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 5 of 17.
“To ensure that we maintain a high level of trust in the judicial system, we need to ensure that our judicial officers are competent and able to dispense justice fairly, expeditiously and to answer the judicial needs for our future. I am mindful that this proposal requires a Constitutional amendment. If the Government is minded to move ahead with this proposed review, I would suggest that the Government set up a review committee to ensure that the composition of the new JSC and LSC remains robust and responsive to the new challenges ahead, especially in terms of HR and the personnel management framework for the legal officers. I support the Motion.”
“We also have the Family Justice Courts (FJC); the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal (CDRT); the Employment Claims Tribunal; and, lastly, the Protection from Harassment Court, all of which require specialised skills in the dispensation of justice to different categories of litigants. Judicial officers play an important role in the administration of justice, all the more so for State Court Judicial Officers. These officers need more specialised skills and more specialised knowledge to better understand the complex facts and how to apply the law to these facts. They need to have good judicial temperament and show empathy in dealing with members of the public and firmness in dealing with criminals. As a family law practitioner, I wish to share that Judges need to deal sensitively with spouses who are highly emotional and they need to deal sensitively with children as well. Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Legal Service Commission (LSC) was set up under Article 111 of the Singapore Constitution. The LSC has played a very important role in staffing the Judiciary, the AGC and the various agencies like the Insolvency Office, Public Trustee's Office, Legal Aid Bureau and the legal departments of the other Government agencies. But having too frequent rotation of Legal Officers under the LSC may not allow them to develop greater depth of skills and expertise required in today's circumstances. Hence, I submit that it is timely that we consider the need for a dedicated JSC to take over the human resource development functions of officers in the Judiciary. This will allow the proposed JSC to actively source for suitable judicial officers to serve in the various specialised Courts and to meet the challenges of the future.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the Adjournment Motion by the hon Member for Bukit Batok Single Member Constituency. I declare my interest in speaking on the Motion as a practising lawyer as I do appear before Judges in the course of my work. The Judiciary is one of the three branches of Government; the other two being the Legislature and the Executive. As an independent public institution, the role of the Judiciary is to uphold the law and ensure justice is accessible to all the citizens of Singapore. In a recent survey by the Institute of Policy Studies in March this year, 82% of the respondents had either a great deal or quite a lot of trust in our Courts. As our former Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong observed, there is a high level of trust in the quality and incorruptibility of our judicial system and infrastructure, a strength that has anchored Singapore's economic development. Our present Chief Justice also recently said: society's regard for and trust in the Courts are extremely precious. When I first started legal practice 32 years ago, we only had the Supreme Court and the Subordinate Courts. Over the years, the laws have developed to cater to our changing society and changing circumstances. The global economy has also changed and our judicial system needs to keep up with such changes. Today, we have increased specialisation to cater to a more diverse population, changing needs and more complex cases. For example, the Criminal Courts need to deal with brilliant and sophisticated criminal minds trying to cheat innocent victims of their monies; the Civil Courts have to deal with some of the very complicating civil disputes; intellectual property litigation often involves cross-border disputes and disputes involving sophisticated financial instruments.”
“Sir, I have quite a large number of residents who wanted to travel for various reasons and who have made various appeals. Some of them may be for studies and some of them may be for other purposes, like looking after nephews, to attend weddings. For some reason, MOH has applied quite strict criteria to those who have made the appeals. I am asking MOH whether they will consider being more flexible about allowing people to get their vaccination earlier before they travel overseas, as contrasted to extending the vaccination programme to residents of a different age when they can be actually quite neutral about taking their vaccination earlier or later. So, we have one group who wants it earlier versus another group who are actually very neutral about whether they get their vaccination earlier. So, could MOH be a bit more flexible to allow those who want to get their vaccination earlier to get it earlier?”
“May I ask the Minister of State, how does MOM balance the interests of employers who may be falsely accused by the foreign domestic worker? I have received feedback that there are occasions when a foreign domestic worker may not want to work with a particular family, because they have to look after the elderly or the house is too big, so they lodge a complaint to their Embassy. At the end of the day, no further action was taken against the employee and the foreign domestic then gets a free transfer out. Meanwhile, the employer is stuck because he is not allowed to hire another foreign domestic worker. He is also stuck in the sense that he has this so-called report made against him. So, how do we balance the interests of the foreign domestic worker versus an innocent employer who may be desperately looking to get another worker?”
“Let me stress that I have got nothing against cyclist riding at the reasonable speed but education must also come with enforcement because we need to deter the small minority of reckless riders from being a danger to other users of the footpath or park connector. 12.44 pm Hence, I urge LTA to step up enforcement along the footpaths and to install more cameras to deter inconsiderate riders. Wherever possible, LTA should consider widening the footpaths or park connectors and demarcate one side for cyclists and one side for pedestrians.”
“Sir, in 2019, LTA imposed a ban on users of personal mobility devices from all footpaths. This came amid an increasing number of accidents involving such PMDs. One cyclist died after an accident with the PMD. This ban brought some relief to the other users of the foot path. However, due to the push for healthier lifestyle, more and more cyclists are also using the same footpaths. I support the concept of shared foot paths whereby both cyclists and pedestrians can share the use of footpaths. Unfortunately, I regularly receive feedback about the behaviour of irresponsible cyclists who think that footpaths and park connectors are a race track for them to race at alarming speeds. Sir, I walk along Gardens by the Bay East because that is within my constituency. Many a time as I walk, I worry when I when I feel the buzz of the bicycles racing by me at a fast speed. Sir, we need to do more to ensure the safety of pedestrians using the footpaths and park connectors. Sometimes, I see seniors taking a leisurely stroll along the footpaths. Sometimes, there are couples with young toddlers and children who meander all over the paths. If a cyclist comes along riding at high speed and crash into the senior or the young child, that would be disastrous. In a recent court case, a cyclist was sentenced to one week jail after he crashed into a 53-year-old pedestrian, who subsequently died. So, a crash of a bicycle at high speed can have fatal consequences. I submit that LTA can do more to educate cyclists who use the footpaths to commute to ride at a reasonable speed.”
“I have two clarifications. One is for Senior Minister Sim Ann – Madam, please do not go away yet. Just wanted to ask about the spalling concrete. When the residents complained about spalling concrete, it is like going to drop onto their head and, frequently, they want a solution fast. But the reality is that when we complained to HDB about the spalling concrete, they take a while for someone to come, inspect the place, then arrange for a contractor to come. In the meanwhile, the resident says that "Hey, look, you know, this thing is going to drop on my head. It is gonna to injure me and it is going to hurt me any time." So, is there any way that we can ask HDB to do a more comprehensive programme whereby we can try to put a stop to the issue of spalling concrete? The second clarification that I require is from Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim. This is regarding the rental flats. I understand the proposal to have a partition in the 1-room flat. But may I ask the Minister of State what is the response of residents to this 1-room flat being partitioned? Because at the end of the day, the residents who share a 1-room flat have to share toilets, they have got to share the kitchen as well, and we are not going to be able to say that "Look, you know, my soap is here and the shampoo is somewhere else." They have to share facilities. Frequently, the feedback that I get is that they are unhappy about having to share and that is why some of them then moved out from the flat and sleep in the void deck. So, is that really the solution that we want? So, perhaps Minister of State can clarify that for me.”
“During the COVID-19 circuit breaker, some neighbours had set up a WhatsApp chat group so that they can order food together to enjoy economies of scale. The question is whether we can tap on this source neighbourly friendship to look out for one another. May I ask, what else can MSO do to encourage community ownership and good neighbourliness so that we can live harmoniously with each other? In that way, we can develop more mutual respect and understanding with our neighbours.”
“While it may be costly to allow a heavily subsidised flat to be rented to such singles, the government can show compassionate for singles who are truly in need. I also urge the Government to consider having slightly bigger rental flats for families which may be larger. For example, if you have a couple with three or even four children, they would find it a squeeze to have to stay within a 2-room flat. Basically, a 2-room flat would be a single bedroom with hall. So there will be only one bedroom for the parents and the children, whether it is three or four of them, they would all have to sleep in the living room. So I urge that HDB to review the policy of only having 1- to 2-room rental flats and allow larger rental flats for families which are larger. Community Relationships Sir, COVID-19 has changed the way we live, work and play. Many residents have to spend more time at home because of the work from home policy. This has created more tension within the neighbourhood and the HDB estate because the working adult who used to work in an air conditioned office may not be used to the home living environment. There is more noise, there's possibly cigarette smoke from neighbours, and sometimes you may face unhygienic droppings from pigeons or cats. Over the past months, I have received more complaints from residents about noise from their neighbours, about smokers who smoke outside their windows and the smoke drifts into their flat, about pigeons and cat droppings. The silver lining, Sir, is that we get to spend more time with our families at home, and we are in closer proximity with our neighbours more than ever. This is really a good opportunity to encourage residents to get to know our neighbours better, foster a sense of ownership for the shared living environment.”
“Sir, for the past few years, 2014, 2015 and 2020, I had urged MND to review the policy of not allowing singles to rent flats on their own. The reason is that some of these tenants may be elderly singles, who due to their age or behaviour, just cannot get along with another person in the same flat. Others may be Singaporeans who had married a foreign spouse but cannot rent a flat due to the foreign nationality of their spouse. And then, there are also divorcees who had to sell the flat after the divorce but cannot rent a flat because they do not have custody care and control of the children. During the COVID-19 pandemic, when two singles who may be strangers to each other, and they are required to share a small space with each other, it does pose a huge stress point for both occupants. Their living environment would not be comfortable and they may have certain ingrained habits which make it difficult for them to adapt to living with each other. They have different standards of hygiene, different habits or medical conditions, and this may result in frequent quarrels. There may also be occasions when one of the occupants may just then shift out and sleep in the void deck. There was a survey done a year ago, where 15% of the homeless interviewed say that they are a registered tenant in a public rental flat, but they had problems getting along with their co-tenant, and hence, they moved out and lived in the void deck. Sir, I want to repeat my appeal to ask the Government to consider allowing singles to rent a 1-room HDB flat in exceptional circumstances. We should always encourage families to stay together; but on a case-by-case basis, allow singles to rent a 1-room flat.”
“Sir, I have several blocks of HDB flats along Old Airport Road and they are located within my estate, and they are almost 60 years old. Despite all the efforts to maintain and upgrade them, many of these flats suffer from spalling concrete at their ceiling and at the kitchen. Residents frequently feedback on their worries that the concrete slabs may fall onto them, and the exposed rusting steel bars are also very unsightly. The lifts in those blocks are also very old and difficult to maintain. HDB keeps arranging for the spalling concrete to be repaired but they keep recurring and the spalling concrete pose a risk to the occupants. May I ask whether there are any plans to upgrade and develop these older flats to keep them in a more liveable condition? Sometimes, when I see the design of the newer BTO flats, I feel envious and wonder whether some of the new features can be introduced to the older estates. If there can be some upgrading, then may I ask whether the residents of the estate or the community leaders can be involved in the upgrading plans? What else can we do to rejuvenate older flats so that they will be more pleasant, more airy and not deteriorate in terms of the living environment? HDB Blocks Facade Repair”
“Mdm Chairman, for the past few years, I have been involved in litter picking in my constituency. Sadly, I do not see much improvement in the state of cleanliness in the estate. My grassroots leaders and I still see cigarette butts, empty cigarette packets, drink bottles, plastic bottles, plastic bags, used tissues, used face masks thrown all over the floor. At hawker centres, you will see chopstick wrappers strewn all over the ground as well. Despite the increased number of summonses issued against litterbugs, I feel that the littering situation has not improved in the past five years? If this is the case, NEA should consider other options to signal that littering is not acceptable. I urge NEA to consider amending the law to allow imposition of a corrective work order for all littering offenders, instead of only for the second offender. NEA must send a message to all litterbugs that their acts of littering have negatively affected the environment and that the litter must be picked up by others. Hopefully, with a Corrective Work Order stint, the offender will see the mess caused by their own actions and acknowledge their role to keep the environment clean. Why should the average Singapore citizen have to live with a dirty environment caused by a few inconsiderate litterbugs?”
“Mandate such installation of such charging points because waiting for the condominium to approve the installation at AGMs would take far too long. Wherever possible, charging points should also be installed on the streets or roads next to parking lots. To encourage condominiums, office buildings and HDB estates to set aside space for charging stations, LTA should also consider some form of financial incentives for them. May I also ask the Minister whether the projected installation of more charging stations will require extensive electrical upgrades. If so, what is the cost involved to upgrade electrical power? We not only need charging points for the Electric Vehicles, we also need the chargers to be able to charge the Electric Vehicles quickly. If it takes too long to fully charge an Electric Vehicle, then consumers may not want to spend the time waiting for their cars to be charged. Finally, I also call on the Government to consider how to dispose of spent or used batteries of Electric Vehicles such that at the end of the day, we will not end up with an environmental hazard and the question of how to dispose of such batteries. Adoption of Electric Vehicles”
“Madam, a few years ago, I was looking to buy a hybrid car. I wanted to do my small part to buy a car which uses less petrol and hence be environmentally more friendly. However, at the car dealer, I was told that the hybrid version of the car would cost almost $10,000 more than the petrol model. The car dealer told me that unless I drive long distances, the savings in petrol would not be able to offset the higher costs of the hybrid car. Thus, while I applaud the intent of the Government to move towards cleaner energy car models, we need to take a holistic view at the pricing of cars such that we can effectively encourage car buyers to opt for cleaner energy cars. Thus, the Government should look at lowering taxes on electric cars or hybrid cars so that a similar model would either be less expensive than an internal combustion engine vehicle or at least on par in terms of pricing. Otherwise, the average consumer may not want to pay more for a cleaner or greener vehicle if it burns a big hole in his pocket. We should also look into making more charging points easily available. Recent media reports suggest that very few condominiums allow the installation of charging points for Electric Vehicles. And for those condominiums that wish to do so, they need to seek approval at the annual general meeting (AGM) of residents, whereby 75% must approve the installation of the charging station. Without available charging points for their Electric Vehicles, many drivers will be concerned as to how they charge their Electric Vehicles. Thus, I urge LTA to make it compulsory for HDB car parks, for condominiums and even office buildings to provide a minimum number of charging points in the car parks.”
“I refer to flats that have either been surrendered because they have not met the MOP or flat bookings that were cancelled because parties were not able to proceed with the flat purchase due to either the marriage breaking down or the parties not being able to go ahead with the marriage. So, in either instances, they would suffer. If you cancel the sale and purchase agreement, there is a penalty of 5%. If you have taken over the flat and then you have to surrender the flat due to divorce or whatever reason, the HDB will only compensate you 95% of the purchase price. Again, the question really is: if the flat can be sold back at either the same price in the open market or a better price, why should the loss be taken by the applicant who had the misfortune of not meeting the MOP or had to surrender the flat?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just wanted to ask the Senior Minister State this: I understand that for flats that are returned to HDB, HDB imposes a penalty of 5% on the value of the flat. Alternatively, they only compensate only 95% of the value of the flat. Considering that most of these flats can be sold back into the open market at a similar price, would HDB consider lowering the penalty imposed such that the owners who have to return the flats, for whatever reasons, will not suffer such a big loss? Ultimately, I think the question is, because HDB is not going to make a loss on the resale of the flat, why should the loss be passed down to the applicant who had to surrender the flat?”
“This is especially for cases where the neighbour can be very unreasonable, or what sometimes, the newspaper refers to as "neighbours from hell". After a case is resolved, is there any tracking of the case? I am concerned that sometimes, the CDRT may consider a case as closed when the Tribunal makes an Order. But the dispute remains in the community. Parties remain at loggerheads with each other. And when I visit them as Minister of Parliament, they would each bring their source of complaints to me. So would an order, would a mandatory order for counselling help mitigate the tension between the parties? This may be similar to a family court order for parties to go for counselling before a Police Protection Order (PPO) application. May I also seek an update about cases under the Prevention of Harassment Act (POHA)? Has the specialist court been set up for the protection from harassment? Has there been many cases against doxing filed in the courts since POHA was amended? Has Ministry of Law made any assessment about the effectiveness of POHA since the Act was amended in 2019?”
“Sir, in my work as a Member of Parliament, I regularly come across cases involving disputes between neighbours. Frequently, this involves either a neighbour who makes too much noise in the middle of the night or a neighbour who places his personal plants, bicycles, beyond the common shared space in the corridor. Sometimes, the quarrel arose over minute matters, which then escalate into vulgar language being used or thrown at each other. I have also come across cases involving hoarders who accumulate junk in the flat and, in the process, block the common area causing fire hazard to the neighbours. It is also a hygiene issue as there may be cockroaches and rats that would come through the house. Frequently, we ask HDB staff, we ask Town Council staff and sometimes even Grassroots leaders to help by mediating between the involved parties. But the dispute between neighbours are very difficult to resolve. Many of them refuse to attend mediation at the Community Mediation Centre. 7.30 pm The final option is to refer parties to the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal or CDRT. But from feedback, many residents are reluctant to go that step. Many do not think that mediation would solve their dispute. They also think that going to the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal would not solve their dispute. They continue to suffer in silence and the resentment festers. And sometimes, even after resolving the matter at the Tribunal, the problem does not go away. The hurt and resentment remains as egos are hurt. The Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal has been in place since 2015. May I ask whether Ministry of Law has done any assessment of its effectiveness to help resolve the disputes?”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have received many complaints from residents regarding noisy cars, noisy motorcycles, speeding along the East Coast Parkway and Mountbatten Road. Residents complain that cars and motorbikes have been illegally modified to remove the noise muffler and hence, are much noisier. There are also comments that the car in the Tanjong Pagar accident was illegally modified and hence, became combustible. I wanted to ask the Senior Minister of State whether the Government will step up enforcement and impose higher penalties against workshops that carry out such illegal modifications. At the end of the day, it is not just the drivers who modified the vehicles, but also the workshops that are complicit in carrying out the illegal modifications. And currently, with the travel restrictions, these modifications cannot be done or undone in Johor Bahru (JB). So, when we send the vehicles for testing, would LTA take action against vehicles that had been illegally modified and whether they can trace where the modifications had been done?”
“Question No 1. The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, for the installation of speed cameras, the Traffic Police (TP) will consider locations where speeding takes place often and which are prone to accidents. This is regardless whether the speeding incidents and accidents tend to occur at night or in the daytime. In addition, TP will assess if the terrain is suitable for the camera to be installed and effectively detect violations. Besides fixed speed cameras, TP officers conduct anti-speeding operations daily. TP also works closely with LTA on the installation of speed regulating measures, such as road humps and speed regulating strips, where necessary and feasible.”
“And despite the fact that there are many unsold properties in the market, URA tells me that there are 52,783 unsold units in the market which have already obtained planning approval. Despite so many unsold units, residential property prices remain high as developers did not reduce their prices. In fact, agents tell me that some new developments which were launched recently in my constituency are priced at between $2,100 and $2,800 per square foot. Friends in the car industry also told me that there were visibly more people in the car showrooms looking to buy cars. It was as if there was no recession at all, much less the worst recession in Singapore’s history. So, I urge the Government to continue to be fiscally prudent in its Budget. We need to save for another rainy day because we really have no other natural resources except our reserves. I also urge Singaporeans to be mindful that we must all exercise financial prudence to prepare for uncertain times ahead of us. COVID-19 has changed the way many businesses operate and many businesses have realised that they can operate their business from anywhere in the world without having to come to Singapore. Thus, we must never take Singapore’s continued success for granted. Sir, I support the Budget Statement by the Finance Minister. 1.23 pm”
“Every additional tax relief or subsidy that Members ask for would mean that taxpayers would have to pay for those measures. No one likes to pay more taxes but yet, if we do not project for more tax revenue, we will not be able to fund those expenses which are necessary. We may not be able to help those who truly need additional help from the Government's measures. Sir, Budget 2021 contains various measures to help Singapore to emerge stronger as a nation. I agree with the general direction set by this Government to emerge stronger together. I think it is important for the Government to help our businesses transform so that they can create good jobs for our citizens and opportunities for all the businesses. We must be ready for a post-COVID future and build a stronger Singapore. Our citizens must also be equipped and upskilled to take up jobs which may be different from the current jobs that they are used to. We must never be complacent and think that our place in this world is guaranteed because Singapore had been successful in our earlier years. If our Singapore workers lose their desire to work hard, lose their hunger to be successful, other countries whose citizens are more hungry will step up to meet the challenge. Sir, I wish to sound a word of caution to my fellow Singaporeans. Last year was described to be an unprecedented year in which Singapore suffered one of the worst recessions in our nation’s history. However, when I read the real estate statistics shared by URA in January this year, I was surprised to find that prices of private properties still managed to increase by 2.2% last year. Sale of private properties by developers and in the resale market did not slow down at all despite this recession.”
“I submit that we must also give credit to Singaporeans who gave their full-hearted support for the efforts of the Government. Singaporeans wore face masks when it was mandated, they used sanitisers regularly, stayed at home where necessary during the circuit breaker and coped with safe distancing measures. Our citizens did their part to help manage this pandemic. Although the impact of the past five Budgets have made a great difference to many workers and businesses, the question is what next. As a country with no natural resources, we must always be mindful of digging into our reserves which is finite. The last five Budgets with all the additional COVID-19 support measures have cost Singapore almost $100 billion. This year, our expenditure for Health has shot up to $18.8 billion. Defence will cost $15.4 billion and Education will cost $13.6 billion. Our deficit for this year is projected at $11 billion. Members may also recall that during the National Day Rally in 2019, the Prime Minister said that it will cost $100 billion or more to protect Singapore against rising sea levels. Will we ever be able to put back the $100 billion withdrawn from our reserves for this COVID-19 support measures? I recall in 2011 that the Government returned the $4 billion which was withdrawn from the reserves for Jobs Credit Scheme. How will we be able to pay for the huge expenditure required for future development projects? Over the next week, during the Committee of Supply debate, we will hear many Members of Parliament asking the Government to do more and more for our citizens. And I hope that we will all exercise prudence and remember that the Government is but the trustee of all the taxes paid by all tax payers.”
“Mr Speaker, last year has been a difficult year for many Singaporeans due to COVID-19. Fortunately, due to Singapore’s strong fiscal position and our reserves, we were able to turn the situation around. The five Budgets announced by Finance Minister last year has helped many of our workers stay employed and helped many businesses stave off insolvency. Many of my friends who are employers expressed their appreciation for the Jobs Support Scheme which has helped them to keep paying their staff. I also met many residents who were able to receive the Self-employed Income Relief Scheme or SIRS because this gave them much support for the leaner months due to the circuit breaker. There was also substantial support given by the Government for families to help build a caring and inclusive home and plans to transform and grow the economy. Compared with many other countries, Singapore has done relatively well in managing the negative impact on the economy. For that, I think it is appropriate to give credit to Deputy Prime Minister and his colleagues from the Finance Ministry as well as to thank the Multi-Ministry Task Force and the many frontline workers for their efforts in keeping Singapore strong economically and for keeping Singapore safe. The Deputy Prime Minister has said that the Government will enhance the salaries of nurses and other healthcare workers. I fully agree. Like several other Members of Parliament before me, I also urge the Government to consider enhancing the salaries of our other essential workers as well. The COVID-19 crisis has shown us that during a health crisis of this nature, our essential workers, like our cleaners and those who clear our rubbish on a regular basis, they play an important role in our daily lives.”
“I just wanted to ask the Minister of State this: many of our seniors who are eligible for the Silver Support Scheme are actually of a certain age, where they may not be literate, they may not understand an SMS that comes through the telephone, or they may not be able to appreciate the information provided by the Government. Is there any way in which we can communicate to them in the language that they understand, the vernacular language? Or is there any way in which we can get the Community Clubs (CCs) or the grassroots leaders to convey and explain to them the reason for the reduction in the Silver Support Scheme? Otherwise, I can appreciate that for many of those who are less literate, it will be a big challenge to understand why it was this amount last year and this year, it will be reduced.”
“May I ask the Minister of State, how often does ISD meet up with groups of religious leaders, brief them about what to look out for when reaching out to their members of their religious groups? My concern is really whether the ISD brief the pastors, brief the priests, brief the imams on what to look out for amongst their members who may be radicalised. Because if they do not even know what to look out for, then they can hardly report upwards.”
“Sir, many of my residents have expressed concern about the speed of the development of the vaccine. And the Minister's assurance was very helpful in allying their fears. Sir, I wish to ask the Minister for Health, I recall that in the 1950s and 1960s, there was this wonder drug thalidomide, which had severe side effects for pregnant women. So, let me ask the Minister, what assurances are there that, there would not be adverse side effects which may show up perhaps a few years later, especially for pregnant women. Another clarification which I wish to ask Minister Lawrence Wong is about the TraceTogether token. Sir, I hear what Minister had said about residents collecting tokens, even though they have apps in their smartphones. I feel bit disconcerted because I feel that for residents to collect them and keep them as a reserve, is really quite a waste of resources. And the literature, as the hon Mr Dennis Tan had said, states that the battery runs out in six months and you will be given a free replacement of the battery. If it is damaged, there will be free replacement of the token. If you lose it, there will be a first free replacement as well. I feel that we should encourage our residents not to waste resources like this. Use the app if they have it in a smartphone and for those who do not have the smartphone, then yes, we want to encourage them to adopt this TraceTogether programme by collecting the token. But certainly, for those who have smartphones, I hope that the Minister can reconsider and ask those with smartphones to not collect or not seek a replacement when the battery wears out.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank Minister for the clarification. The Minister has spoken about the issue of motive by the Liews. I took out a copy of the judgment issued by Justice Chan Seng Onn and in one of his statements, he had said that, "I find the Prosecution had failed to dispel the reasonable doubt raised by the Defence and showed that there was no improper motive by Mr Liew and Mr Karl in making the Police report." I was wondering if the Minister clarify whether the Liews have an improper motive in filing this Police report.”
“Sir, if I may ask the Senior Minister of State, whether he can confirm that it is no longer compulsory for the TraceTogether token to be used at cinemas because it was reported in the press that it is compulsory with effect from 16 November 2020, whereas my constituency, my residents would only be able to get their TraceTogether tokens on 14 December, which is almost one month later. It is not just for Mountbatten but Marine Parade as well – Speaker's constituency, we will only be able to get it on 14 December and quite a number of our residents are quite senior. The other question that I have for the Senior Minister of State is, what if the TraceTogether tokens are damaged or run out of battery or the battery is discharged? What is the process of replacement? Because, if everyone has already sort of collected and it is then made compulsory in venues like shopping malls, schools, cinemas, restaurants and if my token is damaged or the battery runs out, is it difficult to get a replacement? Because if it is, that means I cannot go anywhere until I get the replacement. Perhaps Senior Minister of State can clarify that.”
“Sir, one aspect of the unhappiness by members of the public is that the disclosure was not timely. So, may I ask the Minister of State, what is the time frame when we say that MOE expects the institution to be open and timely in their communications with the students. As an undergraduate, if you are approaching a lecturer, you would want to know whether the lecturer is under investigation and whether the lecturer is likely to be a predator. Given the unequal relationship between a student and a lecturer, I think it is justifiable that a student would ask for timely disclosure, so that they would be able to know and assess how to deal with the lecturer. In that sense, may I ask MOE how would the Ministry want to keep the student community safe in circumstances like that? Can I also ask MOE whether they can provide this House with an update on the number of similar incidents in the past years?”
“But when times are hard, should the Government decline to help these people just because they have a house with a higher value? Is the COVID-19 crisis something that they could have predicted? Some of these residents are mere tenants of the homes with higher annual value; some are children of actual owners of the property; and some have inherited the homes from their parents. Our reserves are built on the hard work contributed by all tax payers. Why do we have the expectation that people do not deserve help simply because they have bigger homes of a higher annual value? Should we not look at their loss of income? Should we always insist that these people must sell their homes before they get the short-term help specifically targeted at those affected by COVID-19? So, I urge the Government to review this policy of pegging our assistance to annual values of properties. Mr Speaker, I support the Motion. 2.54 pm”
“" Two years later after Parliament prorogued, I again called on the Government to "be a more receptive and kinder government when dealing with people of differing views." I repeat this call for a less confrontational political system, so that Singaporeans can be more united. If we do not get our politics right, there will be continued distrust in the Government and we will not stand united. We will not be able to overcome crises together. I also urge the leaders of other political parties to condemn the destructive criticisms which push falsehood and twist facts out of context. Constructive suggestions build up Singapore. Destructive untruths will bring down our country because it instils hatred against fair and decent leaders. Mr Speaker, I just have one additional comment on the President’s Address. When we talk about building a fair and just society, my hope is that this means fairness for all Singaporeans regardless of housing type. In the past budgetary provisions, we have dug deep into our reserves to help those adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. I agree that those who are low-income and need more help should get more help. But for those who need help but live in homes above a certain annual value, why should they be deemed to be self-sufficient? I do not agree with this policy. When a Singaporean suffers loss of income, then regardless of his house type, he needs help. He may have family expenses like medical bills, mortgage instalments, school fees to settle. He may have to look after sick elderly parents or look after children with special needs. He may not be able to sell his home during a financial crisis. During good times, he pays all his taxes dutifully.”
“Debate on policies is supposed to result in better policies for Singapore. But instead of debate on policies, the social media goes on a frenzy as political personalities are attacked during the election. Just as in many other countries, politics seem to have divided Singapore and this is not good for us as a nation. The amount of vitriol and hate which I read about in the social media during the election campaign saddens me. During the election, the frequent feedback which I have received is that the Government is arrogant; it is not willing to listen; our leaders are out of touch; the leaders are not humble. Rightly or wrongly, there is also the perception that there is bullying and unfair treatment of people who do not agree with our policies. So, I am glad that the President had devoted an entire section in her speech about "Evolving our Politics". I also applaud the Government for recognising the Leader of the Opposition. I urge the Government to be more open to constructive criticisms and rational debate. I would submit that the Government must not treat politicians from other parties as enemies. They too are fellow Singaporeans. We must assume that they want the best for Singapore even if they do not agree with all our Government policies. And where politicians from other parties and even backbenchers from PAP have good ideas, I urge the Government to acknowledge and consider these ideas. After the 2015 election, in my speech to thank the President in 2016, I said that: "Many residents spoke to me about the rejection of confrontational politics. They want a government that can work with different organisations which are committed to building Singapore to become a stronger and better nation.”
“We all want a Singaporean Core; we want Singaporeans to be employed first and to get the best jobs. But yet, if we do not open our doors to allow skilled and talented foreign workers to Singapore, we risk losing out to international competition for foreign investment. If foreign investors face severe manpower restrictions and they cannot get the best workers to work here and to grow their companies, why would they come to Singapore? Why not invest in another country where manpower cost is lower and there are less restrictions? Thus, the solution is not to close the door to skilled foreign workers but to ensure that we have policies which do not discriminate against Singaporeans, that we have policies which will help Singaporeans to get better jobs. So, I urge the Government to continue ensuring that Singaporeans remain at the centre of all that we do, and for the Government to do a better job of explaining in very simple terms the trade-offs faced by us as a small nation. Mr Speaker, Sir, my concern about Singapore’s future is not only about COVID-19 and about job losses. This is a pandemic that has caused the worst recession in Singapore since Independence. But Singapore had overcome the Asian Financial Crisis in 1996; we had defeated SARS in 2003 and we survived the collapse of major financial institutions due to the failure of Lehman Brothers. We are a resilient country and together as one people, we will be able to overcome all challenges. My other concern is about our politics. The People’s Association had done a wonderful job in promoting social harmony and integration, racial and religious harmony. But come election time, as a people, we are no longer united and instead have become divided.”
“Mr Speaker, I joined the workforce 32 years ago as a lawyer. Throughout my life, I had known the PAP as the Government in charge of Singapore. My assessment at that time was that PAP is a capable Government. The values expounded by the PAP Government resonate with me – meritocracy, no cronyism, diligence and hard work, a firm stand against corruption. It is a Government that had performed over the years and gave Singaporeans progress and a better life. It is a Government which I can support. Today, life has become more complicated. By all measures, we had done well. Our living standard is still one of the best in the world. If you look at healthcare, housing, public transport, education opportunities, security and public order, they are all of a very high standard. But Singaporeans face challenges of higher cost of living, more stress, stiff competition and income inequality. We also live in a more inter-connected and complicating world order where governments in other countries have become protectionists and more inward looking. As President Halimah said in her speech, "countries are fighting to meet their own needs, fueling a new wave of protectionism". I believe that many Singaporeans understand the challenges facing us as a small trading nation. Singaporeans, myself included, also acknowledge that the PAP Government is still a capable government and that it will be able to deliver. There will always be policy gaps which I think most of us acknowledge. There is no perfect government in the world. Over the past 14 years as a Member of Parliament, I have met and had many discussions with Government Ministers and senior civil servants. I have come to acknowledge that almost all policies are about trade-offs. Take workers, for example.”
“If they happen to stay with their parents in a better home, should they also be excluded from the Self-Employed Persons Income Relief Scheme? If the intent of the Government is to protect the livelihood of the workers, then I submit that we must do more to help self-employed persons who are badly affected by the COVID-19 crisis. Even as we ask our citizens to make a sacrifice, the Government should also bear part of the sacrifice with them. The $1,000 per month for nine months is not a big sum of money, compared to what they have lost during this period. This group of people are not asking for charity. They would be much happier carrying out their commercial activities, earning their income based on their skills and expertise. They do expect a drastic fall in their income due to the expected financial downturn even after the COVID-19 crisis. But what they are asking for is some form of financial support to tide them over to meet their basic expenses during this period because their businesses are forced to cease operations. I am of the view that this request is not unreasonable. Sir, I urge the Government to extend the benefits of the Self-Employed Persons Income Relief Scheme to more self-employed persons. Consider raising the criteria of the trade income to $250,000 per annum and remove the criteria of the annual value of the homes. In unprecedented times like this, the Government should try to assist as many people as possible. And for those who do not require any help from the Government, they can always be encouraged to return the grant or the subsidies back to the Government, which has already been done by many companies.”
“Hence, he would struggle to bear the entire expenses for his family. I have received emails from my residents appealing for help. One said that she is a licensed estate agent divorced a few years ago. She has four children aged between 10 and 15 in her custody. She has a wheelchair-bound mother to look after. Another wrote to me stating that she needed to financially provide for her aged parents and their children. Her spouse had just been retrenched. And on top of all their daily living expenses, they still had to pay for their housing mortgage loans for the past two months. The recent announcement that some of their businesses cannot resume even after 2 June has caused them more financial pain as they have to struggle for another one to two months. Sir, as a general principle, taxpayers' monies should be used to help the lower-income or those in greater need, and I am not referring to the really higher income residents who have deeper pockets or have large savings. But I submit that the fact that some self-employed persons who had a higher income in the last year or that they lived in a home with a higher annual value of more than $21,000 does not mean that they have the ability to survive two to three more months without any income. It all depends on their savings and expenses. In a recent OCBC survey of Singaporeans' ability to save, 18% of working adults say that they do not have savings to last them one month, and 28% say that they do not have savings to last them beyond three months. That means that 46% cannot last three months. Thus, if these self-employed persons had less savings or they had higher expenses, should they be left without any support from the Government?”
“I wish to highlight one group, and this would be persons who are self-employed but not eligible for the Self-Employed Persons Income Relief Scheme (SIRS) due to the eligibility criteria. Some of them had missed out because their trade income had exceeded $100,000. Some had missed out because they reside in homes with an annual value of more than $21,000. Even if the homes are not owned by them but rented by them, or even if they are staying with their parents, they would not be eligible if the annual values of the home exceed $21,000. Sir, I urge the Minister for Finance to reconsider the eligibility criteria. I received many messages from self-employed persons like housing agents, insurance agents, tuition teachers, instructors, contractors and people in the sales industry. They said that for the last two months, their income had fallen drastically because they were all required to stay at home and unable to carry out their business activities. For some of the housing agents, they said their income had been totally zero for the past two months, even though they tried to sell properties online. They dread that their income will remain zero for the third month because the Council of Estate Agents had informed them that they are still not allowed to bring their clients to the show flats. Many of them accept that it is part of their duty as Singaporeans to stay at home and are willing to do their part to break the COVID-19 virus transmission. However, for a person who has a net trade income of, say, $120,000 per annum or an average of $10,000 per month, he would not be eligible for the income relief scheme. From earning an average of $10,000 per month, he now gets zero income for two or even three months.”
“Sir, in the Ministerial Statement made by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance on 5 May, he explained that large parts of the last three Budgets were directed at protecting the livelihoods of our workers. The central focus of the Fortitude Budget is on jobs. Sir, I support the focus of the Fortitude Budget, which sees a further commitment of $33 billion by the Government to support companies and residents affected by COVID-19. In particular, the extension of the Jobs Support Scheme to affected businesses would certainly help businesses adjust to the loss of revenue during this period. I also support the $2.7 billion stimulus to strengthen employment and to create more jobs, traineeships and skills training. In the COVID-19 environment, many businesses face uncertainty about the future and many are scaling down their hiring as they worry about an impending recession. Many businesses ask, "With a slowing economy, would my business be able to survive, much less employ new staff?" Thus, the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package would help to assure jobseekers, especially those entering the workforce after graduation, that there are still job opportunities and skills training or upgrading available to citizens who want a job. It has been seven weeks since the Solidarity Budget was announced. Over the past two months, due to the circuit breaker measures, many businesses which are non-essential have to cease operations totally. Although the Solidarity Budget announced on 7 April 2020 had helped many businesses, the financial impact on many others who have not benefited from the budgetary provisions are felt deeply and keenly.”
“Sir, I just wanted to ask the Senior Minister of State how we deal with countries where the numbers are low and they seem to have no community spread, and the reason is because they do not do sufficient testing. We understand that there are some countries that do not have enough test kits and they do not do sufficient testing. The other question I have is that last month, the Minister for Health did say that we are not doing widespread community testing because the yield is very low for asymptomatic testing. To be effective, it needs to be done repeatedly because being tested negative does not reflect immunity and those who had been tested can be infected after the test. So, how do we reconcile that? Even if they are tested okay and they come over, they may still be COVID-positive.”
“Sir, let me just say that I truly appreciate the efforts of MOH in maintaining the safety of our citizens. But I have spoken to various F&B outlets and basically, they are a bit worried and concern whether they are able to sustain the prolong closure of their businesses. So, some of them say, "If you continue like this, we won't be able to open even when you say go ahead and open", because by then they would be insolvent. I would like to ask the Minister whether MOH can consider bringing forward some of the relaxation of the measures, just like what we did previously when we segregated seats; you label seats that should be left empty to make sure that people would not congregate. I am not asking for nightclubs and bars to be opened because there is where the crowd is, but for some of the F&B outlets to be able to sit a few of the diners. Perhaps, we can look at the examples of Hong Kong, UK and New Zealand and see whether we are able to relax some of our measures, just like they have done.”
“Sir, if I may ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary a question. I think the consumers are frustrated, because everytime there is a drop in crude prices, there seems to be a lack in the fall in pump prices. Whereas, the minute there is increase in crude oil prices, pump prices rise quite quickly. While the CASE is happy to work with CCCS to provide fuel prices in Fuel Kaki, I am just wondering whether MTI would be able to ask the fuel companies, in the interest of price transparency, to consider asking the fuel companies to provide or publish a breakdown of their costs components. That means the base costs of crude oil, the taxes, the land costs, their labour costs and so on. This will be similar to what One Motoring or LTA publishes insofar as the price of cars are concerned. One Motoring publishes the Open Market Value (OMV), the Additional Registration Fee (ARF), the taxes as well as the base costs of cars. For consumers, I think it will help if they are able to understand what are the crude oil prices, what is the fuel component of it, so that when a fuel companies increase their prices, then they would know how much more the fuel companies are charging for the the fuel component of the costs.”
“Sir, considering considering the impact of such fake messages on the public, may I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, how else can Police signal that perpetrators of such fake messages will face the full brunt of the law? Can the punishment be more severe for people who make such fake messages?”
“So, my thanks to the Minister for making this happen. Sir, I support the Bill. 5.41 pm”
“Would there be a similar prohibition against forfeiture of deposits paid. Can the consumer who booked the tour or the air ticket be allowed to claim relief from forfeiture? Next is the Assessors. The Bill provides for the appointment of Assessors by the Minister. Under clause 13 of the Bill, the Assessor’s determination is binding on all the parties to the application. There is no appeal from an Assessor’s determination. These are very wide and discretionary powers given to the Assessors. Lawyers are specifically excluded from the hearing by the Assessors. May I know what if there is clear prejudice by an Assessor. How does MinLaw ensure that the appointed Assessor will always be impartial and make a determination or adjudicates in a fair and equitable manner? Finally, Sir, remission of property tax. I wish to express my support for clause 29 of the Bill. This clause 29 makes it mandatory for a landlord to pass on the benefit of the property tax remission to the tenant. I think this is far better than moral suasion which the Government has been asking the landlords to act upon. Many tenants that I speak to were very unhappy that they have not seen any benefit being passed on to them. Many of them share that their landlords have been stalling and giving excuses for not passing on the tax remission. To all the landlords who had already planned to pass on the tax remission to the tenants, my heartfelt thanks for doing your part in helping your tenants survive this difficult period. To the other landlords who are still thinking about it, this Bill makes that decision non-negotiable and this is good for the landlord. The tenant survives, continues to pay the rental to the landlord and the landlord continues to get his steady stream of rental income.”
“May I also ask the Minister also explain why are residential properties excluded from this Bill. For example, I have residents who say that they are unable to shift out from their tenanted residential homes because their contractors cannot complete the renovations of the home due to the suspension of activities or the circuit breaker order imposed by the Government. Can a tenant of a residential home in this case seek relief under this Bill? Next, Sir, is about event contract. Clause 7 of the Bill provides that if an event, for example a wedding or a tourism-related contract, is unable to proceed due to a COVID-19 related event, then the venue provider cannot forfeit the person’s deposit unless the provider obtains a determination from an Assessor that it would be just and equitable to forfeit the whole deposit or a part thereof. However, the suspension of the rights against forfeiture is for a period of only six months. According to the press, some couples have stated that they are unable to postpone their wedding to another date within the next six months. There is no certainty whether the COVID-19 situation can be resolved by then and whether their wedding can then proceed. The organisation of a wedding or for that matter, a convention, a conference, a concert or a sports event takes many months of planning. This current situation leaves too much uncertainty for all parties. There are guest lists to plan and logistics arrangements to be made. Would it not be better to allow the contracting party to cancel the contract and to just pay for whatever reasonable expenses incurred to date by the venue provider? May I ask the Minister too – what about contracts for tours or boat cruises booked with travel agencies and air tickets booked with airlines?”
“The landlords worry that they would have to pay hefty interest or late charges on their loans with their financiers when they cannot collect the rent from the tenant. They also worry that the tenant may after six months, become insolvent, then they, the landlord be left without legal recourse except against the security deposit paid by the tenant. In the response from MAS to the Bill, MAS stated that the contractual rights of banks are not affected, other than the right to commence legal action for a default on a loan covered under the proposed Bill. Banks’ contractual right to charge fees and interest for non-payment or late payment of loan obligations due is unaffected, meaning to say banks can continue to charge fees and interest for late payment or non-payment of the loan obligations. Thus, it seems that if the tenant does not pay the rental arrears in full after the six months, the landlords are at greater risk because the Bill exposes them to an eventual law suit by the bank. The bank can go after the landlord, go after the security and they can repossess the property but the landlord cannot claim against the tenant if the tenant becomes insolvent. The other concern which I have is how does the law ensure that tenants understand that this Bill merely provides the tenant temporary relief from certain legal action? At the end of six months, the tenant would still have to pay the arrears of rental plus applicable interest under the tenancy agreement. But if the tenant is struggling to pay the entire rental for a few months, how realistic is it to expect that the tenant can suddenly at the end of six months magically cough up the entire six months arrears of rental. Will this Bill give struggling tenants a false sense that they can escape their legal obligations?”
“Sir, when MinLaw introduced this Bill on 1 April 2020, it was explained that the Bill seeks to offer temporary relief to businesses and individuals who are unable to fulfil their contractual obligations because of COVID-19. MinLaw further explained that: “The COVID-19 pandemic, and associated public health measures imposed by governments around the world, has had unprecedented and unforeseeable social and economic impact. There are supply chain disruptions and manpower shortages, among other consequences. In many cases, this has undermined the ability of individuals and businesses to fulfil contractual obligations. It would thus be unfair to hold them strictly liable for their failure to do so.” Minister Shanmugam had also given a more elaborate explanation for the basis of this Bill. Sir, I agree with the rationale provided for the Bill. It provides some form of temporary relief to people or businesses who are adversely affected by COVID-19. Hence, I support the Bill. However, there are a few areas which I hope that the Minister can provide some clarification and perhaps the thinking behind the Bill. First, relief against termination of lease for non-residential property. Clause 5 of the proposed Bill provides that a landlord cannot exercise his right of re-entry or forfeiture under a scheduled contract, being a lease or licence of a non-residential immovable property, and the landlord cannot the exercise any other right that has a similar outcome. Sir, there have been some concerns raised by landlords who are either individuals, small companies or SMEs. They feel that this suspension of their rights under the tenancy agreement would affect their cash flow negatively.”
“So, I urge the Government to allow appeals on a case-by-case basis and to render assistance to this group of people during this difficult time. Sir, I support the Supplementary Budget measures. 10.30 am”