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 47 of 51.
“Sir, I wish to speak on the topic of integration of new citizens and PRs. Like Mr Inderjit Singh, I have noted in feedback with the Indian community that Singapore Indians are concerned about the Indians from elsewhere who either work here or are new citizens and PRs. There is concern that they do not mix with the local Indians and they stay apart and, in some cases, consider themselves superior to the local Indians. I wondered whether this was something that was peculiar to the Indian community. But on asking around, I understood that the Chinese community also felt the same way. And this highlights an important issue - the need for integration and the potential faultlines within the ethnic communities. Rather than cover up the issue, it is best that we address it openly and transparently and with sensitivity. It seems to me that we must go back to the basics, which is this: what does it mean to be Singaporean? The late Mr S Rajaratnam put it best - being Singaporean is not a matter of birth or race; it is an act of will. And that is the reason why we say the pledge because it is a conscious act of pledging yourself to be Singaporean. When you say the pledge, you commit to being a Singaporean, meaning you commit to be one united people; you commit to do this irrespective of your race, religion or ethnic background. Both current Singaporeans and new citizens and PRs must understand what this means in the context of being Singaporeans today and trying to grow our population. For Singaporeans, we must remember that we must always be an open society, welcoming visitors and welcoming those who want to be more than visitors, who want to stay here and become part of us. We must never become a closed, ossified, stratified society - because that is the surest way to decline.”
“The Extradition Treaty negotiations are linked to the Defence Cooperation Treaty negotiations, and, when it comes to something as important as defence cooperation, it cannot be entered into upon anything less than equal standing between two countries, with mutual give and take. If pressure is the reason, then we will also have to look for alternative sources of supply and alternative methods of construction. So, whichever way we look at it, whether the reason be environmental or pressure, we will still have to look for alternative sources of supply and alternative methods of construction. And that is where the underlying philosophy of this Budget comes in, because, in order to find a way around a problem, we need these qualities. We need the spirit of enterprise, resilience and self-reliance. There will be many times in the future when we will have to deal with the vagaries of globalisation, competition, adverse economic conditions, foreign relations or other external factors that impact on us. Having few resources, we will have to be resourceful. Being small, we have to think big. We need all of those things and qualities which this Budget seeks to promote. With that, Sir, I support the Motion. 2.06 pm”
“We recognise that Indonesia is a sovereign state and if it wishes to ban the export of sand for environmental reasons, then of course it is their prerogative to do so, and we will have to respect that decision. This means that, in the short term, we must look for alternative sources of sand. In the long term, we must find alternative methods of construction that would reduce our dependence on sand. If the reason is environmental, however, then, on the bright side, it is heartening to note Indonesia's concerns about the environment. With the environment being of such great concern, it is hoped that Indonesia will take equally firm and decisive steps to deal with the problem of the haze and the forest fires that cause such devastating deforestation, especially in the light of the anticipated El Nino effect this year. It is also hoped that the ban against forest fires will be enforced by the enforcement agencies with the same zeal and diligence as the sand ban is currently being enforced. If the objective is pressure, then I venture to say that this is misconceived. We respect Indonesia as a sovereign state and value it as a neighbour. It should not be forgotten, however, that Singapore is a sovereign state too. Under international law, sovereign states have equal standing in their dealings with each other. There should be no place for pressure when sovereign states deal with each other, especially not between friendly neighbouring sovereign states. And if the reason is pressure, then clearly, we cannot accede.”
“That picture appeared to be perfectly cordial and it did not seem to me, therefore, that their government had any issue with our Ambassador at all. Or perhaps their Speaker had not seen the photograph? Their Speaker's next claim was that our reclamation projects could affect Indonesia's maritime borders. The answer to this has helpfully been provided by Indonesia's own Foreign Minister. He had said that Singapore's land reclamation efforts would not affect the country's sea border. The Indonesian Foreign Minister was quoted by Reuters as saying that: "It is possible that they [i.e., Singapore] may increase their shore but that does not mean that they move the sea border, as since 1973 we have had an agreement." Basically, the issue is this: the Speaker's assumption is that the borders move when we reclaim land. But in this case, we have got a strict demarcation. So, even if the land is reclaimed, the borders do not move. His [the Foreign Minister's] reply, as I understand it, is also Singapore's position. So it is good to know that their Foreign Ministry and ours share the view that our land reclamation projects will not affect Indonesia's maritime borders. In the same report, their Foreign Minister reiterated that the sand export ban had been prompted by environmental concerns. So, it is now back to environmental reasons. With all of these somewhat confusing signals, we are not really the wiser as to what the reason for the sand ban is, ie, whether it is for environmental reasons or to pressure us, or both. Hopefully, Indonesia will at some stage clarify which of these it is. It would be helpful for us, and I am sure it would be helpful for them too. In the meantime, though, let us take each reason in turn. Environmental reasons.”
“This was then followed a short while later by comments from the top Indonesian Foreign Ministry official, the Ministry's Director General for Asia, who was reported in the Jakarta Post as saying that the ban was, and I quote: "A key way of placing more pressure on Singapore to move faster towards signing an extradition treaty and resolving the country's border spats. The ban also aims to push them [i.e., us] to resolve differences in extradition and some border negotiations." In another report, which made the front page of the Jakarta Post, a member of their parliamentary committee on security and international affairs was reported as saying that the sand ban was not enough to push Singapore to quickly sign the extradition treaty. This was followed by a Straits Times report that reported that, in speaking to Antara News Agency, the Indonesian parliamentary Speaker had said that their government should send back our Ambassador as a sign of protest and that our land reclamation projects would affect Indonesia's maritime borders. So, two points. As to his first point about sending back our Ambassador, it did occur to me that their government might not necessarily share their Speaker's view because, in the very same edition of the Straits Times on the very same day, there was a rather nice picture of our Ambassador to Indonesia handing over a big box of relief supplies to the Indonesian Minister of Health who received it with a very nice smile. The supplies given by our Ambassador that day were worth 200 million rupiahs. The aid was from the Singapore Embassy in Jakarta, the Singapore Association in Indonesia, and Singapore Telemedia.”
“So the Government should look into a more formal, structured way of bringing improvements to those who live in private estates. That would be very helpful. I move now to the other aspect of the Budget Statement, which was building capabilities for the future and investing in our people. In this context, the Finance Minister mentioned the spirit of enterprise, resilience and self-reliance. Whilst this Budget addresses specific needs and specific objectives, such as GST offsets, Workfare, CPF and income tax, I think that one of the most notable things about this Budget is this underlying philosophy which is quintessentially Singaporean: i.e. enterprise, resilience and self-reliance. And the need for these qualities to ensure our progress and our future becomes clear in the light of the recent events which have taken place, for example, the sand ban. Recently, Indonesia banned the export of sand. While the ban applied across the board, Singapore is one of the countries most affected as we purchase large quantities of Indonesian sand for our construction industry. The reason first given by Indonesia for the ban was the general need to protect its environment and maritime borders. Shortly after that, however, the Head of the Indonesian Maritime Security Coordinating Board said that the sand ban was due to Singapore's alleged indecisiveness in resolving border and extradition issues, thereby linking it to the negotiations for the extradition treaty and the border talks between the two countries.”
“So if we want to have a really good first-class residential neighbourhood, we will have to develop good first-class social habits. The second most common complaint that I have is littering from the upper floors. There appears to be very little consideration for those who live on the lower floors. Again, this is something that Singaporeans must understand if we want to have a good living environment. It begins with us. Government provides infrastructure, but each and every individual Singaporean living in the environment has a social responsibility to make the place environmentally clean and pleasant for others. The other thing I noted about this part of the Budget on creating a good living environment was that there was a lot of focus on the HDB heartlands. I think that more can be done to have a comprehensive and proper programme for improvements for private estates. There seems to be an idea that the people in private estates can take care of themselves, there is less attention paid to the infrastructure for them. However, I think that it is important that those in private estates are not left out. There are things which they need, for example, linkways. They need covered pedestrian overhead bridges, they need various other forms of amenities and infrastructure which they do not have the ability to implement easily. For HDB estates, we have the town councils. The town council does this for the whole HDB estate. But there is no coordinating body for the private estates. And I hope that this is something that the Government can look into. Because not everybody in the private estates necessarily drives a car. Many of them take buses; many of them also take the MRT. They too have amenities that they wish to have.”
“This makes it difficult for them to prove that they are working in order to get any financial assistance that is linked to their efforts at getting work. So steps should be taken to address this so that such low-income workers will be able to benefit from schemes such as the WIS. And steps must also be taken to ensure that employers pay their CPF because, in many instances, such employers try to take advantage of low-income workers like that and not pay CPF. One other aspect of the Budget which I wish to comment on is the creation of a living environment of the future. The Finance Minister has said that as a global city, we cannot just be an economic marketplace. We must have a living environment that is best in Asia. And with this in mind, we want to create a home where the family feels that they own not just their flat, but also our neighbourhood. So we want to transform our HDB heartlands. MND will undertake a systematic and total urban regeneration, and we will have a network of water bodies to enhance our living environment and bring waterfront living to HDB neighbourhoods. The idea is that we want a first-class residential environment. If we are going to have that, we also need to have first-class social habits which, at the moment, in some HDB estates, we do not have. When I do my walkabouts, one of the most common complaints that I encounter is the problem of people urinating in the lifts. I know that we want a network of water bodies and to bring waterfront living to our neighbourhoods, but we do not need to have water works in the lifts as well. This adds to the cost of cleaning up. This adds to the burden of the town councils. It does not enhance our living environment.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak in support of the motion. This is an excellent Budget. It is creative and it is innovative. It sets the vision of where we want to be and it outlines the means by which we are to get there. And what is most important about this Budget is that we are to get there together. The different segments of our society all reach a goal that is set out in the vision. And the idea behind this Budget is that no one should be left behind and that is particularly important when you consider the strains that are put on us with globalisation, the stretching out of incomes and the disparity between wages. That is why I am glad that much attention has been paid to levelling up for those who are less fortunate, including Workfare for low-wage workers. I applaud this initiative because it is important to encourage the spirit of self-reliance, independence and resilience of which I will say more later. But on the issue of Workfare, this helps the older, full-time workers aged above 45 years who earn $1,000 or less as well as those above 35 years who earn $1,500 or less. One point I wanted to make on Workfare was in relation to helping the informal workers. The Finance Minister had indicated that we want to encourage informal workers to join the CPF system and to benefit from the Workfare Income Supplement scheme, or WIS. This is a good initiative but there are practical problems in the implementation that will need to be addressed. Many of these are odd job labourers. They do not have formal employment contracts. Some of them do not even deal with the employers directly, especially in the construction industry. They tend to deal with the foreman or the supervisor. There is very little documentary record of their employment.”
“Given our interconnectedness and the interdependence of the ASEAN member states, I would hope that ASEAN would be an effective platform for the resolution of regional issues. However, where ASEAN is unwilling or unable to be an effective platform, then we must also use other supplemental means to secure an acceptable space for Singapore. An example in point is the haze. I read in Tuesday's newspapers that Indonesia has expressed unhappiness that Singapore had voiced our concern over the haze on 25th October 2006 at the UN Committee on Sustainable Development and that one of their Ministers had boycotted a meeting on developing an SEZ at Batam to register disapproval of our stand. I do not know why this should be so. The haze is a problem; that is a fact. It is a source of great concern to Singaporeans; that is a fact. And something needs to be done; that is a fact, too. I note that Indonesia had said that our raising the issue was tantamount to interference in the domestic affairs of Indonesia. But I would have to say that the annual haze problem constitutes an intrusion into the domestic environment of Singapore. That is something that we do have a concern about raising. The difficulty, as I understand it, was the inability to obtain a consolidated ASEAN statement on the haze, which is why there was a need for us to raise unilaterally at the UN level. So, whilst I would support ASEAN as a cornerstone of our policy, I would urge our Government, where necessary, to use other diplomatic means, if it is necessary in the protection and advancement of Singapore's interests whilst at the same time recognising that we do wish to work in cooperation with our neighbours. With this, Sir, I wish to thank the President for his Address and I support the motion. 2.13 pm”
“The friend that they were renting with may have passed away or is no longer there for whatever reason, and they find it very difficult to rent a flat with somebody else because they just do not have anybody else to rent a flat with. To ask them to live with a total stranger is in fact quite difficult. Something needs to be done to look into finding rental housing for the elderly. Retirement homes or senior citizens villages are some ideas that have been canvassed. It would be helpful if we have something along the lines where they can rent the room but have some common facilities. I do not think that we should have elderly villages or senior citizens homes away from other flats where there are young people. We must not put the elderly in a group by themselves and leave them alone. We want to put them in an environment where there is a mix of children and young couples, where they can engage with the community and there will be an opportunity for people to visit them and they form part of a complete community. This is something that needs to be looked into. That is my take on what we need to do for internal policy to make these segments of our society feel more included. I would next like to touch a little bit on our foreign policy. In his Address, the President highlighted the need for a small state like Singapore to have an active foreign policy and to participate in regional platforms, such as ASEAN and APEC, with a view to strengthening regional cooperation and managing regional problems. I also note that the MFA Addendum states that we must further entrench ASEAN as the cornerstone of our foreign policy.”
“I would have thought that it is a better holistic policy for those who fall into this group if the spouse actually stays and works here so that the spouse can contribute to the family income. Allow them to rent. I appreciate that rental housing is heavily subsidised, but then it should be a question of priority. Priority should go to Singaporeans married to Singaporeans, then Singaporeans married to PRs. The last priority should be to Singaporeans with foreign spouses, but do not disallow them from renting altogether. The third group of people who do not really feel included are the single unwed mothers who are not allowed to rent HDB flats. I do strongly feel that this is an outdated policy. I have spoken on this before, and I understand that the rationale is that MND does not want to encourage them to have babies out of wedlock. But if this is the policy objective, it is not working, because there are many children born out of wedlock. As I have said before, the availability of rental flats is not something that the couple have in mind when they engage in the activity that results in the child. That is the last thought on their minds. So, inevitably, we are going to have some children born out of wedlock. But the idea is, if we can get the mother and the child in a stable environment and given an environment which allows the mother to have the child educated, instead of having to worry about all these extraneous things, I think that would be helpful. The fourth category is the policy where we can only rent if we have two singles who are above 35 years of age. I am seeing more and more cases at my MPS of the elderly needing to rent a flat. They are from the lower income vulnerable group.”
“The second group of people who feel that they are not very included are Singaporeans with foreign spouses. Here, it is more of the Singapore males from the lower income group with foreign spouses. They are affected by two policies: one, from MND; the other, from ICA. The MND policy is that, first, they cannot purchase a flat, because they do not have enough cash. But under current MND policy, they cannot rent a flat unless the wife is a Permanent Resident or they have a Singaporean child. So, if they want to rent, they have to rent from the open market, which adds to cost. At the same time, the foreign spouse is usually on a social visit pass. After every few months, she - it is usually she although there are some cases where the foreign spouse is male, but in most cases it is female - will have to leave Singapore and go back to the home country. This adds to their cost again. At the same time, because the spouse is on a social visit pass, she cannot work and contribute to the family income. All this lends a sense of insecurity. They could get a roof over their heads if they have a child. But when they have this sense of insecurity, they are not going to want to raise a family. At the same time, we are making the spouse go back and forth, making it difficult for them to rent an affordable home. In the meantime, we wonder why we have falling birth rates. This is not to say that that is the only cause for having a falling birth rate. But this is one segment certainly which finds it difficult to settle down, have families, have children, because of the difficulties imposed on them by the policies that we have. So, I would urge the Government to look into this.”
“Now that has been changed and they subscribe to the WDA employability skills programmes. But there are many other training courses which actually require an 'O' Level before a person is eligible for the training course. This means that someone who may have the work skills cannot go for the course simply because he or she does not have an 'O' Level. So, instead of being a stepping stone, the 'O' Level has become a barrier. I agree that there should be a certain standard before a person goes for a training course, but the standard need not necessarily be an 'O' Level standard. The standard should take into account relevant work experience. There are employees without formal qualifications but have relevant work experience, they would benefit from training courses to upgrade and enhance their skills. The Ministry of National Development has a barrier-free access policy. I would encourage the Ministry of Manpower to adopt a barrier-free employability policy and take a leaf out of the MND book. I think the SAF can also do its part. Clearly, it is not the SAF's job to provide employability. But just before our NSFs' ORD, they can be encouraged or linked up with WDA or other agencies that could provide financial counselling as well as give them information on training programmes. I see this sometimes when I meet them at my MPS. These are young men in their early 20s. They have just come out from NS. Clearly, they must have dropped out of school at a relatively early age and they find it difficult to get a job. If the SAF could do something just before they ORD and link them up with the relevant agencies, I think that would go a long way towards enhancing or increasing their employability. That is the first group of people who do not seem to be very included.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak in support of the motion by Mdm Halimah Yacob, and my speech will have two parts, ie, one that focuses on our internal policy and the other on external policy. With respect to our internal policy, the President had, in his Address, talked about a competitive economy and an inclusive society, and I would like to focus, like my colleague Mdm Halimah Yacob, on the inclusive society portion. As the President rightly pointed out, to meet competition and pursue growth, we need to strengthen social cohesion. But we will only have social cohesion if people feel that they belong and are included. Hence, the need to build an inclusive society that leaves no one behind. But there are segments in Singapore who do not feel included. In the next five years of this Government, I think that policies have to be changed to address these segments, and I would like to speak on their behalf, based on the cases that I have seen in my MPS. Like Mdm Halimah Yacob, I am concerned about those who dropped out from school and have low education levels. Typically, from what I have seen, they tend to drop out at Primary 6 or at secondary school. There also seems to be a trend where we have teenage single mothers who typically drop out at age 14. When they see me at age 19 or 20, they have at least one, sometimes two kids. Later on, they realise that they have a problem, but it is difficult for them to get back into national schools. They cannot always make it to ITE. And if they have to go to a private school, it is expensive, and they cannot afford it. They also have difficulties with getting into programmes to upgrade their skills. Until recently, for example, I understand that ITE requires an 'O' or 'N' Level certificate in order for them to get a NITEC.”
“For example, the enhanced scope and the rule-making powers granted to the Minister will enable him to take into account the new landscape, something that both myself in my speech and Ms Rajah's had mentioned. Since its enactment in 1959, previous earlier major amendments had dealt mainly with enhancing powers to deal with illegal moneylending, harassment and other like situations. So these amendments under consideration are really the first set of amendments which addresses the wider issue of the framework governing legal moneylending since the Act was first enacted in 1959. So let us see how these amendments work out before we assess the need for further amendments. On the point not quite arising from the Bill but related in a way, because as I said when I moved the amendments to the Moneylenders Act in November last year, when we tackle illegal moneylending, we take a holistic approach. I am happy to report that arising from the tougher punishment regime that was put into the Act last year and also actions taken both by MHA, the Police and other related agencies, the ground situation has indeed improved. In particular, the Police's resources have been beefed up, concentrated in the Unlawful Moneylending Task Force residing in CID. And as has been said, three raids have been carried out and actually, two syndicate heads have been arrested. We will push on with these measures. Sir, I think I have answered the key points raised by Ms Rajah. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.”
“The proposed amendments are a move in the right direction to provide a more holistic approach to the business of legal moneylending. But it is hoped that this will not be the end of the process. Constant review and updating of the Act to keep apace with the fast-changing consumer credit industry will provide a good foundation for the legal moneylending business. Sir, with this, I support the amendments. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, I thank the GPC Chairman, Ms Indranee Rajah, for her support of the Bill. Essentially, she makes two key points. The first is with regard to new sections 10A and 10B. She is absolutely right. They will sharpen the teeth of the Registrar of Moneylenders requiring moneylenders to provide information and documents and also enable him and his officers to enter premises and inspect documents. But as important, together with the enhanced powers of the Minister, to make rules under section 37, these new provisions will not only provide greater efficiency and inject more flexibility to the administration of the Act, they also enable Singapore to adopt the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force, something which I had mentioned earlier. As I said in my speech, the moneylending landscape has evolved since 1959 - a point, I think, also made by Ms Rajah. So we do need to finetune our legislative framework to cater to this. Indeed, there are also new challenges like money laundering and terrorism financing. So, as part of a responsible member of the FATF, we also have to ensure that our legislative framework satisfies the requirements of the grouping. As for the need to amend the Moneylenders Act further in lieu of what Justice V K Rajah had said in the case mentioned by Ms Rajah, she is right that these amendments are useful first steps.”
“It also allows the Minister to prescribe the class or prescription of borrowers to which the moneylenders may make a loan and to prescribe the maximum rate of interest that may be charged for any loan or class of loans. The amendments signal a new approach to legal moneylending. The ability of the Minister to make rules in the categories suggested under the proposed new section 37 indicates that there will be a differentiation in the classes of people to whom loans can be made. This, in turn, means more flexibility in the credit business. The old regime was more of a situation where one size fits all, whereas the ability to make the rules proposed in the new section 37 would allow for recognition of the different classes of borrowers and greater flexibility and responsiveness to the moneylending business. This is important in today’s credit environment where there is a wide range of consumers, ranging from the relatively uninformed to those who are savvy about consumer credit. The proposed new sections 10A and 10B are also to be welcomed. The proposed new section 10A empowers the Registrar or an officer authorised by him to require the moneylender to provide information or documents. The new section 10B empowers the Registrar or an officer to enter premises used by a moneylender to carry on business in order to inspect the premises and documents found on the premises. This power to request information is important because it lends teeth to investigation and enforcement. It will make it harder for offenders to disguise or hide any breaches of the Moneylenders Act. It would also help to clamp down on money laundering or possible terrorist financing activities.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the proposed amendments to the Moneylenders Act. The Moneylenders Act was most recently amended in November 2005, and those amendments focused on illegal moneylending, enhancing the penalties for illegal moneylending and making it an offence to harass debtors. Those amendments, together with the setting up of the Anti-Unlicensed Moneylenders Task Force, had netted returns. It has been reported that five heads of moneylending syndicates have since been arrested. The current amendments, however, focus on updating the regime for the legal moneylending business, and these amendments are both welcome and timely. The current Moneylenders Act is an old piece of legislation. It was modelled on the Straits Settlement Moneylenders’ Ordinance of 1935, which was, in turn, based on the English Moneylenders Act of 1900. The business environment and the circumstances against which credit is advanced have changed greatly since then. In the High Court decision of City Hardware Pte Ltd v Kenrich Electronics Pte Ltd, Justice V K Rajah had, in his judgement, noted that the time had come for a holistic review of the Moneylenders Act against a wider backdrop of modern consumer credit policy relevant to Singapore. Under the proposed amendments, the old section 37 of the Moneylenders Act will be repealed. The new section 37 allows the Minister to make a wide range of rules in respect of the moneylending business. This, I think, is an important first step towards being able to have a holistic revamp to the moneylenders’ regime. The proposed new section 37 allows the Minister, for example, to make rules in a variety of situations, such as prescribing the maximum amount that may be lent to a borrower or a class or a group of borrowers.”
“I have three supplementary questions, Sir. First, is on the opening up of the JLVs and FLAs to cover arbitration. I would be grateful if the Minister for Law could explain the rationale behind extending it to arbitration, given that foreign law firms are already able to conduct arbitration in Singapore, whether under SIAC or any other mode of arbitration. The second question: DPM and Minister for Law mentioned that foreign lawyers would be allowed to own equity shares in local firms. I would like to know whether the foreign lawyers would also be required to be admitted to the Singapore Bar and, thereby, practise Singapore law, or whether by virtue of their admission through equity in a local firm they can automatically practise Singapore law. The third question: for the Juris Doctor degrees, in the US, of course, it is a post-graduate degree. What I want to know is whether people who get degrees from the US and want to come back to Singapore to practise would also be required to undergo the Singapore Diploma conducted by the NUS, something that students who graduate from the UK and other countries are required to undertake before they can practise.”
“Sir, I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs, the Senior Minister of State for Law and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. I should also clarify to the Senior Minister of State for Law that it is normally the necklines that go up and down, and not the bustlines. With that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.”
“What is worse is that the offenders who do this are the sort of people who present a respectable front in the society where they are known but yet they go abroad, engage in this kind of acts, come back and then put back their front. So, one, it sends a signal. Secondly, because there is the possibility of prosecution in Singapore, it would make them think twice about it and, therefore, act as a deterrent. So, I just wanted to ask the Minister where we are on the status of this proposed legislation and whether or not the Ministry will be introducing it. 6.15 pm A related topic but slightly different in context is what measures would be taken to deal with people who engage in commercial sex with minors in Singapore. This problem takes on significance when you consider the number of teenagers who get onto the Internet and the possibility of making contact with these teenagers. Teenagers nowadays have an adult view of life. They have exposure to many things which many of us would not have had when we were children. They are curious about sexual activity, and some of them, quite openly, when you read in the newspapers, have no qualms about engaging in sexual activity in exchange for money or some other form of consideration or benefit. I would therefore like to ask the Ministry whether it is taking steps to deal with this. What measures are being looked into and in which direction it thinks it would be taking steps to deal with this problem? Penal Code”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister about two related topics. One is the status of proposed legislation on sex with minors overseas, and the other is on the measures that would be taken to deal with commercial sex with minors in Singapore. On the first topic, it would be recalled that sometime ago in this House, the Senior Minister of State said that the Ministry would look into this issue of Singaporean adults who go abroad and engage in sex with minors overseas. The Ministry was at that time looking into it, and although the initial answers had been that this was something that we would not be doing, the last status indication was that this is something that was under review. I would therefore like to know what is the current status on this and whether legislation will be introduced to deal with this problem. It is a difficult problem because of the evidentiary difficulties. In Singapore, we have strict laws to deal with the problem. If somebody engages in sex with a minor in Singapore, we can handle the evidence and the police can prosecute it. It is within our control. It is much more difficult, of course, when an adult goes abroad, because the act occurs overseas, the witnesses are overseas, the child is overseas. The difficulties of prosecuting are clear. But that by itself does not mean and should not be a reason for not having legislation to deal with this problem. Firstly, having legislation would send a strong signal to people that we regard it as wrong. There is something particularly abhorrent about this kind of offence because it takes a particularly horrible kind of advantage over young children.”
“If it is a suicide attack, the immediate perpetrator obviously would be dead or likely to be badly injured. But there may be people who assist them. So these people may seek to escape. The question is, how tight is our border control? On the reverse side, there is also a situation where potential terrorists might come into Singapore. So I wish to know what kind of measures do we have to deal with that and to prevent such people from coming into Singapore. Quite apart from terrorists coming into Singapore, the London bombings in the middle of last year highlighted another new phenomenon which is that of home-grown terrorists, and that is a disturbing new development in the area of terrorism. I would like to ask the Minister for his views on whether there is a potential danger of home-grown Singapore terrorists and, again, if so, what kind of measures are being taken to address this. Generally, on a bigger security picture, I would like to ask the Minister what lessons we have learnt from the London bombings and how we can apply what has been learnt from those lessons to improve our security preparedness in Singapore. Also, I would like to ask him what is the current status of our preparedness to deal with terrorist attacks in Singapore. What have we learnt from the NorthStar operation? Will we be having more such exercises and what, in general, can the members of the public in Singapore do to assist the Home Team in dealing with potential terrorist attacks and homeland security? Homeland Security”
“The first incident, from what I understand, is that the gun had been around for a long time. So, that is not too much a problem. But in the second incident, it is not being indicated publicly the origin or the source of the gun. I am not asking for that because I understand that the matter is still under investigation and that information would probably have to be withheld. But the point I want to highlight though is the fact that the presence of a gun means that there is the possibility or availability of arms or explosives in Singapore. And this has, of course, some bearing on our general security climate and security concerns, especially in relation to terrorism. So I would like to ask the Minister what kind of measures or controls we have in place to minimise the risks of materials that could be used to make bombs, or any other kind of dangerous materials that could be used for terrorist acts, from being brought into Singapore. The other point that arises out of these crimes but with an impact on the wider security picture is the checkpoint security. In the case of the nightclub owner murder, the suspect was able to escape because the family of the victim was unable to give a description of the suspect until sometime after the incident. Again, I do not have any criticism here of the speed with which the authorities reacted. But the point I am highlighting is, in the event that an incident occurs, whether it is a terrorist incident or some other incident, what kind of measures do we have to deal with checkpoint security, how fast and how quickly can we secure our borders in the event that something happens, how do we react, in terms of border control, in the event that an incident like this occurs? Also, for terrorist attacks, it depends on the nature of the attack.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head P of the Estimates be reduced by $100. I will speak on the topic of security and crime. I note that there was an increase in the crime rate for last year by 19.9%, including all but one of the index crimes. I would therefore like to ask the Minister the reasons for the increase in the crime rate, what measures have been taken to address this and also whether he sees any particular trend arising from this increased crime rate and, if so, how this trend should be dealt with. I was also particularly concerned about the increase in violent crimes. To be fair, I am actually referring to two instances of violent crimes. But in a place like Singapore, where there are so few instances of violent crimes, each single one appears to be all the more shocking when it occurs. Recently, there was an incident reported in the newspapers of a 59-year-old man who had in an attempted robbery discharged a gun, and then of course more recently the murder of a nightclub owner who was shot five times. The suspect, we understand from the newspapers, has now been arrested in Malaysia. I would like to ask the Minister whether these incidents are indicative of any trend in violent crimes or whether the Police think that these are simply one-off incidents. I ask because I have a concern that there may be copycat crimes. Certainly, we do not have that phenomenon here in Singapore as badly as it occurs in the US. But there is cause for concern because such incidents could give other criminals ideas. Also, these two particular crimes highlight something which, to me, has a wider implication, in terms of security in general and, in particular, in relation to terrorism. The first aspect was the use of guns in these two incidents.”
“I would like to thank the Minister for Law and the Senior Minister of State for Law for their responses and clarifications and, in view of what they have said, I wish to beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $129,543,390 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $98,863,800 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Column No : 633 Head P - Ministry of Home Affairs”
“In this regard, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister, amongst those who are non-business related bankrupt petitions last year, what is the breakdown between those who filed for bankruptcy themselves and those who faced bankruptcy petitions against them by financial institutions. Can the Ministry give us the age and education profile of these cases for the last year and an assessment if the trend is more prevalent amongst young educated who actually are asking for bankruptcy? The Minister for Law also mentioned last year that the Official Assignee's Office (OA) had set up a self-petition management team to closely monitor the self-petition bankrupts. Can I ask the Minister to give an update of the work of this team and what their findings have thus far been. This is important as we must ensure that those who self-petition, do not do so under the false illusion that they can get away without paying their debts. They may not know the strict obligations of a bankrupt under the Bankruptcy Act, for example, there are travelling restrictions, making contracts, etc. What is more important is whether this team in OA's office can develop a preventive education programme to teach vulnerable groups on what they need to do to avoid bankruptcy, and at the same time manage their debts. Sir, I understand that IPTO has also set up a pre-bankruptcy mediation centre in 2002 to encourage creditors and debtors to enter into mutually acceptable debt arrangements to avoid bankruptcy. I would like to ask the Minister how successful has this centre been in helping these pre-bankruptcy cases. Lastly, I would like to ask the Minister for an update on the omnibus Insolvency Legislation Act that was proposed last year by the Committee tasked to do so.”
“It is agreed that, at the end of the day, it is the responsibility of the individual to honour his contractual obligations when he takes up these facilities or loans. At the same time, however, I think we must also ensure that the financial institutions also exercise their own corporate and social responsibility when granting these credit facilities. We have heard of MAS' guidelines that say that they leave it to the market to find its own equilibrium. But observation of the aggressive marketing strategies undertaken by some of these financial institutions suggests that their profit-orientation may overshadow their social responsibility. If I may say, it is rightfully so, as it is not their core business to be socially responsible. I hope not. Sir, the concern I have is that the young and impressionable are certainly vulnerable. It is not uncommon for a fresh graduate to receive applications of credit cards and line of credit upon graduation. Some of these are even pre-approved. The most impressionable will, in no time, end up with a couple of credit cards and unsecured loans. Car loans are also easy to come by these days. The lower income is not spared either. Loans in the form of hire purchases are very common. Sir, statistics given in this House thus far indicate that the majority, about 70% of the bankrupts, are between 31 and 50 years old. However, if we look further, at the younger age group - below 40 years old - the proportion is about 43%. At this age group, one would assume, if they are married, they have dependants. They probably have elderly dependants to support too. Sir, it will take a long time for them to get back on their feet if they are declared bankrupt.”
“So I would like to ask the Minister whether the Ministry would consider amending the Act to look not so much at the income for the past year - because people who fall into this income group, if they are earning something like about $1,000 or $1,200 a month, chances are they would not have much savings anyway - but at the person's current means to determine whether he or she can really afford legal representation at this particular point in time. And, if they cannot, then we can consider extending legal aid to them. The second question I would like to ask is whether the Government would consider extending legal aid to cover criminal matters. At present, the Act does not extend it to cover criminal matters. In fact, for criminal matters what they do is they go to the Law Society which has a criminal legal aid scheme. But that is a volunteer scheme. It just seems a little odd that for something as serious as a criminal charge, these persons would have to actually depend on a volunteer scheme. So I wonder if the Government might extend the scope of legal aid to cover criminal matters as well. Bankruptcy The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports and Minister for National Development (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman): Mr Chairman, the issue of bankruptcy has been highlighted over the last year or so. We use to think that bankruptcy involves only people who are affected by business failures. However, as we learned last year, 90% of bankruptcy cases involved non-business related reasons, the majority are due to over-spending on credit facilities. Much has also been asked about the regulations governing the issuance of credit facilities by financial institutions.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Estimates be reduced by $100. If I may, Sir, I would like to speak on the topic of legal aid and the opportunities that people have for legal representation. Before doing so, I should like to declare my interest as a practising lawyer. Under the Legal Aid and Advice Act, a person is only eligible for legal aid if, (i) the applicant's disposal capital is not more than $7,000, or (ii) the applicant's disposal income does not exceed $10,000 per annum. If you look at the disposal income requirement, this works out to something like approximately $900 a month for the past year and that is quite a high threshold. The Director of Legal Aid has no discretion to vary this. The Minister can authorise the Director to grant legal aid if the Minister is of the opinion that it is in the public interest that legal aid be granted to a particular person, but the Director himself has got no discretion. There are, of course, very few instances where the issue may be of public interest, but it is important to the individual in question. There are many instances where a person may earn more than $900 a month, but not very much more than that, and yet still need legal aid. Take the case of a housewife who gets maintenance. Let us say she gets $1,000 a month. That works out to about $12,000 a year. She would not meet the legal aid criterion. But if, for some reasons, her husband cuts off her maintenance and then there is an issue in dispute and she needs to litigate that, she would not qualify for legal aid.”
“Sir, I wish to speak on the Registration of Criminals Act amendment. The Act was amended recently to allow the records for certain categories to be considered as spent. And the reason behind this was to give offenders a second chance to find jobs. But that amendment only works depending on the question that the employer asks. If the employer asks, "Do you have a record?" Then the person can say, "No", because it is spent. But if the employer asks, "Have you ever been convicted of an offence?" Then the person has to say, "Yes". And the purpose behind that amendment is then lost. I would like to ask whether the Government, as a major employer, is considering amending its forms. Its employment application forms, as I currently understand, actually ask the second question, which is "Have you ever been convicted of an offence?" I wish to know whether the Government, having amended the Act, will, as a major employer, also walk the talk and amend its forms to give such offenders a second chance.”
“If the family has three, four or five children, that family needs help and telling them that they cannot have help because they have more than two children would not help them and would not lift them out of the poverty trap and it would not help the parents either. So we have to think of more targeted programmes to help the people who fall into this kind of group, the people who need the most help. And you need a holistic kind of help because it is not just money. It is about counselling them, helping to change their mindset, to understand family and financial planning and also to encourage the mothers to go back to work, whilst, at the same time, giving them the support in terms of childcare. The other thing also would be transport subsidies if that were possible because, frequently, I find the school fees and school textbooks are taken care of, but sometimes they have difficulties in meeting the transport fees in getting the children to school. Whilst the Budget on the whole is a very good Budget and, by and large, helps a broad number of Singaporeans, there is still a small group that can be helped better under more targeted and more focused programmes. With this, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget. 5.55 pm”
“But putting them into national schools, maybe still possible at the age of 9, is very difficult if the child is 14 years old. He has to go to a private school. He needs a lot of extra tuition and a lot of catching up. The existing schemes do not really deal with this. The other problem is when you have families where the mothers are not working because they have several children and they do not work because they have young kids to look after. I often ask the mothers what is their educational qualification because I try to encourage them to work. Frequently, I find that they are either of Primary Six or Lower Secondary education level. The HOPE scheme, which is intended to help low-income families, is aimed at helping those who limit themselves to, at most, two children. So it is open to couples if both have no more than two 'O' level passes, although I understand that this is going to be relaxed to include parents without post-Secondary qualification and slightly older couples who still have low income after working for some years. But the HOPE scheme still maintains the rule that couples must have no more than two children in order to be eligible for HOPE. That is not a very hopeful scenario. The people who are left out would be divorced parent with a child or children, single parent with a child or children, and couples with more than two children. And these are precisely the ones who need help the most. For families where there are more children, I would say this, the child, once born, cannot be unborn. The child is there.”
“Because the first generation spends the time building up the business and getting the money; the second generation works to preserve it; and the third generation who do not have to work terribly hard but have the money, then just decide to quarrel about how the money should be spent and, very rapidly, the money goes. As a nation, we are still in the first generation and we should be careful to carry on to the second generation, and to continue for many more generations. So that is why I agree with and applaud the workfare approach, which is to help people to help themselves. By and large, all the initiatives in the Budget - to help people to help themselves - are very good. I just want to comment on one, which is the topic that the Prime Minister spoke on, about creating hope for the future. The Prime Minister mentioned that the fourth strategy is to create hope to ensure that children do better than their parents and can help lift their parents out of poverty instead of inheriting their problems. So we should invest more in the education of children from low-income families to help them become school-ready and work-ready. I agree with the sentiment and the approach, but I am not convinced that the existing schemes fully achieve this purpose. Existing schemes, such as the Financial Assistance Scheme and the KiFAS, tend to be generic in nature. They help a general percentage of people and that is fine for a general group, but they are not targeted enough to help some of the truly needy. One example is what I see on the ground. When residents come to see me and I find that there are children well beyond school-going age of 9, 11 and, in one case, 14 years old, who have not been to school, I have to try and get them into school at this stage.”
“This was in the early part after the last elections when there was a lot of discussion on whether to raise GST. One of my residents said, "No, we should not raise GST." I explained that the Government needed to get money, had to have income, and one of the main sources of income was taxes and a better way of doing it would be indirect taxes for smaller amounts. Her response was, "It does not matter. Get the money from somewhere else. Whatever it is, just don't raise GST." There was a sense that she did not understand that the money has to come from somewhere. For those of you who are of my generation and reasonably old would remember the movie, "The Sound of Music". There is a scene in "The Sound of Music" where Maria and the Captain were in the glasshouse, and she sang a song that is called "Something Good". But there is a line in that song which struck me as particularly appropriate for this Budget. And the line is, "Nothing comes from nothing. Nothing ever could." For those of you who remember that song, the Budget is just like that. The money does not come from nowhere. It is going to come from somewhere. It is going to come from money that we have earned, money that we have saved and money that we have put aside. So it is important for Singaporeans to understand that. We share surpluses, but we must also be very wary of pure welfare because if we keep doling out the money, very soon, there will be nothing left. There is a Chinese which says that wealth does not last beyond three generations. And I see this in the line of my work because I do litigation. Very often, in litigation, the conflict and the fighting take place at the third generation level.”
“It is very important for young Singaporeans to know our political history as well as our economic history. And, therefore, when we put money into education to develop our human capital and invest in our people, it is important that the Ministry of Education should take a look at this aspect and ensure that our young people get to learn this. The Prime Minister spoke of the Opportunity Fund and the fact that $50 million for education would be set aside as part of the Progress Package. This would be left to the schools to dictate what they would spend the funds on and the hope is that they will provide opportunities for the students to learn beyond the classroom and to build a firm foundation for learning. I would urge the schools to provide programmes that will encourage our students to have a better sense of our political and economic history. It is also noteworthy that Mr Rajaratnam, even in his passing, has reminded us of this fact. It is important because without this sense of our political and economic history, this Budget and every other budget just become an exercise in "what goodies can we get". And it is true. Whenever we listen to the Budget speech, everybody wants to know when we can get to the "goodies" section and see what handouts there are and what we will get. There is nothing wrong with that so long as we, as Singaporeans, understand that you can only hand out "goodies" when there is surplus from which to hand out "goodies". And not everybody understands that. I think it is important that we teach our school children from a very young age, basic economic principles. I know that economics is not a compulsory subject, but I think it is important to teach them these principles. Let me just cite an example. I did a walkabout once.”
“It is a lesson that we learnt many years ago and because we learnt it, it is something that we enshrine in our laws to make sure that going forward, we will have a set of principles by which we abide where we can live together. There are many people who would cite the "kampung" spirit. They would tell you, "Oh, in the old days, we have the kampung spirit." But I can tell you that that is actually more illusory than real. If you go back to the Straits Times' archives and read the newspapers about history in the 50s and 60s, you will see the degree of racial and religious conflict that there was then. So, the sensitivity to racial religious conflict is hardwired into the collective memory of older Singaporeans, but it is not there in the sense of the younger Singaporeans. A second example is the lack of awareness of the problems of segregation, which also leads to a lack of awareness of the critical importance of ethnic integration. There have been calls to do away with the ethnic integration programme, but the people who call for this do not fully appreciate the dangers of segregation. When Singapore was a colony and under the British, there were Indian areas, Chinese areas and Malay areas. That is a great policy for a colony. It is not a good policy for a nation. It is not a good policy for a people that are trying to create a national identity. So that is why I say it is necessary for us to understand our origins in order to understand where we must go. We need to understand the origins of the racial conflict in Singapore to know why we have to be sensitive to race and religion and why we have to have racial integration. Those were just two examples. But the point I wanted to make was, it is very important for young Singaporeans to have a sense of our history.”
“There are many Singaporeans who do not know the fires in the crucible from which Singapore was forged, which means that they do not know our position in time and space in history and they do not have a sense of the uniqueness of who we are. We do not have 5,000 years of the history of China and we do not have the other 5,000 years of the history of India. We do not even have the relatively shorter history of Europe or the Americas. But what we do have is a nation that is forged from will, intellect and a set of principles, and this is something that they must know because, if we do not know from where we came, how do we know in which direction they are to go? We must know our origins in order to understand our destination. And why do I say this? Let me just take two examples. The lack of awareness of our past history and of the racial and religious conflicts sometimes leads to calls for unfettered freedom of expression. It is good for us to be able to say what we like, we should be able to express ourselves. That is true to some extent. But when it is freedom of expression untempered by a sensitivity for race and religion, that is dangerous and is illustrated by the recent incidence of the prosecutions under the Sedition Act. It is also made all the more relevant by the progress of technology because, nowadays, you have young people who enjoy blogging. There is nothing wrong with blogging in itself. But, of course, in the process of blogging, people may unwittingly traverse upon the sensitivities of others and hurt others. This is a hard lesson which the Danes are learning today.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me the opportunity to participate in this debate. I wish to say at the outset that I support the Budget, and shall focus on two particular aspects of the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance's speech. The first aspect is growing our human capital and investing in the next generation. The Prime Minister had said that besides attracting talent, we are also investing in our own people, we are providing students with more opportunities from primary to tertiary level, we should develop critical thinking, reshape the education landscape, provide more curriculum options, etc. I agree with all of that. I think that that is a praiseworthy objective and that it should be firmly supported. There is, however, something I wish to say in that regard, namely, that it is not sufficient just to equip our students with skills. It is not sufficient to give them knowledge. Education is more than just mere technocracy. In educating our young, we must not forget to teach them the things that make up the heart and the soul of a nation. And I say this because I read the newspapers in the past few days and noticed that there were quite a number of young Singaporeans who had written in to say that they did not know the role that Mr S Rajaratnam had played in our history. They did not know that he was the man who wrote our Pledge. Neither did they know about the historical circumstances which led him to pen the Pledge and to craft those words which have become the articles of faith that bind all Singaporeans, irrespective of our racial, religious or linguistic backgrounds.”
“When dealing with minors and young people, the question is whether this should be left to the casino operator and its agents or whether this is something on which the Police's assistance should be enlisted to help remove the minor. Dealing with minors is an emotive issue and I can see here that there will be potential for allegations of assault and battery, ruffling up the minors and bearing in mind that the minors in question may not just be Singaporean young people, but also foreigners and there is also the PR aspect of it. The question is whether it may not be better to have official enforcement agency to deal with it. I also note that any minor who enters or remains on a casino premises will be guilty of an offence. I would be grateful if the Minister could clarify whether this would be a seizable offence, bearing in mind that some of the minors who contravene the "no entry" rule might be foreigners. We should ensure that our enforcement process is quick and relatively painless. I am not, in any way, suggesting that Singaporean minors should be treated differently from foreigners but it is just that when you are dealing with minors, and particularly having regard to the fact that the Integrated Resorts are intended to be a tourist attraction, the potential for a negative PR when dealing with minors is there and is something that we should be mindful of when we do our enforcement. The last point on which I would like some further clarifications from the Minister is whether the provisions of the draft Bill really have sufficient safeguards against money-laundering or at least enabling the authorities to detect money-laundering activities.”
“This potential problem has been recognised in the Bill and is dealt with in clauses 130 to 137 of the Bill. I would be interested to know though how this would actually work in practice and whether the provisions are sufficient to keep the minors out. I notice that what the Bill requires the casino operator to do is to obtain acceptable proof of age from the minors. At the moment, acceptable proof of age does not have a specific definition. I am curious to know why it is not specified that the proof that is required would be proof of identification with photograph, such as identity cards (ICs) for Singaporeans or passport in the case of foreigners. The way the provision is structured is that it is a defence to disciplinary action if it is shown that the minor was 16 and above and produced acceptable proof of age. If proof of age was an ID document which has a birth date, then he or she should not have been let in at all unless the ID was forged or tampered with. If it was forged or tampered with, then of course, I can understand that would constitute a defence. But the way the Bill is drafted suggests that the acceptable proof of age that is required may not be definitive or conclusive which then leaves room for the casino operator to have to make a judgment call on the age of the young person and they may possibly make the wrong judgment call and let the minor in. The other point relates to clause 133(4) of the Bill which provides that the minors can be removed from the casino premises by the person in charge of the casino, an agent of the casino operator or a casino employee by using no more force than is reasonably necessary.”
“Where there is the lure of money, certain types of activities tend to gravitate towards it, and solicitation for prostitution and illegal money-laundering are such potential problems. This is dealt with under clause 129 of the Bill which provides that the casino operator shall take all appropriate steps to ensure that there is no solicitation for prostitution or any other immoral purpose or unlicensed money-lending by its employees, patrons or other persons within the casino. My question is whether these provisions go far enough and whether they are sufficient because casino operators, the very nature of their business is to make money from the casino activities. They have a commercial purpose and objective. Law enforcement and law and order is not their primary function nor is it their primary focus. When you look at the Bill, this is the only provision that deals with that. And right in the heart of more than over 100 provisions, it is just this one clause that deals with solicitation for prostitution and illegal money-lending. And the words are that "the casino operator is to take appropriate steps" which sound somewhat vague. What does it mean that they have to take appropriate steps? If the legislative framework is being supplemented by a holistic framework outside of the legislation, in other words, working with various social agencies or working with the Police outside of a legislative context, then perhaps that would help to address the problem. But if everything hinges purely on clause 129, then it does not appear to me that that is sufficient. The second aspect that I wanted to touch is that of minors. Minors are obviously vulnerable persons. Being exposed to casino activities is a source of concern.”
“Sir, the Casino Control Bill is a comprehensive Bill or legislation that seeks to regulate casino operations, hitherto considered a very un-Singaporean activity within a very Singaporean context. The Bill is far ranging, covering, as it does, regulatory aspects, such as the establishment of the Casino Regulatory Authority, licensing of the casino operators and its employees, as well as supervision and control of the casino operators and its operations and internal controls. It also has two peculiarly Singaporean provisions - the imposition of a casino tax and provisions dealing with the National Council on Problem Gambling. On Parts of the Bill that deserve special commendation, I would think it is the provisions in relation to the licensing of the casino operators as well as the licensing of casino employees. The probity and integrity of an establishment, such as a casino, are the sum total of the people who run it and who are employed in it. The provisions in this Bill which deal with the licensing of employees, in particular, are comprehensive and I would commend and support those. I would like to focus on some of the other provisions that the Bill is directed at. It would not have escaped notice that right in the middle of the word "casino", are the three little alphabets, "sin", and it is symptomatic of casino operations that embedded in the heart of it is the potential for social ills or social risk. Clearly, the draft Bill is aimed at dealing with some of these potential social ills. The ones that I wanted to focus on are prostitution and illegal money-lending, the provisions dealing with the barring of entry of minors, the casino and money-laundering. Where there are casinos, there is money.”
“Under the RCA, the Registrar of Criminals keeps a register. And on that register are various particulars. It includes the conviction, particulars of the offence, but it also includes things like the ex-offender's fingerprints. And if a person is charged with a crime but is subsequently acquitted or completely discharged, the fingerprint records and the photographs which are on the register are destroyed. And they are destroyed because the person is deemed innocent. There is a similar approach with respect to the DNA database that is also kept by the Registrar. For these ex-offenders who had their records spent but whose convictions can sometimes be referred to for particular purposes such as investigations or court proceedings, what happens to their registrable particulars, in particular their finger prints and DNA records? Do they remain on the register or are they destroyed as well, similar to those who are acquitted or discharged?”
“But the question is whether we want to interfere too much in the employer's HR practices, and particularly for those in the private sector, because we do want them to have a certain autonomy in the way they run their HR business. The alternative would be that we have to, both as employers and society, change our mindset, and to now slowly realise that there is another category that has come into being. Instead of the previous two categories, which is either offender or non-offender, there is now a third category of someone who has been an offender but because it is spent, we should treat him or her differently than someone who still has a record, and that obviously is going to need, if we go that route, a lot of persuasion and cooperation, and we would need the employers as well as members of society on board for that. And I think that is a role that should be played not just by MHA but something which the Ministry of Manpower should be working on as well, and employers' associations, such as the Singapore National Employers' Federation. I would also like to ask the Senior Minister of State to clarify two points. One, when explaining why we had decided to go along the regime of spent records rather than having the records expunged, he said that it was because this is a new legislation and we want to proceed cautiously. If I could just inquire, what are the specific concerns about having a regime where these records are expunged? Is there something that we are particularly afraid of or concerned about that we have seen from experience with the legislation in other countries, or is this just a general concern? The second clarification I would like to seek is: what happens to the registrable particulars of these ex-offenders whose records have been spent? Let me explain.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I speak in support of the Bill. I strongly support the intention behind the amendment which is to allow an ex-offender who has turned over a new leaf to have a second chance and to start on a clean slate. The proposed amendments are useful because, first, they allow the ex-offender who has a criminal record that has been spent to be deemed to have no record of that conviction. And, secondly, because it is tied to him having a five-year period of being crime free, it is a powerful incentive to help that person stay crime free and therefore have his record spent. The concerns I have though are whether the amendments either go far enough or whether the legislative framework may have some difficulties in terms of implementation. I think the most pertinent point will be the one which the Senior Minister of State has highlighted, and that is the attitude of employers. Because we have decided to embark on the regime where records are spent rather than expunged, it means that the fact of the conviction remains even though you can say that you now no longer have a record, and it does mean, as the Senior Minister of State has illustrated, that if an employer asks you point blank, "Do you have a criminal record?", you can truthfully answer yes. But if he asks you point blank, "Have you ever been convicted?", you cannot truthfully say no. You have to say, "Yes, I have been convicted.", which means that the ex-offender's employability or his ability to get a second chance is dependent, to some extent, on how the employer frames the question. There are only two ways to deal with that. One possibility is to legislate on it and we say that the employers have to ask the question in a particular way, ie, they can only ask whether you have a record.”
“Sir, I think we would accept that there is no timing which is a good timing for raising transport fares. However, our public transport companies appear to have made unfortunate timing and elevated it to an art form, because they have announced their application at a time when they also announced quite large profits. I think the question the public has in mind is: where our transport companies are doing well, can they not use some of these profits to subsidise their operating cost? And is that something that the Public Transport Council will bear in mind?”
“The public also recognises the risks posed by second-hand smoke. In the long run, my Ministry's intent is to do away with the need for an exhaustive list and move towards allowing smoking only in private premises, wide open spaces and designated smoking areas. Hawker Centres Upgrading Programme (HUP)”
“In the NEA's own online survey conducted in February this year, more than 80% of respondents were in favour of imposing some form of ban on smoking in entertainment outlets. My Ministry recognises the concerns of operators who fear that a ban on smoking would affect patronage and result in a drop in business income. NEA will be consulting operators and trade associations to address their concerns and explore measures to mitigate any possible business impact before the ban is announced later this year. Sir, I now turn to hawker centres and coffeeshops. These are frequently patronised by families, including young children. At times, patrons could find it difficult to avoid second-hand smoke from an adjacent table. 63% of those surveyed by the Health Promotion Board supported a ban on smoking in hawker centres and coffeeshops. NEA's survey indicated that more than 90% of respondents supported some form of ban on smoking in hawker centres and coffeeshops. On the other hand, patrons may not be affected if the natural ventilation in these venues is sufficient to remove the smoke quickly. In fact, among those who supported the ban on smoking in hawker centres and coffeeshops in NEA's survey, close to a third indicated their preference for a partial ban, for example, in the form of a smoking corner, as a first step. Sir, NEA will consult the relevant business associations on extending the smoking ban to hawker centres and coffeeshops. A decision on the ban on smoking in hawker centres and coffeeshops will be made by the end of this year, after all the consultations have been completed. Sir, my Ministry will continue to review the list of public places, as and when necessary, so as to better protect the health of our population from the threat of second-hand smoke.”