Lam Pin Min
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Transport, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time". This Bill, together with the Active Mobility (Amendment No.”
“It is timely for us to put in place a regulatory framework to ensure that active mobility devices being brought into and used in Singapore are safe. This is a key step in helping us put in place a safe and sustainable active mobility landscape in Singapore. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 1.55 pm”
“Clause 6 facilitates the transfer to and vesting in the financial security provider of a seafarer's rights against a shipowner as a result of any liability arising from the shipowner's obligation to repatriate the seafarer. For example, the liability to pay the seafarer's wages and entitlements.”
“Mr Speaker, to ensure a safe and high-quality blood supply for our patients in Singapore, pre-donation interviews are conducted to screen blood donors for risk factors and blood donations are also tested for blood-borne infections. However, infections can only be detected some time after the blood donors have been infected.”
“I thank the Member for that clarification. As far as I know, not all mental conditions will be excluded from blood donation. In fact, we have checked with HSA. There is a wide spectrum of mental illnesses – from very mild mental conditions to very severe conditions.”
“I think we must be cognisant that the reason why they are inmates is because of certain things that have happened, prior to that. That actually pre-disposes them to some high-risk behaviours.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,050 lines we hold for Lam Pin Min, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 21.
“It is, therefore, important to note that the insurance market is essentially a private-sector venture. Companies that underwrite insurance are for-profit organisations, and it is essential that medical insurance, a vital component of the financing framework for healthcare in Singapore, be regulated properly. This would mean that we should be looking at ways to ensure that different products can be compared across-the-board, and information is readily available for Singaporeans to make the right choices. On this note, perhaps we should also consider how different Singaporeans have different types of needs. Pensioners, for instance, are a group of people who have different needs – they have medical coverage under existing public service medical benefits for pensioners. Many pensioners are concerned about the MediShield Life plan and how they will be affected with its implementation. Many have questioned what will happen to their existing medical benefits. Will they be better or worse off? Besides pensioners, are there other groups of Singaporeans who will be affected? While we have the guiding principles right, it is also necessary to go down to the nitty-gritty and look at MediShield Life in terms of the impact it will have on the lives of ordinary people. Page: 116 Now, while we have moved forward on our plans for universal lifetime medical coverage, let us remember that the artificial boundaries that we draw between health and social care are gradually blurring. We need to see social care as an important part of health care and a part of the continuum of care. I have spoken about how Singaporeans choose to remain in the acute hospital settings because they are unable to utilise Medisave/MediShield funds for community hospitals and other social care settings.”
“One way, perhaps, is to enable employees in the Civil Service or Page: 115 private sector to make the right choices of insurance plans that complement MediShield Life. Singaporeans need to be educated about what MediShield Life covers or not cover so that all employees can make informed decisions on what additional plans to purchase to complement their existing MediShield Life plan. I also fully agree with the MLRC's recommendation that the Government should consider strengthening financial support to companies willing to provide portable medical benefits that ride on the MediShield Life scheme. Should we also consider going one step further to legislate health insurance portability, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act in the United States? In many ways, this draws us in to the standardised B1 Integrated Shield Plan that the Committee has recommended. A standardised Shield plan for B1 class wards would provide those Singaporeans who are keen for an upgraded plan better clarity and less confusion. There are, currently, many different Integrated Shield Plans out there in the market and, more often than not, patients may not fully understand the financial implications for each and every one of the Integrated Shield Plans available. Many Singaporeans do want to have better coverage and the option to choose the doctors of their choice, without having to pay an arm or leg or being excessively insured. The standardised B1 Integrated Shield Plan can provide such a choice with standardised coverage across-the-board. It should ideally also complement MediShield Life, and also Employee Medical Benefits at the same time. The last thing we want to do is to encourage the market to come up with products that duplicate and waste resources.”
“As for Singaporeans who really cannot afford to pay for their medical bills despite heavy subsidies by the Government, there is Medifund – a medical endowment fund set up by the Government to act as the ultimate safety net to help needy Singaporeans. It may sound like a broken record but I must emphasise that our 3M framework is something that has worked well for us and we should not just throw the baby out together with the bathwater. What we need to do is to groom and nurture the baby and eventually transform it to a fine gentleman. While the Government has done much to address affordability through increased subsidies, MediShield Life and the Pioneer Generation Package, much work needs to be done to address the accessibility issue – such as the crowdedness in polyclinics, long waiting times at Specialist Outpatient Clinics and the emergency departments, and the near 100% occupancy of inpatient beds in many restructured hospitals. The MLRC has also brought up issues relating to Employer Medical Benefits. Many employees today have some form of medical insurance provided by their employers. Even Public Service employees today are also offered additional payment under the MSO scheme to purchase additional insurance on their own. It is important for MOH to rethink how this would work synergistically together with the new MediShield Life scheme. I noticed, for instance, that MOM has recommendations for portable medical benefits which allow employers implementing any of the recommended portable medical benefit options higher tax deductions. How can we streamline Government policies such that they would complement the new MediShield Life scheme?”
“Singapore's healthcare system has been rated by the World Health Organization as the best in Asia, and the sixth best in the world in year 2000. In 2004, Political & Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC) ranked Singapore's healthcare system as the third best in the world. In 2008, the Global Competitiveness report ranked Singapore second for infant mortality rate and twelfth for life expectancy at birth. The Singapore healthcare financing framework is anchored on the twin philosophies of individual responsibility and affordable healthcare for all. This system has evolved over the years, with the current multi-tiered protection to ensure that no Singaporean is denied Page: 114 access to basic healthcare because of affordability issues. The first tier of protection is provided by heavy Government subsidies in acute public hospitals and polyclinics, which all Singaporeans can access. The quantum of subsidy will increase, especially for the Pioneer Generation and low-income Singaporeans. The second tier of protection is provided by Medisave, a compulsory individual medical savings account scheme which allows Singaporeans to pay for their share of medical treatment. The third tier of protection is provided by MediShield, a low-cost catastrophic medical insurance scheme, which will soon be replaced by MediShield Life, an enhanced universal lifetime medical insurance plan for all Singaporeans. Individual responsibility for one's healthcare needs is also promoted through features of deductibles and co-payment in the new MediShield Life – our universal health insurance scheme.”
“Besides addressing affordability, MOH will also need to work towards maintaining quality and improving accessibility of healthcare to all Singaporeans. Having worked in the healthcare industry for the past 20 years and having interacted with many healthcare professionals from all over the world, I am confident to state that our healthcare system is undoubtedly one of the best in the world. In fact, it is an envy of many other countries. I believe many of my medical colleagues, both inside and outside the House will agree with me wholeheartedly. This did not happen by chance but through the foresight and hard work of the Government, policy makers, as well as dedicated healthcare workers. In all honesty, ask yourself, do you trust that you will receive appropriate and sound professional treatment with a good outcome when you visit a doctor for your medical problem? In the course of my work, I have often seen patients from outside Singapore who shared with me that they do not trust their healthcare system and doctors in their own countries. So, is our current healthcare system rotten to its core, requiring a major facelift, as some advocates make it to be? Are we really a First World country with Third World healthcare problems? Obviously, I personally do not think so. The Singapore healthcare system and its financial framework are generally sound and cost-effective: our National Healthcare Expenditure (NHE) is at 4% of GDP. In comparison, OECD's average is 9.6%. Even then, Singapore achieves good health outcomes. With an ageing population, our national healthcare expenditure and the Government's share of our overall healthcare expenditure are expected to increase. It is not just my personal belief or opinion that our healthcare system is one of the best in the world.”
“The MLRC has also recommended that MediShield Life be all-inclusive by providing coverage to all Singaporeans, including the uninsured, previously excluded due to pre-existing medical conditions and, most importantly, for life, that is, for as long as one lives. The removal of the current MediShield age limit of 90 is thoughtful as Singaporeans are living longer and the likelihood of the elderly falling sick is much higher, thus making medical insurance coverage for them even more critical. With this universal lifetime coverage, all Singaporeans will have greater peace of mind, for life. Of particular interest to many Singaporeans is the affordability of the MediShield Life premium. Many Singaporeans have given feedback to me that they are pleasantly surprised by the lower-than-expected increase in quantum for the new MediShield Life plan. Many are also happy with the permanent subsidies provided for Pioneer Generation and low- and middle income Singaporeans, as well as the four-year transitional subsidies for everyone. Of course, the additional subsidies and assistance for those who may be facing financial difficulties in paying the premium, whatever the reasons may be, are exceptionally reassuring to many. While we immerse ourselves in the euphoria of the birth of a universal lifetime medical insurance scheme, we need to be cognisant that MediShield Life alone is not a panacea for Page: 113 ensuring the affordability of healthcare in Singapore. It is the combination of all efforts, from enhancing the 3M framework to reining in medical inflation and, most importantly, keeping Singaporeans healthy for as long as possible.”
“I had raised this concern countless times in Parliament and I believe many like-minded colleagues in this house had done so, too. The Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Health had also submitted our paper on enhancing healthcare affordability to the Government last year, and one of our recommendations specifically called for enhancing the 3M framework, which included better protection and continual coverage of MediShield for Page: 112 all Singaporeans without any age limit. It is good and heartening to know that the Government has accepted the recommendations of the MLRC and will work towards operationalising and communicating this scheme to the general public. I am especially pleased that we have decided to adopt the approach of "Better Protection, For All, For Life" towards MediShield Life. This is a universal lifetime health insurance that aims to give all Singaporeans better protection and peace of mind. Let us also acknowledge from the start that these are the result of a government that listens; one that listens to the people and addresses the evolving needs of Singaporeans, and is ever-ready to change our existing policies to meet the changing needs of the people. The MLRC recommends that the lifetime claim limit be removed and this is, indeed, good news for those patients with chronic diseases that require lifelong treatment. The daily claim limits for hospitalisation will also be increased by 55% from $450 to $700 and the cancer treatment claim limits increased by 140% from $1,240 to $3,000. The co-insurance rates will also be decreased from the current 10%-20% to 3%-10%. This would eventually mean that MediShield Life will pick up a higher proportion of the medical bills, and the patient pays less, offering Singaporeans with better protection.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for allowing me to speak on the Motion to seek Parliament's endorsement of the MediShield Life Review Committee (MLRC) report. The idea of MediShield Life was first conceived at the National Day Rally in August 2013 when Prime Minister Lee announced that the Government would be looking into providing universal lifetime medical insurance coverage for all Singaporeans. From August last year till the submission of the MLRC report in June this year is almost nine and a half months – exactly the same duration needed to bear a baby till full-term. From the reception of many Singaporeans, this seems like a smooth normal delivery. However, I do believe the MLRC must have gone through the perils of this "pregnancy", such as morning sickness and abdominal cramps, before reaching the final report. For that, let me congratulate and thank Mr Bobby Chin and his Committee for doing an excellent job in reviewing a complex health insurance plan, such as the MediShield Life, and putting forth the recommendations that will eventually better the lives of all Singaporeans. So, why did the Government take on a mammoth undertaking, such as the MediShield Life? We have often received feedback from friends, relatives, constituents and fellow Singaporeans that the cost of healthcare has increased significantly over the years and many Singaporeans are worried about the affordability of healthcare as they grow old. Whilst the current MediShield does cover a significant portion of the hospitalisation bills, Singaporeans are concerned about the high co-payments and deductibles, albeit they can be paid for through the Medisave accounts. However, for those with limited Medisave savings, this would translate to more out-of-pocket expenditure in the form of cash.”
“Mdm Chair, first and foremost, let me congratulate the Minister for topping the COS chart with the most time allocated, most number of cuts, as well as the most number of speakers for the debate. Just like our highly acclaimed healthcare system, MOH has achieved many accolades this year. On behalf of the GPC for Health and many Members of House who have spoken so passionately on health and ageing matters, I would like to thank the Minister, the Senior Ministers of State and the Parliamentary Secretary for Page: 145 sharing MOH's plan to keep Singaporeans healthy and healthcare affordable to all. I would also like to thank the Permanent Secretary and MOH staff for their support and advice on all health-related issues. With that, Madam, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $6,034,002,600 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $1,081,059,200 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Thank you, Mdm Chair. I have several clarifications for the Minister and Senior Minister of State as well as the Parliamentary Secretary. First, on Punggol Polyclinic. I have raised the problem of long waiting time at Sengkang Polyclinic since 2011. Recently, I think MOH has announced that the Punggol Polyclinic will only be ready in 2017. I would like to ask the Minister why it takes so long to build a polyclinic and, in the meantime, what would MOH do to ease the long waiting time at Sengkang Polyclinic. Second clarification would be on integrated Shield plans. How will the enhanced coverage of MediShield Life affect existing integrated shield plans? And with the implementation of universal coverage in the MediShield Life plan, are the private insurance companies allowed to reject or exclude pre-existing conditions in their Integrated Shield plans? I have come across cases where the companies' underwriters actually exclude certain conditions even though doctors have already certified that the condition had already been treated and there will not be any long-term problems. To the Senior Minister of State – I am quite intrigued to hear about the interim caregiver service. I would just like to clarify with the Senior Minister of State will that be provided by all restructured hospitals in Singapore and whether these caregivers are nurses or trained caregivers. And, lastly, to the Parliamentary Secretary – there is this grant scheme for healthier option ingredients that you have mentioned just now. How does HPB ensure that stallholders do not charge consumers extra even though they have Page: 136 enjoyed the subsidies provided by HPB?”
“Madam, while we endeavour to ensure that our healthcare system remains efficient and relevant to Singaporeans' needs, let us also remember the old adage "Prevention is better than cure". I am sure that many Singaporeans would like a healthy life where they do not need to use any of our public health services. I am thus glad to see that HPB has undertaken numerous programmes to help Singaporeans achieve good healthy habits. Free or cheap health screenings are also available, many organised by CCs and RCs. However, while we have achieved much, are there more plans by MOH to help Singaporeans remain healthy? Page: 125 For instance, can we perhaps "think" about subsidising healthy food options? Controversial though it might be, but this might be an effective method. Throughout the world, countries have taken on such "sin" taxes. For instance, in Denmark, there is a tax on saturated fat, and in Hungary, taxes on packaged food high in salt, fat or sugar. Can we think of ways to incentivise healthy living, rather than punishing for living unhealthily? In Singapore, unfortunately, healthier food options generally cost more. For example, unsweetened soya milk costs about 10 to 20 cents more than the standard sweetened version and brown rice is costlier than the normal polished white rice. Studies have shown that subsidising healthier foods can be effective in modifying dietary behaviour. Will MOH consider subsidising healthy food options to encourage Singaporeans to take up healthy eating habits? In addition, will MOH also consider introducing a "no claim bonus" on MediShield premiums if one stays healthy and free of illnesses?”
“Madam, I have highlighted repeatedly for the past few years the need to support caregivers as they care for their loved ones. Caregivers are perpetually under constant stress and pressure, as many have to perform caregiving tasks, in addition to their daily work. In a Straits Times' article last year, some of these caregivers were featured. Ms Joyce Lim, for instance, was featured and she has to care for her elderly mother and brother who both have health problems. I am also glad that MOH has promised to increase the places available at centre-based services to help caregivers. However, there remains an urgent need to look into the needs of Page: 94 such caregivers and provide them with the necessary support as our population ages. I would like to ask the Minister for an update on the kind of support available to caregivers today. Also, with the implementation of a disability financial assistance for the Pioneer Generation who have moderate to severe disabilities, would the Minister also consider implementing a caregiver allowance for those who are caring for the disabled, but not of the Pioneer Generation age group? Respite Manpower for Caregiver”
“While we endeavour to meet the medical coverage of others who are uninsured, let us not forget those who cannot afford any increases. How can we ensure that Singaporeans remain covered for healthcare, regardless of income group? Can we consider premium subsidies for the lower-income group as well? I also hope that the Minister will look into the co-payments component of MediShield Life. This component is often paid for using MediSave and/or cash. Many Singaporeans have given the feedback that the co-payments can be prohibitive, especially in smaller bill sizes where the co-payment component makes up a significantly larger proportion of the bill compared to bigger bill sizes. Lowering the co-payment will minimise the out-of-pocket expenditure, making healthcare costs relatively more affordable.”
“As a whole, I think the affordability of MediShield premiums will be a major issue that the Government has to grapple with. While the current increase in CPF contribution rates is useful, how will those who do not have a job, for instance, housewives who contribute to Singapore differently by caring for the young, and caregivers, be taken care of? How will they afford the insurance premiums for MediShield Life? I had also previously suggested a reverse premium structure, which was first coined by Senior Minister of State Amy Khor, as a possible policy solution to cope with the anticipated rising MediShield premiums. This is worth serious consideration for it creates individual affordability when they can afford it, that is, when they are young and working, After all, CPF contribution rates do reflect this trend. When a Singaporean is younger, his CPF contribution rates are higher, while when he is older, the rate, both personal and by his employer, falls. Will the Ministry consider the implementation of such a reverse premium structure to make MediShield Life premiums affordable for all? Let us also not forget that with premium increases, different groups of Singaporeans will be affected differently. The rich and well-off will have less of an issue, as they have the means to afford and cushion any premium increase. The recent announcement of the subsidies for the Pioneer Generation is very reassuring. Page: 65 However, the rest of Singaporeans, especially those in the lower- and middle-income groups, will find any premium rise hard to manage. Any rise which may appear miniscule to others will be viewed as an added strain on their finances.”
“Madam, I read with anticipation the preliminary recommendations by the MediShield Life Review Committee. The call for the removal of the current life-time claim, increasing the daily claim limits and covering those who are currently uninsured are steps in the right direction. In particular, I applaud the call to include Singaporeans who have pre-existing conditions who are currently uninsured and those who have allowed their premiums to lapse because of inability to pay. As a society, we should progress together and ensure that those who need more help get them. Page: 64 The increase in coverage, I am sure, will lead to increased premiums as the community takes on a larger shared risk. I am particularly concerned about this. With inflationary pressures on Singaporeans, many, especially in the lower-income group, have difficulties coping with everyday life, much less paying extra for the revamped MediShield Life. In this vein, how then can we ensure that premiums remain affordable for Singaporeans, both when it is launched and in 10 to 20 years' time? This, I think, will be a major issue for many Singaporeans. Feedback that my GPC has gathered shows that a portion of Singaporeans, even today, has allowed their MediShield coverage to lapse. Several reasons account for this; their MediShield premiums have risen as they age till it is now sky-high; the periodic top-ups by the Government to MediSave were wiped out by hospital bill payments, either for themselves or their family members; and the advice from medical professionals is to allow their MediShield coverage to lapse and rely on MediFund. Many of these I have raised in the earlier Health GPC paper that was submitted to MOH.”
“We all will reach the other side this I firmly believe, And the elderly are closest oh what clues we could retrieve. Page: 34 For their characters are closest to how we'll be on high. They are the ones most developed, you can see it if you try. They've let go of the frivolous, and kept things that are dear. The memories of so sweet, of loved ones that were near. As a nation we are missing our greatest true resource, To get to know our elders and let them guide our course." This poem captures the essence of what I view and want growing old to be. As a society, we need a mindset change. Growing old should not be seen as a burden. In every elderly, there is a person who has lived a meaningful and fulfilling life, just like any of us. Our elders have devoted their lives to the building of our nation. Even when they are old, they still have a role to play. They have seeds of wisdom which they can share with us. Many of them want to continue to contribute to the society. Madam, the Pioneer Generation Package, MediShield Life and the SG50 Seniors' Programme announced by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman in his Budget Speech are good initiatives to address the needs of the elderly. MOH can perhaps consider engaging professionals and subject matter experts to look closely into the issue of ageing holistically – by consulting the public widely on an array of ageing related issues, so as to address all aspects of ageing, not just one-off, but for the long haul. Maybe we can even consider having a national conversation on ageing, and collectively decide on how we want to engage one another and make ageing as something beautiful. One thing for sure, if we are lucky and live a healthy lifestyle, we will reach the other side. Sustainable Healthcare Planning”
“Without them, the doctors, the nurses, the pharmacists, the administrators or even the cleaners in our healthcare system, we will not be able to meet the needs and expectations of Singaporeans. Between 2007 and 2012, Singapore's doctor-to-population ratio improved from 1:620 to 1:520. Similarly, our nurse-to-population ratio also improved from 1:205 to 1:154. However, how are we compared to other developed nations in the West? In recent years, with the tight labour market and high demand for healthcare workers, we have had our fair share of healthcare professionals from overseas. With the anticipated opening of more hospitals and step-down care facilities, we will need more good people in our healthcare system. In this context, I would like to know the short- and long-term plans to develop the manpower necessary to meet our future needs, and also measures to ensure that foreign healthcare workers are well integrated and capable of delivering the high standard of care expected. At the same time, with the ageing population, we will expect our healthcare utilisation to increase. Many people have often taken a rather pessimistic perspective of ageing as a "silver tsunami", adding burden to the society. As you may know, tsunami is a series of gigantic tidal wave with enormous destructive power, often causing mayhem along its path. It has a rather negative connotation. But I would beg to differ and see ageing as something beautiful. An aged person is like a treasure to the people around. As the Chinese saying goes: 家有一老, 如有一宝. Let me quote a poem entitled "Treasure" by Cara Marie Filipeli: "Oh the value of the elderly! How could anyone not know. They hold so many keys, so many things they can show.”
“Income inequalities would also lead to difficulties from the low- and middle income groups to afford medical services. While we have means tested subsidies, we need to ensure that our services remain affordable to all. In this view, I would like to know the measures that the Ministry will be taking to ensure that healthcare remains affordable for all Singaporeans in the next decade. Will the Ministry consider measures like introducing a fixed treatment rate for low-income Singaporeans at CHAS GPs and polyclinics for certain common ailments and chronic diseases, or expanding the standard drug list by including more essential drugs used in the treatment of common conditions and surveying and making public information on fees across the healthcare industry? I do not want to sound like a broken record, but the liberalisation of MediSave use is one area my fellow GPC Members and I have been calling for over the years. Many Singaporeans have given me feedback that they have sufficient MediSave in their CPF but the current rules do not allow them to use beyond the current ceiling. For example, $400 per year is allowed for use in the Chronic Disease Management Programme (CDMP). Can we allow more MediSave to be used for outpatient treatment of chronic diseases, or even purchase drugs, or essential medical paraphernalia? This will definitely help ease the out of pocket expenditure on healthcare services for many Page: 33 Singaporeans. Let us also remember that while the tool may be sharp, the worker also needs to be skilled. Indeed, while we have a good tool in the form of our healthcare system, we also need good people to run it.”
“Income inequalities in Singapore have also risen, and together with rising medical costs, reflect the key challenges that we in Singapore need to deal with. Nonetheless, let us not rest on our laurels even as we are acknowledged worldwide for our efficient healthcare system, but ensure that we remain at the forefront to meet the healthcare needs of Singaporeans. My colleagues and I have raised some of these challenges and made recommendations in the GPC Page: 32 (Health) Report submitted to MOH last August. In recent months, we have also seen signs that the bed crunch situation is not abating. While we seek to add more beds to the system in the form of acute and community hospitals, let us not lose sight of the bigger picture. To me, the bed crunch is just a manifestation of the underlying fact that we have not effectively deployed our resources and ensure right siting of care. They are many measures we can take to ensure the right siting of resources, for instance, ensuring that A&E services are not over taxed by minor non-urgent cases, or encouraging the primary care and private sectors to take up more of the burden of our acute public hospitals. In these terms, what steps then is the Ministry taking to restructure our system to ensure the right siting of care and the full use of our limited resources, both in the public and private sectors? What is MOH's plan with regard to health and social care integration? While we strive to restructure and ensure our healthcare system remains accessible to all Singaporeans, let us also remember that affordability is one key concern of many Singaporeans, especially the elderly and the low- and middle-income families. I have in the past pointed out that medical inflation is rapidly outstripping wage increases.”
“Mdm Chair, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Estimates be reduced by $100". Singapore's healthcare system has developed and evolved through the years to what it is today, through a mix of pragmatism, eclecticism, learning and adapting from best practices to arrive at a formula that works for us. It is a system built on firm foundations, resting on the tenets of individual responsibility, ensuring healthcare quality, accessibility and affordability through Governmental support. Our healthcare system has been the subject of numerous comparisons and, more often than not, has been praised for its efficiency and quality. In a 2012 Forbes article, Singapore's healthcare experience was touted as a "Singaporean Miracle". I quote the article here: "Singapore has, arguably, the most market-oriented system in the world. Singapore's GDP per capita is about 20% higher than America's, with comparable (if not higher) health outcomes, and spends an absurdly low amount on healthcare relative to the West." Similarly, in 2013, Slate magazine also published an article that highlighted aspects of Singapore healthcare; Government subsidies, MediSave, MediShield and MediFund which America could learn from. The effectiveness of Singapore healthcare is further affirmed by a Bloomberg Healthcare survey, which ranked us second, in terms of efficiency, no doubt helped by our low GDP per capita spending and healthcare cost per capita. The accolades accorded to us are many, but we all know that we are not perfect and we continue to face many challenges and issues in our healthcare system. The rapidly ageing demographics will also impose additional strain on our healthcare system. With a good healthcare system, life expectancies of Singaporeans have also improved.”
“Mr Chairman, first let me declare my interest as the President of the Singapore Dragon Boat Association. Sir, I watched the recent Winter Olympics in Sochi, fascinated by the many different sports on display and the talent of the individual athletes representing their individual countries. All of them had put in tremendous efforts to represent their countries and to do their countries proud. As expected, the big nations, Russia and US, won the most medals. Yet what I found most fascinating was that many smaller nations had been able to punch above their weight in spite of their significantly smaller population. Norway, for instance, has a population of about five million, and won an astonishing 26 medals. Slovenia has two million but won eight medals. A recent count by an article in The Atlantic showed these two countries topping the medal charts, if it is ranked according to final medal performance by the size of each country's population. However, while it is important to achieve sporting excellence through the various high performance strategies, I would also like to highlight that sports is more than just medals and glory. As a country, we need to make sports a way of life. I would like to ask the Minister if his Ministry has plans to partner the NSAs and provide the necessary support and funding so that, collectively, we can work towards the common goal of making sports a national language that can inspire, unite and motivate Singaporeans – to borrow a quote from the Acting Minister Lawrence Wong himself.”
“Mr Chairman, the Sports Hub is opening in mid-June this year, and a whole range of sporting events and festivals has been lined up in the Sports Hub calendar. I am sure many Singaporeans will be able to participate in the activities at the Sports Hub in one way or another. Besides these events, the Sports Hub will also be gearing up to host the 2015 SEA and ASEAN Para Games. I would like to ask the Minister if the Public Private Partnership (PPP) framework for the Sports Hub development has served its purpose and met its original objectives. Page: 156 With just slightly more than a year to go, I would also like to ask the Minister for an update on the preparation for the SEA and ASEAN Para Games in 2015. Sports Facilities Master Plan”
“Madam, I would like to direct this clarification to Minister Grace Fu with regard to the matching grant for CDA. While I understand that it is a joint responsibility between the parents and also partly the Government, will the Minister actually consider removing the one-to-one matching, or maybe make it less onerous, maybe one-to-two, one-to-three, so that the lower-income families can contribute that amount to benefit from the cap that is provided by the state?”
“Madam, the recent Total Fertility Rate published by SingStat showed that it has decreased from 1.24 in 2012 to 1.19 in 2013. Our Government has been actively seeking ways to help boost the birth rate, through the implementation of various schemes, like paternity leave and baby bonuses, flexi-work hours and work-life balance initiatives. In fact, last year, a $2 billion marriage and parenthood package was announced and the quantum for the Baby Bonus was increased. With the drop in TFR, I would like to ask the Minister for his views on the effectiveness of the policy changes over the years. Page: 65 I have also received feedback from some of my residents that the one-to-one matching for the Child Development Account (CDA), while justifiably encouraging parents to co-fund their children's upbringing, has disadvantaged low-income families, who may not be able to contribute upfront the matching amount. Will the Minister consider doing away with the matching requirement and just contribute the Baby Bonus into the children's CDA? Encourage Local Childbirth”
“Bobby comes home one day, and his parents tell him that Bob is in the hospital, would not be back for a long time and no, sorry, Bobby is not allowed to visit him. Bobby is, of course, devastated. Months of sadness and loneliness pass for Bobby and finally, Grandpa Bob gets well enough to return home. What a bittersweet homecoming it is, though. Bob is confined to a bed or chair; he cannot walk nor talk and little Bobby is afraid and sad. Bobby's first attempt to talk to Bob is frightening and he ends up running from the room to tell his mom that Bob sounded like a monster. When Bobby returns to Bob a few minutes later, there are tears on Bob's face. It is a moment of reckoning for Bobby, because he finds that he can communicate with Bob and believes that Bob is responding to him, even if it is ever so very slightly. The wooden blocks and stories slowly come back out, only this time, it is Bobby who is in the lead. Eventually, Bob learns to walk again, just a little, with young Bobby teaching the subject he has known so well through his cherished stories, first one foot, now the other. Mdm Speaker, our older generation have taught us to walk. They have cared for us, building us a nation of opportunities and wealth. Now in their times of need, it is our turn. Like the story, our younger generation can and should support our own Bobs, to help them to walk if they so desire, to talk, to empathise and to support them. The Pioneer Generation Package is a right step in this direction. With that I support the Budget. 1.03 pm”
“" The problem, as Kim explains, is that younger South Koreans have come of age in a time of relative affluence and freedom, and like many younger people in East Asia, have gradually become more independent-minded than their elders and less attached to the traditional Confucian values that have been the basis of Korean society for centuries. The net result is a society divided among values and age lines, and the dispute over who gets to sit on priority seats is an exemplification of the underlying tension. Thus, while we seek to ensure that the older generation is well taken care of, we must ensure that our younger citizens understand the rationale behind these measures to help the elderly and accept them. The last thing we want to have is a divide between older Singaporeans who enjoy certain benefits and the younger Singaporeans who do not. We must ensure that there will be no tension between our citizens because of age. Mdm Speaker, I want to end off my speech like I always have – by relating a children's story. This one is called "Now One Foot, Now the Other" by Tomie dePaola, an American writer and illustrator who has created more than 200 children's books and has received the Laura Ingalls Wilder Award for his lifetime contribution to American children's literature in 2011. This story is one that touches my heart every time I read it. There are two main characters in the story – Bob the Grandfather and Bobby the Grandson. Allow me to quickly share the main gist of the story here. Page: 32 Bobby's dearest person in the world is his grandpa, Bob. Bob teaches Bobby how to walk, stack wooden blocks and tells him stories. Bobby's favourite, as he grows, is the story about learning to walk with Bob, first one foot, then the other. Then, Bob suffers a stroke.”
“Can we, for instance, look at abolishing the retirement age and continue to pay older workers based on their performance and contribution? Mdm Speaker, I would like to highlight a potential conflict between the young and the old and draw valuable lessons from the South Korean experience. Let us turn our attention to MRT priority seats at this moment. I am sure many of us here will know that priority seating on our trains is a noted point of concern. While we hear of many sleepers in these seats, I am still heartened that a recent survey by TODAY newspaper showed that most Singaporeans would give up their seats for those who need them, especially the elderly. However, the situation in South Korea is slightly different. Like us, South Korea Page: 31 is one of the world's most rapidly ageing countries and is expected to become an "aged society" in the next four years. South Korea also has the third lowest birth rate in the world. I am sure we can see many similarities between Singapore and South Korea. Yet, in South Korea, as a recent The New York Times article by Kim Young-Ha points out, there is an inherent tension between the young and the old, in the form of his observations about priority seating in the Korean subway, and I quote him here: "There was a time when young people were happy to give up their seats for the elderly. And the elderly, fitting to tradition, have always assumed that they had a right to a seat occupied by a younger person. But young people today are simply less deferential to their elders… For now, South Korea's intergenerational conflict seems limited to the underground. But without a meaningful dialogue on how to help both our struggling elderly and disaffected young people, the tension will find a way of rising to the surface.”
“In the United Kingdom, the Department of Health has made coordinated health and social care a key aim, with the aim of improving patient outcomes in different settings. We can do more to relieve the burden on our acute setting, if our primary, acute and community care settings are better integrated, in terms of subsidises, seamless referrals, streamlining care pathways and patient record management. Mdm Speaker, it is good that the Government has prepared the Pioneer Generation Package to help those who have contributed to Singapore in their youth. Much, in fact all, of this assistance is in the area of healthcare but let us remember that it is not only in the area of healthcare that we need to turn our attention to. At the United Nations level, the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing, called for: "A society for all ages encompasses the goal of providing older persons with the opportunity to continue contributing to the society. To work towards this goal, it is necessary to remove whatever excludes or discriminates against them." While the Government has worked hard to remove the monetary obstacles in healthcare affordability, we need to ensure that in other areas, the elderly can still participate meaningfully in society. This includes the areas of employment and access to knowledge, especially infocomm technology. We can and should do more to ensure that older persons, including the Pioneer Generation, continue to have the opportunities to lead their lives they want to, to work in the jobs they want to, and to access the information they need. The non-monetary aspects of growing old must not be neglected and the Government can do more to help them.”
“In last year's Budget debate, I had called for more help for these caregivers, and I would like to raise this again. Can we not consider a similar form of caregiver allowance, in the form of cash payouts or even Medisave or CPF top-ups to help them, just like in many other countries? It is an undeniable fact that the expenses for people with disabilities and their families are generally higher. Early therapy and educational support for children with special needs require a lot of resources and can be costly, as are the dedicated transport services for the handicapped. The new education and transport subsidies to help the disabled from a young age are indeed welcome, and I hope the Government will continue to monitor this space closely and to provide the necessary assistance to mitigate the rising cost of living over time. In his Budget speech, Deputy Prime Minister also pointed out that there is an urgent need to ensure that the capacity of the healthcare system is expanded so that our infrastructure will meet our current and future needs. Recent news articles have also highlighted once again the bed crunch that many of our hospitals are facing. I agree wholeheartedly that there is an urgent need to also reduce the over-concentration of patient load in acute settings. In the face of higher demand for healthcare, we also need to spread the burden and ensure that our primary care sector takes up the challenge. The same applies for community care settings. In an ideal healthcare ecosystem, all sectors should be working together to coordinate care for the community and to ensure the Page: 30 right siting of care.”
“The additional 1% increase to Medisave contribution will no doubt help citizens with healthcare costs. However, the elephant in the room has to do with affordability. For the lower-income groups, for instance, those who earn less than $1,500 per month, is that 1% increase sufficient? These groups are more vulnerable to the inflationary impact of healthcare costs. Similarly, we cannot expect all older persons to work. Page: 29 For instance, as of June 2013, in the 50-55 age group, 94% of male residents and only 66.5% of female residents participate in the labour force. This number decreases as we look at older age groups. Raising CPF contribution rates will ensure those in the workforce get the help they need, but let us remember those who do not work, many not by choice. Many older women stay home to take care of their children and families and contribute to Singapore in their own ways. Can the Government do more to care for their healthcare needs, instead of overburdening their families? This year's Budget has also seen the introduction of the new Pioneer Generation Disability Assistance Scheme, which will give out $1,200 a year to our pioneers with moderate to severe disabilities. While it is not a huge sum and might not be adequate for those who require long-term medical and social care, the assistance scheme is a good gesture. This sum of money will help caregivers as they seek to care for their loved ones. Yet, let us remember that there are other caregivers who also give up their careers and make sacrifices to their lives to care for their loved ones. These caregivers care for their family members with disabilities, who may not make up the Pioneer age group. Caregiving is never easy and the stress on caregivers, financially and emotionally, can be enormous.”
“Subsidies for the low- and middle-income at Specialist Outpatient Clinics will rise from 50% to 60% and 70% respectively, while those from the Pioneer Generation can receive subsidy as high as 85%. Those between the ages of 55 and 64 this year will also receive Medisave top-ups of $100-$200 over the next five years. These will make healthcare within the reach of all and ensure that they will get the care they need. In addition, I would like to urge the Government to liberalise the use of Medisave, so that the out-of-pocket expenditure on healthcare can be minimised. Many Singaporeans have lamented the fact that they may have sufficient money in the Medisave but the rules do not allow its use on legitimate medical expenses beyond what the current allowable ceiling is. One case in point is the Medisave withdrawal limit for the Chronic Diseases Management Programme (CDMP). Only patients suffering from the list of pre-approved chronic diseases are allowed to use Medisave to pay for their medical expenses. What about many other patients who may be suffering from other chronic diseases that require long-term treatment? What about expenses on health screening and essential medical paraphernalia, such as blood pressure and blood sugar monitoring machines, or even diapers for the invalid? The Government should also consider the expansion of the standard drug list and institute regular surveys on medical costs and make public such information, which I had previously called for. These additional measures will go a long way towards ensuring that healthcare remains affordable for all Singaporeans. Mdm Speaker, I am also glad to see that CPF rates will be raised for all workers, especially older workers.”
“In line with its general principle of seeing healthcare within the spectrum of continuum of care, the GPC has recommended that MediShield coverage be enhanced and extended to cover social and community care costs. This is ever more pertinent with the ageing population and that more and more of the population would need to utilise such care options in future. The GPC has also called for the MediShield age limit to be removed and that all Singaporeans be included in this national healthcare plan. The co-payments and deductibles for basic plans, though essential, should be lowered to make it more affordable for Singaporeans. I support the great work of the MediShield Life Review Committee and I hope that the Review Committee will take these suggestions into consideration in their final recommendations for the MediShield Life plan. However, many Singaporeans, especially those from the lower- and middle-income families, remain apprehensive about the rising healthcare costs. Although MediShield Life will provide enhanced coverage for all Singaporeans, including those with pre-existing illnesses, many are worried about the affordability of the premium. While the Government has promised to offset the anticipated premium increase for all Singaporeans for the next few years, I hope Page: 28 the Government can do more to help the needy by providing long-term financial assistance to help keep these vulnerable groups covered under MediShield Life. As a general principle, the GPC has recommended that the Government step in to provide the necessary assistance to the elderly and needy Singaporeans who genuinely encounter financial hardship in maintaining their MediShield Life coverage. A review of the subsidy framework was also one of the recommendations by the GPC for Health.”
“The Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Health had released a report in August last year, calling on the Government to make healthcare affordable to all Singaporeans, especially the elderly. The key recommendations by the GPC were: (a) Enhancing the 3M framework by strengthening MediShield coverage, ensuring premium affordability and liberalising Medisave usage; (b) Review and rationalise existing medical assistance scheme and subsidy framework; Page: 27 (c) Managing rising healthcare costs through expanding the standard drug list; and (d) The right siting of care in the continuum of care. I am extremely heartened that many of the recommendations in the GPC report have been taken up in this year's Budget. In particular, I wish to applaud the additional subsidies for Specialist Outpatient Clinics, polyclinics, extension of CHAS benefits to the Pioneer Generation, disability cash assistance, Medisave top-ups and revamping MediShield to the more inclusive MediShield Life plan for all Singaporeans. I am also glad that CPF contribution rates for older workers have been raised. These will go a long way to ensuring that healthcare remains affordable for the elderly. The ring-fencing of the $8 billion to fund the Pioneer Generation Package is also very reassuring as it provides peace of mind to the estimated 450,000 beneficiaries that this package will continue, regardless of the economic climate in Singapore, for the rest of their lives. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman is absolutely right to point out that healthcare cost will be the key concern of many Singaporeans, both young and old. I am glad that the Government has heeded the Health GPC's call to ensure healthcare affordability, through the various provisions in this year's Budget.”
“Mdm Speaker, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. When I sat listening to the National Day Rally Speech last year, I was very comforted when Prime Minister Lee singled out the Pioneer Generation as a group that we need to give priority to. The Prime Minister had said, and I think it is worth repeating here: "One group which we need to take special care of is our Pioneer Generation. They are special. They are the ones who worked hard to build today's Singapore. They made this place. They enabled us today to enjoy these facilities. They earned less than us. They had fewer safety nets when they were working. They brought up this generation and they paved the way for us to live a better life than themselves. That was their goal. They achieved it and I think we should know and that we should be grateful to them. Now mostly they are retired, at least in their late 60s, many older. And we must take special care of this special Pioneer Generation in their golden years." This year's Budget has managed to do this. It is an inclusive, thoughtful and caring Budget – one that not only honours the Pioneer Generation but also extends a helping hand to the young, workers and companies to help create a fair and equitable society with quality growth. What impresses me most is the implementation of the Pioneer Generation Package. It honours and thanks the Pioneer Generation whose grit and determination helped build today's flourishing Singapore. It is timely that it also addresses the concerns and needs of this very special group of seniors, and I am especially glad that due consideration had been given to meet their medical needs.”
“Mdm Speaker, for the above reasons, I do not support the Bill. 4.00 pm”
“Although this Bill is temporary, and will have a non-renewable 12-month or shorter life span, I fear that this Bill will be the precursor of, the test-bed of permanent legislation that will come about after the COI has completed its work. If indeed the COI recommends that tough laws, especially relating to alcohol are needed, I am prepared to support them. But until then, we should hold our horses and not pass judgement. We must proceed with utmost caution and not put unnecessary strain to a delicate situation. Madam, this Bill can be more tightly scoped. It can be stripped to its bare essentials, primarily providing ancillary support for the maintenance of law and order such as those in clauses 18 and 19 on the Liquor Licensing Board's powers Page: 64 during the freeze period, and clause 20 for the swift cancellation or suspension of any business licence of a licensee who commits or is reasonably suspected of contravening the law. But this Bill is designed for much more than that and will be implemented as a substantial law. It will be the primary legal tool for the special zone of Little India during the freeze period. I regard the Bill as a coercive tool that is not justified by the circumstances. It is hard to quarrel with the individual provisions of the Bill given that the priority is to maintain law and order. However, they are not stand-alone provisions, and when the provisions are collectively considered, which this House must, then a different narrative is played out. When it comes into force, this Bill will probably pass muster any legal challenge to its constitutionality. But it is a loaded legislation; it carries far too many connotations. And we must be very careful of the unintended consequences that this Bill elicits.”
“The special class permits required during the freeze period and the inspection regime for entrants to the special zone in clauses 5 and 9 to12 respectively would make Little India a much less appealing place for social engagements for locals and foreigners alike. The power to search will make movement into and within Little India inconvenient at the very least. It is likely that Little India will become less vibrant and less congested. The latter is probably preferred from a crime control perspective. However, has the Government considered the Bill's impact on social life and the legitimate business activities in Little India? Again, I question whether the response manifested in this Bill is an over-reaction, an over-kill. Madam, I now conclude. As I emphasised in my speech at the Second Reading of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Bill last year, we are all in full agreement with the goal of a safe and secure environment, something which Singaporeans enjoy today and perhaps may even take it for granted. The question of how we get there – the means to achieve the end of a low crime-rate of a safe environment is of utmost importance. Put simply, the approach cannot be one of the ends justifying the means. Will the Police and other agencies be hampered in their efforts to maintain public order in Little India without this Bill? Not at all, as it has been demonstrated since 14 December 2013. In fact, POPA, the Public Order Act, the Penal Code and many other laws will always be there for the authorities to use. There is a spectrum of laws that allow for a calibrated approach.”
“The Bill will stoke the fear that migration threatens our wellbeing, the fear of being overwhelmed by foreign values, cultures, and influences, and the fear that Singaporean's identity, integrity, and innocence are under siege from within. Such negative sentiments towards immigration are infectious and counter-productive. Once immigration is largely equated with an existential threat, then the essence of an openness of mind, spirit and heart – so vital in an immigrant society like ours – will certainly concede to and be crushed by growing angst, anger and anxiety among Singaporeans and migrants alike. I fear that this image of the "criminal" migrant worker will become firmly entrenched in public perception and discourse. I wonder whether this perception has actually crept into the Government's thinking and so now finds its way into public policy, even when the statistics have failed to provide a link between immigration and criminality. Madam, we must do our best to avoid this in-group/out-group mentality in which the latter is threatening to the former. This racialised public sensitivity must be avoided because it would ultimately affect and infect inter-ethnic relations here in Singapore. Fifth, the Bill will enervate Little India of its vibrancy and relevance. This Bill makes Little India a special zone. But specialness here means a coercive regulatory framework that will be in place for 12 months. Given the heightened security regime in Little India, it will not be surprising if locals and migrant workers alike consciously and conspicuously avoid Little India. In some Page: 63 respects, this Bill will transform Little India into a de facto gated community devoid of colour, charm and character that had made it attractive to locals and foreigners alike.”
“Madam, the Bill gives law enforcement officers enhanced powers to deal pre-emptively and decisively with potential public order threats in the special zone of Little India. For instance, officers will be empowered to inspect and interview any persons who enter the special zone for alcohol. This will also have powers to exclude or ban persons from entering the special zone for specified durations if a person's presence or actions are likely to threaten public order. At one extreme, the powers envisaged under the Bill make Little India out to be a dangerous place. At the other extreme, the Bill may create the perception of immigrant criminality tendencies. In either case, we risk erecting social boundaries between Singaporeans and the South Asian migrant workers, and Page: 62 perhaps migrant workers in general. The crime rate of migrant workers is lower than that of residents. This Bill creates the mis-impression that the riot would not have occurred, had there been stronger alcohol curbs, and/or had there been stricter controls on the number of migrant workers in Singapore. Madam, this Bill comes swiftly and specifically as a pointed response to the Little India riot. It draws unnecessary and suspicious attention to the transient workers who congregate in Little India. Given the long history of disamenities there, including minor illegal acts, the perception of immigrant criminality is reinforced by this Bill. Given, at best, Singaporeans' ambivalent sentiments towards short- and long-term immigration, this Bill unwittingly and ironically provides a top-down self-critique of our immigration policy.”
“Page: 61 Alcohol regulation has a strong presence in the Bill: see clauses 4 to 7 specifically, and clause 20 generally. The Bill proposes a general prohibition against the sale, supply and consumption of alcohol in Little India, and the creation of a permit regime to allow such activities to be carried out there under specific conditions. In my view, this Bill proceeds on the basis that alcohol was the primary cause of the disturbance on that fateful December night. I accept that alcohol controls are necessary. In fact, Singapore has, by far, a too liberal regime governing the sale and consumption of alcohol. I have filed PQs on this matter of liquor licensing in Little India. In this regard, I find it worrying and very hard to comprehend how the Liquor Licensing Board could have issued 374 liquor licences in 2013 within a 1.1 square kilometre area in Little India where alcohol, until recently, could be purchased and consumed at will and for a long time, had been fingered as a major cause for much of social disamenities there. It is all too convenient to blame alcohol consumption for the riot. It was certainly an aggravating factor but we must be careful not to make it a scapegoat for the poor controls with regards to alcohol, generally and in Little India, by the relevant government agencies. This Bill may seek to paper over the regulatory and policing inadequacies that contributed to the chaos of 8 December 2013. And if long overdue controls on alcohol sale and consumption are needed to stabilise the situation, then let us address them by making the necessary amendments to the relevant legislation, such as to Part VIII of the Customs Act, or introduce other appropriate legislation. Fourth, the Bill will hamper the healing and recovery of Little India.”
“In his Ministerial Statement in this House on 20 January 2014, the Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister said that: "The majority of Singaporeans recognise that foreign workers are generally law-abiding and do contribute to our society and economy. As many foreign workers told Minister Shanmugam and Minister Iswaran, Mr Dhinakaran and Mr Vikram Nair during their visits to the dormitories, they want to continue working here, appreciate our rules and laws, and want to continue to live in peace and not be tarred with the same brush as the few who had done wrong." Madam, the Police and other agencies must be provided with the necessary resources, including legislative ones, to do their jobs. It is certainly within the Government's realm of prerogative to seek to enact this Bill. However, we must be mindful of the impact it has on Singaporeans and the foreign workers. Passing this proposed legislation opens up a range of possible interpretations of the conduct of migrant workers in Singapore. It is correct that this Bill is drafted to be of general applicability, but it would be naive to pretend that its implementation would be of general applicability. The powers proposed are likely to be used when the transient population in Little India swells by the tens of thousands over the weekends. We must be very mindful of this reality since the migrant workers will primarily be subjected to the proposed law. Third, that this Bill proceeds on the basis that alcohol was the cause of the disturbance on 8 December. Madam, the COI will begin its public hearings tomorrow. In the riot's immediate aftermath, Singaporeans were urged not to speculate on the causes but to allow the COI to go about its task.”
“Furthermore, clause 12 enables a police officer to perform certain actions, such as search persons and vehicles and effect seizures, even in situations where the officer reasonably suspects an offence is "likely to be" committed. This is a low threshold to use the powers of search and seizure. And to boot, the police officer can do so without a warrant. I am prepared for such powers to be given to a police officer if he reasonably suspects an offence has been or is being committed. However, to exercise such powers without a warrant and, particularly, on the suspicion that an offence is likely to be committed, strikes me as affording too much discretion and pre-emptive power to the Police. Additionally, clause 12(2)(a) provides for search and seizure powers to be exercised "on a random basis" for the detection of an offence. This strikes me as being incompatible with reasonable suspicion. This might give licence to the Police to engage in fishing expeditions. Madam, this Bill is a disproportionate response to the riot in Little India. Yes, it was the worst public order disturbance in Singapore in more than four decades, and resulted in substantial damage to emergency response and private vehicles, injuries to Home Team officers who responded to the scene, Page: 60 and significant disruption to public order and our sense of security. It is also worth noting that the alleged rioters were rather discriminating in their targets. Madam, we have been assured that the riot was a one-off spontaneous mayhem. Are we, therefore, using the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a nut here? Could the Minister state categorically what are the clear and present dangers posed by the migrant workers to necessitate this sharpened, proposed legislation?”
“I listened attentively to the Minister's Second Reading speech but am still unable to see why we need to resort expediently to this Bill at this point in time. This Bill also clarifies, in clause 11(5), that the Police can also use the powers conferred on them under the Public Order Act. When it is enacted, the Bill will add to the law enforcement agencies' enforcement arsenal. Page: 59 My concern is that this proposed law will have a chilling effect at a time when Little India is well on the road to healing and recovery. I must confess that when I reviewed this Bill, I was worried whether there were clear and present dangers posed by migrant workers following the riot – information and intelligence which the Government is not at liberty to share. Proportionality must be a touchstone of any coercive legislation. Unless the Government can show that relations have deteriorated between Singaporeans, the authorities, and the migrant workers, the powers sought by the Executive in this Bill strike me as excessive. So, while the Bill is supposedly for Little India's "local issues," it, nonetheless, provides for powers that can extend well beyond Little India. For example, clause 12 provides for the police to stop, enter, search, remove any vehicle, vessel or aircraft whether or not it is within the special zone of Little India. Vehicles in and outside of the special zone I can understand, but vessels and aircraft? This wholesale porting of powers over from POPA strikes me as manifesting the Government's abiding desire to retain emergency-type laws and powers when we are far from experiencing an emergency situation. Are we generating a moral panic here?”
“The proclamations take effect for 48 hours, typically from 6.00 am every Saturday and conclude at 6.00 am the following Monday. This is not elegant, but POPA still gets the job done. The authorities have not needed to use the full suite of powers under POPA. The Government has indicated that there is nothing between the big stick that is POPA and the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act. Hence, there is a need for this Bill. Save for the curfew and some other provisions, however, this Bill has incorporated most of the hard-hitting provisions of POPA. This makes the Bill a very sharpened instrument in dealing with a non-emergency situation. By all accounts, Little India is now more orderly, and the crowds are returning. It appears that the series of measures implemented to restore calm and maintain public order in Little India are working. The measures include a ban on public consumption of alcohol and restriction on the sale of alcohol at specific times. As such, I cannot see how this Bill will make a significant difference. Instead, I fear that a heightened legislative and regulatory posture would raise the stakes and hinder a return to normalcy. Secondly, that the Bill is a disproportionate and a knee-jerk response. Madam, the Minister has explained that this Bill is scoped more tightly compared to POPA's "wide-ranging powers" to deal more effectively with the local issues within Little India. It was explained that this temporary law will enable the Home Affairs Ministry to enact longer term legislation to take into account the findings and recommendations of the Committee of Inquiry (COI), and the recommendations arising from the public consultations on the review of the liquor licensing regime.”
“Having considered carefully this Bill since its First Reading exactly four weeks ago, Madam, I do not support the Bill. I do not doubt at all that the Members of this House – and I include myself here – are steadfastly for the maintenance of public order in Little India and throughout Singapore. I am unable to support this Bill because, first, the current suite of laws, while inelegant and perhaps cumbersome in their application, is sufficient; second, this Bill is a disproportionate and a knee-jerk response to the concerns of law and order in Little India; third, given that the Committee of Inquiry has begun its inquiry, this Bill proceeds, prematurely, on the basis that alcohol was the cause of the disturbance on that fateful night of 8 December; fourth, that the Bill will not aid in the healing and recovery of Little India, and instead pushes the discourse of immigrant criminality and risks erecting social boundaries between Singaporeans and the South Asian migrant workers when we can least afford it; and fifth, the Bill will enervate Little India of its vibrancy and relevance. I will now elaborate on each of them. Firstly, the current exceptional measures in Little India are underpinned primarily by proclamations issued under the Public Order (Preservation) Act (POPA). POPA provides that if, in the opinion of the Minister charged with the responsibility for internal security, public order in any area in Singapore is seriously disturbed or is seriously threatened and he considers it to be necessary for the purpose of maintaining or restoring public order in that area Page: 58 to do so, the Minister may proclaim the existence in that area of a state of danger to public order. So, we have had weekly proclamations under POPA since 14 December 2013.”
“I certainly hope that the Ministry will give due considerations to subsequent longer-term legislation, including banning consumption of alcohol in public, to ensure the peace and safety of Singapore, not just within Little India, but in the rest of Singapore, too. With that, I support the Bill. 3.40 pm Assoc Prof Tan Kheng Boon Eugene (Nominated Member): Mdm Speaker, that the "one-off" riot on 8 December last year did take place is disconcerting and troubling enough. The disturbance and the consequences flowing from it have interrogated and challenged the legitimacy of our economic and immigration policy. The Government has assiduously sought to manage public opinion seared by the images of the riot that have offended our sensitivities and sense of well-being. I see this Bill as part of this effort. Page: 57 In order to win support, the Bill before us now is designed as a temporary law, portrayed as a necessary and tightly scoped law. I must emphasise that the violent actions of those involved in the disturbance cannot be justified, and that we must have a zero tolerance of such conduct. This Bill speaks of the Government's resolve to possess the full range of legal and coercive powers, even if it is for 12 months, to prevent the disturbance of 8 December from happening again. We would want to facilitate the recovery of and healing in Little India, particularly for Singaporeans who live and work in the area, and of the South Asian foreign workers who gather in the area over the weekends and on their days off. The fundamental reason for this Bill is important. After all, who would be against a law that seeks to keep Singapore safe? But how we get there is just as important, if not more important. We must not lose sight of the "how" question.”
“While I have no objection to foreign workers visiting the nearby shops and making use of amenities in the estate, I am concerned about the effect of alcohol intoxication on the human faculty and behaviour, especially in public areas, such as streets, parks and HDB void decks. I would like to urge the Government to take the bold step and go further and seriously consider banning the consumption of alcohol in public places, not just in Little India, but island wide. There have been numerous recorded events of riots associated with drinking in public in many countries, many resulting in massive damage to properties and loss of innocent lives. Countries that prohibit drinking in public places include Australia, Canada, Finland, Hungary, Norway, Poland, Russia, Spain and the United States. These are precious lessons we can learn from, and we should not wait for another incident to happen before looking at such a measure. Mdm Speaker, the riot in Little India has taken many Singaporeans, including myself, by surprise. Did we expect a riot to take place in Singapore after 40 years of peace? Probably not. Will it happen again in the future? Maybe. Do we want to do something to prevent this from happening again in our beloved homeland? Definitely, yes! The unprecedented serious damages to emergency response vehicles and injuries to Police and Civil Defence officers and the significant disruption to our peace and sense of security definitely warrants quick, decisive and bold measures to equip our law enforcement team with the appropriate powers to deal effectively with the local issues within Little India.”
“Clause 12 of the Bill allows a Police officer not below the rank of sergeant, without warrant, to stop, enter, search and remove or retain any vehicle; enter and search any premises or place; stop, detain and search any persons on the basis that an offence has been or is likely to be committed. My concern is that with so much discretionary powers conferred on Police officers, some of them who can be relatively junior and inexperienced, even if he is above the rank of sergeant, how will the officer be adequately trained to ascertain that an offence is likely to be committed? What measures will be put in place to ensure that our officers will not be put in a difficult situation to exercise reasonable judgement and that over-zealous officers will not abuse the power vested on them? I would also like to ask the Minister if any consideration will be taken in the monitoring of indicators to lift any measures, permanent or temporary, during the 12 months of the imposition of the Act. Mdm Speaker, I speak with concern because my constituency in Sengkang West is in close proximity to foreign worker dormitories along Jalan Kayu. I have received much feedback from residents that they have witnessed many foreign workers sitting in void decks and along the pavements, drinking beer and "staring" at passers-by. Some of my residents expressed concerns and worry over the safety of their family members, especially in the night when they return home from work and need to walk along the quiet streets back to their Page: 56 flat.”
“I would like to clarify with the Minister what happens after these 12 months as the Bill is silent on this. With the imposition of these measures, it could also mean that Little India becomes an area shunned by people, both for the restrictions on alcohol sales and its consumption and a possible risk of being stopped and searched by patrolling officers. What then is going to stop foreign workers from Page: 55 congregating at other areas and consuming alcohol there? There are also other areas where foreign workers congregate in large numbers, for instance, the Thais at Golden Mile and the Burmese at Peninsula Plaza. While these areas have remained relatively peaceful, if alcohol consumption holds such an impact, then should we not be concerned about these areas where foreign workers congregate? Should the unlikely eventuality of a similar nature of incident occur elsewhere in the country, further away from Little India, will another "special zone" be designated under this same Act? At the same time, while we turn our attention to these foreign workers, let us remember that business owners and the provision of services have also been hard hit by the riot and the subsequent measures, especially those small businesses that depend on the sale of alcohol. These are small businesses, owned by Singaporeans who are just making their livelihood. I would thus like to ask the Minister if the impact on business in Little India is being monitored and, if so, are there measures being taken to help these small businesses.”
“I also hope that COI will dwell deeply into the root causes that have contributed to the perceived exaggerated reaction of the foreign workers on the night of the riot. On the subject of needs, it is thus interesting to note that Little India has become a place of congregation for many foreign workers. Every week, we see thousands, if not tens of thousands of foreign workers descending upon that area. However, it is always a fine line when we ask if the provision of services follows the congregation of people or vice versa. For me, I would believe that these grow hand-in-hand, and that services grow alongside the growth in population. Thus, Little India has become busier and busier, and we see the evolution of more and more types of services to cater to the needs of these workers. On this matter, the temporary measures, which confer wide-ranging powers on the Singapore Police Force, including the ban of alcohol consumption and sales in designated "special zones", may be useful in preventing possible spontaneous actions, pending the COI's findings on the riot. On the other hand, there is skepticism on the enactment of this Bill as it is being perceived as draconian and disproportionate, curtailing the basic privileges and rights of citizens and non-citizens. The timing of the Bill, before the conclusion of the COI and criminal proceedings, has also been questioned as being presumptive and reactive. There are some quarters who also question why this temporary Bill is necessary when existing statutes are already available to address the concerns arising from the Little India riot. Clause 1 of the Bill states that the Act "shall continue in force until the end of 12 months after the date of its commencement".”