Christopher de Souza
Singapore
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. My supplementary question arises out of our deployment of our Multi-Role Tankers Transport. I think our airmen and soldiers, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and MINDEF should be commended. It was a complex high-altitude mission, and it was successful.”
“Much obliged, Sir. My supplementary questions draw from the fact that the situation displays: one, how Singapore has agency; and two, how Singapore can use the situation as a catalyst.”
“It cannot be allowed to be the master. It does not moralise. Thus, as we embrace AI, we must do so with discernment. We should use it to the extent that it facilitates decision-making, but it cannot be allowed to usurp our decision-making. Innovation cannot come at the expense of trespassing on some existing IP rights.”
“In relation to the study on the drug trafficking and the death penalty. In fact, in response to that, I think there is a very good statistic that we should elaborate on in this House and also out there in education that 15 grams of diamorphine feeds 180 drug abuses for one week.”
“The Singapore Land Authority plays an important role in unlocking the value of state land for community use. As a sportsman, I have personally seen with immense joy how underutilised spaces, such as areas under flyovers, can be transformed into safe and vibrant places for sport and recreation, whether for pickleball, futsal, badminton, te…”
“To propel our status as a hub, Singapore will need infrastructure, such as exhibition facilities, to showcase mediation capabilities, breakout rooms, bilateral mediation hearing rooms as well as printers, laptops and screens for settlement agreements to be typed out.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,264 lines we hold for Christopher de Souza, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 23 of 26.
“An effective military must have soldiers who, in addition to having strong affiliation to his own primary group, they must also see and identify with the larger military organisation. If I may quote from Fredrick Manning's work on morale cohesion in military psychiatry, I quote, "High levels of esprit mean that the soldiers' loyalties go beyond their primary face-to-face peers and immediate leaders. This is an important step if morale is to be maintained in combat, for hard fighting will result in losses, no matter how good the unit is." In other words, for an Armed Forces to be effective, each and every soldier must identify with a singular, unified military. On this point of promoting solidarity within the SAF, I would like to raise two questions. First, can the Minister comment on how a separate track, specialised corps, may affect social cohesion in the SAF. I am particularly concerned with the differential terms of employment for the MDES and how SAF personnel in the existing arms may view the extended tenure, professional development opportunities and, in particular, varied remuneration terms of colleagues in the MDES. Second, in order to learn from best practices elsewhere, can the Minister share with us other military forces which currently have similar structures, and how these have worked? The SAF (Amendment) Bill tabled today addresses extensively the new rank structure in the MDES, and how this new rank structure will be integrated with the existing rank structure for the Army, Navy and Air Force. With your permission, Sir, I would like to focus on the possible implications of this new rank structure on the SAF.”
“I share SAF's confidence that this forward-thinking strategy will offer even greater protection for Singaporeans and our country. I support the Bill. Assoc. Prof. Paulin Tay Straughan: Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for this opportunity to share my thoughts on this important Bill. The Bill addresses the development of a new SAF uniformed track, the Military Domain Experts Scheme, which will be implemented in the first quarter of 2010. This scheme is part of the Ministry of Defence's plan to build a strong and dynamic Third Generation Army. I appreciate the argument that a separate track for key military domains will allow the SAF to recruit, groom and retain talents for deep specialisation in engineering, intelligence, nursing, among other areas. As a specialist track, the MDES has four distinctive noteworthy features which sets it apart from the existing arms of the SAF: a later retirement age (at 60 years), a remuneration scheme which comprises a variable component that is pegged to similar jobs in civilian industries, opportunities for professional and academic development and progression and a separate rank structure – which this Bill addresses in detail. May I first comment on the implications of a separate specialist track on the SAF. I have a limited knowledge of the military so I humbly request that the Minister excuse me if I do not reflect all the facts in my discourse. Notions of social cohesion and esprit de corps are critical attributes of any military force. Effective combat performance is very much determined by the extent of group solidarity, both horizontal as well as vertical cohesion.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate. I speak in support of the Bill as the new class of specialist servicemen from the Military Domain Experts Scheme (MDES) will enable the SAF to defend Singapore even more effectively against the evolving threats among others, of terrorism and piracy. Today, counter-terrorism and counter-piracy measures take on even greater importance and urgency and require deeper involvement of the SAF. In addition to hardware (ie, fighting with rifles and machines) we need to keep pace, as a 3G SAF, with the rapid advances in technology involving sophisticated computerised machinery. Where the defence of our country is concerned, man and machine must work closely together to provide a more effective SAF. Therefore, it is timely that our specialist soldiers be given more time and niche training to specialise in fields such as maintenance, air force engineering, naval warfare, air operations and systems and military intelligence. Such deep specialisation will enable them to study and train adequately to master the knowledge and skills necessary for them to be members of a high-tech 3G defence force. The scheme also promotes nursing, which displays SAF's resolve to continue to provide responsive medical care to our soldiers. When I perform my reservist In-Camp Training, I continue to be impressed by how the SAF continues to use advances in computers and technology to make it an even more proficient force. The Scheme will help cement this force-wide practice. The Scheme will also secure Singapore as one of the few Armed Forces in the world to have such a specialised corp. I believe that such innovation and resolve will assist in maintaining the high standards the SAF expects of itself.”
“Thank you, Minister, for your informative reply. Moving from the base plate of policies that he has explained to us, could we move further to ensure that further policies are in place to prevent enclaves from happening? I think integration is one thing but we need to have our new immigrants, our fellow Singaporeans and our new Singaporeans live alongside us. Hence, is there anything that we can do to ensure that we remain geographically multi-racial?”
“Thank you, Minister, for the confirmation that the measures have tempered exuberance. Given that they have, is the abolition of the Interest-Only Loan and Interest Absorption Scheme, going to be a temporary measure and will there be a lifting of the abolition in future or do you see this as a more permanent feature?”
“Such provisions are important as they provide assurance and confidence to all parties and establish our reputation as a legitimate world-class financial centre, with International Arbitration services to match. I note that the Monetary Authority of Singapore, which was consulted, has no objections to these amendments which underline our commitment to attracting legitimate sources of funds. Nonetheless, the proposed new section 12A(3) provides a safeguard in giving our courts the flexibility and discretion to refuse to grant such interim orders if they consider it appropriate. I think this is a wise and cautious provision. Lastly, the new section 19C will empower the Minister for Law to designate entities to authenticate, on a non-mandatory basis, 'made in Singapore' arbitration awards to facilitate the enforcement of such awards in countries that are party to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (ie, the New York Convention). I support this amendment as this will certainly make it more attractive for arbitration parties to settle their disputes here as they will be able to enforce their Singapore arbitration award overseas. Sir, to echo the Minister for Law's sentiments, the amendments in this Bill signal to the legal world that the Government is serious about ensuring that Singapore continues to be an attractive and effective hub for international arbitration. I support the Bill. 4.24 pm”
“Just two months ago, the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) signed an agreement to set up an arbitration centre here in 2010 to hear intellectual property-related (IP) disputes, as its Director-General, Francis Gurry, observes Asia "becoming the centre of gravity for creativity and technology". Thus, clause 2 of the Bill is timely. It amends section 2(1) to recognise the enormous changes in the way the world communicates today. Electronic communication has permeated and dominated communication in every business organisation. Re-defining "arbitration agreement" to include electronic communications such as electronic emails and data exchange is necessary and inevitable. This is also in line with Option I of Article 7 of the Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, as amended by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) in 2006. The second amendment to empower Singapore courts to grant interim orders to assist foreign arbitrations is consistent with the 2006 amendments to the 1985 Model Law and in line with the legislation of other countries such as the United Kingdom and New Zealand. Currently, a Singapore court can only grant interim orders to assist Singapore arbitrations. Concerns have been expressed by members of the public about how the proposed new section 12A may be a disincentive for parties to park their funds here. I, on the contrary, think that as we develop into an international investment and wealth management hub for organisations and individuals, it is even more critical to have legislation that maintains transparency, cooperation and adherence to international laws.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate. First, Sir, I declare my interest as a lawyer who acts as counsel in SIAC arbitration cases. I rise in support of the Bill as I believe the amendments are part of a package of measures which will continue to ensure Singapore's continued choice as a top tier international arbitration city. Singapore is currently the top city in Asia for International Chamber of Commerce-International Court of Arbitration (ICC) arbitrations and one of the top six ICC arbitration venues in the world, which venues include New York, Paris, London, Geneva and Zurich. With the rapid rise of big Asian economies like China and India, there is great growth in commercial activity in this part of the world. It is inevitable that the number of international arbitration cases in our region will increase dramatically as the globalisation of commercial entities continues. We are set to capture much work in this area as we are currently a top arbitration venue in Asia if not, the top. We are a highly attractive and conducive venue, thanks to our accessibility to East and West, the integrity of our public institutions, transparency, geographical proximity, availability of international legal and related expertise, infrastructure and connectivity, tight security, cost-effectiveness and a strong sense of the rule of law. Top international arbitral institutions such as the American Arbitration Association's International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) and the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) are already based here.”
“Moreover the passports were also seized for security reasons as Mas Selamat's wife was a member of the JI's Women's Wing. ISD will take all these factors into consideration in coming to a decision whether or not to issue the family with travel documents. DECLINE IN PRODUCTIVITY (Reasons and solutions) 16. Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how can productivity-driven growth be facilitated across the various economic sectors; (b) how should various industries and sectors enhance their human resource management and practices to be productive; and (c) whether he can provide reasons for the drop in productivity in Singapore.”
“Thank you, Senior Minister of State, I have two supplementary questions. On the issue of Singapore being on the terrorists' radar, have our MHA officers been given access to Mas Selamat and if so, what did he say? And secondly, what is the outcome of Mas Selamat's family's request for travel documents to enable them to visit him in Malaysia? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, let me first say that, Singapore understands Malaysia's need to hold Mas Selamat for further investigations in order to neutralise any potential security threat, specifically the plot he was hatching whilst hiding in Johor. Malaysian authorities have given our security officers access to Mas Selamat. He was, however, uncooperative during the interview and refused to talk. So at this point, ISD's accessment is that he remains defiant. Sir, the security agencies of both countries are in close communication with each other. Nevertheless, given Mas Selamat's past records, we must be realistic about what we can extract from a hardcore terrorist like him, in particular, on the details of his escape. He may not reveal everything. Indeed, even if he does eventually talk, we may have no way of confirming with certainty everything that he says. So that is the reply to the first question. On the second question, Sir. ISD is still considering the request from the family members for travel documents. The passports of Mas Selamat's family members were seized in 2005 because of the immigration offences they had committed whilst they were in Indonesia in the earlier years, when Mas Selamat was on the run from the authorities. He had produced a false Indonesian identity card and he and his family had hidden in Indonesia as illegal immigrants.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for her reply and note that HDB has taken concerted efforts to reduce the 1,000 blocks in her reply to just 200 blocks. I would like to know whether there is any indication from HDB that if among the 200 blocks, where there is a disproportionately high number of elderly citizens living in the blocks, would HDB prioritise such blocks such that they move ahead of the rest in the queue.”
“Sir, I thank Minister, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, for his considered reply. The Minister mentioned section 129. I am aware of that section. I think section 129, sub-section (2) refers to going after casino operators – if they fail to carry out reasonable checks to prevent a series of crimes happening in the casino. So that is, again, casino-centric. That is a focus within the casino. My speech was really what we could do to ensure that the trickle-down negative social implications are stemmed beyond the casino and society at large. I understand that the reply was a coordinated effort between MHA, MCYS, NCPG and the CRA. Again, my point is different from that. I am asking whether the Minister would consider that CRA be empowered, after collecting the data and looking at the information, to tweak and regulate upstream, the casino to ensure that the trickle-down negative social implications do not happen.”
“This would be ineffective to battle negative social implications outside of the casino, ie, in the society at large, which is an explicit priority of the CRA under section 8(c). So as to achieve this objective, would the Minister consider the proposal to empower the CRA to (1) carry out the co-ordinating and data collection function between MHA and NCPG in order that (2) it is armed with valuable insight into the social implications casino gambling has on Singaporeans – these implications being problem gambling, loansharking, money laundering and heightened vice activities, which information will (3) allow the CRA to calibrate its regulation of casinos to minimise such negative social implications in society at large. This proposal is consistent with the object of the CRA under section 8(c) of the original Act and the broad power it can be given under two other sections of the original Act, namely, section 10(2)(d) and section 9(2). This proposal will also allow the CRA to take on a more effective role in minimising the social implications of problem gambling outside of the casino, ie, in Singapore society. Sir, I support the amendments but seek the Minister’s reply on my proposal which attempts to make the regulatory framework tighter and more effective. 3.29 pm”
“A further avenue to provide the CRA with such power is section 9(2) of the original Act which states: "The Authority may undertake such other functions and duties as the Minister may assign to the Authority and in so doing, the Authority shall be deemed to be fulfilling the purposes of this Act …" My proposal for empowering the CRA to: (i) possess oversight of the social implications casino gambling has on Singaporeans – these implications being problem gambling, loan sharking, money laundering and heightened vice activities, and (thereby); (ii) calibrate its regulation of casinos to minimise such negative social implications finds support in the second reading of the original Bill where Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng stated: "... having casinos could mean more people gambling and getting themselves – and their families – into trouble. Concerns were expressed that crimes, such as loan sharking, money laundering and prostitution, could increase and tarnish Singapore's reputation as a clean, safe and secure place ..." Deputy Prime Minister Wong’s candid statement finds support in empirical data. According to the Credit Counselling Singapore (CCS), the number of debt-distressed individuals who cite gambling as a major cause of their financial problem grew from 12.7% in 2006 to 27.5% in 2008. The percentage more than doubled. Even more worrying, younger people, age 40 and below, make up a bigger proportion or 60.7% of this group of debtors. It seems that the major pre-occupation of the Act and this Bill is to empower the CRA to regulate only what happens in the casino.”
“The CRA can be empowered to take on this co-ordination and data-collection role through an avenue which already exists in the original Act, namely, section 10(2)(d) which states that the CRA may "carry out research or other educational activities relating to casino gaming, or to support (financially or otherwise) the carrying out by others of such activities or the provision by others of information or advice". Therefore, I ask, should not the CRA be empowered under section 10(2)(d) read with its object as stated under section 8(c) to become the co-ordinating body between MHA and NCPG so that it will have enough data to accurately calibrate the level of regulation of casinos to ensure a minimal amount of negative social impact on Singaporeans and their families and a reduced amount of casino related offences, like money laundering, soliciting and loansharking? After all, NCPG is primarily dedicated towards preventing problem gamblers from gambling and MHA is committed to fighting crime. Their roles are separate, distinct. Whereas, to battle the negative social implications which the casinos will bring, we need to have synergies between these organisations. This will translate into a clear understanding of what is an effective level of casino regulation. This role should be fulfilled by the CRA.”
“According to a Straits Times report on 2nd April this year, "If South Australia's experience is any guide, however, Singapore will see few applications for family exclusion orders. In the four years up to last June, there were 18 applications for such orders in the Australian state, and only eight were issued. The rest were dismissed or withdrawn." My third point is that I think it is important to remember the objective of the Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA), which is captured in section 8 of the Act. In particular, section 8(c) reads: "The objects of the Authority are to maintain and administer systems for the licensing, supervision and control of casinos, for the purpose of containing and controlling the potential of a casino to cause harm to minors, vulnerable persons and [importantly] society at large." Therefore, it is an object of the CRA to study and stem the negative social implications of casinos beyond the casino, ie, "in society at large". Therefore, my proposal is to make it explicit in the Bill, or at least in the Minister’s reply in this debate, that the CRA is empowered to work with NCPG and MHA to track whether the casinos are creating irreversible damage to our social fabric in the form of: (a) money-laundering activities; (b) rise in problem gambling and the effects it has on families; (c) growing number of people resorting to loans from loan sharks; and (d) an increase in prostitution syndicates. It is also proposed that the Bill, or the Minister’s reply, should make it explicit that the CRA is empowered to collect data on these social implications.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate. One of the main amendments to the Casino Control Act is that those who give incorrect tax returns on gaming revenue will face stiffer penalties. In addition to paying double the underpaid amount, they can be fined up to $25,000 or jailed for up to two years or both. I support this amendment under section 149A of the Bill. This will send a clear signal to the casino operators to put in place rigorous accounting processes to ensure that their relevant departments and staff adhere to the law. The other major amendment is to automatically exclude from the casino un-discharged bankrupts, persons on Public Assistance as well as those who voluntarily want to be kept out, thereby removing the need for a Committee of Assessors to make an exclusion order in respect of each such person. I wish to make three points arising from these amendments, and the family exclusion orders which already exist in the Act: Firstly, we cannot rely on pathological gamblers or probable problem gamblers to self exclude themselves. Incidentally, these terms "pathological" or "problem gamblers" are phrases used in a 2008 MCYS Report on Participation in Gambling Activities Amongst Singaporean Residents. Secondly, family exclusion orders which already exist in the Act under sections 158 to 164, which allow families to apply for exclusion of problem gamblers from casinos, are also unlikely to have much impact as I understand that, to date, only 14 families have gone beyond enquiring about these orders. According to NCPG, Singapore is the second place in the world to have such family exclusion orders, after the state of South Australia, where only 170 enquiries were received between July 2004 and July 2008.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply. I hope to be able to persuade the Minister that Ulu Pandan is a unique environment where a pilot project will do very well, and I say this for a reason.”
“I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. On the issue of the fine, the reason behind my concern is that if you read clause 61, it is actually a default punishment provision. It says that if there is no other penalty prescribed under the provisions, then if there is an offence under the Act, you either get up to $10,000 fine or up to 12 months' imprisonment. Sir, it is a provision that is going to be used a lot because it is the default provision. I understand that it is MOE's position that there is bite in this permutation but I think it would be helpful if the Senior Minister of State gave an indication that it is the intention of MOE that these provisions both deter and punish – the punishment being tarnishing the brand name of education in Singapore. I think that would be helpful, certainly to the courts.”
“If it is not possible at this stage, would the Minister consider emphasising, in his response, that it is Parliament's intention that the punishment meted out should be aimed at, one, deterring unscrupulous cheating exercises by PEIs and importantly, second, preserving Singapore's growing identity as a first-class education hub. Such emphasis in Hansard reports will send a clear signal to the Judges as to what sentences ought to be meted out in order to give effect to Parliament's intentions vis-a-vis these provisions, and permutations between jail sentences and fines would also be a possibility. The second reason why I believe a maximum fine of $10,000 is insufficient is because the quantum of the fine does not match the gravity of the offence, ie, destroying a student's education, the tuition fees for which were likely derived from hard-earned part-time work. The scar of being let down by a PEI may even deter the promising student from enrolling for another course in another PEI. Therefore, in cases where it so merits, the punishment meted out should not only be aimed at deterring the PEI and other PEIs from doing the same (ie, general and specific deterrence) but should also be punitive in nature due to the serious negative impact it creates on a budding student. In closing, Sir, I reiterate my support for the Bill as it is a strong initiative by MOE to bite the bullet, regulate private education and, in so doing, preserve the integrity of education in general in Singapore. Sir, I support the Bill. 4.36 pm”
“It would help ensure that people who have the relevant experience to decide on a sufficient educational standard or benchmark are part of the regulatory framework. The framework will be run by people – decisions on what is sub-standard are subjective. People with sufficient experience are needed to ensure that those subjective decisions are proper, reasonable and balanced. The second suggestion is that I find the penalties for the failure of PEIs to seek permission to offer courses, and to advertise un-registered courses or solicit or receive fees from any student for such courses, too light. Currently, the punishment is just $10,000 and/or a jail term of 12 months. Where the fine is concerned, ie, a cap of $10,000, I believe that that is much too light and would not sufficiently deter fraudsters and is certainly not punitive enough. I say this for two reasons: First, if a PEI is out to cheat a student, it is rare that it would only cheat one student in the school. It is likely that the whole cohort would suffer from a bad syllabus, absent teachers or even the sudden closure of the PEI altogether. If the cohort comprises 20 students, the money the PEI would stand to gain from a dishonest cheating enterprise could easily exceed $100,000. The maximum fine of $10,000 is an insufficient deterrent. The $10,000 lacks bite. PEIs could well consider it a business cost, and one which justifies taking the risk of embarking on an unscrupulous exercise to cheat vulnerable students. A fine of up to $100,000 seems a more robust deterrent. Would the Minister consider raising the bar?”
“Other characteristics which enhance the education experience in Singapore are our political stability, safety and security, good healthcare – all these contribute to a conducive environment for learning. Hence, I feel very strongly that we must not let our national reputation be sullied by unscrupulous parties in any field, least of all, education. Being educated in Singapore comes with the consequence of being immersed in Singapore education culture – diligence, sizing up the student's capabilities and giving him or her the best opportunities to reach his or her potential. This has translated into Singaporean and non-Singaporean students who have studied in Singapore doing well, some even topping universities around the world. So, we must protect this image of Singapore as a country that is endowed with an exceptional education system. This means ensuring that the PEIs do not tarnish this reputation. This Bill will assist us in achieving this. The Bill went through two rounds of public consultation where some good points were raised. I would like to build on this and offer two suggestions on how to make the regulatory framework tighter and more effective. The first point is regarding the composition and qualifications of the members of the academic and examination boards. Taking into account the feedback that the original requirements were overly prescriptive, this requirement was withdrawn by MOE. However, I do think we need people who have requisite experience on the board. Therefore, the original proposed requirement of "5 years relevant industry experience related to the courses offered" should be reconsidered.”
“Hence, I support this Bill for putting in a comprehensive, strong and muscular regulatory framework to address these loopholes and to deter future unscrupulous behaviour by PEIs. However, there are good private education providers in the market. They should be encouraged – the framework in the Bill will give them platforms to distinguish themselves as good institutions from the other weaker ones. The higher standards and the introduction of a watchdog will divide the good institutions from the weaker ones, thereby giving the prospective student clearer insight before deciding which institution to enrol in and pay tuition fees to. Hence, I am glad that the Government has decided that industry self-regulation will not suffice. Neither will the piecemeal approach to regulating different aspects of the sector – for example, with CaseTrust being responsible for student protection and fee protection, SPRING Singapore taking charge of the organisational component, MOE dealing with the registration of the PEIs, etc. This results in loopholes and students falling through the cracks. Under the new framework, the Council for Private Education will be responsible for many aspects of the private education sector. I welcome this. Now that Singapore is growingly recognised as an international education hub, this Bill is timely. I have had the chance to meet a number of foreigners who live in my constituency who moved here to provide their children with a better education. They see value in our system because it is not just our schools or educational institutions per se but rather our entire environment which attracts them. They think that our mix of East and West provides excellent international exposure.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate and lend my support to the Bill. The introduction of this Bill is timely. We now have a comprehensive and detailed framework to regulate the private education sector. Before providing the reasons why I support the Bill and several recommendations on how the regulatory framework can be further enhanced, I wish to share a heartfelt experience which one of my Ulu Pandan residents went through. This is a personal encounter with a resident, I do not think it is an unfamiliar story encountered by many Members in this House. This student went to polytechnic so that she could earn sooner. A university is not an option for her because she could not afford to spend time in a full-time course. She needed to study as well as work to pay for household expenses and pay towards the family income. She did well in polytechnic, she got a job, she worked hard at it and she saved up enough money to go into a part-time degree course at an external university. The external university required upfront payment, so she had to take a loan from a bank. Having paid the downpayment in full for the whole academic year, she soon realised that the school syllabus was not up to expectation. It was far beyond any benchmark, I would imagine. She wanted to stop, the school refused to return her the money and the interest was piling up with the bank. I looked at it and thought that it could be a possible offence of cheating. So I referred the matter to the authorities and we muscled back the money for her. There are many vulnerable students who are possibly in the same situation, who have to do part-time courses as they need to work.”
“They have been very popular with close to 100% take-up rate. HDB will continue to build more of them. One thousand more units are planned for launch over the next two years. To meet the needs of an ageing population, we have also put in place an array of monetisation options to enable elderly home owners to unlock their flat equity to support their retirement. Downgrading to a Studio Apartment or a smaller resale flat is one way to unlock flat equity. The elderly can also choose to sell or sublet their flat and stay with their children. HDB has progressively relaxed its whole flat subletting rules to allow more lessees to do so. Since March this year, HDB has implemented the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) to help the less well-off elderly in smaller flats unlock their flat equity. This subsidised scheme allows them to age-in-place while receiving a monthly income for life. To date, more than 300 elderly households have applied for the scheme. We will continue to review and enhance the LBS and other monetisation schemes to cater to the needs of our elderly.”
“So, this is part of the system which, in fact, to Prisons' credit, is something they instituted on their own, to involve members of the public to ensure that its processes are more transparent and, hopefully, fair. Column No : 1122 NEW FLAT APPLICATIONS BY THE ELDERLY 6. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for National Development (a) what percentage of new flat applications are from the elderly for the last 12 months; (b) what is the success rate of these applicants compared to the rest; and (c) whether the Ministry will be introducing any new measures to cope with the housing demand of an ageing population. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, over the last 12 months, about 4% of new flat applicants in our HDB’s Built-To-Order (BTO) exercises were 55 years or older. New HDB flats are primarily meant for first-timer households with 90% of BTO flats set aside for them to set up their first home. First-timers are also given double the chances when balloting for a new flat. The success rate of applicants is therefore determined by the status of whether they are first-timer or otherwise, and not by their age. Many of the elderly have benefited from our public housing schemes earlier in their lives and, if so, they are considered second timers, and will be accorded lower priority. Elderly who are first-time applicants will enjoy the same chances as their younger counterparts. Sir, in recognition of the unique housing needs of the elderly, HDB has introduced the Studio Apartment for those 55 years or older. Studio Apartments are sold with a shorter lease of 30 years and come with elder-friendly features such as lever taps and hand bars.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. He mentioned that there will be processes put in place to reduce abuse and that, in serious cases, the matter will be referred to the courts and to the CID. So, the assumption and hope is that most cases are not serious and, therefore, dealt with internally. And if that is the correct assumption, then the question is, why not lend the support from experts like district judges who have in their experience, precedence and institutionalised methods of dealing with disciplinary problems to come, not on an ad hoc basis through the visiting programme, but on an entrenched and regular basis so that, internally, where disciplinary processes are concerned, there is a database and there is precedent so that discipline can be inculcated among the population, thereby reducing the amount of prisoner abuse? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: I think Mr de Souza may not have heard me correctly just now. In fact, this new system instituted about a year ago, called the Institutional Discipline Review Committee System – there are about four or five committees empanelled – is part of the structure now. It is not just ad hoc visits by them or Visiting Justices. Every case that is adjudicated with caning will be put before this committee. Each committee will comprise, I understand, at least one lawyer, if not chaired by one, either a lawyer or someone with judicial experience. The full facts are put before the committee and the relevant officers are also there. For example, the investigating officers involved in the offence are there to answer any queries. The committee will then give its view as to whether the number of strokes given is excessive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, clause 9 inserts a new section 15A to empower the Minister to approve certain person as qualified persons and provide for selected ones to be exempted from certain practice training requirements by his or her standing and experience. This will shorten the training period and encourage more graduates to return to Singapore to practise, increasing the number of lawyers needed here. This is a move in the right direction, ie, to let the market forces attract and recognise talent, thereby entrenching our position as a credible regional legal hub. Further liberalisation along these lines should be encouraged. As these amendments are new, I urge the Ministry to closely monitor the impact on the market and, if necessary, make adjustments for further fine-tuning, especially to set the tone that any lawyer who intends to practise in Singapore should understand and respect Singapore’s legal systems and structures, as well as the jurisprudential principles underlying how our courts decide cases. Sir, I record my support for the Bill.”
“The Minister had mentioned at this year's COS debate that, "The intent of this change is for law firms to devise more meaningful Training Contracts for their trainees. At present, a pupillage system is in place. But some pupils may have little direct contact with their pupil masters. The intention is to try and ensure that trainees have a constructive and structured learning programme and make the law firms take a greater responsibility in this area." Coming out of this, may I also suggest that the training contracts set out what kind of training and exposure their trainees should receive during the period of the contract, so as to prevent situations where they are made to perform tasks, such as photocopying and receptionist duties, which have no bearing on their legal and professional skills and knowledge, and do not constitute any form of legal training. With greater involvement of the law firms in the training of our new lawyers, I hope the Ministry will, in consultation with the profession, issue guidelines to ensure the core content of the training contract is kept updated and continues to be relevant to the evolving demands and needs of the market, thereby better preparing our new lawyer cohorts to meet them. It is important that a lawyer’s training always be kept up to date by having the Singapore Academy of Law (SLA), the Law Society (LS), and the Government, namely, the Ministry of Law and the Attorney-General's Chambers, actively involved in annual reviews of the syllabi. Ultimately, this will lead to improvement in the service standards of our new lawyers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate and lend my support to the Bill. I declare my interest, at the onset, as a partner in a Singapore law practice. Earlier this year, in a speech during the debate in COS, I described how Singaporean law students, whom I visited in the UK and were working legal professionals there, were candid about wanting to return to Singapore to practise but found the one-year full time Diploma in Singapore Law course a major deterrent. I had suggested that returning law students be allowed to undergo training more relevant to practice, along the lines of a training contract. By fusing the Diploma in Singapore Law and the current Practical Law course into a training contract, the returning law student will receive his first pay cheque sooner, has greater incentive to return to Singapore and be a resource in our growing legal hub. He also studies areas of law relevant to practice, rather than repeating basic subjects he would have already covered at university, even in his first year. This will also assist in meeting the increasing demand for more lawyers who are called to the Singapore Bar. Therefore, I am pleased to note that the first major proposed amendment is to require a qualified person to serve a practice training period in place of a pupillage, ie, under a practice training contract with a Singapore law practice. I would like to express my appreciation to the Ministry for swiftly accepting feedback from the legal community to include more practical-based training to better prepare our graduates for legal practice. Replacing pupillage will assist to achieve this.”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply and I support the slew of measures introduced by him. But there is one common theme in the slew of measures which is they are supply-centric targeted. My question is, why not include in the arsenal a weapon which allows the Government and MHA to tackle the demand side, and this is illustrated through making borrowing from loansharks an offence? It is underscored by many of our home visits to blocks where you have the whole mood of the corridor being low, if you have "owe pay, pay money" spray painted. My second question is, is it drastic – I think the Minister used the adjective, "drastic" for measures to penalise borrowers – to penalise the borrower who has given a false address so as to obviate the harassment to himself and to put the harassment on an innocent party? I do not think there is anything drastic in going after somebody recalcitrant like that. Would the Minister please reply to these two supplementary questions?”
“I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for graciously allowing the initiative in the suggestion to come into force. I do have a follow-up question, Mr Speaker. Would MOE liaise with MHA when the student having entered into Primary One comes to the vesting age for his IC because it is at that point that the race is recorded officially in an official document? And if he has called himself a Singaporean Eurasian for nine years before that, would MOE liaise with ICA so that he will continue to identify himself as a Singaporean Eurasian?”
“Two supplementary questions for the Deputy Prime Minister. First, does the Minister envision the full 18,000 potential jobs to be filled and, second, would the Minister assure that those who have been offered jobs subscribe to the ethos of our Public Service?”
“During the Budget debate this year, MOE announced that it would make available close to 7,500 teaching positions and teaching support staff for our schools and tertiary institutions. Given, the high expectations placed on our teachers, a topic I have talked about in this House several times, I would like to ask the Minister for Education how many teaching support staff has MOE recruited, what its target in terms of recruitment of teaching staff is for 2009 and how near is MOE to that target. In conclusion, Sir, our GDP is expected to decline by 6%-9% this year, with unemployment set to rise. We need to unite as a people to overcome the challenges ahead. But we should not forget that we have in the meantime a nation to keep safe, children to teach and our social fabric to protect. In supporting the motion, I trust the Government will consider the four points I raised in relation to Mas Selamat, reducing the incidence of loansharking, SPUR, WIS and the injection of 18,000 public sector jobs into the labour market and education.”
“We should quickly use the same strategy to combat the rapid growth of unlicensed moneylending in Singapore, given that: (a) The anecdotal evidence that a significant number of those borrowing from loansharks are using the loan to pay off gambling debts; (b) As a result, innocent residents have to bear the brunt of harassment if a false residential address is given; (c) The whole corridor suffers the stigma of graffitied walls even if a false address is not given; (d) The continuing Government philosophy that if we continue to work, we will be given an incentive, such as WIS, why not make borrowing from illegal moneylenders, which causes much harm to the neighbourliness of communities, an offence? The Attorney-General is always in a position to exercise his discretion whether or not to prosecute the borrower based on the unique mitigating factors, if any. I urge MHA to quickly implement the policy which includes a shift away from supply-centric enforcement to one which also combats the demand. This would be similar to the two-pronged enforcement action taken against drugs and corruption. Would MHA therefore provide an update of when it will introduce provisions which make borrowing from loan sharks an offence? I move onto my fourth and last point - education and easing the load placed on teachers. The President made clear: "Education is our best investment in Singapore's future. Our education system is designed to give each and every child the best opportunity to stretch his abilities." While I fully agree, I wish to add that to achieve this, we need to give teachers the space and time to teach.”
“Naturally, the Attorney-General will have the ultimate discretion whether to prosecute a borrower, and unique circumstances prompting a compassionate approach would likely merit non-prosecution. Examples of two prominent pieces of legislation which combat both the supply and demand elements of an offence are the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA) and the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA). Sections 5 to 7 of the MDA penalise the trafficking, import and export and manufacture of controlled drugs, ie, the supply of them. But, significantly, section 8 of the MDA also penalises the possession and consumption of controlled drugs, ie, the demand for them. By penalising both the demand and supply, the drugs problem in Singapore has been contained. The second prominent piece of legislation is the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA). Section 5(a) of the PCA penalises the supply of corruption, and in order to effectively deter acts of corruption in Singapore, section 5(b) of the PCA penalises the demand for corruption. Thus, both the demand and supply of elements of corruption are tackled in tandem, resulting in Singapore's extremely low incidence of corruption.”
“That was a 19% increase over 2005 when there were 8,568 reported cases. Similarly, the 2005 figure represented an increase of 47%, to be exact, over 2004, which had 5,809 reported cases. Multiple initiatives were introduced by Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to try to solve the problem. These included: (a) Enhancing the penalties under the Moneylenders Act; and (b) The formation of the Anti-Unlicensed Moneylending (UML) Task Force to increase, among others, the number of ambush operations. However, the figures show that these measures have not deterred loansharks syndicates. A look at the statistics for 2007 support this point. In 2007, there were 277 arrests over the first three quarters, ie, from January to September, which were just 17 short of the total number of arrests for the whole of 2006. Thus, in the light of the unattractive figures quoted above, MHA is correct to consider taking a different strategy in tackling the very real problem of unlicensed moneylending. This involves simultaneously tackling the supply of and the demand for illegal loans. Currently, the law, called the Moneylenders Act, curbs UML only by deterring the supply of illegal loans into the market. It does nothing to penalise or deter the borrowing, ie, the demand side. This is clear from sections 8(1)(b) and (c) of the Moneylenders Act. The offences in these sections do not deter the demand for illegal loans. Introducing a new section which makes it an offence if a person secures a loan for himself or on behalf of any other person from an unlicensed moneylender will help deter the demand. The punitive measures which come along with the offence can be calculated based on the harm that the State deems such borrowing creates and based on the level that will best deter such activities.”
“Consequently, Singaporeans are concerned about the fact that he may have had sympathisers in Singapore who helped him travel to Malaysia. It is encouraging that the security forces of regional countries, in particular ISD and the Malaysian Special Branch, continue to work closely together to combat the threat of terrorism. In the case of Mas Selamat, the cooperation has borne fruit. When the time is appropriate, I hope the Minister for Home Affairs will answer the questions on the minds of many Singaporeans, ie, how he escaped, whether there were JI sympathisers who helped him and, if so, how many? Now that he has been recaptured, how should we deal with him, going forward? What measures do we have in place to prevent a repeat of such an incident? The third point I would like to address is the issue of the prevalence of loanshark attacks in Singapore. The President had stated in his speech: "Challenging times will put stresses on our society and our families, but we must manage these stresses and meet the challenges as one people." One stress line is the rising debt owed to loansharks. On 22nd May 2009, the Straits Times reported: "Sales of CCTV cameras, alarms jump - More residents fear crime, loan sharks." I quote from the article: "Police also received nearly 4,000 complaints of loanshark harassment ... in the first three months of this year, up from 2,066 complaints in the same period last year." I welcome the Home Affairs Minister's decision announced earlier this year to seriously consider making borrowing from illegal moneylenders a crime. Let me explain why. In January last year, Senior Minister of State, Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee, informed that there were 10,221 reported cases of unlicensed moneylending in 2006.”
“On this note, why not offer WIS to workers who have a basic salary of $1,500 or less, even if their over-time pay tilts their monthly pay cheque to beyond $1,500? This way, to echo my fellow Member of Parliament, Mdm Halimah Yacob, we will not be discouraging the diligent workers from working hard. The Government would have to pay WIS based on $1,500 and not on the accumulative figure of basic salary plus overtime pay. Where is the harm in that? Next, I would like to discuss issues relating to national security. The President had stated, "Mas Selamat's recapture is not the end of the terrorism threat." And in a later part of the Address, the President stated, "Maintaining a safe and secure Singapore is a basic pre-condition for our people to pursue their dreams." With these two statements in mind, I would like to compliment the Home Team and Internal Security Department (ISD), in particular, for playing an active role in the recapture of Mas Selamat. It has been a trying and difficult year for ISD, but its resilience has paid off. To me, ISD's perseverance in tracking down Mas Selamat displayed true tenacity. They overcame adversity. Indeed, MHA's own statement in the addendum to the President's Address sums up the ever changing parameters in the anti-terrorism business and I quote: "How we achieve safety and security will change over time as our operating realities and society change. The operating environment today is complex and challenging." Therefore, the recapture of escaped terrorist leader, Mas Selamat, has set many minds at ease. Nonetheless, the question on the top of many Singaporean minds is how he managed to cross our border with Malaysia?”
“The Government's willingness to drive and sponsor this is the right move. Therefore, I address now – SPUR. It is heartening to note that as at the end of March 2009, SPUR, which was launched last December, has seen 90,000 workers sign up for it. However, I understand that the jobs bank at the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) and Community Development Councils (CDCs) still has over 20,000 vacancies. In 2008, 16,880 workers were made redundant. May I ask the Government where does the mismatch lie? Is it industry-based? Do we have an update on how many of the unemployed who have undergone SPUR training have, in fact, found jobs following retrenchment? Next, the 18,000 public sector jobs. The Government announced in Budget that it would be making available 18,000 public sector jobs over the next two years. How many of these 18,000 jobs have been taken up? How many people have applied so far? And how successful have the advertising campaigns been to generate a good response to these recruitment drives? I ask these questions because I have met constituents in my constituency, Ulu Pandan, who have the requisite skills to serve well in Government jobs, but are still unaware of the Government's recruitment drives. Next, WIS. Currently, if a worker's monthly income is less than $1,500 and he is above 35-years old, he will receive the WIS from the Government. WIS was introduced to encourage an increased rate of employment and to signal to Singaporeans that the Government will, where employment policy is concerned, walk shoulder-to-shoulder with Singaporeans if they make the effort to work. Therefore, we should reward those who work harder.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC, Mr Michael Palmer, to thank the President for his Address. In the first global "stress test" performed by Swiss business school, International Institute for Management Development (IMD), Singapore was ranked second, after Denmark, to be among the best prepared to withstand the economic stresses of a recession. At second, out of 57 nations surveyed, we are deemed to be well-placed to weather the financial crisis and improve our competitiveness after we emerge from it. However, the President's Address underscored the fact that the global environment is capricious and that we can ill afford to be caught wrong footed to our economy's detriment. I agree and wish to speak about four main points arising from the direction the President set in his Address. First, jobs. The President stated, "We must keep up the effort to up-skill and re-skill our workers to become more employable and productive, in a changing economy" and that "NTUC is at the forefront of these efforts, working shoulder to shoulder with Government and employers." It is against this backdrop that I wish to discuss the Skills Programme for Upgrading and Resilience (SPUR) programme, the 18,000 public sector jobs the Government will release into the labour market and the need to tweak and fine-tune the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme. An article on 20th May 2009 in the Business Times reported that according to the latest Kelly Global Workforce Index, five out of six local professionals believe they could become irrelevant if their skills are not upgraded within the next five years. Workers are more pressed than ever in the present age to keep upgrading their skills.”
“In conclusion, Sir, I rise to support the Bill not only because it provides a framework to facilitate the continued public order we enjoy in Singapore but also because its introduction is timely and relevant.”
“Sections 38 and 39 in Part IV of the Bill, which seek to introduce provisions to deter and punish the filming of law enforcement activities where it prejudices the effective conduct of the activities or endangers the safety of law enforcement officers, are worth scrutinising. A case in point is the "live" television footage of the Mumbai terrorist incident. This likely adversely affected attempts by Indian special forces to free the hostages, since the terrorists themselves were likely able to watch the footage. While this is a type of situation which new sections 38 and 39 obviously seek to deter, there are other types of situations which should attract the same penalties. These include law enforcement activities which do not have any anti-terrorist element, for example, an undercover anti-drug operation, or a Police intelligence gathering exercise. Would the Minister confirm that if a person was to film such activities, and that such filming exposed the identities of undercover law enforcement agents, the person will be liable to destroy the film if directed to do so by the officer under section 38(2)(a), and failure to comply with such a direction will constitute an offence under the new law? Additionally, would the Minister confirm that the Police Officer will be empowered to seize the film without warrant under section 38(2)(d)? I believe from the reading of the Bill that section 38 does apply to undercover police activities, and I believe that such a position is consistent with the wording of section 38 which seeks to protect, in particular, narcotics and intelligence officers. Would the Minister clarify this point?”
“My concern is that the new move-on powers given to Police Officers will generate an even higher number of 999 calls – for example, people will think it appropriate to call the Police to have noisy groups move-on from the vicinity of their homes. Move-on directions should be used sparingly and not for non-urgent cases involving, for example, neighbourhood noise. I wish to seek clarification from the Minister on one aspect. Could the Minister clarify the types of behaviour that will attract move-on directions? The explanatory statement to the Bill explains part of section 35 of the Bill in the following way: "A group of persons may be deliberately stepping in front of someone who is attempting to enter or leave a late-night store." It seems a move-on direction can be issued against that group if "the complaint about the behaviour is made by the occupier of the place." It surely cannot be the case that all late-night store holders can seek a Police Officer’s intervention in the hope that a move-on direction will be issued. If this were the case, the Police Force will be stretched even more, inundated with an even higher number of 999 calls. Therefore, the Minister’s clarification on the type of behaviour he actually envisions move-on directions will be used for will assist Singaporeans to better decide whether to call 999 for a move-on direction. This would in turn assist in deterring a spike in 999 calls. The second aspect of the legislation I wish to concentrate on, Mr Speaker, is in relation to deterring prejudicial filming of law enforcement activities.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Bill not only because it provides a framework to facilitate continued public order in Singapore but also because its introduction is timely and relevant. The Pattaya experience over the past weekend underscores the continuing importance of possessing sophisticated legislation to handle potentially dangerous public demonstrating. I wish to concentrate on Part IV of the Bill, ie, the new powers to preserve and maintain public order. First, the move-on power. Here, the broad collective effect of sections 34, 35, 36 and 37 of the Bill is to give Police Officers above the rank of Sergeant a new type of power: the power to (a) direct a person to vacate or move on from his location and (b) mandate that he not return to that location for 24 hours provided (c) the police officer reasonably suspects the person’s behaviour to fall under any of the four types of behaviour in section 35 and provided also (d) the move-on direction is reasonably necessary in the interests of public safety, public order or the protection of the rights and freedoms of other persons, these being limited to the enjoyment of the place in question and the carrying on of the lawful business at that place. No court order is required. Given this new situation, I seek the Minister’s clarification on two points. The first is that move-on powers should not translate into an increase in 999 calls for non-urgent cases. Mr Speaker, Sir, Police manpower is limited. There has been public awareness generated on the opportunity cost of calling 999 for non-urgent cases.”
“So, I would ask for the Minister's clarification on why the hesitation to include details, that the Minister envisions will be included in the subsidiary legislation, in the Bill.”
“First, I would like to thank the Minister for his instructive and insightful response. I agree that this Bill is not transplant a la Iranian style. I fully agree with that. Given the Whip is lifted, I would like to seek clarifications. First, there is no doubt that organ trading is prohibited and new section 14(2A) actually increases the penalty. But if one was to read the Bill very carefully, there is an exception to the penalty. And the exception to the penalty is what this House has been debating – that one can be compensated for loss of earnings, accommodation, travel cost, childcare and domestic help. If it is really that mechanism that is being debated and that has been excepted from the penalty of organ trading, then there is really nothing more important than the details of how this mechanism will quantify compensation and that it compensates rather than profits the donor. So I ask the Minister: why not include these details like caps and ceilings in the substantive Bill? The Minister mentioned a range that could be included via subsidiary legislation. Why not if that is anticipated to be beneficial in subsidiary legislation, include it in the substantive legislation, which is the Bill? This would ensure that what HOTA intends to do – which is to prevent organ trading and facilitate organ donations – is achieved. To clarify, I am not advocating maintaining the status quo or doing nothing. I am suggesting something very active, Sir. I am suggesting to tighten the Bill to prevent abuse. Then, we can preserve our healthcare system as first-class and well-known throughout the world to be ethical.”
“I am aware that the Bill seeks to allow the removal of organs from a deceased person above 60 years of age, I support this. I am also aware that the Bill seeks to create a specific offence of organ trading within enhanced penalties, I also support this. Unfortunately, these initiatives have been bundled together with the reimbursement amendment which lacks details and can lead to abuse. These initiatives, that is donations from those about 60 years of age and the enhanced penalties, should have been unbundled into separate Bills seeking to amend the same Act. Therefore, bearing in mind that the Whip has been lifted, I do not support the Bill. I would urge the Minister to insert into the Bill details on how the reimbursement is to be quantified to prevent abuses. If such details sufficient to check abuses are included, I would support the Bill. Therefore, Mr Speaker, I do not support the Bill in its current state.”
“What we deem conservative compensation in Singapore could be deemed by foreigners as a significant amount sufficient to justify the donation of an organ. Therefore, the issue of over-compensation comes in. How will the Minister ensure that the compensation offered through the Bill does not unwittingly open the door to organ trading by virtue that conservative compensation in this country might mean a lucrative windfall by the citizens of countries within the region? Fourth, how is the recipient chosen? Given compensation's entrance into the equation, how will MOH ensure that the recipients who need the transplant most will receive the donated organ – and that donated organs do not veer to those who can compensate the donor the most? Fifth, organs needed for the donor's sheer survival – May we receive from the Minister his clear assurance that the HOTA amendments will not allow, even in the future, compensation for living organ donors where the transplants involve vital organs needed for the living donor's sheer survival – eg, a heart. While such a position seems obvious, the Minister's assurance will be comforting. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, I support, wholeheartedly, the MOH's principle of reimbursement but the Bill lacks a clear, transparent formula on how appropriate compensation levels will be quantified and regulated. If there were clearly articulated and expressed provisions within the Bill itself to ensure the reimbursement mechanism is kept not-for-profit, transparent and devoid of abuse, I would support the Bill. However, the Bill lacks these. So, while I agree with the principle of reimbursement, I do not support the Bill. This is because without the details, the framework in the Bill could be the subject of abuse.”
“I would query why they are being relegated to secondary legislation which is not debated in Parliament. We are dealing with a compensation mechanism. There is nothing more important than the details of how this mechanism will quantify compensation. These details will ensure that the mechanism compensates or reimburses rather than profits the donor. Yet, the Bill is devoid of these details. Instead, Members are forced to have to predict quantifications and cite hypotheticals, as did the hon. Member, Mr Sam Tan. The Bill should have included these details, thereby subjecting them to Parliamentary debate and scrutiny. Would the Minister explain what regulations will be put in place to ensure the amended HOTA does not deteriorate into legislation which legalises organ trading. Also would the Minister explain who will ultimately be paying the compensation; who will have administrative oversight of the payment of such compensation; and who will determine what are "reasonable" levels of compensation or reimbursement. Just as a proposal, would the Minister consider introducing a third party compensation authority? Would MOH consider facilitating third party NGOs such as KDF to decide on the amount of compensation the donor is to receive. Public monetary donations to these organisations, with matching grants from the Government, could be used to pay such compensation to the donors. Alternatively, MOH itself could take on this role. If the compensation is quantified transparently and on a not-for-profit principle, this could ensure fair compensation or reimbursement and that organ donations do not just reach recipients who can pay more. Third, Sir, over-compensation – one cannot help but be reminded of the recent case involving Mr Tang where a foreign donor was involved.”