Josephine Teo
Singapore
“The Government's risk-calibrated approach to data security in artificial intelligence (AI) systems was explained in a written reply, given on 9 January 2024, to related questions asked by Dr Tan Wu Meng and Mr Gerald Giam.”
“Access to frontier models is helpful for specific use cases, such as advanced research and cybersecurity. However, these form a small proportion of artificial intelligence (AI) demand. For most industry, Government and research uses, capable models are already available.”
“The Government tracks the development of technical standards for identifying artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content, including watermarking and digital provenance approaches, as part of broader efforts to manage AI-related risks.”
“Upon receiving a valid report of intimate image abuse, the Commissioner of Online Safety is empowered by law to direct Online Service Providers (OSPs) to disable access by Singapore users to the specified harmful online material. This direction may be extended to cover identical copies found on the platform.”
“The Government is committed to keeping children safe online. We have announced plans to extend age assurance requirements to designated social media services, including requiring platforms to keep users under 13 off their services.”
“Under the Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Act 2025, the Commissioner of Online Safety is empowered to issue directions to platforms to remove specified harmful content, including intimate image abuse.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,900 lines we hold for Josephine Teo, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 15 of 58.
“SingPost’s rates for basic letter services have remained unchanged since 2014. In approving the increase in postage rates, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) took into consideration the higher operating costs, particularly for manpower and energy, that SingPost faced in recent years. Domestic postage services that are consumed in Singapore also remain subject to the Goods and Services Tax (GST), which increased by one percentage point from 1 January 2023. Prices will only rise for letters weighing up to 20 grammes and 40 grammes, by 1 cent per year in 2023 and 2024, from the current rates of 30 cents and 37 cents respectively. If consumers already hold existing "1st Local" and "2nd Local" stamps for such letters, they can continue using them after the rate adjustments take effect, without needing to top up the difference.”
“My suggestion to the Member is to encourage the resident to call at one of our ServiceSG Centres. To give the Member a sense of the scale that ServiceSG Centres are able to help residents with, in terms of services, the ServiceSG centres at Our Tampines Hub and One Punggol, typically, will be able to work with the residents to go through more than 400 frequently transacted services offered by the Government. The other three ServiceSG centres located in CCs also offer over 200 services that they can help residents to complete.”
“My suggestion to the Member is to encourage the resident to call at one of our ServiceSG Centres. The alternative is that through a partnership between IMDA and the People's Association (PA), there are also 38 Community Centres that offer a scaled down version of what is available at the ServiceSG Centres. To give the Member a sense of the scale that ServiceSG Centres are able to help residents with, in terms of services, each one of these ServiceSG Centres, typically, will be able to work with the residents to go through more than upwards of 400 types of services offered by the Government. The 38 Community Centres where there is a partnership between IMDA and PA, they also offer upwards of 200 services that they can help residents to complete. [Please refer to "Government Assistance for Residents who are Not Digitally Literate", Official Report, 30 November 2022, Vol 95, Issue 78, Oral Answers to Questions section.] [(proc text) Written statement by Mrs Josephine Teo circulated with leave of the Deputy Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)] I wish to make the following factual correction to my statement made at the Sitting of 30 November 2022. My statement should read as follows:”
“Security officers can check a visitor’s photo ID, such as one’s NRIC, during registration to verify their identity. To contact the visitors when necessary, they may also collect certain information, such as name and contact number. For buildings or compounds that collect NRIC numbers, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC)’s Advisory Guidelines for Management Corporations require them to implement tighter measures to secure the collected personal data. If a visitor thinks that security officers have not observed PDPC guidelines, he or she should seek clarification from the Management Corporation’s Data Protection Officer and seek an amicable resolution of the matter. The visitor can lodge a complaint with PDPC if the matter is not resolved.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his comment. It is certainly a good suggestion. May I also just say the broader point that Mr Dennis Tan as well as Mr Lim Biow Chuan brought up is that even in terms of the way we design services, and as agencies pivot to digital delivery, they should be conscious of the fact that there will be certain segments of the population that will not find it so comfortable to use digital services and to make the non-digital service options still available. That is, indeed, the philosophy that we are trying to adopt. One very common reference that we can all relate to is the use of the CDC vouchers, for example. Even in terms of how it is being designed, it has in mind how citizens who are not so comfortable using digital tools can be enabled to benefit from the scheme. That is why a non-digital option was retained. Over time, I think we see that fewer and fewer of our citizens need to rely on those non-digital options, but we will, obviously, have to keep those non-digital options available until such time that most, if not all, of these citizens can migrate to the digital versions.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his question and for his very useful feedback. We recognise that there will be situations like these where residents will feel quite unsure about what to do when they encounter Government services that have shifted online substantially. My suggestion to the Member is to encourage the resident to call at one of our ServiceSG Centres. The alternative is that through a partnership between IMDA and the People's Association (PA), there are 38 Community Centres that offer a scaled down version of what is available at the ServiceSG Centres. To give the Member a sense of the scale that ServiceSG Centres are able to help residents with, in terms of services, each one of these ServiceSG Centres, typically, will be able to work with the residents to go through more than upwards of 400 types of services offered by the Government. The 38 Community Centres where there is a partnership between IMDA and PA, they also offer upwards of 200 services that they can help residents to complete. [Please refer to "Clarification by Minister for Communications and Information", Official Report, 30 November 2022, Vol 95, Issue No 78, Correction by Written Statement section.] If all else fails, Mr Lim is very welcome to send an email to me and I will certainly find a way to help his resident.”
“Mr Speaker, the Government fully recognises that not everyone is comfortable using digital tools. The SG Digital Office was established in June 2020 to support the adoption of basic digital tools and skills among less digitally savvy individuals. Residents can visit SG Digital community hubs at selected libraries and community centres to receive one-to-one or small group training on skills, such as how to use a smartphone, make e-payments and learn cybersecurity tips on how to stay safe online. To date, more than 210,000 seniors have been engaged under the Seniors Go Digital Programme. Additionally, many agencies provide in-person and contact centre services, to assist those who may have difficulty transacting with Government online. The Public Service has also set up five ServiceSG Centres to serve as one-stop physical touchpoints where officers can guide residents through digital transactions and help them complete frequently used Government services across 20 agencies. While the Government’s use of digital communication channels has increased, offline channels remain critical. On top of newspaper publications and broadcasts via free-to-air television and radio, many Government agencies inform residents of key policy announcements through hard copy letters, via the Digital Display Panels at HDB blocks and even through house visits. For example, the Silver Generation Office conducts outreach to communicate Government policies to residents and guide seniors who need help applying for assistance schemes online. Even as more services are digitalised, the Government remains committed to maintaining an inclusive society and will continue to ensure that residents can communicate and transact with the Government, regardless of their digital ability.”
“The field of quantum computing is relatively nascent. Quantum computers are expected to be able to solve certain types of complex calculations faster than conventional computers today and can benefit various sectors, including the healthcare and biomedical sector for drug development. To reap these opportunities, Singapore has made steady investments in quantum research and development over the past two decades, including the establishment of Centre for Quantum Technologies as a Research Centre of Excellence. This year, the National Quantum Office was set up in the Agency for Science, Technology and Research to further advance Singapore's quantum technologies, talent and ecosystem development. There is growing international interest in the potential risk of quantum computing to cryptography, which would affect digital authentication and communications. The US' National Institute of Standards and Technology has been leading efforts to standardise post-quantum cryptography, which we are monitoring. In Singapore, the National Quantum-Safe Network was launched this year as a nationwide testbed to trial and assess commercial quantum-safe technologies, such as Quantum Key Distribution. Beyond that, MCI, the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore and the Information and Media Development Authority are working with other relevant agencies to develop quantum-safe approaches for the continued security of digital communications and records.”
“In an answer to a Parliamentary Question in February this year we explained that based on the first trial, which retrofits roadside lampposts in brownfield sites, GovTech assessed that it is technically feasible to deploy sensors on retrofitted lampposts. GovTech has also developed a lamppost infrastructure design that converts a normal lamppost into a shareable Lamppost-as-a-Platform (LaaP) that can accommodate multiple sensors. The design allows agencies deploying sensors to share the same LaaP infrastructure and avoid duplicating the resources and time to set up their own infrastructure. We are still studying the demand, costs, and their impact on deployment. The second trial tests use cases relevant to residential areas in a greenfield site, and its conclusion has been delayed by COVID-19. It is currently still ongoing and is expected to conclude in 2023. As the trial is still in early stages, it would be premature to discuss the performance.”
“We can instead seek to raise the level of security to make it harder for scammers to succeed. For example, with scams perpetrated through calls and SMSes, Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean explained, for the Parliament Sitting on 4 July 2022 [Please refer to "Completion of Review of Use of SMS and Clickable Links for Government Agencies by Smart Nation Digital Government Group", Official Report, 4 July 2022, Vol 95, Issue 63, Written Answers to Questions section.], the comprehensive set of measures to strengthen backend prevention, detection and mitigation measures that Government is implementing. Public education is another critical plank of our anti-scam measures. For seniors in particular, the Singapore Police Force works with various stakeholders like Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) and RSVP Singapore to implement targeted programmes. The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA)’s SG Cyber Safe Seniors Programme also raises awareness and drives adoption of cyber hygiene practices amongst seniors. It has engaged more than 45,000 seniors since its launch; Programmes are also regularly reviewed and updated to ensure their relevance.”
“The Government serves a wide range of citizens. As more of them use and enjoy the benefits of digital tools in their daily lives, our services must also strive to offer comparable user experiences. This is a key impetus for government agencies to digitalise many transactions with citizens. By and large, digitalised services have brought added convenience to the public as more transactions can be completed anytime, anywhere. Nonetheless, we recognise the need to support those who are not ready or unable to use digital services. Most government agencies provide in-person over-the-counter support or contact centre services to assist them. We have also set up ServiceSG centres where officers can guide and help citizens complete frequently used Government services across 20 agencies. In addition, we recognise the need for continued availability of non-digital options for services that seniors regularly access. For example, physical CDC vouchers can be printed at community clubs and used for payment to participating merchants. In healthcare, patients at the 14 public hospitals continue to be able to make cash or NETS payment over the counter, even as digital options have become more widely used. Most also offer additional payment options, such as through 7-Eleven retail outlets, post offices, SAM or AXS kiosks. Like the Member, we are concerned about the increased threats of scams. It is not only seniors who are scammed; victims come from all age groups. Scam tactics also vary and do not always rely on digital means. The Government cannot realistically prevent citizens from falling prey to scams by avoiding digital services for public sector transactions, when so many of the transactions in their private lives have gone digital.”
“Mr Leon Perera had asked a similar question which was comprehensively addressed in the Sitting of February 2021. As previously explained, Government agencies conduct many forms of public engagements, including consultations on proposed legislation, to obtain feedback on issues of concern to the public. We appreciate the importance of closing the loop with relevant stakeholders and will often also share findings with the public at large. Given the breadth and depth of feedback, they are usually summarised to capture the key themes. Where specific comments provide additional insight, they may also be reflected. However, not every respondent would consent to having their feedback published in full, as many would prefer to provide feedback on a confidential basis. Only publishing feedback from respondents who have given consent might also give an incomplete picture of the feedback gathered. This may well result in a skewed picture and run counter to the objective of reflecting the broad range of views from the public.”
“For large-scale crowd events where mobile cellular network traffic in the vicinity could be higher than usual, the Infocomm Media Development Authority works with mobile network operators to implement measures to increase capacity. This is already the case for events, such as the National Day Parade. Such measures range from optimising their networks that serve the event areas, to the deployment of additional network equipment. Mobile networks are closely monitored and engineers will be on standby to address network issues. Voice calls are also prioritised over Internet access on mobile networks, to ensure callers are able to reach emergency services.”
“The Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) seeks to enable a vibrant and competitive telecommunications market, in order to improve service quality and to protect consumers’ interests. In this regard, IMDA’s inaugural publication of statistics on telecommunication service providers’ handling of consumer feedback is a new initiative that provides increased transparency on an important aspect of telecommunication service providers’ performance. This is intended to help consumers make more informed decisions when choosing a service provider. IMDA has also published other performance reports, for example, the publication of statistics on service providers' network quality performance, since 2007. Telecommunication service providers are, ultimately, responsible for attending to their own customers and resolving their complaints. If they do not improve their customer service, consumers can and do vote with their feet and switch to other service providers. In addition, IMDA has set up an Alternative Dispute Resolution, or ADR Scheme, to further incentivise telecommunication service providers to resolve contractual disputes with their consumers in a timely manner. Hence, IMDA will monitor service performance over time, including various customer service standards, to assess if improvements are made and if high standards are maintained.”
“In turn, online services will be held accountable for their systems, processes and actions. And where there is egregious content, such as content that undermines racial and religious harmony, the Government will step in to protect users. Ultimately, we must recognise that there is no single measure that will assure us of online safety. We will need laws, codes, education, user reporting and a whole range of interventions. We will also need to keep updating our measures to deal with new risks. I am heartened that Members are united on this and I thank the House for its unanimous support. Shared responsibility, parental guidance and active individual involvement will play a key role in ensuring that even in the face of harmful online content, users, including children, can stay safe online. This Bill is a first step. We will continue to work with all of you and our various partners to keep our people safe online. Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move. [Applause.] 4.06 pm”
“(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Deputy Speaker, in this day and age, a piece of harmful online content has the potential to spread like wildfire, causing serious damage. We all know that firefighters are needed to put out fires. The cyberspace, too, needs such first responders. The purpose of the Online Safety Bill is to enable us to "fight fires" in a timely and effective manner. While it is important to put in place relevant laws, it is impossible for the law to eradicate harmful online content completely. Instead, we need to adopt an agile and accretive approach to deal with the fast-changing cyberspace. More importantly, the Government fully understands that we need partners to co-develop solutions. One important stakeholder is parents. However, many parents are not digital natives themselves. Hence, keeping up with the ever-evolving online space proves to be challenging for them. The Government is, therefore, working with multiple stakeholders to enhance parents’ awareness of online safety and strengthen their capabilities to guide their children, for instance, by informing parents about the safety options available on social media platforms. Although keeping the cyberspace safe is an uphill task, so long as we work together, I am confident we can create a safer and more vibrant digital future for Singaporeans. (In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I have tried to respond to as many of the questions and suggestions as I can. The Bill before us today seeks to create a safer online environment for Singapore users. Users will be empowered with the tools to manage their own safety and equipped with the information needed to make informed decisions about how they wish to use online services.”
“Thank you. This will give Members a sense of the breadth and depth of public education efforts that are already available in Singapore even as we recognise that there are gaps that need to be plugged. To highlight a few examples, Google held its Online Safety Park at the Digital for Life Festival earlier this year and it is partnering the Media Literacy Council (MLC) to bring its "Be Internet Awesome" programme to Primary schools to train 50,000 parents and children on online safety measures. The last I met with them, they said that the 50,000 target has been met. They are actually aiming to double it to 100,000. Meta collaborated with the National Crime Prevention Council and MLC on a campaign to educate users on top scam typologies and tips to keep safe. This campaign reached over two million users and a second campaign has been launched on e-commerce scams. There are many others and we will continue to build on these efforts. Mr Deputy Speaker, may I make a few comments in Mandarin, please?”
“Which leads me to my final point – that public education must come hand in hand with legislation. Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin, Mr Alex Yam, Mr Mark Chay, Mr Leon Perera and Mr Zhulkarnain spoke about this. Members also called for more collaboration with service providers in this area. For example, Mr Melvin Yong asked whether the Government would consider setting up a self-regulatory task force with key OCS providers. We can explore this suggestion when we engage further with the industry. Mr Deputy Speaker, I seek your permission to distribute a handout to Members which contain a list of safety measures on social media services and public education programmes organised in collaboration with various technology companies and community partners.”
“Continuing the work of the Sunlight AFA, which concluded its tenure in July this year, SHE is working with the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations to launch a support centre for victims of online harm. We see this as an important gap to plug. We are committed to making it happen and I believe that it will be made available soon. Those in need will then be able to seek support and legal advice from counsellors and probono lawyers from this centre. As I mentioned in my opening speech, online harassment, cyberbullying and doxxing are dealt with under the Protection from Harassment Act 2014 (POHA). Victims of gender-based online harms, of which a commonly known example is image-based sexual abuse, will be able to seek recourse under POHA where the online harm amounts to harassment. The Protection from Harassment Court has served many victims since it was established last year. And a reason that more have been able to get redress is because of the wider awareness of its existence. MinLaw is also looking into how victims can be better empowered to put a stop to such online harms generally, and to seek redress against and hold accountable those who are responsible. This includes cyberbullying and more novel forms of online hurt, such as cancel campaigns, which Minister Shanmugam has spoken about before. MinLaw's efforts will complement MCI's efforts to enhance the Government's regulatory tool kit, as well as MHA's efforts to address criminal offences committed online. More details will be announced at an appropriate juncture. But I think Members see that we are not stopping with this Bill. There are other proposals that are being considered and we probably will not have to wait very much longer for these to be known publicly.”
“To mitigate against false age declarations, which is the problem I think we all recognise, some social media services use a combination of artificial intelligence, machine learning technology and facial recognition algorithms to proactively detect and remove underage accounts. Some also allow users to report accounts suspected to be underage, which will be investigated and suspended if the reports are accurate. However, there is, currently, no international consensus on the standards for effective and reliable age verification by social media services which Singapore can also reliably reference. Instead, we will continue to closely monitor and extensively consult on the latest developments in age verification technology, taking into account data protection safeguards and consider viable regulatory options. In addition, we will continue to work with social media services, educators and other stakeholders, to help parents guide young users navigating online spaces and make young users better aware of the safety tools that are available to them. Members have also raised the importance of providing support to victims or users affected by online harms. We recognise that while laws provide the necessary legal tools for victims, they can often be daunting and difficult to approach. Members would be glad to know that organisations, such as SG Her Empowerment, or SHE, have stepped up to augment Defence Guild's efforts in providing legal support to victims of online abuse. May I just register the MCI family's sincere appreciation to Mr Zhulkarnain and his fellow volunteers for stepping up to perform this very important function.”
“Therefore, IMDA's draft codes will put in place additional safeguards to protect young users, including minimising their exposure to inappropriate content and providing tools for children or their parents to manage their safety online. The code also requires that services provide differentiated accounts to children, whereby safety settings are robust and set to more restrictive levels that are age-appropriate by default. Children and their parents or guardians must be provided clear warnings of implications if they opt out of the default settings. We will continue working with industry players to see how such measures can be strengthened. We recognise that there are gaps. In practice though, users might try to circumvent these measures. Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Melvin Yong, Mr Gerald Giam, as well as some respondents to MCI's public consultation in July, have asked about the possibility of requiring age verification systems. Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Mr Alex Yam, Mr Mark Chay and Mr Melvin Yong asked about measures to better protect the young, including age-specific provisions or mandating screen-time restrictions. Most social media services that have got significant reach or impact already require users to be at least 13 years old to register for an account. Users have to declare their date of birth at the point of registration. This way, services will be able to apply age-appropriate policies to their respective users, including content moderation. In line with this, PDPC will be clarifying that personal data may be used to implement such age-appropriate policies on social media services. It is permitted and we will make it clear.”
“This is a more effective way, to tackle voluminous online content at source. In turn, users expect that social media services assess their reports and take appropriate action in a timely and diligent manner. Services will be required to include information on these actions in their annual reports. With this information, IMDA will be able to assess the adequacy of the service's measures. Audits may also be undertaken to ensure compliance. Mr Gerald Giam and, I believe, also Mr Saktiandi Supaat, asked for the social media services to submit reports at a higher frequency than annually to establish the services' effectiveness in acting on user reports. As a start, IMDA intends for the reports to be submitted annually but this can be reviewed later on. Given the speed at which harmful or egregious content can be amplified and spread online, the speed of action must be proportionate to the potential harm of the content identified. Members asked about the timelines for services to act on directions issued by IMDA or to respond to user reports. IMDA's directions will stipulate a specific timeline for disabling access. For egregious content that could cause serious harm, the timeline would, generally, be within hours. IMDA will also require social media services to act on user reports in a timely and diligent manner that is proportionate to the severity of the potential harm. In particular, timelines must be expedited for content and activity related to terrorism. Members have expressed concerns about the impact of harmful online content on young users. Ms Janet Ang and Mr Gerald Giam raised the need to leverage technology to combat harmful online content, including through setting default content restriction settings for young users. We understand and share these concerns.”
“Mr Zhulkarnain, Mr Alex Yam, Mr Saktiandi Supaat as well as Mr Gerald Giam asked who will enforce the Bill, whether it is a dedicated new body, such as an eSafety Commissioner that will be set up, and whether the respective Government teams are sufficiently resourced. I thank them for looking out for the teams working behind the scenes on online safety, including their mental well-being, as highlighted by Dr Shahira Abdullah. As I mentioned above, compliance assessments will be undertaken by IMDA, which has both the experience and expertise in performing this role. If egregious content is flagged to IMDA, and IMDA assesses there is a need to act, action will be taken. All this will be a lot of work, but we will, periodically, review our resourcing to ensure that the team is able to carry out its responsibilities fully and effectively. And, here, I notice that my colleague from MOF is also right behind. I am sure we have the support of the Ministry if more resources are to be needed. Members have asked how individual users can provide feedback about problematic content or non-compliance. I agree with Mr Saktiandi Supaat that users are effectively a wider pool of eyes who can help to identify and flag problematic content. Mr Alex Yam is also right to remind us that users must play a role in policing harms they may come across. Users are, indeed, our first line of defence. This is why we expect social media services to take user reports seriously and to ensure that their systems and processes are sufficiently robust. Under IMDA's draft Code of Practice for Online Safety, designated services will be required to provide effective, transparent, easy-to-access and easy-to-use reporting mechanisms to all individuals.”
“Let me also address various technical questions from Members. Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked how "Singapore users" will be determined. The OCS providers will, typically, have geolocation data on whether a user accesses the service from Singapore. This is common practice. Mr Gan and Mr Melvin Yong also asked how the Government would ensure that Singapore users are not exposed to harmful content, given the use of VPNs. Just like fire codes cannot prevent people from playing with fire, neither can we shield people completely if they intentionally seek out harmful content online. Parents have a role to play, as do the individuals themselves as well as our wider society, to be aware and vigilant. Mr Zhulkarnain asked what we mean by "reasonably practicable" steps taken by the OCS to comply with IMDA's direction. This requires the balancing of various considerations, such as the technology that is available to implement that direction. So, we will have to look into the details. Mr Zhulkarnain also asked about the proposed section 45J(2). This provision ensures that compliance with IMDA's directions does not cause a service provider to incur liability in Singapore, if, for example, the content creator takes issue with it. IMDA's concern is to protect users in Singapore and this Bill only requires action against content accessible in Singapore. Thus, this provision, naturally, only insulates against liability under Singapore law. Since our measures are also proportionate to the harm and consistent with leading jurisdictions, it is unlikely that the service providers will attract liability elsewhere for complying with IMDA's directions in Singapore. But we will monitor international developments and keep in mind his suggestions on reciprocal immunity.”
“Where there is non-compliance, in general, IMDA will engage the services to understand their reasons. This includes services that do not have a corporate presence in Singapore. Thereafter, if there is no meaningful response or mutually acceptable solution, and IMDA finds the services to still be in breach of their obligations, measures, such as financial penalties, will be considered. Mr Desmond Choo asked if the penalties for non-compliance are too low to have sufficient impact or deterrence. The financial penalty quantum is comparable with other local legislation that covers social media services, such as the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act and the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act. Services will also face reputational damage. Imagine if a service is consistently found to be in breach, and IMDA over a period of time is regularly issuing them penalties, these will be known to the public and users themselves can exercise the decision whether to continue using the service. So, I think the reputational damage has also to be considered. In the event that these still fail to address our serious concerns, IMDA may then issue a blocking direction to Internet Access Service Providers to stop Singapore users from accessing these services. But to Mr Zhulkarnain's question, the purpose of section 45H(2)(b) is to ensure that this happens only if the platform had refused to comply with IMDA's direction. This reflects our proportionate approach towards regulating content. To Dr Shahira Abdullah's question regarding the details of a blocking direction, such as duration, this will depend on the individual case. Suffice to say that it is a measure IMDA will not take lightly. But IMDA's resolve in protecting Singaporeans' interests should not be tested.”
“I would also like to remind Members of the overarching purpose of the Bill. And that is, to provide a safe environment and conditions that protect online users, while respecting freedom of speech and expression, as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. Let me also address a specific area that Mr Giam raised – the provisions on journalistic content in the UK’s draft Online Safety Bill. I thank Mr Giam for his support of the Bill – I mean the Singapore Bill, not the UK Bill – and also his suggestion for Singapore to mirror the UK proposal. We are always watching developments internationally and considering what would be useful in our context. I will make three brief points on Mr Giam’s suggestion. First, the draft Bill in the UK has not been passed into law. The draft provisions have been through several revisions and are far from final. So, whether this part goes in eventually, that remains to be seen. Second, without going into detail, there have been criticisms that the provisions on journalistic content may be exploited by bad actors. It could inadvertently allow anyone, under the guise of being a “citizen journalist”, to communicate egregious content and expose users to harm. Third, this Bill is about online safety. It has no interest in curbing legitimate journalistic content. This brings me to my next point on enforcement, which several Members have raised. I will explain the enforcement measures that the Bill provides for at each stage and how these relate to the online service providers. IMDA will, first, assess if there are instances of non-compliance, either with the Code's requirements or with directions issued by IMDA. It does not matter whether there are management changes within the companies. Accountability resides with the legal entities.”
“When assessing whether a piece of content is harmful or egregious, IMDA will take an objective approach, considering the context in which it is presented. If such content is educational in nature or helps users to overcome these harms, naturally, it will not be considered harmful or egregious. On the other hand, social media trends or challenges may sometimes appear innocuous, such as the “milk crate” challenge Mr Darryl David had mentioned. But if they result in harm to users, such as by advocating or providing instructions on self-harm or suicide, they would be considered harmful. If the concern is whether individual social media services have done enough to curb exposure to harmful content, the Government will continue to consult widely across society and share the feedback with the companies. In other words, we would want to hold the mirror to them so that they know what our society’s expectations are and be able to make adjustments accordingly. When urgent action is needed, such as to remove offensive content that advocates violence towards certain communities or could cause serious injuries to them, IMDA must be able to act fast. In such situations, consultations with stakeholders are better done as part of an after-action review. To Mr Gerald Giam’s question, if services are aggrieved by IMDA’s regulatory decisions, they can appeal to the Minister. And the Minister’s decision can also be challenged on judicial review. Mr Gerald Giam and Mr Leon Perera sought assurances that the Bill will not be used to curtail democratic rights or freedom of expression. I stated in my opening address that IMDA does not have unfettered ability to issue new Codes. The Bill clearly sets out the purposes for which IMDA can issue these Codes, which are recorded in Hansard.”
“Should we go beyond concerns over safety of individuals and communities to cover other types of content at this juncture? This has the same problem as if our proposals attempted to cover other types of services prematurely. The Bill will become unwieldy, our proposals lacking in focus and the results likely ineffective. Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked if we had considered streamlining all online-related harms into the Online Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill. Our approach has been to identify and address specific areas of harm in a targeted manner. As to whether the laws will be consolidated later, that remains to be seen. At this time, it is more important that we put in place legislation that effectively addresses and combats the respective harms. For example, at the Committee of Supply debates this year, MHA announced that it was studying potential levers to deal with criminal offences committed online. Work is in progress. These levers are envisioned to complement the provisions under the Online Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill. This leads me to questions raised by quite a few Members on how the types or thresholds of harmful or egregious content are determined and whether a committee or deliberative body could be set up to formulate or review these thresholds. The Government had consulted various stakeholders, including parents, community groups and industry representatives in arriving at the proposals in the Bill. Egregious content can take many forms and exist in grey areas which can be difficult to define clearly. A case in point is Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin’s example of online forums for users to share their experiences with one another to deal with depression and anxiety, and to provide mutual support.”
“To a large extent, the kinds of problematic content the Members have in mind will already be covered within the Bill. Content that advocates or instructs on violence, including sexual violence, to individuals will be covered. IMDA’s draft code of practice for Online Safety will require services to assess and act on cyberbullying, including content that is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to the user, which Mr Leon Perera and Mr Darryl David, as well as Mr Melvin Yong, also emphasised the need for. For cases of harassment, there may also be recourse under laws, such as the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA). I will say more about this later. To Mr Louis Ng’s question on providing more details of “harmful content” under the Code, IMDA has issued a set of draft guidelines giving examples of the content covered, which will be finalised together with the Code. Mr Leon Perera spoke at length about the problem of loot boxes in online gaming. Mr Mark Chay also raised this issue. This matter falls under the Gambling Control Act, but since Members have raised it, I will briefly address it. The Government recognises the potential harms of loot boxes. This is why we made significant updates to the Gambling Control Act earlier this year to ensure that our laws are able to address emerging trends and products, such as in-game loot boxes, which are monitored by the Gambling Regulatory Authority. I invite the Members to file Parliamentary Questions if they wish to discuss this issue in greater detail. Mr Saktiandi also raised queries on content, such as lifestyles that go against traditional norms of society, participation in foreign armed conflicts, animal cruelty and commercialised nudity.”
“Mr Louis Ng and Mr Zhulkarnain asked about the specific factors in determining whether communications are private, that could shield such services from complying with IMDA’s protective measures. Mr Mark Chay asked about messaging platforms. Labelling a group or communications as private does not make it so. The Bill sets out a list of factors that must be considered collectively. For example, it may be possible to conclude that a social media group is public, even if that social media group has been set to “private” and requires the owner to grant permission before one can access the content, but the owner is indiscriminate in granting that access. We will continue to study this issue closely with other agencies, industry and international partners. Next, on what type of content the Bill will, or will not, address. Mr Zhulkarnain asked whether drug abuse and other illegal activities will be covered. Mr Saktiandi highlighted a particular area in the online domain that is of growing concern to many users – scams. Under “egregious content”, as defined under the Bill, content that may cause risk to public health will be covered. Depending on the facts of the case, this may include drug-related content. IMDA’s Code of Practice for Online Safety also requires services to apply content moderation systems to vice and organised crime, including fraud and scam content. Mr Gerald Giam and Mr Leon Perera asked whether the Bill would cover non-consensual sharing of intimate images, and Mr Louis Ng asked why content “likely to cause feelings of enmity, hatred, ill will or hostility” is applied only to racial and religious groups, and not to other demographic segments, such as gender.”
“We have been thinking about it and we will share more details when ready. Within each specified OCS, which entities to designate will depend on how much reach or impact they have with Singapore viewers. IMDA will consult services before designating them under the Bill, to ensure that designated services are clear on the requirements and are given the opportunity to provide input on the proposals laid out by IMDA. Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Leon Perera asked about the consultation process. Details will be set out on how IMDA will work closely with the designated services. Having built constructive relationships with many of these services over the years, we are confident the processes will be robust. The list of services to be designated eventually will be published by IMDA. Ms Nadia Samdin, Mr Alex Yam and Ms Tin Pei Ling asked why private communications have been excluded. The short answer is that there are legitimate privacy concerns, which Mr Gerald Giam also shares. But users are not without recourse. IMDA’s draft Code of Practice for Online Safety will require designated social media services to provide easily accessible user reporting mechanisms throughout its service. If individuals encounter harmful messages or unwanted interactions in private messages when using these social media services, they could block the sender or report the sender to the service. While we do not intend to police private communications, we are also aware that there are groups with very large memberships, which could be used to propagate egregious content, making them no different from non-private communications. In such instances, IMDA will be empowered to take the same actions against them.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Members for their interest in the Bill. All 16 Members who spoke have given their support, reflecting the broad consensus on the need and timeliness of the proposals. Members raised many useful points which I will address. Let me start with clarifications on the types of services that the Bill will cover. Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Louis Ng and Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked what other types of services, besides social media services, may be specified in the Schedule of Online Communication Services, or OCS. Dr Shahira Abdullah wanted to know how IMDA will decide which service providers to designate. She and Ms Tin Pei Ling also asked about updating our regulations to keep in step with new technologies. Like many Singaporeans we engaged, Members acknowledged the fast pace of change in the online landscape. We are, therefore, committed to updating our laws and regulations as frequently as necessary to keep them relevant and effective. In terms of the type of services, we will prioritise those that are more widely used in Singapore and where the safety risks have become or are becoming apparent. IMDA will use various data sources on user trends in Singapore to aid these assessments. The Government is actively studying several areas, but I seek Members’ understanding that it can be counter-productive to discuss them prematurely. Let us instead better understand and characterise the issues, taking reference from regulatory attempts elsewhere, before moving to design a suitable set of interventions for Singapore. For example, Mr Melvin Yong, Mr Alex Yam, Mr Gerald Giam and Mr Mark Chay asked about online gaming, whereas the Bill only covers social media services currently. We share their concerns about online gaming.”
“Under this Code of Practice, prescribed internet intermediaries, including certain social media platforms, must ensure that online political advertisements communicated in Singapore carry disclosure notices to inform end-users of the person(s) or organisation(s) that requested to place, or paid, for the political advertisements. The Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act (FICA) also provides the Government with the powers to issue directions to deal with online content or accounts that are part of a hostile information campaign, such as by preventing such content from being viewed in Singapore. Our local media play the important role of reporting news and opinions objectively and have a special responsibility to Singapore and Singaporeans. They are aware of this responsibility and are expected to do their utmost to guard against any attempts at foreign influence.”
“Foreign countries are allowed to advertise or produce media content pertaining to their countries for local consumption, for topics such as the promotion of tourism or education. However, our local media should not be used by foreign countries as platforms to promote their political agenda or to influence our domestic affairs. Matters of governance and domestic politics are for Singaporeans alone to decide. Hence, we have in place a number of legislative safeguards to mitigate the risk of foreign influence across various media platforms. For local newspapers, the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (NPPA) prohibits SPH Media Trust from receiving funding from foreign sources for any purpose, without prior approval from the Minister. Funds for purposes other than bona fide commercial ones are prohibited. For Free-to-Air TV and Radio, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA)'s TV and Radio Advertising and Sponsorship Code prohibits advertisements or sponsored programmes which are directed towards any political end. For online content, under the Broadcasting (Class Licence) Notification, IMDA can require Internet Content Providers (ICPs) that engage in the propagation, promotion or discussion of political issues relating to Singapore to be registered, and to undertake to not receive foreign funding except subscription and advertising revenue for bona fide commercial purposes. The Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) has a Code of Practice for Transparency of Online Political Advertisements.”
“Created and run by Ms Sandra Low, a mother of an 11-year-old and 9-year-old, "Kids PlaySafer" has conducted talks on digital literacy and cyber safety to help parents manage their children's digital needs. Mdm Deputy Speaker, may I continue in Mandarin, please.”
“They wanted the Government to mandate stronger measures and social media services to do more to reduce harmful online content. At the same time, they emphasised that all of us, as users of social media services, have an individual responsibility to protect ourselves. During one of our engagements, Mr Mark Joel Premraj, a parent, shared his perspective on how parents also play a key role in educating their children on inappropriate content online, including how to encourage them to flag the inappropriate content they come across. Besides establishing a robust regulatory toolkit, the Government has taken active steps to nurture a well-informed and discerning public. Efforts to educate the public include the National Library Board's S.U.R.E. programme. It equips the public to think critically, be responsible producers and consumers of information, and stay safe and well online. Since its launch in 2013, S.U.R.E. has conducted over 6 million physical and digital engagements. In addition, the Ministry of Education (MOE)'s refreshed Character and Citizenship Education curriculum has a stronger focus on Cyber Wellness education, where students learn to be safe, respectful and responsible users of cyberspace, and to be a positive peer influence. In support of the Digital for Life movement, launched in February last year, community partners have also spearheaded initiatives which helped over 270,000 Singaporeans enrich their lives through digital technologies. For example, TOUCH Community Services has partnered Meta to conduct the Digitally Ready Families programme, where low-income families learn digital life skills and cyber wellness tips. Another Digital for Life partner is "Kids PlaySafer".”
“But IMDA will not have carte blanche to issue directions. Its powers will be limited in scope. First, IMDA will not be able to issue directions in respect of private communications. Those will remain private. Second, directions can only be issued for certain categories of egregious content relating to user safety. The new section 45D proposed by the Bill defines "egregious content" to include content advocating terrorism, suicide and self-harm, violence including sexual violence, child sexual exploitation, content posing public health risk and content likely to undermine racial and religious harmony. These categories will be set out in law. When dealing with content that requires the expertise of other agencies, IMDA will consult them accordingly. As an example, when assessing content pertaining to public health measures and risk, IMDA will consult the Ministry of Health (MOH) and its experts. The new section 45M proposed in the Bill requires designated services to take all reasonably practicable steps to comply with an applicable Code of Practice. If they do not, IMDA can take regulatory action under the proposed section 45N to issue (a) a financial penalty; or (b) a rectification direction requiring the service to remedy the failure to comply with the Code of Practice. Non-compliance with a rectification direction will be a criminal offence, punishable with a fine. For egregious content, non-compliance with a direction by IMDA will also be a criminal offence, punishable by a fine. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I said right at the beginning that laws are necessary but success alone in ensuring our citizens' safety cannot just depend on the laws. Respondents of MCI's public consultation and engagements agreed with this view.”
“This post was religiously very offensive and denigrated two religions in Singapore. However, it was not moderated nor removed by the platform concerned. IMDA had to step in to engage the platform and the platform eventually disabled access to the post. There may also be egregious content on non-designated social media services, which are not subject to the Code of Practice for Online Safety. In May last year, a poll published on a social media service sexualised local female Islamic teachers, asked users to rank them and further promoted sexual violence against them. The post went viral and the modest reach of this particular service received a sudden big boost. It not only caused great distress to the individuals involved, but also unsettled many others in the community. These issues are like fires that occur, even as the Fire Code has prevented most fires. In such instances, we must have firefighters who are properly equipped to act quickly, so as to minimise, if not prevent, serious injury and damage. If Parliament agrees, the new section 45H proposed by this Bill will allow IMDA to act as an "online firefighter", to direct any social media service to disable Singapore users' access to egregious content and stop the egregious content from being transmitted to Singapore users via other channels or accounts. IMDA has, in fact, performed this role for some time now, working with social media services behind the scenes to deal with egregious content. As Singapore's media regulator, IMDA also has significant experience in assessing content across the different media platforms and making decisions to protect the community. Under this Bill, IMDA will be better equipped to ensure Singapore users are protected from egregious content online.”
“They support the Government's commitment to find innovative and effective solutions to combat harmful online content and recognise the need to improve online safety. The designated social media services will be expected to meet the key outcomes as follows: First, minimise Singapore users' exposure to harmful content and empower users with tools to manage their own safety. The social media services must also take additional steps to minimise children's exposure to inappropriate content and provide tools allowing children or their parents to manage their safety. Second, make available an easy-to-use mechanism for Singapore users to report harmful content and unwanted interactions. Third, provide transparency on the effectiveness of their measures in protecting Singapore users from harmful content. Designated social media services must provide information that reflect Singapore users' experience on their services. This will allow users to make informed decisions about how they use the service. If the Bill is passed, IMDA will further consult relevant social media services, before finalising the Code for issuance. We believe that the Code of Practice for Online Safety will reduce users' exposure to harmful online content, but it will not eliminate them completely. Part of the reason is that these social media services tend to operate globally, drawing in users and content from around the world. Their safety measures are not tuned to reflect an in-depth understanding of Singapore's local context or our racial and religious sensitivities. Members may recall that in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, supermarkets were purportedly running out of toilet paper. A social media post surfaced, suggesting that people use the Bible and the Quran as toilet paper.”
“By stating in the Codes the outcomes which regulated services must meet, IMDA aims to provide sufficient clarity on what the services must do to protect users, whilst allowing some flexibility for them to adjust their approaches. We can also expect IMDA to update the Codes from time to time. This will allow us to be agile and responsive to technologies as they evolve. But before introducing new requirements, IMDA will consult and work collaboratively with service providers to assess the most suitable approaches to strengthening safety on their platforms. Under the Bill, IMDA does not have unfettered ability to issue new Codes. The new section 45L sets out that IMDA can issue Codes for the following purposes: First, to ensure services have systems or processes in place to address harmful content. Second, to provide practical guidance or certainty in respect of what content should be covered. Third, to set out the procedures that service providers must follow when audits are carried out. Fourth, to require services to collaborate with approved researchers to understand systemic risks relating to the service. Earlier, I explained that we will apply our new laws to social media services as the first type of OCS. Let us now turn to the Code that designated social media services with significant reach or impact in Singapore must comply with. In October, IMDA issued a draft copy of the "Code of Practice for Online Safety". This draft Code comes after an extensive study of international online safety legislation as well as proposals and engagements with major social media services in Singapore, including Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Twitter and HardwareZone. The social media services consulted were receptive to the proposals laid out in the draft Code and the Bill.”
“Under the Bill, a social media service is defined as an electronic service, whose sole or primary purpose is to enable online interaction or linking between two or more users, including enabling users to share content for social purposes; and which allows users to communicate content on the service. Why have we chosen to regulate social media services as a matter of priority? Well, because three in five users or thereabout from MCI's June 2022 survey experienced harmful content online using social media platforms. This is the highest proportion compared to other platforms, such as e-commerce sites, search engines and news sites. Given the voluminous user-generated content in today's evolving online space, it is not efficient to regulate individual pieces of content. IMDA will instead focus on system-wide measures which are more effective at scale. Under sections 45K and 45L of the proposed Bill, IMDA will be able to designate OCSs with significant reach or impact in Singapore, and require them, via the Codes of Practice, to put in place measures to keep Singapore users safe. This approach is similar to how we go about regulating fire safety. Building owners, occupiers and qualified persons must adhere to the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF)'s Fire Code, which requires them to put in place systems and processes to maintain high fire safety standards, to keep their occupants safe. Likewise, OCSs must have in place systems and processes to minimise Singapore users' exposure to, and mitigate the impact of, harmful content on their platforms. IMDA will impose these requirements on designated OCSs via Codes of Practice.”
“[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair] Second, as far as possible, be outcome driven instead of being overly prescriptive. In today's context, we are dealing with a vast volume of user-generated content. Rather than chasing individual pieces of content, we must ensure that systems and processes to regulate the content are put in place and maintained by the platforms. Instead of prescribing how these systems and processes are set up, we should specify the outcomes they ought to achieve. The third, and perhaps, most important of all, is to recognise that laws are not a silver bullet. The Government will need to work with partners, including our citizens, to tackle harmful content and enhance the safety of users online. Today's online content service providers are different from traditional local broadcasters and require a different regulatory approach. In fact, each type of service is different. "Social media services" are not the same as "over-the-top media services", which also operate differently from "game distribution services". The Bill allows us to adopt this accretive approach by building on existing laws to introduce new ones; so that over time, our foundations for digital safety become stronger. If passed by Parliament, this Bill will create a new part in the Broadcasting Act to regulate "online communication service", which are electronic services that enable users to access or communicate content via the Internet. The regulations will only apply to specified types of "online communication service", which are listed in a Schedule under the Broadcasting Act. For now, we will only specify one type of OCS in the Schedule and that is "social media services".”
“Mr Speaker, the Singapore public, like many other societies, is concerned over the potential damage caused by harmful online content and expects social media services to take greater responsibility to protect their users. In July and August this year, MCI conducted a public consultation and series of engagements on our proposals to combat harmful online content and received more than 600 responses. Respondents expressed the desire for safety features to manage their exposure to certain types of content. Similarly, MCI's June 2022 study, found that nine in 10 respondents felt that such measures would protect users from harmful online content to at least a moderate extent. Parents, in particular, were concerned over viral social media content which featured dangerous pranks and challenges, harmful advertising, cyberbullying and explicit sexual content. Some suggested keeping younger users in mind when developing safety features, including tailoring content moderation thresholds and ensuring young users can easily report inappropriate content. In a separate poll conducted earlier this year by the Sunlight Alliance for Action, Singaporeans ranked reporting systems and laws to tackle online harms as the top two measures that would facilitate help-seeking. I will now explain our approach to enhancing online safety for Singapore users and Members will find that there are similarities to the practices elsewhere, examples of which I have circulated. The first is to tackle the problems in an accretive manner. Rather than take a "Big Bang" approach which some countries are attempting and have an all-encompassing law, let us design our laws in a considered and calibrated manner.”
“There is a growing consensus that rules must be put in place to prevent harms in the online world, just as in the physical world. Calls for online services to take greater responsibility in ensuring safety on their platforms have also led to jurisdictions such as the UK, the European Union (EU), Germany and Australia to introduce or propose new online safety laws. Mr Speaker, I seek your permission to distribute handouts to the Members, which summarise online safety laws enacted or under consideration in these jurisdictions.”
“If such harmful content existed only on websites, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) would be able to deal with them under the existing Broadcasting Act. But today, users are much more likely to consume content from the feeds of social media services, where such harmful content can be pushed via algorithms, and spread quickly through our social connections. Just two weeks ago, Meta announced that Facebook recorded nearly 2 billion daily users, while Instagram recorded 2 billion active monthly users. TikTok has been downloaded over 3.5 billion times worldwide since its launch, while YouTube recorded 30 billion daily views on "YouTube Shorts". As the Internet evolves, so must our laws. In the book "Tools and Weapons" co-authored by Microsoft's President Brad Smith and Carol Ann Browne, the backwardness of some cybersecurity measures was likened to "digging trenches to defend against missiles". In the same way, we must recognise that online content can inflict serious damage on our people and communities, if our laws fall short. We must have the ability to deal with harmful online content accessible to Singapore users, regardless of where the content is hosted or initiated. The entities controlling the biggest and most popular online communication services (OCSs) or platforms accessible in Singapore all operate outside of Singapore and fall outside the legal remit of the Broadcasting Act today. To ensure that Singapore users of these services and platforms can be kept safe, we must be able to take appropriate action on these entities, as long as they provide content accessible by Singapore users. We are not alone in thinking this way.”
“Recently, The Straits Times reported a record high number of protection orders filed and granted in 2021 under POHA, more than double the number in previous years. Lawyers attributed the spike in applications to media attention on the issue of harassment. The application process has also been enhanced with the opening of the Protection from Harassment Court. However, there are still gaps that need to be addressed. One growing concern is content encouraging suicide and self-harm. Just two months ago, an investigation in the United Kingdom (UK) concluded that 14-year-old Molly Russell took her own life after being exposed to thousands of self-harm and suicide related posts in the months leading up to her death. Many of these posts portrayed suicide as an inevitable consequence of depression. There have also been reports of users' accidental deaths while attempting to mimic videos of impossible physical stunts. Unknown to some victims, these reckless acts and dangerous challenges had been heavily edited. Our children, who may lack the capacity or maturity to deal with certain types of content are particularly vulnerable when exposed to inappropriate content and unwanted social interaction online. In June this year, MCI conducted a study which asked respondents what online content they felt children needed to be most protected from. The top three were sexual content, cyberbullying and violent content. In a dialogue with youths held by MCI and the National Youth Council last year, participants indicated that the top three online harms they and their peers faced included being insulted online, impersonated by someone else and receiving unwanted contact from another person.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, a study conducted by the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) in June this year found that almost 80% of Singapore residents are concerned with online harms. In stark contrast, when we ask people how they feel about walking the streets of Singapore alone at night, 97% said that they would be comfortable to do so. There is obviously a sizeable gap between how safe Singaporeans feel online and offline. Today, most of us remain connected online throughout the day. Online services have become the key conduits through which we communicate and consume content. Because of this, the prevalence of harmful online content on these services can have negative serious consequences on the physical, emotional and mental well-being of society. The Bill we are debating today is not the first law introduced to secure our online space. The Government has, over the years, introduced targeted laws to deal with specific types of harmful online content and behaviour, including: (a) Falsehoods, which are dealt with under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act, or POFMA. (b) Foreign interference, which is addressed under the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act, or FICA. (c) Online harassment, such as cyberbullying, which is dealt with under the Protection from Harassment Act, or POHA. POHA was also recently updated in 2019 to cover doxxing. Our laws have served to protect many Singaporeans. POFMA was integral to Singapore's response to COVID-19, allowing the Government to address the deluge of misinformation which made COVID-19 not just a pandemic, but an "info-demic".”
“On 30 September 2022, the Shangri-La Group announced a data breach of its guests’ information at eight hotels across Chiang Mai, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei and Tokyo. The majority of the Shangri-La Hotel guests who attended the 19th Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD), especially dignitaries, registered in groups through their Embassies without submitting their personal details. Some hotel guests provided their personal particulars, and Shangri-La Group has informed them about the data breach. The impact of this breach on SLD is likely to be minimal, but MINDEF is taking further steps with the SLD organiser, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), and Shangri-La Group to enhance safeguards. The Personal Data Protection Act requires all organisations to put in place reasonable security measures to protect the personal data in their possession and/or control to prevent unauthorised access, disclosure or modification. The Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) is investigating the data breach of guest information at Shangri-La Singapore. Organisations are responsible for safeguarding their systems and their customers’ personal data. To support organisations, PDPC has published the "Guide to Data Protection Practices for ICT Systems", a compilation of good practices that organisations can implement to enhance data protection. The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore has also developed various resources, including cybersecurity toolkits, to guide enterprise leaders and their employees to strengthen their cyber defences.”
“Submarine data cables are vital to the digital connectivity that drives the global economy. Today, they carry more than 95% of global data flows. Singapore is a leading Asia-Pacific hub for submarine cables – we are connected to many destinations, including key hubs, such as Europe, China, Japan and the United States. There have been incidents of damage to submarine cables by shipping and fishing activities, as well as natural causes, such as undersea landslides and earthquakes. Singapore’s international connectivity has remained resilient throughout, due to the diversity and volume of our connections to other countries. Over the past five years, the number of submarine cables landed in Singapore has increased from 19 to 26. MCI and IMDA will continue to strengthen the diversity and resilience of our submarine cable network. This includes partnering relevant Government agencies to attract new submarine cables to land in Singapore, connecting us to new destinations and through different routes. We also work with international partners to safeguard this network of submarine cables, for example, through setting up prior agreements to facilitate the expeditious and efficient installation, maintenance and repair of submarine cables.”
“The CDC vouchers is a very good example. Many seniors over time have learnt and gained confidence on how to use the digital vouchers, but there remains a group that far prefers to use the physical vouchers and those options still remain visible. In summary, we will continue to nudge forward, and we will continue to offer options for seniors who feel more confident and want to move to the next level of their digital engagement. But we will also want to be very mindful that some seniors are still not yet comfortable, and we want to offer them that sense of confidence that they are not being pushed in a direction that they do not wish to go.”