1 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Prime Minister (a) how many polling stations experienced technical issues with the electronic voter registration system during the 2023 Presidential Election; (b) whether cyber interference for the technical issues experienced has been ruled out; and (c) what is being done to (i) ensure that all who voted were correctly registered and (ii) prevent a repeat of situations where persons remember voting in the 2020 General Election but which names were not in the 2023 updated Registers of Electors.
2 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Prime Minister in view of the Elections Department’s press statement dated 24 August 2023 regarding the wrongful removal of names from the Registers of Electors after General Election 2020 (a) how many times has this happened in the aftermath of past elections or by-elections; and (b) what steps will be taken to prevent a re-occurrence.
3 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Prime Minister regarding voters who were removed from the electoral register due to an error (a) what was the total number of voters affected; (b) whether there was any individual notification exercise to expunged voters in reminding them to add their name back to the register since the last such exercise in 2019; and (c) why was a tally of the number of NRICs scanned and the number of votes collected after the last general election not conducted as a first instance check.
4 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Prime Minister (a) what are the reasons resulting in the names of about 200 Singaporeans not being reflected in the Registers of Electors eligible to vote at Presidential Election 2023 despite voting in General Election 2020; and (b) what are measures taken to prevent such recurrence.
\tThe Minister for Education (Mr Chan Chun Sing) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Prime Minister, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 1 to 4 by Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Pritam Singh, Dr Tan Wu Meng and Ms He Ting Ru on today’s Order Paper, please?
\tMr Speaker: Please proceed.
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me first set out the Elections Department's (ELD) key executional objectives at every election, which is to ensure: firstly, that only bona fide voters are issued with ballot papers; secondly that no extra ones were put in; and thirdly that all votes cast are counted, so that the election result is determined by the eligible voters for that election.
To achieve this, we have put in place a set of procedures that need to be complied with. Let me explain.
Upon the voter’s arrival at the polling station, the election official will verify his identity and eligibility to vote at the polling station, and then register the voter’s attendance via a hardcopy polling station register or the electronic registration system. Thereafter, the voter is directed to the ballot paper issuance counter. The election official issuing the ballot paper is required, by law, to read out the name and voter serial number of a voter before the voter is issued a ballot paper. This allows the polling agents to mark their copy of the register and provide an additional check to ensure that only eligible voters in the register for that polling station are individually issued with a ballot paper. As a result, when the votes are tallied for an election, we can be confident that the outcome is the one decided by the eligible voters for that election.
After the end of each election, ELD compiles the list of voters registered to have voted on Polling Day and compares them against the list of voters in the certified Registers of Electors for the election. Those who were not registered as having voted on Polling Day are included in the list of non-voters, which is published after each election for inspection. The non-voter list contains the names of people who have not turned up to vote. The vast majority of them did not vote either because they were not in Singapore or were ill on Polling Day. For these cases, their names were not crossed out in the hardcopy polling registers as they did not turn up at the polling stations.
After each election, there would be a few voters who claimed that they had voted even though upon checking, their names were not crossed out in the hardcopy polling registers. Thus, in reply to Mr Pritam Singh’s question, prior to the introduction of electronic registration at General Election 2020 (GE2020), ELD encountered only a few cases of voters who were on the non-voter list who claimed that they had voted.
For GE2020, GE2015 and GE2011, ELD recorded about 111,000, 155,000 and 147,000 non-voters respectively. As can be seen, the non-voter list for GE2020 was much smaller, rather than bigger, than the two previous GEs.
As per every election, ELD published the non-voter list for voters to verify about three months after GE2020. This was publicised via a press release on 5 October 2020, which was covered by the mainstream media.
Ms He asked why a tally of the number of NRICs scanned and the number of votes cast after the last general election was not conducted as a first instance check. Given the much lower number of non-voters for GE2020 compared to the two general elections before, ELD did not suspect that an unusual number of voters had not been recorded as registered. Checking the registration figures at the end of Polling Day may also not be instructive – and this is because the process to ensure voting secrecy means that we will not be able to identify individual voters, including those who had not been registered accurately and would therefore be listed as non-voters in due course. Furthermore, every voter receives only one ballot paper and the ballot boxes which contain all of the cast ballot papers are always in the custody of election officials, properly sealed, with polling and counting agents able to witness this process, and secured while in transit.
Ahead of Presidential Election 2023 (PE2023), ELD publicised that the revised Registers were available for inspection from 15 June 2023 and that the certified Registers which contains updated information from the inspection period were available for inspection from 21 July 2023. These exercises were carried out to enable Singaporeans to check their details and restore their names to the Registers ahead of the election.
From October 2020 to the day of the Writ in August this year, some 32,000 voters checked and restored their names. Similar to previous exercises, there were very few who requested ELD to restore their names due to inaccuracy in the recording of their voting status in GE2020. As such, ELD did not suspect that there were significant inaccuracies in the recording.
The list of non-voters had been opened for inspection shortly after the GE2020 and the public were reminded that the registers were available for inspection in June and July 2023 before the Writ for PE2023 was issued. Voters need not wait for these periods, but are able to check their status in the registers all year round either through Voter Services on ELD’s website, at any of the over 100 community centres or clubs or by calling ELD.
However, there remained some voters who did not check that their names were on the Registers. After the Writ was issued for PE2023 and up to Polling Day, 1,093 Singaporeans informed the ELD that they did not receive their poll card even though they said that they had voted in GE2020. For context, this number averages one voter per polling station, which had an average of 2,400 registered voters in GE2020. So, this is about one voter per polling station with an average of 2,400 registered voters in GE2020. Further, ELD’s analysis of the distribution of the affected voters showed that there is no pattern across the polling stations and that the 1,093 cases were distributed across more than 500 polling stations.
ELD has investigated this and concluded that the most probable cause of the error was that the NRIC details of these affected voters had not been captured properly by the electronic registration system, which was only introduced from GE2020. This is because the proper registration procedure may not have been followed for the affected voters, especially in some of the more crowded stations.
Let me explain. A voter’s NRIC and poll card are first checked by election officials at the registration counter before the NRIC is scanned to register the voter. When the NRIC of a voter is scanned by the barcode reader, an alert or \"beep\" sound will be emitted and a digital screen will flash an \"OK\" button, indicating that the voter data has been successfully captured in the system. At this point, the election official should tap the \"OK\" button to return to the registration screen so that the NRIC of the next voter can be scanned.
If the NRIC of the next voter is scanned when the screen has not returned to the registration screen, the alert sound will still be emitted, as this indicates that the NRIC has been scanned. However, the record of this voter would not have been captured. It is likely that in their effort to clear the queues at some polling stations quickly in GE2020, some election officials might have missed out this step. As a result, the registration of the affected voters was not captured.
For PE2023, we implemented a new electronic registration system with a simplified process. Election officials need not press any button to return to the registration screen to register the next voter. Therefore, the issue of non-captured registrations as a result of not pressing a button would no longer arise.
Dr Tan asked what is being done to ensure that all who voted were registered, and Dr Tan, Mr Singh and Mr Liang also asked what will be done to prevent a recurrence where those who had voted were inadvertently removed from the Registers. Going forward, besides making a public call for voters to check their status when the non-voter list is published for verification, ELD will institute an additional measure to individually inform Singaporeans on the non-voter list via mail and through SG Notify in Singpass to verify their status, and to restore their names to the Registers if need be. We thank Ms Ng Ling Ling for her suggestion.
Dr Tan asked about the number of polling stations that experienced technical issues with the electronic registration system during the recent PE2023. Based on ELD’s preliminary investigations, there was a 30% average loss in device connectivity in the first hour of polling and this reduced to 16% by 10.00 am. There was no evidence that this was caused by cyber-attacks. Instead, this could have been partly contributed by the surge in the volume of transactions during the morning peak, where about 52% of the total number of voters had already voted in the first four hours, compared to 32% in GE2020.
For PE2023, ELD had endeavoured to reduce queues and waiting times for the convenience of voters.
The number of polling stations was increased by 15% to 1,264 stations, from the 1,097 stations in GE2020. This reduced the average number of voters assigned to a polling station from about 2,400 voters in GE2020 to 2,150 voters in PE2023.
Each polling station also had more e-Registration devices than before, from between two and four devices each, proportionate to the number of voters in the polling stations, with an additional spare device each for contingency. For reference, a polling station with only two e-Registration devices can process at least six voters per minute on average, which is a 50% higher throughput compared to manual registration which does so at the rate of an average of four voters per minute.
I would like to also take this opportunity to thank our election officials who adapted quickly and kicked in the contingency measure as planned to register voters using the hard copy registers, which they had been trained to do. As a result, by about 9.55 am, ELD had reported that queues had improved at most stations. We would also like to thank voters who had to queue longer during the morning of peak hours Polling Day for their patience and understanding.
The electronic Registration system seeks to reduce waiting times and automate attendance taking for the benefit of voters. ELD will continue to enhance the system so that the registration data are captured swiftly and accurately.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his answer. Let me first declare that I have Clementi residents who were affected and shared their concerns with me as their Member of Parliament. I declare that I have a Clementi resident who remembered voting in 2020, but in 2023, found she was not on the Registers belatedly and she regrets not having had the chance to vote and choose her President at the ballot box that day. I also have Clementi residents who saw how hard our election officials, how hard our public officers worked, and the heroic efforts made by our public officers when technical difficulties arose.
Can I ask the Minister supplementary questions on what I will call the \"3Rs\": reliability, resilience, responsibility?
Firstly, on reliability. When an electronic registration system is tested, is it benchmarked for 100% accuracy in the tender requirements, at least as good as paper, if not better?
On resilience, can I ask ahead of the Presidential Election, was there a proper full-dress rehearsal, incorporating set-up, log-in, getting the terminals up and ready, and then, comprehensive load-testing beyond what would be the traditional expected loads, to stress test the system? This is because I have residents who have concerns about whether someday, there may be cyber interference and we know what advanced persistent threats are out there.
Lastly, the third \"R\", on responsibility. I note that the ELD website mentions \"Your vote decides the future of Singapore\". How we design these systems also shapes the voting process as well. Can the Minister assure us that ELD will do its level best to learn from this and continue improving, in particular, contractor specifications, tender requirements, so that the situations like these can be avoided in future?
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. Let me respond to the three supplementary questions.
I will start with the third one. Yes, definitely, ELD will continue to improve just as per every election. We will take in the debrief and feedback from all members of the public and also Members in this Chamber, and ELD will continue to seek to strive better, be it process wise or the technical issues that we face. So, that is the third question that Dr Tan asked.
The second one, on the issue of reliability, yes, indeed, ELD has specifications on the reliability standards. And let me perhaps take this question a bit further to explain what we mean by \"reliability standards\". The reliability of a system depends on a few parts and to answer the second question, all these were also stress tested. First, we have to make sure that the hardware is functioning well. Second, we have to make sure that the connectivity between the over 4,500 systems all around the island, is connected well and has certain redundancy. And third, we have to make sure that the software is also working fine.
Sir, as I have explained, the first is that, for this particular PE, we have ruled out the issue of a cyber-attack. The second is that we have also checked that the hardware has worked well and it was not the main contributing factor to the slowness in the first few hours, the slowness that started at 8.30 am that lasted until about 10.00 am during Polling Day. The third thing is about connectivity. For all the polling stations, we had double redundancy to make sure that we did not rely on any particular network, and this was also stress tested during the run-up. In fact, ELD undertook the technical tests. Prior to Polling Day itself, they conducted full-dress rehearsals with all the devices on, to check the connectivity and hardware issues; and they were satisfied that they were all in working condition.
ELD, in the initial findings, has pretty much narrowed this down to a technical issue that has to do with the software. And let me explain it in layman's terms as follows. In ELD's stress tests, they stress test a certain volume of transactions within a certain amount of time. So, this election, notwithstanding the fact that within the first four hours, 52% of the people have voted compared to 32% in the last GE, we had stress tested that scenario.
But there was one particular feature that perhaps, in hindsight, the technical officers could have looked deeper into. And that is when all the devices were sending messages to the central server and when the inordinate amount of surge happened, some of the messages did not get through. And when the packets of messages did not get through, the system kept trying. And because as the system kept trying, it continued to pile up a backlog of packets that have to be cleared.
When ELD technical officers realised this, after 8.30 am when this thing happened, they quickly increased the memory and computing power capacity, and this helped us to quickly resolve the issue. So, if you like, some messages did not get through, they continued to pile up, creating a backlog and it caused a bit of a cascade effect. But with the quick discovery of this problem, the ELD officers were able to quickly increase the computing power and also the memory in order to clear the backlog. But once the backlog had set in, it took us about an hour plus to clear the backlog and return the clearance speed to normal.
But I must say, even with assurance about the redundancy, ELD's planning norms are such that in every polling station, even if the electronic registration systems failed, we will be able to clear the queues with the manual processes, as we had done in the past. So, the baseline is that manual processes will allow us to comfortably clear all the voters in that polling station. On top of that, if this is supplemented by the electronic system, it will help us to speed up the clearance even faster. Which is why, for this particular PE, even though there were 52% of the voters voting in the first four hours, by about 10.00 am in the morning, we had pretty much managed to clear all the queues and clear 52% of the voters within the first four hours.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Sir, between 11 and 24 August, ELD's press release of 24 August stated that about 200 Singaporeans had informed ELD that their names were not in the Registers of Electors even though they had voted in GE2020. The Minister said in his reply that this number is now 1,093. Based on the Minister's reply, will the ELD be sending letters and notifications to all non-voters in GE2020 who have not applied to put themselves back on the Registers of Electors to ensure that no voter has been struck off, due to the additional steps in the electronic registration system process that was employed in GE2020?
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir. I thank Mr Pritam Singh for his supplementary questions. First, let me assure Mr Pritam Singh all the 1,093 voters who were left out or not registered properly for PE2023, all their names have been restored to the Registers. And now ELD is doing the reconciliation for PE2023. We will be sending all those in the non-voters list for PE2023 personal notifications, as I have explained, to encourage them to verify their status.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Thank you, Sir. Two further questions for the Minister. Firstly, given that voting is compulsory in Singapore, why does ELD not automatically update all the citizens' names on the Registers of Electors after each election? That will minimise some of these problems that we have just talked about.
My second question is what is the purpose of this administrative step for those who did not vote in the last election, to apply for their names to be restored to the Registers? Is this necessary or is the purpose still meaningful today, given that it can open up to potential operational slips and also additional administrative work for ELD and the voters as well, since they have to go and put their names back? So, is the purpose still a meaningful one?
\t
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, we thank Mr Liang Eng Hwa for his feedback. Precisely because voting is compulsory, the Election Acts requires that the names of the non-voters be expunged from the Registers if they did not vote. This is in the Election Acts. And a penalty of $50 must be paid for one's name to be restored if he or she does not provide a valid reason for not voting. The penalty is waived if the voter is able to provide a valid reason such as being overseas on Polling Day. Otherwise, he or she will no longer be able to vote in future elections, or to stand nominated as a candidate for elections. In other words, the penalty for not voting and the process of expunging the names of non-voters, give effect to the notion of compulsory voting. Starting on a clean slate with no penalty will undermine this.
\tMr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
\tMs He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. The first being, leaving aside secrecy, which of course we agree is very important, does ELD have data about how many total identity cards were scanned during GE2020 versus how many votes were eventually recorded as being cast during the election? That would actually give us a first instance indication of whether there is any discrepancy beyond the 1,097 voters that have contacted ELD to say that they voted but their names were erroneously removed from the Register. That is my first question.
My second question is, I note that in a reply to one of my Parliamentary Questions in 2020, the Minister stated then that, in 2019 and 2016, one-off exercises were done to remind voters whose names were not on the Registers to ask them to take action and to re-apply to go back onto the Registers. I am just wondering whether we can do a one-off sweep to all voters, including voters that were removed from the Registers prior to GE2020 and PE2023, to ask them to take action to put their names back on. And also, in that vein, whether or not we can make it standard practice after every election that ELD would then send out a notice to voters who did not vote, asking them to apply, so that you do not just rely on press releases?
\t
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, let me answer Ms He Ting Ru's first question. At the end of every Polling Day, there will be a combination of electronic records in the current system plus some manual records. Because in instances where the electronic system malfunctions or fails for whatever reason, we will have to rely on the manual record. So, at the end of each Polling Day, we would not immediately have the numbers because there is the electronic dataset, which we have to reconcile with the manual set. So, that is the answer to the first question. And even if we can reconcile it immediately, it will not be able to tell us who are the non-voters accurately.
On the second question, indeed, it is not so much about a one-time sweep or when the voters can check their names. As I have explained in my reply, once the reconciliation is done, from that period until the next election when the Writ is issued, at any point in time, the voters can check their status. And we agree with you; we encourage all the voters to check their status anytime. It is not just only during the period when ELD publicises this. ELD will of course still make the publications, but the voters can go to any of the community centres (CCs) or the ELD website to check their status.
On top of that, this time round, we are specifically adding this extra step whereby those who are in the non-voters list will be encouraged to go and check their status way ahead of the next election.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh: Thank you, Speaker. To the Minister, just on my earlier supplementary question, the 200 and later on the number was revised to 1,093, these are individuals who got in touch with ELD to inform ELD that, \"I am not on the list although I did vote in 2020\".
My question is, again, based on your reply, the Minister said, following GE2020, there were 111,000 non-voters. And then, from October 2020 to August 2023, 32,000 individuals applied to restore their names. So, this 32,000 would have to be a part of this 111,000 who were non-voters. My point is there is possibly another 80,000 voters who, as of PE2023, could also be non-voters but who voted in GE2020?
I just want to confirm whether ELD is also going to reach out to everyone to ensure that they have not been erroneously struck off the voting list. I hope the Minister got the subject matter of my first supplementary question.
\t
\t
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Let me explain the numbers. There are 111,000 non-voters. The vast bulk of these non-voters, be it in GE2011, GE2015 or GE2020, were either overseas or some of them could be very old and very frail and so, did not vote. They are the vast bulk of these. For the 32,000 who asked to be restored, chances are that most of them were perhaps overseas or ill on that day and they have asked to be restored.
I do not think you will have 111,000 minus the 32,000 and, therefore, you end up with about 79,000 persons who have voted. That would not happen because, from the numbers, you will know that this is not the case. Also, from the previous experience, we know that the number of people who are so-called registered wrongly is not in that order of magnitude.
Perhaps, I should explain, just to put aside any doubt that this has in any way affected the accuracy or validity of the results. Of course, the first thing I must say is this – ELD will endeavour to make sure that we minimise the error to as close to zero as possible. It is very difficult because, whether it is the manual or electronic system, sometimes, there will be an error. But we will endeavour to make sure that this error is the minimum possible.
But just to give a bit of context as to what the error rate is like. Just now, I have explained that a typical polling station will have about, say, 2,500 voters. And the error, as what we have described just now, on average, is about one per polling station, which means about one in 2,500. That is the margin of error.
If we look at our recent GE results, the closest contest, if I remember correctly, should be Potong Pasir in 2011. It is about 100-plus votes difference out of about 20,000 voters. So, that margin is about one in 200 or thereabouts. That is the winning margin, the closest ever. But our error, the closest ever, is more like one in 2,000 – or rather, less than one in 2,000.
So, I just want to assure the public that ELD has gone through the records and, while there is a margin of error, this margin of error is nowhere to the extent that it will call into question any of the election results that we had in recent memories.
\tMr Speaker: Okay, one last clarification.
Mr Pritam Singh: Yes, Minister. Maybe I was not clear about the so-called 80,000. I am not saying that in all the 80,000 cases, there would have been some mistake. I am just saying there could be some individuals who voted in GE2020, but they had not informed ELD yet, that is the group that I am concerned with.
Just very quickly and continuing on what the Minister said towards the end about ELD, on the day the press release was sent, I dropped a note to ELD because I had members of the public who wrote to me about this problem – and I would just like to say that ELD replied on the same day and assured me that they were looking into the matter. I think it is important to also assure members of the public that ELD has been quite forthright in its communication with me.
\t
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Yes, indeed. So, 111,000 after the 32,000 – we will do the reconciliation again this time – exactly like what I said, we will send all those on the non-voters' list an individual reminder henceforth to remind them to make the check. So, we do not rule out that there could be a few more who may have voted but may have recorded wrongly.
And going forward, we will always do this process. That means, all those on the non-voters' list, for whatever reason they are on the non-voters' list, we will send them an individual reminder, on top of the public service announcements that we have made.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Speeding Up Drainage Improvement Works at Bukit Timah Canal between Rifle Range Road and Jalan Kampong Chantek ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the drainage improvement works at Bukit Timah Canal between Rifle Range Road and Jalan Kampong Chantek can be expedited.
\tThe Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Speaker, the Bukit Timah area has been historically prone to flooding due to its topography and high level of urbanisation. Over the past decade, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) has been progressively upgrading its drainage infrastructure to mitigate flood risks in this area. Notably, PUB completed the construction of the Bukit Timah First Diversion Canal in 2019.
In the same year, PUB commenced drainage upgrading works to widen and deepen the Bukit Timah Canal from Rifle Range Road to Jalan Kampong Chantek. When these works are completed, Bukit Timah Canal can convey 30% more rainwater to better meet the long-term challenge of increasing rainfall intensity.
This is part of PUB’s continual efforts to enhance our drainage network to better mitigate inland floods. PUB has invested almost $2 billion on drainage improvement works in the last decade and another $1.4 billion has been set aside to carry out further improvements to the drainage system from 2021 to 2025.
Climate change does not only bring about heavy rainfall but also drier weather conditions which may affect our water supply. Long-term planning and investments in weather-resilient water sources like NEWater and desalination are important. In the last five years, PUB has invested about $3 billion in key long-term water supply investments, including desalination plants, NEWater factories and expansion of its used water infrastructure, and will continue with such investments.
Since the announcement of PUB’s upgrading plans of the Bukit Timah Canal, NParks has also confirmed plans to implement the Bukit Timah-Rochor Green Corridor in the same area. PUB has been working closely with NParks to dovetail the drainage improvement works with the Green Corridor works. This would avoid prolonged traffic diversion along Bukit Timah Road and the inconvenience it would pose for residents, motorists, business owners and other stakeholders. However, as a result, the completion of drainage improvement works will be delayed from 2024 to 2026. We seek the patience and understanding of stakeholders during the construction works.
To reduce flood risks in the interim, PUB has completed several additional measures in 2022. These include raising a 450-metre stretch of Dunearn Road and deepening a 600-metre stretch of Bukit Timah Canal.
With more intense weather events arising from climate change, it is not feasible to expand our drains to cater for every extreme rainfall event. This would require massive land take and much higher costs. We will need to be prepared for occasional short incidences of flash floods.
I strongly encourage members of the public to use PUB’s communication channels to receive alerts on flood warnings, so that they can adjust their commuting plans accordingly. Managing flood risks is a collective effort.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Revision to Advisories on COVID-19 Vaccinations and Other Measures","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Government’s position is that non-vulnerable Singaporeans should continue to get their booster shots to keep their vaccination against COVID-19 current; and (b) how long more will Singaporeans continue to be able to get their booster shots free-of-charge.
7 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Health (a) whether an update can be provided on the Ministry's review of the remaining post-COVID-19 measures currently in place such as the mask-wearing requirement in healthcare settings; (b) whether there are plans to modify this measure to make mask-wearing non-mandatory in healthcare settings; and (c) if so, when will this change take place.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 6 and 7 together?
\tMr Speaker: Please do.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Thank you, Sir. My response will also cover the matters raised in the written question by Ms Joan Pereira.
Sir, since the transition to Disease Outbreak Response System Condition (DORSCON) Green in February 2023, all COVID-19 measures have been stepped down, with the exception of the National Vaccination Programme (NVP) which serves as our first line of defence against the fast-mutating COVID-19 virus. However, we have also adjusted our normal time practices, such as requiring mask wearing in patient-facing settings, to better protect patients and healthcare workers from respiratory infectious diseases in general, not just for COVID-19. The Ministry of Health (MOH) will continue to monitor the broader communicable disease situation, review our disease control practices and adjust our approach.
New COVID-19 variants will continue to emerge. The latest variants of interests are EG.5 and BA.2.86, which have a number of additional mutations compared with previous Omicron variants. Fortunately, so far, the science and empirical evidence show that existing vaccines continue to accord good protection against severe illness for individuals.
The pharmaceutical industry continues to update COVID-19 vaccines to preserve the effectiveness against new variants. For example, Pfizer’s latest vaccine specifically targets XBB1.5. Our contracts with suppliers enable us to procure the latest vaccines once they are assessed to be appropriate for the local situation.
Recently, the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) has approved the monovalent XBB 1.5 vaccine from Pfizer for patients aged six months and above and is reviewing other XBB.1.5 vaccines. The Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination is currently reviewing the data of the updated Comirnaty vaccine and will be providing its recommendations. The updated Comirnaty vaccine could arrive in Singapore by end-October. We will share more details when operational arrangements are confirmed.
We are able to achieve DORSCON Green not because COVID-19 became a mild disease. It is still a dangerous virus, especially for our vulnerable individuals and seniors. We can live with the virus now because our resilience has strengthened due to vaccinations and safe recovery from infections.
It is, therefore, important for us to maintain our resilience. That is why MOH strongly recommends that seniors aged 60 years and above, as well as residents living in aged care facilities and medically vulnerable persons, continue to receive a booster dose of the updated vaccine one year after their last booster dose. Healthy persons aged 12 to 59 may also receive the additional dose in 2023, which remains free under NVP, if they choose to. There are no plans to charge for COVID-19 vaccines because vaccines still play a critical role in keeping COVID-19 at bay.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for his answer. Just one supplementary question. May I ask the Senior Minister of State what is the long-term COVID-19 exit strategy for Singapore and whether we have attained herd immunity such that continued vaccination will be optional from now on? I am glad to hear the Senior Minister of State mention that there are no plans to charge for booster shots going forward and that those aged 12 to 59 would still be advised to take their vaccines.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: The COVID-19 situation is quite dynamic. The virus mutates. What it does, it is still changing. So, there is really insufficient data to commit to a long-term vaccination strategy at this time. MOH will continue to monitor the situation closely. We will take into account expert advice, the latest evidence and will update our recommendations on the basis of those, as needed.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
\tDr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I would just like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether, in his opinion, there is vaccination fatigue now, whether the vaccination rate is dropping partly because people are feeling it is much safer now and also for fear of the side-effects of vaccination. If so, what is MOH's strategy to deal with this vaccination fatigue and whether there is a long-term plan, like what the Senior Minister of State just mentioned?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Dr Lim for his very important question. The core of the strategy is educating the public, engaging them on their fears and concerns and explaining to them the importance of vaccination and not just for COVID-19 but for many other diseases. Vaccination works and it is an important part of how we defend ourselves against infectious diseases. We will continue to provide public health education materials, engage the public on their fears and concerns, and we hope that the Members of this House will help us in doing so.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Age-based Only Benefits Irrespective of Income and Housing Type in Majulah Package","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Majulah Package for Singaporeans can be modified to include items for which only age, and not housing type and income, form the eligibility criteria.
9 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Majulah Package can be amended to encompass elements where sole age-based qualifications are applicable, excluding considerations of housing category and income.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Finance (Mr Chee Hong Tat) (for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 8 and 9 together?
\tMr Speaker: Please go ahead.
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Thank you. Sir, the Majulah Package is meant to boost the retirement and healthcare adequacy of Singapore Citizens who were born on 31 December 1973 or earlier.
The key segments we want to help are the “young seniors” who are now in their 50s and early 60s. They have benefited from Singapore’s economic growth and our investments in education, healthcare and social security. Hence, we have designed the Majulah Package to provide more support to those with lower incomes and less wealth.
\tNevertheless, we recognise that there may be concerns that are common to all Singaporeans within this group. The Ministry of Finance (MOF) will therefore consider these suggestions by Ms Phua and Mr Edward Chia, as we finalise the parameters of the Majulah Package. Details on the Majulah Package will be announced in Budget 2024.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Denise Phua.
\tMs Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): I want to thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. Thank you also for being so positive in considering my inputs and hon Member Edward Chia's inputs.
The Majulah Package as it was announced at first, sounds like it is going to be means tested. And I can understand why because the state has limited resources. But like what Senior Minister of State just mentioned, there are some common needs amongst people of this age group, and therefore, I want to make a call to MOF to design the Majulah Package to be more like the Merdeka and the Pioneer Packages, which are very well designed and very inclusive. It had overall cash payouts, MediSave top-ups, outpatient subsidies and even health screening. I understand that you may not be able to design it totally like the previous packages, but I thought that we could learn more from the lessons from the design of these two earlier packages, for consideration.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Speaker, I thank Ms Phua for her suggestions and MOF will certainly consider her suggestions as we design the Majulah Package.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measure of Success for New Healthy Longevity Clinic","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Health (a) what will be the measure of success of the recently launched Healthy Longevity Clinic; and (b) whether there are plans to expand the services offered by the Healthy Longevity Clinic to other parts of Singapore, particularly polyclinics, when the current pilot at Alexandra Hospital proves to be successful.
\tThe Second Minister for Health (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M) (for the Minister for Health): The launch of the Healthy Longevity Clinic at Alexandra Hospital was very well covered in the media and generated much public interest. It is essentially a research project to try to develop effective and practical interventions for the future.
The clinic is therefore recruiting research participants for now, and there are currently no plans for the longevity clinic services to be offered at polyclinics and other public hospitals. But we hope with investments in research and development in longevity science and supported by national policies such as Healthier SG and Age Well SG, we will develop the capabilities to support our population to live long and healthy lives.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply. I think the pilot clinic is at Alexandra Hospital, which is very near to my Radin Mas constituency. So, the residents have been quite excited over it.
It seems that the goal of the Healthy Longevity Clinic seems to have many parallels with the national Healthier SG programme, as both seek similar direction to enhance health spans by preventing and managing chronic conditions. I would like to ask the Minister; can he clarify what are the key differences between these two programmes? As I read from the news article, the Healthy Longevity Clinic has been designed to serve as an affordable alternative to private clinics with more affordable tests and treatments.
\tMr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: I think unfortunately, the title \"Healthy Longevity Clinic\" will attract a lot of people who want to live long. Every one of us want to. But what it actually is, is a research project and it is different from evidence-based screening where it is available on a population basis and already clinical tests, like blood tests, metabolic immune cardiovascular tests, they are all already available under existing programmes and for many of us, it is highly subsidised. So, I would recommend that those who want and should be testing for their health, want to diagnose whether they have something going on that will affect their health, go for these programmes.
Whereas this project is really a barrage of screening tests beyond what a person would normally go through. It takes a lot of discipline, it takes a lot of commitment and therefore, unless you are committed to be a research participant, I would beseech that you do not participate because this takes a lot of time, and the results are not meant to guide your health but to guide research.\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Review CPF Withdrawal Limit for Singaporeans who Have Not Met Full Retirement Sums in View of Inflation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Manpower whether the withdrawal limit of $5,000 from the CPF Special and Ordinary Account savings for Singaporeans who have not met their Full Retirement Sum can be increased to match the rate of inflation.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Speaker, the intent of the Central Provident Fund (CPF) is to meet members' long-term retirement needs. Increasing the $5,000 unconditional withdrawal limit will only lower members' future monthly retirement payouts, especially for those who have not met their required retirement sum. To help Singaporeans cope with inflation and the rising cost of living, the Government has instead rolled out a comprehensive series of measures to provide immediate and targeted support which have helped the lower-income and the more vulnerable groups.
Nonetheless, the CPF system has some built-in some flexibility. For those who turned 55 from 2013 onwards, they can withdraw up to 20% of their Retirement Account savings from age 65. Property owners also have the flexibility to set aside the Full Retirement Sum (FRS) with a mixture of property and cash and can thus withdraw their Retirement Account savings above the Basic Retirement Sum or BRS.
\t
\t
\tMr Speaker: Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, can I pose one supplementary question to the Minister? Given that we are going to implement the Majulah Package, this will lead to the beefing up of the CPF Retirement Account for the lower-income Singaporeans.
Given that, will the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) reconsider its policy stance with regard to increasing the $5,000 withdrawal for the lower-income CPF account holders? Given that besides retirement, many Singaporeans would also like to realise some of their lifetime ambition, some of the things they like to do, at the age of 55. So, in line with the inflation that we have experienced over the last few decades, the $5,000 withdrawal amount appears to be too small. So, will MOM reconsider that amount?
\t
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank Mr Leong for that question. All of us in MOM, alongside with the CPF Board, constantly and consistently review the whole suite of measures that we have at hand to help Singaporeans. It is our commitment to all Singaporeans that we will walk every step of the way with you.
I think, coming from an investment background, Mr Leong would understand that there are some savings that are for the long term and there are also short-term measures to help out. We have always believed that the CPF system offers, over the long haul, adequacy for peace of mind at retirement.
We can support our Singaporeans to managing some of the increased cost of living through the many measures that we have introduced over the last many years. Mr Speaker, Sir, if you can bear with me, I can enumerate some of the schemes for illustration.
For the immediate cost of living issues, the Government has announced one-off support measures under the Assurance Package at Budget this year. So, you have got the Cost-of-Living Special Payment of between $200 and $400 for each eligible adult Singaporean. Then, there is the Cost-of-Living Seniors' Bonus of between $200 and $300 for eligible Singaporeans aged 55 and above.
There is also a doubling of U-Save Rebates provided to households over the next three tranches of disbursement in 2023. In total, eligible households can expect to receive up to $760 in U-Save Rebates this year.
During COVID-19, the Government also introduced a comprehensive suite of measures at the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets. I would not go into details.
Back in 2008 and 2009, during the Global Financial Crisis, the Government also introduced the Resilience Package which included a doubling of Goods and Service Tax (GST) credits and Senior Citizens' Bonus in 2009. There were Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC) rebates, as well as personal income tax rebate.
To Mr Leong's point further in terms of giving them something as an uplift upon reaching 55, I think there is a very delicate balance and series of trade-offs between that and to provide for a longer-term payout for them. We do not rest on our laurels. We constantly look and review the policy and looking at the broader context of the savings, the percentage of people attaining the BRS; we are not completely closed off. I hope that addresses his question.\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Sustainability Audit for Singapore's F1 Grand Prix and Other Events","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether an update can be provided on the sustainability audit carried out from last year's Singapore Grand Prix; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider ensuring that the sustainability audit for the Singapore Grand Prix and the Meetings, Incentives, Conferences and Exhibitions sector being developed this year includes timelines for (i) measurement of Scope 3 emissions that are indirect emissions occurring in the value chain of the reporting company and (ii) requirements to set interim emissions targets for 2030.
13 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Ministry is considering any mechanisms to be put in place to ensure a substantive portion of emission reductions from the Singapore Grand Prix and other Meeting, Incentives, Conferences and Exhibitions sector events are driven from actual emission cuts within their direct control and value chain, rather than carbon-offset driven.
\tThe Second Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 12 and 13 on today's Order Paper together?
\tMr Speaker: Please proceed.
\tDr Tan See Leng: Both questions relate to the sustainability efforts for Formula 1 Singapore Grand Prix and the meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions (MICE) industry.
The Formula 1 Singapore Grand Prix's carbon footprint was measured for the first time in 2022. Energy use made up the majority of emissions at 96.1%, while the remaining 3.9% were Scope 3 emissions from transport, waste and water. These findings were published in the Environmental, Social and Governance report by the race promoter, Singapore GP Pte Ltd or SGP on 8 September 2023. A similar audit will be conducted for the race this year.
More than 60% of the energy used by SGP is supplied by on-site generators. The remainder is drawn from our electricity grid. SGP aims to halve the energy emissions from the race by 2028. This will be done through reducing energy consumption, increasing the use of renewable energy and powering the on-site generators with alternative fuels that have lower carbon emissions. The race promoter has also switched to energy-efficient LED track lightings which reduces electricity use by at least 30% compared to the previous metal-halide bulbs. Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) are then used to offset the electricity that still needs to be drawn from the grid.
\tFor the MICE industry, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) \tand Singapore Association of Convention and Exhibition Organisers and Suppliers (SACEOS) are working with event organisers to start tracking the industry’s waste and carbon emissions from this year onwards. This is one of the targets that we have set under the MICE Sustainability Roadmap that was launched last year. The roadmap also sets out strategies that prioritise industry capability building in sustainability, through driving standards and innovations that are primarily targeted at emissions reductions.
We will continue to finetune our plans to manage carbon emissions for the Singapore Grand Prix and the MICE industry in the coming years ahead.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Veterinary Expert Inputs for Use of Live Chickens and Chicks in Art Installation at National Gallery Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for National Development regarding the use of live chickens and chicks in an art installation at the National Gallery Singapore (a) whether veterinary expert inputs have been sought prior to the deployment of the chickens; and (b) what is known regarding the impact on the animals' well-being during and after participation in the art installation.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Tan Kiat How) (for the Minister for National Development): Sir, under the Animals and Birds (Pet Shop and Exhibition) Rules, a valid licence is required for any exhibition of animals, to safeguard animal health and welfare. The National Parks Board (NParks) assesses all such applications to ensure that they comply with its licensing requirements.
For the art installation that the Member has referred to, NParks conducted a site inspection and obtained the input of one of its veterinarians, before issuing a licence to the National Gallery Singapore (NGS) for the exhibition. Through the inspection, NParks had assessed that the poultry would be provided with adequate food, water and rest, as well as appropriate housing. As the exhibition would raise awareness on animal welfare, NParks had also assessed that it would fulfil the licensing condition for public education.
NGS also worked closely with Chicken Rescue Rehome (CRR), a local chicken rehoming group, to put in place safeguards such as requiring visitors to keep a distance and to avoid flash photography. Along with regular checks by CRR representatives and a dedicated team of carers, these measures ensured the well-being of the poultry throughout the five-day exhibition period.
Sir, the poultry were then returned to the care of the Ground-Up Initiative, which had loaned them to NGS, and all of them continued to show signs of good health.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Mr Speaker, I thank the Senior Minister of State for his answer. I would like to declare that some young Singaporeans around Clementi had seen the news in TODAY online about live chickens and chicks being used in an art installation at NGS. Some of these young Singaporeans felt very concerned, some as young as Primary 5 and Primary 6. They shared their views with me, and I raise these views on their behalf.
Can I ask the Senior Minister of State if he can confirm exactly what happened to these chickens and chicks after they were made use of for the art installation? When was the last check done on the well-being of these animals? Did they show any evidence of distress or harm thereafter? Because it has to be a longitudinal follow-up to make sure they are still alright.
Can I also ask the Senior Minister of State, given the profile of the venue, NGS, is this a trend of what is going to come? Because there are some young Singaporeans who are concerned, notwithstanding the educational objectives described, about what message we\tare sending when animals are made use of in an art installation in this way.
These are legitimate views, and I would like to seek the Ministry of National Development's (MND) view on these as well.
\tMr Tan Kiat How: Sir, I am very heartened that the children in Clementi are very caring and have a heart for animals. I do hope that this is something that they will carry back to the community, to care for the different animals in it.
On the questions that the Member has raised, let me take them in turn. On the first, allow me to reiterate what I said in my earlier reply. A licence is required from NParks before an exhibition of live animals can be held. As part of the licence application process, NParks does look into the health, safety and welfare of the animals, including the provision of food, rest and housing, before the licence application is approved. As part of the licence application, NParks also looks at whether the exhibition has a public education element.
As I mentioned earlier, our understanding for this art installation was that the animals would be there for a few days and the installation is meant to raise awareness on animal welfare and the need to care for and to live with the animals in our community.
The last check that we did was when the poultry were returned to the Ground-Up Initiative, which had loaned them to NGS. When we checked with the organisers, they confirmed that the poultry were in good health.
On the other question that the Member had on whether this is a trend and if there will be more such exhibitions involving live animals, I cannot speak for event organisers or venues that host such exhibitions. But what I can assure the Member and his residents is that NParks will assess each application carefully and make sure that they comply with the necessary requirements, including safeguarding animal health and welfare.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Income Criteria for Blue and Orange CHAS Cards in View of Inflation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"15 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the income criteria for the blue and orange Community Health Assistance Scheme (CHAS) card will be raised in view of the recent inflation; (b) how many households have appealed for blue and orange CHAS cards for the past two years and of which, how many appeals have been rejected due to the household monthly income per person criteria; and (c) whether CHAS subsidies will be reviewed due to the recent high medical inflation.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Health (MOH) regularly reviews the income criteria and subsidy levels for our healthcare subsidy schemes. Both the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) subsidy levels and income criteria were last reviewed in 2019. From early next year, CHAS cardholders can benefit from the Healthier SG Chronic Tier, if they enrol with a Healthier SG general practitioner (GP) clinic.
In the last two years, MOH has received around 14,000 appeals for changes of CHAS card status. Three in four managed to upgrade their cards. MOH considers all appeals on a case-by-case basis to review applicants’ means and circumstances, beyond just applying eligibility criteria of per capita household income or the annual value of their homes.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Thank you, Speaker, and also, thank you to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the comprehensive reply. I have three supplementary questions. First, we understand that MOH last reviewed the income criteria in 2019, which was pre-COVID-19, and inflation was still low. But in the past three years, the headline inflation and core inflation have hit 5%. So, will MOH consider incorporating an inflation index or a wage index in the income criteria so that it will always move with the time when determining the income criteria for the various CHAS cards?
The second supplementary question is, of the 14,000 appeals for card upgrades that MOH received, how many were successful?
The last supplementary question is, would MOH consider incorporating an inflation index into the amount of subsidies that each CHAS card would give to the residents, so that again, it would always move in tandem with inflation, and you would not have to review every three or four years?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: I thank the Member for the questions. I appreciate his concerns in this matter. I had mentioned earlier that three in four of the appeals are successful. That is quite a large number. We do look into the specific circumstances on a case-by-case basis.
As to the suggestion, as I mentioned, we do regularly review the income criteria. It is a constant practice. We note that things have evolved and changed, post pandemic. And so, we will take into account the suggestions and the inputs that the Member has given in our constant review in this matter. We do look at it holistically, including the circumstances of the matter and the inflation index in our assessment of the review.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore Sign Language Interpretation Services for Significant Government Live TV Broadcasts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"16 Mr Ong Hua Han asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry will consider providing Singapore Sign Language (SgSL) interpretation services during significant Government live TV broadcasts; (b) when will SgSL receive official recognition as one of Singapore’s languages given its legal status in 77 countries as a sign-language used by the deaf; and (c) whether there are plans to increase support for SgSL instruction providers and to increase the number of SgSL interpreters.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Speaker, since April 2020, the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) has required TV broadcasts of significant national and public interest, such as National Day Rally and Budget speeches, to be accompanied by Singapore Sign Language (SgSL) interpretation. MCI will continue to make Government communications and information more accessible and inclusive to the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing community, and work with Mediacorp to enhance accessibility features on free-to-air (FTA) TV channels.
For students who require signing support in schools, SgSL is the language for academic instruction and communication. The Ministry of Education (MOE) has designated mainstream and special education schools to provide signing support in SgSL for students diagnosed with hearing loss. Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) have funds to support students diagnosed with hearing loss, including sign language interpretation services.
In the community, the Singapore Association for the Deaf (SADeaf) is funded to promote the use of SgSL and to provide deaf access services, which include SgSL interpretation, note-taking services, and sign language courses. Deaf and hard-of-hearing persons can also tap on the Temasek-Trust CDC Lifelong Learning Enabling Fund to pay for their sign language class fees and deaf access services when attending training courses by selected providers.
The Government is studying the recognition of SgSL as Singapore’s official sign language, in consultation with the Deaf community. As SgSL is currently already used in practice, we need to consider how official recognition will bring tangible benefits to the Deaf community. Instead, we will continue to work with the Deaf community to improve the provision of deaf access services to the community.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Projection of FY2023 Tax Revenue Growth and Impact on Additional Help for Singaporeans to Deal with Inflationary Costs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"17 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in view of the record high tax revenue in the last financial year ending 31 March 2023 (a) whether the Ministry expects the tax revenue growth trend to continue for the rest of the current financial year; and (b) whether the Government will consider additional monetary payouts to Singaporeans, over and above those that have been announced, to combat inflation rather than waiting for the next Budget in 2024.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Finance (Mr Chee Hong Tat) (for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, our tax revenue collections have grown broadly in line with Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The higher tax revenue collection in financial year 2022 (FY2022), compared to the previous year, was due to our economic recovery after the COVID-19 pandemic. While some of this growth momentum has benefited tax revenue collections in FY2023, it is unclear whether the trend can continue due to the uncertain global economic outlook.
The Government understands that cost of living remains a key concern. That is why we had enhanced the Assurance Package to $9.6 billion in Budget 2023 to provide Singaporeans with additional financial support. More support is provided to lower- and middle-income families, as well as seniors staying in both public and private estates.
As Prime Minister Lee mentioned at the 2023 National Day Rally, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) is currently studying further enhancements to the Assurance Package. We will announce more details shortly, after the review is completed.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Thank you Speaker, and thank you to the Senior Minister of State for the comprehensive reply. Will the Senior Minister of State be able to shed some light on whether the amount of tax collected in the first quarter of FY2023, which means from May up to August this year, has increased as compared to the same period in the last financial year?
Secondly, we understand that MOF is reviewing to enhance the Assurance Package. Will the Senior Minister of State be able to shed light on whether it will come in the form of cash or some vouchers? Because giving vouchers would have an expansionary effect on the economy, where they have to spend. But if you give cash alone, people may put that in their savings, and they do not spend.
\t
\t
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Speaker, the tax collection, as I mentioned in my reply earlier, is in tandem with the performance of the economy and the GDP. There is a bit of time lag. So, we collect the taxes, say, in a particular period, it actually refers to the economic activity several months back in a previous period. That is why I mentioned that the collection, there is a certain momentum that we are seeing even in the current financial year arising from the stronger economic performance and recovery post-COVID-19 pandemic. But whether this can continue, this is something that we need to watch very carefully because, as Mr Ang would be aware, there are some dark clouds in the global economy and the economic outlook for this year is unlikely to be as strong as, say, last year. So, these are things which we have to monitor carefully.
But, nevertheless, the point that I made in my main reply that we understand that there are cost of living concerns because that remains a concern for many Singaporean families and the Government will look at how we can provide more help. We will study whether there are ways to enhance the Assurance Package and, in particular, we have been providing not just vouchers but also cash components and many other types of assistance to Singaporeans within the Assurance Package and that is something that we will look at as well – how to channel the resources to provide the maximum impact.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Help Measures for Households and Businesses Given Continued Rise in Food and Fuel Prices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"18 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in view of rising global food prices and export controls imposed on rice and its substitutes, what measures will the Ministry implement to mitigate the impact and assist the lower- and middle-income groups.
19 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the upcoming inflationary outlook in view of the latest rising food and energy prices; and (b) what are the further measures to mitigate the impact to households and businesses.
\tThe Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 18 and 19 on today’s Order Paper together as they pertain to inflation as well as support for households and businesses?
\tMr Speaker: Please proceed.
\tMr Alvin Tan: Inflation in Singapore has eased in recent months. The Consumer Price Index (CPI)-All Items inflation fell to 4.1% on a year-on-year basis in July, from 6.6% in January. Similarly, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Core Inflation eased from 5.5% to 3.8% over the same period. For the rest of 2023, inflation should slow further as import costs are likely to remain lower relative to a year ago. For the full year, the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) expects CPI-All Items inflation to average 4.5% to 5.5%, while the MAS Core Inflation is projected to be 3.5% to 4.5%. Nevertheless, upside risks remain, including from further shocks to the global economy and global commodity prices and supply chains.
The Government has taken a multi-pronged approach to help households and businesses cope with inflation.
We have introduced measures to help lower- and middle-income households manage the higher cost of living. For example, the Assurance Package in Budget 2023 provided a Cost-of-Living Special Payment of between $200 and $400 and additional Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers for eligible Singaporean households.
The Government is also helping businesses manage rising costs. For instance, we enhanced the Enterprise Financing Scheme in Budget 2023 to reduce businesses’ borrowing needs. To mitigate higher energy prices, Government schemes, such as the Energy Efficiency Grant and the Resource Efficiency Grant for Emissions, help businesses become more energy-efficient.
MAS will continue to keep the Singapore dollar strong, which dampens imported inflation.
Finally, to help consumers make informed purchasing decisions, the Government has worked with the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) to onboard more retailers onto its Price Kaki app. Price Kaki, of course, promotes price transparency by providing easy and timely comparisons of grocery and hawker food prices.
We will continue to monitor trends in inflation and do even more to help Singaporeans, businesses and households, if necessary.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
\tMs Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Thank you, Speaker. I have one supplementary question for the Minister of State. Would the Ministry consider efforts to encourage our consumers to switch to non-basmati white rice alternatives, some of which may even be healthier or more nutritious, in order to diversify away from our country's reliance on white rice imports?
\t
\tMr Alvin Tan: I thank the Member for the question. Maybe also to share a little bit of background on global rice prices. Global rice prices, in fact, have risen in recent months because of India's ban on the export of non-basmati white rice and, of course, adverse weather conditions. So, if you look at the Food and Agriculture Organization's (FAO) All Rice Price Index, it has increased by 31.2% in August year-on-year. That is the rice price. But if you look at the global rice of most other food commodities, they have fallen. The overall FAO Food Price Index has actually dropped by 11.8% in August year-on-year.
I am giving Members the bigger picture so that we can see how we can better address this. The Government has also then strengthened food supply resilience both by diversifying the food import sources as well as encouraging local production.
So, in July 2023, when India banned the non-basmati white rice exports, we requested the Indian government for waiver from the ban for our domestic food security requirements. The Indian government acceded, and our multiple import sources and our rice stockpile scheme have also allowed us to mitigate the impact of these disruptions.
I also encourage Singaporeans to widen their choice of food, including different kinds of rice. I also encourage everyone to use the Price Kaki app by CASE to choose as well as to find out the prices of rice between different retailers as well. So, widen your scope. There are different sources of rice and different prices of rice as well.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Sir, we continue to see domestically driven cost pressure in addition to the external imported factors, like higher energy and commodity prices. I would like to ask the Minister of State – with this cumulative effect over the last two to three years, has the Government studied how that has impacted the low- to middle-income and the businesses, and what are the measures we can take to help mitigate some of the cumulative increases over the last two, three years?
The other question is on the trend of the energy and commodity prices. They are all elevated back again, and I wanted to know what MTI can do to help moderate some of these cost pressures, especially to the businesses.
Mr Alvin Tan: I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. With regard to the impact, particularly on the lower- and middle-income households, in fact, if you look at the January to June figures, the impact of inflation rates were lower for low-income households. The CPI-All Items Inflation for the lowest 20 percentile and the middle 60% income groups came at 4.9% and 5.6% year-on-year respectively, compared to 5.9% year-on year for the highest 20% income group. So, it is less for the lower-income group.
Nonetheless, we are also aware that this same level of inflation can have a more adverse impact on lower-income households. I think both Minister Tan See Leng as well as Minister of State Chee Hong Tat have already explained as per in my reply how we are particularly helping the lower-income group through higher payouts, for example, in the Assurance Packages and the Good and Services Tax (GST) Voucher schemes. Also, as Minister of State Chee mentioned earlier, the Government will look at ways to further help Singaporeans, if necessary.
With regard to the energy prices, global demand for oil is expected to moderate, given the ongoing global economic slowdown and also China's slower than expected economic recovery. But despite coming off their peaks last year, global oil prices are expected to remain elevated in 2023 because of tightened supply constraints.
All in all, what the Government is doing is also on the fiscal stance but on the monetary policy stance. And it is for MAS to continue the current stance of appreciating the Singapore dollar to dampen imported inflation. In fact, MAS will review this stance in the next monetary policy meeting in October.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Insurance Coverage for Individuals with Mental Health Conditions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"20 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health (a) how many Singaporeans under the age of 35 are living with or have been diagnosed with bipolar disorder within the last three years; and (b) what avenues of appeal and assistance are available to young Singaporeans who encounter stigma from insurers or are declined insurance coverage due to their mental health condition, including bipolar disorder.
21 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) what avenues are available to patients who are unable to obtain medical insurance coverage as a result of their mental health condition; (b) whether the Ministry is considering a regulatory approach to address this concern; and (c) if so, what are the measures being considered.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Communications and Information and Health (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 20 and 21 on today’s Order Paper?
\tMr Speaker: Go ahead.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Thank you, Sir. My response will also cover the matters raised in the written Question No 24 by Dr Tan Wu Meng in today's Order Paper.
Sir, according to the Singapore Mental Health Survey 2016, 2.8% of Singapore residents aged 18 to 34 years had bipolar disorder. The proportion with active symptoms was lower, at 2.1%.
Members raised concerns about individuals being denied health insurance coverage due to their mental health conditions. This is a valid concern and should be considered within the larger context of our S+3M healthcare safety net system.
All Singaporeans are eligible for healthcare subsidies of up to 80% in public healthcare institutions. All Singaporeans and Permanent Residents are also covered under MediShield Life (MSHL), regardless of pre-existing conditions, including mental health conditions. MSHL is sized to cover nine in 10 bills in the subsidised wards of public healthcare institutions.
Beyond subsidies and MSHL, individuals can also buy private Integrated Shield Plans (IPs) and other insurance plans. In making underwriting decisions, insurers are fully expected by the Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) to deal fairly with their customers. For example, insurers should not indiscriminately reject an application solely on the basis of declared personal information, such as occupation, income, disability or medical condition, including mental health conditions.
Insurers should carry out an objective assessment of every application, based on reliable information or data relevant to the risks being insured. Where an application is rejected or approved with higher premiums or additional conditions, insurers should properly explain to the customer the basis for the underwriting decision. MAS will take action against insurers whose practices are in breach of MAS’ regulations or guidance.
Individuals who have concerns over their insurer’s underwriting decision can make an appeal through their insurer’s feedback channel or through MAS.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan. Please keep your supplementary question short. We want to allow Ms He to also ask her supplementary question.
\t
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his answer. Can I ask the Minister if he would consider one suggestion? Would MOH look into setting up a website portal so that members of the public can provide authenticated experiences of their dealings with insurance companies, including when the company is unreasonable in refusing to provide insurance coverage, such as in the case of the person, a member of the public, Tan Hui In, who, in The Straits Times Forum in July, mentioned how their daughter had bipolar disorder but got turned away by two large insurance companies? Mr Speaker, can I ask the Minister to consider this because such a platform will help the public see better which firms are kind or which firms might be considered \"one kind\"?
\t
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Dr Tan for his suggestions. Firstly, a website or a social media page portal does not need MOH to set it up. These are experiences that the public can, indeed, share. But I think the larger point is, perhaps, should we take into account complaints or concerns expressed by members of the public and how they have been dealt with by their insurance companies and use that in some way to inform the public. But it is a good suggestion. I will take it back to my colleagues in MOH and we will study to see how this can be used to improve conditions for all the insured.
\tMr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
\tMs He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply earlier. I have two supplementary questions.
First, I noticed that the Senior Minister of State quoted data from the 2016 Mental Health Survey that was conducted. I am wondering whether a more up-to-date survey is in the works, given that with increased awareness and after COVID-19, we could actually see a difference in the number of individuals who are diagnosed with mental health conditions and illnesses.
Second, does the Ministry consider these issues about ostensible denial of insurance coverage? Does the Minister consider this to be a problem or is the Ministry working with MAS at the moment to study whether this is an issue and how many individuals this might actually be affecting and whether or not further remedial action needs to be taken to make sure that insurers are not discriminating against these individuals?
\t
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms He for the questions. The short answer to both questions is yes. There will be further surveys and studies conducted and released, and MOH and MAS do continue to work together to see how we can appropriately regulate and guide the insurance industry to be able to provide these products in order to appropriately protect the public.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. Business Motions. Leader of the House.
[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":"Rearrangement of Business","subTitle":"Business Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That, pursuant to Standing Order 10(2), the Motion for leave to bring in a Bill by Ms Hazel Poa be taken immediately after the proceedings on the Motions on 'Consideration of Matters Regarding Member of Parliament' and 'Suspension of Member' have been concluded.\"
Mr Speaker, as Members are aware, the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP), Ms Hazel Poa, has filed two Motions. In her first Motion titled \"Suspension of Member\", she is moving to suspend Minister Iswaran from service of Parliament with the consequence that no Member of Parliament (MP) allowance shall be paid to him for the period of suspension.
Her second Motion is for leave to introduce a Bill to amend the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act of 1962, or the PPIPA. Specifically, she is seeking to amend the Act to allow Parliament to back pay Mr Iswaran should he be subsequently cleared of any wrongdoing and resume his official duties. This being an amendment of a Bill by a Private Member, leave of Parliament to introduce the Bill is necessary under Standing Order 66(1).
I have separately filed a Motion titled \"Consideration of Matters Regarding Member of Parliament\" which deals with Members' standard of conduct, calls for firm and fair dealings with Members under investigation for wrongdoing and proposes that the matters relating to Mr Iswaran be considered when the outcome of the investigation is known.
All three Motions are scheduled to be dealt with today.
In the normal Order of Business, under the Standing Orders, Motions for leave to introduce Bills would be dealt with before Motions on matters to be debated.
In this case, however, the question of whether there is a need to amend the PPIPA to allow Parliament to back pay Mr Iswaran will depend on whether or not Parliament resolves to suspend him in the first place. This, in turn, will depend on the outcome of my Motion and Ms Poa's other Motion, which I will be asking to be debated simultaneously.
I am, therefore, moving to revise the Order of Business such that Ms Poa's Motion for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the PPIPA will be taken immediately after the proceedings on my Motion and Ms Poa's other Motion have concluded. This would be a more logical flow and allow for more efficient conduct of parliamentary business. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That, pursuant to Standing Order 10(2), the Motion for leave to bring in a Bill by Ms Hazel Poa be taken immediately after the proceedings on the Motions on 'Consideration of Matters Regarding Member of Parliament' and 'Suspension of Member' have been concluded.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Simultaneous Debate on Motions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Speaker: Leader.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the Motions on 'Consideration of Matters Regarding Member of Parliament' and 'Suspension of Member' be taken together, and the debate on these Motions and on any amendment proposed thereto be proceeded with simultaneously as though the debate were on a single Motion.\"
Mr Speaker, as mentioned earlier, these two Motions deal with the same topic insofar as Mr Iswaran is concerned. I am thus moving this Business Motion for a simultaneous debate on the two Motions, so that Members can address both Motions in a single speech. This will allow the issues raised in the two Motions to be considered holistically.
To be clear and for avoidance of doubt, it is only the debate that is to be concurrent. The Motions remain as two separate Motions. And at the end of the debate, the votes on the two Motions will be taken separately. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
Resolved, \"That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the Motions on 'Consideration of Matters Regarding Member of Parliament' and 'Suspension of Member' be taken together, and the debate on these Motions and on any amendment proposed thereto be proceeded with simultaneously as though the debate were on a single Motion.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah].
Mr Speaker: Order. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day and Notices of Motions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Child Development Co-Savings (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [18 September 2023], \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\" – [Minister for Social and Family Development]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Shawn Hwang.
Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong (Jurong): Mr Speaker, our family dynamics is evolving. Parenting today is a shared responsibility between mothers and fathers. Fathers today are eager to take an active role in parenting and we should support this.
According to a McKinsey study on paternity leave, 100% of fathers surveyed expressed that they were glad that they took paternity leave and would do so again; and 90% of fathers noticed an improvement in their relationship with their partners.
In many countries, the views on paternity leave are changing as well. According to a study by the World Economic Forum, more countries and companies are offering paternity leave benefits to new fathers. Worldwide, 90 out of 187 countries offer statutory paid paternity leave, with four in 10 organisations providing paid leave above the statutory minimum. In OECD countries, men's use of parental leave is increasing overall, even though the number of days taken is still fairly minimal. This is a good trend.
Increasing paternity leave is an unequivocal endorsement that fathers play an important role in the family on the arrival of a newborn. Fathers should be given adequate time to bond with their newborns or adopted children. More can be done.
In Sweden new parents are entitled to 480 days of leave at 80% of their normal pay. In Estonia, after the end of maternity leave, parents get an additional 435 days off, with compensation calculated at the average of both earnings. In Slovenia, fathers have a guaranteed 90 days of paternity leave, with the first 15 days at 100% while the remaining 75 are paid at minimum wage.
According to the World Economic Forum, numerous studies have shown that policies promoting father's involvement at home is good for the economy, gender equality and families. Other studies have also shown that active fatherhood is also good for the men's own health and well-being as well as their relationship with the partners. Research shows that when men are more involved in the early care of a child, they are more likely to remain connected to that child and to carry out a more equitable amount of care work.
This Bill is a good step forward, but our work does not end here. Let us continue to take more progressive steps to be a more equitable and compassionate society where we give our families and children the best possible outcomes. Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. This Bill is a testament to our nation's commitment to supporting families, recognising the shared responsibilities of parents and ensuring the well-being of our children.
The doubling of the Government-Paid Paternity Leave from two weeks to four is not just a commendable move; it is transformative.
As a father of four, I remember the joyous yet challenging sleepless nights when my children were born. Those initial weeks were a blur of diaper changes and feeding schedules. Having an extra two weeks would have made a whole world of difference in sharing the load with my wife and bonding with my newborn.
Sir, the introduction of the Shared Parental Leave, allowing parents to share eight weeks of maternity leave, is a progressive step. It promotes flexibility and choice, allowing families to decide what arrangement works best for them.
By providing additional paternity leave, we are, too, acknowledging the importance of mental well-being of both parents. Shared responsibilities can alleviate postpartum stress and anxiety, ensuring a healthy mental space for parents.
I recently spoke to a couple who were both working professionals. The wife, unfortunately, suffered from postpartum depression that lasted a few months and the husband felt really helpless during that period. His leave was exhausted and he had to return to work. This extension of paternity leave would have allowed him to be there for his wife and the newborn in such a critical period.
Sir, while I support this Bill wholeheartedly, I also recognise that there are some concerns.
Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) might be concerned about the operational challenges posed by extended leave periods. I spoke to an SME owner who questioned the possible productivity loss during extended leave periods. While he supports the idea of paternity leave, he was concerned about the short-term impact on his business. And while the Government's commitment to reimburse wage costs is reassuring, the potential disruption to business operations is a valid concern. I urge the Ministry to consider additional support measures for SMEs, perhaps in the form of temporary manpower assistance or even further training to ensure smooth business operations in such times. Perhaps, the Ministry could also carry out a comprehensive review to gauge the long-term effects on SMEs.
Sir, with increased flexibility, there might be concerns about the potential misuse of these leaves. I have heard that there should be checks in place to prevent any potential misuse. While the term \"potential for misuse\" often come up in discussions about increased flexibility leave policies, I want to challenge that notion.
In my interactions with constituents and even within my own circle of family and friends, I have found that the overwhelming majority are responsible and would not misuse such a vital support system. I believe that the key to the success of policies like this is trust – trust in our citizens to use these leaves for the intended purpose of nurturing their families.
So, in that regard, I urge companies, rather than implementing checks that could deter people from taking leave and perpetuate stigma, we should focus on fostering a culture of responsibility and integrity. In fact, the more we trust one another, the more we empower them to make ethical choices. These, in turn, strengthen our social fabric and make policies like this more effective in the long run. While it is natural to have concerns about potential misuse, let us not let these concerns overshadow the larger goal here to support and nurture Singaporean families. Trust begets trust and it is time we place ours in our people.
Sir, while the Bill provides for these leaves, there might still be a societal stigma attached to fathers taking extended leave and we must ensure that there is a robust public awareness campaign to normalise this and emphasise the importance of shared responsibilities.
The real question is – are we doing enough to foster a society where employers genuinely value and support the family commitments of the employees? In that regard, could the Ministry share on their efforts to apply, educate and promote the benefits of shared of parental responsibilities and, in the bigger picture, the shared notion of a Singapore Made for Families?
Sir, the gig economy is growing and many of our citizens work in non-traditional employment structures. It is crucial to ensure that they, too, can benefit from these provisions. So, I urge the Ministry to consider how these benefits can be extended to all working parents, regardless of their employment nature. Are there plans to pilot a programme or study to assess the best ways to extend these benefits to such workers? Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Sir, I support the amendments to this Act. This amendment is not just a piece of legislature, but it is also a reflection of our values, aspirations, and commitment to the future of families in Singapore.
Firstly, the extension of the Government-Paid Paternity Leave from two weeks to four is a commendable move. This allows fathers to play a more active role in the early stages of their child's life and also underscores the importance of shared parental responsibilities. Furthermore, the introduction of the Shared Parental Leave, allowing parents to share up to eight weeks of maternity leave, is a progressive step. It provides flexibility and choice, allowing families to decide what arrangement works best for them.
I am aware that stigma towards utilising family leave is present in our society. Therefore, we must ensure that we have a public awareness campaign to emphasise the importance of shared responsibility.
In conclusion, this amendment is a significant step forward in our commitment to supporting families. It recognises the needs of modern families that is constantly evolving and provides the much-needed support. But in line with this progress, let us remember that policies alone are not enough. We need a paradigm shift in our societal values, where we give priority to holistic development and foster a strong sense of community.
(In English): Sir, in conclusion, this Bill is a significant step forward in our commitment to supporting families. It recognises the evolving needs of modern families and provides the necessary support. This Bill is not just a piece of legislation. It is a reflection of our values, our aspirations and our commitment to our future.
But as we move forward, let us remember that policies alone are not enough. We need a paradigm shift in our societal values where we prioritise holistic development and foster a strong sense of community.
While we must address the concerns raised, they should not deter us from the primary objective of this Bill – to support and nurture Singaporean families. I commend the Ministry for introducing this Bill and hope to see its successful implementation, ensuring a more supportive future for all Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill which will assist and support couples in raising children. The amendments will help them to better balance their work responsibilities and the critical task of bringing up the next generation.
One of the most noteworthy provisions of this Bill is the expansion of parental leave options.
The Bill proposes to increase Unpaid Infant Care Leave for Singaporean parents with infants under two years old by six days per parent per year for the first two years, with amendments requiring companies to offer this additional time off to all qualified Singaporean parents who have worked for at least three months.
Longer parental leave periods not only foster stronger parent-child bonds but also contribute to healthier emotional development in children. By extending the duration of paid leave, we empower parents to be present during those crucial early stages of their child's life.
Furthermore, this Bill addresses the need for fathers to be more involved in the care and nurturing of their children. Research has shown that the greater involvement of fathers is beneficial for children, contributing positively to their children's physical and cognitive developments.
The enhancement of the Government-Paid Paternity Leave and Government-Paid Paternity Benefit schemes are much welcomed. More shared parental responsibilities will also support mothers who need to juggle work and household tasks in addition to childcare.
I urge the Ministry to continue to study the effects of these policy reforms on child development, parental well-being and worker productivity. This information will be used to drive future legislative changes. For more effective implementation, tighter and more comprehensive collaboration amongst Government agencies, educational institutions and the commercial sector is needed in order to develop a complete support network for families.
I would like to take this opportunity to urge the Ministry to launch a public awareness campaign to enlighten parents about their rights and advantages with this Bill, ensuring that all eligible families may benefit from its provisions. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Lastly, like what Nominated Member of Parliament Mr Mark Lee mentioned yesterday, we need to be mindful of the challenges that SMEs face when dealing with additional parental leave even if it is unpaid leave. These challenges include staffing gaps, business continuity issues and increased operational costs.
SMEs often operate with smaller workforces compared with larger corporations. When employees take extended paternity leave or additional Unpaid Infant Care Leave (UICL), it can result in significant staffing gaps.
Relative to large corporations, SMEs are more vulnerable to the impact of employee absenteeism. The absence of even one key employee can disrupt the day-to-day operations and put added pressure on the remaining staff.
To manage staffing gaps during extended leaves, SMEs may need to hire part-time or temporary staff. This can lead to increased operational expenses, which can be especially strenuous in sectors like retail and F&B, where staffing needs are often instantaneous. The cost of recruiting, training and paying temporary staff can strain the SME's cashflow momentarily. Can the relevant Ministry explore the possibility of reimbursing and recognising these SMEs which are supportive towards their employees?
Mr Speaker: Minister of State, Ms Sun Xueling.
The Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Sir, I thank Members for their general support for the Bill. I am heartened that most of us agree that a collective, whole-of-society effort is needed to build a conducive environment that values and supports families on their parenthood journey.
Let me now respond to the questions and suggestions that Members have raised.
Mr Shawn Huang has shared in his speech that the use of paternity leave among the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries is increasing overall. We have observed a similar trend in Singapore.
To Mr Desmond Choo and Assoc Prof Razwana Begum's question, since the introduction of Government-Paid Paternity Leave, take-up rates have increased from about 25% in 2013 to 53% in 2021.
Assoc Prof Razwana Begum asked if there is research on the role taken by those fathers who utilise their paternity leave entitlements. From the Marriage and Parenthood Survey 2021, 97% of the married respondents agreed that paternity leave allowed fathers to play a bigger role in their newborn's life. Our research also showed that fathers found paternity leave useful to support their wives after birth and to settle into the role of fatherhood.
To Ms He Ting Ru's question, we do survey the reasons why fathers do not fully consume their paternity leave. A key factor affecting fathers' utilisation of paternity leave is workplace support. This includes whether supervisors are adequately assuring that using paternity leave will not affect fathers' career prospects and that colleagues are willing to cover the fathers' duties in their absence. We will continue to explore ways to encourage employers to support all fathers to use their paternity leave such as by raising awareness of the benefits of providing a family-friendly workplace culture.
Ms He Ting Ru also expressed concern on the gap in support for self-employed fathers and those without full-time employment. Ms See Jinli Jean further asked if the Government can consider providing paid paternity leave for the full four-week period of lost income to a self-employed father who stopped working for seven days a week for four weeks.
The weekly index of six days takes reference from the Employment Act, which stipulates one rest day per week. This makes for a common base of reference to employees who receive Government-Paid Paternity Leave. For fathers who are not eligible for Government-Paid Paternity Leave, such as those on short-term contracts, they may receive the Government-Paid Paternity Benefit, which is a comparable cash benefit in lieu of the paternity leave.
Mr Desmond Choo asked if we could allow parents to use Unpaid Infant Care Leave flexibly during the child's first two years and whether the number of leave days can be increased based on the number of children. I would like to clarify that parents can take 12 days of Unpaid Infant Care Leave flexibly as agreed with their employers during the initial 12-month period, following which they will be entitled to another 12 days of Unpaid Infant Care Leave in the second 12-month period in which the child remains under two years old. Employees may discuss their leave plans with their employers to see how best to meet their needs.
Mr Louis Ng and Ms Mariam Jaafar asked if childcare leave can be increased. I think many of us as employees would like childcare leave to be increased. I fully empathise with the challenges Ms Mariam Jaafar had shared that her residents face.
The difficulty is not so much the cost to Government but rather the difficulties faced by employers and businesses who are impacted when leave is made compulsory. Already, based on the current set of proposals to increase Government-Paid Paternity Leave (GPPL) and Unpaid Infant Care Leave (UICL), Members in this House have highlighted concerns from employers that the increased leave provisions will adversely impact their manpower costs and operations.
Mr Mark Lee in his speech yesterday said, \"the introduction of GPPL and UICL enhancements may pose significant challenges for certain businesses, particularly small- and medium-sized enterprises with streamlined workforces where each employee's role is crucial to daily operations. Frontline service-oriented industries may need to recruit temporary personnel to cover for employees taking extended leaves.\"
Mr Yip Hon Weng also shared in his speech yesterday, I quote, \"appealing for more leave is not a viable solution. As a small, competitive nation, we must weigh these advancements against its potential effects on businesses, ensuring a balanced approach. We must vigilantly track the impact of these policies to discern whether they truly move the needle in the desired direction.\"
These seemingly divergent views show that we need to strike a practical balance between supporting parents in their caregiving responsibilities and meeting employers' manpower needs. Our leave provisions need to take into account not only the roles of parents as caregivers but also the roles parents play in workplaces as employees.
I understand that parents with more children will require more leave to take care of their children, should they fall ill.
Currently, the Civil Service provides childcare sick leave on a per child basis. Based on the latest available survey data from 2020, 27% of private companies voluntarily provided additional paid childcare sick leave to employees.
I would like to encourage private sector employers to consider providing childcare sick leave, which is available in the Public Sector on a per child basis. This can greatly alleviate parental stress from taking care of more children.
To Ms Mariam Jaafar's suggestion, we will look at means, such as surveys, to gauge the take-up rate of UICL.
Mr Louis Ng and Ms Mariam Jaafar asked for the equalisation of parental leave. Mr Melvin Yong asked the Ministry to consider providing adoptive and foster parents with more GPPL and UICL.
Let me clarify that the current leave provisions are differentiated to meet the needs of the respective parents. Maternity leave is provided for mothers to recuperate physically from childbirth and care for and bond with their newborn. Hence, it is longer than paternity leave, which allows for fathers to care for their wives and bond with their newborn child. This is also why maternity leave is longer than adoption leave.
Couples who wish to have the father spend more time with their newborns can have the father tap on Shared Parental Leave for up to four weeks from their wife's Government-Paid Maternity Leave or Adoption Leave.
To Ms Hany Soh's query, we currently do not intend to change the Shared Parental Leave provision under this Bill.
I would like to assure Members that the Government is on the same page as Members in wanting to encourage shared parenting. This is why beyond the minimal stipulations for maternity leave and paternity leave, any additional leave that the Government may consider in future will likely be of a shared nature, as per our move on shared parental leave in 2013.
On fostering, unlike adoption, fostering is a temporary care arrangement. Hence, foster parents are not eligible for Government-Paid Maternity or Paternity Leave. However, they are entitled to the same quantum of childcare leave and Unpaid Infant Care Leave as biological or adoptive parents.
To better support adoptive and foster parents, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and our community partners offer a range of services to meet their needs. All new foster parents are also trained by the Social Service Institute to care for foster children and can receive advice from more experienced foster parents through peer support networks. To defray the costs of caring for a foster child, MSF provides a monthly fostering allowance as well as childcare and medical subsidies for the foster children.
Mr Desmond Choo expressed concern that some self-employed fathers may not qualify for GPPL if they take time off from work to support their wives in the pre-delivery phase. Let me clarify that in such cases, self-employed fathers remain eligible for the Government-Paid Paternity Leave as long as they have been carrying on their trade, business, profession or vocation for a continuous period of at least three months prior to the childbirth. They will not be disqualified simply because they took some time off work during this period.
Ms See Jinli Jean has asked the Government to consider disbursing a self-employed person’s claim for lost income at the start of his or her leave period rather than after it has concluded. I wish to clarify that claims for leave or income lost are processed on a reimbursement basis to ensure that the leave has been taken as intended first before payment is made. This also helps with the computation of the actual amount of income lost to be reimbursed, which would not be possible to ascertain until the leave has been taken.
Ms Hany Soh asked if flexibility could be exercised to allow expectant mothers to consume their maternity leave earlier in their final trimester. The primary intent of maternity leave is to provide mothers with time to recover from childbirth and to care for their newborns. We allow flexibility for mothers to start their maternity leave earlier, up to 28 days before delivery, but the bulk of their maternity leave should still be used for post-confinement. Expectant mothers who need to absent themselves from work earlier than 28 days before can tap on their sick leave or hospitalisation leave if they feel unwell, for example, if they suffer from severe nausea in the first trimester.
Members such as Mr Yip Hon Weng, Dr Wan Rizal, Mr Don Wee and Assoc Prof Razwana Begum have asked about the Government’s efforts in encouraging fathers to utilise paternity leave as well as to normalise paternity leave and the importance of shared parental responsibilities.
As Ms Yeo Wan Ling has stated, societal norms must be considered in the discussion of encouraging take-up of parental leave. It is important that the society adopts a mindset that embraces paternal involvement from the onset. To promote active fatherhood and the importance of shared parental responsibilities, we have been working with community partners such as the Families for Life Council and the Centre for Fathering on three key family movements in Singapore – the Families for Life, Dads for Life and Mums for Life movements. These movements look at strengthening family ties and resilience with the aim of increasing marriage stability as well as advocating the importance of shared parenting and household responsibilities between mothers and fathers. For example, the Centre for Fathering runs several campaigns throughout the year to reinforce and signal the importance of fathers’ active involvement in their child’s development. One of the campaigns is the Great Companies for Dads Awards, which engages and recognises companies that nurture a family-friendly work culture through their policies and initiatives.
The attitudes and mindsets of supervisors and colleagues also make a big difference in helping fathers feel assured that they are not being discriminated for using their leave. We also hope to encourage self-employed persons to recognise the benefits of parental leave and how the Government tries to support them through the provision of Government-paid paternity benefits and Government-Paid Paternity and Maternity Leave. To Ms Hany Soh’s questions, we had indeed sought employers’ views and feedback on the leave enhancements through our consultations with the tripartite partners.
We will continue working with our tripartite partners to encourage employers to foster family-friendly workplace cultures that will better support parents in managing their work and family responsibilities. We also encourage employers to be supportive and understanding when fathers take paternity leave. This would help employees be more motivated, like what Ms Yeo Wan Ling has shared. In the long run, progressive employers can stand to benefit from better talent attraction and retention.
To Mr Melvin Yong's suggestion to conduct a local study to examine companies that offer the best work-life balance, we will look at best practices today to identify what other companies can adopt.
Assoc Prof Razwana Begum asked whether gig workers would benefit from the increase in Government-Paid Paternity Leave, and if not, what support is available to compensate them. Dr Wan Rizal stated that it is crucial to ensure gig workers can also benefit from these leave provisions. I would like to clarify that working parents who do not qualify for Government-paid leave schemes due to their employment arrangements, such as those on short-term contracts and gig workers, may be eligible for equivalent parenthood benefits in the form of Government-paid benefit schemes – that is the intent of Government-paid paternity benefit and Government-paid maternity benefit. These are cash benefits granted in lieu of the Government-paid portion of paid leave.
Mr Don Wee suggested launching a public awareness campaign so that more parents are aware of their leave entitlements. Mr Desmond Choo also asked if the Government could broaden its work with the trade associations and chambers (TACs) and the Labour Movement to spread awareness of the enhanced Government-Paid Paternity Leave, especially among the self-employed.
We thank Members for the suggestions. The Government will work closely with our tripartite partners to raise awareness of these benefits among employees and the self-employed, including gig workers, to encourage them to utilise their leave or benefits. For example, we have developed an infographic and produced a video on parental leave targeted at raising awareness among self-employed persons. The infographic was disseminated through our tripartite partners’ networks. We will continue to build on these efforts and look for ways to further raise awareness and encourage parents to utilise their leave benefits.
Dr Wan Rizal and Mr Don Wee asked if we will consider conducting a review to assess the impact of leave enhancements. As Mr Shawn Huang and Ms Usha Chandradas have said, it is a continuous process to review our policies to meet the evolving needs of parents and to make our society more family friendly. We will monitor the impact of our leave enhancements.
Mr Mark Lee suggested revising the reimbursement schedule of the Government-Paid Maternity Leave and Paternity Leave to more frequent intervals to alleviate cash flow strain on SMEs. I would like to clarify that claims for reimbursement can be submitted for any part of the Government-Paid portion of the leave that has been taken and are not restricted to only after the last day of leave has been fully utilised. This applies to self-employed persons too.
We recognise that some employers may have concerns with parents taking additional parental leave due to the nature of the work and challenge of finding covering arrangements. Mr Don Wee, Mr Mark Lee, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Dr Wan Rizal have highlighted that companies, especially SMEs who have fewer employees, may face operational challenges, and have suggested providing additional support for them. We have introduced the additional two weeks of Government-Paid Paternity Leave on a voluntary basis, so that employers have some time to make adjustments according to their manpower and operational needs. We intend to make this provision mandatory in due course and we will be conducting the necessary stakeholder consultations with tripartite partners before any such move.
In the meantime, employers and employees may exercise flexibility in the parents’ utilisation of parental leave, such as by taking the leave in more than one period within their child’s first year, to minimise disruptions to business operations. Parents should also play their part by discussing their leave arrangements with their employers in advance, so that their employers can plan for the necessary covering arrangements and any additional resources that they may require. I also thank Mr Desmond Choo for sharing that the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) is ready to help our SMEs to develop policies that will better support parents.
Another important strategy for companies to build agility in manpower needs is through the adoption of flexible workplace arrangements (FWAs). As mentioned by Ms Yeo Wan Ling, FWAs are more sustainable options and can benefit not just parents of young children but also other caregivers. When implemented well, FWAs can increase productivity, lower absenteeism and turnover, which in turn can help companies mitigate the effects of manpower constraints.
Mr Melvin Yong suggested expanding the Child Development Co-Savings Act (CDCA) to provide incentives to employers who provide good FWAs to employees with children. We review the scope of the CDCA periodically to best serve the needs of parents. For FWAs however, they benefit not just parents but also caregivers of other familial members. As such, incentivising FWAs may take other forms other than through amending the CDCA.
We share Members’ views on the importance of having FWAs. And the Government is on the lookout for positive examples of such companies to share with others at opportune times. We take heart that some companies have already walked this path and found success.
Take, for example, 1AND8 Singapore Pte Ltd, the company behind the Museum of Ice Cream. They have adopted the Tripartite Standard on Flexible Work Arrangements and allow their staff to fully telecommute, only returning to the office for physical meetings when required. The company also practises staggered hours and has part-time work available for their frontline Guest Specialist Experience positions. This approach has helped the company to boost work productivity while also enabling their employees to achieve a better work-life balance, leading to increased job satisfaction and higher morale. The positive outcomes are evident in their employees staying with them for extended periods, contributing to a lower turnover rate.
Mr Mark Lee suggested establishing a comprehensive framework to recognise companies that support national-level initiatives such as the Tripartite Standard and progressive wages. Today, companies that adopt the Tripartite Standards will be profiled with the TS logo on MyCareersFuture job portal. This allows them to gain greater visibility in talent recruitment. Companies who pay their lower-wage workers progressive wages can also adopt the Progressive Wage Mark to profile themselves as responsible employers that support the uplifting of lower-wage workers. This can encourage consumers and service buyers to prioritise purchases from them.
I will now address comments raised by Members about extending support to caregivers of other dependants.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked if the different leave schemes could be amalgamated into a family care leave scheme to provide flexibility for parents and caregivers. Today, the leave schemes are differentiated to cater to the needs of different caregivers. They are also calibrated to balance between employees’ caregiving needs and employers’ business costs and manpower needs.
Ms Usha Chandradas, Ms See Jinli Jean and Mr Desmond Choo have also called for more support for familial caregivers. Today’s Bill is on the CDCA and so we are discussing maternity and paternity leave and benefits.
On the broader topic of support for caregivers for the elderly, I would like to assure Members that your feedback will be provided to the agencies looking into this topic. Beyond legislated leave provisions, it is important that we bring all stakeholders including employers to build a family-friendly work environment, so that caregivers can better manage both their work and caregiving responsibilities.
On the Child Development Account (CDA), Ms Hany Soh has asked for greater flexibility on how funds can be utilised. I thank her for her feedback. The range of approved CDA usages is circumscribed to ensure that the funds are well-utilised to the benefit of the child. Nonetheless, we do regularly review the CDA scheme, together with our suite of marriage and parenthood policies. Over the years, we have enhanced the CDA scheme to provide more support to parents. For example, we have increased the Government co-matching contributions and also introduced the CDA First Step Grant. We have also expanded the areas where the CDA funds can be used and will continue to review how this can be further refined.
Mr Ong Hua Han asked if the CDA co-matching or the CDA First Step Grant could be increased to better support children with disabilities to cope with the cost of living. These schemes are designed on a broad basis to support all parents in raising their children. We fully recognise that families caring for children with special needs face more financial challenges. Hence, the Government provides funding support and means-tested subsidies for children enrolled in early intervention programmes, Special Education (SPED) schools and Special Student Care Centres (SSCCs) to keep fees affordable for families with children with special needs.
The Government is also working to expand places in early intervention services, SPED schools and SSCCs to ensure that children with special needs can access an education that develops their potential and equips them with knowledge and skills to participate meaningfully in society.
Mr Ong Hua Han also asked if the income threshold of means-tested schemes such as the Assistive Technology Fund and Enabling Transport Subsidy can be revised to align with the median household per capita income. He suggested factoring in actual costs borne by families as part of the means-testing calculations.
I thank the Member for his suggestions to help families with children who have special needs. MSF regularly reviews the income thresholds for such schemes to ensure that households receive the help that they need and we will take in his inputs when reviewing all these schemes.
We recognise the critical role that caregivers play in caring for their loved ones with special needs and the importance of supporting families with persons with disabilities. Support for caregivers is indeed crucial to the children's well-being and development. Our support for caregivers is thus multifaceted.
Early intervention centres provide caregiver engagement and training so that caregivers are equipped with the skills and knowledge to support their children at home. The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has also started the Inclusive Support Preschool pilot to integrate early childhood and early intervention support for children with developmental needs within a preschool setting to provide a more inclusive learning experience and reduce the need for caregivers and children to shuttle between preschools and Early Intervention (EI) centres.
We continue to improve access to knowledge and skills for parents with special needs children to carry out their caregiving duties and connect them with support networks.
For example, ECDA launched a Parents' Guide last year to provide parents with information on ways to access EI services, support available to facilitate the child's transition from the preschool years to school-age provisions, as well as self-care strategies and resources. SG Enable has also worked with CaringSG, a caregiver-led organisation, to launch the Step One programme in July 2023.
Mr Louis Ng asked for the equalisation of benefits to single unwed parents, starting with the extension of the cash component of the Baby Bonus scheme. I thank Mr Louis Ng for his suggestion. Many of the existing benefits are already equalised. These include subsidies for education, healthcare, infant care and childcare, the foreign domestic worker levy concession as well as CDA benefits. Rather than see the Baby Bonus cash gift as discriminatory to single unwed parents, it should be seen as a separate benefit to specifically promote parenthood within marriage. Hence, it is extended only to married parents.
I fully empathise with the challenges faced by single unwed parents, in particular, those who are lower-income. I would like to assure Members that additional help is available for them. Currently, single unwed parents requiring support with their basic living expenses can approach our Social Service Offices (SSOs). Our SSOs will assess their households' needs and circumstances and provide ComCare financial assistance if they meet the criteria. Our SSOs may also refer them to other Government agencies and community partners for further support.
Family Service Centres also work with single unwed parents and their children to address their social and emotional needs, not forgetting that there are bottom-up initiatives such as the Northeast Community Development Council's \"North East Growth Fund\", which provide subsidies for formula milk and diapers to young children up to six years old so as to support new mothers.
Let me now turn to issues relating to implementation and governance.
Mr Yip Hon Weng and Dr Wan Rizal have raised concerns about potential misuse of parental leave. These are valid concerns as the annual commitment for the enhancements to Government-Paid Paternity Leave and Government-Paid Paternity Benefit amounts to about $57 million.
MSF has measures in place to verify the authenticity of parental leave claims. Claim information that cannot be validated against Government data will be verified by our processing officers against supporting documents. In addition, disbursed claims will be selectively reviewed to detect erroneous payments to employers, employees and self-employed persons.
If any erroneous payment is identified and verified to have taken place, the CDCA grants the Government powers to recover such monies from employers, employees and self-employed persons, as the case may be. We will undertake the recovery of such monies in a timely manner.
Assoc Prof Razwana Begum asked several questions regarding Approved Persons. The primary role of the Approved Person is to oversee the withdrawal of CDA funds in respect of an Approved Institution. Approved Persons must be able to fulfil their roles and responsibilities specified in the Child Development Co-Savings Regulations as well as MSF's Terms and Conditions for Approved Persons and Approved Institutions.
For those who have not been proper in carrying out their role as an Approved Person, MSF will suspend their approval. The suspension safeguards the child's CDA funds but does not mean that the relevant Approved Institution has to cease service provision for the child. For instance, a preschool can continue its delivery of services as long as it remains licensed by ECDA. In the past three years, one Approved Person has been suspended due to their failure to keep proper records.
The amendments to section 7 provide for a simplified process wherein revocation of the approval granted to these Approved Persons does not need to be approved by the Minister. This would be applied in specific situations that can be determined objectively, such as where the Approved Institution is no longer able to provide services because it has ceased operations. This serves to improve operational efficiency.
I hope these clarification address Assoc Prof Razwana Begum's questions.
Sir, let me now conclude. The amendments being made to the Child Development Co-Savings Act via this Bill is a clear signal of the Government's continued commitment to increase our support for parents in managing their work and family commitments. We will continue to do our best to provide such assurance to Singaporeans who are planning to embark on their parenthood journey.
At the same time, we are fully aware that schemes and subsidies alone are insufficient. At the broader level, we must strive to nurture a society that embraces family and is family-friendly. Every one of us has a part to play in building a Singapore Made for Families, where families are valued and supported. With that, Sir, I beg to move.
Mr Speaker: Any clarifications for Minister of State Sun Xueling? I do not see any hands.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Ms Sun Xueling]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I will suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.15 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.55 pm until 4.15 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Society of Saint Maur Incorporation (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, “That the Bill be now read a Second time.”
Sir, the Bill seeks to amend the Society of Saint Maur Incorporation Ordinance 1923. The Ordinance was enacted in 1923 to incorporate The Lady Superior in Penang of the Society of Saint Maur and her successors as a corporation sole, to allow for perpetual succession under the name, “The Lady Superior of the Convent of the Holy Infant Jesus in Penang”. The Society of Saint Maur is more commonly known as the Infant Jesus Sisters, or IJ Sisters, in Singapore.
The order arose in response to the dire need in those days to provide young girls, especially those from disadvantaged families, with a good education. Arising from this mission, the IJ Sisters arrived in Singapore in 1854 and went on to found 11 Convent of the Holy Infant Jesus schools for girls in Singapore as well as an orphanage, home and children’s centre. They also provide after-school care for children. Over 169 years of history in Singapore, scores of girls have had their lives transformed through the work of the IJ Sisters.
As a former IJ girl, it is my privilege to move this Bill. The IJ Sisters approached me to represent them. And we have worked closely to ensure that the Ordinance will be current and relevant to their needs.
The Bill updates the name references in the Ordinance, given historical developments and current conventions. Following Singapore’s Independence in 1965, and the eventual reorganisation of the IJ Sisters, the IJ Sisters now have a Lady Superior in Singapore and a Lady Superior in Malaysia. The amendment gives recognition to this independence and allows the IJ Sisters in Singapore to grow with its own distinct identity.
The reference to “Penang” in the corporation’s name will thus be removed. The Bill also makes further amendments so that the references to the “Lady Superior in Penang of the Society of Saint Maur” in the Ordinance refer to the Lady Superior who is appointed for Singapore and not any other successor of the Lady Superior.
The Bill also removes the Schedules as they are spent; they contain listings of properties that were vested in the corporation by sections 6 and 7 of the Ordinance in 1923. The properties in Malaysia listed under the First and Third Schedules are not under the Society of Saint Maur in Singapore, and the property in Singapore listed under the Second Schedule is no longer owned by the corporation.
The corporation continues to own other properties in Singapore and the Bill also includes the necessary saving provision to ensure that existing property rights and any other rights and obligations will not be affected by the name change. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: As the Bill is a Private Bill, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 87(3), the Bill will be referred to a Select Committee. Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira: Mr Speaker, as the Bill will be referred to a Select Committee, I beg to move, \"That the Select Committee on the Society of Saint Maur Incorporation (Amendment) Bill consists of Speaker as Chairman and the following Members:
(1) Ms He Ting Ru,
(2) Mr Murali Pillai,
(3) Ms Joan Pereira,
(4) Ms Rahayu Mahzam,
(5) Mr Alvin Tan,
(6) Ms Jessica Tan,
(7) Mr Raj Joshua Thomas.\"
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the Select Committee on the Society of Saint Maur Incorporation (Amendment) Bill consists of Speaker as Chairman and the following Members: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1) Ms He Ting Ru, (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2) Mr Murali Pillai, (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3) Ms Joan Pereira, (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4) Ms Rahayu Mahzam, (proc text)]
[(proc text) (5) Mr Alvin Tan, (proc text)]
[(proc text) (6) Ms Jessica Tan, (proc text)]
[(proc text) (7) Mr Raj Joshua Thomas.\" – [Ms Joan Pereira] (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Consideration of Matters Regarding Member of Parliament","subTitle":"Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Speaker: The House had earlier resolved that this Motion and the next Motion appearing on the Order Paper will be debated jointly. In respect of speeches on these two Motions, the House should not be discussing the ongoing Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) or Police investigations of any particular Member of Parliament's (MP) personal conduct and what possible offences may have been committed.
I advise Members at the onset to exercise caution in discussing or reflecting on such matters as it could prejudice investigations or prejudge such a Member.
Pursuant to Standing Order 50(1), any discussion on the CPIB or Police investigations, and an MP’s personal conduct will be ruled as irrelevant to the subject matter under discussion and will be disallowed by me.
Leader of the House.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That this House: (a) Affirms the need for Members of Parliament to uphold the highest standards of integrity and conduct themselves in accordance with the law; (b) Affirms the need to deal firmly and fairly with any Member of Parliament who is being investigated for possible wrongdoing; and (c) Resolves to consider the matter regarding Member of Parliament S Iswaran when the outcome of the ongoing investigations against him is known.\"
As Members are aware, Mr Iswaran, who is a Member of the West Coast Group Representation Constituency (GRC), is currently under investigation by the CPIB and is on leave of absence.
At the direction of the Prime Minister, he has been interdicted in his capacity as a Minister on a reduced pay of $8,500 per month, until further notice, as explained by the Prime Minister in his Ministerial Statement delivered at the last Sitting on 2 August 2023. In response to a clarification by Mr Dennis Tan as to whether the reduced pay comprised both the Minister's pay and MP allowance, the Prime Minister explained that Mr Iswaran's MP allowance was not interdicted, as unlike a Minister's pay, it was not at the discretion of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister pointed out that it was a matter for Parliament and that Parliament had not done that, nor in previous cases, had it done so. Instead, what has happened is that the MP has been on leave of absence and, eventually, when the case is settled one way or another, then, consequences will follow.
I believe that it is in this context that the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Ms Hazel Poa has filed her current Motion. Indeed, in her Facebook post of 8 September 2023, Ms Poa expressly states that she filed the Motion for Parliament to suspend Mr S Iswaran from the service of Parliament for the remainder of the current session of the 14th Parliament, \"so that he no longer receives his MP allowance...\".
In other words, Mr Speaker – or more accurately, in her own words – Ms Poa is moving a Motion to suspend Mr Iswaran solely in order to cut off his MP allowance.
Mr Speaker, this gives rise to some concern as to how this House should exercise its powers. We should make decisions on the basis of generally applicable principles and not on individual cases in isolation.
We are being asked to suspend a Member. The suspension of an MP is a serious matter. If done, it must be done in accordance with the law and on the right principles. We need to know on what basis the suspension is sought, what threshold or criterion for suspension the NCMP is relying on and what are the principles that lead Ms Poa to propose suspending Mr Iswaran at this point of time?
Ms Poa will be speaking in this debate after me and I invite Ms Poa to clarify these matters.
Mr Speaker, this House is given the privilege of regulating the conduct of its Members and when it does so, it should act on principle, rationally and fairly, and the standards we espouse should apply to all Members.
That is why I have brought the Motion in the terms set out above.
Mr Speaker, there should be no quarrel with the first limb of my Motion. As lawmakers and elected representatives of our citizens, it goes without saying that MPs should uphold the highest standards of integrity and to conduct ourselves in accordance with the law. Nevertheless, it is important to signal to Singaporeans that this is what we expect of ourselves so that they have the assurance of knowing that we are committed to this.
However, we must also be realistic and recognise that there will be occasions when Members may come under investigation for possible wrongdoing, as is currently the case. The question is, what approach this House should take when that happens.
This is dealt with in the second limb of my Motion, which asks the House to affirm that in the event an MP is investigated for possible wrongdoing, we should act in a manner that is not only firm, but also fair.
Again, I do not think that there can be any dispute on this, as a matter of principle and approach. The real question is how it is to be applied. Obviously, what is fair will depend on the individual circumstances of each case.
Ms Poa is calling for the suspension of Mr Iswaran. What is the principle that Ms Poa is advocating in calling for his suspension? Is it that he is under investigation? If so, then her proposal should cover all MPs being investigated. At the moment, there are three Members of Parliament under investigation: Mr Iswaran, Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap.
Regarding Mr Singh and Mr Faisal Manap, Members will recall that this House had referred Mr Singh and Mr Faisal Manap to the Public Prosecutor following the outcome of the Committee of Privileges' inquiry into the complaint against Ms Raeesah Khan. Notwithstanding that they are under investigation, they have not been suspended.
Is Ms Poa calling for their suspension as well? If not, then why not?
This brings us to the third limb of my Motion, which is what we should do with respect to Mr Iswaran at this point in time.
All we know at this point in time is that Mr Iswaran is under investigation by CPIB under the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, we do not know the facts or what specifically he is being investigated for. The outcome of the investigation is not yet known. We simply do not have sufficient material to make an informed decision at the present time.
As such, Mr Speaker, it is premature to take any action with regard to Mr Iswaran at this stage and doing so would be to prejudge the outcome of the investigation. It would be better to wait for the outcome of the investigation before deciding what to do. That would put us in a better position to assess the right and fair course of action.
Mr Speaker, at the end of the day, it is important that we deal with situations like these objectively and dispassionately. We should not attempt to exploit such situations for political ends, but rather to do the right thing at the right time.
The People's Action Party (PAP) has been very strict with its MPs and Ministers and will continue to be. I hope Opposition parties will uphold equally high standards – not just in words, but also in deeds. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: In accordance with the decision of this House to take this Motion together with the next Motion standing in the name of Ms Hazel Poa, I will now call on Ms Poa to move her Motion and make her opening speech before allowing Members to debate on both Motions. Ms Hazel Poa.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Suspension of Member","subTitle":"Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move*, \"That this House suspends Mr S Iswaran from the service of Parliament for the remainder of the current session of the 14th Parliament.\"
[(proc text) * The Motion also stood in the name of Mr Leong Mun Wai. (proc text)]
As the House has passed a Business Motion to rearrange business such that my Motion for leave to bring in a Private Member's Bill will be taken after the simultaneous debate on my Motion and the Motion by the Leader of the House, I would like to first provide some background on the Motion statement as it appears today as well as my Private Member's Bill.
We had originally wanted the Motion statement to state that the suspension would be: (a) until Minister Iswaran has been cleared of all wrongdoing and he is able to resume duties or (b) until the end of the current session of the 14th Parliament, whichever is earlier.
We were, however, advised by Parliamentary staff that the first condition is not sufficiently definite and thus cannot form part of the Motion statement. It was, therefore, removed.
We had also originally wanted the Motion statement to include the provision that should Minister Iswaran be cleared of all wrongdoing, the Member of Parliament's (MP) allowance not paid over the duration of the suspension should then be paid to him. We were informed that this also cannot form part of the Motion statement because, currently, the law does not allow that to be done. If we wish to back pay Minister Iswaran, legislative changes will have to be made. This is why we have also asked for leave to introduce a Bill to make that possible.
The main goal of my Private Member's Bill is to empower Parliament to authorise the back payment of the allowance of an MP who has been suspended from the service of Parliament by resolution. Thus, the Motion statement stands as it is today.
Sir, I regret the circumstances that have led us to debate this Motion. This is the first time since Independence that such a Motion has been moved in this House. My colleague, Mr Leong Mun Wai and I have placed this Motion before the House after serious consideration. It is not a case of \"Anything you can do, I can do stronger\", as the Prime Minister said during the Sitting on 2 August.
Since 12 July, Minister Iswaran has been instructed by the Prime Minister to take leave of absence from his official duties until the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) completes its investigations into him.
As the Prime Minister informed this House on 2 August, while Minister Iswaran is interdicted from his Ministerial duties, he will draw a reduced pay of $8,500 per month. However, Minister Iswaran continues to draw his full MP allowance of $192,500 per year.
The Prime Minister said that it was not within his discretion to cut the MP allowance. To do that, it must be done through a Motion in Parliament to suspend the Member from the service of Parliament. Hence, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) decided to file the Motion to suspend Minister Iswaran.
How is this case different from others as to warrant a suspension?
Firstly, he is no longer performing his duties as an MP, whether in Parliament or in his constituency. The Prime Minister has made the decision to place Minister Iswaran on leave of absence in both his capacity as Minister as well as MP. While we do not have the details of the investigation that the Prime Minister is privy to, we believe the Prime Minister must have good reasons to do so. So, in effect, Minister Iswaran has been fully suspended from his MP duties, but not from his MP allowance.
Secondly, this case involves corruption, a crime we have always maintained we have zero tolerance for. We believe this merits a strong statement that reflects our values. In addition, for many years, the Government has justified the high salaries for political officeholders on the basis of ensuring that our Government remains honest and free of corruption. This is why many Singaporeans, including myself, find it difficult to accept that taxpayers' money is being used in this way.
Let us set aside this particular case involving Minister Iswaran for the time being and instead, consider a generic case of corruption.
Should we have a system that allows an outcome whereby an MP who is eventually found guilty of corruption and whose duties had been suspended can continue to receive in full his or her MP allowance over the entire duration of the investigation plus the duration of Court proceedings until he or she is finally pronounced guilty, and all avenues of appeal exhausted? Is this a good use of tax revenue? Is this not a drain on our resources? If this is not a desirable outcome, then we need to do something.
This Motion is therefore about the prudent use of taxpayers' money, not a presumption of guilt. While we do not want corrupt MPs to benefit financially, we must balance that with ensuring that innocent MPs do not have to pay a price for accusations or suspicions that are later proved unfounded.
To do that, we have two options: the first is to pay the allowance first and then claw back if found guilty; the second is to suspend the allowance and then pay back if found innocent. Both of these options are currently not legal. Existing laws do not allow any clawback of allowance nor paying back of withheld allowance. Legislative changes are necessary to adopt either one.
Under the first option of 'pay first, claw back later\", a potential problem exists. After the payment of the allowance, we have no control over where the money flows. There might be difficulties later in recovering the sum of money; and time, effort and cost may be incurred in the recovery. Hence, we prefer the second option of suspend first, pay later.
It is PSP's stance that an MP or Minister who is under investigation for corruption and suspended from official duties should be put on no-pay leave until the investigation or criminal case is concluded. If the MP or Minister subsequently resumes their official duties after being cleared by the investigation or criminal case, they should be entitled to full back pay for the period during which they were on leave of absence.
The Leader of the House has also filed a Motion today. There are three parts to the Motion, which I would deal with in turn. Clause (a) of the Leader's Motion asked the House to affirm the need for MPs to uphold the highest standards of integrity and conduct themselves in accordance with the law.
PSP has no objection to this. We are also of the belief that MPs have a responsibility to be men and women of integrity and to act in accordance with the law. It is our duty to Singaporeans and what Singaporeans expect of us.
Clause (b) of the Leader's Motion asked the House to affirm the need to deal firmly and fairly with any MP who is being investigated for possible wrongdoing.
In principle, PSP has no objection to this. However, we may differ on what constitutes \"firmly\" and \"fairly\". We are not advocating that any MP who is under investigation should be suspended. That would indeed be unfair and setting the bar too low. Anyone can lodge a complaint and an investigation will be triggered. Out of the many cases investigated, a much smaller number would result in an arrest, as had happened with Minister Iswaran.
We do, however, maintain that an MP or Minister who is under investigation for corruption and suspended from official duties should be put on no-pay leave until the investigation or criminal case is concluded and will only receive back pay if they are subsequently cleared by the investigation or criminal case.
Clause (c) of the Leader's Motion asked the House to resolve to consider the matter regarding Minister Iswaran when the outcome of the ongoing investigation against him is known. In effect, it is asking the House to maintain the status quo where Minister Iswaran continues to draw his MP allowance until the investigations against him are completed.
This is unacceptable to PSP. It is unclear how long the investigations will take. We have seen that corruption investigations can take a long time, especially when it involves overseas participants.
In 2017, Keppel Offshore & Marine (KOM) admitted to corruption to the US Department of Justice. In December 2017, KOM was served a conditional warning in lieu of prosecution by CPIB, with investigations continuing into the KOM executives involved. The CPIB investigations only concluded more than five years later in January 2023, with a stern warning to the KOM executives.
If we do not suspend Minister Iswaran and he is subsequently charged and found guilty of corruption, we would not be able to recover the allowances that were paid to him while he was under investigation and not performing his duties.
There have been precedents of MPs who have remained an MP and continued to draw the full MP allowance throughout the entire legal process while they were charged for corruption until they chose to resign or were otherwise disqualified from office. This was the case with former PAP MP and Minister of State Wee Toon Boon in the 1970s, who remained an MP throughout his trial for corruption.
He was charged in April 1975 for corruption. He remained an MP for another one year and five months until September 1976 when he resigned. By the time he resigned as an MP, he had already served two months of his 18-month jail term.
PSP believes that it would be a most unsatisfactory situation if this were to happen in the case of Minister Iswaran. Given that Minister Iswaran is: one, under investigation for corruption; two, placed under arrest; and three, put on leave of absence by the Prime Minister, we believe that these three factors together make a strong case for his suspension from Parliament.
That is why today I have moved this Motion and sought leave to table a Private Member's Bill to amend the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act in order to create the legal mechanisms to back pay an MP their allowance if they are suspended.
PSP believes that the suspension together with the provision to back pay him should he be cleared of all wrongdoing is indeed dealing with the matter firmly and fairly. The Motion moved by the Leader of the House does not achieve this. It is, in fact, calling for a maintenance of the status quo.
Let us compare the financial outcome of suspending Minister Iswaran versus not suspending under two scenarios of him being innocent or guilty.
If Minister Iswaran is innocent, there is no difference in outcome between suspending or not suspending him. However, if Minister Iswaran is found guilty, there is a distinct difference. If he is not suspended from Parliament, he will gain the MP allowance while taxpayers lose tax revenue. If he is suspended, he loses the allowance while taxpayers save on tax revenue.
This clearly shows that suspending leads to a more desirable outcome financially. Therefore, if the House were to vote on the Motion as a whole, PSP will be voting against the Motion moved by the Leader. I hope all Members will support the Motion moved by Mr Leong Mun Wai and I.
Mr Speaker: Yes, Leader. You may seek a clarification.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just wish to seek some clarifications from Ms Poa so that when I do my reply later, I can do so in a considered manner and we are not talking at cross purposes.
The first clarification I am seeking is this: under what specific provision is Ms Poa seeking to suspend Mr Iswaran? I know Ms Poa would like to suspend him in order to cut his allowance. But the cutting of the allowance is an outcome. It happens when you suspend somebody. But you cannot just suspend in vacuum. There has to be, as I mentioned in my earlier speech, a threshold, a section of legislation or some legal provision where you seek suspension.
So, my clarification is this – under which section of legislation or what regulation is Ms Poa seeking to suspend?
Mr Speaker: Ms Poa.
Ms Hazel Poa: If I recall correctly, I believe it is section 56(5). Basically, it is a provision where there is no restriction to circumstances under which Parliament can suspend a Member.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Is Ms Poa referring to the Standing Orders (SOs)?
Ms Hazel Poa: Yes.
Ms Indranee Rajah: SO56(5)? SO 56 has no \"(5)\". It is just 56.
Ms Hazel Poa: Oh, sorry, section 59(5) – \"Nothing in this Standing Order shall be taken to deprive Parliament of the power of proceeding against any Member according to any resolution of Parliament.\"
Ms Indranee Rajah: My second clarification, therefore, is this – if that is the relevant provision of the SOs, is Ms Poa saying that we do not need to have any principles for suspension? We just suspend because we can? In other words, you do not look to see whether something has occurred; in other words, you do it because you can do it.
What is the principle on which she is saying that we should suspend?
Ms Hazel Poa: I believe I have stated the basis of asking for suspension quite clearly. Basically, let me reiterate that being investigated for corruption, under arrest and not performing his MP duties. I accept that there are no current rules prescribing exactly the circumstances under which a Member can be suspended, but I do not see that as a prohibition against doing something that we feel is the right thing to do even though the rule has not yet been put in place.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Just one further clarification. Because Ms Poa has limited it quite carefully to corruption. Can I ask Ms Poa, is it her view then that if an MP is under investigation for murder or for rape, then suspension should not apply?
Ms Hazel Poa: I have not thought about those other cases. It is not my intention to set out the rules under which Members can be suspended. I am merely looking at the case in point, where I feel there is a strong case for suspension.
As to setting out generic rules, I believe that there will be somebody in Government or Leader of the House that is in charge of that.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Just to confirm. Ms Poa is not bringing this Motion as a matter of broad principle of general application, but a very specific targeted Motion directed at Mr Iswaran. Is that correct?
Ms Hazel Poa: Yes, I believe that all disciplinary cases are of that nature.
Mr Speaker: Mr Vikram Nair, you have a clarification for Ms Hazel Poa?
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): I have two clarifications for Ms Hazel Poa. The first is: does Ms Hazel Poa agree with the presumption of innocence? And the second is: does Ms Hazel Poa agree that a person who is charged or accused of any wrongdoing should be given a chance to answer that charge and should know the applicable rule before he is charged?
Ms Hazel Poa: Yes, of course, I do, which is why we are also making the provision to back pay the Minister if he should be found innocent. There is no presumption of guilt here; just how to better use taxpayers' money. And Minister Iswaran will be going through the full process of the law to determine whether or not he is guilty or innocent.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Consideration of Matters regarding Member of Parliament, and Suspension of Member","subTitle":"Simultaneous debate on both Motions","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Speaker: In accordance with the decision of the House to have a simultaneous debate on both Motions, I will now call on Members to make their speeches.
Members are allowed to consider both Motions in a single speech. The time limits will apply as if it were a debate on a single Motion. At the end of the debate, I will put the questions on both Motions to a vote, so that the House can express its views on each Motion separately.
As the intent of the Business Motion is for Parliament to debate the two Motions together and vote on them at the end of the debate, I will disallow any amendment that has the effect of substantially qualifying, transposing, contradicting or nullifying the other Motion.
Any Member who disagrees with a Motion can vote against that Motion. Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, I support my colleague Ms Hazel Poa's Motion today.
The Progressive Singapore Party (PSP), tabling this Motion today, that is of historic significance, which is to uphold the zero-tolerance approach that our nation has towards corruption.
For many years, the People's Action Party (PAP) government has been telling Singaporeans we must provide high pay to Ministers and Parliamentarians in order to ensure that the Government maintains its fairness and incorruptibility.
The PSP agrees with paying people well to maintain corruptibility, but we also believe that when a Minister or Parliamentarian is being investigated for corruption and when this investigation or criminal case has not been ended yet, they should be suspended from their duties, or they should stop receiving such high pay for the time being. If the Parliamentarian or Minister were to be decided to be acquitted and to be guilt-free, then the full amount of the pay due to him during the unpaid leave period should be paid back.
The Leader of the House, Ms Indranee Rajah, today also raised a Motion and it requires that Parliament awaits the result of Minister Iswaran's case to be out before we make a decision on this. If Parliament were to choose to agree with that Motion and to reject the Motion from the PSP, then what is, in fact, happening is that we are maintaining the status quo; which means that Minister Iswaran, during this period of investigation when he is on leave, he will continue to receive more than $16,000 every month in terms of Member of Parliament’s (MP) subsidies or allowance until the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) has completed the investigation into him.
This means that the annual payout could be up to S$192,500 in terms of MP allowances and it comes from the public coffers, and it is the taxpayers who are actually contributing to the public coffers. The Government has the responsibility to prudently use the taxpayers' money and it has the obligation to prevent taxpayers' money from being abused or misused. To that end, the PSP disagrees with the Motion from the Leader of the House and is unable to agree or accept that arrangement.
The PSP believes that if Minister Iswaran is eventually found to be not guilty of corruption, then taxpayers, due to the restrictions of the current laws, would not be able to recover or claw back the money that has been paid out. But if we do not claw it back, that means that taxpayers, during the period through which a person is being investigated of a corruption have, for no reason, paid a large sum of money to this person under corruption charges. We are talking about a sum of $16,000 per month. That is not a small amount. From the Ministry of Manpower, we can understand that there are so many Singaporeans who are working diligently and contributing their labour and effort, and, despite that, their household income is below that of $16,000.
Of course, the PSP also wants to seriously proclaim that we believe that before Minister Iswaran is proven to be guilty by the Court, he is innocent. Suspending his duties and allowance are but temporary. If he is found to be not guilty eventually, then we should, when the whole investigation is completed, repay him the MP allowance.
The PSP would like to say that for taxpayers and Minister Iswaran, there should be a fair approach. And that is why we are tabling this Motion today to suspend his duties and MP allowance for the time being.
The PSP would also like to urge Parliament to move or agree to the Motion tabled by Ms Hazel Poa and myself, and amend the 1962 Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act in order to ensure that Parliament has the right to back pay Minister Iswaran while he is absolved and when he resumes his public duties.
The PSP has tabled this Motion for the for the amendment Bill because we truly want to improve our system, and this is valid, reasonable and in accordance with the laws. We hope that all Parliamentarians can understand our intention and provide full support.
(In English): I support the Motion moved by Ms Hazel Poa. For country, for people.
Mr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I refer to the Motions filed by the Leader of the House on 14 September, precipitated by the Motion filed by PSP's Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Hazel Poa on 7 September calling for the suspension of Mr S Iswaran.
In my view, there are two key issues for Parliament to consider: first, whether it is fair and proper for a duly elected Member of Parliament (MP) to be suspended from responsibilities towards his or her constituents and legislative duties before due process is concluded; second, what Parliament ought to do when an MP has been effectively interdicted from MP duties arising from actions taken by his or her Party leader.
First, let me speak on the issue of fairness.
The hon Member Ms Hazel Poa's case is that a Member should be suspended from Parliament because he has been arrested and is being investigated for the serious offence of corruption. However, the centrality of the rule of law in Singapore renders the hon Member's suggested course of action premature, a point made all the more stark because we do not even know the details of what Mr S Iswaran is accused of. Parliament should be mindful of the dictum of presumption of innocence.
With respect, I would also request PSP colleagues in the House to consider the precedent their Motion would create should a future government decide to fix Opposition MPs by way of politically motivated investigations.
Sir, in some cases, those who have been investigated under the Prevention of Corruption Act have not been charged. In a few other cases, accused persons who have been brought to trial have been acquitted or the prosecution applies to withdraw the charges. In yet other cases, those convicted at first instance have seen their convictions overturned on appeal. Any of these scenarios could come to pass in Mr Iswaran's case.
In the Workers' Party's (WP) view, the wheels of justice must be allowed to fully turn before Parliament decides what to do.
The WP cannot agree to the Motion filed by the PSP. It would not just be unfair and premature but, significantly, this House would be seeking to overturn the electoral mandate given to Mr Iswaran by the people through the ballot box by prematurely passing judgement on him.
This leads me to the second issue on how to deal with an MP who has been put by his party leader on indeterminate leave of absence from Parliament with full MP's allowance. While it may not be appropriate to suspend Mr Iswaran from Parliament, it may well be appropriate to suspend the payment of his MP allowance.
WP MP Mr Dennis Tan raised this matter of Mr Iswaran's MP allowance in Parliament last month.
Mr Speaker, there is disquiet among members of the public because he continues to collect his allowance. As far as I know, Mr Iswaran is neither performing duties in his constituency nor in Parliament and his likeness is not found on Town Council or People's Association banners in West Coast Group Representation Constituency (GRC).
The Prime Minister said in this House last month that if Parliament wants to stop an MP's allowance, Parliament has to move to interdict the individual as an MP and Parliament has not done that and, I quote, \"What has happened is that the MP has been on a leave of absence and, eventually, when the case is settled in one way or another, then consequences would follow.\" What needs to be noted, however, is that the Prime Minister's act of interdicting Mr Iswaran as Minister appears to have effectively interdicted him as an MP as well.
For the WP to decide on whether to support the Leader's Motion, there are a few questions I would like to ask the Leader in order that this House can understand the full extent of the restrictions on Mr Iswaran as an MP.
My first question is: can the Leader confirm whether Mr Iswaran's ban on entering Government buildings extends to Parliament House? Does Mr Iswaran have access to the Public Service Division's MP Appeal System and is he rendering assistance or expected to do so to his residents in his capacity as an MP?
My second question addresses the Prime Minister's comment that consequences will follow. It is unclear if those, I quote, \"consequences\" include a clawback of the MP allowance. I would advance that such a clawback for the period during which he has not performed MP's duties would be a reasonable expectation of the public. So, my second question is this: can the Leader tell us whether a clawback of Mr S Iswaran's MP allowance is within the PAP's contemplation in so far as clause (c) of the Leader's Motion is concerned? For completeness, it is this issue that forms the basis of my Parliamentary Question today and filed on 7 September about the duration Mr Iswaran is expected to be absent from Parliament.
My third question concerns para (c) of the Leader's Motion where it says that this House will consider this matter when the outcome of ongoing investigations is known. This contrasts with what the Prime Minister said during the clarifications of the Prime Minister's Ministerial Statement on Mr Iswaran last month. The Prime Minister said and, I quote, \"If there is a case, the case has not been heard, he has not been found guilty or acquitted or whatever.\"
My third question is this: can the Leader clarify whether the word \"outcome\" in para (c) of the Leader's Motion means that this House will consider this matter once investigations are completed and a decision has been made on whether charges would be preferred against Mr Iswaran or if it means that this House will consider this matter only upon conclusion of the entire criminal justice process, including any possible appeal?
The WP's position on the Leader's Motion will turn on the responses to these three specific queries.
Mr Speaker: Mr Lim Biow Chuan.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, I was taken aback when I saw the Motion by the hon NCMP Ms Hazel Poa and Mr Leong Mun Wai.
In their Motion, they asked that \"This House suspends Mr S Iswaran from the service of Parliament for the remainder of the current session of the Fourteenth Parliament.\"
In Ms Hazel Poa’s Facebook page, she said that she had filed the Motion so that Mr S Iswaran no longer receives his MP allowance while he has been requested by the Prime Minister to not perform any official duties during his investigation by CPIB.
Sir, it is a fundamental principle of law that any person who is accused of an offence is deemed innocent until proven guilty in a Court of law. The burden of proof is placed on the prosecution, and the accused is assumed to be innocent until the prosecution can prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime that he has been charged with. The accused does not even need to prove his innocence. The burden of proof is on the prosecution.
This principle is also enshrined in the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At Article 11, it says: \"Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time that the penal offence was committed.\"
Sir, to the best of my knowledge, Mr Iswaran is currently under investigations by CPIB. He has not been charged for an offence and neither has he been convicted in a Court of law of any offence.
In the statement made by the Prime Minister on 2 August 2023, Prime Minister Lee said that \"while investigating a separate matter, CPIB came across some information concerning Minister Iswaran that merited investigation. CPIB would need to interview Minister Iswaran to take the investigation further and he sought my concurrence to open a formal investigation. Minister Iswaran was brought in by CPIB and subsequently released on bail. I instructed him to take leave of absence until the investigations were completed.\"
Sir, to this date, I am not aware of any other facts that have come out and the Prime Minister had said that CPIB investigations are still ongoing. He said, \"Details cannot be provided so as not to prejudice the investigations.\"
Thus, if Ms Hazel Poa of PSP is asking that Parliament suspend Mr S Iswaran simply because they feel that he does not warrant the MP’s allowance, then does this mean that they have already judged that Mr Iswaran had committed a wrongdoing even before the details of the investigations are out? Let me repeat that. They are judging that Mr Iswaran had committed a wrongdoing even before the details of the investigation are out. Surely, Mr Iswaran should be given due process and every opportunity to present his case before the Court of law if ever CPIB decides to charge him. And this is the basic principle behind the rule of law.
So, with the greatest respect, if PSP is advocating this principle, then it is a very dangerous principle. It means that if any member of the public lodges a Police report against Mr Leong or Ms Poa or, for that matter, any other MP and the Police decides to commence investigations against them, this House would similarly have to suspend them from the service of Parliament.
If Ms Poa or Mr Leong feels that an MP ought to be suspended from service merely because he is under investigation, let us seek advice and I think the Leader of the House has said already that this principle would then have to be applicable to all MPs in this House.
In the 2 August Sitting, I asked Mr Leong whether it is his position that the Leader of Opposition, Mr Pritam cannot receive his salary or cannot carry out his duties in Parliament merely because he has been referred to the Police for investigation. Mr Leong then replied that it only pertains to investigation by CPIB. But why only cases involving CPIB? As the Leader of the House said, \"Why not for other offences, other serious offences – molest, rape, murder\" or is it purely an arbitrary decision made by PSP?
So, allow me to ask Mr Leong again – if an MP is investigated for perjury, for lying under oath, is that not a serious offence, too? It involves an allegation of dishonest conduct, an allegation of lying under oath which means that we cannot trust that person who may lie at any opportunity. Is Ms Poa or Mr Leong saying that these offences are not serious?
Sir, allow me to clarify that I hold the Leader of the Opposition with great respect. While I may not agree with Mr Pritam Singh on some political matters, I will stand to defend his right to sit in Parliament unless he is convicted of an offence and, even then, the punishment levied must be such that it will disqualify him from serving as an MP under the Constitution, because not every punishment will result in disqualification as an MP under the Constitution.
So, the fundamental question which I have for the two NCMPs is: what is their basis for asking for Mr Iswaran to be suspended from service when we do not even know what is the case against him? He has been placed on leave of absence and, hence, is not able to attend Parliament. So, I do not understand this rush to suspend him. Why not allow the CPIB time to do its work? Does PSP say that every single Government officer who is under investigation for any offence also be suspended, and the salary docked?
Why would PSP want Parliament to amend an Act of Parliament just simply to push for the suspension of salary of one particular MP? Is it their position that you punish first – suspend, cut his salary – and then reimburse him later if he is found guilty? This goes against the rule of law.
So, for that reason, I cannot support this Motion by Ms Poa and Mr Leong. I firmly believe that once the case against Mr Iswaran is concluded, the Government will do whatever is right to ensure that all parties are treated fairly. Hence, I support the Motion by the Leader of the House that we wait for the outcome of the investigations before considering any other action.
Mr Speaker: I think Mr Lim actually used the wrong word here. The reimbursement should be if the Member is found innocent.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan: Yes. Yes, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker: Mr Raj Joshua Thomas.
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas (Nominated Member): Sir, there are two applicable principles that this House should look at when considering the Motions before us.
The first is the legal principle of the presumption of innocence, which have been mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition and Mr Lim. The second is the legal and democratic principle of tenure of office as provided in the Constitution.
The first is a simple, almost universal principle that where a person is being investigated or has been charged with an offence, he is to be presumed innocent until found guilty by a court of law. The Government's stated position is equivocal support for this principle.
As the hon Minister for Law said in response to the hon Member Christopher de Souza's Parliamentary Question on this in August 2008, I quote, \"Let there not be any doubt on this point. The presumption of innocence is an important and fundamental principle, and it is one of the foundations of our criminal justice system. The Government is absolutely committed to upholding the presumption of innocence as a core principle in our commitment to the rule of law.\"
The principle is also applied by the Courts in Singapore. In a judgment by then Justice VK Raja, also in 2008, His Honour wrote, \"If the evidence is insufficient to support the prosecution's theory of guilt, the judge must acquit the accused... it simply has not been proved to the satisfaction of the law that the accused is guilty, and the presumption of innocence stands unrebutted.\"
As it stands, Minister Iswaran is still under investigation. No charges have been brought at this point and no determination has been made by a Court. Therefore, the presumption of innocence continues to stand unrebutted.
The second principle is that of tenure of office. Article 46(1) of the Constitution provides that an MP will continue to be an MP from the time of election until the next dissolution of Parliament. The MP's seat would only become vacant under certain circumstances, which are enumerated in article 46(2). These include: (a) resigning; (b) failing to attend Sittings in two consecutive months without obtaining leave from the Speaker; and (c) becoming subject to the disqualifications from being a Member of Parliament like being convicted for an offence by a Court and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than one year or to a fine of not less than $10,000.
The principle of tenure of an MP is important. It is a nod to the fact that MPs are elected by the people, who are the highest source of authority in a democracy and that they should therefore not be easily removable by any other authority in the land.
This underlying reason should also apply to suspensions because the suspension is imposed by a body other than the people and prevents an MP from carrying out what he was elected to do. It should therefore not be a lever that is easily available and should only be used under very narrow circumstances.
Suspension is provided for in sections 21(1)C and 21(2) of the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act 1962. The narrow circumstances in which it may be invoked is where the MP has displayed dishonourable conduct, abuse of privilege or contempt. Importantly, these circumstances must be proven.
As regard abuse of privilege, an MP must be first found guilty of abuse of privilege. As regards contempt, the MP must first have had to be found to have committed contempt by a Select Committee or found guilty in a court of law, pursuant to prosecution by the Public Prosecutor, or if an MP was summarily determined by Parliament to be guilty if the alleged offence was committed in the view of Parliament or where it was Sitting.
The Standing Orders (SOs) also provide for suspension of a Member. SO59 provides that Parliament may suspend a Member but specifically so for the commission of the offences of disregarding the authority of the Chair or of persistently and wilfully obstructing the business of Parliament by abusing the rules of Parliament. Such a suspension requires that a vote be put to Parliament to determine whether such an offence had actually been committed.
Ms Poa referred to SO59(5). If I may read that out, \"Nothing in this Standing Order shall be taken to deprive Parliament of the power of proceeding against any Member according to any resolution of Parliament.\" This does not mean that Parliament has the ability or the right to willy nilly decide to pass resolutions and to suspend Members for any reason. These resolutions must be pursuant to one of the provisions that I had mentioned earlier.
So, the common thread through all of these prescribed potential avenues for the suspension of an MP is that it must have been judged or determined in the manner provided that an offence had actually been committed. In the current matter involving Minister Iswaran, the case is still under investigation. No judgment or determination has been arrived at.
I therefore come back to what I started with. In the current matter, the presumption of innocence continues to stand unrebutted and any move by Parliament to suspend the Minister as an MP is not only premature but does not have legal legs to stand on. For completeness, there is also no mechanism to suspend merely an MP's salary.
In this regard, I cannot support the Motion by the hon NCMP. I will support the Motion by the hon Minister Indranee Rajah. Her Motion restates the standards that we expect our MPs to have. It affirms that they are to be treated fairly but firmly in the period after investigations are initiated, but before the presumption of innocence is rebutted, and resolves to deal with the matter at hand once the outcomes of investigations are known.
As a final point, Sir, I would like to confess that unlike Mr Lim, who was disturbed by it, when I first saw the Motion, as a graduate in both political science and law, I was quite titillated by this question of the circumstances in which an elected MP could be removed, suspended or otherwise prevented from exercising the mandate given to him by voters. I listened very carefully to Ms Poa's speech to identify the legal leg upon which her Motion would stand – but there was none.
In fact, Ms Poa even glossed over the basic requirement to invoke any of the avenues for suspension, which is that the presumption of innocence must first be rebutted.
The matter involving Minister Iswaran has understandably created anxiousness and some amount of consternation amongst the public. As a polity that prices transparency, fairness and incorruptibility, it is not unexpected that questions on egalitarian treatment or just or unjust remuneration have a reason in relation to this case. These matters invoke emotions in people.
But Parliament operates within the constructs created by the Constitution, by law and by our SOs. Whether it is to do with the suspension of a Member, formalities like Points of Order, apologies or Guillotine Times for Budget Cuts, or larger questions like how to ensure free and fair debate in this Chamber, there are laws, rules and procedures that apply to all of us. If a Member disagrees with these constructs or thinks that there are better ways to do things, then it is open to that Member to propose to amend them and for Parliament to consider these proposed amendments. It is an MP's prerogative.
But as long as these provisions stand, they must be abided by, and Motions, Debates and proposals must be framed within them. This is called the rule of law.
Where there is public concern and emotion on certain matters, it is an indication to our Government to address these matters and to assure the public, which is what the Prime Minister and other Ministers had done in relation to this matter at the last Sitting. It is not a licence to proceed to do something outside the constructs of the law in a knee-jerk reaction.
As much as I can understand public frustration with having to wait while investigations are underway, we must allow due process to run its course. And as difficult as it may be in a public justice system where accused persons are publicly mentioned, we must maintain the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
So, Mr Speaker, Sir, while I was titillated by the academic idea of the Motion, I was deeply disappointed in the substance of it. A Motion that calls for the suspension of a Member must necessarily as a basic premise first set out the legal provisions upon which the proposed suspension would stand. There were simply none disclosed in Ms Poa's speech.
For the reasons I had set out in my speech, I will not support the Motion raised by the hon NCMPs, and I will support that raised by Minister Indranee.
Mr Speaker: Mr Vikram Nair.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): Mr Speaker, I support the Motion standing in the name of the Leader of the House, Ms Indranee Rajah. I also disagree with the Motion standing in the name of Ms Hazel Poa calling for the suspension of Mr Iswaran until the end of this term of Parliament.
Our role as an MP, Mr Speaker, ultimately comes from the mandates at the ballot box. It should therefore not be taken away lightly.
An MP is not an employee but, rather, is self-employed. Being an MP gives a person certain privileges, including the right to attend and speak in Parliament. Related to this, while an MP is self-employed, when an MP is elected on a party platform, that MP is also accountable to the party and the party's rules. Ultimately, the party is also, in turn, accountable to the electorate. So, if a party puts a Member on leave of absence, that party would ultimately be accountable to the electorate to ensure that the electorate continues to be served. These are all mechanisms that includes checks and balances within themselves.
There are clear provisions, Mr Speaker, that allow Member's rights to be suspended. These are set out in the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act 1962, which I will refer to as PIPPA for short, and the SOs of Parliament.
Section 20 of PIPPA sets out the punitive powers of Parliament. These punitive powers include, under section 20C, the powers to suspend a Member. So, let us be very clear. Suspension is a punitive measure.
These powers can only be exercised where a Member has engaged in: one, dishonourable conduct; two, abused privilege; or three, engaged in contempt of Parliament. I do not think any of these accusations are currently being made in this Motion against Mr Iswaran.
The subsequent sections such as section 21 of PIPPA set out the process for making determinations. I would add that generally, fair process should be accorded to a Member before his privileges are suspended.
Ms Poa seems to agree with this principle and acknowledges that ultimately, this is a matter that will be determined by the investigation process and, if necessary, by a Court thereafter.
Generally, fair process includes the Member being made aware of the allegations against him and being given a chance to answer it. So, if Parliament wishes to exercise punitive powers before investigation is concluded, then that Member should be given a chance to answer those allegations.
Clearly, I would suggest that in this case, that would not be appropriate because Mr Iswaran is being investigated by CPIB. Those investigations are taking place. Other witnesses are being called. It would be a bit of a circus for a second investigation to take place in Parliament over the exact same set of facts.
Where there has been no determination that Mr Iswaran has committed any crimes or engaged in dishonourable conduct, I would suggest that the punitive powers of Parliament should not be exercised yet. In general, a person is presumed to be innocent until he has been convicted, and Mr Iswaran should be accorded the same right as every other person has.
The SOs of Parliament have one provision dealing with the suspension of a Member and this is SO59. I think Ms Poa referred to SO59(5), which says that nothing in this Order will take away the general powers of Parliament to suspend the Member.
What is interesting is SO59 is actually an Order that deals with the powers of the Speaker to propose a suspension of a Member: one, for disregard for the authority of the Chair; or two, persistently and wilfully obstructing the business of Parliament. These are the only express grounds in the SOs of Parliament that allow for the suspension of a Member.
While these provisions have been used by Speakers in some other jurisdictions, in Singapore, I am not aware of any case where this power has been used to suspend a Member.
So, I would suggest that if we are going to stray outside of these express provisions that give Parliament the power to suspend the Member, we have to be crystal clear on the principles being applied. It also goes against the principle of retrospective criminality for us to see what has happened and then decide that is wrong. It is important for laws to set out very clearly what is wrong first so that people know what standards they have to abide by.
If you look at this Motion objectively, what is happening here is, if you just look at the facts, I think Ms Poa was Mr Iswaran's opponent in the West Coast Group Representation Constituency and has now put up a Motion calling for his suspension.
If this is set as a precedent, imagine what this power would do on the opposite side, if a ruling party were to decide it wants to suspend a Member without any clear, principled basis. Those Motions would pass if the Party Whip were exercised. Clearly, that would not be a precedent we want to set. So, I would suggest that Members be very, very slow to put forward Motions calling for the suspension of another Member, especially where there has been no clear, principled basis for this.
Related to this, Ms Poa is proposing an amendment to PPIPA, which is legislation. Generally, legislation is meant to address the country at large and is not meant to be targeted at an individual or a particular case. It would actually be quite unprincipled to amend legislation for a single case.
Additionally, if this legislation is meant to apply to Mr Iswaran for conduct he had engaged in prior to the legislation coming into place, this would also be a breach to the principle that legislation should not impose criminal liability retrospectively. For this reason, I also do not agree with the proposed amendments to the legislation.
So, in brief, Mr Speaker, I agree with the Leader of the House that, at this time, we do not have enough information to make a decision to suspend Mr Iswaran and none of the clear provisions for suspension set out in both PPIPA and the SOs apply. I therefore support her Motion.
I also disagree with the Motion put forward by Ms Hazel Poa because I believe that the powers of suspension should be exercised only in accordance with the express requirements of PPIPA and the SOs.
Mr Speaker: I will now call on Leader of the House to make her reply on her Motion on \"Consideration of Matters Regarding Member of Parliament\", followed by Ms Hazel for her reply on her Motion on \"Suspension of Member\".
Thereafter, I will put the question in respect of each Motion to the House for voting. Leader of the House, you have up to 40 minutes.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to thank all Members who have spoken on this and made their contributions to this very important debate.
I would like now to respond to what has been said by Ms Hazel Poa and the position of PSP, but also to help Members understand the principles and the tenets upon which we should act in such a situation.
Insofar as Ms Poa and PSP's position is concerned, what does concern me greatly, is that her Motion and the move to suspend Minister Iswaran does not appear to come from a place of principle. It is, by her own admission, specifically targeted at Minister Iswaran and not a matter of policy or principle.
In order to decide what we must do for this, it is very important to first understand what the law is. And that is why I asked Ms Poa under which specific provision she was seeking to suspend Mr Iswaran. Because as I understood her argument, which is the same as she has posted on social media, her argument, PSP's argument is that: \"I want to cut your pay. And because I want to cut your pay, I want to suspend you.\" In other words, \"this is the result I want, and therefore, I would suspend you.\"
But that is not the correct approach, because when you look at our rules, you will see that generally, suspension is a punishment. It is punitive in nature, generally. And the cutting of pay is a consequence.
So, we must first ask ourselves: in what scenario do you suspend and has that threshold been met? Where do we start? We start with the PPIPA.
The PPIPA does have specific provisions on suspension. Let me deal first with the part that deals with the allowance because that is where PSP is coming from. Section 29(3) of the PPIPA says, \"no salary or allowance payable to such Member for his service as a Member of Parliament shall be paid in respect of any period during which he is suspended from service in Parliament.\" So, section 29(3) is the provision that says that if you are suspended, then you do not get your pay. But that begs the question: when are you suspended?
Well, there is a specific provision in section 20, which says that \"for any dishonourable conduct, abuse of privilege or contempt on the part of a Member, Parliament may\" – and then, it has various things – \"may suspend him from the service of Parliament for the remainder of the current session of Parliament or for any part thereof.\"
So, there is one specific provision which has a certain threshold with three requirements: dishonourable conduct, abuse of privilege or contempt. But that does not apply in this case. It has not been made out yet.
If subsequently something arises out of the investigations that you can say constitutes dishonourable conduct or abuse of privilege, then maybe so, but that has to be considered down the road. But, at this point in time, can we say that section 20 has been triggered? I would respectfully say no.
Then, there is the next provision, which is section 19. Section 19 says, \"without prejudice to sections 20 and 21, Parliament may, in accordance with its Standing Orders, suspend any Member from the service of Parliament for the remainder of the current session or for any part thereof\". Section 19 tells you to look at the SOs. So, let us look at the SOs. And that is why I asked Ms Poa the question earlier.
The relevant SO is SO59. SO59, subsection (1) has a specific provision on suspension. It states: \"Whenever a Member has been named by the Speaker or the Chairman immediately after the commission of the offence of disregarding the authority of the Chair, or of persistently and wilfully obstructing the business of Parliament by abusing the rules of Parliament or otherwise, then if the offence has been committed by such Member of Parliament, a motion shall forthwith be proposed by a Minister or Parliamentary Secretary present that the Member shall be suspended from the service of Parliament and the Speaker shall forthwith put the question on that motion, no amendment, adjournment or debate being allowed\".
Whatever else one may wish to accuse Mr Iswaran of, we certainly cannot accuse him of the conduct listed out in SO59. There may be others who may have offended that SO, but not Mr Iswaran. So, that does not apply.
That brings us to the provision that Ms Poa referred us to earlier, which is SO59(5). But SO59(5) is a general provision which just basically says that Parliament can move a resolution.
So, if you are relying on that provision, effectively what you are saying is that \"because I can pass a Motion to suspend you, I will.\" That is where the question of principle comes in. Should this House do something just because it can? The question is not, \"should we do it because we can\" and even then, I have to put a reservation there, because I am not sure that it can be read as broadly as Ms Poa puts it.
But for the sake of argument and just for the sake of argument, if it is as broad as she says, as a Parliament and as a House, we have to act on principle. Because if we do not, it becomes very dangerous. Because, what it then means is that we can pass any resolution that we like without having regard to values, principles or standards and targeted specifically at any Member of this House.
Think about what kind of Parliament that would be. What would be the standards of integrity of such a Parliament? What would be the sense of fairness and how would people regard this House if we did something like that?
So, I would be very, very cautious before we say that we suspend a Member just because we can. It is quite important that we should establish the principles of suspension.
When I asked Ms Poa what are the principles she is advocating, she listed a few. Let me go through them in turn.
First, she said it is because Mr Iswaran is under investigation for corruption and corruption is a serious offence. But then I ask Ms Poa, what about rape? What about murder? If a Member is under investigation for those offences, should the Member be suspended? Ms Poa did not have an answer. She said she had not thought about that, which means that she had not thought about the principle.
This is worrying because it means that when PSP advocates something, they are not acting as a matter of principle, but as a matter of targeting a specific individual and that is my concern.
And anyway, in any event, whilst Mr Iswaran is under investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act, firstly, it has not yet been established whether he has done any wrongdoing yet, at this point of time. So, as I mentioned before, the facts are not known, the specific allegations against him are not known. So, on what basis do you suspend?
The next thing Ms Poa said was that we should suspend because Mr Iswaran is on leave of absence. Leave of absence, in and of itself per se, cannot be a reason for suspension. If that were so, then we would have to suspend Mr Faisal Manap. He was on leave of absence because he was ill. But we do not do that, because he was ill. So, in other words, it is not the leave of absence in and of itself. It is the reason why you have to take leave of absence. And in this case, Mr Iswaran was effectively asked to take leave of absence because it is untenable for him to perform his duties as a Minister and it will be very difficult for him to perform his duties as an MP whilst under investigation. So, as a matter of proper, good order, he should be on leave of absence.
Then, the next point that she made was because he was under arrest. Well, yes, when you are under investigation, part of Police procedure is that you are under arrest, but I come back to the same point. This is still at the investigative stage, and you have not actually established whether there was any wrongdoing.
So, then she made the next point that he was not performing his duties. Here, let me just make a very short digression to say that while he has not been able to perform his duties as an MP, his constituents are still being looked after. I wanted to make that point because it is very important that his constituents know that they are still being taken care of and are in good hands.
In fact, Minister Desmond Lee has been doing the Meet-the-People session. He and another MP, I think Miss Rachel Ong, have been doing house visits. The other MPs in West Coast GRC have been covering events on the ground. So, I just wanted the residents of West Coast GRC to know that notwithstanding the fact that Mr Iswaran has to be on leave of absence, they are still being taken care of.
Then, Ms Poa talked about the question that, well, it is taxpayers' money that is being used in the interim period. But the important question is – what is the principle? You do not suspend somebody just because you do not want to pay him. You have to suspend him because there is a principle that has been breached or a threshold has been crossed.
It may well be, depending on the outcome of the investigations, that that threshold may be crossed. I do not know. None of us know at this stage. So, that is why my Motion at this point in time says that we should wait until the outcome of the investigations before deciding what to do, simply because that threshold has not yet been met.
And on this, I note that the Leader of the Opposition had also taken a similar position, for which I do thank him. Because he said Parliament should be very mindful of suspending somebody in the meantime and this would set a precedent should the Government decide to fix anybody. He also talked about the wheels of justice and that we must not do anything precipitously – this is not the Leader of the Opposition's words – but essentially, what he is really saying, which is the same thing as what others have said is, \"do not pre-judge the issue\".
And that is correct, because the Leader of the Opposition and Mr Faisal Manap are under investigation. They were referred to the Public Prosecutor.
On that, I just also want to say that when you look at the way that we approach that, we did not suspend them because we felt that it was better for the outcome to be heard. In fact, we went further in that case. Because here, in this Motion, I am only asking for us to wait till the outcome of the investigations. In the case of the referral to the Public Prosecutor on the Committee of Privileges Inquiry for Mr Singh and Mr Faisal Manap, we actually said that we would wait till the outcome of the proceedings.
Let me just read from the relevant report, because the Committee of Privileges' recommendations were that \"Mr Singh be referred to the Public Prosecutor, for further investigations, with the view to considering if criminal proceedings ought to be instituted in respect of his conduct before the Committee, and that Mr Faisal be referred to the Public Prosecutor for further investigations for his refusal to answer relevant questions put by the Committee and consider if criminal proceedings ought to be instituted\".
And what the Committee of Privileges said in their recommendation was this: \"Based on the evidence before this Committee, we are satisfied Mr Singh had told untruths to this Committee. Parliament is empowered to summarily decide on the matter and also decide on the appropriate sanctions based on our findings. However, we recommend that Parliament refers Mr Singh's conduct to the Public Prosecutor, with a view to consider the institution of criminal proceedings. We would also recommend that Parliament consider deferring any action to be taken in respect of possible dishonourable conduct and contempt of Parliament until criminal proceedings, if any, are complete.\"
The point I want to make is this. The specific offence in that case was dishonourable conduct and contempt. That falls squarely within section 20 of the PPIPA. The Committee of Privileges had made its finding with regard to Mr Singh and Mr Faisal Manap. Mr Singh and Mr Faisal Manap, of course, dispute that. I understand that. And that was the reason why we said they should go to Public Prosecutor.
But the Committee of Privileges and this House would have been well within its rights to say: \"We accept the findings of the COP [Committee of Privileges] and we act immediately under section 20.\" But we did not. We did not because we felt that, as a matter of fairness, we should wait and see what the outcome of the proceedings were.
And so, the actual resolution which I moved was this: \"that Mr Pritam Singh's, Ms Sylvia Lim's and Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap's respective roles as set out in the report, in relation to the untruth spoken by Ms Raeesah Khan in Parliament, and Ms Lim's or Mr Faisal's stating of untruth to the Committee on oath or affirmation and the appropriate sanctions in respect thereof, be deferred until the conclusion of the investigations and criminal proceedings, if any, against Mr Singh.\" So, in that case, I went further, and I said to wait till not just the conclusion of the investigations but the conclusion of the proceedings.
In this case, I am saying, let us wait until the conclusion or the outcome of the investigations because that would put this House in a better position to know what to do.
Let me just come back to some of the other questions that were asked.
Mr Singh had a question. Mr Singh supports the position that Mr Iswaran should not be suspended at this point in time, I think. His second question, though, was, what should Parliament do in the interim period. And I think his position was that it might be appropriate to suspend his MP allowance. That is what I think Mr Singh said.
The difficulty with that, and this is what Ms Poa was alluding to, is that there is no provision in the PPIPA currently to suspend allowance. It is a binary position: if the person is a sitting MP, he receives the full allowance. If the Member is suspended, then he does not get any allowance. So, the law does not provide for anything in between.
Ms Poa mentioned that she had, in the original Motion, wanted to provide for clawback but was advised by Parliament – which I think is the current position under the law, that there is no provision for a clawback. So, the question is: what do we do?
Currently, right now, given the state of the law and given that we do not know the facts and that we do not know the outcome of the investigation, that is why I have said we should wait till the outcome of the investigation. Then, we have a clearer idea of what to do.
And the next question then is, what should we then do with respect to the monies that are paid with respect to Mr Iswaran.
I think the answer is this. We will look at it again when we know if the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) intends to bring any charges and if so, what the charges are. We will consider a clawback, if justified. If he is charged, the Prime Minister will consider the allegations and accusations against him and decide whether to make him resign and to pay back both salary and allowance without waiting for legal process.
Bear in mind, this is a party discipline matter. It is a party discipline matter. And the Prime Minister would do this on the basis that he has not lived up to the party discipline and standards of conduct, whether or not he has committed offences. And if it is really necessary, then we will consider what to do with respect to legislation.
But there will be issues there. That is the reason why I say, again, that these are issues that should be considered when the outcome of the investigation is known. Because it may very well be that at the end of the investigation, he is also cleared. And if he is cleared, then what we would have done in the meantime, if we accept Ms Poa's Motion, is that we would have suspended him and we would have docked his pay when there was, in fact, no need to.
At the end of the day, it is a question of where is the balance, what is a fair way of dealing with this, given the current state of the law, given the current state of knowledge that we have?
Ms Poa's approach is, really, let us just ignore whether or not he has done anything wrong. Let us just suspend him because it is a matter of money. And then, if need be, we pay it back.
But I think we need to approach it as a matter of principle, which is that, at the current time, when you cannot say clearly that some threshold has been crossed, then we say wait, see what the outcome of the investigations are. And if, depending on the outcome, a threshold has been crossed, then we will certainly look at it as a matter of party discipline. And the Prime Minister has very firm views on standards of integrity and conduct, and he will not let the matter rest if thresholds have been crossed.
I think that assurance I can give, which is that if certain thresholds had been crossed and if warranted and merited, we will do something. As to what exactly we will have to do, we will have to see what happens. But I have said quite plainly that we will certainly consider a claw back and also think how to do it.
So, I hope that sets Members' minds at rest, because if we do not suspend him today, it does not mean that you cannot do so in the future. If you do suspend him today, you are effectively saying that he has done something wrong, when there is no basis at the present time. There may well be later; we do not know. But at the present time, it will be premature and prejudging the issue.
Mr Speaker: I will now invite Ms Hazel Poa to make your reply on your Motion. You have also up to 40 minutes.
Sorry. Okay, there is a clarification? Ms Hazel Poa, hold on for a while. Minister for Law.
The Minister for Home Affairs and Law (Mr K Shanmugam): Sir, as the discussions are going on, I looked at the PPIPA and SOs quickly.
My suggestion to my colleagues, Ms Poa and Mr Leong is that they have gotten it completely wrong. I do not know whether they have taken legal advice or whether they have read the provisions. But sections 19 and 20 of PPIPA set out the grounds for expulsion.
Section 19 refers to the SOs. If you look at the SOs, the only relevant SO is SO59. SO59, subsections (1) to (4) set out the grounds on which there can be expulsion. Subsection (5) is a saving provision. It does not give you a substantive power.
If you are right, then all the carefully drafted provisions in PPIPA setting out when exactly Parliament can suspend an MP are irrelevant. They are otiose.
And the carefully drafted SO59 is also irrelevant. Because whenever Parliament does not like someone, we can pass a resolution by majority and throw the person out or suspend that person.
I do not know if you have understood how the provisions work together.
This is a serious matter. I would suggest you go and read it carefully before Ms Poa concludes. I should have addressed you, Speaker, Sir. My apologies.
Mr Speaker: Let me now call on Ms Hazel Poa to make your reply on your Motion. As I have said, you have also up to 40 minutes.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank all who have participated in this debate.
All of us share a common desire to maintain high standards of conduct in this House and to treat Members who are under investigation firmly and fairly. These are motherhood statements that few are expected to disagree with. How we apply such standards, however, may not be the same. Such differences will come to the fore when we apply them to specific cases, like in the case of Minister Iswaran.
While PSP feels that it is fair to suspend Minister Iswaran for now and to back pay him when he is cleared of all wrongdoing, the Leader of the House does not think so. That is a judgement call and I think we will have to agree to disagree.
I have also asked for leave to table an amendment Bill to make it possible for Parliament to back pay Minister Iswaran, if necessary.
Under current provisions in the PPIPA, no allowances are to be paid to Members who are suspended from the service of Parliament. We have proposed to amend that provision to allow Parliament to pay such allowances if a resolution is passed. This amendment gives Parliament the flexibility to decide whether suspended Members should be paid their allowance, whether in full or in part. Without this flexibility, Parliament is hampered in taking timely disciplinary actions. If we are unable to back pay and we have to uphold the principle of innocence until proven guilty, it means that we cannot suspend any Member until the entire legal process has been completed. This may be a long period of time.
We are, in fact, being held ransom due to the lack of provision to back pay. Regardless of Parliament's decision on Minister Iswaran, we believe that the amendment should still be passed. There is only an upside, no downsides to this amendment.
Let me now address the issues that have been brought up by various Members.
I think the common theme that runs throughout is the presumption of innocence. All who spoke – Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Mr Raj Joshua Thomas and Mr Vikram Nair – made the same point that by suspending, we are presuming that he is guilty. That is a point that I dispute. I think that argument is a red herring.
If suspension means presumption of guilt, then I am afraid we have been doing that on many, many occasions. Police officers have been suspended from duties and placed on half pay while they are under investigations, as evident in answer to a Parliamentary Question just yesterday and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has also said that is a standard practice for Police officers.
So, the fact of the matter is suspension is not a determination of guilt. It is merely a measure that is commonly used to deal with situations where a person is under investigation. Most of the time the suspension comes in two parts: suspension of duties and an effect on the pay.
In this particular case, the Prime Minister has already made the decision to suspend Minister Iswaran from his Ministerial duties and reduced his pay to $8,500. He has also suspended him from performing his MP duties and have his other colleagues cover for him in his constituency. So, the suspension is already done. All that I am asking for in this House is to suspend the allowance as well.
In addition, Members Raj Joshua Thomas and Vikram Nair also mentioned that MPs have the mandate of the people and, therefore, suspension of duties should not be lightly done. I would like to seek clarification from them. Does this mean they have an issue with the Prime Minister's decision to suspend Minister Iswaran from his duties as an MP?
The Leader of the House said that while section 59(5) says Parliament can suspend a Member, we should not be doing something just because we can. I believe I made it very clear why we are asking for this. It is not just because we can. I have also listed the three reasons why I think we have a good case to suspend Minister Iswaran.
The Leader of the House proceeded to address them one by one, but she does them in isolation. For example, when I said that he is not performing the duties, she quoted the example of medical leave. But the three conditions are meant to be taken together, not individually. For example, when we say that you can vote if you are a Singapore Citizen and aged 21, you do not tackle the criteria one by one, age 21 separate from Singapore Citizen. Both conditions must be satisfied.
PSP feels that adopting a harsher stand against corruption versus other wrongdoing is fair, given the extremely high salaries we are paying Ministers to stay corruption-free. Since we are paying such extraordinarily high salaries, is it not fair for the consequence of corruption and the handling process of its investigation to be correspondingly tougher?
Adopting a light touch approach here will only send the wrong signal. The sanguine approach adopted towards Minister Iswaran's MP allowance stands in stark contrast to the approach adopted towards the public. If Minister Iswaran continues to receive over $20,000 per month while not performing any duties and under investigation for corruption, while ComCare recipients who are permanently unable to work due to old age, illness or disability get $640 per month, what does this say about our values? How is it equitable that Minister Iswaran gets in one month what these ComCare recipients get over three years? If the investigation and prosecution take one year, the amount he continues to receive will be equivalent to what these ComCare recipients get over 38 years.
PSP urges the House to suspend Minister Iswaran and to back pay him if and when he is cleared of all wrongdoing. We have explained why our approach leads to better use of taxpayers' money while making sure that Minister Iswaran is not penalised should he be found innocent. This is in line with our idea of being firm and fair.
We trust that all who have been following this debate are well able to come to their own conclusions. We will leave it at that.
Mr Speaker: Are there any clarifications for either Members? Yes, Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just a quick clarification for the Leader on the status of Mr S Iswaran's responsibilities as an MP. I have asked two questions specifically on his access to MPAS, for example, his access to Government buildings, including Parliament. Can the Leader please clarify that situation?
Ms Indranee Rajah: Sorry, I just want to make sure that I have the question correct. One was access to Government buildings and the other was? Can I trouble Mr Singh to repeat the question?
Mr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh: The other question was access to the Public Service Division’s (PSD) Member of Parliament Appeal System (MPAS). Essentially, just to confirm whether the Minister is still performing his roles and duties on the ground as an MP looking after his constituents. Because I think the key issue here is, if he is effectively suspended as an MP as well?
Ms Indranee Rajah: I thank the Member for his clarification. First, it is important to remember that there is a distinction between Mr Iswaran's role as a Minister and his role as an MP. As a Minister, he was appointed by the Prime Minister. So, he holds that position at the Prime Minister's pleasure. The Prime Minister, therefore, also has the ability to interdict him and to tell him to stop carrying out duties as Minister whilst he is under investigation. That is because his appointment flowed or came from the Prime Minister.
That is as I understand it and if I am incorrect, my colleagues will set out the correct position. But that interdiction includes a direction that he should not be allowed access to all Government buildings. That flows from the Ministerial position; and that is obviously because you are under investigation, and you do not want to prejudice the investigation.
Then, there is the issue of Mr Iswaran's status as an MP. Mr Iswaran's status as an MP was not by appointment, by the Prime Minister or otherwise. He was elected. He was elected by the constituents of West Coast GRC. His mandate comes from them, and you can only suspend or take away his ability to act as an MP in accordance with the PPIPA. And I have taken Members through those provisions.
So, in other words, currently, because he is not suspended, if Mr Iswaran wanted to come today and enter Parliament, he can because he is an MP. But as a matter of party discipline, he has been requested by the Prime Minister to also cease his MP duties because you can imagine how difficult it is to carry out your MP duties when you are under investigation or even to come to Parliament. Imagine if he was sitting here and somebody were to ask him about the investigation, what is he going to say? I mean, the investigative authorities are listening to this. This is a public matter. He might end up jeopardising his own case.
So, as a matter of party discipline and good order, he has been asked to stay away and, at least to his credit, he has complied with that – even though he is entitled to come in as an MP.
That is why I think I should also clarify something which was said earlier by Ms Poa, which I think I have just clarified by my explanation. I think Ms Poa said something to the effect of Mr Iswaran being suspended by the Prime Minister. Did Ms Poa say that? Anyway, the direction to stop work as a Minister – the interdiction – comes from the Prime Minister in his capacity as Prime Minister to Mr Iswaran in his capacity as a Minister.
Insofar as not carrying out MP duties and going on leave of absence, that is something which is requested by the Prime Minister as a matter of party discipline. Mr Iswaran could come to Parliament if he wants to, but he has not done so because he has listened to what he has been asked to do.
Leave of absence and not being able to perform MP duties is quite different from suspension. Suspension is as provided for under the Act and certain criterion and thresholds have to be met. That was the clarification I wanted to make.
Mr Speaker: Indeed, if I can add on. When I approve your leave of absence from Parliament, you could still turn up in Parliament. Mr Vikram Nair, did you raise your hand as well?
Mr Vikram Nair: I raised my hand because Ms Poa had asked me a question on what I thought of Mr Iswaran's suspension. But I think the Leader has addressed that.
Mr Speaker: Any other clarifications for either Minister Indranee or Ms Poa? Ms Carrie Tan.
Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I feel compelled to speak and seek clarification from Ms Hazel Poa as to what is her purpose and intent in comparing this amount of allowance that is still being paid until a verdict has been reached on Minister Iswaran's case, with the payouts from ComCare. Because I believe Ms Poa as an ex-public servant knows very well that these are budgets that are completely separate from each other. And it does not mean that simply because you suspend an MP, that money is going to go to some further ComCare applications. So, I would like to clarify what is her intention in bringing up this analogy?
Ms Hazel Poa: We are talking about Government financial resources. If it is not paid, it will actually be still within Government coffers that can be redirected elsewhere.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have one clarification for the Leader. The purpose of PSP raising this Motion is to ensure we are consistent in terms of when we are advocating high salaries for our public office holders. Because we are advocating that high salaries will lead to being corruption-free. So, after we have established that, we also have to ensure that the high salaries go to deserving people.
In this case, I am interested in what the Leader has said towards the end of her closing speech just now. The Leader mentioned about the possibility of clawback and we have also recommended back pay. The problem of our legislation today is that it does not provide for clawback or back pay of the high salaries that we are paying our public office holders.
So, if the Leader can confirm that we are going to have a Bill in the future to ensure that that legislation is also in place, then I think PSP can reconsider many of our positions with regard to this Motion.
Ms Indranee Rajah: I thank Mr Leong Mun Wai for his clarification. First, he says that he is concerned about the salaries and, of course, what would happen in the case when somebody is not performing. Well, as I said earlier, if a certain threshold has been met, if it was warranted, then we would consider having a clawback. How that is to be affected remains to be seen. Because as explained today, the law as it currently is, does not allow for it. This does not, however, preclude the Prime Minister from, as a matter of party discipline, requiring it. And if Mr Iswaran acceded to that, then there is actually nothing more to be done, if it warranted it.
So, to ask me now, can I confirm that we will have a Bill or something to amend – my answer is, wait and see what the outcome of the investigation is because such a Bill may not be necessary.
What I can assure Members of is that, at least on our side – the party's side – we will do what is right and what is fair, having regard to the circumstances. That assurance, I think, I can give.
Mr Speaker: Any other clarifications from Members?
We have now come to the conclusion of the debate. I shall put forth the necessary questions to the House for a decision.
We will first deal with the Motion by the Leader of the House on \"Consideration of Matters Regarding Member of Parliament\".
The question is, \"That this House: (a) Affirms the need for Members of Parliament to uphold the highest standards of integrity and conduct themselves in accordance with the law; (b) Affirms the need to deal firmly and fairly with any Member of Parliament who is being investigated for possible wrongdoing; and (c) Resolves to consider the matter regarding Member of Parliament S Iswaran when the outcome of the ongoing investigations against him is known.\"
As many as are of that opinion say \"Aye\".
[(proc text) Hon Members say \"Aye\". (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: To the contrary say \"No\".
[(proc text) Some hon Members say \"No\". (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Any Member who wishes his dissent or abstention to be recorded or to claim a Division before I declare the result, kindly stand up so we will record that.
[(proc text) Hon Members Mr Leong Mun Wai and Ms Hazel Poa stood at their seats for their dissent to be recorded. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Thank you. The \"Ayes\" have it.
[(proc text) Resolved, (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That this House: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (a) Affirms the need for Members of Parliament to uphold the highest standards of integrity and conduct themselves in accordance with the law; (proc text)]
[(proc text) (b) Affirms the need to deal firmly and fairly with any Member of Parliament who is being investigated for possible wrongdoing; and (proc text)]
[(proc text) (c) Resolves to consider the matter regarding Member of Parliament S Iswaran when the outcome of the ongoing investigations against him is known. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: We will now deal with Ms Poa's Motion on \"Suspension of Member\".
The question is, \"That this House suspends Mr S Iswaran from the service of Parliament for the remainder of the current session of the 14th Parliament.\" As many as are of that opinion say \"Aye\".
[(proc text) Some hon Members say \"Aye\". (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: To the contrary say \"No\".
[(proc text) Hon Members say \"No\". (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Does any Member wish for his dissent or abstention to be recorded or to claim a Division before I declare the result?
The “Noes” have it.
[(proc text) Question, \"That this House suspends Mr S Iswaran from the service of Parliament for the remainder of the current session of the 14th Parliament\" put, and negatived. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Ms Hazel Poa, I would like to ask whether you wish to proceed with the Bill.
Ms Hazel Poa: Yes.
Mr Speaker: Okay, Ms Hazel Poa, proceed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act 1962","subTitle":"Introduction of Bill by Private Member","sectionType":"BI","content":"Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, I beg to move*, \"That leave be given to introduce a Bill intituled \"An Act to amend the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act 1962.\"
[(proc text) *The Motion also stood in the name of Mr Leong Mun Wai. (proc text)]
We have introduced this Bill to give Parliament the flexibility to authorise the back payment of the allowance of a Member of Parliament (MP) who has been suspended from the service of Parliament by resolution.
Without this amendment to allow back payment, we would be unable to suspend any MP until the full process of the law has been completed. It would be unfair if MPs eventually found innocent were to be penalised. This process can take a long time.
If the MP were eventually found guilty, it would have been a waste of taxpayers' money and a drain on our resources. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
Mr Speaker: The question is, \"That leave be given to introduce a Bill intituled 'An Act to amend the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act 1962'.\" As many as are of that opinion say \"Aye\".
[(proc text) Some hon Members say \"Aye\". (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: To the contrary say \"No\".
[(proc text) Hon Members say \"No\". (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: I think the “Noes” have it.
[(proc text) Question negatived. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That at its rising today, Parliament do stand adjourned to a date to be fixed.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Keeping Workplaces Safe Beyond the Heightened Safety Period","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mr Speaker, in August 2022, I filed an Adjournment Motion and spoke about the need for us to prioritise the safety of every worker.
The Labour Movement was concerned that the COVID-19 pandemic had seemingly undone all the good workplace safety and health (WSH) practices nurtured over many years. The rush that many companies embarked on to clear the backlog of work had resulted in a spike in workplace accidents, injuries and fatalities.
In my speech then, I had proposed five action areas to further improve WSH practices: (a) establish safe and easy-to-use Reporting channels; (b) partner the unions to enhance safety Inspections; (c) step up safety Gearing of our workers; (d) mandate Higher management's commitment to safety; and (e) leverage Technology to enhance workplace safety. These five areas make up the acronym \"RIGHT\".
In response, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) instituted the Heightened Safety Period (HSP) in September 2022. I think we can all agree that the measures imposed under the HSP were unprecedented and tough but effective.
In his speech at the annual WSH Awards last month, Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad provided an update on the workplace fatality rate. For the first half of 2023, the annualised fatality rate per 100,000 workers was about 0.8. This was a significant improvement from a rate of 1.3 in the second half of 2022 and about 1.6 in the first half of 2022. Clearly, the additional WSH obligations and increased penalties against errant companies imposed by MOM as part of HSP had undoubtedly worked well in driving down workplace fatalities.
Notable features of HSP included increased penalties for safety breaches, senior management having to account personally for serious safety lapses and barring errant companies from hiring foreign workers for up to three months.
Towards the end of HSP, the Labour Movement was concerned that workplace fatalities could rise if we were to exit HSP prematurely. In May this year, I filed a Parliamentary Question asking if MOM could extend the HSP. I was concerned that the strong safety culture imposed by company management during HSP did not have the necessary lead time to sink in and to take root.
Sir, it takes years to build a collective and strong WSH culture. Lifting the HSP after just eight months could undo all our hard work.
MOM eventually decided to lift the HSP from 1 June 2023 while retaining some of the HSP features, such as the enhanced penalties and requiring senior management to account personally for serious safety lapses.
Unfortunately, my fears seem to be coming true. Based on the National Trades Union Congress’ (NTUC) internal tracking, within just three months of exiting the HSP, 13 workers tragically lost their lives between June and August 2023. I must add the caveat that this is not an official figure as the cases are a collation of inputs from our unions and associations. Subject to MOM's confirmation of the statistics, this would mean that the fatality rate had gone up from about 2.3 cases per month during the HSP to an alarming 4.3 cases per month in the three months post-HSP.
Sir, these fatalities are not just statistics. Every worker is a father or mother, son or daughter, brother or sister. They leave behind loved ones who mourn their passing, loved ones who have to deal with the sudden and unexpected loss of a key breadwinner of the family. Closure will be hard to find. This is why I have filed my second Adjournment Motion today on keeping our workplaces safe beyond the HSP.
Mr Speaker, I have four suggestions on how the Government and the industry can work together to do so. In my first Adjournment Motion last year, I used the acronym \"RIGHT\" to encapsulate my five recommendations. My acronym today is \"SAFE\", which stands for: (a) Safety by design; (b) All workplaces to have a dedicated WSH professional; (c) Financial penalties to augment composition fines and stop work orders; and (d) Enforcement checks of unsafe workplace practices.
First, safety by design. This is a set of principles that prioritises the safety of workers when designing the worksite. Today, MOM has in place the WSH (Design for Safety) Regulations that specify the duties of developers, contractors and designers. This should be reviewed and expanded. The scope of obligations should cover risks beyond just the construction phase. All workplaces, from blue-collar to white-collar jobs, should have a continuing obligation to design and provide a workplace that prioritises the safety of the workers.
\"Safety by design\" considerations could include simple things such as proper lighting to prevent eye strain and even adopting anti-slip flooring materials to avoid slips, trips and falls.
Under our current law, the Workplace Safety and Health (Risk Management) Regulations state that employers are responsible for identifying safety and health hazards at workplaces and taking measures to eliminate or reduce the risks. But, Sir, we must move away from this mental model of looking at risks and hazards as things to be managed away. Instead, companies need to actively put safety at the forefront of designing their worksites and their offices.
Companies that design workplaces for employees' safety will send a strong message to their employees that they care as an employer and will be rewarded with a healthier and more productive workforce.
In the US, the Occupational Safety and Health Law does place a continuing obligation on employers to provide a safe workplace, regardless of whether the sector is deemed to be high-risk. I hope that MOM could study relevant overseas jurisdictions and expand regulations to impose safety by design on all employers.
Next, all workplaces need a dedicated WSH professional.
Mr Speaker, I have spoken for years about the need to impose an obligation for all workplaces to hire dedicated WSH officers beyond the limited settings today. I am confident that mandating a WSH officer to review all aspects of safety in a company will help move the needle in making workplaces that much safer.
Even if we cannot immediately move to mandate all workplaces to hire a dedicated WSH professional, we can and we should start by expanding the list of companies that are required to employ one. Take, for example, our logistics and transportation sector, which accounted for four fatalities in 2021, one fatality in 2022 and five thus far this year. Although classified as a high-risk sector, logistics companies are not required to appoint a WSH officer. This is inconsistent with other high-risk sectors.
Next, I propose that we should increase the financial penalties faced by companies in the event of a workplace fatality. Currently, penalties for errant companies mostly involve composition fines and Stop Work Orders. I argue that this is insufficient. I propose for all Government agencies to include a WSH clause in every condition of their respective licences.
Take, for example, the construction sector. A construction company is at risk of being debarred under the Demerit Point System (DPS) should the company have frequent safety infringements. The DPS concept should be expanded to all companies that are licensed in some shape or form by any Government agency. This can be done by inserting WSH-related clauses into their licensing conditions.
Sir, today, many large-scale construction projects in Singapore are carried out by joint venture companies – several individual firms pooling resources to establish a new legal entity. In line with this trend, workplace accidents at such worksites are also becoming commonplace.
Can MOM confirm if penalties imposed on workplace safety breaches accrue to a joint venture or to the individual companies that form that joint venture? Does MOM have a disqualification framework to disqualify a company director or any associate that he may use as a proxy from setting up a new company after one company had been debarred for safety breaches by MOM?
Lastly, I urge MOM to further tighten enforcement of unsafe work practices. Whenever there is a workplace accident or workplace fatality, it is very common to hear anecdotally that that particular unsafe work practice had been happening regularly, sometimes for months and sometimes even for years.
While I note that MOM has been stepping up its enforcement operations, there is scope to do more because lives and limbs are at stake. We must step up enforcement checks more frequently to deter companies from cutting corners in workplace safety practices.
As I have mentioned numerous times in this House, we must make it easier for workers and members of the public to whistle-blow and flag unsafe workplace practices. It should take no more than a snap of a picture and a short description of the egregious activity on a mobile application for anyone to flag out a potentially life-threatening and unsafe workplace practice.
Mr Speaker, the suggestions that I have laid out are simple to follow. By doing what is safe and what is right, we can make our workplaces much safer.
The Labour Movement stands ready to partner all our tripartite partners to keep our workplaces safe beyond the HSP. To complement this year's national WSH campaign, NTUC will be launching our own WSH campaign later this week on Friday, with a focus on reporting without reprisal and on reporting without retribution.
Workers must feel safe to report any workplace safety concern to their management. Workers can escalate any WSH matter to the unions if the company management fails to act on any safety reports. A safe workplace must be a basic right for every worker.
Sir, let me repeat that. A safe workplace must be a basic right for every worker.
Sir, I hope that this will be my last Adjournment Motion related to workplace safety. I urge the Government and the industry to take workplace safety and health seriously, work closely with NTUC and do what is safe and right.
Together, we can help every worker return home from work safe and sound, every day. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.
The Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): With your permission, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout, please?
Mr Speaker: Please go ahead. [A handout was distributed to hon Members. Please refer to Annex 1.]
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Member for raising this matter. Workplace safety and health (WSH) did not begin with the start of the Heightened Safety Period (HSP), and neither does it stop when the HSP ends.
Every worker deserves a safe and healthy working environment. Our starting position is Vision Zero. We will always strive for zero fatality as every fatality is one too many and every incident is preventable.
Our WSH aspiration remains to achieve a fatal injury rate of below 1.0 per 100,000 workers on a sustained basis by 2028. What this means is that we – the Government, employers and workers – must continue to strengthen our workplace safety culture and work environments to achieve this.
As the Member had pointed out, the fatal injury rate has improved to 0.8 per 100,000 workers in the first half of 2023. Prior to the HSP, we faced a fatal injury rate of 1.6 in the first half of 2022 and this necessitated the heightened measures of HSP to stem the tide of incidents. Our progress one year on reflects the outcome from HSP, which ended on 31 May 2023. So, I share the Member's concerns on the number of workplace fatalities since we exited the HSP.
However, we do need to recognise that there will be some month-to-month volatility in fatality numbers and assess the situation over a longer period. I would like to assure the Member that our rolling 12-month fatal injury rate to-date is 1.0, which remains close to our WSH 2028 aspiration of below 1.0.
I would like to refer Members to the international WSH comparison chart in the handout that was distributed just now. Thus far, only four countries in the world have achieved a fatality rate of below 1.0 consistently. Singapore ranked fifth based on our three-year average fatal injury rate, after the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden and Germany. Other countries in Asia have not achieved this.
So, contrary to what the Member had shared, post-HSP, we have actually retained most of the broad-based and sectorial measures of the HSP, such as requiring chief executives to personally account for serious WSH lapses. We also introduced a revised Demerit Points System to debar more errant construction companies from hiring foreign employees for a period of time.
Following the HSP exit, the Multi-Agency Workplace Safety and Health Taskforce (MAST) introduced a set of Safe Accountability, Focus and Empowerment (SAFE) measures to instil greater WSH accountability at the sector, company and individual levels. MAST is progressively rolling out these SAFE measures and will continue to drive new measures. Members can refer to the infographic in the handout on the various measures that we are implementing and have implemented. I hope this assures Members that we hold ourselves to high standards and, even post-HSP, we will not let up on our efforts.
We have seen improvement in the construction sector in the first half of 2023. In particular, fatal injuries for regular construction worksites have improved as our efforts have kept them vigilant.
More targeted interventions are required for smaller-scale construction work, including renovations and facility management, which accounted for the majority of the fatal and major injuries in construction. So, it is not so much the larger sites but all these renovations and maintenance work that have been causing us these issues. So, we are working with the relevant agencies to enhance the safety standards for such contractors.
MAST will also continue to strengthen WSH ownership in construction, such as by introducing more stringent safety requirements and a WSH bonus scheme for public project tenders.
One sector of concern is manufacturing. Manufacturing was the top contributor of workplace fatal and major injuries in the first half of 2023, with 35% more injuries compared to the second half of 2022. The expansion of the Demerit Points System to the manufacturing sector in October 2023 should deter WSH breaches and strengthen standards. So, we are moving on from construction and now to manufacturing. Egregious companies will be temporarily debarred from hiring foreign workers.
I agree with the Member on the need to increase the financial penalties to deter WSH contraventions. During HSP, we doubled the quantum of composition fines for WSH lapses and we have retained this measure. To further enhance deterrence, we will be increasing the maximum fine from $20,000 to $50,000 for breaches of WSH Act Subsidiary Legislation that could result in death or serious bodily injury, and this is per breach.
Beyond composition fines and Stop Work Orders, the maximum penalty for WSH Act breaches for an individual is a fine of up to $200,000 and/or two years' imprisonment, while that for a company is a fine of up to $500,000.
On the Member’s suggestion to expand the current WSH (Design for Safety) Regulations, I agree that \"Design for Safety\" is important. It is an upstream process to identify and reduce risks through good design at the conceptual and planning stages, such as incorporating safe access to maintenance in the building design.
Employers' duties to conduct risk management and take reasonable steps to eliminate or minimise risk serve as a safety net. This ensures that employers continuously provide and maintain a safe and healthy work environment for their employees. In doing so, they should already consider control measures, such as providing appropriate safety training and equipment, to reduce the risks.
Moving on to WSH officers. Competent WSH officers who can manage WSH risks are essential to support better WSH outcomes. MAST is looking to strengthen the effectiveness of our WSH officers and their reporting lines to stakeholders so that they can carry out their duties better.
On the Member's suggestion to expand WSH officers to other higher-risk industries, we will need to assess the effectiveness of having WSH officers in such industries and the potential impact on workplace fatal and major injuries. So, this is something that we will study.
Even so, what is more important is for corporate leadership to take charge and be accountable for workplace safety and health. Corporate leaders have influence over resources and priorities that drive their organisations' safety culture. MOM had earlier rolled out the Approved Code of Practice for Company Directors' WSH Duties to provide guidance on how they may fulfil their WSH obligations. MOM is also reviewing our framework to close the gap where errant companies or culpable company directors can absolve their WSH responsibilities by setting up a new entity to circumvent penalties due to WSH breaches, such as debarment from hiring foreign workers. This is aligned with the Member's suggestion to have a disqualification framework or to extend WSH penalties from joint ventures to partnering companies.
The Member suggested that MOM should tighten our WSH enforcement and make the reporting of unsafe workplace practices easier. MOM has not wavered in our enforcement efforts. On the contrary, we have intensified inspections to ensure that employers maintain a strong focus on safety.
Earlier in May, MAST launched the National WSH Campaign with the theme \"Reporting Saves Lives\" to support workers in taking ownership of their own and their co-workers' safety. It is not just about the workers, but it is also about those around them, too. The campaign called for employers to facilitate an internal reporting system for workers to report unsafe workplace practices to their supervisors.
MOM has also enhanced various channels to make reporting easy, including a dedicated SnapSAFE page on MOM website. So, SnapSAFE, as the Member suggested, is easy to use. One just uploads a photo and keys in a brief description of the occurrence, and we will take it from there.
Members of the public can also play an important role to be our \"eyes on the ground\" by reporting unsafe work practices. MOM looks into every reported case. We will take action against errant work practices, and we will also offer whistle-blower protection. For that, we also assure.
Sir, we remain committed to Vision Zero and our WSH 2028 goals. While we have exited HSP, rest assured that we will continue to pursue safe measures to build stronger workplace safety culture and ownership across Singapore.
We cannot achieve this on our own. All of us, from corporate leadership, industry associations, union leaders to workers, must continue to play our part to uplift workplace safety and health so that every worker can return home safely to their loved ones.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 6.44 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":"Matter Raised On Adjournment Motion","questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Growing Renewable Energy Adoption to Meet Net-zero Carbon Emissions Pledge","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"26 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the expected demand on renewable energy in Singapore by 2040; and (b) what are the plans to ensure that Singapore has sufficient capacity to meet the demand.
27 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether Singapore's continued heavy dependence on natural gas will hinder the commitment to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050; and (b) whether the development and growth of renewable energy will soon be enough to tilt the balance.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Both questions relate to Singapore’s energy transition for our power sector.
Singapore is committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. We are, therefore, making significant moves to increase the supply of low-carbon energy domestically.
First, we are maximising solar deployment and are on track to attain our target of at least two Gigawatt-peak (GWp) of installed solar capacity by 2030. We are also funding research into new technologies that can help Singapore increase our solar energy yields. These include high-efficiency solar photovoltaic cells, building-attached photovoltaics and open-sea floating photovoltaics.
Second, we are targeting to import up to four Gigawatt (GW) of low-carbon electricity by 2035, which is around 30% of Singapore’s projected electricity demand. Thus far, we have awarded Conditional Approvals for up to three GW of low-carbon electricity to be imported from Cambodia and Indonesia.
Third, we are accelerating our exploration of low carbon alternatives. Singapore published our National Hydrogen Strategy last year. We are currently assessing the submissions from our Expression of Interest for low-carbon ammonia power generation and bunkering and will make an announcement in the coming months. We have also recently announced plans to undertake a nationwide study to assess Singapore’s potential for deep geothermal and carbon sequestration.
Lastly, aside from research into solar technologies, we have committed $184 million into research and development, to unlock technological bottlenecks for hydrogen, carbon capture, utilisation and storage and other emerging low-carbon technologies.
Even as we decarbonise the power sector, natural gas will continue to play a significant role as a transition fuel for Singapore and enable us to balance the energy trilemma of security, sustainability and cost competitiveness.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Prevent Criminals from Getting Away with Lighter Sentences by Exploiting Maximum Amount of Mitigating Options Available to Them","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Law with regard to the guidelines on reduction in sentences recommended by the Sentencing Advisory Panel for guilty pleas, what measures are in place to prevent criminals from getting away with much lighter sentences by exploiting the maximum amount of mitigating options available to them.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Guidelines on Reduction in Sentences for Guilty Pleas were issued by the inter-agency Sentencing Advisory Panel on 15 August 2023.
These Guidelines do not fundamentally change our present sentencing practice. Currently, the Courts can and do reduce sentences, in appropriate cases, if accused persons plead guilty. Such reductions are granted by the Court in recognition that a plea of guilt by an accused person may have significant benefits, including allowing victims to find closure early and sparing victims and witnesses the need to prepare for a trial and testify in Court. It also allows for a faster resolution of cases.
The Guidelines build on and provide greater structure to the existing practice by setting out clearly the ranges of reduction in sentence that a Court may consider granting, based on when an accused person pleads guilty. This is intended to provide increased consistency, clarity and transparency to the existing sentencing practice. The recommended ranges of reduction set out in the Guidelines are set out in broad terms, to provide the Court with flexibility and discretion. Based on the circumstances, the Court may calibrate the sentence according to the facts of the case.
The Guidelines would not result in \"criminals getting away with much lighter sentences\". As mentioned earlier, our Courts already grant reductions in sentences where accused persons plead guilty, in appropriate cases. The Guidelines build on this existing practice and do not introduce an additional or new layer of reduction in sentence.
The Guidelines also provide that they are not intended to result in reductions in sentences over and above the existing judicial guidelines or precedents in cases where offenders have pleaded guilty. Further, sentences cannot be reduced below any mandatory minimum sentence prescribed in law.
Also, the Court retains the discretion to not apply the Guidelines in specific cases, if there are good reasons not to do so. The Guidelines expressly provide that, where the Court is of the view that it would be contrary to the public interest for the Guidelines to be applied, the Court does not need to do so and may instead apply a reduction that is just and proportionate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Gender Pay Gap for Finance-related Roles and Steps to Close the Gap","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower based on the Ministry’s annual Occupational Wage Survey (a) what is the gender pay gap for finance-related roles annually from 2012 to 2021; and (b) what is being done to address the current gender pay gap in the finance sector.
Dr Tan See Leng: In the financial and insurance services sector, the gender pay gap has narrowed from 27.1% in 2012 to 15.6% in 2022. Part of this gap is because more men are in higher-paying occupations, such as managing directors, chief executive officers and fund or portfolio managers in this sector. This gender pay gap also does not account for other factors, such as differences in hours worked, experience and education. If we account for these factors, the gender pay gap would be lower.
One of the ways to further reduce the gender pay gap is to help employees better balance work and family responsibilities so that they are able to maximise their potential at work. This is particularly important for women as they tend to bear heavier caregiving responsibilities at home. The Tripartite Partners will continue to encourage family-friendly workplace practices such as flexible work arrangements. Parental leave schemes have also been enhanced to promote greater sharing of caregiving duties across genders. The upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation will also strengthen protections against common forms of discrimination, including discrimination on the basis of sex, pregnancy status and caregiving responsibilities.
To help more women realise their career ambitions, business organisations have also taken the lead to organise networking and mentorship programmes, such as the Advancing Women in Finance Mentoring Programme for mid-career women run by the Financial Women’s Association of Singapore.
We will continue to work with the Tripartite Partners and relevant agencies to strengthen the support ecosystem to enable more women to enter, remain and progress in the workforce, including in the finance sector.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Occupancy and Waiting Time for HDB Rental Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether an update can be provided on the current occupancy and waiting time for HDB rental flats, including flats under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme, temporary and permanent flats; and (b) whether the occupancy and waiting time for rental flats will decrease as more HDB BTO projects are completed in the next six to 12 months.
Mr Desmond Lee: As of August 2023, there are about 51,500 occupied flats under the Public Rental Scheme, with an average waiting time of five months. There are about 1,700 occupied flats under the Interim Rental Housing (IRH) scheme, which is offered on a case-by-case basis to lower-income families who are in transit between longer-term options. As there continues to be sustained demand for public rental flats, we expect the number of occupied public rental flats to increase slightly over the next year, but we will seek to keep waiting times stable.
There are about 900 occupied flats under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS). The PPHS is open for application once every two months. Eligible applicants are put through a ballot and those shortlisted via the ballot are invited to select a flat and sign the tenancy agreement in the month following their application. They will collect the keys to the flat at the same time and can move in immediately.
Even as more Housing and Development Board (HDB) Build-To-Order (BTO) projects are completed, we expect sustained demand for PPHS flats. We will double the PPHS flat supply from about 2,000 units at present to 4,000 units by the end of 2025. Nonetheless, supply remains limited, and we will not be able to offer a PPHS flat to every applicant. As such, potential PPHS applicants are encouraged to consider their full range of options, including open market rental or living with their families.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regulating Artificial Intelligence and New Technologies for Precision Medicines","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"31 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) how does the Government regulate AI and new technologies used for precision medicine in order to protect data privacy and patient confidentiality as well as ensure patient safety; and (b) how does the Government address concerns that customised treatments and precision medicines may increase healthcare costs for patients, compared to cheaper generic drugs.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Artificial intelligence (AI) and precision medicine are all major technological breakthroughs that can potentially transform healthcare. Some of the use cases promise to deliver greater cost efficiency and clinical effectiveness. Other potential uses are less straightforward. There may be a promising new precision medicine which may work only on certain individuals and cost significantly more.
Having said that, the healthcare sector is characterised by very tight regulation. In Singapore, any new technologies, including the use of AI, are regulated by the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) as medical devices if they diagnose, manage or treat medical conditions. For example, clinical genetic and genomic services will be regulated as part of the Healthcare Services Act in end 2023. Patient data, including genomic data, are already subject to laws and regulation that safeguard patients’ privacy.
Many precision medicine technologies are still nascent, with many applications that are experimental in nature. The Ministry of Health (MOH) will continue to develop our governance framework and policies to ensure that we can deploy these technologies in healthcare in ethical and clinically and cost-effective ways.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reasons for Granting Disruption from National Service","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Defence (a) for each year from 2018 to 2022, how many full-time National Servicemen disrupted their National Service (NS) for overseas studies; (b) of these, how many were Government scholarship holders; and (c) what are the reasons for allowing the disruption.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Annually, from 2018 to 2022, about 580 full-time National Servicemen (NSFs) were disrupted for university studies: 520 pursued university locally, while 60 pursued their studies overseas.
The bulk of disruptions, about 70%, were NSFs who had enlisted later than their classmates. The standing policy is to allow each cohort to start their university studies in the same year and thus these later enlistees were disrupted to achieve this outcome; 27% are NSFs who were disrupted to study medicine so that they can serve their National Service (NS) as SAF Medical Officers. Public Service Commission scholars make up the remaining 3%, or an average of 19 NSFs. This follows a long-standing practice since 1967 to attract top talent into the public sector.
All NSFs are required to complete the remainder of their full-time NS after the disruption period.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expenditure Per Student Spent on Mother Tongue Language Education","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Education (a) for each official mother tongue language (MTL), what is the current expenditure per student to receive such MTL education at the preschool, primary, secondary and post-secondary levels respectively; and (b) what are the future plans to enhance the teaching of MTLs at all levels.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Bilingualism is the cornerstone of our education system. We remain committed to supporting our students learn their mother tongue.
Ministry of Education (MOE) schools offer differentiated Mother Tongue Language curriculum to cater to diverse learning needs and interests of the students. Our teachers use a variety of teaching methods and resources to help students become active learners and proficient users of their mother tongue.
We will continue to improve the teaching and learning of Mother Tongue Languages, ensuring that it stays in step with evolving contexts. We do not track expenditure based on subjects, as teaching and learning of a subject involves many types of expenditure, and spending on different subjects and programmes is connected and interdependent. For instance, resources such as a digital learning device can be used for the learning of all subjects.
At the launch of the 2024 Primary School Mother Tongue Languages curriculum last month, I shared that we will tap on multi-modal approaches for students to learn Mother Tongue Language through visual, auditory and kinesthetic means.
Three other features of the new curriculum were also mentioned. One is the greater use of technology to engage students in learning Mother Tongue Language. The other is to make learning more authentic for students to see its relevance in their daily lives. Third is a greater emphasis on 21st-century competencies, such as cross-cultural literacy and communication skills, for students to be more future-ready.
While we continue to review the teaching methods and resources, we recognise the challenges that our students face in grasping their mother tongue today, as many of them are using English to communicate with their family members at home. MOE seeks the partnership of parents and the community in creating an environment where young children and youths have opportunities to learn and use their mother tongue beyond the classroom setting. Ultimately, our students will enjoy learning mother tongue if they find the language interesting and useful in their daily lives.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Discussion of China Standard Map 2023 Edition at High-level Bilateral and Multilateral Interactions, and Its Impact on Progress of Code of Conduct in South China Sea Negotiations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) whether the China Standard Map 2023 Edition has been discussed during recent high-level bilateral and multilateral exchanges, including the 43rd ASEAN Summit; (b) what substantive progress has been made in the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC) negotiations; (c) what contentious issues are still unresolved; and (d) when will the third reading of the Single Draft COC Negotiating Text take place.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: There have been various statements and outcome documents from the recently concluded Association of Southeast Asian Nations and related Summits which are in the public domain. Singapore’s position is that all claims in the South China Sea must be in accordance with international law, including the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
On the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC), negotiators have completed the second reading of the Single Draft Negotiating Text. Singapore will continue to work towards an effective and substantive COC that is in accordance with universally recognised principles of international law, including the 1982 UNCLOS, and that safeguards the rights and interests of all parties in the South China Sea.
36 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for National Development how does the new classification of HDB BTO projects into Standard, Prime and Plus flats instead of mature and non-mature estates assure a first-timer family of a HDB BTO flat within the first three tries of application.
Mr Desmond Lee: This question has been addressed in the oral reply to Parliamentary Questions on the new Housing and Development Board (HDB) framework for Build-To-Order (BTO) flats, which was delivered on 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Social and Fiscal Impact from Introduction of Plus and Prime HDB Flats\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"MRT Stations and Bus Interchanges with at least One Lactation Room and Breastfeeding Room","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether he can provide an update on the percentage of MRT stations and bus interchanges currently having at least one lactation room and breastfeeding room; and (b) whether the Ministry can make it compulsory for all MRT stations and bus interchanges to have at least one lactation room and breastfeeding room. \n\n
Mr Chee Hong Tat (for the Minister for Transport): As at 31 August 2023, 60% of bus interchanges and all interchange stations on the Thomson-East Coast Line have a baby care room with nursing facilities. All stations on the upcoming Jurong Region Line and Cross Island Line, as well as all new bus interchanges, will be equipped with baby care rooms.
For existing Mass Rapid Transit stations and bus interchanges that have been built previously, a number of them are adjacent to major developments with nursing facilities, such as shopping centres. For the remaining stations and interchanges, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) will consider providing baby care rooms as part of upgrading works, subject to space availability and technical feasibility.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Scale of Dormant Bank Accounts in Local Financial Institutions and Protocols for Handling Such Accounts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"38 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Prime Minister (a) what is (i) the number and (ii) dollar value of deposits held in dormant bank accounts in local financial institutions (FIs); and (b) whether MAS requires local FIs to trace and contact holders of dormant accounts to activate their accounts or claim their funds.\n\n
Mr Lawrence Wong (for the Prime Minister): There are about 215,000 deposit accounts of individuals in our three local banks, holding a total of about $300 million, that have been dormant for at least 15 years. They constitute 2% of the total number of deposit accounts in the three banks and 0.07% of total deposit value.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) currently does not prescribe how banks should treat their dormant deposit accounts but has been reviewing the issue. In practice, some banks send notification letters to holders of deposit accounts to inform them that their accounts have been inactive for a period of time. Beyond a certain point, it would not be practical for banks to continue efforts to trace these account holders. But account holders or their authorised personal representatives may at any time contact banks to reactivate their accounts or to claim the funds on behalf of the estate of the deceased account holder.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Build Up Pipeline of Singaporeans to Take Up Jobs on Non-Traditional Sources Occupation List","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower given the recent addition of jobs in the Non-Traditional Sources (NTS) Occupation List (a) what are the measures being taken to build up the pipeline of Singaporeans to take up jobs on the NTS; (b) how will the Ministry ensure that locals in these jobs will not be deprived of job opportunities or attractive salaries; and (c) whether the Ministry will review and roll back on any NTS adjustments when there are sufficient locals taking up these jobs.
Dr Tan See Leng: With our ageing population and more highly educated workforce, the reality is that it is not possible to build up a pipeline of Singaporeans for every occupation. The nine occupations on the Non-Traditional Source (NTS) Occupation List (OL) were selected carefully in consultation with sector agencies, taking into account the number of S Pass holders in these occupations who are affected by the increases in S Pass qualifying salary and the degree of manpower shortages. In addition, these occupations see low take-up by locals and are harder to automate.
Nonetheless, low take-up does not mean that there are no Singaporeans in these occupations. I share the Member's concern that the employment prospects of these Singaporean workers should not be compromised by the introduction of NTS OL. We have, therefore, put in place a strict quota with a sub-Dependency Ratio Ceiling of 8% and a fixed monthly salary criterion of at least $2,000 to safeguard against over-reliance and cheap sourcing of NTS workers.
The list of occupations will be reviewed every three years. We are prepared to amend the list where necessary, if employers are able to hire sufficient locals or manpower demands are less intense due to automation or job redesign. We are working closely with the tripartite partners and sector agencies to monitor the impact of NTS OL.
Finally, the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices requires all employers to fairly consider all candidates for a job and adopt fair remuneration policies. Workers who have not been treated fairly can approach the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices for assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Traffic Accidents involving Lorries Transporting Workers in Rear Deck that were Attributable to Driver Fault","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Home Affairs for each year in the past five years, for traffic accidents involving lorries where workers are being transported in the rear deck during the accident, what percentage of the accidents is attributed to (i) lorry driver fatigue, (ii) the fault of the lorry driver and (iii) the fault of the driver of the other vehicle involved in the accident.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Traffic Police (TP) is only able to provide data on accidents involving lorries that were ferrying passengers and which resulted in casualties or deaths. TP does not track the occupation of the passengers, if they are workers or otherwise, or if they were seated in the front or the rear of the lorry. TP also does not track whether the accident was attributed to fatigue.
Over the past five years, for all accidents involving lorries with passengers which resulted in casualties or deaths, the fault in about 45% of the accidents laid with the lorry driver, while the fault in about 56% of the accidents laid with the driver of the other vehicle.
The percentages do not add up to 100% because there are accidents where fault is attributed to both the lorry driver and the driver of the other vehicle. There are also cases where fault could not be attributed due to insufficient evidence.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Differentiated Incentives and Restrictions for HDB BTO Flats Based on Number of Children Per Household","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"41 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for National Development in light of the recently announced moves towards a more equitable public housing system for Singaporeans (a) whether the Ministry is considering differentiated incentives and restrictions based on the number of children per household; (b) what is the justification for differentiating singles from married couples who do not have children; and (c) what additional ways can policies on the public housing system promote parenthood and help young parents without negatively impacting singlehood.
Mr Desmond Lee: Given the land and resource constraints we face in Singapore, we have to balance the housing needs of different citizen segments carefully.
We engaged over 16,000 Singaporeans through Our Housing Conversations conducted under the Forward Singapore exercise. Singaporeans collectively agreed that young married couples and families with young children have the most urgent need for housing and should be prioritised. This recognises that parents want to give their young children a conducive living environment to grow up in. For married couples who do not currently have children, supporting them in owning their first home helps them to settle down and set up their families.
Today, the vast majority of flats are already set aside for first-timer families. From the upcoming Build-To-Order (BTO) exercise, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) will introduce a new applicant category, known as the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples), or FT(PMC), for eligible families with at least one child aged 18 and below, or married couples aged 40 and below. FT(PMC) applicants will receive a total of three ballot chances for their flat applications in HDB’s BTO and Sale of Balance Flats (SBF) exercises in any estate. In addition, the current Parenthood Priority Scheme will be expanded to include FT(PMC) applicants and renamed as the new Family and Parenthood Priority Scheme. The scheme will provide priority allocation of BTO and SBF flats to eligible young married couples and parents with young children.
We also understand that larger households may require a bigger living space of their own. Today, the flat allocation quota for 3-room and larger HDB flats are fully set aside for families. We also have the Third Child Priority Scheme (TCPS) in which eligible families with three or more children will receive priority allocation for up to 5% of flats sold in the BTO and SBF exercises. TCPS is available for eligible families, regardless of whether they are first- or second-timer households.
We generally do not have differentiated incentives or restrictions for households based on the number of children. What we have instead are the policies and priority schemes to facilitate marriage and parenthood, which give families choices and allow them to select a flat based on their specific needs, budgets and housing grant eligibility, as well as conditions, such as the Minimum Occupation Period.
We also recognise that more Singaporeans are remaining single – some by choice, others by circumstances – and they, too, wish to have a place of their own. Over the years, we have adjusted our housing policies to meet their needs and aspirations. For example, for first-timer singles, we had increased the supply of 2-room flexi flats in the Non-Mature Estates that are set aside for them last year. With the implementation of the new flat classification from the second half of 2024, first-timer singles will have more locational options, as they will be able to purchase new 2-room flexi flats island-wide, across Standard, Plus and Prime projects, from HDB.
Singles who would like to own a larger flat may purchase one from the resale market and may receive up to $95,000 in housing grants.
We will continue to monitor the situation and adjust our housing policies where necessary to support the different segments of Singaporeans. This includes engaging Singaporeans to explore new ways to better meet their evolving housing needs and aspirations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Lactation Rooms in Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Education (a) whether he can provide an update on the percentage of (i) primary schools, (ii) secondary schools and (iii) post-secondary educational institutions currently having at least one lactation room; and (b) whether the Ministry can make it compulsory for all schools and educational institutions to have at least one lactation room.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Ministry of Education (MOE) is committed to providing a conducive workplace for nursing mothers. All MOE schools and tertiary education institutions have either at least one lactation room or suitable room for nursing mothers to use.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Business Sectors Still Reliant on Cheques to Transit to Digital Payment Methods","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Prime Minister (a) whether MAS will work with the business sectors, including property, law and insurance companies, wholesale dealers, brokerages and telcos, with a heavy reliance on cheques for financial transactions to help them achieve a smooth transition to digital payment methods; and (b) in cases where persistent cheque usage is due to statutory or regulatory requirements, whether MAS will work with the relevant Government agencies to explore the possibility of amending these requirements.
Mr Lawrence Wong (for the Prime Minister): The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) announced in July this year that all corporate cheques will be eliminated by end-2025. This comes as cheque volumes have declined sharply in recent years. In contrast, e-payment transaction volumes have grown significantly as both corporate and retail users increasingly use e-payments to transact. The share of the cheque transaction volume as a proportion of payments using Fast and Secure Transfers (FAST), Inter-bank GIRO and cheques has shrunk from 32% in 2016 to only 4% in 2022.
Since 2021, a workgroup led by MAS and the banking industry has actively engaged businesses from industry sectors with high cheque usage, including the property, insurance and legal sectors. The workgroup found that most businesses have already adopted digital payments as they found these channels efficient, convenient and suitable to meet their payment needs. Nevertheless, some businesses asked if an alternative payment solution can be developed to enable them to make deferred payments. To meet this request, the banking industry will implement solutions by 2025, which will allow businesses to make a deferred payment or issue a cashier’s order electronically without the need for paper cheques.
Separately, all Government agencies have reviewed their regulations to ensure that there are no regulatory hurdles preventing businesses and individuals from making payments digitally. This review, which was carried out in 2021, identified a few regulations that had to be amended, including those relating to property conveyancing services and Central Provident Fund (CPF) transactions. These regulations mainly pertain to retail cheque transactions, and the relevant Government agencies will complete the necessary amendments to better facilitate the use of digital payment options. In the meantime, Government agencies and the banking sector will continue to collaborate with the SMEs Go Digital and Seniors Go Digital programmes to help small businesses and individuals use e-payments safely and confidently.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Volume of Complaints Received for Alleged Medical Negligence by Hospital Staff","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"45 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Health what is the (i) average number of complaints received per month for alleged medical negligence by hospital staff and (ii) average total patient intake per month, with a breakdown respectively for Sengkang Hospital, Singapore General Hospital, Tan Tock Seng Hospital and other regional hospitals.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: In 2022, the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) received an average of one complaint per month for alleged medical negligence by registered medical practitioners in the public sector hospitals. All these complaints were investigated, most of them involved complex cases, and the SMC was satisfied that there was no negligence on the part of healthcare workers. There were no such complaints received by other Professional Boards.
The patient intake is well spread out across regional hospitals. However, it is higher at the National University Hospital, Singapore General Hospital and Tan Tock Seng Hospital, due to their higher patient loads and the complex cases they manage.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of HDB BTO Units Launched where Optional Component Scheme Is Not Applicable","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development in each year over the last five years, what are the number and proportion of HDB BTO units launched where (i) the Optional Component Scheme is not applicable and (ii) the pedestal pans are pre-fitted in the flats and whether this is optional or compulsory.
Mr Desmond Lee: Build-To-Order (BTO) flat owners can opt for the Optional Component Scheme (OCS) to pre-install floor finishes, internal doors and sanitary fittings for a fee before they move in.
From 2018 to 2022, on average, about 39% or 6,800 BTO flats launched per year did not come with the OCS as the components would be pre-installed in the flats during the construction process. Such flats include those that were built under the Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction method, flats with shorter waiting time of three years or less, and Community Care Apartments which come with pre-installed fittings for seniors aged 65 and above.
Pedestal pans fall outside the scope of OCS, as they are pre-fitted in all BTO flats to meet the requirements to obtain the Temporary Occupation Permit.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Social Service Agencies to Increase Number of Special Student Care Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"47 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry has plans to support Social Service Agencies in increasing the number of Special Student Care Centres in Singapore; and (b) if so, whether these centres will be set up in more diverse locations across Singapore to make them more accessible to families of children with special needs. \n
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Special Student Care Centres (SSCCs) provide before and after school care services for students with special needs aged seven to 18 who attend Special Education (SPED) schools. There are currently 10 SSCCs of which eight are co-located with SPED schools, providing a total of 320 places serving students with special needs of different profiles.
While there are sufficient SSCC places for children with sensory impairment and intellectual disabilities, we project an increase in demand for SSCC places for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). We have, therefore, worked with Social Service Agencies (SSAs) to start two new SSCCs with a capacity of 100 places for children with ASD in July this year.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) works closely with SSAs and SG Enable to identify areas where there is demand for SSCC services. We plan to set up more SSCCs, in tandem with the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) plan to build more SPED schools, to provide greater convenience to families with children with special needs who require SSCC services. MSF will continue to engage stakeholders, including parents and caregivers of children with special needs, to gather feedback and improve the accessibility of SSCC services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Protocols for Schools' Overseas Trip or Expeditions Undertaken without Accompanying Teachers or Adults","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Education (a) whether there are any overseas trips or expeditions that students from schools and institutions run by the Ministry are required to go on without accompanying teachers or adults; and (b) if so, what protocols are in place to ensure students’ safety and well-being on such unaccompanied trips.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: All overseas trips organised by Ministry of Education (MOE) schools, polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) have accompanying staff to oversee the safety and well-being of students. Our polytechnics and ITE also organise overseas exchange programmes and internships of longer duration, where students have accompanying staff or on-site staff from the host institutions or companies.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Loss of Pay for Middle-rank and Senior Civil Servants Interdicted from Duty while Assisting with Investigations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Prime Minister what percentage of the pay of a (i) junior, (ii) middle-rank and (iii) senior civil servant is lost when such officers are interdicted from duty while being actively investigated by CPIB and SPF.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): In the Civil Service, when officers have to be interdicted from duty during investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) and the Singapore Police Force (SPF), they will be put on half-pay, subject to a pay ceiling of $8,500 per month.
If the officers are found innocent at the end of the investigation, they will be reinstated, and the half pay that has been withheld will be paid back to the officers. However, if they are found guilty and subsequently dismissed from service, they will lose the withheld pay. We do not recover or claw back the half pay that the officer was given during the period of interdiction.
These rules apply to all civil servants regardless of seniority.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Parking Facilities for Marine Offshore Workers who Carry Heavy Gear to Vessels at Marina South Pier and Marina Bay Cruise Centre","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"53 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Transport whether more parking facilities can be provided for marine offshore workers who carry heavy gear onto their vessels at Marina South Pier and the Marina Bay Cruise Centre.
Mr Chee Hong Tat (for the Minister for Transport): Marina South Pier currently has 59 carpark lots, of which 23 are season parking lots reserved for tenants and operators at Marina South Pier, and 36 are visitor lots, including two electric vehicle lots. Marina Bay Cruise Centre Singapore has 323 visitor lots and no season parking lots.
If there are no available lots at Marina South Pier, marine offshore workers can offload their equipment at the four loading and unloading bays at Marina South Pier before parking their vehicles at Marina Bay Cruise Centre Singapore, which is about a 10-minute walk away with a sheltered linkway.
Due to space constraints, it is not possible to increase parking capacity at Marina South Pier and Marina Bay Cruise Centre Singapore. However, the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore will be building a multi-storey car park at a site adjacent to Marina South Pier as part of \"The WAVES\" development, which will provide additional parking lots for workers and visitors going to Marina South Pier. This development is estimated to be completed by 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expansion of Household Services Scheme’s Pilot Programme to Include Child- and Elder-minding Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"54 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Manpower whether an update can be provided on the Household Services Scheme’s pilot programme to expand its scope to include child-minding and elder-minding services.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) launched a two-year pilot programme in March 2023 to expand the scope of the Household Services Scheme to include basic child-minding and elder-minding services. Twenty-five companies have joined the pilot programme. Among the companies that have started providing the expanded scope of services, half provide both child-minding and elder-minding services and the other half provide either child-minding or elder-minding services. These companies are currently providing such services to over 300 families. The pilot is still in the early stages, and we expect the participating companies to further scale up and expand their offerings in the coming months.
MOM will continue to monitor the pilot programme and market response through regular surveys with households and companies and assess the effectiveness of the scheme nearer the end of the pilot.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Use of Smaller-capacity Buses to Increase Frequency of Service","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"56 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Transport for bus lines with off-peak frequency that average 15 to 20 minutes and not filled to capacity, whether smaller-capacity buses can be considered for deployment to increase frequency.
Mr Chee Hong Tat (for the Minister for Transport): Running smaller-capacity buses at higher frequencies during off-peak will increase operating costs borne by commuters and taxpayers. Let me explain why this idea is not feasible in practice.
First, the smaller buses will have to be procured in addition to existing larger buses, as the latter will still be required during peak periods when there are more commuters. Second, a small bus still requires a bus captain. To operate smaller buses at higher frequencies than the existing larger buses, more bus captains will need to be hired. And third, smaller buses have different operating and maintenance regimes compared to the existing bus fleet. This will increase operational complexity for the maintenance workshop and lead to higher maintenance costs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing Range of Early Identification, Intervention and Support Programmes for Families with Special Needs Children","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry will consider strengthening the range of early identification, intervention and support programmes for parents and caregivers of children with special needs; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider developing and implementing a community education programme to inform parents and caregivers of children with special needs about available support options.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: It is our goal for children with developmental needs to be given a good start in life and have opportunities to achieve their fullest potential.
The Government has strengthened support at various touchpoints to enable more timely and systematic identification of children with developmental needs. From birth, parents can track their children’s developmental milestones via the Child Health Booklet and are encouraged to take their children for Childhood Developmental Screening (CDS). Eligible Singaporean children receive subsidised CDS at polyclinics and Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) general practitioner clinics. CDS has been streamlined to be conducted together with recommended childhood vaccinations. By end-2023, every preschool will have an Inclusion Coordinator, who can help fellow educators identify children with potential developmental needs for further assessment and link them up with relevant early intervention support.
Children who require early intervention (EI) will be referred to appropriate support – either at hospitals or an EI programme in the community. A range of EI programmes is available for various age groups, levels of support and settings. For example, children aged three to six requiring medium levels of EI support can be supported at EI centres via the Early Intervention Programme for Infants and Children or in preschools via the Inclusive Support Programme. Those with low levels of EI support can be supported in preschools via the Development Support – Learning Support programme.
Besides early detection and intervention for children with developmental needs, support for their caregivers is also crucial to the children’s well-being and development. EI centres provide caregiver engagement and training so that caregivers are equipped with the skills and knowledge to support their children at home.
In 2022, the Early Childhood Development Agency launched the Parents’ Guide, a guide with information on ways to access EI services, support available to facilitate the child’s transition from the preschool years to school-age provisions, as well as self-care strategies and resources.
Furthermore, SG Enable has worked with CaringSG, a caregiver-led organisation, to launch the Step One programme in July 2023. This programme aims to equip caregivers with knowledge and skills to carry out their caregiving duties and connect them with support networks. Caregivers can find out more about these support options via the online Enabling Guide.
To help parents make an informed decision on the appropriate educational setting for their child in schooling years, the Ministry of Education (MOE) has collaborated with hospitals, EI centres and special education (SPED) schools to develop common standards to guide professional assessments and align recommendations given to parents. MOE also holds an annual Parent Forum, in collaboration with the KK Women's and Children's Hospital (KKH) and the National University Hospital (NUH), to help parents better understand how mainstream and SPED schools can support their child’s needs. During the schooling years, SPED schools work closely with parents to monitor their children’s growth and facilitate the application of skills at home and in the community. The biennial MOE SPED Learning Festival also includes workshops for parents to connect with professionals for advice on supporting their child’s Special Education Needs.
We will continue to engage healthcare providers, EI operators, preschools, SPED schools and parents to ensure robust early identification and intervention for children with developmental needs, as well as to provide education and support for their caregivers. In addition to having services and programmes available, it is equally important for family, friends and other caregivers to provide support for children with developmental needs and their families. Let us all play a part by extending a helping hand when we see families in need.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Length of Time Member of Parliament S Iswaran will be Absent from Parliament","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"58 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Prime Minister whether an update can be provided on the length of time Member of Parliament S Iswaran will be absent from Parliament. \n
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): Mr S Iswaran was granted leave of absence from Parliament Sittings as he was being formally investigated. Investigations are still ongoing and providing an update at this juncture as requested by Mr Pritam Singh may prejudice the investigations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expanding Definition of Disability to Include Those with Certifiable Mental Health Conditions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"59 Mr Ong Hua Han asked the Minister for Social and Family Development when will the definition of disability for access to programmes, such as Open Door under SG Enable, be expanded to include those with certifiable mental health conditions, in order to align the protected characteristic of mental health in the upcoming workplace fairness legislation.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Both disability and mental health conditions are protected characteristics in the upcoming workplace fairness legislation because they are some of the more commonly reported forms of workplace discrimination. However, persons with disabilities and persons with mental health conditions receive different types of employment support that cater to their different needs.
The support for individuals with mental health conditions is focused on their recovery and helping them to cope with their conditions. The Government has a comprehensive approach to support persons with mental health conditions. The Ministry of Health (MOH) has been working with various agencies to promote mental health and upstream prevention; improved early detection, intervention and management; and expand health, social and community support services. Persons with mental health conditions who require employment assistance can approach the Job Club under the Institute of Mental Health, the Singapore Association for Mental Health and the Singapore Anglican Community Services. These organisations provide support, such as job placement, post-employment follow-up and training in conflict resolution and stress management.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mandatory National Child Safeguarding Standards for Organisations that Provide Services for Children and Young Persons","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry will consider developing and implementing mandatory national child safeguarding standards for organisations that provide services for children and young persons.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Breaches of Section 33 of Early Childhood Development Centres Regulations 2018","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) in the last three years, how many breaches of section 33 of the Early Childhood Development Centres Regulations 2018 have been reported to the Ministry; and (b) how does the Ministry use that data to improve systemic practice across Early Childhood Development Centres.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Early Childhood Educators' Mental and Emotional Wellness are Taken Care Of","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"62 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Early Childhood Development Agency has any programmes or guidelines in place to ensure that early childhood educators' mental and emotional wellness are managed and taken care of.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans for Improving ECDA's Oversight of Staff and Management of Preschools and Childcare Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"63 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Social and Family Development to detect and deter cases of child abuse or inappropriate conduct at preschools or childcare centres, what are the plans for ECDA to (i) maintain effective oversight of both staff and management of such centres and (ii) strengthen reporting policies, which include encouraging and protecting whistle-blowers.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Training and Other Measures to Address Workload, Stress Management and Mental Well-being Issues for Staff at Preschools and Childcare Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether mandatory training or any other measures to address issues of workload, stress management and mental well-being of preschool and childcare centre staff is provided by ECDA.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Modifying Combat Aircraft with Fin-lined Nozzles to Reduce Noise Pollution from Overflights","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Defence whether the RSAF has conducted research on modifying combat aircraft with fin-lined nozzles to reduce noise pollution from overflights and, if not, whether it will do so.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: There are currently no aircraft or aircraft engine manufacturers that have certified or successfully incorporated the use of fin-lined nozzles into their engine design. The Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) will continue to monitor the development of this and other technologies and evidence of their ability to also meet operational requirements in a cost-effective way.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Working with International Agencies to Tackle Online Child Sexual Exploitation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Home Affairs how is the Singapore Police Force working with international agencies to tackle online child sexual exploitation.
Mr K Shanmugam: In July 2023, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) jointly organised an inaugural “Crimes Against Children” Regional Forum with the United States Homeland Security Investigations to share enforcement strategies and investigative practices and strengthen collaboration across the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
The Member may wish to refer to the SPF press release on the forum dated 11 July 2023 and the opening address by Minister of State for Home Affairs and for Social and Family Development, Ms Sun Xueling, for SPF’s approach to tackle online child sexual exploitation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Approvals Granted to Foreigners to Purchase Landed Properties under Residential Property Act 1976","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) for each year since 2013, how many foreign persons have received approval to purchase terrace houses, semi-detached houses, detached or strata landed houses under the Residential Property Act 1976; (b) whether investigations into the sources of funds for the purchase of these properties are conducted before such approvals are granted; and (c) if not, why not.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Many Members have filed queries on the recent anti-money laundering operations conducted by the Police and Singapore’s anti-money laundering framework. The queries cover a wide range of issues across several Ministries. The Ministry of Home Affairs, together with various other Ministries, will respond to the queries comprehensively in a Ministerial Statement in October. [Please refer to \"Singapore's Anti-Money Laundering Regime\", Official Report, 03 October 2023, Vol 95, Issue 113, Ministerial Statements section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Obligation of Property Developers to Report Property Buyers Failing Customer Due Diligence Checks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether property developers are obligated to report property buyers who fail the Customer Due Diligence (CDD) checks performed on them to the authorities; and (b) if so, to date, how many property buyers have failed such CDD checks.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Many Members have filed queries on the recent anti-money laundering operations conducted by the Police and Singapore’s anti-money laundering framework. The queries cover a wide range of issues across several Ministries. The Ministry of Home Affairs, together with various other Ministries, will respond to the queries comprehensively in a Ministerial Statement in October. [Please refer to \"Singapore's Anti-Money Laundering Regime\", Official Report, 03 October 2023, Vol 95, Issue 113, Ministerial Statements section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Abuse against Security Officers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs since May 2022, what is the number of cases of abuse against security officers that has been lodged; (b) whether the number of abuse cases is trending lower since new offences were introduced in the amended Private Security Industry Act which took effect from 1 May 2022; and (c) whether there are any plans to further enhance penalties to deter abuse against security officers.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) amended the Private Security Industry Act (PSIA) in October 2021 to enhance protection for security officers against abuse and harassment in their course of work. The amendments have been in force since May 2022.
Since May 2022, there has been an average of 27 cases of abuse or harassment reported each month. This is higher than the average of 13 reported cases per month between 2018 and 2021. MHA understands that the enhanced protections afforded to security officers have encouraged more of them, their employers and the Union of Security Employees, to come forward to report incidents of abuse or harassment.
As it has only been slightly over a year since the amendments to the PSIA came into force, MHA will continue to monitor the situation for now.
6 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Law (a) how much have been collected by the Public Trustee in fees charged for the administration of un-nominated CPF monies in 2022; (b) what is the average fee charged and average amount of un-nominated CPF monies administered per estate; and (c) why does the Public Trustee not charge a flat fee for the administration of un-nominated CPF monies regardless of the amount administered per estate.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Public Trustee (PT) receives from the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board the CPF monies of CPF members who pass on without nominating any beneficiaries and distributes the un-nominated CPF monies in accordance with the provisions of either the Intestate Succession Act 1967 or the Administration of Muslim Law Act 1966, whichever applies.
The work done to administer these CPF monies includes tracing and identifying the next-of-kin of a deceased CPF member, determining all eligible beneficiaries by confirming the familial relationships between the next-of-kin and the deceased CPF member, and making distributions.
PT charges a statutory fee to cover the costs of all such work. Without this fee, which is kept very low, taxpayers would bear the cost of the work done. The fee model is prescribed in the Public Trustee (Fees) Rules 2010 and follows a tiered scale so that cases involving larger sums of un-nominated CPF monies will bear a bigger share of the costs.
The Public Trustee’s Office does not track average fees. It is not feasible or meaningful to do so because different cases have different levels of complexity. For example, in some cases, significant time and effort may be required to trace the beneficiaries.
To save on the fees entirely, CPF members should exercise their choice and nominate the recipients of their CPF monies. This way, the PT need not be involved in distributing the monies or collect fees for doing so. There are no costs involved in making a CPF nomination and no fees chargeable when the CPF Board distributes the monies directly to adult nominees. CPF members can make a nomination via the CPF Board’s online nomination service.1 They may also visit the CPF Service Centres or ServiceSG Centres, where the officers will help with the nomination process and also act as their witnesses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : cpf.gov.sg/MakeCPFNom"],"footNoteQuestions":["6"],"questionNo":"6"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing Powers of Public Officers in New Mandatory Mediation Framework to Include Resolving Second-hand Smoke Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Law whether the Ministry will consider expanding the new framework for mandatory mediation and increasing the powers of public officers to include resolving second-hand smoke cases between neighbouring units in HDB estates in addition to noise cases.
Mr K Shanmugam: An inter-agency committee is reviewing the Community Dispute Management Framework. Potential enhancements include mandating mediation for suitable types of cases and piloting a team of personnel vested with investigation and enforcement powers to follow up on serious disputes between neighbours.
For the pilot, the team of dedicated personnel will focus on noise disputes as noise is the primary source of disputes between neighbours, and mandatory mediation will apply. As experience is gained from the pilot, agencies will assess expanding mandatory mediation to other types of neighbour disputes, including disputes involving second-hand smoke.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effects of Industrial Light & Magic's Decision to End Singapore Operations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Trade and Industry with regard to the decision by Industrial Light & Magic to end its operations in Singapore (a) what is the expiry date of the tax incentive schemes granted to the company; and (b) whether the Ministry has the number of Singaporean and non-Singaporean staff that are expected to be made redundant and, if so, what are these numbers.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Industrial Light & Magic has not been awarded any tax incentive.
The company’s closure is expected to affect more than 300 employees, about two-thirds of whom are locals. The Economic Development Board (EDB) and Workforce Singapore are working with the company to help affected employees seek alternative employment opportunities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Frequency of Inspections for Electric Vehicles, Given Their Higher Reliability","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will consider requiring less frequent inspections for electric vehicles (EVs) given their generally higher reliability than comparable internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles.
Mr Chee Hong Tat (for the Minister for Transport): The Land Transport Authority (LTA) requires all motor vehicles to undergo compulsory periodic inspections to ensure that owners regularly maintain their vehicles to meet roadworthiness standards.
While electric vehicles (EVs) do not have an internal combustion engine, their high-voltage electrical systems, including the charging inlet, cables, traction batteries and electric motors as well as other components, including tyres, steering, lighting and braking systems, need to be checked for signs of wear and tear or damage.
To ensure safety for all road users, there is currently no plan to reduce the inspection frequency for EVs. However, we will continue to review the inspection requirements regularly to keep up with technological developments and international best practices.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Centralised Platform for Funeral Service Providers to Register LED Wreaths to Ensure Adherence to Guidelines","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the Ministry will consider working with the industry to have a centralised platform for funeral service providers to register their LED wreaths to ensure that the number of LED wreaths delivered to each wake adheres to the guidelines.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: In June 2022, the National Environment Agency (NEA) and the Association of Funeral Directors Singapore co-developed and issued the guidelines on the use of light-emitting wreaths and inflatables at funeral wakes. The guidelines include a limit on the number of such wreaths per wake, where they can be placed and the hours they are allowed to be turned on. NEA had worked with stakeholders to promulgate the guidelines through the terms and conditions of permits for wakes held in public spaces.
Funeral service providers have generally been compliant with the guidelines. From June 2022 to July 2023, the number of feedback received by NEA has decreased from eight feedback per month to an average of three feedback per month.
NEA has no plans to set up a centralised platform at this time and will continue to work with relevant stakeholders to monitor the situation and to promote compliance with the guidelines.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cleanliness Standards of Tables in Coffee Shops after Implementation of Tray-return Rule","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether any reduction in cleanliness standards for tables in coffee shops has been observed after the implementation of the rule requiring diners to return their dirty trays and crockery after dining.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Since the implementation of the tray return policy, the Singapore Food Agency has not observed a reduction in cleanliness standards for tables in coffee shops. The rate of feedback received on table cleanliness in coffee shops has decreased.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Allowing Pets in Outdoor Dining Areas of Food Establishments beyond Licensed Pet Cafes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the Ministry will consider allowing pets in outdoor dining areas of food establishments apart from licensed pet cafes.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Under the Environmental Public Health (Food Hygiene) Regulations, food establishments are required to obtain a pet café licence from the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) if they wish to permit pets into their premises, including outdoor dining areas. This is to ensure that additional food hygiene practices required to maintain food safety are adhered to.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Likely Effect of El Niño Weather Pattern on Singapore in Coming Year","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how will the El Niño weather pattern affect Singapore in the coming year; and (b) whether preparations are being made for a dryer Singapore weather, including its effect on water supply from both the local catchment and imported water.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: El Niño conditions are now here and will likely bring drier and warmer weather to Singapore in the next one to two months. The El Niño is expected to last till at least early next year, with the warmest temperatures potentially from March to April 2024.
To safeguard water security, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) has diversified Singapore’s water supply strategy through the Four National Taps: local catchment water, imported water, NEWater and desalinated water. While drier and warmer weather may impact our water supply from local catchment and imported water, NEWater and desalinated water are weather-resilient sources. PUB has invested and will continue investing for the long term to strengthen our water security and drought resilience amidst the effects of climate change.
All of us have a role to play in managing water demand. By using water wisely, everyone can contribute to the sustainability of our water resource.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enforcement Actions against Mosquito Breeding","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) in 2023 to date, what is the number of cases of mosquito breeding against which NEA has taken enforcement action; (b) how does the trend compare against the past three years; and (c) whether more NEA enforcement officers will be deployed at current dengue hotspots to help close the dengue clusters.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The number of enforcement actions taken differs from year to year, depending on the overall dengue situation. From the start of this year, the National Environment Agency (NEA) has taken enforcement actions in about 5,200 cases against premises owners for mosquito breeding. In 2020, 2021 and 2022, enforcement actions were taken against premises owners for mosquito breeding in approximately 14,700, 11,300 and 15,900 cases respectively.
NEA has increased inspection and mitigation efforts at dengue hotspots and will continue its dynamic deployment of vector control resources to close dengue clusters as quickly as possible. However, NEA’s measures need to be complemented by individual and collective community actions to prevent mosquito breeding and reduce the Aedes mosquito population.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of El Niño Weather Pattern on Local Farm Yields and Imported Food Supply","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment how will the El Niño weather pattern, resulting in warmer sub-surface ocean temperatures, impact local farm yields and imported food supply of Singapore.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: El Niño is a large-scale climate phenomenon over the tropical Pacific Ocean. It typically brings drier and warmer weather to much of Southeast Asia, but may also cause heavy rains or extreme weather events in other parts of the world. El Niño conditions are now here. While we are unable to ascertain the impact of El Niño specifically on food production, extreme weather events are known to cause crop loss and adversely affect food security.
Singapore imports more than 90% of our food and we are not able to isolate ourselves from global food supply disruptions. Such disruptions could arise from a variety of causes, including extreme weather events, geopolitical tensions or decisions by foreign governments. Our multi-pronged approach to food security through diversifying our import sources, producing locally and stockpiling essential food items remains relevant and effective in mitigating the impact of a wide range of disruptions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Safety and Well-being of Children in Early Childhood Space","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Mr Don Wee asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in the absence of mandatory closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera installations in infant and childcare centres, kindergartens and school buses, what are the independent inspections and checks as well as enforcement measures in place to ensure the safety and well-being of vulnerable infants, toddlers and young children.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Safety and Well-being of Children Enrolled in Preschools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in light of the recent allegations of child abuse at preschools (a) what immediate measures are being taken to ensure the safety and well-being of the children enrolled in those schools; (b) how is the Ministry ensuring that such incidents do not occur in other preschools; and (c) what steps are being taken to hold the school's management accountable for their actions or lack thereof.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Protocols in Place for Reporting Abuse of Children in Preschools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what protocols are in place for reporting and investigating incidents where parents report that their children return home from the preschool with injuries; and (b) how are parents informed and involved in these processes.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Protocols and Platforms for Reporting Alleged Abuse of Children in Childcare Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether there are protocols and platforms in place for whistle-blowers, especially staff, to report alleged abuse of children or negligence by childcare centre managers and principals; (b) if so, what are these protocols and platforms; and (c) if no, what can be done.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Training of Early Childhood Educators to Include Definition of Mistreatment or Abuse of Children","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the training of early childhood educators include the definition of mistreatment or abuse of children, given that some educators may have had differing standards of what constitutes abuse.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Caregiver Grants and CPF Top-ups Received by Stay-at-home Parents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry has data on the number of stay-at-home parents for each year in the past five years; (b) if so, how many of these (i) have received caregiver grants and (ii) have had their CPF topped-up by loved ones; and (c) of those that did receive CPF top-ups by loved ones, what is the median amount.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: There is no recognised definition of stay-at-home parents. A proxy would be residents outside the labour force who are not looking for work because they have to take care of their own children aged 12 and below. The data is available in the annual \"Labour Force in Singapore\" report, published on the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM) website.
The Government does not have further information on the number of them who received caregiver grants or Central Provident Fund (CPF) top-ups by their family members.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Funding Received by Preschool Where Alleged Mistreatment Occurred","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) since 2014, how much funding has the local preschool provider which runs the childcare centres where the alleged mistreatment of children are reported in August 2023, received as an Anchor Operator; (b) whether the level of funding to this preschool provider will be reviewed given the recent allegations of child abuse; and (c) if not, why.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Staff-to-children Ratio, Salaries and Working Conditions of Educators of Preschools Operated by MOE, Anchor Operators and Private Operators","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the average staff-to-children ratio for each age group for preschools operated by the Ministry of Education, anchor operators and other private operators respectively; (b) what are the average salaries of early childhood educators; and (c) what has been done to improve the salaries and working conditions for early childhood educators since October 2022.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 33 to 52 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Update on Investigations into Alleged Mistreatment of Children at Centres of Preschool Chain\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Insurance Coverage Discrimination against Persons with Pre-existing Conditions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry works with healthcare insurers, including Integrated Shield Plan (IP) insurers, to ensure that exclusion criteria are based on appropriate medical and actuarial grounds and do not inappropriately or disproportionately discriminate against persons with pre-existing conditions; and (b) what avenues of appeal are available to persons concerned that an insurer's decision to deny coverage might be unreasonable.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 20 and 21 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 19 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Insurance Coverage for Individuals with Mental Health Conditions\", Official Report, 19 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 112, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Use of MediSave for Treatment at Private Mental Healthcare Institutions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) how many private mental healthcare practitioners, including psychiatrists, accept MediSave payments and how accessible is the information; and (b) whether current MediSave limits are sufficient to cover annual treatment costs.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: More than 270 private clinics are accredited to submit MediSave claims for mental health treatment under the Chronic Diseases Management Programme (CDMP). Singaporeans may refer to the Mind Matters Directory Listing on the Agency for Integrated Care’s (AIC) website for some MediSave-accredited clinics offering mental health services. This listing is being progressively expanded to include more clinics that offer MediSave claimable mental health services.
Depending on the complexity of their condition, individuals can use up to $500 or $700 from their MediSave annually for outpatient treatment of common mental health conditions under CDMP, comprising schizophrenia, major depression, bipolar disorders and general anxiety disorders. The current MediSave withdrawal limits remain sufficient for most individuals. In 2021, more than eight in 10 individuals who made MediSave CDMP claims for mental health treatments did not exceed the annual limits. The MediSave withdrawal limits will be reviewed regularly to ensure they remain adequate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Updated Vaccines for COVID-19 Variant EG.5","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health in view of the COVID-19 variant EG.5 which is designated a variant of interest by the World Health Organization, whether Singapore's vaccine strategy will incorporate booster doses of updated vaccines.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question was addressed in the reply to Question Nos 6 and 7 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 19 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Revision to Advisories on COVID-19 Vaccinations and Other Measures\", Official Report, 19 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 112, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"MediSave Withdrawal Limits for In-vitro Fertility Treatments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has reviewed the MediSave withdrawal limits for in-vitro fertility (IVF) treatments recently; and (b) whether it will consider increasing the MediSave withdrawal limit for IVF treatments.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Our financing schemes remain adequate for subsidised Assisted Conception Procedures (ACP).
To support affordability of ACPs, Government co-funding of up to 75% is available at public Assisted Reproduction centres, with MediSave withdrawals limits of up to $6,000 per cycle. A lifetime withdrawal limit of $15,000 per patient is also in place to avoid premature depletion of MediSave balances towards ACPs.
After co-funding and MediSave usage for the first ACP cycle, eight in 10 eligible Singapore Citizen (SC) couples would incur no out-of-pocket expense, while nine in 10 eligible SC couples would pay no more than $500. The Ministry of Health (MOH) will continue to monitor the affordability of ACPs and review our financing schemes if necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Use of MediSave Account for Treatment at Public Hospital First Attended","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Health whether the current rules allow patients to use their MediSave Account for treatment received at the public hospital where they first attended, even though they were subsequently referred to and warded at another hospital on the basis that this hospital has the expertise and facilities to treat the patient’s medical condition.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Currently, MediSave can be used for treatment expenses incurred at any MediSave-accredited hospital, even if the patient is subsequently transferred to another hospital. Such instances will be treated as a single episode for which the relevant MediSave and MediShield Life claim limits apply.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Junior Doctors' Access to Healthcare and Patient Database as They Start Their Posting at Public Hospitals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health (a) since 2022, how many junior doctors starting their first day posting at a public hospital cluster or a cross-cluster deployment do not have a fully functioning and useable healthcare information technology (IT) account for login to that cluster's healthcare IT system; and (b) what action is being taken to prevent such disruptions from affecting patient care and healthcare workers.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: All doctors working in our public healthcare institutions (PHIs) are given an information technology (IT) account to access the Electronic Medical Records Systems. This is primarily for doctors to access patient records to perform their clinical duties, such as ordering medication and documenting treatment plans.
Around 90% of new junior doctors typically have their accounts set up on the first day of work. However, this may take up to two weeks for some new junior doctors during surge periods, where more than 1,000 new junior doctors participate in the House Officer and Medical Officer posting exercises in January, April and July each year. Pending the creation of their IT accounts, junior doctors will be supported by their clinical team members who have IT access to ensure that patient care is not compromised.
Synapxe, the national HealthTech agency, has been working with PHIs to automate and reduce the processing time to create IT accounts, which will be progressively rolled out starting next year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of HDB Units Benefiting from Blocks Undergoing Lift Upgrading Programme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for National Development in the past five years (a) how many HDB blocks have either undergone the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) or polled in favour of LUP; (b) of these blocks, how many have fewer than 10 units with no direct lift access or units benefiting from LUP; and (c) of the blocks that have undergone or polled in favour of LUP, what is the proportion of the units benefiting from LUP as a percentage of the total number of units in each block.
Mr Desmond Lee: In the past five years, 34 blocks have successfully polled for the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP). Out of these 34 blocks, there are 10 blocks with fewer than 10 Benefiting Units (BUs). The proportion of BUs in each block ranges between 3% and 100%.
The Housing and Development Board (HDB) takes into consideration technical and financial feasibility when assessing which blocks to be offered LUP. The number of BUs or the proportion of BUs in the block are not overriding considerations. In some cases, HDB has offered LUP to blocks with a small number of BUs, if the LUP cost cap on a per-BU basis is met.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extending HDB's Goodwill Repair Assistance Scheme and Home Improvement Programme to Include Water Seepage into Common Areas","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for National Development whether the scope of HDB's Goodwill Repair Assistance scheme and Home Improvement Programme may be extended to cover works to address (i) water seepage from the floor of second floor units into void decks or common areas and (ii) water seepage from internal walls of units to the external walls thereby affecting external paintwork of the flat.
Mr Desmond Lee: The scope of the Goodwill Repair Assistance (GRA) Scheme covers the repair costs borne by residents for cases of water seepage from the floor of second floor units to common areas, such as the community deck. For such cases, the repair cost is split equally between the Town Council and the flat owner, with each co-paying 50%. Under the GRA, HDB helps flat owners pay half of their share, reducing the owners’ co-payment to 25%.
For cases where the water seepage is from the toilet, these are covered by upgrading works under the Home Improvement Programme (HIP).
HDB does not have plans to extend the GRA Scheme and HIP to cover repairs at common areas, such as on external walls and void decks.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Additional Restrictions on Plus and Prime HDB BTO Flats on Resale HDB Flat Prices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry has a projection of the impact that the additional restrictions on Plus and Prime HDB BTO flats have on resale HDB flat prices that are (i) within the vicinity of such flats and (ii) in other areas nationwide; and (b) if so, what are the results of these projections.
Mr Desmond Lee: This question has been addressed in the oral reply to Parliamentary Questions on the new Housing and Development Board (HDB) framework for Build-To-Order (BTO) flats, which was delivered on 18 September 2023. [Please refer to \"Social and Fiscal Impact from Introduction of Plus and Prime HDB Flats\", Official Report, 18 September 2023, Vol 95, Issue 111, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints Received by HDB on Quality of Workmanship under Home Improvement Programme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development in each year for the last two years (a) how many complaints has HDB received regarding the quality of workmanship for the Home Improvement Programme; and (b) of these, which constituencies had the highest number of complaints.
Mr Desmond Lee: In the past two years, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) received a yearly average of about 1,200 cases of feedback on workmanship issues for the Home Improvement Programme (HIP). This constitutes about 1.5% of the total number of Dwelling Units undergoing HIP works per year.
HDB does not track complaints received by constituencies. Instead, HDB monitors the performance of HIP contractors to determine their suitability for future tenders. HDB also regularly inspects works carried out by HIP contractors and engages the contractors to ensure quality and service standards are met.
HIP works are covered under the one-year Defects Liability Period. Flat owners who encounter issues with HIP works within this period can approach HDB for assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Maintenance of Air-conditioner Ledges of HDB Blocks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"34 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the rationale for air-conditioner ledges of HDB blocks with a Temporary Occupation Permit (TOP) issued on or before 30 April 2004 to be maintained by the common vendors and for those with TOP on or after 1 May 2004 to be maintained by the flat owner; (b) whether any study has been done to determine if flat owners have been maintaining these ledges as required; (c) whether the maintenance of these ledges can be standardised regardless of the year of TOP; and (d) if not, why not.
Mr Desmond Lee: For the Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats launched for sale from May 2004, air-conditioner ledges are included as part of the strata area of the flats and belong to flat owners. This facilitates general cleaning and maintenance of the air-conditioner ledges by flat owners, as the ledges are accessible to them. It is not possible to retrospectively apply this treatment to flats launched for sale before May 2004.
HDB does not monitor how regular the flat owners have been maintaining their air-conditioner ledges. However, where necessary, HDB carries out enforcement checks on potential killer-litter objects that may be on these ledges.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Full-page Advertisement in Business Times for Recipients of Singapore Business Awards 2023","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"35 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether any public funds were spent in taking out the full-page advertisement in the Business Times on 3 August 2023 by the Advisor to Yuhua Grassroots Organisations and various grassroots leaders to recipients of the Singapore Business Awards 2023; (b) if yes, from which agency the funds came from and how much was spent; and (c) what was the rationale behind taking out the advertisement.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: No public funds were spent on the advertisement in the Business Times on 3 August 2023.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Formal Channels of Support for Employees Seeking Help on Workplace Discrimination","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"36 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what steps are being taken to ensure that employees seeking help on workplace discrimination are aware of and have access to formal channels of support provided by their companies or unions; and (b) how is the Ministry addressing the common reasons for employees not seeking help, such as fear of being marginalised at work and facing repercussions in their careers.
Dr Tan See Leng: The upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation will legislate the requirement for employers to put in place proper grievance handling processes, which include protecting the confidentiality of the employee who makes a report on workplace discrimination. Employers will also be prohibited from retaliating against those who report such cases. Retaliatory behaviour includes wrongful dismissal, harassment, deprivation of contractual benefits and any other act done to victimise the individual who made the report.
The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices will continue to work with the unions and industry partners to explain these requirements and channels available to employees seeking help on workplace discrimination.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Persons with Disabilities Employed by Small and Medium Enterprises","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"37 Mr Ong Hua Han asked the Minister for Manpower based on the Enabling Employment Credit given out every year (a) how many persons with disabilities are employed by small and medium enterprises with less than 25 employees in 2020, 2021 and 2022; (b) what is the average length of employment of these employees in each year; and (c) what is the disaggregated data on the disability group which these employees belong to or identify with in each year.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Enabling Employment Credit (EEC) is a wage offset scheme introduced in 2021 to support the employment of persons with disabilities. In 2021 and 2022, about 3,000 persons with disabilities supported under the EEC each year were employed by enterprises with fewer than 25 employees. This accounted for about one in three individuals supported under the EEC. The majority of them had either intellectual or sensory impairments, while the rest included persons with physical disabilities and autism. We do not track the average length of employment of these employees.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Overall Average CPF Interest Rate Across CPF Accounts and Balances","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Manpower for each year in the past five years, what is the overall average CPF interest rate across the different types of CPF accounts and balances.
Dr Tan See Leng: The overall average Central Provident Fund (CPF) interest rate (including Extra Interest1) across the different types of CPF accounts and balances from 2018 to 2022 has been close to 4% per annum.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : To help boost retirement savings, the Government pays extra interest of 1% on the first $60,000 of a member’s combined CPF balances, which is capped at $20,000 for the Ordinary Account (OA). For members aged 55 and above, the Government pays extra interest of 2% per annum on the first $30,000 and 1% per annum on the next $30,000 of their combined CPF balances (capped at $20,000 for the OA)."],"footNoteQuestions":["38"],"questionNo":"38"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Include Platform Workers in Workplace Fairness Legislation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Manpower whether there are plans to include platform workers in the workplace fairness legislation in future.
Dr Tan See Leng: Discrimination against platform workers by platform operators is a breach of the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP). The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness in their final report has recommended to include additional guidelines in the TGFEP to make this existing position clearer. Platform workers who face such discrimination may approach the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices for assistance.
The proposed workplace fairness legislation covers employment relationships. We will consider if platform workers could be included in the scope of the workplace fairness legislation in the future.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Successful Applications for Employment Pass","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"40 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Manpower for each year since 2010 (a) how many Employment Pass (EP) applicants have had (i) none, (ii) one, (iii) two, (iv) three and (v) more than four successful EP applications; and (b) what percentage of such groups of applicants have been successful in their most recent EP application.
Dr Tan See Leng: The table below shows the annual average proportion of Employment Pass (EP) applicants from 2010 to 2022 who had no prior past successful EP applications, one to three past successful EP applications, and four or more past successful EP applications.
The vast majority of applications submitted are successful. This is because the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) publishes the EP criteria and provides employers with the Self-Assessment Tool to gauge the likelihood of an EP application being approved before deciding whether to proceed with the application.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Profile of Projected Number of Singaporeans Eligible for Retirement Savings Bonus","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Manpower what is the projected number of Singaporeans who are eligible to receive the Retirement Savings Bonus as broken down by (i) age bands of five years and (ii) males versus females.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and the Ministry of Finance (MOF) are finalising the details on the Majulah Package, including the eligibility criteria for Earn and Save Bonus and the Retirement Savings Bonus. More information will be announced in Budget 2024.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[{"annexureID":2510,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex 1","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230919/annex-Annex 1.pdf","fileName":"Annex 1.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null}],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":5796,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Wan Rizal","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230919/vernacular-19 Sept 2023 - Dr Wan Rizal - Child Devt Co-Savings Bill.pdf","fileName":"19 Sept 2023 - Dr Wan Rizal - Child Devt Co-Savings Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5797,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Don Wee","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230919/vernacular-Don Wee CDCA 19Sep2023-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Don Wee CDCA 19Sep2023-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5798,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Leong Mun Wai","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230919/vernacular-Leong Mun Wai Motion 19Sep2023-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Leong Mun Wai Motion 19Sep2023-Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}