Chua Kheng Wee Louis
Singapore
“It is my sincere hope that the passage of this Bill does not mark the end of Singapore's vision of a share-owning society, but rather the beginning of a new chapter – one in which we seriously revisit how Singaporeans and the Government can invest together, participating fairly and directly in the nation's wealth creation, and achieving w…”
“Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Just three quick supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. First, I think the Senior Minister of State talks about gaining access to the best tools available globally.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Just two quick supplementary questions. The first is on the guide that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary shared just now.”
“Thank you, Chairman. Just one clarification for Ministers on the EV chargers. I think the MOT has previously said that we are looking at three to 12 charging points per HDB carpark by 2025, but my question is not so much on the deadline, but more in terms of the number of chargers that can be supported, because in most of the multi-storey…”
“Thank you, Chairman. Just two clarifications for Minister Chee. The first is on the review of the EC policy – any timeline around that? Second is in terms of how the Minister talked about building a robust supply pipeline and given that we are now in March 2026.”
“Chairman, given the increasing unaffordability of ECs in the markets today, I urge the MND to seriously re-think the current EC model and to consider upstream policies to bring the price of ECs into a range that will suit their original intentions. With affordability and equitable access being key tenets to underpin the new EC model.”
The complete record
Every one of 716 lines we hold for Chua Kheng Wee Louis, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 15.
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I last spoke about the Gambling Duties Bill and the Gambling Control and Gambling Regulatory Authority of Singapore Bill in 2022 and I believe much of what I raised back then remains relevant for the Casino Control (Amendment) Bill before us today. As we continue to witness the growth and evolution of the gaming industry in Singapore and beyond, it is essential that we take decisive action to enhance the operational effectiveness of our regulatory regime, ensuring it can adapt to evolving challenges. Most importantly, this Bill also seeks to strengthen protections for our most vulnerable groups: families, individuals at risk of addiction and those who could be disproportionately affected. This is a necessary step toward balancing economic interests with our duty to safeguard the well-being of our society. On the topic of economic interests, I wish to, once again, raise the point I made during this year's Budget debate that in Singapore, betting taxes as a percentage of gross domestic product have been flat in past years at around 0.5%. Given that gambling duties have been unchanged since 2014, there is room to look into raising the relevant gambling duties as a means of supplementing fiscal revenues consistent with an approach of raising taxes on activities with negative externalities. For casino taxes, while I am cognisant that these were raised in 2022, I would argue today as I did back then when we were debating the Gambling Duties Bill, that casino tax rates have much room to grow. In Singapore, casino tax rates range from 8% to 12% of gross gaming revenue (GGR) for premium gaming, and 18% to 22% for mass gaming, respectively.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Just one supplementary question for the Minister. In relation to the new higher-ability programme, can I check again with the Minister if there will be a change in the form class size for those who are in this programme and those who are not in this programme? One of the learning points or points highlighted by many GEP students, past and present, and even parents, is that they shared that the smaller class size of the GEP is one of the key features. I think many educators themselves have also expressed a desire for a smaller class size so that they would be able to, as the Minister said, develop each child to his or her highest potential holistically and I think having that smaller class size will enable them to better do so.”
“To conclude, Mr Speaker, rather than confining our support for platform workers within the existing framework, I hope the additional points I raised can be given due consideration for future legislative amendments to better enhance the sustainability of our platform workers' livelihoods. Notwithstanding my clarifications, I support the Bill.”
“Third, perhaps underlying many of the issues faced by our platform workers is a trust deficit between the powerful multi-billion international technology platforms and the thousands of individual platform workers who feel beholden to the platforms they count on to put food on the table for themselves and not just the customers whom they deliver to. Our platform workers' livelihoods are thus at the mercy of the technology and algorithms behind these platforms, which can sometimes feel like a faceless and merciless machine. One of the residents I met earlier, who cycles to make food deliveries, was even wondering if his lower scores led to him being deployed to "lousy jobs" which involve a long ride to pick up the food and subsequently to deliver them. With the move to introduce CPF contributions for platform workers, there could be concerns, unfounded or otherwise, that algorithms might be programmed to assign more jobs to workers who do not opt in and could better contribute to the platforms' bottom line instead. Perhaps, in addition to formal union representation, the Government can consider the formation of an "Algorithm Committee" to give platform workers confidence that there is fairness and transparency in how the platforms operate. Such a committee was introduced in Spain, for example, as part of their first Collective Agreement for Platform Workers, and, in China, the authorities have also introduced guidelines since 2021 highlighting that the "strictest algorithm" should not be used as an assessment requirement and delivery time requirements should be appropriately relaxed.”
“00 per hour back when I made the speech, this has now been raised to $10.50 per hour, based on the latest LQS as announced in Budget 2024. The 2017/2018 Household Expenditure Survey lists the median household expenditure as $4,906. A DBS survey also suggested that food delivery riders spend $1.12 for every dollar they earn. While such jobs are advertised as being "flexible" and "ad hoc", many platform workers work long hours to ensure that they have sufficient income, with an Institute of Policy Studies survey reporting that approximately 40% of food delivery riders work over 44 hours a week. Today, platform workers have to grapple with ever-changing incentive schemes, weather conditions and other factors beyond their control. Allowing them to earn a fair wage that is in line with minimum wage standards goes a long way in providing some degree of support in alleviating the income instability that our platform workers face. While the nature of the work differs from platform to platform, as long as the principle is abided to, I believe the implementation difficulties are not insurmountable. In China, for example, one of the largest if not the largest market for platform workers, its Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security released additional guidelines earlier this year, stipulating how operators of delivery, ride-hailing, transport and household services platforms should ensure that their workers' salaries match local minimum wages and provide them with time off. This is a further extension of regulations published back in 2021 that already requires operators to meet minimum wage standards and provide social security access to their workers.”
“Today, resident regular primary platform workers aged 60 and over represent the highest percentage of workers by age group at 34.7%, with those aged 50 to 59 representing the next highest percentage at 30.2%. Using the example of a worker aged between 65 and 70 who is somehow still working and not retired, the difference between the initial 3.5% company contribution rate and the steady state contribution rate of 9% is minimal. Assuming he earns the median income of $2,000 as a worker, the difference is a mere $110 a month. Even if we assume the worker is aged 35 or below, meaning a company contribution rate of 17%, the difference is, again, just $270 a month. Surely, that is not too much to ask of our platform companies. I fully agree with what Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon said in response to Parliamentary Questions in April 2022, where he noted that while mandatory CPF contributions will increase platform companies' business costs, I quote: "It is no worse off than any other company employing workers in a similar sector, such as in logistics and transport. Besides, platform companies already contribute CPF for their management executives and administrative staff today." While we want to phase in the workers' contributions over time, given take-home pay concerns, can we not accelerate platform companies' contributions or even mandating that they start contributing their full share of contributions immediately from January 2025? Second, I wish to reiterate a point I made during the 2022 Committee of Supply debate, where I hope that we can pay a fair wage for our platform workers and ensure that they earn at least our minimum wage equivalent, the local qualifying salary (LQS). While this was at $9.”
“This Bill, in essence, implements the recommendations brought forth by the Advisory Committee on Platform Workers to help improve the working conditions and livelihoods of our platform workers, and I believe nobody will disagree with the urgency of addressing some of the pain points faced by our platform workers. There remains much work to be done, however, and my speech will focus on three areas which I believe we can and should do better to ensure the fundamental sustainability of our platform workers' livelihood in the long term. First, under the new section 8A, platform operators must now pay CPF contributions to its platform workers, with platform workers' themselves, too, contributing the equivalent of "employee contributions" through a deduction from their remuneration. Chief among platform workers' concerns is, of course, the reduction in take-home salaries, which can be a sizeable impact, considering the already low average salaries earned by our workers trying their best to feed their families. Granted, in an announcement on 22 August 2024, MOM announced that the PCTS will be enhanced, such that there will be a 100% offset of the platform workers' share of increase in CPF Ordinary Account and Special Account contributions in 2025, before tapering down gradually from 2026 and easing in 2029. However, are we being too lenient on the platform companies themselves in not getting them to better support their own platform workers, whom they rely on day in and day out to keep their platforms working? Platform companies' CPF contributions start at 3.5% for workers across all age groups from 1 January 2025, before progressively increasing each year up to a steady state from 1 January 2029 onwards.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, own account workers have historically been a key feature of our labour markets, with various occupations ranging from real estate and insurance agents, F&B stall owners at our hawker centres to taxi drivers. In recent years, the rise of digital platforms alongside the proliferation of smartphones and the mobile Internet led to the emergence of a different class of own account workers: those who may not entirely be in control of their own business, such as private hire car drivers and food delivery riders, working for the ubiquitous multi-billion dollar platform companies we see today. Many of our Sengkang residents work for these platforms in the gig economy, too, and I have spoken to quite a number of them during my Meet-the-People Sessions, house visits and our shopping malls where many of them are waiting for their next delivery pick-up. While the gig economy is often hailed for its flexibility and autonomy, the reality is that with ever-increasing app sophistication and as these platforms grow in scale, the gig economy has evolved in ways that increasingly disadvantage its workers, and such work is often arduous, risky and poorly remunerated. Behind the appeal of flexibility and the promise of independence lies a reality fraught with inadequate protections and financial insecurity. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] As these issues become increasingly apparent, there is an urgent need for legislation to safeguard the welfare and rights of our platform workers.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just two quick clarifications for the Minister. I think the first, in terms of the nominee directors, my proposal is not so much about the capping of the nominee directorship per se. But I think in ACRA's original consultation paper, they did suggest that for those who hold more than a legally prescribed number of nominee directorships, then you will have to satisfy the prescribed training requirements. I also acknowledge Minister's point about the enhanced supervisory and enforcement effort, so, I think that is definitely necessary and important. But my question is more of, why is it that we cannot have the enhanced supervision while prescribing the minimum prescribed training requirements for those who hold excessive number of nominee directorships? The second is in terms of the key appointment holders. Indeed, just a small clarification because given the definition of the key appointment holders for, basically, those who are principally responsible for the management and conduct of X's business activities. In that sense, the question is more of when it comes to someone who is holding a – whether it is a junior assistant managerial position, the level of requirement versus that of, say, the qualified individual supervising the CSP, whether or not then there is a distinction there and, I think, some of CSPs may be concerned that every single manager that I have would be covered.”
“But when it comes to our commitment to tackling money laundering and illegal activities, we need to take a clear and strong stand, making sure that we examine the sector with a fine-tooth comb and not water down regulatory standards, so that current and prospective businesses which are legitimate can have the confidence of operating in Singapore and dealing with entities operating in Singapore. Notwithstanding my clarifications, I support the Bill.”
“In addition, as the definition of key appointment holders is sufficiently broad such that "any person who is principally responsible for the management and conduct of X's business activities in providing corporate services" would be considered a key appointment holder, there could be a large number of company employees that would have managerial responsibilities, albeit being a junior member of the company, and the level of scrutiny and standards required of a qualified individual (QI) supervising the CSP should be well higher than that of a junior assistant manager. Finally, a group of companies that are connected to one another may provide different corporate services to the same set of clients. To what extent do the current provisions in the Bill mean that duplicate registration is required and, hence, duplicate monitoring of the clients for money laundering risks? For example, there could be efficiency gains for such companies and for ACRA in holding a Qualified Individual responsible for the implementation of the CSP Bill requirements. To conclude, Mdm Deputy Speaker, while we do not want to unnecessarily stifle legitimate activities and investments, it is important that we do our utmost to prevent and detect money laundering and the use of our financial systems to facilitate illicit fund flows. I am confident that most professionals in the legal, accounting and finance functions in Singapore carry out their duties diligently and ethically and a tightening of rules and regulations could be seen as unnecessary, given that they are doing no wrong.”
“Would the relevant agencies and Ministries be spearheading such training and briefings on a regular basis, to ensure that the conduct of fit and proper assessments is aligned with both legislation and the latest AML developments? Next, I recognise that there are close to 2,800 Registered Filing Agents (RFAs) and 3,500 Registered Qualified Individuals in Singapore as at the end of 2023. Within this sizeable group of CSPs, there could be many which are very small entities and could also be largely dominated by one or two dominant customer groups. In such cases, the independence of judgement in the assessment of money laundering risks may be at risk of being clouded in view of commercial considerations. Are there requirements for CSPs to declare their customer concentration risks to certain groups of customers, which are ultimately related to the same beneficial ownership? Doing so could aid ACRA in its risk assessment of the broad swathe of CSPs currently. In addition, under section 9(1)(e) of the Bill, registration or renewal of a CSP will be refused if any of the key appointment holders did not successfully complete a prescribed course or training. What is the level of intensity or duration of such prescribed courses or training?”
“What is the Minister's estimate of the number of nominee directors who would have been covered under this new proposal, especially when 99% of directors hold fewer than 10 directorships and that many nominee directors are likely to be qualified persons themselves? I do hope that the Government will reconsider this training requirement proposal in due course to further strengthen our regulatory safeguards against the abuse of nominee directorships. I have several other clarifications specific to the Bill. Firstly, in relation to the appointment of nominee directors and the requirement for CSPs to take all reasonable steps to be satisfied that the person he or she is appointing is a fit and proper person, I understand that such details will be provided in subsidiary legislation or guidance. In what way would such guidelines and thresholds be similar or different to that of the Monetary Authority of Singapore guidelines on the fit and proper criteria? Given that all directors, nominee or otherwise, owe a fiduciary duty to the company and have a range of other serious duties and responsibilities, it is important that we uphold high standards in determining the fit and proper criteria that should be expected of the nominee directors appointed by CSPs. Doing so will uplift the corporate governance standards of the companies on which they serve on and also complement the work of regulators in anti-money laundering efforts. At the same time, support in the form of training and resources should also be made available to CSPs in guiding them on making such fit and proper assessments, as well as on other broader matters relating to money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing.”
“The proposal first introduced in ACRA's public consultation already provides for qualified persons to be exempt from such requirements, where qualified persons include an advocate and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Singapore, registered public accountants and members of the Institute of Singapore Chartered Accountants. Moreover, the requirement is merely to ensure that such persons satisfy prescribed training requirements. Today, banks have to take steps to ensure that all of its employees are regularly and appropriately trained on anti-money laundering laws and their responsibilities in combating money laundering and terrorism financing. Even property agents have to fulfil an increased number of training hours a year from October 2025 onwards. For nominee directors, whose legal obligations are the same as other directors in discharging their duties responsibly, I do not think that minimum training requirements that were initially considered are a step too far but are, in fact, essential. While it can be argued that it is difficult to come up with a "magic number" on the prescribed number of nominee directorships, the key here is that the proposed legislation would not have prevented non-qualified persons from taking on such nominee directorships. ACRA's justification in not proceeding with this proposal was that it will "enhance its supervisory and enforcement efforts on persons who hold a large number of nominee directorships and exhibit other high-risk indicators". My question then is: does this have to be mutually exclusive?”
“This arises from the requirement for companies to have at least one director who is ordinarily resident in Singapore and, hence, a foreigner may engage CSPs to incorporate companies in Singapore while procuring nominee director services from CSPs. In December last year, it was reported that a Singaporean was helping his clients from China set up companies in Singapore and became a director of a whopping 980 companies. He was subsequently sentenced to multiple charges of failing to exercise his duties as a director and other related charges under the Companies Act, with more than US$5 million being laundered through some of the companies under him. The Companies Act requires each company to have at least one director who is ordinarily resident in Singapore. Additionally, foreigners must engage the services of CSPs to incorporate a Singapore company. As such, a foreigner might also procure nominee director services. In a Ministerial Statement in October last year, Minister Indranee shared that, "ACRA has been studying restrictions on directorships, both to ensure that nominee directors are fit and proper to take up the role and whether it would be useful to limit the number of nominee directorships that one can hold". While the introduction of clause 16 of the Bill meant that a registered CSP must not arrange for a person to act as a nominee director of a company unless he is satisfied that the person is fit and proper, the proposal to require CSPs to ensure appointed nominee directors satisfy prescribed training requirements if they hold more than a legally prescribed number of nominee directorships by way of business was, ultimately, not proceeded with. I view this as a lost opportunity.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, the CSP Bill is an important piece of legislation that is begging to be enacted in the face of rising concerns over the use of Singapore as a home base or transition country by financial criminals. Over the past year, Singaporeans and many others across the world were shocked and captivated by the discovery of one of the largest money laundering operations globally happening on our shores, even as memories of the money laundering of 1MDB funds remain fresh in our minds. As we reflect on the money laundering risks and vulnerabilities in the wake of these incidents, it is important that the reputation of our country cannot be associated with that of money laundering or "Singapore-washing", a term which I first read about in a Financial Times article from November 2022 and which was once again brought up in a Bloomberg Opinion article in June last month titled "Singapore-washing Has Hit a Wall". We need to send a clear message to the world that we are not a haven where our financial system can be easily exploited. When it comes to tightening our regulations, we need to err on the side of caution, even as we continually enhance our supervisory and enforcement methods, as we should. And it is in this spirit that I wish to raise several areas of concerns and seek clarifications to the CSP Bill in this House today. One of the key areas of concern when it comes to the role of CSPs in facilitating or abetting money laundering operations is the misuse of nominee directors and the multiple layers of companies involved in money laundering networks.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Two supplementary questions from me. The first is can the Minister for Transport share further details on the response time requirements for the different levels of oil spill severity, on the different types of resource owners, whether it is the boom operator or otherwise? For example, just like how for us National Servicemen, there are different kind of requirements in terms of the manning, depending on the operational demands of the different units. Second, have the current operators performed to required response time and effectiveness standards in the twice-yearly oil spill response exercise? Are they stress-tested, and will the Minister consider tightening the standards and conducting such exercises annually in light of this incident?”
“Thank you, Speaker. Just one quick supplementary question for the Minister. I note the Minister's explanation about temperature being the reason why we cannot have the one-piece design on cars, but I just wanted to confirm that this new OBU actually meets the minimum grade force standard of the Automotive Electronics Council Q100 requirements for reliable operations in Singapore's climate.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Just one supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. I note in the press release by Cordlife yesterday that they mentioned the remaining five tanks are deemed to be so-called "low risk" in terms of the viability of the cord blood units there. In the testing that the Senior Minister of State mentioned, this one-year period, does it involve comprehensive testing of all the various tanks and units that are stored within Cordlife, and at the same time, also in the operational processes, to give parents the assurance that there is indeed a low risk of the remaining cord blood units being affected and so that there is greater confidence as to any potential future lapses by having this independent third-party audit of Cordlife's assurances?”
“Speaker, just two supplementary questions for the Minister of State. The first is that I understand that based on the guidelines, cost, productivity and feasibility concerns are possible grounds for rejection of FWA requests. But I am also concerned that this could give employers a lot of leeway to actually not consider the FWA requests, where these are actually possible. So, on the part of the employees, should there be concerns that their FWA requests are not adequately considered, beyond mediation and follow-up discussions with management, what are some of their recourse? The second part is I also understand that the Civil Service will be taking up these guidelines, so, just to understand what sort of percentage of civil servants will be able to access some form of formal FWAs after this is adopted?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker and I thank Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua for the update. I certainly concur with the view that, especially in Singapore where land-size constraints is an issue, it is not an efficient use of space. But I certainly also agree with the view that accessibility and affordability to all sports is important. I just wonder if the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can share if, in the next couple of years, when it comes to lease extension agreements for the private golf clubs, whether a view to public accessibility can be a feature in these agreements?”
“Many of us may intuitively know that providing one’s identity to dishonest companies as a phantom employee to earn CPF funds, or handing over one’s bank accounts to strangers to help unscrupulous individuals abuse the accounts, or even facilitating money laundering activities, are all illegal. However, many people may not realise the significant harm that can result from providing one’s identity to strangers for the registration of local SIM cards. Therefore, I urge the Government to conduct more publicity campaigns on this topic to protect our fellow citizens who may unwittingly commit an offense, such as the elderly and those with diminished mental capacity.”
“However, just as we censure financial institutions for not putting in place adequate Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing measures, to what extent does the buck stop at the retailers and authorised dealers themselves; and when would the telecommunication licensee itself be liable for failing to prevent, detect and address such abuses of their SIM cards and telecommunications networks to facilitate crime? Beyond employees of retailers or the mobile service providers, who may have been directly involved in facilitating the SIM card registrations, to what extent would the management team and the board of these companies be liable themselves under the new section 39G, especially since the employees of these mobile service providers are specifically identified as such? Mr Speaker, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As we all know, while physical crimes have decreased over the past five years, scams and cybercrime cases have risen sharply, leading to increase in the overall crime rate in Singapore in recent years. Signs indicate that more scammers are using local SIM cards for scams and illegal lending, even setting up accounts such as PayNow to receive illicit funds and creating accounts on messaging apps such as WhatsApp. After the passing of the Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill, providing personal information to strangers for the registration of local SIM cards, selling SIM cards registered under one's own or another person's name, or receiving, supplying or possessing someone else's SIM card without proper justification can constitute criminal offences.”
“To me, it is much less defensible to feign ignorance when it comes to cases involving lending one's identity to be a phantom employee, even earning extra Central Provident Fund (CPF) along the way, while enabling dishonest companies to sidestep foreign worker quotas, or to wilfully lend one's bank accounts in return for a fee to facilitate money laundering. Under section 39B, it would be presumed that a person has reasonable grounds to believe, that the local SIM card would be used to commit or facilitate a crime and until the contrary is proved, could be found guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or both. To what extent do we wish to pursue or even imprison an elderly person, or someone who may not be literate or sophisticated enough to see the criminal element of this act, even as someone gave him a "token sum" to thank him for his time and efforts and would have "ticked the box" on receiving "any gain"? What kind of educational or information campaigns will be conducted to protect those who may not have wilfully committed an offence for a quick buck and could now face imprisonment? I welcome section 39G, which makes it an offence for a retailer or telecommunication licensee to register a local SIM card using any person's particulars without that person's authorisation or knowing the particulars were false or misleading under certain conditions. We have certainly seen cases in the past, where errant retailers were taken to task; such as earlier this year, where an authorised dealer was fined $48,000 for exploiting customers' personal data to register SIM cards without their knowledge or consent, making an estimated profit of $35,000 along the way.”
“And while we may "feel safe walking alone at night", it is noteworthy that 96% of the population, aged 15 and above, are at least somewhat concerned about becoming a victim of scams; with 99% of seniors, aged 60 and above, sharing the same concern. As scammers and criminal networks continue to evolve their approach in committing scams and cybercrimes against Singaporeans, we need to step up our game to reverse the worrying trend in scam cases and I believe the new measures would be a welcome addition into our arsenal in the war against scammers and cybercriminals. Nonetheless, I have a few areas of concern which I hope the Minister will be able to address. The Bill introduces offences targeting three groups of offenders – irresponsible registrants; those receiving, supplying or possessing local SIM cards; and retailers facilitating fraudulent registration of local SIM cards. Given our earlier efforts to tighten SIM card registration requirements and the implementation of the +65 prefix to identify foreign scam syndicates spoofing local numbers, these scammers have turned to using local SIM cards instead. As set out in the MHA's press release, the rampant misuse of local SIM cards to perpetuate scams has been driven by people who give away their SIM cards or provide their particulars to others to be used to sign up for SIM cards, typically for money, also known as "irresponsible registrants". While it certainly is irresponsible of such people when viewed from a rational third-party perspective, it may be the case of ignorance from the perspective of certain persons, of the significant harms such a seemingly innocent move can cause.”
“Mr Speaker, my speech today will touch on the proposed amendments to deter the misuse of local SIM cards. By now, we are all well aware of how the proliferation of scams and cybercrimes and hence, the overall crime rate in Singapore is on a sharp rise in recent years. While physical crime cases have declined over the past five years, from 23,980 cases in 2019 to 19,966 cases in 2023, the reverse has happened for scam and cybercrime cases, rising almost five times from 11,135 cases in 2019 to 50,376 cases in 2023, with the increase seen last year the largest annual increase yet, at 16,707 cases or an almost 50% jump compared to the year before. While we may not be living in the metaverse per se as yet, our digital lives and online footprint are increasingly inescapable aspects of our everyday lives – from the way we communicate and socialise via online messaging apps and social media, the way we go about our daily jobs in front of our laptops and even the way we transact in the offline world buying lunch or groceries, with Singapore moving closer towards a cashless society. The Gallup's Law and Order Index uses four questions to gauge people's sense of personal security and their own experiences with crime and law enforcement. While much of these relate to one's sense of physical safety and security, in this day and age, it is worth looking at these questions from the digital sphere as well. For example, one of the questions relate to, "within the last 12 months, have you had money or property stolen from you or another household member?" These days, the losses from scams are likely to be way more significant, sometimes involving our life savings, than losing one's wallet from snatch theft or robbery.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just one supplementary question for the Minister. Given that, if I look at the median rentals of 3- to 4- room flats in the last two years since the income ceiling was introduced in 2021, I think it has gone up by about 30% to 70%, or about $600 to $1,600, a month, which is considerably more than the $300 voucher given, which while would go some way in defraying the rental costs, I wanted to ask the Minister if she would consider whether or not to provide greater assistance, especially for those who are less able to afford it, in the interest of equity, especially if rents continue to increase during this one-year trial period.”
“Thank you, Chairman. I figured I should, since Member, Mr Thomas, mentioned my speech. So, I just wanted to clarify with him, if he is suggesting that all Members should make asset declarations and not just Ministers? And does he think that anyone in this Chamber will try to hide their assets?”
“Although the growth in rent has moderated, we cannot rest on our laurels. The need for more widespread rental options to support the wider population beyond specific targeted group remains. From demographic groups like S Pass holders who need a place to stay to individuals who need to move out on their own for varied reasons, the demand in the market for affordable housing, even if on a temporary basis, remains. Even other Ministries are not blind to this problem. In August last year, the Ministry of Health (MOH) sought operators for a planned series of hostels for the foreign healthcare workforce, recognising that they needed support in finding affordable accommodation. Sir, this intervention is illustrative of how affordable rental housing is still very much a work in progress, despite efforts to the contrary. Seventy-percent of S-Pass holders currently reside in rented HDB flats. We need to ensure that rental accommodation options are expanded to prevent the crowding out of local demand for HDB flats. To that end, I would like to ask the Minister the following: The Forward Singapore exercise has emphasised that there will be an affordable home for every budget and need; and that the public housing programmes need to be updated. In that regard, can the Minister share whether the rental programmes are also in line for updating and expansion beyond these pilots? Co-living and Public Rental Housing”
“Chairman, having a roof over one's head is a necessity in a person's life. Even as the Forward Singapore exercise ostensibly shows that the condominium is no longer part of the Singapore dream, having a place to stay, even on a rented basis, provides a sense of stability, security and shelter. Over a year ago, I asked the Minister whether the Government would consider providing further market subsidies for qualifying applicants for schemes, like the PPHS and the Public Rental Scheme (PRS), in order to support young parents. I have also suggested that we cannot rely on the open market to be a catch-all solution for the people who are unable to avail themselves of such rental schemes. At the time, the response from the Minister was that providing subsidies or grants for renting flats in the open market is likely to induce demand and drive up market rents, which will compound rather than help solve problems. As such, we have no plans to provide such rental subsidies. I am gratified that MND and HDB have finally changed its policies in response to feedback, even if it includes one brought up by an Opposition Member of Parliament. I agree with the MND's plans to provide more varied rental options, such as piloting new service apartments and shared facility public rental housing and more importantly, provide subsidies for couples needing help in renting from the open market. These are the first steps on a broader path to meeting varied housing needs, something which I have raised in an adjournment Motion in Parliament in 2021. I would also like to thank the Minister for increasing his tolerance of potential distortionary effects from subsidies. I am sure the couples that stand to benefit from the subsidies are likewise appreciative.”
“With the rising costs of living hitting Singaporeans hard, measures ought to be in place to ameliorate the financial pressures experienced by hawkers whilst ensuring the affordability of hawker food for all. Safeguarding Our Hawkers' Livelihoods”
“Last year, my Sengkang colleague, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, elucidated that pricey coffee shop rents form part of the recipe for expensive hawker food. Likewise, hawkers operating from hawker centres face significant pressures from high and rising rents, causing them much financial strain and, inevitably, many may have to raise their food prices, albeit grudgingly, for many well-meaning hawkers. As of 2021, the median monthly rent was $1,250 for non-subsidised stalls in NEA-operated hawker centres and $2,000 for stalls in privately-operated hawker centres under the Socially Conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre scheme. These pricier rents could likely be due to the operator passing through the high-bids placed during a tender, such as a successful bid of over $6 million for the operation of the recently opened Buangkok Hawker Centre, onto stallholders. Hence, by bringing all centres under NEA control, the costs for our stallholders could be better managed or even reduced, whilst keeping menu prices affordable. Good food stalls in NEA-operated hawker centres also face elevated rents, with tender documents revealing that the median winning bid for January to November 2023 was approximately $1,700, with some stalls even fetching over $6,000 in rent, such as the case for the highest-ever $6,810 per month rental for Newton Food Centre hawker stall. With the introduction of a rental cap for this year's Geylang Serai Ramadan Bazaar, perhaps a similar idea could be implemented for stalls in NEA-operated hawker centres or even other Government-leased properties, such as HDB eating houses as well, instead of a purely price-based tender where hawker stalls are simply awarded to the highest bidder.”
“This is an important question because the high-end kale that a vertical farm needs to sell to be commercially viable is not nearly as valuable as sweet potatoes during a crisis. In essence, it is not clear to me how future tenants at Lim Chu Kang will balance commercial viability with food security objectives. Perhaps, we need to have a larger conversation about how serious we are about ensuring food security by farming locally and what amounts of financial resources would be required to achieve this. Food Security”
“Chairman, I wish to request that MSE share with us a progress update on the Lim Chu Kang Masterplan. The Lim Chu Kang Agri-Food Production Hub has been positioned as a key initiative to support Singapore's "30 by 30" ambition. The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) had earlier said that a detailed Masterplan will be published by 2023. Care needs to be taken to create the conditions to help Lim Chu Kang become a successful agri-food cluster. One question to consider is whether a clustering concept is suitable for agriculture in Singapore. Clustering works if there are true economies of scale, which may not exist if different farms at Lim Chu Kang choose to grow different produce. Indeed, vertical farms survive by differentiating their products for niche markets where prices are higher, but demand is also limited. It would be difficult for vertical farms to compete on a large scale in Singapore, where most households would prefer cheaper produce imported from Malaysia and elsewhere, for example. Another stated objective of the Lim Chu Kang Masterplan is to create good jobs for Singaporeans, but finding locals who want to commute there may be a far greater challenge than we anticipate. Has SFA considered a decentralised model instead? For example, we could consider siting indoor farms in under-utilised buildings or residential areas. Singapore's growing population of plant hobbyists is potentially a good source of farmhands, but long commutes could be a deal breaker for them. Returning to our food security goals, food security is about how we feed the masses during times of crisis. So, to what extent will calorific efficiency be considered when SFA makes decisions about which crops should be grown under the Lim Chu Kang Masterplan?”
“Chairman, two clarifications. The first is that it is hard not for some to see it as a form of carry trade whereby the Government is borrowing at 2.5%, 4% from Singaporeans while the GIC makes 7%, both of which in the long-term. So, the question is: if we already have the CPFIS, can we not allow Singaporeans to co-invest part of their savings? Second, on LRIS, I recognise the Minister's point about risk and that was what the Deputy Prime Minister mentioned as well. But in the advisory panel report, they have also noted that this can be overcome via the use of the glide path of the Lifecycle Fund. So, would the Minister not agree that with the implementation of LRIS, at least based on the numbers they suggested, this would be beneficial for Singaporeans in the long-term?”
“There are workers who are already socially integrated and have picked up English or even Mandarin during their stay. Workers who are more familiar with Singapore's work practices can hit the ground running without needing training from scratch. Currently, workers can only obtain a new job without their current employer's consent during the 14- to 21-day window before the work permit expires, meaning the employers who anti-competitively want to prevent other companies from hiring their workers in the future and for a long period to block them from doing so. Qatar has a 90-day grace period after the expiry of a permit during which a worker can change jobs without employers' permission. We should look to tilt the balance of power to the worker because this is healthy for the industry and workforce. Fair Treatment for Migrant Workers”
“Chairman, employers of work permit holders have been sounding the alarm bells on surging costs of workers' accommodation. Ministry statistics show that median monthly rentals for a bed hit $420 at the start of last year, up from $280 four years before. That is an 11% annual inflation rate, which is not entirely unexpected given the number of migrant workers in the construction, marine and process sectors is 18% above pre-COVID-19 levels and at the highest for all the years MOM has published statistics for. In the 2010 Construction Productivity Roadmap, the Government set a 20% to 30% improvement in site productivity by 2020. The final outcome was 19.5% in the decade past. I understand that there have been no new targets since, with the only productivity related target being the design for manufacturing and assembly adoption in the 2023 Built Environment Industry Transformation Map. But this is a target for process adoption rather than a target for productivity outcomes per se. 2.45 pm A meaningful target is important because it helps us understand how much we can raise productivity before we need to increase capacity for workers. Conversely, if, in the meantime, we are unable to increase productivity and reduce manpower reliance as fast as we would like, we need to ensure that companies are able to access adequate accommodation at reasonable standards and prices so as not to have soaring costs passed through to end consumers eventually, which appears to be what is going on now. MOM shared that migrant workers' numbers cannot keep rising and, hence, the Government should also look to organic ways of retaining talent among work permit holders, which would also improve productivity. One way is to reduce repatriation of workers who have years of experience here.”
“It is instead the chilling fact that the mere presence of such clauses has on employees, especially mid-level ones that may be less familiar with human resource matters and labour protections, when they seek to pursue other job opportunities. What may be worse is absent regulation or guidance. Human resource departments may simply include such boilerplate language in standard contracts. This inadvertently erodes employee rights and diminishes labour market vitality, regardless of whether they do or do not carry the day in court. Review of the Employment Act”
“In Singapore, many non-competes have been declared invalid or unenforceable, but restraints have nevertheless been imposed under certain circumstances. Yet, regardless of the law, many non-competes have become ever more common in local labour contracts. Perhaps more perniciously, they are now increasingly found even in contracts for mid-level employees, not just top management, where the cost-benefit calculus in permitting such clauses are even more shaky. This was amply on display during the recent Lazada trade layoffs, where retrenched workers found themselves bound by a year-long non-compete, adding insult to the injury of losing their job. Given the effects of non-competes on the competition in the labour and product markets, policymakers should not abrogate oversight of such clauses to the judicial system alone but exercise an interest in its regulation. The Government, under the tripartite framework, has indicated that it is developing a set of guidelines on the inclusion of non-compete clauses in local employment contracts. I would like to go a step further and urge the Ministry to consider either providing strong guidance against non-competes or even banning them outright, especially for mid-level and low-level employees. This could be defined by salary of, say, less than $10,000 a month and/or complemented by job scope for all non-C-suite executives. This applies especially to sectors where the frequent movement of employees is a matter of course, such as healthcare and infocomm technology (ICT). The problem with non-competes is not just about whether or not they are legally enforceable. Indeed, in a recent case, e-commerce firm Shopee failed to prevent an employee from joining a rival firm despite the presence of non-compete clauses.”
“The reality is that even though a contract should ostensibly be entered into by willing parties, the imbalance in economic circumstances and bargaining positions between Singaporean employees and employers leaves little room for employees to challenge such unfair employment terms. Further, employees may not see it as in their interest to embark on their new careers by going through the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) or the Courts before they even start work. As my Sengkang colleague shared in Parliament earlier this year, even if these are unenforceable in the Court of law, the danger is that they have a chilling effect on employee rights even before they can be potentially challenged. Pernicious Non-competes and Junior Workers Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: Non-compete clauses are included in many modern labour contracts and impose restrictions on a worker joining or otherwise doing business with a rival firm even after employment with the firm in question is over, usually for a specified period of time. Many companies sign non-competes in the name of protecting proprietary knowledge. In addition to the benefits to the employer, employees may also benefit, assured that its trade secrets are safe, the firm may be more willing to invest in their workers. Non-competes can also promote efficiency since companies are reassured that knowledge transfer within the firm do not come back to bite them after staff members depart. But non-competes can have detrimental effects on worker rights and freedoms. After all, the contract literally constrains what an employee can do even after they are no longer employed. Evidence also suggests that it suppresses wages and can depress innovation.”
“Chairman, I wish to raise the issue of predatory employment contract terms, which many Singaporeans, especially of a younger disposition, may be unknowingly entering into. To better protect our Singaporean workers and educate them on their rights to fair employment and rein in errant employers who make use of unfair terms in employment contracts to gain advantage at the cost of employees' well-being, it is critical to examine some practices and review whether we need to re-examine our stance of not introducing regulations against these. Some examples of these unfair or predatory employment terms are in the position of early termination fees, training recovering fees, replacement fees and other financial penalties that arise when an employee decides to leave a workplace. These terms are often justified by employers as necessary to protect their commercial interests, but in practice, restrict the avenues for alternate employment. Another example is in the position of non-compete clauses or restrictive covenants into certain employment contracts which do have any basis beyond sharing the same industry segment. A recent example is that of retrenched Lazada employees who were bound by a lengthy 12-month non-compete clause covering an extensive list of technology, retail and logistics companies, which extend far beyond the firm's key competitors, according to a news report. Chairman, I urge the Government to investigate how prevalent such practices are in Singapore and whether or not they are justified in the ordinary course of business for an employer.”
“Apart from basic savings accounts, consumers can choose from a range of other savings and fixed deposit products with higher interest rates offered by banks. Yet, despite much higher market rates for both fixed deposits and savings deposits, the CPF deems the level of deposit interest rates to be an unbelievable 0.66% for the period from August 2023 to October 2023. The least we can do is to reflect prevailing rates in the market. I hope the Government will proactively review CPF interest rates to ensure their relevance in the prevailing operating environment.”
“Chairman, I would like to once again take the chance to raise concerns that I had previously voiced out in Parliament over the past three years and also earlier this year, during the debate on our Reserves. There are already certain financial instruments available for members to invest their CPF balances under the CPF Investment Scheme. However, for the benefit of all Singaporeans' retirement, we need to ensure that the long-delayed LRIS is implemented. As described in a poster explaining the benefits of the LRIS, such a scheme involves low fees, is simple and fuss-free. CPF savings are pooled together with other members to enjoy economies of scale, investments follow a market index and there are fewer choices and less headache over which funds to choose and does not need active management to adjust risk. Against the backdrop of inflationary pressures and headwinds in the global investment environment, I hope that the Minister will not respond to this cut calling for the LRIS to be implemented as soon as possible, once again, by saying that he will provide updates when ready, but that he is now ready to provide updates. CPF Ordinary Account Reform Chairman, I would like to once again repeat my call for us to reform the long-outdated and archaic formula in which OA interest is computed. This was last changed in 1999, when the ratio of fixed deposits to savings was updated from 50-50 to 80-20, to reflect the longer duration that CPF OA monies remained with CPF Board. A reform is a long due. As shared by the Monetary Authority of Singapore in its reply to my Parliamentary Question, deposit rates are set competitively in the market.”
“Basically, the used car dealers, when they actually sell on behalf of the owner to somebody buying a second-hand car.”
“Noted, Mr Chairman. So, just two clarifications. The first is for Minister of State Low. I mentioned lemons in my speech. So, in terms of the so-called loophole for the lemon law whereby used cars that are sold on consignment are actually not covered, does the Government intend to plug this loophole, given that it is likely the largest value item for a given household? The second is more for Minister Dr Tan. I think the Minister mentioned the power plants that will be coming up will be hydrogen-ready. So, I just wanted to understand, in terms of the feedstock that they will be using when they are operational, is there a target percentage for them to be using hydrogen? And similar as to how we deal with LNG, does the Government intend to do a kind of centralised procurement of, say, ammonia or hydrogen feedstock for economies of scale?”
“We need to transform the prevailing mindset of caveat emptor or buyer beware into one where individuals can confidently stand against the might of big business and know that the customer is not always right, but at least we will always be treated fairly. Enhancing Consumer Protection”
“Despite transformative changes in how consumers engage with businesses, the approach to safeguarding consumer rights in Singapore has not evolved, appearing to maintain a somewhat indifferent stance toward consumer protections. We only need to look at the many high-profile and recent consumer incidents in Singapore – from the Sentosa Sky Lantern Festival, the abrupt closure of gym franchises, the chronic overbooking of cruises and flights, errant renovation contractors, "lemons" in the used car trade and the unsatisfactory customer service that has become synonymous with certain carsharing and food courier operators. These are just a few of the specific areas which are found wanting when it comes to protecting the interests of consumers. The Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) reported a 24% year-on-year increase in prepayment losses in 2022, with consumers reporting more than $645,000 in losses. In many of these cases, you should not need a consumer association to tell you that businesses cannot just sell subscriptions and then shut down, leaving consumers with no recourse, or that a refund with "platform credits" is not quite the same as cash payments in kind, or that if an airline overbooks and is unable to accommodate your trip, it is solely on them to provide an acceptable alternative to the customers' satisfaction. Moreover, even though many used cars are sold by dealers on a consignment basis, unbeknownst to many consumers, such purchases do not fall under the "lemon law" – ironic, given the prevalence of lemons in the used car industry. 1.45 pm While the Government has undertaken some initiatives to address unfair trading practices, it falls short of the robust protection framework that a first-world economy like Singapore should have.”
“During a Parliamentary Session on the rental of 26 Ridout Road last year, People's Action Party Member of Parliament Poh Li San suggested that it would be in the interest of transparency for Minister Shanmugam and Minister Vivian to declare all their property assets. However, this was not a requirement under the Code of Conduct at the time. It should be. Building a Future-ready Public Service”
“Incorruptibility is fundamental to the success of the Singapore Government. Yet, public declaration of assets by Ministers is not practised here although Ministers do disclose this information as well as company directorships to the President via the Prime Minister in confidence as per the Code of Conduct for Ministers. As described in the Code of Conduct, this would help counter potential allegations of corruption and unexplained wealth, and to avoid potential conflicts between private interests and public responsibilities. Public declarations would thus go a long way in ensuring public accountability, the Singaporeans to whom the executive serves, and not just accountability to the President. In countries like the United Kingdom (UK), Ministers are required to disclose their financial interests publicly, including investment properties. Perhaps we can consider adopting such a practice in Singapore as well. Such declarations would go some way to bridge the trust gap between Singaporeans and their elected officials, and also help to prevent the spread of misinformation. For a start, we need not make the full disclosures of sensitive details mandatory. For example, in the case of residential properties, unit numbers can be redacted to protect the privacy of the Minister involved. I am sure that this practice will be appreciated by Singaporeans. The question of whether our Ministers can be trusted to scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between their official duties and private financial interests, as the Ministers' Code of Conduct requires them to do, has been raised before in this house.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just two areas of clarification for the Deputy Prime Minister. The first is on CPF. Does he believe that it is adequate to plan for retirement adequacy via risk-free returns instead of taking reasonable risks via a diversified, well-managed portfolio for the long term? So, in other words, if our investment entities are good enough for our collective reserves, why is it not good enough for individual Singaporeans' retirement reserves? The second is in relation to LRIS, which I mentioned during my speech as well. Again, as the Deputy Prime Minister is now Deputy Prime Minister and soon to be Prime Minister, does he intend to still follow through on the Government's acceptance of the recommendation in 2016 on LRIS? If so, when and, if not, why not?”