Murali Pillai
Singapore
“Sir, my response will also cover matters raised in the related oral questions, as well as written questions, all filed by the hon Member, Ms Sylvia Lim1, 2, for a subsequent Sitting. The hon Member may wish to withdraw her Parliamentary Questions (PQs) if her queries are answered in today's Sitting.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to respond to the hon Member Ms Poh's third question on jet fuel. We are working with the aviation stakeholders to monitor the fuel supply for aviation hubs carefully to ensure that it remains stable.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in response to the hon Member Dennis Tan's question on maritime hub, I just want to say that for the now, for the current, port operations have been stable. There are no significant fuel supply shortages, and we have adequate fuel and bunker supply.”
“Sir, I would like to answer the hon Member Shawn Loh's question on the status of the aviation hub. There have been some flight disruptions. Apart from the disruptions, most of Changi Airport's flights have been operating normally. The disruptions have been limited to some Singapore-Middle East passenger and cargo services.”
“Sir, I would like to thank the hon Member Mr Chia for his kind words about the efforts we have made thus far to attract young talent. On the specific issue about the GRIT programme, that involves traineeship, the good thing about the maritime sector is that we have jobs available.”
“It was John Harrison's invention of the chronometer, highly accurate even at sea, that allowed longitudes to be plotted and journeys to be precise enough to chase a nimble whale. Likewise, Singapore must remain alive to the transformational power of new technologies, to master new tasks and chart new journeys through untested waters.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,219 lines we hold for Murali Pillai, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 17 of 25.
“This is manifested in the way the Government conducted itself through the crisis, taking its duties with utmost seriousness, being completely honest, forthright and transparent and unafraid to explain the tough measures needed to save our people's lives and livelihoods. Inevitably, there will be charlatans making false and spurious allegations and suggestions as to how they would handle such issues with knowledge gained from hindsight. Their purpose is to drive a wedge between the Government and our people and erode the trust between them. Such acts should be robustly rejected by fellow Singaporeans. Deputy Prime Minister Heng predicted that we would ride through the storm and emerge even stronger. I have no doubt that he is correct, so long as we all remain united. I support both Budgets.”
“In a situation that affects the entire world like a pandemic, the world must get its act together before we, however resilient we may be, because we are very open nation, can return to normalcy. Mr Henry Kwek shared his musings on the global dynamics. Ordinarily, this would be hard for small nations like Singapore to influence. But we saw Singapore contribute to these efforts. Prime Minister Lee and Minister for Foreign Affairs Dr Vivian Balakrishnan gave important interviews that resonated worldwide. In a memorable quote, the Prime Minister said and I quote, "Under the best of circumstances, it is going to be a very difficult challenge for mankind, but the United States and Chinese are swapping insults and blaming one another for inventing the virus and letting it loose on the world. I do not think that it is going to help us solve the problem sooner." It is both in our national interest as well as the world's, for these two giants to work together. Singapore uniquely was able to make this call. It is a true friend of both countries. I respectfully suggest that the words of Prime Minister Lee and Minister Vivian resonated better because of our exceptional people. The vast majority of fellow Singaporeans including hon Members in Opposition fully back the Government in its plans. The fact that we back our Government has nothing to do with us being a paternalistic society; a label that foreign media has used. That assertion is an insult to right-thinking Singaporeans. In fact, it is illogical because in almost a next breath, there is an acknowledgement that the plans we put in place here are good ones. The backing of our people is because of the trust carefully developed over the decades. Deputy Prime Minister Heng spoke about it earlier today.”
“This may require a revisiting of the setting aside of 1% of our land for agriculture. I support that. What is equally important is to ingrain in our people the trade-offs involved. Our people must support local agricultural companies, which must provide good value propositions; and at the same time, our people must accept that there will be higher costs associated with this. So, this is an opportunity for our Government, particularly MEWR, to gain the support of people not just to achieve but exceed the 30 by 30 vision. Moving on to the Solidarity Budget, I have one point to make. This is in relation to the enhancing of Temporary Bridging Loans for SMEs. I am glad to hear the Deputy Prime Minister announce plans to strengthen this aspect. Hitherto, there was some level of scepticism from some businesses on this issue. One businessmen shared with me the potential effect that he feared once the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Bill is passed. He said that he is a landlord and he services a mortgage through the rent from the tenant. Now, if he is not allowed to collect rent, then he would have to take out a bridging loan. According to him, the current interest is about 3.5% per annum. In the end, he fears that he, as a landlord, would take a hit, the tenants will obviously be in a difficult position as well. But the bank ultimately may not, with the 3.5%, over and above what he has to pay under the secured loan. I welcome Deputy Prime Minister's comments on how the enhancing of the Temporary Bridging Loan would have the impact of lowering the costs for businessmen like him. In conclusion, I wish to highlight one aspect of the Government's response to the outbreak in the international arena.”
“In relation to the first point, I learnt anecdotally from my residents that when Malaysia issued the Movement Control Order (MCO) last month, this created a shortage of lift maintenance technicians and prime mover drivers at the ports. This is because a significant number of them are Malaysians. These are important jobs to ensure that Singapore keeps ticking. It may be good to review this and other critical jobs to see whether the Dependency Ratio Ceilings for the relevant sectors need to be adjusted to strengthen the Singaporean Core in these jobs. Second, Deputy Prime Minister specifically highlighted locally, the food resilience point in his Budget as an area to strengthen. I completely agree. As we all know, 90% of our food is imported. There were at least two separate occasions during the COVID-19 outbreak when supermarkets were inundated with residents wanting to buy essential food items for fear that they will dry up. We need to address this issue once and for all. If Singaporeans are assured we have sufficient food through what is grown within our stockpile and outside resources, hopefully, we will be able to avoid runs on supermarkets in the future. The well-known 30 by 30 vision is already a stretch target as our current production level is only 10%. However, I suggest we need to aim even higher over a long-term period. I do not have sufficient information to suggest a target but I can already see potential for entrepreneurism and harnessing of technology in this arena. The hon Member Mr Ang Wei Neng made the same point. Also, there appears to be more and more natural and man-made calamities affecting global food supply chains nowadays, even putting aside COVID-19 event for the moment. Should our target be revised?”
“" I heard another example in Mr Vikram Nair's speech just now about a shopkeeper in his constituency, distributing essential food items to needy families. We have here an opportunity to mobilise even more fellow Singaporeans to join the clarion call sounded by our President to work together as one people and support one another in this journey. Next, I have a point on resilience. In his Ministerial Statement delivered on 26 March 2020, Deputy Prime Minister Heng stated as follows: "While we attend to the immediate and urgent tasks, we will set outsides on the long term so that Singapore comes out of this crisis stronger as a nation." I applaud Deputy Prime Minister Heng and the Government for bringing focus to the need to build resilience to face the next challenge. This was done after the SARS outbreak. Almost a generation ago, we started building up our capability in R&D. As a result, as Deputy Prime Minister mentioned, our country developed COVID-19 test kits quickly and the kits were sent to other countries. This is a source of huge pride for fellow Singaporeans that our little red dot is helping in a big way the global effort to contain the pandemic. Equally, we need to plant seeds of resilience now so that we, when the next crisis comes, which is in words of President Halimah, "inevitable", the next generation of Singaporeans can benefit from these long-term measures and deal effectively with – in the words of Deputy Prime Minister – the next generational crisis. In this regard, I offer two suggestions. One, strengthening the Singapore Core in important operational jobs and two, engaging Singaporeans on the importance of food security.”
“3 billion. I think the correct approach would be for us to deal with the root issue and scale up our efforts to reach out to the "haves" in our society – the grant-makers and donors – and get them to donate more to plug the gap. Deputy Prime Minister Heng mentioned in both his Ministerial Statements that individuals, the private sector and corporations have stepped forward. He suggested donations to be made to, inter alia, the Giving.sg platform. I am heartened to note this. In the same vein, we should consider how to better match needs of smaller-scale VWOs with the interests and contributions from potential donors. Yesterday, I learned from a CEO of an SME that EnterpriseSG officers called him to check whether his employees who had to stand down owing to the contracting business, may be deployed in other companies that are less affected by the COVID-19 outbreak. We could adopt a similar approach and get a Government agency to help match VWOs with pressing needs with grant-makers or donors. I wish to share the content of a resident's email that was sent to me over the weekend. His name is Mr Ang. He said and I quote, "Do you think we, Singaporeans, will be able to help by volunteering and donating part of our CPF monies to aid the Government and Singaporeans in this COVID-19 situation?" He wanted to donate part of his CPF monies! He is heartlander who wishes to be counted in helping the less fortunate during this crisis. When I read his email, it reminded me of what our President Mdm Halimah stated in her address that was read out in Parliament in 26 March 2020. She said and I quote, "In these worst of times, I am heartened to see the best of Singaporeans.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I support both the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets. I have three points to make on the Resilience Budget. First, sufficiency of the Budget to fight and contain the COVID-19 outbreak. Under the Unity Budget, we put aside about $800 million to support frontline agencies to fight and contain the outbreak. The bulk of this amount was earmarked for MOH. Since then, more costs have been incurred. The number of infected persons have gone up; the number of persons under quarantine and Stay-Home Notices (SHNs) are higher; contact tracing is vastly expanded; the costs of quarantining persons have gone up with the usage of hotels and other accommodation; equipment costs have also gone up. My question is: have we put aside sufficient money to back our frontline agencies? They – I am sure all Members of the House would agree – need our full support and should be as fully resourced as possible. The next point is on helping the charity sector. This is a point that was alluded to by the hon Member of Parliament Mr Saktiandi Supaat just now. Since the COVID-19 outbreak, it has been tough-going for charitable organisations including the mid-level and smaller Institutions of Public Character (IPCs). I personally spoke to CEOs of two VWOS which are IPCs supporting children from displaced families as well as the aged sick respectively. They mentioned that donations have dropped significantly. This is to be expected with the rapid contraction of our economy. The VWOs, I am told, may be forced to dip into their reserves which are not as deep. I respectfully disagree, however, with the hon Member Mr Saktiandi that more support should be given by the Government for these charities. Already, we heard from the hon Deputy Prime Minister that we are in a deficit of $44.”
“The concerns I have raised are in some areas quite substantive, particularly on the section 10 powers of the Director-General to issue directions on development works, and on sections 11B and 12C powers of seizure and forfeiture of conveyances. I look forward to Mr Ng's clarifications. But, with respect, I am not sure they can all be addressed without altering the legislation. My preference is that we should send the Bill to a Select Committee rather than pass it immediately. However, I remain open to hearing Mr Ng and the Ministry's replies to my concerns. 5.22 pm”
“Does Mr Ng think that this is sufficient protection against an unreasonable direction and what principles determine whether an excuse is or is not reasonable? Sir, in other countries, private suits against development works have been brought using similar wildlife protection laws and these suits have even halted Government development works in those countries. I do not know if the amended Act is capable of being used as such. But, to me, this seems a bit too important to leave to judicial interpretation alone. Let me also ask the Ministry how, in practice, the Director-General will exercise section 10 powers. Does the Director-General have a staff that is capable of conducting environmental cost-benefit analysis? If not, will that staff be created and trained to exercise these powers? How will the Director-General engage stakeholders, such as environmental interest groups as well as developers, to ensure that any directions issued respect both environmental concerns and development matters? Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the intent behind the Bill. However, we must ensure that the public agrees this Bill's measures, when enforced, are fair, reasonable and proportionate. We must also acknowledge that with limited resources, we have to balance protecting wildlife and the eco-system with human development. It is very fashionable to say that we can have both, but that is actually a fantasy unless we can change how we define human development to mean that we should reduce our footprint and our impact on the natural world. That could mean halting or reversing our population and consumption growth. I do not think we have a consensus on that yet as a society.”
“So, I believe that providers of small-scale passenger or cargo services are actually in need of statutory protection from seizure or forfeiture under this Bill. To me, it is actually somewhat odd that protection is to be given to the large vehicles, which I do not think would be in our public interest to seize, but not to the smaller vehicles at all. Next, the proposed section 10 of the Act will grant the Director-General power to issue directions to require development works to implement measures to safeguard wildlife, public safety or the eco-system. Sir, my first concern here is on whether section 10 applies to the Government or grants any private rights of action. Government development projects, such as the Cross-Island Line, could significantly affect the eco-system and wildlife if measures are not taken. Does Mr Ng think that section 10 grants private parties the right to sue the Government to issue directions on development works, whether carried out by other private parties or by the Government itself? Second, I am concerned there is no proportionality in section 10. There is no requirement in the Bill that the Director-General consider the actual costs of remediation, the likely benefits to the eco-system and wildlife, and the relative social and ecological value of the wildlife. Should we actually put in the same effort to protect common pigeons as we do pangolins? So, I wish to ask Mr Ng why there is no proportionality clause and on what principles he thinks the Director-General should proceed in issuing directions under the Act. Section 10(4) does allow a person to refuse to comply with a Direction if they have a reasonable excuse.”
“For the Ministry, I wish to ask what we have learnt from existing enforcement efforts on wildlife released in nature reserves and how this will be extended to wildlife released in other areas after this Bill is passed. Next, the proposed sections 11B and 12C grant powers of seizure and forfeiture over articles and conveyances connected to offences under the Act. These powers are not strongly limited. Only very large vehicles are exempt from forfeiture, as Mr Ng pointed out. What I am concerned about is that this puts operators of vehicles for hire at risk of having their livelihood seized. For example, a private boat operator who transports wildlife for unauthorised release in the sea could face a risk of having his boat seized and forfeited. I wish to ask Mr Ng how he thinks these powers should be limited for the seizure of conveyances. The seizure of vehicles involved in smuggling – I think that is a widely accepted principle. But does Mr Ng intend that if someone were to drive their car to feed or release wildlife, should their car be seizeable under the Act? In addition, how should vehicles hired out for passengers or cargo be treated? In particular, would Mr Ng agree that passenger or cargo hire vehicles should not be seizeable or forfeitable unless the owner or operator was reckless or abetted offences under the Act? If he agrees on this, then does he think that the Bill, as currently written, really limits the powers of seizure and forfeiture sufficiently? I know Mr Ng has noted that owners of vehicles are not at risk if the offences were committed without their consent. But the question is: what is the burden of proof here? It may be impractical for many vehicle owners to thoroughly investigate the intention of their hirers.”
“I will direct questions on the principles behind the Bill to Mr Louis Ng, and questions on policy implementation to the Ministry. I will start with the feeding and release of wildlife. The proposed section 5A addresses feeding wildlife. Today, I think the public is generally aware that feeding wildlife threatens the eco-system. It also poses a risk to public health and safety if wildlife is encouraged to interact with humans through feeding. The question is whether the penalties in the Bill and the enforcement framework are proportionate. The maximum fine is $5,000 for the first offence. Could Mr Louis Ng explain his thinking about whether the offence should be compoundable and what he thinks should guide sentencing if a case happens to be prosecuted in Court? In what circumstances does Mr Louis Ng think the Director-General should grant written approval for feeding wildlife? For the Ministry, I wish to ask to what extent feeding wildlife will be regulated in practice. Will issuing summons for feeding wildlife be part of regular enforcement activity, or is it more a measure of last resort against people who cannot be convinced to stop feeding wildlife? Next, the proposed section 5B governs the release of wildlife. This is a sensitive issue because some people release wildlife as part of celebrations or religious practices. Mr Ng has shared his many discussions with religious groups on this matter. The potential harm that such releases cause also depends on what wildlife people are releasing and where they do it. Could Mr Ng share his thinking on how we can use this Bill to sensitively address this issue of wildlife release in religious practices? There may yet be other groups out there whom he has not been able to reach out to yet.”
“So, this may not be consonant with the aims of this Bill. I note that under the proposed section 5(1) of the amendment Bill, the Director-General will have powers to give written approval generally to a class of persons. May I please ask if the Director-General will consider issuing general written approval to such classes of persons intervening to help wildlife so that they do not run the risk of committing offences? And, if so, what would be the conditions? Notwithstanding my comments, I support the Bill. 5.13 pm Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I want to commend Mr Louis Ng for moving this Bill. He spent the last two years working with the Wild Animal Legislation Review Committee on the Bill. The Bill is actually highly relevant to the current COVID-19 crisis because novel coronaviruses are known to be endemic to many wildlife populations. We know there are real risks of disease transmission between wildlife and humans. So, maintaining the right balance between wildlife and human activity is not only good for the environment, it is also good for ourselves. I have two broad concerns about the Bill. The first concerns the practices that harm wildlife or the eco-system, such as the feeding and release of wildlife and trafficking. For this, my questions are on whether the penalties proposed in the Bill are appropriate and how will enforcement be carried out. The second concerns the Bill's granting of powers to the Director-General to direct development or works to implement measures to safeguard wildlife. My questions are on how we can achieve the right balance between the protection of wildlife and eco-systems and the need to develop land and natural resources for the benefit of society.”
“I note from the amendment Bill, as currently worded, that the feeding and releasing of wildlife is punishable by sentences or fine. I do appreciate, as Mr Louis Ng mentioned, that the proposed fine quantums are higher. Under the Criminal Procedure Code, community-based sentencing orders, such as Mandatory Treatment Orders (MTOs), may not be made in respect of fine-only offences. There is a carve-out for Community Work Orders (CWOs) though. This may be a good sentencing option in some cases, particularly for those who caused disamenities, such as making public places dirty. Some feeders may have underlying psychiatric conditions. Unfortunately, it does not appear that they can be imposed with MTOs such that the underlying causes of the offending behaviour may be treated so as to reduce the risk of them re-offending. I will be grateful for clarification on the sentencing policies for such offenders. Lastly, acts of kindness. I support the criminalisation of feeding and releasing of wildlife. Mr Louis Ng again eloquently explained the raison d'etre for this. There are occasions, however, where a person's feeding or releasing of wildlife is an act of kindness. Take the case of a person who comes across a wounded eagle which crashed into a glass door. The person, out of concern for the eagle, may feed it and then release it thereafter. This is a real life example. Such acts would not change wildlife behaviour, nor would it cause disamenities or ecological degradation. That is the mischief that Mr Louis Ng highlighted in relation to criminalising acts of feeding and releasing wildlife. But, technically, these persons may have committed such offences, granted the prosecution may exercise discretion not to prosecute. But such people may eventually not take a risk of offending.”
“I join the hon Member Mr Christopher de Souza in congratulating the hon Member for Nee Soon, Mr Louis Ng, for leading the efforts to review the Wild Animals and Birds Act and moving this amendment Bill. Mr Louis Ng highlighted a 14-year journey in his speech delivered in his characteristic passionate style. I applaud the fact that he and his members of the Wild Animals Legislation Review Committee had conducted extensive consultation over two years before tabling this Bill. This is a phenomenal ground-up initiative. I support the Bill in principle and would like to raise three points for clarification. The first point is on a possible overlap between the Animals and Birds Act and the amendment Bill. Under Rules 10 and 17 of the Animals and Birds (Pigeons) Rules enacted under the Animals and Birds Act, it is an offence to feed stray pigeons. The punishment upon conviction is a fine not exceeding $500. The proposed section 3(1)(a) in this Bill preserves the operation of the Animals and Birds Act. "Pigeons", it appears, may satisfy the definition of "wildlife", too, under this amendment Bill, in which case, the feeding of pigeons will be an offence under the proposed section 5A in this Bill. The punishment is a fine not exceeding $5,000 for a first offender and $10,000 for a subsequent offender. If my understanding is correct, may I please ask: what are the circumstances in which the different provisions would be invoked? I can see the attraction of using the powers under this amendment Bill because there would be no need to distinguish between the birds which will satisfy the definition of "wildlife" and there will be less enforcement issues on the ground as well. Second, the possibility of imposing community-based sentencing.”
“Obliged. Sir, this is the Criminal Procedure Code in 1900, about 120 years ago, where the stipulation of 50 years is stated at section 278. The life expectancy of persons then, you would see, Sir, was about 48.5 years, in around 1900. So, quite clearly, if I could say it, age 50 then would have been age about 80-plus now. Finally, Sir, the Criminal Procedure Code in Malaysia; you could see that under section 289(C), males, even though they are above 50 years, but if they are convicted of serious sexual crimes, then they can be whipped, so long as they are medically fit. So, my question to the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary is, is there still a basis to maintain age of 50 as a differentiating measure?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary for her answer. I have a supplementary question, but before that, on a point of elucidation, the focus of my question is whether using the age of 50 is a rational and reasonable differentiating measure to distinguish between those who will be visited with a minimum mandatory caning sentence for committing serious sexual offences on one hand, and those who have committed such offences but escape it because they are above 50. With your leave, Sir, may I be allowed to use the screen on a point of information?”
“For instance, Jamie, who was experiencing psychological violence from her family, approached an area-based counselling service for anger management issues. The counsellor did not directly address Jamie's anger management problem, but instead, offered to address the, I quote, "gay problem", thereby framing being gay as the cause of Jamie's distress. The possibility of being misunderstood or discriminated against by social workers deters many LGBTQ+ persons from seeking help. Could the next Break the Silence campaign be made more inclusive, by explicitly recognising the vulnerabilities of LGBTQ+ persons and other marginalised groups? Could the Ministry provide in-depth sensitivity training for social workers and other first responders to address the specific needs of these marginalised groups? Digital Rights for Children”
“Based on this definition, there is no ability to require a rough sleeper who has a residence to take shelter in welfare homes for the sake of his health and welfare under the Destitute Persons Act. I believe there is a case to remove the residency requirement. With the rough sleeper brought into institutionalised care, I would think there will consequently be a better opportunity to resolve the underlying issues that gave rise to him not returning to his residence. I wish to stress though that any exercise of power under the Act must be done with the health and welfare of the rough sleeper in mind. An Inclusive Break the Silence Campaign Assoc Prof Walter Theseira: Chairman, the "Break the Silence" campaign which you launched when you were Minister has brought crucial awareness to domestic violence issues. While many domestic violence cases fall within traditional family contexts, vulnerable groups, such as LGBTQ+ persons, face specific challenges. The NGO Sayoni found that LBTQ women are at increased risk of facing domestic violence, but they do not often seek help, due to the fear of disclosing their stigmatised identity and a lack of understanding that state institutions will protect them. Initiatives like "Break the Silence" often do not explicitly include LGBTQ+ persons in the campaign resources. If vulnerable groups are not represented or acknowledged, they are less likely to seek help as they may not believe their specific needs will be addressed. In 2016, The Straits Times reported that social workers "feel ill-equipped to deal with LGBT clients". Sayoni's research found LBTQ persons face additional challenges in seeking help because social workers may lack a sensitive understanding of their identities.”
“Sir, the reasons why people may sleep in public places instead of their homes are manifold and be complex. I quote the hon Member of Parliament, Dr Lily Neo on a speech during the COS debates in 2018. She said, "Many of them may have a variety of problems, such as family feuds, HDB housing issues, mental issues, employment and financial issues". In response, the hon Minister for Social and Family Development, Mr Desmond Lee stated, "We need a more coordinated, whole-of-society approach to address the underlying issues and needs of these individuals. MSF works closely with other frontline agencies and the community to reach out and coordinate the help that they need." This approach makes eminent sense. Currently, however, the issue still persists. In the LKY School of Public Policy report published in November 2019, it was revealed that there are about 1,000 rough sleepers on the streets of Singapore. The report also identified that a good number of rough sleepers have residences but decided not to stay at home for one reason or another. I recently came across one such case. I tried to persuade the rough sleeper, who refused to go back home owing to a combination of family and mental health issues, to go to a shelter instead. However, he refused. Over time, he became more and more frail. This was obviously concerning. Now he is missing and that is doubly concerning. I would like to suggest that MSF be given more legislative support to enable it to intervene and help these rough sleepers to ensure their well-being. As currently worded, a "destitute person" under the Destitute Persons Act is defined as, inter alia, "any idle person found in a public place, who has no place of residence".”
“This is because treatment for such cases is focused on containing the situation, not to cure the patients. So, if they are not receiving treatment, one can reasonably expect these patients to be in trouble. Alternative Medicine Practitioner”
“The father was, unfortunately, dead set against sending his son to IMH because of some unrelated incident that happened in the past. In the meantime, the poor neighbours continue to put up with the disturbance which happens in the wee hours of the night. Without the parents’ consent, there was no way even for the IMH Crisis Team to attend at the scene to intervene to help the boy. In addition, because the boy's actions were not deemed to be a danger to himself or others, he cannot be arrested under the Mental Capacities Act and brought to IMH, too. The third challenge is ignorance on the part of care-givers. I recently met a couple at their home. Their daughter, now in her 20s, has been holed up in her bedroom for years. She simply refused to come out from her room since she was in Secondary 3. When I asked them why they decided not to ask for help earlier, they told me that they were worried that her daughter may end her life. Hence, they kept quiet. They were plainly anguished by their daughter's condition but simply did not know what to do for years. Not only that, they were undergoing serious stress themselves and would have suffered mental meltdown, if not for subsequent intervention. Sir, as can be seen from these cases, mental health cases are sometimes presented as social issues that have arisen in the community. Hence, it may be useful to consider engaging the representatives of organisations involved such as the grassroots organisation, Police, SSO, FSCs and so on in an integrated way so that a plan may be drawn up for each patient who has been identified as needing help. In particular, we should keep an eye and follow up on patients who are suffering from serious mental illnesses who have defaulted in their treatment.”
“Sir, it seems to me that there are still challenges on the ground in ensuring that people suffering from mental health issues get timely access to appropriate treatment. I wish to illustrate some of these challenges through three cases I dealt with in the recent past. 1.15 pm The first challenge is difficulty in detecting these cases. Recently, I met a lady who sought some assistance to repair a water pipe in her kitchen. I arranged for a community volunteer to visit her. When he attended at her home, he observed, to his shock, that the entire hall of her home was filled with rubbish by the lady, who appears to be suffering from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD). No one, even her immediate neighbour, knew of hoarding. Not only that, the lady was staying with her daughter who was later identified as suffering from depression. She used to receive from IMH but defaulted. Quite clearly, the lady and her daughter are unable to seek help on their own. If not for the chance meeting between the mother and I, this case would not have been detected. The second challenge we see on the ground is lack of cooperation on the part of care-givers, mostly because of lack of trust. A few months back, I received a complaint from a resident of noise disturbance from his neighbour. I asked my community volunteer to help mediate. The family residing at the unit in question consists of three persons: father, mother and their young son. My volunteer could immediately tell that the son was mentally unwell. He was not able to look at my volunteer in the eye. He was muttering to himself and pacing to and fro. The parents related that he has a habit of shouting and banging on the walls, too. My volunteer tried to convince the boy’s parents to admit him to IMH.”
“Sir, recently, I met a PE teacher from a school that participates in the UPLIFT programme. He shared that there were occasions where his students did not attend regular classes but would make the time to attend his soccer training sessions instead. Ordinarily, such students would have been barred from taking part in CCA, but what was done here was different and, in my view, "uplifting". The teacher used the contact time during the training sessions to develop deeper relations with the students and encourage them to improve their class attendance. This changed approach appears to have worked. Quite clearly, though, a lot of effort has to be put in to change the mindset of the students and, on some occasions, their parents too. May I please ask the hon Minister what are the main problems her colleagues face in the task of ensuring these students under the purview of UPLIFT reach their true potential? What strategies have she and her colleagues identified to overcome these problems? How can we motivate these students to stay the course and how can the rest of the society help? UPLIFT Programme”
“Finally, the courses should also be planned in a way that the teachers are not required to miss lessons. If that happens, the teacher will have to conduct a make-up lesson or get someone to cover him or her. This may not be ideal. Perhaps, an appropriate number of days should be set aside from the outset for professional development so that such time would be taken into account in the teacher’s schedule. This will also manifest a tangible investment in our teachers' professional development. SkillsFuture and Work Readiness”
“Sir, hon Members will agree that the positive education outcomes and results achieved by our children are in large part due to our corp of dedicated and high-quality teachers – past and present. To ensure that we continue to have these positive outcomes, it is imperative that we provide strong support to allow our teachers to deepen their skills and expertise as part of their professional development. Deputy Prime Minister Heng highlighted in his Budget Statement this year that with shorter technology cycles, skills acquired need to be constantly refreshed. This is applicable to teachers, too. Also, the recent policy shifts in our education system such as the "Learn for Life" initiative will also require our teachers to undergo some level of re-tooling. With respect to how professional development is conducted, I have received feedback from teachers that attending courses per se would not necessarily result in a positive classroom impact. This is backed by empirical studies on teacher development going back 30 years. They, instead, suggest that the teacher development courses be structured less formally and allow for more interaction, collaboration, reflection and feedback between teachers to refine their skills. The courses should also be tailored and differentiated in accordance with the experience of teachers, subject, ability of students and specific strengths of the teachers. It would also be good for a ground-up approach to be employed; allowing teacher leaders to find out what is required by his unit and then collaborate with and hold peer discussions on the areas identified. These leaders should also be able to reach out to resources for help outside their school, if necessary.”
“Sir, my Parliamentary colleagues, Mr Teo Ser Luck and Ms Foo Mee Har, had just highlighted Deputy Prime Minister Heng's "70-70" target in his Budget Statement as well as the Asia-Ready Exposure Programme. This comes on the heels of measures already announced this year and last year for enterprises to take advantage of business opportunities in fast growing Asia and, more specifically, ASEAN. To help our students take full advantage of these opportunities, I wonder if the Ministry is prepared to extend to students an opportunity to learn ASEAN languages. Currently, the MOE Language Centre provides Malay (Special Programme) and Indonesian languages as Third Languages. These options are only open to students ranked in the top 10% of their PSLE cohort. I would suggest that less rigorous spoken ASEAN language courses be extended to interested students, including students from IHLs. Such measures, I believe, will greatly facilitate the students' learning experience and enhance job opportunities for them in the ASEAN region. Digital and Information Literacy”
“— Singapore's humble economic circumstances in the 1960s and 1970s. The concern for us is how we can replicate their drive for lifelong learning in our children in these times when we are generally well-off. 6.15 pm Education System Initiatives”
“One memorable project he undertook was the installation of the cable car system from Mount Faber to Sentosa as a Project Manager. During the recession, engineering jobs dried up, he was made redundant, he joined the insurance industry. This was not his comfort zone but he was determined to give it his best shot. He then, through self-study, he became a Chartered Life Underwriter. However, engineering remained his first love, he went back. In mid-2000s, he pursued a Double Masters in Project Management and Risk Management. He retired in 2015. He still is attending courses and presentations at NTU. He is now focusing on upgrading his IT knowledge, learning Python and so on. The values and attitudes of Mr Chang and the people of his generation were shaped by Singapore's —”
“Sir, I seek an update from the hon Minister on Learn for Life initiatives following the important announcement made at last year's COS debates about the Full Subject-Based Banding in Secondary Schools. This comes in the wake of other initiatives such as the revamped PSLE scoring this year onwards and enlarging aptitude-based admissions into tertiary institutions. I had the opportunity to review the speech of Minister Ong Ye Kung made in 2018 when he held out elderly learners from our Pioneer and Merdeka Generations imbibed with the "lifelong learning" attitudes as great examples for our children to follow and build resilience in a fast changing global economy. One such example is Mr Albert Chang, aged 70 years. When he was 14 years old, he left Queenstown Secondary School to work and take care of his family consisting of six siblings, including himself. He joined the Naval Base, which was still managed by the British then, as an electrical engineering apprentice. After the British withdrawal, he became a weapons specialist with SEEL, one of the 2 companies that took over the base and which later merged with ST. Eager to upgrade himself, he attended night classes after work at the Lembaga which was set up in 1960 to promote adult education. He passed his "O" level exams through this route. With an in-house scholarship from SEEL, he went to Singapore Polytechnic to pursue a diploma in telecommunication engineering. On his own, he pursued a City & Guilds of London Institute course and was issued with a Full Technological Certificate in electrical engineering practice specialising in instruments in 1972. Thereafter, he was employed in several companies.”
“Also, the jobs above the current salary ceiling usually involve senior positions such as C-suite officers in multinational corporations (MNCs) or banks. These are high quality jobs which suitably qualified Singaporeans would be aspiring for. Second, without advertising, it will never be clear whether qualified Singaporeans are made aware of such job openings. Lastly, the quantum of the salary ceiling, which is applicable throughout the workforce, is not representative of the average salaries for senior jobs in certain industries such as finance and technology. Unfair Hiring Practices”
“Sir, the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF), implemented in 2014 and last updated in 2018, does not require a prospective employer intending to apply for an Employment Pass for a post that pays salary above the specified limit to advertise to Singaporeans beforehand in the National Jobs Bank. The specified limit was originally a salary of $12,000 per month. This was increased in 2018 to $15,000 per month. Notwithstanding the exemption, the Ministry of Manpower still requires all employers to consider Singaporeans fairly. Sir, in your capacity as acting Minister for Manpower, you explained the rationale to this House in 2013. You said, "This is because open advertising for jobs such as these is usually done in a different manner. Furthermore, such jobs only cover 5% of the local workforce, meaning that the vast majority of jobs would be covered by advertising requirements." I believe the FCF has served us well in ensuring that there is a strong Singaporean PME core in the industries. With the experience gained over almost six years, I wonder whether this is an opportune time to review the FCF to ensure that a proper balance continues to be struck between giving Singaporeans a fair opportunity to access high quality jobs and ensuring that Singapore is an attractive place to do business. I would like to suggest that we do away with the salary ceiling altogether for the following three reasons. First, in the current economic landscape, it should not matter that jobs above the salary peg only covers 5% of the local workforce. What is key is whether Singaporeans are fairly considered for the post in question before a foreigner is considered.”
“Not only that, Singapore helped to organise cybersecurity exercises, such as the ASEAN Computer Emergency Response Team Incident Drill involving ASEAN countries and its Dialogue Partners. Last year, we saw the set-up of the ASEAN-Singapore Cybersecurity Centre of Excellence. May I ask for an assessment of the state of cooperation within the international and regional community at this point? How better prepared are we in safeguarding Singapore's cybersecurity arising from the same? Singapore's Paris Agreement Commitment”
“Mr Chairman, as we all know, the world is becoming even more interconnected through information and communications technology (ICT) especially when 5G technology is embraced and the use Internet of Things (IoT) devices becomes de rigour. Many hon Members of Parliament have cautioned against the corresponding risk of catastrophe occurring in the event the computer systems, particularly those that control critical information infrastructure, such as power, water and transportation networks, are hijacked by states, terrorist groups or criminal organisations. We have already seen examples of such situations occurring. The effects of such sabotage may be felt globally too given that a significant part of the global economy is driven by digital services. There is, therefore, a clear need for the international community to come together to take steps to protect this space against such threats. Senior Minister Teo recognised this need at the Singapore International Cyber Week 2019 conference on 1 October 2019. He said as follows, "Difficult as it is, we need more dialogue and cooperation among governments and the private sector to help us to find better solutions to build a shared future, deal with sophisticated cyber threats and strengthen trust and confidence in the digital systems that we have come to depend on." I am very heartened to note that Singapore is doing its part to promote cooperation and increase preparedness within the international community and our region. This again was highlighted in Senior Minister Teo's speech. For example, Singapore is a member of the United Nations Group of Government Experts (UNGGE) which was set up in 2004 aimed at forging a common set of norms and rules of cyberspace amongst UN members.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I thank the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary Mr Amrin Amin for his response to my cut speech on Rehabilitating and Reintegrating Ex-offenders. I welcome the pilot project that he announced about involving family in the rehabilitation of ex-offenders. I wonder in relation to the aftercare scheme for these ex-offenders, particularly these ex-offenders who were involved in gang activities leading to offences being committed, or committing offences as a result of negative peer influence, whether after they have been released, the circle they keep can be monitored, so that they would be prevented from rejoining the gangs or re-linking up with friends who caused the offences in the first place.”
“It is timely, therefore, to review how these important changes have contributed to the mission of lowering the recidivism rates amongst offenders, and identify what further steps can be taken, not just by MHA but rest of society, to achieve the objective of making Singapore safer. I would be grateful for an update, please. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Calls”
“Sir, let me start off by acknowledging the good work that MHA, Singapore Prison Service (SPS), SCORE and the partners of The Community Action for the Rehabilitation of Ex-Offenders (CARE) Network have done to rehabilitate offenders and reintegrate them back into the society. It is important to remind ourselves of the policy underpinning MHA's efforts on this front. Senior Minister Teo Chee Hian in a written reply issued in 2012 to a Parliamentary Question (PQ) stated as follows: "Effective rehabilitation and successful reintegration of offenders back into society contribute to a safer Singapore". This is however, not an easy objective to achieve. Minister for Home Affairs, Mr K Shanmugam, acknowledged this in a speech he made on 28 June 2019 to the partners of the CARE Network. He observed that whilst the recividism rate over two years went down by half in the last 20 years, nearly one in two ex-offenders returned to prison five years after their release. In the recent past, there have been several structural changes implemented by this House to allow for better rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders. I will name two. The widening of community sentencing options for offenders and the revamp of the Reformative Training regime. I also note that SPF has also implemented other measures such as increasing access to counsellors, providing better opportunities for education and skills training and imposing Mandatory Aftercare Scheme for ex-offenders assessed to have a higher risk of re-offending. It has also leveraged on technology to foster closer relations between inmates and their family members as part of the rehabilitation process; for example, by allowing inmates to correspond with their family members through the e-letters system.”
“Sir, I had raised the suggestion of simplifying procedures for non-contentious probate and administration matters in the past COS debates. I still get feedback on cumbersome processes from people. One example is Mr Chan, whose wife recently died intestate suddenly. He is a care-giver of his autistic son aged 16. Based on the current rules under the Probate and Administration Act, there was a need for him to get another person to agree to be a co-administrator to administer his late wife's estate to protect his minor son's interests. This was not an easy task. In comparison, he was appointed as a single deputy by the Court to take care of his son and deal with his son's property and affairs under the Mental Capacity Act. I understand that the Government has been reviewing this matter since 2017. I seek an update. I will also be grateful if the Government could please consider the interplay between the various statutes in its review, too. Separately, I had pushed for Singapore to accede to the Hague Apostille Convention so as to rationalise the process involved in legalisation of documents for use here and in other countries. I would be grateful for an update on this matter. Singapore-Global Dispute Resolution”
“The observations that were shared were that it was very comprehensive, that it deals with "live" issues on the ground, particularly the fears of mid-career workers, cost of living and, of course, the economic challenge posed by COVID-19. This reflects the extent of consultation that Deputy Prime Minister Heng and his colleagues engaged with people on the ground. I understand from his speech that about 1,000 leaders from different parts of society were engaged and their ideas were incorporated into this Budget. Truly, this is a "Unity" Budget from conception. The $106-billion expenditure is a headline grabber. I do not recall many other Budgets crossing this $100-billion mark. But we were able to do it without drawing on our Reserves. Mr Liang Eng Hwa highlighted this point in his speech and he highlighted that the prudent expenditure policy of the Government helped in this regard. But one thing which I thought is worth highlighting is that, over the years, this Government had been making a heavy investment to grow the collective capabilities of our people and this, in turn, allowed us to achieve the real income growth as well as the economic growth. As a result, operating revenue actually went up. I checked the figures. At the start of the term of Government this year, it was about $64 billion. Now, it is about $75 billion. So, that is real growth resulting in revenue increase and I laud the Government for that. With that, I end my speech.”
“" Deputy Prime Minister Heng does not seem to me like a betting person, but may I please ask what is the basis of optimism over EVs as opposed to HFCVs? Also, what kind of infrastructural development is required to achieve the aim of 28,000 charges by 2030? Do we need to build more substations, for example? What is the expected cost? Would there be cost recovery from users and, if so, how do you do so? I wish to share one point though from personal experience. There is a potential for municipal issues to creep in during the transition period when you convert parking lots for ICE cars to EVs. I have dealt with situations where there have been complaints that EVs take the more accessible parking lots as opposed to ICE cars. So, sometimes, there is scope for such complaints to come up. Going forward, it may be better for a transparent, demand-driven model for conversion of lots. Next, on the vehicular tax structure, I note that the Deputy Prime Minister is contemplating a lump sum tax for EVs to account for loss in fuel excise duties. I appreciate that fuel excise duties generate revenue and are also imposed to discourage excessive driving. It also has another element: it promotes less pollution. So, I take it that in relation to this lump sum tax that the Deputy Prime Minister contemplates to impose, at least there will be certain savings for EV users because it promotes less pollution. I welcome a clarification. I end off with an observation. I had the chance to gather feedback from residents and committee leaders in Bukit Batok following Deputy Prime Minister Heng's delivery of the Budget Statement.”
“Now, ex-offenders still have a problem in securing decent jobs. I met Mr R who is 66 years old. He has just been released from prison after serving five years for selling contraband cigarettes. He is exceptionally fit and looks much younger than his age. He has Secondary 2 education and speaks good English. He told me that he could only secure a part-time job as a coffee shop attendant earning $40 a day. His salary seldom goes beyond $800 a month. Many ex-offenders are underemployed. I wonder if EEC could be extended to provide incentives to employers to employ or give full employment to ex-offenders. We can even work the EEC such that it can be crafted to reward ex-offenders if they were to stay on working and fully rehabilitate themselves. That would translate to some level of savings on behalf of the Government as well, because they do not re-offend. This would strengthen the "Unity" element of the Budget. Before I go on to seek my clarification, I also want to acknowledge the good work of the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises (SCORE) in securing employment for ex-offenders. But we can do our part to help SCORE to do its work to get better jobs for ex-offenders. On the clarification, Mr Yee Chia Hsing spoke about EVs. I note the Deputy Prime Minister's bold vision of phasing out ICE vehicles and having all vehicles run on cleaner energy by 2040. The incentives appear to centre on encouraging EV adoption as opposed to other options, such as Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles (HFCVs), which are favoured by countries, such as Japan and South Korea. The Deputy Prime Minister said, and I quote, "The Government is placing a significant bet on EVs.”
“Her husband was the one who provided emotional support for her and, as a result, Mdm Jorah was able to carry on with her duties. I am sure there are many such examples of families supporting frontline officers. I believe these families must be recognised and supported, and to this, I make two suggestions. First is, if they are put to expense because of these deployment requirements, then I think it is only fair for them to be recompensed. One example is if they have to cancel a travel arrangement because leave had to be cancelled. Alternatively, if there had to be some care arrangement like, for example, Mdm Jorah's husband is stroke-ridden and she had to make arrangements so that he could be taken care of while she goes back to the clinic. Perhaps this can be considered. The other thing is, it would be good if we can put together a package of discounts and even gifts for goods and services for the families. We could use perhaps the Courage Fund, with participation from Singaporeans and the private sector. The Government can play a role in providing the funds and funding incentives for organisations to honour our frontline staff and their families. My next suggestion involves the Enabling Employment Credit (EEC). I laud the introduction of this EEC to incentivise employers to employ and retain persons with disabilities (PWDs). Just a short clarification, I would seek to understand what is the definition of PWD for this scheme? Would it, for example, include persons with mental disabilities? I know voluntary organisations, such as Bizlink, which do good work on this front, would benefit if this is so. Returning to the point I want to make: I wonder if a similar credit could be provided to employers of ex-offenders?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I start my speech, I wish to congratulate the hon Member of Parliament Mr Lim Swee Say for his well-delivered speech in his special style, replete with new acronyms. He spoke from the heart and made many instructive points. One that resonated with me, which is worth repeating in this House, is that it is exceptional for a government to achieve real wage growth, real employment growth and economic growth, all at the same time. He also reminded us that growth is not just for its own sake but it is, ultimately, about making Singapore stronger together as a society, for now and the future. His clarion call to work together to progress forever is something all Singaporeans must join in. Sir, in my speech, I will make two suggestions, seek one clarification and then I will end off with an observation. Turning to suggestions, on the Stabilisation package, the hon Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat expressed gratitude on behalf of the Government to all frontline officers and then he outlined the Stabilisation package. Many hon Members, including Mr Seah Kian Peng, and Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon today also echoed the sentiments of gratitude to the frontline officers. I wish to draw attention not just to these officers but their families. A few weeks ago, I met Mdm Jorah. She is 57 years old. She is a nurse with Bukit Batok polyclinic. She was accompanied by her husband, who is a stroke patient. Her husband shared with me that on occasions, Mdm Jorah came back and shed tears. This was because she was scolded at the clinic by patients who were demanding surgical masks even though they did not have symptoms.”
“In the financial services industry, they have a senior manager's regime and key appointment holders have specific responsibilities. Or will it be a licensing condition imposed on the licensee? Fourth, Exclusion of Traditional Medicine, Complementary and Alternative Medicine from licensing requirements under the proposed HCS Bill. I understand from the Senior Minister of State that the decision is made on a risk-based assessment, not to license these practitioners at this point in time. I also note that the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) practitioners continue to be regulated under the TCM Act. However, there are other disciplines of traditional medicine, such as homeopathy or Ayurvedic medicine, which are not currently regulated. Bringing Traditional Medicine, Complementary and Alternative Medicine within the HCS regulatory framework may promote integration of services with mainstream medicine which may be beneficial to patients. The hon Senior Minister of State mentioned that the industry would be monitored on a risk-based approach going forward. I suggest the enlarging of the monitoring to also include an assessment of the potential for providing integrated services to patients. Finally, regulatory burden and costs. I understand that during the consultation phase, there were fears expressed that there could be increased regulatory burden and fees. I further understand that the Ministry will not be collecting more revenue from existing providers. Hence, this Bill is meant to be revenue-neutral. May I please ask whether under HCS, the regulatory costs attributable to the Government is anticipated to go up? If so, should it not be recovered from the licensees? Notwithstanding my queries, I support the Bill.”
“The wording in the clause, however, introduces a subjective test because the operative word is "the opinion of the Director". Not only that, in addition to the above requirement, under clause 23(1)(b), the licensee must also ensure that the composition of key appointment holders satisfies the skills and competencies requirements prescribed or specified in a code of practice. In contrast, for the appointment of a Principal Officer (PO) or Clinical Governance Officer (CGO) under clause 24, there is no requirement imposed to ensure that these officers are suitable in the opinion of the Director. Clause 23(2) would allow the Director to direct a licensee to remove a key appointment holder who he is satisfied is either: (a) not suitable; or (b) does not possess the skills or competencies prescribed or specified. May I please ask why is it necessary to have a subjective test imposed under the clause? How will licensees be given notice of the Director's approach to the issue of suitability? How will appeals to the Minister on such decisions under clause 48 be determined? Would the Minister be able to revisit the issue de novo? Or should he decide based on the reasonableness of the Director’s opinion, even though he may personally disagree with it? Next, how does the Bill assist in relation to ensuring that licensees adhere to reasonable levels of corporate governance and financial management to ensure that the entities are going concerns? Is it contemplated that the principal officer or key appointment holders take personal responsibility? This is the case in the financial services industry. The hon Senior Minister of State made reference to essential services in his speech.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the aims of the Bill for the reasons articulated by the hon Senior Minister of State Mr Edwin Tong in his speech. I commend MOH for extensive public consultation on the Bill for two years before presenting it in Parliament. I have five queries and will take them in sequence. First, the scope of the definition of "healthcare services" under the Bill. Healthcare Services is defined under clause 3 quite widely and it also includes services provided not for reward. I would like to know if the intent is to also "capture" services provided by voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) or non-profit organisations (NPOs) running senior activity centres, eldercare centres and neighbourhood link centres. As the hon Senior Minister of State knows, there is a wide diversity of services provided at these centres. Some focus on social well-being, which is quite clearly outside the ambit of the definition. Where it gets a little more difficult is where elderly residents are offered frailty assessment, advice on physiotherapy or rehabilitation. Sometimes, this is done not just at centres but during house visits, too. If the intention is to include these corporations, how many of these centres are not currently licensed under PHMCA? What form of assistance can be given to these organisations to help them subscribe to the new licensing regime under the HCS Bill? Next, suitability of key personnel running the licensee's business. Clause 23(1)(a) of the Bill provides that a licensee must ensure that every key appointment holder of the licensee is, in the opinion of the Director, a suitable person to act in that capacity in relation to the licensee. This is, as the hon Senior Minister of State mentioned, to ensure that high governance standards are observed.”
“I thank the hon Member, Assoc Prof Walter Theseira, for clarifying. I apologise to him for remembering the speech wrongly. I think it was Ms Anthea Ong who made the point.”
“However, my concern lies with the proposed section 47(4)(a) of SCJA because it is stated there that leave may not be granted even if the appeal would raise a point of law of public importance. Sir, I would like to ask what are the specific circumstances in which the Court of Appeal may decline exercising jurisdiction in such situations? Notwithstanding my comments, I support the amendment Bills to the SCJA, JRA and the Constitution. 1.34 pm”
“Next, it is proposed under Schedule 7 of SCJA that there are certain categories of cases which may be heard by a Judge or two Judges of the Appellate Division. This arrangement is different from the current Sixth Schedule which specifically states the circumstances in which the Court of Appeal will have a single Judge or when it will have two Judges. May I know why is there a necessity to reverse the policy? Also, who will decide how many Judges would sit in these circumstances? The learned Senior Minister of State mentioned about a configuration of Judges based on consent of parties. Is that what is being suggested in these provisions? My questions will also apply to similar provisions that are proposed to be applicable to the Court of Appeal. Next, Civil Jurisdiction of the Appellate Division is specifically provided under the proposed section 31 and 35 of SCJA that the Appellate Division only has civil jurisdiction. May I please ask whether it is contemplated that the Appellate Division has jurisdiction to hear disciplinary cases involving professionals, such as lawyers, doctors and so on, which do not involve judicial review? Disciplinary cases brought in the Supreme Court are quasi-criminal in nature but generally invoke civil procedure. I would welcome a clarification on this. Next, dealing with appeals from the Appellate Division to the Court of Appeal, I note that leave is required; and it makes eminent sense for leave to be required, otherwise the whole rationale of dividing the workload would be thwarted. I note that the test is whether or not an appeal would raise an issue or point of law of public importance.”
“I note with pleasure that the hon Senior Minister of State has clarified that he will be moving an amendment in the Committee stage of this Bill in respect of the proposed section 29B(2) of SCJA which would clarify that the operative word there should be "time" and not "date". This would prevent controversy from arising once this Bill is passed and put into effect. Next, I note that the proposed section 29D of SCJA provides that the Court of Appeal may transfer a right of appeal against an order made under a provision in the Land Acquisition Act. May I please ask what is the rationale for this reservation of right instead of providing for a direct appeal to the Court of Appeal? In this regard, I note that section 29(2) of the Land Acquisition Act provides for an appeal to the Court of Appeal from the decision of the Board on questions of law. What is the special characteristic of this provision, section 39(A) in the Land Acquisition Act which, for some reason, I am unable to find in the statute book? Under the proposed section 29E of SCJA, the Court of Appeal may transfer an appeal made under the Land Acquisition Act to the Appellate Division. Given that the legislative intent under the Land Acquisition Act is for the Court of Appeal to hear these cases, may I know what are the circumstances in which such remission is proposed so that it is made in a way that coheres with Parliamentary intent? I believe the learned Senior Minister of State mentioned something about the situation where all the substantive issues are dealt with, dealing only with ancillary matters. Perhaps that could be a situation that is being contemplated.”