Derrick Goh
Singapore
“Are there plans to tighten regulations on the sale and use of non-compliant or non-original AMD batteries, which are key contributors to the risk? How can enforcement and inspection measures at retail points and online marketplaces be strengthened to deter the sale of unsafe devices and components?”
“Mr Speaker, the question to the Minister to State would be in two parts. The first question is, although the numbers may not be significant, would the Minister of State clarify if, in dollar terms, the Bill would have a significant impact and therefore, reduction to the current scams amount that happens every year?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, my question to the Minister of State is on his point relating to the considerations of stronger regulations by MAS. Would those considerations include requiring BNPL players to report to the Credit Bureau for data so that all players, including banks and financial institutions, could use those data?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I welcome Minister's Statement on blocking the proposed deal and the Government's emphasis that at the heart of this decision is about NTUC Income being able to serve its social mission.”
“Thirdly, whether we can build a more comprehensive support ecosystem for SMEs, such as by (a) synergising the roles of SME Centres and TACs with the enhanced Partnerships for Capability Transformation Scheme for SMEs to connect more easily to learn digital and green strategies; (b) deepening collaborations with Institutes of Higher Learni…”
“Two, how can MHA be even more proactive in leveraging trends and insights for smarter deployment of anti-scam resources, to pre-empt and mitigate exploitative scam types?”
The complete record
Every one of 171 lines we hold for Derrick Goh, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 4.
“If we are to achieve this, then our Government must stay ahead of the curve by putting in safeguards to assist and protect the different segments of the digitally vulnerable groups as we jump onto the transformation train. As the transformation train moves fast, it is critical that we manage digitisation risks to better protect our public and maintain public confidence so that we can make this transformation together, safely. There are specifically two areas that I would like to highlight. They are: (a) redoubling our efforts to help citizens strengthen digital muscles to improve cyber safety; (b) addressing the escalating cases of scams As we push for greater digital adoption and innovation, our citizens will find themselves empowered to do a broader range of tasks and services conveniently. In doing so, we need to help them build more digital muscles as they will each face not just opportunities but also challenges – the digital life ahead is fraught with challenges. An Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) study released recently in December 2020 noted that the levels of digital literacy in Singapore is low. More than half who are deemed savvy information-wise did not spot signs that information was manipulated. The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore, or CSA, too, had similar findings, reporting in August 2020 that, of the people who know about phishing, only 6% in the survey were able to correctly identify all the phishing emails that were tested. What is concerning is that many felt that cybersecurity incidents will not happen to them and that less than half installed security applications even though a majority of them know the risks of not doing so.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, Budget 2021 comes at a critical point for Singapore as we continue to navigate our way safely into a new and unfamiliar horizon. Thus far, we have collectively fared well relative to other countries in our battle against the COVID-19 pandemic. This has been largely due to the leadership of our Government and the trust and co-operation of our citizens. Although this Budget will not provide as much in support schemes compared to the prior year, I applaud the Government for putting forward an expansionary Budget at $102 billion, representing an 8.8% increase year over year. It is critical that our Government continues to take leadership by investing in key areas to help us seize opportunities to maintain our competitive edge even in challenging times like this. Not only does this Budget support Singaporean workers and businesses in need of assistance, it is also seeking to bolster Singapore’s position in the new post-pandemic world through capability building, along with strengthening safeguards. It is Deputy Prime Minister’s message about “Building a Stronger Singapore, Together” with the focus on "Ensuring equal opportunities for all and supporting the vulnerable segments of our society” that resonates with me. I support this Budget of pursuing a Stronger Singapore that is defined beyond the sole objective of economic vibrancy. The reason is that as we pursue transformation in 2021 and speak of a digital, innovation-driven economy, we need to keep focused that the key objective is meant to help our industries and our people to harness the power of data and technology, to be future-ready. The end objective is to improve the quality of our lives as well as create better opportunities for ourselves, including those amongst us who are less digitally savvy.”
“However, in view of the tightened level of security and licensing requirements, I hope that the Ministry will keep the inconvenience to impacted stakeholders to a reasonable level in terms of, for example, wait time for licence registration and approvals, lead time for range and arms booking, as well as keeping the associated costs manageable. On the second point, the Bill’s calibration is evident by the inclusion of the new class licensing regime. This class of licensing will facilitate the development of Shooting sports which is an area where Singapore has done well, with world-class athletes. Examples include in the international arena, such as the SEA Games, ASEAN Games and at the International Shooting Sports Federation World Cup. I am heartened that the Minister has highlighted that this Bill will mean that student members of a school’s Air Gun Club would now not be required to apply for individual licences, as this has always been a good source for scouting of young talent. In this way, class licensing will facilitate legitimate users and stakeholders. However, as we have noted, the risk of GEW is low but not zero. I hope the Minister can give us the continued assurance that the Class Licensing regime will not apply to the higher risk GEW categories or situations. In concluding, Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is holistic in its approach and balanced. I support this Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Guns, Explosives and Weapons or GEW (Control) Bill is a good step forward. This effectively harmonises and updates the laws against new trends and threats and will strengthen the existing enforcement framework which will, in turn, minimise risks posed by GEW going forward. Having had the experience of being a former National Service Police Commander, I can see that this Bill has taken a holistic approach. Not only has it appropriately increased the deterrence for offences with the intent to cause harm, it has also included proactive features in two key areas, namely: one, upstream preventive measures; and, two, the use of class licensing regime. These steps allow for better risk management without increased regulatory burden, of which, I have a request and one clarification for the Minister. Relating to the first point, a few years back, I previously practised at the National Shooting Centre at Choa Chu Kang under the oversight of a coach. At that time, I noticed that the procedures of the range were not as tight as now. It did cross my mind then that a range user could leave the range with arms and live ammunition – in this scenario, the severity would be high, and the probability is low, although not zero. This Bill will now address this gap and require, for example, the National Shooting Centre, which is now not a licensable activity, to operate more securely under licence, such as tighter control of ammunition storage and issuance, for example, armed security at the range’s control points and better security measures in place to prevent firearms and ammunition leaving the shooting range. This measure is more reassuring for all range users as well as the public.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as digital payments become a way of life in Singapore, it is crucial that our regulatory frameworks continue to keep pace with the behaviours of market participants so as to ensure minimum standards of technology, cybersecurity and data safeguards and to allow us to take a leadership position in the world in defining these standards. We should move boldly, but skillfully execute with a commitment to manage known or foreseeable risks. Sir, I support this Bill.”
“Firstly, having differentiated standards for technology and cybersecurity risk where minimum standards are required for those in the Standard Payment Institutions category or otherwise require them to do a structured self-assessment against benchmark standards. This is already being practised in other major financial centres, such as Hong Kong, where its monetary authority has put in place its cyber resilience assessment framework to mitigate hacks, fraud and data leakage risks. Secondly, providing a simple rating system to help the public make better choices amongst payment service providers. This is no different from how our other regulators do this, such as the Singapore Food Agency providing food hygiene ratings to hawker stalls or the Building Construction Agency providing the Quality Mark and performance scores of developers and contractors to help homebuyers make informed decisions. In this way, ordinary consumers can easily understand and make their own informed assessment when selecting payment providers even as we make more efforts to upskill their digital literacy. Thirdly, requiring such firms to ensure adequate efforts and resources are devoted to educating and protecting customers in terms of how their data is secured and how it is being used responsibly, including in the digital eco-system. This can help ensure that industry players are culturally attuned from day one and ensure that digital public education is as much the responsibility of industry players as it is the Government's. As a related point, as we think through these issues, I advocate that we continue to maintain our successful whole-of-Government approach to regulate and ensure that the no material systemic issues fall through the cracks between areas of responsibility.”
“Similarly, Bloomberg, on 13 September 2020, reported that Grab, our payments' unicorn, had four repeated technology glitches over two years in technology applications relating to exposure of private data. In its September report, the technology magazine CPO headline read, I quote, "Fourth privacy breach in two years for Grab. Given low fines, does the company have a reason to care?" Unquote. Before I go on, I want to emphasise that there is regulatory scrutiny by the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Personal Data Protection Commission, which have made considerable efforts to balance the bright future of technology and data with its attendant risks. What I am saying is that the rate of change in this area should spur us on to greater efforts. Today, we already know that no technology security is fool-proof and we now see exponential use of AI, cloud infrastructure, the emergence of 5G and quantum computing. These developments have deep implications on the future of cybersecurity and responsible use of data and demand a corresponding requirement to uplift our population. This rate of technology change is accompanied by a concern which we need to remember that, payments fintech, on its own, is driven fundamentally by investor valuations. It is well understood that profit margins are thin in the payment services. So, such firms strive to create a data eco-system in the hope of profiting from adjacent businesses. This is where technology risk management could be relegated to a lower priority until a hack happens. Given this, there are three areas that I would like to propose for the Minister's consideration to encourage firms in the e-payment space to undertake the necessary focus without too much regulatory burden.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, innovation in payments will contribute to domestic economic growth and improve the lives of our Singaporeans by facilitating convenience of transactions at a lower cost. At the same time, such alternatives to physical cash can promote digital financial literacy and economic efficiency. Sir, before I continue, I would like to declare myself as the Group Head of Audit at DBS Bank. This amendment Bill, in my view, represents progressive legislation and I commend the focus on identifying potential incremental risks covering broad areas that include financial stability, monetary policy and also financial crime prevention – in particular, anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. There is also some focus on technology risks, which include risks around data. Apart from seeking the Minister's assurance that there will be a robust requirement of anti-money laundering tools to ensure token purity checks and so on so that tokenised payments are not misused for illicit purposes, it is on the theme of technology and data, which is fundamental to digital payment service providers, that I would like to identify incremental risk areas which I feel are known or reasonably foreseeable and, therefore, warrant more attention and strengthening. I reflect on recent examples in Singapore that were reported in the media, such as KuCoin, a Singapore-headquartered digital asset exchange and Grab. KuCoin made global headlines with a reported US$280 million digital coins stolen from a cyber hack recently in September 2020. Industry observers noted this to be the third largest crypto hack in history.”
“In concluding, Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Bills represent a proactive step by the Government, which I believe will be welcomed by the public. It is tough to find the exact balance to avoid under or over-correction. Under-correcting will lead to helping fewer deserving entities, while over-correcting will distort the market. But we cannot fear to act, to do the right thing. Hence, the courage that I spoke about earlier of the Government and Second Minister for Law for tabling these Bills. For the policy intent of these Bills to be effective on the ground, the various criteria need to be calibrated appropriately where a conservative starting point ought to be held without being too conservative should be considered and sufficient latitude be given to the expert assessors to achieve a just and fair outcome for deserving cases. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of these Bills.”
“This means that a high revenue drop eligibility criteria requirement would be of little assistance to businesses that are already struggling. Further to the above, I also seek the Minister's consideration on calibrating reliefs for certain agreements. I believe that for example, tenants that are stuck in fixed rental lease agreements are in greater need of the present reliefs tabled compared to those leases which vary with the turnover of the tenant. Regardless of what the eligibility criteria might be, this amendment Bill might potentially have a negative impact on some businesses that narrowly miss the threshold. I think Minister gave some examples earlier on and these examples are not unlikely to happen, where in the case of a tenant-landlord relationship, as an example, it is probable that the position of a landlord of a non-eligible business might harden. He may be emboldened not to negotiate as the landlord would be aware that the tenant will not be eligible to terminate his lease without incurring sizeable penalties. This can potentially happen, which runs contrary to the good intentions of this Bill. I now turn to the last part, which is my query on the interoperability of the earlier rental relief framework and the present framework. I understand that there have been businesses that have availed themselves to the rental relief framework but have continued to perform poorly and have been incurring substantial financial losses. Such businesses now may wish to then invoke the reliefs under the present framework to exit their businesses notwithstanding the previous assistance they had benefited from. Can Minister clarify whether such entities can still benefit from this Bill?”
“The intent is to help eligible businesses impacted by this pandemic to focus on the future and not be stuck in unproductive positions is a positive move. On this, I wish to raise three areas: two on the eligibility criteria and the third on how the current Bill works with the rental relief framework, that will impact the effectiveness and execution of the Bill, for Minister's consideration and clarification. On the eligibility criteria, the use of (a) revenue drop to identify businesses impacted and (b) business size to ringfence this remedy for smaller companies is logical. However, I would request the Minister to ensure that such interventions are well calibrated to ensure a balanced and fair approach to all businesses. The reason for this is that our Government must advocate for our businesses that sit on both sides of the contract. A clear example would be in the area of leases, where there is a clear need to take care of not just tenants, but also landlords. So, there is a need minimise interference in the risk-taking between parties that is at the heart of business activities and the spirit of entrepreneurship. Further, for this amendment Bill to be helpful, the criteria for the revenue drop should not be too conservative, else it would only cover companies that are already deeply in the red, facing imminent solvency issues. In the example of a successful small businesses in the F&B industry, with a healthy 30% profit margins last year, this means that with a 30% drop in revenue this year, the business would already be bottom-line break-even. Under this pandemic situation, small businesses operating at half of its previous turnover is not uncommon.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank the Second Minister for Law for the swift action taken on the amendments to the Insolvency, Restructuring, and Dissolution (Amendment) Bill and the courage to introduce the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) (Amendment No 3) Bill. The amendments taken together is a holistic approach as the Bills are complementary and reinforce each other to assist small and micro businesses. However, we must keep in mind the reality that some micro and small businesses will never recover. The good part, Mdm Deputy Speaker, is that my understanding is that these Bills are essentially for these entities to elect. So, I am a bit confused when the hon Member Jamus Lim spoke about the challenges in terms of the use of independence and additional lawyers to support the move to essentially recover from the challenges posed by the pandemic for these small and micro businesses. In fact, the Simplified Insolvency Programme or SIP seeks to help businesses that need to recover quickly, restructure their debt obligations to keep the businesses going or to have a simplified and orderly exit if there is no better alternative. The existing insolvency process today, while useful, takes time and is expensive. And in this case, the amendment allows more than micro businesses that are already struggling and cannot afford more costs. As such, the SIP is a welcome response to meet the urgent needs under this pandemic condition. That is why I said, it is an option and Small and Micro businesses that do not feel that it benefits them, need not move and elect for these remedies in this Bill. I now turn to the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) (Amendment No 3) Bill.”
“I think a feasible way is to require smokers to close their doors and windows when they smoke at home, so that their right to smoke will not be affected, and the health of their neighbours will be protected. At the same time, this recommendation is in line with the NEA requirement for in-car smoking. Hotels have a similar practice for in-room smoking. Simple window closures will protect your health. I hope that NEA will study the feasibility on the suggestion in depth. (In English): In conclusion, the new policies in this amendment will give residents greater peace of mind. In the longer term, this will be a significant boost to the environmental public health of all in Singapore. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“I understand that while such a policy does not completely eliminate the impact of second-hand smoke, it can however significantly reduce the impact of smoke experienced by residents living next to a smoker neighbour. Importantly, this proposal is a balanced approach that draws a line and recognises the need for both sides and not just the party whose health is being endangered to play their part. It will also go a long way towards reducing the tension between neighbours as our living spaces become more compact. This will be yet another step taken in the right direction that does not add to the complexity of existing enforcement measures. I hope Minister Grace Fu will study this and consider amending the regulations in future to address this environmental health issue that is at the heart of many HDB and condominium residents. In Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The COVID-19 pandemic has made us to be more concerned about our health. I support the timely amendment to the Bill to raise the hygiene standards of pre-schools, eldercare centres as well as swimming pools, water playground and the central air-conditioning systems, as well as to state clearly the responsibilities of premises managers. This is to better protect the health of our people and giving them peace of mind. I fully support this amendment. At the same time, as a result of the pandemic, more people are working from home, including many smokers. Recently, many residents complained that second-hand smoke from their neighbours have forced them to close their doors and windows, which they felt was unfair. I hope the Government will pay more attention to the health hazards of passive smoking.”
“This represents a 21% increase in cases related to smoking in residential homes and corridors. As circuit breaker measures kicked in on 7 April, it is likely that the number of complaints to NEA could have been higher since the last report. The dangers of second-hand smoke as a silent killer, the smell and residue from nicotine and the irritation to the nose and throat are well documented and have been discussed previously in this House, so I will not belabour this point. Of the resident feedback that I have received about neighbours smoking, at least half of those were smoking near open windows or doors. Today, the solution to limit the effects of second-hand smoke floating from a neighbour is for the non-smokers to shut their windows or doors. This cannot be a fair outcome. A practical way is to perhaps require resident smokers to close their windows and doors when they smoke and, of course, to go down to the open spaces at the ground floor if they have kids around. This solution aligns to existing NEA regulations which require windows of private vehicles to be fully wound up so that the second-hand tobacco smoke is expelled when the driver smokes in certain areas. A similar parallel could be drawn to the smoking rooms at hotels where doors and windows are closed so that the impact to other hotel occupants are minimised. In this way, a requirement like this will protect the rights of all parties concerned – for residents to smoke at home as well as non-smokers and neighbours to protect their health. In fact, this proposal provides the non-smoker the added option of closing their windows or doors.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, a clean environment with good sanitation is something we cannot take for granted. For locations visited by COVID-19 patients, we follow the practice of disinfecting and deep cleaning residential, work or public places. However, in situations related to cleaning of high-risk premises, such as pre-schools and eldercare facilities, and locations where many people share the same body of water or recirculated air, namely, (a) swimming pools, spas and water playgrounds and (b) central air-conditioning systems, there should be maintenance standards and practices set for these areas. So, it is timely that the Government strengthens and mandates maintenance standards as well as placing accountability on premises managers that have aquatic facilities or licensable aerosol-generating systems. This will help reduce the risks posed by diseases and create a safer environment for all to live, work and play. In support of this Bill, I would like to also highlight that more of us are working from home as a result of this pandemic, which have implications on the current way we regulate environmental public health. Given this recent trend, there are now more smokers as well as non-smokers who are working from home. Many industry experts expect this new norm of working from home to continue well after this pandemic ends. This is due to the benefits of remote working for individuals as well as for corporates. Over the last few months, I had received many feedback from residents about exposure to cigarette smoke floating into their flats from neighbours who smoke. This trend coincides with The Straits Times report that NEA received 11,400 cases of feedback for the period January to April this year.”
“Sir, I have a question for Minister of State Gan. She mentioned earlier that the review of the cases was such that there was a Caution and Advisory that was issued by MOM that was in line with other similar cases in the past. Can Minister of State Gan clarify the reason for the additional review?”
“In this way, we can give the needed help and at the same time provide better guidance of their role in the community to file taxes and for the more successful ones in the future, to contribute their share of taxes too. SIRS aside, let me provide another example from a different angle that also illustrates how leveraging technology can improve policy implementation as a key imperative. This relates to the task at hand of guiding the re-start of construction projects that is underway. What we need is the ability to do quick tracing, accurately. However, new COVID-19 cases detected at cleared dormitories indicates we still have not yet implemented better capabilities. The TraceTogether app has limitations such as performance consistency across phone brands, inconvenience, and battery usage even after the software fix to slow down battery drain was done. Perhaps, better wearable technologies or tokens could be prioritised for earlier implementation.”
“Many were disappointed and described NTUC's response as cold and not helpful. The second group are those who know why their applications were rejected but cannot come to terms with or do not fully comprehend with the basis. An example is the use of the property annual value criteria of more than $21,000 that excludes residents from getting the relief. Fellow Members in this House had raised this yesterday and one today, and I share their views. The principle of having "means-testing" as a basis to identify those needing help is logical and NTUC's website stated that this is "consistent with other Government schemes". But COVID-19 relief is not a normal Government scheme and in implementing this blunt tool, it needs to be recognised that it will exclude residents whom the relief measure was intended to help. Additional data points could have been used proactively to identify those falling in the "should help" category so that a portion of this relief measure can be considered, given this challenging period. The last group are those who do not know why they did not qualify for SIRS and do not understand the eligibility criteria. Some in the category, includes our resident hawkers and freelancers who have not been declaring their net trade income. Whatever their reasons for not doing so, they are hard hit in this pandemic. Perhaps, instead of an outright rejection, they could be brought back into the fold and set on the right path, by nudging them to, for example, start tax filings and adopting e-payments – a great initiative by the IMDA – to qualify for some portion of SIRS assistance.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion to thank the President for her Address. I am heartened by her encouragement to new politicians, like myself, to continue the good work done by those before us, in shaping an effective and sound Government. Globally, this year, economies have been paralysed, businesses decimated and livelihoods impacted. The virus has altered the way we live, work and play. Our resident unemployment rate is at 3.9% in the second quarter, faring better than many countries. But, this pandemic is not going away anytime soon. The CEO of renowned pharma giant Merck has said that a vaccine is at least a year away. So, dealing with this crisis will be like running a marathon – there is a finishing line but the run will be long, exhausting and painful. Today, I wish to talk about some of the lessons we can draw and how good policies must be complemented with good execution for us to emerge from this pandemic, a stronger Singapore. Let me cite two examples. The Self-employed Person Income Relief Scheme or SIRS was announced in March to support self-employed workers affected by COVID-19. Over 100,000 were identified as eligible for cash payouts of $3,000 for three quarters. Those not included could submit their applications to the NTUC. However, there has been a lot of feedback from residents about not being able to access the relief package. They are upset and perceive the unfairness of the scheme. I will refer to three categories. First, those whose appeals were rejected and do not know why. Rejected resident applicants received a rejection letter without any reason stated. Although the NTUC website has been upgraded for answers, it was not clear and specific to their own situation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like a point of clarification from the hon Member from PSP about his comments about DBS and I want to declare myself, my interest as a member of the DBS management team. I did hear, Mr Speaker, Sir, the PSP Member did say of his disappointment that DBS, since the days of Mr John Olds till now, that the leadership of DBS is not to the level of the Singaporean percentage. I want to say that the DBS leadership of now is where all the top management is Singaporean except for one person, who is Malaysian and a PR.”