intend to be more selective of which DCs we can accommodate. In particular, we seek to anchor DCs that are best in class in terms of resource efficiency, which can contribute towards Singapore’s economic and strategic objectives. We will also put in place measures to raise the efficiency of existing DCs over time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Protect Bank Customers from Losses and Penalties due to Outages of Banks' Online Systems","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"67 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Prime Minister what measures are there to assist and protect bank customers from losses and penalties suffered due to outages of licensed banks' online systems.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): MAS requires financial institutions (FIs) to have robust systems and processes to ensure reliable delivery of services to their customers. In the event of a disruption, FIs are expected to restore the affected system as swiftly as possible and activate contingency measures to ensure continued delivery of financial services in the interim.
MAS also expects FIs to have a sound process to deal fairly with appeals from customers who may have suffered penalties or losses arising from a disruption in online banking services and monitors how FIs handle such appeals.
FIs should carefully consider the circumstances of each case, taking into account factors such as the severity and length of the service disruption, the nature of the relevant financial transactions and whether the customer had taken reasonable steps to access the alternative transaction channels that were available. For example, if a credit card repayment to the bank was late because of a disruption, the consequent penalties should be waived by the bank. Depending on the circumstances, there may also be grounds for compensation for losses arising directly from the disruption.
With the delivery of financial services becoming increasingly digital, MAS has been reminding FIs to pay even more attention to ensuring their systems are resilient. But it is not possible to rule out all disruptions in the online space. Consumers who need to make time-critical payments regularly may want to consider maintaining accounts at more than one FI to facilitate such payments when systems are disrupted.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Granting Upfront Remission of Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty to Married Couples with at least One Singapore Citizen Spouse Purchasing Replacement Private Residential Property","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"68 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Finance with regard to the raising of Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD) rates for second properties, whether the Government can consider granting upfront remission of ABSD for married couples with at least one Singapore Citizen spouse who is purchasing a replacement private residential property, similar to the purchase of a HDB flat or an Executive Condominium unit from property developers by such married couples.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chua had asked a similar question at the Committee of Supply in March 2021. MOF had provided a response then and it remains valid.
Just to briefly recap, a concession is provided to Singapore married couples to allow them to claim a refund of the Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD) paid on their second property, provided they sell their first property within six months after the purchase of a completed property, or the Temporary Occupation Permit date of an uncompleted property. This is to support couples that need to change homes due to changing family needs, such as when they have children, when their children are growing up, or when they need to right-size in their senior years.
Singaporean married couples purchasing a HDB flat or a new EC unit are granted an upfront ABSD remission. The key reason for this is because they are subjected to HDB regulations which require them to not own other residential property, or to dispose of their existing residential property within HDB’s stipulated timeframe. As there are no such regulations for private residential properties, ABSD remission is only granted upon the sale of the first property within the required timeline.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Preserve RSS Resolution as Part of Republic of Singapore Navy’s Heritage","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"69 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Defence whether the Ministry will consider preserving the RSS Resolution as part of the Republic of Singapore Navy’s heritage and also potentially as a tourist attraction.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: MINDEF and SAF share the positive sentiments of the hon Member of Parliament Desmond Choo and many other NSmen who wish to preserve for posterity, physical elements such as ships, aircraft, tanks that had formed an integral part of their personal NS experiences. We recognise that these physical artefacts can evoke precious and personal memories as well as experiences that could be passed to subsequent generations to strengthen our commitment for a strong national defence.
This is the very reason that each SAF service arm has heritage museums. Ideally, we would want to exhibit every retired platform because of the strong attachments for the unit personnel that served in it, but this is neither possible nor desirable for effective curation – not even for militaries in larger countries with longer military histories, let alone Singapore, with limited land and other resources.
Therefore, military museums preserve iconic retired platforms that provide the most historically significant representation and widest coverage that their citizens can identify with collectively, often related to pivotal battles, lost or won in their history.
Examples include the battleship USS Oregon which had served in the Spanish American War and the light aircraft carrier USS Cabot which had served in many battles, including one of the largest naval engagements at the Battle of Leyte Gulf during World War II (WW2). Even then, these ships were dismantled with several symbolic parts retained for display in museums and memorials in the United States.
Few exceptions do exist, such as the Pearl Harbour Museum which is a top tourist attraction for Honolulu, where one can view entire sunken warships as a result of that \"infamous day in history\". Another example is the USS Missouri, which had participated in the fierce battles of Iwo Jima and Okinawa, but more significantly was the very ship on which the Japanese surrendered to the Allied Forces, thus formally ending WW2.
The costs to maintain these artefacts are high, amounting to tens of millions each year, but could be justified by their international significance and patronage. It is not something any nation should hope for, but if in our future, platforms of such significance do arise, one could envisage them being preserved for Singapore. For the more youthful RSN, it has preserved its first ship RSS Panglima’s gun mount that is now prominently displayed in the Navy Museum. This is the appropriate perspective for a young country with many more memories to be formed.
But even without the physical exhibits, the RSS Resolution’s full story and that of other retired platforms can be told and re-lived by its serving crew. Our museum planners are exploring the use of digital technology and virtual reality to provide visitors a first-hand experience of what it was like operating this ship and other vessels. We are also collating and curating stories from our ex-service personnel who have served on board RSS Resolution and other ships.
Together, these elements will offer a holistic experience to visitors, allow former crew of the RSS Resolution and other RSN veterans to share their personal stories with fellow Singaporeans, and honour the contribution and heritage of all our past warships and their servicemen and women.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Repurposing of Petrol Kiosks with Higher Adoption of Electric Cars","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"70 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for National Development with the move towards higher adoption of electric cars, whether existing petrol kiosks will be repurposed in due course.
Mr Desmond Lee: Under the Singapore Green Plan, our goal is for all vehicles to run on cleaner energy by 2040. To ensure that the charging needs of electric vehicle (EV) users can be met, the Government has been expanding our EV charging network.
With higher adoption of EVs over time, demand for petrol and diesel fuels is expected to fall. Some petrol stations have already adapted by installing EV chargers. Our land use planning will also adapt to the changing needs of the fuel retailing market and petrol stations, while ensuring the needs of the different types of vehicles are met. Where needed, some petrol station sites may be rezoned upon their lease expiry and redeveloped for alternative uses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Transferability of SkillsFuture Credits from Parent to Child","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"71 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Education whether SkillsFuture credits can be made transferable from parent to child if the parent is already retired.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The SkillsFuture Credit seeks to encourage individuals to take ownership of their skills development and lifelong learning journey. As we encourage Singaporeans to pursue learning throughout life, we have designed the SkillsFuture Credit to be non-transferable between individuals, even after retirement. Many courses are highly subsidised by the Government to ensure that training costs remain affordable. In addition, the SkillsFuture Credit can be used on top of the course fee subsidies.
For retirees, they may wish to consider the range of SkillsFuture Credit-eligible courses that are specially curated to suit the skills and learning interests of seniors, such as those offered by the National Silver Academy (NSA) as well as IT courses offered by the Silver Infocomm Junctions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Stakeholder Engagement Exercises to Update Singapore’s Nationally Determined Contribution Pledges for COP27","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"74 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether there are any updates to the stakeholder engagement exercises to update Singapore’s Nationally Determined Contribution pledges for the UN Climate Change Conference 2022 (COP27).
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Under the Glasgow Climate Pact adopted at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP-26) in November 2021, Parties agreed to revisit their 2030 Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDC, by the end of 2022, to achieve greater alignment with the Paris Agreement temperature goals. Singapore will do our part to fulfil our international obligations.
The Government is working on our plan to review the NDC in time for COP 27, including stakeholders and community engagement and consultation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of New PSLE Scoring System on Madrasahs' Primary School Admission Benchmark","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"75 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Education in light of the revised PSLE scoring system in 2021 which uses scoring bands (Achievement Levels), what is the required benchmark that madrasahs have to attain for each cohort in order to be allowed to continue taking in Primary 1 pupils.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The basis of the benchmark for madrasahs remains unchanged under the new PSLE scoring system, which was implemented in 2021. It is pegged to the average PSLE Score of Malay pupils taking four Standard-level subjects in the six lowest-performing national Primary schools.
All madrasahs with PSLE candidates met the benchmark in 2021 and may continue admitting Primary 1 students.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Foldable Wheelchair Lifts to be Installed at HDB Blocks without Lift Access on Every Floor","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"77 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development with regard to HDB blocks which have undergone the Main Upgrading Programme but still have lifts which do not stop at every floor, whether HDB has any plans to retrofit the staircases of these blocks with foldable wheelchair lifts to assist residents with mobility issues.
Mr Desmond Lee: HDB has studied the feasibility of installing foldable wheelchair lifts at staircases of HDB blocks where some flats still do not have direct lift access. It was found to be unfeasible due to fire safety considerations.
Staircases at HDB blocks serve as escape paths in the event of a fire and a minimum clearance width of one metre needs to be maintained at such staircases in accordance with the Fire Code. Installing foldable wheelchair lifts at staircases would encroach into the escape path, impeding the safe evacuation of residents during a fire. Furthermore, the installation of wheelchair lifts would introduce electrical systems that may pose fire risks, counteracting the purpose of HDB staircases being fire escape paths.
HDB is currently exploring the use of powered stair climbers as an alternative. These devices can be attached to a wheelchair to enable it to traverse up and down staircases, with assistance from another person. HDB is pilot-testing different models of the device with a few volunteer HDB households, to assess if the device is feasible and cost-effective, and if it can be implemented on a wider scale.
Through HDB’s efforts, the vast majority of the 5,300 HDB blocks without full direct lift access have been able to benefit from the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP). For the 150 or so remaining HDB blocks, which do not have direct lift access to every flat, HDB will continue to explore new methods to bring down lift upgrading costs as well as alternatives to improve accessibility for residents with mobility needs.
Residents living in these blocks who are in urgent need of direct lift access due to medical or mobility issues can also apply for the Lift access Housing Grant (LHG) of up to $30,000 when they buy another flat with direct lift access.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"MRT Stations with Barrier-free Commuter Route from Station Entrance to Train Platform","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"79 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Transport (a) how many MRT stations have a barrier-free commuter route from station entrance to train platform which is served by (i) just one lift (ii) two or more lifts, respectively; (b) what is the operational lifespan of these lifts; (c) how many of these lifts are nearing the end of the operational lifespan; and (d) what contingency arrangements exist for lift breakdowns especially at MRT stations serving hospitals.
Mr S Iswaran: Based on BCA’s Code on Accessibility in the Built Environment, all 148 MRT stations have at least one barrier free route from the station entrance to the train platform, including at least one lift between the station concourse and train platform levels. In addition, taking into consideration the volume and profile of commuters, as well as technical feasibility, 17 of these stations have two lifts installed. This number will increase as all new MRT stations will be fitted with two lifts wherever possible.
The lifts in our network have an indicative lifespan of 20 to 25 years and their age varies from station to station. In practice, the actual operational lifespan of the lifts depends on several factors, including the inherent design, level of usage and maintenance. Before any lift reaches the end of its operational lifespan, the engineers would closely monitor the condition of the lift and either replace or renew it.
In the event of a lift breakdown, our rail operators have Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to inform, help and guide commuters and to activate their engineers to repair the lifts as soon as possible. They would put up signs to inform commuters about the lift breakdown, provide alerts via mobile apps and station their staff along the train platform and station concourse to provide assistance to commuters. Such assistance would include helping commuters with personal mobility aids use stair lifts, where they have been installed. Commuters would also be advised to travel to adjacent stations and take wheelchair accessible buses or taxis to reach their destination, as an alternative.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Illegal Online Betting Offences since Onset of COVID-19","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"80 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether there has been an increase in the number of illegal online betting offences committed since the onset of COVID-19; and (b) if so, what is the increase in the number.
Mr K Shanmugam: Since the Remote Gambling Act, or RGA, came into force in 2015, the number of people arrested for illegal online gambling offences has increased. This can be driven by many factors, including increasing internet penetration and enforcement operations. It is not possible to conclude that the increase is solely due to the pandemic.
In the two years preceding the start of the pandemic, the number of persons arrested for illegal online gambling offences under the RGA was 145 in 2018 and 210 in 2019. This dropped very slightly to 205 in 2020 and increased to 280 in 2021.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Help to Ensure Safety of Point-to-point Drivers who Ferry Passengers from Airports and Other Border Points Given Increased Vaccinated Travel Lanes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"81 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Transport with the increasing number of Vaccinated Travel Lanes (VTLs) being opened, what measures would be taken to help ensure point-to-point (P2P) drivers who pick passengers up from the airports and other border points are adequately protected from COVID-19 and its variants.
Mr S Iswaran: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in January 2020, LTA has issued advisories to taxi and private hire car (PHC) drivers on measures that drivers can take to protect themselves from COVID-19. For example, they can improve ventilation by not using the recirculation mode of the vehicles’ air-conditioning system and winding down windows. Passengers are also advised to sit at the back, diagonally from the drivers where possible.
MOH has assessed that the current measures remain sufficient to minimise the risk of in-vehicle transmission of COVID-19 and its variants. At this juncture, there is no need for extra precautionary measures, such as having drivers put on full personal protective equipment. Furthermore, more than 99% of active taxi and PHC drivers are fully vaccinated.
We urge all taxi and PHC drivers to continue to take the necessary precautions and to adhere to LTA’s advisories. Those who are not vaccinated should do so if medically eligible and those who are eligible for booster shots should also take them quickly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Prohibit Employers from Requiring Retail Staff to Stand for Prolonged Periods","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"82 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Government will consider prohibiting employers from requiring retail staff to stand for prolonged periods when standing is not necessary; (b) whether the Government works with employers to implement rest times and seats for workers who have to stand for prolonged periods; and (c) whether the Government collects data on (i) the number of retail staff who have to stand for prolonged periods a day and (ii) the health risks faced by these workers.
Dr Tan See Leng: For the first two parts of the question, I would like to refer the Member to the answer MOM provided to a similar question raised by Mr Don Wee in an earlier sitting.
We encourage retailers to provide adequate rest and welfare for their frontline staff. It is only right that employers do their best to create a conducive work environment, as staff will be more motivated and engaged as a result. However, excessive and overly prescriptive regulations laying out in detail how staff are to be deployed will impose rigidity in the sector, as retail outlets have a large variety of settings in how they serve customers.
For the third part of the question, MOM does not collect data of the type described. The occupational health experts are of the view that a person who stands for a prolonged period on a regular basis may experience effects like swollen feet. This can be made worse when the person’s movement is severely restricted, for example within a very limited radius (of less than half a metre). Retail staff do move within the shop premises and they also have opportunities to take short breaks or stretches whilst at work. This would reduce the risk from prolonged standing at work.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Mobile COVID-19 Vaccination Service for Primary Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"83 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider offering a mobile vaccination service, akin to school dental services, for Primary schools to administer subsequent booster shots for young children and to take the opportunity to also raise the children’s awareness on the evolving COVID-19 home recovery arrangements.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question has been addressed by the oral reply to Question Nos 13 to 15 for oral answer on the Order Paper for 10 January 2022. [Please refer to \"Assessment of Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines on Younger Children and Singapore's Decision to Extend Vaccination to Younger Children\", Official Report, 10 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 44, 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":"Rationale for Different Safe Management Measures for Vaccinated Migrant Workers Living in and Outside of Dormitories","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"84 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower what is the rationale for having different safe management measures for vaccinated migrant workers living in dormitories and the rest of the population living outside of dormitories.
Dr Tan See Leng: Dormitories are communal settings where transmissions can occur rapidly. As such, dormitory residents are required to be tested more frequently than the general community.
Today, dormitory residents undergo Fast and Easy Testing-Rostered Routine Testing (FET-RRT). We have implemented Safe Living Measures (SLM), Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) audits and lower capacity numbers in recreation centres as well as controlled numbers for community visits to dampen the risk and speed of transmission, both within the dormitories and cross-transmission between the community and dormitories. For example, mid-last year, community cases were more numerous than dormitory cases and there was the risk of cross-transmission from the community to the dormitories.
Reducing and managing transmission risk will ultimately help to safeguard the migrant workers’ health and reduce disruption to their ability to work. Many migrant workers have told us that they are concerned about not being able to work if they test positive and need to be isolated.
We have progressively eased the restrictions over time. Migrant workers living in dormitories may visit recreation centres daily and up to 3,000 vaccinated migrant workers may visit the community on weekdays and up to 6,000 on weekends and public holidays. In addition, we are working with community partners, like Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs), grassroots organisations, schools and employers to plan and organise regular events and activities for workers in and out of the dormitories. We will continue to monitor the situation and ease restrictions when appropriate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans for Continuing with TraceTogether as COVID-19 Contact Tracing Tool","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"85 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Health in light of living with COVID-19 as an endemic disease (a) to what extent is TraceTogether still utilised as a contact tracing tool; (b) whether there are any plans to transition towards user-oriented contact exposure technology, such as Novid; (c) whether there are any plans or specific dates for permanently deleting server-side identification data registered via TraceTogether; and (d) whether there are any plans for the discontinuation of SafeEntry.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question has been addressed by the written reply to Question No 105 for oral answer on the Order Paper on 10 January 2022. [Please refer to \"Necessity of TraceTogther SafeEntry Requirement Given New Protocols for COVID-19-positive Patients\", Official Report, 10 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 44, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extent of Accumulated Leave amongst Public Healthcare Workers and Cap on Leave that can be Encashed","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"87 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Health (a) what proportion of public healthcare workers have been unable to clear at least 50% of their accumulated leave in 2021 despite the ongoing public healthcare manpower crunch; (b) what is the average cap on leave that can be encashed for 2021 for these workers; and (c) what proportion of healthcare workers have had to forfeit their leave as they have exceeded the cap on leave encashment.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: We need some time to collate the inputs from various HR departments of hospitals, in order to know the proportion of public healthcare workers who are unable to clear at least 50% of their accumulated leave in 2021. However, less than one-third of public healthcare workers will not be able to fully clear their accumulated leave for 2021.
Our public healthcare institutions have allowed their staff to carry forward unused 2021 annual leave to 2022 and to also allow encashment of up to one-third of the 2021 annual leave entitlement. Thus far, less than 1% of staff have had to forfeit their accumulated leave in 2021.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Rationale for Differentiated COVID-19 Testing Approach between Travellers Arriving at Changi Airport and at Causeway","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"88 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Trade and Industry why is there a differentiated testing approach between travellers arriving at Changi Airport via the Vaccinated Travel Lanes (using the polymerase chain test) and those arriving via the Causeway (using the antigen rapid test).
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Vaccinated Travel Lane (VTL) arrangement with Malaysia was launched on 29 November 2021. In consultation with the Ministries of Health of Singapore and Malaysia, both countries agreed bilaterally that it is sufficient for VTL (Land) travellers to undergo an on-arrival antigen rapid test (ART) instead of a polymerase chain (PCR) test, taking into account public health and practical considerations.
In addition to the on-arrival test, there are multiple safeguards to reduce the risk of spread of COVID-19. All VTL (Land) travellers, except children aged 12 years and below, are required to be fully vaccinated. All travellers, except children aged two years and below, are also subject to a stringent testing regime, comprising a pre-departure PCR test or ART, a self-administered ART on Days 2, 4, 5 and 6 of their arrival and a supervised self-administered ART on Days 3 and 7. These measures facilitate the early detection of COVID-19 cases and minimise public health risks to the community.
As of 31 December 2021, 27 COVID-19 positive cases were detected, out of around 28,000 incoming travellers who entered under the VTL (Land).
We will continue to monitor the public health situation and adjust the testing regime for the VTL, if necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Cases of Water Leakage within HDB Flats reported to HDB between 2014 and 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"89 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for National Development (a) for each year from 2014 to 2021, what is the number of cases of water leakage within HDB flats reported to HDB; (b) what percentage of these cases are due to piping or waterproofing issues from the units above; (c) how long on average does it take for these cases to be resolved; and (d) how many of these cases required HDB's special enforcement as a result of the owner's failure to take rectification measures.
Mr Desmond Lee: Ceiling leaks that occur in HDB flats are generally a result of wear and tear over time. In such cases, the responsibility for repairs is shared jointly between the upper and lower-floor flat owners. Both upper and lower-floor flat owners would need to jointly investigate and carry out the repairs. In most cases, ceiling leaks can be amicably resolved when flat owners exercise mutual understanding and cooperate with one another in the investigation and repairs.
Notwithstanding that flat owners are responsible for the maintenance of their homes, on a goodwill basis, HDB has, on a goodwill basis, helped flat owners to investigate, identify the source and causes of leak. Some examples of causes of leaks, could be due to deteriorated waterproofing membrane in toilets, leaked pipes and washing of the kitchen flooring. Upon completion of the investigation, HDB will advise flat owners on the remedial actions, including providing a list of repair contractors if needed.
From 2014 to 2021, HDB received an average of about 21 reported cases of ceiling leak per 1,000 dwelling units each year. About 92% of the cases were due to piping and waterproofing issues from the units above.
The majority of ceiling leak cases will take about a month to investigate and one to two months to arrange for repairs, on average, but the time needed differs according to the complexity, the availability of the upper floor owners and availability of the repair contractors’ resources.
For the minority of uncooperative upper-floor flat owners, HDB will first try to persuade them to cooperate, including seeking assistance from grassroots leaders to mediate. For those who persistently refuse to cooperate, HDB will consider taking legal action as a last resort. For the past three years, HDB took legal action against an average of 30 uncooperative households yearly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Protect Youths from Falling Prey to Cryptocurrency Game Scams","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"91 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Home Affairs in view of the Neko Inu crypto gaming craze that has resulted in Singaporeans losing over $100,000 in cryptocurrency, what is being done to educate and protect youths from falling prey to cryptocurrency game scams.
Mr K Shanmugam: With increasing interest in cryptocurrency, cryptocurrency-related scams have become more common. These scams come in many forms. In addition to online games that the Member mentioned, cryptocurrency-related scams include fake trading platforms and fake investment schemes.
Given that the vast majority of such cryptocurrency scams are perpetrated by scammers based outside Singapore, there is a limit to how much law enforcement agencies in Singapore can do once the scam has taken place. Our ability to solve these cases will depend on the level of cooperation from overseas law enforcement agencies, as well as their ability to track down these scammers. Where money has been transferred overseas, recovery is also more difficult.
Nonetheless, to address these scams, we have stepped up investigation efforts. The Police established a cryptocurrency taskforce in 2018 to monitor the cryptocurrency landscape, develop and improve operational procedures in the investigation and seizing of cryptocurrencies, and establish working relationships with overseas law enforcement agencies, industry professionals, and academic experts. The taskforce works closely with MAS which regulates entities that deal in or facilitate the exchange of cryptocurrencies.
Given the difficulties in investigating and prosecuting such overseas-based cryptocurrency scams, the best defence is a discerning public. To that end, we have stepped up public education efforts to educate the public on cryptocurrency-related scams. Police have shared advisories and worked with Government agencies to increase public awareness. For example, in MoneySense’s recent campaign from April to June 2021, in addition to highlighting the risks of investing in cryptocurrencies, the campaign featured key messages about the risks of dealing with unregulated entities and reminded the public to always \"Ask, Check and Confirm\".
When transacting with cryptocurrencies, we urge the public to only deal with entities that are regulated by the MAS. Members of the public should also practise healthy skepticism to ask, check and confirm before making any transactions on cryptocurrency-related platforms, whether they be investment-related, or for online games. If the offer from an investment platform or online game appears too good to be true, it could be a scam.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Workplace Fatalities Related to Overwork","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"92 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry tracks workplace fatalities related to overwork; and (b) if so, how many of such cases have been recorded in the past five years.
Dr Tan See Leng: Every workplace fatality is investigated to determine the contributing causes of the accident. This includes examination of the work schedules of deceased workers. In the past five years, our investigators had uncovered an average of five fatal cases per year (12% of total fatalities), where excessive work hours were suspected. Thus far, investigations have shown no evidence to link long working hours or fatigue to any fatal workplace accidents. However, our investigators will continue to examine for possible links in every new case that comes up.
To protect employees from fatigue and overwork, working hours are regulated under the Employment Act (EA). Workmen, earning up to $4,500 per month, should not work more than 12 hours per day. Errant employers found to be flouting the EA can be prosecuted and fined up to $5,000 for each offence.
The Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Council also promotes the protection of workers to prevent fatigue through its Total WSH programme, WSH Council guidelines and platforms such as the annual National WSH Campaign. Last year’s National WSH Campaign emphasised Care Time for workers to take care of their safety and health. Simple actions such as regular exercise, constantly being hydrated and having adequate sleep can improve one’s physical and mental health and allow workers to be more alert to unsafe acts or conditions at their workplaces.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Cases where Foreigners Purchased Restricted Residential Properties Through Singaporeans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"93 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Law in light of the recent news report about foreigners purchasing restricted residential property illegally through Singaporeans (a) since 2017, what is the number of incidents of foreigners purchasing restricted residential property; (b) what types of property do they involve; and (c) whether these incidents have impacted property prices.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Government takes a strict approach towards ownership of landed residential property in Singapore by foreigners, including Permanent Residents, to ensure that they remain the primary preserve of Singapore Citizens.
Foreign ownership of landed residential properties in Singapore is restricted under the Residential Property Act (RPA) and foreigners who wish to purchase such properties must seek the approval of the Minister for Law. The Act prohibits the creation of any trust for sale in respect of a residential property, in favour of any foreign person. The Act also prohibits any citizen from purchasing a residential property as a nominee of any foreign person, with the intention to hold it in trust for that foreign person. Any trust created and/or any contract between the citizen and foreign person in respect of such residential property shall be null and void, and any individual that commits such an offence faces a fine of up to $100,000, imprisonment of up to three years, or both.
In 2017, it was discovered that a Singaporean, Ms Song Fanrong had bought three landed properties for three foreign individuals. The authorities investigated the matter and prosecuted Song, who pleaded guilty to one charge under the RPA of purchasing restricted residential property with the intention of holding it in trust for a foreigner, with two similar charges to be taken into consideration for sentencing. She will receive her sentencing later this month.
Members will appreciate that such cases are not easy to detect, as the parties involved would have taken extensive steps to conceal evidence of such arrangements. Foreigners who turn to such illegal arrangements to acquire a landed property are taking a big risk. They could lose their entire investment, which are high value transactions, as the arrangement would be deemed null and void. And all parties involved would also face criminal charges and penalties under the law.
Since 2017, other than this case, the authorities had also investigated another case in 2020 regarding a potential breach. However, there was insufficient evidence and no further action was taken.
The Member asked if such incidents have materially impacted the broader landed residential property market or private housing prices in general. Our assessment is that this is unlikely to be the case.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regulation of Consumer Credit Extended by Retailers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"94 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what measures exist to regulate retailers offering consumer credit for goods purchased where the credit is provided by the retailer and not by financial institutions regulated by MAS; (b) where the debt has accrued via retailer-provided credit, how many of these consumers in 2021 are subjected to (i) debt collector action (ii) bankruptcy proceedings, respectively; (c) what dispute resolution mechanisms exist; and (d) whether safeguards exist to prevent predatory lending.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Consumer credit provided by retailers account for less than 5% of loans by commercial entities to households. Retailers providing consumer credit under hire-purchase agreements are required to comply with the Hire-Purchase Act. Retailers offering other in-house credit sales agreements are required to abide by general laws like the Sales of Goods Act and the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act, which prohibits unfair practices that could mislead consumers, such as misrepresentation or omission of material facts, or pressure selling.
In 2021, there were 39 individuals made bankrupt with at least one proof of debt submitted by a retailer as a creditor. The Government does not have data on other debt collector action against consumers by retailers. Consumers may approach the Consumer Association of Singapore (CASE) for assistance with dispute resolution, including when they are unable to work out a mutually agreeable repayment plan with the retailer.
The Government has engaged major retailers offering in-house credit schemes to improve their business practices, such as adequate disclosure of terms and conditions, responsible marketing and incorporating credit bureau reports as part of their credit assessment. Agencies will continue to keep a close watch on market practices and ensure that Government’s overall regulatory framework remains robust.
95 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Social and Family Development with regard to the Sugarbook website offering free membership to students (a) whether there is any data on how many Singapore students have subscribed to the website; (b) if so, how pervasive is the use of the website among Singapore youths; and (c) whether there is any update on the police taking enforcement action against such website companies that enable the procurement of sexual or pornographic services through their online platforms.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Government takes a strong stance on the safety and protection of all Singaporeans. We have laws, such as the Women’s Charter and Penal Code, that protect our women from being exploited and abused.
During the Conversations on Singapore Women’s Development, protection of women against harms and violence was one of the main feedback areas and participants shared the importance of ensuring that Singapore continues to be a society where women feel safe and respected. We recognise that sexual offences have taken on new forms and can occur on online. We must keep up our efforts to maintain high standards of public safety in Singapore, foster a culture of respect and do our best to protect women and girls from harm.
Websites such as Sugarbook commoditise and devalue relationships. Those affected are predominantly women. This goes against the grain of our societal values and shared vision for men and women to partner each other as equals. Such websites may target young people in their late teens and early 20s, who may be more susceptible to exploitation and abuse. We do not track the profile and number of users who subscribe to the Sugarbook website.
These websites by themselves are not illegal. The Police will take enforcement action if there is evidence of such sites being used to offer or facilitate the provision of sexual services by a woman or girl to another person in Singapore in exchange for payment or reward. They will also take enforcement action if there is evidence of such sites being used to transmit obscene material. Thus far, there have been no evidence of such nature. Correspondingly, to date, no enforcement action has been taken against such websites for provision of sexual services or transmission of obscene materials.
A more effective solution is to increase the awareness of young people to such dangers, in line with our approach to foster a culture of safety and respect. MOE is already doing so through their refreshed Character and Citizenship curriculum, which inculcates and reinforces the importance of respect and appropriate behaviour, both offline and online. Families and parents also play a critical role to guide their children, and inculcate the right values of respect to women from young.
In July 2021, MCI launched the Sunlight Alliance for Action (AfA) to tackle online harms, especially those targeted at women and girls. The Sunlight AfA brings together partners from across the people, public and private (3P) sectors to co-create solutions to address online harms, close the digital safety gap and enable everyone, especially women and girls, to go online with confidence.
Fundamentally, we need to reinforce our values of equality and respect. A whole-of-society effort is required – the Government, society, communities and families – to foster respectful relationships between men and women, starting from young with our children and youths.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enforcement against Foreign-registered Vehicles with Idling Engines","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"96 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) why does NEA currently limit the taking of action under the Environmental Protection and Management (Vehicular Emissions) Regulations against drivers of foreign-registered vehicles only in circumstances where NEA officers had personally issued infringement notices to these drivers; and (b) what steps can be taken by NEA to establish the identity of and take action against, drivers of foreign-registered vehicles reported by third parties to have parked with idling engines in contravention of the Regulations.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The Environmental Protection and Management (Vehicular Emissions) Regulations cover a range of vehicular emissions-related offences, including the use of noisy or smoky vehicles, and the idling of vehicle engines.
NEA takes enforcement action against drivers of vehicles found to have contravened the Regulations. When a member of public reports an alleged infringement by a foreign-registered vehicle, NEA is unable to contact the vehicle owner to trace the identity of the driver because unlike local vehicles, we do not have information on the ownership of foreign-registered vehicles. As a result, enforcement action against foreign-registered vehicles must be taken in person by NEA officers, to clearly identify the errant drivers.
Nonetheless, when NEA receives feedback from members of public on vehicles that contravene the Regulations, checks will be stepped up at the reported areas and enforcement action will be taken against errant drivers. NEA also regularly patrols hotspots and areas with recurring feedback.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Cross Island MRT Line to be Extended from Punggol West to Yio Chu Kang Road and Jalan Kayu","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"97 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will consider extending the Cross Island MRT Line's Punggol extension from Punggol West to Yio Chu Kang Road (at the junction with Sengkang West Road) and Jalan Kayu so as to support the residents there.
Mr S Iswaran: There are no plans to extend the Cross Island Line - Punggol Extension (CPE) beyond Punggol station, based on projected travel demand.
Commuters in the Yio Chu Kang, Sengkang West and Jalan Kayu areas have access to Fernvale LRT station and various bus services, that connect them to the MRT network or other destinations. These include Services 50 and 102 connecting to Sengkang MRT station on the North East Line; Services 50, 70 and 86 connecting to Ang Mo Kio or Yio Chu Kang MRT stations on the North-South Line (NSL); as well as Services 70 and 103 connecting to Serangoon MRT station which interchanges with both the Circle and North East Lines.
When the Cross Island Line (CRL) Phase 1 and Cross Island Line Punggol Extension open, these residents will have even more connections via new stations such as Serangoon North MRT station, or new interchanges at Punggol and Ang Mo Kio which serve these lines.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Number and Proportion of HDB and Private Property Flat Buyers with Total Debt Servicing Ratio of above 55%","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Prime Minister since 2013, what is the annual number and proportion of HDB and private property flat buyers who had a total debt servicing ratio of above 55%.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): The Total Debt Servicing Ratio (TDSR) threshold was adjusted from 60% to 55% as part of the package of cooling measures which took effect on 16 December 2021 to promote a stable and sustainable property market. The intent of the tightened TDSR threshold is to help moderate demand, especially in the private property market and encourage financial prudence among home buyers. The TDSR framework only applies to loans granted by financial institutions (FIs), including those extended to HDB flat buyers.
The number and proportion of private housing and HDB flat buyers who had a TDSR of above 55% are shown in Table 1. Only 3% of HDB flat buyers taking up a mortgage loan from FIs in 2020 have TDSRs of above 55%. However, about two-fifths of those borrowing to purchase private property – which includes those doing so for investment purposes as well as owner-occupiers – have TDSRs of above 55%. The new TDSR threshold will nevertheless encourage a significant number of prospective private property buyers to right-size their intended purchases and mortgages and will enable them to better service their debt obligations particularly as interest rates rise in future.
2 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Defence in light of the falling total fertility rate in Singapore to 1.1 in 2020, how will the Singapore Armed Forces use technological advancement to ensure its forces continue to be formidable and mission-ready.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: MINDEF agrees with the hon Member Christopher de Souza that Singapore's low fertility rates represent a significant structural challenge to SAF in maintaining a strong national defence. SAF has indeed recognised this as a core challenge some three decades ago by incorporating manpower requirements for all operations as a key strategic driver in formulating plans and procuring platforms. Strict discipline was applied to all units in the three Air, Land and Sea services such that processes were re-engineered to be able to function with fewer men or women, but at the same or even greater effectiveness.
These were bold and ambitious measures and forced a re-look across the entire SAF to leverage technology to improve manpower productivity. Many new platforms acquired had to satisfy stringent requirements for manpower. For example, the Army’s recently acquired TPQ-53 Weapon Locating Radar makes use of automation and reduces manpower requirements by 30% compared with its predecessors, but with an increased detection range. Similarly, the Navy now uses new vessels for maritime surveillance and security in the Singapore Straits, which are unmanned.
As a result, today’s modernised SAF is lean and effective. But this relentless drive to optimise manpower must continue. The SAF will have to incorporate advancements in robotics, data analytics and artificial intelligence (AI) to further improve its work processes and raise productivity. Examples are the trialling of automated vehicles in our airbases to transport equipment and personnel along pre-programmed routes and AI-enabled drones to assess damage along runways.
Job redesign is also an important initiative to optimise our manpower resource. For example, the introduction of unmanned watchtowers has enabled servicemen previously exempted due to medical issues to now serve as security troopers for our camps and critical installations.
The SAF is determined that smaller cohorts due to the low total fertility rates will not compromise our national defence. Indeed, despite a smaller NS pool, the SAF continues to be an effective military force and a strong deterrent against any potential threat.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts to Raise Awareness of Outrage of Modesty Cases on Public Transport and Self-protection","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Home Affairs what is being done to raise awareness of outrage-of-modesty cases on public transport and to alert commuters on how to protect themselves.
Mr K Shanmugam: To raise awareness of cases of Outrage of Modesty (OM) on public transport, SPF works closely with public transport operators and partners such as the National Crime Prevention Council, to reach out to public transport commuters. These efforts educate members of the public on what they can do when they encounter such crimes, remind them to stay vigilant when on public transport and encourage them to report the matter to the Police if they encounter anything suspicious.
For example, posters on OM are prominently displayed on MRT lines, bus interchanges and bus shelters. Public education videos on OM are also screened at MRT stations. Since September 2021, advisories on OM have been distributed to more than 700,000 commuters through various platforms, including online ones such as the LTA MyTransport, SMRTConnect and SBS Transit mobile applications.
The Public Transport Security Command also launched the Riders-on-Watch (ROW) scheme in July 2019, which has been incorporated under the Community Watch Scheme (CWS) launched recently on 11 December 2021. ROW taps on commuters to act as additional \"eyes and ears\" on public transport for the Police, with ROW volunteers keeping watch for suspicious persons or activities and providing valuable information to the Police when needed. These volunteers also receive regular advisories on crimes affecting the public transport system.
The Police adopts a tough enforcement approach towards OM cases on public transport and will continue to work closely with the community and key stakeholders to improve the safety and security of all commuters. We urge all victims of OM on public transport to make a Police report as soon as possible, as reporting the crime early is crucial to help the Police identify and arrest the perpetrator.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Protecting Individuals from Internet-related Scams","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether there is sufficient protection in place to protect individuals from the multitude of Internet-related scams including investment scams, job scams, e-commerce scams, loan scams and Internet-banking scams; and (b) how can the public be made aware to not provide their Singpass details or other passwords to prevent scammers from remotely draining money from their accounts.
Mr K Shanmugam: The vast majority of Internet-related scams are perpetrated by scammers based outside Singapore. Such cases are difficult to investigate and prosecute. Much of our efforts to solve these cases will depend on the level of cooperation of overseas law enforcement agencies, as well as their ability to track down these scammers based in their jurisdictions. These scammers are typically part of organised criminal groups and run sophisticated transnational operations which are not easy to detect or dismantle. Where monies have been transferred outside Singapore, recovery is also more difficult.
The Government adopts a multi-pronged approach to combat scams.
First, we have strengthened enforcement. Given the transnational nature of Internet-related scams we have stepped up collaboration with foreign law enforcement agencies, to dismantle scam syndicates. For example, in December 2021, SPF worked with the Royal Malaysia Police (RMP) to dismantle two scam syndicates believed to have perpetrated job scams and fixed deposit investment scams targeting Singaporeans, involving more than 100 victims and losses amounting to more than S$1.5 million. Fifteen people were arrested - eight in Malaysia, and seven in Singapore. SPF has also set up dedicated units to disrupt scammers' operations. For example, in March 2021, SPF set up the Anti-Scam Division (ASD) to coordinate the SPF’s overall anti-scam investigation and enforcement efforts.
Second, through the Inter-Ministry Committee on Scams, SPF coordinates efforts with other public agencies, as well as private sector partners such as banks, e-commerce platforms and telecommunications companies. This cooperation has been effective at disrupting scammers’ operations, especially those perpetuated over the Internet. For example, through Project FRONTIER, SPF has established processes with financial institutions to swiftly freeze bank accounts suspected of scams, in order to mitigate victims’ losses. From January to November 2021, SPF froze more than 5,400 accounts, and recovered more than S$65 million of scam proceeds. We are working with the banks to further strengthen measures to prevent scams, such as enhancing their fraud controls to facilitate timely detection and blocking of suspicious transactions. We are also working with e-commerce platforms to further improve user identification and authentication, and enhance transaction safety.
The National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) also collaborated with GovTech and SPF to develop ScamShield, a mobile application which identifies and filters out scam messages. It also blocks calls from phone numbers that were used in other scam cases or which were reported by ScamShield users. ScamShield was launched in November 2020 for iOS platform users and will be available on the Android platform this year.
In addition, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) had worked with the telecom operators to block known numbers used to perpetuate scams, including those that start with \"+656\" or spoof the numbers of well-known Government agencies. IMDA and SPF have also stepped up efforts to educate the public not to pick up calls with a \"+\" or \"+65\" prefix if they are not expecting any calls from overseas.
Given the investigative challenges associated with transnational scammers, prevention is the best solution. It is imperative that the public is aware of the tell-tale signs of scams. The best defence against scams is a discerning public and our third area of focus is to take an upstream approach by creating strong public awareness on scams.
Our anti-scam public education campaign, called \"Spot the Signs. Stop the Crimes.\" is in its second year. The campaign focuses on using real-life examples to build awareness and vigilance amongst the public on the tell-tale signs of scams. As part of this campaign, we have shared materials advising the public against sharing personal details such as log-in credentials and one-time-passwords (OTP) with unverified parties.
To bolster public awareness, SPF and NCPC partnered with the Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) on various initiatives to educate bank customers. For example, the banks have introduced an online quiz on scam prevention. They have also sent out advisories to customers to remind them not to share their OTPs with others.
Combatting scams is a whole of society effort, and members of the community play an important role in the fight. We urge the public to be alert, and to raise our collective awareness of scams by sharing scam prevention tips with your friends and family. Examples of scam prevention tips include not responding to requests for personal information from unverified sources and to practise healthy skepticism – pause, check and confirm before providing personal information to anyone.
We will continue to strengthen our public education and awareness efforts, working closely with other Government agencies and private stakeholders to better protect the public against scams.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Take-up Rate and Reports Submitted through ScamShield To-date","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Home Affairs with regard to the usage of ScamShield as a form of protection against scam calls and messages, to date, what is the (i) take-up rate and (ii) number of reports made through the app, respectively.
Mr K Shanmugam: From its launch in November 2020, to 31 December 2021, about 229,000 users have downloaded the ScamShield app.
During this period, 3.4 million calls and SMSes were reported as potential scams. Eight-seven percent were detected by the ScamShield app; the rest were reported by the users through the ScamShield app.
ScamShield is currently only available on the iOS platform. While we had earlier announced that the Android version would be available in end-2021, timelines have been slightly delayed as GovTech had to reprioritise resources towards supporting the whole-of-Government response to COVID-19.
The National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) and GovTech are working to launch the Android version of ScamShield in the first half of this year instead. We encourage the public to make full use of the ScamShield app to protect themselves from scams.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Road Traffic Offences Made Against Foreign-registered Vehicles in Singapore in Past Four Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in the past four years, how many reports of road traffic offences have been made against foreign-registered vehicles in Singapore; (b) how many road traffic summonses have been issued; (c) how many such summonses are compoundable with fines; (d) what proportion of such fines remain unpaid; and (e) what measures exist to ensure drivers of foreign-registered vehicles comply with Singapore’s traffic laws.
Mr K Shanmugam: From December 2017 to November 2021, the Traffic Police (TP) detected 112,331 traffic violations by foreign-registered vehicles. Of these, 107,071 were compounded, while the rest were issued with court summonses. Seventy-six percent (81,838) of the composition fines issued during this period remain unpaid.
There are challenges in ensuring that fines issued for offences committed by foreign vehicles are paid, because they are outside our jurisdiction. To address this, foreign-registered vehicles with a certain threshold of outstanding vehicular-related fines are denied entry into Singapore. These outstanding composition sums or court fines will have to be paid before the foreign-registered vehicles are allowed entry.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Gender Ratio of Long-Term Visit Pass and Long-Term Visit Pass Plus Holder and Proportion of These Passholders Employed in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the gender ratio of current Long-Term Visit Pass and Long-Term Visit Pass Plus holders; and (b) what proportion of these pass holders are employed in Singapore.
Mr K Shanmugam: As at November 2021, 70% of ICA-issued Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) and Long-Term Visit Pass Plus (LTVP+) holders are female, and 30% are male. Sixteen percent of all ICA-issued LTVP and LTVP+ holders are employed in Singapore.
Having a LTVP/LTVP+ does not confer automatic rights to work in Singapore. Only LTVP/LTVP+ holders that have a Letter of Consent (LOC), Pre-Approved Letter of Consent (PLOC), or a regular work pass, can work in Singapore. The eligibility of LOC, PLOC and regular work passes can be found on MOM's website
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Phase Out Use of Unabated Coal in Its Electricity Mix Earlier Than 2050","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether Singapore can commit to phasing out the use of unabated coal in its electricity mix earlier than the committed 2050 timeframe announced with Singapore's joining of the Powering Past Coal Alliance on 4 November 2021.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Coal makes up around 1% of Singapore’s power generation capacity. It is used only at 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.
We do not intend to build any new unbated coal-powered plants. The timeline for phasing out TMUC will need to take into account the remaining asset life of the plant and the availability of viable alternatives for companies that it supplies to. We will work with the companies to explore bringing forward the timeline and mitigating the emissions where possible.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Emergence of Second-round Effect of Inflation and Main Drivers Contributing to Wage and Services Inflation Outlook in 2022","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether there has been an emerging second-round effect of inflation; (b) if so, whether such effect will persist in 2022; (c) what are the potential main drivers contributing to wage and services inflation outlook in 2022; (d) what other price stabilisation measures are being explored to mitigate potential rise in supply side cost drivers; and (e) whether there are further plans to enhance cooperation with retailers in 2022 to reduce excessive pricing practices on daily necessities and food items.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: I thank for Member for the question. It has been addressed by oral reply to Question Nos 4 and 5 on the Order Paper for 11 January 2022. [Please refer to \"Reasons for Recent Rise in Costs and Measure 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":"Non-compliant Personal Mobility Devices Detected Every Month and Efforts to Ensure Compliance with Device Requirements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Transport (a) in the past year, how many incidences of installation of non-compliant batteries in personal mobility devices (PMDs) have been reported every month on average; (b) what are the current efforts by the Ministry to ensure that approved vendors of PMD batteries are not simultaneously selling non-compliant batteries in the market.
Mr S Iswaran: Since 1 July 2020, motorised personal mobility devices (PMDs) used in Singapore must comply with UL2272 standards. With continued enforcement and education efforts, more users are aware of this regulation. In 2021, an average of 46 instances of users riding non-UL2272 motorised PMDs were detected each month – which is about half the number of users caught when the regulation was first introduced.
The UL2272 requirement for motorised PMDs applies to the entire device, including its battery and circuitry. This ensures that the motorised PMD, as a whole, is safe for use. Any replacement component, including batteries, should be of the same make and model as the original component. Replacing the battery with a different model would render it non-compliant and would be an offence of illegal modification. Using such non-compliant devices on public paths and roads is also an offence. The maximum penalties for such offences were last increased in 2020 and will be regularly reviewed.
To ensure continued compliance with device requirements, LTA requires all new e-scooters to undergo inspection before they can be registered and mandatory inspections every two years. Since 2021, to stem the inflow of non-compliant motorised PMDs, LTA also requires all imported motorised PMDs to have a valid approval before being brought into Singapore. The number of motorised PMD fires each year has been steadily decreasing since 2019.
Last but not least, LTA and the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) conduct regular public education efforts, to educate motorised PMD users that they should not modify their devices and should only use original power adaptors and battery models for that device type.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Promote Use of Front and Rear Lights on All Bicycles to Enhance Visibility and Safety","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA had promoted the use of requisite regulatory front and rear lights on all bicycles and power-assisted bicycles to enhance better visibility and safety for all cyclists, pedestrians and motorists during its recent enforcement operations against errant cyclists or public outreach efforts to cyclists.
Mr S Iswaran: All bicycles, manual or power-assisted, need to have a white front light and red rear light or reflector that are clearly visible, when ridden between 7.00 pm and 7.00 am the following day on public paths and roads.
This is a key safe riding rule that is included in public education efforts by LTA, such as the recent graciousness campaign on path sharing and the ongoing road safety campaign. The importance of the use of lights, along with safe riding practices, are also featured in the recently revamped “Confidence on Wheels” programme. When conducting joint enforcement operations, LTA and the Traffic Police (TP) also use these opportunities to promote awareness of rules through the distribution of educational materials on active mobility.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress of Improvement Works on Bukit Timah Canal between Jalan Anak Bukit Flyover and Jalan Kampong Chantek and Estimated Date of Completion","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what has been the progress of improvement works on the Bukit Timah Canal between the Jalan Anak Bukit flyover and Jalan Kampong Chantek; and (b) when is the estimated date of completion of these works.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: PUB commenced the drainage improvement work on Bukit Timah Canal between Rifle Range Road (near Jalan Anak Bukit Flyover) and Jalan Kampong Chantek in 2019. As of December 2021, about a quarter of the project is completed. PUB is on track to complete the remaining works by first quarter 2024.
PUB has also completed the road raising works for a 450-metre stretch of Dunearn Road between Sime Darby Centre and Binjai Park in November 2021. This is an interim measure to reduce flood risks at Dunearn Road before the ongoing drainage improvement works are completed in 2024.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Disputes and Enforcement Action Taken Against Persons Who Breach Vaccinated-Differentiated Safe Management Measures at Hawker Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment since the introduction of COVID-19 vaccination entry checks at hawker centres, what is the number of (i) disputes between enforcement officers and diners and (ii) cases of unvaccinated patrons found to be dining-in.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: With the introduction of COVID-19 Vaccination-Differentiated Safe Management Measures (VDS) at hawker centres, only fully vaccinated persons can dine in. Since the commencement of vaccination entry checks on 23 November 2021, there have been four cases where patrons were uncooperative and Police assistance was activated. Twenty-four cases of unvaccinated or partially vaccinated persons were also found dining in. Enforcement action will be taken against persons who breach VDS at hawker centres, with first-time offenders liable for a fine of $300.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Food Farms and Coastal Fish Farms Currently Licensed in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how many food farms are currently licensed in Singapore; and (b) how many coastal fish farms are licensed in Singapore, and of these, how many have leases of (i) less than five years and (ii) between five and 10 years remaining.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: There are 260 licensed food farms in Singapore. 58% are land-based food farms, while the remaining 42% are sea-based farms.
There are 65 land-based food farms with their tenures expiring in less than five years, and five between five and 10 years.
Sea-based farms are currently not on leases. The Government is reviewing our policies for sea-based farms, with a view to provide the industry with greater certainty on their use of sea space.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Successful Applications for Agri-food Cluster Transformation Fund and Total Amount of Grants Given Out","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment with regard to the Agri-food Cluster Transformation Fund (a) since its launch how many applications (i) have been received and (ii) were successful; (b) what was the range of grants in total amounts, given out to each farm; and (c) what is the breakdown by types of successful applicants.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The Agri-food Cluster Transformation Fund provides co-funding support for capital investments by our local farms to improve productivity, sustainability and resource efficiency. Investments by farms for commonly-consumed food items are co-funded at 70%, while those for other food items are co-funded at 50%.
Since its launch on 30 April 2021, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) has received a total of 23 applications as of 31 December 2021. Eight applications have been approved with grant amounts ranging between $10,000 and $700,000 while the remaining applications are being evaluated by SFA.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Factors for Provision of Mother Tongue Languages in Secondary Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education (a) what are the parameters for deciding on offerings for mother tongue languages (MTLs) in Secondary schools; and (b) what are the reasons for not requiring all Secondary schools to offer classes for all three official MTLs (Chinese, Malay and Tamil).
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The provision of mother tongue language (MTL) instruction in a school is dependent on factors such as the availability of MTL teachers and the number of students offering the MTL. Currently, all Secondary school students who are offered Chinese Language or Malay Language can access instruction within their school. Tamil Language (TL) instruction is available in most but not all Secondary schools, due to the very limited supply of TL teachers and the very small TL student enrolment in some schools.
Students from Secondary schools that are unable to offer TL instruction can attend lessons at one of 11 regional TL centres, or at the Umar Pulavar TL Centre. This allows us to optimise the deployment of our limited pool of TL teachers to support all TL students. With this approach, every Secondary student can have access to TL instruction regardless of the Secondary school they are in, though it requires some TL students to travel to a nearby centre for TL instruction.
MOE will continue to provide the necessary support to schools for TL instruction.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Secondary One School Posting Exercise for Students Who Took PSLE from 2019 to 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Education with regard to Secondary one school posting exercises for students who took the PSLE from 2019 to 2021 (a) what is the annual number of students posted to a school which was not their first choice, broken down by travelling time of (i) over 30 minutes (ii) over one hour (iii) over 90 minutes by public transport; and (b) what guidance and advice are provided to students and parents to optimise their choices.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: MOE encourages parents and students to carefully consider their school choices for Secondary 1 (S1) Posting and choose a range of schools that are a good fit for the student’s learning needs. They are also advised to use all six choices and consider at least two or three schools where the student’s PSLE score is better than the school’s indicative Cut-Off Point (COP). We understand that some do choose to include schools that are a distance away from home.
S1 Posting is based on merit and choice of students. This means a student with a better PSLE score will be posted ahead of another student into their choice school.
Students may not always secure their first-choice school as the COPs of some schools fluctuate slightly each year. This is due to that cohort’s PSLE score and their school choices. Even with the change in PSLE scoring system in 2021, the proportion of students posted to a school of choice in the 2021 S1 Posting Exercise was comparable to previous years. More than 80% of students were posted to a school within their top three choices and more than 90% posted to a school in one of their six choices.
MOE posts those unsuccessful in all six of their choices to the nearest school with remaining vacancies, based on their PSLE score and registered address. This would generally be within 30 to 45 minutes travelling time by public transport, subject to traffic conditions and waiting time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"State of Employment for Graduates from COVID-19 Pandemic Cohorts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the state of employment for graduates from the COVID-19 pandemic cohorts; (b) what percentage of these graduates have secured full-time employment; (c) how many graduates are unable to secure full-time employment after attending the SGUnited Traineeship Programme; and (d) what are the job prospects for the upcoming graduating cohorts.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The overall employment rate of the Class of 2020 graduates from our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) was comparable to those from the Class of 2019. Based on the Graduate Employment Survey, about nine in 10 Class of 2020 graduates from the Autonomous Universities (AUs) and eight in 10 graduates from the Polytechnics and ITE were employed within six months of graduation.
However, full-time permanent employment rates were slightly lower than before the pandemic. Seven in 10 Class of 2020 graduates from the AUs and five in 10 from the Polytechnics and ITE secured full-time permanent employment, compared to eight in 10 from the AUs and six in 10 from the Polytechnics and ITE from the Class of 2019.
The employment outcomes of the Class of 2020 were bolstered by the support provided by the Government and IHLs to help them secure jobs and training opportunities during the pandemic. This included the SGUnited Traineeships Programme, which provide fresh graduates with the opportunity to pick up industry-relevant experience. As of end-November 2021, over 11,500 graduates have benefited from these traineeship opportunities. As at end-August 2021, 7,200 trainees have exited or completed their traineeships, of whom about 5,800 (81%) are employed.
Graduate employment outcomes for the Class of 2021 will be released later this year. The Government will continue to closely monitor the employment outcomes of each graduating cohort and provide further support where needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Residential Property Stamp Duties and Additional Buyer's Stamp Duties Collected in Last 10 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Finance in each year of the last 10 years, what is the respective breakdown of residential property stamp duties and Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD) that is collected from (i) Singaporeans (ii) permanent residents (iii) foreigners and (iv) entities.
Mr Lawrence Wong: We are unable to provide such a long time series of data. But over the last five years from 2017 to 2021, Singapore Citizens (SC) contributed about 78% of Buyer’s Stamp Duty (BSD) and about 71% of Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD); Permanent Residents (PR) contributed about 1% of BSD and about 3% of ABSD; foreigners contributed about 2% of BSD and about 17% of ABSD; and entities (including housing developers) contributed about 18% of BSD and about 10% of ABSD. [These numbers have been updated. Please refer to \"Annual Breakdown Amounts of Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty Collected from Singaporeans Buying Second, Third and Subsequent Residential Properties Respectively over Last Five Years\", Official Reports, 14 February 2022, Vol 95, Issue No 45, Written Answers for Questions section.]
For purchases where the parties are of mixed citizenship statuses (for example, SC and PR joint purchasers), the transfer is categorised under the profile with the highest ABSD rate (that is, SC-PR joint purchasers are categorised under PR).
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessment of Second-round Inflation Effects in 2022 and Additional Fiscal Policy Related Measures to Offset Impact of Non-demand Driven Inflation Effects","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Finance (a) what is the assessment of second-round inflation effects in 2022; and (b) what additional fiscal policy related measures can be taken to offset the impact of non-demand driven inflation effects caused by rising producer costs or supply-side constraints on Singaporeans.
Mr Lawrence Wong: This has been addressed in MTI and MOF's combined oral reply to Question Nos 4 to 7 on the Order Paper for 11 January 2022. [Please refer to \"Measures to Help Singaporeans Cope with Rising Inflation and Impact of Government's Fiscal Support for Businesses and Households on Inflation\", 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":"Outcome of Cases Lodged with Commissioner for the Maintenance of Parents over Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the total number of cases lodged with the Commissioner for the Maintenance of Parents over the past three years; (b) of which, how many of these cases (i) managed to reach an amicable resolution at the mediation stage (ii) were subsequently referred to the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents or (iii) were referred to seek assistance from other community resources, respectively; and (c) what are the types of assistance rendered.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: From January 2019 to September 2021, there were 317 cases lodged with the Office of the Commissioner for the Maintenance of Parents (CMP). Of these, 289 cases (91%) were resolved at CMP while the remaining 28 cases (9%) were referred to the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents at the point when conciliation was completed. Out of the 317 cases lodged, 48 cases (15%) were referred for financial assistance.
CMP has also referred elderly parents and/or their children for social and emotional support at Family Service Centres (FSCs), counselling and other social support agencies but has not tracked the data before September 2021. From September to December 2021, five cases were referred for counselling services.
22 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) for each year over the past three years, what is the number of access enforcement applications filed in the Family Justice Courts; and (b) of these, how many are (i) male applicants (ii) female applicants and (iii) cases that have reached an amicable resolution at the mediation stage.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The data on the number of applications for child access enforcement is not available. However, the number of applications for committal could be used as a proxy as a significant proportion are likely to comprise child access enforcement.
A committal application is taken out by a party, with the Court’s permission, to seek the court's finding that the breaching party has been in contempt of court for non-compliance with the court order or judgment and should be penalised. From 2018 to 2020, out of a total of about 14,000 summonses received by the Family Justice Courts for the various types of civil applications, the number of applications specifically filed for committal was 297 (see Table 1 below).
The breakdown of the applications by (i) male applicants (ii) female applicants and (iii) cases that have reached an amicable resolution at the mediation stage is not available.
23 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development with regard to recipients of the COVID-19 Recovery Grant (a) whether the Ministry tracks how many of these recipients successfully obtained a new job after the end of the disbursement of the grants; and (b) if so, what is this number to date.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The COVID-19 Recovery Grant (CRG) provides financial assistance to lower- to middle-income resident employees and self-employed persons who, as a result of the economic impact of COVID-19, are:
(a) Involuntarily unemployed due to retrenchment or contract termination;
(b) Placed on involuntary no-pay leave for at least three consecutive months or;
(c) Experiencing monthly salary loss or net trade income loss of at least 50% on average for at least three consecutive months.
The CRG assistance provides temporary support while recipients actively search for new job or training opportunities, which is also a criterion to qualify for the grant.
While MSF does not track if CRG recipients have obtained a new job at the end of their disbursements, we provide successful CRG applicants with relevant website links to job search and training resources to support their efforts. As of 31 December 2021, about one-fifth of all CRG recipients, or about 5,500 recipients, have received a second tranche of assistance.
Returning CRG recipients could be one proxy of who needs further help. We have also worked with NTUC’s Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) and Workforce Singapore (WSG) to contact and offer job search assistance for those who experience prolonged job or income loss and receive a third tranche of CRG. CRG recipients whose assistance has ended can also approach SSOs, WSG or e2i if they need employment assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of ComCare Applications where Applicant’s Declaration of Debt Expenses as Part of Basic Living Expenses are Not Approved","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Social and Family Development what is the number of ComCare applications where the applicant’s declaration of debt expenses as part of their basic living expenses are not approved.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: When assessing ComCare applicants’ needs, Social Service Offices (SSOs) will assess the household’s income and expenses, and provide cash assistance to cover the shortfall in income for the household to meet its basic living expenses. Beyond cash assistance, households may also receive assistance for household and medical bills, employment assistance and other Government or community support.
We do not track the number of ComCare applications with debt expenses declared as part of living expenses. Debt-related expenses are not regarded as part of basic living expenses in the assessment for ComCare cash assistance. Such expenses vary depending on the household’s financial decisions and use of credit, and may contribute towards the building of personal assets, such as housing. It would not be appropriate for the Government to view these debts as part of basic living expenses and fund their repayment via public resources.
Nonetheless, our SSOs will work with relevant agencies to help families manage their debts and arrears where possible. For example, SSO officers may link clients up with Singapore Power services, HDB or Town Councils, to arrange instalment plans for clients to repay their arrears over time. SSOs also refer families which are unable to pay off their unsecured loans and facing other debt issues to Credit Counselling Singapore, which can advise families on debt management. Where relevant, SSOs may refer families to financial literacy programmes, such as those conducted by the Institute of Financial Literacy and other social service agencies, as well.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review Termination of Pregnancy Act to Lower Limit for Termination to 22 Weeks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health whether the Termination of Pregnancy Act can be reviewed such as to lower the current limit for termination from 24 weeks to 22 weeks in light of advancements in neonatology which indicate that babies born at 22 weeks gestation have a chance of viability.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The threshold of 24 weeks was based on scientific evidence of foetal viability outside the womb. In 2018, MOH conducted a review involving local medical experts on the threshold of 24 weeks. The review concluded that current guidelines should continue, as the survival for premature babies born at 24 weeks was about 50% and for premature babies born at 23 weeks was about 20%. The babies who survived had a very high risk of severe and long-term problems such as neurodevelopmental disabilities.
Updated data for 2019 to 2020 from two local public hospitals showed that out of the 13 premature babies born at 23 weeks, only six survived to discharge. However, all six who survived also suffered from severe problems such as severe chronic lung disease, brain haemorrhage and retinopathy of prematurity. These neonatal conditions often lead to disabilities, poor quality of life requiring life-long medical treatment and a shortened life expectancy. MOH will continue to monitor these indices and take into account local expert advice and experience.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regulation of Psychologists under Allied Health Professions Act","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Health (a) whether psychologists are fully regulated under the Allied Health Professions Act; and (b) whether the Allied Health Professions Council has the power to investigate any complaint made against errant psychologists.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Currently, clinical psychologists are not registered under the Allied Health Professions Act. Hence, the Allied Health Professions Council does not have the power to investigate complaints against clinical psychologists.
However, the services provided by psychologists in hospitals will be subject to the clinical governance framework of the hospitals and existing healthcare legislations such as the Private Hospitals and Medical Clinics Act. Our local degree programmes in psychology also ensure the supply of properly qualified psychologists.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Outcome of COVID-19 Vaccination Trials for Children under 12","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Health (a) what was the outcome of the COVID-19 vaccination trials for children under 12; (b) what percentage of these children developed side effects; and (c) whether particular groups of these children are more susceptible to the side effects.
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. [Please refer to \"Assessment of Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines on Younger Children and Singapore's Decision to Extend Vaccination to Younger Children\", Official Report, 10 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue 44, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Regulate New Frontiers of Technologies Such as Metaverse and Non-fungible Tokens","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) how prevalent are new frontiers of technology such as Metaverse and non-fungible tokens in real-life applications in Singapore; (b) whether the Government has plans to regulate such technologies; and (c) how can regulations be administered considering the borderless nature of virtual reality.
Mrs Josephine Teo: New technologies such as the Metaverse and Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) are at a nascent stage of development, especially in terms of their translation to real or physical world applications. Alongside related technologies such as augmented and virtual reality, blockchain and decentralised financing, the Metaverse and NFTs present potential for people and businesses to extend their activities and asset ownership into the virtual world.
As these technologies are still at relatively early stages of application, it remains to be seen how they will be structured and organised. The Government is closely studying their characteristics and attendant implications and risks. For example, the immersive, interactive, decentralised or anonymity elements of these technologies have the potential to be harnessed to either strengthen or pose risks to online safety, consumer protection, privacy and protection of intellectual property.
Similar to the physical world, the Government will seek to balance between promoting economic vitality, preserving social stability and protecting public security in the digital domain. International coordination of regulatory approaches to the Metaverse and associated technologies will also be crucial, given the borderless nature of these technologies.
Beyond Government intervention, industry players and individual users must also play their part by participating responsibly in the Metaverse and exercising caution in dealing with NFTs and digital assets, even as they seek to seize opportunities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Prosecution of Illegal Trade of Endangered Species in Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development of the cases prosecuted for the illegal import and export of endangered species in the past five years, in how many cases were (i) the runners prosecuted and (ii) the syndicate leaders prosecuted.
Mr Desmond Lee: Between 2017 and 2021, 18 cases were prosecuted for the illegal trade of endangered species under the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act. None of the persons prosecuted have been found to be associated with organised crime in Singapore or overseas at this point in time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Outcome of HDB BTO Flat Applications from First-timer Families and First-timer Singles in Last 10 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development in each of the last 10 years (a) what is the overall number of HDB BTO flat applications from first-timer families and first-timer singles; and (b) what is the number of BTO flats allocated to first-timer families and first-timer singles.
Mr Desmond Lee: Table 1 shows the numbers of BTO flat applications from unique first-timer families and first-timer singles, and the number of these applicants who had been invited to book a flat from 2011 to 2020.
The ratio of BTO flat applications to flat booking invitations for first-timer families has increased in recent years due to strong demand for public housing. There are various reasons for this, such as an increase in family formation rates and social trends toward more nuclear families over three-generation families.
To meet the strong housing demand, we will be increasing the BTO supply to up to 23,000 each year in 2022 and 2023, and are prepared to launch up to 100,000 flats in total from 2021 to 2025, subject to prevailing demand.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Inspections Conducted on Dog Farms and Pet Shops to Ensure Compliance with Licensing Conditions and Efforts to Prevent Unlicensed Backyard Breeding and Sale","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) since 2019, how many inspections have been conducted on dog farms and pet shops to ensure compliance with licensing conditions; (b) of these inspections, what is the number and average amount of penalties issued for non-compliance with licensing conditions; (c) what efforts have been undertaken to prevent unlicensed backyard breeding and sale in Singapore; and (d) whether there are plans to revise the penalties for mistreatment of animals.
Mr Desmond Lee: NParks conducts regular inspections on dog farms and pet shops to ensure compliance with licensing conditions. From 2019 to 2021, NParks conducted around 2,000 inspections on these entities and took enforcement action on 110 cases of non-compliance with licensing conditions. Actions taken included issuing warning letters, composition notices and prosecution in court for serious cases.
To prevent unlicensed backyard breeding and sale of animals in Singapore, NParks carries out investigations and takes enforcement action against illegal home breeding activities. Investigation efforts include conducting surveillance, interviewing eyewitnesses and checking CCTV footage, where offences are suspected. In October 2021, NParks also announced tightened licensing conditions for pet boarders and breeders to raise industry standards and improve the health and welfare of animals.
We are also reviewing the penalties under the Animals and Birds Act, to ensure that they remain effective in deterring acts of animal cruelty and abuse. The review will take into account feedback from consultations with the relevant stakeholders and the public. NParks will continue to work closely with stakeholders to safeguard animal health and welfare in Singapore, and to raise public awareness on responsible pet ownership and animal care.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Inclusion of Overlay Waterproofing Membrane System as an Offering under Goodwill Repair Assistance Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for National Development with regard to the repair of ceiling leaks in HDB flats (a) whether there is any update on the inclusion of overlay waterproofing membrane system as an offering under the Goodwill Repair Assistance (GRA) Scheme; and (b) whether the Ministry is considering the inclusion of chemical infusion as an offering under the GRA Scheme.
Mr Desmond Lee: Ceiling leaks that occur in HDB flats are generally a result of wear and tear over time. In such cases, the responsibility for repairs is shared jointly between the upper- and lower-floor flat owners. Both upper- and lower-floor flat owners should jointly investigate and carry out the necessary repairs. In most cases, ceiling leaks can be amicably resolved when flat owners exercise mutual understanding and cooperate with one another for investigation and repairs.
In cases where the leak is caused by wear and tear, HDB may offer assistance to residents via the Goodwill Repair Assistance (GRA) scheme, where HDB co-pays 50% of the repair cost, with the remaining 50% co-shared equally between the upper and lower-floor flat owners.
HDB has been exploring new technologies to improve current repair methods for toilet ceiling leaks and has identified two new repair methods – nanotechnology waterproofing system and overlaying waterproofing membrane system. These technologies provide alternative repair options for residents who do not wish to hack their toilet tiles or who prefer to keep their existing finishes in their toilets.
The nanotechnology waterproofing system is similar to chemical infusion, where the repair method involves an application of chemical solutions onto existing tiles to prevent the penetration of water. Such repair works are currently offered under the GRA scheme.
HDB is assessing the effectiveness of the overlaying waterproofing membrane system in resolving ceiling leaks and whether it will be offered under the GRA scheme, the assessment is expected to be completed by year end.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Provide Guidelines for Singapore Donors Who Wish to Donate to Charities Based Overseas","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether the Ministry can provide guidelines, including a list of the relevant authorities or regulators of charities in overseas jurisdictions, for donors in Singapore who wish to donate to charities based overseas.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: We are encouraged to see many Singaporeans step forward to help others in need, be it locally or overseas. This is a reflection of our caring and gracious society, and the global outlook of our citizens.
While Singaporeans are generous in responding to appeals for donations, including appeals by charities based overseas, we urge members of the public to remain vigilant and be discerning. Charitable fundraising activities carried out by foreign charities for charitable causes outside of Singapore are not regulated by the Commissioner of Charities as we do not have extra-territorial jurisdiction.
The anonymity of the Internet makes it difficult for potential donors to verify the authenticity of the fundraiser or ensure that funds are received by the intended beneficiary.
If donors wish to support foreign charitable causes, donors may respond to appeals organised by registered charities in Singapore or entities that have obtained a fundraising for foreign charitable purposes (FRFCP) permit from the Commissioner. This will provide donors with assurance that the donations will be used for the intended purposes as required under the Charities (Fund-Raising Appeals for Local and Foreign Charitable Purposes) Regulations 2012. Donors can check if an appeal has been granted a permit by using the Charity Portal’s Fund-raising Permit search function at www.charities.gov.sg.
If a donor wishes to give to a charity based overseas, the donor can verify the legitimacy of the appeal by checking whether the charity in question is registered with the relevant authority in that country. While the Commissioner does not maintain a list of other charity regulators, donors can find this information online. For example, most established charities will indicate on their websites the relevant authorities they are registered with. Donors can also cross check this information by going to the relevant authority’s website. Like in Singapore, most regulators maintain a publicly-accessible register of charities under their purview.
On our part, the Commissioner is committed to developing a well-governed and thriving charity sector and building up a strong and safer giving culture in Singapore. We will continue to step up public education efforts to empower donors to give wisely and safely. Members of the public can find more information on safer giving practices on the Charity Portal (www.charities.gov.sg).
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Study on Prevalence of Concept of Intergenerational Teams in Local Companies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"34 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether any study has been done on the prevalence of the concept of inter-generational teams in local companies; and (b) how will the Ministry encourage work redesign to build inter-generational teams that leverage on age diversity to bring out the skills and capabilities of senior and younger employees.
Dr Tan See Leng: MOM does not have data on the prevalence of inter-generational teams, but as populations age, many studies have shown that it is imperative for businesses to embrace an age-diverse workforce to stay competitive. To support businesses, we are increasing the statutory retirement and re-employment ages to allow senior employees to continue working if they wish. All employers are also expected to adopt fair and merit-based employment practices.
We actively encourage employers to adopt age-friendly practices, including job redesign, to better harness the potential of senior workers. Companies can tap on the Productivity Solutions Grant and Enterprise Development Grant to support job redesign.
Our tripartite partners are also supporting companies’ workforce transformation, such as through NTUC’s Company Training Committees. The Tripartite Standard on Age-friendly Workplace Practices further recognises employers for putting in place good age management practices in areas such as selection and hiring, training and job-redesign.
Such measures have helped our senior workers’ employment rate to remain strong despite the pandemic. We will continue efforts to support companies to harness the skills and experience of a diverse workforce.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Financial Support for Families to Cover Increased Costs of Bringing in Migrant Domestic Workers in Event of Unsuccessful Employment Relationship","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"35 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry will consider having some form of financial support for families to cover the increased costs of bringing in migrant domestic workers in the event of an unsuccessful employment relationship.
Dr Tan See Leng: MOM recognises that employers bear higher upfront costs of bringing in a Migrant Domestic Worker (MDW) during the COVID-19 pandemic due to border control and safety measures. To help alleviate the financial burden on employers, MOM has introduced in September 2021, the initiative to allow employers to share the entry Stay-Home Notice (SHN) and related COVID-19 tests costs with subsequent employers if the change of employer takes place prematurely within the first year of employment.
With the easing of the border control measures, employers are also able to arrange for their MDWs to serve their SHN at self-sourced accommodation or their own residence. About 40% of employers have arranged for their MDWs to serve SHN at their or the employment agent’s residence. This would further lower the costs of hiring an MDW from overseas.
Apart from helping employers manage the hiring costs, MOM has also implemented upstream measures to improve the prospect of successful employment relationships. For example, employers are able to access more information relating to the employment history of MDWs, such as the types and sizes of households the MDW has worked for previously, and the reasons the MDW left their past employers. This allows prospective employers to better assess the suitability of the MDW during the hiring process.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Monthly CPF Payout of Singapore Citizens Currently and in 10 Years' Time","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"36 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Manpower what is the number of Singapore Citizens drawing a monthly CPF payout of (i) below $500 (ii) $500 to under $1,000 (iii) $1,000 to under $1,500 (iv) $1,500 to under $2,000 and (v) $2,000 and above, respectively.
37 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Manpower what is the projected number of Singapore Citizens in 10 years’ time drawing a monthly CPF payout of (i) below $500 (ii) $500 to under $1,000 (iii) $1,000 to under $1,500 (iv) $1,500 to under $2,000 (v) $2,000 to under $3,000 and (vi) $3,000 and above, respectively.
Dr Tan See Leng: The monthly CPF payouts that Singapore Citizens are receiving have been increasing over generations, given income growth, increased labour force participation, and improvements to the CPF system.
Older cohorts also tend to have lower monthly CPF payouts due to more liberal withdrawal rules at age 55. For example, older cohorts who withdrew 50% of their Ordinary and Special Accounts (OSA) savings from age 55 would see their payouts reduce by around half. About 25% of those aged 89 and above1 and receiving CPF payouts in 2020 had monthly payouts above $500. This increased across cohorts to about 40% for those aged 67 to 882, and to about 60% for those aged 65 to 66.3
It is difficult to project CPF monthly payouts 10 years from now with meaningful accuracy as members’ CPF balances could change significantly during this period due to multiple reasons, such as contributions from employment income or voluntary top-ups.
Nevertheless, we can get an indication by looking at the CPF balances of the cohort that turned 55 in 2020 and their estimated CPF payouts when they reach age 65.
About 66% of active members would have accumulated sufficient CPF savings by 55 to set aside their cohort's Basic Retirement Sum and can receive at least around $8004 in monthly payouts for life. Of these, about seven in 10 can expect to receive around $1,600 in monthly payouts, as they would have been able to set aside their cohort’s Full Retirement Sum. In addition, about 10% are expected to accrue additional contributions through employment to also receive at least around $800 in monthly payouts by age 65. The other members are likely to have had low total lifetime CPF contributions which means they could be eligible for the Silver Support Scheme5 if they do not have significant means to provide for their retirement.
The Silver Support Scheme, which covers a third of all seniors aged 65 and above, provides quarterly cash supplements of up to $900 in addition to their CPF payouts and other forms of Government support such as the Workfare Income Supplement, GST Voucher Scheme and ComCare. Many seniors also receive additional retirement support from their loved ones, from their private savings and by unlocking the value of their housing assets through the Lease Buyback Scheme or Silver Housing Bonus.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : These members could withdraw all of their OSA savings upon turning age 55.","2 : These members could withdraw 50% of their OSA savings upon turning age 55.","3 : These members could withdraw 30% - 40% of their OSA savings upon turning age 55.","4 : Based on a 55 year old male in 2020 who starts his payout at 65 years old, on the CPF LIFE Standard Plan.","5 : Subject to additional eligibility requirements such as per capita household income and property ownership at the time of assessment."],"footNoteQuestions":["36","37"],"questionNo":"36-37"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Inspection on Food Provisions for Migrant Workers and Proportion of Migrant Workers with Access to Cooking Facilities before and after Onset of COVID-19 Pandemic","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower (a) in the past five years, how many inspections on the food provisions for migrant workers have been conducted annually; and (b) what is the change in the proportion of migrant workers who have access to cooking facilities before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dr Tan See Leng: MOM actively puts out its feelers on the ground to look after the general well-being of migrant workers. These include (a) deploying Forward Assurance and Support Teams (FAST) to dormitories regularly to engage the migrant workers about their overall welfare; (b) working with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that engage with migrant workers; and (c) providing a mobile application “FWMOMCare” for migrant workers to report issues, including access to food, to MOM.
In the last five years, we received occasional feedback about food, such as food quality issues or the food not meeting the workers’ cultural or dietary needs. We take this seriously and would require the employer to address the feedback promptly.
About two-thirds of migrant workers reside in dormitories which have cooking facilities. Almost all of them have resumed cooking, with proper safe management measures in place. For workers who do not have access to cooking facilities, their employers would have made other arrangements for workers to have access to food.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Protection and Recourse Available to Employees Who Experience Workplace Discrimination or Wrongful Termination for Not Being Vaccinated","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Manpower what are the protection and recourse available to employees who experience workplace discrimination or wrongful termination because they have not undergone vaccination for medical reasons or otherwise.
Dr Tan See Leng: The COVID-19 pandemic has cost lives and disrupted livelihoods globally. With the emergence of the Delta and the more transmissible Omicron variants, the risks of COVID-19 transmission are even higher today. Vaccination remains one of the most effective means of reducing transmission of COVID-19 and lowering the risks of severe illnesses or deaths.
There are currently about 48,000 workers in Singapore who have not yet taken any vaccine dose, the large majority of whom are medically eligible. Our Workforce Vaccination Measures (WVM), where only vaccinated workers can return to the workplace, will help to protect unvaccinated individuals and make our workplaces safer, minimising disruptions to businesses.
The tripartite partners urge those who are not vaccinated but eligible to do so to get themselves inoculated as soon as possible. Tripartite partners agree that for unvaccinated employees who cannot return to the workplace, employers have the option of redeploying them to jobs that can be performed from home; placing them on no-pay leave, or terminating their contracts as the last resort. It would not be considered workplace discrimination or wrongful dismissal for employers to exercise these options in accordance with the employment contract.
Employees who are certified to be medically ineligible for vaccination will, however, still be allowed to enter workplaces. If such employees are discriminated against or dismissed on the basis of their vaccination status, they should approach MOM for further assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Senior Minister of State for Health","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statements were in the reply given by the Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon) during Question Time at the Sitting of 11 January 2022: (proc text)]
The Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon): The most effective has been tobacco tax. Several economic studies have reached a consensus that for every 10% increase in real price, there will be about a 3% to 5% decrease in overall tobacco consumption, a 3.5% reduction in young people taking up smoking and a total of about 3% to 5% reduction of new young people taking up smoking as well. But it was last increased in 2018. So, with inflation and income increases, the tax burden gets eroded over time and we will have to continue to work with MOF to review the tobacco tax rate. [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 No 45, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Dr Koh Poh Koon circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to the reply given during the address of Question Nos 10 to 14 at the Sitting of 11 January 2022. My reply should read as follows:
The Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon): The most effective has been tobacco tax. Several economic studies have reached a consensus that for every 10% increase in real price, there will be about a 3% to 5% decrease in overall tobacco consumption, a 3.5% reduction in young people taking up smoking and a total of about 7% reduction of kids taking up smoking as well. But it was last increased in 2018. So, with inflation and income increases, the tax burden gets eroded over time and we will have to continue to work with MOF to review the tobacco tax rate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":4756,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Don Wee","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220111/vernacular-Don Wee MAS 11Jan2022-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Don Wee MAS 11Jan2022-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4757,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220111/vernacular-11 Jan 2022 - Ms Nadia A Samdin - Prisons (A) Bill.pdf","fileName":"11 Jan 2022 - Ms Nadia A Samdin - Prisons (A) Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4758,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Sharael Taha","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220111/vernacular-11 Jan 2022 - Mr Sharael Taha - Prisons (A) Bill.pdf","fileName":"11 Jan 2022 - Mr Sharael Taha - Prisons (A) Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4759,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220111/vernacular-11 Jan 2022 - MOS Faishal Ibrahim - Reply to Prisons (A) Bill.pdf","fileName":"11 Jan 2022 - MOS Faishal Ibrahim - Reply to Prisons (A) Bill.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}