Dennis Tan Lip Fong
Singapore
“Yes, Sir. By combining practical experience with advanced analytics, we can transform traditional operational careers in the highly productive technology-enabled professions, ensuring that more high-value decision-making and better paying jobs remain in Singapore.”
“When Singapore officers are deployed at Bukit Chagar in Johor Bahru, Malaysia, do they enjoy the same legal protections and operational autonomy as their Malaysian counterparts enjoy when stationed in Singapore?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Relating to one issue of co-parenting, I would like to ask will the Ministry consider granting foster parents synchronised access to the child's Health Buddy app? Currently, foster parents have no access to the app and require the cooperation of biological parents.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for his reply. Would the Ministry consider a tiered co-payment model for private providers similar to the EIPIC-P scheme where middle-income families can pay a regulated rate for a fixed number of additional private therapy hours to supplement their child's public intervention?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just one clarification for the Senior Minister of State. I thank the Government for acknowledging the gap regarding the software-driven energy degradation and for the commitment to monitor and test when necessary.”
“Yes, just a quick clarification. I thank the Minister of State for the answers and the details. The feedback I receive is pertaining, especially to making appointments, because there have been instances where foster parents experience appointments being cancelled without their knowledge, and then having to arrive at the hospital unnecessa…”
The complete record
Every one of 1,079 lines we hold for Dennis Tan Lip Fong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 22.
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. My heart goes out to the parents and family members of the two children at the heart of the incident. Sir, may I seek the Minister's assurance that sufficient psychological support is being offered and given to the parents and family members of the two children?”
“In the meantime, I will also be grateful if the Minister can update us on the Government efforts made so far to ensure that all private condominiums and commercial properties will be able to get adequate support for the installation of charging units beyond the EV Common Charger Grant as well as the adequacy of the grant to all eligible or affected parties. May I also know whether the grant covers any infrastructural works required for the installation charges beyond price and the installation charges? Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding my questions and concerns, I support the Bill.”
“Next, I would also like to ask the Minister, for non-landed, private residences and commercial buildings, whether the Government will stipulate a fixed minimum number of charging points in each carpark or what is the ratio of charging points vis-à-vis the number of carpark lots and, if so, for carparks in these non-publicly owned properties as well as public carparks, will the Government stipulate the ratio in any Government regulation. Mr Speaker, Sir, during the Committee of Supply debate for MSE this year, the hon Mr Lim Biow Chuan raised the issue of MCST needing to obtain approvals from residents via general meetings. Mr Ong Ye Kung replied that there are certain places, such as SP Mobility, Greenlots and Charge+, who are willing to foot the upfront installation fees for EV charges in return for collecting charging revenue for a period. One of the condominium MCSTs in my constituency has already provided feedback that, given the conditions of the lease of chargers, with one of the companies mentioned by the Minister, they may still need to obtain between 75% and 90% general or special resolution approval from residents for the lease anyway. I hope that the Ministry will look further into this and to provide necessary assistance so that condominiums and their residents will be able to overcome all difficulties arising from the need to obtain adequate general meeting resolution approvals and, in the event of no approvals, to advise them what they should do.”
“I would like to ask the Minister: one, whether the successful bidders are supposed to install the charging points in existing lots in the existing public carparks; two, whether the Government has decided on the minimum number of charging points per public carpark, that is to say, what is the ratio of charging points vis-à-vis the number of carpark lots; three, whether these charging points will be in consecutive lots side-by-side; and, four, whether they include any change of design of the carpark in such a way that any queue waiting for any single lot will not cause any obstruction to other cars leaving the carpark or going to another parking lot. Next, beyond the importance of having the right carpark infrastructure or making the necessary conversions or adjustments to ensure the carpark design or infrastructure does not by themselves cause any unnecessary obstruction and inconvenience to motorists and other members of the public during charging, I would also like to ask the Minister whether he will consider any of the following actions to encourage people to move their vehicles away from charging stations immediately after charging so that others are not unnecessarily deprived of their use. One, require service providers to impose heavy payments after charging is done if the vehicle is not removed from the station within a short grace period. Or alternatively, to have carpark authorities impose an escalating fine for motorists continuing to keep the spot occupied after charging and, beyond a short grace period, for example, fines to increase at every 15-minute interval.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill seeks to amend the Land Transport Authority of Singapore Act to confer on LTA new functions concerning the regulation of safe use of EVs and the development and maintenance of accessible charging points in public and common areas, as well as working with EMA on the area of electric charges for vehicles and the facilitation of the development and maintenance of charging points in the public and common areas. In my Budget debate speech this year, I had raised, among other related issues, the issue of the critical number of charging points required in all residential, commercial carparks and even other public carparks, as well as the design of the carparks vis-à-vis the locations of the charging points as well as my concern that most of the present HDB public and commercial carparks are not being adequately designed to prevent bottlenecks or congestion caused by more than a few cars waiting for the current few charging units available at each carpark, especially as, currently, the lots with the charging units are placed side by side and usually on the lower floors. On 1 April 2021, it was reported in The Straits Times that a public tender for the installation of EV charging points at some 200 public carparks across Singapore has drawn 19 bidders. The tender called for bidders to build, operate and maintain more than 600 charging points for 12 years, starting as early as 31 August this year.”
“If this is considered to be too difficult, we should not be surprised, as we did not do it earlier when we had fewer categories of cyclists and with less busy roads, no busy connector or footpath networks used by different types of users. It will boil down to political will. And we should not be half-hearted about this if we have invested huge resources for cycling in our extended cycling network and have nice plans for cycling lanes elsewhere, if we intend to take cycling and other forms of active mobility seriously, and if we still believe in active mobility for last-mile connectivity. If the LTA still harbours any wish for e-scooters to make a return as a choice transport for last-mile connectivity, we had better get our riding culture right, right now.”
“This, I think, is probably the most important and, arguably, the hardest objective we need to achieve. In my speech for the Active Mobility Bill debate in 2017 and on numerous subsequent occasions in Parliament over the past few years, I have harped on the need to work on having consistent enforcement and adequate public education in order to improve our riding culture, whether for e-scooters, e-bikes or bicycles. This remains true till today. I have cited my speech from more than four years ago just to highlight for today's debate that the issue with riding culture has been a tenuous one for a long time due to years of inadequate action in the past. Perhaps in the last four years, the Government has been too busy dealing with e-scooters after the Active Mobility Bill was passed, but I hope that the Government will address the riding culture once and for all for all groups. As I have said on numerous occasions previously, consistent enforcement must go beyond occasional or even weekly spot-checks in selected spots and public education must go beyond just safe riding courses or online publicity to educate those who do not solicit the information by themselves. This is the thrust of the written Parliamentary Question I have filed for today. If people are used to riding in a certain way for years and they do not bother to find out about LTA's safe riding courses or go to the LTA's Facebook to watch their videos on these topics, how do you get the message to these people? How do you tell them to stop beating red lights and cycling against the traffic, and to get a helmet or use bicycle lights? On footpaths, how do you persuade the many pedestrians to keep left and for all users to be considerate to each other?”
“So, do we now think that we need to improve our riding culture or do we think it is merely only a small number of cyclists who flout the law and that we do not need to improve our riding culture? May I suggest that we should do more now? The number of recreational cyclists and e-bikes has continued to increase. The Government is building the much talked about extended cycling network. In recent times, the Government has also talked about looking at having more dedicated cycling lanes, which are non-shared footpaths, and are looking at cycling lanes on selected roads. But having more cycling lanes will not remove any existing cultural baggage. Riders, when left alone in such lanes, still need to be considerate, keep left, use the correct lights at night – which, by the way, many cyclists are not doing and there is inadequate enforcement. Many people are still not happy with sharing the use of footpaths with cyclists; and in my view, this stems from the issues of riding culture too. I have spoken on this previously. In recent years, the Government has had to deal with usage problems with our e-bikes and e-scooters, primarily stemming from a poor riding culture. It has been told to me in Parliament previously that the extended cycling network will not connect to the HDB blocks directly and there will still be a connection via footpaths. So, how do we ensure that PMD and PAB users will always dismount consistently and take a walk through the HDB block they are heading towards? This is part of the problem leading to their ban from footpaths eventually. Sir, I am of the view that having a competency certificate or requiring bicycle, PAB or PMD licensing alone will not improve the situation, unless our riding culture improves.”
“Many pedestrians walk on or across the cycling path without caring for the safety of cyclists. Many cyclists cycle on the footpath. And I said that I have seen accidents in the park over the years, accidents that can be avoided if we had the right cycling culture. And I also said that the cycling culture in East Coast Park reflects the cycling culture nationally. I also said that, to improve our cycling culture, the Government must have the political will to do so. I then reflected that around 10 years before that, I remember there was at one time a flurry of complaints in the newspapers about non-enforcement against errant cyclists, cyclists cycling on the wrong side of the road or beating red lights were already common occurrences then. I remember once the authorities replied to say that they had inadequate resources to address the problem. I said in my speech then that we missed a great opportunity to solve the problem back then in the mid-2000s. In those days, the only people who seemed to have broken the law were elderly cyclists. But after that, there was a huge influx of foreign workers and this meant a huge increase in the number of people using bicycles and many also followed the cycling culture, ignored the road safety rules because of lax enforcement. And then from the late-2000s, with the increase in white collar foreign labour, we also saw many taking recreational road cycling at the same time as many Singaporeans did. This was before e-bikes and e-scooters became popular. Mr Speaker, Sir, regrettably, previous Governments had, over the years, failed to invest sufficiently to improve on our riding culture.”
“At first glance, this may not be a bad idea though it will not be popular with some riders. I would urge the Panel and the Government, in considering whether to have such requirements for cyclists or bicycles, to consider the regularity of breaches of Road Traffic and Active Mobility Rules by cyclists. Ask ourselves whether we see such acts on an almost everyday or regular basis: beating red lights, cycling against traffic, cycling without helmets when on roads, not keeping on the left lane. And how many of us cyclists actually know that it is, for example, illegal to cycle on the right side of a motor vehicle when not overtaking or planning to make a turn to the right? We see frequent social media postings on some of these acts and even a small number of cyclists challenging riders or pedestrians when they were reminded. When there is consistent taking of liberties by cyclists, this factor should be taken into consideration for it reflects prevailing riding culture, the lack of respect for the law and consideration for other road or footpath users, not to mention the occasional road rage, in turn, tarnishes what many other road users think generally of cyclists and will breed a lack of respect for cyclists. It does not help us cyclists in getting more respect and space from motorists on the road and even from pedestrians. Mr Speaker, Sir, I first brought up the issue of riding culture in my speech at the debate of the Active Mobility Bill in early 2017. I said that despite riding in East Coast Park since I was young, I had in later years avoided cycling there because it has become unsafe. I said that cyclists do not always obey the directional signs or keep a proper lookout for pedestrians or other cyclists.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. The Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill is introducing, among other things, the requirement of a competency test certificate for a rider to ride only a road-only power-assisted bicycle (PAB). Sir, I think it is reasonable to require all users of our busy roads to have a basic working knowledge of the rules of the road and the driving or riding etiquette vis-à-vis other road users, including pedestrians, motorists, PAB users and cyclists. This is important for the safety of other road users as well as law and order. After all, for our roads to be safe, the predictability of the behaviour of all road users must be there, at least to a large extent, barring a small number of errant users which should then be subject to the penalties of our laws. Some people have cited the cost of requiring certification as a cause of concern. I hope that the Government will ensure that the certification course and associated course fees are kept low at all times and that those who cannot afford the fees can receive financial assistance for these fees so that they are still able to use such forms of transport and that there should not be too regular renewals. The behaviour of many PAB users and, indeed, cyclists on the road seemed to imply that many riders either do not know the law or choose to disregard the law, for example, riders beating red lights or riding against traffic. Mr Speaker, Sir, I also read from recent media reports that the Government has asked the Active Mobility Advisory Panel to study whether to require registration of bicycles or licensing of cyclists, including considering the possibility of requiring cyclists to take a theory test if they wish to ride on the roads.”
“I think it is a lot of hard work and I agree with the Minister, and as a member of the maritime community, I agree that these efforts are very important to continue in this COVID-19 climate. It is very important for our port of Singapore, our businesses and our reputation. So, I would like to thank MPA and MOT officers for their hard work.”
“Can I continue to implore LTA to consider public education from the point of view of not just giving information to interested users who will draw information from the Facebook but rather to think about how to disseminate public education on safe and considerate use of footpaths and the PCN, to people who do not consciously look for it. Because these are people who use our footpaths, the aunties and uncles who may get upset with people ringing the bell when cyclists are passing by, keeping left or keeping right, people walking their dogs on the PCN or footpaths, stopping to chat. These are all very everyday moments. That is one. The second clarification – I am not sure which appointment holder will answer this – but I will like to take an opportunity to ask, when does the Government envisage our public bus fleet going fully electric? My third clarification is not really a clarification but I would like to take the opportunity to thank the Minister for sharing about crew change. I do not have a clarification because I filed a Parliamentary Question on this recently and I would like to thank the Minister and the Senior Minister of State, perhaps, for a very comprehensive answer on my Parliamentary Question on NewOcean 6, relating to the measures on crew change arising from the infection of crew on visiting ships to the port of Singapore. I just want to take the opportunity to applaud the hard work and the good efforts of MOT and MPA on coming up with the crew change policies and guidelines, as well as for safe boarding of visiting vessels at the port of Singapore by workmen or third parties.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have three clarifications. First, I would like to thank the Minister and all the appointment holders for the answers that they have given in the Committee of Supply. I thank the Minister, especially for the answers given in respect to the concerns that I raised on the aerospace sector. The first question I have is in respect of what Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey has shared with us regarding safe riding. I agree with Member Ms Yeo Wan Ling's concern regarding safe riding on footpaths. I would like to implore on LTA to continue to improve efforts at public education as well as at consistent enforcement. I think it is a message that I have shared virtually every year in the last couple of years. Yesterday, I shared during the MND Committee of Supply in a cut on safety of the Park Connector Network (PCN). The reason why I shared during the MND Committee of Supply – but it is related to, I think, a lot on LTA's efforts on this – is that I believe that a busy PCN, especially during peak times, is always a good indicator of the state of our culture of path sharing by different users. I expressed concern that over two years because – I shared a previous cut on this two years ago in the same MND Committee of Supply – I felt that there is not many changes in terms of the culture. Therefore, I would like to implore LTA to continue to work on public education as well as consistent enforcement. I appreciate Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey sharing about the efforts.”
“And employees in this niche industry may need more time to secure jobs outside this view, given the need for retraining and reskilling. Lastly, I think there is a need for us to evaluate the upcoming pipeline of talent from our Institutes of Higher Learning into both the aviation and aerospace industries. Fresh graduates from these programmes may find little opportunities there if the global recovery is gradual. I hope the Minister can assuage these concerns. Strategies to Reboot Changi Air Hub”
“NTUC itself had to intervene in the retrenchment exercise conducted by Eagle Services Asia to protect Singaporean jobs. With no signs of an immediate recovery for aviation, more of such retrenchments may be expected as companies seek to cut down on their expenses. Even when the air travel does begin to normalise, given that the aviation supply chain is driven by airline demand, aerospace companies could likely be some of the slowest to recover in this hard-hit sector. While they still do have continuing GSS support the sector could use more targeted support if we are to maintain our position as an aviation and aerospace hub. Could the Ministry considered tailored support schemes that could be explored specifically for this group? Would the Ministry also be able to provide further details of its previously announced plans to develop programmes for aviation workers; at risk of losing their jobs or being unemployed, first mentioned in December last year? What is the coverage and scale these programmes, and when will they come into effect? This is a especially pertinent as aviation workers are likely to continue to experience a dent in their incomes, not to mention face increased job risk, well into this year and next, even as other parts of our economy slowly start to pick up. I would also like to ask in terms of retrenchment in the sector, what percentage of the aviation and aerospace sectors has been made redundant and what percentage of this retrench group has benefited from the COVID-19 recovery grants? Can there be consideration of extending the eligible period of support beyond the current three months, given that the aviation sector is likely to remain impacted by the pandemic for a prolonged period of time.”
“Mr Chairman, Singapore's Aviation industry has been one of the hardest hit industry in this pandemic, given the sector's complete dependence on international travel. With the resurgence of COVID-19 in many regions of the world, as well as the emergence of new and more contagious COVID-19 strains, the outlook for the aviation sector remains bleak with air travel likely to be stymied well into this year and next. I recognise the efforts made to support this industry in terms of re-establishing air travel and supporting airport-related companies and employees through the various support packages previously announced, and the newly announced plans in Budget 2021. However, I wish to clarify with Minister on a few matters. The aviation sector has seen the biggest influx of targeted support of $870 million in this Budget. However, is the Ministry also looking to extend targeted support to other aviation related businesses that are similarly affected by the effective halt of air travel? Specifically, the aerospace sector needs help. It currently employs some 22,000 people of which 80% Singapore residents and contributed some $13 billion in total output to our national economy in 2019. Companies in this sector include those involving maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO), avionics and aircraft component production and repair. These businesses are essential segments of our aviation supply chain in Singapore, and face major and sustained downstream impact resulting from airlines deferring aircraft orders and reducing their after-market expenses. Already, we have seen significant retrenchment exercises among a number of key players in the sector. For example, the aircraft engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce retrench about 24% of its workforce in Singapore in July last year.”
“If we want to mix them, they have to try much harder to ensure safe and orderly use by different users. Once the extended cycling network is up, we may see the return of the e-scooters to our PCN in greater numbers. Their return will only exacerbate the present situation with the ill-disciplined and poorly policed use of the PCN. I would like to ask the Minister again to increase both the public education and enforcement efforts by both NParks as well as LTA officers for the safe use of our PCN. Land Use Plans amidst Changing Landscape”
“Safe Use of Park Connectors Two years ago, I filed a cut with MND on the safe use of park connectors. I said that, depending on locations, the park connectors can be busy places and well used by many people for recreational purposes, as well as for commuters getting to or from nearby MRT stations or bus stops. I highlighted my concern about safety of park connectors, particularly the uncertainty regarding the appropriate use of lanes provided on park connectors. Two years on, there are a few changes in some PCN. In the PCN near my home, there is a change to the lane markings. They are now marked in red. The narrow lane has a pictorial sign showing "no e-scooter". The wider lane has a pictorial sign showing a bicycle. Occasionally, there is a sign on a post asking people to keep to their lanes with the pictorial showing two lanes side by side, one for cycling and one for walking. However, in other PCN, there are only pictorial indicators for cyclists and people on foot without any line drawn, or worse still, no separation, no indication at all. Like what I have said two years ago, many people still walk on both lanes and from both directions, and cyclists and PMD users are often left wading through the traffic on both lanes frequently unsafely, especially during peak periods. Many cyclists are still using the lane for walking and many people on foot who are using the wider lane often do not keep left, including many people walking their dogs or pushing a stroller, forcing each other to swerve around them, including forcing cyclists onto the narrow lane. Two years on, I feel that not much has changed. In the interest of safety, I am in support of having separate dedicated lanes for those on foot, for bicycles and PMD.”
“Last month, the Minister for National Development replied to my Parliamentary Question (PQ), informing me that there are 150 HDB blocks which are not eligible for the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP), blocks where there are still residents who do not have same floor access to lifts, that there is no need to inform residents in affected blocks directly that no LUP is available for now, as HDB will continue to explore new technical methods to bring down LUP costs, and to improve accessibility without direct lift access. Presently, Hougang SMC has six such blocks. I have continued to receive requests from residents with no same-floor lift access, asking when their LUP will come. It seems like only if residents write in to HDB to ask for the upgrading will they be told the real reason for no upgrading to-date, for example, whether it is for reason of cost or due to technical constraints. Notwithstanding my PQ, I would like to reiterate my request for HDB to provide an update to residents living in all such affected HDB blocks. It is good to give some certainty to residents, tell all affected residents upfront the reason why HDB is not proceeding with LUP, whether it s because of cost issue for that block or because of some technical constraints. For blocks where cost is the issue, some of my residents have asked that HDB should share with residents the costing involved, and how much each resident must pay, so that residents have a better understanding of the situation including deciding for themselves whether this is something they can afford and are willing to pay for. HDB should engage affected residents directly on its decision, on possible alternative lift installation methods, and also what can HDB provide to improve accessibility without direct lift access.”
“Mr Chairman, may I take my two cuts together?”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. Just a quick clarification for either Minister Chan or Minister Ong. In the Budget debate speech, I said I understand the Government has been studying the potential of battery swapping as a complement to EV charging. I am just wondering whether the Government can provide the House with some update on its study so far.”
“In supermarkets or shops, can we use more of good quality reusable shopping bags like this one, something that I have been using for the last nearly 20 years? If we only need to use, say, one or two plastic bags for refuse disposal a day, can we not take more plastic bags than we need? In this way, we may end up using fewer plastic bags and may still have enough bags for our refuse. Toilet Improvement Programme”
“Mdm Chairperson, with Singaporeans increasingly aware of the need to be environmentally conscious, we should bolster our fight against the use of plastics. In the Green Plan, one of the key pillars is sustainable living, where policies will be geared towards propelling us into a zero-waste nation powered by a circular economy. Physical recycling is the main channel to reuse plastic, but our current recycling rate of only 4% for plastics is poor. To tackle our plastics waste issue, we will, therefore, also need a reduction of plastics consumption, especially single-use plastics. When we are just focusing solely on recycling, this neglect on reducing our waste is what drives production which, in turn, creates carbon footprint. To put matters in perspective, a recent research by researchers from NTU and their colleagues in Finland has shown how single-use plastic bags have a global warming potential 14 times more than a reusable plastic bag. I understand that the citizens' workgroup on reducing excessive consumption of disposables was convened and it called for a fee for each plastic bag if they take three or more of them at supermarkets. I wish to lend my support to this call and ask that the Ministry also study a single-use plastics charge across retailers and F&B outlets, phased in over five years, to encourage a reduction in plastics waste and look for alternatives. Concerns raised on the potential negative effects on lower income households can be tackled by having a rebate scheme. The authorities can also work with charity groups and non-profit organisations to give out complimentary reusable bags. I repeat my call in my Budget debate speech last year for mindsets to shift in the way we consume, to only use what we need to use.”
“I urge the Minister to look into this. Expansion of Coverage of the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act”
“Mr Chairman, while the Workers' Party welcomes the recent tightening of work pass requirements, there remains a need to review other aspects of these requirements. One aspect is the issue of unaccredited certifications, which has been in the news again of late. Holders of certificates from degree mills and unaccredited schools have perplexed Singaporeans in previous incidents and may uncertain the belief that all our work pass holders can do the job they claim to be able to do on paper. To be clear, such academic qualifications may not be forged and we have a system in place to deter forged qualifications. However, these unaccredited qualifications are viewed with scepticism by our citizens and the various degree mills that offer academic degrees and diplomas for a fee with little to no real coursework, give little confidence. While MOM has indicated its risk-based approach in dealing with such matters and employers do have a primary responsibility to ensure the authenticity and quality of the academic qualifications submitted, this approach should improve so that the trust necessary for Singaporeans to accept truly talented foreign PMETs in Singapore can be improved. Therefore, I urge MOM to consider mandatory Educational Credential Assessments, or ECAs, for all Employment Pass and S Pass job applicants that need University degrees and diplomas. The cost to be borne by the applicant. Such ECAs would only be accepted from a panel or Government appointed established independent consultants. The ECA report will be sent to the relevant agencies, the prospective employer and the applicant. This is not a novel idea since our medical and legal professionals have a list of recognised institutions that have only recently become narrower to uphold the standards of professions.”
“I am asking these questions because Singaporeans need to understand and by into the Government's strategic vision on these aspects of our foreign and even security policies and the guiding principles there too, for us to have any chance at success in navigating these very tricky waters.”
“Mr Chairman, I think it is clear that the world has entered a new phase of renewed major power rivalry between the US and China. Many are now familiar with US President Joe Biden's foreseeing extreme competition in US-China relations and General Secretary Xi Jinping's framing of a wide range of issues as PRC's core interests that the US should respect. A recent South China Morning Post editorial even noted that disputes between China and the US appear unavoidable. 2.00 pm Realistically, no amount of pleading or reasoning from Singapore is ultimately going to change minds in either Washington or Beijing. Any believe that a Kumbaya moment will come at any time soon, may be optimistic, but potentially naive. As a smaller actor, Singapore will probably do well to be prepared for the worst that may yet to come. Given the current trajectory in US-China relations and the very real possibility of a more tense environment, several key questions loom large with Singapore. I would like to ask the Minister to spend some time in laying out Singapore's strategic vision to deal with the potential challenges that lie ahead. First, I would like to ask, how Singapore's autonomy and freedom of action can be protected under the more contentious circumstances that we find ourselves in today? Second, how will Singapore maintain positive and robust ties with the two majors, competing against one another without getting drawn unnecessarily into the friction and risk being ground up in the process? Third, how does Singapore avoid one party perceiving our efforts to stand for our own interests as being detrimental to theirs, and earning suspicion for siding with their rival? Let me be clear. I am not asking for operational details.”
“Further, Southeast Asia is also a focal point or intensifying competition between the US and China, and any inability ASEAN to address such an ability could spur further contestation among major powers in our region. This may possibly cause severe and even irreversible divisions in ASEAN in ways that paralleled the recent crisis within the Pacific Islands forum. Calls in Myanmar for the boycotting of Singapore firms began after Dr Balakrishnan's earlier answer to the House which included a line on separating business and politics. Our Government's views, notwithstanding, perceptions in Myanmar and elsewhere in the world may differ. So, this has to be sensitively managed. Finally, I would like to ask what is being done to reach Singaporeans who may be stranded in Singapore but are unable to contact the Embassy in the event of any connectivity issue. Being in a position to extend support may be especially critical in the event of a further escalation of violence and instability. Singaporeans in Myanmar should know of the contingency plans for extraction should the need arise. My next cut. Relationship with US and China Singapore's foreign policy towards the US and China has been one where we have reiterated that we do not wish to choose sides and want to retain the ability to make choices for ourselves. Our Prime Minister has even implored both Beijing and Washington to stabilise the US-China relationship and focus on building constructive ties. This position rests on the view that many areas of significant overlap in interest exists between the US and China, and will continue to exist if not expend. But this does seem at odds with recent global developments.”
“Thank you. Mr Chairman, Foreign Minister Dr Vivian Balakrishnan recently responded to questions on the situation in Myanmar. Following the coup by the Tatmadaw. He stated that an escalation of the situation will have serious consequences for both Myanmar and the region. Indeed, reports that developments remain highly fluid contrary to hopes for greater stability. The death toll of protestors being killed by Security Forces has reportedly been increasing. And yesterday, it was reported at least 18 have been killed. This is disconcerting. Dr Balakrishnan, in his earlier responses, has indicated a need for consensus to hold an ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Meeting on the Myanmar situation. Given the continued uncertainty and tenseness of developments, will the Foreign Minister provide an update on Singapore's position on the crisis? Will he also inform the House of Singapore's role in facilitating the emergence of a consensus for a meeting, if there is one, and what we hope can be achieved from this meeting? ASEAN's ability demonstrate initiative on the Myanmar issue may be key. We speak repeatedly about ASEAN unity and centrality but that centrality only matters if it is meaningful and can make a difference. This is important because an effective ASEAN helps members like Singapore maintain our autonomy and a platform to make our voices heard. Singapore is invested in ASEAN success. So, it is imperative for the Government to bring Singaporeans on board with what it is doing to support our ASEAN's ability to play a practical and positive role when faced with unfolding situation in Myanmar. Political instability in the region, even away from Singapore, can have an impact for us here.”
“One after the other? What I meant is, I can continue with the following cut?”
“Mr Chairman, can I take my two cuts together?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. A very short supplementary question. Will the Government consider giving a periodic milestone for the ride-hailing industry to convert to EVs?”
“Apologies! Scams Involving Bank Customers”
“I would like to urge MAS to explore having a chip-and-PIN debit card or a PIN-only NETS-enabled ATM bank card only meant for domestic payments that are issued to senior citizens. Such cards can provide an added layer of defence to senior citizens against any fraud or scams.”
“Mr Chairperson, there has been a concerted effort to educate and encourage all seniors to go digital. While such projects, like Seniors Go Digital and Hawkers Go Digital, are highly commendable, there must be the awareness of the gap between the availability of technology and the people using it. Contactless payments through credit and debit cards have recently become the norm in Singapore, at retail merchant outlets and even in buses and trains since 2019. Until recently, NETS relies on a PIN for verification since its inception in 1985. Recently, though, NETS has pushed out their new contactless card with similar operating principles for contactless cards as international scheme debit cards. This has led to some worries among the elderly. While contactless payment has made payments easy, senior citizens are more vulnerable to scams. The spike in bank account debit and credit-card scams in recent years has also made the elderly concerned over losing their hard-earned money in these scams. One of my elderly residents was told by DBS that all new cards will be contactless and they will not allow any card requiring PIN for all transactions. He contrasted DBS' services with OCBC's which, he said, provided a debit card which is digitally rendered non-operative by default unless so activated by the customer. Mr Chairperson. I understand that Singapore uses a chip and signature system in verifying payments through debit and credit payments. Many European countries, on the other hand, have implemented a chip-and-PIN authentication system. Such a system may be a good guard against attempts at fraudulent payment scams targeted at debit and credit cards. Indeed, we have seen an increase of such cases in the recent one to two years, and many against our senior citizens.”
“Sorry, Mr Speaker. There is some value in scrubland. Currently, it provides for our biodiversity – there is wildlife, there is floral and fauna. But eventually, it can also develop into something even better over time. So, if we have a holistic approach that can look into land of such a nature, it is in-between, it may not be secondary forest, but nonetheless, it is important biodiversity. Next, I would like to ask the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Minister can confirm that Huationg has been paid for the land clearance that it carried out in December last year and January this year.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two supplementary questions for the Minister for National Development and one supplementary question for the Minister for Trade and Industry. I thank both Ministers for the answers. For the Minister for National Development, I would like to ask the Minister whether he thinks that it is now time to consider codifying Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) and other similar assessments like the Environmental Baseline Study (EBS) into our legislative framework. That means to have a law that codifies all these assessments, quite akin to what they have in the UK, where it prescribes when the EIA must be done, and when it does not have to be done, the legislation will state that it is because it is provided for in a differently scheduled provision under a separate area of law. Related to this, under such a proposed framework, I would like to ask the Minister for National Development whether or not, in the proposed review that he is looking into, to consider a more holistic approach in assessment. At the moment, it is different types of assessment that we are doing – EBS, EIA, and the assessment that Minister Chan has mentioned because of the different conditions. So, I wonder if we can have a more holistic approach. And I say this because, for example, in this case, both Ministers mentioned about scrubland, that this Kranji woodlands being scrubland —”
“As SMEs have comparatively less cash buffer compared to large enterprises, SMEs may find it hard to pay the rental on time. This only slows down the recovery for SMEs and could have the undesirable effect of entrenching the positions of multinational corporations (MNCs) and Government-linked Corporations (GLCs). I call upon the Government to see if there is scope to have tapered support for SMEs in rentals over this period. In the medium term, the study of the commercial and industrial rental markets, as it stands, is necessary, with it studying offerings of low rent commercial and industrial spaces managed by HDB and JTC respectively. Mr Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, acknowledging the building of a sustainable home for all in Budget 2021 is a timely move. When we look at the threats of climate change today, when we look at how much further we must go to protect our natural capital, to promote green transport and manufacturing, to provide more support to our people as we sustainably develop Singapore, it is clear that we have much work to do. At the debate on the climate change Motion earlier this month, Minister Grace Fu stressed that "sustainability has always been a part of Singapore's DNA because we have always pursue a balance between economic growth and protecting our environment since our early years". But it merits mention that this pursuit while leaving us with good economic growth over the decades was also what left us with the limited green space today. Our understanding of our environment today has become much more sophisticated than in the past, in part due to advances in our understanding of climate change. Likewise, our notion of sustainability must also advance with times. We must do much more to address these threats we have never seen before. 1.32 pm”
“Can the Government thus provide the House with specific future plans to work at both global and regional levels to mitigate climate change? Before I end, I want to touch on two other issues beyond climate change. First, Deputy Prime Minister Heng announced in his Budget speech that the Government will partner the Community Development Councils (CDCs) to give all Singapore households $100 worth of CDC vouchers to be used at participating shops and hawker centres. He said he hoped that the vouchers would bring more business to our heartland shops. I am glad that he thinks that our heartland shops could do with this help. I agree that more can be done to help our small businesses in our heartlands. It is challenging times for many such businesses. Recently, a resident who own a mini-mart in a heartland shared with me about his business challenges. Besides challenges from the supermarkets in the area, he also lamented on the challenges from Fairprice on Wheels. He wishes that the Government can consider how to give more space to SMEs, especially when it comes to competition from Government-linked businesses. Next, I move on to the issue of commercial and industrial rents. Let me declare that I am a proprietor for my own law firm business. I have previously spoken about the concerns SMEs had with rentals during the debate on the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets. To its credit, the Government stepped in to provide up to $900 million in cash grants to landlords for rental relief. In addition, the landlords also receive $1.8 billion dollars in property tax rebate. But this does not tell the whole story. In a Straits Times article, it was quoted that many SMEs did not want to go through the process of confronting their landlords for fear of making things worse.”
“So, I repeat the call made by the Leader of the Opposition, the hon Member Mr Pritam Singh, for the Government to review this hike and to phase in the petrol tax hike in proportion to the actual growth of EV usage on the roads. Next, I move on to progressing in our manufacturing and construction sector. In his Budget speech, the Deputy Prime Minister also reminded the House that the Government announced its Long-term Low-Emissions Development Strategy (LEDS) in 2020. In Singapore, our manufacturing and construction industries account for about 38.8% of total greenhouse gas emissions, the second largest sector after our energy sector which contributes about 41.87%. While the decarbonisation of our electricity grid is but one way in which the manufacturing and construction sector will be able to reduce its emissions, what findings have the Government made so far in the study of emerging technologies under the LEDS which can help us decarbonise industrial processes in this sector to move us closer to our updated periscopes? Next, I talk about providing support at the global and regional levels. The Deputy Prime Minister also mentioned that Singapore will continue to play an active role at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations. As a key node in our globalised world economy, we are well-positioned to work with other countries to reduce global emissions. The threats of climate change, which this House will be familiar with, require us to do more actively in a similar vein. We also need to work more closely with our neighbours in ASEAN to curb regional emissions. While the growth of emissions has slowed down for some of our neighbours, this has increased for others, and more work needs to be done.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, another aspect of a sustainable future transport landscape must be the provision of affordable and reliable transport options for our people and small businesses. Deputy Prime Minister Heng announced in this year's Budget that he is going to increase the petrol duty. He gave the basis that, I quote, "usage-based tax has helped shape consumer behaviour towards a more efficient use of fuel or environmentally friendly alternatives". However, as I mentioned above our EV infrastructure is currently far from ready to allow large numbers of car owners to switch immediately to EVs. So, aside from the Government wanting to raise tax revenue from this source, I think raising the petrol duty this abruptly on a basis of shaping consumer behaviour towards an environmentally friendly option, is in some sense putting the cart before the horse. Why was this hike not phased in with advance notice? Just two years ago, in my Budget speech, I spoke against the diesel tax increase, highlighting that it would increase cost of doing business and cost of living. I think the increase of petrol duty may also increase cost of living which may be in these difficult times. As for rebates offered, unless the increase is only for a limited time like a year or two after which it will be adjusted downwards, such rebates are really short-term measures, and ultimately, owners, and even business owners, will have to face the full effect of the price increase later on. So, I hope while this abrupt increase may not be what we say in Chinese: 落进下石, it is certainly 雪上加霜 for many.”
“We cannot afford the loss of productivity this will entail. Given the transformation of vehicle population internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles to EVs and the resulting proliferation of large numbers of EV charging points in time to come, it may be timely to ask about its likely effect on our electricity generation infrastructure. While there may be an electricity supply glut now, the Government needs to plan for the additional electricity generation required for EVs in the years to come such that a step-up usage will be smooth and importantly, sustainable, and will at the same time not pose any strains on our power system at all times. And in answer to the House in January this year, Minister Tan See Leng alluded to how EVs were one of the drivers to increase electricity demand in the future. To this end. I hope the Government will give an update to this House on its current plan to step up the electricity generation specifically for use by EVs in the coming years. Next, I touch on the phasing out of ICE vehicles. Previously, the Government has said it aims to phase out all ICE vehicles by 2040. This endeavour is by no means a small one given that I believe we have more than 900,000, almost a million vehicles, on our roads. Can the Government therefore provide the periodic milestone it aims to reach in this regard in the run-up to 2040, including Malaysian ICE vehicles on our roads, which I brought up last year too. Further, while the Government announced last year that all newly purchased public buses will be electric or hybrid in nature, when does it envisage that our entire bus fleet will be fully electric. I next touch on petrol tax.”
“As the charging technology improves over the coming years with the proliferation of EVs all over the world, we should also bear in mind the possibility of older EVs operating together with newer EVs may slow down the efficiency in the use of chargers. Another factor to consider is the critical number of charging points required in all residential, commercial car parks and other public carparks, as well as the design of the carparks vis-à-vis the locations of the charging points. Imagine a situation where you have 100, 200 cars coming back after work to an HDB carpark, with each taking, for the sake of discussion, say 20 minutes to charge their car. Given the present design, will we have bottleneck issues to address? After all, Singapore is not like the US or Australia where most people live in landed homes and have the luxury of charging their vehicles in their own garages overnight. Fast charging is of course critical, but until we reach the stage where every or most of the carpark lots come with a charging unit, most of the present HDB, public and commercial carparks products are not adequately designed to prevent bottlenecks or congestion caused by more than a few cars waiting for the current few charging units available at each carpark. The design of hundreds or more of our existing carparks will need to be evaluated to avoid the likely congestion scenario I have described. I look forward to the Government's assurance that these concerns are being looked at and if so, to share details of any stepped-up plans to address them. I remember a conversation I had once with a driver in China waking up to queue for his car to be charged at 3.00 am to 4.00 am every morning. We cannot allow such scenario to happen in Singapore.”
“In my Budget debate speech last year, I also urged the Government to consider the alternative of battery swap stations which have the advantage of speed, ensuring the load on our power grid can be managed well, while providing ready infrastructure for battery recycling. I said that this has really been tested in China and should be a key consideration here. Later on, in March 2020, in response to my colleague, the hon Member for Aljunied, Mr Leon Perera, the Government said that it was studying the potential of battery swapping as a complement to charging and that this consideration will influence the final design of our EV network. Can the Government provide the House with an update on its findings on the potential use of battery swapping technology in Singapore? I now move on to EV chargers, charging points and carpark designs. While it is important to have a good number of charging points, we should also bear in mind that these numbers will be insufficient if we do not get the other details right. For instance, will these points enable fast charging? What is fast charging? Can we do in one hour as opposed to eight or 12 hours perhaps, which we can expect from the domestic charging rate? But even at half an hour or one hour, will this be too slow and inconvenient for consumers who are used to spending five to 10 minutes in the petrol station. And assuming that these charging points are all fast charging points, if we want an efficient system, we will still need to ensure EVs have correspondingly quick-charging capabilities as different EVs may have different capabilities.”
“As we await the Government to explain to the House its findings on the Kranji woodlands case, I hope that the Government will also commit to begin providing greater legal protection for our secondary forests and green spaces. Next, I touch on promoting green transport. In order to move towards a more sustainable future for Singaporeans, we should also take a critical look at how our people move. Greening our transport infrastructure is an endeavour that, like other goals in sustainable development, must not only meet our need for environmental sustainability, but must also meet our social needs in an economically viable way. Transport is the third largest sector from which our greenhouse gas emissions from fuel combustion are derived, accounting for about 15.7% of our emissions. Of these, the biggest contributors are the use of diesel, accounting for roughly 63% of transport emissions, and the use of petrol, accounting for 33%. Next, I move on to Electric Vehicles (EVs) and battery swaps. In my Budget debate speech last year when I commented on the then target of 28,000 charging points, I said that even assuming a 30% conversion from the current vehicle population to EVs, we would still only end up with one charging point for every 10 EVs by 2030. I had asked whether we should even be contented with this ratio. I therefore welcome the Deputy Prime Minister's announcement in his Budget speech last week that the Government now plans to increase the number of charging points for EVs from the original target of 28,000 to 60,000 by 2030. This is going to be a step-up from the over 1,900 charging points, 1,400 in public carparks, which we currently have as a January 2021.”
“It is important to note that even though NParks oversees the management of activities within nature parks and that activities which may damage trees within nature parks are regulated by a Subsidiary Legislation under the Parks and Trees Act, the mechanisms by which these activities are regulated, as well as the penalties for contravention, are much less robust than those applicable to areas designated as nature reserves in the same Act. Moreover, the fate of other secondary forest spaces, which are not currently used as nature parks, hangs in the balance as they may be cleared for development. The Workers' Party thus reiterates its call on the Government to commit to providing more secondary forests with greater legal protection, with some of these areas regulated as nature reserves, while simple recreation areas could be allowed in other areas, but with more stringent rules and penalties than is currently enforced in public parks. By legislating to this end, Parliament will send a clear signal to not only future generations, but to various actors, including contractors, Ministries and Statutory Boards, and the Government itself, that the destruction of forest areas will come at a cost. The reason erroneous clearing of forested spaces in Kranji woodlands is a prime example, where the Jurong Town Corporation (JTC) said that it was caught unaware of the clearing of plots of land earmarked for future use and for which an environmental baseline study was reportedly being carried out. Thus far, the contractor has only gotten away with stern warnings despite clearing forests, while JTC has not faced any legal consequences.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, earlier this month the House debated the issue of sustainable development at length. It declared climate change a global emergency and recognised the role that multiple stakeholders will have to play to sustainably develop Singapore. Last week, we also heard about the Singapore Green Plan, with the Deputy Prime Minister highlighting the building of a sustainable home for all as one of the key thrusts of this year's Budget. In my speech, I will be talking on the need to protect our natural capital before talking about promoting green transport, as well as about the proposed petrol tax. I will then touch briefly on making progress in our manufacturing and construction sector and the support Singapore should give for climate change at the global and regional levels. Mr Speaker, Sir, a key area addressed by the Singapore Green Plan is, of course, our greenery. One aspect of the Plan is the one-million-tree movement which aims to plant a million trees by 2030. In response to our Parliamentary Question I filed earlier this year, Minister Desmond Lee shared that the one million trees to be planted under the Plan will sequester an estimated 78,000 tonnes of carbon. While I do welcome this measure, a glaring omission under the Singapore Green Plan is a lack of commitment to provide greater legal protection for our secondary forest. Under the Plan, the Government aims to set aside one thousand hectares for green spaces of which 200 hectares will be for new nature parks.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me get organised because I cannot really write so I could not really take notes. I thank the Member for Fengshan, Miss Cheryl Chan, for the amendment. At first glance, I have a concern that the amendment pertaining to the word "That the climate change is a global emergency" seems to have de-emphasised the importance of climate change in Singapore. But I think I do recall that Miss Chan did mention something along the lines of not just in Singapore so I believe we are in agreement that, as many Members in the House today have expressed concern of that climate change, how it affects Singapore, how it affects the world and the efforts that all of us, locally and all round the world, need to make. So, on that note, I am prepared to accept these amendments. Miss Chan also mentioned about the term "a threat to mankind". Perhaps, it should be more appropriately worded "as a threat to humankind" or, in fact, "a threat to all life on earth". That is all I have to say. Thank you.”
“If we fail to take bolder steps to safeguard our forested areas and if we fail to improve our land use planning in non-forested areas today, we will leave our future generation to the landscape deprived of enough areas to even consider conserving and perhaps more worryingly, we will leave them with the mindset that tomorrow's problems are for tomorrow's generations to solve. Mr Speaker Sir, as we seek to address one of the most major threat Singapore faces today, we, in the Workers' Party believe that we need to rethink our notions on what sustainable development should truly mean as we move into the future – a future where we do not see development and sustainability as two opposing outcomes, a future where sustainability is embraced by all sectors of the economy and a future where all Singaporeans know and feel that all of us have a stake in co-creating a stronger response to the emergency, that is climate change. Mr Speaker, Sir, my fellow Workers' Party Members of Parliament will further elaborate on why the Workers' Party is proposing the amendments to the Motion, for which I beg to move.”