Ng Eng Hen
Singapore
“I think we try to keep this virtuous state of affairs as long as we can to make sure that we can invest steadily. Year-to-year fluctuations would occur, whether it is economic, not so much in COVID-19, but remember the Global Financial Crisis? Everybody needs to take a haircut. If you have to take a haircut, you have to take a haircut.”
“Mr Chairman, as the World around us becomes more unpredictable and changes, the more we need to keep the strongest commitment to strengthen our own defences and, if needed, we must be willing to do more. Singapore celebrates 60 years of Independence this year.”
“MINDEF will continue to work with partners to encourage Singaporeans to raise their digital literacy, develop and maintain good cybersecurity habits, protect sensitive data and guard against scams, fake news and disinformation so as to make the digital domain a safer and more secure space.”
“The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) conducts regular mobilisation exercises (MOBEX) of our National Service (NS) forces. In a silent mobilisation, NSmen are notified through their personal contact numbers. Open mobilisations include the broadcast of unit code-words through mass media.”
“In 2020, the Ministry of Defence replied to a Parliamentary Question on this matter that the relocation of Paya Lebar Air Base (PLAB) would likely occur around 2030 or beyond, after Changi Air Base and Tengah Air Base have been expanded to house the existing assets at PLAB.”
“When incidents or near-misses happen, as it did where one Hunter armoured fighting vehicle rear-ended another during Exercise Wallaby in Australia, thorough investigations are conducted and lessons learnt shared across the units.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,266 lines we hold for Ng Eng Hen, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 46.
“First, the ERPSS agreed with the COI’s preliminary assessment on the cause of death, as earlier stated. Second, the panel emphasised that it is essential for personnel to comply with safety rules promulgated in the approved operating manuals. Breaches, such as those found by the COI in this case, should not be condoned. Third, the ERPSS highlighted the value of strengthening the safety culture in Army units. They felt that if each soldier takes greater personal ownership and responsibility for safety, it would bring about desirable behaviours, such as (a) having a strong respect for safety rules and guidelines; (b) being willing to speak out when there are safety concerns; (c) taking care of one another; and (d) open-reporting, so as to share lessons and prevent future accidents. Such behaviours would substantially strengthen the Army’s efforts to ensure safe training. Finally, the ERPSS flagged out three areas for further emphasis based on the COI’s findings. First, the need to strengthen commanders’ knowledge on heat injuries and improve their decision-making processes. Second, for medics to be able to exercise their professional authority when dealing with medical issues. This includes being able to communicate effectively with commanders who are much more senior than them. Third, for commanders to watch out for soldiers who are feeling unwell or are unable to cope and proactively pull them out of training before they get injured. The COI will submit its final report after completion of the Police investigations and Coroner’s Inquiry, if held. Let me now focus on what the SAF has done or will put in place to reduce the risks of heat injuries so that we can achieve zero training fatalities.”
“This was more than two weeks before the fast march on 18 April. Let me conclude with the COI’s preliminary assessment on the cause of death. The COI found that CFC Lee’s death was the result of heat stroke leading to multiple organ injury. Other than this, the COI did not find any physical injury sustained, as verified by the autopsy, nor any evidence indicating any foul play or medical negligence that caused his death. While the COI was unable to ascertain the direct causes which led CFC Lee to suffer from his heat stroke, it noted that possible contributing causes were accumulated fatigue, insufficient rest, CFC Lee’s less than optimal state of health and his potential use of medication. However, the COI’s preliminary assessment was that the likely reasons for CFC Lee succumbing to the heat stroke were inadequate onsite casualty management and delayed evacuation to the medical centre. The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) will await the outcome of the Police investigations and Coroner’s Inquiry, as well as the Attorney-General’s Chambers' decision whether to prosecute any persons in the criminal Court. If no criminal charges are filed, MINDEF will prosecute persons responsible for lapses in this incident in our military Court. In the meantime, the relevant persons in this incident had been removed from command. Let me share the findings of the External Review Panel. With your permission, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a copy of the ERPSS’ statement?”
“However, there was a significant gap between the onset of symptoms and his arrival at the medical centre. On arrival at the Bedok Camp Medical Centre, CFC Lee was semi-conscious. His temperature taken measured 42.7o Celsius (C). Two bags of fast IV drip were administered and he was also placed in the Body Cooling Unit, for two cycles. Seeing that CFC Lee was not responding to the treatment, the Medical Officer decided to evacuate him to the Changi General Hospital. The Medical Officer accompanied CFC Lee in the SAF ambulance to Changi General Hospital’s Accident and Emergency (A&E) department where he was handed over and admitted to the Intensive Care Unit. Unfortunately, his condition deteriorated and he passed away on 30 April 2018. This was 12 days later. The COI opined that the significant delay from the time of symptoms to evacuation could have escalated the heat injury to a heat stroke. Full body cooling should have been instituted as soon as possible and within 30 minutes of presentation of signs and symptoms. The delay in evacuation resulted as the persons attending to CFC Lee mistook his signs and symptoms as being due to physical exhaustion. Though trained, they had never encountered any previous case of heat injury themselves. There were several suggestions for CFC Lee to be evacuated, but these calls were either not heard or not heeded. For completeness, let me share the COI’s finding on one other aspect, which is CFC Lee’s state of health prior to the fast march. While CFC Lee had no significant medical history, it was established that he had been taking some medication in the weeks prior to the fast march following a visit to the Jurong Polyclinic on 31 March 2018 for acute upper respiratory tract infection.”
“After the conduct of warm-up exercises, the fast march commenced just before sunrise with the troopers despatched in four waves, at five-minute intervals. Each wave included a commander as a rear sweeper. CFC Lee was in the fourth wave – the last wave. After CFC Lee completed the first six km, he had a mandated 20-minute rest. After the 20-minute rest period, as CFC Lee was moving off for the last two km, he sounded off to the commanders that he had cramps in his calf muscles. They advised him to stretch his calf muscles, which he did, and encouraged him to complete the march. CFC Lee was the last one to complete the eight-km fast march in around 100 minutes, including the 20-minute break. Shortly after the fast march, as CFC Lee was walking from the end point of the fast march to the Support Company line, he was observed to be disoriented and immediately attended to by the commander/s and the cover medic/s. Let me now state the findings at the completion of the eight-km fast march. After the fast march, the persons attending to CFC Lee thought that he was suffering from physical exhaustion. His pulse was assessed to be normal and his skin felt cold to touch. His temperature was not taken. The first aid that was administered comprised the removal of CFC Lee’s equipment, unbuttoning his uniform, applying ice packs at his vital points, pouring water on him and giving him water. He was also given oxygen. However, the COI noted that the onsite cooling measures administered were inadequate, including the failure to administer an onsite intravenous (IV) drip, the improper placement of ice packs and the improper use of a ground sheet. When his condition did not improve, CFC Lee was subsequently evacuated to the medical centre.”
“The COI's assessment was that the conduct of the fast march was in line with the lesson plan and relevant regulations. CFC Lee had undergone the requisite build-up training prior to the eight-km fast march, and all measures to prevent heat injuries according to the TSR had been complied with – which are temperature-taking regime, hydration regime, water supply where soldiers must carry water and have resupply points planned for, work-rest cycle based on the Wet Bulb Globe Temperature, and rest management, except that CFC Lee and his platoon did not have the requisite seven hours of sleep that I have just mentioned. Before the fast march, CFC Lee had taken his temperature, which was normal at 36.3°C, and had drunk water. This was witnessed by his buddy, who also observed him to be looking well and seemed to be his usual self. CFC Lee and his fellow scout troopers then consumed their Recommended Dietary Allowance, which consisted of an oatmeal cracker and chrysanthemum drink. Thereafter, the safety brief was conducted by the Conducting Officer. Troopers were asked if they had completed their six-km fast march build-up training, completed their water parade, and had seven hours of uninterrupted rest, and taken their body temperature during the declaration. The troops were asked to declare if they had. The Conducting Officer had checked if there was anyone who was not feeling well. Three troopers stood out as they had not completed their six-km fast march and were subsequently deployed as marshals. No one else sounded off any other concerns when the checks were made. This was followed by the conduct of warm-up exercises to get the troopers ready for the eight-km fast march.”
“40 pm, the entire Scout Platoon, including CFC Lee, were told to fall-in in their No 4 uniforms and assault bags. The commander/s had wanted to punish the platoon collectively for the perceived lack of teamwork and the use of mobile phones after Lights Out, in particular, by two troopers, despite repeated warnings. At 9.45 pm, the commander/s meted out the informal punishment. This was in the form of physical exercises, which comprised Bear Crawls, Sprints, Leopard Crawls, as well as Push-Ups and Crunches. In total, it was from 30 to 35 minutes. They also had water poured over the troopers from their water bottles and subsequently from the jerry can. The session ended with the troopers reciting the Guards Creed a few times in a high kneel position. As I have said, the entire session lasted for about 30 to 35 minutes. The platoon was eventually sent back to their bunks at about 10.25 pm to wash up and had Lights Out by 10.45 pm. The troopers were also instructed by commanders not to switch on the lights in their bunks. The COI noted that the commanders did not seek prior approval for the conduct of this informal punishment or inform their superiors after the punishment. While the majority of the troopers interviewed opined that the commanders were good commanders who demanded high standards, this punishment was unauthorised. The COI found that the conduct of unauthorised informal punishment compromised the seven hours of uninterrupted rest as the trainees had about six hours 15 minutes instead. Less sleep could be one of the factors which caused CFC Lee to have more fatigue before participating in the fast march. Let me move on to the day of the heat stroke.”
“On 17 April this year, CFC Dave Lee and the troopers from the Support Company participated in two physical training sessions in Bedok Camp, namely, Combat Circuit 4 from 6.30 am to 7.30 am at the hockey pitch, and Cardiovascular 6, followed by Balance, Flexibility and Mobility 6 from 3.30 pm to 5.30 pm at the running track. This was a day before the heat stroke. The COI found the training for Combat Circuit 4 to be compliant with regulations or guidelines. However, the COI did discover breaches of the Army's Training Safety Regulations (TSR) for Cardiovascular 6 and breaches of the Army's directive for another subsequent event that took place later that day. Let me, first, deal with Cardiovascular 6. In this lesson, soldiers had to run six laps of 400 metres each, a total of 2.4 kilometres (km). They have to run according to the lesson plan, grouped according to their running ability. However, the entire company was asked to run at a common pace. This meant that, for the first three laps, CFC Lee was asked to run at a slightly faster pace than required, of about 10 seconds faster per lap. For the next three laps, CFC Lee was allowed to run at his own pace. The rest timing in between each lap was noted to be reduced to one minute, which is 45 seconds shorter than what was stipulated in the lesson plan. These deviations were a breach of Training Safety Regulations. The reason given was that the commanders wanted to enhance fitness and foster greater cohesion by keeping the platoon intact, and the soldiers running at the same pace, not in groups. Later that night, before the fast march the next day, the collective punishment that was meted out to CFC Lee's platoon was also not authorised. At about 9.”
“Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to make this Statement. In May this year, I informed the House that a Committee of Inquiry (COI) would be convened to investigate the death of full-time National Serviceman Corporal (First Class) (CFC) Dave Lee that occurred on 30 April 2018. The COI has submitted its preliminary findings to the Armed Forces Council on 16 July this year and I would like to update this House on their findings, as well as follow-up actions taken by the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) since May. Under the SAF Act, the COI is structured primarily to investigate and determine facts related to the incident and to identify causation, lapses and systemic problems, if any, which resulted in the incident. The COI does not deal with culpability of individuals. Specifically, to encourage disclosure and cooperation by all involved in the incident, section 8C of the SAF Act provides that no statements made to the COI shall be admissible as evidence in a Court Martial or for disciplinary proceedings. To keep to this remit, I will, therefore, use no names nor designations in this Statement but instead use a generic term – commander/s or person/s, as appropriate. As I mentioned in May to this House, Police investigations are ongoing and the Coroner may hold an inquiry. Their procedures and evidence uncovered are part of the judicial process to determine if any criminal offence has been committed in this incident and are separate from the COI. In May, I had also informed this House that the COI would submit its report to the External Review Panel on SAF Safety (ERPSS). The COI has done so for their preliminary assessment and I will also be sharing the ERPSS' responses and recommendations. Let me start with events that occurred the day before the heat stroke occurred.”
“Let me answer the first question, which is more factual. If I said so in Parliament, it must be so. The Hansard says so and there is no change in our deferment policy. On the fundamental principles, we must maintain equity for all National Servicemen, and it must be for national interest, never for personal interest. So, that has not changed. In fact, it has not changed over the time that MINDEF has administered this policy. On the second question, my reply to Dr Lim Wee Kiak is that I really do not want to engage in hypothetical circumstances. We assess the individual as it is. It is hypothetical, indeed. If you are not willing to come back to serve your NS when you are earning a few hundred pounds a week, how is MINDEF to believe that you would come back when you are earning many times more? So, that has to come into consideration. And also he has to serve the purposes for deferment based on our current policy.”
“The answer is yes, if it satisfies the criteria that I talked about, that we maintain equity for all other National Servicemen, and that it serves the national interest, never their own. The first example the Member gave was that he competes in tennis and then he decides he wants to be a professional tennis player before he comes back, obviously, that will affect our considerations. The second question is outstanding achievements. Yes, in fact, we have. We have gone on record to say that we have deferred some very exceptional musicians. And as I have said, it is not a science and, for the cases that we have deferred, they went on to their development and enlisted either at the same time or very soon after their cohorts were also enlisted. So, there was equity maintained. Similarly, for academic. I know that we have on record somebody who entered university in his teens but completed his university education at the same time that his cohorts went to the army and he went in together with them. So, those considerations are maintained. So, the key considerations are how do we maintain equity for all National Servicemen, and for national interests.”
“Mr Speaker, I am not privy to all the facts for Mr Davis – or MINDEF is not privy to all the facts – as I understand it. By the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) rules, he has not played for Singapore. So, he is still free to choose which country he wants to play for. FIFA rules are quite interesting, and this is from my understanding; I stand corrected, but you can only choose one country for the rest of your life. That particular shirt you wear can never be changed. Even if you change your citizenship, you can only represent one country. In that sense, I think they have taken a particular philosophy. The question is: do you peg those deferred? The key consideration is national interest. There is a misconception that you can be deferred if you are exceptionally talented. That is not the Enlistment Act. How do you decide between one who is exceptionally talented versus another with exceptional circumstances? Someone who is poor who needs to work to support his family because the parents are sick. From the Court's point of view, they have ruled that personal considerations – put aside. That has been the basis and I think that is correct. Now, obviously, you need some talent, exceptional talent, to be able to compete and bring glory to the country. That is a given. We judge it on that basis. It is never easy, it is not a science. We will consider each case with all the facts and make a decision and tell the public, if not satisfy the majority of National Servicemen, who put aside personal considerations to do their National Service duties.”
“Mr Speaker, as Member of Parliament Dr Lim Wee Kiak noted, I have given a long reply. Because this is crucial to state the fundamentals of our National Service policy and from that, whether deferment or disruption can be given. We have to understand that our Courts have upheld it. I said, after the revision of the sentencing benchmarks, 13 defaulters went to jail. So, the Courts take it very seriously and I know Members here, too. The Member asked specifically whether there has been a trend in increased applications. I do not have the figures but I do not think so. What MINDEF has done is to, on its own, work with MCCY and SportSG to increase flexibility, and I gave some details in terms of adjusting enlistment dates, disruptions, time off. And the fact that we have fewer people disrupting or taking up the offers to disrupt indicates to me that they probably have weighed what they wanted to do and did not see the need to disrupt.”
“These many examples show that MINDEF has exercised flexibility towards sportsmen competing in team sports, a question asked by Dr Intan Mokhtar, Mr Muhamad Faisal and others. But we have done so without transgressing the fundamentals of National Service and still maintaining equity for all National Servicemen. MINDEF will work with MCCY, SportSG and other relevant agencies through various pathways that can allow sportsmen to do well and still fulfil their National Service obligations, whether it is individual or team sports.”
“In fact, Saifullah Akbar will finish his National Service today and he is going to try out for a European club. You may have read his interviews, they asked him, "How did you feel when you were called up for National Service?" He said, "I tried to have a positive attitude. I told myself that army training will strengthen me. And now that I have finished NS, I can go on to pursue my dreams". For him, it was never a choice that he had to make not to fulfil his National Service obligations like everyone else. He said, "I had to train harder" but he kept a positive attitude. That is the kind of example we want young Singaporeans to emulate. For the recent SEA Games in 2015 and 2017, MINDEF supported those competing, whether they were competing individually or as a team. We adjusted some enlistment dates for National Servicemen, so that they could participate in the Games first and enlist later. This included some footballers. Those who were already enlisted were given time off to train and maintain their peak performance. For the upcoming Asian Games later this month, so far, 10 of our National Servicemen have been given a short postponement of their enlistment of a few weeks, or if they have been enlisted, they have been given time off to train for the Games. This includes a member of the Water Polo team who clinched their 27th straight SEA Games Gold last year. We wish all these sportsmen every success and hope that they can continue to do well for Singapore in the Asian Games and beyond. MINDEF has done more. Beyond these provisions, we have offered disruption to Full-time National Servicemen (NSFs) competing in these games. But very few have chosen to disrupt, presumably because they are able to train adequately in the SAF.”
“Many talented sportsmen have served National Service as required and yet, at the same time, raised the level of their own skills and the teams they played with. To MINDEF's knowledge, there are three other footballers who have also been talent-spotted to take part in trials for professional leagues overseas. All three have completed their National Service as required – Saifullah Akbar, and Ikhsan and Irfan Fandi. In fact, Saifullah Akbar and Ikhsan Fandi asked to be enlisted early, presumably so that they could complete their NS first to pursue their professional careers. Prior to enlisting, Saifullah played for the Under-16 national team and he was actually spotted by a professional Australian club at age 16 but he went ahead to enlist for NS. During their National Service, Irfan and Ikhsan trained and played for the Under-22 national team during the 2017 Southeast Asian (SEA) Games. They were supported by the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) and Home Team. Irfan and Ikhsan are now playing for the Young Lions in the Singapore Premier League and representing Singapore in regional football competitions. I understand Irfan has gone for trials with European clubs, including an upcoming trial with Sporting Braga, and Saifullah and Ikhsan are slated to follow suit at CD Tenerife and Braga. I am not a football fan, so these clubs are quite foreign to me, but you would know it, football fans out there. This is a good sign for football in Singapore and talented footballers. Talented footballers, Ben Davis included, can emulate the example of Irfan, Saifullah and Ikhsan to complete their National Service duties as required and also advance their professional football careers.”
“It would also erode the basis on which our Courts have upheld the Enlistment Act passed by Parliament and punished those for not fulfilling their NS liabilities but instead pursue their own personal concerns and careers. As a writer, Mr Patrick Tan Siong Kuan, wrote to The Straits Times Forum, "The defence of our country cannot be a matter of serving when it is most convenient. It is a responsibility that every man must take seriously when called upon, regardless of race, family connections or financial status. It takes personal sacrifice and putting the country before self. Otherwise, there will be no Singapore tomorrow." Mr Suresh Nair who wrote to the MINDEF Feedback Unit said this, "If Davis is proud of his red passport, he must do what every Singapore teenager does, to dutifully observe the National Service obligations." I know it must be difficult for a 17-year-old, Mr Ben Davis, to receive such public attention. It was never MINDEF's intent, but we had to respond to his father’s claims to the media to explain to Members of Parliament and Singaporeans the basis of our decision on this crucial national policy. I have dealt with the application by Mr Harvey Davis for his son. Let me now address the important issue that Members of Parliament have asked – can we and how do we achieve sporting excellence, including for team sports, if National Service duties are to be fulfilled? I think that was the second thing most Members asked. National Service does require sacrifices, certainly personal ones, but performing one’s National Service duties and pursuing national aspirations for sports excellence need not be mutually exclusive.”
“If Mr Ben Davis will not give up his senior contract, which he is now offered, which provides for an allowance of a few hundred pounds a week, to serve his NS, it is even more unlikely that he will return to serve NS if he subsequently gets offered a contract worth many times more. And if he is not given a further contract with Fulham FC, the father has said that he may find other clubs which his son can be loaned to. The application by Mr Harvey Davis for his son’s deferment is to further his son’s professional career first and to the longest extent possible. He has been quite open about this. And you would have read what he said. Singapore and her interests, including his son's NS obligations, are secondary considerations, if at all. There has been no indication, commitment or plans as to how Mr Ben Davis would help football standards in Singapore, if deferred. Mr Harvey Davis has urged MINDEF to approve deferment for his son so that it would serve as an inspiration, he tells us, for the 1,000 students registered with his company Junior Soccer School and League Singapore (JSSL Singapore), 500 or so who are local. For your information, JSSL Singapore is a youth football club and academy business run by Mr Harvey Davis and advertises itself as having links to Fulham FC. MINDEF could not find any valid grounds to approve the application for deferment by Mr Harvey Davis for his son. There is no commitment to serve Singapore or our national interests. To grant deferment to Mr Ben Davis to pursue his personal development and professional career would be unfair to the many others who have served their NS dutifully as required, and not at a time of their choosing.”
“First, Mr Ben Davis is playing for Fulham FC as an English national, not a Singaporean Citizen. MINDEF is not privy to the contract signed between them, but we assume this published information is correct and that the father must have his reasons for doing so. Second, Mr Harvey Davis has consistently refused to indicate when his son would return to serve NS, if deferred. The father replied to MCCY, Sport Singapore (SportSG) and Football Association of Singapore (FAS), stating, "We are unable to commit to a date for his return should he be playing professional football in the United Kingdom or Europe. In addition, it is also a possibility that Ben could be offered a new two-year contract in 2019 after the first year of his pro contract just like he has been offered a new two-year pro contract halfway through his two-year scholarship contract. Or he could be sent out on loan or sold to another club. There are a lot of variables all dependent on his development and progression." Third, if he was not granted deferment, the father indicated that Mr Ben Davis would still proceed to sign the contract, and he has done so. The reason given by the father was that his son would only return to fulfil his NS commitment if he is unsuccessful in his professional career. In fact, Mr Harvey Davis went further after MINDEF rejected the application – that he would consider the option for his son to renounce his Singapore citizenship in order to pursue his career. The father's responses made clear his intent for his son to pursue a professional football career to the fullest.”
“We discussed it with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) on the standards required for their training. Neither was deferment open-ended nor unconditional. They will have to return to serve NS, and if they do not meet the standards agreed upon, deferment will be curtailed. These strict conditions are necessary because even for these individuals who can bring glory to Singapore, there are detractors, who think it is unfair for anyone to be deferred. Mr T Ng wrote to MINDEF, “Please be fair to all Singaporean males, who spent years serving NS. Every Singaporean male’s career is important from his own point of view.” Disruption for individuals after they are enlisted for NS follows the same principles and is also given only for national reasons. We disrupt medical students to complete their medical studies because we need them to serve as Medical Officers during their NS to take care of their fellow soldiers. It is not a personal career choice. We need them. It is not an entitlement, and once the reasons are no longer valid, the disruption will end. No discussions. For example, we previously allowed overseas medical students to disrupt, but this was stopped in 1992, when we could produce enough doctors locally. You can appeal, but we will just say "no", because we have enough. Similarly, dental students were not disrupted after 1989, as there was no need for NS Dental Officers. And for transparency, MINDEF publishes a full list of all medical students who are disrupted every year. Having stated the general principles, let me explain why the application by Mr Harvey Davis for his son's deferment was rejected even though MINDEF recognised his son, Mr Ben Davis' achievement in obtaining a senior contract with Fulham Football Club (FC).”
“We may have forgotten it or diluted it, but the Enlistment Act stands. The written judgment noted that everyone was asked to do his "fair share". "This entails every citizen who is required to serve NS making sacrifices or postponing individual goals to serve the nation when the nation needs his service". The sum of it – these arguments spell out in unequivocal terms the NS obligations for every Singaporean male. So, deferment cannot be for the individual, no matter how talented, to pursue his own interests or career. In other words, because I am so exceptional in talent, I deserve to be deferred. This is not the Enlistment Act. No matter how talented, and even if it vicariously brings credit or fame to Singapore because that would be fundamentally wrong and goes against the core principle of equity. The Enlistment Act is blind to talent, personal considerations, personal circumstances. Some Singaporeans have voiced the same opinions over Mr Davis' application. I assume Members filed these questions as a result of that. Mr Suresh Nair, who wrote to our feedback unit and said this, "Let this Davis case be the right and timely reminder of the need for absolute fairness in applying laws regarding NS deferment". He has understood this. Therefore, to preserve equity for all National Servicemen, MINDEF will only defer individuals very selectively if their deferment serves Singapore's interest first and foremost, never their own. That is the only basis. This was the only basis to defer three sportsmen, swimmers Joseph Schooling and Quah Zheng Wen, and sailor Maximilian Soh, from NS so that they could train and compete in the Olympics. The sportsmen who were deferred, knew this because clear expectations were laid out when deferment was given.”
“That Ministerial Statement, coupled with the written judgment of the Appellate High Court, illuminates the fundamentals on which our NS policy is based, that we must not unwittingly weaken lest we undo this nation’s foundations. I urge all Members to read them. It is crucial. The judges opined that, "In practical terms, what the three fundamental principles of national security, universality and equity mean is that in order to ensure Singapore's national survival, every male Singaporean must serve NS and at the time he is required to under the (Enlistment) Act, without regard to his personal convenience and considerations. When a person refuses to serve NS at the time that he is required to and instead returns to serve at a time of his own choosing, or worse, at an age when he can no longer serve, his actions strike at the very core of the principles of national security, universality and equity." Thirteen NS defaulters were prosecuted after the new sentencing framework was established last year. In Court, in every case, each of them gave reasons why he did not enlist as required. Some wanted to complete their university degree first before NS. Others said they had to support their families. But in every case, in every judgment, the Courts dismissed these personal reasons, convicted and sentenced them to jail because, harsh as it is, the Enlistment Act is blind to "personal convenience and considerations", no matter how talented the individual, no matter how exceptional his circumstances. That is the core of the Enlistment Act. The critical need for a strong defence puts aside personal pursuits and mandates that each liable male performs his NS when required. This is the law our founding leaders and subsequent leaders passed in this House.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Members for their questions. It allows MINDEF to explain our policies. Singapore's founding leaders knew the strict conditions that National Service (NS) would impose on its citizens when they passed the National Service (Amendment) Bill. This was 51 years ago and the Enlistment Act in 1970. In 1984, just as he was about to retire, a reflective Dr Goh Keng Swee acknowledged it plain and simple, "National Service imposes (not only) a great sacrifice of time and money on the young men called up." But Dr Goh followed with the reason why this sacrifice was called for and why NS was crucial to our nation's survival. I continue, quote, Dr Goh's words, "deep in his heart, the average Singapore Citizen knows the danger he faces are real and not hypothetical, and that there is a need to defend ourselves." The Appellate High Court also brought their minds to bear on our NS policy, just as recently as 2017, last year. This was during an appeal on the sentencing of NS defaulters. Their written judgment spelt out the reasons why more stringent sentencing benchmarks were justified but those same reasons lie at the heart of what various Members of Parliament (MPs) asked today – Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Mr Darryl David, Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, Ms Joan Pereira, Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, and Dr Intan Mokhtar in her Question for Written Answer. In various forms, they asked these questions: how strict is this requirement for every male to serve his NS when required? What exceptions or flexibility can be given? It was a landmark decision, presided over by the Chief Justice. The Appellate High Court referred to Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean's Ministerial Statement given in 2006 to this House, when he was Defence Minister.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take the six PQs that are directed to MINDEF and to give a common reply from Question Nos 20 to 25?”
“Mr Speaker, I am not making a Ministerial Statement. I am replying to the PQs.”
“Mr Speaker, let me thank Members for their questions that allow the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) to explain our policies.”
“Medical assessments of our servicemen made by medical practitioners in both the private and public sectors will be considered objectively by Medical Officers in the SAF and are not treated differently. While these medical practitioners may make recommendations for changes to a serviceman's PES grade based on his clinical diagnosis, his final PES grade will take into account the operational context and requirements of the SAF, thus ensuring that each serviceman will contribute optimally during his National Service.”
“National Servicemen are assigned a Physical Employment Standard (PES) based on their medical condition. The assigned PES grade helps the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) determine the type of vocations that are compatible with the serviceman’s medical condition. The PES grade is first assigned to the serviceman at the Central Manpower Base as part of pre-enlistment medical screening. This is based on a review of the serviceman's medical history, including pre-existing medical conditions, and a medical examination. Servicemen are expected to declare any pre-existing medical conditions or diagnosis and provide relevant information from their personal medical practitioners. Where needed, servicemen will be referred for further specialist assessment at a public restructured hospital. All this information is taken into account to ensure accuracy of his PES grading. A serviceman's PES grading is updated as and when there are changes to his medical condition or health status, to ensure that his PES grade is accurate. A PES grade re-assignment is undertaken by the SAF Medical Board through an objective and thorough review process. The SAF Medical Board is chaired by a senior regular Medical Officer holding the rank of Major (MAJ) or Lieutenant-Colonel (LTC), with two other Medical Officers. Where the servicemen’s medical condition is complex and requires further specialist opinion, these cases will be referred to the Specialist Medical Board. Specialist Medical Boards are chaired by an SAF Medical Officer who holds the rank of LTC and is a certified medical specialist. The board also includes a civilian senior medical specialist who is appointed by the SAF to provide objective specialist advice.”
“In 2016, four full-time National Servicemen (NSFs) were prosecuted in the Military Court for bullying a fellow NSF. All were sentenced to between two and four weeks in the SAF Detention Barracks. In 2005, the Supervising Officer, Conducting Officer and instructors from the Commando unit who were involved in the death of a trainee after being submerged in water during a Combat Survival Training course were sentenced to six to 12 months' imprisonment by the State Courts. In 2012, an SAF vehicle overturned during an exercise which caused the death of a soldier. The Conducting Officer who appointed the serviceman to drive the military vehicle even when he knew that the serviceman did not have a driving licence was convicted in the criminal Courts and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. The officer was found to have committed a rash act and attempted to pervert the course of justice. SAF soldiers are encouraged to report any unauthorised activity or punishment. New recruits are specifically briefed on how they can do so. They can either report it through their unit superiors or contact the MINDEF Feedback Unit. The number is 1800 367 6767. It is an easy number to remember, 1800 367 6767. And there are SAF Safety Hotlines for the Army, Navy and Air Force [Army Safety Hotline (9732 3891), Navy Safety Hotline (9172 3389), Air Force Safety Hotline (9234 7233)]. I have listed them in my reply to be distributed to the press, as well as recorded in the Hansard so that people will know these numbers and they know that they can report any unauthorised activity or punishment. Every complaint is investigated fully and those caught doing wrong will be prosecuted.”
“Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) take a zero-tolerance approach towards any form of abuse of soldiers or personnel, either by their commanders or peers. While military training aims to build up the physical and psychological resilience of soldiers and instil discipline, the safety of soldiers need not be compromised. Acts of humiliation are specifically prohibited. Over the years, SAF has put in place a comprehensive safety management system where all training activities conducted are required to be authorised. Each activity is clearly outlined with safety measures and limits, with an approved Safety Management Plan with a Supervising Officer, Conducting Officer and a Safety Officer present throughout. Additional physical training as a form of informal punishment can only be meted out in accordance with stipulated guidelines and based on commanders’ seniority, as prescribed in the SAF Joint Manpower Directive 4-4 on the Informal Punishment System. For all activities, the safety of individual soldiers is paramount, and Commanders must take corrective measures to mitigate risks to their soldiers, where necessary. Similarly, unit orientation activities can only be conducted if authorised and not endanger the well-being of any serviceman. These requirements that I have just spelt out are consistent with the core values of SAF and are known to Commanders. SAF personnel who conduct unauthorised activities, engage in bullying or have wilfully or negligently not complied with training safety regulations have been and will continue to be severely dealt with and prosecuted either by Summary Trials or General Court Martial within the SAF or criminal prosecution in the State Courts.”
“This new module will equip SVs with the knowledge and skills to aid others and support first responders in the event of a terrorist attack. SAFVC has also expanded the range and scale of deployment opportunities for SVs to provide more avenues for their participation. For instance, more SVs are now deployed to support key national and SAF events, such as the National Day Parade, Army Open House and the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF)50@Heartlands exhibition. This year, MINDEF/SAF has launched 15 new roles for SVs, to allow more SVs to contribute to national defence in more areas of interest and expertise, such as Safety, Counselling, Music, Engineering and Supply Chain. Along with the introduction of the new roles, SVs will also be equipped with the required skills to carry out their duties effectively.”
“Since the Singapore Armed Forces Volunteer Corps (SAFVC) was launched in October 2014, more than 700 SAFVC Volunteers (SVs) have been carefully selected, out of over 2,700 applications received. We are also heartened by the strong commitment and enthusiasm shown by our SVs, with a low dropout rate of 3%. The reasons cited for dropping out were mainly due to being unable to meet the medical and training requirements. Our pool of SVs comprises a good balance of males and females, with over 40% being females. The high number of interested females is heartening, and many of them have excelled. SV1 Nur Fadilah Bte Judir is one example. SV1 Fadilah had joined SAFVC to better understand and appreciate what male Singaporeans go through to defend Singapore. Through her SAFVC training and subsequent deployment as an Auxiliary Security Trooper, she was able to develop the necessary skills and knowledge to contribute to national defence. The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF)/Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) have continually looked at ways to enhance the SAFVC scheme to better achieve its objectives of allowing more Singaporeans and Permanent Residents to contribute to national defence, show support for National Service, and deepen their understanding and ownership of national defence. SVs are deployed alongside National Servicemen and regulars to support the SAF's operations and training, and the SAFVC's training is regularly reviewed to ensure that it is safe, progressive and effective. From this year, SVs, along with all MINDEF/SAF personnel, will also participate in the Counter-Terrorism (CT) Community Response Module (CRM) as part of their training.”
“Speaker, the Member has made a very essential point for safety management systems. I used to be Minister for Manpower and he is absolutely right. We went to countries that have very good safety systems. The Scandinavians have excellent safety systems because that is their culture. So, we have to build a culture so that even when commanders change, even when National Servicemen change, we retain it. Some of you may have worked in ExxonMobil where, before every meeting, they would give you a safety briefing. Even if it is a 15-minute meeting, the organisers would give you a briefing to tell you where the exits are, to tell you what happens. It is de rigueur. We have to do that. We have to do that so that the safety systems are maintained and that is why we have Unit Safety Officers that build up this culture. It will take time, but we have gotten it. As I have said, on average, we have one death a year. I believe if all of us give attention, as we did in 2012 to 2016, no fatalities. Let us give this our best attention. Let us go that extra mile and make sure that our sons remain safe.”
“When this incident occurred, the Army was mobilised very quickly at the top leadership levels. We stopped, had a safety timeout for all activities; paused, everybody stopped, safety first. We checked all processes, even when it is not related to heat injuries. Then, specifically, for heat injuries, make sure that the protocols are in place and then we restart the training. For that individual unit, the Army Commanders went down, engaged the men, engaged the family members of the deceased CFC Dave Lee, as well as what the Member has rightly pointed out, how it would affect his platoon mates. So, I was watching whether the social media furore over this would divide, as the Member rightly alluded to, the men and the commanders. Would they gel together on this? And we have to learn from these lessons that when something wrong happens, does it divide or does it unite? Because no one can guarantee you that no such incident will occur in another period, in another time, in another unit. We will do our level best to get a zero-fatality system. It does not only apply to the SAF, it applies to other problems in society. I think in this quiet Chamber where we have the equanimity to examine all the facts, to ask why our men are doing this. What is the purpose? How do we run the system? Is this a bad system? Is it a good system? Is there abuse that is rampant? Are there a majority who are just trying to do their duty? We then come to the very decisions on what we need to do to strengthen the system; but never degrade it, never reduce the trust, but build up this cache. And each year that we can do this, the SAF will get stronger, the SAF will get safer to protect us.”
“We receive, for two years the entire spectrum of abilities from society for males; all of them come to us. And we have to run a system. We have fairly rigorous selection criteria for commanders – OCS, Specialist Cadet School. Can you get it right each time? For the majority, yes. Are there some that you chose as commanders that are not fit to be? If there are attributes which show up and you do something wrong, they will be called out because safety is not negotiable, as we tell them. So, it is a difficult question that you have asked: do we constantly second-guess and check on them? In honesty, it is difficult, but remember, in the military, there is a hierarchical situation, so I take it that the commanders above them would spot it. There are these annual reviews, but let me try to simplify this. We take it that commanders have various skill sets and various empathy levels. But let this message be very clear: when it comes to safety, it gets top-most priority. When it comes to the welfare of your men, that is your top-most priority, whatever your skill sets, whatever your empathy level. You protect the well-being of your men first.”
“Speaker, on the Member's first question in terms of post-commission training for those who might be susceptible to abuse their position of authority, as I have said, if you are in that position, the safety counts first. We have the TSRs there so that, regardless of your empathy level, or your authoritativeness, you follow them. That is not negotiable. We can consider training them, but remember that these sons are given to us for two years, to the extent possible, all of them are given safety training while they are in Specialist Cadet School or OCS. So, that is a mandatory module. For the External Review Panel, yes, the full COI will be given to them so that they can assess the information and ask more questions and, from that, write their report. My own position is that there will be certain security elements. But, by and large, in many instances, the security elements can be maintained. And I would give as much information to this House, to the External Review Panel that you want, so that they, too, can come to an independent conclusion. Whether we want to include them to assess serious injuries, I think the Member's point was not deaths, or COIs or BOIs. Certainly, if the ERPSS feels that they can do more work, I will be happy to ask them if they could also be included.”
“We know your sons are precious. You give them to us, to the Police, to the SCDF for two years; we want to train them. We want to return them to you well-trained and safe.”
“I can summarise the Member's question: how do we select commanders to have the necessary maturity and wherewithal to make good judgements? It probably applies to all jobs. In this debate and in the President's Address, think of what Singapore is doing with NS. Very few countries have been able to maintain NS. We are taking every 18-year-old, 19-year-old for two years, put them together and, say as part of nation-building, as part of building up a defence force or a good Home Team, mix together, lead one another, train, work together, fight together. Do that in any society, you get the full plethora of the frailties of human nature. Malaysia started its NS, which included women. And even for that kind of activity, there were reported deaths for a variety of reasons. So, we have to make sure that for our National Servicemen, the commanders are well chosen. We have psychological tests, to the extent possible, they weed out those who have mal-adjusted attributes, that are not fit to lead. In addition, peer appraisal plays a very important role. You are appraised 360o. And if your peers think that you are not fit to lead, that you do not have enough empathy, or that you do not listen, or that you do not have enough command presence or command ability, then we do not choose you. Can we step up the activities so that they can make good judgements? You know that in Officer Cadet School (OCS), we have situational tests. We put people together, give them situations and assess how they respond. So, yes, that is incorporated in trying to figure out the psychology elements that make a good leader and to see whether this chap has it or not. We have succeeded in our NS and this is why it is so important that we give it top-most priority when it comes to safety.”
“As I have said, these are the facts that the COI and the Police must investigate. So, any findings that I give, I will put the caveat that these are internal investigations. The COI and Police report should disregard it as this is what we found. He was found to have a normal temperature before the activity started. Whether the thermometer was working, I think we have to investigate that. I do not know, I presume it was because it would be used for others as well. Hydration protocols, yes, we do, and there are certain volumes that one has to take in. I think those with sons in NS will recognise that it is done de rigueur. Everybody stands up with their water bottle and takes the requisite volume and you have to prove that you have drunk it. Because some worry that some people may feel that they have enough water and they pour it on the ground. And all these measures, for good units, they recognise that it is done, strictly followed because it is meant to protect our soldiers.”
“I think I understand what the Member wants, but we have to understand that the COI's job is to determine the facts and, in the process, usually, they interview many soldiers who give different accounts. First of all, it may be emotionally trying for the parents to sit there and to hear many accounts of the same thing happening again and again and, even as I recount it, 3SG Chan's events, it is very difficult. That is why we asked them for permission, can we reproduce this coroner's report? And if they had said no, then I would have to rely just to release to this House our COI report because, that coroner's report, by Queensland's procedures, is only given to the parents. We want to assure the parents of any unfortunate National Serviceman who has died, that all the facts will be fully established. Not covered up, but full investigations. Anyone held responsible that deserves punishment will get punished. Neither should we go on a witch hunt, if they are honest mistakes, because the commanders are someone else's son, too, National Servicemen. Most of our SAF commanders are National Servicemen. To points that, with this culture, there might be abuse, yes, I believe that some of it may have gone overboard. But by and large, our National Servicemen, our NS commanders, are decent, young men, who are doing their duty that we asked them to do to raise fighting units. We want to strike a balance, we have to make sure that we, in this House, send the appropriate signal; we, in leadership, send the appropriate signal. Safety first, do your job, if you abuse your position, you will be punished. But if you do your job dutifully, all the facts will come out and you need not fear, but continue to do your job.”
“The COI's primary mission is to establish the facts that led to the incident and cause of death, the contributory factors. That is quite clear and I think we understand that. If the psychological preparation of soldiers was inadequate, it will be flagged out. And, yes, we pay attention to the psychology of the men. It is part and parcel of our military training.”
“Mr Speaker, we have a 24-hour safety hotline that you can call and report it. It will get attended to. When death occurs, emotions are riled up, you have many views, some substantiated, some are unsubstantiated, which is why I said that, this House, Members here also play a critical role in making sure that safety gets top priority. As we have shown in the case of 3SG Gavin Chan, the COI established fully the facts. If there were people culpable, as previous COIs have shown, they were held responsible. So, in any case, in any death where people are culpable or negligent, they will be dealt with according to criminal law or in our military Courts. I think we have enough cases to show that all of us want to have a zero-fatality system. We are working towards that. If Members have any other suggestions, I am happy to hear them and see whether we can incorporate them. But I want to assure you, this gets top-most priority, gets top attention at MINDEF and the SAF.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we should be governed by training safety regulations during training and that is what they are there for. The way our training safety regulations are written, they give the benefit of the doubt to the individual soldier. If he feels unwell, he can flag himself out. That is the starting point. Whether you think he is not completely truthful is beside the point. He has the prerogative to flag himself out. You can train him to do the same exercise later, slowly, gradually, but that is a command decision. But as these two examples show, that is not really the culture that prevails. Our young men who do NS are highly motivated, in the case of Gavin Chan. He wanted to complete the exercise for his unit. In the case of Dave Lee, he completed the eight-kilometre fast march. So, I am not sure that it is accurate to characterise this dilemma between pushing people because they are inherently not as motivated. Our experience is that National Servicemen are motivated and, if they are not, then it is part of your skillsets to motivate him, to give him confidence, to be able to complete the exercise.”
“Speaker, I thank the Member for his questions. The training safety regulations for armour training at night require you to use night vision devices and, exactly for the purpose where you have poor visibility, you need to see where you are moving. You can move without night vision devices if you have, as I have said, the hatch open and the lights on. It is the responsibility of the vehicle commander to report if his night vision devices are not working and, whereupon, you stop the exercise for safety purposes. I mentioned that we have now, henceforth, decided that we want to give as much information as we can and, as Mr Pritam Singh says, apart from sensitive issues or security reasons. But by and large, I think we should be prepared to give out as much information. That is the reason why we have said that the External Review Panel on SAF Safety will be a member of the COI. The COI will submit the full report to the External Review Panel for their questions, for their comments and views. This External Review Panel for safety will write a report and that will be made public.”
“Mr Speaker, the Member will know my answer. It will be the same answer as she would give. If any Member of this House or any member of the public can give me details that there has been abuse of power and that recruits have been unfairly treated, let me know. We will deal with it. We want our soldiers to be well-trained. But that does not give any excuse to any commander to abuse his position, to abuse his authority to do over and beyond what is necessary. If it is not safe for whatever reason, even well-intentioned, it is wrong. That is the bottom line. No questions. If you expose people to unsafe practices, go against training safety regulations, you are wrong from the outset. The excuses may mean very little because the TSRs are there to protect your men. And if you do not know how to protect the men, then I say you cannot be a good commander. It is behaviour prejudicial to good order and you do not deserve to be a commander and you will be punished accordingly.”
“We will do our very best to achieve zero fatalities in training. We will work in unison and instil in every commander and soldier a strong sense of responsibility in ensuring training safety at all levels. Mr Speaker and Members of this House, I have taken this opportunity to give as much relevant details as MINDEF and SAF have involving the deaths of NSFs 3SG Chan and CFC Dave Lee. I would encourage Members in this House to seek any clarification because Parliament is a critical and appropriate forum to ensure that we have done all that is possible to make safety a top priority so that every soldier is well-protected as they defend Singapore. Our soldiers deserve no less.”
“It consists of prominent safety experts and professionals outside the SAF and it helps MINDEF scrutinise our safety management system. I have attached a list of its members. The current Chairman is Mr Heng Chiang Ngee, who was also Chairman of the Workplace Safety and Health Council till March this year. This panel reports to the Minister on the rigour of the system and presents recommendations to improve. These are qualified eminent members and I would like this External Review Panel to do more. So, for a start, MINDEF has discussed with the Chairman of the ERPSS who has agreed to include one of their members in the COIs for all training-related deaths. In addition, the COI will now submit its full report to the ERPSS for further questions, comments and views. In turn, the ERPSS will provide a written report on the COI findings which will be made public. With these multiple layers of safety and with experts within and outside assisting the SAF, we can move decisively to make zero training deaths the norm. I know it is difficult but it must be done. Over the last two decades, we have had, on average, about one NS training-related death a year. From 2013 to 2016 we had no NS training deaths, four years, none. And this shows that zero fatalities can be achieved with effort. The Chief of Defence Force and the Service Chiefs have assured me that safety has always been and will continue to get their highest command attention to achieve zero fatalities. But we need every level to play their part, down to the individual commander and soldier, to protect their own well-being and that of their men and their buddies. Our SAF commanders know that precious sons are entrusted to us when they train during NS. Our commanders take this seriously and never take this trust for granted.”
“Even if there was no ill-intent, are NSF commanders trained adequately and do they have the maturity to exercise good judgement and consciousness regarding training safety? This is what Nominated Member Ganesh Rajaram asked. All commanders undergo safety training both in the Specialist Cadet School (SCS) and Officer Cadet School (OCS). In addition, we have Unit Safety Officers and these are ex-regulars who have held senior appointments, who support the safe conduct of exercises. These Unit Safety Officers do not just have book learning; they have actual experience conducting and taking part in training and operations. But Unit Safety Officers cannot be everywhere all the time. So, for instance, for Exercise Wallaby, we sent 4,000 to 5,000 men down to Shoalwater Bay to train. A strong safety culture and a zero-fatality training system can only be achieved if every soldier has that ingrained concern for the well-being of himself and his peers. On the ground, it is the creed of the commanders to take care of their men. If you do not know how to take care of your men and if it is shown that you do not know how to take care of the men, we will remove your command position, we will remove your rank. Commanders are taught to encourage their men and buddies to flag out when they do not feel well. Individual soldiers are advised to highlight risky behaviour and safety breaches and they can report them to their superiors without fear of reprisal. There is a 24-hour training safety hotline for commanders and soldiers to report safety incidents and near-misses. So, not only when something happens, but a near-miss, report it. We have another External Review Panel on SAF Safety (ERPSS).”
“Separately, the Coroner may hold an inquiry to determine the causes of death and contributory factors. The SAF fully accepts these judicial processes and, indeed, deems them necessary to achieve and maintain a zero-fatality training safety system. I know that there are accusations against the commanders of Corporal Lee, but we should let the independent COI and Police investigations fully investigate the circumstances to establish the facts. We will deal with any wrong-doing thoroughly. Those that deserved to be punished will be punished. If any persons are found to have been negligent or culpable, they will be punished according to the law, both in civilian and military Courts. But we must be careful not to discourage or unfairly punish commanders who are executing their responsibilities dutifully, because many commanders are National Servicemen, too, who take seriously this mission we in society have imposed on them – to train capable fighting units able to defend Singapore against all threats. And he is serious about his duty and he wants to build a fighting unit. We must be careful that we do not discourage them or punish them unfairly. Indeed, we have many positive examples of commanders who risk their own safety to protect trainees. In 2013, NSF commander Lieutenant Kamalasivam pulled a recruit down to take cover in the grenade-throwing bay. The recruit was new. He held the grenade, took out the safety pin and released the grenade lever. Lieutenant Kamalasivam's first instinct was to pull the recruit down and cover himself over him. Thankfully, both suffered minor injuries which they recovered from.”
“This panel should consider further steps, especially when recorded temperatures in Singapore over the last two decades have gone up, increasing the risk of heat injuries. As these two cases show, after every training-related death, independent and impartial investigative processes will determine the key facts, arrive at appropriate conclusions and we will take corrective measures to prevent mistakes from being repeated. This includes punishing those who contributed to the death through reckless and negligent acts. SAF servicemen can be charged and punished in the civilian criminal Courts, even if their acts were committed within the SAF, as part of their duty. I have said so in this House previously but these examples bear repeating for their salutary warnings. In 2012, an SAF vehicle overturned during an exercise and it caused the death of a soldier. The Conducting Officer who appointed a serviceman to drive the military vehicle even though the Conducting Officer knew that the serviceman did not have a military driving licence was convicted in the criminal Courts and sentenced to six months' imprisonment. The officer was found to have committed a rash act and attempted to pervert the course of justice. In 2005, the Supervising Officer, Conducting Officer and instructors who were involved in the death of a trainee who was submerged in water during a Combat Survival Training course were sentenced to six to 12 months' imprisonment. In all cases, prosecutions of SAF servicemen in criminal Courts are based on independent Police investigations and when the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) decides that there are sufficient grounds to prosecute. It will be the criminal Courts that determine the level of culpability and commensurate punishments.”
“If it exceeds a certain level during training, rest periods are mandated at appropriate intervals to allow soldiers to cool down. This is one of the recommendations of the expert panel which the SAF follows dutifully. And it is not just taking a thermometer. We use a wet-bulb globe temperature heat stress monitor. It is a hand-held device which will give you the ambient temperature, calculated with the humidity. And based on that, the SAF institutes work-rest cycles. If it is below a certain temperature, for instance, you can exercise for 30 minutes, but you must rest for 15 minutes. Above 33oC, you must exercise for 15 minutes and rest for 30 minutes and so on and so forth. Commanders and soldiers are reminded to look out for signs and symptoms of heat injury during training. In the event of heat injury, we have on-site cooling measures which include the removal of clothes and application of ice or water to the affected serviceman. The SAF medical centres have customised-built evaporative body-cooling units for heat injuries. Our commanders, soldiers, regulars, Full-time National Servicemen (NSFs) and Operationally Ready National Servicemen (NSmen) know from their own experience that it is the consistent practice for these processes and precautions to be carried out. We must press on to achieve zero fatalities from heat injuries. The SAF is currently evaluating the use of individual wearable devices to monitor a soldier’s condition real-time. MINDEF will also commission an External Medical Panel, as we did in 2010, to review the SAF's policies and measures for the management of heat injuries and recommend improvements.”