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 36 of 45.
“For instance, Members will probably know that one million Instagram "likes" can be bought for US$18 and 500 retweets for US$2. Bots can sometimes take the place of these low-cost workers as well in enhancing the spread of this online disinformation. Other online influencers can also be paid to spread false content, and clickbaits can be used to profit from Internet traffic. Falsehoods affect people, real people in real life, as well as entities. Some examples: it affects those close to home. One of our local actresses: messages were circulated suggesting that she had a sexually transmitted disease (STD). She started receiving messages such as: "Are you a prostitute?" and "Heard you have STD. Get well soon." Lewd comments continued to surface even after the facts were put out and it affected her reputation even when she tried to venture overseas. Recently, the Select Committee on Online Falsehoods heard from a new citizen, Mr Hetamsaria, falsely identified in an article as a new citizen who was disappointed with Singapore and considering giving up his citizenship. The article was shared over 44,000 times on Facebook. The family was deeply affected by numerous xenophobic comments made about them. Just last week, there was fake news on Facebook that a veteran of our local acting scene, Lim Kay Tong, received a 16-year sentence. In truth, this was a clickbait. When users clicked on the link, it led to a recipe for tikka, and another linked to a recipe for pumpkin spice cheesecake. But the impact of the clickbait was self-evident. There was also fake news circulating on WhatsApp claiming that Fandi Ahmad was taken into custody for hurting someone. Again, a clickbait.”
“In New York, an 18-year-old boy, a gifted violinist, killed himself after his roommate live-streamed him behaving intimately with another man, to 150 people. Also in New York, a journalist, Asher Wolf, made anti-war posts online. Her address was shared on the dark web, and people posted dog faeces through to her, in her mailbox. In South Africa, a journalist, Karima Brown, her contact details were published on Twitter by the leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters. She received an onslaught of graphic messages threatening rape and murder. Some threatened to expose her flesh by peeling her skin off. Finally, in Boston, there was a misidentification of the Boston bomber. After the Boston Marathon bombings, online citizens on Reddit wrongly identified Sunil Tripathi as the Boston bomber. The family received hundreds of threatening and anti-Islamic messages, even though they are not Muslim. Third, the area of falsehoods. Falsehoods are disseminated even more easily today for a number of reasons. First, the psychology of Internet users. Internet users are prone to confirmation bias. They have shorter attention spans, people skim, rather than critically evaluate content. They tend to share information because it triggers an emotional response more so than because of its credibility. Users generally share links without even having read them. When content gets shared enough times, it seems and appears more credible. There is also a market for online disinformation tools and services. Fake social media accounts are commonly used to spread falsehoods. "Click farms" consisting of large numbers of low-paid workers can be used to sell video views, "likes" and even votes.”
“In the United States (US), a 12-year-old girl in Florida hung herself after being subjected to cyberbullying by two 12-year-olds: rumours about having sexually transmitted diseases, vulgar name-calling and the like. In the United Kingdom (UK), a 17-year-old boy in Manchester stepped in front of a train after he was called a "black rat" and "ugly" online, both by people he knew and also by people who were complete strangers to him. The second area of concern is in doxxing. Doxxing is the disclosure of personal information to cause violence or harassment to others. The term was originally used in 1990s to describe a tactic used by hackers. They would release dossiers of personal information about other hackers, to breach their anonymity and expose them to harassment. We are familiar with some local examples, such as in the Caltex incident, Members would know about the couple who pushed the old man at Toa Payoh hawker centre; and, of course, the Anton Casey case, where he had to leave Singapore as a result. Some may say that these people get what they deserve. But doxxing has a darker side. It has been used as a political tool by extremists. In the US, an Islamic State of Iraq and Syria-linked group published names, addresses and phone numbers of 1,400 mostly US military and government personnel, urging supporters to attack them. Can you imagine if you were one of these 1,400? In New Zealand, in the wake of the Christchurch terror attacks, an anti-gun control Facebook group posted contact details of the Queenstown detective online. One post featured an image of a rifle and words, "Come and take it". You can imagine how dangerous this information is, and can be, in the hands of the wrong people. Some other examples.”
“The effects are more wide-ranging, more long-lasting. The abusive comments that are put up can be permanently displayed on the Internet. They are broadcast to a large online community. And in truth, the victim has nowhere to hide. In our 2014 Second Reading speech on the Protection from Harassment Bill, the Government highlighted alarming trends about cyberbullying. Since then, matters have grown worse and I will cite a few numbers to this House. In 2017, a survey commissioned by Talking Point found that three out of four children and teenagers had reported being victims of cyberbullying. In a 2019 Google survey, teachers in Singapore view the need to prevent cyberbullying as the most pressing concern when it comes to teaching children about online safety. The consequences of cyberbullying can be dire. The Journal of Medical Internet Research published a study last year and showed that cyberbullying raised the risk of self-harm or suicidal behaviour amongst young persons by 2.3 times. The latest research suggests that bullying may cause physical changes in the brain, increasing the risk of mental illness. Studies have also shown that bullying in childhood has effects that last into adulthood as well. Mental problems, including anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies, poor general health, lower educational, financial and social functioning. Many suffer in silence and we may not know until it is too late. In Singapore, for instance, it was reported a few years ago that a 13-year-old girl was bullied by her friends on Facebook and in a WhatsApp group. She started cutting herself with metal rulers and razor blades as a result, causing injury to herself.”
“Last December, Facebook admitted that it had struck deals with companies like Netflix, Spotify, that allowed them to read, write and delete private messages of users. Google Plus, for instance, on two separate occasions last year, admitted that it had exposed the personal data of over 50 million users in total to third-party developers. After the first discovery, that mistake was hidden from the public for over half a year. Amazon's Alexa, as another example, an "always on" device in our homes – Bloomberg recently revealed that the team charged with auditing commands given to Alexa had access to customers’ home addresses and other personal information. Alexa also recorded private conversation and sent it to a user’s acquaintance. In short, there is no adequate way to moderate and control how this information is used or shared by others. And it is not a simple matter of a leak of data or loss of privacy. Many of us think that we still have some measure of control over our privacy. Some brush off loss of privacy, saying it is a worthwhile exchange for the convenience and benefits that technology brings to us. But we fail to recognise that the digital traces that we leave online can be connected and thereafter shared with others. There are wide-reaching and sometimes devastating repercussions that could occur. There are some key areas of concern for us and I will enumerate them. First, on cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is, really, traditional playground bullying transmuted into an online new digital form. In many ways, it is more insidious than traditional bullying. There is anonymity, and there is a lack of a physical confrontation and it allows people to engage in conduct that they may not ordinarily engage in, in normal daily life.”
“Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Law, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, Tim Berners-Lee introduced us to the World Wide Web in 1989. Thirty years later, more than half of the global population, or 4.4 billion, are active Internet users, 3.5 billion of whom are on social media. The ubiquity of technology, the way it is embedded in every aspect of our everyday lives, is a given. It has gone beyond just being a useful tool to help us perform tasks to becoming the primary means by which we search for information, communicate and socialise. It is commonplace to see families, groups of friends, all sitting around a table, all looking down at their phones. Some figures to demonstrate the widespread use of the Internet and social media are as follows: Google handles more than 5.5 billion searches each day; there are 2.27 billion monthly active users of Facebook; there are 500 million tweets which are sent each day on Twitter; and almost five billion videos are watched on YouTube every day. Singaporeans are at the vanguard of growth in Internet use. In 2017, Singapore, alongside Sweden, topped the Global Inclusive Internet Index. This index measures the adoption and ease of access to the Internet. There is no question about the benefits of the Internet and social media and the convenience that they bring to our lives. But these benefits also come at a price. In exchange for this convenience, we have, in turn, bestowed significant power on the social media companies. We voluntarily surrender personal data to them, exposing the most intimate details of our lives on social media websites. We are often unaware that websites and companies are collecting and amassing our data, without our knowledge, until perhaps a scandal breaks.”
“In my speech, I referred to a 2008 extract from the Hansard. [Please refer to "Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill", Official Report, 8 March 2019, Vol 94, Issue No 101, Second Reading Bills section.] It has subsequently been brought to my attention that the excerpt I read was, in fact, from 2013. And I wish to correct this error for the record. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, with your leave, I wish to correct a factual error in my response speech during the Second Reading of the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill on 8 March 2019.”
“Mr Dennis Tan's question relates to the circumstances in which the information is placed on the server. How it is that there was access that was gained to the data and whether there was a breach of any law? Those are all matters that are covered by the investigations that are currently ongoing, and, to the extent possible, when this has been ascertained, we will provide the information.”
“Can the Member elaborate on what other aspects have not been answered?”
“On Miss Cheng Li Hui's latter question, that information was not on the server that was compromised. Only registration related information was on that server. And if I can just cite for Miss Cheng this relevant portion from the vendor's statement, it says that the information that was on that server were National Registration Identity Card (NRIC), gender, number of blood donations, dates of the last three blood donations and, in some cases, blood type, height and weight. As for the first point, the unauthorised access is from various locations. That is still being looked into and when we have a fuller position on this and have more clarity, we will provide those answers.”
“I can take the supplementary questions now if Members —”
“The measures to be taken to prevent a similar occurrence will be shaped by what specific findings arise from the ongoing investigations into the incident. MOH and its agencies will also conduct a review on the lifecycle management of the data being handled by existing IT vendors. In addition, the HSA Board has set up a Board Committee chaired by Mr Max Loh, Chairman of HSA Board's Audit and Risk Committee. The Board Committee also includes members from Government Technology Agency (GovTech). It will review HSA's current policies and processes for managing sensitive data and recommend measures. Yesterday, the Government also announced that the Prime Minister has also convened a Public Sector Data Security Review Committee, chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, to conduct a comprehensive review of data security practices across the entire Public Service. MOH and its agencies will extend our fullest cooperation to the work of the Committee. Dr Chia Shi-Lu has asked if the Ministry should consider streamlining the procurement of IT services across its departments, Statutory Boards and public hospitals to reduce personal data access by multiple vendors. We agree and have done so progressively in the public healthcare family, where we are able to do so.”
“Thank you. Members of this House have asked for further updates on the preliminary investigation of the data leak of blood donors' personal information from the database of the vendor appointed by the Health Sciences Authority (HSA). Secur Solutions Group Ptd Ltd (Secur Solutions) is an independent vendor of HSA appointed to maintain and enhance the queue management system for blood donors. On 13 March 2019, a foreign cybersecurity expert had informed the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) that the registration-related information of blood donors could be accessed because of a vulnerability in the server used and managed by Secur Solutions. HSA immediately worked with Secur Solutions to disable access to the server. On 30 March, Secur Solutions issued a statement to provide more information on this incident. Investigations are continuing and a further update will be provided when available. Members have also asked questions relating to the cybersecurity expert. The cybersecurity expert works for a company that specialises in identifying and reporting vulnerabilities of information technology (IT) systems. He was not employed or engaged by HSA or the Ministry of Health (MOH). He informed HSA on 16 March 2019 that he had deleted his copy of the data and has no intention of disclosing its contents. He had never made any request for compensation or payment, and we will not be taking any legal action against him because he had reported the vulnerability to us straightaway, and had no intention to keep, use or otherwise expose the contents of the database, and has not done so. Members have asked what additional steps MOH and HSA can take to reduce the risk of data mismanagement.”
“Mr Speaker, with your leave, may I take Question Nos 6 to 12 together?”
“In conclusion, Mr Speaker, I thank the Members, both Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Christopher de Souza, for their contributions to this debate. The Government is continuously working towards a progressive, balanced and modern criminal justice system that protects society from crime. This Bill contributes to this effort by building on past reforms and also, at the same time, enhancing their effectiveness. With the support of the House, 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)]”
“Ms Sylvia Lim also asked for confirmation that a Court will not have an RT sentence take effect on a date later than the date it was passed if the offender is already in pre-sentence remand, as I understand the question. Yes, that will be so, and, in such a situation, it will be started immediately. Generally, the CPC empowers the Courts to direct a sentence of imprisonment, RT or Corrective Training (CT) or Preventive Detention take effect at a later date than the date it was passed. This, however, is usually done on the request of the offender in most of these cases, to allow, for example, time to sort out personal affairs and so on before serving a sentence. So, the usual position is that if you are already in pre-sentence remand, then unless the offender requests, he will simply carry on. If the offender is already in remand in that situation and they are not requesting bail to sort out personal affairs or other matters, then there is generally no reason to postpone the commencement of sentence. Finally, Mr Christopher de Souza asked whether the Government also considered disallowing backdating for CT sentences. As background, although CT sentences share the rehabilitative element with RT, they apply to a different group of offenders. CT applies to adult offenders – as opposed to RT – who have committed one or more offences with maximum sentences of two years' imprisonment or more, and who also have relatively serious previous convictions. These adult repeat offenders can be sentenced to CT for a minimum of five and a maximum of 14 years, without entitlement to remission. Considering the long minimum duration of CT sentences, there is less risk that backdating of such sentences will interfere with any rehabilitative efforts during the sentence.”
“Let me illustrate the point with one example. Let us say an application to reopen a concluded case is filed very late and close to the time the sentence is to be carried out, for example, a caning sentence, which will be irremediable. With this amendment, the Court will be able to consider whether to shorten the procedural timelines to have the application heard and resolved more quickly. We have no doubt that the Courts, in applying its discretion to the facts of each case, will have the fair balance between the parties' interests at heart when deciding. Finally, there were a number of questions on the backdating of RT sentences. Let me deal with that. Both Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Christopher de Souza asked what steps the agencies will take to avoid or minimise remand where RT is a possible sentence. First, as I mentioned earlier, the agencies will work to identify the remand cases where the accused is under the age of 21 early. This age group includes all accused for whom RT may be ordered. The identification of these cases may be done even before a charge. Once such cases are identified, the Prosecution and investigators will take steps to expedite the case and reach the sentencing stage as quickly as possible. In addition, in appropriate cases, remand can be avoided by offering a reduced bail amount, for example, if the sureties have difficulty raising bail in those situations. Release on bail with electronic tagging can also be used as an alternative to higher bail amounts, where appropriate. The CJRA amended the CPC to expressly allow the use of electronic tagging as a condition of bail.”
“The Prosecution will weigh very carefully, in the first place, whether to use sensitive information as part of its evidence, and will only do so where it is necessary. If unredacted sensitive information has to be used in a criminal proceeding, various measures can be taken to mitigate the risk of publicity. First, if there is sensitive information in materials disclosed in the statutory pre-trial disclosure process, the Court may order that the accused and his advocate cannot communicate it to any person. Breach of this order would be an offence. It is also worth noting that, generally, the media are not allowed to publish reports of information contained in materials disclosed during the statutory pre-trial disclosure process, except the basic facts of the case. Second, the Court may order that the matter be heard behind closed doors – in camera. Finally, if the sensitive material contains or concerns the identity of a witness, the Court can order that such information not be published. This is commonly known as a "gag order". Moving to the next area being amended, Mr Christopher de Souza asked for the rationale of giving the Courts and the Registrar the power to shorten timelines in relation to procedure for reopening of concluded cases. I should highlight that both parties will be given a chance to make arguments about the timelines before the Court makes the decision to either shorten or extend them. So, that is the usual way where the Court will entertain submissions from both parties. The Court will take on board all the facts and arguments, taking them into account in deciding whether it is, in fact, just to make the order or not. I stated in my opening speech that this proposal was designed to enhance efficiency and allow for more flexibility.”
“And, to quote the judgment on this, "[t]o allow the Defence to examine the undisclosed material on a preliminary basis simply because there is a dispute on disclosability has a similar practical effect to disclosure and this would in essence be going further than the situations of disclosure envisaged in [Kadar]". The wording in the proposed legislation is entirely consistent with this commonsense position. In a similar vein, Mr Christopher de Souza asked how we can be sure that information is, indeed, disclosed where it is valuable or relevant and necessary to the Defence's case. The Courts have set down detailed procedures to fairly balance the competing interests in this area. And the High Court's decision in Winston Lee's case was then subsequently brought before the Court of Appeal in a Criminal Reference, and our apex Court stated that while the Public Prosecutor is presumed to have complied with his disclosure obligations on account of his constitutional office, this presumption can be rebutted. Once the Defence satisfies the Court that there are reasonable grounds for belief that the Prosecution has failed to comply with its Kadar obligation, the Court will look to the Prosecution to show that it has complied. With the Defence assisting the Court in this regard, we are confident that the outcomes will be fair when the Kadar principles are applied in the context of the redaction of sensitive information. Finally, Mr Christopher de Souza asked a question from the other perspective, from the other side of the spectrum, I think, which is, when there is a need to disclose such information even though it is sensitive information, what will be done to safeguard the sensitive information from being abused?”
“45 pm Mr Christopher de Souza asked whether the requirement that the Court view the disputed redacted material in the absence of the Defence violates an ethical rule against a party communicating with the Court without the other party also being present or able to reply, I would like to make it clear that the rules of natural justice will continue to apply to those proceedings just as they have done in other proceedings. This means that both parties will be able to make submissions on the legality of the redaction and also rebut each other's submissions. While the Court must view the disputed material in the absence of the Defence, this does not mean that the Prosecution will be allowed to make submissions in the absence of the Defence. In other words, you make the submissions, the Defence can respond and the Court views the disputed material in the absence of the Defence. Mr Christopher de Souza also asked how this procedure takes into account the understanding that the Defence would be best placed to know whether something would strengthen its own case. This question relates to the common law principle from the case of Kadar, which I mentioned earlier, that the Prosecution must disclose unused material that tends to strengthen the Defence's case. Mr Christopher de Souza's question calls to mind the argument, sometimes advanced before the Courts, that the Defence should receive disclosure of material for the purposes of arguing that it should be disclosed. The High Court, in fact, considered this precise point in Winston Lee's case and held that even where it fell to the Prosecution to show that in compliance with its Kadar disclosure obligations, the disputed material may be shown to the Court but not to the Defence.”
“] The answer then was that MHA will take ownership of this issue and, at that stage, whilst MHA had no plans to implement VRI, they were nonetheless, and I quote, "MHA's position is that the issue of video recording as well as other operational issues should be looked into, in the following manner: there should be a fair system which seeks to ensure that crimes are solved and the system should also ensure that the rights of the accused are protected. If an accused wishes to challenge the statement given by him, there are clear avenues available today". So, that was the position in 2008, not quite so dismissive as Ms Sylvia Lim has suggested. Next, there were several questions on the removal of sensitive information from disclosed materials. Mr Christopher de Souza asked if the Defence can easily seek the Court’s determination of whether such a removal or redaction should stand. The Defence may apply for the Court’s determination without any procedural barrier. For example, leave of Court will not be required. However, to succeed, the Defence will need to satisfy the Court that the Prosecution should not have redacted the relevant information, either because it was not sensitive information, because the Prosecution is relying on it as evidence, or because it tends to assist the Defence or undermine the Prosecution’s case and, therefore, must be legally disclosed. That is the test in Kadar's case. 4.”
“Provisions like section 32 of the MDA and the proposed section 40B of the CPC recognise the fact that officers of specialised law enforcement agencies, such as CNB, are highly trained and are able to competently and responsibly exercise the investigative powers given to Police Officers of the rank of Inspector and above. Ms Sylvia Lim asked which agencies have commenced using VRI, for what kinds of offences, and for the assessment of the usefulness of VRI in investigations and as evidence. VRI has been used by the Serious Sexual Crime Branch of the Criminal Investigation Department in investigations into rape, and by the Central Narcotics Bureau to investigate certain drug trafficking offences. Several Police land divisions are also preparing to use VRI. Early feedback from the ground and from these agencies is that VRI is useful to investigators and our officers are confident in the VRI system. So far, there has not yet been a case where a VRI recording has been used as evidence in Court. As more cases go through the criminal justice system, we will continue to gather feedback from the implementing agencies in order to further refine and improve the VRI process. I thank Ms Sylvia Lim for being supportive of this. With reference to the suggestion in 2008, that MinLaw was dismissive of this during COS, let me just clarify the position. [Please refer to "Clarification by Senior Minister of State for Law", Official Report, 1 April 2019, Vol 94, Issue No 102.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Members who have spoken up in support of the Bill. Let me address the questions directly. First, questions about VRI. Mr Christopher de Souza asked if non-Police law enforcement officers will need different skills, training and resources to investigate these offences. As with all legislative amendments, before bringing the changes into force, the relevant agencies will assess what kind of training or preparation is needed and will get that done. There is an inter-agency workgroup comprising the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), MinLaw, AGC, the Police and other law enforcement agencies which oversees the development of policies, operational procedures and also training plans to ensure uniformity in VRI implementation across the agencies. This workgroup will work towards ensuring that the investigation of VRI offences is done to a common high standard across all agencies. Mr Christopher de Souza also asked why the non-Police Officers exercising the new powers to investigate VRI offences do not need to be of a rank equivalent to an Inspector of Police but are deemed to be of that rank for these purposes. This is to match the existing powers of those officers. For example, under section 32 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), a CNB officer investigating an offence under that Act has the same CPC powers as a Police Officer investigating an arrestable offence. In exercising those powers, the CNB officer is deemed by section 32(3) to be an officer not below the rank of Inspector of Police.”
“We are conscious that with this amendment, an offender who is remanded for a substantial period of time before being sentenced to RT will face a longer total period of incarceration compared to an offender who was not remanded or not remanded for as long. This was a concern raised by the criminal Bar during our consultation with them. To address this, the relevant agencies, such as the Police and the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC), will work together to ensure that where RT is a possible sentence, remand is either avoided or minimised where possible. This will prevent the offender being disadvantaged. In fact, this is already being done. Of course, this is leaving aside remand ordered by the sentencing Court for preparing the RT pre-sentencing report, which agencies currently keep to about one week or less. The Bill also contains other technical amendments. These clarify the Court's procedure and powers in forfeiting bail bonds, introduce definitions to aid understanding of the High Court criminal case disclosure procedure and improve some language which was unclear. To conclude, the Bill builds on the reforms in the CJRA of last year and further enhances the effectiveness of some of those reforms. In this modest way, it contributes towards a fair criminal justice system that serves the needs of Singaporeans. With that, Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“It emphasises both discipline and rehabilitation in a structured environment, where officers provide supervision and guidance to the RT trainees. The trainees will go through programmes that will help them take charge of their rehabilitation. They will need to soberly reflect on their offences, on how to stay crime-free, and on how to strengthen their relationships with their family. An amendment is proposed to provide that an RT sentence cannot be backdated. What this means is that even if an offender was remanded before sentence, any RT sentence imposed cannot be backdated to take the remand period into account. Let me explain why this is needed. Under CJRA, the CPC was amended last year to reduce the minimum RT detention period. The period used to be 18 months, but under those amendments, the Court is given the discretion to set the minimum period at either 12 months or six months depending on the nature of the rehabilitation required. This substantial reduction in the minimum detention period benefits offenders because it allows them to return to the community and begin their social reintegration earlier. However, the reduced period also means that offenders have a very limited time in RTC to complete the intensive rehabilitative programmes designed to keep them crime-free. If an RT sentence is shortened any further by backdating, it would deprive the offender of the chance to complete the necessary programmes. Without the full benefits of their rehabilitation, there is a higher risk that the offender will not be able to stay crime-free. This will not be good for them or society.”
“This latter type of disclosure refers to the principle in the Court of Appeal’s decision in Muhammad bin Kadar and another v Public Prosecutor and the cases that elaborate on that decision. Where the Defence wishes to dispute a redaction made under this power, the amendments provide that they may apply to the Court in a closed-door hearing. The Court will view the material in the absence of the Defence and it may order that the Prosecution disclose the redacted information. I turn now to cover an amendment relating to Court procedure. CJRA introduced a statutory procedure for reopening concluded criminal cases, where all avenues of appeal have been exhausted. Under the CJRA amendments, the appellate Court that last dealt with the case will hear the application to reopen the case and may extend certain timelines for filing documents prescribed for the reopening procedure. Again, we received feedback that it would be more efficient, and also allow more flexibility for the Courts, if this procedural power includes the power both to shorten and extend timelines, and if it can be exercised not only by the last appellate Court to hear the matter, but also the Registrar of the Supreme Court, and any High Court Judge or Judge of Appeal. We are, therefore, proposing an amendment to that effect. Finally, let me deal with an amendment to the Courts' powers in relation to Reformative Training (RT) sentences. RT sentences apply to offenders under the age of 21. Under such sentences, young people who commit relatively serious crimes go through intensive rehabilitation in a Reformative Training Centre (RTC) followed by post-detention supervision in the community. The RT regime is specifically geared towards the rehabilitation of young offenders.”
“Our current statutes already provide for the non-disclosure of official records relating to affairs of state and, in certain circumstances, official communications. The proposed amendment, which applies only in the criminal context, expressly allows a law enforcement officer or the Prosecution to redact sensitive information if, for example, the redaction is needed to protect a person's safety or the effective conduct of an investigation. To take a further example, let us say that CNB takes a VRI statement from a suspect, who is a member of a drug trafficking syndicate. In the course of the interview, it is revealed that CNB has certain intelligence-gathering capabilities. If this part of the video-recording were to be publicly disclosed, it could compromise CNB’s intelligence-gathering and undermine investigations not just into that syndicate, but also others as well. The proposed amendments would expressly allow that part of the VRI statement to be redacted. We were, of course, mindful that any exercise of this power should not prejudice an accused person's ability to conduct their defence. A key objective of the criminal justice system is to produce accurate and equitable outcomes, through procedures that are fair, and not just fair but seen to be fair as well. With this in mind, the power to redact comes with certain limitations. The Prosecution will not be allowed to redact sensitive information from material disclosed to the Defence (a) where the Prosecution intends to rely on that sensitive information as evidence, or (b) where the law requires the disclosure of the sensitive information because it tends to undermine the Prosecution’s case or to strengthen the defence's case.”
“For example, if the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) is conducting a drug-related investigation and takes a VRI recording, and that recording is wrongfully copied or distributed, the CNB cannot investigate that act. It must call on the Police to assist with that aspect of the investigation. The law enforcement agencies gave us feedback that it would be a lot more efficient if the investigative agency that makes a VRI recording was empowered to investigate any misuse of that recording. That agency would be familiar with the wider investigation and would be able to put the VRI-related offence into its proper context. As such, the Bill will allow prescribed law enforcement agencies which already have the power to take VRI statements to investigate any VRI-related offences relating to the statements they take. The intention is to prescribe CNB as such an agency, with others considered as and when the need arises. The second amendment will allow the Police or the Prosecution to redact sensitive information from any document or thing relating to a criminal case before disclosing it to the Defence or other persons. Sensitive information refers to information which, if disclosed: (a) may be prejudicial to the public safety, public security or propriety, public order, national interest or national security of Singapore or any part of Singapore; (b) may endanger the safety of any particular person; (c) may prejudice the effective conduct of any ongoing or future operation or investigation of any law enforcement agency. For example, information that may reveal the operational processes or capabilities of any law enforcement agency; or (d) may otherwise be prejudicial to the interests of justice in any criminal investigation or criminal proceedings.”
“Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Law, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Government regularly reviews criminal procedure with the aim of ensuring a progressive, balanced and modern criminal justice system that protects society from crime. As part of this review, we introduced the Criminal Justice Reform Act 2018 (CJRA) last year, which amended the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and other laws. CJRA introduced, amongst other things, the video recording of interviews in investigations and a statutory procedure for the reopening of criminal cases where all appeals had been exhausted. Changes were also made to disclosure of evidence in criminal proceedings and to the sentencing powers of the Court, including to the sentence of Reformative Training. The scale of the current Bill is much smaller than that of CJRA. The current proposals serve to improve and refine the laws introduced or amended last year. The amendments can be split into three main categories. First, investigative processes; second, Court procedure; and third, the sentencing powers of the Court. Let me elaborate on each of these. The first change to investigative processes concerns video-recording of interviews (VRI). When we implemented VRI last year, we also created new offences relating to the misuse of VRI recordings. Examples include the unauthorised recording of the VRI process and the unauthorised copying or distribution of a VRI statement. The existing law allows the Police to investigate such VRI-related offences. However, other agencies that use VRI in their investigations may not have the power to investigate such offences and would have to rely on the Police to investigate them.”
“I do not have those numbers to hand out, but if the Member could file a PQ, I would have those numbers to hand.”
“The Healthcare Services Bill that I talked about will regulate private ambulances, and Ms Sylvia Lim, in particular, spoke about the publication of rates for more transparency. That legislation will mandate the publication of common fees charged as well as give more transparency to the bill components to be paid by the consumers so that they will know upfront what those costs would be. Further details would be set out in the Healthcare Services Bill, as we will put it up shortly.”
“Chairman, I will address Dr Chia Shi-Lu's second question. At this point in time, we do not look at appeals for MediShield Life payouts. The reason for that, obviously, is the more you get the payout on an individual, that compromises the fund because you draw out from the other persons who have put premiums inside. But on Dr Chia Shi-Lu's point, we can consider appeals for higher MediSave withdrawals or, if not, then the use of MediFund in the meantime. But the MediShield claims limit is being reviewed.”
“We are also supporting our healthcare institutions to find solutions to increase productivity through the Healthcare Productivity Fund. We are seeing some early results. On average, our productivity efforts have saved about 300,000 manhours across public healthcare and community care institutions per year. However, even with innovations in modalities of care and changes in the way patients can access healthcare services with technology, we are mindful that there are certain aspects of care that we should not or perhaps ought not to replace, for example, the human touch. One of our key strategies in supporting productivity is to continually explore how innovations can free up manpower from routine work so that they can go back to the business of caring for patients directly. To conclude, Chairman, the Government will continue to support productivity and innovation for greater healthcare sustainability, affordability and accessibility. We hope that new policies, such as the enhanced CHAS scheme, will encourage all Singaporeans to seek help early and in the community. We will also be helping caregivers to continue to care for their loved ones in the community. Let us all work together and move away from healthcare to health. Help us, help you. With each and every one of us taking good care of our health, we can all be hopefully happy and active in our golden years.”
“Prof Fatimah Lateef has asked for an update on our regulatory approach and progress with the regulatory sandbox. As a regulator, our priority is with ensuring patient safety and proper continuity of care, as new and innovative care models evolve to meet the healthcare needs of Singaporeans. To do so effectively and safely, there is a need to review and replace the current Private Hospitals and Medical Clinics Act. The proposed Healthcare Services Bill, which will come before Parliament shortly, aims to enhance the regulatory clarity as to the types of healthcare services regulated, strengthen the governance of the licensees providing the healthcare services, provide the necessary safeguards to patient safety and welfare, and to ensure continuity of care and accountability. To complement the change in our approach to regulation, we have also launched a regulatory sandbox in April last year to support the safe growth of new modalities of care and innovations within current care services, that is, the Licensing Experimentation and Adaptation Programme (LEAP). Doctor-led telemedicine and house calls were the first services to come under LEAP and, within the last year, we have 11 providers on LEAP. As providers and models mature, we are also encouraging a shift in the services provided, from managing simple acute conditions, such as cough and cold, to more complex chronic diseases, such as diabetes, supporting MOH's "Beyond Hospital to Community" strategy. Prof Fatimah Lateef will be pleased to note, and I think Mr Leon Perera also raised the point about encouraging innovation in the intermediate and long-term care sector, that we are constantly looking at how technology can help us create a sustainable healthcare future.”
“The HCG can be used in either scenario. Secondly, MOM has shared their plans to increase the budget for the Work-Life Grant to allow more companies to benefit from the grant and implement FWAs for their employees. This will help working caregivers to manage their work and caregiving commitments and is a key step to building a sustainable approach that balances the needs of both employers and employees. Third, we will be expanding the existing respite care services. We currently have respite services at our centres and nursing homes to allow caregivers to take a break from their caregiving duties. Centre-based respite services cater to the needs of caregivers who need a few hours off, while nursing home respite services allow overnight stays from several days to a few weeks. To date, over 2,400 clients have benefited from these respite services. We will be piloting a new night respite service with selected nursing home providers in the second half of 2019 to support caregivers of seniors with dementia who experience behavioural and sleep difficulties at night. We will continue to explore new models of care to meet the needs of caregivers. 4.15 pm The Caregiver Support Action Plan complements the already existing suite of services and schemes currently available to seniors and their caregivers. MOH will be implementing the Action Plan over the next two years to better support caregivers and will provide more details on other specific measures in the coming months. Further to strengthening the financial and caregiving support, we also believe that having a reliable healthcare network is fundamental to every successful healthcare system. And this could be achieved through proper regulations.”
“I turn now to address the questions and the cuts on caregiver support. Even as we address Singaporeans' concern over healthcare expenses, we also recognise the need to consider accessibility to healthcare, which is critical for the timely management of the condition. This is especially so for the elderly who needs long-term care, and we must also care for the caregiver. With this in mind, MOH announced a Caregiver Support Action Plan earlier last month to strengthen support for senior caregiving. Ms Tin Pei Ling and Mr Charles Chong have asked what we intend to do to continue to support caregivers. We intend to do more in at least three areas – financial support, FWAs and options for respite care for caregivers. Firstly, in terms of financial support, we have put in place several financial support measures to help defray the costs of caregiving, such as means-tested subsidies for aged care services, the Seniors’ Mobility and Enabling Fund which subsidises the costs of assistive devices and home healthcare items, and the Caregivers Training Grant which subsidises training. In addition, we will be introducing a new Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) by end 2019 as further financial support to care recipients living in the community with permanent disability and require some assistance in at least three ADLs. The HCG replaces the existing Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) Grant with an enhanced quantum of $200 per month. While the FDW Grant helps to offset the costs of hiring an FDW, the HCG provides greater flexibility to help offset more caregiving expenses, such as the costs of home and community-based services, and transportation to medical appointments. In some cases, some might prefer to hire an FDW to help; others might not; it does not matter.”
“This ratio compares the total premiums collected to the total monies required to ensure that the Fund is able to meet both current-year claims and also its liabilities into the future. Total monies required for the Fund include immediate claims payout each year, and the change in required reserves for future payouts. A less appropriate approach sometimes cited to assess the adequacy of the Fund's premiums collection is to compare total premiums collected to total claims paid in the same year. This approach, however, is not a holistic representation as it omits a large part of what MediShield Life's premiums are meant to support, namely, future long-term claims and premium affordability in advanced ages. For MediShield Life, the benefits are outlined in the information booklet issued to all members. Further information about the Fund size, the reserves and the Incurred Loss Ratio is published on the MOH website, and the MediShield Life financial accounts are audited each year by an external auditor and then submitted to Parliament every year. In addition, the independent MediShield Life Council also reviews premiums collection and claims experience amongst others, and thereafter provides recommendations to the Government to ensure that MediShield Life provides effective protection in an affordable and sustainable manner. The CareShield Life scheme design was also discussed in this House in 2018. CareShield Life supports the long-term care needs of Singaporeans in old age. Premiums are paid during the working ages for lifetime coverage should the policyholder become disabled. Similar to MediShield Life, an independent CareShield Life Council will be set up to advise the Government on the sustainability of the CareShield Life scheme.”
“Premiums are priced by external professional actuaries based on established actuarial principles, taking into account scheme benefits, claims experience, and future changes in demographics, utilisation rates and, of course, the costs of medical treatment, amongst other factors. For MediShield Life, the actual claims experience has been close to the projections used in the pricing of premiums. In 2017, for example, our actual claims amounted to 99% of expected claims. But we have to bear in mind that these are current-year claims. As MediShield Life, however, is a long-term scheme, and part of the premiums collected are set aside as reserves to support long-term commitments and to buffer against adverse scenarios, such as a worse than expected claims experience. Further, to help with the affordability of premiums in advanced years, policyholders also pay ahead during their working ages, so that their premiums rise by less in their older ages, when, at that stage, they become less economically active. Quite apart from that, we also regularly monitor the capital adequacy ratio and the incurred loss ratio of the fund to ensure that the Fund remains healthy. The capital adequacy ratio reflects the Scheme's ability to meet its liabilities under adverse scenarios. MediShield Life's capital adequacy ratio for 2017 falls within the range of private healthcare insurers'. As part of our ongoing review of the MediShield Life claims limit, we will also be reviewing the scheme's capital adequacy ratio in tandem with its impact on premiums. The incurred loss ratio of the MediShield Life Fund over the last five years was approximately 97%, sufficient to ensure the sustainability of the scheme but not excessive.”
“We will continue to review MediShield Life coverage for other direct admissions into community hospitals, based on assessment that such admission is appropriate and safe for patients. Second, on bone marrow transplants, patients undergoing an autologous bone marrow transplant for multiple myeloma used to be admitted for the entire transplant treatment. Presently, however, part of the transplant treatment, including conditioning, stem cell infusion and post-transplant monitoring, can be done in an outpatient setting for suitable patients. This potentially shortens the inpatient stays by up to three weeks. To better support these patients in continuing their bone marrow transplant treatments in the outpatient setting, MediShield Life will be extended to cover these costs up to a claim limit of $6,000 per treatment at approved hospitals. This will apply to treatments performed on or after 1 April 2019. This enhancement can potentially benefit over 20 patients a year. Treatment received in the inpatient setting will continue to be claimable under the existing inpatient claim limits. In addition to MediShield Life, we will soon introduce our second national insurance scheme, CareShield Life, next year. Mr Pritam Singh asked for more transparency on the adequacy ratios and the assumptions behind premium pricing for these schemes. As a start, it must be remembered that MediShield Life and CareShield Life are not-for-profit, long-term schemes. Collected premiums and the investment returns are solely used for the administration of the scheme and the benefit of policyholders. There is no other use of these funds.”
“From 1 April this year, MediShield Life will cover inpatient treatments for serious pregnancy and delivery-related complications, such as eclampsia, cervical incompetency and postpartum haemorrhage, under the existing inpatient claim limits. There are a few more of such complications which will also be covered, and the full list will be found on the MOH website. This enhancement can potentially benefit up to 4,000 patients each year. Besides providing greater assurance against large hospitalisation bills, we also regularly review how MediShield Life can stay relevant as the model of care evolves. Let me share two examples. First, on direct admissions into community hospitals which Mr Murali Pillai asked about and raised a suggestion earlier in the House to allow patients who were directly admitted into community hospitals to tap on to MediShield Life and MediSave, similar to those who were transferred from the acute hospitals for continuation of care. I am happy to say that since 15 July 2018, MediShield Life coverage has been extended to patients directly admitted from the emergency departments of public hospitals into community hospitals. Patients identified for such direct admissions have to be reviewed to be in a stable condition with a clear diagnosis, and require a period of medical, nursing or rehabilitation care. Reason for that is because they are stepping down to a community hospital. This is to ensure that patients are appropriately right-sited and care is safe for patients. All patients in community hospitals can already tap on their MediSave, regardless of where they were admitted from.”
“And that is not too different from the median 59 months which is proposed by Assoc Prof Daniel Goh. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh's 60 months was premised on taking it out exactly, but we have to cater for individuals who might require the services beyond the immediate. The amount of MediSave withdrawal has been carefully considered to strike the right balance between the long-term care and other medical needs of an individual, such as insurance premiums and also hospitalisation expenses. Those who require further assistance beyond what I have mentioned can seek help from MediFund, ComCare and the upcoming Elderfund. The long-term care needs of Singaporeans are, therefore, not solely reliant on a single measure like MediSave withdrawals. They are supported, in fact, by a robust long-term care financing framework that mirrors the current financing framework for acute care, which has worked well for us. Let me now turn to MediShield Life, another key pillar of our healthcare financing system. To alleviate the concerns over healthcare expenses related to marriage and parenthood aspirations, we mentioned last year that MOH would review how to extend MediShield Life to cover serious pregnancy and delivery-related complications. These complications could give rise to large bills and become a worry for expectant parents. Mr Christopher de Souza, who raised the point last year, asked for an update on the review. I am happy to say that we have completed the review after consultations with senior clinicians and have decided to extend the coverage of MediShield Life.”
“MediSave withdrawal limits are set to be sufficient for the vast majority of expenses in each healthcare setting, after Government subsidies and MediShield Life payouts, where applicable, are taken into account. For example, for inpatient stays which MediSave is primarily designed for, we set different withdrawal limits to take into account the varying charges and also the different complexity of surgical procedures. MOH also considers the use of MediSave beyond withdrawal limits on a case-by-case basis, taking into account factors, such as the need for more complex treatments, sometimes unforeseen circumstances or complications, and also financial difficulties which may make it hard for the family to pay the outstanding bill. Ultimately, we need to strike a right balance between the present use of MediSave and its role as savings to cater for healthcare needs in old age. Dr Lily Neo asked about the affordability of long-term care and, more specifically, Assoc Prof Daniel Goh proposed increasing the MediSave withdrawal limits for such care. Let me first set the context. Today, around two-thirds of households qualify for means-tested subsidies of up to 80% for intermediate and long-term care services. We will be introducing CareShield Life, which provides a payout of at least $600 per month for persons who are severely disabled. In addition, we also enabled a cash withdrawal of up to $200 a month from MediSave to complement these schemes. Severely disabled individuals with $20,000 balance in their MediSave, can expect to withdraw MediSave up to about 70 months, after setting aside a minimum of $5,000, taking into account other MediSave uses, such as paying for medical expenses.”
“We will also be introducing additional subsidies for CHAS Orange cardholders. They will be able to receive up to $10 in subsidy per visit for common illnesses, such as cough and cold, at CHAS GP clinics. Collectively, we expect to pay out more than $200 million a year on CHAS subsidies. These changes will take place from 1 November 2019 onwards. We will provide more details closer to that date. To encourage more Singaporeans to tap on the scheme, my Ministry is also looking into ways to simplify the application process for CHAS. We are developing an online application, which we expect to be ready by September 2019. It will be more convenient for Singaporeans thereafter to apply and we hope that more Singaporeans can benefit from CHAS. 4.00 pm At the same time, as CHAS helps more Singaporeans manage their chronic conditions at CHAS GPs near their home, we will put in the measures to monitor that CHAS clinics are, in fact, delivering good outcomes. MOH is also reviewing clinical guidelines for care provided at CHAS dental clinics, to ensure that the care delivered is appropriate, relevant and meets the needs of the patients. Finally, as I have mentioned in this House last month, Dr Chia Shi-Lu will be pleased to know that we will continue to review the PCHI criteria for CHAS and other healthcare subsidy schemes, so that the appropriate target group of Singaporeans can continue to benefit from these subsidies. Aside from Government subsidies, we also review our MediSave limits regularly to keep subsidised healthcare affordable for all Singaporeans. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap asked what are the considerations in determining the MediSave withdrawal limits.”
“With an ageing population, we expect more Singaporeans will require assistance to help manage their chronic conditions. Primary care, being the foundational bedrock of our healthcare system, plays a critical role in shifting healthcare beyond hospitals and into the community. We want Singaporeans to be able to obtain chronic care in the community, and to work with GPs in enabling that. We have, therefore, reviewed our financing structure, to better achieve this, with the whole primary care sector and our partner GPs. As mentioned by the Prime Minister at the National Day Rally last year, we will extend CHAS to cover all Singaporeans with chronic conditions. This is a major philosophical shift, as Singapore has never had universal subsidies for GP care, but we believe this will help Singaporeans as they grow old and also allow for a greater anchoring of chronic care in the community. And as Dr Lily Neo puts it, to facilitate the seeking of early treatment as far as possible. This new tier, CHAS Green, will soon be available to all Singaporeans who previously did not qualify for CHAS Blue or CHAS Orange. This would consist of households with a per capita household income (PCHI) greater than $1,800. It will provide up to $160 of annual subsidies for chronic conditions. In addition to keeping primary care affordable, CHAS will be another step towards transforming our primary care system to serve Singaporeans. To better support existing CHAS cardholders as well in managing their chronic conditions, we will also be increasing the annual subsidies for complex chronic conditions for CHAS Blue and Orange cardholders. They will see an increase of up to $20 in their annual subsidies. This means that existing CHAS cardholders can now enjoy up to $500 in annual chronic subsidies.”
“In 2017, the majority of Singaporeans already pay little or no cash after subsidies, MediShield Life and MediSave for their subsidised hospitalisation bills. Seven in 10 subsidised hospitalisations by Singaporeans did not require any cash payment, and eight in 10 paid less than $100 in cash after subsidies, MediShield Life and MediSave. Nonetheless, we must continue to constantly innovate, raise productivity, manage cost and also be responsive to changes in order to ensure the long-term sustainability of our healthcare financing model. Ms Tin Pei Ling has also asked a broad question on how ready an average Singaporean might be, in terms of coping with his or her healthcare cost, especially in old age. Projections on expenses give us some assurance but we have to remember that healthcare costs can vary and can vary quite easily with a myriad of factors, such as personal health management, disease progression trends, medical technological advances and, of course, the effectiveness of our care model transformation. These are, in turn, shaped by the actions of individuals, providers and payers. We, therefore, take a calibrated approach to regularly review and take stock, see where we are, and ensure that our financing schemes continue to be relevant and adequate. We will continue to do so, to keep care affordable and accessible at each setting. At the primary care setting, we have targeted subsidies at Singaporeans who need them more. CHAS enables Singaporeans from lower- to middle-income households to receive subsidies at participating GPs. In 2018, about 630,000 patients have benefited from reduced out-of-pocket medical expenses due to CHAS and are, therefore, better able to cope with their bills, especially for chronic conditions, such as diabetes.”
“Mr Chairman, the Minister for Health has emphasised in his speech earlier our collective responsibility in ensuring better health for all Singaporeans. With a united front, I believe we can do much more, moving forward to ensure that healthcare remains sustainable, accessible and also affordable for all Singaporeans. Let me elaborate on how MOH can help to strengthen our support for individuals, providers and the community in enabling us to achieve this together. Ms Tin Pei Ling asked how can we keep our healthcare affordable and sustainable. Mr Pritam Singh also wanted to understand how we can pay for our hospitalisation bills that fall below the MediShield Life deductible. As a starting premise, our healthcare financing system is designed to ensure that no Singaporean is denied access to appropriate healthcare because they cannot pay. We provide support through multiple and often overlapping layers, each one playing an important but different role. First, the Government provides means-tested subsidies of up to 80% for Singaporeans across all public healthcare settings. In addition, all Singaporeans are covered by MediShield Life, for life. MediShield Life focuses on large bills and selected costly outpatient treatments to keep the premiums affordable. Next, we then have MediSave to help Singaporeans set aside part of their income to pay for future healthcare needs. Singaporeans can also tap on MediSave to pay for MediShield Life deductible and co-insurance. Finally, MediFund provides a safety net for Singaporeans who face financial difficulties with their remaining healthcare bills. Overall, our system has worked well.”
“We are very glad to be working with SkillsFuture and the Academy of Law as well, in having a broader and more diverse mix of opportunities available and supported by SkillsFuture, so that these individuals who are already in the system can upskill themselves and enhance their career opportunities and, overall, lend to the improvement of the legal landscape that we have.”
“I thank the Member's question on mediation. Most mediations – and I think Mr Sitoh Yih Pin's own experience has been the same – are private and confidential for a number of reasons. People choose to look at the dispute from different angles. Mediation allows you to explore resolution of the dispute on means which are completely extralegal on different considerations, such as commercial considerations or maybe confidentiality considerations. So, it might not necessarily add to legal jurisprudence to have those mediation agreements published. But I understand Mr Christopher de Souza's point on those cases where there might be legal jurisprudence and legal merit in doing so. With the consent of the parties, obviously, and the mediators, that can be considered. On Mr Christopher de Souza's first point – and I welcome that because it gives me an opportunity to explain this a little bit more – we do see development in upskilling of know-how, competencies as a very important part of legal development. We have to make sure that our lawyers who come out from law school and those who come out from their practice traineeship are properly equipped for practice. Mr Christopher de Souza knows that we have been looking very closely at what we do with practice traineeship. The Committee has given a very extensive discussion on that. On top of that, those who are already in practice, either as lawyers or those who are now serving a legal fraternity as paralegals or other support professionals, there must be ample opportunity to upskill.”
“We do this through ensuring that our criminal, civil and family justice networks and frameworks are up to date and making sure that persons of limited means have and will continue to have access to justice. Second, on a broader level, the legal framework must support Singapore’s continuing economic growth. This is especially crucial as we enter a season of global economic uncertainty. While it will pose challenges, there will also be many opportunities from these challenges and disruptions that we can reap, if we can leverage our position as a stable and trusted centre for law and businesses. None of this, however, can be done by the Government alone. In particular, therefore, I wish to record my appreciation and gratitude to the many members of the Bar for their numerous contributions to the work of my Ministry. Many have given their time and expertise to sit on our committees, give feedback during consultations, and also collaborate with us on our many initiatives, both locally as well as overseas. I am grateful for their close involvement in all that we do, and I look forward to building on this strong relationship. On our end, we will continue to work with all stakeholders to achieve all of the objectives I have just set out. Thank you, Mr Chairman.”