The following question stood in the name of Mr Ganesh Rajaram –
1 To ask the Minister for Home Affairs whether he can provide an update on the arrests and subsequent investigation into the possible misuse of funds at National Football League club Tiong Bahru Football Club.
\tAsst Prof Mahdev Mohan (Nominated Member): Question No 1, please.
\tThe Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have the pleasure of taking the first Parliamentary Question in the Year of the Dog. I would like to wish yourself, Sir, and all Members a very Happy New Year.
Police investigations into Tiong Bahru Football Club and various other entities associated with the case are ongoing. A large volume of records was seized. Such complex financial investigations take time. It is not appropriate for me to comment further on the case so as not to prejudice the investigation.
Mr Speaker: Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan.
\tAsst Prof Mahdev Mohan: On behalf of Mr Ganesh Rajaram, if I may just ask a follow-up supplementary question of the Minister, please. I understand that we cannot ask for specific details of the investigations at this stage; it would be sub judice to do so. Could I just ask, given that the new S-League season is only a month away, can there be any clarification as to where the clubs stand on accountability and where they are going, partly because some of the members who are implicated are currently part of the S-League as a whole, and are they running clubs for the new season as well?
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, Sir, I cannot say more about what will happen to the S-League clubs under investigation, but I can say that where the operations of the clubs are concerned, certainly, in terms of how they run the fruit machines, we have made progress. In fact, in the 2016 Committee of Supply debate, as far back as that, the Ministry of Home Affairs had announced that we were reviewing the regulations of fruit machines. In July 2017, we announced the outcome of the review, with new regulations to ensure that the fruit machines remain only an ancillary part of a club's broader suite of recreation and social offerings.
Since July 2017, these new regulations have been in place and have to be observed by clubs, including the football clubs. They include more stringent criteria for fruit machine permits and a reduction in the availability and accessibility of fruit machine offerings.
Insofar as the operations are concerned, there are more restrictions as well as stronger safeguards to protect individuals from the potential harms of fruit machine gaming. We have gone ahead with those measures even though investigations are still ongoing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints of Wrongful Accusation Leading to Investigation of Innocent Parties","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"2 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in the past 10 years, how many complaints have been received from complainants that they have been wrongly arrested/accused based on the information given by informants after investigations; (b) what actions have been taken against those who have made wrong or willful accusations resulting in the arrest of innocent parties and causing embarrassment to them; and (c) whether the Police will allow the complainants to take civil and defamation suits against those who have willfully or intentionally accused wrong parties that resulted in abuse of Police resources.
\tThe Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, when a Police report is made accusing a person of a crime, it is the Police's responsibility to conduct a thorough investigation and establish the facts. The Police will then take further actions based on the findings. This includes placing a person under arrest. The Police do not make arrests based simply on allegations by a complainant.
Deliberately giving wrong or false information to mislead the Police is an offence under section 182 of the Penal Code. A person who is convicted of such an offence can be jailed for up to a year, fined up to $5,000, or both.
In the past five years, there were, on average, about 200 cases each year of persons providing false information to public servants, including the Police. The action taken against such persons depends on the facts of each case and whether it appears that there was deliberate intention. In cases where the false report resulted in a significant waste of public resources, offenders may be prosecuted in Court.
The wrongfully accused party may also take up civil suits against those who have willfully or wrongfully provided false information against them.
Mr Speaker: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
\tMr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, I came across the case of a resident. It could be due to misunderstanding. The Police could not release the identity of the person who lodged the Police report. The accused was wrongfully arrested, in that sense. So, he feels that injustice had been done to him. So, I wish to ask the Minister, under such circumstances when the Police could not reveal the identity of the complainant, what actions can be taken by the Police to assure the accused that action had been taken against the one who had wrongfully lodged the complaint?
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Speaker, Sir, I would like to assure the Member that if and when the Police do decide to make an arrest, it must have grounds to believe that the person is not wrongly accused. If the Police's investigation leads them to the conclusion that there is nothing untoward about the person's conduct that would warrant an arrest, then they would not go ahead with an arrest.
I do not know the specifics of the case that the Member has brought up. But I want to give the assurance that the Police only go ahead with an arrest if they have reason to believe that the person has committed an offence that is arrestable. If upon further investigation, they draw a different conclusion, that is a separate matter from them having to make the arrest in the first place. But to make an arrest in the first place, the Police must have reason to believe that an arrestable offence has been committed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Invitation of Members of Parliament to School Events","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"3 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Education (Schools) whether there are any Ministry rules, directives or operating principles that prohibit primary or secondary schools from inviting Members of Parliament (MPs) from any party, or Nominated MPs, as speakers at events.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Education (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, our schools are places of learning that cannot be used as platforms for partisan politics. Schools do not invite or accede to requests by any Member of Parliament (MP) or political party to speak at school events.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
\tMr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, just one supplementary question to the Senior Minister of State. Is it the case that all MPs cannot speak at schools and that it includes officeholders, Ministers and so on and so forth?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Schools are to be kept free of partisan politics, so people should not be speaking in their capacity as a member of a political party attending a school for an event.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
\tMr Leon Perera: I would take it that Ministers and officeholders of the Government can speak at schools and I believe that is the case. Would the Senior Minister of State not acknowledge that if Ministers and officeholders of the Government can enter schools and speak and personally engage with students, but members of other parties represented in Parliament or Nominated MPs are not allowed to speak and directly engage with students in the same way, would that not have a detrimental effect in two regards: one, the access that students have to both sides of the political debate so that they can develop into citizens who can exercise some judgement on political questions; and secondly, also in terms of the capacity of the students to develop their critical faculty and to see both sides of a question? Would not that one-sidedness be detrimental in that regard?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Perera for providing some clarity over and above his initial Parliamentary Question, that what he is hoping for is for MPs to attend and speak at school events in their political capacity. This is not appropriate. Schools are to be kept free of partisan politics.
The framing that the Member made in the supplementary question suggests that, actually, the intention is for him or whoever he is speaking on behalf of, his party, to attend and represent political views. The words he used were \"political debate\". This is not the intention of what we do in schools.
If the Member would like to make a case as to why there should be partisan politics in schools, then I think that is the case that he should make. We take the view that partisan politics should be kept out of schools.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Long-term Monitoring of Children and Youths who Have Experienced Sudden Death of Peers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Education (Schools) whether there are long-term follow-up measures in schools to monitor the emotional and mental state of children and youths who have experienced sudden death of their peers.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, Sir, when a death occurs, school teachers and school counsellors will identify and attend to students who are affected immediately. Schools also work closely with the parents of the affected students and share with them how they can provide emotional support for their children.
Teachers continue to monitor the well-being of the students and look out for signs of distress. The students are taught coping strategies and encouraged to seek help. Peers are also reminded to look out for and support one another. If teachers or parents find that the students require further support, they will refer the students to the school counsellor. All school counsellors are equipped with the knowledge and skills to help students cope with grief and loss.
If the students continue to show signs of distress or have difficulty coping, they will be referred for follow-up with medical professionals.
Mr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
\tMs Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. I have one supplementary question. May I know how much information or the sudden death situation is shared with the teachers? I ask this because unless the teachers have sufficient information, they will be less equipped to support our children, our youths in overcoming the trauma.
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Mr Speaker, I want to thank the Member Ms Joan Perera for her supplementary question. When the sudden death of a student occurs, the principal will ascertain the facts of the incident before breaking the news to the staff as soon as possible. I would like to assure Ms Joan Pereira that the teachers will be provided with key information of the case and will be briefed.
An example of the steps that schools have already taken would be reaching out to the bereaved family. A second example is what are the additional steps that the school will take. For example, how do they intend to break the news to the affected students, making arrangements to assist students, staff and teachers to attend the wake. Another thing that the teachers will be supported in terms of information is that schools will advise the teachers to direct any queries from the parents or the members of the public to the principal or designated staff. Teachers will also be prepped for possible reactions and they will be advised on how they can better support students.
It may be likely that the principal and staff may not have all the relevant information at the first meeting. But I want to assure Ms Joan Pereira that information will be updated and shared as and when available. This is important to ensure that the principal, staff and teachers in school will have the information at hand to counter or even dispel any rumours or misinformation. The teachers can also use this information to look out for students, watch out for affected students, and refer students who need additional support for help.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing Public Awareness of Special Needs Children and Needs of Their Parents and Caregivers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what measures are ongoing to enhance public awareness of special needs children and the needs of the parents and caregivers of special needs children; and (b) how can the Ministry encourage employers and the broader community to facilitate better workplace support, such as flexible working arrangements, for parents of children with special needs.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Speaker, there are several public education efforts underway to create greater awareness of the aspirations and needs of persons with disabilities, including special needs children and their caregivers.
One such effort is the National Council of Social Service's (NCSS') \"See the True Me\" campaign, a five-year public education initiative that started in 2016 to promote the inclusion of persons with disabilities in Singapore. The campaign aims to create greater awareness and improve understanding of persons with disabilities, including children with special needs. Over the last two years, NCSS has also held campaigns promoting inclusiveness across various platforms which reached over three million people in Singapore and engaged about 95,000 members of the public.
Building an inclusive society and raising the public's awareness and understanding of persons with disabilities and their caregivers are a continuous work in progress. This is why the third Enabling Masterplan includes efforts that start with the young, so that we can nurture future generations of citizens who care for others. These efforts would need to extend to our built environment as well. For example, the building of inclusive playgrounds at our public parks has enabled children with special needs to play with other children and also serve as a platform to enhance awareness of children with disabilities.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) works closely with other Government agencies, such as the Ministry of Manpower, and the tripartite partners to encourage employers and the broad community to support parents in the workplace. When employers and co-workers are supportive and understanding of parents' caregiving needs, this not only makes it easier for these parents to care for their children, including those with special needs, but also benefits employers by helping them attract and retain talent. Family-friendly practices can bring great benefit, including raising staff morale, productivity and loyalty.
Employers can tap on various resources available to implement flexible work arrangements (FWAs). The Work-Life Grant provides employers with funding support to sustain FWAs and defray the costs of implementing these measures at the workplace. In addition, the tripartite partners have also jointly developed a Tripartite Standard on FWAs to help jobseekers and employees identify progressive employers with strong support for FWAs.
It is said that it takes a whole village to raise a child. In the same vein, we need the support and partnership of the people, private and public sectors to build a more inclusive society.
Mr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his answer. I just wanted to raise one supplementary question. In my home visits in Clementi, I have met mothers with special needs children who sometimes felt unsupported by employers. I was wondering whether MSF has plans to engage more directly with employers, including with the human resource (HR) teams, and employees in some workplaces to further increase awareness and understanding of special needs children and the challenges that parents of special needs children face.
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Yes, indeed, as Members can see from the answer, we have been reaching out to all Singaporeans. As I have said, it takes the support and partnership of the public, private and people sectors to make our society more inclusive. With FWAs, we also want to reach out to more to see how we can build not only about having legislation but it is about the heart and mind of our people, including employers, when we want to see and build a community that cares for one another. I want to thank the Member for that suggestion.
Mr Speaker: Ms Denise Phua.
\tMs Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Speaker, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his constant support for this community. I would like to ask, besides the campaigns which are usually more costly, can the Ministry promote public awareness of the disability and special needs sector with a bit more sustainable effort on a daily basis. For example, putting up more information using Smart Nation strategies at the public places of interest and also at places, such as Mass Rapid Transit train stations, for example? I see that in quite a number of countries which are more progressive in this. That is one.
The second is also if MSF would consider using good establishments or proven organisations, such as the Pioneer Generation Office (PGO), to include younger people with disabilities in their efforts so that, as they reach out to the elderly, some of whom are disabled, they are also able to reach out to the younger ones who may be disabled or need some support by their family members.
So, just two efforts: one, more public awareness at more public places; second, using proven establishments to support these public awareness efforts.
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the suggestions and we will consider them. I would like to share, as I have said earlier, we have gone through the \"See the True Me\" campaign. If Members have the time, please take a look at the YouTube videos. It is not only something that we want to relate to people, but I am very heartened to see the number of views that we have recorded since we launched the different videos, and the support that we get from the community. We will continue to do this and we will also look at areas where we can put posters and messages, as suggested by the Member, to see how we can reach out to more people. So, it is important for us to work together.
Secondly, about using established modes of engagement, I am very sure someone who visits a home, including the PGO officers, when he or she sees someone who needs help because of disability, be it children or seniors, that it will be a stimulant for us to look at it. For example, in my area, there has been more than one occasion where my PGO officers shared with me and we have gone down to see how we can help the families better.
So, we will do all we can to make Singapore more inclusive. Nevertheless, I am very heartened that we have Members in this House who care and continue to work with us to make Singapore a more inclusive society.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria to Determine Childcare and Preschool Subsidies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what are the criteria used to determine childcare and preschool subsidies; and (b) when were these criteria last reviewed.
\tThe Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, Sir, providing affordable and quality preschool services for parents is a key priority for the Government. In reviewing the affordability of preschools for families, we take into account fee levels in the preschool sector; household needs and incomes; as well as various Government schemes, apart from direct subsidies, which contribute to the affordability of preschools.
To defray the cost of childcare for families, the Government provides a universal Basic Subsidy of $150 per month, or $300 per month for working mothers. These are available for all Singapore Citizen children.
In 2013, the Government reviewed childcare subsidies to better support low- to middle-income families. An Additional Subsidy was introduced to support working mothers whose monthly household income is $7,500 and below, or whose per capita income is $1,875 and below. Lower-income families and larger families receive more subsidy. Together with the Basic Subsidy, a low-income family can pay as little as a few dollars a month for preschool.
In 2015, we also enhanced the Kindergarten Fee Assistance Scheme (KiFAS) to benefit more families whose children are enrolled in kindergartens run by the Anchor Operators (AOPs) or by the Ministry of Education (MOE). Kindergartens offer shorter focused education programmes and are generally more affordable, with a median fee of $170 today. Families with monthly household income of $6,000 and below, or per capita income of $1,500 and below, can benefit from KiFAS.
Apart from these subsidies, the Government provides support to defray the costs of child-raising. These include the Baby Bonus Cash Gift of $8,000 to $10,000 per child, and the Child Development Account (CDA) to which the Government contributes up to $6,000 to $18,000 per child, depending on the child’s birth order and co-savings by parents. Parents can tap on these measures to help pay for part of the needs of their children, including healthcare and preschool.
In addition, we will continue to make good quality preschool affordable through MOE Kindergartens, as well as preschools under the AOP and Partner Operator (POP) schemes. Fees that preschools under the AOP and POP schemes can charge are subject to fee caps, to remain affordable. For example, the fees at AOPs are capped at $720 for full-day childcare and $160 for kindergartens, before Goods and Services Tax. A family with a monthly household income of $2,500 or less with a child enrolled in an AOP centre can pay as little as $3 for full-day childcare and $1 for kindergarten services per month, after subsidies. These Government-run and supported preschools now make up almost half of the market, from just one-third of the market five years ago, and have helped to stabilise preschool fees. These operators are projected to make up two-thirds of the market by 2023.
Through these series of measures, we seek to keep preschool services affordable, especially to middle- and lower-income households. We will continue to review our policies to ensure that quality preschool remains accessible and affordable for families.
Mr Speaker: Mr Darryl David.
\tMr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. Indeed, it is heartening to see that the Government has been making progress in the area of supporting parents from different socioeconomic status in the course of their journey as parents. I have two supplementary questions, Mr Speaker.
First of all, could the Minister shed some light, in light of perhaps changing circumstances and the rising cost of living, on when the next review of subsidies would be due?
My second question is to perhaps assess the support that is given to non-working mothers or mothers who are working part-time. I do understand the logic that when the parents are working full-time that, therefore, they would need the support of childcare. But in some of my visits and interactions with the residents, the feedback I have received is that there could be many reasons why a parent chooses to work part-time or is unable to work, and it does not necessarily mean that they require any less support with regard to quality childcare and quality early childhood education.
I hope the Minister could shed some light on these two areas.
\tMr Desmond Lee: Mr Speaker, Sir, on the first question, we continue to review not just the adequacy of the basic and additional subsidies, but we continue to review the whole suite of measures. As I have articulated earlier, there are both the direct subsidies to the child but also the indirect measures, such as through the Baby Bonus and CDA policies which were only recently amended, a couple of years ago, as well as the subsidies to operators to help them keep fees low and affordable for Singaporean children.
On the Member's second point, the purpose of tiering the basic subsidies and additional subsidies in the way that we have articulated earlier is to provide support to mothers who work and, therefore, need full-day childcare. For those who do not work or who work part-time, there is the possibility of putting their children in half-day kindergarten services.
Having said that, the Member is quite right that there are a variety of reasons that may prevent a mother from going to work full-time and, hence, benefiting directly from these subsidies. The Early Childhood Development Agency will look at all appeals on a case-by-case basis and we have given exemptions to those who can provide reasons to the childcare centre and with supporting documents, such as retrenchments, and through health reasons or their other caregiving obligations. So, certainly, we want to support not just working mothers but mothers who may, for various circumstances and exigencies, be unable to do so and, therefore, need support for childcare.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Singapore Bank Loans to Coal Power Projects on Government's Carbon Emission Commitments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan asked the Prime Minister in light of reports that Singapore banks have provided loans to multiple coal power projects totalling more than US$2 billion over the last five years (a) whether these investments have any impact on the Government's proposed measures to reduce carbon emissions, including that of a carbon tax; and (b) whether the banks will be required or encouraged to make public pledges to restrict lending to such projects.
\tThe Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) and Second Minister for Defence (Mr Ong Ye Kung) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Speaker, recent media reports have noted local banks’ financing of coal power projects in the region and asked if this is at odds with the global push to shift to cleaner sources of energy.
The local banks' financing of coal power projects has to be understood, firstly, in the context of rapidly growing energy needs in the region. These increased needs are driven by growing populations, progress in widening people's access to electricity and economic growth.
What this means is that even with countries making full efforts to meet their commitments under the Paris accord, the region's consumption of all fuels will grow. The International Energy Agency (IEA), hence, projects a significant increase in consumption of coal, even as the region increases its use of renewables and lower carbon energies. It also projects that future coal production would be based on newer technologies that reduce coal's carbon emissions.
Secondly, the local banks have been taking steps to make financing practices more environmentally responsible. They have implemented the guidelines on responsible financing issued in 2015 by the Association of Banks in Singapore. They have also identified activities that pose a higher risk to the environment, including coal-powered plants that emit higher carbon emissions, and are taking measures to address the sustainability risks specific to these activities. This includes reviewing their clients' sustainability profiles and working with them to improve their sustainability practices. The local banks are expected to complete the review of their entire customer portfolios by the end of this year.
Further, since 2016, the banks have been disclosing their policies and approaches towards responsible financing in their annual reports and websites. They are on track to fully implement the Singapore Exchange (SGX) sustainability reporting requirements this year.
For example, the Development Bank of Singapore (DBS) has recently pledged that it will stop financing new greenfield coal-fired power generation projects in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and developed markets. The bank will also cease all project financing of greenfield thermal coal mines.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has also included banks' sustainability practices in its supervisory assessments of banks. This will strengthen our banks’ efforts to integrate sustainability considerations into their core business and risk management processes.
Overall, the measures which local banks are putting in place should contribute to sustainable practices amongst their clients, supporting our efforts in Singapore as well as among our neighbours to meet our targets under the Paris Agreement.
Mr Speaker: Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan.
\tAsst Prof Mahdev Mohan (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response. I would like to ask a couple of supplementary questions.
In relation to the DBS climate policy commitment that the Minister mentioned earlier, I do note that while the commitment is for developed countries, DBS has not ruled out financing for new coal-fired power projects in developing countries like Vietnam and Indonesia. These projects would be perhaps the biggest culprits in the region for coal-fired power projects, as well as all the ill-effects that result. So, are there any commitments that MAS will be making or could make to encourage big Singapore banks to look at new methods and perhaps even consider signing up to the Equator Principles on managing Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) risk?
I understand that MAS has undertaken certain commitments to assess banks' sustainability practices. The banks have undertaken commitments to integrate sustainability considerations. So, why not also consider the Equator Principles?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: The issue is that in developed countries, they have developed power generation to a certain level, and people in rural areas or in the city have access to electricity. In developing countries and emerging economies where many rural areas still do not have access to electricity, coal becomes an option, especially if it is a coal producing country.
So, in that context, we will see plantings next year. If I remember correctly, the IEA report that I read, half the plantings last year are new power generation, half are in renewables, but there are still many others based on fossil fuels. So, there are still such projects, and a lot of the renewables are actually driven by China now. And in developed and developing countries, there are still many power generation projects and greenfield projects that are based on fossil fuels.
As a result, we do see banks pledging to move away from financing coal-powered plants, because the opportunities are in renewables. But at the same time, they also recognise that there are ESG risks in regard to coal power generation plants. So, it is this context that our banks are operating in. Most of their projects are loans, non-bank loans, and as part of syndication loans, where global banks are also participating.
There are many participants in the region where there is still a demand for coal power to help rural communities access electricity. Having said that, I think the situation is evolving. On one hand, as I mentioned earlier in my reply, more steps are being taken for our banks, as well as MAS, to recognise the ESG risks in all these projects.
On the other hand, there are also other steps we are taking to help the industry enhance the entire green finance ecosystem in Singapore. Some of these include, first, pushing for deeper ESG integration in our finance institutions (FIs); second, expanding the breadth and depth of green finance products, foster the growth of even the green asset class in Singapore and in the region; and third, deepening research and development and ESG products, building sustainability skills and capabilities. So, it is really two sides – recognising the risks but, at the same time, building up the ecosystem for green financing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Call for Thorough Investigation of Keppel Offshore and Marine's Business Affairs for Contracts in Countries Other Than Brazil","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Law whether the CPIB will conduct a thorough investigation of the business affairs of Keppel Offshore and Marine Ltd (KOM) to ascertain whether, besides the arrangements KOM had entered into with Zwi Skornicki for the provision of bribes to secure contracts in Brazil, KOM had also, during the same period, entered into any arrangements with any company or agent to provide bribes to secure its other contracts elsewhere in the world.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Law (Ms Indranee Rajah) (for the Minister for Law): Mr Speaker, the Government does not, as a general rule, comment on the existence or non-existence of investigations by our investigative agencies, including the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau. This is to ensure that the investigative work of these agencies is not jeopardised and that affected individuals or entities are not prejudiced if, at the end of investigations, no offence is disclosed. If there is good reason to do so, or a basis for investigation, the authorities will investigate.
I should add that Keppel Corporation is a public-listed company and is accountable to its shareholders. The boards and management of Keppel Corporation and its subsidiaries, including Keppel Offshore and Marine Ltd (KOM), are responsible for the proper conduct of their businesses. It is incumbent upon them to run their businesses honestly and competently. This would include detecting, reporting and preventing corrupt behaviour. Under the United States' Deferred Prosecution Agreement, KOM is also under a legal obligation to implement rigorous compliance and internal controls to \"prevent and detect\" corrupt practices.
Keppel's public statements, since the Brazilian case has come to light, indicate that they understand the seriousness of the matter. The current management has asserted zero tolerance for corruption, the need to win back the trust of stakeholders and their \"determination to hold (themselves) to the highest ethical standards everywhere (they) operate\". The shareholders of Keppel Corporation, including Temasek, expect these statements to be fully observed and will hold them to account, should they fail to do so.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Broadcast Rights for 2020 Tokyo Olympics","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Mr Ganesh Rajaram –
9 To ask the Minister for Communications and Information (a) whether he can provide an update on the securing of broadcast rights for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics; (b) whether the rights have been secured and, if not, why, given that the event is just over two years away; and (c) whether there is a danger of Singaporeans missing out on watching the Games.
\tMr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member): Question No 9.
\tThe Minister for Communications and Information (Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim): Mr Speaker, negotiations to secure \"live\" broadcasting rights for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics are still ongoing. The negotiations are best left to the broadcasters and rights owners to undertake and conclude, as it would be unwise to take the position that we should have \"live\" telecasts regardless of the cost and for the Government to underwrite any amount demanded by rights owners, particularly when the rights are still being negotiated.
Sir, over the years, broadcasting rights fees have been growing rapidly. For instance, for the 2016 Rio Olympics broadcasting rights, Dentsu originally wanted to charge three times what it cost to broadcast the 2012 London Olympics \"live\". This shows how lucrative the business of broadcasting rights has become. At the same time, it is becoming increasingly difficult for broadcasters to recoup the escalating costs of broadcasting rights, because there are so many cheaper options to watch such sporting events \"live\".
If the rights owners only seek to maximise their profits, they risk making broadcasts of major games less accessible by driving fans to other media channels or away from the sports entirely. This is in no one’s interest in the long term.
Mr Speaker: Mr Kok Heng Leun.
\tMr Kok Heng Leun: I thank the Minister for the reply. On behalf of Mr Ganesh, I have a supplementary question.
In light of the last Olympics when we had Joseph Schooling doing Singapore proud in 30 seconds, would the broadcaster consider together working with the Government to think about pooling resources to secure the rights? As the Minister rightly said, the cost of securing the rights has gone up. This has been done in Malaysia and in other countries. Is there any progress on that?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand the sentiments expressed by the Member, and it is important for us to recognise that these are commercial arrangements. It is best that we leave it to the rights owners and the broadcasters to make the negotiations. The Government will continue to monitor the situation. The most important thing is that we do not think it is right for us to intervene. Let the key players and the market decide what is the best course of action for them.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Record of Incidents on MRT and LRT Trains Such As Sudden Acceleration and Closing of Doors without Warning","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Transport (a) for each year over the past five years, how many instances have occurred of MRT or LRT trains (i) undergoing irregular and sudden acceleration and (ii) train doors closing without warning; and (b) whether there is any mechanism for collating data on such incidents if they are not reported by commuters.
\tThe Second Minister for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng) (for the Minister for Transport): Mr Speaker, over the past five years, the majority of cases of irregular and sudden acceleration and train doors closing without warning, occurred on the North-South and East-West Lines (NSEWLs), which are our oldest lines. Commuters reported an average of 20 cases of irregular and sudden acceleration per year on Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) trains and two cases per year on Light Rail Transit (LRT) trains. The abrupt changes in speed stemmed from temporary speed restrictions due to ongoing track maintenance and renewal works.
Over the same period, commuters reported an average of 125 cases of train doors closing without warning per year for MRT trains, and less than one case per year for LRT trains. The NSEWLs are the only lines where the train doors are closed manually by the train captain on board. This introduces an element of human error. The new Communications-Based Train Control signalling system will address this by automating the announcement and closing of train doors.
Reports by commuters are the primary means by which data on such occurrences is collated. Every report is thoroughly investigated.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
\tMr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. Just one supplementary question: will the Ministry consider publishing such data at regular intervals in future as a key performance indicator of the performance of the system in this regard?
\tMr Ng Chee Meng: The Ministry of Transport publishes different sets of data. In time, we will consider publishing such data as well. We are upgrading our train systems, as the Member well knows. The signalling project will bring better reliability to our train systems. We are also renewing the old trains on the NSEWL to the tune of about 66 trains in the coming years. This will up the reliability and the commuter experiences.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Work Done as a Result of Shutting of Train Lines for Scheduled Maintenance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether he can provide an update on the shutting down of train lines for scheduled maintenance; (b) how much additional work has been done during this period; and (c) how many man hours of effort have been achieved during this time.
\tThe Second Minister for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng) (for the Minister for Transport): Mr Speaker, the extended engineering hours have been useful in accelerating the completion of the East-West Line re-signalling project, intensifying maintenance and bringing forward the noise barrier upgrades.
During December 2017 and January 2018, extended engineering hours have provided the equivalent of 40 nights of additional time for the testing and installation of the East-West Line's new signalling system. This would otherwise have taken another one and a half months to achieve. Barring any unforeseen developments, we are on track to complete the re-signalling programme by this June.
Singapore Mass Rapid Transit was also able to step up its maintenance regime, achieving two and a half times the usual volume of maintenance work each weekend along the closed stretches. We have also taken the opportunity to advance noise barrier installation works at roughly one and a half times the usual pace, with the team completing the equivalent of three to four nights of work each weekend.
We are studying how similar additional engineering hours could also help us speed up the renewal of other operating assets on the North-South and East-West Lines, such as the upcoming replacement and upgrading of the power supply system. Meanwhile, we would like to thank commuters for their patience and understanding as we strive to improve our rail reliability.
Mr Speaker: Mr Henry Kwek.
\tMr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Nee Soon): I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. I have been speaking to many Singaporeans, not just in my constituency, about how they feel about the scheduled maintenance. So far, the feedback has been that it is a reasonable tradeoff. Of course, maintenance is difficult, but if it is scheduled over the weekends or on public holidays, it is manageable.
My question is, in view of the excellent progress we have made, would the Ministry continue with this approach or even increase the frequency, so that we can upgrade our system even faster?
\tMr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for his feedback. I would convey it to our workers on the ground for those positive comments.
Yes, we will continue with this regime for the foreseeable future to expedite the upgrading and improvement works. At the same time, we will minimise inconveniences to commuters by early announcements of the scheduling of either early closures of the line or the entire closure of stretches, so that commuters can make alternate transportation planning. Buses and other alternatives would be made available to commuters.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Alignment of New Coal Gasification Plant on Jurong Island with Singapore's Climate Change Commitments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) (a) how will the substantial emissions from the new coal gasification plant on Jurong Island align with our climate change commitments and our declaration of Year of Climate Action; and (b) how does the Government decide on business opportunities versus environmental concerns and international commitments.
\tThe Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) (Mr Lim Hng Kiang): Mr Speaker, Sir, under the Paris Agreement, Singapore has pledged to reduce our emissions intensity by 36% from 2005 levels by 2030, and to stabilise our emissions with the aim of peaking around the same time. A lower emissions intensity means that each dollar of gross domestic product (GDP) will be achieved more efficiently and with a lower impact to the environment.
Under the Jurong Island Version 2.0 initiative, Singapore explored alternative feedstock options to enhance the long-term competitiveness of the energy and chemicals sector, while keeping to our climate change commitments and ensuring environmental concerns were addressed. After extensive evaluation, gasification was assessed to best meet industry's demand for competitive hydrogen and carbon monoxide as feedstock. To minimise the impact on the environment, the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) has worked together with the Economic Development Board and the plant operator to put in place strict regulations and standards on emissions of carbon dioxide and air pollutants, as well as to deploy best-in-class mitigation technologies. The plant's emissions will also be closely monitored to minimise the impact on the environment, and the plant will be subject to the carbon tax that was announced in Budget 2017.
With 2018 designated as the Year of Climate Action, the Government will increase efforts to raise awareness and increase involvement of companies and individuals on the necessity and the benefits of taking action to achieve sustainable growth and move towards a low-carbon future.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): I thank the Minister for the reply. I have two supplementary questions. One is, how will the substantive amount of ash be disposed of, specifically the fly ash, as this is known to be hazardous? Second, which is important, is how do we reconcile the different messages we are sending to the public now? On one hand, we are saying it is a Year of Climate Action to reduce our carbon footprint but, on the other hand, we are opening up this coal gasification plant which will increase our carbon footprint?
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang: In granting the licence to the operator, MEWR has set very strict conditions on the disposal of the ash, in particular, that it will not add to the dumping requirements that we have. The company will meet those regulations.
On reconciling the two, this is a delicate balance that we have to try to achieve. On the one hand, we have a fairly thriving chemicals and energy sector, contributing 1.8% of our GDP, employing more than 25,000 workers, all with very good jobs. We have to maintain the competitiveness of that sector and, for that, we need competitive feedstock – hydrogen and carbon monoxide. We have explored the different ways of introducing that feedstock and gasification appears to be the most sensible approach.
At the same time, we have made very strong commitments on the Paris Agreement and the Singapore Government intends to meet those commitments. So, in balancing the two, we have reached an agreement with the operator on the regulations that they have to meet, both in carbon dioxide emissions as well as in other standards. And they have agreed to deploy best-in-class technologies.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Could I check where would the ash be disposed of? The second question is whether we considered renewable energy instead. Minister Ong Ye Kung has replied to the earlier Parliamentary Question about how that is a growing sector and whether the Ministry of Trade and Industry will consider that instead of this coal gasification plant.
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang: The company has made commitments to recycle the ash, and as for renewable energy, the gasification project is not an energy project, it is not a generation company (genco). It is to produce hydrogen and carbon monoxide or, essentially, carbon. Because as feedstock to the petrochemical sector, you need more C and more H2. And to do that, you need to convert coal into hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Because we are not adding on to refineries in Singapore, we have 1.3 million barrels of refining capacity and that has not changed for many decades, so we need additional feedstock from other sources. Therefore, we have looked towards gasification of coal. I want to assure Members here that, in terms of energy generation, we are still depending on natural gas which is the least pollutive of all and, of course, supplemented by solar energy in a limited way. So, this is not a genco.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore Study on Consumption of Vitamins and Health Supplements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"13 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health with the upward trend in consumption of vitamins and health supplements (a) whether any study had been done to determine if Singaporeans need such products to supplement their diets; (b) whether the Ministry will conduct a campaign to educate the public on the risk and benefit of consuming such products; and (c) over the past five years, how many of such products have been removed from the market arising from routine sample checks.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Lam Pin Min) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, most Singaporeans can meet the Recommended Dietary Allowances for key nutrients, such as dietary fibre, iron, calcium, vitamin A and vitamin C, from their usual dietary intake. Certain groups of people may be at risk of deficiencies, such as pregnant women and those with restricted diets or certain medical conditions, and they can benefit from some dietary supplements.
The best way for most of us to get the nutrients we need is to eat a balanced diet of a variety of foods. This includes plenty of fruits and vegetables, sufficient grains as well as dairy and non-dairy sources of protein, and keeping food and drinks high in fat and sugar to the minimum. Health supplements cannot and should not replace a balanced diet. Supplements should not be used to treat or cure diseases in lieu of appropriate medical intervention.
The Health Promotion Board (HPB) consistently advises the public against self-medicating using health supplements and to always consult a health professional before taking any health supplements. In addition, the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) issues consumer advisories to educate and advise consumers to be more savvy and discerning in their purchase and consumption of health supplements. These are published through media releases, media articles and consumer guides on the HSA and HPB's Health Hub websites.
For products sold locally, HSA administers a post-market surveillance programme to sample and test these products for harmful ingredients, contaminants or adulterants. Over the last five years, more than 900 health supplements were tested. Eight products were found to contain western pharmaceutical drugs or toxic heavy metals and were removed from the market.
Mr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
\tMs Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. I have one supplementary question. Increasingly, we are beginning to see more of such products being sold online. How does the Ministry of Health monitor the online sales of such health supplements?
\tDr Lam Pin Min: Mr Speaker, I would like to thank Ms Joan Pereira for the supplementary question. Currently, health supplements and the dealers are not required to be approved for licence by HSA, and health supplements are allowed to be sold on the Internet but must not contain harmful substances or western pharmaceutical drugs or prohibited substances.
While I understand the concern, it is not possible to police online sales of health supplements completely. Therefore, HSA takes a risk-based approach in monitoring the online sales of health supplements through the following modalities.
Firstly, HSA conducts routine surveillance and monitors online sites based on feedback and complaints. Secondly, HSA also works closely with our international counterparts which include information exchange and sharing of alerts to strengthen the detection of unsafe and poor-quality health supplements sold locally. In addition to that, HSA administers a post-market surveillance programme to monitor the safety of marketed health supplements and to initiate timely product recalls when necessary. Last but not least, the post-market surveillance testing is further complemented by our adverse reaction monitoring programme to pick up early safety sickness, thereby, facilitating timely intervention to protect the public.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Minimum Space Standards for HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development how does HDB determine what qualifies as over-crowding in HDB flats and whether Minimum Space Standards, or similar objective criteria, can be published to improve transparency.
\tThe Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Speaker, as Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats primarily serve to meet the housing needs of flat owners and their family members, there is no limit imposed on the number of family members who can live together in an HDB flat.
However, HDB imposes an occupancy cap on flats which are rented out to unrelated persons. This is to minimise the disamenities caused by overcrowding and to maintain a conducive living environment in our public housing estates.
HDB reviews the occupancy cap from time to time to ensure that it remains relevant. Currently, the cap is four persons for 1- and 2-room flats, six persons for 3-room flats, and nine persons for 4-room and larger flats.
From 1 May 2018, the occupancy cap for 4-room and larger flats will be reduced to six persons, in line with the rule for private residential properties, and these rules are published on HDB InfoWeb. Appropriate action will be taken against the flat owners if the number of tenants exceeds the occupancy cap.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): I thank the Minister for the reply. Will the Minister consider using this maximum number of occupants allowed in a flat that is being rented out as the same criteria to be applied when the single unwed parent or a divorcee is considered whether they can live with their parents or family members as an alternative accommodation?
I am suggesting this as this would make sense if the family wanted to rent out the flat and they are not allowed to because they have met the maximum number of occupant limits and would be considered overcrowded. Then, surely, the same family cannot provide accommodation to their child or siblings who are single, unwed or divorced.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, as I had mentioned earlier, the cap on flats is applied only for flats which are rented out to unrelated parties. There is presently no occupancy cap on families living together in their own HDB flats and that should be the standard we apply similarly, whether or not it is a family or it is a single unwed parent.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: I also asked in the Parliamentary Question about the minimum space standard. Can the Minister clarify why we are not going to publish this minimum space standard? This is what is actually being done in the European Union and Canada already.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, I think we should look at this in context and perspective. Different countries have different standards. Not all countries have a minimum space standard and, even those that do, use these standards as guidelines. These are not necessarily legislated in some of the countries that Mr Louis Ng mentioned.
In Singapore's context, all of us know that space is limited and we have to optimise space to the best of our abilities. What we do for HDB flats is that we publish the size for the different flat typologies – 1-room, 2-room, 3-room, 4-room – all of different flat sizes. The floor space for each of these HDB unit types is made public and families can choose which ones they would like to apply for.
Mr Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
\tEr Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister: in the recent review or reduction of the number of people who can stay in a rented HDB flat, the same criteria were applied to those old jumbo flats which consisted of one 4-room and one 3-room combined, and it can only be leased out to six persons. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Ministry can review this. It is actually two units together. We have residents from Nee Soon Group Representation Constituency requesting for it because we have some old jumbo flats.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the question. In fact, I vaguely recall, and I stand corrected if my memory is wrong, that we had an earlier debate on this under the Planning Act, and it was Er Dr Lee herself. At that time, the HDB occupancy cap was still 9-6-4, but we had moved or we were planning to move it to six for private residential units. And Er Dr Lee had passionately advocated for HDB to align its standards to the Urban Redevelopment Board (URA) standard, which is six, and this is what we have done.
So, Er Dr Lee has now asked for more flexibility for the jumbo flats. We will have to look at whether or not this is feasible. But we have aligned the standards between HDB and URA; and it is a standard of six for the larger flat types in the HDB case presently.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Just one last question. We talk about over-crowding and I cannot see a reason why whether a person is related or not would determine whether the place is over-crowded. If there are nine people staying in there who are related, it would still be over-crowded, even if the nine people were unrelated. So, can the Minister clarify why there is this point about whether they are related or not, in terms of deciding whether it is over-crowded?
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, as I had mentioned earlier, we do not prescribe minimum standards of space for Singaporean families who purchase their own flats. It may be a family with five children, three children, four children, what flat type you wish to choose is entirely up to you. The different flat types are made available. There are generous grants given, and then you decide what flat you choose. That is a policy that has served us well and will remain. The occupancy standard applies for rental and that standard applies really to minimise over-crowdedness and to maintain the residential character of the HDB estate as one meant primarily for families to live and stay in. That is why there is this occupancy cap and it is applied to unrelated persons.
Mr Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
\tEr Dr Lee Bee Wah: Yes, Minister, I support the change to cap the number of people in rented HDB flat because HDB flats are mainly for people to stay in. But what I am requesting for review are those jumbo flats because it consists of one 4-room flat and one 3-room flat. Based on current ruling, 4-room you can lease out to six, 3-room you can lease out to six, so it is 12 in total, actually. But the Ministry of National Development has put it together and caps it at six only.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her clarification. As I have said, we have made this change to align with URA standards and we will continue to study and review if further modifications and enhancements are needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Top SkillsFuture Courses and Their Impact on Employability of Participants","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"15 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) (a) what are the top 10 SkillsFuture courses that Singaporeans have signed up for; (b) what is the percentage of utilisation of SkillsFuture funds for these top 10 courses; (c) what is the profile of the SkillsFuture users who have utilised the funds for these top 10 courses; and (d) which of these courses lead to new or better jobs.
\tThe Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Zainal Sapari asked for the top 10 courses, so here they are in descending order.
1) Use Basic Functions and Applications of a Computer;
2) Basic Computer Course in Chinese;
3) Use Primary Functions and Applications of a Tablet;
4) Private Hire Car Driver’s Vocational Licence;
5) Use Primary Functions and Applications of a Computer;
6) Follow Food and Beverage Safety and Hygiene Policies and Procedures;
7) Tablet Fundamentals;
8) Use Basic Functions and Applications of a Computer;
9) SkillsFuture@PA Chinese Restaurant Cooking (Elementary); and
10) Beginner Workplace Literacy.
Members might have noticed some titles are the same because they are delivered by different training providers. A more meaningful way to look at it is to cluster popular courses into certain sectors and look at the entire cluster. If we look from that perspective, the most popular area of training is still Information and Communications Technology (ICT)-related courses.
Over the two-year period, about 62,000 claims were made by Singaporeans for these top 10 courses. Close to 90% of the participants are Singaporeans aged 40 and above.
However, it is difficult to ascertain if the training led to better jobs or new jobs. To drive those outcomes, we have specific schemes, such as the Professional Conversion Programmes (PCP), Place and Train, and Adapt and Grow where we monitor the progress of each and every trainee. Notwithstanding, one of the key objectives of the SkillsFuture Credit scheme in supporting the SkillsFuture Movement is to empower individuals to take ownership of their skills development, open up their minds to embrace a lifelong learning mindset and embark on the journey. Judging by the take-up and the types of courses most people enrolled in, we believe the scheme has achieved this objective.
Mr Speaker: Mr Zainal Sapari.
\tMr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): I thank the Minister for the clarification. Some courses, such as cooking classes, Korean language classes, are hailed as SkillsFuture classes. What is the approach that we take in order to determine whether any particular course can tap on the SkillsFuture funding?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: I have explained this point quite a few times in Parliament but I think it needs to be further repeated.
One, SkillsFuture Credit is one feature of a much larger scheme, programme and movement called SkillsFuture. On SkillsFuture Credit, we spend around $40 million a year. But the entire movement and all the courses, including Adapt and Grow that we support the Ministry of Manpower on, Place and Train, PCP, they cost us about $700 million per year. So, it is different contexts. For those courses that we spent $700 million on, we curate them carefully. We enrol trainees based on whether they are really pursuing that career, and they will be guided and the results measured.
SkillsFuture Credit, on the other hand, is really to open up the minds of everyone that you have a $500 voucher, so start thinking about how to upgrade and, really, start changing the mindset to one where we all have to be responsible for our own upgrading journey. Therefore, it is a lot more bottom-up. The choices and the courses are many. As of latest count, it is about 20,000 courses to choose from. But we do notice that the most popular courses are still the ICT courses, particularly amongst the older Singaporeans.
As to whether some people pick up flower arrangement or cooking, we do not judge. If we put a $500 voucher in everybody's hand, we trust that people exercise their decision well to take up courses most beneficial to them. After all, what is leisure to me may be a profession to you.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trend for Workplace Injuries and System for Workplace Injury Reporting","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"16 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the number of workplace injuries reported in the past five years; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider adopting a system of workplace injury reporting based on (i) diagnosis of a specified list of common work-related injuries requiring medical treatment and (ii) requirement of treatment in a hospital without any time threshold, such as used in the US (Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970), Australia (Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004) and the UK (Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013).
\tThe Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong) (for the Minister for Manpower): Sir, under the Workplace Safety and Health (Incident Reporting) Regulations, it is mandatory for employers to report work-related accidents where the employee was given more than three days of sick leave or hospitalised for at least 24 hours. In the last five years, an average of about 12,800 such workplace injuries were reported to the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) every year. The number has been stable over this period.
Our reporting criteria are aligned to international practices which focus on reporting injuries that are more serious. In fact, ours is similar to that of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA). This European Union (EU) regulation also requires reporting of any injury that results in more than three days of sick leave. The reporting regimes in other countries also do not require all injuries to be reported. For example, in the United Kingdom (UK), beyond the prescribed list of reportable injuries, such as fractures, amputations, burns or blindness, all other injuries are only reportable if the sick leave is seven days or more. Hence, our reporting regime of three days or more is actually more robust. The UK also requires the injury to be reportable if it results in hospitalisation for more than 24 hours, which is similar to our reporting regime.
Our incident reporting criteria of more than three days' sick leave and hospitalisation for more than 24 hours would already cover the more serious injuries that other jurisdictions deem reportable. Hence, our regime is comparable and equally robust as the other developed countries.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): I thank the Minister of State for the response. I just have two supplementary questions.
How does MOM know whether there is currently under-reporting of workplace injuries? Second, has MOM come across cases where doctors issue less than three days of medical certificate (MC), so that the employer does not need to report the work injury to MOM, and what steps MOM will be taking to address this?
\tMr Sam Tan Chin Siong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for the two supplementary questions.
First, on under-reporting, we have been monitoring the workplace injuries reporting since the scheme was revised in 2014. Our assessment and observation, and also through our contacts with the companies and workers, suggest that there is no evidence of widespread under-reporting. But, of course, we cannot assume that there will not be any under-reporting. But our assessment is that under-reporting is still constituting the minority.
Anyway, under our regime, even if the employers do not report any workplace incidents, the workers themselves can approach and report the injuries or incidents to MOM. For cases that are reported to MOM, we will take a look at the situation and then we will take appropriate actions. In the last one year, there were close to 1,900 workers who report their injuries directly to MOM because they were not so sure whether their employers had made a report. So, within our system, there is already a regime and also a discipline where we can ensure that the workers can report on their injuries even if their employers do not.
As for the Member's second supplementary question, the issue has been addressed in 2014 when we reviewed and revised our incident reporting regime. In 2014, we had decided, and we had changed the regulation, to ensure that even if a doctor gives two days of MC and then have a break in between, and then issues another two days of MC and so on, MOM will still deem all these injuries or MCs as reportable incidents, so long as the accumulative MCs are three days or more.
If any doctors are found to have adopted this practice of issuing two days of MC, then have a break of one day in between, and then issue another one or two days of MC, if we come across such cases, we will investigate. And if it is a practice for the employers to avoid reporting the incidents to MOM, we will refer the doctors to the Singapore Medical Council for follow-up actions.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Can I ask the Minister of State when is the next time this regulation is going to be reviewed? And during that review, whether MOM will consider adopting a system of workplace injury reporting similar to those of the United States (US), UK and Australia?
\tMr Sam Tan Chin Siong: I thank the Member for the further supplementary question. As I mentioned just now, the Workplace Safety and Health Incident Reporting regulation was reviewed in 2014, which is about three years ago. We have been monitoring the implementation of this revised scheme and we have found it to be working quite well so far.
But of course, as a policy matter, policy review is always a work in progress. We will continue to review and monitor the situation. If there is a need to further review it in the future, we will certainly do so. When we conduct the next review, we will certainly take reference from international best practices, including the countries mentioned by the Member, that is, the UK, US, Australia and so on. We will study them, together with other countries' best practices. We will adopt the most relevant, practicable and reasonable ones to be incorporated and further strengthen our reporting regime.
Mr Speaker: Ms Thanaletchimi.
\tMs K Thanaletchimi (Nominated Member): In regard to near-misses, is the Ministry considering mandatory reporting of near-misses of certain specific injuries since they are quite frequently happening at workplaces? And how do we encourage employers to document near-misses or register near-misses to MOM?
\tMr Sam Tan Chin Siong: Sir, I thank the Member for making a very important point here. This is, in fact, one of the priorities of MOM going forward, in ensuring better workplace safety and health.
Right now, we have been focusing on the downstream workplace reporting and so on but, actually, the more important aspect is to move upstream, to encourage workers and employers to report near-misses within the company reporting system. In the last few months, we have been working closely with the Workplace Safety and Health Council to roll out plans to encourage our employers to take a more proactive approach in reporting near-misses in the workplaces. In that respect, we have developed a mobile app called SnapSAFE. Any company can download this app and use it as their internal reporting system, where their workers or any other employees can report near-misses to the management so as to give the management the opportunity to rectify all the potential risks at the workplace to prevent workplace injuries or fatalities from happening. That will be our direction going forward to encourage more proactive interventions upstream to make sure that all the downstream risks could be eliminated.
We have just rolled this out not so long ago. It is premature to talk about whether we want to mandate the companies to adopt near-misses reporting. But certainly, we will consider it if the need arises one day.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Tests on Autonomous Public Buses and Inclusion in Public Transport Mix","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"17 Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry asked the Minister for Transport what is the progress of work on autonomous public bus fleets in Singapore and when can they be expected to be a part of our public transportation mix.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Transport (Dr Lam Pin Min) (for the Minister for Transport): Mr Speaker, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has entered into partnerships with Nanyang Technological University (NTU) and ST Kinetics (STK) to develop autonomous buses. These autonomous bus projects are progressing well, with NTU and STK on track to commence trials in 2019. The trials will initially be carried out in a controlled environment at the CETRAN Autonomous Vehicle (AV) Test Centre, before expanding into designated areas with lighter traffic, such as NTU, CleanTech Park and Jurong Island. The lessons learnt will be useful when LTA subsequently deploys the autonomous buses to public roads.
Separately, LTA has also issued a request for information (RFI) on the deployment of AV buses in Punggol, Tengah and the Jurong Innovation District. We hope that the RFI returns will help us gauge industry’s readiness and interest in AV pilot deployment, as well as give us inputs on concepts of operations, such as management of AV fleets and infrastructural requirements. The pilot deployment is expected to provide important insights into commuter acceptance of AVs and how we can scale up their deployment across Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Collection of Ride-pricing Data to Assess Market and End-user Experience for Flat Fare Pricing and Surge Pricing","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"18 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA collects data on the availability and ride-pricing statistics of private car hire and taxi operators so as to assess how the market and end-user experience is shaped by novel pricing methods, such as flat fare pricing and surge pricing.
\tThe Second Minister for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng) (for the Minister for Transport): Mr Speaker, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) collects data on the percentage of taxi companies’ fleets that are on the roads during peak hours as a measure of availability. However, LTA has not collected information on the availability of private hire cars (PHCs).
Dynamic pricing methods can facilitate the matching of supply and demand. They complement metered fares and provide commuters with greater choices. Our surveys suggest that commuters’ satisfaction with waiting time for both taxis and PHCs has improved.
Mr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I thank the Second Minister for his reply. I was wondering if LTA so far has received any complaints regarding surge pricing with the new pricing models for rides. Furthermore, what channels are available for members of the public to feed back about private hire platform operators if they feel that the surge pricing has been unreasonable?
\tMr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the supplementary question. I do not have the specific information on whether there were specific complaints but, generally, in the different surveys that LTA has done, commuters have largely been positive about the whole set-up of PHCs as they like the lower fares and upfront charges that are made known to the commuters before they commit to the ride.
As per the second question, on what channels are available, the usual feedback channels to LTA are all available for such complaints.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Raising Greater Awareness for Emergency Preparedness and for More to Be Skilled in CPR and First Aid","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"19 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Ministry can work with media platforms to (i) raise greater awareness about emergency preparedness and (ii) encourage more members of the public to pick up skills, such as CPR and first-aid, in our community.
\tThe Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): We use a variety of platforms, including broadcast, print and social media, to raise awareness about emergency preparedness and encourage members of the public to pick up life-saving skills.
We regularly publicise events, such as Emergency Preparedness (EP) Days, in our neighbourhoods and workplaces to generate public interest in picking up life-saving skills and knowledge.
Together with the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI), we worked with Mediacorp to introduce EP and SGSecure messages into radio programmes, such as on Capital 95.8FM, and television (TV) programmes, such as Happy Can Already or \"欢喜就好\", Eat Already or \"吃饱没\" and Tanglin, to reach out to different segments of the population. More recently, MCI, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) worked with Mediacorp to produce a five-part series titled \"It Will Never Happen Here\". The series explores five different national security threats and discusses what the public can do to prepare themselves against these threats.
We have also rolled out feature stories in print media, such as Lianhe Wanbao and Berita Harian, to profile Singaporeans from different sectors who have played a crucial role in promoting and building EP. Stories of community first responders stepping forward to render assistance during emergencies are regularly publicised.
We have also been actively highlighting the importance of EP through social media platforms, for example, videos on SGSecure advisories like \"Run, Hide, Tell\" and \"Press, Tie, Tell\".
We will continue with our efforts to reach out to even more members of our population.
Mr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
\tMs Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his reply. I have one supplementary question. May I know what is the Ministry's progress in getting more Singaporeans aware of EP and picking up of cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills and so on?
\tMr Amrin Amin: We have made significant progress in our outreach efforts. As of December 2017, some 300,000 households have been successfully engaged through house visits where residents are briefed on the terror threat and SGSecure messages. The aim is to have at least one prepared citizen in every household. This means that in every home, there is at least one person who knows how to recognise and report suspicious behaviour and items, protect themselves and their loved ones, keep calm and reach out to others in times of crises.
As for EP Days, a total of 55 such EP Days have been held to date, and we will continue to roll out EP Days to the rest of the neighbourhoods in Singapore. We will continue to intensify these public outreach efforts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Give Priority for Singapore PR or Citizenship Applications by Minors who are Stepchildren of Singapore Citizens","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"20 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether priority can be given to applications for Singapore PR or citizenship by minors who are stepchildren of Singapore Citizens.
\tThe Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore Citizens are eligible to sponsor their children for Permanent Residency (PR) and Singapore Citizenship (SC) only if the children are born to them within the context of a legal marriage or have been legally adopted by them. In the case of foreign minors who are the stepchildren of Singapore Citizens, the Singapore Citizen should legally adopt the minor before he or she is eligible to sponsor the child for PR or citizenship.
Applications for PR and SC are evaluated holistically on a range of criteria. Strong consideration is given to family ties, such as being the legal child of the sponsoring SC.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentage of Singaporean Mother Tongue Teachers in Preschools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"21 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what percentage of Mother Tongue teachers in preschools are Singaporeans; and (b) what strategies are in place to develop more Singaporean Mother Tongue teachers in preschools.
\tThe Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, Sir, today, about 75% of our early childhood educators who can be engaged to teach Mother Tongue Languages (MTL) are locals, which include both Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents. Of the early childhood educators who specialise in teaching MTLs, about 60% are locals.
The Government has been working to encourage and support more locals to become MTL preschool teachers. From 2016, polytechnic students who wish to become MTL preschool teachers can pursue specialised MTL tracks in Early Childhood. The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) also supports these students with training awards, such as course fee sponsorship, allowance grants and professional development grants.
To encourage mid-career entrants to join the sector, ECDA, Skills Future Singapore and Workforce Singapore also provide support for them to enrol in English or MTL Early Childhood diplomas offered by a range of training providers. The support is available in the form of course fee subsidies, in-training allowances and salary grants under the Professional Conversion Programme and other place-and-train modes.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) annually presents the Outstanding Preschool MTL Teacher Award to raise the profile of MTL preschool teachers. This Award recognises preschool MTL teachers who have demonstrated passion, innovation and dedication.
Going forward, ECDA will work closely with the new National Institute for Early Childhood Development and other sector partners to enhance the training and career development of MTL teachers and encourage more locals to take up MTL teaching in preschools.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Darryl David, please keep it short.
\tMr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): I thank the Minister. Just a couple of quick supplementary questions —
\tMr Speaker: We do not have time for a couple of supplementary questions. Just one supplementary.
\tMr Darryl David: One question, then, Sir. Thank you for the indulgence. With regard to the MTL teachers, do we differentiate between teachers of specific mother tongues in terms of the different languages and do we have different strategies that we adopt for these teachers?
\tMr Desmond Lee: Just to clarify, what does the Member mean by differentiate?
\tMr Darryl David: The different mother tongues, for example, say the different MTLs, do we notice a difference in terms of the percentages of Singaporeans who teach these MTLs and does MOE then have different strategies for different MTL teachers?
\tMr Desmond Lee: I do not have the specific breakdown for different languages, but for further plans, wait for the Committee of Supply.
\tMr Speaker: Order. End of Question time. Introduction of Government Bills.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Supply Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to provide for the issue from the Consolidated Fund and the Development Fund of the sums necessary to meet the estimated expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Senior Minister of State for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah) on behalf of the Minister for Finance; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Supplementary Supply (FY2017) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to make supplementary provision to meet additional expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2018\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Senior Minister of State for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah) on behalf of the Minister for Finance; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.25 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.01 pm until 3.25 pm.
Sitting resumed at 3.25 pm
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Budget Statement","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for Finance (Mr Heng Swee Keat): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year from 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019.\"
Before I start, let me first wish everyone a very Happy Lunar New Year. This is going to be a long Budget Speech as there are many important things to cover. Last year, I had one file and it took me one and a half hours. This year, I have two files! But I promise I will call for a recess in the middle. With that, let me begin.
Riding on the global upturn, Singapore’s economy picked up last year. Our gross domestic product (GDP) grew by 3.6%1, up from 2.4% in 2016. This exceeded the Government's forecast of 1% to 3% at the start of 2017.
Our productivity growth was 4.5% as measured by real value-added per actual hour worked, and 3.8% as measured by real value-added per worker. These are the highest figures since 2010.
The good productivity growth has enabled firms to pay higher wages while staying competitive. Real median income2\tfor Singapore Citizens rose by 5.3%3 last year. For 2018, the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) expects growth to be more broad-based across sectors but moderated from the high of 2017.
The positive near-term outlook shows that the hard work of employers, workers and the Government is paying off.
With the support of businesses, Trade Associations and Chambers (TACs) and unions, we have launched 21 out of the proposed 23 Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs). The remaining two will be launched by the end of March. The tripartite Future Economy Council (FEC) is now overseeing the implementation of these ITMs and the strategies laid out by the Committee on the Future Economy (CFE).
Though new, the ITMs are helping to prepare our companies for a new phase of growth. For instance, as part of the Precision Engineering ITM, several companies in the sector, like Univac Precision Engineering and Globaltronic Precision, have undertaken projects to make better use of digital technologies in their manufacturing processes. This has enabled them to stay competitive and take advantage of the global economic recovery.
We recognise, however, that some sectors, such as construction and marine and offshore engineering, continue to face headwinds. While we address such near-term concerns, the Budget must be a strategic and integrated plan to position Singapore for the future. Strategic because it should identify future needs and issues and propose early preparations to meet them. And integrated because it should pool together resources and integrate efforts across all stakeholders – workers, businesses, voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs), the Government and our citizens – to build a better Singapore for everyone.
We must prepare for three major shifts in the coming decade. First, is the shift in global economic weight towards Asia. This will be accompanied by broader shifts in the global order.
In recent years, several advanced economies have turned their attention inward in reaction to domestic pressures. For example, Brexit has put a cloud of uncertainty over the United Kingdom (UK) and its trade with the European Union (EU) and the world. And the United States' (US') recent tax changes and review of trade pacts will intensify competition and economic nationalism, fuelling anxieties worldwide.
Meanwhile, Asia will play a larger role in global trade and investment flows. China has set up a regional infrastructure bank and laid out bold plans under the Belt and Road initiative. India is reforming its economy, easing restrictions on foreign investments. Closer to home, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries are moving up the value chain and their middle-class population is growing rapidly.
All these developments represent significant opportunities for our firms and people. Our economy must be geared to ride on and contribute to Asia’s growth. However, there are also potential threats to the stability and growth of our region. Tensions on the Korean peninsula and in the South China Sea can dampen investor confidence, while the threat of terrorism across the region remains very real.
The second shift is the emergence of new technologies. Robotics and digital technologies are changing the way we live, work and play. They have already enabled the shift to Industry 4.0 and the rapid rise of e-commerce and a sharing economy. These are interacting with traditional businesses in different ways, sometimes as competing substitutes, sometimes as complementary enablers4.
New technologies are reshaping the economy and jobs. Firms will compete increasingly not on physical assets, but on intangible assets, such as intellectual property (IP), data and user networks. First-mover advantage and time to market will be key. Securing better jobs and higher wages will not be just about how well we did in school, but how well we continue to learn, relearn, adapt and grow throughout our lives.
The third shift is ageing. We are well-placed in Singapore to make the most of the collective wisdom of our seniors, but we must also be prepared for the challenges of an ageing society. There will be a significant increase in healthcare and social expenditure, placing greater demands on families and the Government.
Also, our resident workforce will shrink, tightening our labour market and slowing economic growth further, unless we remain dynamic in our outlook, are increasingly productive in the way we work, and supplement our workforce with a calibrated inflow of workers from abroad.
In addition to an ageing population, there are other forces that can strain our social fabric. We need to keep a close watch on income inequality and social mobility. We want growth to uplift all Singaporeans and deepen our social compact.
That is why we will continue to invest in education and skills upgrading, to give every Singaporean the best chance to realise his or her potential. We will also promote sports, arts and heritage, and volunteerism and philanthropy, to build common interests and shared activities.
These three shifts will not operate in isolation but interact together to affect us in profound ways. Some of these interactions will bring new opportunities. For instance, technology will help our older workers to stay productive and assist our caregivers to care for seniors.
With many Asian consumers at the frontier of technology adoption, there are also many opportunities for companies to meet the demands of these tech-savvy consumers.
But these shifts can also bring new challenges. The rapid pace of technological change may lead to older workers feeling marginalised. In some advanced economies, there is rising discontent over globalisation and technological disruptions. And as technology becomes more pervasive, the risk of cyberattacks and online radicalisation will also increase.
Singapore is in a good position to guard against such challenges and capture the opportunities. Geographically, we are well-connected to the world, with flights to over 400 cities and shipping routes to over 600 ports globally. Within Asia, we have extensive connectivity to over 100 Asian cities by air and more than 250 Asian ports by sea. Digitally, we are connected to the world with over 500 terabits per second of potential capacity. And we will continue to enhance our connectivity by investing in digital infrastructure, as well as land links, such as the Kuala Lumpur (KL)-Singapore High Speed Rail.
As an economy, we are open and free, with strong trade links and free trade agreements with many economies in the region and beyond. As a society, we are multiracial with an international outlook, enabling us to operate in the culturally-diverse Asian and global environments. And our people are also well-educated and tech-savvy.
Budget 2018 will build on this strong position.
First, we will develop a more vibrant and innovative economy. We must anchor Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise, welcome investments, talent and ideas to Singapore, and be bold in venturing out into new markets.
To do this, we must make innovation pervasive in our economy, develop deep capabilities in our firms and workers, and establish strong partnerships locally and abroad. The shifts in the global economy and the emergence of new technologies are to our advantage, because they allow us to seize opportunities beyond our borders.
Second, we will build a smart, green and liveable city. We should take full advantage of the latest technology to improve Singaporeans’ quality of life. That is what our Smart Nation movement seeks to achieve. To improve our liveability as a city, we must also enhance our urban sustainability and enable our economy to be more carbon-efficient.
Third, we will continue to foster a caring and cohesive society. This requires our collective effort. The Government will continue to strengthen our social safety nets and supports, especially in the face of demographic challenges like ageing. We must also remain a society where all of us – as individuals, members of families, and citizens – take pride in caring for ourselves, our children and seniors, and one another.
Finally, we will continue to plan ahead for a fiscally sustainable and secure future. Preparing for the longer-term shifts will require more resources to take care of our families, keep our people safe, invest in capabilities and develop new infrastructure. And we must do this amidst a period of greater geopolitical uncertainty and increasing tax competition. It is, therefore, our duty and responsibility to plan ahead and ensure that we have enough resources to do all that we need to do.
Let me start with building a vibrant and innovative economy. We must support our firms and workers to overcome near-term challenges, as well as prepare them to capture future opportunities. I will address each of these in turn.
First, overcoming near-term challenges. Though our economy picked up last year, some firms remain concerned about business costs.
A key driver of this is wage growth. But wage growth is good for Singaporeans. To sustain wage growth and keep business costs manageable, our firms must continue to improve productivity and achieve quality growth. We will support our firms to cope with near-term cost pressures by extending two measures.
First, I will extend the Wage Credit Scheme (WCS). This scheme co-funds wage increases for Singaporean employees, up to a gross monthly wage of $4,000. For 2017, we expect to pay out more than $800 million to more than 90,000 firms, for wage increases given to more than 600,000 employees. I will extend WCS for three more years. WCS will provide 20% co-funding for 2018, 15% for 2019 and 10% for 2020. This will cost about $1.8 billion over the next three years [Please refer to Annex A-1 ].
Second, I will enhance and extend the Corporate Income Tax (CIT) rebate. For Year of Assessment (YA) 2018, I will raise the CIT rebate to 40% of tax payable, capped at $15,000. I will also extend the CIT rebate to YA2019, at a rate of 20% of tax payable, capped at $10,000. The enhancement and extension will benefit all tax-paying companies, especially smaller ones. These changes are projected to cost an additional $475 million over the next two years [Please refer to Annex A-1].
For the Marine Shipyard and Process sectors that still face weakness, I will defer the earlier-announced increases in Foreign Worker Levy rates for another year [Please refer to Annex A-1].
We will also strengthen support for our workers.
We have been supporting those facing career transitions to stay employed and employable through the Adapt and Grow initiative. For example, the Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) have helped more than 3,700 mid-career individuals take up new jobs last year.
This year, we will strengthen employment support for lower- to middle-income workers in various ways. This includes upgrading the current Work Trial scheme into a Career Trial scheme, with higher funding support for workers to try out new careers\t[Please refer to Annex A-4 ]. The Minister for Manpower will elaborate on this and other measures at the Committee of Supply (COS).
Let me now move on to our longer-term transformation strategies.
To capture future opportunities, our economy must transform in response to the three major shifts I mentioned earlier – the shift in global economic weight to Asia, the emergence of new technologies, and our demographic transition. And what changes do we have to make?
New technologies mean that the ways in which companies do business, create value and organise themselves will change, and change quickly. Our companies must keep up, and our workers must adapt as the nature of jobs and the skills required evolve.
Asia's growth means new markets, with new needs to be met. Changing global patterns of production and consumption, together with new technologies, will bring new opportunities, but also greater competition. Our businesses and workers must differentiate themselves and continue to venture abroad.
And with an ageing population, we need to find ways to reduce manpower demand, while enabling our older workers to continue contributing.
We have made a good start through the ITMs. In the next phase of our ITM journey, we will take a more cluster-based approach to reap synergies and strengthen linkages across multiple industries and explore new opportunities. And we must strengthen the three key enablers that lay the foundation for all the ITMs – innovation, capabilities and partnerships.
First, we must foster pervasive innovation throughout our economy, so that we can make the best use of technology, adapt quickly, and create new value to differentiate ourselves.
Second, we must build deep capabilities in our firms and our people, so that we can compete not on costs, but on the value and skills we bring.
Third, we must forge strong partnerships both locally and abroad, so that our firms and people can work together to address common challenges and access new opportunities in our region and beyond.
By strengthening these three enablers, we can anchor Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise.
Let me start with the first enabler – innovation.
With the rapid pace of change and greater competition, we must make innovation pervasive throughout our economy. Firms in every sector and of every size need to embrace innovation and make the best use of new technologies as a competitive advantage.
Take Pan-United, a local concrete and cement company. It has invested significantly in research and development (R&D), innovating new products to meet customer needs. For example, it has developed a new type of flexible concrete that can cushion the landing impact of aircraft, reducing wear and tear of airport runways. This concrete complies with the latest specifications set by the US Federal Aviation Administration. Pan-United also has a range of concrete varieties catering to different specifications, including one that shields against proton radiation. Such product innovations have helped Pan-United expand into regional and global markets. Pan-United, you might say, is a concrete example of how innovation can help a firm cement its position as a market leader.
This Budget, we will support more firms to innovate across the entire value chain, whether they buy new solutions, build their own, or partner others to co-innovate.
Industry partners, like the Singapore International Chamber of Commerce and the Big Four accounting firms, have given us useful suggestions. We have studied and will implement some of them.
First, we will support businesses to buy and use new solutions. We will streamline existing grants supporting the adoption of pre-scoped, off-the-shelf technologies into a single Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG)\t[Please refer to Annex A-3 \t].
In addition, I will raise the tax deduction on licensing payments for the commercial use of intellectual property (IP). With the expiry of the Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) scheme, the tax deduction on licensing payments has reverted to 100% for YA2019 and beyond. I will raise this to 200%, capped at $100,000 of licensing payments per year. This cap ensures that smaller businesses will benefit more from this measure\t[Please refer to Annex A-5 ].
Next, to support businesses to build their own innovations, I will raise the tax deduction for IP registration fees from 100% to 200%, to help firms protect their intangible assets. This will be capped at $100,000 of IP registration fees per year [Please refer to Annex A-5].
I will also raise the tax deduction for qualifying expenses incurred on R&D done in Singapore, from 150% to 250% [Please refer to Annex A-5].
Finally, to help businesses find partners to co-create solutions, we will pilot the Open Innovation Platform this year. This is a virtual crowdsourcing platform, where companies can list specific challenges that can be addressed by digital solutions. They will then be matched with info-communications and technology (ICT) firms and research institutes, to co-develop solutions\t[Please refer to Annex A-2\t].
Besides supporting our firms to innovate, we will do more to harness our national research capabilities to enhance our economic competitiveness. We have built a strong research and knowledge base in our universities and the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) institutes, which provides a solid foundation for an innovative economy. To maintain this competitive edge, we have sustained our public sector R&D spending at 1% of GDP annually.
We have various programmes to translate our public sector research efforts into commercially viable applications, and we will build on these. This year, the National Research Foundation (NRF) and Temasek will launch an NRF Temasek IP Commercialisation Vehicle. This new investment venture will bring together Temasek’s global investment networks and NRF’s connections with the Singapore R&D community, to grow companies that draw on IP from publicly-funded research. At least $100 million will go into this joint venture – $50 million from the Government, and at least $50 million from Temasek [Please refer to Annex A-2].
We will also continue to harness our R&D resources to drive greater adoption of digital technologies, automation and robotics.
To strengthen our status as an air and sea hub, we will launch an Aviation Transformation Programme (ATP) and a Maritime Transformation Programme (MTP) this year. Through these programmes, our airport and seaport will become platforms for companies to develop, test and use new technologies.
The solutions that emerge can be rapidly adopted in other parts of Singapore, or even exported overseas. We will provide support of up to $500 million for the two programmes, with additional matching investments expected from industry partners [Please refer to Annex A-2].
To improve our labour productivity, we will also expand the National Robotics Programme (NRP), to encourage wider use of robotics in the built environment sector, particularly in construction [Please refer to Annex A-2].
Let me move on to the second key enabler – building deep capabilities in our firms and workers. In particular, capabilities to internationalise, digitalise and be more productive will be critical.
For our firms, we will provide more targeted support to help them build capabilities to meet their needs. Broad-based measures, such as the Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) scheme have been useful in kickstarting a wider movement to improve productivity and to innovate. I am heartened that many firms have embarked on this journey. We will now build on this base and take a more targeted approach to help firms deepen the capabilities they need to continue growing.
In April, we will merge the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING) and International Enterprise (IE) Singapore into Enterprise Singapore. Enterprise Singapore will provide integrated support to companies, for internationalisation as well as the development of other capabilities, so as to help them compete better both locally and abroad.
We will combine IE’s Global Company Partnership grant with SPRING's Capability Development Grant, to form an integrated Enterprise Development Grant (EDG). EDG will provide up to 70% co-funding for companies to develop a range of capabilities [Please refer to Annex A-3].
To further support firms to internationalise, I will enhance the Double Tax Deduction for Internationalisation (DTDi). I will raise the amount of expenses that can qualify for DTDi without prior approval, from $100,000 to $150,000 per year of assessment. This will take effect from YA2019 [Please refer to Annex A-5].
As we strengthen support for firms to build capabilities, I will make adjustments to two broad-based tax schemes – the Start-up Tax Exemption and the Partial Tax Exemption. These schemes help lower costs for smaller firms and startups, but do not directly help firms develop capabilities.
In addition, every profitable company should pay some taxes. This is sound and equitable. So, starting in YA2020, I will make two changes to the schemes. First, I will restrict the tax exemptions under both schemes to the first $200,000 of chargeable income. Second, for startups, I will exempt 75%, instead of 100% currently, of their first $100,000 of chargeable income from corporate tax [Please refer to Annex A-5].
Even with these adjustments, corporate tax will remain low for startups and smaller firms. For a taxable income of $100,000, the effective corporate tax rate is 4.3% for startups and 8.1% for older firms, as compared to the headline rate of 17%.
In addition, companies, including startups and smaller firms, can tap on a wide range of Government support measures to build capabilities and grow their businesses.
As digital technologies transform our economy, all firms must develop digital capabilities. Since we launched the small and medium enterprises (SMEs) Go Digital Programme last year to support companies to digitalise, more than 650 SMEs have benefited. This year, we are studying, with the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) and other industry partners, the development of a nationwide e-invoicing framework. This can help companies improve productivity and enhance cash flow.
Besides our firms, we must train our people in digital skills. Industry partners, like the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises (ASME), have brought this up.
Since we launched the Tech Skills Accelerator (TeSA) in 2016, over 27,000 training places have been taken up or committed. Alvin is one of those who took up the training. Retrenched after 17 years as a systems engineer, he took up TeSA's programme for cybersecurity, which equipped him with the skills needed to join ST Electronics as a white hat hacker, that is, someone who tests ICT systems for security loopholes.
We will expand TeSA into new sectors like manufacturing and professional services where digital technologies are increasingly important. TeSA will also support more people to learn emerging digital skills, such as in data analytics, artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things (IoT) and cybersecurity. We will set aside an additional $145 million for TeSA over the next three years [Please refer to Annex A-4].
The Minister for Communications and Information will speak more about this at COS.
Besides digital capabilities, we must also build deep skills for workers of all ages. There must be depth in whatever we do, because this gives us the foundation to innovate and the ability to compete. This is the essence of SkillsFuture. Industry partners have a big role to play here. Ultimately, the capabilities of a firm depend on the capabilities of its people.
I recently visited Infineon, a semi-conductor manufacturer, which takes training very seriously. Infineon plans its employee training and technology adoption in parallel, so that employees acquire relevant skills and new technologies are used effectively. I was pleased to meet Mdm Esah. Mdm Esah started out doing manual work in the assembly line 42 years ago. As Infineon upgraded its production processes, it also redesigned her job and trained her to use new machines. When I spoke to Mdm Esah, she told me cheerfully, \"I'm happy, I’m confident, I can do new things.\"
Mdm Esah’s example shows that enterprise capabilities and human capital must be developed in tandem and be integrated with a company’s overall growth strategy. We will continue to work with industry partners to help the whole spectrum of our workforce develop deep skills. This will help our people to stay relevant and develop the cross-cultural skills needed to capture opportunities in the region and beyond.
For the young, we have schemes like the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme, a work-learn programme, as well as the Go Southeast Asia Award, which matches undergraduates with regional internships.
For those with more work experience, we have schemes like the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Enhanced Subsidy and the PCPs. In particular, the PCP for Southeast Asia Ready Talent will equip Singaporeans with the know-how to do well regionally.
For our corporate leaders, it is important that they have the skills needed to drive the transformation of their businesses and industries. To develop the next generation of corporate leaders, we have the SkillsFuture Leadership Development Initiative (LDI). Since it started last year, companies have committed to train almost 200 Singaporeans, with over 180 more in the pipeline. This year, we will launch a new ASEAN Leadership Programme under the LDI to help our business leaders build networks and plan business expansions in Southeast Asian markets.
I am also happy to hear that SBF and the Singapore Management University (SMU) will pilot the SBF-SMU Local Enterprise and Association Development (LEAD)-CHARGE Initiative this year, to help SME leaders transform their organisations.
Finally, as our workforce ages, firms must reconfigure how they operate to harness the experience of their older workers and allow them to continue contributing meaningfully.
To support our older workers, we have raised the re-employment age to 67, extended the Special Employment Credit and enhanced WorkPro. With the close cooperation of the tripartite partners, Singapore's employment rate for residents aged 65 and above rose from 14.4% in 2007 to 25.8% in 2017. We will continue to encourage age-friendly workplaces and review how we can better support our older workers.
As we develop our people’s capabilities, we may find that skillsets in certain important fields are lacking. To plug these gaps quickly, we are piloting the Capability Transfer Programme (CTP), to support the transfer of skills from foreign specialists to Singaporean trainers and trainees. The Minister for Manpower will elaborate at COS.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I have spoken about our efforts to make innovation pervasive and to build deep capabilities.
The third key enabler is to forge strong partnerships.
Competition is not the only driving force in our economy. Cooperation is also key. Where synergies exist, we can achieve more when we work together and draw on one another’s strengths to address common challenges and capture bigger and better opportunities.
For example, Ascendas-Singbridge, along with IE Singapore, brought together a group of Singaporean SMEs specialising in Industry 4.0 technology solutions, to set up the Singapore Manufacturing Innovation Centre in Guangzhou, China. The Centre provides these SMEs with a platform to co-create advanced manufacturing solutions with prospective Chinese clients, allowing the SMEs to reach out to the large Chinese market.
We will continue to encourage our companies to form strong partnerships, both locally and abroad. Industry partners, like the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SCCCI), have made similar suggestions.
We will integrate various partnership support measures into a single Partnerships for Capability Transformation (PACT) scheme. Under PACT, companies can receive up to 70% co-funding for projects undertaken in partnership with others [Please refer to Annex A-3].
For the three schemes that I mentioned earlier – PACT, the Productivity Solutions Grant and the Enterprise Development Grant – I will set aside $800 million over the next three years.
We will also strengthen our partnerships with overseas counterparts and anchor Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise. This way, our firms and people can remain plugged into the latest developments all over the world and create new ideas by interacting with people from diverse backgrounds.
Industry partners, like the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry, have pointed out that as our region grows, there will be important needs to address in infrastructure, healthcare and other areas. We need to develop a good understanding of these needs, so that we can innovate meaningful solutions to contribute to our region’s development. That is why we launched the Global Innovation Alliance (GIA) last year, for Singaporeans to gain experience and build networks overseas. We have made early progress. Our universities have expanded overseas internship programmes to eight new locations, including ASEAN countries. We also launched GIA Beijing and established BLOCK71 in Suzhou and Jakarta.
Besides venturing abroad, we will also bring global innovation to Singapore through initiatives like the Singapore Week of Innovation and Technology (SWITCH).
As ASEAN Chairman this year, we hope to make a meaningful contribution by developing an ASEAN Innovation Network. We hope this will strengthen the linkages among the innovation ecosystems in the region, and spark new collaborations and solutions. The Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) will speak more about our ASEAN plans at COS.
In particular, as Asia’s growth will raise infrastructure demand, we seek to forge stronger partnerships in infrastructure development and enhance connectivity in the region. China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Japan and India’s Asia-Africa Growth Corridor, and the World Bank's Infrastructure and Urban Development Hub in Singapore are just some examples of efforts to promote infrastructure development in our region.
To contribute to Asia’s infrastructure agenda, we will set up an Infrastructure Office. This Office will bring together local and international firms from across the value chain, including infrastructure developers, institutional investors, multilaterals and legal, accounting and financial services providers, to develop, finance and execute infrastructure projects. The Office will enable infrastructure players to better tap on opportunities in the region while supporting Asia's infrastructure development and economic growth [Please refer to Annex A-3]. The Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry) and the Senior Minister of State for Law and Finance will give more details at COS.
Our TACs play an important leadership role in forging partnerships and driving industry-level advancements. Through close interactions with their members, TACs understand their industries’ challenges and opportunities better than the Government can. We have seen various examples of TAC leadership and partnerships, which have helped their members uplift capabilities and overcome resource constraints.
For instance, SCCCI, with support from JTC and SPRING, has set up a Trade Association Hub (TA Hub) at Jurong Town Hall, where more than 30 TACs share facilities and resources. The TA Hub, along with the Trade Association Committee that SCCCI also set up, will encourage TACs to collaborate with and support one another.
In logistics, four TACs, along with SPRING and the Centre of Innovation for Supply Chain Management at Republic Polytechnic, have come together to form the Logistics Alliance. Last year, it launched the Transport Integrated Platform (TRIP), which integrates several existing systems into a single digital platform, to enable easier tracking of container trucks and reduce idling time.
The Government will continue to support such efforts, through the LEAD programme. In the last two years, about $45 million has been committed through LEAD for some 50 projects. I look forward to even more TACs and businesses coming on board.
Mr Speaker, Sir, ultimately, all our firms and workers face the same major shifts in the global environment, which will bring greater competition and a faster pace of change. The specific challenges and opportunities will differ from industry to industry, which is why we have taken a sectoral approach for the ITMs. But the key enablers in every industry and ITM are the same – innovation, capabilities and partnerships.
By fostering pervasive innovation throughout our economy, building deep capabilities in our firms and people, and forging strong partnerships locally and abroad, we can succeed in our economic transformation. We can create and sustain a more vibrant and innovative economy.
Mr Speaker, Sir, a strong economy is not an end in itself. It is a means to build a better home and provide a better quality of life for all our people. We will, therefore, continue to improve our living environment and make Singapore a smart, green and liveable city.
Our founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew once said, \"a blighted urban jungle of concrete destroys the human spirit\". Indeed, our urban planners recognised early on that with limited land, we had to build our city with foresight, so we could provide a high-quality living environment even in a dense urban landscape. We designed our Housing and Development Board (HDB) estates with common spaces, parks and playgrounds, so that everyone has easy access to amenities and public spaces. We planted thousands of trees and toiled to transform Singapore into a Garden City and now a City in a Garden. We may be highly urbanised, but we are not a concrete jungle. More than 40% of our island remains covered in greenery.
We also enacted laws against pollution and cleaned up the Singapore River. Along the way, we became innovators in water treatment and waste management. Today, Singaporeans enjoy the comforts of a modern city, along with clean air, clean water and verdant spaces.
Our reputation as a clean and green city is a source of pride for Singaporeans and attracts tourists and investment to our shores. Even otters have returned to our waterways! We must continue to improve our city and our environment and make Singapore an even better home to live, work and play in. History has shown that the most enduring cities are those that are adaptable, flexible and innovative.
I spoke earlier about the emergence of new technologies as a major shift. Our Smart Nation movement aims to make the best use of these new technologies to improve our city, uplift our quality of life, enhance our economic competitiveness and promote social inclusion. This transformation will require a national effort by the Government, together with the private and people sectors.
The Government is embarking on several strategic national projects to lay the foundation for a Smart Nation. We are building a Smart Nation Sensor Platform to deploy sensors and \"Internet of Things\" devices to enhance municipal service delivery. We are developing a National Digital Identity system to enable citizens to authenticate their identities securely and easily when making online transactions. We are also increasing the adoption of e-payments island-wide, to allow everyone to make simple, swift and seamless payments. At the same time, we are opening up digital platforms for the private sector to build innovative services and will share more data with the public to facilitate co-creation [Please refer to Annex B\t]. The Minister-in-charge of the Smart Nation initiative will elaborate more at COS.
Besides building a Smart Nation, we are also collaborating with academics and corporates in research and innovation, to take Singapore’s sustainable development story to the next level. One of the strategic domains in our Research, Innovation and Enterprise (RIE) 2020 plan is Urban Solutions and Sustainability.
Last year, we launched the Cities of Tomorrow R&D programme to drive innovation in urban development, such as ways to improve the sustainability, maintainability and reliability of buildings, raise construction productivity and create new spaces that we can live in. We also started the Closing the Waste Loop project, to use technology to minimise the environmental impact of the waste we generate. This year, we will embark on Energy Grid 2.0, to develop next-generation grid architectures that can respond quickly and reliably to changes in energy demand and supply. For these three programmes, we will set aside $250 million [Please refer to Annex B].
To improve our living environment, we must also address one of the most pressing challenges the world faces – climate change. Climate change is more than just record-breaking temperatures, dry weather or more intense rain. As a low-lying island, Singapore is particularly vulnerable to rising sea levels. That is why the Government has invested significantly to improve our infrastructure, including protecting our coasts and critical assets, building a weather-resilient water supply and redesigning our flood management system.
We must play our part to address the underlying cause of climate change to make Singapore a more liveable and sustainable city, and as a responsible member of the international community.
Over the years, we have made various efforts to manage our greenhouse gas emissions. The Energy Conservation Act was enhanced last year to improve the energy efficiency of our industries. We are investing in public transport to make Singapore car-lite, and green-certified buildings have become a hallmark of our urban landscape. Our early measures to be a green city have shown results. Singapore produces less carbon emissions per dollar of GDP than most countries. We intend to further reduce our emissions intensity to make a bigger effort to combat climate change.
To encourage companies to further reduce emissions, I announced last year that we intend to implement a carbon tax from 2019. I will proceed with a carbon tax on all facilities producing 25,000 tonnes or more of greenhouse gas emissions in a year. It will be levied on the total emissions of each of these facilities. The first payment will be in 2020, based on emissions in 2019. The carbon tax will be $5 per tonne of greenhouse gas emissions in the first instance, from 2019 to 2023.
We will review the carbon tax rate by 2023. We intend to increase it to a rate of between $10 and $15 per tonne of emissions by 2030. In doing so, we will take into account international climate change developments, the progress of our emissions mitigation efforts and our economic competitiveness [Please refer to Annex B.]
The carbon tax will apply uniformly to all sectors, without exemption. This is the economically efficient way to maintain a transparent, fair and consistent carbon price across the economy to incentivise emissions reduction. This means our initial carbon tax rate of $5 cannot be directly compared with that in other countries. Jurisdictions with higher headline carbon prices often also have significant exemptions for particular sectors, which lowers their effective carbon prices.
The carbon tax will be levied on major emitters, which account for about 80% of Singapore’s emissions. The remaining 20% is contributed by many other sources of varying sizes. We will study how to account for these emissions and take action where necessary.
For petrol, diesel and compressed natural gas (CNG), we have excise duties, which already encourage reduction of the use of these fuels and, therefore, reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Hence, I will not levy an additional carbon tax on petrol, diesel and CNG. I will also not increase their excise duties at this point in time, but we will continue to review and adjust them periodically.
The carbon tax will encourage businesses to take measures to reduce carbon emissions. Companies that do so will be more competitive, as more countries impose tighter limits on their carbon emissions, and international agreements on climate change like the Paris Agreement take effect. There will also be new opportunities in areas like sustainable energy and clean technology.
We have to start preparing early so that industries have more time to adapt.
To give companies and households a strong push in the first five years when we introduce the carbon tax, we will provide more grants and support to help them enhance energy efficiency and reduce emissions. We expect to collect carbon tax revenue of nearly $1 billion in the first five years. To achieve our goal of reducing emissions intensity as soon as possible, I am prepared to spend more than this in the initial five years, to support worthwhile projects which deliver the necessary abatement in emissions.
I urge companies to do their part for a higher quality living environment for all, by putting in meritorious proposals for emissions abatement and energy efficiency. Our agencies will evaluate these rigorously. I will set aside funds starting from 2019 to enhance support for companies, including SMEs and power generation companies, to improve energy efficiency.
The support for companies will be done through schemes like the Productivity Grant (Energy Efficiency) and the Energy Efficiency Fund [Please refer to Annex B]. More support will go to projects that achieve greater emissions abatement, beyond the basic enhancements. MTI and MEWR will share more details at a later date.
For our households, the impact of the carbon tax will be small, at about 1% of total electricity and gas expenses, on average. Still, to help households adjust, I will provide additional U-Save for three years. Eligible HDB households will each receive $20 more per year, from 2019 to 2021. The increase in U-Save will cover the expected average increase in electricity and gas expenses for HDB households arising from the carbon tax [Please refer to Annex B]. MEWR will also work with the community to help households save energy and will announce more details at a later date.
We have designated 2018 as the Year of Climate Action to encourage all Singaporeans to fight climate change. The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources will speak more on our other plans to reduce energy use and carbon emissions at COS.
Ultimately, measures like the carbon tax, along with our R&D programmes and Smart Nation investments, are to make Singapore a more liveable and sustainable city. In this effort, everyone has a role to play.
I am heartened to see various community efforts in this area. For instance, the Community in Bloom movement has brought together 36,000 gardening enthusiasts to cultivate more than 1,300 gardens all over Singapore, beautifying our landscape and fostering community spirit. And the Kayak Waterway Clean-Up Programme, run by the non-profit Waterways Watch Society, brings volunteers together to remove debris from our rivers and reservoirs while raising environmental awareness.
In ways big and small, we can all contribute to building a smarter, greener and more liveable city for all Singaporeans to enjoy.
Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I will continue later with the measures we will implement to foster a caring and cohesive society and ensure a fiscally sustainable and secure future for Singapore.
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair in 15 minutes at 4.35 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.22 pm until 4.35 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.35 pm
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
(Resumption)
[(proc text) Resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Heng Swee Keat: Mr Speaker, Sir, I earlier spoke about how we will grow our economy and improve our city. What ultimately matters is having a united people with a common purpose – to build the kind of society we want to live in and pass on to our children to improve.
When I first entered politics, one of my first projects was Our Singapore Conversation. It gave me and my colleagues a unique opportunity to converse with Singaporeans about their aspirations for themselves and for Singapore.
One of the things that struck me was the deep sense of responsibility that Singaporeans felt and shared – a responsibility towards the future of their family, community and country.
As Singapore undergoes demographic and societal changes that place greater demands on families, the community and the Government, we must face these changes together and respond collectively as one.
Over the past decade, the Government has increased support for our citizens, providing greater assurance through schemes like MediShield Life and the Pioneer Generation Package, while giving extra help to those with less through Workfare and Silver Support.
The Government will continue to strengthen social safety nets for those in need. At the same time, individuals, families and the community play an important role in looking out for and supporting one another. That is why we launched the SG Cares movement: to bring together the public, private and people sectors; create greater collective impact; and build a more caring and cohesive society for ourselves and future generations. Budget 2018 will build on the SG Cares movement in three ways.
First, we will support individuals and families to better prepare for the future and care for one another. Second, we will strengthen partnerships between the Government and the community to support our seniors and those in need. And third, we will encourage a spirit of giving in our people.
I will first talk about how we will better support Singaporeans and their families.
Education helps our children realise their full potential. We invest heavily in every child, to ensure that everyone, regardless of background, has access to a quality education. This Budget, we will increase support for education in three ways.
First, we will increase the annual Edusave contributions provided by the Government from $200 to $230 for each primary school student, and from $240 to $290 for each secondary school student. This will take effect from January 2019.
Second, we will update the income eligibility criteria for the Edusave Merit Bursary and the Independent School Bursary, to benefit more students from lower- to middle-income families\t[Please refer to Annex C-1 ].
Third, we will increase the support to students from lower-income families. We will enhance the Ministry of Education (MOE) Financial Assistance Scheme by raising the annual bursary quantum for pre-university students from $750 to $900 and updating the income eligibility criteria.
We will also cover more meals for secondary school students under the School Meals Programme. Students in special education schools will also benefit from these enhancements. Overall, these schemes will cost close to $200 million per year. The Minister for Education (Schools) will provide more details at COS.
Besides education, we will support our people to prepare for their financial needs at key stages of their lives. This starts from giving our youths a good foundation in financial literacy. We will pilot a new financial education curriculum at our polytechnics and Institutes of Technical Education (ITE). We will also enhance existing services to Singaporeans at HDB when they buy a flat, and at Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board when they approach retirement, to enable them to make better informed decisions at these major milestones.
We will support Singaporeans to prepare for their healthcare needs in old age. We are reviewing ElderShield, an insurance scheme that helps those with severe disabilities cope with the financial demands of their daily care. To ensure that the enhanced scheme remains affordable, we will provide premium subsidies for lower- and middle-income Singaporeans. We will provide an update later in the year, after the ElderShield Review Committee delivers its final recommendations.
This Budget, we will also strengthen support for family members to live with or near one another. We will enhance the Proximity Housing Grant (PHG). First, we will increase the PHG for families buying a resale flat to live with their parents or children to $30,000. Those buying a resale flat near their parents or children will continue to receive a PHG of $20,000.
Second, we will enhance the PHG for singles, who are often a key source of caregiving support within their families. Singles who buy a resale flat to live with their parents will now receive an enhanced PHG of $15,000. Those who buy a resale flat near their parents will also now receive a PHG of $10,000.
Third, we will simplify the criterion for determining what is \"near\". Currently, it is defined as living in the same town or within two kilometres (km). To give applicants more choices when choosing a resale flat to live near their loved ones, including flats in nearby towns, we will revise this criterion to simply \"within four km\".
These enhancements will take immediate effect and cost an additional $80 million per year.
Together with the recently-enhanced CPF Housing Grant and the Additional CPF Housing Grant, a first-timer applicant can now receive up to $120,000 in housing grants when buying a resale flat to live with their parents, a 50% increase compared to three years ago.
We will also support households with their expenses. Last year, eligible HDB households received 1.5 to 3.5 months of rebate on their Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC). We will extend these rebates for another year. This will cost $126 million and benefit about 900,000 households\t[Please refer to Annex C-2 ].
Finally, we will make adjustments to the foreign domestic worker (FDW) levy framework. Over the past 10 years, the number of FDWs in Singapore has increased by about 40%, to 240,000 in 2017. We must ensure that FDW demand is commensurate with need and avoid an over-dependency on FDWs.
At the same time, we recognise that some families may need help caring for young children, the elderly or family members with disabilities. Today, such families enjoy a monthly concessionary FDW levy of $60. About 80% of Singaporean FDW employers benefit from this concession. We will retain this monthly concessionary levy rate of $60. In light of the improving life expectancy and health of Singaporeans, we will raise the qualifying age for the levy concession under the aged person scheme from 65 to 67 years. All households with persons aged 65 and 66, which are enjoying or have enjoyed the levy concession under the aged person scheme before 1 April 2019, will continue to pay the monthly levy rate of $60.
For employers who do not qualify for the levy concession or employ multiple FDWs, we will raise the FDW levy. For the first and second FDW employed without levy concession, the monthly levy will be raised from $265 today to $300 and $450 respectively.
These changes will take effect from 1 April 2019, to give employers time to adjust. To help meet demand for part-time household services, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) is also piloting the Household Services Scheme\t[Please refer to Annex C-3 ].
I just spoke about how the Government will support our people to prepare for their future and care for one another. Let me now speak about how we will strengthen the Government’s partnership with the community to better care for our seniors and those in need.
Our community partners play an important role in this. Being on the ground, they are more attuned to the specific needs of local communities and can respond more nimbly and quickly. At the same time, the efforts of the Government and our community partners need to be well coordinated. Our \"many helping hands\" need to work \"hand-in-hand\".
In 2016, I announced the pilot of the Community Networks for Seniors (CNS). CNS brings together Government agencies and community partners to do ABC. A is for Active Ageing, to encourage seniors to remain active and stay healthy. B is for Befriending, to link up lonely seniors with new friends. And C is for Care, for frail and vulnerable seniors.
CNS has helped many seniors, including Mr Willie Fox and Mrs Lena Fox. Mr and Mrs Fox, who are in their 80s, told our Pioneer Generation (PG) Ambassadors that Mr Fox tired easily and had to use a wheelchair frequently. Our PG Ambassadors referred them to CNS, which enrolled them in the Care Line, a 24-hour tele-befriending service launched by the Eastern Health Alliance. CNS also referred Mr Fox to the Evergreen Circle Senior Activity Centre, where he now participates in weekly exercises and enjoys healthy soups cooked by volunteers! Mr Fox now feels stronger and healthier and has almost stopped relying on his wheelchair. He and Mrs Fox are also enjoying making new friends.
I believe that the CNS model can meaningfully improve the lives of many other seniors. To reach out to and serve more seniors, we will expand CNS nationwide by 2020. The CNS pilot also showed us how we can streamline and improve the delivery of services to our seniors. Social and healthcare needs are closely inter-related and both have an impact on the well-being of our seniors.
To enable these services to be planned and delivered holistically, we will consolidate social- and health-related services for seniors under the Ministry of Health (MOH).
From 1 April this year, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will transfer its social aged care functions under the Senior Cluster Network and other programmes to MOH. With this transfer, the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) will be designated the central implementation agency to coordinate such services for seniors and their caregivers.
In addition, to support the expansion of CNS nationwide, we will merge the Pioneer Generation Office (PGO) with AIC. PGO will serve as AIC’s outreach arm in implementing CNS. It will reach out not only to Pioneers, but to all seniors aged 65 and above. To reflect its enhanced role, PGO will be renamed “Silver Generation Office”. Our friendly Ambassadors will continue to knock on doors wearing their familiar shirts, only they will now be called the Silver Generation or SG Ambassadors. I am certain seniors will continue to welcome them warmly.
This Budget, I will also top up two funds that support our seniors to age confidently in the community.
First, I will provide a $300 million top-up to the Community Silver Trust (CST), which provides dollar-for-dollar matching for donations to eligible VWOs providing long-term care services. Since 2011, the CST has matched around $500 million in donations raised by more than 80 VWOs. To support more programmes, we will also expand CST to match donations raised for active ageing programmes\t[Please refer to Annex C-4 ].
Second, I will provide a $100 million top-up to the Seniors’ Mobility and Enabling Fund (SMF), which provides subsidies for assistive devices and consumables for seniors. Another $150 million will be spent over the next five years for transport to subsidised eldercare and dialysis centres. We will review SMF in the coming years, to ensure that subsidies remain targeted.
Besides improving support for our seniors, we will also improve the delivery of social services to other groups in society. Over the next five years, we will strengthen the role and capabilities of our Social Service Offices (SSOs) to better coordinate the efforts of Government agencies, VWOs and community partners in providing more holistic and citizen-centred support to those in need.
Our SSOs will work with these partners to harness and optimise community resources and identify areas where volunteers can complement service delivery. Our SSOs will also improve work processes and the sharing of information among organisations for better coordination. These efforts will bring quicker and more effective assistance to our citizens, to help them get back on their feet. The Minister for Social and Family Development will elaborate at COS.
Even as we strengthen support for our seniors and vulnerable, at the core of a caring and cohesive society are people who have the heart to give back to the community and make a difference to the lives of others.
Take Mdm Patma, for example. Mdm Patma has been a member of the Choa Chu Kang Residents’ Committee for almost two decades. She also volunteers as a befriender with Fei Yue Community Services. Mdm Patma looks out for her neighbours, cares for sick and lonely seniors and organises activities that bring the community together. Many of her neighbours look forward to the delicious home-cooked food she brings to the Cosy Corner at her HDB block. In the process of helping others, Mdm Patma has found a stronger sense of fulfilment and purpose in life. Many of us share Mdm Patma’s spirit and are actively giving back to the community.
I am heartened that over the last decade, our volunteerism rate has doubled, from around 17% to 35%6. At the same time, total donations have increased from around $2 billion in 2011 to $2.7 billion in 20157.
To foster this spirit of giving in our people, we will enhance support for measures that encourage everyone to contribute to the community. I will extend the 250% tax deduction for donations made to Institutions of a Public Character (IPCs) for another three years, until 31 December 2021 [Please refer to Annex C-4]. We will also enhance our one-stop platform, Giving.sg, to better match donors and volunteers with charities that need support [Please refer to Annex C-4].
In addition, I will increase support to our five Community Development Councils (CDCs). Today, the Government matches $3 for every $1 that the CDCs raise, up to an annual cap of $24 million. From financial year (FY) 2018 onwards, I will increase the current annual matching grant cap for CDCs from $24 million to $40 million [Please refer to Annex C-4].
At the same time, we will encourage corporates to support their staff to volunteer or donate. In 2016, we piloted the Business and IPC Partnership Scheme (BIPS). Businesses that support their staff to volunteer and provide services to IPCs receive a 250% tax deduction on associated costs incurred. An example of an IPC that has benefited is the Shared Services for Charities (SSC). So, through SSC, accounting firms provide pro bono services, such as reviews of internal controls, risk assessment and audits, to charities. These firms receive tax deductions while enabling their staff to volunteer meaningfully. I will extend BIPS for another three more years, until 31 December 2021 [Please refer to Annex C-4].
Corporates can also support their staff to donate regularly to the Community Chest through SHARE. Since we launched SHARE as One at Budget 2016, which provides dollar-for-dollar matching on donations to SHARE, more than 440 new companies have come on board. To encourage more companies to support SHARE, I will extend the SHARE as One scheme until FY2021 [Please refer to Annex C-4].
Finally, I will provide dollar-for-dollar matching on donations received by the Empowering for Life Fund (ELF) under the President’s Challenge, for the next five years. This will support the ELF’s work to fund programmes in skills upgrading and employment for the most vulnerable in society.
In total, we will set aside around $190 million per year to support these enhancements to encourage philanthropy and volunteerism [Please refer to Annex C-4].
Mr Speaker, Sir, I have spoken about how this Budget will: support individuals and families; strengthen the partnership between the Government and the community to support our seniors and those in need; and encourage a spirit of giving in our people. It is this shared responsibility – with individuals, families, community and the Government all playing their part and supporting one another – that has made our society what it is today and that will keep our society thriving in the years ahead.
This Budget will support all of us to stay true to this SG Cares spirit and to work together to build a caring and cohesive society.
Mr Speaker, Sir, to secure a better Singapore for Singaporeans, we must ensure that we have the revenues and resources to do so. That is why I stated at the outset that our Budget is a strategic and integrated plan, taking a longer-term view, and setting out our strategic challenges clearly and plainly. This way, we can ensure a fiscally sustainable and secure future for Singapore.
For this decade, from 2011 to 2020, we are on a sound fiscal footing. That is because we planned ahead early and made the necessary moves well before the decade began.
We raised GST from 5% to 7% as early as 2007 and introduced the Net Investment Returns (NIR) framework in 2008. These changes allowed us to enhance our healthcare, transport and social support systems, in the first half of the decade, from 2011 to 2015. During this period, we introduced MediShield Life and the Pioneer Generation Package, and enhanced Workfare.
In 2015, we made further revenue moves to include Temasek in the NIR framework and raised personal income tax rates for the top income brackets. These changes enabled us to sustain our spending for the second half of the decade, from 2016 to 2020.
All in all, we were able to fund a significant increase in overall Government expenditures from $55 billion in FY2011 to an estimated $89.1 billion in FY2018.
As the Government has stated before, we have ensured that we have sufficient resources to meet our spending needs till 2020. This is a result of careful and prudent planning. But in the next decade, between 2021 and 2030, if we do not take measures early, we will not have enough revenues to meet our growing needs. We expect our spending needs to continue growing across all sectors, with some rising faster and more than others. Let me highlight a few.
One of the key areas of expenditure growth will be healthcare. Since the start of this decade, we have more than doubled our healthcare spending, from $3.9 billion in FY2011 to an estimated $10.2 billion in FY2018. This increase went into building and operating more hospitals and other healthcare facilities and enhancing healthcare subsidies. In the coming decade, with an ageing population and an increasing chronic disease burden, the demands on families and the Government will rise. We will need to spend even more on healthcare.
Today, the average annual Government healthcare subsidies received by an elderly person is more than six times that of a younger person, or about $4,500 more. By 2030, the total number of elderly will increase by about 450,000, to 900,000. We will have to build new healthcare capacity to meet the rising demand and also invest in new medical technologies to improve care quality. Within the next five years, we will build six more general and community hospitals, four new polyclinics, and more nursing homes and eldercare centres around the island.
All in all, we expect our average annual healthcare spending to rise from 2.2% of GDP today to almost 3% of GDP over the next decade. This is an increase of nearly 0.8 percentage point of GDP, or about $3.6 billion in today's dollars. Within the next decade, healthcare spending is expected to overtake education. The Government will do its part to spend wisely and ensure greater value-for-money in our healthcare spending. Everyone has a role to play, too, by taking care of our health and saving up for our own and our families’ healthcare needs.
Another key area of expenditure increase will be infrastructure. We have increased our infrastructure spending8 from $8.5 billion in FY2011 to an estimated $20 billion in FY2018.
We are building and upgrading flats, expanding and maintaining our rail and bus networks, and keeping public transport fares low for Singaporeans.
Over the next five years, the annual subsidies for keeping our buses and trains running will be comparable to the amount we spend on pre-employment training in polytechnics and ITEs. And this does not even include the cost of building public transport infrastructure.
Over the next decade, we will need to spend more to develop new infrastructure. We will expand our rail network by over 100 km, redevelop different parts of Singapore like the Jurong Lake District, Punggol Digital District and Woodlands North Coast, and rejuvenate our ageing infrastructure, such as water pipes and HDB flats and lifts.
We will also build Changi Airport Terminal 5 (Changi T5), Tuas Port and the KL-Singapore High Speed Rail so as to ready ourselves for long-term economic trends.
These are massive investments to anchor Singapore as the centre for economic activity in the region, create jobs, enhance liveability and serve as a foundation for future growth. As my colleague, the Minister for National Development has said, \"We are not done building Singapore yet.\"
Third, we will also have to invest more in security to keep Singapore safe. The terrorism threat to Singapore is at its highest in recent years. The range of threats we face is also wider, from major cyberattacks to online self-radicalisation. To counter these threats, we will need to: enhance the operational readiness of our officers; leverage technologies to enhance our response; and partner the community, so that we are all well-equipped to respond in emergencies.
Besides healthcare, infrastructure and security, we will also have to sustain our investments in education to give our young a good start. Even though our student cohorts are falling, we are spending more per child and dedicating more resources to help everyone reach his or her potential. In FY2018, our education spending9 is estimated at $12.8 billion.
We are investing more in preschool education to give every child a good foundation from a younger age. As the Prime Minister announced last year, we will spend $1.7 billion per year on the preschool sector by 2022, double our annual spending now.
We will continue to invest in lifelong learning to help Singaporeans reskill and upskill so that they can access good jobs and thrive in the new economy. Hence, there is a need to strengthen our fiscal footing to meet these growing expenditure needs and to prepare for any unforeseen ones. I have already spoken about this at last year's Budget and said that we would study various options. The Prime Minister also mentioned this in November last year.
Our fundamental strategy is to grow our economy. With a strong economy, we will have more resources with which we can meet the needs and aspirations of our people. The work of the FEC and the strategies I laid out earlier are, therefore, critical.
At the same time, we must continue to manage our expenditure growth carefully and get the best value for every dollar we spend. At 19% of GDP, our estimated overall Government expenditure10 in FY2018 is leaner than most developed economies. And we have been able to get good value for our money, delivering good outcomes in areas like healthcare and education, which are highly ranked internationally. Even so, to emphasise the need to be more prudent, I announced a permanent 2% downward adjustment to the budget caps of Ministries and Organs of State last year.
This year, I will further moderate the pace of Ministries’ budget growth. Currently, Ministries' block budgets are allowed to grow at 0.4 times of GDP growth. I will reduce this rate to 0.3 times from FY2019. Our agencies are also on the lookout for ways to be more efficient and effective.
My earlier announcement to merge PGO with AIC and make AIC the central implementation agency for seniors is one example. Another is the Land Transport Authority (LTA), which has designed a four-in-one facility, integrating one bus and three rail depots in a single development. This achieved significant cost savings and freed up about 44 hectares of land. This is larger than our Singapore Zoo and River Safari put together!
Other agencies are tapping on emerging technologies to improve productivity. JTC Corporation, for instance, has co-developed a robot with the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) to facilitate building inspection works, reducing manpower and time required by 50%.
For our infrastructure investments, the key challenge is that certain expenditures can be very lumpy, with hefty upfront investments. Yet, the benefits are enjoyed many years down the road. To address this challenge, we will do two things.
First, where possible, we will save ahead in preparation for these lumpy investments. This will help reduce the burden in future years. In 2015, we set up the Changi Airport Development Fund to start saving for Changi T5. We now have $4 billion in the fund. This year, we will set up a new Rail Infrastructure Fund to save up for major rail lines ahead. We will start with an injection of $5 billion in FY2018. This can be topped up in future years when our fiscal position allows.
Second, we are looking at borrowing by Statutory Boards and Government-owned companies which build infrastructure. This will help spread the cost of certain larger investments over more years. These infrastructure projects, once completed, will generate economic returns over many years. The borrowing arrangements for these projects will, hence, help distribute the share of funding more equitably across generations.
For example, the National Environment Agency (NEA) will look at borrowing to finance the upcoming Integrated Waste Management Facility. LTA will also look at borrowing for upcoming projects, such as the KL-Singapore High Speed Rail and the Johor Bahru (JB)-Singapore Rapid Transit System Link. The Changi Airport Group, too, will look at borrowing for Changi T5.
Besides spreading out the costs to better match when the benefits of the investments accrue, such long-term borrowings will also help to develop our bond market. To help lower the financing cost, the Government will consider providing guarantees for some of these long-term borrowings for critical national infrastructure. A Government guarantee will enhance the confidence of creditors. This is another way to use the strength of our Reserves to back our infrastructure projects, without directly drawing on the Reserves. The Reserves can then remain invested to generate returns.
We are studying this carefully and discussing it with the President and the Council of Presidential Advisers. Through both saving ahead and borrowing, we expect to smooth out and be able to meet our major infrastructure needs.
For healthcare, security and other social spending, the increases will be recurrent, will benefit Singaporeans broadly, and will directly benefit current generations. The responsible way to pay for them is through taxation so that every generation pays its share.
We should not borrow for recurrent spending, because that will put the burden of recurrent spending on future generations. Therefore, to support these recurrent needs, the Government plans to raise GST by two percentage points, from 7% to 9%, sometime in the period from 2021 to 2025. The exact timing will depend on the state of the economy, how much our expenditures grow, and how buoyant our existing taxes are. But I expect that we will need to do so earlier rather than later in the period.
This GST increase is necessary because even after exploring various options to manage our future expenditures through prudent spending, saving and borrowing for infrastructure, there is still a gap. Increasing GST by two percentage points will provide us with revenue of almost 0.7% of GDP per year. This boost in revenue will be vital in closing this gap. We will continue to manage our expenditures and the need for other future revenue measures carefully, and plan ahead early for our overall revenue and expenditure needs. We will implement the GST increase in a progressive manner, as we have always done in the past.
First, we will continue to absorb GST on publicly-subsidised education and healthcare.
Second, we will enhance the permanent GST Voucher (GSTV) scheme when the GST is increased, so as to provide more help to lower-income households and seniors. Today, we already disburse about $800 million per year from the GSTV Fund. This year, we will make a $2 billion top-up to the GSTV Fund to support these payments.
Third, we will also implement an offset package for a period to help Singaporeans adjust to the GST increase. Lower- and middle-income households will receive more support. We will provide more details once we have determined the timing of the GST increase.
When we mention the need to raise taxes, a natural question is: why do we not tap more on our Reserves instead? Indeed, we have been doing so over the last decade. I mentioned earlier that we introduced the NIR framework in 2008. This started out with the Reserves managed by the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). Temasek was then included in the framework in 2015. Through this framework, we now spend on the basis of total returns on our Reserves, including both realised and unrealised capital gains.
Over the last 10 years since the implementation of the NIR framework, the NIR contribution (NIRC) has more than doubled from $7 billion in FY2009 to an estimated $15.9 billion in FY2018. NIRC is now the largest contributor to our revenues, larger than any single tax, including GST and corporate and personal income taxes.
We are able to supplement our revenues with NIRC today because our predecessors judiciously set aside the savings from the strong growth during Singapore’s earlier stage of economic development. Now that our economy is maturing, and our population is ageing, we must husband this resource carefully, prudently and responsibly.
Currently, we spend up to 50% of expected NIR and keep the remainder in our Reserves. This allows our Reserves to grow with our economy. If instead, we used 100% of the returns, the principal sum of the Reserves will stagnate over time, and the NIRC, as a share of GDP, will consequently fall as our economy grows. The impact of this will not be trivial, given that our Budget now relies on the NIRC as our largest source of revenue.
In a more extreme scenario, if we spent more than our investment returns, we will eat into our nest egg. Doing so would mean that our Reserves will shrink over time, generating a progressively smaller stream of income in the years that follow, till eventually our Reserves are exhausted.
Mr Speaker, Sir, this is not the Singapore way.
We must also never forget that, as an island nation with no hinterland and no natural resources, our Reserves lend long-term stability to our economy and afford us the means to weather crises. During the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, our Reserves and strong economic fundamentals kept the Singapore dollar stable even as currency speculators were attacking other regional currencies. During the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, our Reserves anchored our economy against the storm by backing a $150 billion guarantee for all bank deposits in Singapore. And during the recession in 2009, our Reserves funded a total of $4 billion for the Jobs Credit Scheme and Special Risk-Sharing Initiative to help employers and employees tide over the difficult period.
As a small and open economy, we will always be vulnerable to fluctuations in the global economy and financial markets. We can never predict where or when the next crisis will come. But we know, when the next crisis hits, we will be able to weather the storm because we have our Reserves.
I will now introduce other changes to make our tax system more progressive, fair and resilient.
First, I will enhance progressivity. One common suggestion is to tax the rich and higher-income more or introduce wealth taxes like a capital gains tax. This reflects a desire for a progressive system, with those with more contributing back to society. This is fair and is precisely what we have done over the years.
We increased personal income tax rates for our top income brackets in 2015 and imposed a cap on personal income tax reliefs in 2016. We also introduced a progressive property tax system for residential properties in 2010 and made it more progressive in 2013.
This year, I will raise the top marginal Buyer’s Stamp Duty (BSD) rate for residential properties from 3% to 4%. Today, our BSD rates for residential properties range between 1% and 3% and have remained unchanged since 1996. The new top marginal rate of 4% will apply to the portion of residential property value which is in excess of $1 million. This change will apply to all residential properties acquired from tomorrow. The BSD rates for non-residential properties remain unchanged at 1% to 3% [Please refer to Annex A-5].
Moving forward, we will continue to study options to ensure that our tax system remains progressive.
Next, to make sure that our tax system remains fair and resilient in a digital economy, I will introduce GST on imported services with effect from 1 January 2020. Today, services, such as consultancy and marketing, purchased from overseas suppliers are not subject to GST. Local consumers also do not pay GST when they download apps and music from overseas. This change will ensure that imported and local services are accorded the same treatment [Please refer to Annex A-5].
For the import of goods, there are international discussions on how GST can apply. We will review this before deciding on the measure to take.
Finally, to discourage consumption of tobacco products, I will implement a 10% increase in tobacco excise duty across all tobacco products with effect from today [Please refer to Annex A-5].
I will also be extending and strengthening other tax incentives to enhance our business competitiveness in this Budget. The details of these changes are in the Annex [Please refer to Annex A-5].
Mr Speaker, Sir, I have just laid out the plans for our expenditures and revenues in the coming decade. Expenditure in many areas will rise, especially in healthcare, infrastructure and security. To meet these needs, we must plan ahead and prepare early. We need to remain prudent in our spending, save up where possible, and raise revenues, but in a fair and progressive way. This way, we can ensure a fiscally sustainable and secure future for ourselves and our children.
Having laid out our plans to prepare for the next decade, let me now cover our overall Budget position for the near term.
For FY2017, we expect an overall Budget surplus of $9.6 billion or 2.1% of GDP. This is higher than the $1.9 billion or 0.4% of GDP forecasted a year ago. This increase of $7.7 billion is mainly due to exceptional Statutory Board contributions of $4.6 billion, primarily from MAS, and increased stamp duty collections of $2 billion due to the recent property market pickup. We do not expect either to occur every year. It is not a structural surplus.
We cannot base our long-term fiscal planning on the basis of exceptional factors being positive, year after year. I will, therefore, use some of this year’s exceptional surplus to save ahead for future spending.
First, I will set aside $5 billion in the Rail Infrastructure Fund that I spoke about earlier. This will help to pay for the new rail lines that we are building.
Next, I will set aside $2 billion for premium subsidies and other forms of support for Singaporeans when the ElderShield review is complete.
Finally, I will share some of this year’s surplus with Singaporeans. I will declare a one-off SG Bonus. All Singaporeans aged 21 and above in 2018 will enjoy a \"hongbao\" of $300, $200 or $100, depending on their income. The SG Bonus will cost the Government $700 million [Please refer to Annex C-2]. It reflects the Government’s long-standing commitment to share the fruits of Singapore’s development with Singaporeans.
Notwithstanding the overall Budget surplus, the FY2017 Budget remains expansionary for the domestic economy. When we exclude NIRC and top-ups to funds, we expect a basic deficit of $1 billion, or 0.2% of GDP.
In FY2018, our Budget position will remain expansionary. Ministries’ total expenditures are expected to be $80 billion, or 8.3% higher than in FY2017. On the whole, we expect a slight overall Budget deficit of $0.6 billion, or 0.1% of GDP\t[Please refer to Annex D ].
Mr Speaker, Sir, I will now conclude. To prepare for this Budget, I spoke to many businesses, organisations, community partners, and Singaporeans. They gave me useful feedback, which helped refine our policies and set our priorities for the years ahead.
I would like to thank them for their contributions and also thank the students from Nanyang Polytechnic for helping to draw the beautiful sketches that you see in my slides today.
Budget 2018 is about laying the foundation for our nation's development in the next decade. It seeks to support our transformation into a vibrant and innovative economy, by fostering pervasive innovation, building deep capabilities and forging strong partnerships. It seeks to build a smart, green and liveable city, so that Singaporeans can enjoy a high-quality living environment. It also seeks to further our collective efforts to foster a caring and cohesive society, by harnessing the sense of community and the spirit of giving in our people. Finally, it lays out plans for our expenditures and revenues in the next decade, to ensure a fiscally sustainable and secure future for Singapore.
At its heart, the Budget is a strategic and integrated financial plan to position Singapore for the future. It is a means for us to achieve the aspirations of our people, a roadmap for us to achieve our vision for Singapore.
Our path ahead will not be easy, especially in light of the major shifts happening around us – a changing global economic landscape, the emergence of new technologies, and our own demographic transition.
But we have confronted graver challenges in the past and have always been able to overcome them, using our wits and relying on the solidarity of our people. We are now in a much stronger position than we have been in the past. We have a diversified and well-connected economy, a highly motivated and educated workforce, a cohesive and resilient society.
Together, we will marshal our resources and chart our course – to come together, to work together, to make our aspirations today the reality tomorrow. This way, we can build a better Singapore for everyone. Together, we can make a better future for all of us. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: The Question is, \"That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019.\"
In accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order No 89, the debate now stands adjourned. Debate to be resumed on what day?
Mr Heng Swee Keat: Tuesday, 27 February 2018, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker: So be it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Source: MTI’s Economic Survey of Singapore 2017.","2 : Median gross monthly income of full-time employed Singapore Citizens.","3 : Source: MOM’s Labour Market Advance Release 2017.","4 : For instance, food delivery firms like Food Panda, Deliveroo and Uber Eats have allowed our brick-and-mortar restaurants to go beyond their catchment areas and seating capacity.","5 : Source: MOM’s Comprehensive Labour Force Survey.","6 : Source: National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre’s Individual Giving Survey 2016. Additionally, total volunteer hours have more than doubled, from around 45 million hours in 2008 to 121 million hours in 2016.","7 : Source: Commissioner of Charities Annual Report 2016.","8 : Expenditures of the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of National Development, and the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources.","9 : Estimated FY2018 Expenditures of the Ministry of Education.","10 : Comprising Total Ministry Expenditures and Special Transfers including Top-ups to Endowment and Trust Funds."],"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn to Tuesday, 27 February 2018.\" – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien.] (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at
5.30 pm to Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reinvesting Cost Savings by Public Transport Operators from Going Cashless Towards Improving Customer Experience","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"23 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Transport what measures are being taken by the Ministry to nudge transport operators to reinvest the expected cost savings from going cashless towards improving the public transport customer experience.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: E-payments will bring greater convenience to commuters by eliminating the hassle of doing cash top-ups. It will also allow us to remove cash facilities at Mass Rapid Transit stations and buses eventually, freeing up space, manpower and other resources that the Government and the Public Transport Operators (PTO) can dedicate towards enhancing our public transport system and commuter experience.
For example, any cost savings from the streamlining of ticketing infrastructure can be channelled towards building of new transport infrastructure. Instead of handling cash transactions, PTO staff can better focus on managing rail operations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Installation of Lifts at Pedestrian Overhead Bridges","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the average cost of installing a pedestrian overhead bridge with lift; and (b) whether the Government has a schedule of where and when lifts will be installed at pedestrian overhead bridges nationwide.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: A pair of lifts at a pedestrian overhead bridge (POB) can cost up to $4 million to install and about $40,000 a year to maintain. POBs are selected for retrofitting based on factors, such as their proximity to major transport nodes, the level of pedestrian demand, and the availability of existing barrier-free alternatives nearby.
The Land Transport Authority has retrofitted 26 POBs near public transport nodes, healthcare institutions, homes for the aged, and schools for special needs children, and will retrofit another 21 POBs by the end of 2018.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Change in Employers for Existing Work Permit Holders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether any employers have been found collecting kickbacks to hire existing Work Permit holders who have changed employers; (b) what initiatives the Ministry has undertaken to match employers with existing Work Permit holders who are changing employers; and (c) what has been the rate of uptake of such initiatives.
Mr Lim Swee Say: From 2015 to 2017, 21 employers11 were found collecting kickbacks to hire Work Permit Holders (WPHs) who had changed employers. The Ministry of Manpower takes a serious view of employers who collect kickbacks from WPHs. Employers found to do so are liable for a fine up to $30,000, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to both.
Since 2005, WPHs from the construction sector have been allowed to change employers if their current employers agree. In 2015, construction WPHs were also allowed to change employers near their work pass expiry if they are unable to come to a mutual agreement on the renewal of their Work Permits. These flexibilities were extended to the Process sector in 2017.
WPHs who wish to change employers are able to seek new employment on their own or engage the services of employment agencies. The Singapore Contractors Association Limited has also put in place a Foreign Construction Workers Directory System to facilitate the matching of employers and existing construction workers. In addition, the Migrant Workers' Centre will assist WPHs with valid salary claims who seek employment.
As of December 2017, approximately 131,000 WPHs have changed employers near their work pass expiry or upon employers' consent.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["11 : Employers were issued with warning, caution, admin financial penalties, composition, or were prosecuted."],"footNoteQuestions":["2"],"questionNo":"2"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Applicants for Legal Aid from 2013 to 2017","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Law for each year in the past five years, how many applicants applied for legal aid and, of these applicants, how many failed at the stage of (i) the means test and (ii) the merits test.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Legal Aid Bureau provides Legal Aid, Legal Advice and Legal Assistance, for example, drafting of wills, to lower-income Singaporeans and Permanent Residents. Legal Advice and Legal Assistance applicants only need to pass the means test, while Legal Aid applicants have to pass both the means test and the legal merits test.
The data from 2013 to 2017 for those who applied for Legal Advice and Legal Assistance is set out in the table below.
The data from 2013 to 2017 for those who applied for Legal Aid is set out in the table below.
The number of applications which went through the merits test is lower than the number of applications which passed the preliminary means test, because many applicants of Legal Aid who passed the preliminary means test subsequently withdrew their applications, became uncontactable, or were later found to be above means. Applicants with urgent cases may also have been assisted under a Provisional Grant of Aid before they went through the merits test.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Priority Outpatient Treatment for Elderly Patients at Polyclinics and Hospitals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the current scheme on priority queue for frail and elderly patients seeking outpatient treatment at the polyclinics and hospitals; and (b) whether this priority scheme is also applicable across all patient service points, such as the x-ray department and pharmacy.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: All our polyclinics and specialist outpatient clinics have implemented appointment booking to minimise waiting time for patients. As many of our patients are elderly, appointments are given based on clinical need. This ensures that patients who are more ill or require urgent medical attention are seen earlier regardless of age.
Nevertheless, clinic staff are trained to identify patients with potential fall risks, mobility issues or who appear unwell and assistance will be provided when necessary. Wheelchairs are available and service points are also installed with mobility aids, such as grab bars, ramps and lifts. Priority seats are available for those who need to sit while waiting for their turn.
Polyclinics also have self-help kiosks, online or mobile platforms for payment and booking of next appointments for the convenience of the patients and caregivers. Medications can also be home-delivered or collected at selected retail outlets and Pillbox lockers. These initiatives minimise the need to queue at payment or pharmacy counters.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on HDB Home Loan Arrears from 2015 to 2017","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for National Development over the last three years (a) how many HDB home owners have been in arrears or have defaulted on their HDB home loans and what are their age groups; (b) what percentage of these cases have been resolved; and (c) what are the three most common reasons for the default or arrears.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Over the last three years, of a total of about 405,000 households with outstanding Housing and Development Board (HDB) loans, about 32,000 households (or 7.9%) were ever in mortgage arrears of three months or more.
Of these 32,000 households, almost half are in the 41-55 age group (based on the age of the oldest owner). Another 38% are above 55, and the rest are in the 21-40 age bracket.
At the end of 2017, 57% of these households (about 18,200) were no longer in mortgage arrears of three months or more.
Common reasons why households fall into mortgage arrears include a drop in the household income, prolonged unemployment or illnesses.
To help households in mortgage arrears, HDB provides financial counselling and refers the household to agencies that can assist with employment, financial aid and social support. If the household’s financial problems are temporary, HDB can help by reducing or deferring their mortgage instalment payments to ease their cash flow.
For owners in prolonged financial difficulty, HDB will also help them explore long-term solutions. For example, they may include working adult children as joint owners to help with the mortgage instalments, or right-size to a flat within their means.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[{"annexureID":353,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex A-1 - Support for Business Restructuring","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex A-1 - Support for Business Restructuring.pdf","fileName":"Annex A-1 - Support for Business Restructuring.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":354,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex A-4 - Support for Workers to Deepen Skills and Manage Career Transitions","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex A-4 - Support for Workers to Deepen Skills and Manage Career Transitions.pdf","fileName":"Annex A-4 - Support for Workers to Deepen Skills and Manage Career Transitions.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":355,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex A-3 - Support for Firms to build Capabilities and Forge Partnerships","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex A-3 - Support for Firms to build Capabilities and Forge Partnerships.pdf","fileName":"Annex A-3 - Support for Firms to build Capabilities and Forge Partnerships.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":356,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex A-5 - Tax Changes","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex A-5 - Tax Changes.pdf","fileName":"Annex A-5 - Tax Changes.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":357,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex A-2 - Measures to Foster Pervasive Innovation","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex A-2 - Measures to Foster Pervasive Innovation.pdf","fileName":"Annex A-2 - Measures to Foster Pervasive Innovation.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":358,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex B - Support for Building A Green and Liveable City","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex B - Support for Building A Green and Liveable City.pdf","fileName":"Annex B - Support for Building A Green and Liveable City.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":359,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex C-1 - Edusave Merit Bursary","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex C-1 - Edusave Merit Bursary.pdf","fileName":"Annex C-1 - Edusave Merit Bursary.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":360,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex C-2 - Transfers to Households","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex C-2 - Transfers to Households.pdf","fileName":"Annex C-2 - Transfers to Households.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":361,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex C-3 - Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) Levy","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex C-3 - Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) Levy.pdf","fileName":"Annex C-3 - Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) Levy.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":362,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex C-4 - Measures to Encourage Philanthropy and Volunteerism","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex C-4 - Measures to Encourage Philanthropy and Volunteerism.pdf","fileName":"Annex C-4 - Measures to Encourage Philanthropy and Volunteerism.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":363,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex D - Fiscal Position in FY2018","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20180219/annex-Annex D - Fiscal Position in FY2018.pdf","fileName":"Annex D - Fiscal Position in FY2018.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null}],"vernacularList":[],"onlinePDFFileName":""}