Louis Ng Kok Kwang
Singapore
“It does not matter whether the report was made to the Police or the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary clarify whether an individual who reports an offence under the Bill to the Police will be similarly protected by the whistle-blowing protections under section 53?”
“In my Adjournment Motion six years ago, I shared the story of Emma, a single unwed parent who came to see me at my Meet-the-People Sessions, together with her two-month-old daughter. They were both living in a shelter. As I shared previously, when I asked why Emma did not shed a tear, she told me that she no longer had any tears left.”
“It is not just Nee Soon East cleaners who pay kickbacks. This, again, is a widespread problem that we have not done enough to detect and tackle. To tackle this more effectively, we need to treat kickbacks as seriously as corruption. We need our laws to have a more deterrent effect to have any chance of wiping out kickbacks.”
“Sir, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for answering my cut on second-hand smoke. And I am sure he expects me to clarify further. But I think the Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that there is no current technology to catch someone smoking at home and, so, because of that we cannot legislate a ban.”
“Madam, for years, I have spoken up repeatedly in this House, calling for the Government to take action to protect the lives of fellow Singaporeans from second-hand smoke. I have spoken up so much that Senior Minister of State Amy Khor once said that she is immune to me already. But on a more serious note, this is a serious issue.”
“We should end the discrimination and allow them to qualify for the PPHS. Mandate Sterilisation of Pet Cats I have spent a good part of my life calling for HDB to allow the keeping of cats in HDB flats. Many have called for this and I am glad the Government has finally changed our policies and allow the keeping of cats in HDB flats.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,801 lines we hold for Louis Ng Kok Kwang, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 37.
“Sir, this Bill will allow us to tackle criminal online activities. It will empower the Government to issue directions against online activities which may be criminal, act proactively against scams and malicious cyber activities and introduce appeal mechanisms to safeguard the exercise of powers. I have three points of clarification to raise. My first point is on offences relating to the sale of animals. The Second Schedule of the Bill sets out offences that the Bill intends to combat. This does not include offences related to the illegal trade of animals and wildlife under the Animals and Birds Act, Wildlife Act and the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act. We know that a significant volume of illegal trade of animals and wildlife is taking place online. In 2021, a report by Traffic, a non-governmental organisation (NGO), found that 3,354 live birds were put on sale in 44 Singapore-based Facebook groups from December 2018 to April 2019. The sellers were unlicensed and the sales illegal. Data published by tech companies highlight the scale of the problem. A 2021 report by the Coalition to End Wildlife Trafficking states that tech companies in the group, including Google, Facebook and TikTok, had blocked or removed nearly 12 million listings of endangered species and associated products. Can Minister share why offences under the Animals and Birds Act, Wildlife Act and the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act have not been included in the Second Schedule? Will the Ministry consider including these offences under the Second Schedule? My second clarification is on the nature and effects of the codes of practices.”
“Can the Member also share if a child will have the opportunity to challenge the Tribunal's decision to grant permission for the maintenance application? Lastly, my last clarification is on the definition of record or purported record of abandonment, abuse or neglect. This is defined as any record against or relating to the person that is prescribed to be a record or purported record of the person's abandonment, abuse or neglect of a child of the person. However, we are aware that there is a potential problem of underreported child abuse cases. MSF's data showed a sharp increase in child abuse cases over the past decade. In 2014, 381 cases were investigated by MSF's Child Protective Services. In 2021, this figure soared to 2,141, the highest in a decade. MSF explained that the number of cases has increased since 2015 when MSF introduced more rigorous screening tools and training for professionals. MSF stated that this helped to sharpen the ability of sector professionals to pick up safety concerns for a child and seek appropriate intervention. I am glad that we are now investigating and detecting more abuse cases. However, this also suggests that there may have been a significant extent of under-reporting of child abuse prior to 2015. Can the Member share whether the standard of proof for pre-2015 child abuse cases be adjusted to take into account the potential issue of under-reporting? Madam, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support the Bill.”
“Or there is a good arguable case that the child should maintain the parent on just and equitable ground. How can the Commissioner or Tribunal determine whether there is a good arguable case if the child does not even know that the application for permission has been made? Has the Member considered whether it might be traumatic as well for a child who was not involved in the permission application to suddenly be told that he or she now face a maintenance application because the Commissioner or Tribunal found that there was no abandonment, abuse or neglect? And this finding was made without hearing from the child? How will the communication to the child be managed in this case? All the more so if the Tribunal found that there was a good arguable case that there was no abuse. Can the Member further share the rationale behind not even informing the child of the application for permission? My second set of clarifications is about allowing applications for permission where there are records of abandonment, abuse or neglect. Member Murali had addressed my clarification on when the application for permission would be granted at the President or Deputy President and when it would be referred to the Tribunal for decision. Beyond that, under the new section 3B(7), permission may be granted if there is a good arguable case that the parent did not abandon, abuse or neglect the child or that the child should maintain the parent on just and equitable grounds. Can the Member clarify what is required evidentially to show a good arguable case? Given that suffering and abuse are contextual and subjective, can the Member share what guidance will be provided to the Tribunal to ensure consistency in decision-making?”
“Madam, this Bill will allow the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents to take into account a history of abuse, neglect or abandonment when making a maintenance order. It will also empower a Tribunal to better deal with frivolous or vexatious applications. The Bill will also allow the Commissioner and Tribunal to engage children of destitute parents and to facilitate conciliation where appropriate. I have three points of clarification. Madam, actually I should say I had three points of clarification. I left my speech on my chair and I think Member of Parliament Murali Pillai must have read it because he has addressed most of the points that I am about to raise but he said it, he felt that the points were pertinent ones, and he has foreseen that someone will raise it and that he will address it earlier on in this debate. Madam, my first clarification is on the involvement of children in applications for maintenance with records or purported records of abandonment, abuse or neglect of the child. Under the new section 3B(2), the application for permission must be dealt with without informing or involving the child, except where the child was already involved in any prior conciliation and is agreeable to participate in proceedings. I understand the need to avoid re-traumatising a child who may have been previously abandoned, abused or neglected, as Member of Parliament Murali had raised. However, the child may wish to have the opportunity to decide whether or not to participate in the application for permission. The Commissioner or Tribunal may grant permission for a maintenance application if they find that there is a good arguable case that the parent did not abandon, abuse or neglect the child.”
“Can the Minister of State share how any imprisonment for offences of family violence will affect Protection Orders and other types of family violence orders? What arrangements will be made while this offender is in prison and after the offender's release for the survivor's continued protection? Madam, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Can the Minister of State also share which agencies or individuals will have access to the data from electronic monitoring? How will this data be shared? And what safeguards will be in place to prevent the abuse the use of such data? My fourth clarification is on the use of policing to complement protection and other family violence orders. Paper orders may not be sufficient to deter some offenders. Increased monitoring and risk of detection may serve as more practical deterrence. Can the Minister of State share if there are any plans to arrange appropriate levels of policing by the Police to complement protection and other types of family violence orders? For instance, is there a protocol for increased policing by the Police to be automatically arranged where protection or other types of orders are in place? My fifth and final clarification is on the arrangements to ensure continued protection after an aggressor has served jail term for offences of family violence. The punishment for a family violence may include imprisonment of 12 months or for aggravated offences,18 months. The imprisonment term serves as punishment for the aggressor. But for survivors of family violence, the imprisonment only protects them for as long as the aggressor is in prison. While the aggressor is in prison, there will be no instances that show the likelihood of the aggressor committing family violence since they are in jail. There may not be any factual basis for the survivor then to apply to Court for a Protection Order or other family violence orders, since there is no recent evidence of the aggressor being likely to commit family violence.”
“The new section 60A allows the Court to make a protection order if an aggressor has committed or is likely to commit family violence against an individual. When such a protected individual is the guardian or parent of minor children or otherwise vulnerable family members, it seems likely that those dependants are likely to be in the same household and face the same threats. It would be burdensome to require fresh applications for the individual's dependants. Can the Minister of State clarify whether when a protection order is granted to protect a caregiver of vulnerable family members, should the Court also automatically consider issuing protection orders to protect those vulnerable family members? My third clarification is on the use of electronic monitoring. Section 60C(2) allows the Court to make an electronic monitoring order if necessary for the protection or personal safety of an individual. Given the potential intrusiveness of electronic monitoring, can the Minister of State clarify when electronic monitoring will be deemed necessary? Bilateral monitoring where both the perpetrator and the survivor are tracked has been used in countries, such as the United Kingdom and Australia. NGOs have raised to me that this may jeopardise victims' privacy. If victims do not understand how the monitoring is carried out, it may cause unnecessary anxiety about their locations being revealed to perpetrators. Can the Minister of State share about the types of electronic monitoring arrangements that will be introduced? Are there any plans to introduce bilateral electronic monitoring? Can the Minister of State share how electronic monitoring will be used to detect breaches of other types of orders under the Bill or other family violence offences?”
“Madam, this Bill aims to better protect survivors of family violence. It will strengthen our ability to intervene in family violence and allow for stronger enforcement against breaches of protective measures. I have seen the consequences on lives when our measures fall short of protecting families. I hope these amendments will allow us to act quickly and more proactively to keep families safe. I have five points for clarification. My first set of clarifications are on the manpower needed for implementation and enforcement. The increased protection and enforcement powers under the Bill will require trained manpower. The Bill creates the position of a protector, who holds significant powers. A protector can make an emergency order before a Court order is obtained, can remove an individual from their residence and can apply for protection orders and other family violence orders. The protector must be sensitive to the needs of family violence survivors, be able to make decisions with limited information and make quick decisions that balance the interests of all parties involved. The new section 65(2) provides that only the Director-General may appoint any person with suitable qualifications and experience as a protector. Can the Minister of State clarify the qualifications and experience required of a protector? Can the Minister of State share what training will be introduced for protectors? Beyond creating the position of the protector, can the Minister of State share whether there is sufficient current manpower to implement the expanded powers under the Bill? If not, what is the shortfall and what are MSF's plans to make up for this shortfall? My second clarification is on the individuals covered under the protection order.”
“Agencies would not need to make as many case-by-case assessments. Singaporeans could be consulted to ensure the law reflects their values and priorities. The law could also contain principles and rules to standardise when and how information gets disclosed, strengthening our Government's principle of transparency. I hope the Senior Minister of State can consider these benefits and periodically review our planning framework to consider codifying an EIA law. Madam, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Under section 20 of the BCA, the new subsection 1 states that it is a defence to lodging a non-compliant plan if the accused reasonably believed the plans complied with all the prescribed regulations. What would be considered to be reasonable? Similarly, in the new section 33H of the EPMA, it is an offence to deviate "in a material way" from the plans under a clearance certificate. What is the threshold for the deviation to be considered material? Providing guidance and examples on how these terms are applied would be useful for developers to know the extent of due diligence expected. My third and final point is the need to legislate an environmental impact assessment (EIA) framework for all building works. I have raised this a number of times in this House. These updates to planning permissions are commendable but we still have not taken the critical step of introducing a formal EIA law. EIA is an essential exercise to ensure that we properly balance the benefits of development to the costs to our environment. Loss of natural spaces and biodiversity adversely affects the lives of all Singaporeans. We not only are denied the enjoyment of natural spaces, we also lose an invaluable resource for combating climate change. The Minister for National Development has previously stated that even though we have no formal EIA laws, the EIA framework is built into the planning approvals and agencies can require an EIA to be undertaken. I also recognise that we are taking steps to centralise EIA requirements under NParks. A law to mandate EIA has several benefits over the current case-by-case approach. It creates certainty. Developers would know the cost of falling short. They would be able to plan ahead of time and not need to await some government decision.”
“Madam, this Bill introduces new planning permissions for buildings and related works and enables building approvals to be processed through the new CORENET X platform. I commend the Government agencies and the industry for their collaborative approach in creating the new CORENET X platform. The platform streamlines our planning process into a single submission by developers and a coordinated response across agencies. It is a good example of how all stakeholders can work together for better outcomes. I have three points of clarification on the Bill. My first clarification is on safeguards for preliminary approvals. Under the new section 5AA of the BCA, plans for any lodgement works are automatically approved without any need for the Commissioner to check the plans. The new section 33E of the EPMA and 46F of the EPHA allow developers to apply for a design certificate to commence preliminary works before getting a clearance certificate for pollution control or public health risks is given. Under the new section 17A of the Planning Act, there is a process to apply for provisional permission to commence works before planning permission is granted. I understand it is important to give developers flexibility to commence work early while waiting for final permission. However, once preliminary work has begun, it becomes harder to change course. Would it be difficult for the agencies to refuse final permission, knowing that developers have already incurred expenses? What if rectification costs are too high or not even possible and the damage is already done? Can the Senior Minister of State clarify what safeguards will be taken when giving provisional or preliminary permission to minimise such risks? My second clarification is on the scope of defences under the Bill.”
“Thank you, Madam. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply and for Singapore's strong commitment on marine conservation. But could I also ask whether the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) is equally supportive on the global treaty to end plastic pollution, and how is Singapore contributing to that as well?”
“Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. With regard to discrimination at breastfeeding mothers' phase, I thank the Senior Minister of State for sharing that the Committee is reviewing this. Could I ask whether the Committee is engaging non-governmental organisations, like the Breastfeeding Mothers Support Group Singapore, to get their feedback and to consult them on this process? Second, I do understand some forms of discriminations are not going to be covered under the proposed legislation and would be just covered under the Tripartite guidelines. Could I ask the Senior Minister of State whether we can strengthen the penalties under the Tripartite guidelines? Because, again, as I raised many times in this House, it would not make sense if you discriminate against the women and the penalty is that you cannot hire foreigners. I hope we can strengthen those penalties to again send a very strong deterrent message.”
“Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for sharing about the population density. But could I also ask what is the carrying capacity of our forests for wild boars in Singapore and also whether NParks has the projected carrying capacity as we develop more forested areas? Secondly, I appreciate that the Senior Minister of State has stressed again that our approach is science-based and I hope we continue this science-based approach. But could the Senior Minister of State clarify how it would be science-based if we are really basing it on complaints? When there are complaints, we go in and remove a few wild boars. Again, considering the high reproduction rate of these wild boars, how effective is it to just remove a small number of wild boars and kill them?”
“Thank you, Sir. Could I just ask Senior Minister of State how new are these guidelines, whether they have been revised during COVID-19 to take into account the infection measures? Second, how regularly are these guidelines reviewed?”
“I understand all that and I agree with the Minister of State that we are doing quite a number of things for FSCs. But the short question really is can MSF just look into this and find out how many social workers are focusing on community work in FSCs? And then at least we can see the results of that and change our policies.”
“Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister of State for the reply, but actually it is a different question. I am asking what is the average number of social workers in FSCs who are focused on community work? I ask this because they have provided feedback to me that FSCs and social workers really do want to focus on that, to go upstream, to solve and address some of the problems they are seeing downstream. And the problem now is the lack of funding. I think MSF only provides funding for one headcount per FSC who handles a very large area. So, could I ask whether MSF can look into this further and study how we can help FSCs social workers do more community work?”
“The Bill clarifies how requirements applicable to a company and other corporate entities' meetings are applied for a meeting held using virtual meeting technology. Feedback in the public consultation on the Bill included a suggestion to grant more flexibility on how the identity of persons attending and voting at meetings should be verified. A number of provisions allow the directors of the company or corporate entity to determine requirements on the conduct of virtual meeting technology if requirements are not prescribed by the Constitution. These include the method for verifying the identity of persons voting, the mode of synchronous communication and the mode for making a document available. It is practical to provide flexibility for the directors to decide how these requirements should be met given the practical consideration for their entities. However, basic safeguards or requirements should be set to ensure the integrity of meetings. Can the Minister share if guidance will be provided to directors on best practices in determining the requirements that should be applied for the conduct of meetings? Madam, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“This Bill will allow companies and other corporate entities to conduct virtual or hybrid general meetings. This aligns our company and corporate law provisions with the technological reality of the business environment today. I have three points to make. My first point is on the Court's power to invalidate meetings. The new section 392(2A) allows the Court to declare a meeting invalid if there is a technological disruption, malfunction or outage that has or may cause substantial injustice that cannot be remedied. Can the Minister provide examples on what the Court should deem as substantial injustice that cannot be remedied? A technological disruption may affect only a portion of the proceedings for a meeting. It is not clear from the new provision if the Court has the power to declare only part of the meeting invalid. Can the Minister clarify whether the Court has the power to invalidate only a portion of a meeting if a technological disruption affects only a limited portion of the meeting? My second point is on the deliberate or malicious disruption of meetings. Virtual or hybrid meetings that are held virtually may expose the company to greater risk of disruption by malicious actors through technological means. For instance, if a meeting is not proceeding in the manner desired by one party, it is possible that the party may set out to disrupt the meeting such that it is later invalidated by the Court. Can the Minister share if the Ministry has considered the need to introduce new offences for individuals who take steps to disrupt meetings with the intention that the meeting proceedings be invalidated? My third and final point is on the requirements for meetings held using virtual meeting technology.”
“Madam, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Banks obtaining information via COSMIC will only be able to share it in certain circumstances with a limited set of people, even within their own organisation. Cybersecurity measures must also be in place to protect the information. But how will MAS ensure that banks hold themselves up to these standards? If a bank officer forwards it to a colleague who should not have access to the information, how will MAS find out? Will there be data audits to track the flow of COSMIC information within and out of banks? Information obtained from COSMIC will be highly sensitive and improper circulation may have serious implications for those targeted. MAS must ensure banks protect the information properly. My third and final point is on how COSMIC data will be processed. Having aggregated data from multiple FIs like this is a valuable resource with great potential. MAS has stated that the STRO will have access to data from COSMIC for its analysis. Can the Minister clarify whether there are further plans to provide other Government agencies or FIs access to the COSMIC data? On one hand, this data could be mined to gain valuable insights about suspicious activity. This could even be shared internationally to strengthen enforcement globally. On the other hand, the processing of such data must be carefully governed. It must not be done in a way that might breach confidentiality. It should not be analysed by banks for commercial business purposes. Since this relates to allegations of criminal conduct, machine learning or artificial intelligence models analysing the data must also be carefully managed to avoid any bias. If there are plans to share COSMIC data with other entities, can the Minister share what safeguards are in place?”
“In October 2020, the National Parks Board (NParks) seized 34 kilogrammes of rhinoceros horns from a man travelling from South Africa to Laos through Singapore. This is the largest seizure of rhinoceros horns to-date. Such seizures are just the tip of the iceberg. Smugglers have found ways to circumvent our border security and bring these animals and their body parts onto our soil. When you look at the size and value of animal part seizures at our borders, we are talking about operations that must, by logic, involve financing, coordinating and operations on a large, organised scale. A $50 million shipment of pangolin scales is not the work of isolated individuals. These criminals have the know-how to avoid and evade detection through complicated transactions. This is why we need a platform like this. As MAS develops this platform, will MAS consider including in the scope of the "red flags" identified to those associated with wildlife crime? Will MAS also work with investigators of wildlife crime to ensure COSMIC data is used to both identify perpetrators as well as help banks do so? By making this data available for stakeholders tackling wildlife crime, our financial sector will be able to play an important part in battling this illegal wildlife trade. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has flagged the illegal wildlife trade as a major transnational organised crime. It is a perfect candidate for the powers under this Bill and I hope MAS will take this into consideration as we develop this platform further. My second point is about the policing of privacy regulations. This legislation does a good job balancing the goal of reducing economic crime with the concern of privacy.”
“Madam, this Bill will establish the COSMIC digital platform for FIs to share information about their customers whose information contains "red flags" relating to economic crime. This makes it harder for criminals to use transfers across multiple FIs to avoid detection. Despite the difficult economic climate, I am glad that Singapore remains an attractive financial centre, with increased fund inflows from an increase in the number of family offices from 400 in 2020, to over 700. As our transactions and assets increase, our ability to supervise these transactions must also improve. I support this Bill as this will let us take the lead in detecting and preventing financial crime, strengthening Singapore's position as a major financial hub. I have three points to make. My first point is on using COSMIC to tackle illegal wildlife trade. In my speech on the Endangered Species (Import and Export) (Amendment) Bill, I highlighted how there is evidence suggesting that Singapore is a critical nexus in the illegal wildlife trade. In the past decade, we have seized illegal shipments of animal parts worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Elephants, rhinoceroses, pangolins – these are just a few animals whose dead, dissected bodies are smuggled through Singapore. In April 2019, we broke the record by finding 12.9 tonnes of pangolin scales being smuggled in a shipment from Nigeria. This was worth over $50 million and cost the lives of over 17,000 pangolins. Just a week later, we seized another 12.7 tonnes of pangolin scales. Three months after that, we seized a shipment of 8.8 tonnes of ivory, estimated to come from nearly 300 African elephants.”
“While MHA has stated that owners of payment accounts must be responsible for how their accounts are being used, the reality is that a financially illiterate elderly person may trust their children and be content to leave control of their accounts to their children. It is also possible that they may not be in a position to regain control of their accounts after allowing their children initial access, even if they are aware that the accounts are being used for illegitimate purposes. Can the Minister share how the Police will view such cases? My third point is on the responsibility of network access facility operators and service providers. The Computer Misuse Bill clarifies that network access facility operators and service providers are not guilty of making available any Singpass information that comes across their platforms. However, platforms, too, have a role to play in addressing illegal or harmful content transmitted on their platforms. Can the Minister elaborate on what it views as the responsibility of network access facility operators and service providers in addressing the illegal use of accounts and Singpass credentials? What are the regulatory frameworks in place to ensure that network access facility operators and service providers are not complicit in the use of their platforms for illegal purposes? Notwithstanding these clarifications, Madam, I stand in support of the Bills.”
“Can the Minister explain if the standards of the "ordinary, reasonable person" will be calibrated to factor in the individual characteristics of the accused? My second point is on the new offences under both Bills which involve a failure to verify details. Under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act, or CDSA (Amendment) Bill, a person can be deemed liable for money laundering if they allow certain transactions to take place through their accounts without verifying the purpose of the arrangement, the source or destination of the country, or the person's identity and physical location. Under the Computer Misuse Act or CMA (Amendment) Bill, a person is presumed to believe that the disclosure of his Singpass credentials was for the commission of an offence if the person fails to take steps to find out the identity and physical location of the recipient. Again, can the Minister elaborate on the extent of verification that is expected? It is possible that an individual may provide another with access to their account or to their Singpass credentials for a legitimate purpose, but the access is later abused for criminal purposes. Can the Minister share what is expected of the individual in this situation to avoid committing an offence? Is there an ongoing requirement that the individual periodically verifies the transactions going through their account? For example, an elderly parent may give their children access to their account to help manage their finances. They may also give their children their Singpass details to help with a transaction.”
“Madam, the Bills will strengthen our ability to tackle scams through the misuse of bank and Singpass accounts. The Bills will also introduce new offences of rash and negligent money laundering, expand the scope of money laundering offences and introduce new offences to prevent Singpass abuse. The proposed amendments will allow us to more effectively investigate and prosecute money mules who allow their Singpass or bank accounts to be used for scams. I have three points to make. My first point is on the new offences of rash and negligent money laundering. A person may commit an offence if they enter into an arrangement acting rashly as to the fact that it relates to benefits from criminal conduct. The Ministry for Home Affairs (MHA) has said that a person acts rashly if they had suspicions but did not make further enquiries to address those suspicions. Does the offence require that the person must be suspicious that the arrangement is linked to criminal conduct? Is it sufficient that the person is suspicious that the facts they were given, for example, people's identities or reasons for the transaction that may not be true? Can the Minister elaborate on the extent of verification that a person should make to address any suspicions? A person may also commit an offence if they negligently enter into such an arrangement. MHA explained that a person is negligent if they continue with a transaction despite the presence of "red flags" that are noticeable by an ordinary, reasonable person. Can the Minister elaborate further on what these "red flags" are? Money mules who are implicated in money laundering may not have a clear understanding of money laundering arrangements. For instance, they may be elderly persons or less financially sophisticated persons.”
“Thank you, Madam. Just one last follow-up question. I visited some migrant worker dormitories recently and none of them had mattresses. I asked some of them and I think there is this misconception because they told me that MOM had prohibited the use of mattresses. Could I ask MOM to follow up on this and make sure that there is some awareness out there, that migrant workers have a choice with regard to the use of mattresses in their dormitories?”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. Could I then check if the MOM is following up with some of the migrant worker dormitories and checking whether some of them have prohibited the use of mattresses at the dormitories? And if so, what is the percentage or number of dormitories that actually ban the use of mattresses.”
“Thank you, Madam. Could I just follow up on Member Yip Hon Weng's point and ask whether MND can work closely with the Red Cross, who already have a HoME+ programme? I think it stands for the Home Monitoring and Elder Care, which is about placing motion sensors in the house of seniors and when they detect any unusual movements patterns, then the Red Cross call centre is notified. I have seen how it is effective for our Nee Soon East residents, but I think that with more funding and perhaps partnership from the Government, they can expand further and perhaps even be nationalised. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: I thank the Member for the supplementary question. As I shared earlier, we are exploring technological solutions. So, and we will look at existing programmes as well as explore how we can enhance this journey for our seniors.”
“Thank you, Madam. I think Minister Grace Fu always says I ask for more and so, I should again. Could I ask whether the Ministry of Education (MOE) is going to expand this curriculum in terms of animal welfare? I think we have had it for many years and I am hoping that we can expand it further, so that we can create greater awareness on animal welfare issues and go upstream, in terms of solving some of the animal abuse that we are currently seeing in our community.”
“It provides the Court with powers to order a party to undergo financial counselling as part of maintenance enforcement proceedings. But counselling works best when it starts earlier, long before divorce applications are even filed. Indeed, the RERF Committee said in its 2019 report that sorting out finances early when a marriage has broken down is important to avoid disputes and distress later. MSF may be able to identify families at high-risk of divorce through the various social service agencies and FSCs. Can the Minister share how MinLaw and MSF are working together at an upstream stage to help families access financial counselling even before the divorce application is filed? Also, given that parents with children under 21 years old must undergo the Mandatory Co-Parenting Programme (CPP) before filing for divorce, can Minister of State Sun Xueling share if there are plans to incorporate mandatory financial counselling and planning as part of the CPP? Can the Minister also clarify where an MEO refers parties for financial assistance after reviewing documents submitted by the parties, will the matter still proceed on to conciliation and hearing? Notwithstanding these clarifications, Sir, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Can the Minister also share whether there will be a standard rubric for MEOs to assess parties’ financial positions in preparing the report? Fifth, the Court may vary the original maintenance orders in the MEP. Applicants may think twice before applying under the MEP if their application may lead to their original maintenance orders being varied. Can the Minister clarify if it is only under exceptional circumstances that the Court will vary the original maintenance orders in the MEP? If so, can the Minister share what factors a Court should take into account before varying the original maintenance orders in the MEP? My second point is on the attachment of earnings Court orders. These Court orders direct a party’s employer to deduct a portion of maintenance from their salary to make direct payment to the other party. The new section 91H allows the Court to determine what payments to a person are earnings that can be directed for the payment of maintenance. The relevant sections set out obligations relating to the respondent’s employer and employment when an attachment of earnings order is made. Can the Minister clarify whether earnings from freelance or gig economy work can be deemed earnings? If such earnings can be subject to an attachment of earnings order, can the Minister clarify how the obligations relating to traditional employers or employment apply where the respondent is engaged in gig work? My third point is on financial counselling for couples undergoing divorce. In the public consultation for the RERF Committee’s recommendations, members of the public asked to build up capabilities in financial counselling to help divorcees better manage their new finances. The new section 91(b) makes progress in this area.”
“Sir, this Bill will improve Family Court proceedings by reducing acrimony in divorce proceedings, enhancing the judge-led approach and facilitating enforcement of maintenance orders. I have three points to make. My first point is on the enhanced Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP), which simplifies the enforcement of maintenance orders. First, the new section 86 allows the Maintenance Enforcement Officer (MEO) to seek Court orders for banks or prescribed third parties to provide information. Can the Minister share who these prescribed third parties may be? Second, can the Minister share what are the contemplated timelines that the MEO will seek from the Court for banks and prescribed third parties? Family lawyers have shared with me that banks take time to respond to their requests for information. Can the Minister share if the banks have been consulted on their ability to respond within the contemplated timelines? Third, the new section 88 allows an MEO to conduct conciliation sessions to help both parties agree on maintenance. Given that conciliation sessions could be used by a party to delay proceedings, can the Minister share whether there is a limit on the number of conciliation sessions that the MEO can conduct? Can the Minister share what are the consequences for a party if they fail to attend or are clearly not participating in good faith on the conciliation? Fourth, MEOs will be empowered to obtain information from parties and to submit a report to the Court. Can the Minister share what training will be provided to the MEOs to make discovery of the relevant documents and assess the parties’ actual financial positions? Can the Minister elaborate on what the MEO’s report is supposed to set out and whether it will be provided to both parties?”
“Thank you, Sir. Could I just ask whether MSF follows up with the SSAs on whether they are able to meet these new salary guidelines and, if so, what percentage of SSAs are able to meet these guidelines?”
“But, firstly, Sir, the first question really was – I think the Minister of State mentioned that there were some cases where the Police did not activate the AAs. How many cases were there and what was the percentage of the number of cases where they were not activated? The second was whether the same AA can be provided to the same suspect throughout all the interviews rather than just at one? Or maybe that is already in the current standard operating procedures?”
“Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Could I just ask what are the number and percentage of cases where the AA was not activated? Secondly, could I also ask whether the same AA can be assigned to the young or vulnerable suspect for all the interviews? I think that would help to provide some sense of security for the suspect as well.”
“But again, there is more that needs to be done to tackle the stigma and discrimination that still persists for many single unwed parents. I was recently asked in this House whether I want more single unwed parents. Imagine being a single unwed parent or a child of a single unwed parent, watching the debate at home and hearing those words. Imagine a child wondering whether Mummy is wrong for being a single unwed parent. Single unwed parents are just trying their best for their children in difficult circumstances. I hope again that we will review our policies to ensure that they are inclusive and fair for single unwed parents. We are not asking to incentivise being a single unwed parent. We are asking that we provide them a level and equal playing field so that they and their children can have equal opportunities in Singapore. Meritocracy should apply to them too. In conclusion, Sir, in my speech for the Motion of Thanks to the President in 2020, I said that, "I will continue to fight for a more caring, compassionate and inclusive society, a society with a strong heartware." This fight continues and continues for so many other causes – for our migrant workers, refugees, climate change, animal welfare and – no, I did not forget – secondhand smoke, cats in HDB flats and childcare leave. I will continue to speak up because our lives begin to end the day we become silent about issues that matter. Sir, I will continue to actively speak up on issues that we do not usually actively debate in this House. I support the Motion of Thanks to the President.”
“She brought with her a letter from her baby's doctor stating: "As she – the baby – is currently staying in a shelter, she is frequently in contact with other residents who are unwell and hence predisposed to recurrent infection. As such, it will be greatly appreciated if her application for the HDB rental flat can be expedited." Ema told me that she was not asking for sympathy and was simply looking for a roof over her head and her baby's head. I appealed to the Housing and Development Board (HDB) to allow her to rent a flat and I am glad the appeal was successful. HDB replied that: "We are pleased to inform you that we have obtained special approval for you to rent a 1-room flat with your daughter on compassionate grounds." Since I shared her story, Ema has been living in a rental flat with her daughter who has grown to be a happy, bubbly and, most importantly, healthy child. I raised that we are stigmatising single unweds and their children when we tell them that they can only get a roof over their heads through special approvals on compassionate grounds. I am glad that HDB has since updated its website to make clear that single unwed parents can approach HDB for assistance with their rental housing applications. Just last month, a HDB officer told me how HDB is actually not the Housing and Development Board but actually the “好心” Board or, translated into English, the "Good-Hearted Board". Indeed, they are. I have seen HDB officers with big hearts, like Bee Lan and Jeffrey from the HDB Yishun Branch, and Zing, who heads HDB's Rental Housing Department. I have seen how we can make changes to our policies in the spirit of inclusiveness.”
“In my Adjournment Motion for breastfeeding mothers, I described the shame and discrimination they face at work. The stories are heartbreaking. These mothers are only trying to feed their children, but they are shamed and discriminated against by their co-workers. The difficulties breastfeeding mothers face continues. A nurse who had recently returned to work after her maternity leave shared with me last week that her managers asked her three times on separate occasions to pump in the toilet. When she mentioned that it is not hygienic or sanitary, she was shocked to have them reply saying that other mothers have been pumping in the toilet "all these while". She was appalled by the lack of empathy, understanding and even the sense of basic hygiene. We should provide more help and support. We should ensure that the proposed workplace discrimination law will cover the discrimination breastfeeding mothers face at work. My second suggestion is for single unwed parents and that we do a whole-of-Government review to ensure our policies are inclusive for single unwed parents. President Halimah spoke about how "no one should feel left behind". As we work hard to ensure that we strengthen protections against workplace discrimination, the Government should take the lead and ensure that our own policies do not result in any discrimination and that single unwed parents do not feel left behind. For single unwed parents, we know our policies do discriminate and we really should change. After many decades of discrimination in our housing policies against single unwed parents, I am glad they now have fair access to public housing. In 2019, I shared the story of Ema, a single unwed mother. Ema came to see me to appeal for a rental flat.”
“While we don't have to be as generous as European countries, really seven is embarrassing for a developed country that seeks to allow for its citizens to find some semblance of balance outside of work, for a more sustainable workforce if we need to be pragmatic." I do understand that we need to balance this carefully against what businesses can sustain. But we have an overworked workforce and we need to sustain our workforce too. Our people will always work hard to top global rankings in all industries. But let us make sure we do not top the ranking of the being most overworked city in the world. They need more annual leave. Finally, Sir, I hope that we can continue building the heartware of this nation by being more inclusive. As President Halimah said, "We want every person to be treated equally with dignity and respect." And "we want to reaffirm the core values that we hold dear as Singaporeans – fairness and inclusivity." As we work hard to ensure a less stressful environment for workers, we also need to make it less stressful for women, for breastfeeding mothers and single unwed parents. I repeat my calls to make sure our policies are inclusive for them. In my speech on the Motion of thanks to the President in 2020, I called for more inclusive workplaces for women. I am glad we are making good progress on this by having workplace discrimination laws. This will send a strong signal. I have two further suggestions on how we should further tackle discrimination and be more inclusive. My first suggestion is for breastfeeding mothers and that we ensure the proposed workplace discrimination law will also cover the discrimination breastfeeding mothers face at work.”
“We repealed the work from home legislation and plan to only introduce guidelines on flexible work arrangements (FWAs). We are taking steps backwards. Why? Guidelines send a weak signal. Furthermore, it is strange that the penalty under the guidelines for not providing FWAs would be to curtail a company's Work Pass privileges. If you do not give your employees FWAs, you cannot hire foreigners. How does that make sense? I am not asking that we make work from home compulsory. My first suggestion is that we legislate the right to work from home and give people the choice. Employers can still require employees to be in the office for specific business-related reasons. This will truly help in the work-life harmony we are all fighting for. We know through many surveys that people want this right. We should listen to the calls and provide this to help reduce the stress and fatigue in our workforce. Next, we should also give our people more time to rest. We should increase the minimum amount of annual leave. The current minimum of only seven days of annual leave is extremely low. I have spoken up about this many times in this House. How many of us sitting here would want only seven days of annual leave? Many other countries in this region provide a higher minimum number of annual leave including Malaysia, Bangladesh, Japan, Myanmar, East Timor, Sri Lanka, Laos, Mongolia, South Korea, Qatar, Yemen, Iran, Kuwait and Indonesia and many more. Many of these countries not only have more days of annual leave, they also have a higher number of paid public holidays. Last week, one netizen shared with me: "I'm honestly shocked that seven days is the minimum annual leave we have. I have 15 days from an MNC and that's the least I've ever had.”
“We were told that we could not legislate this. That there would be unintended consequences. It took a pandemic to show that work from home is possible. When COVID-19 hit, we legislated and made work from home compulsory for most. We aggressively shared how work from home benefits everyone – employers, employees and the whole of Singapore. It benefited our transport system, healthcare system and even addressed gender equality. The right to work from home benefited so many people, including one mother who messaged me last week saying: "Flexibility to work from home has been so crucial in terms of being able to send my daughter to school, given that I commute from Canberra to Jurong Island and don't own a car like many Singaporeans. Also, work from home allows me to work out during lunch hour without sacrificing time with my child and elderly parents. Without this, I would definitely be neglecting my health in favour of family time and chores. I genuinely believe work from home enables a happier society and will facilitate Singapore's move towards being the sort of family-oriented, health-conscious society we want to be. It is especially crucial given the ageing population we expect, and the increasing burden on the working generation. It is not just about having time to support children and elderly parents for appointments or events but having time to form foundational emotional bonds to build strong families across generations". That really sums up the importance of the right to work from home and I could not have said it better. We made great progress during the pandemic when it came to working from home. We could have ridden this momentum. But somehow, we did not.”
“In my Budget speeches in the past three years, I have spoken up for teachers, social workers and most recently, nurses. They build the heartware of this nation by helping others. But they need time to help themselves too. I spoke up about how we can provide more support to them so that they can help others better. I will continue speaking up for them. But not only do our teachers, social workers and nurses need more time. Many others in Singapore are overworked too. They, too, need more time. Surveys after surveys show that we are one of the most overworked cities in the world, one of the most fatigued countries, one of the most stressful cities, and one of the worst when it comes to work-life balance. I do believe it is time for us to seriously rethink our policies when it comes to work-life balance; time for a reset. I have two suggestions to make. First, I repeat my calls to legislate the right to work from home. Second, I repeat my calls to increase the minimum amount of annual leave entitlement. I know I sound like a broken record again but these are important things that will help countless people. President Halimah spoke about wanting a society that values and supports families. Let us give people the time to spend with their loved ones for a start. Let me start with my repeated calls to legislate the right to work from home. I recognise that the Government is looking into work-life harmony and balance. I know we have the Tripartite Standards on Work-Life Harmony and we will soon have the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangements. These are undoubtedly good steps forward. But they are far from enough. Before COVID-19, many of us in this House fought hard for legislating the right to flexible work arrangements.”
“Sir, in the past eight years, I have tried to speak up for the marginalised, the unheard and the voiceless. But as the saying goes, "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen". And so, in the past eight years, I have also listened. I have listened to painful stories of injustice, discrimination, stigma and hurt. I have shared these stories in this House because we should not be a nation focused only on hardware. As important is the software and the heartware that I spoke about in my maiden speech in this House. Those are the things that make, as President Halimah said in her speech, a Singapore "where we care for and help one another, and pitch in to make a difference to our community". In the past eight years, I have also seen so much positive change. I have seen how the impossible can be made possible when the Government and civil society work hand in hand. "Nothing is impossible, miracles take time". That was what was drilled into me during my NSF days and indeed, nothing is impossible if we do not give up and if we persist. Senior Minister of State Amy Khor recently commended me for my persistence and so I shall persist. In this second session of the 14th Parliament, I will continue to speak up from my heart about issues that matter. I will continue to speak up for a more equal and just society where heartware matters. I will also continue to speak up for giving our people the most valuable thing of all – time. Every Budget, this House debates how our Government should spend its money to support Singaporeans. Every Budget, I have stressed that we cannot just give money; we also need to give time.”
“I am glad that we are doing more to tackle food waste and I am glad to share that the Good Samaritans Committee is making good progress in drafting the Good Samaritans Food Donation Bill. This proposed law will help allay concerns about liability issues from the donation of food. It will help reduce food waste further and also provide food for the hungry. We are doing further consultations with stakeholders and I hope to introduce this Bill in Parliament through a Private Member's Bill soon. Sir, notwithstanding my clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Can the Senior Minister of State clarify if registered retailers must charge for carrier bags if customers only come to the store to pick up purchases that were made online? How will the charge be determined during check-out online? Also, will the Senior Minister of State consider implementing the disposable bag charge for online deliveries? Grocery deliveries, in particular, are notorious for being packed in layers upon layers of disposable bags. Online grocers are eroding the market share of brick-and-mortar supermarkets and we should be looking at seriously reducing the waste they generate as well. My third point is on the beverage container return scheme. Under the scheme, customers have to pay a small deposit for certain pre-packaged drinks, which will be refunded when they return the container for recycling. This will encourage consumers to return beverage containers and increase their recycling rate. However, this may erode the income of those who collect cans for a living. These individuals are often low-income and elderly. Can the Senior Minister of State share if we have studied how the scheme will impact their livelihoods? If so, what additional support will be extended to them? My fourth and final point relates to the new requirement for building managers to report on food waste being segregated and treated. While treatment of food waste is a good way to reduce the impact of excess food, it would be even better if we can donate excess food instead. To encourage building managers to increase their efforts in implementing food donation programmes, will the Senior Minister of State consider requiring the reports to also include data on the amount of food donated?”
“Sir, this Bill creates the law that we need to impose a charge on disposable carrier bags, establish a beverage container return scheme and require building managers to segregate and report on food waste. I have been speaking up for a charge on single-use carrier bags since 2016. I am glad we are finally debating this Bill in this House today. I support this Bill, as all the initiatives will encourage greener habits, reduce waste and extend the lifespan of our landfill at Pulau Semakau. I have four points of clarification. My first point is a point that I have been stressing repeatedly. It is on the expansion of the disposable carrier bag charge to more, if not all, retail businesses. We currently only apply the charge to large supermarkets because they have the resources to implement it. I know we want to start small and slow and give time for the industry to adapt. But if we want to change mindsets and slash the use of single-use bags, we need to eventually expand the charge to all retail businesses. Can the Senior Minister of State to at least provide a five-year roadmap for the expansion of the disposable bag charge? A longer-term roadmap gives businesses time to adapt their business models and change their systems. With enough notice, some businesses may even pre-empt the rules and impose their own bag charge before the regulations come into force. My second point is on applying the charge to online purchases. Increasingly common are "click and collect" purchases, where customers shop online and collect their products at a physical store. Since products are bought in advance, customers can make plans to bring their own reusable bags to collect their purchases.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. Can I just confirm, one, that MOH is able to close preschools, I believe for up to 10 days, to be able to break the chain of infections of HFMD? And two, what support the Ministry will provide to parents during these closures who have no alternative childcare arrangements?”
“Thank you, Sir. In my Adjournment Motion about a year ago, I had raised this as a recommendation for MOT to work with the hospitals to increase access and use of infant car seats. I believe the Senior Parliamentary Secretary replied in his speech that this is a new idea that he would share with relevant agencies and stakeholders. So, could I ask whether this recommendation has been shared the relevant stakeholders and the relevant agencies as well? And two, whether the recommendations I proposed have been looked into, which included, I believe, for the hospitals to include in their prenatal class the use of infant car seats, the provision of infant car seats to parents who, upon discharge, do not have one, even adding it in the bill. I believe the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said all these will be looked into.”
“The individual is also presumed to not believe that the psychoactive substance is an excluded substance. Furthermore, the presumptions are not rebutted by proof that the accused never had physical possession of the psychoactive substance. Such stacked presumptions are not new under the MDA. However, they are still concerning because they challenge the traditional position that the prosecution must prove every element of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. Stacked presumptions may be even more concerning when applied to NPS, which covers non-exhaustive categories of substances. Can the Minister of State clarify, what would be required to rebut stacked presumptions? My third and final point, is on the enforcement of our drug laws through drug raids. I am glad that we have strong drug laws and that these laws are enforced robustly. However, innocent children may be implicated when their parents are caught up in drug raids. These drug raids can be traumatising for the children. Will the Ministry work with the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and the relevant social service agencies, before and after a drug raid, to ensure that the children in these situations are cared for appropriately? The next generation should not be punished or traumatised because of the wrongs of the previous generation. Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.”