Grace Fu Hai Yien
Singapore
“The Government takes a multi-pronged approach to address the disamenities from second-hand tobacco smoke. The National Environment Agency (NEA) works with Government agencies, Town Councils and community leaders to promote considerate behaviour and strengthen social norms.”
“The Government recently announced land-use changes in Lim Chu Kang to optimise our scarce land to meet our growing and evolving needs. We are at the initial planning stage and agencies are still working out the detailed development proposals.”
“Public Waste Collectors and Town Councils have trialled the collection and treatment of segregated food waste from households. However, participation rates are poor despite regular engagement and reminders.”
“The quality of incense offerings and the practice of burning incense are not regulated by law. Instead, the National Environment Agency (NEA) works with stakeholders, such as Town Councils, agencies and religious organisations, to encourage responsible burning of joss paper and incense.”
“The National Environment Agency (NEA) monitors public cleaning contractors through regular physical audits and remote monitoring, complemented by video analytics. NEA also regularly assesses the cleaning quality and outcomes of public cleaning contractors.”
“This question has been addressed in the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment’s combined answer to Question Nos 15 to 18 on the Order Paper for 7 July 2026. [Please refer to "National Recycling Rates, Plans and Targets", Official Report, 7 July 2026, Vol 96, Issue 32, Oral Answers to Questions section.]”
The complete record
Every one of 2,293 lines we hold for Grace Fu Hai Yien, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 33 of 46.
“First, this means that fundraisers are subject to basic regulatory requirements, such as the duty to provide clear and accurate information to donors as well as to manage and use donation moneys responsibly. Second, this means that where there is misconduct in any fundraising activity, the Commissioner can act to protect donors, for example, by prohibiting or restricting that activity. We have consulted the public and held dialogues with charity representatives on the proposed amendment and have explained our policy position. Like them, we are mindful of the need to refrain from over-regulation, which could stifle charitable efforts as well as charitable giving. I would like to assure the House that the regulatory requirements placed on fundraisers will be reasonable and fair, taking into account the nature and size of the appeals. We will review our fundraising regulations to minimise administrative burden on small-scale and private fundraising efforts, in particular, appeals for local causes, and exempt them from some of the requirements. For example, we will not expect detailed accounts to be maintained for a small fundraising effort conducted among family and friends for a local cause. On the other hand, charities and institutions of a public character (IPCs), who count fundraising activity as one of their core functions, will be subject to the regulatory requirements of maintaining proper accounting records and keeping fundraising expenses within the specified limits. These institutions, which enjoy tax benefits for their charity and IPC status, have a public duty to ensure high standards of accountability and good governance in managing their charitable funds.”
“The Charities Act, with the proposed amendments, will provide a strong yet reasonable regulatory framework, one that seeks to ensure that our charities are managed by persons of integrity and that the interests and good reputation of our charities are protected. Sir, our regime for the regulation of fundraising appeals for charitable, benevolent or philanthropic purposes, whether conducted online or offline, serves to encourage transparency and accountability of fundraisers. It should also provide effective means to address any abuse. This is to safeguard public interest and trust, so that the public can continue to support charitable causes with confidence. Fundraisers are increasingly going online, turning to social media and crowdfunding platforms to garner support for their charitable initiatives. The reach of such online fundraising appeals can be significant, raising substantial amounts of donations. A recent example reported in the news is the case of a baby who was born with only part of her esophagus and whose parents raised S$1.2 million, largely online, to help her get specialist surgery in the US. It is heartening to see Singaporeans responding generously to these appeals. However, the reach and scale of these online appeals highlight the need for a regulatory regime that promotes transparency and accountability so as to maintain a high level of trust and integrity, including in the online giving environment. The Bill thus proposes to amend the definition of "fundraising appeal" in the Act to clarify and reflect the current policy position that all fundraising appeals, whether big or small, online or offline, are subject to regulation.”
“Sir, with the introduction of references to spent convictions in the Act, the Bill also takes the opportunity to clarify the effects of removals and disqualifications under the Act. First, disqualification will stop once the ground for disqualification ceases. A person convicted of an offence involving dishonesty will cease to be disqualified when his conviction is spent. Likewise, a person who was disqualified because he was an undischarged bankrupt will no longer be disqualified once he is discharged from bankruptcy. On the other hand, removals, unlike disqualifications, are permanent. Sir, I assure the House that any removal by the Commissioner is a carefully deliberated decision that is undertaken with the aim of protecting a charity and its assets. The permanence of removals is therefore necessary. For example, an employee of a charity who was removed by the Commissioner because he was found responsible for mismanagement of the charity's assets would be permanently barred from returning to that charity as an employee, and from holding key positions in any charity. Taking another example, should a board member of a charity with frequent interactions with youth be convicted of having sex with a minor and is subsequently removed by the Commissioner, he would be permanently barred from returning to that charity as a board member or a key officer. This remains the case even if the person's conviction later becomes spent. This is because the reason for the removal does not cease to be a concern even after the conviction becomes spent. The person can still serve or be employed in the charity sector in other capacities.”
“Second, we propose to allow the Commissioner to declare a person as someone whom the Commissioner would have removed from his position in a charity, if the person resigns before the Commissioner can order his removal. Currently, before the Commissioner removes a person, for example, on the ground of mismanagement, the Commissioner will first give the person at least one month's notice and an opportunity to make representations. Should the person resign during this notice period, under the existing provisions, he can no longer be removed by the Commissioner even if there are sufficient grounds to do so. Subsequently, he would be able to return to a key position in that or any other charity. With the proposed amendment, we will enable the Commissioner to, by an order, declare a person as someone whom the Commissioner would have removed if the person resigns from the charity before the Commissioner can order his removal. The order will have the same effect as if the person had not resigned and was removed by the Commissioner. This will better safeguard charities and ensure that they are managed by fit and proper persons. While we seek to strengthen the disqualification and removal regimes, we also recognise the spirit of the Yellow Ribbon Project that encourages the rehabilitation of ex-offenders. The Bill proposes to clarify that a person ceases to be disqualified once his conviction for a relevant offence is spent under the Registration of Criminals Act or if he is granted a pardon for the offence. Similarly, going forward, it is proposed that the Commissioner will not be able to initiate a removal of a person from his position on the basis of a spent conviction or an offence for which he has been pardoned.”
“Next, in this climate of concern about terrorism, the Commissioner is stepping up efforts to counter money laundering and terrorism financing in order to better protect the integrity of the charity sector and its stakeholders. The second proposed new ground for disqualification expressly provides that a person convicted of an offence involving terrorism, terrorism financing or money laundering will be disqualified. The next amendment expands the list of capacities in which disqualified persons cannot act. In addition to the current capacities that are proscribed, the new provision will disallow a disqualified person from indirectly managing the affairs of a charity by holding a key position in another entity which is a member or governing board member of the charity. This is to ensure that the disqualified person will not participate in key decision-making fora of a charity through another entity. Given this proposed amendment, section 28 of the Act is also proposed to be amended to clarify that it is an offence for a person to act in any capacity from which he is disqualified. The amended section 28 further makes it an offence to contravene an order by the Commissioner to repay moneys received while acting in a disqualified capacity. Allow me to move on to the proposals relating to the removal regime. First, section 25 will be amended to introduce a new ground for removal, such that the Commissioner can now remove a disqualified person who continues to act as a governing board member or key officer of a charity despite the disqualification. This enables the Commissioner to intervene should a disqualified person refuse to resign from his position in the charity following the disqualification.”
“Sir, the governing board members, as stewards of a charity, are responsible for its operations and accountable to its stakeholders. Together with the key officers and employees, they have a duty to ensure proper management and administration of a charity, including the proper use of charitable assets. Our regulatory regime should therefore ensure that charities are managed by fit and proper persons who can help maintain public trust and confidence in the sector. The current Charities Act already provides specific grounds to disqualify unfit persons from holding key positions. For instance, a person who has been convicted of an offence involving dishonesty would be disqualified from being a trustee, governing board member or key officer of a charity. The Act also specifies the circumstances under which the Commissioner can remove a person from his position in a charity. The Bill seeks to update and strengthen the disqualification and removal regimes in the Charities Act. First, two new grounds for disqualification will be introduced. Presently, after the conclusion of an inquiry, the Commissioner can, with the consent of the Attorney-General, remove trustees, governing board members, officers, agents or employees of charities from the exercise of their office or employment on the ground of any misconduct or mismanagement of a charity. However, only those removed in certain specified capacities, namely trustees, governing board members or key officers, will consequentially be disqualified from assuming key positions in charities. We propose to disqualify any person who has been removed by the Commissioner pursuant to an inquiry, regardless of his position held in a charity.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the vision of the Commissioner of Charities is to nurture a well-governed and thriving charity sector with strong public support. To achieve this, the legislation governing charities and charitable fundraising in Singapore should provide a regulatory framework that fosters a safe giving environment, where there is a high level of public trust and confidence. Yet, our framework must be balanced so as not to stifle charitable work. Since the Act was last amended in 2010, the charity landscape has continued to evolve and develop. We have therefore reviewed the Charities Act to ensure that our regulatory regime remains relevant and effective to support our vision. As part of the review, the Commissioner consulted charities across the various sectors, stakeholders, such as the Charity Council and our Sector Administrators, as well as the public on the proposed amendments. Dialogue sessions were held with charity representatives to explain the rationale for the amendments and understand their concerns. We are heartened by the interest shown in our proposals and the general support given for them. The Bill before the House today is the outcome of our review and consultation. Sir, the amendments proposed in the Bill seek to better protect charities and donors through the following two areas. First, to strengthen the governance, accountability and transparency of charities and fundraisers in Singapore, and second, to enhance the regulatory powers which the Commissioner can invoke so as to maintain a high level of public trust and confidence in the charity sector. Allow me to elaborate on the proposed key amendments.”
“The National Day Parade (NDP) has been held in several locations over the years, such as the Padang, the Float@Marina Bay and the National Stadium. While the Float@Marina Bay (Float) had been intended as a temporary NDP venue when the National Stadium was being redeveloped, it has become popular among Singaporeans over the years for its backdrop of the city skyline and unobstructed views of show segments, such as the Red Lions, aerial display and fireworks finale. It was announced last October that the Float will be redeveloped into National Service (NS) Square, to commemorate NS and serve as the primary venue for the NDP going forward. That does not preclude the use of the Sports Hub and the Padang as sites for NDP. This arrangement allows the Singapore Sports Hub to focus on developing a year-round calendar of events, such as the International Champions Cup (ICC), while providing flexibility to host the NDP in selected years. This is in line with the vision of our Sports Hub as an integrated sports, entertainment and lifestyle hub for the community and our athletes.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Helping Children with Rare Diseases 6.47 pm”
“As I said earlier on, the Member's intention aside, the fact is that the Member has, indeed, made untrue allegations, and I thank him for acknowledging his misleading statements and also acknowledging his apology to Parliament. Deputy Speaker, I would like to stress here that Members of Parliament are given Parliamentary privilege to speak freely and surface different views, but this must not be misused to misrepresent facts or mislead Parliament. I am glad that Mr Perera has clarified his statement by withdrawing his false allegations against Mediacorp and apologising to Parliament. Mr Perera has, indeed, acknowledged that he has made a mistake in recollecting his facts. I would not want to read too much into his intention whether there was, indeed, deliberate allegation against Mediacorp, but statements that were wrongly made in this House deserved to be retracted if it is, indeed, untrue in this House so that the Chamber, the Members, are able to benefit from the discussion and also to restore trust in one another's statements made in this House. It is only in that way that we are able to have a useful and effective discussion in this House because we believe that what we say here we have a serious basis for them and that we will not make any statements unless we are very scrupulous with the facts that are backing the statements. So, I hope that this serves as a timely reminder for all Members of the House of the high standard of integrity and honesty that we expect in this House. Thank you, Sir.”
“And would he also agree that the allegations that were untrue has, indeed, misled the House?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, allow me to clarify with Member Mr Leon Perera on his personal explanation. Notwithstanding his intention, whether he is deliberately misleading the House or otherwise, does he agree that he has, indeed, made a wrong allegation against Mediacorp?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Maximising Every Student's Potential in Classrooms of the Future 7.00 pm”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to take both supplementary questions together. The short answer is yes. There have been structured programmes to allow our athletes to pursue education as well as skills training in the area of sports, including coaching, sports facilities management and so on. And we are looking at increasing the training opportunities for coaching while they are in the sports as well. So, it is both in Institutes of Higher Learning as well as outside. This is really to provide more opportunities and options for our athletes. Some of them may like to pursue a career in coaching − that is available to them. As I had mentioned in my reply earlier, the ecosystem has been enlarged; we have been investing in development as well as in high performance sports over the years. Also, there are other opportunities, such as in the management of sports facilities, gyms and so on. The idea is to give the athletes options. Some of them may like to stay in the sports that they are passionate about. Some of them may like to move on to other non-sports areas. We would like to see how we can support them better, including allowing them to have part-time, full-time internship, apprenticeship in the area that they are interested in.”
“Besides the spexBusiness Network, there are also opportunities for athletes to pursue a career in their respective sports and continue to contribute to the sports' development after they have retired from competition. Our increased funding support over the years for the development of sport − from the learn-to-play entry level to the high performance level − has enlarged the ecosystems of many sports. This has created more employment opportunities for national athletes to work in the areas that they are passionate about and pass down their experience to the younger generation of athletes. Many of our former national athletes have led the way, such as former national swimmer Gary Tan, who is now the Head Coach of the National Training Centre for swimming, and former national shuttler Jiang Yanmei, who is now the Technical Manager of the Singapore Badminton Association (SBA) and Principal of the SBA Badminton Academy@ActiveSG.”
“The Singapore Sports Institute (SSI) seeks to provide comprehensive support to our Team Singapore athletes, through financial grants, training and coaching, sports medicine, as well as opportunities to prepare for a career after they retire from high performance sports. To prepare our athletes early for a career after sports, SSI works closely with corporate partners under the spexBusiness Network to offer our athletes career development opportunities, ranging from internships and apprenticeships, part-time positions to permanent positions with flexible work arrangements. The Network also organises career-readiness workshops to guide our athletes, as well as networking opportunities with the corporate partners. More than 150 Team Singapore athletes have benefited since its inception in 2013. They include former national athletes, such as shuttler Derek Wong, who has made a successful transition to a post-sport career with Deloitte, and current national athletes, such as netballer Charmaine Soh who is also with Deloitte, as well as archer Christina Gunawan and CP footballer Khairul Anwar who are employed with other spexBusiness partners such as KPMG and MCCY. Today, the spexBusiness Network comprises more than 50 companies across 25 industries. I would like to encourage more companies and employers to step forward to support our athletes, so that they can focus on doing their best for Singapore, whilst staying abreast in terms of their career development. With more companies on board, we are able to support more athletes in their pursuit of sporting excellence.”
“For the vast majority of sports, the respective International Federations and National Sports Associations in Singapore determine the rules and safety protocols to ensure the safety of participants in training and during competitions. Event organisers who conduct competitions under the ambit of these sport governing bodies can be held to account for neglecting safety measures. However, mixed martial arts contests tend to be organised as part of commercial entertainment events owned by private promoters, where the sanction that the sports governing bodies can effectively bring to bear is curtailed. To guide sports stakeholders on safety, the Sports Safety Committee established by Sport Singapore (SportSG) periodically reviews and publishes the Overview and Recommendations for Sports Safety in Singapore, with the aim of establishing a comprehensive approach to minimising sports safety incidents, in line with international best practices. The last review was completed in 2015. The Committee recommended that sports event organisers safeguard the well-being of their participants by minimally implementing a comprehensive risk management plan, conducting pre-event evaluation for participants, and deploying properly-trained medical personnel. Organisers of events deemed to be high-risk are advised to standby additional medical resources. Participants also need to exercise personal responsibility by taking safety precautions, being well-prepared when participating in sports activities, and refrain from participating if they feel unwell on the day of an event. SportSG will continue to work with sports stakeholders to strengthen public education and raise awareness of the importance of safety at sports events to make sports safer for all.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] The Future of National Service 6.00 pm”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Counting from President Wee Kim Wee or President Ong Teng Cheong for Reserved Presidential Election − Policy Decision or Legal Question? 7.05 pm”
“The review carried out by the National Heritage Board (NHB) of its legal powers on archaeology is ongoing. NHB met members of the archaeology community in 2016 to gather feedback on proposed legislative amendments to the NHB Act and NHB's archaeology related strategies and initiatives. Based on feedback gathered from these engagement sessions, we agreed that there is a need to do the following: (a) clarify the ownership of archaeological artefacts recovered; (b) put in place regulations or guidelines governing how Singapore conducts archaeological excavations; (c) report all archaeological finds to NHB; (d) ensure that archaeological excavations or investigations are conducted at an early stage or in tandem with development works where necessary; and (e) protect maritime archaeological sites and artefacts. NHB is exploring legislative changes to the NHB Act to address the above issues and will be organising another session with the stakeholders in October 2017 to seek their views for the various legislative changes, strategies and initiatives that are being proposed to protect Singapore’s archaeological heritage. NHB will also seek feedback on its approach and strategies for archaeology during the public consultation phase for the broader Heritage Plan for Singapore in early 2018. Following this, the final strategies and initiatives regarding archaeology will be announced next year, at the launch of the Heritage Plan for Singapore.”
“Our Team Singapore athletes in cycling did well at the recent Southeast Asian (SEA) Games and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Para Games (APG). For the SEA Games, we won one gold, one silver and one bronze, which included our first-ever medal in women's track cycling, and our first gold medal in men's cycling in 20 years. At the APG, we won one gold, five silvers and eight bronzes, which included Singapore's first-ever gold medal in APG cycling events. I would like to congratulate our cycling athletes for flying the Singapore flag high. Sport Singapore (SportSG) works closely with the Singapore Cycling Federation on its plans to develop cycling in Singapore. Funding has been provided for four full-time staff and two coaches, the use of facilities, as well as overseas training and competitions. Campaign funding was also provided for additional training in preparation for the SEA Games. One of the cyclists is currently receiving the spexScholarship. SportSG also supports the sport through the Singapore Sports Institute, in the areas of sports medicine and sports science. Specialists from the Singapore Sports Institute regularly assess the progress of our Team Singapore cyclists and helped them to prepare for the recent SEA Games. SportSG's feasibility study on the velodrome is ongoing. As the development of a velodrome involves significant investments, such a project needs to be carefully assessed relative to other sports infrastructure needs.”
“The rules on sponsorship at the Major Games are decided by the International Olympic Committee, the Southeast Asian (SEA) Games Federation and the respective organisers, and their attendant impact on the National Olympic Committees and athletes of participating countries are established practices which have been in effect for some time. Sponsors would have taken the blackout periods into consideration when deciding on their sponsorship packages for athletes. The Government does not interfere in these decisions. Apart from private sponsorships, our Team Singapore athletes receive support from the High Performance Sports (HPS) system overseen by the Singapore Sport Institute. Under the HPS system, Team Singapore athletes are provided comprehensive support in the form of financial grants, training and competition opportunities, as well as coaching, sports science and medicine support. In addition, Team Singapore athletes, who are not spexScholars, also receive campaign funding to help them prepare and train full-time in the lead-up to Major Games.”
“NAC also needs to work within the overall arts space allocation assigned by the Urban Redevelopment Authority to ensure that there are fair opportunity and access for the increasing number of arts groups and artists requiring space. Over the past three years, the open calls for available spaces at Goodman Arts Centre and Aliwal Arts Centre have seen demand exceeding supply by three times. NAC has, therefore, augmented efforts to free up spaces by working with arts groups and community partners, such as the People's Association, to explore alternative spaces and venues, such as the recent offering of housing spaces to three arts organisations at Our Tampines Hub.”
“The National Arts Council (NAC) recognises the need to keep rental and maintenance costs for arts spaces affordable. NAC currently offers two schemes to assist artists and arts groups: (a) the Arts Housing Scheme (AHS) and (b) the Framework for Arts Spaces (FFAS). Through both schemes, NAC provides substantial subsidies to defray rental costs. In addition to rental costs, tenants pay subsidised sinking funds or service charges for maintenance which depend on the type of arts housing they occupy. Rental for arts housing is set by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) under Civic and Community Institution (C&CI) rates, and is significantly lower by as much as 60% of commercial market rates. NAC provides a further 90% and 80% rental subvention under AHS and FFAS respectively, so that tenants are only required to pay 10% and 20% of these reduced rental rates respectively. For arts housing spaces with an appointed place manager to oversee facility management, tenants pay a service charge that is also kept lower by 60% compared to market rates, through cost-effective measures like bulk tenders, and NAC or the place manager absorbing any remaining costs. Arts groups occupying AHS spaces also contribute to a sinking fund for cyclical works for the building they occupy. Their contributions range from $0.06 to $0.08 psf, and this rate has remained unchanged for many years. This has helped to cushion arts groups against rising costs. NAC has also provided substantial top-ups when these contributions were insufficient to upkeep the properties. Aside from housing support, NAC takes a holistic approach to enable arts groups to build capabilities and better support their operations.”
“The final manuscript the National Arts Council (NAC) received bore little resemblance to the proposal that was originally submitted. The proposal which NAC agreed to fund was for a historical novel set mainly in 1965, to explore a period when Singapore was trying to find a new identity. The proposed title was "MacDonald House". The final manuscript significantly deviated from the proposal in terms of the plotline and the bulk of the novel was not set in 1965 or the years surrounding Singapore’s Independence. It thus did not comply with the terms and conditions of the funding agreement, and the funding was discontinued the following year in 2011.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Community Sentencing and Other Rehabilitative Options 7.02 pm”
“Mdm Halimah also granted the wish of many Members last month by making wi-fi available in this Chamber. Under her personal supervision, we have made the House effectively barrier-free, accessible and an inclusive institution, and welcomed the appointment of our first Member on wheelchair. Mdm Halimah will be missed by many of us in this House. She has exemplified the principles of fairness and equality, giving everyone the opportunity to make their case to ensure a robust yet civilised debate. Her ability to sit through a long Sitting without a break has never failed to impress us. Mr Speaker, Sir, Parliament is a cornerstone of our democracy. It discharges the roles of representation, holding the executive to account, and law-making. Mdm Halimah leaves behind a stronger institution. On behalf of this House, I wish Mdm Halimah all the best in her next and even more significant endeavour. Mr Speaker, Sir, much work lies ahead of us. We are in an unpredictable global climate, where we must ensure that our people and Singapore are resilient and future-ready. We must continue to debate issues that affect our nation with rigour and objectivity. No doubt, there will always be difficult decisions to make. But let us have the courage to speak out and act for what is best for our nation, to fulfil the duties and responsibilities entrusted upon us by the people whom we serve. Mr Speaker, Sir, we trust that you will preside over the proceedings with wisdom and impartiality. We look forward to your leadership and contributions as the guardian of this Chamber. [Applause]”
“Recognising the threat posed to the safety and harmony of the community, and the need to restore normalcy quickly, this House expeditiously deliberated and passed the Public Order (Additional Temporary Measures) Bill in February 2014. The Committee of Inquiry's recommendations were later presented and accepted by the Ministry of Home Affairs in July that year. In March 2015, Parliament House became the place for grief and remembrance of our Founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Mdm Speaker made the House available to Singaporeans from all walks of life, ordinary people, civil servants, community leaders, students to foreign Heads of State. The nation was united in grief as more than 450,000 people filed through Parliament House to pay their last respects to the late Mr Lee. More recently, in November 2016, we passed the Constitutional amendments to the Elected Presidency after three days of robust debate. These changes will provide stability to Singapore's political system and ensure multiracial representation in the Elected Presidency. Throughout the vigorous and intense debates on the many contentious issues addressed in this House, Mdm Halimah's unfailing calm and measured temperament guided us towards fruitful conclusions. To ensure that this House continued to meet high standards of effectiveness, Mdm Halimah oversaw changes we introduced to the processes and procedures of Parliament. I have had the privilege of working with Mdm Halimah on the amendments to the Standing Orders of Parliament earlier in May this year. This included increasing the minimum interval between the First and Second Readings of Bills so that Members can have more time to study and scrutinise a Bill.”
“Now that you are leading this institution, and have an office here, I hope we will have more opportunities to run together and look forward to a refreshed gym in Parliament. Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the House, I would also like to pay tribute to your predecessor, Mdm Halimah Yacob. Mdm Halimah was first elected as the Speaker of the Parliament of Singapore at its 12th Parliament and re-elected at the 13th Parliament. She advanced gender equality by being the first female Speaker of Parliament and is now taking strides towards the highest office of the country. I am sure all Members will agree that Mdm Halimah discharged her functions fairly, impartially and fully upheld the best traditions of this House. With tenacity and patience and without fear or favour, Mdm Halimah moved the proceedings of this House smoothly and even-handedly. She gave all Members the opportunity to voice their views and share their proposals on how we can progress confidently forward as One Singapore. During her term, the debates in this House spanned issues across the social, economic, security and political spectrum. The Population White Paper sparked one of the most intense debates of the 12th Parliament in February 2013, less than a month into Mdm Halimah's role as Speaker. This House debated and endorsed the White Paper, where we called on the Government to adopt strategies towards a sustainable population in Singapore, with a focus on maintaining a strong Singaporean Core and addressing infrastructure demands. In January 2014, the 2013 Little India Riot, the most serious public order incident Singapore had encountered in over 40 years, topped Parliament's agenda.”
“The last two Southeast Asian (SEA) Games under your watch set new records − our best medal haul ever in 2015 and our best away-games medals result in Kuala Lumpur (KL) this year. You wanted to give our young athletes the opportunity in KL and decided to send the largest contingent for an away-Games. And, of course, there was Singapore's first Olympic gold. You engaged the National Sports Associations to know the issues they were facing and supported them to grow and develop our sports talent. And you were there in the stands, shoulder to shoulder with all the Singaporean fans, cheering your heart out for Team Singapore. These qualities characterised your engagements on all issues, whether they were on defence, infrastructure, manpower or social affairs. Your wide exposure to policies from economic to social, infrastructure to heritage will no doubt prepare you well for the wide array of policies and legislation that will be debated in this House. Mr Speaker, Sir, we are, therefore, delighted to welcome you as the new Speaker of Parliament while we will miss your contributions in Government. In electing you to take the Chair of this Parliament, this House places its full confidence in your ability to preside over its proceedings with fairness and uphold the standards of this august institution. I ask all Members to join me in pledging our support and cooperation to conduct ourselves with decorum at all times and respect the privileges accorded to us as MPs. I also have a personal request for the Speaker as he takes on his new appointment. We have been jogging partners along the river and around Parliament.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the House, I extend to you our heartiest congratulations on your election as the 10th Speaker of Parliament. Sir, the Prime Minister has said that you "stood out as the best choice" as the next Speaker of Parliament. Everyone who has interacted with you can attest to your patience and willingness to listen to both sides of a debate. In the years ahead, the many complex and multifaceted challenges facing Singapore will need fair, frank and honest debate. This House can expect a Speaker who will conduct the proceedings with impartiality and enable MPs to serve their fellow Singaporeans in building a better society. Mr Speaker, over the years, you have demonstrated a strong passion and heart for the people. Your sincerity and affable demeanour have given you an exceptional ability to reach out to and connect with people, whether they were heritage or environmental groups, foreign worker advocates, or social service organisations. Across your diverse portfolios in National Development, Manpower and Social and Family Development, one thing remains the same − you have earned the trust of people of different convictions and views. Your capacity to encourage civil dialogue and conversation among people of diverse perspectives will be something that is, as Speaker, central to ensuring we continue to have productive and healthy debates in this House. You similarly earned the trust and respect from stakeholders beyond your work in the Government when you took on the mantle of leading the Singapore National Olympic Council as President in 2014 and helped sports in Singapore scale new heights.”
“Sport Singapore (SportSG) works in partnership with National Sports Associations (NSAs), including the Football Association of Singapore (FAS), to develop their sports. SportSG brings to the table the provision of training facilities, technical expertise for High Performance Sports (HPS), an extensive network of members for grassroots development and funding support. Starting this year, Tote Board is channelling its funding for FAS through SportSG. As with other NSAs, FAS is required to submit to SportSG its multi-year strategic plans for the sport, so that the plans, including desired outcomes, can be discussed and agreed upon. The plans will include areas, such as youth and coaching development, community outreach and participation, as well as football excellence, which includes the review of the S League. SportSG is collaborating with FAS to develop football in Singapore, as seen in the recent merger of the FAS Cubs programme with the ActiveSG Football Academy in March to encourage more youth participation in football. The Ministry hopes to see an effective partnership between SportSG and FAS in developing local football and improving the performance of our national team.”
“Under the Sports Hub public-private partnership (PPP) arrangement, SportsHub Pte Ltd (SHPL) is contracted to design, build, finance and operate the Sports Hub for 25 years. It has delivered a 55,000-seat stadium, 3,000-seat aquatic centre, multi-purpose arena and other facilities. Since the commencement of operations in July 2014, the Sports Hub has played host to major events, including the SEA Games, ASEAN Para Games, National Day Parade, International Champions Cup, HSBC Singapore Rugby 7s and WTA Finals. Given the scale and complexity of the facilities, the project had faced challenges in the first three years of operations. More can and should be done by SHPL to enhance the vibrancy of the Sports Hub, and improve the quality of its calendar of events and programming. As with all major international venues, sustained effort and investment are needed to ensure progress for the project and to build up an exciting events calendar. Sport Singapore (SportSG) is in constant communication with SHPL's management, to ensure that the goals and objectives of the project are met. It has a dedicated team of officers who monitor SHPL's performance closely and holistically. Key members of the team have been involved with the project since its inception and the team reports directly to the Chief Executive and Deputy Chief Executive of SportSG, who have extensive public sector experience. Like many Singaporeans, we have high expectations for the Sports Hub and want to see the Sports Hub succeed as the integrated sports and lifestyle destination that we envisioned. The PPP arrangement enables the Government to leverage the international marketing, operations and financing expertise of the private sector partner.”
“The author received funding under the Creation Grant Scheme in 2010, which supports the incubation of new works. As with all NAC Creation grants, artists and arts groups sign an agreement with NAC upon successful application. This agreement sets out the terms and conditions for the grant. Based on these agreed terms, NAC then disburses this grant in stages. In certain cases, NAC may only be able to partially support projects. For instance, when the artist is unable to meet project milestones that include mutually agreed deliverables and timelines; or when the artist is unable to secure copyright and other clearances; or when the work is assessed not to meet NAC's funding requirements. In this case, the project did not meet the funding requirements mutually agreed upon as the content in the book deviated from the original proposal. Members may want to note that the book has been published in Singapore and is in circulation in bookstores. Beyond grants for specific projects, NAC's support to artists includes facilitating arts housing, professional development, market and audience development, and arts philanthropy. NAC may support an artist or arts group in other areas, even if it is unable to support a specific project.”
“Mdm Speaker, may I beg leave for Question Nos 6 to 11 to be answered by the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Teo in the Ministerial Statements that they will make later today, as well as by the Ministers when the House considers the two Statements?”
“While SportSG’s funding helps the NSAs to defray part of their costs, NSAs are also funded by other sources, such as revenue from subscriptions and competitions, as well as donations from their fraternity and stakeholders. Besides the mandatory annual submission of audited statement of accounts to SportSG, NSAs are also required to allow SportSG to audit their accounting records. If an NSA is found uncompliant with the terms of its funding agreement, SportSG will take appropriate action, such as suspending, terminating or recovering the grant. For more serious cases, such as misappropriation of funds, SportSG would refer these to the Police. SportSG emphasises the importance of robust governance measures through its regular engagements with NSAs. It is the responsibility of the NSA leadership to ensure that the administration and operations of the organisation are managed effectively, in compliance with existing laws and regulations.”
“Among the many sports organisations in Singapore, Sport Singapore (SportSG) currently recognises 63 established sports bodies as National Sports Associations (NSAs). To be recognised as an NSA of a particular sport, the organisation has to demonstrate that it enjoys the support and mandate of the sport’s local fraternity and is in good financial health with varied sources of revenue, among other criteria. SportSG currently provides funding to 45 out of the 63 NSAs. To qualify for SportSG funding, an NSA has to be registered as a society and a charity, as well as meet SportSG’s requirements. Accordingly, it has to maintain high standards of governance and comply with the Societies Act, the Charities Act and its regulations, the Code of Governance for Charities and Institutions of a Public Character, as well as SportSG's financial regulations and other guidelines. In addition, NSAs have to develop multi-year plans with key deliverables aligned with SportSG’s objectives. SportSG's annual grants to NSAs help to support their organisation functions, outreach programmes, training facilities and high performance sports (HPS) plans. The level of funding is assessed from year to year, taking into account its alignment with SportSG's Vision 2030 plans for sport, whether it has achieved the agreed key performance indicators (KPIs), its capabilities in governance and execution, as well as the existence of a sound plan for the development of the sport that is supported by members, among other factors. SportSG does not administer funding to an NSA's member clubs and affiliates.”
“Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for the clarification. Unfortunately, I think when it comes to sequencing Question Time, it is probably more art than science primarily because, very often, we are unable to determine beforehand the length of speeches that Members will make. We run the risk at times, as we have seen in the last Sitting on 4 April, the Sitting had had to be extended to 10.00 pm. So, it is not something that we could envisage in advance or with some scientific formula. But let us put it this way. If we find that there are Questions being piled up and if the rest of the agenda allows us to do so, we will definitely extend the Question Time, as I have done so twice last year. [(proc text) Resolved, (proc text)] [(proc text) That this Parliament resolves that the amendments set out in Appendix I to the Report of the Standing Orders Committee (Paper Parl 6 of 2017) be hereby made to the Standing Orders of Parliament. (proc text)]”
“Mdm Speaker, I would repeat that I think I represent my frontbench colleagues that, indeed, if there is an important petition to be considered or, indeed, if the Public Petitions Committee has yet to submit its report, for example, I am sure we will adjust our schedule for the Motion in order to take in the relevant submissions.”
“If anything, a succinct point is more likely to be more impactful and newsworthy than a meandering speech. Third, we also need to balance the other demands on Members' time. Members know full well that a good debate in the House needs hours of preparation and homework outside. Members also need to remain in touch with different segments of society so that their arguments in the House are grounded in reality. Elected Members need to hear the concerns of the constituents. Ministers need to run their Ministries and formulate policies. If we sit in the House day in and day out, not only will we run out of meaningful things to say, we risk neglecting our work outside Parliament. At the end of the day, after everything is said, we must make a decision and carry on. Robust debate must culminate in decisive action. In the US, a Senator has actually gone to the extent of reading bedtime stories in the Senate to filibuster proceedings. I do not wish to see this House moving towards that state. In this regard, I agree with Mr Desmond Choo's point that this is something that requires Members on all sides of the House to do their part. On policy and politics, we may well disagree and disagree sharply. After all, the very purpose of this House is to be an arena for a contest of hearts and minds. But as Members of Parliament, we also share a common duty to maintain the standing of Parliament as an effective and efficient institution. I hope that this is something that all Members will support fully. Madam, I beg to move.”
“Any petition could come in on the very day that we are having a debate on a Motion or Bill and it would be advantageous if we would have the ability to consider that petition together with the Motion or Bill, as what we have done with Nominated Member Mr Kok Heng Leun's petition. This would allow us the flexibility of including the facts and the views presented in the petition while not delaying the process that has already been ongoing for the Bill or Motion. If the House feels strongly that a petition has to be considered separately by the Petitions Committee, they can always say no to this procedural Motion. May I just wrap up by stepping back, Madam, and looking at the big picture. First, it is important to the Government that we spend time in the House to explain the laws and policies that we propose. The cut and thrust of Parliamentary debate inform the public on the important issues of the day. Accounting to Parliament is something that the Government takes seriously. The Prime Minister's open letter to Government Members of Parliament after the 2015 General Election underscored this. Second, within the House, it is important that we strike a good balance between the different demands on Parliamentary time. Time spent on one item of business means time lost to another. Good time management means we do not have to cut off debate. Good time management means we have time to debate backbenchers' Motions like we did last month. Good time management means we can have more Question Time if need be. Good time management does not mean that Members should pull their punches or mute their criticisms of Government policy. But it does require Members to focus and deliver their key points succinctly and sharply.”
“I give my views as the Leader of the House, but the Speaker has the final say. On Mr Pritam Singh's other issue about removing the 25-Member majority for closure of debate, I would just like to reiterate what the Committee has reported, that this requirement for a 25-Member majority is not consistent with Article 57(1) which provides that all questions proposed for a discussion in Parliament shall be determined by a majority of the votes of the Members present and voting. The requirement was laid down in colonial times. I asked the same question but we could not trace the real background. So, it must have been around for a long time and this is really a housekeeping amendment. The Government has no present intention to invoke that procedure to close debates. In any case, the Standing Order on quorum still stands and that is fixed at 25% of the total Members in the House. And that, by percentage, a quarter is more flexible. It reflects the changing number of Members in the House and, therefore, would be more relevant going forward. Ms Sylvia Lim raised some concerns about the move to include in the Standing Order a Motion to consider petitions together with its related Bill or Motion. This amendment is a procedural one. If it is carried, the petition is considered by the House. Otherwise, the petition goes to the Public Petitions Committee. Either way, the petition will be considered. It is simply a question of how. So, there is no need for a separate debate. In any case, I take Ms Sylvia Lim's point that as much as possible − and I am sure I speak for all my frontbench colleagues − we would like to consider all viewpoints brought to the attention of Parliament. But as Members can appreciate, there are two parallel processes that are going on.”
“Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the speeches by hon Members Sylvia Lim, Pritam Singh and Desmond Choo. First, I would like to make three broad points. The debate today is not about the Constitutional amendments to the Elected President (EP). The amendment process is complete. We had hearings and the report by the Constitutional Commission, a White Paper in Parliament, and a full debate in Parliament last November. The Opposition made its points and the Government responded. The amendments were passed by Parliament and came into force last month. So far as the EP is concerned, there are only two narrow procedural issues − the procedural machinery for an overruling Motion and a notification where the President does not signify his decision on a measure passed by Parliament. Second, in amending the Standing Orders, we are refining a system that has worked well for Parliament, amended and adjusted over time to keep its relevance and effectiveness. Third, the amendments we are debating today were unanimously agreed by the Standing Orders Committee, with both Government and Opposition Members on it. Members were also invited to make submissions to the Committee and had one month to do so. The Committee gave a considered response to the submissions by Mr Louis Ng and Mr Kok Heng Leun. First, I would like to refer to Mr Pritam Singh who raised the issue about sequence of Parliamentary Questions. There is no rocket science involved in the sequencing. If there are a lot of questions on the topic, they get put in front. If a question concerns a topical issue, it gets put in front. A balance is struck between questions from all sides of the House. The sequence of the questions on the Order Paper is decided by the Speaker.”
“[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“In appropriate cases, Ministers will also make statements to the House on important issues outside of Question Time, and Members can seek clarifications on these issues. This was done, for example, during the Zika outbreak last year. I should also remind Members that, if a Member's question is not reached by the end of Question Time, he can choose to postpone his question and request for an Oral Answer to be given at the next Sitting. Otherwise, the Member will still receive a written answer to his question. All questions filed by Members will be answered by the relevant Ministries either in oral or written form. By way of conclusion, I should like to touch on time management in the House. I asked the Clerk to collate some statistics. We are now sitting longer hours for each Sitting. For the 11th Parliament, we sat for an average of five hours and eight minutes per Sitting day. The average for the 12th Parliament was five hours and 40 minutes. The average for this Parliament, up to April, is six hours and 23 minutes. Last month, Members would recall that we sat until 10.00 pm on 4 April. These increases and the absolute numbers are not, in themselves, a matter of serious concern. We have more Members now, and more complex issues facing the country. It is natural that we have been sitting longer. To some extent, we can sit longer if need be and, in fact, I would tell the House that the length of Sittings is likely to continue to increase. But in overall terms, I would prefer to have a focused, meaningful Sitting for a few days every month. I think this would be more beneficial for the quality of debate in the House. So, I urge all Members − participate vigorously in debates by all means, but keep your speeches short, sharp and to the point. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move.”
“The Standing Orders Committee was also asked to consider having Standing Select Committees to consider specific issues. Mdm Speaker, the Standing Orders already provide a number of avenues for Members to take the initiative in raising issues for Parliament's consideration. These avenues are accessible to Government, Opposition and Nominated Members alike. So, instead of looking at having new procedures and formats, I would suggest that Members make full use of the existing procedures. If Members need any advice on the procedures, they can approach the Clerks. Finally, the Committee was also asked if Question Time could be increased. We increased Question Time back in 2004, from one hour to one and a half hours. At times, the one and a half hours are sufficient to finish all the Questions for Oral Answer. At other times, I recognise we were not able to do so. But there are only so many hours in a Sitting day, and we need to strike a balance between Question Time and the other demands on Parliamentary time. There are already instances where the House has to sit late into the night to give Members time to debate Bills and Motions. So, at this point, I do not think it is right to have a permanent increase in the length of Question Time stipulated in the Standing Orders. What the Government will do is to ask the House to increase Question Time on an ad hoc basis if the volume of business permits. Members will recall that Parliament increased Question Time to two and a half hours last July and last October on my Motion. The Government is prepared to continue to take this approach, having regard to the number of questions and the other demands on Parliamentary time.”
“It is better that all the speeches and arguments be kept to the Second Reading debate. But I appreciate the broader point that Members need information on Bills. May I suggest some ways in which Members can get the necessary information. Every Bill comes with an Explanatory Statement, which will provide information on what the provisions do and the broad purposes of the Bill. To some extent, the statement is technical in nature, because it has to explain the legal provisions accurately. But as far as possible, the Attorney-General's Chamber (AGC) will draft the statement in plain English and in an accessible way. I encourage Members to read the statement for more information on the Bill. For amendment Bills, I would like to inform the House that the law drafters at AGC will commence on a project in July to make available tracked amendments against the main Act. A soft copy of the tracked changes will be made available on the Members' portal. The authoritative version of the Bill will still be in today's format, but the tracked changes should make things simpler for Members who wish to go into the legislative detail. AGC will review the usefulness of this facility before making it a permanent arrangement. Beyond the Bill itself, the general practice of Ministries is to release a press statement or fact sheet, which will contain more information about the policy background to the Bill. And, at the end of the day, if a Member needs more information on a Bill that has been introduced, he or she can approach the relevant officeholder, before the Second Reading debate. I know my colleagues on the front bench will be happy to engage any Member before the debate to hear their concerns.”
“Currently, the Standing Orders only permit dissents to be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. Third, there should be a procedure for officeholders to correct any factual errors they make in a Parliamentary speech. The correction would be made by a written statement circulated to Members and published in the Hansard. The Speaker's leave must be sought within 72 hours after the draft Hansard is circulated. This procedure would ensure that factual errors on important policies and legislation in a speech are swiftly corrected, instead of having to wait until the next available Sitting to make an explanation. Fourth, the Speaker should be able to order reprints of the Standing Orders. The powers she would have in this regard are similar to those exercised by the Law Revision Commissioners for statute law. Many parts of the Standing Orders are drafted in very archaic styles and would benefit from some revision. Of course, a reprint cannot make substantive changes to the Standing Orders. Such changes would still have to be approved by Parliament. The Committee also received feedback and suggestions from Mr Louis Ng and Mr Kok Heng Leun. I thank the two Members for their suggestions, which raise important issues. I would like to take this opportunity to explain the Committee's response, and add some observations of my own. It was suggested that Government Bills should be introduced together with Ministerial Statements providing key information on the Bill. On this specific suggestion, the Committee did not think it was necessary. If a Bill is introduced with a Ministerial Statement, any clarifications that may be sought by Members on the Ministerial Statement and the Minister's subsequent responses may pre-empt the Second Reading debate.”
“The increased interval would avoid situations where Bills come up for Second Reading too quickly because the House is sitting for an extended period, for example, during the Budget Debates. In practice, the interval between First and Second Readings would generally be longer − Bills introduced are generally debated only at the next month's Sitting. Third, the Second Reading of Supply Bills can be taken immediately after the end of Committee of Supply (COS) proceedings, even if the usual interval between the First and Second Reading have not elapsed. The heads of expenditure in a Supply Bill would have been fully debated by the House during the COS proceedings, and it makes more sense for the House to go to the Second Reading immediately after COS proceedings are completed, instead of diverting to some other business, or adjourning the Sitting and coming back to the Supply Bill later. On petitions, the Committee recommended that Parliament should be able to consider a Petition together with a Motion or Bill. This would avoid a situation where a Petition on a Bill or Motion is still being considered by the Public Petitions Committee even though the Bill or Motion has already been dealt with by Parliament. The Committee also made a number of miscellaneous recommendations to improve Parliamentary procedure. I outline the key recommendations. First, a Member whose question has not been answered during Question Time should indicate within one hour after Question Time whether he wishes to postpone his question. This is to facilitate the work of the Clerks, who have to circulate written answers to Members who choose not to postpone their questions. Second, a Member should be able to record an abstention in a voice vote.”
“Such measures include Supply Bills and resolutions on certain guarantees and loans. The recommendation is for the Clerk to publish a notice in the Hansard and the Gazette if the President does not signify his decision on such measures within the prescribed time limit. Under the Constitution, if the President fails to make a decision within the prescribed time limit, he is deemed to have agreed with the proposed measure. The second recommendation concerns Parliament's power to overrule the President if he exercises a veto contrary to the recommendation of the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA). The Committee has recommended that procedural machinery be put in place for this purpose. The procedures will provide that (a) the President's grounds and the CPA's recommendation must be made available two clear days before a Motion to overrule the President can be moved; (b) the Speaker must be satisfied that the President's veto was, in fact, contrary to the CPA's recommendation, as required by the Constitution; and (c) there is to be a standard form of words for Motions to overrule the President. The Committee also made a number of recommendations relating to Bill procedure. First, notice of amendments should be increased from two clear days to four clear days. A clear day is basically a full working day. The increased notice applies to both Government and backbench amendments and will give Members more time to consider amendments. Second, the minimum interval between the First and Second Reading of a Bill should be increased from seven clear days to 10 clear days. In effect, this means at least two weeks must pass between the First and Second Reading of a Bill.”