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 [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.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 8 of 12.
“Close to 60% of those who were surveyed believed that the best family arrangement is where the man was provider and a woman was the carer. This contrasts with only 40% of respondents holding this view in the early 1990s. Therefore, addressing this perception gap is an important step towards better understanding of gender equality. We cannot talk ourselves into a vacuum. There needs to be better studies on gender perceptions in Singapore because this will allow us to make better decisions and also address the root causes of the lack of gender equality at the workplace. And perhaps also educate younger Singaporeans on the importance of gender equality. On a lighter note, the last point I wish to make is that we also need to acknowledge that stereotypes do not just affect women. They affect men as well. When we fight gender stereotypes levelled against women, we also need to be conscious that we do not end up confirming male stereotypes. We move rightfully away from the perception that women are not the weaker sex. I think it is important for us to also realise that men are often boxed into needing to appear to be tough, to always have no emotions, to be stoic and always not express their feelings. Former US First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt famously remarked, "A woman is like a tea bag − you cannot tell how strong she is until you put her in hot water." Today, we have showned that women are strong and can rise to the challenge and excel above even men. Men on the other hand should be free to express their feelings and not just feelings of hunger! Mdm Speaker, Singapore women, if accorded the opportunities, have risen to the top, as you yourself so worthily personify.”
“Even as we urge for greater meritocracy so that women have better representation in the workplace and leadership positions and in society, what is perhaps missing in the statistical equation at the moment is that we do not have a lot of concrete studies on current perception of gender equality in Singapore, especially amongst younger Singaporeans. In the maelstrom of information out there, the UN Human Development Report ranks Singapore at the top in Asia for gender equality in 2015. Yet, we are also one of the worst performing when it comes to gender equality in the boardroom. Just last month, recruitment firm Hays conducted a survey and released the result on workplace gender equality. This report also pointed out a very large perception gap − 83% of Singapore men think that there is pay equality between men and women at their workplace, but only 63% of women in the same companies shared that view. Seventy-nine percent, in the same survey, of men believed that meritocracy already exists in career opportunities regardless of gender; for women, only 65% believed so. While there is not a lot of available perception surveys for young Singaporeans, the just released findings of the Gender and Millennials Symposium on Gender Equality perhaps is telling. Prof David Cotter and Dr Joanna Peppin looked at 40 years of gender surveys and since the 1990s, 17- to 18-year-olds have overwhelmingly endorsed the idea that men and women should be equal at work and in politics − 90% and higher − that is, 17- to 18-years-olds believed that gender equality is important. Yet, the same study found that the idea of gender equality at home had conversely slipped.”
“But the converse, that stay-at-home-mothers or caregivers have it easier, is a fallacy. If we can all acknowledge that mothers in general have an important role to play in their children's development, so why should mothers be differentiated between those who are working and those who are not? We have come to the realisation that fathers, too, play an important role in parenting and we have made moves for fathers to be more involved. But again, if we do not make a distinction for them, why skew it for women? Secondly, encourage husbands to top up their wives' CPF accounts so that they have retirement adequacy even if they are just stopping work for a short period. To encourage this, I urge MOM to consider raising the interest rate returns for voluntary top-ups and increase the CPF Cash Top-up relief from spouse to spouse, or from child to parent. There have been suggestions for a mandatory system of contributions but I think we should encourage a voluntary system first. Thirdly, for those who wish to return to the workforce when their children are older or when their caregiving roles have evolved, then they should be provided sufficient support to reintegrate them into the workforce. It does not have to be only about re-entry into full employment as the transition can sometimes be very difficult. Promoting more flexi-work arrangements, part-time work, targeted at stay-at-home-mothers and returning caregivers, will make the transition easier. On a separate topic, on mindsets.”
“So, I shall not attempt to make a weak attempt at claiming to have any solutions that are better than those already put on the table. Instead, I hope to raise three related points that need to be said amidst this debate. Firstly, stay-at-home mothers and caregivers, mentioned by a number of speakers already. As we work on the top end of the ladder, strengthening the diversity of talent at the mid-level and also open doors at the entry level, we must not forget that there is one group that has decided not to be on the ladder, either temporarily or permanently. These are our stay-at-home mothers as well as family caregivers. Some make conscious decisions to take on a role that they feel very passionate about; others, perhaps through circumstance, have had to take on the roles and also put their hearts into being the best in their unique areas and responsibilities. Their roles are, therefore, no less important in society, but the challenges that they face are also no less worthy of our solutions. Many make sacrifices on income, healthcare, personal aspirations, all so that those they are closest to can either have a good start or a comfortable end. Often, it is women who are expected to take on these roles. So, firstly, I repeat my call made in previous speeches and echoed by many Members of this House for stay-at-home-mothers and caregivers to be provided the same grants and tax reliefs that working women are granted. We are a society today that is fast consumed by productivity and even our policies towards women are somewhat driven by that same desire. Thus, it is unfortunate that it appears that a working mother seemingly becomes more highly valued than a stay-at-home-mother or caregiver. It is not easy for working mothers and they should rightfully be supported.”
“We live in a world almost evenly split between men and women, but women worldwide have been fighting for equal rights, equal opportunities and equal pay for long, and yet, regrettably, their efforts have yet to bear abundant fruit in many countries. Why is this so? I would like to make reference to the recent position papers put up by the PAP Women's Wing titled "Strengthening Gender Diversity in Corporate leadership", which was submitted to the kind attention of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). Only one in 10 on our corporate boards is a woman. Even China, India and Hong Kong register a healthier growth in this index. And our female board members get less than half the remuneration of their male counterparts. This is deplorable, especially here in Singapore. In fact, recruitment specialist, Robert Walters, in a report that was published last year, stated that 75% of working women in Singapore feel that they are inadequately represented in leadership positions. Mdm Speaker, 50 years ago, when this little red dot of a nation was formed, its people were its source and strength. It is still relevant today. However, it should sadden us that half of our population are not getting their just dues. Women in Singapore are an inspired lot. They know what they want − as chief executives, as businesswomen, working women and also not forgetting some as homemakers and mothers. They aspire for the best and will not stop at anything lesser than that. In this House we have many capable and inspirational women, talented in different fields and, in the course of the debate on this worthy Motion, much will be said about and suggested on how we can achieve better gender parity on corporate boards as we journey towards achieving the aspirations of Singapore women.”
“"Any woman who understands the problems of running a home will be nearer to understanding the problems of running a country." These were words uttered in 1979 on the campaign trail by the late Margaret Thatcher, a trail that led to her election as Prime Minister of the UK and a trail that she then blazed as The Iron Lady. The actress Meryl Streep who played The Iron Lady summed up her legacy as "(having) given women and girls around the world reason to supplant fantasies of just being princesses with a different dream: the real-life option and possibility of leading their nation; this was ground-breaking and admirable." The immediate past Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr Ban Ki-Moon, said recently that, "Countries with higher levels of gender equality have higher economic growth. Companies with more women on their boards have higher returns. Peace agreements that include women are also more successful. Parliaments with more women take up a wider range of issues, including health, education, anti-discrimination and child support." In our own local political sphere, we have many more women actively participating and contributing to the growth of our nation in recent years. Today, we have 21 female Members of Parliament and, amongst them, we have a Minister, four Senior Ministers of State and one Parliamentary Secretary, not to mention two Mayors, a Chairman of an opposition party and, of course, an enlightened and capable Speaker. We can and should have more in this august Chamber, but we are getting there. Outside of this Chamber, the world is changing as well, but perhaps not as fast as we should.”
“Madam, I thank the Minister for the update. Yew Tee was covered under Phase 1. However, the project has not been completed because there are two sections and we are not the only one to have this where they require higher barriers. And we were told that this would then have to be covered under Phase 2 of the tender process, which means you now have a barrier system that is half complete under Phase 1. So, if there is a further delay for the tender for Phase 2, residents would be left wondering why is it that Phase 1 has been completed but is incomplete.”
“Madam, I thank the Minister and welcome the review. Just a single clarification. Will the Ministry be considering any public consultation for this process?”
“With 32 churches and almost 360,000 members, the Archdiocese of Singapore has been putting in place plans to ensure safety and preparedness for their congregations. The Archdiocese's emergency response operations team has also been actively sharing their experiences with other religious groups. MUIS, the Hindu Endowment Board, as well as the Singapore Buddhist Federation, also have their own teams in ensuring that their places of worship are kept secure and their congregations kept alert. So, the leadership of our various religious institutions need to make it a point to also reach out to leaders from other faith traditions. Because beyond plans and contingencies, it is the human-to-human relations that are the most important. Trust cannot be built unless you know one another. Can the Minister, therefore, share how the Ministry will work with our religious leaders to enhance community resilience and for religious organisations to be prepared for possible crises? Singapore, after all, is only 50 years young. We envision a long road ahead, and our policies reflect that approach. Getting to SG100 will not be without its challenges. But if we do it together and stand united in the face of adversity, we will survive and thrive. Shared Experiences for Youths”
“Mdm Chairman, walk down South Bridge Road and you will have a little microcosm of Singapore's history, culture and hard-won harmony. Within sight of one another are the Chulia Mosque, Sri Mariamman Temple, the Buddha Tooth Relic Temple and Fairfield Methodist Church, each unique in its faith tradition but integral parts of Singapore's short 50 years of being. But we know from our own history that what we have today was born out of painful memories and a collective wish never to return to the tensions of the past. We also only need to look around us and realise that things can change very dramatically. Terrorism in Nice, Istanbul, Berlin, Paris, Jakarta, Baghdad. Racial and religious tensions in Syria, Pakistan, Myanmar, even in the US. Singapore is an open society. People are free to come and go. Public places, including places of worship, can become targets. When I am at my own parish church on Sundays, we have large numbers of visitors mixing easily and freely with regular parishioners, a reflection of the welcome and openness, but also revealing the troubling potential of becoming a "soft target". The same is true for many other places of worship, be they mosques, temples or churches. As part of SGSecure, religious institutions and religious leaders need to ensure the safety of congregations and also play a larger role in helping others in the community so that society remains united and can recover quickly from any potential terrorist attack. Religious and community leaders have a special responsibility to speak up in times of crisis to convey messages of calm and solidarity to their respective congregations and, again, to the wider society.”
“I will keep it short. Sir, please allow me to first thank our fellow Members for filing 52 very wide-ranging cuts − the largest number of cuts for this year. My gratitude to Minister Lawrence Wong, Minister Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee and Minister of State Koh Poh Koon for their enlightening answers and commitment to a future-ready city for all. Therefore, it remains for me to beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $3,346,721,600 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $12,130,669,900 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“— last one. I know he did not touch specifically on APF. Could he share how many farms have applied for it so far and whether there are any hurdles that prevent more people coming forward?”
“Sir, four clarifications − two for the Minister, one for the Senior Minister of State and one for the Minister of State. On the Temporary Loan scheme that the Minister announced earlier today, could he provide more details on who else will qualify for the scheme and how it will be rolled out? Secondly, on the urban rejuvenation plans, I have two concerns. One, there has been a call for public participation in future development of these plans. How will this be carried out and how can the public play a greater role? On the master developer scheme that was announced, these are huge projects. How will private Singapore firms be able to participate fully in these projects while competing with large-scale international firms and, of course, with public companies as well − and by "public", I mean Government companies. For the Senior Minister of State on prefabrication, the ICPH, I understand that the current Kaki Bukit plant run by SEF SpaceHub has a production of about 100,000 metres cube annually. Does BCA have a target for the total number of ICPHs and also a production target by 2020? For the Minister of State Dr Koh Poh Koon, I know he did not touch —”
“If the unintended measure to spread out demand for HDB flats fails, young couples may end up back on the BTO list. Would we have a future-ready solution to deal with a future problem? Lastly, how do we ensure that everyone moves forward together as we journey towards a future-ready Singapore? As our population ages, we will need to provide for our seniors to age in place and to age gracefully with family and in the community. Are we planning ahead of the curve and ensuring that a youthful and vibrant city does not abandon nor alienate our older residents? The lower-income, the vulnerable should also not be made to feel unwelcome in the future-ready city. As they stare down current challenges, they must not be met by a cold wall when the future arrives. Part of this is perhaps already happening. While many of our new attractions are free and accessible and our city has redeveloped and is reshaped, one cannot but feel pressured by prices and costs of everything else in that same space and also feeling out of place. I remember one resident, an older resident, sharing with me that it is nice to visit these places, but just try getting an affordable drink or meal at Gardens by the Bay or Sentosa or even in the city itself. The Ministry of National Development (MND), HDB and the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) will have their work cut out for them, looking not just at how to shape up our future city but to also make it viable and open to all. I would urge that greater citizen participation in the process will only prove helpful. I, therefore, look forward to our future-ready city, but I also hope that it is one that is future-ready for all of us and not just for some of us. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“Divorcees who feel they are dealt a double whammy when housing becomes a problem, singles who feel they are hard done by, vulnerable families who feel that they cannot progress in a housing market that is geared against them, younger Singaporeans who want to live close to their parents but are priced out of the resale market. The Government is doing much to address these issues, but we also need to plan and foresee future problems and have future-ready solutions, for example, the Central Provident Board (CPF) Housing Grant for resale flats which was announced recently in the Budget Statement. This will have a positive impact on young Singaporeans wishing to settle down in a flat of their own close to their loved ones. The grants, though reasonable, show the Government's commitment towards ensuring affordable public housing for all and a subtle nudge towards nurturing closer family ties, where young Singaporeans can opt to stay near their parents or in-laws. But I do have a concern that has been echoed, both in the media and amongst people in the industry, that the HDB resale market is still a free market: willing buyer, willing seller, as we have seen in the price for the Pinnacle@Duxton. So, how do we then ensure that the increased housing grant will not become a net negative if prices are, therefore, artificially jacked up, leading to an artificial inflation of not only HDB resale property prices, but the real estate market on the whole? The end losers would be buyers unable to fulfil their genuine needs and the Government which may be blamed as helpless and being unable to rein in unfair marketing practices. The Ministry has managed to clear the backlog of applicants for Build-To-Order (BTO) flats.”
“Minister Lawrence Wong himself emphasised at last year's Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum that maintaining equity will be the biggest challenge as we develop Singapore further, and how we avoid the "lottery syndrome" for those who manage to successfully ballot for flats in prime areas should be something that the Ministry would look into. One way to look at the issue of equity is perhaps for the Ministry to relook at the leasehold periods. This is not new as we have already introduced varied leases for flats, such as those under the Fresh Start Housing Scheme. But overall, my focus has been to look at how we can build communities in our future-ready city, not just infrastructure. To be able to look at achieving a new integrated city that focuses on community, rather than just the economy. Our future-ready city should not be cold, hard monuments to the pursuit of economic growth but also serve as focal points for the aspirations of citizens. If we can successfully integrate a balanced neighbourhood that has a good social mix, avoids gentrification, and one that looks after the interests of many, will be one city, one nation that we can be proud of. We should be sensitive to three things: honouring the past; acknowledging current challenges; and moving everyone forward. In honouring the past, we need to protect our heritage and preserve our history. Progress is often relentless and unkind, but not having a past, not recognising where we have come from means the future can only be bleak and soul-less. Therefore, I urge the Ministry to do more to promote our built heritage and also preserve the intangible memories that come with them. In acknowledging our current challenges, we need to be cogent to what hurdles some may face within our midst.”
“Even today, despite political changes in Austria and a more centre-right leaning public policy, at least half of all new subsidised apartments in Vienna would be built in the inner-city areas. A strong Social Architecture and Citizen Participation system dominates Vienna and entrenches the belief that urban developments and housing cannot be left completely to the free market. It is important at this point to note certain important caveats. First of all, Singapore does not have the luxury of land as the Viennese have. Secondly, Vienna is predominantly characterised by low blocks and smaller communities, something that Singapore can ill afford. Thirdly, unlike Singapore's core home ownership policy, 80% of Viennese currently live in rental apartments, due partially to the 1917 Tenancy Act which sets a cap on the maximum rent collectable. In Singapore, we have a successful housing policy and our HDB housing is often cited along Vienna as two examples of how a city or a city-state can provide comfortable and affordable housing for its citizens. Vienna sees value in Singapore's lessons in intensification. We can also learn from Vienna in seamlessly integrating social housing into the fabric of their city and also promoting civic participation in the development process. In terms of future housing in Singapore, many people aspire to projects, such as the Pinnacle@Duxton, but there is certainly a worry though. In November 2015, a 5-room unit in the Pinnacle was transacted at a whopping $1.08 million. That works out to be $945 psf. Though the price was also inflated due to the scarcity of supply, housing in Singapore has largely been influenced by location.”
“Between 1947 and 1958, Vienna completed rehousing of residents with much of the social housing integrated into a reconstructed city. This was followed by an urban housing rehabilitation programme between the 1970s and 1980s. As the city expanded, housing areas saw revitalisation. Rather than standing apart, they became an unmistakable part of the cityscape. Vienna had the opportunity to develop this successful social housing model because the city itself was in need of major reconstruction after the war. While Singapore is not emerging from a post-war crisis, we similarly have an opportunity to do so, as we journey towards a future-ready city. The Viennese were bold in their approach in the revitalisation efforts from the 1980s. A mix of social housing, council estate, apartments, condominiums and commercial properties were offered side by side in revitalised estates to achieve a better social mix, regardless of class, income and background. At the end of the Cold War, there were further challenges to development with an influx with the fall of the Iron Curtain and, therefore, they were able to explore radical ideas for metropolitan housing. These include the concept of developers' competitions, which were open to all firms, public and private, leading to unique estates, such as the car-free Autofreie Mustersiedlung − I would first apologise to anyone who speaks Austrian by my mangling of the names − the family-centric Frauen-Werk-Stadt, which was designed by women architects, built by women engineers; and a very ecological term Thermensiedlung, which is heated by natural hot springs. I believe Dr Lim Wee Kiak has a question on the Sembawang hot spring, so perhaps this is something to consider.”
“Thank you, Madam, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100." Our housing policy is a key cornerstone of Singapore's social fabric. Our Housing and Development (HDB) public flats have influenced our way of life and Singapore society since Independence. As we continue to develop and evolve as a future-ready city, our housing policy will similarly evolve. One pertinent question is how housing in our future-ready city will potentially integrate and how accessible they will be to ordinary Singaporeans. Our current Central Business District (CBD) has several pockets of public housing. As of 2014, this comprises an estimated 34,400 residents in 12,609 HDB flats − very small compared to the rest of the island. The reasons for this very small concentration are obvious. The prices were high and available developmental space was limited. Trying to plant in pockets of public amenities and housing resulted in the creation of very small enclaves. So, what about our new CBDs in Jurong and the greater Southern Waterfront? I sense an opportunity to have better urban integration. Both will be almost "green field" sites, allowing for housing, commercial and public spaces to integrate from the very beginning, without having to plan around existing buildings or constraints. One such example of integration would be Vienna's post-war experience. Much of the historic city lay in ruins after World War II and Austrians had the unenviable task of rebuilding their capital. At the 1945 Vienna Reconstruction Conference, a 14-point plan was introduced which, at its heart, stood this very particular vision that: "The human-being should in future stand at the centre of all considerations and plans, and not in the income and profit of the few".”
“I had then asked if the Ministry would investigate if benefits due to younger Singaporeans on temporary employment, freelance work or what we call perma-temps, as well as now in the gig economy, are being curtailed as they are not fully covered under employment-related laws. The Minister had replied then that feedback from the industry and unions would be sought. I welcome, therefore, the most recent survey and the details that the Ministry will be able to provide. This year's MOM focus is also about greater retirement adequacy and progressive work practices. So, the gig workers, freelancers and contract workers should not be allowed to fall through the cracks, as the gig economy continues to develop. A disruptive economy is to be welcomed, but one that disrupts the very core of social policies in our country and Singaporeans must be one that we approach cautiously and carefully. Portable Insurance Plans”
“Madam, being your own boss – there is a certain attraction in the gig economy. You control the time you spend, when you want to work, what you want to work on. But this attractiveness may only be skin-deep. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman himself was so concerned about the gig economy that he has said that the issue warrants a closer look. And he said at the McKinsey Innovation Forum recently that, "We have got to avoid a continuing drift-risk being passed from companies to workers, who actually cannot take much risk − the risk of instability in wages and the risk of not being prepared for retirement because of a lack of social security contributions." Even as our economy evolves, young Singaporeans should think carefully and not be lulled into thinking that freelancing in the gig economy will help secure their future. In the gig economy, people may end up like rolling stones. They do not gather any moss − the opportunity to learn new skills will be absent as they are engaged in their prevailing skillset. Job security is also sometimes non-existent and benefits non-existent as well. Being your own boss, only by name, still means having to take full responsibility. One key element of the employer and employee relationship in Singapore is CPF. Housing, healthcare, education, retirement, all key pillars of our social policy link back to the CPF and to employment. While it may seem advantageous to be your own boss, employers also see great benefits, too, and we may see a race to the bottom and a shattering of our key social policy ideals. Madam, on a related note, I would like to revisit a question that I posed to the then-Minister for Manpower in 2012.”
“Short of going to the extreme, as the town of Overtornea, Sweden, is considering − paid time off once a week for municipal workers to pro-create − we cannot possibly be pumping endless cash and other incentives. What we lack today is no longer the how, but the why. We have assumed for a long time that cost is one of the prime reasons why birth rates are low, but we have addressed these concerns with a very generous package. I have argued in previous Budgets why we cannot reach a stage where we literally get paid to start families. That runs counter to the idea of family in the first place. We can support but we cannot over incentivise. What Singapore needs today is for us to realise that family is a key cornerstone for stability in our lives. A mindset change that we accept that parents have a special responsibility and should be supported by the wider community. Employers to know that a flustered mother turning up half hour late for work after struggling through the rain to send her kids to childcare is not taking advantage. What can the Ministry do in working with families, community groups and religious organisations even, to play a larger part? It takes a village. And when we call for more, can the village also play a bigger role?”
“Let me first congratulate the hon Member, Mr Louis Ng and his wife, Amy, on the birth of their twins. May the two lovely girls grow in health and be full of the same fighting spirit that their father has. There is one instinct that is more powerful than even that of survival, and it is the instinct that comes with parenthood. From my own limited experience with my wife, parenthood sometimes brings out the superhuman in you. Suddenly, you find yourself faster running after the kids, stronger carrying both squirming boys at once, braver standing up to the pesky cockroach in the kitchen and perhaps somewhat wiser as well. But it will be untruthful of me to just paint parenthood and family life as just being a bed of roses. There are, definitely, downtimes when you feel insufficient, deficient even, unworthy. Having kids sometimes frustrates your plans, changes your lifestyle, cramps your style, messes up your hair, ruffles your feathers. But for the vast majority of parents, watching your little ones sleep peacefully, grow up healthily and in wisdom, there can be no greater reward for those sacrifices. Yet, in spite of the many joys of parenthood, the Prime Minister said at the recent Camp Sequoia dialogue that babies are one of the many issues that keeps him awake at night. Not that he is kept awake by bawling babies in the next room but by the general lack of babies in Singapore. In reality, it should be an issue that all Singaporeans should be worrying about as well. But this is not for the lack of incentives, as we have heard from many speakers before – more infant care centres, compulsory paternity leave, flexi-work arrangements, baby bonus and housing incentives.”
“In my constituency of Yew Tee, we are blessed to have the Sungei Buloh Wetlands Reserve and the Kranji Marshes at our doorstep. I understand that the Prime Minister came to jalan jalan at the Marshes last Sunday as well. These 50-plus hectares of protected marshes full of flora and an abundance of fauna is worth protecting. But I have a question for the Senior Minister of State because there is cause for concern amongst nature lovers as major developments across the straits, in fact at the mouth of the straits, have long-term detrimental impact on the reserve. How then does NParks intend to address these concerns and mitigate any negative impact on this fragile nature spot? My last point is in relation to clause 24 under the powers given to NParks. The new functions empower NParks to manage on behalf of the Government any state land used by the landscape industry. Feedback from the landscape industry has been that they feel very hard-pressed to develop further because of the short tenancies that they face. And previous arrangements have been such that they are very fearful as they come close to the renewal of their leases, whether they can continue or they will have to close their businesses. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State if he can allay the fears of the landscaping industry. It is very land intensive and very capital intensive. What are the areas that NParks will be taking on to further develop the landscape industry in Singapore, so that we can continue to have a city in a garden? Mdm Speaker, in conclusion, we should do whatever we can to preserve our natural biodiversity and our nature reserves for future generations. I support the Bill. 3.52 pm”
“But being a city that is very prone to rain and a very large network of drains and canals, perhaps what is more important is further education and public communications. I welcome the added protection for trees, especially in private estates and in private property, but I wish to clarify a point in clauses 14 and 18. Yesterday, we debated and passed the Planning (Amendment) Bill. The hon Member for Nee Soon Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, in her clarification, had asked if URA, the lead agency for the Planning Bill, could be empowered to ensure that issues, such as plastering works, could be done. However, the explanation provided yesterday was that homeowners will need to have their premises and privacy respected. Under clauses 14 and 18 of the Parks and Trees Act, NParks officers or their contractors are now empowered to enter to ascertain tree or plant conditions. I accept the explanation by the Senior Minister of State earlier that this would be the last resort. However, I wish to ask if there is a slight disjoint in the implementation between these two different Bills. One where NParks public officers are allowed to enter and to make corrections whereas another agency, under the same Ministry, is not allowed to do so. Because at the end of the day, while a tree may fall and cause danger to the public, a non-plastered wall after some time of exposure can also potentially cause danger to the public as well. On the designation of the new marine park, I give my utmost support. This is a move in the right direction. Singapore, over the years, is not known for being very diverse in our marine life, but it is, and this designation of the marine park is a step in the right direction.”
“Mdm Speaker, in Singapore, we are glad that we do not at this moment have such a problem but we cannot discount the fact that there would be no such problems in the future. Singapore has thrived and prided itself in avoiding black swan situations. This legislation that we have and are debating on at this moment would go further in correcting the threats to our biodiversity by imported fauna. Improper control can lead to the spread of bacterial diseases as well, which could wipe out our marine life in our nature parks and adjoining waterways. The potential for negative environmental impact is there and it is only proper that laws are tightened to ensure that our existing flora and fauna are protected. In fact, even from a religious standpoint, major religious organisations have come together with NParks in the annual Operation No Release to encourage Singaporeans and clarify that the releasing of live animals is not to be encouraged if it causes greater suffering. To quote Mr Henry Baey, then-President of the Buddhist Fellowship, who said in 2010, "Compassion and wisdom are like two wings on the same bird. One without the other is only futile, it can even be dangerous. Releasing animals may seem like a beautiful, kind, meritorious thing to do. However, if it upsets the ecosystem and causes harm, not only to the animals released, but to all living creatures in the area, can that then be called a genuine act of compassion?" Operation No Release has been in effect for a number of years and I understand that the number of cases in our nature reserves and our waterways has gone down. But the problem seems to have moved proverbially upstream to other waterways and canals that people may not be aware will lead into our nature reserves. So, the new amendment will be useful.”
“Mdm Speaker, if you are a visitor arriving in Singapore, the first sight that greets you as you leave Changi Airport is the calmness along the roads leading to our city − rain trees with their magnificent branches, palm trees spreading their arms in welcome and the colourful bougainvillea shrubs that calm your nerves after a long flight. It is a similar sight that greets Singaporeans returning home. It is a reassuring sight for many. Since 1975, when the Parks and Trees Act replaced the then Botanical Gardens Act, the NParks has worked hard to ensure that this continues to grow from the vision of our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew of having a "Garden City" or a "City within a Garden". In this new amendment, there is one area of focus under clause 5 which deals with the release or abandonment of animals into any river, stream, canal or watercourse, not just within, but now also outside of nature reserves. Much of this is in the past is in fulfilment of benign religious beliefs or personal obligations, but at the malicious end, also because of cruelty. For the existing fauna in our waterways, the introduction of new, perhaps invasive life could prove to be a major disruption. There is a real problem of having invasive aquatic species released into our nature reserves or other water sources leading to it. In the United States, the problem of predatory and large snakeheads is well documented. In Asia, perhaps our solution is to make them into soup but in the US, it is a major problem. The population of this invasive fish has grown at such a prolific rate that there have been reports of snakeheads, which can survive outside of water for a period of time, walking and crossing between waterways and even, anecdotally, having been reported of attacking humans!”
“In terms of now legislating the minimum six months for short-term accommodation leases, this brings it in line with HDB sub-leasing requirements. But I understand that the URA guidelines have been in place since 2009 as guidelines. Why has it taken eight years for it to be legislated? Why now? Is it because of an increase in number of violations or number of complaints that we are, therefore, required to now legislate this? This legislation will also make a rather popular travel arrangement seemingly legal. I am sure many of us who travel are familiar with the AirBnB concept or even couch-surfing. I know that the Ministry is currently studying and drafting legislation, or propose legislation on regulations on new markets, such as AirBnB. But by codifying the amendments to the Planning (Amendment) Bill now, does it run counter to what is being planned for any new legislation in the future? How will the URA, therefore, police current AirBnB listings now that they will all be considered legal subletting? In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, from our national infrastructure and cityscape to where we live and who our neighbours are, the Planning (Amendment) Bill makes major changes to our built environment and how it would look like, now and into the future. Notwithstanding the questions I have raised, I give my support to the Bill.”
“Will this be sufficiently addressed by the amendments, and will abutting buildings also be compelled to make good on bridging the gaps? In terms of a peaceful living environment, one of the areas that perhaps gained most interest on infringements and enhanced powers of investigations provided to URA, has to do with how we keep the peace in our living environment, especially when there are units that have a higher proportion of subtenants. Many are understandably concerned about their neighbouring units being overcrowded, and their safe and peaceful living environment is made less so by strangers coming in and out or changing ever so often. I have a number of clarifications to seek from the Minister. Firstly, the amendment introduces a new Fourth Schedule that lowers the maximum number from eight to six. A custodial sentence is also introduced for infringements. This is well and good, but I am unable at the moment to reconcile the numbers with the guidelines that are set out separately by HDB. In 4-room and larger HDB flats, the number of subtenants allowed is nine. So, if a 4-room flat can have nine subtenants, the new limitations on private property, some of which would be bigger, seem to be out of sync. I am not advocating for the fact that we should increase the number of allowed subtenants to nine, but the question remains whether HDB guidelines should also correspondingly be revised to reflect this new reality in the Planning (Amendment) Bill. Why is this so? In terms of the new limitations, I am happy to learn from the Minister that those that already have more than six subtenants will be allowed to have their leases lapse.”
“But just as we go about urging Singaporeans to conserve energy and utilities, lighting up the night sky may end up burning a fire in the wallet. So, greater clarity in this area on expenditure and control of expenditure, and use of utilities would be useful. With regard to the provision of public areas and pedestrian connections, I spent a working visit to Hong Kong late last year traversing the city centre and the civic district without once emerging into the direct sunlight or the light year-end drizzle. From skylinks to underground passages, you could cover a large portion of the financial and civic district with ease. Aiming towards this would certainly benefit Singaporeans and visitors alike, considering our very equatorial climate and fondness for the rain. I would like to seek the Minister's clarification on how disagreements between different building owners can be resolved, especially between newer buildings and older ones. If a building, especially older strata title ones, holds out from renovation or rebuilding, can the Ministry compel the building owners to make earlier provisions for connectivity, especially when the buildings serve as the middle of the sandwich between two newer developments that have already made provisions? In Hong Kong, I am given to understand that a large portion of the connected buildings are owned or managed by the same developer and, of course, it makes sense for them to have the connectivity planned early. In previous cases in Singapore, we have also seen new buildings which were required under the guidelines to provide linkages, but abutting buildings refusing to link up, resulting in gaps for pedestrians.”
“Take the case in point of the Ellison Building at the corner of Bukit Timah and Selegie. It is perhaps a bit ironic that we have in one Ministry gazetted it as a heritage asset but, in another, has had to take the hard decision to demolish it for the public good. In my recent work trips to the United Kingdom and Taiwan, private enterprise and some government initiatives have returned life to old derelict structures, imbuing them not just with a new vitality, but also one that continues with tradition and one that is exciting to a new audience, welcomed not just by locals but tourists alike. What more can we do so that our children and future generations of Singaporeans do not become poorer for the heritage that we lose? The Planning (Amendment) Bill sends a stronger signal with a custodial sentence being introduced, and the fine imposed being raised, but losing our heritage cannot be adequately compensated by a jail-term or half a million dollars. We need more than that, perhaps a stripping away of the licence of the developer or contractor involved in the destruction but, more importantly, also to educate Singaporeans on the importance of our built heritage. Let me now move on to a more enlightening topic in the Bill − that of lighting up our city. Who does not delight in a beautiful cityscape skyline? Most major cities have one that they are proud of. We have one that we should be proud of, too − a marriage of old and new − a story of our nation's development in one picture-perfect photo. But I hasten to ask, who is going to pay for it all? Under the new URA guidelines and requirements, new buildings will be required to conform to certain design aesthetics. Who would not agree that it would be nice to light up the skies every night?”
“Therefore, the Planning Bill has played an important role in ensuring that the built environment that we choose to live in, and not just one that we have no choice but to try to live in, is one that is dynamic and yet true to our history and our culture. Like that teapot, old may not always mean worthless and new may not always be valuable. Even as the Bill aims to create a delightful cityscape and a more walkable city, I hope that we take a moment to also ponder at what we have lost or might lose in the search of progress, in search of orderliness. Many of our heritage districts are wonderful to behold, picturesque, but to put it bluntly, they may be all but in name. They are often sterile, clean, clinical representations of their past; sometimes commercialised to the point of soullessness. Perhaps the grime is a mark of character of a building, of a district, that in our urge to be utilitarian and for progress, we lose some of what makes us, us. As the Bill hopes to give powers to both afford greater protection against unauthorised demolition or alterations to conserved buildings, and at the same time, create a delightful cityscape, we might have to ask ourselves how we can best achieve most in creating the cityscape that incorporates and, in fact, celebrates our built heritage. Whether by private hands or in the public interest, historic buildings are sometimes disappearing, not just physically but also slowly being drained of their souls. So, I seek the Minister's response on how best we should, not just as a government, but as custodians of our nation's collective storehouse of memories and history, preserve not just the shell of buildings but also the inner spirit and souls of our heritage buildings.”
“Mdm Speaker, there is an old cautionary tale of an old man who wanted to buy an antique teapot. It was said that one day, this old man walked past a rundown knick-knack store and spotted an old ceramic teapot on display, his eyes gleamed and a grin spread across his face. He walked in briskly and said to the young man sitting rather boredly behind the counter and said: "Young man, I will give you $1,000 for that teapot in the window." The young salesman replied: "That old dusty teapot? Why would you want it?" Without explaining, the old man told him, "Wrap it up, I will be back in an hour with the cash," before leaving the shop. [Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair] The young salesman thought to himself that it was incredible that someone would pay such an amount, but thinking perhaps the old man saw something of value, he quickly brushed the teapot and washed it out, wiping it so well that a shine returned. When the old man returned, the young man said, "Sir, I have polished it up and it is almost like new. I think it is now worth $2,000!" In horror and almost immediately crestfallen, the old man said, "My friend, sadly, it is now worthless, for its worth was in the well-seasoned pot blackened by decades of tea-brewing. Now that it is new and polished, it is worthless to me." Mr Deputy Speaker, our built environment is one that is more than functional. It plays a huge role in affecting a community, a nation, both psychologically as well as culturally. It marks where we have come from and where we are headed.”
“We need to have the courage to change the social infrastructure to meet changing social structures and economic circumstances. Mdm Speaker, we already have the Family Justice Courts and the family justice paradigm placing the well-being of children at the centre of their work. MSF has made reforms that move in the same direction, as the previous and current amendments to CDAC show. These are laudable moves and I support the Bill. But the work is only beginning and the reforms need to be holistic. I hope the Government would move next to tackle the whole housing issue. 3.01 pm”
“Placing unwed single parents in the singles category, who can only buy a flat when they reach the age of 35, is a double whammy for the children. The Government is depriving the children housing security when they need it most at the very young age at the most crucial phase of their development. Not only that, by treating their parents as singles, the Government is also refusing to recognise the children and sending a terrible signal of shame to the children, who are innocent and should not suffer the sins of their parents. Maybe, to balance against the need to promote parenthood within the ambit of marital unions, the Government could choose to make an exception for a parent, regardless of marital status, to apply for a 2-room BTO flat at any age. I believe this will be an acceptable compromise, balanced in favour of the well-being of children. For divorcees with young children, the problem is with hefty mortgage loans linked to the HDB flats that they co-own with their ex-spouses. Most will be compelled to sell their flat. Many will have to purchase smaller flats and their children will face the psychological stress of dislocation Page: 56 and relocation. Low-income divorcees will find themselves and their children in a terrible situation, as they will not be able to afford to purchase a flat and will not be eligible for a public rental flat until five years later. Economic disruption may become the norm, but we should keep disruption to family life minimal. The problem may well be that the HDB flat has long been treated as the matrimonial home rather than a more inclusive definition of the familial home. I urge the Government to consider expanding its definition to fit in with the times.”
“In the longer term, I ask that the Government enact comprehensive laws to better protect term contract workers, as this group is fast becoming a substantial group in the new economy. Second, without housing security, parental leave can be meaningless. I would like to echo the hon Member Mr Seah Kian Peng on the importance of housing security. This is the biggest issue for divorcees and unwed single parents. Other than income security and retirement adequacy, housing security is a key foundation stone for our social security system. I cannot stress enough that having a secure roof over one's head is crucial for the proper development of children. It is not just a physical need. This is an emotional need. Children who grow up in a home that is more or less permanent will experience familiarity and love, while those who need to constantly move around will experience psychological stress due to the uncertainty of residence. Some studies have shown that for adults, moving homes can be more stressful than divorce and relationship breakdowns and changing jobs. What more for children who need the certainty in their environment to grow up nurtured and feeling secure? The Ministry must be aware of the housing problems faced by divorcees with custody of young children and unwed single parents with young children. Most often, these parents are women, who are thus faced with the dual roles of breadwinner and caretaker. Unwed single parents are not allowed to purchase a subsidised BTO flat because their family unit is not considered an eligible family nucleus. But what can be more nuclear than the parent-child relationship? For the sake of the children, I urge the Government to expand its definition of "family nucleus" to include unwed single parents.”
“I believe that putting the well-being of the child at the centre of social policy affecting the family is the key to the balancing act. I, therefore, support this Bill to equalise the various parental leave schemes for unwed and adoptive parents. Our children will stand most to gain from these equalising moves. I would like to raise two issues. First, protect the family life of contract workers. The economy is fast-changing to what has been termed as the gig economy and, according to MOM's Labour Force Report last year, 11% of our workers are employed on term contracts. This percentage will grow, as it is a worldwide trend for developed economies that are restructuring. It has been predicted that 40% of workers in the US will be independent contractors by 2020. The profile of short-term contract workers is also changing. They are getting younger, possessing professional credentials and making the conscious choice to be term contract workers. Page: 55 In the coming years, more of the children benefiting from the enhanced parental leave schemes will see their parents working on term contracts. These parents, and their children, will need better protection of their entitlements for this legislation to be meaningful. Employers have been known to avoid leave obligations by signing workers on contracts that are shorter than three months and renewing them with breaks in between. I am aware that the tripartite partners have set up new guidelines in June this year where employers are encouraged to treat contracts renewed within a month as continuous and grant leave cumulatively. In the short term, I urge MSF to work with MOM to track whether employers are following the guidelines and to intervene when they are not, so that "encourage" will become "strongly encourage".”
“The Government can change perceptions. We talked about childcare facilities. One question would be: how many Ministries or agencies currently actually provide childcare facilities within the workplaces? There are provisions under the law. But how many? While we encourage private sector and other employers to do so, perhaps, as the Government, perhaps as a public organisation, we should take the lead in that area. Children are the focus of these amendments. And I hope that with these amendments, we will move towards a more compassionate, merciful society when it comes to viewing unwed mothers. They have it tough enough and, very often, they come from backgrounds that may not give them the advantages to raise their children single-handedly. They have multiple issues and, if we do not extend a further hand to them, their children may undergo similar circumstances in the future. Mdm Speaker, I think what we are doing today is a big baby step in the right direction. But as with children growing up, there is a lot more angst to encounter and a lot of changes to adapt to. Mdm Speaker, I support the amendments. 2.55 pm Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Speaker, this Bill recognises that equality matters for the promotion of family life. While it is important to continue to promote parenthood within the ambit of marital unions, there is a need to balance it with the recognition that not everyone is so fortunate to be able to sustain a happy marriage, or even obtain it. Economic pressures, relationship problems or errors of judgement may be to blame for marital breakdowns or unwed pregnancies. But the most important thing is that children should not be punished for the prejudices and mistakes of adults.”
“And so, it takes a lot more than laws, as Mr Seah Kian Peng has mentioned. This is a long journey for us to get to this point to have these amendments put in place. When I was younger, I perhaps shared the same views. I thought, "Why get married? You have the freedom. You make decisions on your own. You are unencumbered, you are free" – figuratively speaking. But then, perhaps, as fate would have it, love came along. We got married, settled down and have two wonderful young children. But time has also passed very quickly. My eldest son will be three years old very soon, and three years seem to have gone by so quickly. I think for all of us in this House, as well as many Singaporeans, we work long hours, and so, there are sometimes a lot of lost opportunities. And so, I would like to make a case once again for single parents. They bear the burden of raising their children on their own. What we have put in place in terms of leave, in terms of Government-paid paternity benefits are useful, but there are still many hindrances in their way. They are solely responsible for the welfare of their children. We have not made moves in terms of Page: 54 the Baby Bonus, the cash quantum, and in terms of housing. While they have children, while they are parents, they do not qualify for parenthood tax benefits. While we do not want to encourage any move towards single parenthood, I do not think many of them made the decision on the fly, saying that, "Hmm, how about being a single parent?" I hope the Government, although many of these are outside of the purview of MSF, will consider them for the sake of the children. We have also talked a lot about how we can better improve care for children as they grow up. The Government must take the lead in this.”
“Mdm Speaker, twice this year, we have amended this particular Act – perhaps two baby steps in the right direction towards a pro-children and pro-family society. Having children is not an easy decision to make. Children complete us as families. As a father of two young sons, we wake up every morning feeling tired, dishevelled, covered with spittle and spilt milk. But amidst all of these is joy. Amidst all of these is a sense of fulfilment. And so, while it is not easy for complete families to raise children, it is perhaps even tougher for families that may not have the joy of being complete, through various circumstances, sometimes not of their own doing. Unwed mothers, single fathers make courageous decisions to carry on with the pregnancy with all its attendant risks, pains and for single fathers to also take up the mantle to care for their children. These amendments that are proposed today help them in this journey. There were people who have pointed out: will these moves encourage a journey away from the traditional model? But as I have mentioned earlier, it is already not an easy decision for them to make to carry on and have these children. They could easily have said, "End this. Have an abortion. Carry on with life". But they have made the difficult decision to carry on to bring the child to term and give the child a fighting chance. I made a point earlier this year during the Budget debate that while all these benefits are useful, they are not the end-all and not the solution. There are still dramatic changes to the family model, not just in Singapore, but the world over. The way we live our lives, the way we work, our commitments, our own life expectations, our wants and our needs shape the way we view the family.”
“A couple of years back, it was also reported in the local papers, and also then aired in the international media, about an individual with a name closely resembling that of a comic superhero. Some joked that even his poor father's name seems to also represent. But in his cultural background, it appears that it is relatively common in Java. So, with regard to names that may appear offensive or may have long-term impact on a child, what are ICA's guidelines on these? Madam, the amendments that are provided for under the National Registration Amendment Bill are important and timely. Notwithstanding some of the clarifications that I have sought, I Page: 42 wholeheartedly support the Bill. 2.06 pm”
“The changes that are contained within the National Registration Bill are important. But there are, of course, some misguided Singaporeans who may view it as Orwellian measures designed to control Singaporeans. This is one perception that I think needs to be handled carefully and communicated effectively so that it would not have an impact on the Government's standing. Education is essential and I hope the authorities will undertake the necessary measures to allay misconceptions and allegations of invasion of privacy. With regard to powers that are assigned to registration officers to investigate, could I clarify with the Senior Minister of State if there has been a recent increase in the number of offences that warrants a shift of investigative powers from the Police to ICA? Would there also be a transition period for this to take place? With regard to names, registration officers currently at hospitals also undertake the registration of children's births. Therefore, would ICA be training these registration officers with regard to the types of names that are allowed or not allowed, or will all names be permissible at registration but denied further downstream by the Registrar or Commissioner? Also, in terms of cultural sensitivities, under the Schedule, it is indicated that names that relate to titles or positions will be disallowed. But in certain cultures, titles are also born of alien names. Will cultural sensitivities, therefore, also be managed? Under clause 3, as I have mentioned, the registration officers may change relatively often, depending on their employment with that particular organisation. How will ICA manage the appointment of registration officers that may go through some amount of flux?”
“Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the National Registration Amendment Bill. There is a global movement in several countries to tighten registration and security. Brazil has recently announced plans to share biometric data from their electoral registry with the federal government for a unified Brazilian identity card project. This is unprecedented in South America. Japanese tech firm NEC has also developed new technology biometric scanners to identify even new-borns and infants to monitor vaccination rates in developing countries. A prototype has run in India and it was used to capture biometric Page: 41 information from 300 children. In the Straits Times on 5 November, it was also pointed out by a senior cybersecurity official of the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence that Singapore can be a model for building a resilient national critical information infrastructure with regard to national data registration. In terms of the pertinent issues with regard to the Act, the Senior Minister of State has mentioned earlier the timeframe for rolling out the iris scans. This will take place at various stages when renewing your identity card or passport at border controls. My clarification is, if this was an important part of our security and national registration framework, would the Ministry not consider that this be done as a one-time exercise to allow for all citizens to be registered as quickly as possible? Related to that, the Senior Minister of State has also related its security implications. Therefore, my second clarification lies with long-term visitors to Singapore ‒ whether they be workers, foreign workers, expatriates ‒ would it not be in the interest of security to also have this done for them?”
“In terms of cable-cut incidents that the Minister has mentioned earlier, many of these equipment are based in public buildings, some of which would be HDB blocks. Access to rooftops of these buildings can sometimes be circumvented. So, in terms of safety of equipment and the potential for deliberate acts to disrupt telecommunications in Singapore, could the Minister Page: 23 comment on how this would be prevented, going forward? Mdm Speaker, I support the Bill. 1.03 pm”
“Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill and I promise to be brief. I would like to raise three points in my speech. First, with regard to health; second, with regard to access; and third, with regard to safety. In terms of health, with the growing number of space stations and telecommunications access points in Singapore, there is some concern on the ground on impact on human health. According to the American Cancer Society, people exposed to radiofrequency radiation can be affected and there are potential health risks. Recently, in South Korea, there have also been a series of protests against THAAD system – which the American military would be deploying – which is based on radio signals and telecommunications signals. Overall, it is supposed to protect South Korea against any hostile North Korean aggression. But the protestors' complaint was largely that the authorities were not forthcoming with any information on the potential risks, in terms of electro-magnetic waves, on the hundreds of villagers who live and farm in the region where the THAAD system would be deployed. Secondly, in terms of access. There is section 32D where the IMDA has the power to issue their actions, "override the provisions of the Business Trusts Act, Companies Act, Limited Liability Partnerships Act, Trustees Act and the Futures Act". Some of those I have spoken to felt that this was quite overarching in terms of the number of Acts that it overrides and grants access to many of these private buildings. Therefore, could the Minister perhaps explain whether there has been any response during the public feedback with regard to granting of access and whether there are some key areas of hindrance?”
“Madam, I thank the Minister for her comprehensive reply and I add my congratulations to all our sportsmen and sportswomen who have just come back from the Paralympics. I believe there is some amount of confusion among the public in terms of the amount that our Paralympians are receiving. May I ask the Minister if she could confirm that Pin Xiu would be receiving $200,000 per medal that she has got, which means that she will be receiving $400,000, rather than the $200,000 that is being bandied about online? My second question is on sponsors for the SNPC as well as the SNOC. I believe that Tote Board and Singapore Pools are major sponsors of both the AAA as well as the MAP. Is the value that Tote Board is providing to both these awards equivalent and, if it is not so, would they be willing to bring this up to speed? The Minister also mentioned the importance of a whole-of-society approach. I met Deloitte recently and I think they are doing a wonderful job in helping many of our athletes in terms of their future career. What plans are there in place at the Ministry level to encourage, in a more concrete manner, more of such corporations to come on board, especially local corporations? Lastly, the Minister also mentioned the number of carded athletes. Are any of the current Paralympians also receiving scholarships?”
“Madam, first of all, I thank the Ministers for their comprehensive Statements. Please also allow me to place on record my appreciation to the MOH and NEA officers for their hard work on the ground since the start of the Zika infection. A couple of questions for MOH. First of all, are we able to ascertain, at this point, the origin of this particular local transmission? Secondly, I understand from the Minister's Statement that there was a look-back exercise. I would like to ask what we did with the look-back cases that were Zika-positive. Were these patients informed that they were Zika-positive and was this particular exercise helpful in reducing the spread of Zika further? On microcephaly which is perhaps the most visual and the most frightening aspect of Zika, are there any other causes of microcephaly in babies and how many non-Zika microcephaly cases have there been in Singapore since the tracking began in 1993? Also, in terms of public awareness that both the Ministers spoke about, have both the Ministries ascertained what the level of public awareness on Zika is at this moment, and what more can the Government do to stress the whole-of-society approach to containing Zika and preventing vector breeding? Last of all, a question for the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources. Under CVPA, from the start of this year, how many section 36 orders have been served to inspect vacant or non-cooperative households in premises in dengue or Zika areas?”
“I thank the Minister for his earlier reply. Just three supplementary questions. Firstly, with regard to my original question, the Minister has shared that part of the finding is that maintenance can be improved. But beyond that, were there any other findings from BCA's Page: 18 independent audit since March? Secondly, in November 2005, the Commissioner of Buildings did away with the requirement for the display of the Certificate of Lift Maintenance and Testing by the authorised examiners. But last Friday, the Commissioner issued new instructions to say that a new permit to operate the system will be undertaken by BCA and this certification will be required to be displayed and renewed annually. Could I understand a little bit more about what was the reason for BCA reviewing this requirement for display and what role BCA will be taking, beyond just providing the issuance of the certificate? Lastly – I think this is also an issue that many fellow Members have raised in their questions – with the more stringent inspection regime and possibly a lot more servicing required, is BCA aware of the manpower situation in the lift maintenance and lift manufacturing industry and whether we will be facing issues with lack of manpower in the short term?”
“Chairman, I declare my interest as the Deputy President of the Singapore Table Tennis Association (STTA). The National Youth Sports Institute (NYSI) was announced in November 2015 and the first centre was officially launched at the Singapore Sports School (SSP) in January 2016. Aimed at grooming the "Champions of Tomorrow", NYSI is supposed to cover both athletes from SSP as well as mainstream schools' student-athletes. How would NYSI support athletes within and outside SSP? It indicates that its mission is in the four functional areas of Talent Identification and Development, Coaching, Sports Science and Athlete Life Management. How will these functional areas benefit young sportsmen and women? In addition, what role would NYSI play in relation to the National Sports Associations? For example, STTA runs a Junior Development Squad with student-athletes from mainstream schools as well as those in the School Within School programme, a collaboration that STTA has with SSP. Will both groups have equal access to NYSI? As NYSI is a new entity, it would also be interesting to know its goals and KPIs and the cost involved in setting it up. Do we have the required number of qualified sports scientists and sports personnel to oversee the running of these courses? There is also the Singapore Sports Institute (SSI), set up in 2011 to drive the high performance pathway in our local sports ecosystem. How will NYSI complement SSI and are there overlaps? Building Sporting Talent”
“Over the years, Singapore has made tremendous progress in growing, promoting and nurturing a cultural landscape, curating both world-class museums and the performance arts. Even as we grow this scene and put in the investments, how do we make sure that just such a landscape is accessible and relevant to Singaporeans and our own local culture? Accessibility also lies beyond whether art is comprehensible but also whether fundamentally it is physically accessible. Often, we hear of people talking about visiting the museum, watching the latest theatre production. But for people with disability, attending a concert is not as simple as buying a ticket and turning up, and going to an exhibition may not be as simple as an impromptu visit to the galleries. In addition, the less fortunate, especially children, deserve a stake in our nascent arts scene. Arts hold tremendous remarkable learning opportunities for the young, and no one should be left behind. Could the Ministry share how it has made it possible for the disabled, the less well-off and the vulnerable young to be engaged in the arts scene and how the Ministry plans to expand this so that they can contribute to and fully experience the arts and cultural life? I further urge the Ministry to extend more funding to worthy ground-up initiatives to engage the less fortunate in arts. On the subject of potential digital platforms, has the Ministry also looked at the potential for it to transform and expand the arts scene and in reaching out to more Singaporeans? How has the Ministry been tapping on this and what plans does the Ministry have, especially in engaging our youths with arts, heritage and culture?”