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 9 of 46.
“Based on the COI's findings, the ME-Tech informed CFC(NS) Pang in a mix of Mandarin and English that the gun barrel was going to be moved to the standby position and told CFC(NS) Pang to move either closer to him or to a safe position. CFC(NS) Pang replied in Mandarin that it was fine and that the gun barrel would not hit him. Before he moved the gun barrel to a standby position, the GC said he checked if the path was clear and did see CFC(NS) Pang standing near the gun barrel. As the gun barrel was in the highest elevated position, the GC wrongly assumed that CFC(NS) Pang would have time to move away given that it would take some time for the barrel to move into the standby position. The GC proceeded to shout, "Standby, clear away" before activating the control to move the gun. This was heard by the ME-Tech, as well as personnel who were standing outside the gun. As the flick rammer was moving up, CFC(NS) Pang was still removing the screws on the box and looking back at the barrel at the same time. He initially made no attempt to move away. The GC noticed that CFC(NS) Pang was making some evasive movements as the barrel was moving closer to him. The ME-Tech was shocked to see CFC(NS) Pang still in the path of the gun and tried to use his hands to push against the barrel to stop the movement. As the gun barrel made contact with CFC(NS) Pang, the COI opined that instead of activating the Emergency Stop (E-stop) buttons, both the ME-Tech and the GC panicked, and acted irrationally. The ME-Tech tried to push the gun barrel with his hands while the GC went to the main control screen to try to stop the barrel movement. As a result, CFC(NS) Pang was wedged between the flick rammer and the slew ring.”
“Let me take Members through the events. On 19 January, CFC(NS) Pang had responded to the call from the gun detachment commander, the gun detachment commander was a 3SG NSman, for assistance to conduct corrective maintenance on his SSPH gun. The bearing of the gun was beyond the allowable error and needed to be rectified to resume live firing. CFC(NS) Pang was an Armament Technician from the Forward Maintenance Platoon designated to perform such work. But as CFC(NS) Pang could not resolve the issue, a Regular Military Expert 2 Technician was despatched to join him to perform the maintenance work on the gun. I draw Members' attention that there were only three persons in the gun when the injury occurred – CFC(NS) Pang, the 3SG(NS) Gun Commander (GC) and the Regular ME2 technician (ME-Tech). The GC explained the fault to the ME-Tech. To rectify the fault, the plan was to change the Central Processing Unit (CPU) card on the Motor Drive Control Unit – Ammo Handling System (AHS) box. The box was located near Safe Position 3. If you remember the previous slide that was shown, the flick rammer is in the bottom left-hand corner and the box is, as indicated, near Safe Position 3. The ME-Tech briefed the GC to turn off the AHS, to lock the gun barrel, turn off the engine and turn off the master switch. To lock the gun barrel required it to be first lowered to the near-horizontal "standby" position. The ME-Tech then proceeded to stand at the designated Safe Position 3 and started to loosen the screws in the AHS box to carry out maintenance work. The ME-Tech also saw CFC(NS) Pang removing the screws on the right side of the box. CFC(NS) Pang was not in a designated safe position and his back was to the barrel of the gun.”
“To recap from my Statement in February – the configuration, the safe positions and location of key features within the SSPH gun accompany the summary of events which we will distribute now, with your permission, Mr Speaker.”
“"On 5 January 2019, CFC(NS) Pang left Singapore for Exercise Thunder Warrior at Waiouru Military Training Area, New Zealand, as part of his seventh In-Camp Training (ICT) and the unit's eighth ICT. Exercise Thunder Warrior is a live firing exercise. On 19 January 2019 at about 1900 hrs, CFC(NS) Pang sustained an injury while carrying out maintenance work on a Singapore Self-Propelled Howitzer (SSPH) involved in Exercise Thunder Warrior. CFC(NS) Pang was assisting in maintenance work in the SSPH when the gun barrel was lowered and he was caught between the flick rammer and the slew ring of the SSPH turret". I draw Members' attention to the slide which I made in the Ministerial Statement in February. If you look at the picture on the top left-hand corner, the flick rammer is in the middle of the picture, the slew ring above it. And when the gun is lowered and the flick rammer goes up, he was caught between the slick rammer and the slew ring. "CFC(NS) Pang was attended to by the Battery Medic on site and evacuated to the Battalion Casualty Station (BCS) at 1910 hours. He was assessed and stabilised at the BCS before being evacuated to the Waiouru Base Medical Centre at 1950 hours. At 2150 hours, CFC(NS) Pang was heli-evacuated to Waikato Hospital where he was operated on at around 0100 hours. CFC(NS) Pang underwent two more surgeries on 21 January and 22 January before his condition deteriorated. On 24 January 2019, CFC(NS) Pang succumbed to his injuries. CFC(NS) Pang died from severe sepsis arising from his severe chest and abdominal injuries as a result of being trapped between the flick rammer and the slew ring in the SSPH." The COI next established a detailed chronology of events leading to the injury and subsequent death of CFC(NS) Pang.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. In February this year, I made a Ministerial Statement on the death of Corporal First Class (CFC) National Service (NS) Aloysius Pang which had occurred on 23 January 2019. Therein, I gave as much detail as was known then about the incident without prejudicing the due process as prescribed by the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) Act for an independent Committee of Inquiry (COI) to investigate thoroughly the factors leading to the death. The COI has completed its investigations and, in this Statement, I will present the findings of the COI as submitted to the Armed Forces Council (AFC). The COI comprised five persons, none of whom is employed by the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) or the SAF. They were a judge nominated by the State Courts as Chairman; a consultant medical specialist; a member nominated by the External Review Panel on SAF Safety (ERPSS); a member drawn from the Workplace Safety and Health Council; and a senior-ranked NSman. I remind Members that the COIs are convened under the SAF Act empowering it to fact find. The COI has no mandate to determine the culpability of individuals. Indeed, section 8C of the SAF Act specifies that no statements made to the COI shall be admissible as evidence in the Court martial or for any subsequent disciplinary proceedings that may take place. To keep within this remit, I will not provide specific names of other individuals involved in the incident in my Statement, apart from CFC(NS) Pang. Prosecution of any persons will be conducted separately, which I will elaborate later. Let me first take Members through the COI’s findings. I intend to quote from their report predominantly and the dates and times stated in the report are in New Zealand local time.”
“Mr Chairman, there is no change in that sense in our procurement policies where we get the best of class for our needs. Price is a significant consideration. But also, when I say for our needs, obviously, a key restriction is manpower. And if we look at, for example, our ships, the reason why we went to local production, first of all in our frigates, which we did with French DCN, and then we built our own. Even with that, we designed it from conception to operation. Because few other nations are able to have the SAF that we have that is able to defend a small island and have to do so with fewer people. So, for the ships, we went in that way. I think that has paid dividends. For Air Force, less so. From a maintenance point of view, we dealt with the issue by contracting it to some of our strategic partners, private companies. For the Army, some, we have been able to do on our own to develop indigenous capability for local needs. So, I would say that our procurement is still price-sensitive, best of class, but platforms that meet our needs. And where we can, we also recognise that we must develop a local industry to be able to respond because even developing that capability for private practice requires time and effort. And we do not leave it, for example, to the marketplace. You cannot. And that is why, over the years, a number of companies have been able to work with MINDEF and SAF to meet our defence needs.”
“Mr Pritam Singh would be aware that there is an aircraft carrier version, and I can confirm with the Member that we are not buying that one.”
“Construction will begin this year, and our NSmen can look forward to their NS Hub by 2023. Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How will elaborate on the other measures to enhance the NS experience. Mr Chairman, let me conclude. To develop such a capable SAF that I have just described, which can protect Singapore’s interests and keep Singaporeans safe for another generation, will require significant and steady investments. I make no bones about it. It will require resources and our commitment. I am grateful to Members of this House and Singaporeans for their steadfast and unwavering support towards a strong SAF. As I have previously committed to this House, we expect our nominal defence spending over the next decade to grow at 3% to 4% each year, to at least keep pace with inflation. This year's Budget represented a 4.8% increase over last year. The commitment that I have put over the next decade of 3% to 4% holds despite this year's increase. There were just certain projects or acquisitions that have matured and, therefore, we have to spend more. However, the overall defence expenditure will even out in subsequent years. Defence, especially for a small island like Singapore, is crucial if we are to safeguard our interests and deter aggression. Singapore is on track to build a modernised tri-service SAF – and perhaps even a quadri-service SAF, including the cyber force – that can meet security challenges both in the real and virtual worlds in the 21st century. If we continue our steady investments into defence and our NSmen maintain their commitment and resolve to defend Singapore, then our future will be secure for another generation. We can look forward to celebrate SG75 with the assurance that we have strong defences.”
“A number of Members talked about safety – Mr Charles Chong, Mr Chong Kee Hiong, Mr Zainal Sapari. The Commanding Officers of individual units have also been charged with the responsibility and accountability of safety standards and outcomes. As a routine, the Commanding Officer will identify activities each day that pose higher safety risks to his servicemen and women, and satisfy himself that the safety response plan and mitigating measures for such activities are adequate. Safety is, more than ever, a command responsibility, but each soldier must play his role, too. And we are doing this so that we can have realistic training because, if you cannot train safely, you will be set back. Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How will address in greater detail the measures the SAF will take to achieve zero training fatalities. MINDEF has also decided to build a central facility to better respond to the needs of the NS community. A new NS Hub will be built. It will bring together different services which are now scattered across Singapore. For example, today, pre-enlistees take their Individual Physical Proficiency Test (IPPT) at, say, Toa Payoh Stadium, then go to Depot Road Central Manpower Base, and then attend medical reviews at the Military Medicine Institute (MMI) in Kent Ridge. The new NS Hub will take all these services scattered across the island and put them into a central location. Where is this magical central location? It will be opposite Cashew Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station, with easy access. The NS Hub will be built as a smart complex using modern technology for a seamless, user-friendly experience. Opposite Cashew MRT station in MINDEF land. Do not worry, we will not take it from anybody.”
“Just as we have done for kinetic operations – many of you are familiar with our SAF firing ranges, many of you have fired there – well, we have a cyber range as well – the Cyber Defence Test and Evaluation Centre. In this cyber range, our cyber soldiers are exposed to realistic training. We have created a mock-up, a simulation of the SAF’s networks and online traffic, and we use actual malware and attacks against these nodes. Like in live firing ranges, you are supposed to shoot straight, the SAF aims to train soldiers that can respond to these attacks in a realistic and challenging environment. SAF will also tap on NSmen with IT expertise as a result of their civilian jobs or training. One example is the existing NS Expertise Conversion Scheme. It allows non-officer NSmen with industry expertise to become MDES officers for cyber vocations. MINDEF and SAF are exploring better matching of NSmen with their civilian IT vocations. All of us have a part to play in Digital Defence for Total Defence. In Singapore’s digital fortress, we are only as strong as the weakest link, and Senior Minister of State Mohamed Maliki will share more. These acquisitions in hardware and facilities, together with the will and skills of our NSmen and NSFs that make up the bulk of the SAF, will put us in a good position to deal with security challenges for another generation. If all these plans come to pass – and I will add that it will take us 10 to 15 years – SAF will be one of the more capable militaries in the region. Our NSFs and NSmen will be able to train well and, most importantly, must train safely. The Inspector-General for Safety has been recently appointed and the office expanded with more safety officers.”
“We have seen this played out against the Baltic States and Ukraine, to name some. And as a culturally and ethnically diverse nation, we, too, are vulnerable to such hybrid attacks, including targeting of our information technology (IT) networks to disrupt services and capabilities. Members have asked what is our progress of protecting this front and building up a force to protect this front. Two years ago, I announced the set-up of the Defence Cyber Organisation (DCO). DCO has stood up the Defence Cyber Security Centre. In other words, we have this Defence Cybersecurity Centre within MINDEF and SAF for daily operations against cyber threats against MINDEF and SAF IT systems, especially our command-and-control computer networks. In place are incident response teams which can also be deployed to support other national agencies during cyberattacks on critical systems. To meet these needs, SAF has to expand the pool of regulars for the cyber domain, and they will be Military Domain Experts Scheme (MDES) personnel, as well as the non-uniformed Defence Cyber Experts. We have recently announced that more than 300 will be hired in the first phase. But full-time NSmen (NSFs), too, can play an important part in digital defence, just as they do for kinetic operations. I think that was the point by Mr Zainal Sapari and Mr Vikram Nair. The 59-strong pioneer batch of the Cyber NSF Scheme enlisted in late 2018 after passing two rounds of rigorous tests. They are now undergoing an eight-month-long Cyber Specialist Cadet Course, in partnership with the Singapore Institute of Technology, and will graduate this August. We expect to take in another 80 to 90 Cyber Specialists this year to beef up our cyber units.”
“We will build more roads and bridges so that motorised and mechanised troops in the Army vehicles can start training this year. SAFTI City will be progressively built and will have more than 200 buildings of varying heights and types when completed, all wired up. 11.45 am But with this kind of SAF for 2030 and beyond we can move great distances. Our Terrexes can move 70 kilometres per hour (km/h), and our Leopards close to that, slower perhaps across more difficult terrain. But if we only had space to train in Singapore, you could reach one end to the other within less than an hour. So, we will need larger training spaces. In particular, the training areas at Shoalwater Bay will be expanded. There will be new developments in the Townsville Region in Northeast Australia. Under the Singapore-Australia Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, new facilities, such as Instrumented Combined Arms Air Land Ranges and Urban Operations Live-Firing Facilities, are on track to being built. I said that very quickly, but an air-land range is priceless. We can only do this in very few places now – some in the US because they have the land. It allows for coordinated strikes between land and air platforms. So, when these facilities are completed over the coming years, we will be able to train large groups of troops for up to 18 weeks annually, a significant increase from the current six to seven weeks, or about a three-fold increase. Many Members have talked about digital defence. I completely agree. It is a battlefront that we cannot choose to ignore or we ignore it at our peril. Mr Charles Chong, Mr Desmond Choo, Prof Fatimah Lateef and Dr Tan Wu Meng have spoken about this. I spoke to this House about the threat of hybrid warfare and its effect on the real world previously.”
“I last spoke to this House about the SAF Training Institute (SAFTI) City in 2017. The Pioneer and Merdeka Generations are all too familiar with the old SAFTI – you would remember FOFO Hill, Peng Kang Hill, the Pasir Laba Boat Shed and Elephant Hill. We charged up them and sometimes charged down them. SAFTI City will complement these traditional terrains with urban settings to better prepare our soldiers for a wide variety of operations in the 21st century. SAFTI City will be a wired city. We talked about our SMART City; we are hoping that SAFTI City will be a smart training ground. We will use more simulation and detailed monitoring to help our soldiers to learn better. It will be a far cry from the days that we did our NS and charged up hills or against enemy battalions shouting, "Bang, bang, bang, bang!", and they shouted, "Bang, bang, bang, bang!" back. This method is not new. For instance, our fighter pilots have been using this for decades to train for high-speed manoeuvres. After every manoeuvre, they sit down and say, "All right, you say what you did, he says what he did." This is the objective. They showed the tracks, they showed where your weaknesses are. And they have been able to do that because planes are expensive and pilots even more so. But it is only now that modern technology allows us to scale this up for the same processes for individual soldiers within the Army. So, we have been doing this over the years where you can no longer assume that you have hit the target, and you actually have electric sensors on soldiers, on platforms, and the attrition rate is real. And I am glad to report that SAFTI City is taking shape and is on schedule.”
“The Army will be more protected and mobile, with soldiers mounted in Next-Generation Armoured Fighting Vehicles and Terrex Motorised Vehicles. Leopard tanks, HIMARS and Next-Generation Howitzers will support them, complemented by a full suite of combat engineers, signals, logistics and maintenance platforms. But hardware alone would not build you a strong army and a strong military. We will have to have new training facilities both here and overseas which will ensure that our National Servicemen (NSmen) and Regulars can build a modern and capable SAF that can defend Singapore and our interests. I know Members here have asked that, Mr Zainal Sapari, amongst others. The SAF of 2030 and beyond has been designed to be operated with a leaner manpower pool. Mr Baey Yam Keng, Mr Chong Kee Hiong, Mr Zainal Sapari and Mr Pritam Singh asked about this. In other words, we design the SAF of 2030 and beyond to work with a reduction of manpower supply by a third after 2030. I have already mentioned the MRCVs for the Navy which need a smaller crew. The Next-Generation Howitzer which I mentioned earlier will only need three men to operate, compared to nine now. So, it is a significant reduction, and yet the Next-Generation Howitzer will fire more rounds accurately per minute. Autonomous and automated systems will reduce labour-intensive tasks, for example, runway damage assessment of our air bases and air strips. The modern systems and platforms of the SAF can also be operated by NSmen who are not Physical Employment Standard (PES) A or B and, therefore, effectively increase our utilisation of manpower pool. Pari passu with the acquisition of hardware, we will also invest more into training facilities for SAF soldiers.”
“I have talked about air, land and sea manned platforms, but the signature change for the SAF 2030 and beyond is that the SAF will become more of a hybrid force. We will use many more unmanned platforms. Some of the RSAF's unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been operating for more than a decade. They will be replaced by newer UAVs with better capabilities over the next few years. I mentioned the MRCVs and unmanned surface vessels, too. But in the Army, soldiers within the Army will soon use micro-UAVs, your own UAV or the UAV for your unit, for the first time, which will be particularly useful in built-up and urban environments. These unmanned platforms will complement traditional manned equipment, to enhance responses across a full range of operational scenarios. In all, the Next-Generation SAF of 2030 and beyond, with this full complement of assets in air, land and sea, will be able to defend Singapore for another generation. This is the SAF that will take us into and guard our future. This is the SAF that our investments have bought or will buy. This is the SAF on air, land and sea with which the next generation of Singaporeans will celebrate for SG75. By then, we will have a state-of-the-art coastal surveillance network and air defence systems to form a shield around Singapore against incoming threats. RSAF will fly F-35s and F-15SGs over our skies, supported by A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport aircraft, G550 Airborne Early Warning Aircraft, new helicopters and a host of new UAVs. RSN will have MRCVs, Invincible-class submarines, new unmanned surface vessels and larger Joint Multi-Mission Ships, in addition to existing frigates and Littoral Mission Vessels.”
“The MRCVs will use less manpower, about half the size of that found in modern frigates. This is quite an achievement. This is possible because we designed it from the onset, custom-built for lean manning, using technologies which automate many functions, including maintenance. As a result, there is also a cost saving of up to 10% in operating them, compared to other similar-sized frigates. The MRCVs will also have more unmanned air and sea drones. So, it would not be just a manned ship, it will have air and sea drones and modular packages to extend their reach and flexibility against threats. Many Members are familiar with our Landing Ship Tanks (LSTs). I think many Members have sailed on them and they proved their worth time and again. Each time we deploy them in exercises, we say we are so grateful that we have this platform. So versatile and able to meet mission objectives. It has been the workhorse in our humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) efforts and other missions. The LSTs are ageing, too, and will need to be replaced in the next decade by larger and more flexible Joint Multi-Mission Ships. Let me move on to the Army. For the Army, the Next-Generation Armoured Fighting Vehicle will replace our M113 Ultras as the mainstay of the SAF's mechanised forces from this year onwards. Singaporeans will see them soon on our roads at this year's National Day Parade. These Armoured Fighting Vehicles have better armour protection and mobility through urban environments. Another addition to the Army will be the Next-Generation Howitzers with extended range and greater precision strikes compared to our current platforms.”
“Nonetheless, MINDEF will continue to work with the US Department of Defense to optimise operating and maintenance costs. RSAF will also take delivery of new helicopters from 2020 onwards. The H225M medium-lift and our Chinook heavy-lift helicopters will replace our existing Super Puma and CH-47D fleets. These new helicopters will add capacity and be more effective in Search and Rescue or Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief operations. That is for the Air Force. Let me move on to the Navy. For RSN, our submarines in operation are over two decades old. We will replace them with four new Invincible-class submarines. The first was launched recently in Germany, with the other three being built. The Invincible-class submarines will have longer endurance, and also the latest locally-developed sensors and automated systems designed for optimal use in our surrounding waters. We have launched our submarines lately in Kiel, facing the North Sea. We launched our previous class of submarines in the Baltic Sea. Those waters there are much colder. So, we have to optimise them for our warm waters here. We aim to have a full fleet of four Invincible-class submarines by 2025. For surface ships, our ageing missile corvettes have served with distinction since 1989. They are also "Pioneer Generation" that will have to be retired soon, and they will be replaced by the new Multi-Role Combat Vessels (MRCVs). The first of these will be delivered around 2025, with full delivery expected by 2030. More than just improving capabilities, the new MRCVs will incorporate many new ideas. First of all, they will use less manpower. Many Members of Parliament have pointed out how we will deal with the one-third reduction in manpower.”
“Let me begin with the air. Mr Henry Kwek has asked about the F-35s. We have announced our plans to replace the F-16s, which will face obsolescence post-2030, with the F-35s. This will mean that the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) fighter fleet will consist of F-35s and F-15SGs, if plans come to fruition a decade or so from now. As stated previously, MINDEF will issue a Letter of Request (LOR) to the US to acquire F-35s. As required by US law for foreign military sales, the US Congress must approve the sale of F-35s. Our LOR will request an initial acquisition of four F-35s, with the option of a subsequent eight if we decide to proceed. Singapore has the endorsement of both the US Administration and the Department of Defense for our proposed purchase of F-35s. But the Congress must still approve it. In fact, President Trump wrote to Prime Minister Lee last month welcoming Singapore's plans to acquire the F-35s. During my meeting with Acting Secretary of Defense, Patrick Shanahan at the Munich Security Conference two weeks ago, he also said that the US was greatly appreciative of Singapore's decision and his department supported it. A word on price. The price of F-35s has been steadily falling due to healthy orders from the US and 10 other countries, including the United Kingdom (UK), Italy, Australia, Japan and South Korea. The Defence Science and Technology Agency's (DSTA's) assessment is that now is an opportune time to put in Singapore's request. The current unit price of the F-35 ranges from US$90 million to US$115 million per aircraft, comparable to what we have paid for our F-15SGs. The Total Cost of Ownership of a fleet of F-35s, including maintenance across its lifespan, will also be similar to our F-15SGs.”
“To deter and mitigate external attacks against Singapore, we will beef up security for our entire coastline. SAF will add more optical sensors and coastal radars to deter and detect potential threats. We will build more unmanned watch towers for better coverage of the busy traffic across the Singapore Strait. We will also add unmanned surface vessels to patrol our waters, beginning next year. Members have asked for more details on our modernisation of the Next-Generation SAF – Mr Vikram Nair, Mr Pritam Singh, Prof Fatimah Lateef, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Charles Chong – so, let me elaborate. Our plans to build the Next-Generation SAF to better respond to security threats are progressing well for all three services. With your permission, Mr Chairman, I would like to display some slides on the LED screens and also ask for the handout to be distributed.”
“Our MFA and the Ministry of Transport (MOT) officials are meeting for discussions and negotiations and the presence of these Malaysian government vessels does not help in any way and, in fact, exposes them to danger and obstructs productive talks. MPA, PCG and RSN are closely monitoring activities in Singapore’s territorial waters off Tuas 24/7 and will remain ever vigilant to guard our sovereignty and rights under international law. MINDEF will continue its efforts in defence diplomacy. Members have asked that, including Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Vikram Nair. We want to promote regional peace and stability. We make friends with those who are willing, and partner those countries whose interests are aligned with ours and who share our desire for inclusiveness, peaceful resolution of disputes and respect for the law. 11.30 am But at the same time, we must ensure that the SAF is strong and adequate to defend our rights when diplomacy fails and when others choose to do us harm or ignore our rights. As Prof Fatimah Lateef said, "A strong SAF protects Singapore and Singaporeans." And it has been our persistent investments and efforts to build the Next-Generation SAF that can better respond to the security threats for another generation. These developments are progressing well and I would like to elaborate on that because many Members of Parliament have asked how do we respond to different scenarios of threats that will come upon us in this generation. And we have to prepare for the future because it takes that period of time to build up that kind of SAF. First, homeland security. The Mumbai attack in 2008 showed us the devastating destruction that can come from the sea, and we are surrounded by seas.”
“Mr Seah Kian Peng had asked about this. Since last November, Malaysian government vessels have repeatedly entered Singapore’s territorial waters off Tuas, over which the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA), Police Coast Guard (PCG) and Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) vessels have exercised jurisdiction and enforcement without any protest or intrusions from Malaysia for more than two decades. Even now, two Malaysian government vessels continue to be anchored in our territorial waters off Tuas. Singaporeans and Members are familiar with these developments and I need not elaborate. Suffice to say, we have strongly cautioned Malaysia to withdraw their vessels. In fact, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' (MFA’s) press statement in December last year pointed out that, I quote, “Malaysia’s deployments in this area will not strengthen its legal claim and can only heighten tensions. Malaysia will be responsible for any untoward situations on the ground that arise from continued deployment of its vessels into this area.” And indeed, just as we warned could happen, last month, the Greek bulk carrier Pireas collided with the Malaysian government vessel Polaris. Mercifully, no bodily harm ensued, but it could have been much worse. Singaporeans will remember the collision between the USS McCain and the oil tanker Alnic off Pedra Branca in August 2017, where 10 crewmen perished. Even so, some in Malaysia have accused Singapore of orchestrating the collision with the Polaris. These false accusations would have been much louder and strident to push for retaliation against Singapore and Singaporeans, if lives had been lost in the recent collision.”
“In October last year, the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) chaired the 12th ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting (ADMM) and the 5th 18-member ADMM-Plus, which collectively represents four billion people and accounts for 90% of the world’s military. That meeting, we galvanised the ADMM and ADMM-Plus countries to address common security concerns, including counterterrorism and Chemical, Biological and Radiological Defence threats, and we facilitated ASEAN’s adoption of Indonesia’s “Our Eyes” Initiative. It is an initiative which can enhance regional counterterrorism information-sharing. And Singapore will assist Indonesia to set up and operate this facility. This is an important initiative as we prepare to deal with the wave of returning fighters coming back from Iraq and Syria, even as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) loses ground there. I am also glad to report that under our Chairmanship, ADMM adopted the ASEAN Guidelines for Air Military Encounters (GAME), the first such set of multilateral guidelines in the world, with the support of the ADMM-Plus countries. GAME can prevent disastrous consequences that can result from unplanned encounters between military aircraft in the air. We have also worked on putting the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES) – some Members asked about this – it has been put into practice across all ADMM-Plus navies, including during the inaugural ASEAN-China Maritime Exercise in October last year. Later this year, we will use CUES for the ADMM-Plus Maritime Security Exercise, which will include both the US and China. All in all, Singapore did its fair share to enhance regional security and stability. On that score, it was a productive and fruitful year. In the last few months though, we have had our challenges with Malaysia.”
“Mr Chairman, let me thank Members for their continued commitment to a strong defence for Singapore. I note the speeches that many Members in this House have given during the Budget Debate. It is particularly gratifying and reassuring for our future, for Singapore's future, that despite Defence, Security, Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs accounting for one-third of our expenditure, that we have got support across the aisle, across parties. I think that is a strong signal that the future for Singapore bodes well. Last year was a busy year for Singapore. We staged a number of key events on international efforts on the world stage, and in response to Mr Vikram Nair and Ms Sylvia Lim, Singapore's image and standing, because we played host, were enhanced, but it also called for extra and stringent security measures here. In June, Members would remember that the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) deployed at short notice – it was yes, on-off, on-off – and in two weeks, we were asked to host the United States (US)-Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) Summit. Because such high-profile events can be attractive targets for terrorists, the SAF mounted a large-scale deployment involving 2,000 personnel, with dozens of aircraft, ships and vehicles, to provide air, land and sea security domes that covered Sentosa and parts of Orchard Road. Our efforts, together with those of the Home Team, proved a deterrent to would-be provocateurs. The SAF mounted a similar operation when Singapore hosted the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Summit in November where all the ASEAN Heads of Government and many other foreign dignitaries gathered.”
“For all National Service (NS) men with service-related injuries, the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) pays for all necessary medical expenses at Government restructured hospitals, clinics and community hospitals for as long as required for the injured serviceman. This includes the costs of medical supplies and equipment, counselling and specialist care. MINDEF's framework for service injury is more comprehensive and generous than provisions specified under the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA), which pays for up to one year of medical expenses from the date of the accident or capped at $36,000, whichever is reached earlier. Further, MINDEF will also compensate injured NSmen for their loss of earnings as a result of any medical or hospitalisation leave, up to a period of two years from the last day of the call-up. Again, this is more generous than WICA where compensation for loss of earnings is up to a year from the date of the accident. For training-related incidents, compensation for the injured serviceman is also more generous than amounts specified by WICA for the same degree of permanent disability sustained, as MINDEF's compensation is doubled. Finally, financial assistance is also provided for the families of selected injured servicemen through MINDEF's welfare schemes.”
“So, let us get back to basics. Mr Pritam Singh says, "Oh, don't be afraid of MINDEF's reputation." I am not afraid of MINDEF's reputation. I am more concerned about individual lives, about how our commanders, at any given moment of time, watch for the safety of their national servicemen, of the people under their charge, and yet, at the same time, conduct realistic training. I think this is the right way to go. I think there will be no easy shortcuts. We will need everyone to pitch in, and I am grateful at least that all Members of this House believe that NS is an imperative, is a critical need, and that we must improve our safety standards so that we can uphold NS and national defence. Thank you, Deputy Speaker. [Applause.] [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." (proc text)] Adjourned accordingly at 6.07 pm.”
“If the RSAF is critical in the defence of Singapore, which lacks strategic depth, the situation is surely unacceptable, for before we started fighting the war, we had already lost 50 fighters. So, our peacetime exchange ratio must look quite bad. At the individual level, the whole idea of training in peacetime is to deter and, when deterrence fails, be there on the first wave. But you will not be there if you kill yourself during training. Then, the training is in vain." Zero fatality is a very difficult target and, as Mr Pritam Singh said, may be impossible. But we have to aim for it. And as our own experience shows, in some years, we will be able to achieve it. Can anyone guarantee that there will be zero fatalities for the rest of our future? Surely not. But that zero fatality goal sears into the consciousness of every commander and every soldier that, to get there, you better be careful about what you are doing, that safety lapses will not be tolerated, that it will be safety first, because, at the end of the day, I want to train you and want you to be alive to be able to fight when Singapore needs you. Mr Pritam Singh says, "Well, you can get the same outcome. Just allow the people to sue the Government, including MINDEF." That is a very tangential argument and misses the point. There is accountability for commanders who make a mistake. I do not need for those who want to sue the Government to do so before the commanders are held accountable. I have told Members many times, and we have taken commanders or national servicemen who had been derelict, who had not done their duty, to criminal prosecution, not just civilian payouts in the Courts. They go to jail. Their lives, in that sense, and careers, are ruined; and justly so, if they deserve it.”
“I quote from him, "So, when you take a look at the RSAF's mishap data in our early years, the picture is a sombre one. For the first 20 years from 1970 to 1990, we lost in terms of fighter numbers, almost the same number as our entire F-16 fleet today. For comparison, the RSAF has operated the F-16 C/Ds for more than 20 years now from about 1996/1997, and we have lost two. And the last loss occurred more than 10 years ago." That is a stark difference. Just pause to think. For the first 20 years, we lost in terms of fighter numbers, almost the same number as our entire F-16 fleet today. He went on to say, "Most significantly to me as a commander, such accidents also sapped the morale of the people unnecessarily. Each time we attended the funerals of fellow pilots and servicemen, seeing the grief of their loved ones was an emotional trauma. As a commander trying to explain to the family of the lost pilot why it happened, why they are going to continue with life without a husband or a son, grow up without a father, was most difficult. As Chief of Air Force then, I felt that I had failed to take care of my men. To me, they reported to work every day to train for war and I had failed in my duty to ensure that they trained safely so that they could return to their loved ones every day. So, this, he says, "was how Zero Accidents started." "I started asking myself questions", he continues. "Back to the basics, I asked myself: have we lost sight of the overall mission to deter? Each accident erodes deterrence. If we cannot be safe, how does it reflect on our capability? If our own Singaporeans have low confidence in the RSAF", and in this case, the Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) or even the Army, "how can we even be a deterrent?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, let me thank Mr Pritam Singh for his comments in the Adjournment Motion. As Adjournment Motions go, you reflect on them and you cannot answer every point in the 10 minutes that you are allocated. I am sure that if the House wants us to debate the various points that the Member has brought up, I think we can find other fora to do so. But let me start from where we agree, and it is very gratifying. We agree that NS is crucial. We agree that without NS and without the SAF, we cannot defend ourselves; that after 52 years, we are in a much better position of being able to defend our sovereignty and that we have come a long way. We also agree that we want to make training for national servicemen as safe as possible. And as Mr Singh himself says, assure every mother, assure every parent, that their son will go back to them safe in the two years of full-time NS and ICTs. How to achieve this? There may be some disagreement or differences. Mr Pritam Singh says "don't aim for zero fatalities" – that is a goal too high. You set too high expectations. And the Member is right in a way. But which mother shall we say can lose your son? I came to that view that we should aim for zero fatalities from the experiences of our own commanders. And I will share with Members a very good speech by previous Chief of Defence Force (CDF) Bey Soon Khiang, because when it comes to running an operation, you have to listen to your commanders, you have to see what they can do. So, this was a speech that Lieutenant-General (Retired) Bey Soon Khiang, who was the Republic of Singapore Air Force's (RSAF's) Chief of Air Force (CAF) and then CDF, gave at a safety symposium last year.”
“Mr Speaker, I presented what the COI found. And for the first question why he asked him to move forward, it was not clear to the COI, and we have to leave it to the Police. That has got legal implications. Second, was CFC Liu familiar with these aspects? He was attached to an Armour Unit. As I have said, extrication drills are part and parcel of the exercise.”
“Mr Speaker, the Member has asked about these so-called "silent" surveys, and we have them in the civilian settings – the Mystery Shopper, for example. And yes, there is much on the cards where you do safety audits, and you check and you have now hotlines that people can call in. So, that will be part of the menu of things that we will have to ramp up. It already exists. But we want to make sure that it is more accessible and the message gets through. How effective is the Inspector-General? Well, when the Inspector-General, who is the Chief of Staff-Joint Staff (COS-JS), calls you, you listen, and you better listen.”
“The Member has raised a very important, relevant point and it is incorporated. Some of you would remember that the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) in the 1990s had a spate of very difficult incidents. It was gut-wrenching – pilots. And today, the RSAF is a far cry from that. And that is exactly what they have incorporated, where they report near misses for equipment and near misses arising from human error. They separate them because the solutions are different. All our services do it, to some extent. But the Army is a much larger machinery and many tens of thousands of people running around. But we have got to get that into our system at every level. And it will be up to commanders, and they are going to give it their all because they know this is their moral responsibility, this is their professional accountability, and this is something that we must get right.”
“The COI is independent. So, they take as much time as they need, and I have no control over how fast or how quickly they want to conclude it. If they find that they need more information or facts, we will give them the fullness of time that they require. But normally, as was the case with CFC Liu Kai, it takes a number of months, anything from two to four months. The psychosocial aspect is incredibly important, and we are not dealing with something which is esoteric. Safety cultures occur in many industries. The need for safety, whether it is construction, heavy machinery, and the same challenges we face in the workplace also apply to both military and civilian settings. So, it is a science and there are experts at it; and there are benchmarks. As I have said, this is intangible of safety culture. And in these conversations like I had, like many Members had over this Chinese New Year period when we talked about why this is happening, and there is always somewhat a tendency to say, "Well, one generation is different from the other." In the Merdeka Generation, in the Pioneer Generation, it is more of aware of risks, because when we grew up, when we crossed roads, it was always a run or very hazardous. But a newer generation lives in a more structured environment. I do not know what the truth is. We will just have to deal with it and keep strengthening and keep tightening where we feel that it has to be and continue to move it. And if more people buy into this safety culture, I think it will help. But it cannot be dependent on that. It is very clear this is a Command responsibility. Commanders will be taken to task if they ignore safety instructions or have a poor safety culture.”
“All of us can imagine how difficult it is for any parent and mothers to have to lose their sons. And all we can do is to pray that there will be some comfort. I have already shared how we provide relief by grief counsellors. But even our efforts need to be very sensitive. Not all families can accept it at the time. But we should always just be there to offer the help and be consistently there if it is needed. This is an area which you want to retain people in and yet you hope that you do not need their services. We are striking that balance. And I have asked them to train a cadre of grief counsellors that can have institutional memory and that can help others in this similar type of vocation be able to assist those who have been bereaved.”
“I think the reassurance is what the Members have asked in this House and what I have said, I stated very clearly there is the Training Safety Regulation that anyone can stop. On the ground, usually in activities, you have a safety officer and a conducting officer. But even the CO of the activity who is supervising and the other conducting officers, if you bring it up to them, we want to have a culture where the person can assess the safety and risks. So, on the ground, there are avenues, that is, in real time. But apart from that, if there is a recurrent safety lapse or risky behaviour, we have safety hotlines which you can call anonymously or you can write and we will take action. The message is very clear to the units after this Statement. It has always been. But if it needs to be clearer because of the reiteration, then remember that unsafe practices will not be tolerated.”
“I agree with the Member that we want to be careful as we are moving in this safety journey to allow time for units to focus on safety and, if there are administrative aspects that deter them from it, then we should be prepared to relook. But this is a Command decision. CDF, the Commanders, the Commanding Officers (COs) of the units must themselves come to and decide which is the tempo, and the Member is quite right. For certain activities, they have relooked it. I will leave it to them to announce what they are not going to do, so that it gives them enough bandwidth to focus on safety. That is a clear response to that. For CFC Liu Kai's extrication, Members will understand why I have not gone into details. But it was difficult to extricate.”
“Mr Speaker, not only will we take up the suggestion; we are already doing it. That is exactly one of the resources that we looked upon. But even that is in short supply – retired, experienced Warrant Officers (WOs), officers. And Members remember the Committee to Strengthen NS that we started up a couple of years ago where we wanted to put more trainers instead of national servicemen, we wanted to put those with the experience and that is exactly what we did. We extended the terms of service for the retired WOs because they serve as a valuable resource. So, because of this, we have redeployed, put safety as a priority. But we will also look for other avenues where we can put more experience on the ground to help our national servicemen as well as young officers build up the training and safety capabilities.”
“Before every board meeting, they repeat the same thing over and over again – the safety instructions, they tell you where the exits are. And I was told that even in some countries, the safety officer saw some chap walking up the stairs not using the stair rail and says, "This is a safety breach – you should use the stair rail because you can fall." You say it may be overboard, but there is a meaning to it, I think. And I think that can help. You need to have proper instructions, and each time something happens, we must be open, we will review it, get independent parties to look at it, and then strengthen it. Do we want a system where everyone is afraid? You walk into a room, and everyone is frightened that if anything happens, his head will be chopped, more heads will be chopped, up, down. I have dealt with many organisations, both in my private life and in Government. I noticed that the best organisations run not ones which are on tenterhooks, fearful of reprisals so that they dare not do anything, and not ones that are slack. In fact, a slightly busy outfit is the best outfit. Too little, some things happen, too busy. You go into any organisation, you want people who are professional, who know what they do, who are conscious, who are not out just to punish unfairly, but to say how do I make this system better because it will take time, it will take effort, and it will take the part of everybody in their organisation to do so.”
“I thank Mr Vikram Nair for his reassuring comments. Can we learn from other militaries? We have looked at figures to see what injury and fatality rates for other militaries are. Of course, we want to benchmark and make sure that we are somewhere there. But that is difficult because you cannot compare like and like. Systems with conscript systems, Taiwan and South Korea, their data is shared in different ways. So, that is not comparable. There is a military that we can sort of compare our training with and, that is, the UK. But theirs is not conscript. Theirs is regular service. And over a 10-year period, our safety records are just slightly better than theirs. But that is not a reflection. They may have different terrain and so on and so forth. We have to ask ourselves, where is our system at? Is this a systemic flaw? And when we ask these questions, remember as the Member said, so many of us here have or are serving NS. We know what it is about and some of you even blog your experiences when you go to NS. It is not divorced from reality where there is one group doing NS and another group just commenting on it. The very people who comment are the ones who do it every year when you go in and you know what the reality is. If you think that the system has degraded to a point, point out where it is and we will fix it. But if we are experiencing injuries and deaths as a result – as the Member said, human error – then neither should we punish indiscriminately even those who are not involved nor degrade what has taken years for us to achieve. That does not bring anyone any comfort or positive results. Deal with the issue, strengthen the system bit by bit, and it will take years. You know how it is with some commercial companies.”
“Mr Speaker, there are two main questions, one for commanders with safety lapses. As I have said, even those that do not lead to accidents will affect their performance review. So, that signal is quite clear. How high should you go up? We want to be careful that we do what we think works and makes a difference. If senior leadership has to go because they have been involved or have been derelict, then I do not think our population will stand for that. And if you think that that improves the system, push for it. But let us deal with the issue on the ground. I have presented the facts as much as I can. We have had independent reviews, people outside SAF and MINDEF all looking into the problem. And if they decide that a change of the most senior leadership makes a difference, well, it is up to them to recommend. But, for MINDEF and SAF, we want to deal with day-to-day issues, aligning our incentives and disincentives so we get the whole system moving and making sure that the effect is felt on the ground, rather than posturing or politicking.”
“In order to strengthen our system, we went overseas to the Nordic countries, to some European countries, which have higher standards than us. They told me a very interesting example of a particular bridge that was built by two Nordic countries. I will not name them because there are implications which will be explained once I have shared. Two Nordic countries building a bridge to connect the two. Same specifications, they will meet in the middle. One country had half the number of deaths and injuries of the other country. All comes down to culture. And who decides the culture? It is all of us, our children, our friends, our relatives. I have said very clearly and in no uncertain terms that anyone can stop unsafe training. If you think it is unsafe for your buddies, for yourself, raise it. If you think that somebody is pushing beyond his means to physical harm, do so. That way, we maintain realistic training and give comfort to our parents.”
“How do you reassure parents that their sons will be safe? And I am glad what the Member Mr Alex Yam has said, that no parent has come to him to say they want to do away with NS. The parents want to know that you are doing your level best and that you will pay attention. Singaporeans are reasonable. They know that we want to train. But let me give Members another perspective as well in these two incidents and a number of incidents that I shared in this House. I shared with Members the incident of Gavin Chan who was training overseas as well when his Bionix overturned. And I gave Members the findings of the COI. When asked by his crew to switch on the headlights, he said, "We should not do it. It would give our position away to the enemy". In the case of Dave Lee, the heatstroke, he pushed himself beyond what he was able. In this case, Liu Kai, they wanted to be realistic, extrication drills. We have come very far when national servicemen say, "I want to train as realistically as I can". What if we had the reverse situation where everyone attends training but nobody trains? I think we have to take what is good in our system and respond practically. The results must be the ultimate comfort for parents. We will do as much as we can practically each time our COIs tell us there is a lapse or a weakness that needs to be addressed. But I need at every level a safety consciousness, a safety culture. And I tell Members that it does not come overnight and may not come even after many years, to raise the level of safety culture. I had been the Minister for Manpower, and Members will remember the particular period, the Nicoll Highway collapse, the Fusionopolis incident, the COIs that we had.”
“Mr Speaker, let me take the questions in turn. How different is this timeout from previous timeouts? It is significantly different. Previously, there was a period and then units would revert back to their original activity. But as the Member rightly pointed out, after four deaths, old practices must be changed. You must start on the basis that there might be something wrong and look for that factor, whatever that factor is, and that is just a precaution. So, the difference is that units on operations carry on. We had a period of safety timeout, but it has been lifted only for certain activities. More complex ones, more high-risk ones, CDF and his commanders want to be satisfied that not only are the training safety regulations in place, but that there is adequate behaviour, adequate culture in that unit, before you undertake them; and I fully support that. So, there is not as if after a certain period, behaviours will automatically correct. Rear-view cameras for all vehicles. Intuitively and in principle, it makes sense. But as Members can well imagine, SAF runs platforms of various generations. In fact, the most recent generations, the Terrexes, even our Leopard tanks, have rear-view cameras. But you inherit a long tail and the Bionix was in operation since, I think, the 1990s. With this incident, we decided that we will do it for training vehicles; we are reviewing if we should also do it for operational. So, I would say, in principle, yes, but there are other considerations. But, in principle, that is what we want to do. And, certainly, as I said, for those that need to reverse, that are reversing, we will put in not only rear-view cameras but mirrors to reduce blind spots. There was another question of reassurance of parents.”
“Because without national servicemen, we cannot have an SAF or the Home Team that can deter terrorists from attacking Changi Airport or Jurong or harming innocent civilians in shopping malls and crowded places. Without national servicemen and the SAF, potential aggressors would not shy away from simply marching into and occupying today’s affluent Singapore, as Iraq did to Kuwait. Without a strong defence, our air and shipping routes in and out of Singapore could easily be blocked – as Qatar now faces. These are not imaginary security threats that our national servicemen train for, but real – they have happened elsewhere and can occur to Singapore, too. We must never give up on NS that forms the backbone of our SAF for national defence. This imperative of NS and our national defence does not absolve or reduce the accountability of MINDEF and the SAF in any way, to ensure safe training. On the contrary, it compels MINDEF and the SAF to do all that is humanly possible to prevent training deaths for national servicemen because precious sons have been entrusted to us by their families. MINDEF and the SAF will hold ourselves accountable for every single national serviceman entrusted to us. I am deeply sorry for the loss of four precious national servicemen in the last 17 months. The SAF will strengthen its safety systems. Even as we honour those who died in service of our country, we must soldier on, to build a strong defence, to protect Singapore and to protect every national serviceman during training. Thank you, Speaker.”
“For our soldiers, a team of psychologists, counsellors and psychiatrists are deployed to assist unit commanders and servicemen in their recovery from the stress in such incidents. MINDEF does take the families' request into consideration when deploying a deceased serviceman's immediate family members during their NS. Over the past 17 months, four national servicemen have passed away during training. In 2012, the SAF also experienced four training fatalities that year. But from 2013 to 2016, we had none. How did this turnaround occur? This was probably due to multiple factors. But I think the new safety measures we put into place after the devastating incidents of 2012 had an effect. If we put our minds and efforts to achieve zero training fatalities, it can be achieved. Four families have experienced much sorrow after their irreplaceable loss these past months. Singapore has lost precious sons. As deep as the hurt, as great the loss, we must not forget why we suffer them. When the founding generation pledged themselves to build a strong SAF, they were fully conscious that a strong military is only possible with fully committed national servicemen drawn from every family in Singapore. They knew the costs and sacrifice that would be required. Not only in resources that we invest in at every Budget, but much more precious would be the time, the sweat, the tears, even the lives of precious sons. Inherently, military training poses risk. On any given day within the SAF, thousands of national servicemen train hard, amid moving tonnes of steel, bullets, munitions and other explosives. Why do our national servicemen do it? They do it to protect Singapore.”
“We do not reward, nor should signal that we reward adventurous behaviour. And this is in the Training Safety Regulations. So, let me quote it in full. It is in chapter 1, section 2, paragraph 11: "Anyone who spots a safety breach or unsafe practice can call for an immediate stop to it, rectify when possible and report to the Conducting Officer. Once notified, the Conducting Officer should verify the report and, when necessary, rectify the safety breach or unsafe practice. The Conducting Officer must update the Supervising Officer on the measures taken to rectify the safety breach or unsafe practice." Anyone who spots the safety breach; not only commanders, but anyone. Servicemen can also report safety incidents and near-misses through a 24-hour safety hotline. This safety hotline receives about 140 calls a year. Ultimately, safety is both a command and individual responsibility and everyone needs to play their part because precious lives depend on it. It is not true that we cannot train safely if we want to train realistically. If we have a strong safety culture and safety systems, it will give soldiers greater confidence to train hard and realistically. SAF commanders are convinced that it can be done, and these measures I have outlined today will lead us to that goal of zero training fatalities. Mr Speaker, the loss of any soldier is devastating. It leaves a void that cannot be filled in the lives of family members and friends, and its impact is deep and far-reaching. It will take much time for their grief to run its course. Members Ms Anthea Ong and Mr Chong Kee Hiong have asked about assistance when a death occurs. Within the SAF, dedicated grief counsellors are assigned to provide support to the serviceman’s family members in the aftermath of their loss.”
“Members have asked, and this includes a question from Member Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, if we should punish safety lapses, even when they do not lead to injury. Over the past three years, an average of 2% of servicemen a year were punished under the SAF Act for safety lapses – 2 %. Their punishments ranged from a fine to detention and administrative penalties, such as delays in promotion and reduction in benefits. At the same time, we reward servicemen who demonstrate safe behaviour. Units and individuals are recognised during the Service’s respective annual Safety Day. Member Mr Mohamed Irshad enquired about this. If we are to achieve zero fatalities during NS training, we must have a strong safety culture in all our units and safety consciousness down to the last soldier. Commanders and supervisors must lead by example to emphasise safety. And all commanders already undergo safety training and must know that safety lapses will affect their performance review. Safety Officers, who are former senior commanders, help ensure the safe conduct of training. Experienced Regular trainers partner the national servicemen commanders to design training and safety plans. Soldiers must have a strong respect for safety rules, take care of one another and speak out on safety concerns. Incentives and disincentives must be aligned to achieve the right safety outcomes. Our safety system must weed out unsafe practices, even when they do not lead to accidents. This was a point, I think, in the question of Member Ms Irene Quay Siew Ching. Individual soldiers are encouraged to report unsafe practices and risky behaviour to their superiors without fear of reprisal, or regardless of rank, to call for an immediate stop to training.”
“Quite a few Members – Prof Fatimah Lateef, Miss Cheng Li Hui, Ms Joan Pereira and Miss Cheryl Chan – have asked even if safety instructions are adequately in place, how do we ensure that national servicemen are familiar and safety conscious? It is an important question. Also, whether SAF has taken into account the abrupt switch from civilian environment to military training where there are much larger and potentially dangerous equipment. Another good question. These are important issues that need to be factored into our safety systems. One suggestion has been to outsource all maintenance work with heavy vehicles or machinery. This is not possible. Complex maintenance tasks that require specialised tools and equipment are already outsourced. But we still need national servicemen technicians to be with their units to perform basic maintenance so that their equipment can function during operations. We do cater time for NSmen soldiers to adjust from their civilian settings. Before any activity commences, a safety brief is held and inspections conducted to check that soldiers are in good physical state, and that vehicles and equipment are serviceable. Soldiers must also complete an individual risk assessment checklist and raise safety concerns to their superiors for mitigation before any activity begins. NS training is conducted progressively, starting with refresher training for individual skills and proficiencies before any operations are conducted. Prior to their deployment, further training, such as with a simulator, is conducted. I think one Member asked about this. The IGO will review if further mitigating measures are needed to help NSmen adjust from civilian life to in-camp training.”
“There will be more safety audits of units by inspection teams in the Services and supervised by the IGO. Second, commanders of units which do not meet standards and have committed lapses in safety procedures and processes will have this marked against them in their performance reviews. Let me emphasise that such commanders will be deemed to have performed unsatisfactorily even if accidents have not occurred. This is the right emphasis to prevent accidents. In the past few weeks, the CDF reduced the tempo for every unit to review its processes and to emphasise to the troops a safety consciousness to protect themselves and their buddies. Units that are on live operations, such as those protecting key installations, are not affected by this measure and will continue to be vigilant. Basic types of training have resumed since 7 February. Individual units will continue to be audited and will resume realistic training when safety processes are assessed to be in place. Some Members – Mr Darryl David, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Leon Perera – have asked if external agencies review our system to detect root issues. ERPSS, which consists of prominent safety experts and professionals outside SAF, is tasked primarily with this mission. The SAF's safety system is aligned to international frameworks and regulations, such as the Occupational Health and Safety System (OHSAS 18001) framework. It comprises rules that mitigate safety risks in the conduct of all training; processes and training to build up competency of our servicemen and to make sure that the rules are properly applied; inspections and reporting mechanisms to ensure that the rules are followed; and consequences if they are not followed.”
“Second, for all reversing manoeuvres, including extrication drills, the driver can only move the vehicle backwards with the explicit clearance of the rear guide. These two measures, together with the extra emergency horn buttons, will enhance safety and still allow armour units to practise extrication drills. Further, the Army will ensure that only essential vehicles are allowed into the exercise area to minimise the risk of accidents. Apart from these specific measures, in response to the recent NS deaths, SAF has decided that for the safety system as a whole, a dedicated unit will be set up at the highest level to drive and supervise a safety culture and enforcement against slack practices. This move also responds to the ERPSS finding that while the safety policies and management systems of SAF are largely in place, there was a need for more compliance checks and ground level audits. In line with this objective, SAF will undertake the following systemic measures. The current Safety and Systems Review Directorate (SSRD) will be expanded and elevated to an Inspector-General Office (IGO) under the Chief of Defence Force (CDF) to oversee all Services. The Office will be headed by the SAF Inspector-General. The Chief of Staff-Joint Staff (COS-JS), which is an existing appointment of a Service Chief equivalent, will concurrently be the Inspector-General. This dual function is synergistic as the COS-JS has an overview of all operations and, as Inspector-General, will have the authority to ensure that Safety First habits and processes are incorporated at all levels of training. More safety officers will be deployed to assist individual units and supervise training activities.”
“Second, from March this year, rear-view cameras will be progressively installed into our training fleet of Bionix vehicles, so that the driver can see during reversing. The Army will study if these new features – the safety horns and the rear-view camera – ought to be incorporated for the operational vehicles as well. All heavy-wheeled vehicles, such as five-tonners, will also be progressively installed with rear-view cameras and mirrors to reduce blind spots. Third, as with live firing exercises, the Army will also now conduct safety Table Top Exercises for all high-risk non-live firing exercises before the actual execution. I think some Members asked about this. This includes familiarisation with emergency measures and evacuation plans. Fourth, more experienced Regulars have been added as trainers. Fifth, starting from March this year, medics will upgrade their skills in resuscitation and handling of emergencies through attachments to hospital emergency departments or ambulances. Sixth, vehicle and equipment serviceability will be improved based on the recommendations of the external panel. Finally, with regard to the safety distance between vehicles. In an exercise area, vehicles are used for a variety of administrative, safety and training purposes. The current distance of 30 metres was prescribed after evaluation and tests and, in general, assessed to be adequate for safety and still allow supporting elements to be responsive to events on the ground. But where vehicles have to reverse, such as in extrication drills, the Army has put in new measures to enhance safety. First, trainers will no longer travel in Land Rovers but will join exercise troops in the combat vehicles during high-risk training.”