Lim Biow Chuan
Singapore
“Sir, just two short supplementary questions. First, currently, the United Nations define seniors as 65 years whereas we have set ours at 67 years. So, would the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) consider reducing to 65 years for the age eligibility criterion for getting the concessionary rate for the MDW?”
“In light of this, the existing practice of the Ministry, which disallows the repeated renewal of shorter term COEs, should also be eliminated to preserve the maximum flexibility for EV drivers to extend the use of an environmentally friendly car.”
“Sir, in June last year, the Thomson-East Coast Line (TEL) was launched. Sir, let me express my gratefulness to LTA for the TEL line, as there are three TEL MRT stations within the Mountbatten constituency. The TEL line has facilitated travel for many residents in my constituency.”
“Sir, I receive many queries from Polytechnic and GCE "A" level students wanting to know about their enlistment dates, asking about their Physical Employment Standard (PES) status prior to enlistment for. Sir, I also receive queries about NSmen hoping to study overseas.”
“MFA has said on several occasions that Singapore supports the right of Palestinian people to a homeland of their own. Singapore delivered not one, or two, but a total of six to seven tranches of humanitarian aid for Gaza in January 2025.”
“Even in Parliament, Sir, our Clerks and other staff work such long hours because MPs debate long hours, spend time debating Bills until late in the evening and sometimes until late at night. Sir, I have on many occasions, received emails from Ministers late in the middle of the night.”
The complete record
Every one of 802 lines we hold for Lim Biow Chuan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 17.
“May I ask MINDEF how is the ACCORD supporting pre-enlistees and their families as they prepare for the transition to full-time NS? Has ACCORD also considered steps to support those transitioning out of full-time NS? Can we do more to prepare our NSFs – for either a vocation or career after NS or to prepare them for their further studies? I urge MINDEF to do more to allow our NSFs to feel that their time spent during NS is for the right purpose and that they have benefitted from their stint in NS. Importance of NS”
“Thank you, Sir. The ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Gaza strip are important lessons to Singaporeans – never to take peace for granted and to always be prepared to defend their nation. Countries around the world have been racing to reverse their shrinking militaries by increasing defence spending and reinstating some form of national service. Sir, I served my NS 40 years ago when there was no threat of war or aggression. For many of my contemporaries, we served NS because we felt the need to do our part to serve the nation. But in today's world, there are many different narratives out in social media and fake news abound. It will be more challenging for MINDEF to persuade Singaporeans to defend their country if there are external unfriendly forces trying to provide different reasons for aggression. Photos and reports can be easily manipulated to paint a different picture for Singaporeans. May I ask what can MINDEF do further to reinforce the importance of NS among Singaporeans and in particular new citizens? Can MINDEF do more to strengthen the understanding of total defence among Singaporeans? May I ask whether the Advisory Council on Community Relations in Defence (ACCORD) will carry out more initiatives to strengthen community support for defence? Supporting Pre-enlistees and NSmen Sir, I get to meet many NSFs during the presentation of the Edusave awards. These young men have just completed their "A" levels or polytechnic education and they come to collect their Edusave awards with neat, shaven haircut and in NS uniform. Almost of all of them have a positive attitude towards NS and I wish to compliment MINDEF for a job well done. But we should not rest on our laurels because NS and the defence of our nation is critical to our nation's survival.”
“I appreciate the Government's gesture for adjusting the Annual Value bands for owner occupied residential tax rates. But for this group of retirees without income, the increase in tax rates last year has caused them distress. May I ask the Government to consider a special property tax relief for this small group of people. The 24-month instalment does not help them because it is still the same tax amount payable by these owners which they will have to dig into their savings, nor do they benefit from the other tax measures like the income tax rebate because they do not have any income. So, Sir, I urge the Government to consider showing appreciation for this small group of retirees without any income by acknowledging their contributions to Singapore and by offering them a special property tax relief. Sir, I look forward to the Government's response and I repeat my support for Budget Statement 2024.”
“They can also tap on various other Skills Development Fund grants to help pay for their courses. Next, Sir, I would like to talk about supporting the retrenched workers. In March 2017, I had asked the Government to consider mandatory retrenchment benefits for workers who had lost their jobs due to retrenchment. In my speech made seven years ago, I had said that for the worker who is retrenched without any compensation, it is a frustrating time for him as he struggles to provide for his family. Thus, I am truly glad that the Government had in principle agreed that we can do more to support workers who are involuntarily unemployed because displaced workers are already straining to make ends meet. I look forward to hearing more details of the scheme so that citizens who lose their jobs involuntarily can have some temporary relief while they re-skill themselves and find another job. Finally, supporting the retirees. Sir, within my estate, there are several retirees living in private properties who are either living off their pension or living on their savings. They have worked hard their entire life to contribute towards building up Singapore. And some of them have the fortune to invest their savings into buying a private property for their golden years where they hope to live the best part of their life. The Assurance Package has certainly helped them and I want to express my deepest appreciation to the Finance Minister and to the Government for sharing part of Budget 2024 to residents living in private properties. Some retirees are better off than others. But for those who have no other source of income other than their savings or pension, I wish to make a pitch for them and to ask for a review of the owner-occupation property tax hike.”
“This will help businesses survive and help keep the costs of labour more manageable. Next, I will talk about preparing for the future. I applaud the efforts of the Government to strengthen SkillsFuture. The programme was launched in 2015 and each Singaporean received a credit of $500 into their account. A further top-up to the SkillsFuture Credit was made in 2020. The SkillsFuture programme is an important principle that learning is for life; every Singaporean must do their part to continually upgrade themselves. Sir, I confess that it took me almost six years before I used the SkillsFuture Credit to attend a Vietnamese course from a language school. It has been many years since I attended formal lessons in classes. As expressed by the hon Member Dr Wan Rizal, I was very nervous about having to attend classes and eventually I was told that I had to pass a test before I could make a claim for the SkillsFuture Credit. But these lessons has allowed me to build up confidence that with some effort and perseverance, we will be able to adapt to learn new skills. So, my intent is to try to pick up conversational Bahasa Melayu sometime this year or next. And sometime later, I would like to take up a basic course in plumbing at ITE so that I can learn some life skills or take some courses to learn how to maximise the use of AI to improve my life. But, Sir, the important message from the Government is that each one of us is responsible for equipping ourselves for the future – whether it is for self-improvement or to improve our career prospects, that is for each individual to decide. And for citizens in their 40s or 50s, having the $4,000 credit and the opportunity to learn updated skills to enhance their employability is so important.”
“Sir, I worry for the day when due to exigencies like another COVID-19 pandemic and the Government cannot balance its Budget, what then will the Government do? Hence, I wish to urge the Government to review the reasons for the increasing costs and to find ways to mitigate such increases. Many businessmen that I speak to complain that the two main reasons for costs inflation is firstly, escalating land costs; and secondly, labour costs. The businessmen lament that if the Chief Valuer continues to assess properties at a high price, then the rental of shops, offices and other industrial buildings may never come down. A case in point is when the Government rejected a bid for the Marina Gardens Crescent site because the bid was too low. This means that if the Government maintains that the right price for land is a higher price based on the valuation set by the Government, then land costs will always remain high, and this will in turn cascade down to the ultimate user of the properties, who are the tenants. Sir, I urge the Government to consider setting some form of conditions or restrictions on the sale price or rental price for some commercial properties so that we can moderate the rental prices of properties, and hence, keep the cost of land down. For labour costs, I believe that many businessmen gripe about being unable to find workers for some of the less-desired work that Singaporeans shun. This shortage of workers can be seen clearly in the cleaning industry where many cleaning companies simply cannot find cleaners, for example for the Town Council conservancy contracts or the cleaning contracts for the hawker centres. So, I urge the Government to review the foreign worker dependency ratio in areas where we are quite certain that Singaporeans will not want to work.”
“Sir, I support the Budget Statement by Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister. I appreciate the efforts by the Government for the financial policy of the Government to look after everyone. There are provisions to help individuals, help families, workers and businesses. Many people view the Budget Statement as simply an announcement of the goodies which the Government dishes out for its citizens. I really hope that we can change that mindset. The financial policy of the Government must be not just to help our citizens tide over their current issues but also to provide a roadmap for Singapore's future. If the Government does not plan for the future, then we are merely putting out fire every time a crisis happens. Sir, there are just four items that I would like to talk about. First is cost of living. We had an extensive debate in Parliament in November last year, about the increased costs of living. Thus, I am glad that the Government continues to acknowledge the increased costs of living and has enhanced the Assurance Package given to the tune of $1.9 billion so that everyone benefits and those who need more help get a little bit extra. The disbursement of cash, GST vouchers, U-Save rebates, S&CC rebates and CDC Vouchers will certainly help residents cope with the increased costs of living. It should not be seen as an "ang pow" or as gift to citizens, but it is meant to alleviate the increased expenses that every household is facing today. However, my concern is that such cash, CDC Vouchers and other rebates cannot be a long-term solution. After a while, citizens may keep asking for more and more cash handouts and rebates. Eventually, we may possibly develop a crutch mentality for such handouts.”
“Sir, just two questions for the Minister. First, could the Minister clarify – why was this not spotted by the Auditor-General over the past years when they audited the Government processes and accounts? Second, the Minister said that the refund would be made together with interest at 5.5% per annum. Could I ask the Minister how does the Ministry compute the interest payable on the GST that was collected erroneously? Previously, when I wrote to Government to ask about how interest was charged, the Government told me that MOF has a policy of charging 8.1% on interest for refunds, when residents could not pay back the Ministry, whereas the Government is refunding at 5.5%. So, how does the Ministry determine this interest payable?”
“Thank you, Speaker. May I ask the Minister: I understand the Minister said that we are retaining the concession-based system for the CBT system. So, has LTA considered the possibility of persuading the one-third CBT ticket holders who are not on the ABT system, to go into the concession-base system which is being retained? The second question is whether LTA has considered using the $40 million to incentivise existing CBT holders to convert to the ABT? They may be happier to join them if you offer them a credit to their account when they sign up for the ABT system.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Unfortunately, despite all the punitive actions to be taken, the problem does not seem to be mitigated. So, my Mountbatten residents are also complaining that vehicles travelling down the East Coast Parkway, because of their modified exhausts, are making a lot of noise. So, either we step up the enforcement or if I can ask the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) whether they would implement any other kind of regulations to deter people from modifying, speeding and creating noise at unearthly hours. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Indeed, we not only look at specific issues but we also look at the feedback that we receive. We also carry out joint operations when we receive such information. We will not only look at the area but we also relate them to the different devices as well as information that each agency would have. So, we will continue to look into the specific area that the Member has shared and see how we can address the issue. Nevertheless, what is key is that we continue to monitor the situation in such issues that have been raised in certain areas. So, coming from the TP side, we work very closely with the ground and, if need be, we will also work with the community in the area.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I ask the Minister of State whether the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) would consider implementing regulations to stop apps from targeting minors or vulnerable young children from accessing these apps? There was a recent CNA article in which the reporters said that some of these apps were meant to target minors who were trying to access dating apps, and as a result, there were passes, some indecent comments made to the minors. So, would MHA consider, say, requiring these app owners to require members signing up to use their Singpass before allowing them to sign up, so this will make sure that those who are minors would not be able to sign up for such apps?”
“So, can I invite Mr Speaker to make a decision on this so that we can move out of this debate. Otherwise, we will be going back to issues which we have debated over and over again, and now resurfacing yet again.”
“A point of order, Mr Speaker. We have debated this time and again. We should not be wasting time on revisiting this debate over and over again. It is a waste of everyone's time. So, can I ask Mr Speaker to make a —”
“From the Report by the CPTL, I understand that there is an intention to make Part B more vigorous. I have received a lot of feedback from existing students that the academic workload for Part B is worse than the law school examinations. I took a look at the course content at the SILE website and I was surprised by the large number of subjects that are covered. It was as if SILE was trying to squeeze in a few years of legal content into a five- or six-month Part B course. Sir, in the past, the Practice Law Course, which is the current Part B, was meant to ensure that law students have sufficient knowledge of the practical aspect of legal practice before they are allowed to practise as advocates and solicitors. And that learning journey is always ongoing, because it is impossible to know everything as a lawyer. The law school examination is meant to give the student academic knowledge of a particular areas of law and the Practice Law Course is to supplement that knowledge in terms of the legal practice. Sir, I am of the view that we ought to maintain the intent of the Part B which is to impart practical skills to the aspiring lawyer and it is not meant to sieve out those who have no interest in the practice of law. If a student has passed his or her examinations and graduated with a law degree, MinLaw should accept that that student does have the requisite academic legal knowledge. Otherwise, that person should not have obtained the law degree. Making Part B more difficult would merely add on the stress of being a lawyer when the legal profession is currently suffering from a shortage of lawyers. I hope that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can clarify my queries.”
“Otherwise, the trainee may not benefit from a training contract, whether it is for six months or one year. Third, Sir, I want to talk about admission of lawyers (NP). Clause 6 of the Amendment Bill provides for a new category of individuals to be admitted to the Singapore Bar as a lawyer (NP). My query is on the use of the term "lawyer (NP)". Generally, the term "lawyer" is meant to apply to those whose profession is to conduct lawsuits on behalf of clients and to advise as to their legal rights and obligations. For the non-practising lawyers, they are generally known as legal counsel. By adding a category of the term "lawyer (NP)", would members of the public be able to distinguish between a lawyer in active practice and a lawyer (NP) who, in the past would be called a legal counsel? May I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary which other jurisdictions has a similar term as lawyer (NP)? Would members of the public then feel that lawyers (NP) would be in a position to advise the clients on legal practice matters when they are not really legal practitioners? Sir, I do not, in any way, mean to suggest that legal counsels are less regarded as compared to lawyers. But it is important to distinguish the primary function of lawyers and that of legal counsel. They are separate as they advise different parties. Further, if this law is passed, would all the existing legal counsels be able to apply to be admitted to the Bar as lawyers (NP)? If so, would there be a large number of applicants because currently, there are many legal counsels who are working in corporate organisations advising their companies. What would the process be like in dealing with such applications? Finally, Sir, let me address Part B of the course.”
“Has MinLaw considered the fact that lengthening the practice training period by a further six months may cause financial hardship on law students? It may also create the impression that all aspiring lawyers must have deep financial means. Next, Sir, I want to talk about quality of training. I recognise that the CPTL wanted to lengthen the training period so as to allow a longer period of mentorship to acquire basic legal skills. It also allows the mentor lawyer a longer period to assess the trainee lawyer. Currently, there is no structure for the training contract. The SILE does provide guidelines but whether the trainee receives proper training very much depends on the law firm and the supervising lawyer. If a supervising lawyer behaves unethically, then the trainee maybe be learning the wrong behaviour about a lawyer's conduct. Two years ago, there was a case about a lawyer who took on the role of being a supervising lawyer when he was not qualified to do so. And according to the judgment by Justice Choo Han Teck, the lawyer may have supervised another trainee who have since been admitted to the Bar. In other words, that person who had been admitted to the Bar had received training from a supervising lawyer who was not qualified to do so. Justice Choo had then said in the judgment that the Supervising Authorities should pursue the matter. Thus, Sir, even if the training contract is for one year and not six months, whether the trainee receives adequate supervision and training during this training period depends very much on the experience and ability of the supervising solicitor. And even then, the supervising solicitor must have the time to teach or guide the trainee.”
“Sir, I declare my interest as a practising lawyer. Sir, I understand that this Bill introduces amendments which were based on the recommendations of the CPTL. I too have a few queries on the amendment Bill for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. First is the length of time to qualify to be a practising lawyer. According to MinLaw's announcement made when the amendment Bill was read for the first time, the Legal Profession Act regulations would be amended to lengthen the practice training period from six months to one year. This means that in future, any aspiring lawyer would now have to undergo four years of academic study to obtain a law degree, spend six months preparing for the Part B examination and then spend one year on a practice training period – a total of five-and-a-half years. Sir, I urge the Government to consider that not every law student comes from a wealthy background. For an aspiring lawyer who comes from a poor family, the additional six months on a practice training contract would impose additional financial constraint on the family. It may also deter those who have the right attitude, skillset or talent from taking up law as a career because of the length of time required. For some students, a delay in six months may mean nothing. But for a law student from a poorer background, that delay of six months would mean an inability to contribute to the household expenses of the family. It will cause more hardship for the family. And if the student has to repay study loans, this would also mean a delay in the repayment of the study loan. Thus, an additional six months' extension of the training period may have different implications on a law student depending on his or her family circumstances.”
“While I may not agree with Mr Pritam Singh on some political matters, I will stand to defend his right to sit in Parliament unless he is convicted of an offence and, even then, the punishment levied must be such that it will disqualify him from serving as an MP under the Constitution, because not every punishment will result in disqualification as an MP under the Constitution. So, the fundamental question which I have for the two NCMPs is: what is their basis for asking for Mr Iswaran to be suspended from service when we do not even know what is the case against him? He has been placed on leave of absence and, hence, is not able to attend Parliament. So, I do not understand this rush to suspend him. Why not allow the CPIB time to do its work? Does PSP say that every single Government officer who is under investigation for any offence also be suspended, and the salary docked? Why would PSP want Parliament to amend an Act of Parliament just simply to push for the suspension of salary of one particular MP? Is it their position that you punish first – suspend, cut his salary – and then reimburse him later if he is found guilty? This goes against the rule of law. So, for that reason, I cannot support this Motion by Ms Poa and Mr Leong. I firmly believe that once the case against Mr Iswaran is concluded, the Government will do whatever is right to ensure that all parties are treated fairly. Hence, I support the Motion by the Leader of the House that we wait for the outcome of the investigations before considering any other action.”
“It means that if any member of the public lodges a Police report against Mr Leong or Ms Poa or, for that matter, any other MP and the Police decides to commence investigations against them, this House would similarly have to suspend them from the service of Parliament. If Ms Poa or Mr Leong feels that an MP ought to be suspended from service merely because he is under investigation, let us seek advice and I think the Leader of the House has said already that this principle would then have to be applicable to all MPs in this House. In the 2 August Sitting, I asked Mr Leong whether it is his position that the Leader of Opposition, Mr Pritam cannot receive his salary or cannot carry out his duties in Parliament merely because he has been referred to the Police for investigation. Mr Leong then replied that it only pertains to investigation by CPIB. But why only cases involving CPIB? As the Leader of the House said, "Why not for other offences, other serious offences – molest, rape, murder" or is it purely an arbitrary decision made by PSP? So, allow me to ask Mr Leong again – if an MP is investigated for perjury, for lying under oath, is that not a serious offence, too? It involves an allegation of dishonest conduct, an allegation of lying under oath which means that we cannot trust that person who may lie at any opportunity. Is Ms Poa or Mr Leong saying that these offences are not serious? Sir, allow me to clarify that I hold the Leader of the Opposition with great respect.”
“He has not been charged for an offence and neither has he been convicted in a Court of law of any offence. In the statement made by the Prime Minister on 2 August 2023, Prime Minister Lee said that "while investigating a separate matter, CPIB came across some information concerning Minister Iswaran that merited investigation. CPIB would need to interview Minister Iswaran to take the investigation further and he sought my concurrence to open a formal investigation. Minister Iswaran was brought in by CPIB and subsequently released on bail. I instructed him to take leave of absence until the investigations were completed." Sir, to this date, I am not aware of any other facts that have come out and the Prime Minister had said that CPIB investigations are still ongoing. He said, "Details cannot be provided so as not to prejudice the investigations." Thus, if Ms Hazel Poa of PSP is asking that Parliament suspend Mr S Iswaran simply because they feel that he does not warrant the MP’s allowance, then does this mean that they have already judged that Mr Iswaran had committed a wrongdoing even before the details of the investigations are out? Let me repeat that. They are judging that Mr Iswaran had committed a wrongdoing even before the details of the investigation are out. Surely, Mr Iswaran should be given due process and every opportunity to present his case before the Court of law if ever CPIB decides to charge him. And this is the basic principle behind the rule of law. So, with the greatest respect, if PSP is advocating this principle, then it is a very dangerous principle.”
“Sir, I was taken aback when I saw the Motion by the hon NCMP Ms Hazel Poa and Mr Leong Mun Wai. In their Motion, they asked that "This House suspends Mr S Iswaran from the service of Parliament for the remainder of the current session of the Fourteenth Parliament." In Ms Hazel Poa’s Facebook page, she said that she had filed the Motion so that Mr S Iswaran no longer receives his MP allowance while he has been requested by the Prime Minister to not perform any official duties during his investigation by CPIB. Sir, it is a fundamental principle of law that any person who is accused of an offence is deemed innocent until proven guilty in a Court of law. The burden of proof is placed on the prosecution, and the accused is assumed to be innocent until the prosecution can prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime that he has been charged with. The accused does not even need to prove his innocence. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. This principle is also enshrined in the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At Article 11, it says: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time that the penal offence was committed." Sir, to the best of my knowledge, Mr Iswaran is currently under investigations by CPIB.”
“Finally, clause 26 of the Bill requires parties to a settlement agreement to apply to record the settlement agreement as an order of Court. What if one party refuses to consent to the recoding of the settlement agreement? Who then will bear the legal costs of filing the application to record the settlement agreement? Sir, I would be grateful if the Minister of State can assist to clarify my concerns. And save for those concerns, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“This is to avoid a situation whereby the tenant may have forgotten to keep or to submit records of their capex and thus be unable to substantiate their claim in the event that the landlord does predetermine the tenancy. Next, Sir, I want to speak about clause 2 of the Bill. Clause 2 of the Bill provides for the law to be applied to all qualifying leases. Sir, may I ask whether this will include even the smaller retail landlords like those in HDB shops or the owners of smaller shops at Lucky Plaza, City Plaza or Peninsula Plaza? How does the Government intend to assist the smaller landlords to ensure that they are aware of the need to comply with the Code of Conduct? For example, would they be aware of the need to provide a certificate from the registered surveyor or the cap on the amount of security deposit? I know many of these small landlords would have absolutely no clue where to find a registered surveyor because they have been renting out the place for so many years. Next, Part 4 of the Bill requires the landlord or tenant to settle disputes with an authorised dispute resolution body and that authorised dispute resolution body must then maintain a panel of mediators and a panel of adjudicators. May I ask the Minister of State which is the authorised dispute resolution body? Sir, I declare that I have served as a director in the Financial Industry Dispute Resolution Centre (FIDReC) for 12 years. And I know, for these past 12 years, it is not easy to establish a dispute resolution body which has a pool of experienced and respected adjudicators and mediators. So, would this body referred to in the Bill be able to find enough adjudicators who are sufficiently experienced in landlord-tenancy disputes?”
“There are some shopping malls where there are still many empty retail spaces as compared to a major shopping mall where there is huge demand for retail space due to better management of the mall. Thus, Sir, I would urge that we should consider allowing free market principles to set tenancy terms as far as possible. In respect of the Bill, I have a few queries for the Minister of State. Paragraph 3 of the Code of Conduct provides for Advertising and Promotion (A&P) charge to be capped at the overall gross rent. This means that if a landlord wants to adjust what is commonly known as the A&P charge, he must do so within the total gross rent payable by the tenant. But surely, A&P charges payable by a tenant must be a matter of negotiation between the landlord and tenant. As long as it can be proven by the landlord that the A&P charges are meant to promote the mall or the building, why does the Code of Conduct restrict the amount of A&P charge to be collected? The setting of this rule would cause a landlord to simply refuse to conduct any A&P activities for the building or the mall if he is unable to raise A&P charges without cutting back on the amount of rental that he receives. So, if the total amount of rent cannot be changed, then he will simply not do any A&P activities because why would he want to cut his own rental? Paragraph 4 of the Code of Conduct also provides for the landlord to pay compensation if there is predetermination of the lease. As said earlier, I agree with this principle and I would add that we should make it mandatory for the landlord to send reminders to the tenant on the need to submit their declaration of value of capex works within three months of completion of the renovation works.”
“Further, at that point of time, rental control tenants had demanded exorbitant compensation before agreeing to vacate the rent-controlled premises. And, Sir, I have acted for such tenants before the Tenants Compensation Board. I know how difficult it is when the tenant demands hundreds of thousands of dollars for the premises that he does not own and for which he has been paying a small meagre sum of rental for many years. Thus, I call on the Government to review any request for amendments to the Code of Conduct with some caution so that a right balance of fairness can be considered from both the landlord and the tenant's point of view. During times when there is a shortage of retail space, usually landlords have a better bargaining position. And we have had a relatively strong economy for many years and property prices remain strong. However, during times when there is a glut of retail space, tenants can and will make demands for better tenancy terms from the landlord. Landlords would then cut rental. They will moderate their tenancy terms in order to rent out their premises. Otherwise, vacant premises are deemed to be a wasting resource to the landlord. If there are many retail properties which are vacant, it may cause property prices to nosedive. Members of this House who have lived through the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997 will know that a negative property market may eventually result in a recession because property owners cannot pay for their loan instalments and many property owners face financial ruin. In fact, observers of the retail market will also know that not all retail spaces are in equal demand.”
“" Sir, I am also concerned that the Code of Conduct is not a subsidiary legislation drawn up by the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) but by FTIC which has the right to propose modifications to the Code of Conduct. Although members of FTIC are appointed by the Minister, in the event that, one day, more members of this FTIC are pro-tenants, then there is a risk that the recommendations in the Code of Conduct may tilt too much towards protection of a tenant who is not the owner of the property. Sir, allow me to set the context of landlord-tenancy relationship in perspective. Landlords are typically owners of properties and they had paid hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars to buy real estate. These property owners then part with possession of the premises to tenants who are given exclusive possession of the premises for the duration of the tenancy. And in many landlord-tenancy disputes, the greatest worry of the landlord is that they are unable to recover possession of the premises from a tenant in default of rental. By the time the landlord commences legal action to seek an order of possession, the arrears would have accumulated to a large amount. Hence, the starting point for most tenancy agreements is that they seek to protect the landlord to enable the landlord to recover possession of the premises whenever there is a breach of tenancy agreement. Many of us in this House may not remember the Control of Rent Act – except Mr Murali – which was legislated after World War II to protect tenants against unscrupulous landlords during the housing shortage in the post-war years. However, eventually, the Control of Rent Act was abolished and this was because it had outlived its purposes as there was no longer a housing shortage.”
“Sir, I declare my interest in speaking on this topic as a practising lawyer and whose area of practice includes landlord and tenancy-related matters. I have acted for both landlords and tenants. In principle, Sir, I agree on the need for fair and more balanced lease negotiations between landlord and tenants of retail premises. This is especially so when tenants have spent tens of thousands of dollars renovating their premises and establishing their businesses at the rented premises. Often, there is goodwill built up by tenants in respect of a particular location. Sir, this Bill makes it mandatory for a landlord and tenant to comply with a set of Code of Conduct for the leasing of retail premises which are defined as "qualifying leases". The Code of Conduct was drawn up and issued on 26 March 2021 by the Fair Tenancy Pro Tem Committee. Sir, I have read through the Code of Conduct and, in particular, the leasing principles stated in the Code of Conduct. First, I agree with this principle that a landlord should act reasonably and not have the power to predetermine the lease of premises unless there is a requirement for redevelopment works. And if the landlord does predetermine the lease due to redevelopment works, then it is only right that the landlord should make some offer of compensation to the tenant for the costs of renovations incurred. However, Sir, I want to express some caution when Parliament is asked to legislate on matters which ought to be determined by market forces. This was a similar principle made by Minister Indranee Rajah in February 2018 when she responded to my colleague, the hon Mr Murali Pillai, during his Adjournment Motion. She said, "In general, free market principles should apply.”
“Mr John Bercow was a member of the UK Conservative Party before he resigned when he assumed the role of Speaker. However, even though he was not a member of the political party at the time, he was accused of not being impartial when he was Speaker. In fact, it was said he was refused a place in the House of Lords because he was not seen to be politically neutral. He was alleged to be biased against Brexit. Thus, Mr Speaker, impartiality really depends on the person who is the Speaker and not his political affiliation. In many other Commonwealth countries, many Speakers are active members of their political parties. Australian Speaker Mr Milton Dick is a member of the Labour Party, the Canadian Speaker is a member of the Liberal Party and the Speaker of the Lok Sabha India is a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party. So, even if we appoint a person who is without any political affiliation, whether the person is a judge or otherwise, I am quite certain that the person would have his or her own views of the speeches made by Members in the House. In fact, I would submit it is impossible for anyone, except a robot, not to form their own views as to whether a speech is populist or not. So, for that reason, I cannot support the Motion of Mr Leong Mun Wai and I would support the amended Motion as moved by Mr Vikram Nair.”
“In April 2023, the Leader of the House raised the point that Mr Leong Mun Wai had made several statements in and out of Chamber which were wrong and not proper. She said that Mr Leong had addressed Speaker in a manner that was disrespectful, disregarded the authority of the Chair, and that drew a caution from her on the need to maintain proper demeanour in Parliament. She said Mr Leong apologised to the Speaker in Chambers very shortly and clarified he had not intended to cast aspersions on the Ministers and admitted he was wrong to make the suggestions in his statement. The Leader of the House then said there was no need to take further action on this matter and she sought Mr Speaker's concurrence on this matter, in particular to the fact of disregarding the authority of the Chair is a matter for the Speaker, and then Mr Tan Chuan-Jin, as Speaker, said he concurred. So, Sir, this is evidence that our Speaker is impartial in his conduct. He could have taken action against Mr Leong Mun Wai for behaving in a manner that was disrespectful and had disregarded authority. But he treated everyone fairly and he accepted the apology of Mr Leong and said that he concurred with the Leader's recommendation not to take further action on the matter. So, Mr Leong apologised, Speaker accepted it, and the matter was closed. I would want to submit, Mr Speaker, that suggests very strongly that our Speaker has always been impartial. Next, going to the point of Mr Leong's Motion that the Speaker must be independent, I am not sure how Mr Leong measures the term "independent". If he suggests that "independent" means not being a member of a political party, then perhaps I can remind him of the former Speaker of the House of Commons, Mr John Bercow.”
“The Speaker does not take part in the debates of the House but can abstain, vote for or against the Motion as if he has the original vote as an elected Member. Sir, I was elected as a Deputy Speaker from 2015 to 2020. During my five-year term, I was the Deputy Speaker to Speaker Mdm Halimah, now the President, and subsequently, I was Deputy Speaker to former Speaker, Mr Tan Chuan-Jin. As a Deputy Speaker, whenever I am required to preside over Parliament or to chair a Committee, I am always mindful of this need to ensure that I remain fair and impartial to all the Members in the House. So, I make sure that Members, whether they are from the ruling PAP party, the Opposition party or the NMPs, they are all given the chance to raise clarifications and to hold the Government to account. So, I am mindful that Parliament is a place for debate on policies and a good debate will allow better ideas to prevail and this would benefit all of Singapore. As a Deputy Speaker, whenever I hear speeches made by MPs from the PAP, MPs from the Workers' Party, I, too, form my opinion on the contents of the speech, but I keep my views to myself. And as a Deputy Speaker, I know that I should not express my own view or even mutter my view under my breath. So, Sir, I want to add that the former Speaker, Mr Tan Chuan-Jin, has made known his stand to me and the other Deputy Speaker Mr Charles Chong that we have to be fair to all MPs, including members of the Workers' Party (WP), the NCMPs and the NMPs. Over the past many years that I have been an MP, I have not heard of any MP within the House suggest that our Speaker has not been impartial. Sir, let me refer the House to a Point of Order which was raised by the Leader of the House in April 2023.”
“Sir, if I may also extend my congratulations on your election to the post of Speaker. Sir, one of the duties of the Speaker of Parliament is to preside over the Sitting of Parliament and to enforce the rules prescribed in the Standing Orders of Parliament. This is to ensure the orderly conduct of Parliamentary business. Sir, I want to stress the importance of Standing Orders because without Standing Orders, Parliament could descend into chaos as there will be no need for accountability. Members of Parliament (MPs) can be arguing, quarrelling with one another. We note that in some countries, members of parliament fight in parliament. MPs can be criticising another person in public or in parliament, without giving them a fair chance of reply. This will be in breach of natural justice. Time limits are set in Standing Orders because MPs can drag their speeches and, in the US, this is called filibuster. Some of the older Members may remember Mr Lee Siew Choh who spoke seven hours in 1961 in the Singapore Legislative Assembly, and you then keep everyone occupied because you just want to extend the length of your speech and extend the time. So, many Parliaments, not just Singapore, set time limits on the length of speeches. So, I stress again, Mr Speaker, Standing Orders are important for the conduct of Parliamentary business. Sir, in carrying out the duties in the House, the Speaker must remain impartial and fair to all MPs. This part, I agree with that part of the Motion of Mr Leong Mun Wai. This is also clearly stated in the website of the Singapore Parliament. The Speaker regulates and enforces the rule of debate. He decides who has the right to speak and puts the question for the House to debate on and to vote on.”
“Secondly, would it be more efficient if we were to allow such changes to be effected through subsidiary legislation? For example, could the Parliament not authorise the Minister to make subsidiary legislation to allow for oaths and affidavits to be signed by a Commissioner or Notary Public to be done virtually instead of having to amend all these laws via Parliament? Save for the above two clarifications, I support the Bill. I support the various amendments to the Constitution and other Acts to allow for the administration of oaths through virtual means.”
“The rules specify that the Commissioner for Oaths should be able to confirm that the person who signs the document is the person that he claims to be and that the document that he signs, together with all the exhibits attached thereto, is the same document containing the same exhibits that the Commissioner himself will later sign. These rules, however, do not apply to oaths or other documents signed before a Notary Public. Sir, modern video technology has made great advances over the past years. It is no longer the same as 20 years ago, when you can only rely on expensive telephone calls to keep in touch with overseas relatives or friends. I know of many parents who video call their children studying overseas on a regular basis to chat with them. In the past, businessmen would rely on Skype or FaceTime video calls to carry out their meetings. Today, we have WhatsApp, WeChat, Teams and Zoom video conferencing platforms, just to mention a few. Sir, we should not shy from adopting technology to allow deponents to affirm or swear their documents using modern technology as long as the Commissioner for Oaths or the Notary Public is able to clearly ascertain the identity of the deponent and to verify his signature on the documents. We should allow documents to be signed virtually so that in the event of future crises, where we are required to stay away from the office, we would still be able to function effectively using video technology. I just wish to seek two clarifications from the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. May I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether oaths and affirmations administered by Consular Officers are also allowed to be done virtually?”
“During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ministry of Health (MOH) had introduced various measures like the circuit breaker, heightened alert, social distancing and work-from-home so as to break the chain of viral transmission. However, despite the COVID-19 pandemic, businesses need to continue to operate. Life has to go on for many people. This has affected the legal processes because businesses still need their staff to swear or affirm affidavits for Court proceedings. Companies still need their senior management to sign documents before a Notary Public for use overseas; sometimes for incorporation of businesses overseas, sometimes, to sign reports for the purposes of reporting to regulatory authorities overseas. As a Commissioner for Oaths and a Notary Public, I had received many queries from deponents to ask whether they are allowed to affirm and sign affidavits, statutory declarations or other documents without physically being present before me. Deponents and applicants point to the fact that they are having meetings and discussions via electronic modes of communications like Microsoft Teams and via Zoom. There were also regulations which encouraged listed and unlisted companies to conduct their general meetings via electronic means. This is to keep physical interactions and COVID-19 transmission risk to a minimum, which remain important in the long term even as safe distancing regulations have now been eased. In April 2021, the Rules of Court were amended to allow for affidavits to be affirmed by a deponent appearing before a Commissioner for Oaths through a video link or live television link.”
“Sir, I declare my interest in speaking on this topic as a practicing lawyer. I am also a Commissioner of Oath and a Notary Public. The role of a Commissioner of Oath is set up in section 68 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969. Broadly speaking, a Commissioner for Oath administers oaths for any affidavit or affirmation, swear executors and administrators, and take and receive statutory declarations. The role of a Notary Public is set up in a Notaries Public Act 1959. Members of the public will usually associate a notary public as a senior lawyer who is called upon to certify documents for use overseas or to administer any oath or affirmation in connection with any affidavit or statutory declaration which is used in any court or place outside Singapore. Statutory declarations and affidavits are required by law for a number of legal and business matters. Under various regulations in Singapore, an applicant may be required to make certain statutory declarations and affidavits for the purposes of their business or tax-related matters. For correlated matters, deponents are required to swear or affirm affidavits for use in Court. As making false oath in Court proceedings and making false statutory declarations is an offence, the deponent would usually have to appear before a Commissioner for Oaths to enable the commissioner to verify the deponent's identity and to ensure that the deponent understands the contents of the document that they are signing. In a case where the affidavit or declaration is for use in an overseas court, the notary public performs a similar function.”
“No, I am not saying that. I am asking Mr Leong. Because, to me, surely, you must be convicted before something can happen. Is Mr Leong saying that the minute a person is referred to the Police for investigation, the MP must be suspended, or he must receive a salary cut? Is that Mr Leong's point? And I just want to assure the Leader of the Opposition, that is not my position.”
“Let me ask Mr Leong again because I recall that Parliament referred the Leader of the Opposition to be investigated by the Public Prosecutor. Nothing has come out of that yet. But is it Mr Leong's position that the Leader of the Opposition cannot receive pay or carry out his duties because he is an MP? An hon Member: [Inaudible.]”
“Sir, if I can just ask Mr Leong Mun Wai? Earlier, he had said something about if an MP is under investigation, he expected the Government to do something about it. So, can I ask Mr Leong to clarify, is it his position that if any MP is under police investigation, we should then suspend the MP or dock his salary?”
“Point of Order, Deputy Speaker. I think he is making a fresh speech. It has nothing to do with clarification on the Minister's speech.”
“Grateful, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. I just wanted to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether LTA agrees that there are more pedestrians involved in traffic accidents and whether the current level of road safety education is adequate. Just last month, the Courts made a pronouncement about the pedestrian who was knocked down because he followed jaywalkers blindly while crossing the road, and he was just looking at the phone. So, situations like that, and anecdotally I get a lot of feedback that drivers see that road users are not paying attention to cars at all. They are all looking at their phone, listening to their music. If this carries on, there would be more traffic accidents. So, I was just wondering whether the Ministry of Transport (MOT) thinks the level of education of pedestrians is adequate. Many drivers tell me that they feel it is not enough and that the road safety message should be pushed further.”
“The judge may also ascertain the wishes of the child by conducting an interview with the child and there has been case laws on the power of the judge to do so. However, may I express some reservations about a judge carrying out interviews of the child because a judge is typically an authority in the law. He or she is not a trained child counsellor who can discern whether a child has been coached to express certain views or is under duress to say positive things about one parent just by one interview. Although some judges may have some degree of training in handling children, the reality is that a judge spends more time analysing the law and the facts applicable to the case. Thus, unless a judge spends a much, much longer period of time talking with and interviewing the child, I do have some reservations whether a judge is able to make a better assessment of the wishes of a child by a simple interview, compared to trained social workers who will be spending more time talking and interacting with the child and observing the expressions of the child. So, may I ask the Minister to clarify what is the intent of this amendment as the current case law does allow the process. Is it the position of the Government that they prefer that judges carry out the interviews more regularly, as compared to the judge appointing social workers or Child Representative to take care of the child’s interest? At the end of the day, what is important is how to ascertain what is in the best interest of the child. Subject to the above clarifications, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“May I then ask the Minister how would the Court make a reasonable variation order which can take into account the needs of an applicant who is reliant on the respondent’s maintenance for herself and the children versus the financial needs of the respondent who now has to support another wife and possibly his other children? May I also ask whether the MEO is able to investigate and deal with cases where a respondent resigns from his job and has no more income as he simply wishes to deny maintenance payable to the applicant? The loss of income in this case is or would be self-induced with the intent of denying the applicant the maintenance which she ought to be entitled to. How would the Court also deal with situations where a respondent refuses to pay child maintenance because he is denied access or visitation rights to the child? Will the Court be able to deal with such situations even though the application before the Court is an enforcement of maintenance application? Or would the Court require a separate application for enforcement of the access rights? Sir, the next part of the Bill which I wish to speak on is the enhancement of judge-led approach in considering the wishes of the child. Sir, in the media release by MinLaw, it was stated that the Bill will provide clarity that where the wishes of the child are to be considered by the Court, the judge may conduct interviews with the child. The current legal position is that the Court in making decisions about the child may appoint a Child Representative to the Court or the Court can appoint a trained or professional assessor to make recommendations on the child’s custody or access orders. The appointed assessor would then prepare a Social Welfare Report, or a Custody Evaluation Report or an Access Evaluation Report.”
“Without the information given by the MEOs, the applicant who is trying to enforce the maintenance order will have a difficult time trying to check what are the respondent's assets. In particular, the Courts should be given the powers to act expeditiously and to make interim orders, whenever necessary, to ensure that complainants or applicants who are financially stretched are able to receive the maintenance that they deserve and are entitled to receive; otherwise, the applicant would typically suffer and situations where there are children involved will result in hardship for the family. Where the MEOs are able to ascertain that the respondent is deliberately refusing to make the maintenance payment, the Court should not hesitate to attach the salary of the respondent or attach his assets in order to enforce the maintenance order. In addition, the Court should consider making an order that the respondent's credit cards be cancelled until the arrears of maintenance are settled. Where an MEO finds that a respondent’s conduct in refusing to pay the maintenance is contumacious, I would submit that the Court ought to punish the respondent for wasting the time of the applicant, the MEO and the Courts. The respondent should not be able to get away with delaying the maintenance payment just to frustrate the applicant; and then he walks away without consequence once he pays up the arrears. Sir, I recognise that there may be occasions where a respondent may be unable to make payment of the maintenance because his family circumstances have changed. For example, if he loses his job or, sometimes, if the respondent remarries and has to support another family. In situations like these, I expect that the MEO would recommend a variation of the maintenance order.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I declare my interest as a lawyer where part of my legal practice involves matrimonial law. There are two parts of this Bill which I wish to speak on. Clause 81 – Court Orders on Maintenance enforcement application. Currently, when a complainant applies to Court for enforcement of maintenance, the frustration is always with the possible delays in the receipt of the maintenance. Delays happen when the respondent does not turn up; the case is then adjourned. The next time the respondent turns up, he applies for adjournment to engage a lawyer. The case is then adjourned again. Sometimes, the Court sends parties for mediation and the case is adjourned again while parties try to find an amicable solution. If the respondent disputes the claim, the Court will direct parties to prepare their case and more time is taken up. In the meantime, the complainant suffers because of the time required to attend Court again and again and the failure to receive the maintenance which had been ordered to be paid to the applicant. Even if the respondent were to eventually make payment of the arrears of maintenance, there is this possibility that he may default in payment again, then the applicant has to start the process all over again. Thus, there will be times when an applicant may eventually give up on the maintenance application and decide not to enforce the order. This is unfair to an applicant who has been granted the maintenance. Hence, Sir, I support the amendments to the Women’s Charter to allow the appointment of the Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEO) in order to have a more sustainable maintenance outcome. The MEOs would then be empowered to carry out investigations on the assets of the respondent and then report to the judge.”
“I am so grateful, Sir. I am still not very sure how it works. Supposing parties agree to complete on certain date, but the buyer cannot get his financing on time and ask for one extra month, so, what does he do? They have to write to IRAS – because they have already paid the stamp duty when they exercised option, but he cannot complete the transaction because he cannot get his funds on time, he then has to write to IRAS about that increase in stamp duty or can parties negotiate on their own? How does IRAS expect them to solve this?”
“Thank you, Sir. May I ask the Senior Minister of State, I understand the rationale, but there are certain parts of it which I cannot understand, which is the part about variation. For example, if the parties cannot complete for reasons that are not within their control, for example, if it is subject tenancy and the tenant wants to vacate, they cannot vary their contract because it has not impact on the progressive nature of the Stamp Duty. Or if, for example, the parties cannot complete because the bank changes the date. How does that impact this provision to make Stamp Duty more progressive? I mean, at the end of they, the variation must go to the root of the policy considerations. Which is that you do not want parties to game the system and to avoid the progressive nature of the increase in Stamp Duty. So, perhaps, the Senior Minister of State can confirm, if the terms of variation do not go to the root of the avoidance of the Stamp Duty, can parties still proceed with the variation.”
“Sir, may I ask the Senior Minister of State whether we can relook the definition of wealth tax? For some of these retirees, they do not see themselves as wealthy. I know they have got a property that may be worth quite a bit, but they are retirees with no income. They just had the luck of buying a property at a lower price when they were much younger. So, how do we want, as a matter of principle, to deal with this group of people who are living in a better property, but with no income? Is it the principle of the Government that we would want to persuade them to sell their property, so that they would not be considered wealthy? I mean, how do we define the term "wealth"? Because I cannot see this group of retirees as being wealthy, except for the fact that they were fortunate enough to buy a property when they were younger.”
“Mdm Chair, public transport is a topic on many citizens' minds. Many citizens feel that public transport must be affordable, reliable and accessible. I used the public transport regularly and other than during peak hours when I experienced more crowdedness on the MRT trains, I am generally quite happy with the state of public transport. However, for some of the younger citizens who aspire towards car ownership, they worry about the high costs of COE. They also worry about the high ERP charges and ask whether the only solution to road congestion is to impose higher ERP. For non-car owners who may need private transport due to the need to ferry young children or the elderly parents, they have seen a spike in hire car charges. Hence, they worry that substitute options like taxis and private car hire are getting more expensive. May I ask the Minister to share more about the sentiments and key areas of feedback on public transport through the Forward Singapore exercise? What are the expectations of Singaporeans for our public transport system? Placemaking with Pedestrian-only Streets”
“Mdm Chair, it was reported in the last Committee of Supply (COS) debate that for every journey on our public transport, the Government subsidises the journey by more than $1. In October last year, the Government announced that it will provide an additional subsidy of about $200 million in 2023, and this is on top of the current subsidies of more than $2 billion annually to run bus and train services. Hence, the fare increase was kept at 2.9% for the 2022 fare review exercise. The various support from the Government has enabled the bulk of the fare increases to be deferred and kept our public transport fares affordable. Madam, I appreciate the support from the Government for public transport fares and the subsidies are a large sum of money. However, the reality is that fare subsidies do come from all the taxes that we all contribute towards – income tax, corporate tax, goods and services tax (GST), plus the Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC). I understand that the public transport fare formula is due for review in 2023. May I seek an update on the fare formula review so that commuters and Singaporeans can also share their views as to how public transport costs should be shared between commuters and the tax-paying public. If all public buses are operating on EV mode, would this help reduce the costs of operating the buses as there would be substantial savings in fuel? Land Transport – Managing Rising Costs”
“Sir, the current HDB policy is that both parties in the divorce can apply to buy a subsidised flat upon obtaining the divorce interim judgment and resolving ancillary matters on the matrimonial home and custody of their children. But this also means that they cannot buy a replacement flat until after the divorce is finalised. Not every divorcing couple has the option of renting another flat while waiting for the divorce to be settled and their matrimonial flat sold. For the party who has custody of the children and usually that is the mother. She is left wondering where would she and the children stay after the matrimony flat is sold. It would take time for them to buy another flat while waiting for the matrimony flat to be sold. Thus, it is reasonable that the parent would want to plan ahead for the next home for the children so as to offer them some security and a roof over their heads. Can HDB review its policy so as to allow a divorcing couple to buy a replacement flat pending finalisation of the divorce? HDB can set a condition that if the matrimonial flat is not sold within six months of the interim judgment for whatever reason, then the party who had bought the replacement flat would have to surrender the flat back to HDB. BTO in Non-mature Estates”