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 28 of 45.
“On issues of race and other aspects of our Tapestry, not only between youths themselves, but across generations, with other people. We need to talk about how we can refresh and revitalise the bonds that bind us, because the social solidarity that we enjoy today, that we sometimes take for granted today, has proven so important, especially in today's pandemic and the crisis. It needs constant attention. The ructions and the affray that bedevil a migrant society such as the United States is constant a reminder that inclusiveness will always be a work in progress for us. Nor are older societies, like Germany, where an anti-lockdown movement is emerging, immune from divisions and distrust that cause society to fracture under stress. When society is torn apart by xenophobia and prejudices that appeal not to our better self, but to our worst instincts, it becomes impossible to even talk about a caring society. And that must be something we always keep at the back of our minds as we build a nation for tomorrow, as we build a more inclusive and caring society. How do we apply all of this to the desire to build a more inclusive society? It means a few things, starting with having to practise and work on inclusiveness every day. We must acknowledge our differences and accept that despite these differences, we live peacefully together, happily because we are in the same boat, in the same place. I should add that inclusiveness is not about ignoring or just living with differences or denying that different groups have different or even conflicting agendas.”
“The affinities of race have been harnessed to foster a spirit of self-help among our communities. The ethnic self-help groups or SHGs have rallied their respective communities to serve the more vulnerable across the spectrum of race and ethnicity. For example, Vibrance @ Yishun organises programs to serve all ethnic groups, even while it conducts its own programmes specifically to meet the needs of respective communities. SHGs may be race-based, but they are far from race-bound. And not only are the beneficiaries of these gropus across racial lines – so are the volunteers. Almost a quarter of the volunteers at MENDAKI today are not from the Malay race. Our ideal is that one day, we want to see a Singapore, where we do not need such SHGs. But that is not going to come about by wishing the differences away. It can only come about by working at it actively, daily and consciously. And on critical issues such as education, economic upliftment, beyond the main efforts by the Government, the communities and SHGs are mobilised, ground up with their own initiatives to help people, help community, and this must be welcomed. Our diversity and geography means that we must always be conscious and do what we can to sustain our multiracial society. We are not starting from a blank slate, but we cannot take the peace we enjoy for granted, nor can we take our social fabric, built up over generations, for granted. And we must recognise that it takes years to weave a good Tapestry, but mere moments to destroy it. And once the threads start unravelling, it will be difficult to bridge the social divide, the racial divide, the ethnic divide and to stitch the Tapestry back together, will be a mammoth task. I believe our youths must have as much a voice in this discourse as anyone else.”
“The whole gamut of policies and programmes that Senior Minister Tharman once famously described as the "most intrusive". And amongst them, the EIP, which Senior Minister Tharman described as our "most important" social policy, and our "greatest strength". There is absolutely nothing natural or inevitable about any of this. It did not happen by itself, and it is not something which will endure by itself. We must not think that we have arrived or that we have reached an ideal post-racial state that has been attained and that no further more effort by way of these policies need to be put in place. Race and religion remain faultlines and they remain highly emotive issues. And the risk of regressing on what we have achieved is always there. And we cannot assume that our progress will be a straight line. Yes, we are by no means perfect and discrimination remains a viscerally `rt lived reality for some, as hon Members Faisal Manap and Carrie Tan have pointed out earlier, and we must always continue to find ways to do better. In Singapore, consciousness of race cannot be erased – nor should it be. Indeed, if we were all the same, we would have nothing unique to contribute, nor learn from anyone else. Because we are not the same, we each have something unique to contribute, to bring to the table, something only we can give to the common good of all of us. The more diverse we are, the richer our culture becomes. We should view difference from the lens of contribution, and not separation. Nor should being "one united people, regardless of race" mean that we should renounce our cultural affinities or discourage people of the same community from coming together to support each other, and others in the community.”
“This is an ideal that we have been striving towards for more than 55 years, since we started our little nation – the day we became independent. On Separation Day itself, Mr Lee Kuan Yew affirmed that Singapore is "not a Malay nation, not a Chinese nation, not an Indian nation. Everybody will have a place in Singapore", and that is how we started. And after decades of nation-building, we are today less race- conscious and more tolerant of each other. More "one united people, regardless of race, language or religion". The young especially, are closer to this ideal than perhaps, their parents and grandparents. But we must also ask ourselves, how did we get here? There was certainly nothing natural or expected in the progression from Singapore to Singaporean, as the tagline for the Singapore Bicentennial last year put it. If it were indeed an expected natural trajectory, or a natural progression, it would have occurred elsewhere in the world naturally, including among our neighbours in ASEAN. We got here precisely because we have worked hard at it consistently and systematically, through policies that touch almost every aspect of our lives. We live together, our children play together, they study together, and our sons do the National Service together. We recognise that communities can be narrow and exclusive, as well as generous and inclusive, and our policies must be aimed to promote the latter and counter the former. Common spaces like our public parks, schools, libraries, sports facilities, and public housing where all races interact, deliberately and accidentally, help to promote a more open and shared outlook across communities by creating opportunities for social mixing and simply doing things together.”
“In fact, it is this very diversity of yarns that make Singapore exciting and more beautiful. In contrast to a Tapestry which had it been spun out of a single spool of fibre, single colour, one type, one nature that would have yielded a uniformly plain and monochromatic Singapore Cloth. You can see the difference. Our differences, our diverse ethnicities, our cultures, different backgrounds and heritage and beliefs, they make for a collective which is far richer, and for a whole which is far greater than the sum of its parts – and that is the Singapore Tapestry. At the same time, because of the diversity inherent in this Tapestry, texturally we can be a little rough at times. There will be rough and tough times when some threads in the Tapestry wonder why they are in this Tapestry, or why other threads are in the Tapestry. And these questions do not just revolve just around questions of race and religion, but to newer, perhaps more divisive and contentious issues, including questions concerning LGBT, equality, personal freedoms. How then do we weave the Singapore Tapestry tightly, but at the same time, ensuring enough space in between the different threads for diversity to exist harmoniously? This is quite a paradox, but it is a paradox that we must, and we can and we have to overcome. Ms Sylvia Lim, on Tuesday, spoke about becoming a race-blind society. We share the same aspiration, recognising the individuality of each of our races, but at the same time, reaping the strength in that diversity behind the common Singapore identity. Race is one of the primary threads of our social fabric, and the fact that different races are acknowledged while also bound by a shared belonging is what make our Tapestry strong, cohesive and also highly unique.”
“We are a society comprising both the young and the old and neither can exist alone, and we must learn to recognise that all of us have a part to play in moulding our future. Second, societies need to give the young hope – hope of a brighter future, including good jobs and good lives. Many of the young in developed countries see the dreams of their parents slipping beyond their grasp and are reacting against a system which they might feel is no longer capable of giving them hope. We cannot let this happen to us here in Singapore. Our society needs to remain meritocratic, but not ossified. The forces that enabled the Boomers and Gen X to progress ought not be allowed to stratify society. We must therefore work hard to ensure that meritocracy does not develop into structural inequality. We need to make sure that our society remains fair, transparent, has equality of opportunities and that the fires of the Singaporean dream keep burning. The story of today's Singapore youth, like the youth before them, must therefore be woven from the fabric of hope. So, I return to the Singapore Tapestry metaphor I mentioned earlier. That Tapestry is really the heart of Singapore. A Singapore for all Singaporeans. The Singapore Tapestry will always have yarns of different colour, sizes and even nature. Some are old threads, some are young threads. But whatever the case, there are certain enduring truths about the Tapestry. Each of us, each thread and each fibre, is part of a larger whole. All of us have a role to play in keeping the Singapore Tapestry from fraying or worse, from being stretched and ripped apart. Yet, even as there is only one single Tapestry, we remain individuals, with our own identities, our own dreams and our own aspirations.”
“Which in turn brings up even more fundamental questions of what kind of social compact and politics we desire for our country, both now and in the long term. An important consideration for me is how we can harness youthful energy to bring about positive change, to allow our young to blossom, instead of allowing uncertainty and discontent to fester amongst our young and resulting in negative confrontation? I see two things. First, we need to allow the young to give voice to their dreams and aspirations. We need to give them the space and the avenues to engage with the rest of society, and have conversations with older generations to implement change, whilst at the same time understanding the constraints and trade-offs that age and experience sometimes can give a better insight to. The older generation in turn needs to be a little more patient, accepting and appreciative of generationally different views. So, both sides need to come together. These shared ideas have indeed help take us forward. Let me give you some examples. We have been working with Singaporeans across the age spectrum, across the generations to reflect on our shared identity, and to think deeply about the values and legacy that we want to leave behind. More than 80,000 people of all ages have contributed their ideas and views to the Founders' Memorial to date, on how best to honour our past and create a beacon of inspiration, for our future. This year, 74 Singaporeans aged between 17 and 73 – a fairly broad spectrum of almost six decades – have come together to discuss and put together what they think every Singaporean ought to know, and create content to update the Singapore Citizenship Journey for new citizens.”
“Young people in Singapore, like their peers around the world, are the vanguard for an environmentally sustainable future, advocating not only new ways of living, but also new ways of making a living. In this way, they are really our active agents of change and we need to tap on this dynamic resource. We will expand our partnerships with youths on these and other issues. We have been working with youths through projects such as the Youth Mental Well-being Network, which was launched earlier this year. We have started a Youth Circle with MSE to partner youths to create proposals and workable solutions that can improve our environment and enhance sustainability for the long term. The hon Ms Raeesah Khan said, I think two days ago, that youths need to have a seat at the table to look at such issues, and we agree. The above are just some examples of how we want to engage our youths to participate and contribute actively to their own future, having a say, being an architect in their own future and also on matters of national importance. We will continue to create more opportunities and avenues for youths to partner the Government and society on issues that matter to them, and we will do so on a regular and sustained basis. Let me now turn to the second question – what drives a caring and inclusive society and how can our young people help to realise the vision of such a society? When we engaged youths under the SG Youth Action Plan last year, they outlined their vision for a better society not just for themselves, but for Singaporeans. And inherent in this push for a more caring and inclusive Singapore are key considerations of (a) reducing social inequality; (b) building a more tightly knit society; and (c) improving civic discourse and participation.”
“NYC has also launched the Asia-Ready Exposure Programe (AEP) for youths to acquire cross-cultural skills in a global world, that is important, cross-cultural skills to understand the region better, to widen their prospects and with that the range of opportunities. We have also set up a portal called gradgowhere.sg that contains resources for youths looking for jobs. The National Jobs Council is coordinating efforts to provide 100,000 jobs and skills opportunities for jobseekers, including graduates and working youths, under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package. MCCY and NYC will also set up a "YouthTech" programme to equip 1,000 youths, in the first instance, with digital skills and training, and then deploy them into the community and social service sector to help this sector to upskill and to digitalise. These programmes to equip youths with skills and provide more employment opportunities and will help address their immediate concerns about day-to-day living. For more details on these programmes, I would like to ask Members to look at the handouts that I have just given out. At the same time, while youths are concerned about the immediate bread and butter issues, they also reflected to me that they are equally concerned about the broader, longer term questions, such as looking after our mental well-being and how do we better entrench our environmental sustainability efforts. These are important issues, and I know that many young people angst over them. Our youths are very much at the front and centre of these efforts. They have called for action to reduce the stigma associated with mental health issues, and greater awareness and openness in seeking help.”
“But we have to, because each thread that comes loose from this fabric is Tapestry, it threatens the integrity of the thread next to it, and if left unchecked, eventually could unravel the entire fabric. This is an important aspect of the work in my Ministry and I will come back to this point. Let me start with the first question. The youths of today face intense competition once they start formal schooling. Globalisation presents new opportunities of exchange, but also opens up academic competition beyond national boundaries. This competition gets sharper in the workplace. And it is exacerbated by the current COVID-19 pandemic when global economies are in recession and opportunities are fewer to come by. My colleagues have outlined the steps to protect Singaporeans better, but the hard truth is that competition is a fact of life and we cannot influence the trajectory of other countries. Yet despite this, I want to encourage our youths to realise that competition drives us to excel, competition pushes us out of our comfort zone to be more than what we thought we could be and realise a better version of ourselves. We will support you in this journey as best as we can. Whether it is in getting work experience, facilitating job and training opportunities or skills development. Let me outline a few recent efforts. Together with the National Youth Council or NYC, MCCY has set up a Youth Corps Internship Scheme to allow our students from Institutes of Higher Learning to be placed into on-the-job training to ready themselves for experience for the job eventualy. Internships and work experience in these times could otherwise be more difficult to come by.”
“Today, in an uncertain environment with complex challenges ahead of us, all the more we must chart a path together. As a Government, we need to partner with the community including our young people, to leverage on our shared values and forge a way forward. Today, I hope to address some of these concerns raised – not just through our policies and our programmes – but also in our broader efforts to partner and work with young people to catalyse the solutions and tackle these issues together. I will be addressing two broad questions that our youths have raised. First, how can I secure a good future and achieve my aspirations in these turbulent times? This question deals not only with bread and butter issues in these uncertain times, but also how we can collectively address longer term challenges, like climate change, sustainability and the environment. Second, how can I help realise the vision of Singapore as a more caring and inclusive society? How do we become the kind of society we want to live in, and would be happy to leave behind, for our children? This second question is both philosophical and also practical – how do we weave the Tapestry of Singapore’s society to accommodate a diversity of threads seamlessly, so that the Tapestry is at once both beautiful to behold and also comforting to touch. Sometimes, the Tapestry can be more beautiful to behold from afar than to touch and feel textually. Keeping it together, keeping it nice, beautiful, soft to the touch is a constant work in progress. The threads are woven together, sometimes by suasion, sometimes by policy, and the feel can be kind of uneven and rough on occasion. Sometimes a thread or two might come loose and we have to put it back with some effort.”
“It’s scary having to navigate a future that feels so hostile and full of unknowns.” I think all of us would have a lot of empathy for this sentiment – the future is uncertain. But I would also say to this group and to those out there – that we are at the cusp of a very different future that is promising in so many ways. The COVID-19 pandemic has animated a strong spirit of care, cohesion and active citizenry in our society, from ground up, with many organising their own initiatives to assist those in need. For example, Project Stable Staples raised $150,000 in funds to give NTUC vouchers to 2,500 individuals they saw and identified as having been affected financially by COVID-19. The Youth Corps Singapore volunteers supported food distribution drives and delivered meals to nearly 9,000 beneficiaries. Various student groups have helped to share messages of encouragement and also translate content for migrant workers staying in the Changi Exhibition Centre Integrated Community Care and Recovery Facility. Others have contributed through SGUnited, a movement and one-stop digital portal for Singaporeans to contribute toward the national response for the COVID-19 outbreak, and they do so through donations, through volunteering and, of course, also in taking part with others in community-led efforts. What is striking about all these initiatives is that they were initiated by volunteers, who stepped up, even as they themselves were, at the same time, worried about their own lives and livelihood. This is very heartening and we need to encourage more of these efforts, work together with them and build on them. In the best of times, the Government does not have all the answers.”
“Will my skills still be relevant in a post-COVID-19 world, where there have been disruption upon disruption? Will I be able to stay competitive, especially in this climate when foreigners can compete for the job and perhaps even do it remotely from another country? Will I be able to afford the things that matter to me most at this point in my life: getting married, buying a home, looking after my parents, whilst trying to start my own family? At the same time, they are also thinking deeply about the way we live, as a people, dealing with broader societal issues, and the values and ideals that they wish to see in society. While previous generations chased the traditional 5Cs, this generation is concerned with some other Cs – climate change, constant competition and caring communities. At the top of their minds are questions such as: how do we care better for one another? Can we better support vulnerable communities and how do we ensure that we leave no one is left behind? How can our society be more inclusive? And can we move from just tolerating, to truly embracing our diversity? Youths also asked hard questions about the fairness and the tone of political campaigns at the recent General Elections. They asked to see more diverse views in Parliament, more checks and balances and more open debates on constructive policy alternatives. These concerns and questions are entirely valid and reflect the rapid changes in our economic, political and social environment, amplified, catalysed by the effects of the current COVID-19 situation. A participant, one of them from my youth engagements, summed it up as follows, and I quote, “Youths seem to be dealing a lot with uncertainties – clashing ideologies, existential threat of climate disruptions, fundamental economic shifts.”
“The Government is here to help them reach their personal and collective potential, but the future is in their own hands. There is a Chinese saying, “年轻有为”. It is usually used to describe a young person who is capable and outstanding. Unfortunately, there is no equivalent of this for older people. No one talks about “年老有为”. While this saying usually describes young people, it also describes a very positive and hopeful state of affairs with being young and associated with being young – the young are full of potential, promise and eventual accomplishment. For the young, with the luxury of having time on their side and the endowment of energy and imagination, the sky is the limit. However, amid the backdrop of COVID-19, there is a perceptible sense that the positivity in our youths might be somewhat diminished and I understand their concerns, as I am sure many of my colleagues in this House do, about the impact of the pandemic on bread and butter issues. This is only to be expected in the current climate, but we must ensure that while we are realistic and we remain aware of the situation, that our youths do not become discouraged, do not become defeatist or disenchanted. The pandemic will pass, but our aspirations and dreams must remain. 年轻有为 still applies. And perhaps even more so in today's context. In the last few weeks, I have spoke with a number of youths, across a broad range of backgrounds. I asked them about their concerns and their aspirations, and what they felt we should address in this new term of Government. I promised them that we would bring these up in Parliament and let me just share a few of their thoughts with you. Understandably, many of the concerns revolve around the current economic climate: will I be able to find a good job when I graduate?”
“Thank you. I will refer to these handouts briefly in the course of my speech. Madam, at first glance, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth seems like a potpourri with ingredients thrown together out of convenience – culture, community, youth, and of course, sports. These four strands hold and bind Singaporeans and Singapore society together, for the long term. And I would say – they are no less important than the foundations of our country’s economic and security framework. Like Mr Sitoh earlier, I believe these four strands coming together synergistically is critical not only to providing an outlet to rebound from the current pandemic, but also to our long-term goals in nation-building. They foster a national identity and consensus in a way that no other facet of society can. I am honoured and very humbled to be given this opportunity as Minister to lead in this endeavor, to build on the solid foundations established by my predecessors. In this speech, I will focus on youth, and on the kind of society that we want to foster. There is no strict definition of youths. In MCCY, we have defined youths as those between 15 and 35 years – sadly excluding myself. So, this covers everyone from Secondary school to young adults in their thirties, either just left school or entering the workforce. This group makes up about a quarter of our population in Singapore. Our young people are a crucial segment of our society. The youths of today are the leaders of tomorrow. So trite but very true. They are the people who must have a say in the kind of society they want to be in, and play a part in shaping the kind of future for Singapore that they want to leave behind.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, before I begin my speech, with your permission, may I ask the Clerks to distribute some handouts.”
“Mr Speaker, copies of the Bill have been provided to the Clerk, who will distribute it to Members now. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]”
“Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Law, I beg to to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to amend the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act 2020." [(proc text) Bill read the First time. (proc text)]”
“We must reflect on and learn from what is happening, and how we can emerge stronger as a society. The Government will convene the Emerging Stronger Conversations, so that Singaporeans, including our youths, can reflect and reimagine the future together. These conversations will be an inclusive platform to discuss important bread-and-butter and key societal issues. We invite Singaporeans to partner the Government to translate these reflections and ideas into action. The SG Together Action Networks will bring together Government, community, and businesses, to cocreate solutions and lay the foundation for our vision of a stronger Singapore society. The current pandemic has underscored our duty to each other as fellow Singaporeans. We came together to do our part, and demonstrated that we are a caring, inclusive society, that is united in the face of adversity. In this new term of Government, MCCY's agenda of policies and programmes will bolster this Singapore Spirit, and in partnership with Singaporeans, forge a stronger, more resilient society of mutual care and collective well-being. We will create a shared future by working together, as one people.”
“Due to the economic impact of COVID-19, the road ahead will not be an easy one for many of these organisations. We will invest in new capabilities that can help them lower costs, improve service delivery, and develop new and exciting products. We will continue to create opportunities so that youths are well-positioned to thrive in the future. We will set up a "digital corps", comprising trained youths, who will be deployed to assist community and social sector organisations to digitalise. We aim to create up to 1,000 opportunities for this. We will partner Youth Sector Organisations (YSOs) to provide life skills training for youths, such as in leadership and financial planning. We will equip youths with the skills and knowledge to capitalise on opportunities in Asia through the Asia-Ready Exposure Programme (AEP). To look after our youths' well-being and create better access to help, we will partner YSOs to co-create mental well-being resources, online. We will also continue working with partners to strengthen peer support among youths in schools and the wider community. As part of the Youth Mental Well-being Network, we will support youths who want to initiate ground-up efforts to promote mental well-being. In 2018, we launched Our SG Arts Plan and Our SG Heritage Plan, setting out a 5-year roadmap for our sectors. We are reviewing these at the midpoint, drawing on the experiences, insights, and aspirations of the arts and heritage communities. Similarly, in 2019 we launched V2030 Recharged, co-created in close collaboration with the sports community. These plans will support MCCY's vision to foster a caring people, cohesive society, and confident nation. Singaporeans have undergone a shared experience that has changed our lives.”
“With community partners, we will strengthen solidarity by providing opportunities for Singaporeans from different backgrounds to engage in respectful dialogue on sensitive issues of race and religion, both online and face-to-face. We will continue to enrich and grow our arts scene and cultivate our tangible and intangible heritage. We look forward to the outcome of our nomination to inscribe Hawker Culture in Singapore on the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, so we can proudly showcase our culture to the world. Sports can inspire Singaporeans to rally together as a nation, and celebrate with our sporting heroes. MCCY is committed to supporting our athletes' aspirations through the SportSG spexScholarship programme, funding for National Sports Associations, and High Performance Sports (HPS) funding, which also provides sports science and sport medicine support for athletes preparing for their campaigns. Earlier this year, we introduced the Inspire Fund, in partnership with Temasek Foundation, to support athletes outside the HPS system. Through this, we can spur our athletes to greater heights. To strengthen the resilience of the community and social sectors over the longer term, we are partnering the National Council of Social Services (NCSS) and Tote Board to raise the digital capabilities of the local non-profit organisation sector, particularly the charities. We will also raise the digital capabilities of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in the arts, heritage, and sports sectors by leveraging SMEs Go Digital Programme, with support from the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) and Enterprise Singapore (ESG).”
“We also created traineeship and internship opportunities for youths in the community and social sectors, enabling them to pick up work-ready competencies while giving back to society. Singaporeans have rallied together during this crisis. We have seen Singaporeans showing empathy, social responsibility, and neighbourliness – values and behaviours that underpin a cohesive and caring society. More ground-up movements are emerging to propagate community-based initiatives for mutual support and we will support them. We want to sustain this strong spirit of civic contribution and mutual care, even when COVID-19 is over. Through Youth Corps Singapore, Team Nila, and the People’s Association (PA) Youth Movement, and grants for ground-up projects, such as Our Singapore Fund, Our Harmony Fund, and the National Youth Fund, we will empower Singaporeans to create positive change in society. Through the SG Cares movement, MCCY will continue working with partners and intermediaries to coordinate volunteerism efforts, build capabilities, channel resources to areas of need, and grow a more caring society together. We will continue to create opportunities for Singaporeans to come together and build shared memories with their communities, friends, and loved ones. Even as the arts sector works to safely resume live performances, we will continue the #SGCultureAnywhere campaign so that Singaporeans can continue to enjoy the arts and culture. We will also continue to build and upgrade sports facilities, and offer affordable, quality ActiveSG programmes, so that Singaporeans can enjoy an active lifestyle and bond through sports. Through such platforms, Singaporeans with a passion for the arts and culture or sports will have access to opportunities to pursue their aspirations.”
“The Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's (MCCY) mission is to build social capital and inspire the Singapore Spirit. COVID-19 is impacting us in many ways, reminding us that social cohesion and a strong spirit of civic responsibility are more important than ever before. In this new term of Government, MCCY will continue to work with Singaporeans to build a home that is caring, cohesive, and confident. We will step up our community and youth engagement efforts, while continuing to develop a vibrant arts, heritage, and sports landscape that Singaporeans can enjoy and be proud of. MCCY will continue to help Singaporeans stay connected and support each other through the crisis. The SG Cares Volunteer Centres complement the efforts of our community organisations to care for vulnerable groups, by coordinating volunteerism efforts on the ground. Religious organisations are also giving spiritual guidance and comfort to their communities, working with us to put in place measures to keep their worshippers safe. Together, we have and will continue to adopt new ways to connect with those in need of support, such as phone calls, tele-conferencing, contactless delivery of essential goods, and digital platforms for religious worship. To safeguard the livelihoods of our arts and sports professionals, MCCY introduced the Arts and Culture Resilience Package and support measures for the sports sector, a suite of funding and training support for new artistic commissions, SGUnited jobs for sports professionals, digital channels for arts and sports content, and upskilling opportunities in preparation for post-COVID-19 recovery.”
“Today, Sir, after the conclusion of proceedings on the Second Supplementary Supply (FY 2020) Bill.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, copies of the Bill have been provided to the Clerk, who will distribute it to Members now. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Law, I beg to to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to amend the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act 2020." [(proc text) Bill read the First time. (proc text)]”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I have a Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) (Amendment) Bill, to be laid upon the Table. [(proc text) Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the Bill, laid upon the Table by the Senior Minister of State for Law. (proc text)]”
“Sir, I thank Mr Liang for the comments. In terms of the first question, yes, we try as far as possible to find a solution for the parties that come before the assessors, even if the precise scope of the Act might not well relate to or be able to assist the specific problem. To give an example, in some cases we try and make reference to ESG, as the Member has mentioned. In other cases, the assessors try and find a solution between the disputing parties, for example, through referring them to mediation or even, on occasions, the assessors themselves stepping in to find some common ground between the disputing parties and try and bridge the gap where possible. On the Member's second point, again, a point well taken and we will do that. The Member may know that we have yesterday filed a notice of intention to put in a supplementary to the Bill. This relates to other aspects of the Bill. But no doubt, together with that, we will step up steps to raise consciousness and public awareness and also public education on the operation of both aspects of the (Temporary Measures) Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act commenced on 20 April 2020. As at 29 May 2020, which is around five weeks since the Act commenced, 3,943 Notifications for Relief (NFRs) have been served using the online system. Parties may also serve the NFRs in hardcopy on the counter-contracting parties. We are unable to track the number of hardcopy NFRs which parties served to the counter-party. The vast majority of the NFRs served relate to two types of contracts. First, hire-purchase agreements or conditional sale agreements for commercial plant or machinery, or commercial vehicles, as the case may be; and second, for leases or licences for non-residential properties. The number of NFRs served as at 29 May 2020 for each category of contract is as follows: (a) Hire-purchase and conditional sale agreements: 2,107 (b) Leases or licences of non-residential properties: 1,254 (c) Events and tourism-related contracts: 250 (d) Construction contracts and supply contracts: 213 (e) Certain secured loans to SMEs: 97 (f) Options to purchase given by housing developers, or sales and purchase agreements between purchasers and housing developers for housing accommodation, which were only added to the scheduled contracts – Members may wish to note – on 13 May 2020. For that, there were 22 NFRs. We would like to encourage contracting parties as far as possible to be fair and reasonable to each other, considering that the impact of COVID-19 was an event that no one could expect. In doing so, parties should be better able to reach a mutually acceptable solution.”
“Mr de Souza might be aware that under the Salvage Convention, salvors who engage in salvage operations in any waters will be able to enforce special compensation claims in any proceedings brought before a Court or arbitral tribunal in Singapore. And the availability of such claims under our current framework will be a positive development for the marine environment, generally, and also for Singapore. Sir, I believe I have addressed questions raised by Members. I thank both Members who have spoken and supported this Bill. I would like to say that this is one step taken towards updating Singapore's legislative framework governing admiralty jurisdiction and also, of course, maintaining a progressive legal framework for the maritime industry. Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move. [(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)]”
“The 1993 International Convention on Maritime Liens and Mortgages, which 19 countries have acceded to, also does not provide for special compensation claims to give rise to maritime liens. For these reasons, the Bill does not confer a lien on such claims. Both Mr de Souza and Mr Tan touched on the impact that this Bill has on the environment. Mr de Souza asked, in particular, how this Bill might incentivise salvors in the context of environmental protection. Ultimately, this incentivises salvors undertaking a rescue or salvage of a vessel even when the prospects of saving the vessel or the goods are remote or it is inherently risky because it allows compensation for these claims, thereby encouraging them to help either to salvage the remains or to move the vessel into another location which is less environmentally damaging. Today, salvors commonly obtain security to satisfy their special compensation claims through the relevant P&I clubs. This Bill provides an additional avenue for obtaining security for such claims. This avenue may be needed where contractual arrangements for security are absent, or could perhaps, in some cases, be inadequate. By broadening the range of enforcement options available, this amendment gives salvors greater assurance of compensation when they undertake operations to protect the environment. Mr de Souza asked how the introduction of such claims might affect the eco-system of such projects and the environment near Singapore. The mechanism of special compensation was created to ensure that salvors are incentivised to assist endangered vessels that might provide a threat to the environment.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Mr de Souza and Mr Tan for their support of this Bill and also for the comments and suggestions that have been raised. Let me address the questions raised directly. Mr de Souza asks if the Bill change the High Court's admiralty jurisdiction over salvage claims, other than adding claims currently proposed under the Salvage Convention. The answer is no. The Bill expands the High Court's admiralty jurisdiction to also cover special compensation claims that arise under contract, such as under the Lloyd's Open Form SCOPIC clause. But in other respects, the jurisdiction of the High Court is preserved. Mr de Souza also asked about ranking and whether the Bill provides for special compensation claims to enjoy a maritime lien. The Bill does not do so and let me explain this. My Ministry has studied this and consulted with maritime law experts. We eventually opted not to confer a maritime lien on special compensation claims, in view of admiralty law principles and also international practice. Today, the common law grants traditional salvage claims a maritime lien because property has been saved, either the vessel itself or the cargo. And this in turn ensures that there are assets from which all other claims can then be paid. This rationale, however, does not apply or may not apply to special compensation claims, because these claims arise in situations where possibly, neither the vessel nor the cargo has been saved. We also considered international practice on whether these claims are given a ranking of a maritime lien. Jurisdictions like the UK and Hong Kong, who have similarly expanded their admiralty jurisdiction laws to cover special compensation claims, have not provided legislatively for such claims to be conferred a maritime lien.”
“Clause 2 provides that the High Court's admiralty jurisdiction includes any claim arising under the Salvage Convention. This includes Article 14 of the Salvage Convention, which provides for special compensation. It also provides that the High Court's admiralty jurisdiction covers contractual claims relating to salvage services. This includes contractual clauses that provide for special compensation, such as the Special Compensation Protection and Indemnity clause. Finally, it provides that the High Court's admiralty jurisdiction covers any other claim in the nature of salvage. This ensures that all salvage claims previously covered by admiralty jurisdiction continue to be covered. Clause 2 also preserves the principle that there is parity in treatment of claims arising from salvage operations in respect of both ships and aircraft. Clause 3 of the Bill repeals section 176 of the Merchant Shipping Act, which provides that the High Court has jurisdiction to decide all claims relating to salvage. This provision is a historical anachronism and is unnecessary. The High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act already provides for admiralty jurisdiction over salvage-related claims and it should be the single piece of legislation dealing with this issue. Sir, this Bill updates our maritime legal framework in line with international practice and will pave the way for Singapore's accession to the Salvage Convention. With that, Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 5.27 pm”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Law, I beg to move, “That the Bill be now read a Second time.” Sir, this Bill complements Singapore's upcoming accession to the International Convention on Salvage 1989, or the Salvage Convention. The Merchant Shipping (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act was passed last year, to implement the Salvage Convention. To-date, 72 countries have ratified the Salvage Convention. A key aspect of the Salvage Convention is the introduction of special compensation. These are compensation for claims arising from salvage operations. Special compensation claims allow a salvor to be compensated for salvage operations to prevent or minimise environmental damage, even if the salvor did not save the vessel or its cargo. This differs from traditional salvage claims dealt with under an earlier convention adopted in Brussels in 1910, where salvors are only awarded if the salvage of the vessel or its cargo was successful. This Bill expands the High Court's admiralty jurisdiction to cover special compensation claims that arise under the Salvage Convention, or by way of contract. Currently, the High Court's admiralty jurisdiction covers only traditional salvage claims. By placing special compensation claims on the same footing as traditional salvage claims, this Bill further incentivises salvors to protect the environment and keeps Singapore abreast with other signatories to the Salvage Convention, including the UK and Hong Kong, who have also made similar amendments to their own admiralty jurisdiction. Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a short Bill. I will highlight the key amendments very quickly. Clause 2 amends the current section 3(1)(i) of the Act, which relates to salvage claims.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will just respond to two points. The first was raised by Mr Louis Ng, the point about whether the Courts have oversight of why a party may choose not to consent. Let me just explain the framework. Under clause 28, it is an enabling provision. So, the current position under the Evidence Act is that in all non-criminal proceedings, the Court may permit any witness to give evidence by video or television link in remote proceedings. No consent of the parties will be needed in such a situation. This is for all types of witnesses, whether expert or factual. But in criminal proceedings, the current position is that all witnesses must be present in Singapore and the current position is therefore narrower. What the Bill does, is to try to expand this slightly given the current situation by allowing overseas witnesses to appear by remote proceedings if the parties consent. And the reason for this is because, in criminal proceedings, life and liberty is at stake and we want to ensure that the overriding consideration is fairness to the parties. To the extent that there might be some prejudice to the accused person and the accused person does not consent, then in such a situation the Courts are unable to force the appearance of the witness by remote proceedings, and I hope that explains the situation. Mr Patrick Tay asked about unions and the way in which unions might conduct their meetings. I believe I talked about this in my speech earlier as well as about the other types of different meetings that might take place. No doubt, these particular considerations that might apply to one type of meetings or another will be taken into account when the Minister prescribes the alternative arrangements.”
“So, for example, the Court or the Syariah Court must not make an order to conduct proceedings remotely, if having regard to the overall justice of the case, the proceedings cannot be conducted fairly if proceedings were held remotely. Fairness of the proceedings remains the overriding consideration. The existing rules which prohibit unauthorised audio or visual recordings in Court will also apply under Part 5 of the Bill. So, for instance, a litigant who is engaged in remote Court proceedings cannot be recording the proceedings without the Court’s permission. These measures, Sir, are designed to be temporary in nature and are intended to ensure the continued operation of the Courts during the COVID-19 situation as much as possible. Hence, two temporal limits have been put in place. First, the measures will only apply during the specified period. This is the period that the control measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 are in force, or any further period necessary or expedient to conduct any proceeding in a safe and efficient manner. Second, clause 28 also contains sunset clauses. These allow the Minister for Law, in consultation with the Chief Justice or the Minister in charge of Muslim Affairs, to declare that clause 28 would cease to apply to any Court or Syariah Court proceedings, respectively. Sir, to conclude on these two Parts of the Bill, clauses 27 and 28 of the Bill are designed to respond to changes arising from our country’s fight against COVID-19. These provisions will ensure that commerce and the administration of justice do not grind to a complete halt, even as we observe the circuit breaker measures which the Government has implemented.”
“Hence, more proceedings will be held remotely with the aid of technology. The Judiciary and the Syariah Court have already moved decisively prior to this in response to the measures implemented by the Government to minimise the spread of COVID-19. During the period specified by the Judiciary and the Syariah Court, every matter fixed for hearing in the Supreme Court, State Courts and Family Justice Courts, as well as in the Syariah Court, either have already been, or will shortly be adjourned, unless assessed to be essential and urgent. Hearings during this period will, as far as possible, be conducted through electronic means. Clause 28 of the Bill will complement and facilitate these measures by allowing for a wider use of remote communication in Court proceedings in the following way. Subject to conditions which I will outline, accused persons in Singapore and specified categories of witnesses from abroad can give evidence remotely, either by video or television link, in any Court proceedings. This applies also to Syariah Court proceedings. Clause 28 will allow any Court or Syariah Court proceedings to be conducted remotely, if certain conditions are met. This means that Judges may hear the cases remotely, outside of a courtroom. There are some conditions, as I have mentioned earlier, to ensure the propriety of the proceedings. Therefore, a witness who makes an appearance or gives evidence must do so only from a place specified by the Court or the Syariah Court. Second, if the witness is a witness of fact, then the parties to the proceedings must come together and agree that this witness can testify by remote communication. Existing safeguards adapted from the Evidence Act and the Criminal Procedure Code will continue to apply.”
“I should highlight to Members that clause 27, like some other parts of this Bill, applies retrospectively, from 27 March, the date of MOH’s Safe-Distancing Regulations. Hence, under clause 27(5), the order under clause 27(1) may apply retrospectively so that any meetings held in the intervening period would be covered. We have made this known as far as possible to the market once this Bill was being prepared so that people in the market could rely on the provisions of this Bill, and know about it as soon as possible. In the period leading up to the publication of this Bill, MinLaw and MOH issued a joint press release on 31 March announcing these proposed legislative provisions so that the market and its users were clear, and also making clear that the intention was for this Bill to apply retrospectively from 27 March. On the same day, SGX, ACRA and MAS issued their joint guidance for listed companies. The guidance sets out in detail how issuers could hold meetings in compliance with the safe distancing measures. Applying clause 27 retrospectively ensures that rearrangements made to meetings between 27 March and when the alternative arrangements are prescribed, will be upheld. This includes meetings that were deferred in response to safe distancing measures, and also meetings which were reconvened after being originally deferred. Sir, the application of clause 27 in this period will reduce disruption, increase legal certainty and allow for, as much as possible, commercial transactions and activities to carry on, even in this period. I will now deal with clause 28. The conduct of Court proceedings in physical courtrooms will also need to be reduced during this period where control measures are in place.”
“The range of options that can be considered are set out in clause 27(2), which allows in appropriate cases, for meeting proceedings to take place electronically or by video-conference, or voting by electronic means or for an appropriate period of notice to be provided or enhanced, to name a few. To illustrate, alternative arrangements for a company AGM may look something like this: the meeting can be completely virtual and there will be no need to meet physically. A smaller quorum could also be set. Documents, such as notices of meetings or proxy forms, may be sent by electronic means, instead of hard copy. People do not need to be in the office to do printing, copying, sealing of envelopes and so on. Notices of meetings, including electronic meetings, will have to comply with the prescribed minimum notice period, as a safeguard. Since voting in person by everyone at the meeting is not possible, proxy voting can also be used. As a safeguard, a specific office-holder, such as the chairman, may be designated as the sole proxy. There will also be safeguards to ensure that the meeting is conducted properly. Hence, the meeting must have “live” video and audio feed. Members must be given the opportunity to submit questions, such as through email, in advance of the meeting and these questions must be addressed by the chairman or the relevant officer of the meeting before or during the meeting. There may be some variations in the way in which these arrangements might work from one type of meeting to another; from one society to another society. There is not a one-size-fits-all approach, which is why clause 27(2) prescribes a suite of options available to the Minister to prescribe, as may be appropriate, from one type of meeting to another.”
“Societies and charities would be unable to meet deadlines to elect officers for governance purposes, and cooperative societies unable to issue dividends to members. There are many other examples. So, across a range of sectors and in the financial markets, the inability to hold meetings has led to a significant degree of uncertainty and disruption. Hence, Part 4 of this Bill seeks to introduce and allow some flexibility for the conduct of meetings to be held in compliance with the necessary safe distancing measures, while at the same time, maintaining propriety in the conduct of these meetings. Clause 27 applies to all situations where personal attendance at the meeting is provided for in written law or any legal instrument. There need not be an explicit requirement for physical attendance. The relevant law or legal instrument may simply entitle a person to attend a meeting. In this case, clause 27 would apply. The relevant law or legal instrument may provide for both virtual meetings and personal attendance. In such a situation, clause 27 would also apply. Under clause 27, the Minister for Law may prescribe, by order, any alternative meeting arrangement he considers necessary or desirable for that meeting or class of meetings to take place. Compliance with the prescribed alternative arrangements will override anything to the contrary in law or the legal instrument. The prescribed alternative arrangements are designed to be pragmatic and also practicable, given the prevailing conditions. Safety of the participants, in particular, will be the priority. But there will be safeguards to facilitate informed and effective participation and, at the same time, mindful of the technological constraints and security considerations to ensure that the meeting is held regularly.”
“For example, DBS Group Holdings, OCBC and Great Eastern, three examples of large corporates where ordinarily more than a thousand shareholders would attend the meetings – and there are other companies – have had to defer their AGMs, pending the passing of this Bill. This, in turn, also meant that they would have had to defer payment of final dividends for the financial year, as these can only be approved at the AGM. Several real estate investment trusts, such as Ascendas and OUE Commercial, have also had to defer their AGMs. And listed companies, like Capitaland and Starhub, have had to obtain extensions of time, keeping their meetings and, thereafter, their corporate plans, in abeyance. But it is not just the corporate sector which has been affected. Similar challenges have also been faced by a range of different bodies in different sectors, for example, charities, societies, co-operative societies, trade unions and MCSTs. For these bodies, not being able to hold their meetings can have various adverse implications. Some trade unions, for example, may be unable to obtain approval for additional expenditures to provide assistance to members, particularly during this COVID-19 situation. MCSTs may not be able to carry out urgent non-routine works on their estates, where subsidiary proprietors’ approvals would have been needed. En bloc sales may not be able to complete by the stipulated timelines, if the requisite meetings are not held. In these situations, if sellers fail to meet their deadlines, they may have to start the process all over, jeopardising existing sales arrangements and, of course, scuttling the plans of buyers and sellers alike.”
“I will now deal with Parts 4 and 5 of the Bill which introduce two provisions – clause 27, which deals with alternative arrangements for meetings which are usually required to be held in person – the attendance of the shareholders, for example, in person at an AGM; and also clause 28 which provides for the conduct of Court proceedings by remote means. Sir, legal proceedings and such meetings generally require personal attendance. However, the spread of COVID-19 infections and the Government's control measures to address this, has meant that such meetings and Court proceedings, to be held in person or to be attended by persons physically, are no longer always possible or, even when they are, should be reduced. On 27 March, MOH’s Safe-Distancing Regulations under the Infectious Diseases Act, came into force. This limited gatherings outside of work and school to 10 persons or fewer. Since then, these control measures have been progressively enhanced, stepped up and made stricter. This has given rise to some problems transacting usual commercial and other matters. Many companies, including those listed on the Singapore Exchange, have been unable to hold shareholder meetings, including AGMs, to obtain shareholder approval to undertake a proposed course of action by the company. For example, meetings which otherwise would be held to approve dividend payments, which can, of course, be given to shareholders and to assist in their cash flow, could not be held. Companies could not raise capital, for example, through rights issues and share capital increases, where meetings were otherwise necessary. Since 27 March, when the Safe Distancing Regulations were stepped up and came into force, certain AGMs were also postponed as a result.”
“Today, Sir. After the conclusion of proceedings on the Supplementary Supply (FY 2020) Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, copies of the Bill have been provided to the Clerk, who will distribute it to Members now. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to provide temporary measures and deal with other matters relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to make a consequential amendment to the Property Tax Act (Chapter 254 of the 2005 Revised Edition)." [(proc text) Bill read the First time. (proc text)]”
“Mr Speaker, I have a Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Bill, to be laid upon the Table. [(proc text) Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the Bill, laid upon the Table by the Senior Minister of State. (proc text)]”
“As I had mentioned, we exclude them as a general rule because you do not encourage this kind of behaviour. We do not want to encourage people to self-inflict injuries and that is why MediShield Life does not cover it. Nonetheless, to the extent that these injuries arise as a result of an existing mental condition that might pre-dispose the claimant or the person to inflicting the injuries on himself or herself, in those situations, we can consider exceptions to the general positions.”
“Sir, the general rule is that treatment of self-inflicted injuries or injuries resulting from attempted suicide is excluded from MediShield Life, so as to not encourage this kind of behaviour. Nonetheless, exceptions can be considered where such injuries might arise from mental illnesses.”
“I would also like to let Ms Tin know that the Trust is made up initially of a $1 billion injection by the Government. And Ms Tin might remember that in 2018, it was topped up by another $300 million. Since the inception of the Trust, it has matched up to $700 million in terms of donations from the eligible organisations.”
“I will address Ms Tin's first point. On the matching fund, MOH has set up the Community Silver Trust in 2012. That is to encourage donations and also additional resources to providers in the intermediate and the long-term care (ILTC) health space. And that is done by providing a matching grant, every dollar for every dollar, for eligible ILTC providers. The Trust's matching grant supports providers in building capabilities, enhancing the quality of care. The matching grant also frees up charity dollars, which organisations can then channel towards defraying the costs of healthcare for their seniors.”