Alex Yam
Singapore
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I know the Minister of State indicated that while it is still undergoing investigation, we should not speculate. I know also from her reply that they have removed the wrong classification of our trade deficit with the US.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Building on the point that the Minister-in-charge of energy had raised earlier about fixed rates. There is concern amongst consumers that the gencos and the electricity suppliers may, at some point, invoke a force majeure, and that would affect the supply contracts that are signed with consumers.”
“Chairman, therefore, I look forward to hearing how MCCY intends to further embed the ethos of "we first" across multiple aspects of society so that our national identity is formed through participation, not just persuasion.”
“Thank you, Chairman, 41 questions and 330 minutes later, I certainly think the Ministry deserves the $100 back. So, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $2,407,711,100 for Head X ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.”
“Thank you, Chairman. The Minister updated the House earlier about the importance of keeping pace with technological advancements as well as hybrid threats, especially in the cyber domain.”
“If we are intentional in leveraging the reach and influence of institutions like SAFRA, we can ensure that Total Defence can remain a lived national commitment and not confined to the uniformed services or to our schools.”
The complete record
Every one of 592 lines we hold for Alex Yam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 12.
“The Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) website explicitly states the intent of this particular measure to encourage women in Singapore to remain in the workforce after childbirth. Under Early Childhood and Development Agency (ECDA) guidelines for additional childcare subsidy, the emphasis is also on working applicants, even for those seeking special approval, the first priority is those that are looking for a job. I would like to suggest that, perhaps, we should support our mothers for who they already are, offer subsidies or grants, regardless of employment or economic value, and not just the basic grants. Consider them for the role, an important role that they play in society today, especially a country where our total fertility rate (TFR) is so low. We are doing a lot already, but we should continue to do more because mothers are mothers, and not because of the economic potential, as I have mentioned. With our low TFR, I would, therefore, like us to consider the merits of adopting the following. These are existing examples that other countries have introduced. The UK has a 52-week maternity leave system, perhaps to be introduced with Swedish flexibility, to take up the leave up to the age of eight for the child. French maternity health coverage from prenatal to post delivery, German hospital coverage for up to 12 days after birth, Finland's "baby box" system upon childbirth and aspire towards Iceland's 90% take-up rate for paternity leave. Norway has generous subsidies for childcare and daycare. And also, the French have a universal preschool system. Of course, all these are not without challenges, as each example in each country would throw up different varieties of issues. But, there is more that we can do.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, as the last speaker of this debate before the round-up, I had to redraft this speech a number of times, having heard many good ideas and suggestions from Members on both sides of the House, none of which, unfortunately, I can claim as my own now. But I will raise three issues today. The first, on motherhood and parenthood. I think we can all agree that motherhood is one of the noblest vocations. We often speak of it in glowing terms: nurturing, caring and sacrificing. In reality, it is much more complex and complicated. Ask any mother and words sometimes like mess, stress, distress and tiredness will come up, but it does not take away the intangible joys and rewards of parenthood. But neither can we gloss over the pressures that the role brings. Motherhood, therefore, to my mind, is the greatest and, yet, most neglected roles in society. We expect mothering to come naturally with motherhood. Unfortunately, it does not; no manual prepares you for it. Even having more than one child is not a trial run. Jocelyn and I have four children, we know it does not prepare you for the next child when it comes along. However, there is an impression, unintended perhaps, that even as we support parenthood and motherhood in our society, that there are different categories of mothers. Some people have mentioned that there seems to be an emphasis on the economic value of mothers. Over many speeches during this debate, Members have raised concerns over the Working Mother's Child Relief, which has been adjusted. But it says much in the title: Working Mother's Child Relief, the operative word being "Working".”
“We must endeavour to build a more equal society for all, not just for one, because whatever the label applied to each of us, we must first acknowledge the wholeness and dignity of each person as an individual being. I acknowledge as well the passion and drive that the LGBTQ+ community has displayed over the years in their effort to repeal section 377A. Many members of the community and their allies are measured, responsible and aware of the complexity of the issue in our society. While we break down this barrier for what is in the private sphere, I continue to believe strongly that this must not lead to the breakdown of the institution of marriage in the public sphere. Mr Deputy Speaker, I welcome the constitutional amendment as an affirmation of the role and importance of traditional marriage and family in shaping our society. I fully acknowledge as well that the view may evolve in the distant future, but for now, we have an opportunity in this House to ensure that the institution of marriage endures and is championed and celebrated. On the basis of the passage of Article 156, I also give my support for the repeal of 377A. After the conclusion of all our debates, we must return to working together. Unity is not the absence of disagreement but a consensus to agree to work together in spite of those disagreements. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support both Bills.”
“For example, if a religious institution declines to conduct a ceremony for a transgender or same-sex couple, will they be subject to a lawsuit? There are many other implications and I hope that the Government would be able to clarify this. Mr Deputy Speaker, I now move onto the repeal of section 377A of the Penal Code. This is a decision that I struggled deeply over the last few months, personally and professionally. I made the point earlier on the role that section 377A as a bulwark. If we do pass Article 156, and pass it we must, I am of the belief that a new gate, perhaps not as robust as what many perceive 377A itself to be, but a gate nonetheless, will now be in place. As I have made clear earlier, the non-enforcement of 377A had made the law itself redundant. Parliament alone should be responsible for the passing, amendment and repeal of all laws, and she states this right clearly today rather than wait for the Courts to strike it down. As such, I am prepared to support the repeal of 377A with the passage of the constitutional amendment. I must also emphasise that I am not unsympathetic to the experiences of rejection, violence and vilification that the LGBTQ+ community faces. I know many of them and I am honoured to enjoy the friendship of many as well. I am also aware of the targeting of religious and social conservatives online by trolls and those opposed to their views on traditional marriage and family. We must therefore come down hard on discrimination in all its form in the workplace, in schools, in the public sphere. We should treat bullying and harassment seriously, be they in physical or virtual spaces, for all parties in this debate.”
“The task ahead will require a whole of society effort to emphasise the importance of marriage and the family – not just on the part of Government but for every individual and group that believes in the importance of marriage and family, and to champion it collectively. Our laws that uphold the family and marriage, especially on spousal rights, must be re-emphasised. Education, the key leveller for society, that is widely available for all in Singapore, must continue to ensure that our curricula continue to uphold the definition of marriage and family. And in the media space, print and in broadcast, must also help to shape the norms as currently established. Mr Deputy Speaker, let me now touch on the operational aspect of the amendment. The amendment as it stands in Article 156, spells out that the Government cannot be challenged in Court over the definition of marriage. What I hope the Government will help to clarify is the protection of non-government entities from legal challenges over the issue of marriage in the public sphere. Rightfully, our Government is secular and must remain so. It does not base its laws or policies on religion or faith. But Singapore is also a multi-religious and multiracial society. We built this city on our Asian values, cultures and traditions. Many citizens’ beliefs and way of life are shaped in line with their religious and cultural beliefs. Singaporeans must feel free and safe to practise their beliefs without fear of backlash, as long as their own actions do not cause harm or danger to others. So, what protections are there to ensure that businesses and other institutions, such as religious organisations, are freed from legal challenges regarding teachings and beliefs on marriage?”
“Some 66% also agree with a proposal to perhaps consider enshrining marriage as “only between a man and a woman". Those who share these sentiments are called out online and accused of blind prejudice, of being bigots. In fact, I accept, as many Members have alluded to, that in taking a stand about this, I and other Members open ourselves to disagreement by others; strong disagreement at times. I appreciate, therefore, this opportunity for a respectful debate in this House. Because in a democracy, it is important that the viewpoints of all citizens can be heard and taken into consideration. I do support the constitutional amendment, but as some would be aware, I would have preferred to push for heterosexual marriage to be enshrined or codified as a fundamental liberty in our Constitution. Yet, I acknowledge that that same high bar for a constitutional amendment in the future would apply to defining marriage in the Constitution right now. In as much as the current amendment would not be considered equivalent to enshrining marriage, it offers a clear definition of marriage as it currently stands, as a union between a man and a woman. I hold the Government to its word that under its watch that no redefinition of marriage will take place. And even if a future government does so, it will perhaps require a repeal of Article 156 that we are introducing, as it would be made redundant. I therefore seek the Government’s continued affirmation that this remains its commitment. This being the year of the celebrating family, perhaps all the more apt that we collectively pass this amendment and affirm marriage and the family and their place in our society. With the passing of the constitutional amendment, the task is not complete. There is added impetus on multiple fronts.”
“This sexual difference draws them together in a mutually loving union that should be always open to family. Therefore, erasing the connection between gender and marriage changes the fundamental nature of a marital union, which is to nurture society’s next generation. Unlike other relationships, marriage has the potential to create and nurture new lives, making it a unique institution. For these reasons, states recognise the marriage of a man and woman as a public institution in its laws. Marriage is protected and honoured because it makes an exclusive and indispensable influence over the common good of society. The real problem today is a view that marriage as simply a formality or a fad with no social obligations, that it is just a private and personal decision between two persons with nothing to do with wider society. But marriage is not just a religious or cultural institution. It is a legal institution as well. In a heterosexual marriage, by bringing children into the society, the state has an obligation towards the couple and their children. For this reason, marriage requires the state to intervene and regulate it because of the social implications. If it is just a relationship between two ordinary people, we do not regulate ordinary friendship or even platonic friendships. Mr Deputy Speaker, in preparing for this debate, I was cautioned by quite a number of people that to speak against redefinition of marriage signifies perhaps, a failure to keep up with the times. That those of us who hold on to the traditional definition of marriage are conservative and old-fashioned – out of touch with reality. Yet, earlier this year, a poll did find that a majority of Singaporeans oppose same-sex marriage.”
“As other Members have mentioned, we are guided by our culture, our faith and the environment that we grow up in. I am a Catholic by faith, guided by the teachings of my faith to discern with justice decisions that are moral. I am also a father and a husband, whose moral duty it is to ensure stability and well-being for my children and family. So, I arrive at today’s debate having wrestled with all my roles and responsibilities. I also arrive having had the opportunity over the last few months to have robust, intense and passionate discussions with fellow legislators on this topic, and many constituents and Singaporeans who have corresponded with me and feel passionately about this issue – on both sides. I am deeply appreciative of the willingness of all sides of the debate to have listened rationally and respectfully to each other to arrive at a common ground. Mr Deputy Speaker, let me first speak on the constitutional amendment. I will state what I believe marriage to be. Marriage is a bond that draws a man and woman together. It is a natural relationship framed not just by love but promises of commitment and responsibility. Marriage aligns with the way in which men and women live interdependently and bring out the best of each other. Marriage is a faithful, exclusive, lifelong union of a man and a woman, joined in an intimate community. It is the bedrock of families and conversely, society as well. A man and a woman commit themselves to each other, for better or for worst, to the wondrous responsibility of bringing children into the world and caring for them. The call to marriage is also woven deeply into how society works, into the human spirit itself. Man and woman of course, are equal, however, are created differently but made for each other.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this is a debate that I have thought long and hard about. It is an issue close to my heart and also to many conservative Singaporeans at large. Section 377A has been a key flash point of debate on societal norms, traditional values, freedom, equality any many other topics. This very House has also seen many a fiery and passionate debate over the last two decades on this issue. In our Courts, it has witnessed a share of constitutional challenges as no other law, perhaps, has seen. And it is with the most recent challenge in the Courts that has brought us here today. For many, 377A represents a bulwark against a perceived counter-cultural tide that may engulf society should the law be done away. This has held true for many years, in particular the last 15, following the political compromise of 2007. But it was an uneasy compromise as each constitutional challenge risked it being struck down by the Courts rather than legislated by Parliament. By not proactively enforcing 377A also in essence made it redundant as a law. At this point it is worth noting that for most conservatives, opposition to the repeal of 377A is premised not on the act nor the actors itself, but what the repeal may lead to – what I alluded to earlier, of that tide, or slippery slope of what they view as same-sex unions, adoptions and surrogacy by same-sex couples becoming the norm. Recent interviews with apex religious leaders in the media show that it remains a complex issue. However, they do acknowledge that the prerogative of repeal lies with Parliament, as long as the rights of the religious are protected, what they believe in and what they can preach. As a parliamentarian, my public duty is to make laws that are for all Singaporeans. But I am not just a legislator.”
“I foresee the challenges that the changes to the metaverse would pose to society and to the Ministry in policing it and helping to keep all of us safe. I do hope that the Ministry will be able to muster sufficient manpower resources to quickly ensure that the safeguards spelt out in this Bill are as good in words as they are in action. Our children, especially, need us to take the right decisions to keep them safe. We owe them and others our responsibility. And so, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this Bill and hope that my suggestions can be adopted.”
“They decry the chilling effect on free speech that Bills like these introduced elsewhere and here will have on free speech. But let us look at some surveys of what users themselves want out of their online experience. In the most recent survey published by Pew Research in August 2022 on sentiments amongst teens and adults in that bastion of free speech, the US, 62% of teen respondents aged 13 to 17, who were surveyed, said that their top priority is a welcoming, safe online environment, and that is far more important than being able to speak their minds freely online. Even with the adults who were surveyed, while the results are more evenly spread, 50% as compared to 47%, they also prefer the same safe environment online. So, it does show that a safe environment both in the real world and in the online world, are what we aspire to, and we must do what we can. Apart from regulations, which are needful, I believe that the Ministry would do well to empower all users – adults, parents and children – to do some self-policing. Online safety requires a whole-of-society effort to be educated on what is proper behaviour online personally and what is safe interactions with others. Just as parents cannot simply hand over responsibility, care and control of their children to others in the physical world, we must be aware of our own rights and responsibilities online and how we educate our children to look out for themselves. We do not as yet have to confront the tragedy of Molly Russell within our own country. As observers, we can sympathise, we can lament; but I think, as parents, it is an experience that no one of us, no child, no family, should have to go through or endure. Mr Deputy Speaker, we have a huge task at hand.”
“The current proposed Bill does not stipulate a timeline, as many other Members have pointed out, compared to other countries, for example, in Australia, that indicate a 24-hour take-down window. We should perhaps apply the same to our laws, so that the damage is limited and action can be taken so that harm to individuals can be avoided quickly in the light speed by which content travels in the metaverse today. By the same measure of speed of content viralling, the entire industry itself is evolving dramatically day by day. While the major social media platforms have been engaged for this Bill, one of the players, Twitter, has changed hands just last week. The new owner, Elon Musk, is a free speech absolutist. He wants to transform Twitter into a platform that, oxymoronically, is a safe haven for all forms of free speech, including harmful ones. As the company evolves to fit into their new owner's worldview, how will the Ministry take the process forward and how will we deal with potential difficulties of a social media giant which may well now become unwilling to accept the rules that we seek to enforce for the safety of Singaporean users? While I also accept that the Bill will similarly evolve and include more industry players, platforms, as the metaverse expands, I do call on the Government to consider including in the very near future social messaging and private messaging platforms where information can spread like wildfire, especially amongst older audiences, and also gaming platforms and chat platforms like Discord, where cyberbullying and misogyny are becoming rampant. Regulating the metaverse is more challenging than herding cats. Therefore, we must act quickly before they run amok. Mr Deputy Speaker, some commentators have also seen shadows everywhere.”
“We can now freely debate various issues in this hallowed chamber without restrictions because we, collectively, took a sensible course of action. But the lessons of COVID-19 misinformation must not be forgotten. How easily, in a crisis, public safety can be compromised through fake news, quack treatments and bogus remedies. If we had allowed misinformation to run rampant, thousands more could have died. From COVID-19 conspiracy theorists to vaccine deniers, we could all be in a vastly different situation today if we did not take a rational, science-based, evidential approach. Some of you might be aware, I for one, was badly affected by a booster shot, enough to put me in hospital with still some lasting after-effects, perhaps for the long term. Yet, despite being amongst a very small minority unfortunate enough to suffer a severe reaction, I believe my decision to be vaccinated was firmly informed by science and evidence rather than to be hoodwinked by online hocus pocus. We all saw how it could have been vastly different in other countries; even, locally, we have examples. The elderly lady, taken violently ill and hospitalised because her circle of friends convinced her through mutually shared online fakery, that deworming drug, Ivermectin, was a miracle drug against COVID-19. And these are just a small sliver of the massive deluge of misinformation online on COVID-19 that have flooded all countries and could have compromised, not just individual health, but the entire community and the safety of various countries. As such, I do wonder if the Ministry has enough manpower to ensure that such egregious content can be expeditiously removed before further harm can be done.”
“Let us just start by looking at what is deemed by some as the new epidemic of our times: pornographic content on various platforms. Up until the early 2000s, pornography in all its forms was somewhat isolated, consigned to corners of red-light districts, back alleys of night markets, confined to the margins by social norms and, to some extent, shame. Today, by some estimates, the industry is estimated to be worth more than $100 billion annually. While statistics are hard to come by, some researchers indicate that it comprises one quarter of daily search engine requests and seven in 10 children are inadvertently exposed to such materials daily. I am glad that this Bill makes it clear that such content should not be exposed to our children, and child sexual exploitation in all its various forms on all platforms will be tackled aggressively. But I also believe it still does not go far enough to curb the risk to children through other content. The safeguards proposed in this Bill require algorithms to be adjusted to prevent any content "detrimental to the physical or mental well-being of children" and to also include automatic parental tools. But these, as other members have pointed out, can be easily circumvented. I do agree that, for some, age verification dwells into the realm of privacy, but I think it is the only sure and needed way for content to become age-sensitive for the end user. Over the last two years, we have lived through the crisis of a generation. The pandemic has forced us to make uncomfortable decisions at times. But, yet, for the sake of public health, some small sacrifices have had to be made. It has all turned out to be better.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, most, if not all the hon Members who spoke before me are parents of young children or teens. I have four precocious young children of my own. Jocelyn and I, like many parents, sometimes relent and allow tablets and smartphones to be their temporary guardians, a salve for those moments that you just need a quick break from parenting. Yet, truth be told, our fussing and anxiety over them continue even while they quieten down for their much-enjoyed screen time. As parents, these thoughts do course through our minds: are they playing games that are too violent? What questionable videos are they accessing, perhaps involuntarily? Are they being exposed to the wrong company or the wrong content in their online interactions? We cannot discount that the Internet and social media have been a great force for good over the last two decades. They have revolutionised education, transformed the global economy, increased the flow of information and knowledge, and also helped us all to keep in touch with one another. But the Internet is like water – a good servant, but a bad master. As far back as in 1998, our late founding father, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, had described the Internet as a force for both good and evil; that the Internet is as much a purveyor of truth as it is of outright lies. He further pointed out that though it may take some time, morality and wisdom must find a way to control and tame new technology to preserve the fundamental values of society by which parents bring up their children to be good citizens. Sir, big tech today is worth over $10 trillion. Let that sink in. Big tech is now so big and so ubiquitous that we have forgotten to be shocked by its growth and its value. And big tech needs to be held accountable.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have one supplementary question for the Minister. With regard to one of the two exceptions, for those who are 55 years old and above, there is an exception made for them to purchase 4-room flats and lower, I would like to ask the Minister if MND believes that this may inadvertently also drive up prices in the smaller flat-size market – because, I think, the figure that was quoted earlier was three in 10 are in this category. Therefore, do MND and HDB see that there might be a rise in demand for the smaller flat types? Ultimately, I think the cooling measures are important and I think it bears reiterating that MND remains committed to providing Singaporeans with affordable and attainable homes over the longer term.”
“The cybersecurity industry faces a talent crunch, and the Government has been investing in efforts to better involve women in the field. I consider DIS as an invaluable opportunity for women who are keen to join the field to develop their talents and passion, as well as to reduce the gender gap in the industry. Therefore, will women have the option to voluntarily serve NS under the scheme? Mdm Deputy Speaker, cyber attacks and warfare that target social media and personal devices indicate that cybersecurity defence is not and cannot be the sole responsibility of the Government or SAF alone. It has to be a whole-of-nation effort encompassing the relevant organisations, such as social media platforms, cybersecurity groups and also our citizens. Every one of us has the personal responsibility to take necessary precautions against malware, and to educate ourselves against disinformation, online fraud and online security threats. These impact not just us as individuals, but also other persons and organisations that we communicate with, given the high interconnectivity of devices. Special attention must also be given to the less technology-literate among us, so that they will not be left behind in our national defence against cyber attacks. Mdm Deputy Speaker, as we mark our national birthday this coming weekend, let us reaffirm our sacred commitment to the defence of our national and our affirmation of our shared responsibility to uphold unity, democracy, justice and equality. I therefore support this Bill to establish DIS and the related constitutional amendments.”
“What is the current size of the initial core of our DIS and what is the plan and rate of ramping up? Are there also plans to expand the scheme to other tertiary institutions that will offer relevant foundational courses beyond NTU? What efforts will be taken to retain suitable talent after National Service (NS) is up for our NSFs? Can SAF offer remuneration, benefits and a career that can rival some of our most sought-after tech companies? How do we also ensure that our personnel involved would be highly security-conscious, who practise excellent cyber hygiene and do not flout secrecy laws? We have had instances of information leaks even by experienced civil servants at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. The damage to our national security would be very serious if this happens in the cybersecurity set up. So, candidates must be specially picked and trained so that they do not commit these errors. In addition, because certain NSmen or NSFs will have particular access to sensitive data, will the Ministry consider a moratorium on them becoming employees of foreign governments or organisations when they leave DIS without prior permission from MINDEF? There is also some misplaced concern that new vocations within DIS may be seen or regarded as a more comfortable vocation to serve NS obligations compared to the other services. This is a potentially damaging mindset to have as it would adversely affect the morale of our soldiers within the wider SAF. All NS vocations come with high amounts of responsibilities and stress, and should be respected and regarded seriously as such. In addition, my view is that DIS offers an opportunity for women in Singapore to contribute towards our efforts for a strong digital core.”
“Following that, several important Ukrainian nuclear power companies, media firms and government entities were also compromised. For many Singaporeans, the Ukraine crisis is a stark reminder that "we must never lose the ability to defend or look after ourselves" – to quote Minister Vivian Balakrishnan. It is imperative that we maintain our security and stability through a strong, capable and credible SAF that includes building up our digital intelligence and defence capabilities. This, of course, is not a new journey as we had introduced digital defence as a new sixth pillar of Total Defence in 2019. But an organisation is only as good as the people it has. Therefore, I will focus my speech on the people in DIS, in particular, and in SAF in general. I am heartened that recruitment and talent development efforts are underway for DIS. As I mentioned, people are at the heart of all organisations and we must spare no effort to nurture them. Certainly, it takes time to train up personnel to a certain level of competency. I note that SAF intends to leverage both on NSFs, as well as our NSmen through the expansion of the Command, Control, Communications and Computers Expert (C4X) and Defence Cyber Expert (DCX) schemes. Selected NSFs will also undergo a work-and-learn scheme with NTU, where they can take up modules to earn academic credits, eventually, leading to a degree in data science and AI, computer science or computer engineering. In turn, they would serve four years of National Service. I seek a few clarifications in this regard and related matters. Can SAF define how these NSFs and NSmen will be selected for DIS? How does differentiated National Service models impact other arms of SAF?”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, the move to establish the Digital and Intelligence Service (DIS) is timely. Warfare has moved away from conventional means as technology now pervades all aspects of our lives. As the Minister for Defence indicated in his opening, sovereignty is now being challenged, even in the digital sphere. Over the last decade, threats to society have made their presence felt in the digital sphere – scams, organised crime, misinformation campaigns, cyber disruptions of critical services and transnational hacking. The overall concept of cyber attacks is not new. These attacks seek to infiltrate and disrupt vital data services and systems, conduct sabotage, espionage or manipulation, resulting in damage to the state and even widespread casualty and loss of life if critical infrastructure is affected. The consequences of hybrid warfare are no less than those of physical conventional warfare. Sophisticated and large-scale cyber warfare used to be something that we associated with the distant future. But as technology advances rapidly, societies and governments around the world have developed greater reliance on digital infrastructure and data storage capabilities. Naturally, this leads to higher stakes in the cyber domain when it comes to national security. Today, we do not have to search our imagination to envisage the impact of extensive cyber warfare. The war waged by Russia on Ukraine rages on, involving a hybrid of physical and cyber attacks. According to a report by Reuters, the day that the Russian forces invaded Ukraine, hackers crippled tens of thousands of satellite Internet modems in Ukraine and across Europe, resulting in a massive loss in communications.”
“I thank the Minister for that explanation. I completely agree with the stance of MHA. Could the Minister share with the House how do specific communities work behind the scenes, perhaps in the prisons, to address some of these issues?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. The first is a little bit shorter one. Have the Malaysian authorities given any indication to SFA when they will review or, perhaps, end the current ban on chicken export? The second is related to our food security. In our previous food security roadmap – I think this is 2013, 2014 – stockpiling was considered one of the core strategies for food security. The last time the public was updated on our national stockpile was, I think, in March 2020, at the start of the pandemic and amidst panic buying. Minister Chan Chun Sing in his capacity then as Minister for Trade and Industry updated on the situation of our national stockpile. Could the Minister, therefore, update the House on our current stockpile situation, whether they remain robust and without jeopardising our negotiating position? Are we more resilient today, considering the two years of COVID-19 and the challenges brought about by the Ukraine conflict and global feedstock cost? So, whether our stockpile situation has stabilised?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Minister for the reassurance of the journalistic integrity of the newsroom with Government funding. I have two supplementary questions. One, in terms of access to future print copies of the newspaper. I remember fondly riding in my father's car, rolling down the manual window and shouting out in dialect "ma biew po" and exchanging a couple of coins for a copy of the evening tabloid. Many of our older generation continue to rely on access to news via the printed copies. In this restructuring and the pivot towards digital, how will the Government ensure the continued availability of printed copies in the future so that our elders in society are not left out? Two, in terms of the workforce in SMT. Over the last few years, I recall that in October 2009, there was a restructuring and 70 staff from SPH's Media Group were laid off. And I think in 2020, a further 5% of the workforce, over 100, were also laid off as part of addressing the challenges of COVID-19. As it continues to pivot and transform itself, how will the Government, through its funding mechanism, ensure that workers within the Media Group are fairly treated as it continues to pivot towards the digital sphere?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Related question under the Code of Conduct for retail electricity licensees, retailers are required to approach other retailers to attempt to novate their customers on the same contractual terms. I hear from the previous answer to the hon Sylvia Lim that you do not have the current numbers on how many would possibly be able to novate. But a follow-up question is, how would the regulator EMA, in this case, ensure that the code is adhered to by those retailers who are exiting the market, so that these negotiations do carry on and benefit the end consumer. The next is related to the ex gratia payment that Minister had mentioned and which was also in the EMA press release. Details are a bit scant on this. How would the retailers be getting in touch with their customers, in terms of possible ex gratia payment to ease the transition? Those are my two questions.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Two supplementary questions. Currently, the vaccines that are used in Singapore are under emergency approval. First, at what stage is HSA at in providing full approval to the vaccines eventually? And, under those circumstances with an expected booster regime in the works, will the Government then consider making boosters and vaccination compulsory? This is to address the concerns I raised in relation to Question No 6. On Question No 7, I asked in terms of concerns over efficacy of the vaccines against new variants, what is the Government's long-term plan in dealing with variants, as well as the concerns of citizens that vaccines might not be fully effective when new variants emerge?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. One point of clarification for the Parliamentary Secretary. In relation to the most recent incident at River Valley High School, there was online feedback from students who felt harassed on the actual day of the incident as the media gathered outside. Although the members of the media were doing their job, was there something more that MCI could have done to prevent this feeling of harassment on the part of the students and their contact with the media?”
“But more often than not, I think we are in a society where we tend to ignore somewhat the pressures of stress and how it builds up over time. Because it is so much related to our education system, would the Minister be able to share how he thinks our education landscape should evolve over the years so that this idea of a very stressful and pressurising environment would become less so and we would have a more resilient student population and a more resilient society in the years ahead?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I thank the Minister for his Statement. I think the Minister's Statement was very reassuring in terms of the number of counsellors and the number of students that have come forward. I lived through a somewhat similar incident in school almost two and a half decades ago. My best friend took his own life and, until today, for all of us who were in the class, we do not know what happened. There was no counsellor. All that happened was we received a phone call that morning; we came to school; our form teacher spoke to us; we went to the wake; we went home; and that was it. Quite a number of us were affected for a long period of time. So, I am very heartened that the Minister has shared the numbers and the experience for this particular incident. I understand that there are currently about 700 school counsellors, teacher-counsellors and we hope to deploy 1,000 in the next few years. Could the Minister share with the House how the teachers are equipped in terms of their skillsets to identify and, perhaps, to refer students to more highly trained professionals? The second clarification has to do with this impression that when you talk about education in Singapore, the word "stress" accompanies it at all levels. In the last few weeks, parents were stressed because they were applying for school admissions. That process has evolved over the years, but as you listen to parents, you find that stress still comes up very often. When I talk to my peers as well as to residents, their comments are often also about stress in school. I always recall one of my earliest bosses saying that stress is good because it tells you that you are alive.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I welcome the MTF's focus on future differentiated treatment for the vaccinated and unvaccinated. It is perhaps one of the tools in the kit to persuade and encourage, nudge and cajole those who are still considering. However, I wish to return to a suggestion I made at the very beginning of the national vaccination programme, which is to consider making vaccinations mandatory. A lot of effort has gone into encouraging Singaporeans to be vaccinated because it makes sense. I therefore considered it our civic duty to be vaccinated if there are no medical grounds to refuse. Ultimately, the fear is that the freedom of a minority to choose not to be vaccinated will affect the freedom of the majority who have chosen to be vaccinated for the sake of themselves, their families and the community. The second clarification I seek is with regard to the effectiveness of TraceTogether and SafeEntry for contact tracing. Over the last few days, with regards to the KTV cluster and also partially to the Jurong Fishery Port cluster, we heard some limitations vis-à-vis contact tracing because people who do not bring their phones with them or their dongles with them because of fear of being detected in certain places. So, whether or not the MTF can comment on whether contact tracing has been made more difficult recently. Lastly, on differentiated treatment, I quote a comment that was made by fellow Member Nadia Samdin on differentiated treatment. While I welcome it, how will we eventually distinguish between those who knowingly avoid vaccination and those who do not have a choice, for example, the young and the medically excused? This is, of course, if we do not introduce mandatory vaccination.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Senior Minister of State for her response. We often quote trade-offs and costs as part of our decision-making matrix, but for the families in the recent accident who have lost their sons in Singapore, that cost would surmount all other costs that we talked about. The Senior Minister of State spoke earlier about the Workgroup from way back. It has been over 10 years already. Would the Ministry consider, therefore, reconvening another workgroup to re-study new proposals as well as improvements in vehicle designs over the last 11 years that could potentially have new solutions to improve safety on board lorries? In terms of other safeguards, there have been substantial studies internationally on the constraint of speed and how that would impact results out of accidents. So, therefore, would the Ministry also consider safeguards such as constraining speeds of lorries for the time being, until new solutions can be found, to perhaps 40 kilometres per hour, so that it significantly improves survivability as well as safety at this speed? In terms of seat belt, I hear what the Senior Minister of State has said, that the design of the lorries and so on and so forth, but we have done that for the SAF; we have introduced seat belts on our five-tonners. Over and above that, will the Ministry also consider requiring owners and operators to tie down the equipment that they transport together with the workers because it is often these free-flying projectiles in an accident that cause a significant amount of injuries?”
“I thank the Minister for his Statement. I think we certainly welcome the new framework. I have spoken on this on a number of occasions and I welcome the updates. Just one clarification I seek from the Minister. In the last two years, one of the questions that was raised is, quite a number of cases relate to those who have a position of trust with the victim. Just to rattle off some recent cases: teacher molests seven boys, former Secondary school teacher abuses 15-year-old students, Secondary school teacher molests boy in school lab, Primary school teacher molests 12-year-old boy and so on. You also have, recently: male nurse allegedly molests male patient, Statutory Board director outrages modesty of female subordinate, doctor at Mt E accused of molest against a female patient. Many of these are in a position of trust. Would the Ministry consider further enhancing the sentencing framework and increase the penalties for those who not only cause hurt or sexually abuse the victim, but start out from a position of trust, so that we ensure that such crimes where the victim already feels a sense of comfort in the presence of the person, does not fall prey to such offences.”
“Mr Chairman, for many of us, much of our live reality now takes place online. This also means that highly-sensitive personal data is being shared readily, but also often unknowingly. In the past year, a quarter of Singapore residents suffered at least one cybersecurity lapse, with unauthorised attempts to access online accounts being most common. For enterprises, cybersecurity is also becoming a day-to-day struggle, as cybercriminals, whose techniques are becoming increasingly sophisticated, continue with their attacks on different businesses. COVID-19 has forced businesses and companies to rely heavily on digital platforms to operate remote places. These platforms are, therefore, attractive targets and are extremely vulnerable to breaches if security is not adequately maintained. Transformative 5G technology also makes us more connected than ever. The recent cyber breach at Singtel is a stark reminder that even as we adopt new technology, major corporations with a wealth of resources are also at risk. How then will the Government better protect Singaporeans and enterprises in cyberspace? Strengthening Cybersecurity”
“Can we truly become Asia's Silicon Valley? Digitalisation Impact on Life Post-COVID-19”
“Chairman, digital technologies are indisputably relevant to the modern economy. And this has been particularly so during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the demand for new spheres of innovation grows to cushion the disruptions and to leverage on new opportunities brought about by the pandemic, new applications, new digital solutions appear on a daily basis. Digital technologies are increasingly impacting all parts of the economy. Even in the traditional sectors like F&B, agriculture, and construction, technology investment is growing fast as a worldwide trend. 3.45 pm Asia has been benefiting from the new wave of digital innovation in the recent years. Compared to the rest of the world, the IMF observed that Asia is leading in e-commerce and fintech. Both developing and advanced economies in the region have seen significant digital gains. We must strive to understand how best we can make the most of these digital opportunities to benefit our economy and improve our living standards. Can the Minister share how we will strengthen our competitive advantage in the global digital economy? We have a significant foothold over our regional counterparts as tech giants flock to us to establish headquarters or regional offices in Singapore. But as we heard in the earlier MTI Committee of Supply, the technology talent crunch remains a perpetual concern. The information communications sector would need another 60,000 professionals over the next three years. The Government and businesses must therefore focus efforts on finding talented individuals to secure our technology start-up status. It will not be easy as many of the job openings require specialists of digital skills. How do we therefore ensure that we have sufficient talent to meet the demands of our growing digital economy?”
“Chairman, Mr Lee Kuan Yew in 1973 said that when "the elephants fight or flirt, the grass suffers and when they make love, it is disastrous". This was in reference to our place in the world when he made these remarks at the Commonwealth Conference. Our MFA plays crucial role in ensuring that we are not crushed as elephants roam about us. Thank you to 26 Members for filing cuts. Gratitude to Minister, Second Minister and Senior Minister of State Chee, as well as all our Foreign Service Officers for flying our flag high. Chairman, I therefore beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $427,837,900 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $12,500,000 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Thank you, Chairman, for your indulgence. One clarification for the Minister. The Minister earlier described with great depth how we are coping with great power contestation at the Government and diplomatic levels. However, could I seek the Minister's view on how we can do more at the people level to strengthen our local resilience and further the understanding of our foreign policy positions as various other countries seek to steer local sentiment through either soft power projection or influence and disinformation campaigns.”
“Yet, while peace portents well for the world, we are reminded that the region is still very much a tinder box with the new US administration's tense new relationship with Saudi Arabia, continued acrimony with Iran and unease with some of the Israeli administration's policies. Given these major developments in the Middle East, what are the implications for our foreign policy? Emerging Markets Beyond Asia”
“Mr Chairman, amid the closing of borders and lockdowns, and the gloom due to the pandemic, paradoxically, the Middle East has shown some promise of peace in the region last one year. The Abraham Accords normalised relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as well as Bahrain. In another new chapter in the region, Saudi Arabia and three other Arab countries have reinstated diplomatic relations with Qatar – three years after ties were cut with Doha. These agreements would perhaps signal a major shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics, which have long been characterised by the refusal of Gulf Arab states to engage in talks with Israel. The agreement can perhaps motivate additional Arab nations to negotiate bilaterally to normalise relationships with Israel. There are, of course, others who feel that the agreement would again ignore the most controversial regional issues such as the Palestinian question or the fraught relationship with Tehran. Singapore and the Middle East have always had high-level exchanges, economic cooperation and people-to-people linkages. There are exchanges in a number of sectors, including healthcare, governance, culture and the environment. We have the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (GSFTA) and we are the first country outside of the Middle East to conclude a free trade agreement (FTA) with the GCC. We have also a good relationship with Israel and the Singapore-Israel Industrial Research and Development Foundation has been supporting joint industrial R&D projects between companies from both countries.”
“For all our hyper-connectivity, we are witnessing a fragmentation that made it more difficult to resolve problems that affect all of us.” With the then US administration vigorously advancing its America First policy, a mixture of nationalism, unilateralism and xenophobia, and its rivalry with China, the world was left, perhaps, with a leadership vacuum. The resultant fallout was a relative decline in multilateralism and the weaponisation of global interdependence. This is fast becoming a "new normal". I recall that in the early days of the crisis, the great uncertainty that permeated as borders started closing and the then unknown virus was spreading rapidly. I also remember many a frantic resident contacting to ask for advice as they or their family members tried to leave parts of the world, such as China, to return home for safety. Our MFA consular officers were tested up to the hilt to mobilise resources to bring Singaporeans overseas home to their families during this crisis. A debt of gratitude to all those who worked so tirelessly then and now to bring them home. Can the Minister, therefore, speak on our efforts to bring Singaporeans home over the course of the pandemic as borders closed? These border closures also disrupted much of our supply chain. How did the Ministry do its part to ensure that our supply chain continuously connected us to the world? As we begin our vaccination campaign in earnest, it is worthwhile stating that Singapore is an early supporter of COVAX, the COVID-19 Vaccination Global Access initiative. How is Singapore playing its role as a responsible global partner and neighbour in this regard? Chairman, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Singapore's Relevance to the World”
“Chairman, I beg to move, “That the total sum to be allocated for Head N of the Estimates be reduced by $100”. COVID-19 has brought about tensions in foreign relations amongst various nations. Borders were hurriedly closed as governments attempted to stem the spread of the virus, and added to this was the tension arising from even the transnational supply of medical equipment. Nationalism was rearing its ugly face and multilateralism was elbowed aside. In closing the 75th session of the UN General Assembly last September, Assembly President Volkan Bozkir noted that the pandemic has been a test, demonstrating that multilateral cooperation is the key to overcoming global challenges, and he stressed the need for collective action to tackle common threats and “vaccine multilateralism” to combat the coronavirus. In this pandemic the absence of cooperation is somewhat puzzling because global public health generally requires cooperation to control its spread and to minimise the damage to the global economy. Dr Joshua Busby of the Robert S Strauss Center for International Security and Law pointed out that, in the past, if we looked at various diseases and epidemics, the US and the Soviet Union found it within their interests to cooperate – and even outdo each other – such as on the eradication of smallpox in the midst of the Cold War. The dissonance among leading nations, amidst this pandemic, prompted even Pope Francis last October to issue an encyclical, to lament the poor cooperation amongst countries and to warn that the forces of “myopic, extremist, resentful and aggressive nationalism are on the rise”. I quote from that encyclical: “Aside from the different ways that various countries responded to the crisis, their inability to work together has become quite evident.”
“Chairman, my thanks to fellow Members for the 41 cuts across a multitude of topics on our security and defence. A very big thank-you to Dr Ng Eng Hen, our two Senior Ministers of State, for their considered response and affirmation of our commitment towards safeguarding our sovereignty. With that, Mr Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $14,814,265,200 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $907,700,000 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Thank you, Chairman. Two quick clarifications, a follow up to my first cut. Could I ask if Dr Ng could share more about the state of our bilateral and multilateral security relations with our immediate neighbours and key partners? Are they on an even keel and does MINDEF see any potential downside in security cooperation in the region as the pandemic progresses? My second clarification is for Senior Minister of State Heng. He mentioned the appointment of safety advocates. Could he share what proportion of units have already appointed them and if there are any significant ideas or improvements that have arisen from their participation?”
“And in light of this, what are the training safety measures that have been introduced in response to the IGO’s findings? Digitalisation of Medical Support”
“Mr Chairman, training safety has been a key concern of mine for many years. This moment, I would also like to extend condolences to the 39-year-old Regular Serviceman who passed away unfortunately last week after undertaking personal physical training. Safety does not happen by accident. It must and always be the SAF’s top priority. This is an obligation that the MINDEF and the Singapore Armed Forces owe to every Serviceman and their loved ones. The second External Review Panel on SAF Safety would was inaugurated in 2017 would have completed its three-year tenure last year. The fresh perspectives from the diverse range of experts that were gathered on that panel would have provided the Singapore Armed Forces with insights on how to improve safety systems and processes. Could the Minister provide an update on the panel’s findings and how has the SAF followed up on its recommendations? My second cut. Training Safety Singaporean families send their children to serve in the SAF each year. The safety record of the SAF is naturally one of the key concerns of all families, and it is essential that we maintain the trust that Singaporeans have in the SAF. At the COS debate last year and in 2019 as well, the Minister for Defence Dr Ng and Senior Minister of State for Defence Mr Heng Chee How spoke about the SAF Inspector-General’s Office, or IGO in short, which plays a key role in strengthening safety in the SAF. I understand that the SAF IGO conducts audits of safety practices across the SAF. Since its formation in 2019 in the aftermath of training accidents, the SAF IGO would have completed its first two-year cycle of audits. Could the Minister provide an update on the IGO’s audit findings since 2019?”
“Chairman, your permission to take both cuts together.”
“Mr Chairman, Singapore faces threats around the clock and this does not change with COVID-19. As a small nation, we know it takes very little to tip us over. This is why we need the Singapore Armed Forces to be ready at all times. The pandemic has disrupted many aspects of SAF operational readiness, including training and exercises – both local and overseas. NS training was deferred for an extended period of time, and overseas training and exercises had been severely curtailed. I would imagine that this has affected the RSAF in particular, which requires sufficient air space to conduct its flight training. Yet, it is imperative that the SAF continue to maintain vigilance over all of our air, land, sea and cyber domains – to defend our sovereignty. Could the Minister for Defence provide an account of how the MINDEF as well as the Singapore Armed Forces has maintained operational readiness to keep Singapore safe, even amidst the pandemic? Over the long term, how does the SAF intend to manage the challenges of a prolonged pandemic? RSAF Aircraft Noise and Vibrations”
“COVID-19 has certainly caused unprecedented disruption to our economy, society and our very way of life. Over the last 12 months, Singaporeans have lived with closed borders, the circuit breaker, and the introduction of numerous limits on everything from work modalities to our social gatherings. I, for one, remember trying to balance a Zoom meeting with three other separate home-based learning sessions at the same time. In this time of crisis, Singaporeans have risen as one to face down the virus. The Government, civil servants, frontline workers and ordinary Singaporeans have all done their part to bring us to where we are today – to be able to enjoy some semblance of normalcy. Many may have heard or read about how MINDEF and SAF has contributed to the national COVID-19 fight. But few know the full scale of the problem that we faced, and the might that MINDEF and SAF brought to bear against it, especially when the crisis was at its peak. Seeing the SAF trucks roll in to our Community Club with the first delivery of surgical mask many months ago, was a moment of pride. For all these and more, I add my gratitude to our servicemen and women for your stellar contributions. Would the Minister for Defence share more details of MINDEF and SAF's contributions to Singapore's efforts against COVID-19, including on-going and future plans? Biological Threats”
“Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head J of the Estimates be reduced by $100". The past year has been marked by disruption and change on a global scale. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated some worrying geopolitical trends and seen the rise of growing nationalism across the world. In the face of a serious public health crisis and economic challenges on a scale not experienced in recent years, many countries have turned inwards and shifted their focus to domestic priorities. They have closed their borders and put in place a multitude of protectionist policies. This pandemic has paradoxically weakened the prospects for multilateral cooperation at a time where it is needed the most. Even the distribution of much needed vaccines across the world has become yet another area of great power contestation. Small states like Singapore are particularly vulnerable to external geopolitical shifts, and a volatile and complex international environment would invariably undermine our own security. As geopolitical rivalries intensify and as countries' commitment to multilateralism becomes increasingly undermined by the pandemic, Singapore is unfortunately put in a challenging position. In light of these tumultuous times, how have recent geopolitical and security developments shaped the Ministry of Defence and the Singapore Armed Forces plans and priorities, both now and in the years ahead? Chairman, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Defence Expenditure”
“In the past one year, we have navigated the pandemic with the help of digital services, whether we want to find out where to collect our masks, or to see a doctor, or if it is safe to go to a mall or to a park, we would utilise the digital platforms created by GovTech. There are also the safe entry systems and contact tracing tools and networks which were created by the Government to help all of us stay safe. Many of these digital services have gone a long way to directly benefit citizens and businesses. Let me take the opportunity to thank all the engineers and staff at GovTech for innovating on our behalf during this difficult period. As we further our Smart Nation initiative, opportunities abound as well for the private sector. The Government has had several strategic national projects that have involved close collaboration with industry players. For example, the rapid development of our cashless payment system can be attributed to the hard work of our officers as well as bank service providers and merchants. Such collaboration improves diversity of solutions and resources. It also contributes to job creation and makes a good training ground for budding tech experts to pilot new technologies. It will help our businesses to develop new capabilities and improve their product and service offerings, which will in turn stimulate economy. Can the Minister share about how we are collaborating closer with the private sector to further our Smart Nation drive? Data Protocol and Safeguards”
“Chairman, the pandemic has threatened public health and safety, forcing individuals and organisations to cease economic and social activity and to stay within the safe confines of our homes. One cannot imagine how we could possibly have coped if not for the Smart Nation infrastructure that was already in place pre-COVID-19. The Government's foresight to progressively build up our digital infrastructure and engineering capabilities have paid off handsomely. In the midst of a pandemic, we could count on technology to access essential services and goods, reducing exposure to the virus. We could also stay informed with the myriad of official online channels, established to protect us from misinformation. 5.30 pm Then, there is the TraceTogether, which allows for the establishing of an efficient contact tracing network. This network has effectively prevented widespread community outbreaks and saved our healthcare system from being overwhelmed. Minimising the impact of the pandemic has also allowed for our economy to enter the recovery stage, while the general population gets to resume life with some form of normalcy. For commercial entities, the application of smart technology pushed them to innovate and reinvent their operations or product offerings. Not only were they able to continue their operations during the pandemic, they are even scaling new heights. We will continue to face multifaceted challenges, further complicated by COVID-19. Can I ask the Minister to share about how the Smart Nation will help us emerge stronger from the pandemic? Smart Nation Private Sector Involvement My second cut. As I mentioned earlier, we coped with this pandemic due to our resolve and helped definitely by technology.”