Edwin Tong Chun Fai
Singapore
“These questions have been answered in the reply to Questions Nos 26 to 31 for Oral Answer on today's Order Paper. [Please refer to "Addressing Issues Identified in Legal Profession Sustainability Study", Official Report, 7 July 2026, Vol 96, Issue 32, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time secti…”
“I am answering in my capacity as the Minister charged with the responsibility for the People's Association. The Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers Scheme was first introduced in June 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic with two key objectives: one, to help Singaporean households cope with daily expenses; and two, to support hawker…”
“If the incident is a result of bilateral obligations relating to data protection and inviolability of equipment not being complied with, then the Government will consider all available legal and diplomatic options, in accordance with the bilateral RTS Link treaties, as well as the relevant international law.”
“In 2024, community sentences under part 17 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (CPC) were imposed in 86 criminal cases handled by the State Courts.”
“It is a five-minute journey across both ways; and with the availability of closed circuit television coverage and the real-time monitoring that will be done by the officers on both sides, we did not think that this will be necessary.”
“The Ministry of Law will provide an oral reply to this Parliamentary Question, together with other Parliamentary Questions which have been filed on this topic at the next available opportunity.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,221 lines we hold for Edwin Tong Chun Fai, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 17 of 45.
“People’s Association does not make donations to charities using government funding. However, PA works with corporate and community partners to raise funds for community and charitable causes which are aligned with our objectives.”
“Notwithstanding this, PA has accepted and agreed to implement additional measures recommended by EY to improve its business processes and systems. These include enhancing processes and systems in respect of the procurement and contract management of development and facilities management in the Inter-Agency Planning and Operations Groups (IPOGs), as well as stepping up on the supervision of the managing agent to administer and verify FM work. PA will progressively implement the remaining recommendations by EY which require more in-depth review and structural changes, such as reviewing the organisational structure of IPOGs.”
“PA had also previously made a police report on this matter, and have been regularly providing relevant information to the police to assist in their investigations. On AGO’s findings on the management and oversight of CVs at OTH and HBB, PA’s review showed that there was a lapse in obtaining documented approvals for such variations. Whilst this is a breach of process, the audit also found that, in these transactions, the variations were in fact contemporaneously supported by the Superintending Officer’s instructions administered according to the conditions of contract, and that all the variation works had been completed on-site. Covering approvals have since been sought to regularise these CVs. EY was also instructed to review PA’s contract management process for several development and FM projects, apart from OTH and HBB, undertaken in the period April 2016 to July 2021. EY did not find evidence of similar contract management lapses outside of OTH and HBB. As to the overpayments arising from the above lapses, PA worked with project consultants to review and determine the amounts of overpayment and have recovered these amounts in respect of HBB. In respect of OTH, PA has finalised the computation of the overpaid amounts with its consultants and are working to recover them. In the course of the above review, several other outstanding additional claims from the contractors were surfaced, in respect of works carried out at OTH under the FM contract. PA is working with the relevant parties to review and settle verified claims. EY’s review of PA’s management and operations of its development projects beyond AGO’s scope shows that AGO’s findings were not systemic, outside of HBB and OTH.”
“In its FY2020/2021 Report, the AGO made several audit observations on the development and facility maintenance (FM) phases of two of the People’s Association’s (PA) development projects, namely, Our Tampines Hub (OTH) and Heartbeat @ Bedok (HBB). Following these observations, PA took immediate remedial actions. Some of these actions included the following: (a) inserting provisions in development contracts as standard form, to ensure greater clarity and compliance on price fluctuation adjustments for government projects; (b) undertaking a thorough check on all contract variation (CV) cases flagged by AGO; and (c) introducing several additional measures to improve the oversight and management of CVs. PA also carried out a full audit of all CVs under OTH and HBB’s main development contracts, going beyond those sampled by AGO, and undertaking a review of the overpayments reported by AGO for CVs and price fluctuations at HBB and OTH. Beyond this, PA also appointed an external consultant, Ernst & Young (EY), to undertake a comprehensive, independent review, and to make appropriate recommendations to PA to strengthen its overall governance and oversight systems. EY’s scope of work extended to transactions at OTH and HBB beyond those flagged by AGO as well as to development projects apart from OTH and HBB. Both PA and EY have concluded their checks and reviews. Their findings suggest that one of the root causes for the lapses was due to human oversight and lapses, such as the non-adherence to the required systems and circumvention of established processes. PA is following up on this finding and has initiated disciplinary proceedings against the relevant officers after completing its internal investigations.”
“The Major Games Award Programme (MAP) is a private award scheme managed by the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC). The Council decides on the categories of awarded medallists and the monetary rewards offered to each of them, in consultation with the programme’s sponsors. The MAP award structure takes into account the level of competition and the frequency of the Major Games. The Olympic, Commonwealth and Asian Games have more competitive fields and take place every four years, compared to the SEA Games that takes place every two years.”
“The $130 million CDC Vouchers Scheme 2021 using digital vouchers was launched on 13 December 2021 to thank Singaporeans for their solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to support heartland merchants and hawkers. On 11 May 2022, the CDCs rolled out another tranche of vouchers under the CDC Vouchers Scheme 2022, to support Singaporean households in their daily expenses. As the Scheme is open to all Singaporean households regardless of their household income, there is no need for the collection of such data. As of 30 June 2022, about 1.17million households, or 96% of 1.22 million eligible households, have claimed their 2021 CDC Vouchers. Out of the $122 million under CDC Voucher Scheme 2021, over $98 million (or 80.3%) has been spent. For the 2022 tranche of CDC Vouchers, about 1.02 million households or 83% have claimed their 2022 CDC Vouchers since the launch in less than two months; of which over $49 million (or 40.2% of the total amount claimable) was spent in more than 17,500 participating hawkers and heartland merchants. We are encouraged by the positive feedback received on the Scheme from Singaporeans, many of whom found the digital vouchers easy to use. The digital CDC Vouchers Scheme uses the RedeemSG platform developed by GovTech, which is a general voucher system that serves various government schemes. Government agencies which are interested to use the system can approach GovTech for further discussion.”
“The CDC Vouchers 2021 using the digital vouchers was launched on 13 December 2021. It was to thank Singaporeans for their solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic and to support hawkers and heartland merchants in their businesses. As at end March 2022, more than 15,000 participating hawkers and heartland merchants are on board the scheme. About 1.12 million Singaporean households have claimed their vouchers. Over $72 million has been spent at participating hawkers and heartland merchants. The CDC Vouchers scheme uses the RedeemSG platform developed by GovTech's Open Government Products. It is a general voucher system that serves various Government schemes. RedeemSG makes it easy for campaign organisers, merchants and recipients to use digital vouchers as a form of payment and redemption. It is currently used by some organisations and is being developed to cater to a wider range of needs that could be used by various organisations, such as Government agencies and charities, and for philanthropic causes.”
“If fraud or scams are suspected, donors should file a Police report immediately. The COC takes a serious view of violations of the regulatory requirements under the Charities Act and will look into cases where improper fund-raising activities are suspected and reported to the COC. The COC can also take action to suspend, restrict or prohibit the conduct of any fund-raising appeal if there is reason to believe that the appeal has been improperly administered. Zakat collections are administered by the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) under the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA). Nevertheless, MUIS has also put in safeguards and mechanisms to help the public identify bona fide collections. The Muslim community is encouraged to refer to MUIS' zakat website for the list of authorised zakat collection centres, and the security advisory about scams when they transact online. Should members of the community have any queries or concerns to report about zakat collections, they may contact MUIS or use the link on the MUIS zakat portal (www.zakat.sg/contact).”
“All fund-raising appeals conducted in Singapore for charitable, benevolent or philanthropic purposes are regulated by the Commissioner of Charities (COC) under the Charities (Fund-Raising Appeals for Local and Foreign Charitable Purposes) Regulations 2012. The Regulations spell out the duties and obligations of fund-raisers, which include disclosure of clear and accurate information; proper management and usage of donations; as well as keeping accounting records of donations received and disbursed. While Singaporeans are generous in responding to appeals made on religious grounds, we urge donors to remain vigilant and be discerning. Donors who wish to support charitable causes, be it for religious or other causes, can practise the steps of "Ask, Check, Give": First, donors should ask the fund-raiser basic questions such as what their tithes or donations will be used for and how they can receive updates about the usage. Next, check via the Charity Portal (www.charities.gov.sg) if the fund-raiser is a registered charity in Singapore. Donors may also refer to the annual report, audited financial statements and published information of the charity to verify the usage of the tithes and donations. If the giving is for local religious purposes and does not involve house-to-house and street collections, it will not require any permits from the COC and Police. Lastly, donors can give with peace of mind after ensuring that their tithes and donations are going to a genuine charitable cause. Should donors have any concern or doubt that an appeal for donations is not legitimate, do not feel pressured to give. If there are serious concerns regarding any fund-raising activity, donors should report the matter to the COC at mccy_charities@mccy.gov.sg.”
“We will encourage our youths to share their views and ideas with NAC and NHB during the public call later this year.”
“The Singapore Youth Festival (SYF) Arts Presentation resumed in 2021 following the virtual arts festival SYFgoesOnline! introduced in 2020. These efforts complemented the regular Art and Music curricula and arts Co-Curricular Activities in school which continued to be carried out through a mixture of in-person, virtual and hybrid modes. In addition, even though in-person Museum-Based Learning (MBL) sessions were suspended during the circuit breaker period, NHB worked with MOE to co-develop online resources to facilitate both teacher-directed and self-directed learning. Physical MBL sessions to the National Museum of Singapore and the Asian Civilisations Museum progressively resumed from October 2020. In 2021, NHB also piloted virtual MBL sessions to enable more students to participate. Our arts and culture sector has also engaged the youths actively during the pandemic, through digital and hybrid formats or smaller scale events. These include programmes, such as NHB’s Children’s Season, National Gallery Singapore’s Children’s Biennale, Singapore Chinese Cultural Centre’s youth festival RE:MIX, and the Esplanade’s Feed Your Imagination series, which have all resumed in hybrid format. Since 2021, NAC, MCCY and the National Youth Council have also jointly organised ArtsXplore, an incubation programme that enables the youths to engage in arts exploration, experimentation and creation together. Youths have a stake in the future of Singapore’s arts and culture. As we chart our future directions and draw up plans for Our SG Art and Heritage Plans 2.0, NAC and NHB have embarked on conversations with our arts and heritage community, as well as youths, on the arts and heritage landscape in Singapore.”
“Our arts and culture give us our unique identity, instil pride in our people, and foster a stronger, more cohesive society. Over the past two years, MCCY, National Arts Council (NAC) and National Heritage Board (NHB) have rolled out measures to support livelihoods, build capabilities and position our arts and culture sector for a strong recovery. These initiatives have safeguarded our arts and culture and allowed Singaporeans from all walks of life, including youths, to continue participating in arts and culture activities during the pandemic. The $75 million Arts and Culture Resilience Package (ACRP) safeguarded jobs and talent in the sector. The ACRP and broad-based support schemes supported over 900 arts and culture organisations, through operating grants to defray costs and overheads, grants for capability development and organisation transformation. In addition, the ACRP supported over 1,500 digitalisation projects, which provided digital access to arts and culture offerings during the pandemic. Our arts and culture practitioners and organisations have made use of the ACRP to resume activities safely, while transforming themselves to meet future challenges. Students continued to have access to arts and culture education during the pandemic, through school programmes and external offerings. NAC supported Arts Education Programme (AEP) providers, comprising local arts groups and freelancers, to digitalise arts education programmes. NAC also supported AEP providers’ pivot to hybrid or virtual modes of teaching by raising capabilities in e-pedagogy, such as through the development of an E-Learning Primer and an Inspiring Digital Learning webinar, with the National Institute of Education.”
“I think 18 years is the agreed period of time with Indonesia in the treaty. As to how and to what end they want to use that and deal with fugitives arising from the AFC or otherwise, I think that is a call that they make. But on the terms of the treaty, it goes back 18 years. To the Member's first point, the treaty contains the substantive obligations between the two states. I think I pointed out both in my opening speech as well as my reply to the Member that that is the principle – you look at the treaty and the terms of the treaty and that governs the relationship between the two parties as to the terms on which you extradite or not extradite, as the case might be. I perhaps want to just clarify one point which I think the Member alluded to earlier in her speech. When I said in my opening speech that there are some cases where you could widen, that might apply, for example, if your treaty is worded in a way which allows you to piggyback on what laws might be amended to. So, if your treaty says all offences which the state might now, or, at some stage, revise their statutes to cover, then, of course, in such a scenario, because it is a moving definition in the extradition treaty, it moves along with any amendments or enhancements that the state might offer, like in this case. So, if what was previously agreed is fixed at just one year imprisonment, you can only extradite for one year, then that would be binding on the parties. But if one says, it is for a period of time, or whatever you might choose at some stage to amend your laws to, then the treaty would follow that provision. So, in that scenario, it might widen, but, otherwise, the principal point is that the treaty obligations between the parties will be binding on the parties.”
“But as to why 18 years, that was the request for that treaty and we acceded to 18 years. It could have been some other period of time but this was the consensus agreed upon with Indonesia concerning that treaty. Mr Dennis Tan asked several other questions, I will just deal with them quickly before I end off. As far as the point on military law is concerned, if the offence that the requesting state seeks to extradite a fugitive for is only a military offence, then such a scenario would not result in the extradition being permitted. In the course of apprehending the fugitive, there are search and seizure provisions. These are, as I pointed out earlier, for physical items. But if this leads to other evidence, which suggests that there have been, as Mr Dennis Tan puts it, proceeds of a crime and so on, then the relevant investigations will entail on the evidence which follows such proceeds. I think I have dealt with section 16 as to when the Magistrate will order the release. Finally, in relation to the question of the spike, I think I have also dealt with that. We do not expect there to be an unusual or heavy spike. But, of course, with the provisions here, we will have to look at what the caseload might turn out to be. I do not think this will be something that is extraordinary or anomalous, but, as I mentioned in my opening speech, our experience has been that states will continue to seek extradition for the most serious of offences, cases in which there is a significance, for which the fugitive is to be apprehended for serious offences. So, on that basis, we do not expect there to be an extraordinary spike given these amendments. Sir, with that, I beg to move. 6.54 pm”
“As I had earlier alluded to, time is often of the essence in such matters where the fugitive is a flight-risk and familiarity with this working process, the good working relationship on the basis of section 121 of CPC is being retained. Therefore, since the section 121 CPC procedure is used more often in practice, we decided that it was not necessary to replicate this procedure for our arrangement with Brunei in the Extradition Act. On Mr Murali Pillai's ancillary question, a Magistrate's powers under section 121 of CPC are self-contained. In other words, the Magistrate would not need to have regard to Part 6 of the Extradition Act. Ms Sylvia Lim raised, I think, two points and one comment, if I am not wrong, let me address them. First, she asked if this represents a shift or a change in approach. The short answer is no. We have always been desirous of looking at countries which have a common desire to work with us to strengthen comity, international collaboration on apprehension of criminals and bilateral cooperation in combating crime. And to the extent that these arrangements are seen to be mutually beneficial, work for us and that we can overcome any issues related to the divergence of our respective legal systems, then we will be prepared to enter into treaties or arrangements with them. On the second point concerning, I think it was restrictions, time-bar, if I am not wrong, if the position is such that the offence is time-barred in the sense that that foreign state is unable by reason of the time-bar to prosecute that fugitive in the foreign state, then we will not allow the extradition, on the basis that it would have been a futile extradition because you cannot prosecute that fugitive.”
“Since extradition requests are made solely at the government-to-government level, as Mr Murali Pillai alluded to, Court applications under the Extradition Act would be made by officers from the Attorney-General's Chambers. The new section 50 provides that the Attorney-General may delegate to a public officer any of his or her powers under the Act and, in the Explanatory Statement, Members will see that it is elaborated upon that a public officer so empowered may act for the Attorney-General in Court proceedings. Mr Murali Pillai asked about the arrangements with Malaysia and Brunei and why the reciprocal arrangements with Brunei for the endorsement of arrest warrants are not included in the amended Act; and also asked about the legislative intent in relation to a Magistrate's powers under section 121 of the CPC. As I have mentioned earlier, aside from minor updating of the language, we have preserved the part on "Extradition To and From Malaysia". This is in Part 6 of the amended Act, by way of endorsement of arrest warrants. In practice, the Singapore and Malaysian authorities have largely relied on the section 121 of the CPC procedure, which, as Mr Murali Pillai mentioned, covers the same subject matter of the reciprocal endorsement of arrest warrants. Mr Murali Pillai spoke about the special relationship with Malaysia and Brunei and I think his own experience shows that the officers on all three sides are aware of this and use this procedure. It has been simple and expeditious. Our operational agencies and their counterparts have some history and share a good working relationship on the basis of this established procedure.”
“So, in this case, if after the initial arrest notice has been issued, it subsequently transpires that, upon review of the full set of extradition materials from the requesting state, these thresholds for committal are not met, then, in that scenario, the Minister can ask for the warrant to be cancelled. To Mr Dennis Tan's point, it is also in that scenario, that if the Magistrate is of the view that the threshold has not been reached, has not been crossed, then, in such a situation, the Magistrate can order a release. Mr Murali Pillai asked whether a Singapore Court has the discretion not to grant an order which goes against Singapore's public policy. Sir, the short answer to this question is no, but let me explain this. Under the Act, a Magistrate is only entitled to commit the fugitive to prison if the Magistrate is satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to justify his or her extradition; or the Magistrate has to release the fugitive in all other circumstances. I made that point earlier. In other words, as long as there is a prima facie case that would justify the trial of the fugitive, or sufficient evidence that the fugitive had been convicted of that offence, the Magistrate must order the committal of the fugitive. Having said that, in the event that the extradition request from the requesting state does, indeed, go against Singapore's public policy, the Minister can consider if this would fall within any of the restrictions on surrender, which have been enhanced in this Bill. All of these would be grounds on which to refuse the request for extradition. Mr Murali Pillai asked who can make applications to invoke the powers of the Court under the Extradition Act.”
“This requirement will remain even with the introduction of the record of the case mechanism. Mr Murali Pillai asked why the Magistrate's power to issue warrants of arrest by a Notice by the Minister is being retained. Let me explain what this contemplates. Sir, the reason for the retention of this power is for provisional arrests. Provisional arrest is the procedure that applies for urgent cases where a requested person is deemed to be a flight risk and there is insufficient time for the requesting state to prepare a full extradition request. As Mr Murali Pillai mentioned, it is preferable, and, indeed, required, for any foreign state or territory to request the extradition of a fugitive through a formal request via diplomatic channels. However, there are, sometimes, cases where there is information that the fugitive is a flight risk and there is an urgent need to detain the fugitive to prevent him or her from fleeing. This allows Singapore to fulfil our international obligations under our treaties. In such cases, where the overriding concern is to ensure the detention of the fugitive, the quickest way would be for the Magistrate to have the power to issue warrants of arrest without being authorised by a Notice by the Minister. Subsequently, a full extradition request must be submitted by the requesting state within a fixed number of days – the number of days depends itself on the terms of the treaty – and in any event, within a reasonable time. If, for example, the full extradition request and the supporting documents are not furnished by this time, or the documents are inadequate, or if any of the restrictions on surrender apply, the Minister can then direct the warrant to be cancelled.”
“The Attorney-General's Chambers and my Ministry will ensure that every extradition request is sufficiently substantiated with such evidence before we accede to the extradition request and commence committal proceedings. At the committal proceedings before a Magistrate, the Magistrate would similarly need to be satisfied of the prima facie evidence requirement, before the person can be committed to prison to await their surrender to the requesting state. Mr Louis Ng raised, as an example, the restrictions of the Minister's power to order a person's surrender if the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that the person would be prosecuted for reasons of race, religion, sex, ethnic origin, nationality or political opinion, and what mechanisms would be in place to ensure the summary of evidence is sufficient for the Minister to ascertain that such grounds exist. Sir, let me explain. Generally, if there is reason to believe that a person is going to be discriminated against, or prosecuted along one of these discrimination grounds, then you are unlikely to find that the evidence submitted by the requesting state would detail this. On the contrary, if there is a dearth of credible evidence in the extradition request justifying the commission of the alleged offence by the fugitive, this could form a basis and contribute to the grounds for the Minister's belief that the fugitive is being discriminated against or that one of the restrictions on surrender might apply. For completeness, we would add that Singapore has always required extradition requests from requesting states to also contain undertakings that the fugitive would not be prejudiced or otherwise punished for reason of race, religion, nationality or political opinions.”
“To deal with this point – for instance, when would the Minister choose to extradite a fugitive even when his or her remaining imprisonment term is minimal – I mentioned earlier in my opening speech that there may be instances where the surrender of the fugitive is, nevertheless, warranted, even if the remaining imprisonment term might be minimal. For example, there might be significant public interest in the requesting state or territory for the return of that fugitive. And in such a scenario, we might decide to accede to the extradition request even if the requirement for the discretionary restriction has been met. Let me touch on Mr Louis Ng's queries on the use of summarised evidence and the record of the case mechanism, and what mechanisms are in place to ensure that the summary of evidence is sufficient for the Minister to make the required determinations under the Act. I had explained earlier that the record of the case mechanism simplifies the procedure for admission of evidence to justify the extradition of a fugitive. For example, it may suffice for a prosecutor of the requesting state to summarise the circumstances of the fugitive's arrest, rather than to include numerous affidavits from each witness and every arresting officer to describe their individual roles and capacities in which the fugitive was apprehended. It provides an alternative means to presenting evidence but does not in any way mean that the bar or the standard of evidence that has to be reached for the threshold for assessment of committal for this fugitive is to be lowered. There must still be sufficient evidence to prove a prima facie case, in other words, on the face of it, that there is sufficient corroborating evidence that the fugitive, indeed, committed such an offence.”
“On this note, this brings me to Mr Murali Pillai's query on how the shift to the threshold approach for extraditable offences would be reconciled with our bilateral treaties which adopt the list approach. I think several Members also touched on the question of how you might reconcile this in the context of having a treaty and also the impact that this Bill might or might not have. I mentioned that Singapore's existing extradition treaties would be the primary source for our international obligations to foreign states and territories. Saving provisions have been drafted in the Bill to preserve the status quo in our existing extradition treaties, which means that amendments would, generally, not apply to our extradition treaties. Where applicable, however, the threshold approach could, in some cases, widen the scope of extraditable offences under our bilateral treaties and arrangements. However, this is not the case for the example which Mr Murali Pillai cited vis-a-vis our bilateral treaty with the US. The US would not be able to rely on the bilateral treaty to request extradition of a fugitive wanted for an offence that is not within the categories of offences in the treaty. This would respect the fundamental principle in international law that the ambit of the treaty governs the obligations between the states. Mr Louis Ng asked whether we could share scenarios on how the Ministerial discretion is meant to be exercised in deciding to accede to or reject an extradition request. I think Mr Dennis Tan also touched on a question of when the Magistrate might order the release of the fugitive.”
“This specific carve-out to the restriction on surrender is adapted from clause 12(2)(a) of the London Scheme, which, as I earlier mentioned, would only apply for declared Commonwealth territories. For completeness, the Member also observed that there are additional restrictions that apply to Commonwealth territories and not to foreign states. These additional restrictions are where the offence was committed outside the requesting state and Singapore and is not an extraterritorial offence under the law of the requesting state; and where the person has become immune from prosecution. The reason that these additional restrictions apply for declared Commonwealth territories is because these are aligned with the London Scheme. That said, it is not the case that where a request of such a nature is made by a non-Commonwealth territory, that such a carve-out to the restriction on surrender for offences of a political character would never apply. For all foreign states and territories that are not part of the Commonwealth, the bilateral or multilateral treaty in place would be the primary source of our international obligations to each other in relation to extradition. And this also addresses Ms Sylvia Lim's point about what we do with the new treaties, including that with Indonesia. The treaty terms would prevail. Some of our bilateral and multilateral treaties contain a similar provision. For example, I pointed out earlier that the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings makes it clear that a terrorist bombing offence is not an offence of a political character. Singapore would similarly be obliged not to restrict the surrender of a fugitive to the foreign state or territory in the event the offence was the bombing of a political figure's residence.”
“In fact, these pre-Independence treaties will only apply where the Government has considered that these treaties are binding on Singapore and where we have published this in subsidiary legislation, as Mr Murali Pillai has suggested. The short answer, therefore, to Mr Murali Pillai's question is that only our pre-Independence treaties with Germany, entered into in 1872, and the US, entered into in 1935, apply to Singapore. The relevant treaties are published as subsidiary legislation in the Federal Republic of Germany (Extradition) Order in Council and the United States of America (Extradition) Order in Council. None of the other pre-Independence extradition treaties entered into by the UK currently applies to Singapore. Mr Louis Ng asked for clarification as to why there are special restrictions on surrender to declared Commonwealth territories and also why, in general, do additional restrictions apply in cases where Commonwealth countries request extradition. He has also asked about the significance of section 28, which provides that offences against the life or a person of a political figure or a member of the political figure's immediate family, are not offences of a political character. Let me give a brief explanation on how section 28 operates. The Act contains an existing restriction on surrender in section 9(1), where a fugitive is not liable to be surrendered if the offence is of a political character. Section 28 provides exceptions to this restriction. In other words, the "political character" restriction does not apply in respect of an offence against the life or person of a political figure and his or her immediate family for declared Commonwealth territories. The fugitive may be extradited in such a scenario.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Members for their support of this Bill. Overall, I have heard the Members' comments and some questions as to its operations and processes. But there has been overall support and I will address those questions in turn as best as I can. Mr Murali Pillai asked why we have proposed to retain the definition of "foreign state" in the Extradition Act and whether we could consider listing the foreign states in a Schedule in the Act or by way of subsidiary legislation. Sir, in every review, we must consider what is outdated, what ought to be changed and what still continues to work well. And, of course, making the changes and retaining those that continue to work well. The definition of "foreign state" is one such instance which continues to work well for our present purposes, with slight adjustments. The definitions that we have retained had been updated previously in 1998. Mr Murali Pillai mentioned that the definition of "foreign state" includes a foreign state which had a treaty with the British Empire at the time when Singapore was part of it and that this could cause uncertainty as to which foreign states may be held to be able to invoke the extradition processes under the Act. Sir, let me clarify that this is not the case. It has been previously clarified in this House that whilst it is true that before Singapore's Independence, there were extradition treaties entered into by the United Kingdom and other foreign countries in which Singapore was listed in the scope of operations of these treaties, it does not follow that, today, all those arrangements automatically apply to Singapore.”
“The number of beneficiaries helped by Community Development Councils (CDCs) has been increasing over the last five years. Over the last five years, the CDCs helped, on average, around 167,500 applications for financial assistance. On average, the processing of each case takes about two to three weeks, though cases for which urgent assistance is needed would have been expedited. The assistance provided in terms of cash quanta would be unique to the contextual factors in each case.”
“So, we wanted to develop this with the same kind of feeling and ethos. And it is in that respect that we invited practitioners, leaders of the arts community – Mae Anderson, Janice Koh, and I mentioned some names earlier – to come and share their experience with us and think in terms of how to envision this space for future use. Kampong Java is another space that we looked at. All of you probably drive past it each day and not realise that it is there. It used to be used terrace houses that are now disused. So, we worked with SLA to take advantage of the fact that it has not been used and see how we could repurpose it. It used to be terrace properties, so, a little bit grungy, a little bit rundown, but quite perfect and ideal for arts spaces. So, we reimagined the space, thought about how these can become independent affordable spaces for, again, experimental and incubatory arts companies. And we are working with the arts industry also to get ideas as to how this can be managed and operated. These are some examples of the thinking in terms of how we can expand on existing spaces, old spaces, to bring them into new ones. And also, ultimately, use the spaces fairly and efficiently and ensuring that, as and when we have new companies, new ideas, new forms of art coming through, they will also have their space in the sun and be able to develop.”
“Thank you, Mr Darryl David. When it comes to arts spaces, our objective is really, one. Given Singapore's land scarcity, we want to ensure optimal usage and efficiency in usage; second, we want to ensure that there is fair access because we have new and younger groups coming through and we want to ensure that, for the space, there is sufficient turnover, so that they can also occupy the spaces and there are opportunities for these new growing groups to incubate and experiment; and, finally, we want these spaces to continue to remain relevant. In some cases, we update the spaces, so that old spaces can be used for new purposes. Over time, I think we have had the opportunity to grow the spaces available. If you take just the real estate purposes, over the last 10 years, we have grown it by about 35% in terms of absolute real estate space dedicated to arts users. And we continually look at how we can refresh the existing spaces. I will just give you some examples, some of which my colleagues have touched on earlier. We have the Tanjong Pagar Distripark (TPD). We all know that it used to be a place where container cranes and so on occupy those spaces. It is an unlikely space. But if you think about it, it is actually quite intuitive to use it as an arts space – high ceilings, large walls – you can have displays there that you cannot otherwise do in our current settings or spaces. So, we are using this as an experiment to develop this into a new hub for arts spaces. The Member spoke about 45 Armenian Street as well – 45 Armenian Street is a place with lots of history. Many of our arts practitioners know the place as a young experimental place with buzz where you come in, you incubate, you spend some time learning from each other as well.”
“As to Mr Mark Chay's point about what are the potential pathways, we intend to put them on the same platform as the able-bodied athletes. If the able-bodied athletes have a certain pathway opportunity, we intend to make sure that we put the para-athletes on the same track, on the same path, so that there is equality, if not in terms of outcomes, certainly, in terms of where the starting point should be.”
“I thank the Member Mr Chay for his questions. To deal with his first point, Mr Chay might be pleased to know that we have been working with partners, such as the Global Sport Innovation Centre (GSIC), and just a few months back in December last year, GSIC launched the Asia Pacific HQ in Singapore. Having partners like GSIC in Singapore means that we will aggregate the thought leadership in Singapore. 7.00 pm As Members know, with gaming, technology and innovation, there is a natural synergy, a confluence of various aspects of this gaming and fitness industry. And we will have a place in Singapore where we will have content and game developers coalesce, we will have hardware developers as well, and, of course, those who are involved in technology, including things like wearables, which are gaining prevalence in the way in which we do fitness. So, all of that will be in Singapore and we intend to work with them to develop this ecosystem and strengthen Singapore's position for sport-tech solutions. In relation to the para sports academies, we intend to work with several sports first, as a start. In the first instance, we will probably use the existing framework and infrastructure and work with the Disabilities Sports Council to see how we can move the para-athletes into the system in this way. I think that is the fastest way to scale up. Over time, I appreciate that each sport may be different and the way in which we train, nurture and develop our para-athletes may be different sport to sport, and may also be different between a para-athlete and an able-bodied athlete. But, as we develop the base and infrastructure, we will begin to scale up with the expertise so that more of them can enter the system in this way.”
“Whether it is on the playing field or under the stage lights, our athletes and artists show us that what matters are what we bring to the table – our unique gifts, talents and experiences – and our shared dreams. The qualities we see on the stage or on the pitch – grace under pressure, commitment to excellence, dedication to one another, to our team mates – are the very same ones we hold dear in society, that inspire in us pride, unity and courage, and the ability to dream even bigger together. They speak to the heart of Singapore. On that note, Mdm Chairman, MCCY will ensure our arts, heritage and sports sectors will emerge from this pandemic stronger, better, faster and more vibrant, innovative and resilient. They will continue to inspire, unite and move us, as we continue to strengthen the heart of Singapore towards an even more caring, gracious and truly inclusive society. [Applause.]”
“We will have the Hanoi SEA Games in May, the Birmingham Commonwealth Games in July and August, the Hangzhou Asian Games and the Hangzhou Para Games in September and October, respectively. I am confident that our TeamSG athletes will continue to fly our flag high and inspire us with their resilience, fortitude and solidarity, the very same qualities that will enable Singapore to progress and develop on multiple fronts. I have spoken at length in Parliament earlier this year and last year on the Government's support for high performance sports and our TeamSG athletes. We will continue to do so and enable each of our athletes to put their best foot forward in these competitions. We encourage all to support our TeamSG athletes. Mdm Chairman, our transition out of the pandemic will not be without bumps and hurdles. Much of the impact that COVID-19 has on the sectors we care for is intangible and often latent. They are hidden. We have to ensure that we do not suffer a deficit in social resilience in our society, even as we strive to protect lives and livelihoods in this pandemic. Madam, sports, culture, heritage – they hold a mirror to our society. They show us who we are, how far we have come and what we cherish, value and aspire to. Resilience in defeat and grace in victory – these are qualities that are like a microcosm of our society. As our athletes and artists succeed, so does our nation. 5.00 pm More importantly, in sports, art, culture and heritage, we see that our diversity in race, colour and creed is, in fact, our strength. These distinctions do not divide us; they enable us, they make us stronger.”
“Third and, finally, we are looking to enhance processes and resources for a targeted response that can better assess the nature and scope of a complaint and attend to them quickly. One possibility could be a team of ground responders empowered to collect and share evidence or reports with the CDRT to alleviate the evidential burden for parties involved. More details will be announced as we continue with this review and the findings are firmed up. Madam, the various initiatives I have spoken about today signals our commitment to ensure that we emerge from this pandemic not just stronger, but also more cohesive and innovative as a society. Let me round up my response this afternoon by returning to sports and our sportsmen and sportswomen, all of whom exemplify the values and qualities we all aspire to as a people. Mr Darryl David asked for an update on TeamSG's preparations for the major games in 2022. Let me just recap 2021. We had a successful 2021. Last year, all of us cheered our Olympians and Paralympians as they flew the Singapore flag high and proud in Tokyo. We celebrated the achievements of Loh Kean Yew and Aloysius Yapp who reached the pinnacles of their respective sports last year, in badminton and in cue sports. Shayna Ng and Yip Pin Xiu, names which I am sure all of you recognise, continued to inspire us through world-class performances in bowling and swimming. Our youth athletes did extremely well, too. Colin Soon won four Gold medals at the Asian Youth Para Games for swimming; Maximilian Maeder won the Under-19 World Championships for kite foiling; and Izaac Quek, who is competing at the World Table Tennis (WTT) Singapore Smash, won the Under-15 Singles title for table tennis. We will have a busy sporting calendar in 2022.”
“Very often, they are also a neighbour themselves and can be the best first responder to the situation to understand the context, the lay of the land and, quite possibly, be the respected person that both neighbours can look up to. These are the ingredients for a successful mediation. Mr Patrick Tay asked about the CDRT's caseload. In the past five years, 721 claims have been filed with CDRT, with 138 cases ordered to undergo mediation at CMC or CDRC, and 656 cases being disposed of by CDRT. We are studying process changes to alleviate the difficulties which some parties face in navigating the CDRT process and to ensure greater effectiveness of CDRT among the parties involved. These changes could include empowering CDRT to obtain expedited relief, akin to an interim injunction, in egregious cases and introducing measures to deter non-compliance with CDRT orders more effectively. In cases where respondents breach the orders granted by CDRT, claimants have gone on to apply for Special Directions, Compliance Bonds and Exclusion Orders from CDRT. Mr Gerald Giam raised a point about uploading of evidence. The current requirement for audio and video recordings, which often are the most direct way in which you can show and substantiate your position to the CDRT, these are usually submitted using CD or DVD due to the need to preserve data integrity and security. Nonetheless, the Courts are continually reviewing their processes and will take into account Mr Giam's point and assess the viability of alternatives to submit evidence in Court. In the meantime, Court users who require assistance to submit audio or video recordings to the CDRT can approach the CDRT Registry for assistance.”
“The CMC has been using social media to promote its services and has also been reaching out to frontline officers to promote the benefits of mediation and the referral process. We are exploring more varied modes of mediation to increase accessibility, for example, doing online virtual mediation. Additionally, we are also studying the feasibility of mandating mediation in appropriate circumstances and in those cases, requiring disputing neighbours to undergo mediation before filing a claim with CDRT. This is so that neighbours may resolve differences amicably as far as possible, without first going through the CDRT process, which is adjudicatory and often zero-sum in nature. We are also considering possible consequences for parties who fail to attend mediation and, yet, want to pursue a claim at CDRT. Mr Gerald Giam suggested that we allow adverse inferences to be drawn and we will consider that. We will also consider the other suggestions by Mr Gerald Giam, which were good suggestions, on how to effectively promote mediation in such situations. We are also studying possible mechanisms for a CMC settlement agreement to be registered as an order of Court. This will then make it easier for the CMC to have its settlement agreements enforced as an order of Court. Madam, beyond these, grassroots and other community leaders also play an important role in preserving positive neighbourly relations and often partner frontline agencies in resolving such disputes. We will work on programmes to better equip our community leaders with the skills to informally mediate between residents.”
“Oftentimes, they are also best suited for mediation, which provides not just a quick, friendly, informal process to deal with, but also one which, as far as possible, preserves the existing relationship between the two neighbours – one that is amicable and conciliatory in nature. However, at present, as some Members have pointed out, the mediation take-up rate remains low despite this being a proven effective means to resolve disputes. We are, therefore, considering three broad areas of enhancements to better manage such disagreements. First, we will collaborate with residents to strengthen the spirit of neighbourliness and graciousness through shared norms. In her MND COS speech, my colleague, Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, spoke about forming a Community Advisory Panel (CAP) on Neighbourhood Noise. This panel will seek to build consensus through community norms that can be a useful guide for determining acceptable behaviours among neighbours and also serve as a useful reference point for agencies in advising residents to be considerate neighbours. Second, we are considering ways to improve our dispute resolution mechanisms, both in mediation and in the CDRT. For mediation, we intend to increase the take-up rate for mediation, both formal and informal. The Community Mediation Centre (CMC) has a high settlement rate – I mentioned this previously and I will mention it again. For every 10 cases that go before the CMC, 8.8 of them are resolved. That is a very high number. This shows that when parties avail themselves of this process, formal mediation is very effective and should be the preferred mechanism for resolving neighbourly tensions. We are looking into increasing awareness on the benefits of mediation.”
“Third, we will support these community volunteers in their projects through grants, cross-sharing of volunteering opportunities and also providing resources, together with other agencies. The PA's efforts also complement ongoing SG Cares' efforts to expand the base of volunteers through working with community partners. Madam, let me now touch on the prevalence of neighbourly disputes. Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Derrick Goh, Mr Gerald Giam, Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Gan Thiam Poh all asked about our processes to deal with such disputes and how we can enhance the use of mediation. Members will be aware that in 2014, the Community Dispute Management Framework (CDMF) was introduced. The framework was aimed at facilitating effective resolution of common neighbourly disputes to seek to foster a more harmonious living environment. An interagency workgroup has been reviewing this framework. Mr Gerald Giam asked who was involved. MinLaw, MCCY, MND and MHA are involved in this review. As I also mentioned in my MinLaw COS speech, our agencies are exploring a range of enhancements to the framework. These cover both upstream measures to promote prosocial norms and downstream measures to enhance our response to disputes, addressing situations where disputes would benefit from mediation and possibly dispute resolution at the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT). Madam, we recognise that some disagreements, such as neighbour-generated nuisances, noise, and local and neighbour disamenities may not always meet the threshold for intervention by Government agencies.”
“The way to increase care, cohesiveness, bonds on the ground, is not necessarily to come up with special projects or special events to bring people together, but to share as part of our daily lived experiences. When you step out of your home, when you go down to the common areas in the community, how can we foster that bond? Last October, I had announced that five centres would pilot the smart RC/RN concept, where these centres would be more accessible and better equipped, for example, with smart access control systems, so that residents can access them at a time of their choice. The pilot centres allowed for enhanced use, fostered a greater sense of coming together and community and belonging for the neighbourhoods involved. We will progressively roll out the pilot across more RC centres in the second half of 2022 to take advantage of some of the gains we have seen from the pilot. Mr Mohd Fahmi Bin Aliman and Miss Cheng Li Hui also asked how MCCY plans to make volunteerism and care a greater part of our lives. To do so, the SG Cares movement and People's Association (PA) will generate multiple pathways for volunteerism so that everyone can play a part for the common good. There are several initiatives and I will just highlight one that the PA is studying and will implement shortly. That is, to broaden opportunities for volunteerism on the ground where, as far as possible, we can do it on a fluid, informal and flexible basis. Let me explain that. First, working with the community to support volunteers, formal and informal, who wish to work on specific causes. We will support volunteers in causes that they care about. Second, we want to partner already existing networks on the ground to encourage community involvement and to reach out to potential networks of volunteers.”
“45 pm Madam, as a basic requirement, we must ensure that our IRCCs will continue to foster mutual trust on the ground. They are bridges and connectors on the ground across communities. At the same time, we are also operating and very quickly moving into a rapidly-changing landscape. We will, therefore, have to refresh our IRCCs, so that they stand ready to respond to future challenges, such as evolving societal attitudes, increasing fault lines and the pervasive impact of social media on race and religious relations, like some Members have highlighted earlier. We must also anticipate the challenges in the next bound. To this end, we have formed a Workgroup to review how we can refresh our IRCCs to continue strengthening our racial and religious harmony. The Workgroup comprises members who are experienced IRCC leaders, representatives from religious organisations, civil society leaders and groups and community partners as well as youth leaders who play an integral and instrumental part in shaping what we want to be doing in the future to promote racial and religious harmony. Over the next few months, the Workgroup will consult widely with a range of community stakeholders, identify the strengths and challenges faced by the IRCCs, look at some of the issues, look at how we can tackle them and put forward their recommendations. I look forward to the Workgroup presenting its recommendations later on this year and I will share them with Members of this House. Next, Madam, Ms Joan Pereira asked how we can continue to strengthen community life at the neighbourhood level and Miss Cheng Li Hui asked how we can increase care and cohesiveness in Singapore. At the heart of our communities and neighbourhoods are the Residents Committees (RC) and Residents' Networks (RN) centres.”
“As Ms Joan Pereira said, this year marks the 20th anniversary of our Inter-racial and Religious Confidence Circles (IRCCs). Many Members, in fact, know that our IRCCs have been instrumental in shaping our interfaith harmony over the years. Their mission to strengthen our social cohesion remains as important today as it was 20 years ago, when we first set it up. IRCC was first formed in 2002, at a time when the world was reeling in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and Singapore had also just uncovered the Jemaah Islamiyah plot to attack embassies on our own soil. We now have IRCCs in every constituency, with over 1,500 members comprising key leaders from various religious organisations, grassroots, community leaders and other stakeholders. The IRCCs have, over the years, been a critical bridge between the different community groups, building bridges, building trust and friendships and just doing day-to-day things, so that the lived experience enhances those bonds. On average, the IRCCs organise over 250 activities each year, including dialogues on different faiths, practices and festivals, and joint collaborations to support one another in times of need. We agree with Ms Joan Pereira that we should do more to open the common spaces, to listen and learn about other faiths, religions and practices, without prejudice. The IRCCs also act as a conduit between the Government and community by highlighting issues emerging on the ground, providing insights and ideas. Mr Fahmi Bin Aliman asked how we plan to step up social cohesion efforts. Ms Joan Pereira and Miss Cheng Li Hui asked how we plan to keep IRCCs effective and relevant and promote a more inclusive nation. 4.”
“First, SportSG will introduce the Para Sport Academy, under ActiveSG's Academies and Clubs, to create more opportunities for persons with disabilities to pursue their sporting ambition at a competitive level. I spoke during my earlier Parliamentary Motion last year about the unique ability of sports to enhance an individual's own self-confidence and to transform community attitudes towards a person with disabilities. Sports are one arena where we can, and, indeed, we should, level everyone up. Through sports, we can empower persons with disabilities in deeply profound ways to help them realise their full potential and raise their visibility and prominence in society. For many para-athletes, their stories attest to the value of sports in Singapore, playing a pivotal part in building an inclusive society. The Para Sport Academy will bring us one step closer, one step further along this journey, ensuring our para-athletes will have an equal platform and as much opportunity as any other to scale the pinnacle of sporting excellence. Second, sports can uplift and motivate. In that spirit, SportCares will be collaborating with ComLink to offer programmes to vulnerable youths, families and seniors. SportCares will also roll out a mentoring programme and will also offer bursaries, scholarships and internships for youths from disadvantaged backgrounds. Both of these initiatives will provide enhanced opportunities for those with disabilities or from less privileged backgrounds to achieve their hopes and dreams and use sports to uplift themselves. My colleague, Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua, will share more details on these two initiatives, as well as other sports developments to look forward to.”
“ActiveSG Academies and Clubs will ramp up the capacity of high-quality programmes, to strengthen sport development, social integration, health and wellness and inculcate strong values of resilience and determination, values that one can get through sport participation. They will also offer additional pathways for youth development at the elite level. We have also picked up growing interest in pickleball – I think some Members may be familiar with that sport – an increasingly popular sport, particularly among our seniors. We will continue to keep our ears to the ground and will, in this case, for pickleball, increase the frequency of this and any other popular activities that will bring people back to sports. Third, we will optimise facilities and spaces to encourage people to return and to play together. These spaces will be community-driven, serving the unique needs of our different neighbourhoods. These include repurposing spaces for a range of sports and converting underused spaces into outdoor gyms. We hope that these measures will encourage Singaporeans to resume sporting and wellness activities safely. Madam, as we raise our ambitions in sports, we also want to emphasise the values that unite and promote an inclusive "Sense of Us" – of who we are as fellow Singaporeans. One of the values that Singaporeans hold dear is inclusivity. We must build a society where everyone, regardless of their own circumstances in life, can take part and can flourish. I appreciate very much Miss Cheng Li Hui's and Mr Darryl David's questions on inclusive sports. There are several aspects to this, for which we have a few broad initiatives.”
“One such event is RIDEnjoySG, an innovative campaign that encourages participants to cycle safely on bike paths and park connectors whilst, at the same time, enjoying real-world rewards via location-based challenges and augmented reality. Madam, 2021 was a thoroughly exciting year for sports, despite the many uncertainties and challenges. We progressively resumed sporting activities and also hosted several international events. In 2022, we want to step it up. Like arts, sports are a social "glue" that brings us together, as we cheer on our athletes fighting hard for Singapore, or as we develop friendships by simply engaging in a game or two on the field or on the court. We will commit $20 million to our Bring Sport Back programme in 2022. This is designed to reinvigorate Singapore sports, bring people back to play and enjoy sports together and, through sports, reconnect with one another. Bring Sport Back will focus on three key elements. First, we will safely reintroduce mass participation events for all, through more community events and sports festivals. To facilitate this, SportSG will be opening a grant call to fund mass participation events at up to $50,000 per award under the Blended Events Grant – Bring Sport Back edition. Second, we will ramp up community participation in sports through enhanced programming and more group activities. Currently, more than 170 facilities have already resumed "5 against 5" team sports. We are working on resuming larger team sports capacities across more facilities around Singapore, bringing it back to full capacity in several phases. We will roll out more leagues and competitions for people of all ages under the ActiveSG umbrella. These include the ActiveSG Cup launch and ActiveSG Leagues for Athletics, Badminton and Canoeing.”
“I think she showed her vintage naming those players, but I would suggest that we look forward as well. Irfan Fandi, Gabriel Quak, Jacob Mahler are some names of the future. We have been supporting the sports and fitness industry to enhance their value proposition through digitalisation, to transform the way they present and, in turn, the way we consume and experience activities and sporting content. The ActiveSG Circle has partnered stakeholders to develop more than 3,000 hours of digital content since 2020 and, to date, has accumulated a viewership of 67 million, with five million unique visitors. This is very encouraging and we will continue with this effort. SportSG also closely supports the sports and fitness industry in expanding their blended digital and physical offerings, including events and competitions, like the Arena Games Triathlon to be held in May this year, which will blend live and virtual reality experiences for a truly immersive experience. We have also been nudging digital production and innovation through the Sports Resilience Package (SRP), which was enhanced to a total of $75 million last year. To date, more than 600 businesses were supported by the SRP. The SRP will sustain the momentum of innovation, such as through the Enterprise Innovation and Capabilities Development Grant (InnoGrant), which supports businesses in applying technology and innovative solutions. Through these, some sports businesses are fundamentally transforming the way we experience sports. For example, SportSG's "Blended" initiative supports businesses through areas, such as data analytics and fan engagement, so that they can better develop hybrid experiences which better connect with the audience. With Blended's support, 18 hybrid events reached over 90,000 participants.”
“NHB is working towards the gazetting of the Padang as a National Monument on National Day later this year. Madam, even as we safeguard our tangible heritage, we will continue to preserve and celebrate our intangible heritage. We were very proud some time ago when our hawker culture was inscribed on the UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) list. We are now looking at a second UNESCO ICH nomination. There are some exciting possibilities. I will not share them here yet. We have sought views on them and we will think about them a bit more, think about how else and what are the possible nominations and will continue to engage with our relevant stakeholders, as well as the public, before reaching a decision. Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked for an update on our long-term vision for the arts and culture sector. Madam, it is a good question. Even as we work on the here and now, and Members will see that we have many initiatives on the here and now, we have kept a clear eye on the future. Since mid-2021, we have been actively engaging stakeholders in the sector to develop a vision for the next Arts and Heritage Plans and will further engage stakeholders this year. The Arts and Heritage Plans 2.0 will continue to build upon the vital role played by the arts and heritage in deepening our national identity. Again, Minister of State Low Yen Ling will give more details on the Arts and Heritage Plans 2.0. Madam, let me now turn to sports. Mr Darryl David and Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about strategies to bring sports participation back, and Mr Mark Chay asked a series of questions about sports entertainment and, in particular, digital content, to promote Singapore's culture and identity. Miss Cheng, in particular, spoke with such passion about the National Stadium.”
“The CMF was set up in 2013 to encourage cultural philanthropy, to push arts and heritage charities to also diversify their income streams via fundraising, with dollar-for-dollar matching of private cash donations to arts and heritage charities. This enhances the resilience of our arts and heritage charities, and there has been an encouragingly strong response to this. Arts and heritage charities received over $300 million in CMF grants, reflecting donations catalysed by the CMF since its inception. To date, a total of 111 arts and heritage charities applied to CMF at least once. These 111 represent over two-thirds of the total number of arts and heritage charities in Singapore. Many charities have also embarked on their own fundraising for the first time to diversify their revenue streams. We want to sustain the momentum of giving and to encourage charities to keep up fundraising efforts and forge and develop stronger relationships with their own ecosystem of donors. There will, therefore, be a top-up of $150 million into the CMF. The top-up will encourage cultural philanthropy and enhance the sustainability of the arts and heritage sectors. The CMF will complement existing initiatives to provide stronger support to smaller charities to develop their own governance and fundraising capabilities. Our cultural heritage plays an important role in growing a strong, confident society by anchoring our own unique Singaporean identity and telling stories that are our own and that define and inspire us as a country. The Padang, for example, has borne witness to many significant national events. The site is an instantly recognisable enduring testament to our history as a people and as a country.”
“To encourage more widespread digital adoption, we worked closely with stakeholders and tech partners to develop the Arts and Culture Digital Roadmap which was launched in February this year. 4.30 pm Second, enhancing conditions for our SEPs. Our arts and culture landscape depends heavily on the rich talent of our freelancers. They are creative and talented and are a source of spontaneity and innovation. We value them and want to help them to continue to thrive and contribute. Therefore, we will work with partners to help SEPs build up their skills, improve working conditions, explore new ways for them to create value in the arts sector and also in the wider creative economy. Third, developing vibrant and inclusive arts and culture spaces to keep up with the emerging trends and better meet practitioners' needs. One example is 45 Armenian Street (45AS). We have asked leaders in the arts community to help envision the space and how it can best be operated and managed. I thank the Chair of Art Outreach Mae Anderson, the Vice Chair of Wild Rice Janice Koh, and co-artistic director of Independent Archive Shaiful Risan, as well as other members of the 45AS Resource Panel for so generously sharing their time, expertise and experience with us and also engaging with the wider community, to collaborate with NAC. To ensure that 45AS remains a safe space for artistic experimentation, one that supports the work of our young, emerging practitioners and is always inclusive, multidisciplinary as an arts space. My colleague, Minister of State Low Yen Ling will elaborate further on our focus areas to strengthen the sector. Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked for an update on the Cultural Matching Fund (CMF).”
“Self-employed persons (SEPs) and organisations also came together to develop projects supported by the SEP Grant (SEPG), creating over 5,000 work and training opportunities for our SEPs. We will fully utilise the $75 million for the ACRP by the end of this Financial Year (FY). To build on the gains that we have made, we will provide an additional $12 million in FY2022 in continued support of our arts and culture practitioners. The VHS will also be extended. Last year, we incorporated the CDSA and DPG into NAC and NHB's ongoing grants and, this year, we will also incorporate the OTG and SEPG. Ms Janet Ang asked how we will continue to provide vibrant arts and culture spaces, and about our plans to co-create new models for the sector. Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Darryl David and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked about our efforts to revitalise the sector. Madam, they are right. We must act proactively to protect and sustain a thriving and innovative arts and culture sector. If arts and culture become unintended casualties of the pandemic, we will lose a sense of who we are as a nation and what makes us special as a people. Therefore, we will work with the community to ensure that the sector remains vibrant, innovative, and more importantly, forward-looking, and continues to provide good and meaningful jobs. That the landscape continues to reflect our shared values, our ethos and our social mores, inspires and uplifts us and forges a strong sense of national identity. Our key focus areas are: First, digitalisation as a key enabler for the sector to engage new and existing audiences and complement existing revenue streams.”
“For example, the re:SOUND collective made use of the VHS to hold a concert, Tapestry with Jeremy Monteiro. This was held at the Singapore Conference Hall. Likewise, groups like Pangdemonium and The Singapore Ballet also utilised the VHS. I was present at Tapestry some weeks ago. I was present at the Singapore Ballet a few nights ago and I will be present at Pangdemonium's performance this Saturday at the Victoria Theatre. I hope that Members will also support the arts in the same way. We also used the ACRP to provide opportunities through digitalisation and transformation to meet future challenges. Over 1,500 digitalisation projects were supported under the ACRP through the Digitalisation Fund, including the Digital Presentation Grant (DPG). This allowed the sector to obtain invaluable experience innovating in these new frontiers. Together with the Capability Development Scheme for the Arts (CDSA), we created close to 15,000 work and training opportunities for the sector in 2020. On the back of these gains, we took a longer-term view in 2021 – when we understood the pandemic a little more and we understood the sectors a little better. We wanted to look beyond the pandemic and position the sector for a strong recovery post-COVID-19 and in the mid- to longer-term. With the second tranche of the ACRP, we supported transformation efforts that encouraged even greater collaboration within the sector to explore opportunities, share best practices and come together to tackle common issues. More than 100 transformation projects by over 190 organisations were supported by the Organisation Transformation Grant (OTG).”
“Whilst the situation remains dynamic, MCCY and our agencies will continue to advocate on behalf of the arts and culture, and the sports sectors, for a safe reopening. We remain committed to supporting our sectors through this recovery. The Government will introduce the Small Business Recovery Grant (SBRG) and will also extend the COVID-19 Recovery Grant (CRG) to end-2022. This will help support small organisations, as well as lower- to middle-income workers and self-employed persons (SEPs) affected by the COVID-19 restrictions, including those in the arts and culture sector, and the sports sector. Mr Darryl David, Ms Tin Pei Ling and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked about the impact of the $75 million Arts, Culture and Resilience Package (ACRP), which was introduced in April 2020. The ACRP demonstrated the Government's clear commitment towards supporting the arts, culture and heritage sectors since the pandemic started. This support was critical, safeguarding jobs and livelihoods, and also protecting talent in the sector. The ACRP and broad-based support schemes supported over 900 arts and culture organisations. Of these, 241 organisations were supported under the ACRP Operating Grant, to sustain operations and make for more nimble adjustments in response to the pandemic. We understood how SMMs and venue capacity limits weighed painfully on the sector, with lower revenues arising from reduced audiences or visitor capacities. To support our arts groups, we introduced the Venue Hire Subsidy (VHS) to defray performance costs. This encouraged the resumption of activities and also brought back vibrancy to our arts and cultural scene, with more than 1,700 live performances and other cultural events supported in 2020 and 2021.”
“This is the spirit of Singapore Together, where Singaporeans shared their post-COVID-19 aspirations for society during the Emerging Stronger Conversations (ESC) conversations that were concluded last year. Mr Mark Chay asked about the progress of the ESCs. We have been working with Singaporeans to translate these aspirations into reality. Conversation must, therefore, become action. In this vein, 31 Singapore Together Alliances for Action (AfAs), involving over 34,000 individuals from the people, private and public sectors were formed to address key themes, for example, the AfA on Lower-Wage Workers, which spearheaded eight ground-up projects to uplift lower-wage workers. The ESCs and AfAs were convened in spite of COVID-19, because Singaporeans wanted to come together to rebuild our Singapore together. We will do more to harness this spirit and to work collaboratively with the public. Our arts and culture practitioners were put through a difficult period. We navigated it, with financial support and targeted support. But we know that, ultimately, audiences are the life blood of the arts. Therefore, the resumption of arts and culture activities in a safe manner has been a priority for us. Over the past year, we have allowed more activities to resume safely as we continued to simplify and streamline safe management measures (SMMs). We increased the number of audiences and participants who can enjoy these activities. We simplified SMMs for performers and crew, so that larger productions can be staged, especially international productions, and we provided support to preserve core capabilities and ensure a smooth resumption of activities.”