He Ting Ru
Singapore
“When our researchers develop AI system that work across Southeast Asian languages, we create tools that can be deployed in our own service sectors, our hospitals, our schools. When our companies lead in AI adoption, we generate demand for new skills, new roles and new industries that our workers can be trained into.”
“Thank you, Sir. I would like to ask the Minister for further colour about the longitudinal tracking of bullying incidents, as in my Parliamentary Question, both in terms of perpetrators and how does the Ministry actually track that.”
“Mr Speaker, while I am supportive of the Government's zero tolerance approach towards stamping out vapes, we should also be holistic and mindful of the socio-economic and even possibly psychological undercurrents that give rise to vaping.”
“With decisions like periodic increases to tobacco duties, I hope we are seeking to maximise the sin tax impact instead of considering its revenue impact. Similarly, we should be doing more to curb the health impacts of public smoking, for instance, by tackling smoking while walking.”
“Sir, I would like to once again thank our Parliamentary staff for their work in ensuring the smooth running of the various functions of our Parliament. And with that I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“For instance, during a debate on the Online Safety Bill, we proposed that OSC submit annual reports detailing the number and categories of reports received, directions issued and findings of online harms trends.”
The complete record
Every one of 636 lines we hold for He Ting Ru, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 13.
“Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. I refer to the urban heat vulnerability analysis report, published in June 2020 by Cooling Singapore, which is quite a detailed first stage analysis, I understand. A report where they stated that further research is being done, especially in relation to the regional effect of heat. This report states that climate change intensifies not only the urban heat island effect, but also causes health, social and economic challenges. So, I would like to know, in terms of these cross-Ministerial, whole-of-Government issues, which Ministry or agency is responsible for leading the cross-agency plans and coordination to address these challenges? One of my supplementary questions would be what are the efforts to raise awareness of heat injuries in groups, such as the elderly, parents of young children and people who work outdoors more, because obviously these groups are more exposed to the heat, which will only intensify as the years go on? Again, I refer to India's Heat Action Plan, for example, which identifies high-risk populations and groups, and increases outreach and communications about the dangers of increased heat to these groups. So, I am just wondering, maybe this is something that MSE would be working together with MOH on? I would like to ask whether the Ministers are able to share more information about this at this stage. Finally, I have one question for MND, in particular. I noticed that in the report that I quoted earlier from, the urban heat vulnerability analysis report, there was a segment where there was some analysis and studies done on access to cooler indoor spaces —”
“This is where public education is crucial in helping the public to understand the important role played by defence counsel, and by extension, Public Defenders. After all, defence lawyers are there to, amongst others, ensure that an accused person is innocent until proven guilty, understands the charges being brought against him and safeguards the due process of law while an accused person's case is being brought before the courts. It is also helpful to note at this point, that Public Defenders are officers of the Court. They are also Public Officers pursuant to clause 3 of the Bill. This means that they both have duties to the Court and also to the public. Public Officers are expected to uphold values of integrity, service and excellence and are governed by a code of conduct. Ensuring that the public are aware of these duties and codes which Public Defenders are bound by will be key in convincing the public about the necessity of the PDO. The PDO must thus ensure that its conduct is exemplary, standing up to intense scrutiny and that it provides an accused person of a proper defence. While I have touched on some areas of concern and asked for some clarifications in my speech today, it does not take away that the formation of the PDO by the Ministry is a positive development. A strong PDO would only further aid in ensuring that the robust house of justice continues to endure. I support the Bill.”
“What may, however, warrant more attention is the concern raised by the Criminal Bar in the past, that they sometimes feel like they are battling a perception that criminal work plays second fiddle to civil and commercial matters and that they struggle to attract lawyers into their field. While the Ministry has previously stated that the PDO hopes to recruit across a mixture of backgrounds, what is its specific plans to address the concerns raised by the criminal bar and could the Minister elaborate on what will be done to ensure that talented young and mid-career lawyers would consider public defence and even private criminal defence work as their first choice. Are there plans for officers in the Legal Service to be rotated into the PDO to allow greater exposure to the work that public defence entails? If so, what safeguards would there be in place to ensure that any information obtained by a Public Defender is safeguarded from unauthorised use or disclosure if the officer is subsequently reassigned or rotated into another office, such as that of the Public Prosecutor's office. After all, Public Prosecutors are responsible for bringing cases against accused persons and thus represent the other side of the coin in the criminal justice system. To round up, I would like to touch on the important principle of justice being kept accessible and comprehensible. This was a key point of our Motion raised in November 2020 and all of us would agree that in order to maintain confidence in our judicial system, justice must be done and also must be seen to be done. There will be questions from the public about whether public funds should be expanded to fund a Public Defender's Office, especially in the case where the accused person is, in fact, guilty of a crime.”
“Next, moving onto the decisions themselves, relating to whether or not an applicant is granted access to aid under the PDO, the Bill provides that the CPD has the power to issue a grant of aid to an applicant, provided he has satisfied, that they meet the requirements as outlined in clause 12. The CPD's decision would be final, except in circumstances under clause 12(7), where the Minister may overwrite the decision. This approach is in contrast against the case of solicitors who are excluded or removed from a panel by the CPD. In the event that the solicitor is aggrieved by the CPD's decision, they may apply to the general division of the High Court under clause 5(2) to appeal against such a decision. While there may be reasons for this different approach, we should consider having a formal appeals mechanism for an accused person to appeal against the CPD's decision not to grant them aid for greater certainty. This would also further enhance public confidence in the office. This appeal process could take on the form of an appeals panel of solicitors to review the decision. Moving on to a more general point about the criminal legal landscape in general and the impact that the PDO would have on it, part of the concern about the formation of the PDO was that this would adversely affect the livelihoods of current criminal defence practitioners. I do not believe this should be the case, however, as the PDO has been primarily designed to expand legal representation to accused persons who do not currently have the means to appoint counsel to represent them to minimise the possibility of this happening.”
“There is concern that although there are reasons for this exemption, this ultimately compromises the client-attorney relationship or it would be seen to be compromised by the clients who may then be reticent in providing full and frank disclosure to their solicitor. While the Bill does make it clear about the circumstances under which such disclosure may occur, namely, when deciding whether to refuse an application for criminal defence aid, to vary or cancel a grant of aid or to determine whether there are merits to an application for criminal defence aid, would it be possible to have more explicit guidelines as to what types of privileged information may be disclosable to the CPD and to ensure that the clients either consent to such disclosure or know exactly what may be disclosed and under what circumstances such disclosure will take place. Perhaps, to allay concerns, it could also be made explicit that any such information that is necessary to be disclosed will remain strictly confidential and not disclosed to any other third parties. Second, on the scope coverage. Clause 12(1)(b) of the Bill states that only Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents are eligible to apply to the PDO. As cases such as Parti Liyani's has shown, a sizeable proportion of the more vulnerable parts of our society include Work Pass holders. These individuals would continue to rely on the goodwill of lawyers to act pro bono if they do not have the financial resources to engage a criminal defence lawyer. While we understand that at this early stage of setting up the PDO, it would be prudent to limit its scope until the exact expenditure is known, would the Government be considering at some point, expanding coverage to long-term residents, albeit subject to more stringent criteria?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, while speaking during the Private Member's Motion on Justice for All raised by my colleague, Ms Sylvia Lim in November 2020, I talked about the importance of having the house of justice possessing strong pillars to ensure that just outcomes are delivered for those guilty of crimes, but also for those who are innocent. Like many other countries, we continue to work to ensure that accused persons from vulnerable backgrounds do not end up being further disadvantaged, particularly because they cannot afford to be legally represented in the criminal justice system. This is why today's Bill for the creation of the Public Defender's Office (PDO) is a cornerstone in the development of our criminal justice system and its importance cannot be overstated. The idea of a Public Defender in some form or another is also one which has existed in many other jurisdictions for many years. While I agree that we must exercise caution in ensuring the our own PDO does not fall into a situation seen in many other countries where clients abuse the system at both the expense of the taxpayer and adversely affects the credibility of the office, we also must not forget to take on board where public defence systems do work to bring about a stronger, more robust and credible criminal justice system and to take on board these positive lessons. It is in this spirit that I would like to raise some clarifications and questions about the Bill before us. First, I note that clause 4(5) of the Bill states that the solicitor has a duty to disclose information which may otherwise be subject to client-attorney privilege, the Chief PD (CPD) to enable the CPD to perform its functions under the Act.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I just wanted to follow up on the question that I asked the Minister previously. I am not sure whether it was answered. It was whether a review would be held to look into the circumstances that basically led to this early termination of the PPP project. This is really very much in the spirit of taking up learning points to be applied to similar projects in the future, whether it is for a vibrant sports and events scene in Singapore or, in particular, in terms of our negotiation and structuring or usage even of the PPP projects in the future, whether or not there is anything to be learnt from this. The Minister has described that some parts of the project have been assessed to be successful, but, other parts have fallen short. So, I am just wondering in terms of the learning points, making sure that any mistakes are not being repeated in the future, whether this is something that is going to be taken and whether this review and the results would be shared with the public.”
“I thank the Minister for the response on my Parliamentary Question (PQ) that was filed for tomorrow. I take the point that there can be limitations on how quickly the data can be updated because, as the Minister explained, sometimes, there is a bit of a time lag. But given that there is going to be some clawbacks and reimbursement steps to be taken, and also, it probably is quite a stressful situation for the households involved, when previously, they received the rebates and now they are being asked for some clawbacks. I am just wondering are there any steps that can be taken to prevent this from recurring? After all, over 3,000 households were involved. What are the steps being discussed between the agencies to prevent this from happening again? The second point is, the Minister stated that action has already been taken to recover the sums that were erroneously disbursed. I am just wondering is there a timeline for this to take place and, at the moment, how far is MOF through this process? How many households have actually had the amounts clawed backed from them? And the last point: there were 3,166 ineligible households identified. Is there any further action that will be taken to identify whether there are any other households involved in this or is the number of households already taken as 3,166?”
“And as for the timeline, if I am not wrong, on 4 April, I said I had to check my records because the letter that the CPF Board wrote back to me was a physical one. It took a couple of days but in the meantime, I found the copy of the letter that I sent to CPF Board. I forwarded it to you. You acknowledged it to say that you would look further into this. So, that that was that. And that is just an explanation of on the timeline. Thank you.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is good to hear the assurance that the Government will take care of people. But I think the point I was trying to make was that things like these are still happening on the ground. And even though these avenues are available, our residents sometimes come to us and say that they really feel that they have to jump through many hoops, they feel very demoralised. Some of them tell us that they feel a bit humiliated going through the process. The sense that Mr H came to me with, was that he could not afford it. And, in fact, he brought down his invoice, his bill, where he actually struck out the item in question; and he wrote down "delete". I have a copy of that bill. From memory, he said that he went down to the polyclinic and they actually told him that he had to come to his Member of Parliament in order to put an appeal. And the point there was, is there any way where, yes, if the systems are working, if the systems are flexible, do our residents know that they are there? How do we get that message out to our residents, rather than have them feel that we are uncaring, that the system does not work for them, that they had to really work for it, that they have to really be humiliated? This is how they feel. So, this is the point that I was really making here. Again, I was not casting any aspersions on the doctors, on the system. I never said that the doctors told him to cut down his usage or his dosage. Again, like I said earlier, he asked for these medications. Again, we would not go into details because of confidentiality. But he actually asked for these to be deleted because he felt that he could not afford it.”
“For example, we should not see house and care work being the preserve of women and must be mindful of ensuring equal male and female role models are well represented. The rest of us must also do our part and be aware that our words and deeds matter. What we say and do are a reflection of our beliefs. It is, as my grandmother used to say: "sim hor; sia hor; da hor". In Hokkien, "have a good heart, think good things, say good things." I support the Motion. [Applause.]”
“These studies show, too, that women and ethnic minorities tend to experience bias when being treated for pain, and note that, generally speaking, healthcare systems and research have been built around men, leaving women chronically misunderstood, mistreated and misdiagnosed. There is also concern that, historically, women are left out of medical research, which is concerning, as recent research is shining a spotlight on how there is a gender impact on health and illness and that males and females respond differently to treatment. In Singapore, I note that a panel led by Senior Minister of State Amy Khor to advise HPB on women's health was set up in 2012 and that work has been done to promote women's health. It is heartening that there is targeted support for women's health outcomes and progress has, definitely, been made, but I believe we have not enough information publicly about how the concerns I raised above are being addressed in the Singapore context. We must go beyond just promoting women's health but also need to play our part to address any biases and ensuring that the research gap, when it comes to medical and health issues that affect women, is addressed. Mr Speaker, I have covered a wide variety of topics and my colleagues will continue to speak on the other areas that need strengthening and improvement. Before I close, I would like to make one final point about the deep mindset shifts required of us and the comprehensive societal education necessary to bring about much-needed change. We have to go beyond the planned Character Citizenship Education (CCE) changes to ensure that our curriculum and education, in general, make a conscious effort to challenge gender stereotypes.”
“I hope that a task force will look at instituting practices, such as having specially-trained health visitors to routinely call on new moms just before delivery and during confinement, to answer questions and provide reassurance at home in a more relaxed, non-clinical environment as part of the norm. We also should learn from traditional practices like doing confinement and jamu, and retain those practices which promote postpartum recovery and well-being, as these contain, after all, the wisdom of generations of mothers who came before us. Beyond the early days and months, issues, such as mom guilt – where moms feel guilty for having to leave their children with a career while pursuing a career – and bearing a disproportionately larger share of the mental load, must also be addressed. The task force must also consider how to support new fathers. It is not uncommon to hear that fathers often feel at a loss on how to support their wives and that they can feel alienated during the pregnancy and postpartum journey, all the while wondering how to bond with their newborns. This can have an adverse impact on them playing a greater role in bringing up their babies. More attention must also be paid to closing any gender health gaps that may exist. International studies show that in many areas of healthcare, women experience poorer outcomes. The UK's House of Lords had a debate last year on improving women's health outcomes and whether there is a gender health gap. Some societies have seen situations where women have longer life expectancies, but spend a longer period of time in ill health.”
“Despite this rocky start, I was extremely fortunate. For a village quickly grew up around me: aside from my parents assiduously ensuring that I had all the food and nutrients needed to recover in the immediate postpartum period, cousins and friends, who were themselves young parents, also offered all kinds of assistance. These ranged from offers for respite care in various shapes or forms, helpful recommendations and also late-night conversations on WhatsApp as we, together, stayed awake nursing or rocking fussy babies into the wee hours of the morning. One such conversation which shall always remain with me is a comment made by a cousin that she found being a mother was actually harder than summiting Mount Everest! This difficulty is why the development of a child and maternal health and well-being strategy is so important if we are to support women in their motherhood journey. Our focus must move beyond just medical care. It is good to see that efforts announced during the Committee of Supply (COS) this year will provide care for maternal mental health and to encourage support for them at the workplace and in the community. For new mums who do not have a village growing up around them, it is vital that they are given the right care and support in the vulnerable weeks and months that follow childbirth. They should also have easy access to non-judgemental advice and education about dealing with common issues ranging from lactation support, baby sleep advice and the change in relationship with their partners and families with a new baby.”
“It is also notable that discrimination and discriminatory practices persist despite the guidance and counselling offered through the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP). It is why we are still even talking about the issue today, and the White Paper includes tackling discrimination as one of its topics. The guidance approach is just not good enough. We need legislation and policies that actually work. While mediation is an option, there needs to be proper mechanisms for monitoring, investigation, adjudication and deterrence in place. I hope that we will take reference from other jurisdictions to see how thoughtful legislation outlawing such discriminatory behaviour can benefit women and other vulnerable groups. I would now like to turn to a major role that many women play: becoming a mother. When I was pregnant with my youngest, his eldest brother, who was only aged four at the time, came up to me at bedtime and told me, "Mama, I am glad I am not a woman." When I asked him why, he told me very seriously that it was because "it’s so hard to be pregnant". And, indeed, while parenthood brings much joy and growth, I do distinctly recall how lost and bewildered I felt the day we brought him home from the hospital. Having gone through 26 hours of labour and finally giving birth to an almost four-kilogramme baby, I was exhausted, in a huge amount of pain and just felt as if I had been run over by a bus, multiple times. Baby’s constant wails and demands for food also left me frantically trying to find answers from my phone – with my husband being equally panicked. My mother, from a generation who were told that "formula was more nutritious", was also unable to help with the challenging task of breastfeeding.”
“When it comes to representation at the top, having more women in decision-making leadership roles has many benefits and gives young women role models to look up to. A resident also pointed out to me that the multi-Ministerial task force to fight COVID-19 was an all-male affair when it came to the co-chairs and other public-facing figures – which, surely, causes some dissonance, given that the paper itself acknowledges that women are disproportionately more affected by the pandemic. While it is undoubtedly true that we cannot make progress without "allies", I hope we do better at giving women a public leadership voice when we "build back better" coming out of COVID-19's long, long shadow. My colleague Sylvia Lim spoke about this extensively last year and I would like to repeat her call for change to make it conducive for women to step up to the political forefront. Turning to anti-discrimination legislation, I am happy to hear that anti-discrimination legislation will be introduced in Singapore. This move has long been called for by Members in this House and, indeed, is one of the proposals contained in our 2020 manifesto, where we called for anti-discrimination legislation to be formally instituted to prohibit against employment discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age and against Singapore Citizens. After all, legislating against discrimination would make such practices illegal and, presumably, will come with attendant penalties for non-compliance. It would also give our businesses clarity to know what discriminatory practices are, and to introduce internal processes to protect their employees from discrimination.”
“Women and girls experience the greatest impacts of climate change, which amplifies existing gender inequalities and poses unique threats to their livelihoods, health and safety." Such climate-driven inequalities do not affect only developing nations, but also high-income ones, such as Singapore. I also cannot help but notice that most of the jobs in the traditional energy sectors are almost entirely male-dominated. The green transition, therefore, represents a chance for us to ensure that women are well and justly represented in these new "green jobs" and we must work to ensure that the gender gap in STEM skills does not prove to be a barrier to greater gender equality in a low-carbon future. The White Paper, too, would like us to challenge these stereotypes, to push women to take leadership roles and to support entrepreneurship. Indeed, removing barriers to female entrepreneurship will not only drive national economic growth, but also contribute to empowering women to be financially self-sufficient. The establishment of the Singapore Women Entrepreneurs Network by SBF last September is a welcome step to create a community of support for existing female entrepreneurs. Would this initiative be expanded to support budding, prospective female entrepreneurs, with an emphasis on women in traditionally male-dominated industries, such as energy and STEM? Would there also be any special emphasis on Femtech? What about women who own micro businesses with different concerns? And while I am on this topic, and since we are discussing mindset shifts today, perhaps it is also time to do away with gendered terms like "girl boss" and "mumtrepreneurs", which, to me, seem to suggest that there is something out of the ordinary about women or mothers taking a lead in business.”
“There has been more attention in recent years given to the study of the phenomenon of what is known as the "pink tax", loosely defined as producers and providers charging more for the same products and services once these are marketed at women. A study commissioned in 2015 by New York City found that women's products cost 7% more than similar products for men and that women paid more in every industry studied. Back home, a study by the Sunday Times of 10 retailers found women paying more for half of them. It appears that such gender-based pricing penalises women for, well, being women! The scope of this phenomenon and whether it is actually justified warrants a study in Singapore. Women also bear a disproportionate share of unpaid labour, both tangible and "invisible" in the form of the mental load, because it is still usually the woman who is expected to oversee the smooth running of our households. The burden is also on her shoulders to ensure that the children are watered and fed, and that she not only has to coordinate the schedule, but is also expected to take time off work to attend to medical and other appointments of their dependants. The Member for Aljunied, Mr Gerald Giam, will speak more about what we can do to ensure that our unpaid caregivers – both women and men – are recognised and supported. It is no wonder that there are also increasing recognition and data showing that women are disproportionately affected globally by rising costs of living – because they start from a weaker economic position that is exacerbated by all the factors mentioned above. We have, in this House, spoken at length about climate change and its effect on Singapore, yet I note that in an article earlier this year, UN Women wrote, "the climate crisis is not 'gender neutral'.”
“Our efforts at reducing this pay gap must persist until women in Singapore achieve equal pay to their male counterparts for equal work. We also need to ask about what the adverse effect the pandemic and our recovery from it has had on the gender wage gap and the effect of the chronic under-valuing and under-paying of jobs that are traditionally the preserve of women. These include nursing, caring, and teaching. Millions of us in lockdown around the globe found out first-hand how critical these workers are for the functioning and well-being of our economies, societies and families. The real gender wage gap also should take into account the number of women who do not "lean in" to seek higher paying jobs, promotions or careers, due to reasons, such as a lack of confidence, familiarity or just plain discomfort with what is seen as "too male" environments. My colleague, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, will speak more on this. Additionally, the 2020 MOM study asks but does not answer why such segregation exists. It mentions data from two years with a 16-year gap – 2002 and 2018. This does not give us a good picture of the problem. We, therefore, repeat the call from our manifesto that employers with 10 or more employees should be required to report to MOM the gender pay gap for the same job description. This information must be made publicly available, in aggregate form. Only with such publicly available basic data on a regular basis, could we have a better idea of the problem and move to close the gender wage gap. This will help employers increase access to a wider talent pool, enhance the diversity of their workforce and better attract and retain capable workers. Unfortunately, the adverse impact on women's purchasing power does not stop at the gender pay gap.”
“That 41-page long paper was debated and passed in Parliament a month later on 9 February. The seeming haste raises questions about whether the rushed timeline is necessary, or even beneficial to public debate and understanding. An invitation for full and rigorous public scrutiny is one of the key tools for managing and countering misinformation and disinformation, and goes a long way towards dispelling unwarranted and unwelcomed conspiracies. That said, I am happy to see the paper acknowledging that a whole-of-nation approach has to be taken. The Workers' Party supports the spirit of the Motion and the White Paper's overarching goal of achieving a fairer and more inclusive society. However, we believe improvements can be made. My colleagues and I will address some of these during the course of today's debate. To start, the White Paper specifically targets Singapore women. I feel we can do better: the principles and aspirations contained within the paper should form a blueprint of what we, as a society, stand for and what we value, no matter who you are. Additionally, the protections and aims should apply to all women in Singapore, regardless of nationality or status. My colleague Mr Leon Perera will elaborate further on these issues. Moving on to the gender wage gap. The latest publicly available study conducted in 2018 and published in 2020 by MOM showed that there was still an adjusted wage gap of 6%. The White Paper mentions that the adjusted rate has dropped further to 4.3% in 2020, with the unadjusted median gender pay gap being 14.4%. While this pay gap is on the decline, it, nonetheless, still exists and I hope we will go beyond the points suggested in this White Paper to close the gap.”
“Mr Speaker, when moving the Motion on Empowering Women last year, I spoke about how we stand on the shoulders of those who forged the way before us and how we must continue to build on the progress that women have made to get us to where we are today. I spoke about society and the economy at large and how they benefit from greater equality for women. Finally, I talked about the personal: how just two generations prior, my grandmother had to fight hard just to be allowed to go back to school for a meagre two more years before she was once again shut up at home and asked to wait to be married off. I also shared my hopes that my sons would grow up in a fairer society and do their part to ensure that women and girls are not only given equal opportunities to forge their chosen paths in life, but that they will also be respected as equals and see outcomes that are on par with those for boys and men. All these remain relevant today with the release last week of the White Paper on Singapore Women's Development. The Conversations on Singapore Women's Development were launched in September 2020 with sessions taking place through the year that followed. The year 2021 was also designated the year of celebrating SG women with its attendant events and activities. Yet, despite being over a year in the making, the White Paper was released barely a week ago, leaving Singaporeans with precious little time to go through the White Paper and consider its recommendations before the issues contained within are debated here in Parliament. There was just not enough time for my residents to provide feedback on the over 100 pages of its contents. Contrast this with the no less consequential population White Paper which was released on 9 January 2013.”
“Sure. Thank you very much for your clarification.”
“Thank you for allowing me to make this clarification. I have checked my records and notes and referred to a recent case of a resident who came to seek help during my Meet-the-People session earlier this year. I subsequently wrote in to CPF for assistance with this. Due to his medical conditions, he was prescribed various medications for these chronic conditions which, despite the various subsidies and claims of MediSave available to him, he was unable to avoid paying in full as there remained a residual cash payment that he was required to make. He, therefore, hoped to be able to increase the claimable limits by an additional $500 and this was the request that I conveyed. He also said to me that because of his situation, he previously asked for medications to be deleted because he could not afford it. This is also contained in my letter. As of now, I cannot say for certain if CPF has responded to this particular appeal as I would need to access my physical records to check if a reply letter has been sent by CPF. Mr Speaker, this case is a specific example of a resident who made a request to cut back on medications as they believe they cannot afford it, perhaps due to a lack of awareness of the help available or else, a lack of confidence in making the necessary applications and appeals.”
“Thank you for bringing this point up. These are some of the issues that I have encountered during my Meet-the-People sessions. Unfortunately, because I want to make sure that I get the correct information and details out to the Senior Minister of State, I will respond to him at a subsequent point, after going back and checking.”
“Headwinds will be strong and frequent in the years to come, and our people will need to demonstrate grit and fortitude to survive and thrive. The difficult environment we see ahead of us will test us and we should not add further to the financial and other burdens of our people by raising our GST when there are other available options. It is therefore regrettable that we must vote no to a GST increase and therefore cannot support this Budget.”
“Lessons can be learned from the introduction and abandonment of the "Green GDP" by China in the early part of the century. Our impact dashboard could, for example, contain indices relating to our emissions, land use changes, waste reduction efforts and have specific measures on how well we are doing in our transition to a green economy – a topic that my colleague Dennis Tan will elaborate more on. Finally, we need to move from being merely a circular economy – as outlined by MTI in 2019 – to what I think of as a "circular society". This means that while we aim for zero waste in terms of material use and energy resources, we also need to ensure we do not waste wealth, technology and knowledge, have a thriving knowledge commons and a strong culture of philanthropy. The last point in particular is something I note that this Budget aims to promote through various tweaks to tax incentives and co-funding measures. To know how successful the increase in spending has been, philanthropic indicators on the dashboard could include details such as trends relating to donations and the nature of who is donating. As little is currently known about how a circular economy or society can promote better social equity, more research is certainly needed – particularly in the local context. Narratives of a circular society can and should be developed, as the long-term sustainability of our country and planet is at stake. We must stop assuming that infinite economic growth is possible and start shifting towards formally measuring our progress on other things that matter. Mr Speaker, we are indeed at the crossroads, and it will be negligent of us not to put our heads together to figure out how best to chart out a sustainable way forward for Singapore.”
“To illustrate this point, many may not realise that GDP does not measure things, such as planting a tree, and that it does not measure the unpaid household and care labour undertaken by so many of our fellow Singaporeans. Yet, one would be hard-pressed to argue that these do not matter in how we measure our progress as a society. How do we, therefore, determine whether enough has been done to address concerns about, for example, mental health and well-being? After all, it is clear that there is much work to be done in Singapore, judging by the number of registered psychologists and psychiatrists in Singapore, especially in the public sector. There are also long waits to see counsellors in schools and tertiary education institutes, and concerns have been raised about the quality of support received. These are but some examples of what should matter to us as we measure our society and how we measure our holistic progress. Many economists have been advocating for years that countries start developing a dashboard which contains a variety of other measures for how well an economy and society has been doing. Yes, GDP matters, but it does not do well in measuring our human, social and natural assets. A uniquely Singapore dashboard should, therefore, be developed and published together with GDP results. This can contain quarterly or annual measurements of our progress in terms of poverty reduction, social mobility and wealth distribution in an easy-to-understand way, allowing us as a people to understand at a glance what our targets are and the progress we have made or failed to make beyond GDP figures. The dashboard should also contain measurements of the impact that we have on our environment and planetary health.”
“However, with the advent of AI and advances in technology, these costs should be much lower compared with when GST was first introduced and any upgrades to accounting or associated software should be a one-time cost for both Government and businesses. Additionally, compliance costs will likely be of far greater concern to smaller enterprises, and I note too that small businesses with turnovers of less than $1,000,000 are not required to register for GST. How can it be that a country such as Singapore, which has long-prided itself ourselves on having targeted, efficient – even convoluted at times – policymaking, could shy away from implementing a system of GST-exempt items by saying that it is too much effort? Turning now to how we measure our spending and our progress, I repeat previous calls made in this House to rethink the long-term sustainability of how we measure our progress. Since its adoption in 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference as the formal measure of a country's economy, gross domestic product (GDP) has proved to be a useful measure of the progress made by a country. And Singapore has done extremely well from our difficult beginnings. Yet, in recent years, there has been a sense amongst many of us that GDP does not tell the full picture by any means. In particular, healthy GDP figures in 2021 and 2022, especially compared against the depressed bases in 2020, leave out the entire story of our country. There is a growing acknowledgement that beyond economic growth and survival, we should also thrive as a society and be mindful of the impact that we have on our planet. GDP measurements alone fail to address these shifting values in our current world. GDP alone also does not capture the full picture of how we care for our people.”
“Exempting items such as healthcare, infant care and childcare will also help to ease current and future cost pressures in industries that struggle to fill their manpower requirements with local workers. And I note there are stark implications for those industries with the foreign worker policies which are being tightened by the measures just announced in this Budget. Additionally, I note that exemptions applying to children's products and childcare would surely be welcome relief for parents or prospective parents and go towards addressing our low total fertility rate (TFR), as financial concerns are often cited as one of the key reasons why people delay having children or decide not to have them. I need hardly add that raising our TFR is an existential problem for us that we have been unsuccessfully trying to solve for decades. Consumption taxes are regressive by nature. While it is true that exempting essential items from GST is regressive, the alternative of keeping our existing system of no exemptions is likely to be even more regressive. This is because those who are on a lower income spend a far larger proportion of their income on consumption, which is always taxed in our case. Therefore, exempting key essential items from being taxed will significantly reduce the impact on lower-income groups. Additionally, while it is true that higher-income earners also benefit from such exemptions, these items, being essential in nature, should result in any derived benefits being self-limiting – after all, how much more rice can a rich person eat? Another argument is that it is too expensive to implement these exemptions and that this will increase compliance costs for businesses.”
“Notably, politicians in Germany are already advocating a natural gas reserve to shelter consumers from price shocks in the wake of the conflict. All these further underscores the need for our green transformation to take place urgently. The situation is grim in the near-term. It is why the Workers' Party cannot agree to a GST hike – whether delayed or staggered – especially as we believe not all other alternatives have been exhausted. Yet we also acknowledge that there are long-term pressures on our public purse strings, as we search for a shift towards long-term sustainability on all fronts, be it environmental, demographic or economic. After all, the world cannot keep growing endlessly, a fact illustrated by figures released in November last year which have shown that India's fertility rate has dropped to below replacement rate for the first time ever. In view of this, we also believe there is room to make our GST system less regressive beyond the current approach to further ease the burden on the lower-income groups. It is why we have to consider if our GST can start allowing for exemptions on certain essential items – treatment that is often seen in the case of other economies. The list of items should be kept to essentials such as food supplies, healthcare and care services, including childcare. This is what economies, such as the UK, Australia and Japan, currently do and their experiences should inform us as we come up with our own list of exemptions that would be most beneficial to more vulnerable Singaporeans, and to avoid the pitfalls some countries have come across while deciding which items should be exempt and which not.”
“They have also noted that there have already been price increases prior to the tax hike taking effect. Just the other day, I noted during one of my estate walks that a Buangkok coffeeshop stall has put up a sign stating that rising prices have obliged them to increase the price of all items by 50 cents, which definitely far exceeds 2%. Furthermore, global brands such as Nestle have also sounded the alarm and announced that they will increase prices of their products – and these increments will not be captured by any GST Voucher scheme. I fear that the cascading and knock-on effect that such cost increases will be devastating on households already on a knife edge. Additionally, the war in the Ukraine, which has finally come to a head last week, will only lead to more supply chain disruptions and global price rises, and if it proves to be prolonged, it may end up having a far larger effect than predicted or catered for. We will not be spared in Singapore. Already, crude oil has hit multi-year highs of over $100 a barrel and stock markets have reacted with volatility. Food prices will not be spared, as Russia and the Ukraine are major exporters of agricultural products, and Russia is one of the largest exporters of fertiliser globally – any drop in supply would lead to an increase in costs, which means farmers will pay more and have to pass it down to the end consumer. Russia is also a major supplier of natural gas, which has implications for us in Singapore, as around 95% of our energy needs are still powered by natural gas. This will only add to the woes currently experienced by our households and the businesses already grappling with huge increases in their energy bills.”
“Many of them are members of both the "sandwich" class and also the "sandwich generation", and rising prices have and will continue to hit them hard while they struggle to provide for both the elderly and the very young in their families. For these Singaporeans, the concept of inter-generational equity, or intergenerational solidarity, is extremely important in ensuring that one generation does not unduly bear the brunt of paying for expenditure of either a future or previous generation. My colleagues have and will continue to touch on these issues. But while this concept may appear to be remote in Singapore at the moment, I would also note that as we restructure our economy and society, we should be wary of allowing a situation to develop where political outcomes and opinions are, or are seen to be divided strongly along intergenerational lines. This has been seen in the West in the phenomenon of "Boomer blaming" for everything – from Brexit to toxic work environments that degrade mental health, and only serves to exacerbate generational grievances. And we need to tackle this matter in a holistic way, ranging from creating more opportunities and spaces for the generations to learn from and support each other, and to ensure that our fiscal policies do not, and do not get interpreted as unfairly favouring one generation to the detriment of other generations. Coming back to the issues surrounding the here and now, the ever-increasing cost of living is a topic that we hear feedback about time and again. Individuals, households and businesses have approached us for assistance with juggling the impact of relentless price increases. They have noted that a final 2% tax increase means a 28% increase in the amount of tax to be paid.”
“In fact, it was not unheard of for employers to offer "duvet days" to their employees: days off not because they are ill, but because employees sometimes just need some time to rest. These are often structured in a way that works best for their firm or industry, and have been shown to actually increase productivity and the mental and physical well-being of workers. I am not advocating a wholesale copying of these approaches, but I believe it is worth looking at our own labour market to see what positive changes we can make by studying these examples. To those who worry that these practices may result in people taking advantage, I observed that these practices appeared to work well in a highly dynamic, profitable and productive environment, as the common understanding was that people were serious about their jobs and were willing to work hard in order to progress in their careers. Indeed, we cannot discount that the financial services coming out of London remain world-leading and innovative. If the argument that these are the things that could not work for Singapore, then we should take a long hard look at ourselves and ask: "why not?", followed by "how do we get there?". How do we move to a society where people are empowered to exercise good judgement and be truly responsible? How do we ensure that people do not succumb to the temptation to indulge in corrupt practices because it is the right thing to do, and not because they have a high salary preventing them from being tempted? Against this backdrop, I would like to turn to the most pressing problems and issues facing Singaporeans as we emerge from the COVID-19 years. In particular, our residents in Sengkang keenly feel the press of having to deal with lasting financial and social effects of the pandemic.”
“These are real-life scenarios that all of us have seen our residents tackle. And while it is true that many helping hands are available, we are often told that much time, energy and stress is involved in navigating the support system. While these systems are in place to prevent abuse – and quite rightly so – we must also ask ourselves and continue to ask ourselves important questions: who we are as a people and what values do we stand for? Do we want our policies to empower Singaporeans to be our best selves or do we restrict Singaporeans from being our worst selves? As we think about our new way forward together, it is still a key principle that Singaporeans must be self-reliant and we must be responsible. Is this consistent with our laws and policies that are formulated with the assumption that everyone is out there to game the system, on the lookout for unfair advantage for themselves to the detriment of others? Does this approach not build a culture of Singaporeans trying to figure out what is legal or allowed, rather than applying their own mind to what make sense and is reasonable for both themselves and their fellow citizens? Another clear example is the current debate surrounding our medical certificate (MC) culture. The requirement for many employers for the doctor's note for any absences from the workplace due to medical reasons stands in stark contrast to my experience in my first job in the city of London. Indeed, in the UK, employers are only allowed to ask for "fit notes" if employees are sick for more than seven days. Workers are asked to self-certify if they are sick for less than seven days.”
“It is also troubling to hear pleas, both online and offline, for our leaders and policy-makers to "come down from the ivory towers" to see what the situation is on the ground. The situation where our people feel and perceive that this Chamber is an ivory tower that is out of touch with reality is highly concerning and one which cannot be allowed to carry on. We should adopt a reflective approach on the possible drivers for this feeling amongst the public and work together to overcome it. The Budget this year is entitled "Charting Our New Way Forward Together". It acknowledges that a "New Way Forward" is required and that we, in this House, have a duty to ensure that we do so together and that we do not leave anyone behind. This is something we can all get behind. Indeed, the Workers' Party's 2020 Election manifesto's preamble is entitled "A Singapore For All". But the key is to ensure that the formulation of our policies and their effects on the ground move us decisively towards achieving this aim. As a society, we need to decide together how best to invest in our people, how we should spend our tax dollars. After all, what does it say about us as a society that our senior residents come to us and tell us as a matter of course that they have requested for their medication dosages to be cut down because they cannot afford to pay for the full dosages that doctors have prescribed to them to treat their medical ailments? What does it say about us when our young parents have to make daily choices about how to apply the last dollars in their bank accounts as they cannot afford to buy both nappies and formula for their newborns, when the family is hit by an unexpected job loss through no fault of their own?”
“Mr Speaker, the last few years have sometimes felt like something straight out of a storybook: it was the best of times as we witnessed Singaporeans stepping up and volunteering to help the vulnerable amongst us during lockdown. It was the worst of times as we watched the early outbreak in the dormitories unfold, together with reports of terrible living conditions. It was the spring of hope, as we opened up to Phase Three at the end of 2020. It was the winter of despair as, in particular, our key workers and restaurants suffered many reverses and took many steps back in our path towards reopening. Old certainties have been shaken, the script had to be torn up multiple times and many a time, we have been left wondering – and perhaps still are – if the light at the end of the tunnel was actually that of an oncoming train. And today, even as we struggle to stay afloat amid what feels like endless price increases, we are also faced with understandable anxiety over climate change, the situation in the Ukraine, as we wonder whether we are witnessing the birth of the great conflict of our times. Today, more than ever, we have seen that the way we react when we are threatened, the actions we take when we are under pressure, are the most accurate reflection of our characters, of who we are as individuals, organisations and as a society. It has not been easy. The various peaks and troughs which we have experienced since COVID-19 hit us have been exhausting and there will be more to come still. Our path to living with COVID-19 is a long one and the fatigue experienced by many of us – from our frontline care workers, young parents, teachers, business owners – is real.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. I think the second part of my question which relates to whether any further action will be taken against patients who have been found to have approached these doctors for false ART test results and vaccination records has not really been answered. On the second part of my supplementary question, I would like to know whether there have been any proactive investigations carried out by the Ministry to find out if any other clinics are carrying out these false certifications, how many of these have been carried out and whether any other irregularities have been found.”
“I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. It seems that we have an idea of how many businesses are affected by the exit of all these gencos. But this increased business cost adds to the cost pressures on goods and services in general and this, ultimately, goes down to consumers and individuals or residents in the end. So, I would like to know, does the Ministry or the Government track or study the impact that this episode has actually had on the cost of living for individuals? And what are the findings of any such study?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question relates to children who need extra support in schools. I have a few questions. First, how does the Ministry track how these children are doing in school? Secondly, how does the Ministry track how successful these measures of support are? And, finally, are there any proactive steps being taken within a framework, some kind of formal screening available, to identify students who might have learning difficulties or special needs and benefit from these forms of support, and also their families, their parents and their caregivers?”
“These citizens will be inoculated against marketing gimmicks by both industries and governments that might disingenuously suggest sustainability conscious practices and instead generate an imperative on them to be truthful and transparent with citizens. For after all, our society and economy would be nothing in a world facing climate meltdown brought about by shortsighted, unsustainable practices that fail to account for people, planet and prosperity.”
“To address this, we can take a few steps. First, awareness of our sustainability effort has to be built into our education system at all levels. Our students should leave the educations system with a solid foundation in the importance of sustainability and also with a vernacular to understand and analyse the information that they receive in the media and from other companies of the efforts that have been undertaken. This vaccination against greenwashing, a topic which has raised by some of my colleagues, would enable consumers to be critical recipients and build a disincentive towards any greenwashing efforts. Second, we must strengthen protection granted to whistleblowers to ensure that any violations have a higher chance of being found out and that a culture of corporate responsibility is better protected by workers and employers alike. Frameworks or regulations that tackle false and misleading practices, including greenwashing, should also be considered to protect or empower consumers to flag out instances of greenwashing. Finally, we must work with independent activists in the sustainability space and work collaboratively with them to build a strong ecosystem. This can identify blind spots and encourage innovative solutions and approaches that businesses may not have thought of. We need to leverage the passion that these activists have to nudge our industries to do better. All these taken together will enhance the literacy and fluency of citizens in sustainability-related issues, enabling a more analytical and sceptical population who are willing to question and call out abuses of false marketing from companies.”
“It might seem gimmicky to see lobsters in the jumbo seafood tanks wearing tags with QR codes that tell you exactly where they were caught and by which fishermen. But the technology actually holds huge potential. It allows the capture of information to allow for more efficient fleet planning and can raise an alert if overfishing is occurring. It also plays a role in consumer education, providing information such as the carbon footprint of their food and gives confidence that the food is traceable to its source and the technology is there to track and ensure that good sustainable practices are adhered to. These issues and ambitions may sound remote, especially in a world where many are struggling to put food on the table. But the reality is that we are facing a resource-scarce future. In the long run, our local businesses would benefit from being encouraged to start building a sensitivity towards supply chain vigilance and can use this to set themselves apart from our competitors, especially in Asia, to lead the way in markets that put a premium on goods and services that are accountable and sustainable, this will give a big leg-up in the internationalisation efforts of these companies. That said, I want to bring this spotlight back to the importance of citizen awareness and activism, to amplify the effectiveness of any Government regulation or policy in this space. When consumers are more aware and demand sustainable and green practices and have a mindfulness over the carbon footprint, the greater the incentive will be on companies to be aware of the risks within their supply chain and to adopt greener practices. To be blunt, if investing in greener practices has no impact on how consumers buy, companies may then shrug and continue the business as usual.”
“As a high-income country, we should be ensuring our own suppliers are environmentally and socially sensitive to offer a competitive edge to those who source from other high-income countries who care about these considerations. It would thus be prudent for our Government to carefully assess whether similar requirements can be placed on companies that operate in Singapore, perhaps beginning with companies exceeding a certain size. Whether or not strong incentives rather than legislation would be sufficient to encourage enough adoption of this, remains to be seen. Second, we must play our part on the global stage to strengthen the global regime for regulation around supply chains and to be an active player to support wider adoption of such practices internationally. This will ensure that the majority of competitors on the global stage invest in similar practices and will also ensure a level playing field. While it may take a while to get there, we should take heart from the recent adoption of the global minimum tax rate of 15% by 136 countries. I know that, with the right effort, it can be done. Third, we should continue to support industries that harness latest innovations from fields, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and sensor tracking, to allow companies and governments to exercise greater vigilance of supply chains. For manufacturing companies, introducing technology from the Internet of Things allows managers to seamlessly monitor performance of their production lines in real time and also enables accurate information about matrices, such as energy consumption and the carbon footprint of their processes. Blockchain technology tools should be looked into for traceability.”
“Working with the Government to make best efforts to build more robust measures to place greater accountability across the system will make significant headway towards guarding against Singapore consumers being unknowingly complicit in some of the ails we read about, such as poor labour practices or the disregard of the environmental impact of practices up and down the entire supply chain. With this in mind, I have three suggestions to set us on this path. First, companies operating in Singapore should perform diligence on their supply chains and we need to proactively mitigate against any risks along the supply chain. In 2017, France passed a law that required companies above a certain size to establish a plan of vigilance for identifying risks of human rights, health and safety or environmental violations within their global supply chains. This required companies to proactively build a view of the risks within their supply chain and to put in place procedures to mitigate these risks. This allowed companies to better evaluate potential partners and subsidiaries and also requires mechanisms to be put in place for workers and organisations to flag violations. This approach is especially relevant in the post-pandemic era where businesses everywhere are re-examining the sustainability of their supply chains and looking into whether they can be rationalised or even shortened. This is thus a perfect opportunity to weave in such considerations as part of the economy-wide rethinking. Instead of viewing this just as a cost, we can recognise the competitive advantage this could bring us.”
“This issue was brought up by my Aljunied colleague Mr Leon Perera as allegations were made by the Brazil Federal Labour Prosecution Office and the International Labour Organization (ILO) that the company participated in the widespread use of child and slave labour in Brazil's cocoa industry. In filings last year, Olam admitted that they could not trace the origin of all their cocoa beans. This is despite marketing messages on its website that promised customers that they will know that the chocolate has been produced in a way that supports the most vulnerable people and environments in the supply chain. While environmental and social issues as a corporation become increasingly critical, the Government plays a key role in holding corporations accountable. These examples illustrate the importance of a holistic approach to ensuring our planet and people continue to thrive and how we need to build the right corporate culture in Singapore across these various spheres of sustainability. It is also insufficient to allow companies to be mindful only of direct actions performed within our shores when they have wide impact abroad. As mentioned, the intricate and complicated nature of the global supply chain makes traceability and accountability even more important than ever. Only then can we be certain that corporations and the products we buy and also what our Government buys, not only do not harm the environment and have minimal footprint but also do not participate in the exploitation of vulnerable peoples. It is not always straightforward for companies to audit the practices of their suppliers or even going further upstream to ensure compliance up and down the entire supply chain, but we must not let perfection be the enemy of the good.”
“We created a campaign backed by the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals to set out clear direct steps for consumers and industry players alike to advocate in order to banish antiquated and unsustainable practices. While tackling planet, the environmental and ecological impact of operations, we quickly realised that we also needed to address the people and prosperity elements in tandem to effect meaningful change for the industry. This was no less because ensuring that smallholders were able to earn a living wage, in turn, reduced the likelihood that they would, as a matter of necessity, sacrifice long-term goals for short-term gains, which were often environmentally harmful in order to feed their families. We thus worked with global and local NGOs to develop best practices and educational materials for workers to understand what they needed to do in order to keep safe while minimising the impact that they had on the environment. These practices would maximise the long-term sustainability of the land and their livelihoods by adopting new technologies, such as adopting better ways of ensuring robust traceability in the supply chain for customers, be it B2B or end-users. Education also had to be done to explain why the current pricing mechanism was lacking and also why they should demand sustainability when making their consumption choices. While working on agricultural sustainability practices in rural settings may seem a long way from best practices in our local urban context, the principle of ensuring genuine sustainability and environmental practices applies equally to us, as well as in our cross-border investments. For example, Singapore-based Olam has found itself in hot water in Brazil recently.”
“Specifically, he has called for our industries to look to minimise negative impacts and to maximise our positive impacts on all three aspects. And I believe that there is much wisdom in this approach. Singapore, our businesses and industries are irreversibly plugged into the global trade and supply chain ecosystem. Even trends of glocalisation, exacerbated by the shocks brought about by the pandemic, have not reduced the complexity of our global supply chains. Our position at the crossroads of many networks, whether they relate to physical trade, such as our importance as a trading port, or services, such as data centres, financial and fintech systems, means that we continue to be in a position to exert influence far beyond our shores. Corporate responsibility cannot remain focused only on issues within our borders, but must consider the external impact that our industries' actions have beyond Singaporean shores. We, therefore, must build credible, accountable and sustainable ecosystems for our businesses to thrive in beyond our borders where necessary. To do so, we must not only, as the Motion states, seek greater Government intervention to enhance corporate accountability, but we must also create the right set of incentives and regulations to build genuine, thoughtful corporate practices to maximise positive impact on our people, planet and prosperity. We must also be aware of cheap marketing gimmicks which serve the purpose of winning short-term customer favour. Instead, we should work together with our industries to rewrite the playbook to create genuine sustainable change. A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to, as part of my job, we are going to campaign within what was seen as a sunset industry to lead the charge to drive consumer and industry change.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, today's Motion is about how we can move towards a low-carbon society. It rightly points out that in order to do so, there is much more to be done through the partnerships we built between the business, Government and people sectors in order to move Singapore's transition towards a low-carbon society. Indeed, many advanced economies, like Japan, are setting bold targets of being carbon-neutral or even carbon-negative. This is, no doubt, even more important because of the pressing climate and resource crisis faced by everyone on Earth. And we, in Singapore, must do our fair share to bring about a green and sustainable future for our planet. The Workers' Party supports this and I would like to note now that, while important, moving towards being low-carbon and going green is only part of the wider picture of how our economy and society should look like in the future. Changes need to be systemic and sustainable in the long run. And being sustainable goes beyond just the environmental impact. It also includes the sustainability of the social, economic and cultural impacts that our industries and businesses have on our communities and these aspects are intertwined with and often inseparable from environmental matters. So, while it is the case that we must urgently take bold and swift action to move towards a low-carbon society, it will be a massive missed opportunity if we deal with these issues in silos and our efforts to reduce our carbon emissions are taken in isolation from the social, economic and cultural aspects of sustainability. To achieve these aims, our businesses could take inspiration anew from John Elkington's original idea about the 3Ps – people, planet, profit – which he has since adapted to refer to people, planet and prosperity.”
“How would these ensure that our stock market and, by extension, our capital markets and finance industry remain competitive and attractive to investors who are increasingly looking for the next best thing to put their money in? What steps are our regulators and authorities taking to ensure the sustainability – and, thus, the likelihoods of many of our people employed in these industries – of our capital markets so that they remain healthy when we look to the long term? Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.”
“The beneficiary of these shares, old and new, is the Financial Sector Development Fund (FSDF). FSDF's objectives primarily relate to the promotion of Singapore as a financial centre and the development of our financial services industry. Would the Minister of State be able to give an update if there is any intention to expand the role or impact of the fund, given the potential increase in SGX shares held to its benefit? Moving on to governance, by which I mean the governance of the board and also the dual role of MAS as both regulator and promoter. What are the criteria applied to determining whether a director is sufficiently independent for sitting on the board of SEL? Could the Minister of State consider outlining a clear framework the various factors to be considered when appointing independent directors for SEL for the purposes of greater transparency and confidence? As MAS has to both promote and grow the finance industry and also serve as regulator of the industry – in our case, of SGX and our capital markets – what are the processes and frameworks that are put in place to address any conflicts or perceived conflicts that may arise from this? For example, in the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority was formed by the carving out of the former Financial Services Authority (FSA) in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis to be able to better focus as it serves its function as the regulator of the finance industry. I would also like to seek greater clarity from the Minister of State about if and how the amendments to the Act will make it easier for the exchange to compete and stay relevant in the changing landscape, that it will not become moribund one day.”