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 20 of 22.
“Madam, the Active Mobility Bill provides for a new legal regime for use of public paths by bicycles and other PMDs. Today, I would like to touch on three issues relating to cycling and mobility issues in Singapore. They are cycling culture, political will and public education. Cycling culture. Cycling has been one of my favourite past times since I was in school. Having lived near the East Coast Park for years, I spent many happy moments on the cycling paths of East Coast Park. As the park became more and more crowded on weekends over the years, I have been avoiding cycling in the park itself. Why do I avoid cycling in East Coast Park? I think it has become unsafe over the years. Many cyclists do not obey the direction signs or keep a proper lookout for pedestrians or other cyclists. Many pedestrians walk on or across the cycling paths without caring for the safety of cyclists. Many cyclists cycle on the footpaths. I have seen accidents in the park over the years, accidents that can be avoided if we had the right cycling culture. Madam, the cycling culture in East Coast Park reflects the cycling culture nationally. We should improve our cycling culture. Although most cyclists comply with the law and have good cycling habits, some of the following acts are still carried out by a minority of cyclists on an everyday basis. When I say "cyclists", I also include electric bikes and PMD users. And the examples are, when on roads, beating red lights or cycling against the traffic, and when on public paths and park connectors, cycling at high speed, not keeping left and not giving way, thus creating the risk of accident with pedestrians or other users. When I was at university in England, my second-hand road bike was my main form of transport.”
“Claimants may, in such cases, reject what may otherwise be a fair settlement sum with their opponents earlier on in the proceedings, in the hopes of getting a higher recovery later on, but which may not ultimately prevail. Four, third-party funders effectively become the new additional party to any proceedings which has an interest in the proceedings, which is to effect maximum returns on its investment, which may run in conflict with the interests of not just the claimants they are funding, but also to the prejudice of the defendants on the opposite side on how the claim should be conducted, and whether settlement should be entered into. Madam, I would also like to seek clarification from the Senior Minister of State as to how the Government intends to deal with issues I have highlighted above. Will all these issues be addressed in the subsidiary legislation that the Senior Minister of State has mentioned? Madam, I would also like to seek one other clarification from the Senior Minister of State. What is meant by the term "direct financial benefit" under clause 3 of the Bill where it proposed to include a clause 3A(a) and clause 3B? Will this mean that third-party funders will be allowed to fund the setting up of a law firm's litigation department, which I read that such funders do in some jurisdictions? If so, would there be a conflict of interest for lawyers vis-a-vis the third-party funders and the actual claimant? Madam, while I am, in principle, supportive of allowing third-party funding and this Bill, I am concerned that the issues which I have raised must be correctly addressed by the Government at the onset, so that we can avoid experiencing the same problems which surfaced in other jurisdictions and exclude the known negative aspects of third-party funding.”
“Can the same lawyers act for both the claimants and the third-party funders without being in a position of conflict? In many cases, lawyers or even arbitrators have been routinely appointed by the same third-party funders in different cases. Clearly, in such cases, there is a huge question mark over whether the interests of the claimants are protected or compromised. The claimants are left with no one to protect their interests if their position differs from that of the third-party funders, and I do not think this is desirable. In the context of international arbitration, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon said in 2013 that, "International arbitration features the unique situation of counsel and arbitrators often being drawn from essentially the same pool". The Chief Justice also said, "A potential problem can arise when a funder finances multiple arbitral claims and where an arbitrator in one of those claims is also the legal representative of the claimant in a separate claim that is being financed by the same funder". The Chief Justice also raised questions about third-party funders having influence over the arbitration proceedings and appointing arbitrators who have prior commercial relationships with the third-party funders. He asked whether such relationships should be disclosable to the other party. Three, third-party funding has resulted in prolonged litigation. In some reported cases, third-party funders have entered into third-party funding agreements with claimants which encourage claimants to settle a claim for more money by increasing the claimants' share of the recovered amount, if it is beyond a certain specified sum.”
“Madam, I would like to declare my interests as a lawyer who has a practice in the area of commercial arbitration. Madam, this Bill essentially legalises and introduces third-party funding for legal costs in international arbitration proceedings in Singapore. Third-party funding is essentially financing provided by financing firms for claims in arbitration or litigation. These companies treat arbitration or litigation claims as assets. Like insurance, they distribute risks across their portfolio cases and, in the process, they are able to also invest in claims which are otherwise regarded to have lesser merits and may not otherwise see the light of day. I recognise that third-party funding has been in existence in some jurisdictions for some time. Third-party funding may be growing, but it is not without controversy. In countries where third-party funding is allowed, the following problems have been raised. One, third-party funders may transfer control of the cases from the claimants themselves and take control of the strategy and decision-making for cases which they fund. If so, would this not be desirable because it would no longer be about the claimant's interests? For example, the claimant may wish to conduct the claim proceedings in a certain manner or may wish to settle the claim at some point, but the third-party funders may disagree, and the third-party funders' preference will prevail if the third-party funding agreement ceded control and decision-making for the claim to the third-party funders. Two, there is also the issue of conflicts of interest for the lawyers who are acting on behalf of the claimants in a claim funded by third-party funders. Who are the lawyers answerable to?”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive explanation. On the issue of social isolation, I understand from press reports that there has been a huge number of increase, over the last, say, 15 years, in the number of elderly people living alone compared to 15 years ago. I am particularly addressing people who live alone and whose spouses have passed on. I understand from my grassroots activities that some of these elderly do not want to be involved in some of these current activities at the SACs and other activity centres. I am just wondering whether the Ministry will consider taking a new approach to some form of befriender programme or something to interact with these elderly whose partners have passed on and to provide social company and to try to reintegrate them into society.”
“Such an amendment helps to enhance adherence to training safety protocols and bolster public confidence in SAF. There is always room for improvement. We can and should always strive to do better. This includes enhancing training, which includes more attention to promoting safety for our troops. It also involves taking steps that further bolster public confidence in SAF as a key national institution. We owe it to our citizens and our women and men in uniform. I believe that the GPA should be amended to allow civil liability in negligence against a member of the Armed Forces or the Government for causing death or personal injury during training as a result of any conduct in training that conspicuously violates safety protocols, procedures and regulations.”
“Furthermore, such settlement will be subject to the discretion of MINDEF. Above all, the availability of such offers of compensation does not, in itself, encourage officers to comply with TSRs. If the law were to allow civil liability and MINDEF would still like to make a "without prejudice" offer during negotiations for future claims, it may well be looked upon quite differently by claimants. Mr Deputy Speaker, the independence of the judicial process through the civil Courts will help to prevent any undesired impression or accusation of cover-up and underscore that MINDEF or SAF are above board. This willingness to allow for legal scrutiny builds public confidence. Allowing civil proceedings is not about pinning guilt on particular individuals, which is ironically the case with the current regimes used by MINDEF, such as summary trial, Court Martial or criminal proceedings. It is about giving a Serviceman or his family an unfettered right of recourse not dependent on an organisation which might otherwise have been vicariously liable for the tort but for the current statutory exemption from liability. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, making commanders more accountable and more careful during training helps to ensure that learning outcomes are safe for our service personnel by the standards that SAF has set for itself in its various SAF Core Values. Declaring values and laying out safety regulations are but one step towards greater safety for our troops during training. Compliance is key. And by allowing independent judicial oversight through civil proceedings when there are violations of safety standards, SAF further encourages commanders to be mindful of safety protocols in the controlled environments that training is supposed to be.”
“While as a lawyer I have familiarity with this kind of thinking in litigation, for the lay person without having the right of civil suit, the entire culture of this internal system of compensation to have offers couched in confidential, "without prejudice" language and with MINDEF's denial of liability as a basis for such compensation, just does not augur well for the confidence of the injured Serviceman or the family of a deceased Serviceman in such a system.”
“This is unlike the right to a civil claim, where the decision to commence action lies with a Serviceman or his family. By allowing them to have the right of suit, once the suit is commenced, the Courts will decide on liability based on the evidence and arguments that are presented before it. The defendants have the right to defend themselves. The injured Serviceman or the family of the Serviceman bringing the suit still has the burden to prove his or their case, as is required for all civil cases. Ultimately, it is up to the civil Courts to decide based on the merits of the case. MINDEF mentioned in their press release of 7 March 2016 of an offer of compensation to Pte Lee's family which was rejected. It appears that the offer was "based on the full extent allowed by the compensation legislation". MINDEF also said that "To respect privacy and maintain confidentiality, compensation amounts are not disclosed, but are generally two to four times that of amounts provided under the Work Injury Compensation Act" (WICA). It is not very clear what was offered to the family but, for avoidance of doubt, the awards under WICA are usually less than awards under common law negligence claims. I have two further reservations about this system of compensation. This seems to be strictly on a confidential and "without prejudice" basis.”
“The Minister has, in response to my supplementary question about lifting the right to sue for training cases, said that: "The Member says, why not lift it from training? You cannot train at one pace and expect your security forces to ramp up their capabilities when in real operations. There is a saying, you know, 'When you do not sweat in training, you will spill blood in real operations'. You have to make your training realistic so that when we meet those circumstances – like the guard who fired at the car and stopped the car in time. Do you think you can get that level of proficiency if they think they are not protected during training?" With respect, I was not asking for unbridled or unrealistic restrictions to training. That is quite clear from the scenarios I cited in my question. Nevertheless, I have said today that civil liability should be allowed for limited circumstances, for instance, when officers have clearly failed to comply with TSRs. Surely, the Minister was not implying that training in compliance with TSRs is not realistic or that any breaches of TSRs to make training realistic is acceptable to SAF. The Minister mentioned that punitive actions have, in the past, been taken against errant officers by way of criminal proceedings or proceedings under military law. By military law, it can, of course, be Court Martial proceedings or summary trials. But such actions are very different from the rights of an injured Serviceman or the family of a deceased Serviceman having to commence a civil claim in negligence against any errant officer or SAF. The Serviceman or his family has no say whether criminal proceedings, Court Martial proceedings or summary trials are to be commenced. It is completely at the discretion of MINDEF or the Attorney-General's Chambers.”
“Answering to SAF through the military justice system does not achieve this. In effect, at least from a civil law perspective, errant officers or instructors are not directly accountable to the people they are in charge of. At best, officers are only accountable to the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) or to the state. The Minister for Defence is right to say that civil suit is not trivial. That is precisely why there are circumstances where civil claims should be allowed, and I submit that violation of safety procedures during the controlled environment of training should be one of them. Knowledge of the potential seriousness of consequences can encourage those responsible for the lives of our women and men in uniform to be more careful and treat their duties more seriously and be less cavalier about non observance of TSRs or safety considerations in lesson plans. Knowledge of the possibility of a civil suit reduces the moral hazard by making the gravity of consequences more evident. One common claim about the Singapore legal system is that clear, consistent and proportional sanction deters violations of the law. Allowing civil liability for violations of training protocol is an extension of this principle. The point about deterrence is that civil liability can be quite easily avoided by adherence to established safety regulations governing the type of training in question. Even if an accident happens, and they unfortunately do, once commanders have shown that they have taken all necessary precautions and have complied with TSR requirements, they should not be held responsible. They should not have to worry about any civil liability.”
“In training situations, safety protocols laid out in lesson plans and the TSR seek to minimise accidents and other incidents. When a training accident occurs because of clear, and especially deliberate breaches of established safety codes by officers responsible for conducting the training or recklessness as to its compliance, there should be channels for civil liability, just as there are channels for criminal liability. There may be situations that are not criminal but where victims and their families should still be able to seek legal recourse directly. I am not calling for a blanket civil liability for accidents; just for accidents during the controlled environment of training. Training conditions have clear safety codes laid out, and commanders have a duty to comply. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, when commanders violate established protocols, they are sending out a signal that they do not care enough about measures put in place for protecting those under their charge, that they are willing to put their men at unnecessary risk. SAF should not tolerate, much less condone, such behaviour, and it is important to make this clear both within its ranks and to the public. If commanders choose to engage in such behaviour, if they choose to endanger our children, siblings, spouses or parents in situations that do not warrant such risk, they should answer for it, and not just to the state, but to the Servicemen or to his or her family. Section 14 of GPA should be amended to reflect this. If someone endangers or, worse, harms our women and men in uniform because of a lack of care with regard to established safety protocols, they need to answer to those they have a responsibility for. This should be the case, even if an act is not criminal.”
“I was a little bit surprised when the Minister for Defence equated examples of operations with breaches of safety protocol during training in his reply to my supplementary question in Parliament last March. The Minister cited examples of: (a) a Police Officer discharging a firearm when in pursuit of a suspect that the officer "thinks is going to commit harm"; (b) service personnel who "see a significant threat" at a key installation they are protecting; and, (c) the Police shooting incident after a vehicle tried to breach the barricades at last year's Shangri-La Dialogue and was shot by a Gurkha Police Officer. The Minister's examples all pertain to Police operations, not even training. Training personnel to make operational decisions does not involve completely replicating a real-world situation. It is peculiar at best to think that training personnel to make snap judgements about responding to significant threats or vehicles breaching barricades requires the use of live weapons on real people, for instance. A line can and should be drawn between training and operational considerations. This is a line that is clear in principle and in fact. In the Minister's response to my Parliamentary Question in March, he said, "injuries and deaths can happen despite best efforts." He went on to discuss two accidents that involved negligence, a rash act, and an attempt to "pervert the course of justice". These incidents involved "acts that amount to criminal offences under general law", as the Minister noted. I agree with the Minister that accidents can and do sadly occur. Accidents, however, can take place for a variety of reasons, under a range of conditions. They may occur on the road, in the regular operation of equipment, or because of unforeseen circumstances.”
“The TSRs describe safety procedures in detail, often giving very exact distances, ranges, equipment and contingency safety measures for different types of training exercises. They lay out what should be done and spell out what needs to be avoided. There is good reason for this meticulousness. A mistake from carelessness, laziness, or irresponsibility may lead to serious injury, even loss of life. So, it is important to remind commanders what to do and what to avoid when conducting training. Lesson plans and TSRs are, in a number of cases, written in blood. Safety procedures for prisoner of war training saw a revision after the unfortunate death of one service personnel and serious injury to another. The tragic death of Pte Dominique Sarron Lee brought a revision to safety procedures relating to the use of smoke grenades in training, including a change to the type of smoke grenade SAF uses. There are other examples which I do not have the time to go into now. Operations. Training situations are and should remain qualitatively different from operational circumstances. It is important not to conflate these very different situations. Operations are not, at their core, meant for practice and learning. They have very different objectives and goals. What is at stake in operations is very different from a training exercise. They may involve conditions outside the control of commanders and SAF. In this regard, considerations of risk during operations are very different from training. There is a different case to be made for exempting commanders from legal liability during operational situations. Training safety protocols obviously do not readily apply. A clear line exists between operations and training.”
“All military training and operations carry some risks to be sure, but training affords the controlled circumstances that allow the careful management of such risks. The aim is to ensure that learning takes place without harm to our service personnel. These are the same personnel whom we will have to rely on during operations. To expect service personnel to risk themselves for our country, to go into harm's way for us when asked, it is only right for the nation to afford them adequate protection where possible, not least during training, when what is at stake is a learning outcome and not an immediate life or death situation. Given Singapore's limited human resources, it is also in the interest of SAF and the nation to keep injury and death in training to a minimum. Actually, SAF has always recognised this distinction between training and operations. That is precisely why SAF has the TSR and other safety directions in lesson plans. When I was an officer cadet, we were all drilled in the TSR. We had to be tested on it. We consulted the TSR and had safety briefings before activities and exercises. When we go into the units, the same emphasis on TSR remains. This was also the case during my National Servicemen (NSmen) training. As NSmen commanders, the safety of our men during training and observance of TSR are always top priorities. After all, every NSmen is a son, sibling, spouse or father to another Singaporean. We inprocess together to do our In Camp Training once a year and we want to outprocess together with everyone safe, sound and happy to go back to our families. NSmen who have been through the usual NS cycles will understand that and it is down to NSmen commanders to ensure, as far as training safety is concerned, that that will happen.”
“I had asked whether this law could be amended at least to reduce the possible moral hazard of any officers not taking sufficient care and caution in abiding by established TSRs during training exercises. In response, the Minister for Defence said that if I felt strongly about the changes to GPA, I could put up a Motion. I do feel strongly about not just the case of Pte Lee. Any loss of life is regrettable. But there are larger issues at stake as well. They have to do with ensuring that our women and men in uniform have the protection they deserve during training. This remains the case even as SAF seeks to prepare them realistically for tough operational situations. They also have to do with bolstering public confidence in the Armed Forces. After all, we have an armed forces which is composed mostly of conscripts. Anything to do with SAF has the potential to affect every single Singaporean family. As legislators, those of us in this House have an obligation to citizens that we work to their best interests. It is for these reasons that I am moving this Motion. Tough and realistic training is important for SAF. There is no doubt about that. However, training occurs in a controlled environment by design, unlike operations that, by their nature, have higher levels of risk, uncertainty and unpredictability. Action and behaviour permissible during training should be subject to more stringent limits than operations. Managing the training environment ensures that not only learning takes place, but that service personnel do not face unnecessary physical risks. Our Servicemen must remain safe, healthy, fit and ready for operations when called.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to address the House today about the Government Proceedings Act (GPA). Specifically, I would like to propose that section 14 of the GPA should be amended to allow civil liability in the tort of negligence in respect of a member of the Armed Forces or the Government for death or personal injury during training as a result of any conduct by any officer during training that conspicuously violates safety protocols, procedures and regulations. An example would be if an officer or instructor fails to comply with Training Safety Regulations (TSR) or any training safety protocols recommended in any Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) lesson plans or manuals. There should be a clear distinction between training and operations for purposes of liability under section 14 of GPA. Such an amendment to GPA can better protect our troops and better enhance public confidence in SAF in the area of training safety. In March 2016, I filed a Parliamentary Question to the Minister for Defence on issues relating to the death of Private (Pte) Dominique Sarron Lee during SAF training. I asked a supplementary question as to whether the Government would consider amending section 14 of GPA to allow certain situations of liability instead of the current absolute exemption from liability for all claims attributable to service. I gave a few examples for consideration: the waiver can be limited to actual operations and should not apply to training, or when a death or personal injury occurred as a result of omission from observing TSRs or when the negligence of an officer has some causal connection with the death or personal injury.”
“I thank the Minister for the answer so far. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Hong Kong customs authorities had actually openly stated what was the problem with the import declaration or customs declaration, because I have not quite really seen it in the media so far.”
“Madam, I am in support of the Bill. 4.23 pm”
“Madam, I understand that all states which are party to this Convention are required to implement the requirements of this Convention in a way that ensures that the ships flying the flag of a state, which has not ratified this Convention, do not receive more favourable treatment. I also understand that all states which are party to this Convention are also obliged to have effective port state control to ensure ships entering its port meet the requirements of this Convention. Madam, not all port or flag-states may be signatories of this Convention. Some ships which come into Singapore port may come from flag-states which are not signatories. To ensure consistent protection of crew under these provisions, port-states like Singapore which are signatories to this Convention must carry out consistent enforcement when vessels enter port. Singapore is a major maritime hub. We have one of the world's busiest ports. And we have one of the largest ship registries in the world. We have to do our part, both as a port-state as well as a flag-state, to ensure that shipowners comply with the IMO Conventions or regulations and to make this Convention and this Bill work. In this connection, may I ask the Senior Minister of State how will MPA ensure that all ships entering Singapore, especially those which are not registered with the Singapore registry, have their MLC certificates in place? Madam, this Convention is certainly a good and big step in the right direction, in so far as it provides more protection and assurance in respect of repatriation cost, unpaid wages, compensation for death and long-term disability. However, I feel that there is still more that we can do to improve on the certainty of seafarers being paid their fair wages and being paid in a timely manner.”
“For the crew on these vessels, sadly, this Convention may be academic to them and will not really improve their lot. Madam, I understand that for the purpose of the financial security required by this Convention to secure the various crew-related claims, the IG group, or the world's Protection and Indemnity clubs, who are the top-tier group of P&I clubs, are going to provide automatic additional cover, presumably with additional premium and they will provide cover to ships regardless of whether they belong to a flag-state, who is the signatory state to this Convention. This is great news, as it would ensure that the crew of more ships can enjoy the security intended under this Convention. However, with regard to crew who are serving on board ships which are not entered with these P&I clubs or on board many more smaller home-trade vessels which are not as well regulated for various reasons, whether crew can enjoy protection under this Convention will depend on whether their ship has the requisite insurance coverage. We should not assume that this is a given in all cases. Madam, under this Convention, seafarers have to be serving on board at the time of claim. The crew can only make any claim on the MLC certificates if they are still serving on board. It brings the Page: 78 possibility of owners repatriating seafarers by giving false assurances that outstanding wages of claims will be paid after repatriation. But once repatriated, the financial security may no longer assist the seafarers. And the seafarers will have to engage lawyers to pursue their claims.”
“I am glad that, under this Convention, even if the contract is entered into between the crew and manning agents, and not with the owners, the crew can now look to the financial security under this Convention. Much as this convention is a good and big step in the right direction and will bring comfort and assurance to many seafarers, I can still see some practical limitations, which I hope this Government and the world maritime community can continue to make efforts towards. One, the financial security system is to secure up to four months' wages. If the outstanding wages exceed four months, the crew may still need to instruct their own lawyers to effect recovery of their unsecured amount. Hence, this convention does not fully assist the crew with unpaid wages of more than four months. There are a small number of shipowners whose crew may not be paid wages on a regular basis. They may, for example, be paid their full wages at the end of the contract term, which can be a few years. Meantime, they may be given, say, a small allowance. They may use such an allowance to buy daily necessities. Often, when such crew try to stop work and return home, often due to unhappiness with poor working conditions, the owners may threaten not to pay their salaries in full. The crew's only option will be to leave the vessel and instruct lawyers to file a claim in Court. But the crew may not have the funds to do so. Some of the crew may even have entered into one-sided contracts with manning agents. Included in this category are some fishing fleets, which I understand come into Singapore port for various reasons. These are not Singapore-registered vessels. They are foreign-owned and have foreign crew.”
“For example, crew may be promised additional wages, overtime payment but, unfortunately, for the crew, the documentation from the shipowners supporting such payment may be less than perfect. It is not uncommon these days to see competing claimants trying to overcome the higher priority which crew wages enjoyed over other claimants, by challenging such payments, often using intimidating and even lengthy Court applications, which come with the implied threat of legal cost, which may effectively pressure crew to settle for a smaller sum than as claimed. Madam, with this Convention, the provision of the financial security from insurance companies for unpaid crew wage claims and death, disability claims as well as repatriation costs and provisions will provide some welcome assurances to the crew. Coincidentally, it may also be welcomed by other trade creditors as the crew wage claims may not eat into the judicial sale Page: 77 proceeds of abandoned ships which are arrested. Madam, with this Convention, I understand that shipowners have to display their MLC certificates for the required financial security on board the vessel and the crew can contact the insurers directly. This seems rather convenient but, in practice, this will only work if the owners will allow the crew unrestricted access to the insurers, whether by phone, email or shore visits to the offices of insurers. Madam, it is not uncommon to see owners disputing liability to crew for wages on the ground that their crew is employed by the ship managers or by manning agents directly. Sometimes, the owner did not pay the ship managers or manning agents for the crew's wages and, as a result, the latter may delay or fail to pay the crew.”
“It may not be convenient for the crew, given the way ship operations are run. Vessels have tight turn-around time and may not have much time in port. Crew may need to man the vessel even when the ship is in port. In some situations, the master may not grant permission for crew to go ashore. Sometimes, the owners or their agents may not allow the crew to go ashore and the agents' co-operation is required as they need to get the paperwork from local port authorities and also arrange for harbour launches to go to the anchorages to pick up the crew which can be costly to the crew. Although in most jurisdictions, crew has the right to commence legal proceedings for unpaid wages and, under the Admiralty Laws for many countries, crew wages have higher priority than most other types of claims, in practice, crew may be reluctant to commence proceedings as they have to engage their own lawyers and fund their own litigation. Even if the crew manages to find a lawyer to file their crew wage claims, there may be competing claims in the same proceedings where a ship is arrested by creditors. Crew wage claims may be only one of the competing claims among different creditors. If shipowners give up their ships, refuse to pay crew wages and let the ships be sold via judicial sale, all creditors will compete for a share of the sale proceeds. As crew wage claim takes higher priority than other claims, unpaid wages can often affect the claims of other creditors. However, that does not mean that crew will have it easy and their wages can always be recovered. Sometimes, the crew wage contractual documentation may be far from ideal.”
“In the second half of the 1990s, many shipping companies from the former Soviet Union countries faced bankruptcy. With the end of the Cold War and the break-up of the USSR, many of these shipping companies had struggled to survive. Their crew even had to arrest their own ships to sue for their own unpaid wages. Some of the crew were even emotionally reluctant to sue their companies as they had been sailing with their former state enterprises since the period of communist rule. Sometimes, these unpaid wages ran into months and even longer. Page: 76 These days, we still see owners failing to pay crew wages when they run into financial problems, especially with the shipping industry being in the doldrums in the last few years. When companies collapse, they can leave crew stranded onboard with wages unpaid and, sometimes, even without funding for repatriation and, in some situations, even without provisions, as fleet management take time to work out solutions for the crew as well as with creditors. Some of us here may have read news of crew stranded onboard many ships all over the world which are owned by the Korean conglomerate, Hanjin. It may take quite a few months to settle these problems. I understand that a local company had a similar experience recently, albeit on a much smaller scale. Typically, when a shipowner starts to owe its crew their wages, the crew may still continue to work on the vessel for a little while. The crew will often be alerted to take action when they know that the shipowner has other creditors, as, for example, when the ship receives a claim from trade creditors, or when their family is in hardship after not receiving their wages for some months. There are practical reasons why crew may not take action for some time.”
“Madam, I declare my interest as a shipping lawyer. This Bill wishes to introduce the amendments by the ILO to the MLC of 2006. Amongst other things, the proposed amendments will require shipowners to obtain financial security to cover up to four months of unpaid wages for their crew, repatriation costs and other expenses required of an abandoned crew, such as food, clothing, accommodation, drinking water, essential fuel for survival on board the ship, necessary medical care and any other reasonable costs or charges. The amendments also introduce new mandatory requirements to ensure that seafarers who suffer death or long-term disability due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard are compensated fairly and without delay. The financial security required will be provided by marine insurance companies like Protection & Indemnity clubs, otherwise known as P&I Clubs. Under this Convention, from 18 January 2017, all ships which are subject to this Convention will be required to carry and display onboard two certificates confirming that financial security is in place for: (a) the repatriation cost and outstanding wages; and (b) contractual payments for compensation for death or long-term disability. I shall refer to these certificates as MLC certificates for the remaining part of my speech. Madam, the plight of seafarers who were abandoned by shipowners who have suffered from financial difficulties or denied their wages by their employers is something I am familiar with. I started work as a lawyer doing crew wage claim work for abandoned crew on board commercial ships in these exact circumstances which have given rise to the amendment to the MLC and, indeed, this enabling Bill.”
“I thank the Minister for the reply. I would like to ask how the Minister would propose mitigating the costs and risks for Singapore should there be a major American departure from the current Rebalancing Strategy. The rationale for my question is this: I am essentially asking with respect to our plans if (a) the US' alliances with its existing allies will weaken or be less involved, or (b) if the US becomes even more active or more involved. These scenarios will affect Singapore quite differently. I am seeking to understand the Government's forward-planning in these respects. I feel that it is important that Singaporeans know the Government's plans to deal with the different scenarios.”
“Madam, does the Minister not agree that the presidential candidate needs to be a unifier of the country's people, the symbol of unity for the country? However, the Senate is different. The Senate has a specific custodial function. That is the main contradiction between the two ideas that we have here. So, can the Minister comment on this? Does the Senate need to be a unifier of the country?”
“Madam, can I take the opportunity to ask the Minister whether he can update the House on whether the cause of the recent Circle Line breakdown has been uncovered?”
“It will be similar to the criteria for the current CPA.”
“The details are similar. We are going to, we have – the details will be similar to the current PEC. The criteria in the Bill.”
“I thank the Minister for the clarification. The criteria would be similar to the present criteria.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I oppose the proposed Constitutional amendment with regard to NCMPs. (In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in English. I have a very general question for the Deputy Prime Minister regarding this Bill. There are many changes that have been introduced under this Bill. Can the Deputy Prime Minister explain to the House which of the proposed changes are now being tabled because of something that has gone wrong in the past and thereby necessitating the changes required under this Bill? If there are any such instances, will the Deputy Prime Minister elaborate on the circumstances which took place? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, I oppose the proposed amendment to the provisions in the Constitution for NCMPs. I also oppose the other amendments in this Bill relating to the Elected President scheme and the CPA. The WP calls for a referendum on the Elected Presidency. Let the people decide whether the Presidency should remain an elected office in the manner under the present law or as proposed by the WP ‒ the Senate proposal.”
“We believe that under a fair and healthy democratic system, and if the system is running well, there will surely be Opposition party members being elected into Parliament to represent the voters. Thus, Parliamentary debates can then represent diverse views, and more balanced decisions can be made. Our Secretary-General, Mr Low Thia Khiang, has likened NCMPs to duckweeds, which float on the water surface and do not sink roots. As NCMPs may not gain direct ground experience in the running of the Town Council, an Opposition party with only NCMPs and no elected MP will be placed at a distinct disadvantage. Therefore, if we only have NCMPs in Parliament but not elected Opposition MPs, the Opposition will never have the opportunity to accumulate the relevant experiences in running a Town Council. This will be unhealthy for the future of Singapore politics. The PAP is hoping that a system with more NCMPs will distract the electorate from the need to vote in elected MPs from alternative parties. This is to entrench the Parliament supermajority of the PAP. We need more than just NCMPs to check the Government. We need a good political system whereby a check-and-balance mechanism on the Government can be implemented through a fair and competitive election process. When the voters vote for Opposition candidates and the Opposition candidates successfully become fully elected MPs, they will then be able to enter Parliament with the full mandate of the voters and can then be said to truly represent the constituencies which voted them into Parliament. An NCMP does not represent any constituency. The point is that it is the fear of losing elected seats in GEs that compels the PAP to take the pleas of the people seriously.”
“As NCMPs may not gain direct ground experience in the running of the Town Council, an Opposition party without any elected Member will be placed at a distinct disadvantage. We have seen from recent elections that a political party which is not able to show a track record of having run a Town Council gives room for scaremongering to make voters less certain about whether to vote for its candidates. The PAP is hoping that a system with more NCMPs will distract the electorate from the need to vote in elected Members from alternative parties and, if Singaporeans buy their story, it will only help to entrench the Parliament supermajority of the PAP. We need more than NCMPs alone to check the Government. It is the fear of losing elected seats that will enable Singaporeans to check the PAP Government and to compel the ruling party to take the people seriously. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I speak briefly in Mandarin? (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Deputy Speaker, this amendment Bill is seeking to increase the number of NCMPs from a maximum of nine to 12. The WP has always objected to the NCMP scheme since its inception in 1984. We believe that Parliament should consist of fully elected MPs with the full mandate of the people. The PAP Government amended the Constitution and the rules governing Parliamentary elections. It introduced the GRCs system, making it more difficult for Opposition party members to be elected into Parliament. It has been redrawing the electoral boundaries at every GE. The WP is compelled to consider after each election whether to accept NCMP seats. Page: 91 If GRCs were abolished, the NCMP scheme would be unnecessary.”
“Will the Deputy Prime Minister share with the House what would be the proposed changes to the rules for future Presidential Elections? It is important that we should also know this now as we should consider critically all the proposed changes, both in this Bill as well as other changes that the Government intends to introduce. I now move to the topic on NCMP. The Constitution of Singapore was amended in 2010 to provide for a minimum of nine Opposition MPs via the NCMP scheme. If there are fewer than nine Opposition Members elected in a GE, the NCMPs would be selected in priority among the best losers from the Opposition, depending on the percentage of votes obtained, until there were nine Opposition Members. This Bill now seeks to increase from a maximum of nine to 12 NCMPs. The WP's position on NCMPs was enunciated at the Debate on the President's Address at the beginning of the 13th Parliament in January this year and our position has not changed. The WP has always objected to the NCMP scheme since its inception in 1984. We believe that Parliament should consist of fully elected Members with the full mandate of the people. The introduction of Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs) and the consistent gerrymandering at every GE with the redrawing of electoral boundaries compelled the WP to consider after each election whether to accept NCMP seats. We believe that if GRCs were abolished, the NCMP scheme would be unnecessary. Our WP Secretary-General, Mr Low Thia Khiang, has likened NCMPs to duckweeds, which float on the water surface and do not sink roots. Essentially, an NCMP is not the elected Member of any constituency.”
“The WP's response is that we can still have such a body as proposed by the Commission but that, as this body is supposed to perform a check on Parliament, it should have the popular mandate of the people and be directly elected. The WP is, therefore, proposing that the Senate be established as the Upper House of the Legislature. The Senate shall, essentially, take over the custodial powers of the Elected Presidency. Sir, this will allow the custodian role to be taken away from the President and free the President to perform the role of Head of State and be the symbol of unity for Singapore and Singaporeans. Sir, the Government accepts in its White Paper that there is an inherent tension between an electoral process and a President who discharges a unifying, symbolic function but believes that it can be mitigated, even if not entirely eliminated. The Government did not elaborate in its White Paper on how it intends to do so. May the Deputy Prime Minister please clarify how the Government intends to do this? The Commission touched on their concerns on how Presidential Elections can be divisive and recommended that the election rules be improved upon, including the understanding of candidates on the roles of the Elected President. The Commission also touched on the need for greater public education to have a better understanding of the role of the President. The Government's response is that the risk of Presidential Elections being politicised can be dealt with to some extent through the rules governing election campaigns. Page: 90 I expect that the Government would probably have rightly considered such changes before it tabled the present amendment Bill.”
“But are we not selling ourselves short in the process when we force the two elements to co-exist? The Commission clearly thinks that it is better to split these roles. This was the second time since Independence that the Government has convened a Commission. Is this not a very good time to consider this recommendation from the Commission? Next, on the proposed minority requirements in the amendment Bill, I am concerned that these requirements can be construed as patronising and unmeritocratic. They may encourage unhealthy stereotyping of racial perceptions. I also fear that by having the statutory assurance of a reservation for a certain minority after five terms, people may unintentionally and unwittingly be encouraged to vote along racial lines. What we should be doing is always to encourage people to think beyond the race of the candidate. I fear that any minority requirement will not encourage people to think beyond the race of the candidate but may achieve the opposite result. I believe that this provision is unnecessary as Singaporeans will rise to the occasion to choose their Head of State based on the person's character and achievements, regardless of race, language and religion. The Government, in its White Paper on the Review on Specific Aspects of the Elected Presidency, rejected the Commission's proposal to unbundle the President's symbolic and custodial roles and assigning the custodial role to an appointed body of experts. The Government said that the second key should be held by an elected body with direct mandate from Singaporeans. The Government also said that the body of experts, as proposed by the Commission, would not be able to veto as it lacks the democratic mandate and this would impair the efficacy and rigour of the second key.”
“The strict eligibility criteria ensure that only a very exclusive group of people are eligible. They will be made even stricter under the proposed amendments being debated and become even more exclusive and narrow such that only a very small group of people with a very exclusive profile may qualify. In contrast, as a unifier, the President must have, in the words of the Commission, "a premium on inclusivity". I feel that this must surely include the ability to relate to Singaporeans from all walks of life, races, ages and classes. By combining the roles and having the strict eligibility criteria, we have restricted the eligible persons to a very exclusive group: some past political officeholders or senior public servants or chairman or CEO of a company with a minimum average value in shareholders' equity of at least $500 million. In my view, we have unnecessarily limited ourselves here. Good political leaders of the world have come from very diverse backgrounds. There must be people from different walks of life who can be a good Singaporean Head of State and unifier of our people, without being a CEO of a company with a large shareholders' equity or who have not been in politics previously. Surely, it is very possible that we can have someone who come from a charity or voluntary welfare organisation background, or someone who is an educationist, doctor or even a journalist, but who may not have the financial management experience required under this system. President Sheares was a doctor. President Wee Kim Wee was a journalist. Under our present rules, they would never Page: 89 have qualified. Yes, admittedly, our Elected President system with its two distinct roles, is unique.”
“After deliberation, the Commission found it difficult to overcome, I quote "the strains rooted in the unavoidable tension between the President's historical and custodial roles" and recommended that the Government may wish to consider unbundling the custodial role from the symbolic role of the President and have the custodial role be performed by an appointed body of experts operating like a second chamber of Parliament but with no veto or blocking power. The WP studied the Constitutional Commission's report and we agree with the Commission's alternative proposal to revert to an appointed ceremonial Presidency and to have a separate body to exercise the custodial role. The main difference is that we think that this body must be elected by the people directly, not merely appointed by any persons. The custodial role of the President requires that he be prepared to confront the Government if necessary. He can only do so if he has gone through a national election, competed in the hustings to be elected above other candidates and received the elected mandate of the people. The Constitutional Commission said that the election will likely be politicised and divisive. To contest in such an election to be the Head of State will require one to be partisan in some ways, even if it should not be along party lines like for Parliamentary elections. Being partisan may not sit comfortably with the notion of a unifier of the entire country which the President is supposed to be, even if an election may not be divisive. The strict eligibility criteria which are said to be necessary for the President's custodial role are not similar to the traits that may make a candidate a good Head of State and unifier of the country.”
“"First, the President's historical role as a symbol of the country's unity is premised on the President being non-partisan. However, in discharging the custodial role, the President faces the prospect of having to confront the Government of the day – a task which might appear to be at odds with a non-partisan unifying role. Further, the prospect of having to stand up to the Government necessitates an electoral mandate, in order to endow the President with the requisite legitimacy to do so. This requires that candidates to undergo an intensely political and potentially divisive election process. It may fairly be asked whether a person who emerges victorious after a sharply contested election can convincingly lay claim to being the nation's symbol of unity. Finally, Page: 88 in terms of the President's eligibility criteria, the maximisation of his symbolic and unifying role suggests a premium on inclusivity, in particular, with respect to matters, such as minority representation, as well as the ability to relate to and connect with the general populace. In contrast, however, the custodial role entails a significant degree of exclusivity, particularly in relation to the requirement that the candidate possesses demonstrable experience in high office, in matters of policy and/or financial and technical expertise." The Commission heard submissions and proposals from many Singaporeans.”
“Madam, I rise to oppose this Bill. In my speech today, I will be touching on the contradictions of the President being a Head of State and unifier of the country versus the President in his custodial role. I will also be touching on the topic of NCMP. [Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair] There are two unique and important roles which our Elected President currently plays under the present system. One, the President is a Head of State as well as a symbol of the unity of the country. Two, the President has a custodial role in safeguarding our financial Reserves and the integrity of our Public Service. The WP believes that the office of the Elected President should be abolished and the Presidency be reverted to its former ceremonial position. Though we understand that many Singaporeans desire that this right of election should not be taken away from them, it does not remove the fact that it is difficult for an Elected President to concentrate on being a Head of State and be a unifying force for Singapore and Singaporeans while having a separate custodial role in respect of our country's Reserves. The Constitutional Commission of 2016 led by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon reflected on seven principles that have informed the evolution of the Elected Presidency. It accepted that, I quote, "There is an undeniable tension" between some of the principles reviewed". I quote, "especially those pertaining to the President's historical role and the custodial role that was subsequently grafted on." Please allow me to quote certain paragraphs of the Constitutional Commission here on the seven principles as I feel that they are important and have been aptly described.”
“A quick clarification, Madam. Perhaps Mr Seah could give an example, just so we can understand what the concerns he has.”
“I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. I just have two supplementary questions. I appreciate the answer that was given by the Parliamentary Secretary and may I implore the Ministry to keep the line open for possible exceptional situations where the local training providers may not be able to provide a certain training. So, not just structured programmes that the Ministry may expand into from time to time. The other question is: I believe that the Government has announced previously they will be giving out individual study awards up to $5,000 to support young and mid-career workers as well as fellowships worth $10,000 to help senior workers. For that, the SkillsFuture Secretariat has said that these awards may include overseas courses in certain sectors. I would like to clarify with the Parliamentary Secretary what sectors and courses are included in this and what are the criteria for the selection.”
“At the same time, we want to ensure that this whole system is embedded not only as the responsibility of the teachers but also their peers, as well as the whole society. So, when the Member mentioned about teachers already having a heavy workload, it is not being undertaken by the teachers alone, but also by the school counsellors. Nevertheless, the whole society is responsible to ensure that our children have a balanced life. And it is important for us to have protection for all the different aspects of our life.”
“I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his answers. Just a few supplementary questions. I was just wondering, with the recent exemption of remote gambling, how will the current Ministry of Education (MOE) syllabus be adapted to include the higher risks and warnings against remote gambling? My second question is: in 2012, the then-Minister for Education said that MOE was developing a core CCE syllabus where key elements of problem gambling awareness and prevention programmes would be given due emphasis in the new syllabus. So, I would just like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary: how will this core CCE syllabus be effective in combating problem gambling in their homes, especially with online gambling? Finally, I believe that teachers are already overloaded with their various responsibilities and work burdens. What are the Ministry's plans for additional help for teachers to ensure that due assistance is rendered to students with problem gambling in their homes? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for the question. As I mentioned in my answer earlier, the CCE programme, as well as the Cyber Wellness programme, has been able to reach out to our students not only about gambling or online gambling, but also in other aspects of addictive behaviour. The Member is right to say that we have enhanced our CCE over the years. We have been able to reach out to students not only via one module but different modules at different stages. It is important for us to ensure that it is not only limited to the modules that we offer in school, but also to the society via the external organisations. In essence, we are providing holistic engagement of our students in school.”
“Under the scheme, some form of deposits or insurance may be required for participating businesses, but the scheme does not cover all businesses and is dependent on CASE working out the arrangements and accreditations with the relevant trade associations. May I ask if the Minister of State has considered amending legislation to require a secured payment mode such as customers making payment to a reliable third party or body which can then dispense payment to the retailers as each of the session is utilised by the customers, or by use of a performance bond? This may already be in place by a voluntary or more limited basis than I am thinking here. But, Madam, we really should do more to prevent retailers from looking to bulk payments for packages as quick and easy solutions for business cash flow, and to give consumers peace of mind when they sign up for term subscription packages. Alternatively, the Government maybe should consider starting a scheme to encourage and allow retailers from all industries and not just those who have signed up with CaseTrust to voluntarily opt for a secured payment or performance bond practice. Such schemes can be driven by good business incentives. The Government may even wish to consider incentives, such as suitable tax reliefs. Madam, despite things having become more expensive in Singapore in recent years, Singapore still has a reputation as a shoppers' paradise which saw investors pouring $10 billion into retail developments here in the past five years. We must continue to maintain our reputation as a major retail centre in the world. And to do this, we must continue to improve our consumer protection laws in a fair and responsible manner.”
“Above all, consumers, local or otherwise, must be confident that when they go into any shop in Singapore, whether in Orchard Road or Sim Lim Square, or when they shop online, they can, without question, expect retailers to behave honourably and ethically and will not engage in unfair practices. Madam, I am in support of the proposed amendments in Schedule 2 which included various forms of conduct as unfair practices, but I also wonder whether the current Act and the proposed amendment Bill may be sufficient to deal with businesses where customers sign onto a term subscription package, like gym, spa, hair or nail salon, or travel packages. Madam, on one hand, I recognise the attraction of the bulk business that may come to small businesses with a term subscription package, and how it can help to keep customer loyalty and provide good cashflow for the business. On the other hand, I also recognise that the discounts that come with a fixed term package may be attractive to customers. I myself signed up with California Fitness many years ago, shortly after they opened in Singapore. And as my hon colleague, Mr Lim Biow Chuan has pointed out, California Fitness was recently in the news for its sudden collapse, leaving many customers who have signed up for valuable packages in the lurch. My wife and I have also signed up regularly for foot massage packages. Such term packages can often be a win-win deal for both businesses and customers. I am aware that CASE has the CaseTrust Accreditation Scheme which covers certain businesses, for example, renovation companies, employment agencies, spas and travel agencies.”
“Would it not be more appropriate to require officers to seek a Court warrant first in all the cases, just like in clause 12(j)? We should not be lowering the threshold for entering premises and carrying out searches or seizures for different kinds of offences. Let the Courts be a point of control and oversight to decide whether any entry, search or seizure is actually necessary. The presence of a notice, while admittedly is better than no notice at all, does not take away the fact that the powers to enter and take photos, seize or detain without a Court warrant are rather draconian. Let us not take such searches too lightly. Carry out searches by all means, if the Court sanctions it. But do not make it easier for searches to be carried without a warrant from the Court. Madam, next, I would like to ask the Minister of State how the new administering authority intends to ensure that retailers who are subject to injunctions should, as the injunction requires them, put up notices to all and sundry that they are objects to such injunctions and that potential customers see such notices before they enter into any transactions with the retailer. How is this going to be administered? I am concerned that if it is not administered effectively and consistently by the authority, the injunctions will be less effective and may fail in preventing the very acts that the present Bill is seeking to prevent. It will be too late when the customer enters into the transaction and is subject to unfair practices.”
“Mdm Speaker, I am in support of strengthening existing laws to provide better protection for consumers, whether it is to protect local shoppers or foreign tourists. It will only take a few bad hats to give Singapore a very bad name, and we cannot afford that as Singapore is a major retail centre of the world. Madam, I have a few clarifications for the Minister of State. Clause 12(i) of the Bill provides that in connection with an investigation under section 12(g)(i), the authority may have a power to enter premises without a Court warrant. It sets out the requirements of a prior written notice, for example, giving two working days' notice of the intended entry indicating the subject matter and the purpose of the investigation, and also to be accompanied by a copy of the alleged offences. Under this provision, an investigation officer may be empowered to inspect and search the premises, take photos or videos of the premises or persons in the premises, seize or detain goods, bring necessary equipment, require someone at the premises to produce documents, or to take away information stored in digital form. Clause 12(j) of the Bill then provides the power to enter premises under a Court warrant in cases where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that there are documents on the premises which have not been produced or may be required to be produced, or where officers attempted to enter under the conditions in clause 12(i), but failed to do so. Madam, I would like to know from the Minister of State the rationale for having the power to enter premises without a warrant under clause 12(i) of the Bill, to search, take photos, and seize and detain goods.”