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 18 of 45.
“Mdm Chairperson, this pandemic has affected our daily lives in almost every respect. As Mr Sitoh Yih Pin points out, this crisis of a generation has tested the very core of our resilience as a society. MCCY and our stakeholders have felt this very keenly. We are a people-oriented, people-focused and community-building Ministry. Community and camaraderie are the bedrock of cohesion. This, however, requires the coming together of people, which is something that we have not been able to do quite so easily. Arts, culture, heritage, religion and sport, to name a few, are critical pieces in our country's path towards development and progress. They give us our unique sense of identity, instil pride in us as the people of Singapore and foster a collectively stronger, more cohesive community. These are the foundational cornerstones of our society. The pandemic has underscored just how important those pieces are. Hence, when Singaporeans interact less, when our young people stop playing sports with one another, when Singaporeans do not come together to enjoy cultural and community events together, the bonds that bind us will gradually weaken. The long-term effects, if not addressed, may erode our sense of "us" in years to come. And we will suffer a deficit in social trust. So, in these unprecedentedly difficult times, we will redouble our efforts to replenish and fortify the connections that bring us together. Our arts, heritage and sports sectors are that critical social "glue" that binds us together, instils pride and gives us a warm sense of belonging to our Singapore. To strengthen the threads of our social fabric, we must deepen the partnership among Singaporeans and with the Government.”
“I thank Mr de Souza. On the first question, the answer is yes. All the different objectives and principles behind what we do in sentencing will obviously apply. But it has got to be the appropriate set of facts and context and the appropriate cases. So, restorative justice will be considered, as and when it is appropriate. On the second query, yes, we have to ensure that we continue to put SIAC out there. We have to work hard at doing that, and part of this is also to ensure that SIAC remains in the mindshare. So, when we talk about forays into foreign jurisdictions, as we have done with Mr Murali Pillai, I think he was present on at least one of the trips overseas to speak about our rules, to talk about our system and to, basically, socialise the idea of using SIAC. I think that is one step that will be taken. Second, I think it is important to ensure that we continue to have the best arbitrators in SIAC. We look at our Panel as one where we ensure that the best in the class, when it comes to arbitrators, are retained by SIAC – the best personnel, best expertise, best secretariat, to administer the cases. These are often the best advertisements, as it were, to ensure that parties, when they come to choosing the relevant rules, will come to choose SIAC rules and we can give them the best service. Third, as I mentioned in my speech, it is important to continually update our processes, our laws and even our procedures to ensure that we best fit the business use. When we do this, when we make amendments like the CFA, for instance, we give parties out there the best reasons to come and use the SIAC and, in some cases also, be present in Singapore for the arbitration.”
“Yes, Sir. I assure Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim that we will look at this. The system of law governing inheritance may be different. But the administration is something that we can look at because both of the systems will require some degree of administration. And for the applicants to make their application, there will be some process. So, we can look at that behind the scenes in the eService that I talked about.”
“Sir, certainly so. Mr Don Wee can be assured that we look at this as a multi-disciplinary cross-cutting approach and, certainly, there will be opportunities for the business community, including the accountants, as Mr Don Wee has put it, to work with us on this.”
“But these options will be looked at and enlarged as we review the CDMF to look at more substantial and also more practical solutions to solve these problems.”
“I think, the Member has in part, answered the question himself. CMC is something that is available, the threshold is low, and the cost, if I am not mistaken from memory, is $5 per claim. Sometimes, there are difficulties, of course, getting both sides to come to mediation. That is of course, understandable. And that is why the CDMF review committee is looking at measures, which I have explained in the prior written answer to this House. We are considering a range of options, including in some cases, mandating the mediation. So, that takes care of those cases where consensual mediation might not be possible. In addition, if the matter escalates and, despite repeated attempts, there is no possibility of a consensual or a friendly or amicable resolution, then the Member is able to advise the resident to come to the CDRT. In that situation, obviously, the limitation is in part that there must be substantial evidence, at least substantial to the extend that you cross the relevant threshold in a manner which I have explained just now, because CDRT is an adjudicatory tribunal and it has to go on the basis of what is the appropriate remedy to impose, given the nature of the evidence. And of course, the Act also sets out the circumstances which the tribunal will look at when considering the appropriateness of the remedy, bearing in mind that this is smoking within the confines of an individual's own home. Obviously, you have got to find a balance between what you do in your own home and the impact that you might have on another individual trying to have a quiet enjoyment of his or her own home. So, these are the options available with the consequential challenges that might apply.”
“Data management in the People’s Association (PA), as with other public agencies, is governed by the Public Sector (Governance) Act (PSGA) 2018 and the Government Instruction Manual (IM) on ICT and Smart Systems Management: Data. The IM sets out, amongst other things, the data protection requirements that apply in respect of the management of personal data. There is a framework in place to manage any Government data incidents. Standard operating procedures and workflows are included to guide and ensure that the relevant personnel comply with applicable policies and procedures. In the event of any data breach, PA would have regard to the specific circumstances and context in which the breach had occurred, in assessing the appropriate remedial actions to be taken.”
“Given the low take-up rate of mediation, the Committee is looking to mandate mediation in certain circumstances, such as for protracted disputes where voluntary mediation has not been conducted. The Committee is also looking into requiring claimants to attempt mediation before they can seek recourse at CDRT. The Committee is also considering giving officers managing the cases stronger powers on issuing orders for mediation and medical assessment, warnings, and to furnish formal evidence or reports to CDRT which may help residents pursue claims at CDRT. We are also looking at making various procedural improvements to CDRT to enable affected parties to obtain quick, interim relief in egregious cases. We will provide more details of the review in due course.”
“An inter-agency committee regularly reviews the Community Dispute Management Framework to (a) strengthen neighbourliness to minimise disputes upstream; (b) promote community mediation as the primary way to resolve disputes between neighbours; and (c) provide an effective avenue for legal recourse, as a last resort, for intransigent cases. In the current round of review, one persistent issue that the Committee identified is that many residents involved in disputes are unwilling to attend mediation, even though the Community Mediation Centre (CMC) has a high settlement rate. This could be due to a lack of awareness of the benefits of mediation. So, efforts to increase public education around mediation is one area the Committee is working on. The Committee is also aware that some residents face practical difficulties with regard to the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal (CDRT). CDRT, currently, takes a judge-led approach and is not bound strictly by the rules of evidence. This flexible approach, generally, works well, but some residents face difficulties in resolving cases where the facts are disputed, especially where the unreasonable interference is intermittent or transient in nature, or where it is challenging to pinpoint the exact source of such interference. The Committee is studying a range of proposals to address these issues. Upstream, the Committee is considering how we can collaborate with residents to strengthen neighbourliness, as part of our ongoing efforts to promote gracious living. These efforts can help reduce the likelihood of disputes arising in the first instance. Downstream, the Committee is considering how to strengthen our response to protracted neighbour dispute cases and see them through to resolution in a more expeditious manner.”
“As part of the national SG Cares movement, MCCY has been working closely with the Public Service Division (PSD) to champion staff volunteerism in all public sector agencies. Civil servants can utilise one day of volunteer leave to volunteer in any local charity with an Institution of Public Character status. This is an additional provision over and above their vacation leave. The yearly average take-up for volunteer leave by civil servants prior to COVID-19 was in the hundreds, although this figure has decreased during the COVID-19 period. However, the extent of volunteerism among officers goes beyond this as officers have been volunteering through activities organised by their agencies under the Public Service Cares initiative (PS Cares). PS Cares provides officers the platform to engage and serve the community without the need for them to take leave. For example, in 2020 and 2021, about 4,350 officers volunteered in COVID-19 operation roles, including going door-to-door to help seniors register for vaccinations and supporting the mobile vaccination teams. The National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) promotes volunteerism in the corporate sector. As part of the Company of Good (COG) programme developed by NVPC, COG members are encouraged to put in place policies, such as paid volunteer leave, to promote corporate giving. From the Corporate Giving Study 2021 conducted by NVPC, approximately 29% of the 1,014 companies surveyed had paid volunteer leave provisions for staff 1. For companies reported to have paid volunteer leave provisions, an average of 42% of the company's employees utilised volunteer leave. NVPC will be releasing the findings from the study in March 2022.”
“From 1 February 2022, Religious Organisations (ROs) must implement Vaccination-Differentiated Safe Management Measures (VDS) for all congregational and worship services at places of worship, which can involve up to 1,000 worshippers at a time, subject to Safe Management Measures and the safe capacity of the premises. Under these prevailing measures, ROs can allow one group of no more than five persons at any one time to conduct private worship in the premises, regardless of vaccination status. They cannot mingle with other worshippers who are taking part in activities subjected to VDS, such as congregational worship services. Allowing unvaccinated individuals to gather only in very small groups reduces the risk of widespread transmission of the virus and severe health outcomes for the unvaccinated. Faith communities support the national stance for vaccination and recognise the need to adopt VDS measures in religious activities in order to keep congregants safe. ROs have made important adjustments to their religious worship and activities to accommodate these measures. We appreciate the continued support from our ROs.”
“For example, use crowdfunding platforms that have pledged commitment to the Code of Practice for Online Charitable Fund-raising Appeals which the COC has introduced. It is also important that donors check and ask the right questions before giving. For example, donors can ask the fund-raiser questions, such as who the beneficiary is, what their donations will be used for, and how they can receive updates about the beneficiary. Donors should check that the appeals are bona fide before giving. Members of the public can access the Charity Portal for more information on Safer Giving and trusted crowdfunding platforms. On our part, if there is reason to believe that a fund-raising appeal is fraudulent, the COC’s Office will investigate the matter. The COC can act to protect donors by invoking his powers to suspend, restrict or prohibit the conduct of the appeal. While we do not intend for the regulatory regime to stifle the spontaneity of ground-up efforts to give help, we, nevertheless, encourage individuals or groups to partner and support charities who are familiar and have experience organising disaster relief efforts, to ensure that the funds raised will be channelled efficiently to the intended beneficiaries. As donors, we, too, have a part to play. By being vigilant and discerning in responding to fund-raising appeals, we are better placed to ensure that our contributions will be put to good use.”
“It is heartwarming to see many Singaporeans looking out for others in times of crisis and helping our neighbours affected by the recent floods. There are both organised efforts by charities, as well as informal ground-up efforts that are soliciting funds and in-kind donations to help Malaysians affected by the floods. Fund-raising activities are regulated by the Commissioner of Charities (COC). Anyone, including businesses and organisations, raising funds for foreign charitable causes is required to apply for a Fund-Raising for Foreign Charitable Purposes (FRFCP) permit from the COC prior to the commencement of the appeal. This ensures that donors' funds are channelled to the stated, bona fide purposes. You can check if an appeal has been granted a permit by using the Charity Portal's Fund-raising Permit search function. There are registered charities in Singapore that provide humanitarian assistance to countries afflicted by disasters. The COC's Office works closely with these charities to facilitate the issuance of the FRFCP permit prior to the commencement of the appeal. We encourage members of the public to support the appeals organised by these charities or entities that have been granted the relevant permits. Such charities include the Singapore Red Cross. However, there are also informal appeals to give by individuals or loose groups who genuinely want to help. With the Internet and social media, it has become easy to conduct online appeals among friends or friends of friends and the wider community via online crowdfunding platforms. When responding to such appeals, it is important for donors to be discerning.”
“If there is an exceptional basis to allow otherwise, the Minister may, on a case-by-case basis, waive the requirement that the IPC’s activities must not be confined to sectional interests. For example, special consideration was given to the four self-help groups, viz. the Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC), Yayasan Mendaki, Singapore Indian Development Association (SINDA) and Eurasian Association. This is because they were set up to complement the Government’s efforts to uplift lives by addressing the unique needs of their respective communities through community self-help. That said, the work of the four self-help groups is not confined to serving only the needs of their respective racial communities. They also run programmes that serve all ethnic groups. Should a charity wish to apply for a waiver of the requirement, it may put forth its reasons in its IPC application to the Commissioner of Charities.”
“COVID-19 has posed unprecedented challenges for many sectors, including our charity sector. The Government has put in place initiatives to encourage charitable donations, better support all charities in their fund-raising efforts and help them in their digital transformation efforts. Efforts to encourage giving Last year, the Community Chest launched the Change for Charity initiative to partner businesses to incorporate giving mechanisms into their business models. This seeks to encourage their customers to donate to ComChest as they interact and transact with businesses. The Government also matches donations to encourage giving, in schemes like the Community Chest’s SHARE As One programme, the Tote Board’s Enhanced Fund-Raising Programme and MCCY’s Cultural Matching Fund for Arts & Heritage charities. Digital transformation and fund-raising The Commissioner of Charities introduced the "Charities Lean Forward" series of webinars, the Charities GoDigital Kit, and the enhanced VWOs-Charities Capability Fund to help charities kickstart their digitalisation journey, and better understand how to better fund-raise online. Together with the National Council of Social Service and the Tote Board, the Commissioner also rolled out the enhanced Tech-and-Go!, a first ever tech hub for non-profit organisations to accelerate the sector’s digital transformation. Institutions of a Public Character (IPCs) can issue tax deduction receipts to donors for qualifying donations made. These tax deductions are only limited to IPCs which are dedicated to serving the needs of the community in Singapore as a whole. The Commissioner of Charities also holds IPCs to a higher standard of regulatory compliance and governance.”
“These initiatives will lay strong foundations for us to further raise the standards of football in Singapore, and raise generations of young football talent. The success of our football programme also requires the support of Singaporeans and those who want to pursue their aspirations in football. I was in the stands at the Suzuki Cup alongside many fellow Singaporeans, watching our Lions. We wore our hearts on our sleeves. We rued missed scoring chances, but also cheered our team on, celebrating every good pass, every good tackle and every goal. Although we had to be socially distanced, the atmosphere was electric. Singaporeans rallied together to support our team. That is the magic of sport – to evoke strong emotions and bring people together. It is also clear that Singaporeans are not just looking for their teams to win. We want to see them give their all in the sporting arena, doing their best and striving for Singapore. This is what makes us proud. This is what unites us, and it is what good performances by our Lions can achieve. I want to thank the many fellow supporters who attended the matches at the National Stadium or followed them from home. I am sure our Lions were inspired and uplifted by the support you showed them. I hope that this encourages more young talent who are passionate about football to pursue their aspirations, and inspire Singaporeans to join us to Unleash the Roar!”
“Our national men’s football team delivered an impressive performance at the ASEAN Football Federation Suzuki Cup, making it to the semi-finals for the first time since 2012. Their determination and fighting spirit delighted and inspired many Singaporeans. Our Lions’ strong performance is a cause for excitement and celebration. To ensure the future success of Singapore football, we need to build a strong and sustainable pipeline of football players and further raise our standards of play. One key effort in this regard is Unleash the Roar!, or UTR! for short. This project was launched by the Football Association of Singapore and Sport Singapore in March 2021 to (a) uplift Singapore football, both at the amateur and professional levels, and (b) rally Singaporeans and fans of Singapore football behind a common goal. A key strategy of UTR! is to strengthen the youth development eco-system for football. First, School Football Academies (or SFAs) will be established in schools to provide high performance training for talented secondary school students. In 2022, we are setting up ten academies, including at the Singapore Sports School, St Patrick’s School and Jurongville Secondary School, with plans for more in the future. Second, a National Football Curriculum will be introduced to guide the development of training plans. There is also a comprehensive plan to train and mentor coaches to raise their professional competencies, so that they can implement the curriculum effectively. In addition, the UTR! office has formed strategic partnerships with the German professional football club Borussia Dortmund and the Spanish football league La Liga, to accelerate the development of our local football talent, and strengthen our local football ecosystem.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move the amendment* standing in the name of the Minister for Law, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. I had earlier in my speech explained the reasons and the rational for making this amendment. [(proc text) *The amendment reads as follows: (proc text)] [(proc text) "In page 2, line 13: after "relevant appeal", to insert ", or any proceedings that are preliminary to any relevant proceedings or relevant appeal," (proc text)] [(proc text) Amendment agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Clause 2, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)] [(proc text) Clauses 3 to 7 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill reported with amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“We will, at the same time, continue to monitor the impact of the various reforms, keeping our finger on the pulse of developments and lessons learnt in other jurisdictions and apply them contextually to Singapore. I assure Members that we will continue to stay responsive and engage in active dialogue amongst all stakeholders as we study the progress of our initial framework and look at the extent to which this might be extended to our proceedings. Sir, with that, I beg to move. 2.09 pm”
“In doing so, we will study also the profile of the likely litigants who will avail themselves of any such expansion and determine in those cases whether some additional form of protection might be necessary for the framework. And if so, we will also prescribe them. Finally, let me address Mr Thomas' observations on After-the-Event Insurance and its correlation to CFAs, particularly in other jurisdictions. Let me thank Mr Thomas for his views and interest on the subject. My Ministry is aware of the developments outlined by Mr Thomas and we will review these developments as part of a holistic study of the litigation funding landscape. I would add that After-the-Event insurance is not peculiar and not relevant only to CFAs. They are relevant across the board and generally, supplement and support the litigation funding landscape. So, we will study the After-the-Event insurance in that context and look at whether or not any moves need to be made on that front. Sir, I believe I have covered all the queries raised by Members, both general as well as specific. My Ministry, as I have said, will continue to review the reforms proposed in this Bill for future expansion and what other safeguards will be necessary. But we believe that the introduction of a CFA framework in this form has the potential to bring multi-faceted benefits. It provides a further avenue for litigants to pursue meritorious claims and levels the playing field for our lawyers, particularly on the international setting. It will also signal Singapore's progressiveness and our responsiveness to the needs and realities of the industry and further enhance Singapore's status as a premier, first-class dispute resolution hub.”
“The main tenets of the CFA framework will be set out and had been set out in the Bill, supplemented by safeguards to be prescribed under subsidiary legislation. The categories of proceedings permitted by the CFA framework will also be set out in the subsidiary legislation. And we took this approach as we anticipated that the profile of litigants would be different for different categories of proceedings and different types of cases. And hence, differentiated and targeted safeguards will be required. There will be flexibility to appropriately adjust the safeguards, as we continue to monitor and refine the framework. To Mr Murali Pillai's point about the principal considerations, and whether the same level of public consultation will be undertaken, the answer is yes, there will be. The difference in terms of where we are now today on the current framework and where we may expand it to, for lawyers, obviously, when you deal with and compete on the international fora with other foreign lawyers, we want to put our lawyers on the same footing. That may not apply in the context of domestic proceedings. For domestic proceedings, the main consideration now would be whether we can allow this so that there will be an enhancement to access to justice. Those are the principal considerations. There may be more as we consult but these are the driving considerations. And we will consult with key stakeholders as we look at the landscape and determine whether it would be appropriate to extend this framework to also other types of cases, to promote access to justice.”
“The Court can then make an assessment as to what amount will be appropriate under the assessment, to be paid under the CFA for this lawyer. The principles are largely similar to existing principles relating to contentious business agreements, as set out in section 115 of the Legal Profession Act. Where a lawyer withdraws from representing a client under a CFA, existing rules under the PCR will also continue to apply. This includes obligations on the lawyer to take reasonable care to avoid foreseeable harm to the client, such as giving reasonable notice and cooperating with the client's new lawyers. None of these will change with the CFA. Mr Thomas asked about the importance of guidelines and possibly training for lawyers. I think I had covered that. We will do so and we will ensure that there is sufficient guidance for the market once this is in place. We will take into account the topics highlighted by Mr Thomas. Some of them will be addressed in subsidiary legislation. Others we can put up guidance together with Law Society, to ensure that lawyers and their clients will be aware of this. Finally, as I mentioned at the outset, the Bill envisages the possibility of an extension of the framework, a point that I had also covered. But specifically, Mr Louis Ng asked how the framework will be flexible in catering to different categories of disputes. I think Mr Pillai asked how and what are the considerations we have as we consider the extensions of this framework to other types of cases. Sir, the overarching CFA framework has been designed with the flexibility to enable the framework to be expanded incrementally, step-by-step, after we study and we take into account views by stakeholders.”
“Mr Zhulkarnain asked about other protection mechanisms for litigants and what safeguards are available for a litigant who had entered into a CFA with a lawyer and thereafter changes lawyers; or whose lawyer decides to withdraw from the case. My first response really is to ensure that, as you prepare the CFA, structure the terms which will cater for these eventualities. Sometimes, parties change lawyers; sometimes, there might be changes in the way in which the case proceeds. It is best to ensure that, as far as possible, in terms of an agreement, you cater for these scenarios upfront. So, lawyers and their clients should discuss and provide for how and when the CFA may be terminated, and if it is terminated before the conclusion of the case, how would the remuneration structure and what triggering conditions will apply in those cases. And this, I would say, is no different from current traditional fee agreement that is based on either time cost or conclusion of some milestones and so on. So, parties should deal with this as a matter of agreement. Where a client changes lawyers after a CFA is entered into with the first lawyer, section 115F of the Bill contemplates this scenario and provides for the consequences of such change. Either party can apply to the Court and the Court will have the same power to enforce or set aside the agreement as if the change had not occurred, having regard to the relevant terms of the CFA. With regard to fees payable to the first lawyer, the Court may order the amount due in respect of anything done by the lawyer under the CFA to be assessed. So, there could be a scenario where, before the conclusion of the case, a lawyer is discharged but a substantial amount of work is done.”
“And I think what we want to do is to say that we do not proscribe how parties may choose to structure the fee arrangement, their CFAs, but at the same time, have oversight by reasons set out in the framework, with requirements that they must fulfil, including the "cooling off" period, including the fact that it must be in writing, and also ensuring that parties do not agree a fee that is based on a proportion of the returns from damages or otherwise, in the case itself, which would then has no co-relation to the effort by lawyers. But save for that, I think as Mr Pillai says, look at the reasonableness in the context of each case. I would say that the mere fact that there is an uplift is not a reason for setting aside the agreement. That is the whole raison d'etre behind the CFA. I would add a further point that when you have limits on uplift fees in other jurisdictions, they are typically legislated because the fee arrangement in those jurisdictions extend to access to justice type of litigants. They help access to justice indigent litigants to access the courts. And in those cases, you will more likely find a cap on the amount to which you can uplift. In this case, at least at the start of our framework, we do not apply the framework to those types of cases and those types of litigants. And so, in our case here, we do not need to put a limit on the fee arrangements and the uplift amounts. But as I mentioned earlier, if we extend our framework into other types of cases, this will be a fresh consideration that we will review at the appropriate time.”
“Even if the CFA provides for the payment of an agreed fees, the PCR prohibits overcharging – a point I made earlier – even in a context of today's rules on agreed fee without the uplift. If the lawyer cannot in good faith charge the fee, taking into account factors, such as the nature of the work done or legal work concerned and the time necessary to undertake the legal work – points which Mr Murali Pillai made – then, these are factors which will be taken into account by the Court when assessing the veracity of the agreed fee. We believe that legal costs will continue to be moderated and also adjusted by the market itself. If a client finds that a lawyer’s fees are too high, they are free to engage another lawyer who may offer a different range of fees and different uplift formula. Lawyers are also free to adjust their fee arrangements to better place themselves in competition. And Mr Raj Joshua Thomas had himself alluded to this, in urging for lawyers to be allowed to negotiate terms appropriate to the complexion of the particular case concerned. Mr Murali Pillai asked what would constitute a fair amount for lawyers to charge as an uplift, so that this will not be viewed as a case of overcharging. I think I covered this in my initial remarks.”
“Further, as the lawyers may have to fund the litigation until its conclusion, or at least a portion of it, there is likely to be less tendency to pursue all possible avenues at any cost and a greater tendency to be more cost-conscious on the contrary and cost-effective. At the same time, to assuage Members, the experiences of other jurisdictions also lend support to this. Members might recall that I said earlier that we took a cautious approach. We studied the approach in other jurisdictions and learned from their experiences. For instance, in England and Wales, data suggests that CFAs have not caused an increase in unmeritorious cases. A study on the impact of CFAs in clinical negligence cases over a period of 10 years showed that there has been an increase in cases. But, over a period of 10 years from 2006 to 2017, even in Singapore, we saw an increase in cases. So, it is not because of the CFAs. But what is important is that the proportion of successful claims in this period did not change. In fact, there were more successful claims funded by CFAs. This underscores the role of the CFAs in enabling the pursuit of meritorious claims. Studies in Australia have also showed that there had not been a significant uptick in unmeritorious suits since the introduction in their jurisdiction of the CFAs. And we believe that Singapore’s experience is not likely to be different. As mentioned in my earlier speech, we will also be implementing rules and safeguards to minimise the abuse of CFAs. On whether litigation costs will be raised, let me reiterate that existing professional obligations continue to apply, and this includes the rules against overcharging.”
“So, what I said earlier in my opening speech about the relevance of the legal professional (PCR) rules, they continue to apply. Among others, Rule 17 of the PCR requires lawyers to explain a proposal of settlement clearly and properly to the client; or any other offer or position taken by another party, which affects the client. At the same time, the lawyer must also evaluate, together with the client, whether any consequence of a matter justifies the expense or the risk to be undertaken. So, if you choose to proceed with the case, there must be an assessment by the lawyer that this would be in the best interest of the client, bearing in mind, obviously, that, in litigation, there are various vicissitudes that you cannot control – points which Mr Raj Joshua Thomas and several other Members highlighted. If there is a reasonable prospect of the client recovering a higher sum of money in litigation, as compared to settling the matter, such that pursuing litigation would justify the expense of doing so, the lawyer would be obliged to advise his client of the same. These are principles which many of the lawyers who have spoken would be familiar with. Second, the prospect of increased frivolous litigation and raised litigation costs from CFAs – several Members have touched upon this. We expect that the introduction of CFAs would, on its own, per se, be unlikely to lead to an increase in frivolous litigation. In CFAs, the remuneration of lawyers depends on the successful outcome of the cases. Generally, lawyers are also rational economic actors and they would likely have little commercial reason to support frivolous or weak litigation. The risk of little or no likelihood of monetary return for their efforts would not be commercially justifiable.”
“Companies and lawyers will still have to make an assessment and assess the extent to which a CFA will need to be disclosed, in the context of existing guidelines and the regulations governing disclosures. Mr Murali Pillai asked how concerns relating to CFAs that had been highlighted in the past – I think Mr Murali Pillai cited some past speeches and examples – had been addressed. First, dealing with potential conflicts of interest, I had again mentioned how, in the context of a proper CFA, in this case at least, the sense is that the interest between a solicitor and his client in the CFA can be aligned. But to Mr Murali Pillai's point about a potential conflict arising because of a direct financial interest in the outcome of the litigation, Mr Murali Pillai also asked whether the lawyer may advise on a settlement instead of litigation in order to settle the matter earlier and receive payment. This is notwithstanding that the client will receive a lower amount than what he may reasonably expect if the matter proceeds to litigation. Mr Raj Joshua Thomas also highlighted a similar scenario. He used the phrase "under-settling". If parties have an agreement and you choose to decide that there will be a payment based on a settlement, then, obviously, if you define the terms of the settlement not below a certain amount, or at least containing these terms, that will protect the client's interest, to ensure that there is no under-settling in this case; not just any settlement, but a settlement that comports with the client's interest in the outcome. Under a CFA, the standard expected of a lawyer in advising how a case should be conducted or proceeded on remains the same as that of a normal fee agreement.”
“If there are questions, however, on the validity or the effect of a CFA, parties should bring an application to Court under section 115D(2) of the Bill. Under section 115D(5) of the Bill, if the Court finds that the CFA either does not satisfy the statutory requirements or is found to be void or voidable, then the costs under the CFA can then be assessed in accordance with the rules applicable to taxation. Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim also sought confirmation that lawyers agreeing to CFAs would not be held personally liable for adverse party-and-party costs under a CFA, unless there are circumstances of personal or professional conduct that attracts personal liability for costs. That is correct. Under a CFA, a client will continue to be liable for any cost orders that may be made against the client. This will also be clarified in subsidiary legislation. On Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim’s query about the disclosure of CFAs vis-à-vis regulatory obligations, such as SGX announcements or audited financial statements, let me reiterate again a point I made at the start of the reply speech, that CFAs really are an additional fee structure. It is an agreement that allows lawyers and their clients to work out a fee structure. CFAs are not intended to change, nor do they change, any existing statutory or regulatory obligations relating to disclosure, from what is expected if normal fee agreements are entered into by companies. So, in assessing whether you need to make an announcement, the usual criteria will apply, whether it is material in the particular context of the circumstances of that particular announcement.”
“This approach towards CFAs and the transfer of forums will avoid any unintended consequences and risks to litigants arising from CFAs, and we will make clear the position in subsidiary legislation. Mr Murali Pillai asked about the circumstances of enforcement by the Court, with reference to the proposed section 115D(4) and (7) of the Bill he mentioned. The sections referenced by Mr Murali Pillai are aligned with the current 113(3) and 113(7) of the current LPA, in terms of the Court’s powers to deal with contentious cost agreements. The CFA is, in essence, a contract. And I made the point earlier that parties should have freedom of contract to negotiate the terms of the CFA – and it should be enforced by the Court like any contract if the requirements in the proposed 115B of this Bill, which sets out the regulatory framework and the requirements of the CFAs in this case, have been complied with; and also, of course, if the CFA is not found to be void or voidable for one of the grounds listed in 115D. On taxation of solicitor-and-client costs under the CFA, Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked whether the taxation process in Court will still be applicable in respect of solicitor-and-client costs under a CFA. He also asked if disputes regarding the validity of CFAs would fall under the scrutiny of taxation proceedings, or if they should be subject to separate Court or arbitration proceedings. Generally, Sir, solicitor-and-client costs under a CFA are not subject to a taxation. This is provided under section 115C(5) of the Bill and it is similar to the position for contentious business agreements under the current section 112(4) of the LPA.”
“Further, mediation proceedings that are more domestic in nature may involve litigants of a wide range of profiles that need differentiated treatment and protection, for the reasons I mentioned earlier. And so, this requires some further study and consideration. For these reasons, to answer Mr Louis Ng's point, my Ministry has assessed that it would be prudent to consider standalone international and domestic mediation proceedings holistically, as part of an ongoing study of CFAs. Second, Mr Louis Ng asked how the CFA framework will take into account cases that are commenced in one forum and transferred to another, and whether it is possible that a case may be commenced in a forum where CFAs are permitted and then transferred to another forum where CFAs are not permitted. The answer to this is as follows. Where proceedings are transferred between two fora in which CFAs are allowed – for instance, from arbitration to related Court or mediation proceedings – then, obviously, the CFAs will continue in the case of the solicitor and the client. So, CFAs will be allowed in those circumstances. Generally, otherwise, CFAs are not permitted in cases which are transferred from or to a forum where CFAs are not permitted. So, in the particular example that Mr Louis Ng highlighted about the High Court and the SICC, for the time being, CFAs will not be permitted for proceedings that are transferred from the High Court to the SICC and vice versa. We will study this further and consider whether we should change this, but as a starting point, under this framework, as long as one of the proceedings, either from which it is transferred or to which it is transferred, does not allow the CFA, then the CFA will not be allowed.”
“Certainly, we have committed to doing so upfront. That is the reason why we have consulted extensively, both open as well as closed, and we will continue to do so and work with Law Society to ensure that lawyers and users alike, clients, are familiar with the framework and, as far as we can, provide guidance which does not tie the hands of solicitors as they negotiate these CFAs but, at the same time, give guidance as to what the framework requires of the CFAs. Sir, with that, let me now address the specific queries raised by Members. Mr Louis Ng asked if CFAs would be allowed to act in international mediation proceedings that do not arise from permitted categories of arbitration or litigation. My Ministry is currently assessing standalone international and domestic mediation proceedings holistically, as part of a separate ongoing study of the CFAs. The potential benefits that CFAs can offer in the use of mediation have to be viewed against the interplay between international mediation proceedings and domestic mediation and litigation proceedings. So, for instance, at present, there is no clear delineation in existing legislation between mediation proceedings that are "international" and those that are "domestic". If parties to an "international" mediation do not reach a settlement, the dispute may proceed to be heard in the SICC or the High Court. As CFAs will presently not be permitted in the High Court, this may then create an ambiguity for lawyers and litigants, given that proceedings on one stream in the High Court will not be allowed for CFAs and those at the SICC will be allowed for CFAs.”
“The second point is that I have heard several comments about the agreement: should we regulate the agreement, should we put this in pro forma or should we put in some standard terms? I also heard Mr Raj Joshua Thomas said earlier that we should also have a fee structure that allows lawyers to negotiate and that, in his words, is best "appropriate to the complexion of the case". This, really, is the raison d'etre behind the CFA – to let the parties decide what are the triggering requirements to allow a party to decide when an uplift would be appropriate, depending on the context of the particular case. And it is in this context that the interest of the lawyer and the client can best be aligned – not separated, but best be aligned. Despite that, we continue to have oversight over the agreement because, just as we have done in Part 8 of the LPA for agreed fees, not CFAs but agreed fees, the Court continues to retain a discretion to have an inquiry into, and oversight of, these agreements. Likewise, in the context of the CFA, that remains the same. So, the Courts will still have oversight of the uplift, and in Mr Murali Pillai's words: "to determinate based on the reasonableness of the case, the context of the circumstances, the relevant weightage of the risks taken, the complexity of the case, the length of the case. All of these are factors which the Court takes into account. Which is why it would not be possible upfront to state, you can only uplift by X, or 2X, or 3X", because it may be appropriate in some cases, it may not be appropriate in other cases. So, that is the second point I will make. The third point I will make is that throughout Members' speeches, I have heard that because this is a new development in our framework, we should be giving guidance.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank all the Members who have spoken in support of the Bill. Before I go into addressing the specific queries raised by Members, let me just make three broad points. The first is, we appreciate that in introducing the CFA Framework, we have moved away from some of the traditional structures that lawyers are used to – maintenance, champerty – Mr Lim spoke about it; Mr Murali Pillai as well. Which is why we have chosen to do this incrementally, cautiously. We set up a framework to deal with prescribed proceedings first, dealing with the scenario where in most, if not all, of those circumstances, the clients involved are likely to be sophisticated clients, understanding the commercial context and appreciating the need for this. And at the same time, putting our lawyers who compete with foreign lawyers for international work, on the same platform, so that they can also, like their foreign counterparts, go in to make a bid for work on the basis of using CFAs. So, we start with that principle and to take up Mr Murali Pillai's point, as we study, and we have not completed our study – to extend this to other proceedings, we will carefully decide, we will consult widely – and in the same way as Mr Pillai has said we have done leading up to this Bill, we will continue to do so – all stakeholders. We will decide at that stage whether an extension is appropriate and if so, with what kind of additional criteria as safeguards. As Members would know, even with this framework that we have put in a cautious manner for sophisticated clients, we are already putting in safeguards here. So, that is the first point that I would make about the framework.”
“I had understood Assoc Prof Jamus Lim's point. There are different classes and that is precisely why we have dealt with it in different pieces of legislation, recognising that there are different intrinsic qualities that go behind each of these classes. For trade marks, in particular, the point is a broader one. If we try to reduce the space or the recognition of trade marks or curtail them or compromise them, then the knock-on impact on innovators and inventors wanting to bring their products into Singapore to obtain that protection will be in turn affected. And that was the broader point that I made – about sounding a caution about trying to restrict the application of trade marks for these innovations. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“It is just that you cannot misrepresent the basis or the source of your product. So, competition is not stifled but innovation is protected under our current regime. Sir, having said all that, the point I made earlier about constantly evolving, constantly having to adapt and react to changes in this space remains true. We will not rest on our laurels. We will continue to ensure that our IP system fosters innovation, promotes commercialisation – and that includes in spaces like in green technologies – and helps new ideas, new innovators realise their potential. Once again, I thank Members who have spoken – both Mr Ng and Prof Jamus – and support the Bill. In summary, this Bill is part of our process, our continual process and efforts to ensure that our IP office and our regime and system that we use, and very often it is not just about the laws but about how they are implemented in practice, what is the procedure like, how quick can we do it, how fast is the turnaround time and how efficient can we deal with applications. All of this is part of our efforts to ensure an efficient and a business-friendly environment. This in turn helps our companies, innovators and inventors protect their IP and turn their innovations into a competitive edge and advantage. MinLaw and IPOS will continue to work to review, update and improve Singapore’s IP regime. Mr Speaker, with that, I beg to move.”
“And, finally, the Singapore IP Fast Track programme, introduced in 2020, expedites the processing of IP applications – whether they are patents, trade marks and registered designs, they can move from application to protection in as fast as six, three and one month respectively. That is very quick by international standards. And the sooner and quicker we are able to do this, the more confidence an innovator will have in the system that it will be able to register and protect its inventions. This reduction in the time needed to acquire protection benefits innovation in fields with short product life cycles in particular and facilitates the rapid commercialisation and proliferation of new technologies which may include green technologies. Sir, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim also spoke about how we might look at and review the IP regime and how we might want to be more circumscribed and, as I heard him say, reduce the scope and breadth of trade mark applications and recognition because of the need to ensure that there will be more competition for the incumbent's space. Sir, the point really is quite the converse. A strong IP system that recognises invention, protects innovation is one that will promote innovation and promote this space. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim spoke about having more competition for the incumbents, but I will venture to suggest that if we had no IP protection or less IP protection, then in fact the space for the incumbents to be in Singapore will be far less ideal. And you will find that incumbents will take their innovations and inventions elsewhere where they can apply for and obtain trade mark protection. In terms of competition, I would say that competing goods can actually be sold. There is no bar to that.”
“What we can do, and have done, is to help accelerate the pace of innovation by facilitating: (a) better support from our IP regime for the development and use of emerging technologies; (b) technology transfer from the public sector to the private sector to expedite the introduction of new innovations to the market; and finally, (c) faster protection to benefit innovators working in fields with short technology life cycles. In my opening speech, I mentioned the Singapore IP Strategy 2030, or SIPS 2030. Part of our commitment under SIPS is to support technological advances through policy reviews. So, for instance, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim mentioned the new rules that were introduced last November as part of the Copyright Act 2021 to clearly permit computational data analysis. Future reviews will continue to take into account emerging clean technologies and, certainly, future reviews on a broader point will also take into account what Assoc Prof Jamus Lim said about AI and machine learning. All of these are developments that continue, they evolve and, over time, new changes will mean that we might need new rules. So, we are committed to ensuring that our regime, as a whole, given that we are dealing with a high technology, cutting edge space, we will have to continue to evolve to meet these changes. Another commitment under SIPS is to increase enterprise access to publicly funded IP, including for innovations that can benefit our healthcare and sustainability efforts. Unlocking the fruits of public sector research will benefit our businesses, even as their work in bringing research to the market helps realise the potential of these innovations.”
“IPOS will conduct further consultations with stakeholders on procedural details before implementing the new breeder’s test. The second item for clarification by Mr Ng relates to the new section 30A of the Registered Designs Act (RDA). This relates to the disclaiming of rights in relation to a specified feature of a design. Mr Ng sought clarification on the principles for interpreting a disclaimer under the RDA. IPOS’ approach to disclaimers under the RDA takes reference from our trade marks regime, and adopts the same intent and understanding as to the effect of disclaimers. When applying for registered design protection, an applicant may identify what they wish to protect by providing a representation and description of their design, and if necessary, by clarifying which parts of that design they are not seeking protection for. The intent in providing applicants with the option to make disclaimers is so that applicants can specify which features of a design they do not wish to protect. So, the protection conferred on a registered design will include the features that have been described and represented, whilst excluding any features that have been disclaimed. Therefore, a disclaimer should only reduce the features that are protected under the registered design. Next, let me turn to Mr Ng's third point on Singapore’s IP strategy and how it can support sustainability innovation and contribute to our fight against climate change. Sir, climate change is not only an urgent global issue. It is an existential challenge for us in Singapore as a small island. We must get creative and pioneer technological and policy solutions for sustainable development. Intellectual property (IP) is a useful tool to drive and support innovation, including innovation in clean technologies.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank both Mr Ng as well Assoc Prof Jamus for their support of the Bill. Let me try and deal with it, in Mr Ng's words "quick fire fashion" response. Mr Ng asked about a breeder's test and also about the principles that will apply for interpreting a disclaimer. I will deal with these two points first and touch on sustainability issue later on. The new section 18A of the Plant Varieties Protection Act introduces an additional mode of examination. This involves the breeder or another person, organisation or entity acceptable to the Registrar of Plant Varieties in IPOS, or the Examiner. This is known as the breeder’s test which Mr Ng referred to a moment ago. Mr Ng asked when a breeder’s test should be done, so that applicants would be clear when it would be necessary for them to expend the time and resources to do the test. Sir, to qualify for plant variety protection, a candidate plant variety must, among other criteria, be: (a) distinct; (b) uniform; and (c) stable. These are known as the "DUS criteria". Whether a candidate plant variety meets the DUS criteria is established at examination. Currently, the Registrar may either appoint external experts, as I mentioned earlier, as examiners to conduct examination, including the tests for the DUS criteria, or utilise an existing examination report with results on the DUS criteria, issued by a foreign examiner from an approved country. The new breeder’s test mode will give the applicant another manner in which the application can proceed. So, breeders can now opt to perform the required tests by themselves, or to directly engage someone else recognised by the Registrar or the appointed Examiner to do so, before submitting the results to IPOS.”
“All of these are adjunct to the sporting career and we will take opportunities as much as we can to continue to develop these adjunct areas, so that the sportsmen, the athletes themselves, can continue to serve in that capacity and, at the same time, still find a career after their playing days are over. We agree with Ms Poh that we have come quite far on the HPS framework. We have also looked at the environment and working with private stakeholders like in spexBusiness. But we agree that more can be done and we will certainly press on with ensuring that athletes remain single-minded, focused on training and ensuring that they devote as much of their time and energy possible to achieving their best outcome and not have to worry about ancillary matters. We will continue to work with all our stakeholders on this.”
“I thank Ms Poh. I agree with the sentiment that the Member has expressed. We do need to ensure that our athletes are single-minded, focused and put all their energies and devote their time and mental focus on training and eventually, also on competition. And so, the spex programme that I have mentioned – from scholarship, to education, to business, to GLOW and TAG – they provide a range of support and ensure that it is curated. As I said earlier, each athlete is at a different station of his or her own life. Some are students and studying, some are trying to ensure that they get a place in the workforce, some came out of school and yet others want to retain an interest in the sport that they so deeply and passionately care about. So, we do want to try and ensure that through all of these spex programmes, at different parts of the athletes' life, they are supported in a way which allows them to focus on their training. For the safety net that Ms Poh mentioned, it is also important. So, to that extent, in some cases, athletes transition from a playing career, a competition career to a coaching career. I mentioned coach Kelvin and coach Henry Koh earlier. Those are two examples. They were top tier athletes in their time and they transitioned, and we allow them to transition into coaching. SportSG plays a role in this. Broadly speaking, we also want to ensure that we take advantage of and leverage the expertise of these athletes. So, they can find a post-competition career in sports science, in nutrition, in training, in physiotherapy, in physiology.”
“They deal with the prize money, they decide how that is best applied and the Government does not retain any portion of this. On the contrary, regardless of whether they succeed at a competition or otherwise, as I have mentioned, the Government continues to support the athletes on his or her own journey, and also continues to support private donations, private sponsorships through the One Team Singapore Fund, which I mentioned earlier.”
“I thank Mr Xie for the questions. I will deal with both. On the first question, I would have two or three points to make. First, it is imperative on us to continue to invest in the whole system. Because by doing so, providing holistic support and ensuring that the base is grown, then the possibility of more "Kean Yews", more "Shaynas", more "Aloysiuses", who all became world number one last year, will continue to be not just an aspiration, but a reality. So, we have to expand our base. Build up better sporting infrastructure, talent spotting, talent development, nurturing, bringing them through the system and ensuring that these trailblazers, that Mr Xie has mentioned, will continue to inspire future generations of sportsmen for Singapore. Our HPS famework, which I have taken some pains to lay out in some detail, allows us to insulate our athletes from the vicissitudes of reliance on just prize money – some high, some low, some competitions do not provide prize money – but provides a constant stream of support and ensures that is both targeted, focused as well as personalised for each individual athlete. On the prize money, which Mr Xie has mentioned, this is up to the organisers of each competition. Some provide prize money. Others, like the recent World Championships, you play for prestige and of course, ranking points. Ranking points allow you to rise up in world rankings and allow you to be seeded subsequent competitions, thereby improving, enhancing chances of progressing further in the competition. All of these, whether prize money, or otherwise, the amount is determined by organisers. But I want to assure Mr Xie that the Government retains no part of this prize money. It is between the athlete and the relevant NSA.”
“There are very few things that can motivate, galvanise and inspire in the way sports can. Singaporeans were top of the podium on the world stage several times last year. Each occasion was an inspiration, bringing our community together, fostering a deep sense of national pride. By the same token, even in defeat, as our football Lions have shown us at the recent Suzuki Cup, sports can also inspire. We all rallied behind our team who fought hard, played with pride and even though they lost that match, they won our hearts. And this is what sports can do. Each moment of sporting success is special, uplifting and uniting us all. The Government will therefore remain committed to sports in Singapore. We will keep our sports facilities, programmes and activities open and accessible to every Singaporean to promote a strong sporting culture and develop a pipeline of strong sporting talent. We will support every one of our national athletes with the assistance and resources they need to excel at the elite level and emerge as national champions and world-beaters on the best arenas and the world stages.”
“Izaac was first identified by the Singapore Table Tennis Association (STTA) at age seven when he was in STTA's Bishan Zone Training Centre. He then enrolled at the Sports School and joined the national Junior Development Squad and Youth Training Squad, training under head coach Jing Junhong. Today, Izaac competes regularly on the world stage whilst at the same time, pursuing his Sports School studies and achieving excellent results in both of them. Apart from these organisations, corporates and fellow Singaporeans can also play a role in supporting our national athletes. In 2017, the Government recognised this and launched the One Team Singapore Fund, which is a matching grant framework, to catalyse and encourage the support of private organisations and corporations and members of the public for our national athletes. Donations to the One Team Singapore Fund are directed towards supporting athletes in areas such as enhancing their training environment and increasing their own competition opportunities. They benefit all athletes regardless of whether they win at competitions or not. So, the support is consistent and the framework ensures this. This provides athletes with certainty that they will be given support to achieve their best, regardless of the outcomes and not just have to rely on prize money. To date, the Government has matched more than $15 million of donations from the public since 2017, of which in half that period, as Members would know, is the COVID-19 pandemic period. All of these funds go directly to benefiting the sporting infrastructure and to our athletes. Mr Speaker, as I conclude, we know that Singaporeans cheer and celebrate our athletes achievements as a community of enthusiastic spectators, passionate sports fans and proud Singaporeans.”
“We also work with key stakeholders in the sporting ecosystem. For instance, the National Sports Associations (NSAs) play a key role in this environment. They not only help to identify future champions, but also support and coordinate their training and competition schedules. Some actively seek sponsorships and endorsements to finance the career and aspirations of their athletes. Others provide performance-based incentives to them. The Government enjoys a collaborative and constructive relationship with many of the associations and we will continue to work with them and support them as they seek to achieve the best outcomes for our athletes. There is also the Singapore Sports School (SSP), which I would like to mention. This was established in 2004. It offers an integrated sports and academic programme for Secondary and post-Secondary students. The Sports School offers its students comprehensive training in a variety of sports in an environment that also allows them to excel in their academic pursuits. The school has produced Team Singapore Olympians like Kean Yew, sprinter Calvin Kang and swimmer Tao Li. Earlier this month, the school announced its students' results in last year's "O" and "N" levels and International Baccalaureate (IB) examinations. I was pleased to learn that the students did very well and congratulated the school for its fine work in nurturing student-athletes. It shows that we have a system that can deliver outstanding athletes with a fine academic record as well. An example of a sportsman who has benefited from this multi-stakeholder, multi-faceted approach to supporting and developing athletes is Izaac Quek. He is currently one of the world's top-ranked youth table-tennis players.”
“Mr Speaker, beyond just having the best training methods, employing cutting edge technology and sport science and giving financial support, the one other key success factor for us has been our talent, our people talent. The team behind Team Singapore. We have officers at the SSI and NYSI who are prepared to and often go beyond the call of duty and they become friends, counsellors, mentors and a source of personal support to our athletes. This personal, dedicated approach is a key feature of the care given to each athlete in the HPS system. And one excellent example of this is Muhammad Hidayat Osman, a strength and conditioning specialist at NYSI. Hidayat works with our young wrestlers on areas such as their strength, explosiveness and flexibility. Hidayat was a former wrestler himself and he noticed that there were limited wrestling opportunities for athletes to improve their skills. He therefore volunteered his own time to be a sparring partner for young wrestlers so that they would have more avenues and opportunities to train. He also embarked on a coaching course in wrestling, so that he can better understand the needs of wrestlers through the combined lenses of sport science, strength development and skills training, to do more, further and wider to help the athletes under his care. Sir, the Government's support for our national athletes is therefore holistic and comprehensive, rendered in an all-round approach. We invest in the system and we also invest in our individual athletes. Additionally, we directly support athletes from the moment they are identified as a budding talent, through their development and growth as an elite athlete and in many cases, even as they transition away from active competition.”
“Besides Sophie, other athletes who have benefited from the spexBusiness scheme include badminton player Jaslyn Hooi, taekwondo exponent Chelsea Sim, wushu exponent Ho Lin Ying and synchronised swimmer Miya Yong. These programmes help them to train and balance the commitments of working professional life, allowing them to do both meaningfully. Next, the spex framework also offers direct monetary grants. These include spexGLOW, or Grant for Loss of Wages, which offsets any lost wages sustained from missing work either through preparation or competition at the Major Games. There is also spexTAG, or Training Assistance Grant, which helps to defray athletes' training costs. In the last five years, some 4,000 athletes have used these grants to pursue their sporting ambitions. Apart from the spex schemes which I have just outlined, the SSI and NYSI commit time, effort and attention to promote the well-being of each athlete through his or her own sporting journey. Under the Athlete Life Management framework, the SSI and NYSI focus on integrating sports performance with interventions to promote mental well-being and stress management. Since 2020, Sport Singapore has also engaged athletes to identify possible symptoms of psychological and mental distress, including eating and sleeping disorders. The HPS system recognises that athletic performance at the elite level can experience unpredictable peaks and troughs, and progression is rarely linear or predictable. The competitive sport environment is one that can exert and can impart tremendous, immense stress and pressure on even the most resilient of our athletes.”
“The Polytechnic, itself, is a strong supporter and partner of the scheme, proactively assisted Martina in managing her class and examination schedules, granted her extensions for the submission of assignments and offered her a customised path of study that accommodated her own training, and also travel and competition commitments. There is also the spexBusiness network to help athletes who are stepping into the workforce secure jobs and pursue meaningful careers whilst at the same time balancing their own sporting commitments. The scheme also provides support to those who are retiring from active competition and training, in their transition to full-time work. The network currently comprises more than 60 companies and organisations across more than 25 industries. These provide a wide array of career opportunities to Team Singapore athletes. They include Deloitte, Adidas, the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) and OCBC Bank, just to name a few. Since 2013, 330 former and current athletes have been assisted through this scheme. Take Sophie Soon for example, our national para-swimmer. She is one such beneficiary. Sophie started her internship in 2019 at Toyota Motors Asia Pacific, which is a spexBusiness partner. The company supported Sophie's rigorous preparations for the 2020 Tokyo Paralympic Games by offering her a flexible work schedule. Sophie has proven herself as both a top athlete and a model working professional. She finished fourth in her breaststroke final at the Games and was hired as a full-time staff with Toyota after she graduated from the Polytechnic.”