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 13 of 22.
“If this seems too expensive, impractical or ambitious, then MOT may need to reconsider e-scooters and other PMDs as a serious option for first and final mile connectivity. However, if our cycling path network were to become sufficiently extensive, such that PMD and e-bike riders do not need to alight and push, it may in turn do away with the need for cyclists to share the use of foot paths, which is still currently allowed. This prospect may be welcomed by many foot path users who may not think that sharing foot paths with cyclists is a good idea. I have asked these questions earlier this year and I look forward to the Senior Minister of State's clarification today. Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding the questions and concerns I have, I support this Active Mobility (Amendment No. 2) Bill.”
“In lieu of the continuing use of e-scooters by a small number of food delivery riders and their companies not able to stop them, I would like to ask Senior Minister of State Lam to clarify explicitly: (a) besides taking actions against errant riders, can and will LTA take immediate action against their companies to stop such breaches of law? (b) What penalties are available against the food delivery companies for failing to ensure their riders' compliance with the law? Mr Speaker, Sir, not long ago, we heard in this House that the construction of the expanded cycling path network for use by bicycles, e-bikes and PMDs will be ramped up. May I ask the Senior Minister of State to provide an update on the status of the construction of the expanded cycling path network and whether it has been affected by COVID-19 measures or by any of the foreign workers involved in the project being quarantined or prevented from working? The nagging question I have about the expanded cycling path network is whether cycling paths will be directly linked to HDB blocks, condominiums, houses, shophouses, office buildings and industrial buildings such that riders do not need to alight and push their PMDs or e-bikes along foot paths to their homes, workplaces or other destinations. If riders need to pass a foot path or road en route to their destination, it may result in some e-scooter or e-bike riders continuing riding on the path and taking the easy way out. As e-bikes have become more commonly seen after the foot path ban for e-scooters, we also see more e-bikes on foot paths now. We may end up kidding ourselves after spending so much money on the expanded cycling path network – that it will solve the problems created by e-scooters' use of foot paths.”
“So, it is important that we get the issues of public education and adequate enforcement right, or we will be kicking the can down the road. Mr Speaker, Sir, in the past few months, from April to June, I have seen on quite a few occasions, food delivery riders in their uniforms using e-scooters on foot paths and on roads. They are mostly from Grab and on two occasions, Foodpanda. In February this year, I asked in a Parliamentary Question whether the Government will consider imposing legal obligations on food delivery companies to ensure that their delivery riders on e-bikes or e-scooters will comply with active mobility or road traffic regulations, including but not limited to compliance with device requirements or proper usage. Minister Khaw Boon Wan said in reply that under the Activity Mobility amendment and the Shared Mobility Enterprises (Control and Licensing) Act, food delivery companies should be responsible for ensuring that their riders ride safely. However, it is not clear as to how those laws were imposed on obligations. So I raised the same concerns again at the Committee of Supply debate for MOT this year and also suggested the imposition of penalties on the food delivery companies in the event of any failure on the part of their riders to comply with the law. Senior Minister of State Lam said in response and I quote, "Businesses have a role to play, which is why LTA has introduced regulations on companies and continues to work closely with companies to encourage responsible behaviour in their riders." But no further details were given on enforcement.”
“I have previously spoken of how information needs to be piped to those who do not sign up for a course or do not actively seek such information online, including cyclists and device users as well as pedestrians. I hope that the MOT and LTA will look at how to enhance the public education efforts for shared use of foot paths and public connectors. Next, I would like to talk about adequate enforcement – the other limb necessary for safe active mobility use. On 5 May, The Straits Times reported that Senior Minister of State Lam had said that there has been increased use of non-compliant personal mobility devices (PMDs) on roads during the circuit breaker period. Even though we have seen fewer e-scooters around, there is hardly a day for me when I do not see any e-scooters on foot paths or on the road. There are still e-scooters defying the ban after so many months. These riders clearly think they can get away with it because they do not sense that they will be taken to task immediately. I am really not sure that enforcement is indeed sufficient with spot checks on certain locations. For example, I use the Siglap Park Connector daily and I have never seen enforcement officers in the vicinity of the connector. Unless one pushes his e-scooter to the park connector, most riders will need to ride on the road or on foot paths to get to the park connector. Ditto for other park connectors. For example, the one along Hougang Avenue 7. I am sure I am not the only person who has recently seen e-scooter riders riding across the road at traffic lights. Even if we think that these days, we may not see as many e-scooters as we used to do before the foot path ban, we should not forget that when the expanded cycling path network is up, e-scooters may yet be popular again.”
“I support this Bill’s intention to extend the coverage of the law to include path-related open spaces. Clause 4 amends section 6(1) to allow for any such space to be declared pedestrian-only, footpath or a shared path by LTA whether be it in public land or private land. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State how would this be done in practice? Would LTA consult the local stakeholders before declaring any area to be a specific type of path? I also support the Bill’s intentions to enable the earlier disposal by LTA of seized non-compliant active mobility vehicles for safety reason. On the issue of the disposal of seized vehicles under the Act, may I know currently how many of such seized vehicles are being held by LTA? May the Senior Minister of State also share with this House how does LTA currently dispose the seized vehicles? Are they taken apart and sold for scrap locally or abroad? How are the batteries disposed of, bearing in mind the safety risks associated with illegal batteries? Mr Speaker, Sir, during the circuit breaker, it was reported in the media that many people flocked to use many parks and park connectors. I am a daily user of a popular park near my home as well as a park connector leading up to the East Coast Park and I concur with those reports. My use of the parks and park connectors during the circuit breaker reinforced my previous views on the culture of foot path or park connector use by all users. Even without a large number of e-scooters in use, as we have previously seen, we can do more to improve on the culture – keeping left, giving way, or giving space to each other; riders reducing speed when approaching other users.”
“But till today, we still see throttle e-bikes around. The best solution to disallow non-specs e-bikes, e-scooters or other PMDs would simply be to ban its import. After the Bill is passed today, the requirement for import approvals will likely be a first step to make sure that we do not have unauthorised e-bikes or e-scooters, and in fact, other types of PMDs, some of which we may not even be able to imagine at this moment. We need to make sure that the controls are in place to ensure that no unauthorised small motorised vehicles can even be shipped into Singapore via any shipping lines or logistic service providers. They must be stopped at all our customs checkpoints for land, air or sea. The logistic service providers of all importers including online suppliers must be made aware and accountable for the ban. Online e-commerce suppliers must not allow sale and import of such unauthorised machines into Singapore. Will the Senior Minister of State share with the House how the Government will work with suppliers and retailers as well as all shipping and logistics companies to ensure that no unauthorised models can be brought into Singapore including from foreign e-commerce online suppliers? Will someone who try ordering an illegal vehicle online from a foreign webpage be told before paying and checking out that it cannot be delivered to Singapore? Finally, given likely frequent changes in technology, standards for permissible SMVs should be regularly updated and that these updates be made easily available to the public to access and check. For instance, a link to these requirements can be placed on a prominent place on the LTA website's landing page. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support this Bill. I now move on to the Active Mobility (Amendment No. 2) Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad that MOT is finally introducing the Small Motorised Vehicles (Safety) Bill. In particular, it is finally introducing a law to make it an offence for a person to import a small motorised vehicle without having a permit to do so. Back in April 2016, at the 2016 Committee of Supply Debates for MOT, I had mentioned that unauthorised e-bikes were still available for sale. I said that many e-bikes which were in use were not authorised models and I asked the Ministry to consider only allowing authorised e-bikes to be sold in Singapore. This was when MOT was looking at introducing new active mobility laws and looking to promote use of PMDs for first and last mile connectivity. Less than four years later, on 4 November 2019, on the day MOT announced in Parliament that e-scooters were to be banned from the footpaths, consigning it into, at the least, temporary obsolescence for many users, I had a Parliamentary Question that day asking what are the measures in place to deter the sale and supply of non-compliant PMDs in Singapore by online suppliers and whether the Ministry has asked Singapore Customs to help detect and prevent non-compliant PMDs from being brought into Singapore by any supplier or individual. I wondered why it has taken so long for the Government to cut this import of illegal e-scooters or e-bikes. The public had to endure wide usage of illegal specs e-scooters and e-bikes for some time. Till today, I still see quite a few illegal e-bikes being used. Senior Minister of State Lam also mentioned this recently. I remember in the debate for the Second Reading of the Active Mobility Bill, I was asking about allowing throttle operated e-bikes and Senior Minister of State Lam gave his explanation as to why throttle e-bikes were not allowed.”
“He asked whether the Special Relief Fund can be paid directly to all registered private hire drivers instead. I urge the Government to look into this. On the issue of landlords passing on savings from the property tax rebate and rental waivers granted under the Unity and Resilience Budgets, I am glad that the measures are being taken to ensure landlords' cooperation. However, I would like to ask what measures are being taken to ensure that tenants will share any property tax rebate or rental waiver savings they obtain from landlords with their sub-tenants, including the newly announced increase in rental waivers for Government-owned properties? Now, be they tenants or sub-tenants of Government-owned, private, commercial, industrial or office properties, what can sub-tenants do to ensure that they get to enjoy any rental rebate passed on to the tenants by the landlords? Are coffeeshop store-holders in this position as well? Finally, I would like to ask the Government to look at how we can extend better protection to many elderly Singaporeans working in hawker centres and coffeeshops as well as those elderly working as cleaners against the risk of the COVID-19 virus as I believe that they are the most vulnerable group – the elderly. For example, could the Government look into whether they could take more measures to ensure that these elderly hawkers and workers will have better protective equipment and safer working environment? Mr Speaker, Sir, in closing, the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic fallout resulting from it are likely to be here for quite some time. I look forward to the Government rendering more assistance to more of our affected Singaporeans and SMEs.”
“The property that they live in or own or co-own may not be relevant to their current income and earning capacity as well as most relevantly, their present position of suffering from sudden financial problems due to the COVID-19 crisis. If they own such property, is the Government expecting such self-employed people to sell their property quickly? If so, is it really fair or realistic to expect such persons to sell their homes immediately in such a market condition? This is different from the usual situation of people applying for financial assistance due to longer term employment and so on. May I also clarify whether this relief is open to those who live in such property above $21,000 annual value but do not own such property? Next, I move on to help for our taxi and private hire drivers. It is already a well-known fact that our taxi drivers and private hire drivers are suffering from a huge drop in business. I would like to seek some clarifications regarding the Point-to-Point Support Package for taxi drivers and private car hire drivers. I would like to know whether it is true that the Special Relief Fund under the Point-to-Point Support Package is only available to taxi drivers who work under the auspices of a taxi company or for private car hire drivers who work with Grab or GoJek? A resident who has a private car hire licence and serves his own source of customers had checked and was told that he did not qualify. If it is true, may I know the rationale behind this? A private hire car driver also shared with us at our Meet-the-People Session in Hougang last week that the incentives that come together with the Special Relief Fund may come with conditions imposed by his company that are impossible to fulfill in this economic climate.”
“May I clarify whether such arts businesses, i.e. those registered as charities, will be entitled to the same wage support under the Jobs Support Scheme as available to other businesses? If not, what is the corresponding assistance being given to this group of arts businesses? Mr Speaker, Sir, I move on to certain aspects of the Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme (SIRS). May I ask how did the Government arrive at this figure of 100,000 self-employed persons? In MOM's paper titled "Labour Force in Singapore 2019", it was mentioned that in the year ending June 2019, and I quote from paragraph 1.1.9, "211,000 residents were engaged in own account work as some form of employment" and own account workers were defined in the same paper as, and I quote from paragraph 1.17, "individuals who operate their own business or trade without employing any paid employees". The Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme will be open to those who earn a net trade income of no more than $100,000, live in a property with an annual value of no more than $13,000 originally and do not own two or more properties. While it is good that the $13,000 annual value limit has since been raised to $21,000 yesterday. In principle, the concern with setting a figure – a limit – at all, on this is that we are talking about a special economic crisis situation caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic, which has developed suddenly. These self-employed people see their livelihoods being adversely affected in a short time and require quick and immediate assistance from the Government, regardless the nature of their residences.”
“With the circuit breaker announcements, things will get worse for many businesses in the coming month or longer, especially the many businesses that do not thrive on working remotely. The property tax rebate, together with the savings by way of the rental rebate, will be helpful in some ways to alleviate the sharp pain, and so will the Jobs Support Scheme. But will it be enough to ensure the survival of the business and to save jobs? Retrenchment has already started in different industries. Just last week, one of our residents, who is a chartered accountant in his 30s, shared with me that he has just been retrenched from a mid-sized accounting firm and is struggling to find employment in his industry. Indeed, if business is down, businesses will struggle to pay all their business expenses until a certain level of business has resumed – especially many SMEs, who may have precious little to sustain their business expenses, including rent and income beyond a few months. This economic crisis is likely to hang over the world for quite some time. Beyond the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets, how will the Government assist businesses and Singaporeans to stay afloat in the coming months and beyond? Before I move away from businesses, I would like to seek some clarifications regarding arts businesses. With the cancellation of entertainment, our flourishing arts professionals have to cancel their plays, musicals, concerts and other performances, and shows, which may go on until the end of the year. When performances are cancelled, there are no ticket sales and corporate sponsorships are often cancelled – not to mention that in these difficult times, it is challenging to expect support from many corporate sponsors. Many of these arts businesses are registered charities.”
“The Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme is not applicable to them as the scheme stipulates that there should not be any employee income. I believe that this situation is not unique to the private education business. There are many in our micro-SMEs in other industries or sectors who are in the same situation. On Sunday, I met one of our residents, who runs a phone repair business and who is in this exact position. How would the Government help these affected Singaporeans? Yesterday, it was announced that all pre-school operators are to provide 50% refund of net school fees for non-attendance during the circuit breaker period. Parents will no doubt welcome this announcement. For parents who send their children to MOE Kindergartens and pre-schools run by anchor and partner operators, including those run by PAP Community Foundation (PCF) and NTUC, they are already entitled to various subsidies. But for other SME operators, where Singaporean parents only get the standard subsidies, or for faith-based kindergartens, where there are zero subsidies, the net refund that these operators must cough up is relatively much higher as the net fees payable are higher compared to MOE Kindergartens and those run by anchor and partner operators. In some cases, the total refunds will likely be higher than the 75% wage support received by way of the JSS. Furthermore, many operators had to incur extra costs recently to have additional manpower to cover for those on Leave of Absence (LOA) or five-day medical leave, and for extra cleaning works. I have dealt in some detail on the private education industry. However, it is but one example out of many businesses which have been affected by the COVID-19 crisis.”
“Learning service providers to MOE schools and to pre-schools are another group of SMEs in the education industry which have been affected from an even earlier time, with all outdoor programmes and all large-attendance programmes being cancelled in early February and co-curricular activities (CCAs) in March. Given the requirements in pre-schools that trainers cannot teach in other schools concurrently and students of different classes cannot share the same enrichment classes, many enrichment classes had to be cancelled from February onwards, with many left without any revenue. Besides a significant loss in revenue, these SME businesses still face the pressures of premise rental and staff salary. The Government's offer to pay 25% of the salary of their staff up to the first $4,600 under the JSS – which is just a few percentage points above the amount of employer's CPF contributions the employers will have to pay for each staff per month anyway – may assist to a certain extent, but it may not be significant enough to save jobs – the reason stated by Deputy Prime Minister Heng for the Resilience Budget. How will the Government provide greater assistance to these businesses? At this point, let me touch on one further aspect of the Jobs Support Scheme or JSS, again. The JSS is not applicable to one category of employees – employees who are shareholders, partners or sole proprietors of businesses even though they may take a salary as an employee of the business. I understand that in the private education business, there are many people in such a position – sole proprietors, partners or company shareholders of their businesses – who are at the same time registered employees of their business. Those such persons can be regarded as self-employed in some ways.”
“Since the Resilience Budget has been proposed on 26 March, has any study been done to assess the grave effect the pandemic has or is about to have on all business sectors? Let me share one example of a troubled sector here. On 24 March 2020, the Government announced that all centre-based tuition and enrichment centres will be suspended. The reason given is the need to reduce the intermingling of students from different schools and enhance the safety of our students. This brings to a stop the daily bustling activities that take place in our tuition and enrichment centres during both weekdays and weekends. While some of the tuition centres may have resorted to online learning, yet online learning has not been able to completely replace many of the pre-existing programmes in the tuition centres and enrichment centres. Some programmes may not be suitable for online learning. Some tutors, are for various reasons, not able to convert their face-to-face programmes to online modules. Some parents are also, for various reasons, not keen to convert existing programmes to online learning or even via Zoom, when offered. Many parents prefer traditional methods of personal teaching. Habits and mindsets will always take time to change, but that is scant comfort to businesses suffering the sudden shock to their businesses brought about by the abrupt ban. For centres who may not have locked in their students' subscriptions for a longer time, having chosen to collect fees on a monthly basis, they face abrupt loss of revenue as some parents have not continued to pay the fees.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. The COVID-19 pandemic, with the effects of lockdown or stay-at-home orders, has brought a standstill to businesses all over the world and Singapore has not been spared, too. Beyond aviation, tourism and F&B, most industries and sectors in Singapore have been affected, some earlier than others. The effect on economies worldwide will be an unprecedented one, possibly worse than any global economic downturns we have ever seen since the Great Depression. The economic fall-outs may go on for quite a while after the COVID-19 pandemic has been tamed. I declare my interest as an SME owner. As the businesses of our SMEs are affected, many Singaporeans they employ are in turn affected. Under the Resilience Budget, the Jobs Support Scheme extended greater assistance to specified sectors, such as aviation and tourism and F&B sectors, giving 75% and 50% support for wages up to the first $4,600 of each of their staff wages for these respective sectors for nine months. The remaining businesses only received a flat 25% of their staff wages up to the first $4,600. While the aviation, tourism and F&B sectors may be badly affected, the vast majority of our SMEs outside of the aviation, tourism and F&B sectors lament they will get much less than the 75% or 50% wage support received by the priority sectors. Who is to say that businesses in other sectors are not as badly affected or will not be as badly affected? While the wage support for the Jobs Support Scheme under the Solidarity Budget has been boosted to 75% for all businesses for the solitary month of April and will be welcomed by all, for many businesses, it may only mitigate part of the losses expected from the enforced month-long closure of workplaces starting today.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two questions. My first question is for Minister Lawrence. Could I ask the Minister to shed some clarity on the rationale behind the action to be taken in the event that a there is an infected staff or pupil in a school. For example, what is the rationale behind decisions, for example, in deciding whether a school should be closed for the day for cleaning or should be close for two weeks or whether Stay-Home Notices should be issued to pupils and staff. I think some parents would like to know more details of this. My second question relating to our manpower needs. I believe I have asked a Parliamentary Question relating to this. I would like to ask, perhaps, the Minister for Manpower or any Minister, what is the status of the reported 30,000 Chinese workers who were at home much earlier, during the Chinese New Year period. How many of them have returned and if they have not returned, when are they expected to return?”
“Chairman, I thank Minister Khaw, Senior Minister of State Lam and Senior Minister of State Janil for answering some of the questions I have raised. I have a clarification for Senior Minister of State Janil. In my Budget debate speech, I raised the issue of the Government's handling of the foreign internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles issue in Singapore. I also had some suggestions. I would like to just ask Senior Minister of State Janil: at this moment, how does the Government intend to handle the issue of foreign ICE vehicles in Singapore? I am saying this because I think we all know that there are plenty of Malaysian lorries, buses motorcycles and passenger vehicles that come in and out of Singapore almost on a daily basis. I am sure that the Government would have to factor the presence of this large number of foreign ICE vehicles in Singapore as we work towards the plan in 2040. So, I will be grateful for the clarification.”
“Mr Chairman, the Bukit Panjang LRT system, dogged by reliability issues, is now undergoing a $344 million overhaul that is due to be completed in 2024. Yet, we should not forget that parts of the Sengkang-Punggol LRT system (SPLRT) are also reaching a critical point in their lifespan where concerns on reliability may begin to surface. Indeed, both LRT lines were upgraded to two-car operations in 2016 and load on the systems would surely have increased. SPLRT did see some preventive maintenance and asset renewal works between 2017 and 2018. However, if past experience with the MRT system is any indication, should we expect that more works ought to be done to maintain and improve on the reliability numbers of the LRT system? I would like to ask the Minister when can the residents in both Sengkang and Punggol expect such renewal and overhaul works to happen? Rail Infrastructure Renewal”
“Separately, in respect of the delivery companies’ obligations to ensure that their active mobility riders have third-party insurance, will MOT take steps to ensure that all third party liability insurers will not be able to exclude or repudiate policy liability for accidents which take place while the riders are in breach of the law? For example, PMDs being used on the road, rider using an illegal specs e-scooter or PAB rider using footpaths. I am concerned that if allowed, claims by injured parties may be frustrated when accidents take place in such scenarios, which may defeat the very purpose of requiring such insurance coverage, particularly when the rider is self-employed and own his own device. Expansion of Cycling Paths”
“The competency test certification process adopted last month is a big step forward. I believe that with disqualification rights, people will take greater care to use their e-scooters safely and considerately. So, I would again urge MOT to incorporate disqualification rights in our law. Delivery Riders on PMDs and PABs My third cut. Last month, in response to my Parliamentary Question, MOT affirmed that under the Active Mobility (Amendment) and the Shared Mobility Enterprises (Control and Licensing) Acts, food delivery companies should be responsible for ensuring that their riders ride safely. The new Acts do not provide details on this. Will the Minister confirm that these regulations will be included in the subsidiary legislation? Meanwhile, I would also like to suggest that such regulations must include imposition of penalties on the food delivery companies in the event of any failure on the part of their riders to comply with the law, for example, pertaining to the use of devices with correct specifications, use of devices on paths allowed for the relevant devices, riding safely, and so on. It is important to ensure all food delivery companies will take ownership of the issue of their riders using lawful devices or riding lawfully and safely during their deliveries. On the very day the Government banned e-scooters from footpaths, Deliveroo announced that they would stop working with e-scooter delivery riders on footpaths. However, I continue to see GrabFood delivery riders using e-scooters on footpaths or roads even in the last two weeks. I am shocked that GrabFood still allow their delivery riders to carry out delivery in an unlawful manner and I hope that MOT will take action.”
“30 am If there is no direct link between the extended cycling network and the homes or workplaces of Singaporeans, e-scooter users would technically have to alight and push their e-scooters when on roads or footpaths and e-bike users must push their e-bikes when passing through footpaths. How confident are we that all riders will comply accordingly? The new cycling lanes with a more extensive network alone will not solve all the problems we have seen with e-scooters before the footpath ban. Most of these problems, I submit, had to do with a poor riding culture, inadequate public education and inadequate enforcement. With the new mandatory competency test certification for all users, I hope the public education situation with riders will improve considerably. However, for the non-riding public, I hope the Government will take steps and review how it can improve its public education. The Government must think of how to push such information to people who do not seek it, and such efforts should be carried out in all our four official languages. On the issue of enforcement, people may take their chances and continue to use their devices illegally or in unlawful ways if they think that the chances of meeting enforcement officers are slim. Even now, I still see e-scooters being ridden on the road or on footpaths, albeit in a limited way. I still see illegal specs e-bikes being used and e-bikes on footpaths. May I ask the Minister, while we await the building of the extended cycling paths, what efforts will be taken to enhance enforcement as well as public education beyond the current efforts? I have also in the past suggested that the Government should consider mandatory safe riding certification courses with disqualification rights.”
“I would like to ask again, whether as part of the extended cycling path network, cycling paths will be directly linked to every HDB block, condominium, private landed house, shop house, office building and industrial building, so that there is a direct access for e-scooters, other PMDs, e-bikes and bicycles from each of these type of building, without the rider having to alight and push these devices on footpaths at all. Direct access to the extended cycling lane network cannot be a half-hearted attempt, for example, having cycling paths circling a number of HDB blocks, but with no direct link from each block; or having cycling paths circling around clusters of private residential estates, expecting e-scooter or other users to alight and push en route to cycling paths. Similarly, people going to work in office buildings or industrial estates, must have direct access without having to travel on surfaces on which their mode of devices are barred. In fact, going one step further towards utopia, if our cycling path network were to become sufficiently extensive such that PMD riders do not need to alight and push. It may in turn do away with the need for cyclists to share the use of foot path, which is still currently allowed. And this prospect will be welcomed by many footpath users who may not think that sharing footpaths with cyclists is a safe idea at all. It is not a safe idea because we still have a riding culture problem. 10.30 am On the other hand, if the extensive linkage between cycling paths in our homes and offices seem too expensive, impractical or ambitious, then MOT may have to reconsider e-scooters, other PMDs and even e-bikes as a serious option for first and final mile connectivity. 10.”
“We have seen from the piracy problems off the coast of Somalia and the Gulf of Aden, not so long ago, and more recently off West Africa, how piracy result in increase in insurance and other operating costs for shipowners and operators, and shipping costs for shippers. Many ships also avoided these waters. Well, the piracy situation in the Strait of Singapore and the Strait of Malacca is thankfully far better than what we have seen in the waters off Somalia or West Africa. This is something we should not take for granted. In July last year, the Chinese government raised the security level on Chinese flagged ships transiting the Strait of Malacca. I hope MOT and other Singapore Government agencies involved will work actively with our counterparts in neighbouring countries to (a) understand the causes of all piracy incidents regardless of the locality of each incident; and (b) help bring all culprits to justice or encourage neighbouring authorities to work towards that end. By doing the above, I hope all parties and all countries can work to minimise or curb piracy activities in the region. PMDs, PABs, Bicycles and Cycling Paths MOT announced in November 2019 that e-scooters will be banned from footpaths but will be allowed on cycling paths; and MOT will extend the network of cycling path from 440 km to 1,300 km by 2030. Last month, at the Second Reading of the Active Mobility (Amendment) Bill, I had some questions on the proposed extension of the cycling path network. But Senior Minister of State said that MOT will only be touching on the extended cycling power network during the COS debate today.”
“I had filed the PQ to the Minister for Transport instead of the Minister for Defence, as MOT is the domain Ministry for maritime transport, and in my view, this goes beyond the issue of security or security arrangements with our neighbouring countries. Minister Khaw's answer confirmed that no investigation was carried out by Singapore on the incidents reported and we are none the wiser about the cause of these piracy incidents – why there was a sudden spike in the number or who were the culprits behind the incidents? Minister Ng's answer also shed no light on the same. The port of Singapore is one of the busiest ports in the world. Many ships pass through the Strait of Singapore every day for which a large number comes through to the port of Singapore and is anchorages and even its Outside Port Limits (OPL) waters for a variety of commercial shipping, bunkering and ancillary activities. It does not matter to shipowners or uses that the Straits of Singapore is not entirely subsumed under our territorial waters. Many shipowners and users associate the Strait of Singapore with the access and passage between the Malacca Strait and the South China Sea and with access to the Port of Singapore and its OPL. It is therefore in the interest of MOT, MPA and indeed all stakeholders in the Port of Singapore and our maritime hub, that the Strait of Singapore and its adjacent waters are kept safe and free of piracy activities. In fact, in my view, it is in the greater interest of Singapore, as compared to our neighbours, that piracy activities are minimised or curbed.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. I declare my interest as a member of the shipping community in Singapore. Last month, I filed a Parliamentary Question (PQ) asking (a) whether any investigation is being carried out in respect to the piracy incidents in the Singapore Strait in and after December 2019; (b) has the Government identified the persons or groups responsible for the reported incidents and where they originated from; (c) what action has been taken by any of our Government agencies to date; and (d) what are the Government's plans to prevent similar acts of piracy? Minister Khaw Boon Wan replied that there were 12 incidents involving piracy and robbery in December 2019 and January 2020, and as none of those incidents happened in our territorial waters, no investigations were required of our agencies. He said that as the Singapore Strait does not only include Singapore territorial waters, the fight against piracy requires collaboration among all partners. According to him, the Republic of Singapore Navy conducts joint coordinated patrols with Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand through the Malacca Straits Patrol (MSP) in the Strait of Singapore as well as in the Strait of Malacca; that the MSP hold regular meetings to enhance coordination, review conduct of operations and share intelligence and information. On a same sitting in February two hon Members in this House also filed questions relating to the piracy incidents to the Minister for Defence. Minister Ng Eng Hen in his reply to one Member talked about RSN's cooperation with neighbouring counterparts under the MSP.”
“Mr Chairman, despite the move towards a greener, zero-waste nation, suppliers of fresh fruits and vegetables, meats and eggs as well as hawkers and cooked food sellers continue to use lots of styrofoam and plastic packaging. Of the 1.6 million tonnes of domestic waste disposed of in 2018, one-third is made up of packaging. More than half of this packaging is made of plastic, but only 4% of plastic waste is recycled. In COS 2018, citing Taiwan’s ban in single use plastics including straws, cups and shopping bags by 2030, I had asked about the Ministry’s plans to reduce the use of plastic disposables in Singapore involving either the restriction or the banning of single use plastic carrier bags, straws and disposable cups, containers and utensils. In 2016, the Government also said that it will not ban styrofoam products for food crockery and packaging but will seek to discourage hawkers from using disposable ware. We still see much styrofoam food crockery and packaging being used at hawker centres, coffee shops and other food outlets. I would like to ask for an update of the rate of use of styrofoam products in food crockery and packaging vis-à-vis other materials since 2016. Given their harmful effects on the environment, I would also like to ask whether the Government will conduct a review of the use of styrofoam products for food crockery and packaging use, and whether it will set any target to ban such products or if not, what measures it will take to either reduce or to disincentivise such uses in the next five years. I will also like to ask whether the Government will be looking into encouraging alternative single-use products usage, such as bamboo products. Introducing a Single-use Bag Charge”
“In 2019, the UK set a new target of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, with ambitious policies and generous funding to support this. More has to be done and decisively so, or the climate emergency will continue to worsen.”
“Carbon Auditing Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, Sir, it has been one year since the carbon tax has come into effect and last Friday, Senior Minister Teo announced the goal of capping Singapore's greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, halving it by 2050, and eventually achieving net-zero emissions. I support this goal. What we need now is the commitment by Government and businesses to actually reduce emissions and track it. In Australia, carbon neutral certification under the Climate Active Carbon Neutral Standard is an example of how the government supports businesses as they account for and reduce carbon emissions. The Energy Conservation Act currently requires large energy users in the industry and transport sectors to monitor and report energy usage and conduct energy efficiency assessments. A similar framework can be applied to carbon emissions. We should, in the journey to halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, require all Government bodies and large companies to conduct annual carbon auditing. There are a variety of carbon management services available in the market today. With carbon auditing, organisations can understand their greenhouse inventory, isolate each emission source, and hence, determine and model emission reduction strategies, their payback and viability. To help ease organisations into this, the Government could implement carbon auditing subsidies for the next 10 years. If companies successfully reduce their carbon emissions year on year, incremental subsidies can incentivise them to continue to do so. Other ways to encourage a greener report card could be doubling on handouts for low-carbon initiatives and progressive carbon tax relief.”
“The Government has set a carbon tax of $5 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent for five years and plans to review it by 2023 with the intention of raising the carbon text to between $10 and $15 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2030. Industrial energy efficiency, particularly for large emitters is currently being addressed by the Energy Conservation Act (ECA). Large emitters are required under the ECA to submit annual energy efficiency improvement plans. From 2021, these emitters must also establish facility-wide energy management systems and conduct energy efficiency opportunities assessments which must be submitted to NEA. I would like to ask the Minister how successful has the ECA been in improving industrial energy efficiency for our energy and chemicals industry and more specifically, for our oil refining Industries in the past five years? Can the public have access to aggregated information on the improvements? Minister Masago said in his Parliamentary Question reply to me last month that the Government works closely with the oil refining industry to ensure that they achieve high standards of energy efficiency and adopt sustainable practices; and that all three oil refineries in Singapore have set up co-generation plants, which can significantly improve the energy efficiency of the refineries. Has the Government set any projection or targets for emissions reductions for our refining industry in the next five years? And if so, what are these? And if not, will the Government consider doing so?”
“Mr Chairman, it was reported that land in Singapore changed from a net absorber of carbon in 2012 to a net emitter in 2014. According to NParks, this is due largely to land conversion from forests and other vegetated areas to settlements. This is particularly concerning, as over the past few years, we have seen the prioritisation of development projects over the benefits afforded by sensitive eco-systems due to such projects as the Cross Island Line, the Tengah HDB project and the Mandai project. Will the Government be committed to securing the inviolability of our nature reserves and greater protection of the little that is left of our more natural green eco-systems in the future? Apart from the forest significant heritage and ecological value, they provide Singapore with carbon sinks, important in our urban environment and helps mitigate the urban island heat effect. I also understand that Singapore uses satellite images covering all land use classes and the five carbon pools, as defined by the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and have established permanent sampling plots across the nation for the tracking of carbon in relevant land use classes. I would like to ask the Minister how have or how can such efforts help Singapore improve tree bio-mass growth rates so as to preserve and build more carbon sinks. Will the forest restoration action plan, as announced by NParks in January 2019, help in converting land in Singapore back to a net absorber of carbon? Emissions from Oil Refining Industries My next cut. Singapore's energy and chemicals industry sector contributes to about 60% of Singapore's total emissions. Around three-quarters of these industry sectors emissions come from the oil refining and petrochemical sector.”
“Could I clarify with the Senior Minister of State, is the Government going to consider nurturing a certain amount of domestic manufacturing capacity for critical necessities in products like medical disposables?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not sure I have heard the Senior Minister of State answering Question No 5. Could I ask him to answer Question No 5 again?”
“As the lead Government agency on climate change, the National Climate Change Secretariat should consider working with public and private research agencies and researchers on this so that easy-to-access facts and evidence on climate change can be in the public domain to build further buy-in for green policies. Mr Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, Singapore's environmental resiliency is being tested in ways unprecedented. We should spare no effort to lead the region and the world in this effort, not only as an honest broker but also as an innovator in the space. As such, a bold Green Agenda should be considered as Singapore moves to the next chapter of nation-building. We owe it to our future generations to do so.”
“However, the question remains whether the Government will commit to securing the inviolability of our nature reserves and greater protection of the little that is left of our more natural, green ecosystems in the future, while finding better ways to plan land use for housing, transport and tourism. I will speak more on this in the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources' (MEWR's) Committee of Supply (COS) debate next week. I will now move to Shifting Mindsets. Beyond good policy, Singaporeans also need to come together in buying in to this Green Agenda. Mindsets must shift in the way we consume, to only use what we need to use. Just to cite a common example: single-use plastic bags. Can we take or use what we really need? Can we pack more things into each plastic bag? Do we really need to double bag all our groceries at the checkouts? If we only need to use, say, one or two plastic bags for refuse disposal a day, do we need to take 20 bags from the supermarket a week? We can also reduce the number of single use plastic bags we need to take for our refuse by concurrently using good quality reusable shopping bags. We may end up using fewer single-use plastic bags and may still have enough bags for our refuse. To encourage Singaporeans, we should ramp up our public education to reach out to Singaporeans of all ages and educational levels and in different languages. We should even encourage easy accessibility to the latest research on climate change by the average citizen. Translating this research into readable, digestible commentaries for Singaporeans gives further buy-in and builds awareness.”
“The Government often lauds its green accomplishments under the City in a Garden paradigm – on increasing accessibility to parks, on the upkeep of community gardens, and on projects like Gardens by the Bay, for example. Each of these efforts bear their own positive outcomes for environmental education, community involvement, ecotourism and liveability. But amidst the continual urban greening of Singapore, are we prepared to risk undermining the benefits provided by the relatively more natural and more sensitive green ecosystems in our country? These ecosystems benefit us in a plethora of ways, from helping us store carbon and cool Singapore, thus aiding our response to climate change, to acting as havens for biodiversity with educational value. In addition to their potential as sites for low-impact, sustainable ecotourism, they provide Singaporeans with recreational value and with relief from our stressful urban environment, a benefit that is much harder to quantify but is nonetheless important. Already, a National Parks Board (NParks) study indicated that Singapore's land became a net carbon emitter in 2014. Over the past few years, we have seen the prioritisation of development projects over the benefits afforded by sensitive ecosystems due to such projects as the Cross Island Line, the Tengah HDB project and the Mandai Project. The latter two of these have been styled as a "forest town" project and a "nature destination", respectively. Thankfully, environmental groups, academics and public agencies have come together seeking to reduce the negative impacts these projects will have on the environment, in particular on our local biodiversity and forest cover, even after mitigation measures.”
“We, therefore, welcome the Housing and Development Board (HDB) Green Towns Programme as it encourages sustainable living. However, will the benefits afforded by this concept be accessible only to new towns, or will our current HDB estates in places, such as Hougang and Aljunied, be retroactively upgraded to enjoy these benefits? We should also not forget about private properties and improving green efforts there. Even as they make up around 21% of the total resident households in Singapore, they account for 41.4% of the total electricity consumed in 2018. Therefore, improved greening efforts there can help net bigger gains. Would the Government consider expanding the Estate Upgrading Programme to include greening items for private estates? This may include solar-friendly installations in common areas and greening up shelters or building community gardens that act as carbon sinks. Also, could there be further incentives to push for solar installations across private households that allow excess power to be sold back to the power grid? Currently, payment is made by way of a credit adjustment based on the prevailing nodal prices. However, there does not seem to be incentives beyond that for private households. If private property owners can buy into such plans, this can help us reach the two gigawatts-peak (GWp) capacity target sooner and give further sustainability and robustness to our power grid. Let us next talk about Protecting our Green Areas and Redefining Development. In addition to gearing up our economy and infrastructure to prepare for the climate emergency, it is worthwhile to ask ourselves whether we are doing our best to reap the benefits of environmental sustainability for our society.”
“The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) internal combustion engine cooperation is also needed if we are to successfully electrify our transport system. A key consideration here is Malaysia, where people and trade currently travel via the Causeway and the Tuas Second Link on ICE vehicles currently. If we do phase out ICE vehicles here, are we also implementing a ban on foreign ICE vehicles from entering Singapore? If there is no infrastructure in place in Malaysia to support commercial EVs, would that also impact our businesses with a top partner in trade? This is important to get right as, on one hand, foreign ICE vehicles and how we handle the issue, may have a significant impact on our EV plans and, on the other hand, we should not be seen to export our green problems away with unilateral bans. Indeed, we can work with Malaysia's state and federal authorities to build a sustainable and inclusive ecosystem for EVs. To go one step further, we can propose an ASEAN Autonomous Vehicle and Electric Vehicle project that holistically looks at all the challenges of EVs that my colleague Mr Leon Perera had previously mooted in this House. This will help to focus minds towards a target and benefit interconnectivity across the region. The effective solving of these issues I have highlighted in the adoption of EVs can turn us into the bellwether state in ASEAN for EV adoption, just as Norway is for both the Nordic region and the world. Next, Green Housing Initiatives. Housing is another area where calibration is required. If urban planning is right, we can reduce the Urban Heat Island effect, increase energy efficiency and promote better waste management in our towns.”
“The power grid, in particular, will be taxed. While Singapore is in a power glut now, electricity demand will only go up as Singapore moves on in its Smart Nation ambitions. One looks to Sweden with a ban on ICE vehicles slated for 2030, where demand for electricity is currently outgrowing capacity in local grids, forcing EV charging networks to compete with other infrastructure projects for electricity. This is not to mention that Singapore currently generates upward to 95% of its energy via natural gas. While it is the least-polluting fossil fuel and has higher efficiency compared to ICE vehicles, there will continue to be a carbon footprint generated. While our current power generation mix will improve by 2030 due to more solar capacity, how are we moving to lowering the carbon footprint of our power generation in 2030 to 2040? Also, with regard to charging points, the Government expects to have 28,000 charging points by 2030. But even assuming a 30% conversion from the current vehicle population to EVs, it still means about one charging point to 10 EVs by 2030. Should we even be contented with this ratio? Besides intelligent charging solutions, should the Government also consider the alternative of battery swap stations which have the advantage of speed, ensuring load on our power grid can be managed well, as well as providing a ready infrastructure for battery recycling? This has been tested in China and should be a key consideration here. How soon can we electrify our public bus and private hire infrastructure to EVs will also be important as many Singaporeans rely on such services. Would the Ministry of Transport give a timeline on this happening separately from the 2040 overall target?”
“Will soft-engineering, nature-based approaches, such as the restoration of intertidal ecosystems, which have the potential to protect our coastlines, be considered for use under this fund, or will only hard-engineering approaches, such as polders and land reclamation, be chosen? It would be useful if the Government could give a sense of its spending priorities in this regard. Preparing to adapt to climate change alone would be unwise. There must also be a move to mitigate climate change while we still can. Even as we have committed to the 36% cut on emissions intensity by 2030 in our first pledge, how have our efforts been to date? Perhaps the Government can provide an update. The Workers' Party also welcomes both the announcement by Minister Masagos Zulkifli at the Madrid Climate Conference last December that Singapore will submit its long-term Low Emissions Development Strategy soon, and the announcement by the Deputy Prime Minister that Singapore's commitment to the Paris Agreement will be updated this year. We look forward to the Government's updates, and to understand how they represent progress beyond our current commitments and strategies. Next, Greening our Transport Infrastructure. Climate change has also accelerated the need to calibrate Singapore's infrastructural development to meet environmental challenges. Transport is a major sector which requires such calibration. The Workers' Party, therefore, welcomes the Government phasing out all internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles by 2040. However, many practical electric vehicle (EV) issues are to be hammered out in the interim and I would like to ask what actions the Government will take on them. The biggest elephant in the room is on rebuilding an infrastructure currently tailored for ICE engines.”
“With the certainty of climate change, we, as a nation should be daring and set a bold Green Agenda to guide Singapore's trajectory of development. Please allow me to put forth some ideas to this House. We need a holistic view on climate emergency. We need a holistic response to all issues of climate change. In other words, the success of efforts to combat climate change must not solely be measured by the effectiveness of any one policy narrowly. We must also invest in and track efforts to address the wide-ranging impacts of climate change and our policies on society at large, whether be it on urban drainage systems, food security, water security, waste management, urban liveability or public health, to cite but a few impact areas. An example of this is coastal adaptation and flood protection. Thirty percent of Singapore's land area lies less than five metres above mean sea level. Even under an optimistic emissions scenario, there has been projected that sea level in Singapore could rise by about half a metre by 2100, posing a coastal flood risk. Therefore, the establishment of the new Coastal and Flood Protection Fund with an initial injection of $5 billion is a timely move. As the Government commits to investing more in coastal adaptation and flood protection though, where will this money be spent on? Will the money be invested in the best science so that better projections of sea level rise can be made for Singapore? Will investments be made in the best social science, so that the prioritisation of coastal land uses can be better assessed?”
“Mr Speaker, regrettably, I had to turn down my daughter's request to bring her to school today because I was rushing out to work. [Laughter.] Mr Speaker, Sir, during last year's Budget Debates, I spoke of building resiliency in Singapore in economic and security matters. This year, I would like to devote my time to speak on environmental resiliency. The world today is at a crossroads facing down the existential threat of human-induced climate change. Over 11,000 scientists worldwide now warn that the world "clearly and unequivocally faces a climate emergency". Singapore's vulnerability to climate change is also evident. Our island is now being heated up twice as fast compared to the world, and maximum temperatures, we are told, could reach 35°C to 37°C by the year 2100. Many countries seek to take concrete action. One in 10 people on the planet now live in a place that has declared a climate emergency and have effectively used it as a jumping point for real action. Inspired by young Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, youths across the world are rising up and demanding immediate action to address the climate emergency we are facing. Singapore's recent SG Climate Rally is a cry for action from our youths, one that the leaders of today ought to heed. My colleagues and I in the Workers' Party have heard it loud and clear. We agree with them and have sought actively to raise concerns about climate change and the policies that can be taken by the Government. We are glad that some policies have been looked into and taken up. Yet, it would be prudent to recognise that there is a long way to go in building environmental resiliency in view of the lessons the world has learnt and is continuing to learn about our relationship with our environment.”
“Would MOT consider specifically regulating after-market batteries, sold separately from the devices, including testing and supply, so that access to batteries which do not conform to requisite safety standards is denied completely, thereby avoiding fire risks from their use? In addition to inspections, MOT can work with Singapore Customs to bar import of off-specs batteries, including via individual online purchases. In closing, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if the Government still expects e-scooters to be a viable option for first and final mile connectivity when the cycling path network is expanded, I urge the Government to address the issues and concerns I have highlighted and get things right ahead of the expanding cycling path network. Notwithstanding my concerns, I support this Bill.”
“In November 2019, the Senior Minister of State did not comment on disqualification rights but I believe that, with disqualification rights, people will take greater care to use their e-scooters safely and considerately, so I would urge MOT to incorporate disqualification rights in the proposed regulations. Mr Deputy Speaker, this amendment Bill bans underage riders under 16 from the use of PMDs but also allows underage riders to "ride under escort", that is to say, with the supervision of a supervisor. May I ask the Senior Minister of State to confirm that these provisions are not just confined to commercial classes, that is, commercial context only, and whether it covers informal context, for example, with friends or families? I would also like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether there will be clearer requirements to be spelt out in the subsidiary legislation for such supervisors and the conditions for such escorts? I am also concerned that if there are insufficient LTA enforcement officers in every location, how do we ensure all escorts and supervisors are compliant with the law? In fact, why do we not only allow all riders to learn after they have reached the statutory legal age for the use of e-scooters, just like how we do with motorcycles, cars and other vehicles on the roads? Finally, I would like to know who should be legally liable if the underage rider causes injury or property damage to a third party due to his own negligence while under supervision? Will it be the underage rider or the supervisor? Will insurance be made compulsory for all such riding by underage riders? I would also like to touch on an issue regarding e-scooter battery quality.”
“I still see illegal specs e-bikes or PABs on footpaths as well. And I still see many illegal specs e-bikes. On the issue of public education, as I have mentioned earlier, we also need to embark on public education that pushes the education to people of all ages, riders or otherwise, including for those who do not voluntarily seek the information. Having sufficient public education to inform and ensure all PMD users as well as pedestrians know what is allowed and not allowed will go a long way to ensure that the right riding culture is developed ultimately. I would also like to ask the Government to also reconsider one of the questions I have asked in my Parliamentary Question on 4 November 2019, namely, that the Government should consider mandatory safe riding certification courses with disqualification rights. I know that Senior Minister of State Lam Pin Min answered my question then by saying that a mandatory theory test would be more appropriate than a safe riding course. While I do not agree that it should be confined to a mere theory test, certainly, some form of mandatory tests should be introduced, together with disqualification rights. In that connection, I am happy that a mandatory competency test will be introduced by this Bill. In the context of this Active Mobility (Amendment) Bill and the Shared Mobility Enterprises (Control and Licensing) Bill introducing new regulations for shared mobility services, I hope that shared e-scooter services will only be available to users who have passed a mandatory or competency test.”
“It cannot be a half-hearted attempt, for example, having cycling paths circling a number of HDB blocks but with no direct link from each block or having cycling paths circling around clusters of private residential estates, expecting e-scooter users to alight and push en route to cycling paths. If this seem too expensive, impractical or ambitious, then MOT may have to reconsider e-scooters and other PMDs as a serious option for first and final mile connectivity. However, if our cycling path network were to become sufficiently extensive such that PMD riders do not need to alight and push, it may, in turn, do away with the need for cyclists to share the use of footpaths, which is still currently allowed. This prospect may be welcomed by many footpath users who are still not comfortable with the sharing of footpaths with bicycles. If there is no direct link, the existing footpath ban will mean that e-scooter users technically have to alight and push their e-scooters when on roads or footpaths. How confident are we that all riders will comply accordingly? On the issue of enforcement, while I appreciate the efforts of many LTA enforcement officers, since the AMA took effect, spot checks on certain days of the week or in selected areas may not be adequate. Senior Minister of State Lam Pin Min mentioned on 4 November 2019 that LTA had 174 enforcement officers. I was a little surprised that, by that time, the number of officers had remained only at that level. People may take their chances and continue to use their devices illegally or in unlawful ways if they think that the chances of meeting enforcement officers are slim. Even now, I still see e-scooters being ridden on the roads or on footpaths, almost every day.”
“Three, there must be sufficient public education and consistent effective enforcement, especially early on after the introduction of the new Active Mobility regulations. There must be sufficient resources and a willingness from all authorities concerned responsible for enforcement. The Government must ensure that information is made available not just to people who voluntarily look for it by way of voluntary Safe Riding courses or on the LTA website or Facebook page. The Government must think of how to push such information to both riders and non-riders, such as pedestrians, and to people who do not seek it, and such efforts can be not just in English, but should also be in other languages, such as Chinese, Malay and Tamil. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if the Government still expects e-scooters to be used as a viable tool of first and final mile connectivity, the above points will continue to ring true. While the completion of the extended cycling network may possibly allow PMDs or e-scooters a new leash of life again, we should not be lulled into thinking that the new cycling lanes with a more extensive network alone will avoid all the problems we have seen with e-scooters in the past three years leading up to its footpath ban. Most of these problems, I submit, had to do with a poor riding culture, inadequate public education and even inadequate enforcement. We should resolve these issues or problems before the extended cycling path network is ready for use. Otherwise, the Government will just be kicking the can down the road. For a start, will the cycling paths be directly linked to every Housing and Development Board (HDB) block, condominium, private landed house, shophouse, office building and industrial building? I would like to know whether this will be the case.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, on 4 November 2019, in his reply to a few Parliamentary Questions, including one from myself, Senior Minister of State Lam Pin Min announced in this House that e-scooters will be banned from the use of footpaths, a ban that greatly limited the practical use of e-scooters. He had also announced that e-scooters will be allowed on cycling paths and the Ministry of Transport (MOT) will step up the construction of such cycling paths to provide clear separation between pedestrians and e-scooters, extending the network of cycling paths from 440 kilometres (km) to 750 km latest by 2025 and to 1,300 km by 2030. While the many unsafe or inconsiderate e-scooter incidents may reduce for now, let us not forget the painful lessons we have learnt in the past few years. In my speeches on e-scooter issues in the Second Reading of the Active Mobility Bill in January 2017, the Second Reading of the Land Transport (Enforcement Measures) Bill in September 2018 and the Committee of Supply debates for MOT in 2016, 2018 and 2019, I have, among other issues, brought up the following points. One, we have had a poor cycling or riding culture over the years – bicycles beating red lights, cycling against the traffic and, until the AMA came into force, cycling on footpaths. These acts could be seen on an everyday basis. I am not sure even now it has improved in the past three years. Two, our poor cycling culture coupled with the lack of enforcement by the authorities over the years and the lack of political will of past Governments to improve the riding culture, meant that in recent years, with the introduction of e-scooters, we need to create from scratch a new culture of safe and considerate use of bicycles and PMDs.”
“I thank the Minister for the reply. I just have one supplementary question. Could the Ministry consider addressing the needs of those drivers of the delivery trucks where there is only one driver or that they may have two staff but they cannot afford anyone staying behind in the vehicle while making the delivery to the nearby shops?”
“Next, on section 29D, the Bill provides that under section 29D, the Court of Appeal may transfer two specific types of appeal to itself: (a) an appeal against any decision of the General Division that has been made to the Appellate Division and (b) when an order under section 39A of the Land Acquisition Act is in force, any appeal made to the Appellate Division under section 29(2) or 38(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. The power to do so can be exercised inter alia on the Court of Appeal's own motion or on a reference by the Appellate Division. Section 29(3) states that making a decision under section 29D(1) to so transfer the case to itself, the Court of Appeal must have regard to matters prescribed by the rules of the Court. In addition to what the Senior Minister of State has shared with us earlier, I would like to ask him whether he is able to share a little bit more as to what would be these matters of considerations which the Ministry has in mind. Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, it appears that with the new Appellate Division, an increase in the number of Judges in the High Court is inevitable. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State: one, what is the projected number of judges that would sit at the Appellate Division of the High Court at the inception of the division after the passing of this Bill; and two, whether the Senior Minister of State has any estimation or projection as to the number of additional judges which the High Court is expected to have in the next five years after setting up the Appellate Division. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill and the proposed legislative changes for the restructuring of the Supreme Court.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to seek a few clarifications from the Senior Minister of State on the Supreme Court of Judicature (Amendment) Bill. Section 29C(2) provides for an appeal from the General Division of the High Court to the Court of Appeal if the Sixth Schedule or any other written law so provides. Section 1 of the Sixth Schedule provides that for the purposes of section 29C(2), an appeal against the decision of the General Division in the exercise of its original or appellate civil jurisdiction is to be made to the Court of Appeal in the list of cases provided under A to J. I would like to know how does the Government decide in such cases under the Sixth Schedule should be allowed a direct path to the Court of Appeal and it would not be appropriate for the Appellate Division to be the final arbiter body. I am saying this bearing in mind that for any existing legislation hitherto requiring the Court of Appeal as the final Court hearing any appeal, it may still be possible to amend the relevant law, making the new Appellate Division as the final arbiter. Yes, I am aware that the Senior Minister of State has provided some explanation in his opening speech and I thank him for that. I do wonder whether the Senior Minister of State can elaborate a little further on this. I would like to know what were the considerations behind the decision leading to the list of cases under the Sixth Schedule. For example, how does the Government arrive at the conclusion that it would be suitable to have the Court of Appeal to hear cases under section 18(5) of the Maintenance of Parents Act and that it is not appropriate for such appeals to be now changed to, say, the Appellate Division instead.”