Indranee Rajah
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, I would like to make a clarification in relation to two written answers on childcare leave issued by the Prime Minister's Office on 25 September 2025 and 3 February 2026 in response to Parliamentary Questions filed by Members of Parliament Ms Cassandra Lee and Ms Valerie Lee respectively.”
“Based on Year of Assessment (YA) 2025 data, about 9,500 working mothers claimed a lower amount of Working Mother's Child Relief (WCMR) under the fixed-dollar basis than they would have under the previous percentage-based basis, for children born or adopted on or after 1 January 2024.”
“We regularly receive feedback on enhancing child-related leave provisions, including the Member's suggestion. In recent years, parental leave provisions have been significantly enhanced, such that parents now have 30 weeks of paid leave, including 10 weeks of Shared Parental Leave.”
“The Government does not have data on the number of transactions involving multiple units on a single residential title that have not been subdivided. Such properties are treated as a single property for Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) purposes when it is bought, so no ABSD is foregone.”
“The Government publishes data on personal income tax, which is publicly available on www.data.gov.sg. This includes data on the number of course fees relief claimants and the amount of the relief granted. The Member may refer to the website to access the data for the first three questions.”
“In considering the duration of leave, we will look at the need. In this case, as I have explained, there is a difference between those who give birth physically to a child and those who adopt.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,520 lines we hold for Indranee Rajah, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 40 of 51.
“The rule of law requires that public authorities, in exercising their public functions and statutory powers, do not cross the line of legality. As a teacher of constitutional and administrative law, I must admit that I have been somewhat puzzled that Statutory Boards or private bodies exercising statutory functions could not avail themselves of the AG's advice and representation in judicial review actions brought against them. The reality is that counsel from our Bar acting for the Statutory Boards operate under a quite different set of incentives and performance indicators from the AGC. While they may not have a "win at all costs" mindset, lawyers from the Bar may lack an appreciation for and a nuanced understanding of the public interest and what it entails. This is not surprising since they are not schooled in the public service and may not appreciate how the judicial review cases they are handling can have a reach far beyond their Statutory Board principal. Second, with each Statutory Board defending itself and not being mindful of the larger picture, there is always the danger that there is lacking a whole-of-Government approach and perspective to judicial review proceedings. Broadly speaking, administrative law principles do not just specifically apply to a Ministry or a Statutory Board; they may also apply to all bodies exercising statutory functions. So, a concession on an administrative law principle might not be onerous to one particular Statutory Board, but may be an entirely different proposition altogether for another. So, we may have a perverse situation in which one Statutory Board may unwittingly undermine the development of a coherent and robust administrative law jurisprudence.”
“For the avoidance of doubt, in a judicial review application involving a Statutory Board which is not listed in the Schedule to the Bill, the AG may still intervene in the public interest, but, in doing so, the AG does not represent the defendant Statutory Board or protect the interests of the Statutory Board. Mdm Speaker, in summary, this Bill empowers the AG to represent Statutory Boards in judicial review and other Court proceedings and, in so doing, will, first, ensure that the conduct of litigation is aligned across the public sector; and, second, promote the coherent and systematic development of public law principles. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 5.01 pm Assoc Prof Tan Kheng Boon Eugene (Nominated Member): Mdm Speaker, I welcome this proposed law to confer additional functions on the AG. There are at least 66 Statutory Boards in Singapore covering a gamut of areas in every aspect of life ranging from public libraries, civil aviation, institutions of higher learning, Page: 71 religious matters, casino and gaming operations, national examinations, sports and more. We are very much an administrative state. And in tandem with a citizenry that is more assertive of their rights and interests, judicial review of administrative action is probably a growth industry. Judicial review enables citizens to challenge and put a stop to unlawful Government action. While more litigation is not necessarily better, the fact that there are more judicial review applications and proceedings in the past decade point to faith and confidence in our judiciary. They also signal that the legal system is robust and the commitment to the rule of law remains functional.”
“Third, the AG is of the opinion that the Government and the relevant Statutory Board have no conflicting interests in the matter; and fourth, the AG is of the opinion that such representation is not contrary to the public interest. However, if the AG determines at any point of time that there may be a likely conflict between the Government's and the relevant Statutory Board's interests, the Statutory Board will have to engage an external counsel. Page: 70 The AG's decision to represent the relevant Statutory Board or otherwise under clause 3 will be final and conclusive. Clause 4 deals with representation in Court proceedings which do not involve judicial review or related matters. It empowers the AG to represent relevant Statutory Boards in such proceedings if, (a) the first three conditions set out in clause 3 are satisfied, and (b) the AG is also of the opinion that the proceedings concern a matter of public importance. The AG should be involved in cases of public importance. Such matters have the potential to affect Singapore as a whole and could involve issues of public law and the public interest. As such, they require closer oversight. As with representation under clause 3, the AG's position to represent a relevant Statutory Board or otherwise under clause 4 will also be final and conclusive. As mentioned earlier, the AG may only represent Statutory Boards which are specified in the Schedule to the Bill. The Schedule currently lists the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the Singapore Land Authority (SLA). This list will be gradually extended to cover other Statutory Boards over time. This phased approach will allow Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) to develop its protocols to meet the projected caseload.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Attorney-General (Additional Functions) Bill of 2014 confers on the Attorney-General (AG) additional powers to represent Statutory Boards in judicial review and other Court proceedings. The AG is the Government's legal representative. In general, Statutory Boards are defined as separate legal entities from the Government. They are staffed by in-house legal counsel and, where necessary, they engage external counsel to represent them in legal proceedings. Consequently, the AG is not empowered to represent Statutory Boards. In judicial review proceedings against Statutory Boards, the AG may intervene in the public interest but, in doing so, the AG neither represents the defendant Statutory Board nor protects the interests of the Statutory Board. As announced by the AG in his speeches during the Opening of the Legal Year ceremonies in 2013 and 2014, if the AG is conferred the power to represent Statutory Boards in legal proceedings under appropriate circumstances, this will first ensure that the conduct of litigation is aligned across the Government and Statutory Boards. And, second, foster the development of public law principles within a coherent and ethical framework. I will now take the House through the main features of the Bill. Clause 3 of the Bill empowers the AG to represent relevant Statutory Boards which are listed in the Schedule to the Bill in applicable judicial review actions and related Court proceedings if four requirements are satisfied. First, the relevant Statutory Board makes a request to the AG for such representation. Second, the Minister charged with the responsibility for the relevant Statutory Board consents to such representation.”
“Taking the second question first, I think the Member's question was whether or not we would cap the interest rates for those whose annual income is above $30,000. Currently, they are not capped because the thinking is this: those who earn above $30,000 would also have access to other types of credit from financial institutions. In other words, they have options and they are not necessarily driven to borrow from the registered moneylenders. That said, we are reviewing the issue of interest rates and caps. That is something which the Committee that has been set up to look at moneylending issues is looking at, so they can look at that. Page: 24 The second question that the Member has raised is about the age. That is something we can ask the Committee to consider as well to see if it is a viable thing to do.”
“Madam, I thank the Member for his questions. Let me take the second question first. Certainly, it is anticipated that with SIT as well as UniSIM, there will be more places for Polytechnic students and, hopefully, rather than pursuing a degree in private institutions which will cost a lot more, the Polytechnic students will afford themselves of this new opportunity. I should also mention, as I indicated earlier, that both SIT and UniSIM are intended to be applied Universities, meaning that there would be a lot more emphasis on the practical aspects of learning, and that makes it a very natural next step for graduates from the Polytechnics because Polytechnic education is, in itself, applied or occupational education. So, you can see that what we have done in the CUEP recommendations is basically open up the number of places in the universities with the idea that this would provide more opportunities for the Polytechnic students. With respect to the second question about whether we envisage the number of ITE students going to Polytechnics to be increased over the next five to 10 years, I would say the answer is yes. The question is, at what point do they upgrade to Polytechnic? Is it necessary be immediately after ITE or could it possibly be after spending sometime at the workplace, gaining experience, and then when they go and take a diploma, it is directly relevant to their field of work or industry that they are working in? And the latter is something that we would like to see develop so that people are to leverage on the certificates that they obtain at the ITE, keep in the industry, deepen their skills and move forward to progress in the area that Page: 37 they have gained experience in.”
“Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for his question. I think it is a work-in-progress and certainly some parents may see it or feel that some schools are preferred from their perspective. But, overall, in terms of what makes a school a good school are really the things that we have outlined. Firstly, a good school caters to the needs of its students well. Secondly, we must nurture the student; make sure that the student is engaged. Thirdly, you want to make sure that the teachers are resourced, equipped and supported so that they can be good and caring educators. Fourthly, a good school would foster a strong community relationship and good partnership with the parents. These are actually the KPIs. These are the things you look at to determine whether the school is a good school. And then how do you support that? You have to make sure that the school is properly resourced, that the pedagogy is well delivered, that the school engages with the parents and that the teachers have good training. In terms of KPIs, those are the things we would look at. Page: 33 Over time, as the Minister had explained at the Committee of Supply, "Every School A Good School" does not mean every school the same school. What we are really striving to do is for each school to be able to deliver all the base things perfectly well but, at the same time, for each school to have certain specialities or what we refer to as peaks of excellence which students can look at and say that, "Well, this is more suitable for me than that particular school", so that, over time, you spread across the spectrum schools that meet the diverse talents and needs of our students.”
“Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I should say at the outset that I agree that a school's heritage is important. It gives the students a sense of identity, it gives them a sense of the school's history and it gives them a sense of belonging and knowing where they come from and the community from which they sprang, if you like. We can see this very clearly in the number of parents who want to send Page: 32 their students to the schools that they came from. That sense of identity and bonding is very strong. That said, I am not sure whether it would be necessary to establish a specific heritage fund. As I said earlier, all schools receive a range of funds according to their operations and programmes. I think the first approach is to see whether a school can fit it within its current funding and there is no reason why it cannot be combined with something else. For example, if you wanted to do something for your co-curricular activities or Citizenship and Character Education, that can also be wrapped up in the heritage values. But if a school has, let us say, a specific project which requires more funding, it can certainly put up that request and we can consider that.”
“Singapore is also an active member of various international bodies, such as the INTERPOL. These conventions and international bodies provide platforms for cooperation between states. Over the years, our agencies have built up a broad network with many countries to share expertise, render technical assistance, exchange information and collaborate in operational exercises. Finally, our enhanced mutual legal assistance regime under the Bill will complement and add to our continuing efforts to contribute to the global fight against international crime. I believe Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef had an additional question about assistance for offences not on the list. The answer is that we would have to look at MACMA to see which are the offences that MACMA allows us to provide mutual legal assistance for. So long as it falls within the ambit of MACMA, we will provide the assistance. If it falls outside the ambit of MACMA, we will not be able to do so. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)] Page: 52”
“At the outset, I would reiterate the point made by Mr Hri Kumar, that under MACMA, there is no need for a treaty or arrangement to be in place before mutual legal assistance can be rendered. So long as an undertaking of reciprocity is provided by the foreign requesting state, mutual legal assistance can be provided even in the absence of a treaty. Mr Hri Kumar had asked whether it remains our policy to offer assistance only to countries that reciprocate. We will continue to require from requesting States an undertaking of reciprocity in that it will comply with a future request from us for similar assistance. As to Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef's question on handling a request from a country which had previously been unhelpful to our request, we have not come across such a situation thus far. In terms of regional networks, at the ASEAN level, there is a Regional Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters which all ASEAN Member States are party to. Singapore was the first to ratify this agreement in 2005. Where a request is received pursuant to this ASEAN agreement and the legal requirements are met, we would provide the assistance sought. Page: 51 Outside of the MACMA framework for formal assistance, assistance can also be sought by foreign states at a more informal level, such as between financial intelligence units in the early stages of an investigation. Singapore has taken steps to boost our international network in cooperation in legal and law enforcement issues to combat transnational crime. We are party to various treaties and conventions related to crime and countering terrorism, such as the UN Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime and the UN Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism.”
“I would like to assure the Member that our agencies are adequately trained to handle the mutual legal assistance requests in a timely fashion. Regarding the time taken to process and approve a foreign request made to Singapore, we act on each request as expeditiously as possible and prioritise urgent requests with time Page: 50 sensitivities. However, the actual time taken depends on several factors, such as the complexity of the request and the nature of the request. The time taken for the requesting State to respond to our clarifications is also an important factor and this can sometimes cause significant delays. As for how Singapore decides whether to accede to a request for mutual legal assistance, our approach has always been to be as facilitative as possible within the framework of our laws. In this regard, MACMA sets out the legal conditions that need to be met before assistance can be provided. Each request received will be assessed based on its circumstances and merits. I do not propose to detail all these conditions, but will cite some to illustrate the point. For example, we would decline to assist if a request is contrary to our public interest or if it could prejudice a criminal matter in Singapore. We may also decline a request if the assistance sought may prejudice the safety of any person or if it would impose an excessive burden on Singapore's resources. The Minister for Law can also decide not to assist in a request that would be against the interests of the sovereignty, security and public order of Singapore to do so. Both Members raised questions relating to our regional and international networks on mutual legal assistance.”
“Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Members, Mr Hri Kumar and Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef for their support of the Bill. They have raised a few questions which I will address in turn. On the query raised by Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef regarding the list of legal representatives who can participate in the Mutual Legal Assistance framework, such a list does not feature in this context. And perhaps I should explain how a mutual legal assistance request in Singapore is processed. Mutual legal assistance is the process by which States seek and provide formal assistance in criminal matters at the government-to-government level for the purposes of investigation and judicial proceedings. In this regard, the mutual legal assistance requests are usually sent, received and processed by a central authority within the government. In Singapore, the Attorney-General's Chambers is the central authority handling mutual legal assistance requests. If the Attorney-General's Chambers assesses that the request meets the legal requirements under MACMA, it will send a notice of the request to the Minister for Law. The Minister will assess each request before instructing the Attorney-General on the action to be taken. If we are able to assist in a foreign request, our relevant agencies will be involved in providing the assistance sought. Examples of assistance include obtaining evidence for use in foreign court proceedings, arranging for the attendance of a person in the foreign state, or giving effect to a foreign court order to confiscate assets in Singapore. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef also asked about the training and time required to process requests for mutual legal assistance.”
“Currently, Singapore can assist in the enforcement and satisfaction of a foreign confiscation order by confiscating instrumentalities relating to drug offences only. The Bill introduces an amendment to expand the scope of assistance to all serious offences and align the MACMA with the domestic confiscation order regime. Page: 47 Fourth, the Bill introduces amendments that were moved earlier by MHA for the CDSA that are equally applicable in the context of mutual legal assistance, such as extending the application of legal privilege to in-house counsel, amending the definition of a "financial institution", and removing the requirement for a certificate by a foreign authority to prove a foreign offence. These amendments will enable Singapore to remain a responsible and effective member of the wider international cooperation network in the war against transnational crimes. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 3.15 pm”
“The CDSA lists serious offences, but generally excludes offences that are unlikely to be linked to money laundering. An example of a serious offence not covered by the CDSA would, for example, be the offence of causing death by a rash or negligent act. The Bill will thus de-link from the CDSA the type of offences for which mutual legal assistance requests can be made or provided. It will create a standalone list of such offences within MACMA itself. This will allow offences which are not linked to money laundering, such as selected Road Traffic Act offences, to be added to the mutual legal assistance framework. All offences listed under the First and Second Schedules of the CDSA have been imported into the MACMA while some additional offences have been added to the MACMA Schedule of "serious offences". Further, in order to ensure that all serious offences are covered by the MACMA, the Bill will introduce a "catch-all" provision whereby mutual legal assistance will be available for all Singapore offences carrying a maximum sentence of at least four years' imprisonment. This threshold is pegged to a similar level as that prescribed in the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime, to which Singapore is party. Both of these amendments will allow Singapore to provide and obtain international mutual legal assistance for a wider scope of serious offences. The next set of amendments relate to instrumentalities for serious offences. An instrumentality of an offence refers to the instrument or tool used in connection with the commission of an offence, for example, a car which is used to smuggle cigarettes into our borders.”
“Dual Criminality will also no longer be required for the enforcement of foreign confiscation orders and for assistance in search and seizure orders in respect of foreign requests from jurisdictions that have Avoidance of Double Taxation Agreements (DTAs), Exchange of Information (EOI) arrangements or international tax compliance agreements with Singapore. These changes demonstrate Singapore's commitment towards combating cross-border financial crimes and address any misperception that Singapore is a shelter for tax-illicit monies. Second, the types of offences for which mutual legal assistance can be rendered under the MACMA will be expanded. A standalone list of offences will be introduced into the MACMA, and this list of offences will determine whether mutual legal assistance requests may be made by Singapore, or made to Singapore by a foreign country for a coercive form of assistance where the Dual Criminality requirement is applied. This will be done by amending the definitions of "drug trafficking offence" and "serious offence". Under MACMA, as it currently stands, mutual legal assistance requests may be made or provided if the request concerns an offence that falls under two categories of offences under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act Page: 46 (CDSA). These are drug trafficking offences or serious offences as defined in the CDSA, which are generally money laundering offences. These CDSA Schedules also determine whether the Dual Criminality requirement is satisfied since the equivalent Singapore offence must be one that is listed under those two Schedules. The present link between MACMA and the offences in the CDSA has existed since the MACMA was enacted in 2000.”
“These are assistance in obtaining evidence, enforcement of foreign confiscation orders, and assistance in search and seizure. Page: 45 In addition, the Bill seeks to amend and clarify the application of the Dual Criminality requirement for coercive forms of assistance with respect to foreign tax evasion offences. In respect of foreign requests for a court order to produce information or items, Dual Criminality will not apply if the act or omission underlying a tax evasion offence falls within the act or omission prescribed under the MACMA. When Singapore designated tax evasion offences as money laundering predicate offences last year, the aim was to allow mutual legal assistance to be rendered in cases of wilful or fraudulent tax evasion. However, owing to the different types and names of taxes imposed in Singapore and overseas, there is some legal uncertainty about whether the dual criminality requirement would prevent Singapore from rendering assistance where there is clearly wilful or fraudulent tax evasion but the foreign tax evaded, for example, capital gains tax, is not a tax that is imposed in Singapore. This amendment seeks to remove this uncertainty by expressly lifting the Dual Criminality requirement and making clear that Singapore can render assistance for foreign requests involving tax evasion offences, regardless of the type of tax evaded. This will help strengthen Singapore's ability to assist in bona fide cases of wilful or fraudulent tax evasion.”
“In these States, the Dual Criminality requirement still applies but it is confined only to requests involving coercive forms of assistance, for example, search and seizure requests, or requests to confiscate assets. The requirement is removed for forms of assistance which do not involve the use of their enforcement powers. The Ministry has studied the international trends and practices and we think that there is merit to this calibrated approach. For instance, if a person voluntarily consents to give evidence or provide assistance in a foreign court concerning a foreign offence even though it would not have constituted a serious offence in Singapore, that request can be considered and should not be automatically refused simply because it does not fulfil the Dual Criminality requirement. Singapore may not have any connection or interest in the case and there may be little reason for us to stand in the way of assisting in such requests. The Ministry has assessed that these forms of assistance no longer require Dual Criminality as a legal safeguard. The Ministry will therefore not impose the Dual Criminality requirement for types of assistance that neither attract penal consequences for non-compliance nor adversely affect the property rights of individuals. This means that Singapore will be able to render assistance for foreign requests involving any foreign offence to: (a) arrange the attendance of persons in the foreign state; or (b) facilitate the custody of persons in transit through Singapore; or (c) locate or identify persons; or (d) assist in effecting the service of process. The Dual Criminality requirement will continue to be maintained for the coercive forms of assistance under the MACMA.”
“The proposed amendments remove the Dual Criminality requirement for those forms of mutual legal assistance which do not involve coercive forms of assistance. These are the types of assistance that neither attract penal consequences for non-compliance nor adversely affect the property rights of individuals. The Dual Criminality requirement will be retained for coercive forms of assistance. Dual Criminality refers to a situation where the foreign offence involves conduct which, if it had occurred in Singapore, would have constituted a serious offence. If it concerns conduct that is not listed as a serious offence in Singapore, there will be no Dual Criminality requirement for such conduct. The general rationale for the Dual Criminality requirement is that a State should not use its powers to promote aims that are at odds with that State's standards of acceptable behaviour and its view of what constitutes criminal conduct. It also protects individuals against the excessive exercise of power by one State in another sovereign State and this is one of the legal safeguards built into the MACMA. Under the existing MACMA, all foreign Page: 44 mutual legal assistance requests that do not satisfy the Dual Criminality requirement must automatically be rejected. The international practice of the Dual Criminality requirement varies across States. Some States adopt an approach similar to Singapore's current regime while a few have dispensed with the requirement entirely. However, most leading jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada, have moved towards a more calibrated application of the Dual Criminality requirement.”
“Left unchecked, transnational crime will undermine the Rule of Law and global governance. Mdm Speaker, the Ministry periodically reviews the MACMA to study how Singapore can be more facilitative as a mutual legal assistance partner and at the same time, to ensure that Singapore continues to be armed with effective tools to combat transnational crime. In 2006, the MACMA was amended to dispense with the requirement for a mutual legal Page: 43 assistance treaty before Singapore can render assistance to a foreign country's request when made appropriately. The legislative amendments tabled today represent further strides to enhance Singapore's mutual legal assistance framework. The Bill introduces four changes. First, it calibrates the conditions which must be fulfilled before mutual legal assistance can be rendered by removing the Dual Criminality requirement for selected types of assistance. Second, it expands the types of offences in respect of which mutual legal assistance can be given or received under the MACMA by creating a standalone list of serious offences within the MACMA. Third, it expands the scope of enforcement of foreign confiscation orders; and Fourth, it aligns the MACMA with amendments made to the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Bill 2014. I will now take the House through the main features of the Bill. The first pertains to removing the Dual Criminality requirement for selected types of assistance. We have calibrated the conditions which must be fulfilled before mutual legal assistance is rendered. The current MACMA provisions impose a Dual Criminality requirement for all forms of mutual legal assistance.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Mdm Speaker, this Bill seeks to amend the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act (MACMA). The MACMA facilitates the provision and obtaining of international mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, and is an essential tool in Singapore's arsenal to combat transnational crime. The MACMA was enacted 14 years ago against the backdrop of decreasing trade restrictions and rapid globalisation. There was and remains a need for effective international cooperation to guard against transnational crimes and criminal organisations that try to exploit the loopholes caused by national boundaries and differences between the enforcement jurisdictions of different countries. For instance, an individual hacking into a Singapore-based server from another part of the world may think that Singapore authorities will be unable to ascertain his identity because the Internet Service Provider possessing his user information is located outside of Singapore. The MACMA addresses these issues by creating a framework for cross-jurisdictional cooperation and legal assistance between States. The MACMA sets out various forms of assistance that Singapore may request from a foreign country and vice versa. These forms of assistance range from arrangements for an individual to travel to a foreign country to give evidence – which is voluntary in nature – to assistance in search and seizure, which involves using a State's domestic enforcement powers. The MACMA signals Singapore's commitment to combat crime on a global scale. This commitment is more relevant than ever today. With growing cross-border crime, the need for enhanced international criminal cooperation has also increased.”
“(proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time; and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]”
“This could cover a variety of matters, including the technical feasibility of effecting the blocking order, the burden that the order may place on the network service provider and any adverse effect an order may have on the network service provider's business or operations. Second, website owners must also be notified of the application so that they, too, have the opportunity to present their case before the Court. In this regard, however, we are cognisant of the challenges posed by anonymity in cyber space, especially where the notice requirement to owners of online locations is concerned. As such, the Bill allows the Court to dispense with the relevant notices to the website owner where the Court is satisfied that reasonable efforts have been made to ascertain the identity or address of the website owner and send the notices to the website owner. The Bill also grants website owners a right to be heard during the blocking order application, as well as the same right of appeal as a party to the application. Third, the Bill provides for an avenue by which a party to the blocking order, as well as the website owner, can apply to Court to vary or revoke the order. For instance, website owners may apply to revoke the order if the site's content has been modified and the website has ceased to be a "flagrantly infringing online location". Rights holders may apply to vary the order if the web address of the website has been changed, such that the blocking is circumvented. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, this Bill allows us to fulfil our obligations under the Marrakesh Treaty and reaffirms our unwavering commitment to respecting intellectual property. Sir, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to.”
“I will now take the House through the main features of this new framework. The new framework allows rights holders to obtain blocking orders against what the Bill terms as a "flagrantly infringing online location". The Bill keeps the definition of "flagrantly infringing online location" technically neutral. This is to accommodate rapid technological advances over time. The Bill also prescribes a non-exhaustive list of factors to assist the Courts in determining whether an online location is flagrantly infringing. The intention, therefore, is to catch websites which are in blatant breach of copyright. On the other hand, sites that offer primarily legitimate digital content, legitimate business services, such as cloud storage services, search engines, such as Google, or social media sites such as Facebook, that do not satisfy the factors will not be affected by the proposed schematic. The proposed measure will, therefore, not hinder access to and the exchange of legitimate content. Artistes can continue to distribute and share their content via legitimate websites. The procedure governing the application and grant of blocking orders has been carefully calibrated so as to balance the rights of rights holders, online location owners and network service providers. Page: 122 First, the Act requires rights holders to notify network service providers of their intention to apply for a blocking order. This allows network service providers the opportunity to resolve the matter out of Court. The application for a blocking order must be served on the network service provider. This ensures that the network service provider has the opportunity to present its case before the Court as to why an order should not be made.”
“Instead, it is aimed at pirated content. The new framework is thus a "no-fault" regime vis-a-vis the network service providers The new measure is targeted at entire websites. Rights holders who wish to disable access to, or remove, specific parts of a website, for example, specific infringing content or specific web pages, can continue to rely on existing mechanisms in the Act, such as the notice and take-down system described earlier. This framework was derived after extensive consultations with industry stakeholders. While we sought to allow rights holders to more effectively protect themselves against pirate websites, we were also cognisant that the proposed framework should not unduly impinge upon the rights and interests of other stakeholders, including network service providers and website owners, hosting legitimate content. The proposed judicial measure balances the rights of the different stakeholders involved. First, rights holders will be able to obtain blocking orders relatively quickly and with greater certainty. Page: 121 Second, the interests of network service providers and online location owners will be safeguarded in three ways: (a) by prescribing statutory thresholds which ensure that only flagrantly infringing websites are caught; (b) by instituting robust procedural safeguards. This includes notice and service requirements, as well as appeals and reinstatement avenues; and (c) by the Court acting as the ultimate gate-keeper. While these measures are not exhaustive, adoption will signal our commitment against online piracy and firmly convey that Singapore does not condone copyright infringement. Stakeholders whom we consulted have generally expressed their strong support for the proposed site-blocking framework, as has the Media Literacy Council.”
“In addition, the Copyright Act does not expressly provide for the conditions under which access to copyright infringing websites may be disabled and this adds to the uncertainty. In 2012, the Government appointed a Media Convergence Review Panel (MCRP) to study issues impacting consumers, industry and society in the converged media environment and to make recommendations on how to address these challenges. Page: 120 On the issue of online piracy, the MCRP recommended a multi-pronged approach, comprising public education, promotion of legitimate content services and adoption of appropriate regulatory measures. Among the various regulatory measures that could be adopted, the MCRP deemed site-blocking to be the most feasible measure to combat digital piracy. The Government has accepted the MCRP's recommendations concerning online piracy. The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) drives continuing public education efforts. It has been reaching out to the public to raise awareness about IP creation and protection through the Honour Intellectual Property (HIP) Alliance programme and other platforms. Second, rights holders are also working to increase the availability of legitimate digital content in Singapore, so that consumers are able to access such content conveniently and at reasonable prices. The Bill focuses on the third aspect – regulatory measures – and introduces a new regulatory measure to complement the other efforts. It amends the Act to institute a judicial site-blocking avenue. This will allow rights holders to apply directly to the Court for an order directing network service providers to block access to flagrantly infringing websites, without having to first establish liability on the part of the network service provider for copyright infringement.”
“He had been sentenced to eight months imprisonment by the Swedish courts for violating copyright laws in 2009. The battle against online copyright piracy is, as you can see, global. This Bill seeks to enable copyright owners in Singapore to better protect their rights in the online space. Before I take the House through the relevant provisions of the Bill, let me give an overview of the present system and the challenges rights holders currently face when trying to protect their rights, which this Bill seeks to address. First, rights holders can request network service providers to disable access to, or remove copyright infringing material from, its network. This is done by issuing a "take-down" notice to the network service provider. However, it is not a statutory requirement to comply with this take-down notice. Hence, it is not mandatory for network service providers to comply. In many cases, network service providers may contend that the take-down notice regime does not apply to them. For example, they may not have hosted the infringing material on their networks but functioned merely as conduits for the transmission of copyright infringing material. Under the current regime, rights holders can bring a legal action against network service providers for copyright infringement but, in order to succeed in removing the copyright infringing material, where the claim is disputed by the network service provider, it is necessary to establish the liability on the part of the network service provider for copyright infringement. This creates considerable uncertainty for rights holders, and both parties can incur considerable legal costs as well as time in such suits.”
“The prevalence of online piracy in Singapore turns customers away from legitimate content and adversely affects Singapore's creative sector. It can also undermine our reputation as a society that respects the protection of intellectual property. Digital music sales now make up a large percentage, about one-third, of music producers' total revenue. However, industry stakeholders tell us that the decline in physical music sales in Singapore has not been compensated by a commensurate rise in digital sales. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) has reported that the total music revenue in Singapore, consisting of both physical and digital sales, declined from $29.8 million in 2009 to $16.4 million last year. The decline in total music revenue could, therefore, affect the development of new musical talent in Singapore and stifle the growth of the creative industry. It could also keep providers of legitimate online content away from Singapore. We, therefore, need to take stronger measures against online piracy. Jurisdictions, such as the UK, Norway, Denmark and Belgium, have introduced legislation to permit the blocking of pirate websites. Denmark has been practising this for Page: 119 more than five years. Let me illustrate with the UK as an example. In the UK, the UK courts have, to date, ordered major network service providers to block access to more than 40 websites on grounds of copyright infringement. The list includes The Pirate Bay, a website notorious for its blatant infringement of copyright material. It has been blocked in many countries, including the UK, Belgium and Denmark. Just last month, Swedish authorities arrested Peter Sunde, a co-founder of The Pirate Bay who had been on the run for two years.”
“Copies which are friendly to persons with reading disabilities may, however, not be distributed or imported generally, although persons with reading disabilities may import such copies for their personal use. The ability to import is especially important for increasing access to works accessible to persons with reading disabilities. Singapore is not a major creator of such works. Allowing such works to be imported would, therefore, give the community much needed access to works from overseas institutions, such as the Royal Blind in the UK and the National Federation of the Blind in the US. Page: 118 To facilitate the distribution of such copies internationally, the Bill further allows institutions in Singapore, such as the Singapore Association of the Visually Handicapped and the Lighthouse School, to make copies for the purposes of exporting them. I turn next to the second aspect of the Bill, which seeks to empower rights owners to more effectively disable access to sites that flagrantly infringe copyright or pirate websites. Online piracy is a global issue and it affects us in Singapore as well. An independent 2012 survey by Vobile Pte Ltd found that Singapore ranked fourth out of 18 countries in Asia, and 12th out of 38 countries globally, in terms of the number of downloads of infringing content per Internet user. A 2013 survey conducted by Sycamore Research and Insight Asia also revealed that approximately three-quarters of our youth aged 19 to 24 consume copyright infringing material. Among the 900 respondents whom Sycamore Research polled late last year, the top reason for engaging in online piracy was that pirated content was available easily and for free.”
“Clause 2 amends the Act to allow a broader category of persons and institutions to create accessible format copies without requiring permission from the rights holder. This could include persons with reading disabilities; and education institutions and institutions assisting them, such as SG Enable and the Society for the Physically Disabled. Second, the Bill allows copyrighted material to be converted into any format, so that these formats are accessible to persons with reading disabilities. Presently, the Act only allows copyrighted material to be converted to a limited range of prescribed formats. These formats are restricted to sound recordings, Braille, large-print and photographic versions of the said material. Clause 2 broadens this range to encompass all formats that could assist persons with reading disabilities. Take, for instance, DAISY, or the Digital Accessible Information System. DAISY is an audio substitute for print material. It allows reading-disabled persons to navigate pages of audio books more easily. It is an increasingly popular format which the Act does not cater for. However, it would be covered under the proposed amendments. Third, in addition to literary and dramatic works, the Bill amends the Act to further allow artistic works, sound recordings and sound broadcasts to be converted into formats which are friendly to persons with reading disabilities. This will facilitate the conversion of audio books to reading disabled friendly formats like DAISY. Fourth, the Bill allows institutions assisting persons with reading disabilities, as well as educational institutions, to not only reproduce, but also distribute, import and produce for export such copies. At present, the Act only covers the making of copies.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the proposed amendments to the Copyright Act are to achieve two objectives. First, to afford persons with reading disabilities greater opportunities to access copyrighted works in line with the Marrakesh Treaty. Second, to combat online piracy by allowing rights owners to more effectively seek Court orders to disable access to pirate websites. Let me first address the provisions relating to the Marrakesh Treaty. The Marrakesh Treaty, concluded under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), seeks to facilitate access to copyrighted works for persons with reading disabilities. Member States of WIPO adopted the Treaty in June last year. Singapore is committed to ensuring that our intellectual property (IP) regime serves the needs of the visually-impaired community. We will be signing and ratifying the Marrakesh Treaty by the end of this year. These amendments will put us in a position to meet the obligations of the Marrakesh Treaty. Let me now highlight four main amendments that the Bill makes in relation to the Treaty. First, the Bill allows persons with reading disabilities, as well as any person or institution acting on their behalf, to produce copies of the copyright-protected material in formats which persons with reading disabilities can access. At present, converting copyrighted material into other formats, including formats suitable for persons with reading disabilities, requires the permission of rights holders. Only two institutions that assist persons with reading disabilities, namely, the Singapore Association of the Visually Handicapped and the Lighthouse School, need not obtain such Page: 117 permission.”
“For the first part of the question, I do not have the information with me. Perhaps, the Member could file a separate question on that. The second aspect of the question relates to the scope of the recommendations for the Advisory Committee on Page: 42 Moneylending. Essentially, the idea is to ask them to do an overall review because in the past couple of years, Members in this House had raised various questions on access to credit, on interest rates, how we can safeguard and protect borrowers, especially low-income borrowers. But, at the same time, you also do not want to prevent access to this kind of credit for those borrowers who cannot normally access the type of credit you can get from banks and financial institutions. The Committee will have a wide mandate and, in fact, if Members have suggestions or concerns, they should feel free to send their suggestions and comments to MinLaw for the Committee to look at.”
“By way of assistance and with respect to comparative legislation – perhaps this will help Members to understand what other countries have done – even in other countries, it is not a blanket protection. In British Columbia, for example, they have a Good Samaritan Act where the person coming forward is not liable for damages for injury or death, unless the person is grossly negligent. In the Australian Capital Territory – it is the same thing – the person is exempted unless the person acted recklessly. In Queensland, the person is exempted unless the person acted with gross negligence. In New South Wales, a person is exempted unless the person has failed to exercise reasonable care and skill. In these examples that I have cited, you can see that if a person acts outside of what is expected of them, meaning if you are a paramedic, for example, but you act without care and skill or you are grossly negligent, you will still be liable in any event. That is not so very different from the law in Singapore where the only standard that is expected of you is of a person with your particular skill and expertise. We would not require a person to have a very high standard if that person is a lay-person and does not have a particular expertise, skill or responsibility. 2.02 pm”
“Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for her clarification. Before I address the specific issue that was raised, let me give a background on the Good Samaritan law – what it is and what it is intended to achieve. In some jurisdictions, Good Samaritan laws impose duties on bystanders to provide reasonable assistance in emergency situations. More typically, however, Good Samaritan laws protect bystanders who volunteer their assistance in emergencies from liability for any wrongdoing following on for such assistance. So, what is the purpose behind a Good Samaritan law? It actually has two purposes. The first is to address the situation where people generally do not come forward to assist and the law is intended to require the person to assist. That, of course, presupposes there is a situation where people generally do not assist, but that is not the case here, as I have illustrated. The second purpose is to protect persons who assist others, to protect them from civil liability. And that, I think, is the scenario which the Member is alluding to, where somebody comes forward to help, but in the course of assisting may actually render further injury to the person. As explained earlier, our current law only requires a person offering assistance to comply with the standard of care reasonably expected of a person with his skill and responsibility. So, let us say you are somebody who has no medical experience and you go Page: 20 forward to help and you are helping in good faith, you are not expected to render the kind of assistance that a doctor or a paramedic would be rendering because that is not the level of care that is expected or level of expertise that you have.”
“Mdm Speaker, before I respond, may I ask the Member to clarify when she refers to "a situation to be circumvented", what situation is that? What is sought to be circumvented? Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef: Madam, it would be a condition where someone is in need of help, and the help is rendered by a member of the public who is not skilled or not a trained person of means, that is, not a doctor or a nurse. That person, in the event of rendering care, has incurred an injury on the victim, and in the event that the victim decides to take action.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Mr Low Thia Khiang for his clarifications. He said just now that "constructive politics" is only a term; it is rhetorical. That was my point; it is not. Politics is real. It is real because it impacts on the lives of people. It is real because what we say and do in this Parliament makes a difference to Singaporeans. It is real because you stand for something and what you say must mean something. It is real because whatever you do has an outcome and an impact on the lives of people. So, when I spoke about "constructive politics" just now, that was what I meant: the way you approach it and, ultimately, its impact on the lives of people. I do not think I need any further explanation on that point. The second point Mr Low raised was the issue of the Town Council and said he believed it was through an open tender. I am not sure if Mr Low was actually present in Parliament when that point was extensively debated, but it is in the newspapers, it is on record, it is in the Hansard. But it was quite clear that the initial award of the contract was not as a result of an open tender. And that I think was stated and agreed to by their Chairman. They had given an explanation for that subsequently but, essentially, the first award was not pursuant to a tender. It is not necessary, I believe, Mr Deputy Speaker, for me to go on at length. I have stated our position or my position. Mr Low has expressed his earlier. But at the end of the day, the most important thing is that the way we conduct our politics in Singapore makes a big difference in the lives of people. And it is important, therefore, that our politics should be constructive and should not be purely opportunistic nor populist.”
“It means that if you take over a Town Council worth hundreds of millions of dollars and give out contracts to your own supporters worth millions of dollars without a tender, what kind of political values are those? When asked straightforward questions, for example, whether you pay your supporters – who are also your Managing Agent – a salary, in addition to their charging fees as a Managing Agent, and then decline to answer, what kind of political culture do you build? How does that engender trust? The President laid out an entire agenda. It is significant that Mr Low's speech was wholly devoted to the topic of politics and disregarded entirely the rest of the President's speech which outlines the Government's agenda for the future, for Singapore and Singaporeans, and how to make lives better for Singapore and Singaporeans. There are various ways to interpret this disregarding of the entire agenda. Perhaps Mr Low feels that our policies are not working or Mr Low has no constructive alternatives to the challenges that we face, or perhaps none which he thinks are constructive, or with the recent woes of his Town Council, he wishes to create an impression that nothing is wrong and that the Government is out to fix them.”
“The future of our polytechnic and ITE students is bright, and ASPIRE is working on ways to enable them to access the many opportunities that lie ahead of them. Mr Deputy Speaker, before I conclude, I would like to say a few words on constructive politics. Earlier, Mr Low Thia Khiang, in his speech, rejected the notion of constructive politics. He said whatever way politics is described and coloured, it is still politics. But constructive politics is important to us. It means political parties putting people before politics. It must ultimately result in better lives. Constructive politics is about putting Singaporeans at the heart of what we do by, first, offering practical alternatives. Second, acknowledging the trade-offs and being responsible. So, for example, if you know that 70% of Singaporean jobs depend on SMEs, then one should not suggest a complete freeze on foreign workers, because that will seriously impact our Singaporean jobs, even though it may sound popular, and even though it may sound good. Something like that is politically opportunistic, not constructive. But it does not help people on the ground, like our Singapore SMEs. Next, constructive politics also means not flip-flopping when convenient. So, for example, you do not ask for more foreign workers to be allowed in Singapore in 2012, and then in 2013, after the White Paper on Population, say that there should be a complete freeze, and then a few months later, ask for more foreign workers again. Because there are Page: 97 real trade-offs and people's livelihoods and jobs are at stake. And above all, constructive politics must mean upholding the highest standards of integrity.”
“We are, therefore, exploring ways in which the polytechnic and ITE educators can continue to be at the cutting edge of industry skills and practices. Next, industry participation and collaboration is vital. None of the above would be possible unless industry and employers are invested in and collaborate with us to achieve these objectives. We are studying how we can work closely with the employers and industry Page: 96 in order to achieve the objectives mentioned earlier. Finally, providing information to make right career choices is important. In this regard, we are looking at career guidance not just for school, but given that education is now a lifelong continuum, from school throughout working life, so that people can find the careers that are best suited to their strengths and circumstances at different stages of their lives. The reality of the situation is that the world is changing so fast that in the next five to 10 years, new jobs will come into existence that have not been invented today. The people who will thrive in that kind of future are the ones who have relevant skills and are continually able to learn new ones. The strength and uniqueness of our polytechnic and ITE qualifications lie in their flexibility. Our graduates can work immediately but their qualifications give them a base on which to acquire further learning. Given that the future is likely to be more unpredictable and volatile, a qualification which imparts technical or professional skills, coupled with strong continuing education and training or professional upgrading to stay ahead of the curve, will give good outcomes in the long run.”
“Next, upward progression of polytechnic and ITE graduates is important. The desire for the degree is driven by the outcomes people anticipate that the degree will give. However, if all chase a degree route immediately, that would actually not result in the best outcomes for our polytechnic and ITE students, as explained earlier. What we should aim for, therefore, is a multiplicity of pathways that are viable options in and of themselves. So, they should be able to either pursue further studies immediately – some do this – or work first and pursue further studies later, preferably in a related sector, or work and progress upwards through professional certifications and training even without the need for a degree. Ideally, what we want is for each of these pathways to be able to still give our students the outcomes they hope for in terms of career prospects and progression. We are looking at how we can facilitate progression pathways to enable our polytechnic and ITE graduates to progress upwards even without a degree or before they get one. Continuing education and training and skills upgrading is important, as illustrated by the example of Ms Sylvia Tan, mentioned earlier. We are looking at how we can help our polytechnic and ITE graduates stay on top of the game to navigate the vicissitudes of the future through continuing education and training, industry certifications and short courses that will add to their repertoire of skills and keep them in high demand. Next, staying at the cutting edge matters. In order for our students to be at the forefront of technical skills, as well as the intangible ones, the educators must be at the forefront as well.”
“An electronics firm, Jason Marine Group, won the SME Employer of the Year Award in February. They sharply reduced staff turnover by 50% after they revamped their HR programme and developed an upward career path for their staff. This boosted both their recruitment and their retention. In response to the question on what he had learnt about building employees' careers, the founder, Joseph Woo said, "Everyone wants to be developed and trained, to continue to improve – not just training in terms of skill, but also experience and exposure. As for a career path, everyone wants to know how far he can go from here." One other thing that came out strongly both in our study trips and engagement sessions was the need for information and assistance in making the right career choice. One of our findings was that when it comes to making career decisions, students are most influenced by their parents and their perception – as well as their parents' perception – of career opportunities in related sectors. In second order of importance of influence, are career platforms, such as exhibitions, talks, career fairs and the media. Some parents I spoke to said Page: 95 that they were not aware of the many different types of careers and job options available today and, as such, they tended to fall back on the usual or more well-known traditional choices. Sir, the takeaways for the ASPIRE Committee from all of these studies, engagements and interactions are as follows. First, real skills and intangible qualities matter. And they must meet industry needs. In this regard, we are looking at Work-Study programmes and how to structure the curriculum and internships so that there will be a tighter nexus between what is taught and what is required in the workplace.”
“" In the article, Sylvia Tan, an IT manager who was retrenched, reflected on the fact that if she had been able to pick up new skills, like Page: 94 cloud computing and analytics, perhaps she might not have been retrenched. In short, the basic principles continue to apply – supply should not exceed demand, real skills and competencies matter, and continuing education and training are becoming ever more important. In addition, when you speak to employers, they will tell you that what really matters to them even more than a paper qualification are the intangible qualities. Clearly, a potential employee must have the basic technical and substantive skills, but what the employers value most are the intangible qualities, such as diligence, analytical skills, resilience, teamwork, communication skills, EQ, leadership qualities and problem-solving skills. This was reflected in the third article on page B12, entitled "Education must match Economy's Needs: Experts". At a forum held in Singapore organised by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, the experts voiced their view that "education remains the key to Singapore's success as a knowledge-based economy, but it needs to be targeted at developing the right skills". Dr Siriwan Chutikamoltham, Director of Banking of Finance at Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Business School said, "There should be less emphasis on just getting degrees. Education should match what is going on in the economy." How do you encourage polytechnic and ITE graduates to take advantage of their diplomas and certificates and to meet their aspirations at the same time? Part of that answer was provided in a fourth article on page B11, entitled "Good HR Policies Draw Talent and Boost Business Growth".”
“The first was the article on page B7 reporting on how more polytechnic graduates have scored places in Law and Medicine in university. We are happy for these students, and this also shows the strength and quality of our polytechnic education. As the article reported, 40% of our students who actually qualified for Junior College chose to go to the polytechnic instead. The reason most often cited for doing so was that they wanted to get hands-on learning straightaway. From the students' and parents' perspectives, the outcomes they want are good pay, good career prospects and upward progression. Currently, this is equated with academic upgrading. Almost six in 10 ITE students and four in 10 polytechnic students wish to upgrade immediately upon graduation, even though they are, in fact, ready to be employed. The ITE student feels he or she would not be successful if he or she does not upgrade to a diploma, whilst the polytechnic student feels that he or she would not be successful without a degree. Additionally, they are worried that if they do not pursue academic upgrading immediately they may lose momentum. However, on page A2 of the very same newspaper, there was a big article entitled: "Degree holders most vulnerable to retrenchment". It reported that in the last two years, degree holders found themselves most vulnerable to losing their jobs, among all qualification groups. SIM University economist Randolph Tan was quoted as saying, "As graduates become more available, it brings about more friction in the job matching process. More graduates think that getting a degree is the pinnacle of achievement but what they do not realise is that the workplace demands much more of them.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, in his Address, the President spoke about the Government's pledge to ensure that Singapore remains a nation of opportunity for all. Being a nation of opportunity involves: First, creating the conditions that will generate opportunities for Singaporeans to do well and prosper, and the energies of our economic agencies are focused intensively on this, as we have heard from Minister of State Teo Ser Luck just now. Second, enabling our people, through education, to access and leverage on these opportunities, now and in the future, in Singapore and internationally and that is where MOE comes into the picture. Members would know of the ASPIRE Committee which was formed, principally, to focus on opportunities for our polytechnic and ITE students. I would like to update the House on the Committee's work so far. We have engaged in extensive public engagement. We have spoken with more than 2,000 stakeholders from five Page: 93 Polytechnics and the ITEs, including students, parents, staff and alumni. We also surveyed more than 10,000 polytechnic students, 4,000 ITE students and some 600 parents. In the course of our review, we found that there is a strong endorsement for the education provided by our polytechnics and ITEs. However, this is accompanied by a very strong desire on the part of students and parents for immediate further academic upgrading. Paradoxically though, if everyone goes that route, it may not work out in the best interests of our students. When I was working on my speech, I was wondering how best to convey this conundrum and I found, ironically, the answer in today's The Straits Times which carried four separate articles that illustrated the issues for our applied education landscape today.”
“(proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for his support of the Bill and his very helpful comments. He had actually also highlighted an example which I think I should address because it illustrates what is meant by Geographical Indications. So, for example, Katong laksa would not, unfortunately, qualify as a GI, the reason being that, in order to be a GI, its components would actually have to be grown or originate from Katong. So, the laksa leaf would have to be a Katong laksa leaf, the rice flour would have to come from rice grown in Katong, the tau pok would have to come from the soya Page: 87 bean that was grown in Katong and the clams would have to be harvested there as well. The Member had asked about feedback from the public consultations and whether any feedback received was incorporated into the Bill. The feedback from the consultations largely revolved around particular GIs of interest to various producers from different parts of the world. The feedback related to issues that have been debated in other countries, such as whether certain GI terms were viewed as generic and can be registered. The takeaway from the exercise was to confirm the need for us to create a transparent and fair system for registration, which would examine each GI application on a case-by-case basis. This we have done through the three-stage process for registration. I have described this process in my earlier speech. But the Member may rest assured that we will work to have a fair and transparent GI regime that will enhance our reputation as an intellectual property hub in this region. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.”
“For instance, they will be able to request that our Customs authorities detain suspected infringing goods which are to be imported into or exported from Singapore. These measures are generally based on those in the Trade Marks Act, with modifications to suit the situations involving GIs. I move on now to implementation. The changes under the Bill will be implemented in stages to correspond with the EUSFTA's ratification timeline. The GI Registry will be established only if the EU Parliament ratifies the EUSFTA. The enhanced protection for all categories of registered GIs will only kick in when the benefits of the EUSFTA is provisionally applied both ways. Improved border enforcement measures will only be effected within three years after the EUSFTA enters into force. This will give Customs time to build up capabilities to undertake enforcement action. The staged implementation ensures that any potential disruptions to local businesses dealing with or using GI products do not kick in before the benefits of the EUSFTA start to accrue. Page: 83 It will also give businesses time to make the necessary changes to adjust to the new GI regime, including, for example, the re-labelling of products for sale in the local market, which is what some local businesses are already in the process of doing. When the new GI protection regime comes into force, it will not over-ride or undermine any rights which GI holders already have under the existing regime. These rights will co-exist with those under the new regime. However, those who wish to benefit from increased certainty of recognition, enhanced level of protection and improved border enforcement measures can opt for registration.”
“For instance, if a person has continuously used a GI term in Singapore for a sufficiently long period of time, or has previously used the term in good faith, he or she may continue to use the term, even if the GI is subsequently registered. We do not foresee a significant impact on consumer choice, as the majority of products labelled with GIs in the local market are already of the correct Page: 82 geographical origin. Moreover, for many products, there is substantial intra-GI competition. For example, there are many producers of "Bordeaux" wines, competing with one another in different segments of the market. Businesses that import foodstuffs, wines and spirits may have to adjust their operations to comply with the new requirements. For example, they may have to work with producers to re-label such products for sale in our local market. That said, through our public and industry consults, we have already alerted our local businesses, and they have already started planning for the new GI regime. That is the first main change. The second relates to the enhanced protection for registered GIs. Under the TRIPS two-tier system of protection, wines and spirits enjoy an enhanced level of protection. This enhanced level of protection means that protection is conferred even if consumers are not misled as to the products' true geographical origin. Clause 4 of the Bill will extend this enhanced level of protection beyond wines and spirits to all successfully registered GIs, including agricultural products and foodstuff. The third change relates to border enforcement measures. Under Part VI of the Bill, owners of all registered GIs will have access to improved border enforcement measures.”
“Among other things, applicants will be required to specify the quality, reputation or characteristics of the good in question and how that is attributable to the geographical origin. Second, there will be examination. There will be a detailed examination of each application to ascertain that they fulfil certain fundamental requirements. These are largely similar to what is mandated under the present Act and TRIPS. Third, publication and opposition. Thereafter, the application will be made public for a period of time. This is to allow third parties an opportunity to object to the registration, for example, on grounds of "generic-ness", meaning that the GI has become a common name for describing that product in Singapore. In this respect, GI terms which are proven to have become common household names in Singapore may not be registered. Registration of a GI will last for 10 years initially. Like the trade mark registration system, this can be renewed for further periods of 10 years. To protect existing rights, GI registration will also follow the "first in time, first in right" principle. This means that a new application for GI registration may not invalidate a prior conflicting GI or trade mark which already exists. Trade mark owners today using terms similar to GIs being registered will thus not be inconvenienced. However, the GI can still be registered if consent is obtained from the owner of the prior conflicting trade mark. Consequential amendments to the Trade Marks Act will be made to align the current Trade Marks regime with this position. There will also be exceptions for existing users of GIs so that their business operations will not be disrupted.”
“However, in practice, the absence of a registration system means that a term can only be conclusively determined that it is a GI through a Court ruling in a civil suit. There have not been any such disputes before our Courts. Thus far, there have not been any such disputes before our courts. I move on to the objectives of the Bill. Under the recently concluded FTA negotiations with the EU (the European Union (EU)-Singapore Free Trade Agreement or EUSFTA), we have agreed to take steps to bring the agreement into force by strengthening our GI regime. The Bill proposes to: first, establish a Registry of Geographical Indications or "GI Registry"; second, enhance the protection of GIs in Singapore; and third, provide improved border enforcement measures for GIs. I will now take the House through the main features of the Bill. Part IV of the Bill establishes a system of registration for GIs. The aim of having a system of registration is to improve the certainty of protection given to GIs. Registration will give the holder certainty that a term is recognised as a GI and is, therefore, entitled to all the protections enjoyed by a GI, without needing to confirm this before the Courts. This will facilitate the enforcement of these rights. The proposed GI Registry will reside within the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS). When established, the Registry will examine applications for GI registration in respect of: (a) wines and spirits; and (b) selected categories Page: 81 of agricultural products and foodstuffs, such as cheese, meat and seafood. Registration will be a three-stage process that seeks to be transparent and fair. The process is similar to the trade mark registration system in Singapore and comprises the following: First, application.”
“Wines produced outside of Bordeaux that are labelled or marketed as "Bordeaux" wines would infringe the "Bordeaux" GI. The traders and producers of GI products, or their relevant associations, may then pursue civil action to stop the infringement or seek damages. Why protect GIs? As indicated earlier, many GIs revolve around food and drink. Singaporeans increasingly consume and enjoy food products from all over the world, including various agricultural and dairy products, wines and spirits. GI protection safeguards the interests of our consumers. It provides greater assurance that the products bought by our consumers truly carry the characteristics that they are known for, and which are attributable to their geographical origin. Currently, GIs are already protected in Singapore under the Geographical Indications Act, in accordance with the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) standards. Page: 80 TRIPS provides a two-tiered scheme of protection: First, all GI products enjoy a basic level of protection, where GI labels cannot be used on products which do not come from the place indicated by the GI, if this misleads the public as to the true geographical origin of those products. For wines and spirits, there is an enhanced level of protection where GI labels cannot be used even if consumers are not misled as to the true geographical origin of the goods in question. One example of this is the use of the term "Bordeaux-like". This may not mislead consumers, but is nevertheless not allowed. The present Act does not require GIs to be registered before they enjoy the relevant type of protection under TRIPS.”