Gan Siow Huang
Singapore
“So, it is both regulatory codes and also review of existing regulations for us to move both new buildings and existing buildings toward higher adoption of solar as well as other environment sustainability measures. On the third question on strengthening our local ecosystem, that is a really good question.”
“Mr Speaker, BCA had conducted a public consultation to review various aspects of the Building Strata Management Act, and this includes the proposal to lower the resolution requirement for third-parties solar ownership models. They are exploring a reduction from 75% to possibly 50%.”
“This year, the Government has set aside $800 million under the Decarbonisation Grand Challenge, to support research and innovation in low-carbon technologies. This includes energy storage systems and grid modernisation.”
“I want to thank Mr Azhar Othman on his comments. I fully agree that data centres, they are energy guzzlers. In fact, data centres are also actively looking for alternative solutions that are more sustainable. Electricity imports, hopefully, if we can get that coming, using renewable energy sources.”
“Speaker, I would like to respond to Mr Fadli Fawzi's earlier question on petrol prices at the petrol stations. Singapore has a competitive and open economy, and prices naturally would fluctuate in response to various factors, including changes in global supply and global demand.”
“It is actually premature for us to give any meaningful and useful advice to companies that may potentially be affected by the Section 301 investigations. We are following up with the US authorities to try to better understand the reasons as well as the coverage of these Section 301 investigations.”
The complete record
Every one of 531 lines we hold for Gan Siow Huang, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 11.
“I encourage employers to factor in the caregivers' past work experiences, their qualifications and skills, as well as their personal attributes, that are relevant to the job they are applying for and to provide fair support to them in returning to the workforce.”
“Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) currently has no plans to commission a study to raise awareness of the character traits and personal values of individuals who disrupted their careers to be caregivers for their elderly or ailing parents. We recognise positive traits, such as resilience and sense of duty, among this group of caregivers. However, we are mindful not to overgeneralise caregivers as they are unique individuals after all, and employers ought to assess each of them fairly based on their qualities and ability to fulfil the job requirements without bias. To support caregivers in returning to work, the Government and tripartite partners encourage the adoption of flexible work arrangements, or FWAs. Having access to FWAs will enable caregivers to work sustainably around their caregiving needs. We have developed resources, such as implementation guides and FWA policy templates, and conducted workshops to guide employers in adopting FWAs. We will also be introducing a set of Tripartite Guidelines on FWAs by 2024, and this will set norms for FWA requests to be requested and evaluated fairly. In addition, Workforce Singapore provides employment facilitation programmes and services for caregivers who need support to return to the workforce. For example, Career Conversion Programmes provide training and salary support to employers who hire and reskill mid-career jobseekers for new occupations, with higher support for those who have not been in work for at least six months. Mr Speaker, caregivers returning to work are a resource and talent pool that companies should tap on to meet their manpower needs.”
“The Ministry of Education (MOE) takes a firm stand against vaping. We work closely with the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) and Health Promotion Board (HPB) to educate students on the harmful effects of using imitation tobacco products, including e-cigarettes and e-vaporisers. In schools, students learn about Singapore's laws and regulations on vaping and the consequences on individuals, families and society. Students in MOE schools also learn to recognise impulsive and addictive behaviour and are equipped with skills to say "no" to e-cigarettes and e-vaporisers as well as strategies for self-control and to manage negative peer influences. The Autonomous Universities (AUs), polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) also raise awareness among students about the harms of vaping and the benefits of leading a vaporiser-free lifestyle. When students are caught using or possessing e-vaporisers, the prohibited product will be confiscated, parents are informed and school-based disciplinary action will be taken, including suspension, or caning for boys. They are referred to Student Health Advisors or lifestyle coaches or are placed on cessation programmes by HPB where counsellors will guide them through their cessation journey to effect long-term behavioural change. Recalcitrant offenders may be referred to HSA which may issue them a fine.”
“This is similar to how each of us needs to take care of our physical health by having a balanced diet, adequate rest, exercise and seeking treatment when we fall ill. Colleagues at the workplace can play a role as well, by providing emotional support to their peers or simply showing kindness and lending a listening ear to those around them. We need to normalise conversations around mental health and mental well-being and remove any associated stigma. This was why HPB launched the "It's OKAY to Reach Out" campaign in 2021 to build awareness and understanding around mental health, empower individuals with coping skills to improve their mental well-being and to reach out for support when they feel overwhelmed. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to acknowledge the efforts by employers, HR managers and workers to implement mental well-being initiatives at the workplace, create a safe space for conversations around mental health and mental well-being and for those in need to seek timely help. Supporting the mental health and well-being of our workers is key to enabling them to lead a dignified and fulfilling life. Let us continue working together to build inclusive workplaces where workers can thrive in, and as part of our contribution to making Singapore a more inclusive place for all. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." (proc text)] Adjourned accordingly at 9.17 pm.”
“This programme provides free access to qualified consultants who can advise SMEs on how to manage safety and health in an integrated way and free intervention programmes such as mental well-being workshops to enhance SMEs' current support. Since mental well-being was incorporated into Total WSH in 2020, more than 62,000 employees have access to Total WSH mental well-being workshops, of which more than 13,000 have attended and benefited from these workshops. Similarly, HPB has a Workplace Outreach Wellness (WOW) package which supports both SMEs and large companies in rolling out broad-based workplace health programmes. This includes mental health workshops and Workplace Health Programmes based on the company's readiness and their employees' needs. In addition, SkillsFuture Singapore funds various courses relating to mental well-being which seek to equip individuals, employers, managers and professionals managing workplace mental well-being with an overview of mental wellness, as well as providing information on how they can better support their colleagues and staff in times of mental distress. Training providers are able to contextualise these courses to suit the needs of the organisation, including the SMEs. Mr Edward Chia would be pleased to know that the Young NTUC WSQ-certified training programme that he mentioned is one of the courses funded by SkillsFuture Singapore. Much has been said about what employers and HR can do to create more supportive workplaces. We must not forget that workers too, have to take ownership of their mental well-being by taking active steps to stay positive mentally and to seek help when needed.”
“Similarly, for the annual WSH CARE (Culture of Acceptance, Respect and Empathy) Awards, the use of iWorkHealth or any equivalent tool to regularly assess the state of workforce mental well-being will be a key criterion from this year onwards. To get more companies to embrace taking care of their employees as a priority, I believe that the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) will be happy to consider the Member's suggestion to include workplace mental health and well-being support in the new framework around corporate purpose for the recently launched new Company of Good programme. On workplace mental health competencies, I agree that the management, HR, supervisors and employees themselves can be better trained to support mental well-being at the workplace. In particular, HR plays a pivotal role in developing mental well-being policies and encouraging workers to go for mental well-being workshops to raise awareness and competencies. Ideally, all workplaces should identify and equip relevant representatives to spot signs of mental distress and common mental health conditions, provide initial support to their co-workers and guide the person in distress to seek professional help. I thank the Member for his suggestion to enhance the Playbook on Workplace Mental Well-being to propose differentiated interventions for different groups of workplace stakeholders. Employers and those interested may wish to refer to the iWorkHealth website for a holistic framework which contains different types and levels of interventions and develop a strategy with interventions that best suit their own context. To support SMEs in strengthening their workplace mental well-being, we have the Total WSH Programme by the WSH Council.”
“These initiatives include having a whole-of-Government hotline for confidential counselling services to provide all our public officers a safe channel to speak to trained counsellors and building a community of Wellness Ambassadors to serve as added support at the workplace. As the Member has rightly pointed out, more can be done for workplaces in Singapore. I echo the Member's suggestion for more companies to regularly assess the state of their employees' mental health, for example, through the use of the iWorkHealth (iWH) tool. It is a free online psychosocial tool for organisations and their employees. This is the first step to identifying psychosocial risks in the workplace by giving an indication on the state of mental well-being within the organisation, not just in areas with potential to cause risks but also in areas where the organisation has done well. The 2022 iWorkHealth results showed that one in three employees experienced work stress or burnout. The customised and anonymised company report allows each participating company to have a better understanding of their employees' state of mental well-being and stress factors at work, which then allows them to implement targeted interventions to address the unique challenges of their company. Since the tool was introduced in 2021, the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Council has been promoting the use of iWorkHealth through the trade associations and our tripartite partners. Several Government agencies have also started using it. As of end-2022, more than 22,000 employees have used iWorkHealth. To encourage greater adoption, companies which adopt the iWorkHealth tool are awarded bonus points that count towards their overall standing to qualify for and win the bizSAFE Exemplary Awards.”
“Mr Speaker, it is getting late and I am mindful of the mental wellness of our Members. So, I will be precise in the reply. First of all, I thank the Member Edward Chia for his continued passion and interest in driving mental health and wellness at the workplace. The Government has recently formed the Interagency Taskforce on Mental Health and Well-being, which is chaired by Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary. Within the taskforce, I lead a sub-group that looks specifically at improving employment and employability of persons with mental health conditions as well as strengthening support for mental well-being at the workplace. We have just completed a series of public consultations on ideas that we are exploring. These include having trained mental health champions at the workplace, raising awareness and adoption of mental well-being resources available and reducing the stigma around mental health. We will take into consideration the Member's inputs as we put together recommendations. I also thank the Member for laying out the economic case for better workplace mental wellness. With the pandemic bringing mental health to the fore and the Government's support through several resources, many employers have started to put in place more measures to support their employees' mental well-being. Based on MOM's survey on quality workplaces, the percentage of employers who have adopted two or more mental well-being initiatives has more than doubled from 16.1% in 2019 to 42.5% in 2021. The Public Service Division has taken the lead by launching a suite of initiatives to better support our public officers.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Education, I beg to move "That the Bill be read a Second time." The Skills Development Levy (Amendment) Bill is linked to the previous Bill in our Order Paper, SkillsFuture Singapore Agency (Amendment) Bill 2022. In the debate we have just had on that Bill, I have explained the amendments proposed in both Bills. Members have already raised their questions and expressed their views on both Bills during the earlier debate, although they are still welcomed to do so now, if there are any additional questions or views. Mdm 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. – [Ms Gan Siow Huang]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“First, by allowing SSG to take legal action against errant parties and achieve a stronger deterrence effect. Second, by protecting learners from being misled into courses through false or misleading advertisements. Third, by enabling the timely and proper restitution of public funds, which ensures that investments from all our stakeholders be it the Government, individual learners, or employers, can be put to good use. My final point is that building a strong continuing education and training ecosystem is a shared responsibility with learners, enterprises, training providers and the Government. I would like to thank the team in SSG for its perseverance and hard work. Through partnerships with the stakeholders, I am confident that we can collectively strengthen the SkillsFuture movement and enable more Singaporeans to acquire the skills that they need, to seize the opportunities ahead. With this, Mr Speaker, I hope that I have addressed Members' questions and suggestions. And with your permission, I beg to move.”
“Mr Shawn Huang and Ms Denise Phua asked about how penalties are ascertained and whether they are commensurate with the offences. The penalties will be decided by the Court, within the limits stipulated in the Bill. As for how the limits are determined, we have referenced the penalties for offences in other Acts to ensure that the penalties in the Bill are appropriate and proportionate. Finally, Dr Wan Rizal raised the suggestion of having an independent body to review and approve enforcement actions. To be clear, it is the Court that determines whether to convict a person of the offence and the penalties to be imposed on a convicted person. As for other enforcement actions that SSG can take, such as taking down a false advertisement, we assess that it is not necessary to have an independent body. Over the years, we have taken concrete steps to enhance the relevance and quality of adult training and education in Singapore. Confidence and trust in the training ecosystem have grown, with more individuals participating in upskilling and more companies, trade associations, sector agencies and unions leaning forward to partner SSG to drive skills development in Singapore. We must and will continue on this path to strengthen our lifelong learning system, involve industry more closely and encourage innovation, and quality in our training. As the Government continues to ramp up our investments in SkillsFuture and prepare for the future economy, it is important for us to strengthen SSG's legislative levers so as to deter errant behaviour as well as to preserve public confidence and trust in the training system. The two Bills will help enable us to do so in three main ways.”
“To ensure that inspectors have the necessary and up-to-date skills, they undergo capability development programmes regularly. SSG officers are trained to leverage technologies and use tools such as data analytics to spot anomalous patterns in support of the enforcement work. SSG also participates in the regular inter-agency forum where public agencies such as the Police share best practices and experiences. Now, even the inspectors need upskilling. The legislative amendments include safeguards against the abuse of these powers. For instance, an inspector must produce the identification card issued by SSG before they can exercise powers under the Act. In addition, powers to require the attendance of a person by written order can only be exercised if the inspector has information that the person appears to be acquainted with the case. Inspectors who abused their powers would be subjected to disciplinary action. The differentiation of roles between authorised persons and inspectors, which Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about, is another safeguard to prevent abuse of power. The role of authorised persons is to verify information provided by persons who apply for funding from SSG and whether the funds obtained have been properly applied. On the other hand, inspectors require stronger powers as their role is to investigate offences. Because their roles are different, we have differentiated the powers that they can exercise. Ms Denise Phua asked whether inspectors can access information stored in the cloud. For the purpose of investigating an offence under the SSG Act, inspectors have the powers to require any person to provide or grant access, without charge, to electronic documents.”
“They would be paid back to the funds they were drawn from so that they can be used for the intended purpose, which is to support upskilling efforts. Mr Don Wee asked whether SSG would obtain feedback from participants on learning outcomes during investigations. As I mentioned earlier, SSG collects feedback on learning outcomes comprehensively and also regularly, from trainees via post-training surveys; immediately after the course is completed, and six months after course completion. Such feedback is to monitor quality and guide the CET sector on how we can improve. The survey is not done in conjunction with investigations and questions are not designed with the intent of aiding investigations into abuse of SSG's funding. However, I will not preclude investigators using such feedback, or indeed any other available data, if they are relevant to the cases. Let me now address the queries regarding penalties, powers and safeguards. Mr Mark Chay and several Members asked about SSG-appointed inspectors, including whether their powers are appropriate, whether there are safeguards to prevent abuse of power and whether the inspectors have the necessary capabilities to carry out their work. I would like to reassure Members that we have calibrated the powers appropriately. Broadly, the principle is that investigative powers should be commensurate with the nature of the offences. The enhanced investigative powers in the SSG Act are similar to those that SSG currently has and exercises to investigate offences under the Private Education Act. There is a robust process to appoint only a selected group of SSG officers as inspectors to exercise powers to investigate offences and their tenure will be subject to regular review.”
“We will do our best to communicate these changes, but the onus rests with training providers to ensure that they, their partners and their staff adhere to the law. Mr Patrick Tay asked how long it would take for SSG to complete investigations for possible offences. The length of investigation depends on the scope, complexity of the issue and the level of cooperation received by the involved parties in the investigation. Nonetheless, I assure Members that SSG will take swift and timely action in its investigations. Following the commencement of the Amendments, SSG will also review the offences to see which ones may be compoundable. On whether recalcitrant companies will be barred or blacklisted, SSG takes a serious view of SSG-funded training providers that do not comply with prevailing regulations. The enforcement actions taken against these errant training providers are published on the Training Partners Gateway portal today, including suspension and termination. Ms Denise Phua and Mr Sharael Taha asked about the extra financial expenditure arising from the Amendments. Together with MOE, SSG evaluates its manpower and resourcing requirements on a regular basis to ensure that it is adequately resourced. We will consider the Amendments as part of this regular review and ensure that SSG is adequately resourced. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim said that the amendments seem to allow for the wrongly obtained funds recovered by SSG to be channelled towards funding is operational costs and that this could create potentially perverse incentives for over-zealous regulation and possible abuse. Let me clarify that any recovered funds would not be channelled towards SSG's operating costs.”
“As I mentioned in the opening speech, there are three elements to the offence of entering into or facilitating an abusive funding arrangement. First, the offenders must have entered into or facilitated an abusive funding arrangement. Second, they must have known, or have had reason to believe, that the funding arrangement is abusive in nature. And third, they must have entered into or facilitated the abusive funding arrangement with the intention to dishonestly or fraudulently induce SSG to provide funding to them, or to someone else. It is only when the first two elements are present and when it is proven that the person has taken steps to help the person or someone else obtain funding from SSG, that the statutory presumption comes into effect to put the onus on the person charged with the offence to demonstrate that he did not have dishonest or fraudulent intentions. It is therefore open to the person to rebut the presumption. The Court will consider all the evidence in deciding whether there is intent and whether all the other elements of the offence are present. I will also add that a statutory presumption is not novel and is also found in other similar offences, such as the offence of promoting abusive funding arrangements through the Productivity and Innovation Credit Scheme. Several members highlighted the need to clearly communicate the changes to training providers. I agree. SSG has existing channels of communications with training providers, including circulars, engagements and feedback channels. SSG intends to have dedicated sessions to explain to training providers the intent and substance of the amendments, and engage them on any clarifications they might have.”
“Since these are administrative lapses, most of the 93 training providers were suspended from SSG funding for six months, without further repercussions. In cases such as the publication or distribution of misleading advertisements, opportunity will be given for the errant party to take corrective action, for example, to take down or correct the advertisement. However, if the facts of a case constitute an offence, or if there are recalcitrant persons who refuse to comply with SSG's directions, SSG will have to refer the case to AGC to determine the next course of action. Ms Denise Phua asked who would be held liable for offences. Where the person who commits an offence is an entity, the existing SSG Act and SDL Act already contain provisions which explain the circumstances in which individuals can also be liable for the same offence committed by an entity. For example, under section 61 of the SSG Act, a director or manager of the company who conspired with others to effect the commission of the offence, may also be guilty of the same offence as the company. Ms Denise Phua asked whether the onus to ensure accuracy is on the advertising agency or the training provider. The training provider may be held liable if the Court ascertains that the training provider had known or ought to reasonably have known that the advertisement is false or misleading or has been reckless as to whether the advertisement is false or misleading. Mr Mark Chay asked whether the definition of advertisements can include what is communicated to potential learners at roadshows. The provision covers advertising materials that are distributed at roadshows. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about the presumption of intention.”
“I urge learners to take ownership of their learning journey, make good use of the available channels to give feedback to SSG on their learning and also point out suspect practices so that collectively we can strengthen our CET ecosystem. Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Sharael Taha asked whether the amendments we are making today will address the underpayment of the SDL owed to SSG. To clarify, this set of amendments seeks to strengthen SSG's legislative levers and enforcement powers against abuses of SSG's funding system. As for recovering underpayment of the SDL which I had previously touched on in Parliament, SSG has contacted all affected employers to reconcile the variances and is in the process of recovering the underpayments. It has also reviewed its processes to resolve future payment issues in a more scalable and timely manner. Mr Sharael Taha also asked about the overpayment of grants. SSG's plans to streamline its business rules and use more data-at-source verifications and systems-enabled checks, to avoid future lapses, are progressively being implemented. Allow me to now turn to questions about how the amendments, such as the offence provisions, will be operationalised. Mr Patrick Tay asked whether taking legal action can be the last resort. SSG appreciates that there are administrative errors and missed deadlines that can occur from time to time. These are not regarded as offences, but areas of improvement to be worked on. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about the outcome of the 93 training providers that SSG had taken action against in 2021. Actually, the majority of these cases were related to breaches of SSG's funding terms and conditions, such as failing to submit the required annual returns to SSG.”
“Companies have also leaned forward to drive skills development, with 25 SkillsFuture Queen Bee companies partnering SSG to uplift skills in their respective sectors. There are now close to 1,000 training providers, providing about 25,000 courses supported by SSG. We are continuously strengthening the quality of the Continuing Education and Training (CET) ecosystem in Singapore. The amendments that we are making today will equip SSG with the necessary powers to take action against errant parties who mislead others or abuse SSG's funding system. I would characterise them as part of our ongoing efforts to enhance our system, which has grown steadily. Faced with a wide array of training programmes, Ms Denise Phua, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Don Wee and Mr Melvin Yong have asked about how the public can verify the authenticity of programmes and provide feedback to raise the quality of the courses. The list of SSG-supported courses can be found on the MySkillsFuture portal and can serve as a reference for members of the public. Feedback on SSG-funded courses is also taken seriously. Trainees who have undergone training programmes are invited to submit their post-course feedback via the Training Quality and Outcome Measurement, or TRAQOM survey. The results go toward SSG's evaluation of programmes. The trainees' feedback will also reflect as ratings on the course listing within the portal. Through this effort, we enable learners, companies and bona fide training providers to have greater confidence to participate fully in the SkillsFuture movement. While SSG uses a range of tools to identify advertisements that could be false or misleading, members of the public may contact SSG directly as well if they have doubts about the claims made about SSG-funded programmes.”
“Mr Speaker, let me begin by thanking Members for their views and support for the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency (Amendment) Bill and the Skills Development Levy (Amendment) Bill. The various points raised reflect our common interest in strengthening the SkillsFuture movement and equipping Singaporeans with the skills to seize the opportunities ahead. I would also like to thank Members for their various suggestions on matters such as tapping more on private training providers and companies for upskilling, accreditation of adult educators, types of training to support and so on. We will continually review our policies and take Members' suggestions into consideration. I will not be addressing them today as they are not directly related to the Bills. I invite Members who would like to have a full reply on these issues to file Parliamentary Questions, so that we can address them properly. Let me now turn to the comments related to the two Bills which cover three broad areas. First, why there is a need for these amendments? Second, how the amendments will be operationalised, including how the offence and enforcement provisions will work in practice? Third, whether the penalties and powers of SSG are appropriately calibrated, and whether there are adequate safeguards against abuse? I will address each of these in turn. Mr Yip Hon Weng and several Members talked about the importance of giving Singaporeans the confidence to participate in training programmes of good quality, while Assoc Prof Jamus Lim asked whether the amendments are born out of an abundance of caution. Over the years, the SkillsFuture movement has been growing steadily in strength. In 2021, about 660,000 individuals and 24,000 enterprises participated in and benefited from SSG-supported programmes.”
“With the increasing pace of change in industries and jobs brought about by automation and digitalisation, we must continue to prepare the Singapore workforce for the future economy. To do so, we need to strengthen the quality of the training and adult education ecosystem, including stepping up our legislative levers. The new offences and related provisions in the Bills seek to enable SSG to better deter and take appropriate actions against abuse of funding given by SSG and misrepresentation of SSG's schemes. This will allow individuals and employers to have greater confidence to participate in training. We will also better protect genuine learners from being misled into taking courses that are of little or no value. This will also benefit the majority of training providers who are bona fide in their commitment to workforce training and skills development. The enhanced measures will also help ensure that investments from the Government, individuals, employers and other stakeholders will be channelled towards legitimate training providers and courses and put to their intended use. Together, these moves will strengthen the SkillsFuture movement and support our effort to equip Singaporeans with the skills needed to seize the opportunities ahead. Sir, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“Offences relating to SSG funding, paid wholly or partly out of SDF monies, will be ported over to the SSG Act from the SDL Act, and will be enforced using enforcement powers under the SSG Act. Offences and enforcement powers that pertain to the levy will remain in the SDL Act. Second, we will make it easier for employers to compute SDL liabilities and make monthly contributions for both Central Provident Fund (CPF) and SDL. Today, employers use the definition of "wages" under the CPF Act, to calculate the CPF payable for their local employees, and a slightly different definition of "remuneration" to compute the SDL payable for their employees. For example, certain medical benefits are currently considered part of "remuneration" but not part of "wages" and, therefore, subject to SDL and not CPF. This can result in additional administrative burden on employers. Clause 2 of the SDL (Amendment) Bill will replace the definition of "remuneration" in the SDL Act with a definition of "wages" as in the CPF Act. We currently intend for employers to adopt the same definition in the CPF Act of what constitutes wages, before applying the respective formulas to compute SDL payable. The computation formula for SDL and the scope of employees for whom SDL is payable, remain unchanged. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the changes described above aim to provide SSG with the necessary powers to investigate and take appropriate actions against errant activities, and to do so consistently across the different funding sources administered by SSG. The Government's continued investment in SkillsFuture is critical, given that lifelong learning and employability is a new pillar under our social compact.”
“To provide SSG with stronger levers to investigate offences under the SSG Act, clause 12 of the SSG (Amendment) Bill enhances SSG's enforcement powers by inserting the new section 57A to empower SSG-appointed inspectors to verify identities of persons reasonably believed to have committed the offence, require attendance, conduct interviews and, where necessary, search for and seize documents or equipment for the purpose of investigating offences under the SSG Act. These powers are largely similar to the ones that SSG has currently under the Private Education Act, where SSG-appointed inspectors are already equipped to investigate offences under the Act, such as publishing false or misleading advertisements. Clause 9 of the SDL (Amendment) Bill will amend the SDL Act to confer on SSG-appointed inspectors similar enforcement powers for the purpose of investigation of offences relating to SDL. We will also take this opportunity to make other amendments to streamline operational processes within the SSG Act and the SDL Act. First, because SSG currently taps on various funding sources, including SDF and other sources, we intend to consolidate offences and enforcement powers relating to the funding provided by SSG within the SSG Act, so that the offences and enforcement powers can be applied consistently, regardless of the funding source. Currently, offences and enforcement powers relating to incentives, grants or loans are set out in the SDL Act or SSG Act, depending on whether the funding source is SDF monies or non-SDF monies. Clause 6 of the SDL (Amendment) Bill repeals the offence and related provisions concerning SSG funding out of SDF monies.”
“However, if the facts of a case constitute an offence, SSG will have to refer the case to AGC to determine the appropriate course of action. By safeguarding those that are genuine in the pursuit of training, we hope to create a vibrant CET ecosystem of quality training providers and programmes, where companies and individuals participate in and will benefit from skills upgrading. Further, I would like to assure Members that there will be due process where SSG exercises these expanded regulatory powers. For example, before directing a person to remove an advertisement, or to refund trainees or SSG if the course is cancelled, SSG will first give a written notice for the person to submit written representations to explain their actions unless it is not practicable or desirable within a reasonable specified timeline. SSG will decide whether to issue the direction or to modify it after considering the written representation by the person. If a person is aggrieved by SSG's direction, the person can appeal to the Minister. Clause 12 will insert section 57H to provide for this. In view of the new offences, SSG's enforcement powers will need to be enhanced. Under the SSG Act today, SSG's enforcement powers are for limited purposes, mainly to verify information submitted to SSG for SSG funding, as well as to ensure that SSG funding had been properly applied by the funding recipient. Persons authorised by SSG may enter premises, take photos and videos, access documents and ask for returns within a specified period. However, these powers are limited and are not sufficient for the investigation of offences.”
“We also intend to give SSG powers to direct remedial actions under the new section 57F in the SSG Act as inserted by clause 12. SSG can direct remedial actions if it assesses a person has published or distributed such false or misleading advertisement; or caused them to be published or distributed. Examples of appropriate remedial actions include removing the false and misleading advertisement and publishing a corrective advertisement as approved by SSG. In addition, to better safeguard public interests, clause 12 inserts the new section 57G to empower SSG to direct training providers and other recipients of SSG funding to refund monies paid by trainees and/or funding provided by SSG if the course did not start on the scheduled start date or ceases to be provided before it is completed. Under sections 57F and 57G, failure to comply with these directions will be an offence. Those who are guilty of this offence will be liable for a fine and/or imprisonment. Lastly, providing false or misleading information for the purpose of obtaining SSG funding is currently an offence under section 58 of the SSG Act and those convicted of the offence are liable for a fine and/or imprisonment. However, SSG currently has to rely on contractual levers and civil proceedings to recover the funds that have been wrongly obtained as a result of such false or misleading information. Clause 13 will insert subsection 4 under section 58 to empower the Court to order those convicted of the offence to repay the wrongly obtained funds to SSG. At this juncture, I would like to make it clear that our intention is not to penalise administrative lapses or genuine mistakes of the training providers that could occur from time to time.”
“A past example of an abusive funding arrangement that is not covered by the current SSG Act was where training providers colluded with several companies to apply for grants from SSG. Individuals were recruited to be employees for the sole purpose of attending a course and drawing training grants from SSG. The individuals' employment was terminated after the course. With the proposed amendments, such abuses will be covered and, hopefully, deterred. Second, clause 12 inserts the new section 57E to set out a specific offence for publication or distribution of an advertisement that is false or misleading in a material way. Subsection 4 under the new section 57E defines a "false or misleading advertisement" as an advertisement that falsely represents that SSG has provided funding, approval or endorsement for a course or its provider when this is not the case. It also includes an advertisement that falsely represents the contents or skill sets that would be acquired through attending an SSG-funded course. The definitions are based on actual cases of misrepresentations that SSG has encountered. For example, courses were advertised to be funded by SSG, accredited under the Singapore Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) credentials or would lead to a government-issued diploma when they are not. This misleads individuals into signing up for unsuitable courses. If left unaddressed, such misrepresentations could undermine public confidence in the SkillsFuture movement. The new offence of "false or misleading advertisements" will allow the SSG to take actions to deter such activities. Those who are guilty of this offence will be liable for a fine and/or imprisonment.”
“To address these issues, the SSG (Amendment) Bill creates specific offences against the abuse of SSG funding, as well as misrepresentation of SSG's funding schemes, SSG-funded courses and SSG-funded providers. These new offences will make the SSG Act a more comprehensive piece of legislation to deal with the range of criminal conduct that SSG needs to regulate. I will now highlight the key features of these new offences and their related provisions inserted by clauses 12 and 13 of the SSG (Amendment) Bill. First, clause 12 inserts section 57B to define "abusive funding arrangement" as one where a person obtains funding that they would not have gotten or higher than what they would have otherwise gotten from SSG. Clause 12 also inserts section 57C to set out a specific offence for entering into or facilitating an abusive funding arrangement. The key elements of the new offence are as follows: (a) the offenders must have entered into or facilitated an abusive funding arrangement which I have just described; (b) they must have known or have had reason to believe that the funding arrangement is abusive in nature; and (c) they must have entered into or facilitated the abusive funding arrangement, with the intention to dishonestly or fraudulently induce SSG to provide funding to them or to someone else. Those convicted of this offence will be liable for a penalty equal to the amount that they wrongly obtained, or would have wrongly obtained and a fine and/or imprisonment. In addition, the Court may order the convicted offender to return the wrongly obtained funds to SSG so that the funds can be used for their intended purposes.”
“First, the SSG Act currently has limited provisions to deal specifically with the abuse of SSG funding. Today, SSG can recover wrongly obtained funds through contractual and civil actions. But recovering funds through civil action can be costly and time consuming. More importantly, it does not effectively deter potential abusers from trying to wrongly obtain funds for purposes other than what they are intended for. Legislative levers to deal with funding abuse cases are thus required. However, today, only funding abuse cases that involve the provision of false or misleading information are covered under the existing provisions of the SSG Act. Beyond this, SSG will have to rely on the Penal Code to prosecute egregious cases of cheating. It is necessary to expand the set of offences regulated under the SSG Act to comprehensively and clearly cover the different forms of funding abuse that may arise. Second, SSG's levers to deal with false or misleading advertisements are limited today. When SSG detects these cases, SSG relies on contractual levers to terminate the errant entity's status as an approved training provider, preventing them from offering SSG-subsidised courses further. However, SSG does not have legislative levers to direct errant entities to take remedial actions, such as to take down or correct these advertisements. If there is continued misrepresentation of SSG's funding schemes and its funded courses, the public could be misled into signing up for unsuitable courses, wasting their resources and effort. This could undermine public confidence in the broader SkillsFuture movement, to the detriment of other training providers as well.”
“Sir, the SkillsFuture Singapore, or SSG, was established in 2016 to administer the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency Act and drive the implementation of the SkillsFuture movement. SSG is also the appointed agency to administer the SDL Act and the Private Education Act. To support the skills development of the Singapore workforce, SSG draws on various Government funds, including the Lifelong Learning Endowment Fund (LLEF), the National Productivity Fund (NPF) and the Skills Development Fund (SDF). In particular, the SDF, which is one of SSG's main funding sources, comes from the SDL collected from employers for all employees wholly or partly working in Singapore, as required by the SDL Act. SDL collections are channelled into the SDF to support individuals and employers to upskill themselves and their employees respectively. The Continuing Education and Training (CET) landscape in Singapore has evolved over the years. More Singaporeans and employers are participating in upskilling and reskilling. The Government's investment in CET has also increased significantly. Hence, it is timely to review the SSG and SDL Acts to put in place tighter mechanisms to protect against the potential abuse of funds provided by SSG, as well as misrepresentation of SSG's funding and SSG-funded courses while ensuring that we continue to support individuals, employers and training providers to further the SkillsFuture movement. With the substantial increase in Government investments in CET, the risk of abuse of SSG funding has risen correspondingly. SSG has come across advertisements that contain false or misleading descriptions about SSG's funding schemes, SSG-funded training courses or SSG-funded training providers. Against this backdrop, there are two key gaps to be addressed.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Education, I beg to move, "That the Bill be read a second time." Sir, the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency (Amendment) Bill, or the SSG (Amendment) Bill for short, is linked to the next Bill on the Order Paper, which is the Skills Development Levy (Amendment) Bill, or SDL (Amendment) Bill for short. With your permission, I would like to propose that the substantive debate on the two Bills be taken together now as they are related. We will still have the formal Second Reading of the SDL (Amendment) Bill to ensure that the procedural requirements are dealt with.”
“I thank the hon Member for the two supplementary questions. On the second one, the exam paper and the erratum were prepared by Cambridge Assessment International Education. Both the exam paper as well as the erratum were printed and issued together to every student at the start of the exam. As to whether this is a common issue, I checked with my Ministry of Education (MOE) colleagues. We had more than 200 "A" Level papers per year; no erratum in 2021 GCE "A" Level; and there was one erratum for one paper due to typographical error in 2020. So, basically, it is not a common incident. For each case, we do seek to be fair to all students. The time taken by each examination centre to clarify on erratum will be compensated to the students, so that they still have the same amount of time that they need to complete the exam paper. 3.00 pm”
“In the 2022 GCE "A" Level H2 Chemistry paper 3, an erratum to one of the optional questions, affecting two sub-parts, worth one mark each, was issued together with the question paper to every student at the start of the examination. During the examination, a few schools sought additional clarifications on the erratum with the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (SEAB). SEAB then issued the clarifications to the erratum and advised schools to give make-up time according to the duration of the announcement of the clarification. This would ensure that students continue to have the full duration of two hours to complete the paper. Cambridge Assessment and SEAB will take this incident into consideration during marking and ensure that students are not disadvantaged. SEAB will also review the management of errata to avoid such incidents in future.”
“Mr Speaker, may I combine the response to Question No 24 by Dr Tan Wu Meng and Question No 25 by Mr Patrick Tay?”
“Mr Speaker, to make best use of the limited land in Singapore, MOE considers how we can adopt higher-rise designs without hindering or compromising teaching and learning. In particular, MOE provides open spaces in our school campuses, to support student learning, as well as healthy social and emotional development. One example is Valour Primary School, which was completed in 2020, with eight-storey blocks. The school has various sky terraces and pockets of open spaces adjacent to classrooms at multiple levels, which allow students to interact, play and exercise. The second level of the school is designed as an open area, with (a) a parade square which doubles up as a play court, (b) a playground and (c) other outdoor learning spaces. Together, these sections form a contiguous space for both formal and informal student activities.”
“We recognise that counselling work is demanding and teacher-counsellors have to balance their teaching and counselling workload. Schools does have the flexibility to reduce teaching or CCA duties for teacher-counsellors to provide them more time to spend with their students if they need to. And training for teacher-counsellors also has been enhanced to equip them not only to support their students' well-being, but also better manage their own well-being. We do that for the school counsellors too. Self-care is also important for the counsellors.”
“As I mentioned earlier on, all our Primary school, Secondary school, Junior College (JC) and Centralised Institutes (CI) schools are resource with one or two school counsellors. And in total, we have about 410 school counsellors deployed in our schools currently. Hon Member Louis Ng has mentioned that this might not be a sufficient number. Actually, our schools can also engage flexi-adjunct school counsellors to supplement their short-term manpower needs and this is at the discretion of the school leaders and management. Overall, about 120 flexi-adjunct school counsellors are engaged in our schools. MOE has also provided further training to over 700 teachers, who are then deployed as teacher-counsellors in our schools to work alongside the school counsellors. Currently, there are about two to three teacher-counsellors in each school and we aim to increase the number of teacher-counsellors to over 1,000 over the next few years. I hope the hon Member and Members in this Chamber take a more holistic approach towards supporting students with counselling needs. The load cannot fall fully on the school counsellors. Instead, we need to look wider at the community support within the school – fellow students, teachers, adjunct school counsellors and outside of the schools, the community partners. Our interest must be to provide adequate and effective support to our students.”
“Mr Speaker, all schools are resourced with one or two trained school counsellors depending on the school's counselling needs. Prior to their formal training at the National Institute of Education, untrained school counsellors are attached to schools to learn from experienced school counsellors but will not be involved in actual counselling work. Beside school counsellors, students are also supported by a network of teacher-counsellors, flexi-adjunct school counsellors, peer supporters and community resources such as Response, Early Assessment and Intervention for Community Mental Health teams and Family Service Centres.”
“For this case which occurred quite recently, NTU is still in the process of conducting its investigation and is also looking at further safeguards that it could consider to prevent such human errors from affecting future examinations.”
“Ultimately, we have to understand the purpose of having examinations, assessments and tests. These are mainly to gauge the students' understanding of the topics that they have been taught and the ability to apply the knowledge that they have gained during the course of their lessons. On guidelines for IHLs to adhere to and standardising the time for students to retake exams, I think we need to understand that there are different types of tests, exams and assessments for different disciplines as well as subjects. Some may be covering many topics, some may be very few topics; for some tests, the students may need a lot of time to prepare, for some maybe modular in nature. So, it may not always be practical to prescribe a standard time for students to prepare for re-examination. On the second point about the lecturers and the staff having to prepare for more make-up examination papers, I believe that our IHLs do work as a team, at the team level and not at the individual level. And indeed, it is useful for each IHL to have its own system and also have some flexibility to prepare for not just the main exam, but also for contingencies.”
“Can I request Dr Wan Rizal to repeat the second supplementary question, please? The Member mentioned that in some instances, the lecturers may have to prepare for several papers?”
“There were five isolated incidents within this period where examination papers were leaked ahead of time, affecting a small minority of the undergraduate student population for the more serious cases. The IHLs acknowledge the additional stress on students when there is a need to retake examinations. Sufficient time is provided for students to prepare for the re-examination. In addition, lecturers and mentors avail themselves to support affected students. Students who require more assistance can also turn to para-counsellors or professional counsellors in the IHLs.”
“Members have asked about the recent premature online release of a NTU test paper, what the root causes were and also whether all our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) have sufficient measures to prevent similar incidents from occurring. IHLs have protocols to prevent unauthorised access or premature release of examination papers. These include password-protecting digital copies of the examination papers and only releasing the password to students just before the scheduled examination time, hosting e-assessments on internal platforms with controlled access and storing printed copies in secure locations with restricted access. NTU is conducting an internal investigation into the leakage of a test paper that occurred earlier this month. NTU's preliminary assessment is that the premature online release of the test paper was due to human error on the part of an administrative staff. The individual had failed to password-protect the electronic version of the test paper which was meant for students taking the test online. As a result, the students were inadvertently given access to the questions before the test started. NTU undertook remedial action to ensure a fair assessment process for all students by having a retest with reduced examinable topics and extended counselling support to affected students. NTU takes this matter seriously and is reviewing its internal protocol and staff training to prevent recurrence of a similar incident. Dr Tan had filed a Parliamentary Question for the 29 November Sitting and asked whether there had been similar occurrences over the past three years.”
“Mr Speaker, may I take Question No 16 by Dr Wan Rizal, Question No 17 by Ms Joan Pereira in today's Order Paper, as well as Parliamentary Question by Dr Tan Wu Meng1 for tomorrow's Sitting, which are all on the same subject?”
“I thank the Member for the two supplementary questions. On the first question, certainly, we will continue to look for ways, including conducting surveys and also giving reassurance to migrant workers to report and also to allow the detection capabilities to be improved. Secondly, on why the number of employers who were found guilty seems to be relatively low compared to the number of reports made, it is actually the norm for a small proportion of complaints to be taken up for investigation. The complainants may not have the full facts, which are only surfaced upon investigation by MOM. We have to be fair to employers, too. So, we have to go deep into the facts and find evidence before we can take actions against employers. A complainant who sees a shop full of foreigners may not be aware that there are actually locals working backend or offsite. In such cases, there is no infringement committed and no enforcement action taken. In recent years, MOM has used data-mining capabilities to strengthen evidence gathering and enable MOM to take action against errant employers.”
“From 2015 to 2021, MOM received about 660 reports per year on firms inflating their foreign worker quota by making CPF contributions to locals who are not working for the firm, otherwise known as "phantom workers". Administrative financial penalties were issued against 11 employers per year over this period. The median penalty was $15,000 and the penalties ranged from $1,250 to $200,000. Other enforcement actions taken included issuing cautions, directions to rectify breaches and debarment from hiring migrant workers. MOM investigates all reports received and generates investigation leads through data analytics. We also conduct no-notice enforcement checks. We will continue to monitor the effectiveness of our measures and review them where necessary.”
“The Singapore International School in Hong Kong was set up in the 1990s at a time when there were many Singaporean adults who were working in Hong Kong with a sizeable number of children who wanted to have a Singapore-style and Singapore curriculum type of education there. MOE then extended assistance to the community in Hong Kong so that this would ease the Singaporean students' integration into our education system when they return to Singapore. We look at the demand and while there are many Singaporeans working overseas in many large cities, we understand that not all are staying in the same place and some cities are large. Secondly, not all parents want a Singapore-style and Singapore curriculum type of education for their children. A lot of the consideration is driven by the demand from the parents. And, of course, we also consider the resources needed, the resources in terms of educators as well as funding, that have to be made available to these international schools.”
“The subsidy given to Singaporean students in the Singapore International School in Hong Kong is an absolute quantum. It is used for them to offset part of the school fees.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, MOE provides funding and teaching support to the Singapore International School in Hong Kong (SISHK).”
“MOE and SportSG have regular meetings, where we discuss the outcomes desired of the CCA programmes. That is where we get SportSG to design the CCAs to suit the learning needs and development outcomes that we want of our students. I thank the Member, Mr Mark Chay, for agreeing with us that what we are trying to do, really, is to provide more options and opportunities for our students to be able to pursue arts as well as sports.”
“On the first question, indeed, we would like to extend SP-CCA to more activities in sports and the arts. At the end of the day, we want to allow our students with different talent to be able to flourish and develop their talent. We also note that the students themselves need to indicate their preferences, need to be able to travel outside of their schools. We know that for some of our students, they want to do CCAs within their own schools so that they can be with their friends, so that they can play sports and do activities with people whom they know. So, the SP-CCA is actually an add-on, an additional channel for our students who have the passion to pursue sports and the arts that are not offered by their schools, or for various reasons, to be able to do so. So, the main consideration is our students' preferences and their passion. We cannot force the students to go for sports and arts, just because we think it is strategic and it is something that we want them to be good at. At the end of the day, we have to respect the students' choices. I did not quite get the Member's second question. Can you repeat that please, Mr Mark Chay?”
“Mr Speaker, the Strategic Partnership Co-Curricular Activity (SP-CCA) is a partnership between MOE, Sport Singapore (SportSG) and the National Arts Council (NAC) to enable Secondary school students from different schools to come together to pursue their interest in sports and arts beyond what is offered at their schools. SP-CCA started in 2019, with athletics and ethnic dance. The programme had to be redesigned into a hybrid format during the COVID-19 pandemic to minimise inter-school interactions for safety of our students. Resuming in-person activities this year, the programme has expanded to include a new team sport in water polo. SP-CCA has been offered to Secondary school students who are older and who can make their way to practice venues outside their schools. MOE will monitor the programme and consider the extension to other levels and areas in sports and the arts. The SP-CCA athletics and water polo programmes leverage the expertise provided by SportSG. MOE will continue to work closely with our partners to explore how the National Sports Associations might be involved in future.”