Patrick Tay Teck Guan
Singapore
“Will CPF Board also notify SDS holders with clear anti-scam advisories, whether via SMS or any other means, especially with emerging modus operandi by scammers? This is so that the message reaches them properly and reduces confusion. Mr Speaker, Sir, with these questions, I support the Bill.”
“We are not asking to oppose change but for clarity, contemporaneous communication, equitability and assurance so that impacted workers will not be left behind. In short, a fair and just transition. I hope today's debate helps move us in that right direction. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“I thank the Minister for sharing the response to the Parliamentary Question by the fellow Member of the House. I was wondering, and I think I have brought this up before on previous occasions, whether we can consider stricter penalties against those who do not comply, with this requirement.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two questions for the Minister for Health. Firstly, the rise in energy and related costs will impact our public healthcare clusters.”
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the response. I have just one supplementary question for the Ministry of Manpower that in the light of these wage levels of our PMEs, in the course of reviewing some of our existing employment labour laws as well as regulations to factor this in, so that such PMEs are adequately represented,…”
“Stable psychiatric patients often remain at IMH simply because there are no community facilities to receive them. My third question is whether there are plans to develop more custodial care and step-down facilities – sheltered homes, supported living – so that IMH’s beds are reserved for those who need its full clinical expertise?”
The complete record
Every one of 915 lines we hold for Patrick Tay Teck Guan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 19.
“Chair, my first cut is on the Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) Judgments. With the Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) having jurisdiction to adjudicate both salary-related disputes as well as wrongful dismissal claims, it now hears more cases. Having a deeper understanding of the rulings of the ECT would benefit not just practitioners and lawyers, but claimants and respondents too when presenting their respective cases. Past decisions of the ECT would be extremely useful as a source of reference and precedence and should thus be made available. For a start, I would like to suggest that the more landmark and instructive judgments can be selectively published. Enforcement of ECT Judgments/Orders My second cut is on Enforcement of ECT Judgments/Orders. The ECT now has jurisdiction to adjudicate both salary-related disputes as well as wrongful dismissal claims, making it more convenient for parties to resolve employment disputes via a single forum. However, an Employment Claims Tribunal judgment that is not satisfied would still need to be enforced in the same manner as an order made by a District Court. This would involve detailed processes set out in the Rules of Court pertaining to the filing of relevant forms/documents as well as the payment of court fees. A worker who has successfully obtained a judgment may thus still be subject to a protracted enforcement process. Workers’ lack of knowledge of the workings of our courts system exacerbates this problem. There is thus a need to simplify and expedite the enforcement mechanism to facilitate workers’ recovery of moneys.”
“In this vein, how does the public sector intend to help its officers achieve lifelong employability, given that the skill requirements and jobs would evolve throughout a longer career span? How has it been engaging the Labour Movement to help officers understand, embrace and thrive in a new environment that is increasingly dynamic and even disruptive? What has been the progress in terms of skills upgrading within the Public Service? SkillsFuture for Public Officers”
“Just as SkillsFuture is crucial for the private sector, it is also vital for the public sector to embrace SkillsFuture. This is especially so today, with technology and digitalisation disrupting work, workers and workplaces regardless of where you are in the world and what you do. Today, we have seen several traditional jobs being automated completely, for example, services that are now online and where customers can do self-checkout and self-help. On the other hand, we also see some jobs, that are performed very differently today – for instance, through deploying RPA and "training" robots, as opposed to performing the manual tasks ourselves. What this means for Singapore, is that as a small and open economy, we need to be able to transform and innovate new products and services to maintain our competitiveness, while working within manpower constraints. Technology and longer career spans are two positive opportunities that can help us overcome our constraints. This underscores the importance of Industry 4.0 and SkillsFuture to ensure that the public sector stays ready, relevant and resilient. To achieve a win-win-win outcome for workers, employers and the economy, we must continually upskill our workers to equip them with in-demand skills of today and of the future. This will help them take on quality jobs and better jobs should their jobs become automated or replaced by machines. The public sector has taken the lead in extending the retirement and re-employment age a year ahead of schedule. It has also been working with NTUC-affiliated unions to form Company Training Committees in its push to promote skills upgrading.”
“First, speed up the disbursement of JSS and the additional $500 SkillsFuture Top-up, encouraging businesses and workers to make use of this period of downtime to restructure, train and upgrade. Second, allow Singaporeans between 40 and 60 years old to have more courses available to them, including those recognised under the ITM Skills Framework or relevant courses offered by NTUC. Third, restore the Surrogate Employer Programme so that freelancers, self-employed persons or certain neglected workers can also receive allowances during their absence so that they can go for courses for upgrading. Fourth, raise the absentee payroll to encourage businesses to send their workers for training. Fifth, at the same time, we must pay attention to job security of our workers. As NTUC Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng has announced, NTUC will set up a JSC to help retrenched workers with job matching and necessary training through e2i. (In English): My view is that this is a comprehensive and inclusive Budget, one that will help Singapore overcome our short-term challenges and, at the same time, prepare ourselves for future threats, disruptions and opportunities. I urge our tripartite partners and all of us in Singapore to rally together, stay united and look out for one another. This is so that we can navigate and overcome this rough patch together, and then ride on the wave of change and embrace the upturn thereafter as one Singapore.”
“In light of the current situation, as well as business slowdown for many industries and the possibility of a recession, the Government can step in to provide an additional nudge and incentive for employers to send all their workers for training and skills upgrading through increasing the absentee payroll and course fee funding. Minimally, I submit that this enhanced critical funding can help to address the vulnerabilities of the mature and older workers in this time and space. Today, the world has changed and continues to change. Against an increasingly uncertain global environment and an economy that is facing challenges both in the short term and long term, many of our workers are understandably worried that their jobs will be impacted. To ensure job security for workers, my fifth suggestion would be the formation of JSC. As NTUC Secretary-General and Minister Ng Chee Meng has shared, NTUC will be piloting a JSC to pre-emptively match at-risk workers and PMEs into jobs. Through JSC, NTUC and its affiliated unions will help displaced workers find new jobs within the network and, where necessary, provide the requisite training to help workers smoothly transition from one job to another. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The COVID-19 outbreak will undoubtedly affect our economy. Many workers have told me that they were worried about their jobs. I fully understand their concerns. The new Budget, as announced by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, is both assuring and stimulating. Not only does it address the immediate needs but also focus on long-term planning. With regard to this, I have five suggestions.”
“By the same token, to minimise jobs and skills mismatches, career advisors could look at providing peer-level support for this group and additional support, such as coaching, to identify skills gaps and training intervention that may be needed. Third is to restore the Surrogate Employer Programme. During the SARS crisis in 2003, I was in NTUC overseeing the Surrogate Employer Programme, where NTUC acted as a surrogate employer and helped many of those affected by the downturn, such as Tour Guides as well as SIA's Cabin Crew who were on unpaid leave, to go for training and upgrading while benefiting from a training allowance. These efforts resulted in a win-win-win for all, in that when the Singapore economy rebounded months later, affected workers who had the training allowance as stipend could now return to their jobs and assignments quickly, to the delight of their employers and customers. In addition, they were now armed with additional qualifications, such as a Diploma in Hospitality or other related certifications. I see a good opportunity for us to revisit and reintroduce this scheme to support workers who may fall through the cracks or those not covered under the current schemes, such as our freelancers and self-employed Singaporeans. To further support this group of workers, could the Government also look at extending calibrated wage support through sector agencies to help them cope with the immediate impact brought about by the current economic situation? NTUC stands ready to partner the Government to administer the Surrogate Employer Programme so that this group of workers can also benefit from training assistance and incentives. Fourth, to raise the absentee payroll and course fee funding.”
“These efforts, which were introduced last year, aim to equip workers across all sectors and all sizes of companies with the necessary skills, so that they can secure better wages, better welfare and better work prospects. Notwithstanding a laudable Budget, I have five specific suggestions for consideration. First, to speed up the disbursement of JSS and SkillsFuture Top-up. In the near term, some companies that are directly affected are already feeling the effects of economic fallout brought about by COVID-19 and any immediate relief is welcomed. As such, can the disbursement of JSS be brought forward from the start date of July 2020? In the same vein, many workers, especially the freelance and self-employed, have asked if the SkillsFuture Top-up originally scheduled in October 2020 can be rolled out earlier, so that they can make use of this period of downtime to embark on the relevant training. As I urge the speeding up of disbursements, I also suggest for the Government's support to lengthen and stretch the validity of these schemes should the situation worsen or become prolonged. Second is to expand the Training Support for Mid-Career Singaporeans. My second suggestion is not to confine the additional top-up for those aged 40 to 60 only to those 200 career transition programmes offered by the CET centres as outlined in Annex B-2 to the Budget Statement. I urge for the courses availed to include those recognised under the Industry Transformation Map (ITM) Skills Framework as well as suitable Government and NTUC-run courses and programmes and those of our CTCs.”
“Some Members may not know, but what is particularly beneficial and useful are that freelancers and self-employed individuals can also tap on their SkillsFuture Credits to learn new skills or even develop in their field. I am heartened, therefore, that this top-up will give all Singaporeans aged 25 and above an added push as they make lifelong learning a way of life. Second, is the added focus on mid-career workers between the ages of 40 and 60 through the various programmes and policies. Based on labour market statistics and reports, this group continues to be the most vulnerable and affected by retrenchments, with higher skilled, middle-aged PMEs the hardest hit. Mature and older workers, including PMEs, also face greater difficulty in the job market with the long-term unemployment rate of Singaporeans climbing with age. For those who are unemployed or retrenched, re-entry into the labour market is also an uphill task. In my interactions with mature workers, and especially PMEs, they have shared their concerns about being made redundant by younger colleagues or being replaced by technology and job automation. In short, they worry about staying employed and employable. Third, would be the creation of the SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit for Employers. This is also something I have suggested in this House. I hope this credit for employers will serve as a catalyst for companies, especially SMEs, to develop their workforce as they transform their business, by embracing and investing in skills upgrading and training of their workers. In particular, the SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit will further augment and complement existing efforts by NTUC and our affiliated unions to partner companies in forming CTCs.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this year's Budget. Today, as we debate Budget 2020, Singapore, as a country, must grapple with the round-the-clock challenge of battling with COVID-19. This is over and above the continued race to keep up with the rise of digitalisation, new technologies and economic transformation. Against the backdrop of these exacting forces, the future of work, workers and workplaces will and must evolve and transform. Thus far, many union leaders, workers as well as my grassroots leaders and residents have shared positive feedback about this year’s Budget. At a personal level, I am sure the Stabilisation and Support Package announced at Budget 2020 will be a boon to both businesses and workers, as it provides assurance and support in this time of economic uncertainty and ensure every worker matters and every job counts. On one hand, businesses will receive job and cash flow support to retain and retrain workers. On the other hand, our workers – from the young and mid-career to older workers – will get a much-needed boost through the various SkillsFuture Credit schemes to upgrade, upskill and stay employable. What is particularly reassuring is that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat has also stated affirmatively in his speech that the Government is prepared to do more should the need arise. This year’s Budget is seen as an expensive as well as expansive one. I am particularly happy and delighted with three items fleshed out in the Budget because it has answered three calls which I have been making in this House. First, is the $500 SkillsFuture Credit top-up for all Singaporeans, which I have been lobbying for over the past two years.”
“I would like to ask the Minister of State a supplementary question. For local or foreign workers, in light of the required five-day medical certificates (MCs) that are issued by doctors for flu or fever during this COVID-19 period, whether MOM can classify these MCs given out as COVID-19 MCs and outside of the scope or ambit of the 14 days of Sick Leave under the Employment Act. Otherwise, the suggestion would be to classify it instead as Hospitalisation Leave under the Employment Act so that a worker will not over consume the 14-day Sick Leave entitlement under the Employment Act.”
“Fourth, we do see a greater trend towards mediation over the years, especially with the implementation of the Mediation Act in 2017 and the various mediation institutions in Singapore. I have also seen some choosing mediation over litigation, while others opt to use mediation in conjunction with litigation. Would the Minister foresee a further increase in disputes resolved as a result of the new Bill and, if so, to what extent? Would the Minister also be able to share some of the views and concerns of the legal fraternity as well as the business community, in response to this new Bill? Sir, clarifications notwithstanding, I stand in support of this Bill.”
“By the same token, the settlement agreement may also be invoked by a party as a defence against a claim that has already been settled. This prevents settled disputes from being re-litigated, which saves parties’ time and costs as well as judicial resources. While the Bill is no doubt commendable, I have the following questions and clarifications for the Senior Minister of State. The Bill only applies to international commercial settlement agreements resulting from mediation and does not extend to settlement agreements concluded for family, inheritance and/or employment disputes. First, is there a reason why the Bill is not extended to these other areas of dispute? If so, would the Minister be willing to share the reasons? Also, does the Minister foresee that there should be a similar Bill covering these other areas, given today's globally interconnected world, where many individuals opt to work around the globe, having assets typically situated in different parts of the world and where transactions cut across borders? Second, given the growing freelancer community and, especially for those who look to venture overseas, whether digitally or in person, would the Bill also cover intellectual property (IP) rights? Third, I understand that the Court retains the discretion to refuse the application to record the agreement as a Court Order if there was a serious breach by the mediator of the applicable standards. What are some examples of serious breaches by the mediator which would warrant the Court’s refusal of the application? And is it necessary to refuse enforcement, especially if commercial entities have been properly advised and have the freedom to enter into such settlement agreements?”
“Apart from SMC, we also have the International Institute of Mediators (Singapore) Limited (iiM), which was established as a result of its founding members’ commitment to develop and promote the mediation profession on a global basis. Aside from the regular mediation sessions conducted by its members, the iiM additionally provides education and training for those who aspire to become trained mediators. I am also pleased to share that the National Trades Union Congress' (NTUC’s) Freelancers and Self-Employed Unit (UFSE) and iiM have inked a collaboration agreement in December 2019 to better serve the needs of the freelancer community in Singapore. This is one of the many initiatives illustrating the Labour Movement's commitment towards its freelancer members, ensuring that they have an appropriate avenue for amicable dispute resolution. With this collaboration, NTUC UFSE members will be able to enjoy discounted rates for mediation services provided by iiM. Turning now to the international commercial sphere, with the increasing prevalence of global and international trade between countries, coupled with Singapore’s open and highly developed free-market economy, the need for cross-border mediation resources and enforceable international settlement agreements becomes particularly crucial. It is against this commercial backdrop that this Bill is commendable. Under the new Bill, international commercial settlement agreements may be recorded as an order of Court which can then be more readily enforced in the same manner as a judgment by the High Court. This is an improvement from the long-standing position where mediated settlement agreements are typically only binding contractually between parties and not directly enforceable as a Court Order.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I declare my interest as an accredited mediator with the Singapore Mediation Centre as well as a Fellow in the Singapore Institute of Arbitrators. I rise in support of this Bill, which seeks to enhance the dispute resolution landscape within Singapore, by giving greater recognition towards mediation and international commercial settlement agreements. The benefits of mediation are four-fold. First, mediation accords parties greater control over the outcome and resolution of the matter, which contrasts with long-drawn Court trials, where the outcome of a case rests in the Judge’s hands. Second, the contents of parties' disputes are kept confidential, unlike litigation where parties' dirty linen and affairs are often aired in Court. Third, legal costs are reduced, as parties no longer have to pay for their lawyers' fees and Court fees once a settlement has been reached. Lastly and most importantly, parties' relationships are preserved and this is essential where parties wish to continue business relations with each other. As Singapore recognises the benefits of mediation and continues to develop its position as a leading global dispute resolution hub, mediation institutions and schemes will take on an increasingly important role. At present, we have the Singapore Mediation Centre (SMC), which has mediated over 4,000 matters to date. The settlement rate is approximately 70%, with more than 90% of the settled disputes resolved within a day. To date, SMC has received positive feedback. Many individuals have saved time and costs and would likewise recommend SMC to others involved in disputes.”
“I have two supplementary questions for the Minister of State for Manpower and one supplementary question for the Minister for Trade and Industry. Firstly, on the massive number of jobs created because of the ITMs. My two questions are, firstly, as we create all these jobs, how do we ensure we level the playing field to ensure that the firms that create these jobs consider Singaporeans fairly? Secondly, now that we have the FCF as well as other Employment Pass criteria in place and the FCF has started since 2014, is MOM considering reviewing it and looking at tighter measures to ensure that recalcitrant companies who do abuse that are watched carefully? For the Minister for Trade and Industry, can I have his assurance – and I also urge him – that as we plan our strategies to attract investments and as we plan our winning moves for the future, can we ensure that our various economic agencies put Singaporeans – not just jobs for Singaporeans but quality jobs for Singaporeans – front and centre in all their strategy papers?”
“In such a situation, those involved in regular employment by day, would already have the requisite CPF contributions through the employer's plus employee’s CPF contributions needed for the big-ticket items in life, such as housing, retirement as well as healthcare bills and so on. In this case, would the CAYE scheme still serve its objective of ensuring that these SEPs are self-sufficient? Are there considerations for this class of persons to be exempted from MediSave contributions in respect of their freelance work and revenue, to avoid imposing additional financial constraints upon them, especially since the Singapore economy is going through an uncertain period? Lastly, as a general observation, the CAYE scheme was developed to plug the lacuna in the law and assist SEPs with saving monies in their CPF account to tide them through rainy days and fund big ticket items. The root cause of this issue is fundamentally because SEPS, or freelancers, are not employees and, therefore, not entitled to CPF contributions to begin with. However, it is worth highlighting that in some countries, such as Norway and Australia, certain classes of SEPs, such as food delivery riders, are now considered "employees" and accorded employee rights and benefits, including the right to join unions. Perhaps, in due course, it may be time to examine our laws to determine if certain classes of freelancers should be accorded "employee" status and the associated benefits, especially where their contract for service resembles an employment contract. Perhaps, a good starting point would be to allow freelancers to be covered within the scope of the Trade Unions Act. Sir, my clarifications notwithstanding, I stand in support of this Bill.”
“Second, I note that, at present, there are approximately 6,000 SEPs who provide services directly to the Government and, therefore, stand to benefit from the CAYE scheme. As of last year, I understand that there were approximately 200,000 SEPs in Singapore's resident workforce. If the figure of 200,000 remains the same this year, it would mean that only 6,000 out of the 200,000 SEPs, or about 3%, provide services directly to the Government. Would the Minister be able to provide some clarification as to why only 3% of the SEPs provide services directly to the Government? Is it because the Government generally prefers contracting with bigger and more stable companies with established reputations? In this case, what more can be done to help SEPs remain competitive? Or would it be due to the differences in demand and supply of the nature of the services provided by the SEPs? Does MOM see the figure of 3% as worrying? In which case, what more can be done? We need to ensure that these freelancers do not lose their rice bowls, amidst the economic uncertainty. What other ways are there which the Government is utilising or considering to support the healthcare and retirement needs of freelancers in Singapore? Third, we observe that there is increasing fluidity in Singapore's employment landscape. For instance, some freelancers have opted to diversify their careers by picking up regular employment and working as employees by day and freelancing at night, subject to the terms of their employment contracts.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. I note that there are several amendments to the CPF Act. However, my focus today would be the introduction or provision of the Contribute-As-You-Earn (CAYE) scheme. The CAYE scheme is designed to help SEPs contribute to their MediSave account as and when they are paid for their work, instead of requiring a yearly lump sum. Starting from 2020 onwards, under the CAYE scheme, SEPs will have small and regular contributions made to their MediSave accounts when the Government pays for their services. The Government will transmit the MediSave contributions of the SEP to his/her MediSave account. He/she will then receive the balance fee. In this regard, it is similar to the existing CPF contribution scheme which requires employers to make monthly contributions to their employees' CPF accounts. I also note that the CAYE scheme is presently at its infancy and, at this point, the pilot run is not applicable to the private sector. I am glad to note that the Minister has agreed to consider some form of matching contribution for this pilot CAYE. While the CAYE scheme is no doubt commendable and a positive attempt by the Government to support freelance and SEPs, I have the following questions for the Minister. First, we note that, at present, the CAYE pilot scheme will only be applicable for Government contracts and there are no plans to extend it to the private sector as of now, during this pilot phase, presumably to ensure that there are no glitches and that MediSave contributions are calculated correctly. My question is: are there plans to extend it to the private sector? If there are plans, when can we expect it would be extended to the private sector? And does MOM foresee any resistance from the private sector?”
“We must ensure that there are adequate safety nets in place to help injured workers to seek medical treatment and compensation in the event where the employer has failed to perform their obligations under WICA. With the increase in WIC insurance premiums, it may be timely to explore if a small percentage of the premiums could be channelled to grow the Workers' Fund to provide relief in such exigencies. Sir, I stand in support of this Bill and hope that my recommendations will be considered, with the objective of enhancing work safety for our workers in Singapore, for a more productive and efficient economy.”
“In any case, given that the risk profile of NMEs is significantly lower than manual employees, insurance premiums for NMEs would be lower. Employers can work with unions and the Migrant Workers' Centre (MWC) for their foreign-worker workforce to raise workers' awareness of their rights under the WIC framework. This will reduce the worker's anxiety in the event a work injury is sustained and smoothen the work injury complaint process for all parties. Unions or MWC, as the case may be, can also assist workers with their queries on the WIC claim process to enable them to make informed choices concerning the WIC claim. Workers can also seek free legal advice through the legal clinics offered by the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) and MWC, in partnership with the Law Society of Singapore's Pro Bono Services Office. There have been instances where some errant employers have terminated insurance coverage for their foreign workers within the term of their Work Pass or had overlooked renewal of coverage. With the sharing of policy and claims data by licensed insurers with MOM and other licensed insurers, MOM can now implement a better monitoring system to ensure that employers maintain mandatory insurance coverage for foreign workers throughout the validity of their work passes. Audits should also be conducted on the insurance policies procured by the employer to ensure that adequate coverage has been secured for their workers and the type of work undertaken by the workers. Even with good processes in place, there must also be provision for cases which slip through the cracks.”
“However, it should be borne in mind that the decision and/or duration for light duties is ultimately the doctors' decision, and based on a true and accurate assessment of the workers' sustained injuries and the doctors' assessment on how long the worker requires to fully recuperate before being fully fit to perform his original duties. In any case, any increased costs on the employers' part should be reimbursed by the WIC insurance. The expansion of mandatory insurance coverage to non-manual employees earning up to $2,600 a month, together with the lifting of compensation levels to keep pace with wage growth and rising medical costs, provides enhanced protection for vulnerable workers. In parallel with this enhancement, efforts must be stepped up to raise workers' awareness of their rights under the WIC framework and to also better monitor employers' compliance with the maintenance of mandatory coverage. Additionally, the Government should also work with unions to continue encouraging companies which employ professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) earning more than S$2,600 to also buy insurance for peace of mind of employers and workers. Of course, this suggestion may face resistance from employers. However, to alleviate any such worries, it is proposed that the expansion of mandatory insurance coverage protecting workers earning beyond S$2,600 be imposed gradually, in consultation with employers and in tandem with economic growth over the years. Second, it is important to bear in mind that the costs of insurance premiums would pale in comparison with the amount a company without insurance may have to pay an employee who suffers work injury under the common law.”
“There have been past incidences where vulnerable workers have been coerced by employers to conceal work injuries in order to remain in employment. Some errant employers have also terminated employment arrangements of injured foreign workers and sent the workers home to escape liability. With the introduction of lower premiums for "safer" companies, some companies may be incentivised to under report work injuries. As such, there must be avenues for workers or whistleblowers to report any malpractice for MOM's investigation. It is, first, commendable that there is a general increase in the compensation for work injuries under this Bill to keep pace with wage growth and healthcare costs. However, we note that under the proposed amendments, employees will only be compensated the full average monthly earnings (AME) for the first 14 days of MC and/or light duties, and thereafter, only two-thirds AME of up to one year. It is odd that the workers are not able to be paid the full AME for as long as they are on light duties, especially if the sole reason for being placed on light duties is because of their work injuries. Perhaps, it is time to explore the possibility of paying the workers the full AME for the full period that they are placed on light duties and not limit it to the first 14 days. Granted that this could possibly mean increased costs on the employer' side while not being able to reap the full economic benefits from the employees and workers.”
“For instance, conducting seminars for the union leaders or workers, or stating such avenues or measures in the Employee Handbook which workers and employees can access on the employers' obligations to report work injuries. It is hoped that with more transparency accorded in the process, there will be a decline in failures to report work injuries. Second, injured workers should be kept in the loop in the WIC claim process so that they are able to access the documentation trail and make informed decisions concerning the claim, such as whether to elect to take the claim to Court instead. Injured workers should be notified when the employer reports the work injury and be kept abreast of developments in the WIC claim process. If for some reason, the worker elects to pursue his claim in Court, it is likely that the employer may not be pleased with such a move for various reasons, such as bad publicity, legal costs and so on. Perhaps it needs to be reiterated and emphasised that during the course of the litigation process the employer is not allowed to terminate the employee for reasons associated with the accident, save where permitted by law, failing which there might be legal consequences. Third, while the WIC claim is being processed, the employer should ensure that the injured worker is able to seek the medical attention that he or she requires in an expedient manner with the employer's support. There have been reported incidences where injured workers were not able to seek medical treatment because the employer did not provide them with a Letter of Guarantee and the workers had to go without treatment as they were unable to afford medical treatment. Fourth, there must be avenues for injured workers to raise issues encountered in the WIC claims process to MOM.”
“To speed up the claims process, WIC claims will be processed for all work injuries reported by the employer. This will overcome the problem where the worker is not aware that he or she had to file the WIC claim and is subsequently time-barred from doing so. Licensed insurers will process all claims arising from accredited WIC policies to reduce the number of disputes arising from policies with complex exclusions. Last year, following a stepping up of enforcement efforts by MOM, 39 employers were fined for failing to report work injuries, compared to only one employer in 2017. I note that under this Bill, the penalty imposed on employers for failing to report work injuries has been increased. Auto-processing of WIC claims would only serve the injured worker if employers comply with their work injury reporting obligations. I would suggest the following measures to be taken to support the amendments proposed under the Bill. First, MOM should audit employers to ensure that employers are complying with their obligations to report work injuries. This could be done with reference to third-party data, such as information from workers, unions and medical practitioners. Accurate reporting of workplace injuries will provide a true representation of the extent of workplace accidents in Singapore and provide important information to licensed insurers to enable them to assess the premiums payable by the company. Apart from implementing audits on the employers to ensure compliance on their part, perhaps more could be done to educate workers and their respective union leaders of their employers' reporting obligations under the law, lest they be fearful of adverse repercussions.”
“With this information, insurers are better placed to price the premiums based on their risk profile and claims history. Companies with fewer work injuries will enjoy lower premiums, compared to less safe ones. In this aspect, companies will be incentivised to ensure a safe work environment for their workers, which is likewise beneficial for them, as healthy and happy workers will be more productive and efficient at work. On the other hand, workers benefit when they return home safely. Lastly, the effect of the amendments is the expansion of compulsory insurance coverage to more non-manual employees (NMEs) working in non-factories earning up to S$2,600, an increase from the current S$1,600, which will benefit another 25,000 workers, which comprise largely of junior professionals, managers and executives (PMEs). As this group of junior PMEs are within the lower salary range, the compulsory additional coverage will provide greater assurance both financially and emotionally of coverage in the event of work injuries. As for companies, while at first it appears that it is an increased financial outlay in terms of insurance premiums, it must be borne in mind that, should there be work injuries, the insurers will step in, which is a cost-saving measure in the long run. Where companies observe safety measures at work, there is the potential for lower insurance premiums. While the changes proposed under the Bill are welcomed, I would like to suggest some further enhancements to the proposed changes aimed at expediting the WIC claims process and expanding the scope of mandatory insurance coverage. Under the Bill, all work injuries resulting in any instance of light duty or medical leave would have to be reported by the employer.”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill. The WIC framework is a no-fault system with the aim of providing workers injured in work-related accidents with low-cost and expeditious means to claim WIC. The Bill seeks to improve the framework to better enable the meeting of its objectives. Briefly, the amendments to the Bill are commendable in the following areas. First, there is now a mandatory requirement by MOM to report all instances of medical certificates (MCs) or light duties due to work injuries. This is beneficial in the sense that there is less incentive for employers to influence doctors to prescribe fewer days of MC to the injured workers, to circumvent the original reporting requirement of only needing to report injuries which result in death, or at least MCs of four days. Second, MOM will now accredit a standard WIC policy with a core set of insurance terms and conditions, which reduces disputes from policies with complex policy exclusions. This will ensure that both employers and employees' interests are better protected. For employees, there is more certainty in receiving compensation, especially if employers face financial difficulty. As for the employers, they would know with greater certainty that they would be reimbursed under the insurance policies. Third, under the amendments, there will be an increase in the compensation amount and medical limits, in view of rising wages and healthcare costs. This is a recognition on the Government's end of the financial implications that workplace injuries have on people, such as loss of income and hefty medical expenses. Fourth, insurers will now be required to share policy and claims information with MOM and such data will be centralised and available to other insurers, too.”
“How well received is the VCC structure in Singapore? Has it achieved its objective in making Singapore a more attractive fund management hub? In the workforce: are there also plans to provide education and training to the fund managers, lawyers and accountants who would be advising and assisting with VCCs? If so, what are these plans? In the educational institutions, are there also plans to introduce this VCC framework into the local law schools and universities, as part of their Corporate Law modules, to prepare local law students for the possibility of working with the VCC framework, for example, drafting of fund documents, knowing the VCC requirements and so on? If so, is it well received? Could more be done to prepare and ensure that our students and workers are able to be adept and competent with handling the VCC framework? Third, there are indications that the Singapore economy is headed towards uncertain territory. Would the Minister be able to share whether this VCC framework, with the additional funds flowing into Singapore, can assist with cushioning the impact of the economic slowdown? Sir, clarifications notwithstanding, I stand in support of this Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill. The VCC Act provides for the incorporation and operation of a new corporate structure, the VCC, which caters to the needs of investment funds. The VCC structure is designed to encourage investors to place their funds in Singapore and strengthen Singapore's economy. I note that there are several amendments to the VCC Act and they may be broadly classified into two areas: first, amendments to the VCC to align the VCC insolvency regime with all the other corporate structures in Singapore; and second, other more technical amendments. I have no objections to the amendments. However, my questions today revolve more so around the development and progress of the VCC Framework since it was introduced last year, in particular, the impact of the VCC Framework on the economy and job market and prospects in Singapore. The Second Minister for Finance, Ms Indranee Rajah mentioned in Parliament last year, that the VCC framework will create new business opportunities for lawyers, accountants, tax advisors, fund administrators and custodians in Singapore. MAS has estimated that the VCC framework could create over 1,000 new jobs for service providers in the first two years of its introduction. In this respect, I have the following questions. First, it has been about one year since the passing of the VCC Act. How many new jobs have been created as a result of the VCC and has it reached the 1,000 mark? As a follow-up question, are they all in the legal/accounting sector? Would the Minister be able to provide a brief breakdown of the new jobs created within the various sectors? Second, I note that the VCC framework is a relatively new corporate structure introduced last year, which is unlike the traditional company.”
“I would like to ask the Minister for a clarification. Now, we are doing Tech@SG for the tech sector. Will the Ministry of Trade and Industry consider or is it in the works to considering other sectors as well? Because it is not just the ICT sector that needs foreign expertise or even data analytics, data science expertise. It could be the financial sector or many other professional services, and all these contribute quite significantly this year and, moving forward, to the economic growth of Singapore.”
“I thank the Minister for his response and the rationale of Tech@SG. I have three supplementary questions for the Minister. Firstly, whether such companies in the Tech@SG programme will still be subjected to the Fair Consideration Framework as well as the triple-weak scrutiny which the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices that the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) is rolling out. The second question: whether the agencies concerned in rolling out Tech@SG considered leveraging MOM's Capability Transfer Programme to roll out some of these knowledge transfer, skills transfer and capability transfer to Singaporeans? Thirdly, amidst this sense of uncertainty and quite dismal outlook in terms of the employment and job market, our focus is on helping, supporting and assisting fellow Singaporeans. I just wonder whether there are controls in place or will there be controls that will be instituted on Tech@SG to make sure that our local professionals, managers and executives are not compromised or prejudiced against?”
“Can the Minister assure this House that the affected employees will be well taken care of and truly be no worse off in the short term as well as in the long term? Thirdly, classification of HTX as an "Essential Service" and accountability of HTX. I am particularly concerned that under this Bill, there will also be a consequent amendment of the CLTPA to classify HTX as an "essential service". This simply means employees employed in HTX may go on strike, but they are guilty of an offence if notice of intention to strike is not given to their employers at least 14 days before the strike. I appreciate the sensitive nature of the work of HTX and that we must not and cannot afford strikes and disruption in such a sensitive area. Naturally, some are concerned as to whether it is something that infringes the right of every worker in Singapore and whether we are compromising the rights of workers in Singapore. As employees of a Statutory Board, I assume that they can be union members and form a trade union and be collectively and individually represented. I look forward to HTX working out an arrangement, together with the trade union movement, to ensure that workers within HTX are represented and adequately protected. Finally, I would like to ask on the question of accountability of HTX to Parliament because the Bill does not seem to provide an explicit answer to this. There is, however, explicit mention of the Minister and the agency members and I hope they will be able to exercise their powers judiciously and effectively for the safety and security of Singapore and Singaporeans. With that, I support the Bill.”
“How many are fresh hires outside of the Home Team and public sector? How many are transferred from each of the Home Team units, such as SCDF, SPF, MHA Headquarters, ICA, Prisons and so on? Will there be personnel transferred from outside the Home Team, such as DSTA, DSO, HSA and GovTech? For those within the Home Team or related Government agencies and are transferred to HTX, I am deeply concerned about their interests, welfare and their fate, including career progression and terms and conditions of service. I am aware the Bill states in explicit terms that they will not be worse off. I think the question is not just whether they will be worse off at the point when they are transferred over, but more in terms of their long-term prospects and future. This is especially pertinent as many of them may be in different schemes of service, such as the Pension scheme, Invest scheme or other similar schemes of service, which are unique to their service. These officers who may be affected by the transfer would naturally be concerned and uncertain about their future and what lies ahead. Section 47(5) of the Bill states that the employee being transferred will be on existing terms until such time the conditions of employment are drawn up by the agency. When will the exact conditions of employment be ready so that the affected staff can be apprised of their new terms and conditions and whether they will be given an opportunity not to take up the new terms and stay in their current job roles and schemes of service? Similarly, as with the setting up of any new agency, amalgamation or integration, there will be new cultures to adapt to and new management to adjust to.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill which seeks to establish HTX and will be a Statutory Board under MHA. While I support having a dedicated Science and Technology Agency for the Home Team to augment and maintain our operational edge, I have three concerns which I hope the Second Minister will be able to address and respond to. First, duplication of work and resources. Looking at the areas of work and terms of reference of HTX, I see possible overlap of work and duplication with the science and technology agencies already in existence, such as DSTA, MINDEF, GovTech, HSA, DSO and A*STAR. Some of these capabilities and expertise already reside within these agencies. What then is the rationale for setting up an HTX and not tapping on expertise residing within an existing Ministry or agency like MINDEF, DSTA or DSO? Whether it is systems engineers, specialists in marine and maritime engineering, technology or logistics specialists or even specialist forensic investigation, these experts are already serving in these agencies safeguarding Singapore. Should we not strengthen those existing agencies, instead of having to set up another dedicated agency? Notwithstanding, if HTX is eventually set up, how is the agency going to not just value add but value create for the Home Team and Singapore in terms of safety and security? Second, manpower concerns. Singapore has a tight labour market situation and there are exacting manpower needs and a demand for talent, such as engineers and so on. Every additional new headcount created will be a strain for those hiring outside of the public sector. With the setting up of HTX, I have some burning questions. What is the full manpower establishment of this new Agency?”
“I thank the Minister for the answer and response. Recently, in Boon Lay, there was a fire at one of the HDB rental flats which generates this question. Can I suggest to the Ministry of National Development (MND) possibly to have fire-rated doors on every unit outside of the Fire Code?”
“Its officers will then be able to investigate suspects for fire safety violations and take statements when there is reasonable suspicion of an offence. Notwithstanding, I have two incendiary concerns and will provide suggestions to these two areas. First, I am particularly concerned about the types, accessibility and sale of fire extinguishers. These days, we have various suppliers, including many e-commerce sites hosted locally and abroad, peddling fire extinguishers and fire extinguishing devices. I take cognisance of the fact that MHA will be introducing new measures to tighten control over the supply chain for regulated fire safety products. Can MHA share more about the roles and responsibilities of the different supply chain actors, how the new measures will improve fire safety, and the cost implication of these measures to the industry and to building owners? How about unregulated fire safety products and the control over them? In the same vein, how can the general public and consumer best verify the right type of fire extinguisher to procure and use for their homes, premises and offices and whether there is a way to validate the authenticity and efficacy of these products? In short, for the layman, how to know what type to buy, which size for their premises, from where and whom they should be purchasing the fire extinguishers and fire safety devices and products from. Second, with increased adoption and installation of smart homes and more people having their own devices to detect smoke, burning and fires, can SCDF make it easier for personal home alarms to be linked to a central community system or even SCDF with the caveat that users have to pay if there is a false alarm or activation where resources are sent to respond to the activated alarm?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Fire Safety (Amendment) Bill. In the last two weeks, I witnessed three fires happening in my Boon Lay constituency. One at a rental flat, another at the void deck and one at a commercial shop premises. The causes of the fires across all three incidents were dissimilar and although no one was badly injured, scalded or perished, we should not be lulled into complacency and think that it will not happen to any of us, be it in our homes or at our offices. I applaud the move in this Bill to introduce harsher and more deterrent penalties for five offences under the Fire Safety Act. In particular, the offences mainly involve the unauthorised change of use of premises which could cause existing fire safety measures to become inadequate, as well as instances where industry professionals, such as registered inspectors, do not responsibly supervise and certify fire safety work. The penalty for the failure of an appointed Qualified Person to supervise fire safety work will also be raised. Updating and raising these penalties will help address upstream the causes of fires and mitigate if not eradicate fires in built up areas. By the same token, I support the enhancement of SCDF’s enforcement and investigative powers to hold responsible those who flout fire safety rules. At present, when dealing with fire hazards, SCDF must first issue a Fire Hazard Abatement Notice and can only act against the errant parties if they fail to comply with the Notice. However, some fire hazards may pose "serious and significant" fire safety risks and, where time is of the essence, to nip the problem in the bud. In such cases, I am supportive that SCDF will now have the option to immediately prosecute culpable parties.”
“In the same vein, will such a move also result in escalation of costs to take action or defend during an IP dispute? Although there is a fast track procedure instituted, will costs be truly and effectively kept down, regardless of the value of disputes or cost-sensitive litigants? In short, in our journey towards strengthening our IP regime, encouraging inventions and innovation, can we also do more to help our SMEs, startups, including fintech startups, entrepreneurs and freelance professionals in various sectors, such as those in the creative sector, gaming or software development areas, to help them navigate this area of law and the new disputes regime easily, effectively and in an economical manner as and when they are registering, arbitrating, accused of infringement or taking civil action themselves in the area of IP law which encompasses, trademarks, patents and copyright? With that, I support the Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the IP (Dispute Resolution) Bill. This Bill aims to ensure that the Singapore IP regime continues to support innovative activities in Singapore and positions Singapore as a choice of venue for international IP dispute resolution. I see the three key highlights of the Bill as: (a) to streamline the IP dispute resolution framework in Singapore; (b) to provide certainty that IP disputes can be arbitrated in Singapore; and (c) to amend IPOS' procedures on granting and re-examining patents. I applaud the move to provide certainty that IP disputes can be arbitrated in Singapore and the arbitral award only has effect on the parties and not the world at large. This also means that if an arbitral tribunal makes a finding that a patent is invalid, a third party will not be able to rely on that finding to argue that he does not infringe the patent. However, with the consequent move for IP cases to be heard by the High Court, I am concerned that the costs of arbitration as well as the costs of award will escalate in tandem with IP cases moving to the High Court. With the formalisation of third party observations on patent applications, when a patent application has been published, but a patent has not been granted, a third party may make submissions to the Registrar of Patents on the patentability of the invention. Such a formalisation of process is a positive move to ensure the quality of granted patents. In streamlining the IP dispute resolution framework in Singapore, most, if not all, IP disputes will now be heard by the High Court. With such an exclusive jurisdiction vested in the High Court, I wish to ask the Minister if such a move will overburden the High Court and its judicial officers and overstretch our already lean judiciary.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for her answer as well as the update to this House. I am aware that in Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, there is actually a group of clinicians who have done quite a bit of very good work in the research into prevention and better management of diabetes cases. I am suggesting whether MOH can consider whether our public healthcare clusters, possibly in partnership with the Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine or Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, to develop a dedicated research centre, to look into areas to better prevent, manage, overcome and also win the war against diabetes.”
“I have personally come across casual workers who are sometimes wrongly classified as own account workers, self-employed, freelance, independent contractors, contract-for-service. These terms are used interchangeably. So, can we do more and can MOM have a more robust approach to errant employers as well as a better outreach to such casual workers?”
“Just a point and a suggestion for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. In light of the amendments that she has seen in the last two days on the Penal Code as well as POHA, can I request MOM to take the lead and work with our tripartite partners and review the Tripartite Advisory on Managing Workplace Harassment as well as the outreach efforts and materials?”
“Just a point of clarification for the Senior Minister of State. He mentioned about the Government being precluded from using the POHA to take action. Just for clarity, individuals, in particular, public sector workers or civil servants, they can actually make use of POHA vis-a-vis versus perpetrators or they themselves are perpetrators. Am I right?”
“Care must be taken to minimise inadvertent victim-blaming in the course of investigative and legal inquiry. The victim should also be kept informed of developments in investigations at appropriate junctures. To help victims to get back on their feet and prepare for any backlash from harassers, the Police and the newly set up PHC should direct victims to specialised counsellors or social workers to assist victims in drawing up safety plans. In putting together a personalised safety plan, victims can identify concrete steps they can take to better protect themselves, along with resources they can tap on to seek help. These safety plans can help victims to gain a sense of control over the situation and better cope with the investigative and legal processes to follow. With these submissions and suggestions, I support the Bill.”
“I am glad that MinLaw has, at the Committee of Supply Debate 2019, taken note of my suggestion to track the types of POHA cases filed and that the Ministry will be working with the State Courts to explore this further. Information gleaned from workplace harassment POHA cases can help in the refinement of the Tripartite Advisory on Managing Workplace Harassment to better prevent and manage harassment at the workplace. On a related note, the Bill allows business entities to seek relief against falsehoods through the application of stop publication and correction orders. Falsehoods can damage their business reputation and have knock-on effects on the workers' livelihoods. Last year, videos were circulated alleging that fake chilli was sold in the vicinity of Tekka Market and fake keropok was sold at the Hari Raya Bazaar. The relevant authorities had investigated the claims and found the allegations to be untrue. Not only do these falsehoods cause unnecessary alarm and confusion among the public, the reputation of the business and their workers' livelihoods would also be impacted, in the event where the public chooses to boycott the business due to the falsehoods. Fourth, management of harassment cases. In cases of prolonged and sustained harassment, victims can feel compelled to make drastic changes to their way of life, including moving houses, changing jobs and cutting themselves off from social media and social engagements. Victims undergo significant stress, experience a sense of loss and powerlessness and a pervasive sense of insecurity, even in their own homes. It takes courage for victims to take action against their harassers. This is at the risk of further incurring the wrath of the harasser and being subject to even greater harassment.”
“Harassment cannot be condoned nor accepted as part and parcel of these public-facing jobs. Through the Legal Clinics and Legal Primers organised by NTUC, union members are provided with access to support, resources and the expertise of legal professionals, social workers and counsellors to prevent and manage workplace harassment. At these sessions, workers have shared personal encounters of harassment at the workplace, ranging from physical to verbal harassment, some of a sexual nature. A dipstick poll at one such Legal Primer indicated that 20% of respondents had encountered workplace harassment of a sexual nature before. Name calling and hurling vulgarities were also commonplace. In some cases, harassers used physical force to intimidate victims by blocking their way or even by pushing and shoving. Instances of workplace bullying were also shared. A member shared that her colleague who bore a grudge against her took photographs of her without her consent and spread malicious untruths about her, suggesting that she was in an intimate relationship with another colleague. She was advised to seek recourse under POHA. Victims of workplace harassment often find it difficult to speak up because they may be fearful of losing their jobs, receiving a bad appraisal, perceived as not going along with the office culture or blaming themselves. One member shared that after she had made a Police report against her superior for sexual harassment at the workplace, her superior subsequently made false allegations against her, took away her work duties and dismissed her. Workplace harassment can impact the victim psychologically and physically and his or her ability to work.”
“However, the Bill also provides that the enhanced penalties do not apply to the intimate harasser, referred to as "A", if "A" can prove that despite "A" having been or being in an intimate relationship with the victim, referred to as "B", the relationship between "A" and "B" did not adversely affect "B's" ability to protect "B" from "A" in respect of the harm caused by the offence. Could the Minister share examples of what these possible exceptions might be? Third, workplace harassers. Workplace harassment involving cases of rage and aggression by members of the public against persons in public-facing frontline jobs is on the rise. Last month, a man was caught on camera punching a 60-year-old private security supervisor at Roxy Square allegedly over seeking of directions out of the building. The security supervisor fell and suffered a swollen eye and a sprained neck. Following this incident, I reiterate my call once again for MinLaw and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to review the scope of "public service" workers under the Act. While these private security officers work in private spaces, their work, in effect, straddles the line delineating private and public spaces as provided in the Act. Given the recent introduction of criminal penalties regulating the conduct of private security officers to boost the industry's professionalism and bolster Singapore's defences, it is timely to review the according of special protection to this group of workers under POHA beyond what is currently provided for under the Act. I raised this on several occasions in this House on behalf of these workers who undertake public-facing jobs and who may be exposed to harassment. They include private security officers, cleaners, transport workers as well as healthcare workers.”
“Some of these persons also deliberately mask their identities and Internet Protocol addresses to avoid detection. The anonymity of the harassers adds to the sense of loss of control and fear already experienced by victims. The anonymous harassers may pose threats of violence or incite violence by others on the victims and their loved ones. The victims have no means of assessing if the harasser or persons will carry out the threats of violence, or who they should be guarding against. This creates a significant amount of stress on the victims, which can be debilitating. In this regard, the law enforcement agencies must strengthen their capabilities in identifying these unknown perpetrators to send a strong message to these harassers that they cannot get away with such behaviour. Second, intimate harassers. Intimate harassers can inflict even more pain and anguish on their victims and even persons related to the victims, due to the increased vulnerability and proximity of the victim in the intimate relationship. The intimate harasser has access to private and intimate information of the victim which can enable the intimate harasser to hold the victim to ransom and force the victim to acquiesce to the harasser’s demands. The Bill rightly provides for strengthened protection for victims of intimate harassers who require greater protection and means to extricate themselves from the reach of the intimate harasser.”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill. The establishment of the PHC which adopts simplified procedures and expedited timelines, coupled with the strengthening of protection for victims of harassment, sends a strong signal that victims of harassment must be taken seriously, and harassment cases must be dealt with effectively. It is critical that the avenues to seek relief and redress are not fraught with complexity or lead to a sense of futility or, worse, where the victim of harassment perceives himself or herself to be further victimised. I will be addressing these points in relation to: one, anonymous harassers; two, intimate harassers; three, workplace harassers; and four, the management of harassment cases. First, anonymous harassers. One of the challenges to the ability of the victim to take any action against a perpetrator is the lack of knowledge of the perpetrator’s identity. Take, for example, a female victim who was harassed online by persons unknown to her. These persons had posted hateful messages directed at her, revealed her contact number online while threatening that they were closing in on her residence and posted her contact details on online sex forums offering sexual services. Worried for her safety and her family’s safety, the victim reported the matter to the Police but was told that there was nothing further that the Police could do as they needed real names and contact numbers before they could proceed. This same example may happen to a male victim as well. While the Bill now provides for the application of stop publication orders to prohibit the publication of false statement of facts, these unknown perpetrators can easily put up other false information of the victim on other platforms to continue harassing the victim.”
“Just a point of clarification. In my speech, I asked the Ministry, there is a provision where the definition of "public servants" where the Police engage law enforcement officers on the ground, such as private security officers or Auxiliary Police Officers, they are treated as public servants if they are carrying out law enforcement, crowd control duties and so on. So, would private security officers be treated as public servants in this aspect?”
“I hope a thorough, concerted and multi-pronged approach be taken to cascade, inform and educate the categories of people outlined earlier, including potential complainants, perpetrators and the young in general, to better understand the plethora of changes and new provisions introduced. The Ministry should partner the various agencies and stakeholders to produce suitable reading, reference material, or simple pocket guides in easy to read and comprehend format, so that the public and potential victims will know the law has better protected them, and would-be perpetrators will know that the law has caught up with them. With these submissions and suggestions, I support the Bill.”