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 2 of 25.
“The intention of strengthening enforcement is not to just catch more egregious cases, but to stop them from happening in the first place. As Ms Pereira has pointed out, this means continuing our public education efforts to remind the public to be considerate and gracious when taking public transport. Likewise, safeguarding sea resources and the marine environment serves a collective good. We aim to empower MPA to do so through this Bill. Taken together, the amendments in this Bill are part of our broader effort to maintain a well-governed, forward looking and trusted transport ecosystem – one that continues to support Singapore’s connectivity, competitiveness and environmental sustainability. I thank hon Members for supporting this Bill to strengthen the resilience of our transport sectors. Sir, I beg to move. 4.12 pm”
“We agree with the hon Member that we should not be chasing ever lower prices. That is not our intent. LTA evaluates bus tenders based on a two-envelope process, where quality evaluation is conducted before looking at price submissions. The goal is not to have the cheapest bid, but the best value-for-money proposal. Beyond price and quality factors at each individual tender, LTA also works closely with the National Transport Workers’ Union and transport operators to improve the attractiveness and sustainability of the sector. I was personally involved in working with Ms Yeo and her predecessor Mr Melvin Yong and tripartite partners to improve safety in our public bus sector earlier this year. We are also working with union to improve Bus Captains' welfare, including how we can ensure the salaries of Bus Captains are kept competitive, so that the job can be more attractive to our local Singaporeans. Mr Ang Wei Neng also made other suggestions on how we can strengthen the financial sustainability and affordability of the public transport system. Specifically, he asked whether we can directly earmark part of COE revenue for public transport. In general, that is not the approach that we take for Government revenue. Instead, we look at the needs across different sectors to maximise the impact of Government spending. The public transport sector is a key area for Government investment and we already provide substantial operating subsidies of $2 billion for public transport every year. This equates to more than $1 in subsidies for every journey taken. MOT will consider his suggestion on tying public transport voucher eligibility to CHAS. Mr Speaker, ensuring a safer, more secure and more comfortable public transport network is a collective responsibility.”
“But as Ms Pereira pointed out, the safety risks and enforcement in bus settings will differ from that of the trains. Our Bus Captains are one-man operations – they have to focus on driving buses, helping those who need assistance and keeping passengers safe. When they spot behaviour that is disruptive or causing nuisance to other passengers, or if passengers report such behaviour to them, they will stop their buses to report to the Operation Control Centre, where there are trained personnel to advise them on the next course of action. If the behaviour is dangerous, they will have the authority to stop the bus service for the safety of the passengers. The Police will be activated for cases where passengers get violent, or if there are other safety or security concerns. Ms Yeo asked about whether section 42AC of the new Part 7A, which provides that it will be an offence to endanger the safety of anyone travelling on a bus or within a bus interchange will cover our public transport workers. While this specific offence only covers acts involving bus assets or infrastructure that endanger safety, we intend to issue new regulations that will allow LTA enforcement officers to take stern action against passengers who abuse our public transport workers under the amended Bus Services Industry Act. For more egregious cases, bus passengers who abuse our public transport workers can also be prosecuted under the Penal Code, as per today. Indeed, a major reason for the amendments to the Bus Services Industry Act is to ensure that our buses continue to offer passengers and our workers a more pleasant and secure environment. In this same vein, I thank Mr Ang Wei Neng for sharing his views on the Bus Contracting Model.”
“To Ms Yeo’s question about engaging more manpower, we augment the presence of public transport staff by deploying Transit Security Officers at both MRT stations and bus interchanges to conduct patrols, respond to security incidents and conduct security screenings. This will continue. I also thank Mr Dennis Tan for his queries on how LTA has incorporated lessons from security operations already conducted under the Rapid Transit Systems Act and how we will minimise the impact on bus commuters. Powers to conduct security screenings at our public transport nodes, including at bus premises is not new. As I mentioned in my speech, these powers already exist in the Road Traffic Act 1961. What we are doing here is to consolidate it under the proposed amendments. Our Transit Security Officers already conduct random screening to keep out threats from our public transport network. These screenings are stepped up depending on prevailing threat levels. Such screening remains a necessary deterrence. As noted in the latest Singapore Terrorism Threat Assessment Report released in July this year, our public transport nodes, including bus interchanges remain attractive targets for malicious actors because of high foot traffic. Based on the experience of LTA and public transport operators, commuters are generally understanding and cooperative. Each search takes less than one minute. Only Police and Senior Approved Persons are allowed to conduct frisk searches and it will be only done on a need-to-basis. As far as staffing is concerned, a point that the hon Member Mr Dennis Tan raised, no additional manpower is required. As I mentioned earlier, the amendment here serves to consolidate the powers from the Road Traffic Act to the Bus Services Industry Act.”
“Mr Speaker Sir, I thank hon Members for their support of the Bill, as well as their comments and suggestions. Our transport agencies operate within a dynamic context where operational realities evolve quickly. Hon Member Ms Yeo just mentioned that. I will give some examples of it. From time to time, certain lacunae in legislative provisions may also be identified. Periodic updates are necessary to keep pace with these changes and update the legislation so that our agencies can continue to perform their functions effectively and accountably. The amendments in the Bill serve as an important purpose to strengthen enforcement levers, provide legal basis for crucial statutory functions, ensure clarity for our stakeholders and streamline operational processes across our land and sea transport sectors. Sir, let me begin by addressing our public transport system. Both hon Members Ms Yeo and Ms Pereira spoke about how we should provide adequate support for our public transport workers. Hon Member Mr Dennis Tan also spoke about sufficient training so that authorised officers can carry out their duties to keep commuters safe. I thank them for their concern for the safety and well-being of our public transport workers. This is something that MOT and LTA will pay special attention to. We would like to assure hon Members that under the amended Bus Services Industry Act, authorised officers will be provided with the necessary training to carry out their duties professionally and with sensitivity towards more vulnerable groups.”
“This Bill sets out to all parties the expectations of specific forms of compliance when travelling on public transport, deters anti-social and harmful behaviours and ensures a safer and more salubrious experience for all. Sir, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“As MPA has already incurred significant costs in maintaining the deposit sites and managing dumping activities since 1996, and has been collecting fees in connection with the dumping activities, clause 7 will also validate the past collection of such fees up to the commencement of the new provisions. Fifth, clauses 3, 6, 8, 9 and 10 introduce several operational and housekeeping amendments to the Multimodal Transport Act 2021, the MPA Act 1996, the MPA (Amendment) Act 2017, Merchant Shipping Act 1995 and a related amendment to the Public Utilities Act 2001. These include provisions to simplify processes and better manage MPA’s operations in this digital age to achieve greater efficiency, provisions to renumber section numbers of provisions enacted in a 2017 Act, as well as amendments to ensure that terminology used in the Multimodal Transport Act 2021 is consistent with our international obligations. Sir, some of the amendments I am moving today are the legal equivalent of housekeeping – such as aligning the requirements of law across different transportation modes. But the crux of the Bill is to strengthen the foundation of the public transport system itself. A shared vehicle, whether a train or a bus, in a dense, fast-paced and highly networked city, is only safe if we guard against the worst of our base instincts, whether against those who wish us harm, those whose behaviour are boorishly unreasonable in a public space or even those who do not comply with our collective understanding of what it means to respect the rights and space of others in close proximity.”
“Therefore, this offence is not currently prescribed to be compoundable. With these amendments, we will be able to prescribe this offence as a compoundable offence and to offer composition of up to $10,000 per offence in less egregious cases. Fourth, clause 6(f) amends the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore Act 1996 to empower the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) to demarcate deposit sites for the dumping of objects and materials, such as dredged and reclamation materials. Clause 6(e) allows MPA to prescribe fees, with the approval of the Minister for Transport, for the use of these deposit sites. These fees recover MPA’s costs in relation to the deposit sites, including developing, managing, monitoring and maintaining deposit sites, monitoring the deposit of materials at the deposit sites, and investigating the impact of the deposits on the surrounding seabed and marine environment. These matters are essential to ensure safe navigation and safeguarding of the environment. The fees were originally introduced by the then-Port of Singapore Authority (PSA) and subsequently continued by MPA when it established in 1996. They were not formally prescribed in legislation as the then-PSA and MPA had regarded them as charges for private contractual services. Following the Auditor-General’s Office’s FY2024/2025 report, MPA has been advised that the fees must be prescribed in legislation. This amendment will therefore provide legislative basis for MPA to continue collecting such fees.”
“Second, clause 4 amends section 32 of the Public Transport Council Act to allow the Public Transport Council (PTC) to grant an application by bus operators to withdraw monies from the Fuel Equalisation Fund that they originally contributed. The withdrawals can be granted for reasons unassociated with the original purpose of the Fund. The Fund was set up in 1992 to mitigate the effects of transient increases in fuel or electricity prices. Operators contributed to their own Fund accounts when energy prices fell below a reference price and could apply to PTC to withdraw funds when energy prices were higher. With the implementation of the Bus Contracting Model in 2016, the impact of any increases in the fuel price and electricity tariff on bus operators is already mitigated, as the Government pays service fees to the bus operators which are indexed to the corresponding energy prices. Therefore, this amendment seeks to allow bus operators to withdraw monies that they had contributed to the Fund over the years before contributions were suspended. Third, clause 4 also raises the maximum composition sum under the PTC Act from $500 to $10,000, or half the amount of the maximum fine that is prescribed for the offence, whichever is lower. This will allow PTC to increase the deterrence effect of composition sums imposed against point-to-point transport (P2P) operators for breaches under the PTC Act. For example, this could cover instances where a ride-hail platform operator charges incorrect fares arising from system errors. At present, the maximum composition sum of $500 under the Act is not commensurate with the severity of the offence, as operators are otherwise liable on conviction to a fine of up to $100,000.”
“Clause 2(i) also includes a new Part 7A that provides for the screening of bus passengers and entrants to bus interchanges, and prohibits the carriage of dangerous items onto buses and in bus interchanges. These provisions are currently found in the Road Traffic Act 1961 and are now being consolidated in the Bus Services Industry Act 2015. Hence, this is not a new requirement at law. It is also aligned with the same requirements under the Rapid Transit Systems Act which deals with the MRT system, as provided for in section 23A of the Rapid Transit Systems Act and Regulation 9 of the Rapid Transit Systems Regulations. In addition, sections 42AC and 42AD of the new Part 7A also provides that it will be an offence for someone to wilfully do anything or omit to do anything in relation to a bus, bus depot or bus interchange thereby endangering the safety of anyone on buses or within bus depot or bus interchange, or cause damage to anything that is part of any bus, bus depot or bus interchange. These offences will be aligned with existing offences provided for in sections 25 and 26 of the Rapid Transit Systems Act in relation to railway and railway premises. Once this Bill is passed, we will be able to set out the prohibited behaviours in the regulations and take enforcement against those who do not comply. With these changes, authorised officers, such as Land Transport Authority (LTA) enforcement officers and public transport staff like ticket inspectors and interchange staff who are empowered by the LTA to carry out enforcement, will be able to better protect members of public at bus depots, interchanges and public buses.”
“Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Acting Minister for Transport, I move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Transport Sector (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2025 seeks to make various amendments to land and sea transport-related legislation, and a related amendment to the Public Utilities Act 2001. The Bill covers five key areas. First, the Bill reinforces our efforts to make our public transport system more secure and more comfortable for all. As announced at the Ministry of Transport's (MOT's) Committee of Supply debate this year, we intend to regulate the conduct of commuters to prevent inconsiderate behaviour on public buses and bus interchanges. Through the proposed amendments, we will align the regulatory framework against inconsiderate behaviour across trains and buses. Examples of such behaviour include, littering and consumption of food and drinks; or causing a nuisance or annoyance to other passengers, such as by playing loud music or videos on mobile phones. Those who contravene the regulations will face penalties commensurate with how the proscribed conduct impacts on other bus commuters, with higher penalties for repeat offenders. To enable the intent, clause 2(a), (f) and (i) of the Bill amends the Bus Services Industry Act to provide for regulation-making powers to regulate the conduct of bus passengers and members of the public, which includes prohibiting disruptive and nuisance-causing behaviour onboard buses and at bus interchanges. The Regulations, which will be made later, will take reference from existing regulations under the Rapid Transit Systems Act, which prohibits certain behaviour within the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) network.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in response to the hon Member Mr Xie, can I say that quite clearly not all cases, as I mentioned in my speech, are cases which should go for formal mediation. The idea, and I would take the opportunity to reiterate our framework, is to settle the bulk of disputes in the community itself. That is really using the resources that the hon Member Mr Ng Chee Meng said – our grassroots leaders and community leaders. So, that is the bulwark of the cases that we would have to deal with. Beyond that, there needs to be an assessment made by the public officers, HDB and CRU, to see whether or not these are the cases where it may make sense for the issuance of the formal MD. So, again, one has to look at the context. In a situation where the CRU is of the view that the case is made out straightaway, it is a straightforward case made out, it may not even bother the residents to go for mediation. They can issue an abatement order. So, that is not necessary for them to go through the entire process. And in situations where they feel that there are no troublesome signs like threats of violence and all that, that is the situation where the legislative policy contemplates the issuance of the MD. And I guess as we gather more experience from the pilot, we will finetune the protocols and make sure that the aim behind this CDMF, which is really to ensure that our community self-moderates when it comes to the dealing of disputes, ensures that as far as possible, we do not invoke the formal processes, which also includes MD, so that neighbours not only can live and let live, but also continue on in the spirit that we would want to see.”
“Sir, I am indebted to the hon Member Mr Yip for his thoughtful suggestion. Certainly, I am aware that there is a level of cooperation between the agencies. I think he is looking towards a proper framework so that we can better detect cases which may become violent. It is certainly something that we can consider. Sir, while I am on my feet, may I also state that my colleagues have given me the statistics for the enforcement orders, a question that hon Member Ms Mariam Jaafar asked for. In the past five years, there are 24 Special Directions issued and two Exclusion Orders issued.”
“Sir, in response to the hon Member, Mr Giam's question, I would like to clarify that there are absolutely no plans to vest with grassroots leaders or advisers the power to issue MDs. As I have explained in my speech, these powers are to be vested in public officers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in response to the hon Member, Ms Mariam Jaafar, on the second question first. The issue of service of the CDRT order is really a judicial matter. And I take the hon Member's points and we will convey her feedback to the Judiciary as to the modes of service of CDRT orders that should be available to the successful litigant after the CDRT hearing. Insofar as CRU orders are concerned, that is dealt with by the unit itself, so, that should not present an issue. And certainly, the framework is really to assist the resident. Because the CRU, through the enhanced legislative framework, is able to make the investigations and in a clear cut case, issue an abatement order. And thereafter, if it is not complied with, then, it can escalate and consider enforcement. As I mentioned just now, in response to the hon Member Mr Kenneth Tiong, there could be eviction orders and pursuant to which the person has to leave his house, or there could also be compulsory acquisition by HDB. So, these are all the measures that are available. As to the steps to be taken to enforce, or rather the figures for enforcement, my apologies, I do not have the figures off-hand, but if the hon Member would like to file a Parliamentary Question, I can answer that specifically.”
“On the issue of the anxiety following the incident in Yishun, I would say this. If anyone feels threatened, then the first thing to do is to call the Police via 999. There is no doubt about that. Mediation is not suitable when there are signs of violence, threatened or actual. You should break off and then let the Police deal with it and that must be something ingrained in everybody's mind. And of course, sometimes we are dealing with evolving situations and there must be a constant assessment as to whether the line is crossed.”
“Sir, I am grateful to the hon Mr Ng Chee Meng for acknowledging the heroes on the ground, the grassroots leaders. Indeed, that has also been my experience. They do it on their own time, dealing with disputes involving neighbours. And also, they take their own time to train themselves. They go through mediation courses as well. And as a result of which, a substantial number of neighbour disputes are being solved through them. I would add, Sir, that, actually, there is also another aspect of what they do, which is really creating the goodwill through community activities, getting the neighbours to meet one another. This is something that we took for granted during the kampung days when our doors were always open. Here, the grassroots leaders come, make sure that neighbours meet one another through, say, block parties and other events for residents. And that is very helpful because with the relationship that is built, the neighbour who is originally thinking of complaining, may say, "Eh, wait a minute, I know his circumstances, I know his family well, maybe I will live with it". And that is the live-and-let-live attitude that we want to promote in the community. As to the supplementary questions on supporting the grassroots leaders. Certainly, we are happy to lean forward to train suitable grassroots leaders for mediation training. Mediation is not an easy area for many of them because they may not be legally trained. So, we are certainly happy to see how we can train more. In fact, at the CMC level, we are also looking out for suitable candidates to increase our core of mediators. I think that that can certainly help. We can certainly continue to share best practices and that is one way to strengthen the competence of our grassroots leaders as mediators.”
“Sir, I am obliged to hon Member, Ms Elysa Chen, for her positive remarks. Insofar as the point about assisting applicants in the CDRT process, certainly the Judiciary has leaned forward. As I mentioned in my speech, there is a website which provides very important information on how to collate evidence. And also, I would say the CRU has been formed. The legislative intent is also to assist applicants in certain cases by gathering evidence and that can be presented to the CDRT. Or in a very clear cut case, the CRU itself can issue abatement orders. So, collectively, this will assist the neighbour who is belabouring under some disamenities from his other neighbour.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will take the first part of the question posed by the hon Member, Dr Choo. She suggested whether the legislation can be reviewed further, to put specific noise levels. Certainly, that is something that we can consider. I would give her and hon Members an assurance that we are continually looking to see how we can strengthen the system, because we know how important this issue about ensuring neighbourliness and harmony in the community is. But I think one must agree, the core point is that these issues must be dealt with in the community and the community must exercise self-moderation. That is really the principal point. We should not be directing cases to be dealt with at the CDRT as a first resort.”
“Sir, this is really something which we are looking at and as was mentioned in the speeches made by myself and the Minister of State Alvin Tan, we are looking to complete the pilot, learn from the issues that have presented themselves and then, we certainly want to extend it to all parts of Singapore. I certainly remember the debate that happened in the last session of Parliament, where almost every Member asked that his constituency be volunteered for the extension after the pilot. So, it is a matter of resources. It will come. I come to the last supplementary question, which is an assertion that the CDRT is toothless. I am just looking at it from the perspective of the legislative framework. The legislative framework allows for a person who breaches a special direction to be prosecuted and be convicted, and that must mean that there is some tooth to the action. It is really a matter of enforcement. And may I also add that, under the enhanced powers, the CDRT or the HDB has even the powers to evict a person from his house. In fact, there have been instances where respondents have been ordered to leave their homes for a period of 10 days and 14 days. So, these measures are certainly measures with serious outcomes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I deal with hon Member Mr Tiong's three supplementary questions. I just want to make a clarification. I mentioned in my speech just now that Mr Tiong asked for the number of compulsory mediations for neighbour disputes at CMC for each of the last five years. Actually, he asked for three years. So, with that clarification, let me now deal with the supplementary questions. The first point about whether the MP can be the gatekeeper. My response is to point out that as far as the issue of directing compulsory mediation is concerned, that has to be dealt with even-handedly and also, it involves two institutions: one, the judge, which is an independent branch of our Government; and the other one, is in relation to the public officers. So, we sited it with the public officers as far as compulsory mediation is concerned, so that anybody who is aggrieved, he may write or his MP may write to the public body concerned and then, they will look at it and see whether or not there is a need to issue a Mediation Direction (MD). Because when the MPs get information, they only hear one side of the story. It is very difficult to hear both sides of the story. But the public officers are able to do so. At the judiciary level, as I mentioned my speech, the judges have discretion to order mediation as well. So, cumulatively, we are able to deal with this matter, ensuring that mediation is really the main thrust of our approach or strategy to deal with neighbours' disputes. The hon Member asked about compulsory mediation outside the Tampines project.”
“For cases that involve alleged breaches of CDRT orders to cease smoking, any evidence that points to the fact that the respondent was smoking in breach of the CDRT order, would be relevant. Some examples include letters or contemporaneous messages exchanged between neighbours; and written records with specific timestamps of the acts in question. Residents who require more information on the CDRT process can refer to the “Guide to Neighbour Dispute Claims”, which is available on the Judiciary’s website. Residents may also seek legal help from Pro Bono SG's Community Law Centres and Community Legal Clinics. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me say a few words in conclusion. Some Singaporeans are understandably concerned after the incident in Yishun last month. The Government will continue its existing efforts to strengthen the CDMF. This is a continuous ongoing process. For the more difficult cases, we are now piloting a directed mediation framework and the CRU in Tampines. Agencies are prepared to and will expand the application of the enhanced CDMF as soon as practicable, so that more cases can benefit from mediation and the direct intervention tools of the CRU. However, no framework will be able to address all manner of neighbour disputes or curb specific individual behaviour, especially violence. No one should resort to violence to deal with a neighbour dispute. That is a personal responsibility. It is therefore necessary for us all to press ahead with the important work of building up the community’s capacity to practise self-moderation and to engage with one another when disputes arise. It is a multi-pronged approach in building a harmonious community together.”
“Ms Valerie Lee, Mr Gabriel Lam and Ms Gho Sze Kee asked about neighbour disputes where one or more parties may have underlying mental health conditions. The framework remains as Minister Edwin Tong and Senior Minister of State Sim Ann had explained during the Second Reading in November 2024. Our guiding principle is to persuade the resident to voluntarily go for assessment and treatment. Here, the assistance and involvement of the family and caregiver can be crucial. If frontline officers are unable to persuade the individual to seek treatment, then they will consider guiding the case towards a Mandatory Treatment Order, which we expect to operationalise by the end of this year. For some conditions, treatment may not be possible. In such cases, frontline officers partner with agencies, such as the Agency for Integrated Care, so that professionals can be brought in to assess how best to support the resident and manage the condition. Ms Elysa Chen asked for data on the CDRT’s caseload. She also asked about support for claimants in preparing evidence for CDRT hearings. The top three CDRT disputes for the last five years are claims for excessive noise, excessive vibration and littering. A party may include multiple types of disputes in a single claim. Between 2020 and 2024, a total of 1,031 CDRT claims were filed. About 65%, or two out of three claims, involved excessive noise. Of these CDRT claims, the CDRT issued 233 CDRT orders and dismissed or struck off 145 cases. Another 651 claims were withdrawn or discontinued. The CDRT made 26 enforcement orders, comprising 24 Special Directions and two Exclusion Orders.”
“First, apart from the fine mentioned earlier, once the CDRT enhancements are fully operationalised, complainants who fail to comply with an MD will not be allowed to file a CDRT claim against their neighbours. Next, where a respondent fails to comply, and a case is subsequently filed with the CDRT, the CDRT may make an adverse costs order against the respondent. This is because the respondent has failed to make reasonable efforts at amicable resolution. Mr Xie Yao Quan asked about the CMC’s plans to appoint more mediators and extend its services into the community. The CMC has increased accessibility to voluntary mediation by establishing 18 satellite mediation locations at various ServiceSG Centres, Community Clubs and Neighbourhood Police Posts. Where suitable, virtual mediation is also offered. The CMC continues to expand its pool of trained volunteer mediators, which has grown from about 140 at the start of 2022, to around 170 as of October 2025. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about the immediate intervention measures when parties show aggression. In a similar vein, Dr Choo Pei Ling asked about preventive measures and statistics on disputes that escalate to aggression. To Dr Choo’s query, we have checked with the relevant agencies. Such statistics are not specifically tracked. Any resident who feels threatened by his neighbour should immediately call the Police. The Police will intervene when there are law and order concerns, taking proportionate action based on threat severity. More broadly, agencies will look at how we can strengthen our enforcement posture, particularly in cases that may involve threats of physical aggression.”
“Also, if a CDRT claim is subsequently filed, it is possible for the judge to direct parties to attend mediation. Hon Member Mr Gabriel Lam asked about the expansion of the MD pilot, which started about six months ago on 7 April 2025. Agencies are actively reviewing the learnings from the pilot and will continually refine operational protocols. I will come back to this again in my concluding remarks. Minister of State Alvin Tan will also speak more on the CRU framework in his response. Hon Member Mr Xie Yao Quan asked whether stakeholders, such as grassroots advisers, can be empowered to issue MDs. We have scoped the legislative power to issue an MD to public officers and officers of Statutory Boards. Given the nature of MDs, and that non-compliance can result in a fine of up to $1,500, we have not expanded this power to include non-public officers. We will appoint more public officers as needed. Mr Kenneth Tiong asked about the number of compulsory mediations for neighbour disputes at the CMC for each of the last five years. [Please refer to clarification under "Criteria that Qualify for Intervention by Community Relations Unit and Unit's Effectiveness in Addressing Neighbourly Disputes", Official Report, 14 October 2025, Vol 96, Issue 7, Oral Answers to Questions section.] For court-mandated mediation, from 2022 to 2024, the CDRT and the Magistrates’ Court referred around 90 and 80 cases to the CMC respectively. Since 7 April 2025, the CRU has issued one MD; HDB has not issued any MDs; and the CMC has not issued any re-mediation directions under the MD framework. The Police do not direct any party to attend mediation. Next, hon Member Ms Valerie Lee asked about penalties for parties who fail to comply with an MD.”
“In suitable cases, authorised officers, such as HDB or CRU officers, can issue an MD to direct disputing parties to attend mediation at the CMC. The Ministry of Law (MinLaw) will continue to work with the Ministry of National Development (MND) and HDB to ensure that more suitable disputes are directed to the CMC for mandatory mediation. An early intervention with mediation will give parties a better opportunity to resolve their disputes before it becomes entrenched. Ms Gho Sze Kee asked whether we will consider empowering the CMC to issue MDs. This is already the case for what we call “re-mediation cases”. These are cases where residents previously attempted voluntary mediation and arrived at a settlement, but the same disputes resurfaced subsequently. So, there is value in directing re-mediation in such cases since both parties were willing to attempt voluntary mediation at the first instance. In a similar vein, hon Member Mr Kenneth Tiong asked whether residents may appeal to the Ministry to compel mediation. Beyond re-mediation cases, it will not be appropriate for the CMC to issue MDs to parties directly. The CMC cannot be seen as taking sides and compelling mediation because of an appeal by one party. The CMC cannot rely on the representation of one party to enforce mandatory mediation on the other. A proper assessment of the circumstances must be made. In this regard, the CMC has to rely on triage by ground agencies, such as HDB and CRU, to determine the situation on the ground. For example, cases involving physical threats will not be suitable for mediation. Residents who are unable to obtain their neighbour’s agreement to attend mediation, can approach the HDB or CRU for assistance.”
“This allows us to require disputing neighbours to attend a mandatory mediation, which Members have asked about. Next, we have established the CRU and empowered its officers to take decisive action in a neighbour dispute. CRU officers are empowered to investigate, collect evidence and if need be, intervene quickly through levers like advisories, warnings and abatement orders. Since 7 April 2025, the CRU and the MD framework have been piloted in the HDB estates of Tampines town. We have previously explained why we have chosen to start with a pilot. Generally, most cases should be addressed through mediation or by the CRU. For the remaining intransigent cases, affected residents can consider the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT) as a last resort. We have enhanced the CDRT’s processes under the amendments last year and are working to operationalise them as soon as practicable. Having set the context, let me now address the questions that hon Members have filed in relation to our community mediation framework and the CDRT. Hon Member Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about the number of neighbour disputes where parties refused mediation. As I mentioned earlier, it is best for neighbour disputes to be settled amicably between neighbours or via informal mediation by community leaders or HDB officers. And many are indeed resolved in this way. For disputes that proceed to formal mediation, from November 2024 to August 2025, about 1,300 neighbour disputes were registered with the CMC for voluntary mediation. In about 50% of these cases, one party did not respond. In another 20%, at least one party declined outright. Hon Members Mr Ng Chee Meng and Mr Gabriel Lam asked how we can refer more disputes to mediation. As mentioned, directed mediation is now being piloted in Tampines.”
“Obliged, Sir. First, I will briefly recap the Government’s overall approach for managing community disputes, before addressing Members’ questions on difficult neighbour disputes and how we intend to address these more effectively. My colleague, Minister of State Alvin Tan, will respond to questions on the Community Relations Unit (CRU). Last year, we enhanced our Community Disputes Management Framework (CDMF) when this House passed the Community Disputes Resolution (Amendment) Act 2024. As Minister Edwin Tong explained during the Second Reading of the Act, our aim is to strengthen our community so that neighbours can constructively engage with one another, even when disagreements arise. This starts by fostering positive neighbourly relations. Now and then, disputes between some neighbours do arise. It is best for these to be settled amicably. So, whenever community leaders or Housing and Development Board (HDB) officers become aware of a dispute, they attempt to mediate informally, particularly at an early stage, before relationships break down. They will also encourage residents to attempt formal mediation at the Community Mediation Centre (CMC). When both neighbours participate, mediation has proven effective in resolving community disputes. It is free and it preserves neighbourly relations in the longer term. Our experience shows that neighbour disputes become harder to resolve when they become personal, emotionally charged or if they are prolonged. For these cases, where suitable, the recent CDMF enhancements will empower public officers, such as HDB officers, to issue a Mediation Direction (MD). MDs are legally backed orders that require recipients to attend mediation at the CMC. Non-compliance without reasonable excuse, is an offence.”
“Thank you, Sir. Sir, my response will also address related questions by hon Members Mr Gabriel Lam1, Mr Yip Hon Weng2, Mr Xie Yao Quan3, 4, Mr Ng Chee Meng5, Ms Valerie Lee6, Ms Elysa Chen7, 8 and Ms Gho Sze Kee9, which are scheduled for subsequent Sittings. Thereafter, Minister of State Alvin Tan will, with your permission, Sir, address Question Nos 10 and 11 in today's Order Paper. Mr Speaker, may I request that we deliver our replies, which pertain to neighbours' disputes, and then, for us to take supplementary questions together thereafter, please,”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 8 and 9 in today's Order Paper together?”
“Sir, I spent quite a bit of time in my speech, emphasising on the employment opportunities and prospects in the transport sector. I do hope that fellow Singaporeans, young and old, will consider these options and join our One Transport Family. As we write the next chapter of our transport story. We will face unprecedented challenges. However, we will also discover new opportunities as our environment changes. Navigating these challenges will require concerted efforts from everyone as we enhance our physical infrastructure, digital systems and transport workforce. Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong, in a dialogue with young people, said recently, "Being small is a very deep part of our psyche. Some things we cannot change." This is true. Being small is our geography, but it is not our destiny. Being small requires us to be imaginative, not only use each space to its fullest, but also to allow us access to anywhere we want to be in the shortest of time and in the greatest of comfort. If life is about journeys, then only with a strong transport system can we ensure that all Singaporeans, no matter how big our dreams, can live a full life on our small island, our little red dot. [Applause.]”
“Together with our tripartite partners, we are equipping workers with skills that are increasingly sought after in their industries. The MPA-Singapore Maritime Foundation Joint Office for Talent and Skills is working with educational partners to develop tailored training courses for maritime workers in emerging domains. A pilot course on applied data science and analytics tailored for maritime professionals, co-developed with the National University of Singapore, was well-received and will be scaled up. The transport sector is a rewarding career spent in service of our fellow citizens. It is a dynamic sector with good jobs for Singaporeans of all ages and backgrounds. The veteran union leader, Sister Mary Liew, General Secretary of the Singapore Maritime Officers' Union, shared with me the heartening story of Miss Valerie Thai, a legal professional turned seafarer, with me recently. Valerie obtained her law degree from Australia and worked as a paralegal in Singapore but soon found the legal profession a bit too boring for her. Attracted by the wide range of opportunities in the maritime industry with fields that allow her to tap on her legal background, Valerie took the brave plunge into seafarer training under the Tripartite Maritime Training Award. This award provides a place-and-train programme that equips Singaporeans with seafaring skills and experience for careers in the maritime industry. I met her two days ago, a cadet now, she is eager to blaze the trail for women wanting to be seafarers. I wish Valerie all the best in her training. Valerie's story is one of many. With the diverse range of career opportunities, whether in traversing our skies, connecting people on land or plying our seas. I look forward to welcoming all to join our transport family.”
“In fact, when I spoke to him yesterday, he told me that he got promoted and is now in charge of 26 remote operators on his shift. He continues to upgrade his skills, enhancing his ability to troubleshoot and navigate operational challenges. He is also a proud member of the Singapore Port Workers Union, which supports him in every way possible. What a great example Mr Zulfikar is to his peers. Changi Airport and SATS are also transforming to harness AI automation and robotics to stay competitive and resilient. Existing jobs, such as airport ground handling services, will change in tandem, and new jobs will be created for a new generation of Singapore workers who are tech savvy. Exciting new mobility options in our public transport network are on the horizon as we plan and start piloting autonomous vehicle (AV) shuttles. This will better meet the growing and evolving connectivity needs of Singaporeans without running into manpower constraints. The AV industry will also create good jobs for Singaporeans in roles, such as software developers, engineers and radar designers. We will continue to collaborate closely with our industry unions and education partners to upscale our workers and ensure their access to these jobs. As rightly highlighted by the hon Member Mr Ang Wei Neng, lifelong learning is crucial for our workers as industries are transformed by AI and new technologies. That is why we are investing in support for training partners and companies to provide upskilling training opportunities. CAAS established a $200 million OneAviation Manpower Fund in July 2025 to better attract, develop and retain the OneAviation workforce. The fund will provide stronger and more targeted support to companies to transform jobs and better support workers.”
“This will not only enable them to practise good cyber hygiene, but also uplift them to become the first line of defence to detect anomalies that could signal cyber intrusion attempts. For example, the Singapore Aviation Academy and the Singapore University of Technology and Design offer a joint course to provide aviation professionals with an understanding of the cybersecurity landscape and specific challenges facing the aviation sector, as well as the key foundations in cybersecurity concepts and controls. Finally, and most importantly, we owe our transport story to the hard work and dedication of more than 300,000 workers across our land, air and sea transport systems. They will continue to be central to our transport ecosystem as we write the next chapter of this story. Automation and autonomous innovations have great potential to transform the way we work. This not only allows our ecosystem to transcend manpower and land constraints, but also creates new good jobs for our people. We are already seeing this transformation on the ground today. Tuas Port is designed to be fully automated, intelligent and sustainable, and will offer new jobs with enhanced career prospects. At older port terminals, crane operators work at great heights atop cranes to direct movement of each container from ship to shore, and vice versa. With automation, our crane operators are upskilled from doing manual work to directing automated crane operations and troubleshooting exception cases remotely from control centres. This is the experience of Mr Muhammad Zulfikar Bin Minhat, from managing manual operations on site at Tanjong Pagar Terminal when he started his career 11 years ago, today, Mr Zulfikar remotely manages automated yard operations from PSA's control centre.”
“With so much of our daily lives and economy reliant on our transportation networks, our infrastructure becomes prime targets for malicious actors. Globally, cyberattacks on transport infrastructure have occurred across land, air and sea. In July 2023, Nagoya Port, Japan's largest maritime hub, fell victim to a cyberattack that disrupted its container handling operations. In September 2024, Transport for London reported a cyberattack on their computer systems that lasted for three months. And just last week, a cyberattack at a provider of check-in and boarding systems disrupted operations at several major European airports, leading to flight delays and cancellations. So, you see 2023, 2024, 2025. There is no telling when malicious actors may target our systems in similar attacks, these cyberattacks show us that even as we leverage the transforming power of technological advancements, we must put in place appropriate safeguards to address vulnerabilities. We must work together, as One Transport Family, with our fellow Singaporeans to secure our critical transport infrastructure. We are only as strong as our weakest link. The work has already started. The Land Transport Authority (LTA), the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) and MPA have established cybersecurity operations centres that provide monitoring to detect cybersecurity threats. Agencies also share critical information with key partners, from public transport operators to aviation partners and maritime companies. We are also investing in our people to cultivate their cybersecurity awareness and skills, tailored to the air, land and sea transport sectors.”
“Even as we tackle the challenges of today, we must prepare for the future. Our people are getting older. We are developing more areas across our island. We need to move more people who are less mobile across larger tracts of space. These are points that hon Members, Ms Valerie Lee and Mr Shawn Loh, admirably made in their respective speeches. We will engage our members of public on their desires, aspirations and concerns for the future of land transport. People remain at the heart of our transport system. To fellow Singaporeans, I say, preparing for the future is an important journey. I hope you will support and join us every step of the way. Second, technology. Across transport sector, innovative technologies can enhance efficiency and productivity of our systems. For example, the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) launched DocuMind and DocuMatch last year, harnessing AI to streamline ship insurance certificate renewals for Singapore-registered ships. These tools streamline the process to minutes compared to up to three days previously. New technologies are essential for our path to net-zero. Electrification remains a key strategy to decarbonise Singapore's land transport sector. As we build a network of chargers to support electric cars, we employ new technologies, such as the dynamic load management at our Housing and Development Board car parks to allow us to tap on existing unutilised electrical capacity. And this will enable us to deploy even more electric vehicle (EV) chargers, bringing us closer to our goal of 60,000 EV chargers by 2030. However, as our system increasingly digitalise and move into the cyberspace, we face unprecedented security challenges. We are familiar with the cyberattacks on critical infrastructure by UNC3886.”
“Failure in service is a justified cause for frustration and disappointment. The Singaporean reputation for reliability and predictability is hard earned. Nowhere must this be more clearly seen than in our transport system. So, I accept that we need to work hard to win back the support of frustrated Singaporeans affected by some failures. Let me say squarely what I mean. We will invest to reduce disruptions, but they will not be eliminated. We will still have disruptions. I do not take any pleasure in saying this, but this is the hard truth. But knowing that disruptions will happen, we have in place systems to help affected people still arrive at their destinations, not on time, unfortunately; not without trouble, regrettably but with all practicable haste. I want to assure the House that all my colleagues on the ground, work tirelessly, truly flat out, during disruptions, including the East-West Line disruption in September last year. I saw that with my own two eyes. Alongside my colleagues were many volunteers to guide and support commuters to use the bridging buses. These are hardworking transport professionals, including our sisters and brothers of the National Transport Workers Union and fellow Singaporeans who deserve our respect and support. Yet, they have, on occasions, been cathartic vehicles, on the receiving end of abusive language, anger and derision. I ask all hon Members in this House for ideas that you may have to improve our transport infrastructure and to build up the resilience of our systems. At the same time, I am sure Members will agree that we should forbear from cheap shots and low blows when things go wrong. Never exploit problems, but by all means, let us work on the problems.”
“We aim to keep our rail network running smoothly, through a combination of maintenance, refurbishments or replacements where needed. We will do so by focusing on the three "Rs": resilience, reliability and recovery. First, we will enhance resilience with more alternative routes. We are building new rail lines that will enable commuters to still get to their destinations in the event of disruptions or planned maintenance works through alternative train routes. We will close the loop for the Circle Line next year and extend the Downtown and Thomson-East Coast Lines. In the longer term, we plan to expand our rail network further, such as with the West Coast Extension. Second, we will invest in improving the reliability of our rail assets. As announced at the Committee of Supply this year, we will invest an additional $1 billion over the next five years to enhance the way we monitor and maintain our rail assets, and uplift the maintenance capabilities of our rail workforce. We also set up the rail reliability task force to address immediate issues, following the recent incidents. If not for the COVID-19 pandemic which the hon Member, Ms Mariam Jaafar, reminded us in her speech yesterday ended just 30 months ago, the progress on these two "Rs", resilience and reliability, would have been even more significant. Now we are playing catch-up, but catch up we will. Having regard to the state of affairs now, however, we cannot eliminate rail disruptions entirely. But when disruptions occur, we will ensure recovery as quickly and as expeditiously as possible. We will communicate with commuters and help them find alternative routes. Sir, transport is a key essential service which we all count on to arrive at our destinations on time.”
“With limited resources then, these "bone shakers" were, in fact, refurbished lorry chassis with suspension systems so poor that they vibrated vigorously. But as a young boy, I did not mind it. I was thrilled, in fact. The same journey today, via Mass Rapid Transit (MRT), would take 30 minutes in air-conditioned comfort, just one-third the time it originally took. Today, we enjoy a transport system that is admired across the world. Changi Airport is our nation’s pride, consistently ranked amongst the world’s best airports. Our port was recently named the “Best Global Seaport”. And our land transport network serves about 10 million journeys each day. Our transport systems today are extensive and highly complex, with many interconnected elements and moving parts. Our public transport network today covers 240 kilometres of rail lines and over 350 bus services, with 160 stations and 5,000 bus stops. As I said at the start of my speech, transport infrastructure incur large sunk costs. Even with long-term planning, we can only build to the best of our knowledge and ability at any given time. We must also make the most prudent choices possible. At the beginning of our MRT development journey, we had just five stations. Within 30 years, we have 100 and then to 160 stations today. Underneath this, lies years of design, planning, battles over land and billions of dollars in investment. While 30 years is a short time in the life of a nation, it is long for an MRT line. Our rail system comprises many mechanical parts, each with specific lifespans, similar to everyday appliances, such as washing machines. With different parts of our rail system at different ages, ensuring the smooth operation of all trains in the network becomes increasingly complex and challenging.”
“Again, we see this in the cities of developed countries, whose transport infrastructure have suffered from decades of under-investment. These two challenges, greater complexity in needs and financial demands for infrastructure, also apply to Singapore. As our systems expand and become more complex, the number of potential points of failure increases. The needs of our people are evolving. New vulnerabilities will emerge as we digitalise, adopt new technologies and put more of our services online into the cyberspace. The emerging challenges, coupled with the unprecedented pace of change in our external environment, will mean that we need a new generation of transport professionals. Mr Speaker, Sir, today, I will speak on how we can build a strong transport system through three strategies. First, resilience. We will enhance our ageing infrastructure, make them robust and flexible so as to meet the needs of our population, which are increasing in volume and complexity. Second, technology. We will seize opportunities from new technologies, while safeguarding against cybersecurity risks. Third, people. We will continue to build a professional and adaptive transport workforce, the only real piece in the transport landscape that can ensure our systems remains fit for purpose well into the future. Mr Speaker, Sir, we sometimes forget the breakneck speed at which our transport system has travelled. Many from my generation remember growing up alongside this journey. As a young boy, I took the single-door "bone shaker" public bus to school. I would leave home from Sembawang at 5.30 am to catch the 5.45 am bus on a one-hour 30-minute journey to reach school at Newton by 7.15 am, with 15 minutes to spare before morning assembly.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion of Thanks standing in the name of the hon Member Mr Sharael Taha. That Singapore is a small island is a matter of geography, but that we can travel swiftly and in comfort across all its corners is a matter of human endeavour. It is our transport system that allows us to work, study, exercise, access essential services, socialise, volunteer and live our lives to the fullest. These were amongst the topics that hon Members spoke passionately about in this House over the past five days. If we do it well, transport becomes an invisible social service, moving from point A to point B is as effortless as stepping through a door. This is our urban dream, a 45-minute city and 20-minute town. This dream, of freedom and connectivity, is not new. Although at the time of our Independence 60 years ago, there were immense challenges in ensuring Singapore’s survival, from clean water to housing, such that transport may have seem to be a poorer, lesser cousin. Yet, transport is a peculiar policy problem. Once laid down, whether planned or organic, transport lines carve out their place in the history of a place; implacable, immovable and, for better or worse, they shape the fate of cities. We see this now in the gridlocked congested lives of many cities, whose systems had not been built to accommodate growth. It is Singapore's good fortune that our early Governments built for the future. But transport is not just a decision of the past. It demands ceaseless attention to keep pace with the needs and lives of the people it serves. To neglect investments is to accept time spent in traffic jams, accidents, breakdowns, workdays lost and important occasions missed.”
“I am grateful to the hon Member for his clarification. May I just point out that the planning parameters apply not just to Nanyang but across Singapore. It was mentioned by the hon Member the Gek Poh MRT station was not completed. So, we really, at the end of the day, plan bus routes in relation to expressed needs and there is a balance to be struck. I hope that the hon Member will be able to explain that to his residents.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I appreciate the anxiety of Nanyang residents, as expressed by the hon Member. It would be I believe, a matter of time before the JRL is completed and they would see the benefits. As was mentioned by the hon Member, there are four MRT stations that they can access. At this present moment, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has provided bus services to connect residents to transport nodes and amenities across Jurong region, which includes Nanyang Division. And LTA regularly monitors the travel demand in this region. Through the Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme, LTA has been improving existing services and introducing new bus services, especially for residents in new estates that are further from existing transport nodes. And we are continually reviewing them as and when the demand is expressed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in response to the hon Member Mr Ang Wei Neng, as of end August 2025, Jurong Region Line (JRL) Stage 1 is more than 70% complete. We had previously announced that the JRL will open in phases between 2027 and 2029. We will share more details in early 2026 after we reach an important milestone in completion of further civil works on the JRL.”
“Sir, I completely appreciate the hon Member Mr Liang's views on behalf of his resident. As mentioned in my answer, there are a number of help measures and the issue perhaps is awareness. We seek his cooperation to bring to the attention of the resident these avenues and hopefully, through this, she will get the assistance that she needs.”
“Sir, orders of the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT) are like any other Court orders and are enforced through the State Courts. The process of applying for enforcement orders has been simplified with the introduction of the revised Rules of Court in 2021. It is now only necessary to file a single application for an enforcement order in the District Court. Claimants who wish to enforce an order of the SCT also have the following means of assistance. Individuals with limited means may apply for legal advice and legal aid from the Legal Aid Bureau (LAB). More information on the eligibility criteria can be found at the LAB E-Services Portal on the Ministry of Law’s (MinLaw's) website. Parties who are unclear about the process can also seek advice from the Community Justice Centre, which is located on-site at the State Courts. There are also legal clinics, like those organised by the Law Society Pro Bono SG and supported by MinLaw, which provide assistance and advice in specific cases. More information on legal assistance can be found on MinLaw’s website link to “Legal Support Resources Available to Members of the Public”. MinLaw is working with stakeholders on further changes to make the enforcement of civil judgments, including SCT orders, as was mentioned by the hon Second Minister for Law at the Committee of Supply debates earlier this year.”
“Sir, in response to the hon Member, Mr Saktiandi Supaat's questions, while we have unfortunately seen a few passenger fatalities in the recent years, our broader accident patterns have remained actually quite stable. The bus network serves around four million trips per day and almost all of these trips are completed safely. Of course, we are still concerned about the ageing population and the impact of falls on board could be more serious for them. So, even as an absolute number, we have not seen a rising trend of such incidents. We have taken measures such as improving the design of our public buses to have dedicated priority seats, and the hon Member would note that these seats are usually at the exits, and also having non-slip flooring materials. As part of the enhancements recommended by the Bus Safety Tripartite Task Force, we are also looking into new technological tools and regular refresher training for our Bus Captains in safe and defensive driving techniques. We are working with the bus operators to progressively implement the recommendations of the task force from the second half of 2025. More details will be shared at a later date.”
“Sir, over the past 10 years, there were five bus passenger fatalities. Four of these fatalities involved elderly commuters falling onboard, while the remaining case was the result of a serious collision. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) works closely with the public bus operators to maintain and improve bus safety. Public buses in Singapore are equipped with features such as dedicated priority seats, non-slip flooring materials, bus kneeling function at bus stops, and grab bars at exit doors to facilitate boarding and alighting. Bus captains are also trained to ensure that elderly commuters are safely seated before moving off and to avoid harsh acceleration, braking or jerky movement. LTA and the public bus operators also raise awareness amongst commuters on safe commuting practices. These include public education campaigns to promote safer habits, such as holding onto handrails or grab poles when standing or using the stairwell, and encouraging fellow commuters to look out for vulnerable commuters such as the elderly when onboard buses. To further enhance bus safety, the Government has accepted the recommendations from the Bus Safety Tripartite Taskforce to improve the safety of commuters onboard buses. These include introducing audio reminders on our public buses to alert commuters that the bus is moving off, equipping our bus fleet with more safety technology to alert Bus Captains to potential safety risks and to modify our public buses to reduce sharp acceleration that could cause commuters to lose their balance when buses are moving off.”
“Sir, in relation to the occupational drivers, some of the recommendations that we have made under the Bus Safety Tripartite Taskforce may be reviewed to see whether they are applicable. As the hon Member would appreciate, my focus or at least my task force's focus, was really looking at the bus captains in the public transport arena, and not in the private sector. And perhaps it is time to visit these recommendations with them and see what can be taken on board.”
“Sir, in relation to the question posed by the hon Member Mr Saktiandi Supaat on whether there will be medical reviews for the bus drivers, firstly, may I just clarify that the drawing of a parallel between a bus captain and a pilot was made by Brother Peh, the Vice President of the National Transport Workers' Union. I can understand why he made that comparison. As far as regular check-ups are concerned, I am personally aware that this is something that is done through the tripartite mechanism with the unions as well as the public transport operators and perhaps, we could look at that area to see what else can be done. 5.15 pm”