Png Eng Huat
Singapore
“This question is for the Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad. I just want to seek clarity on whether these two groups of Self-employed Person qualify for the COVID-19 Support Grant or SIRS. Those SEPs who are not on the Workfare radar, who do not contribute to their CPF, but they do file their income tax returns.”
“Some help measures will only come in May or later, but many affected Singaporeans were already struggling to make ends meet since February. I appreciate the Ministry for working at breakneck speed to roll out these measures. I am happy to note that some of these measures are being brought forward to April. Thank you.”
“Our MRT system is also facing an operating cost deficit which will grow with new rail lines that may well redistribute existing passengers rather than grow new ridership. While the fare formula has added the network capacity factor to address rising operating cost deficits, cost management is also important.”
“In the two new BTO precincts in Hougang, the Town Council had to build extra ramps, footpaths and stairs, in addition to the few designated access points, in order to facilitate the safe movement of residents on the ground.”
“This resident is in his early 60s and was running a regional outfit before he was retrenched. What are the chances of him getting either one of the funding options?”
“Sir, would the Ministry be looking into instituting, say, staggered school or working hours, to ease the concerns of parents, students and workers travelling during rush hours even under the current DORSCON level when more infection cases start to surface?”
The complete record
Every one of 386 lines we hold for Png Eng Huat, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 8.
“Thank you, Sir. My questions are for the Minister for Manpower. In her Facebook post, the Minister said that each time the MOM attempts to raise the standard of living in these dormitories, it would face objections from employers due to the added costs that come with the move. My first question is: under the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act, the licenced operator and dormitory owner should be the parties to be held accountable to raise the standard of living in the dormitories in the interest of public health and safety. So, what did MOM involve the employer in the application of the provisions of this Act in this instance? Any intention of the dormitory operator and owner to pass down the cost should be a separate matter for the parties to resolve later as the attempt by MOM to raise the living standard in the dormitories is done in the interest of public health and safety. My second question is: under the Act, operators must develop a quarantine plan in the event of an infectious disease outbreak. Since the onset of the outbreak, taxpayers have been footing the bill for the quarantine exercise at these affected dormitories. As this is a pandemic, would these dormitory operators and owners be held accountable for a share of the containment and quarantine costs?”
“This question is for the Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad. I just want to seek clarity on whether these two groups of Self-employed Person qualify for the COVID-19 Support Grant or SIRS. Those SEPs who are not on the Workfare radar, who do not contribute to their CPF, but they do file their income tax returns. The second group is SEP who are not on Workfare CPF or income tax radar, but they do have documented proof of their livelihood status. And last but not least is there a contact point for these people to make an appeal. Thank you.”
“Some help measures will only come in May or later, but many affected Singaporeans were already struggling to make ends meet since February. I appreciate the Ministry for working at breakneck speed to roll out these measures. I am happy to note that some of these measures are being brought forward to April. Thank you.”
“One particular group of Singaporeans I wish to highlight is those who are asked or encouraged to go on no pay leave for obvious reasons. My colleague, Ms Sylvia Lim, has highlighted some of these workers earlier. Would they be receiving any help as well as there are bills to pay and mouths to feed? These workers would include retail staff, childcare centre cooks, coffee shop helpers, office cleaners and the list goes on. Other groups of Singaporeans that need help include those who are listed as directors or owners of their companies but they are actually one-man-operated entities – that is, self-employed. I have a resident who runs an employment agency all by himself. The world has shut its borders. His livelihood has vanished overnight. There are also Singaporeans who are freelancers and they do not have receipts or CPF contributions to prove their livelihood status. Some may have only filed their income tax returns. Where would such Singaporeans go to seek help for cash support? I note the additional enhancement to the Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme as announced by the Deputy Prime Minister earlier, and I hope the above workers would all be covered. I hope the Minister can clarify on this matter. Next, with the closure of non-essential workplaces and schools, I would expect utilities' usage for households to spike with Singaporeans working from home via telecommuting and students moving to full home-based learning. Affected Singaporeans struggling in this crisis will be unduly burdened by such overheads. Are the U-Save rebates adequately measured to help Singaporeans cover the impending increase in utility charges under the latest stay-at-home orders? Finally, many affected residents I spoke to the past few days asked when can the help arrive?”
“By dipping into the reserves, we are probably hoping to ride out this storm. We certainly need to buy some time for things to get better down the road, for nature to take its course and hopefully for a vaccine to be developed soon to end this misery. But by doing so, we need to ensure the use of our reserves must achieve its intended purpose. The Deputy Prime Minister had said the $17 billion from the reserves will be used to help fund measures like supporting jobs, helping the self-employed and boosting the hard-hit aviation sector. So, the use of our reserves must save jobs, first and foremost. They should not be used to rescue corporate executives of large companies, who did little or no planning to save for a rainy day, and will continue to receive fat salaries while their companies bleed. It must also not be used to protect fat dividends and share buyback schemes for listed companies to appease their shareholders once the crisis blows over. Thus, I would like to ask the Minister how is the Government going to ring-fence the money from our reserves to serve this purpose of saving jobs for our workers, especially for those in the aviation industry, since the sector will be receiving the lion's share of the reserves' money. As public money will be used to co-pay a significant portion of their salaries, are there any conditions imposed on these big companies, such as they must hold off any retrenchment exercise for as long as they are receiving help from the Government? And for listed companies, will there be a temporary moratorium on the payment of the dividends or share buyback exercise, once the assistance is no longer needed? Next, I am in support of the measure to save jobs and the livelihoods of many self-employed Singaporeans in the Supplementary Budget.”
“Sir, we are living in extraordinary times. We are living in a world filled with anxiety now. Anxiety about our livelihood, our health, our loved ones and even our future. Life as we know it has been disrupted and changed in unimaginable ways by the onset of the coronavirus outbreak. The livelihoods of many people have disappeared almost overnight as draconian measures are imposed on society to curb the spread of the virus and borders remain closed. No one knows when we will see the light at the end of this tunnel. I am sure we are all driving blind in the dark at times, hoping that some, if not all of the targeted measures introduced over the course of this pandemic will work somehow. While these targeted measures are meant to slowly choke off the spread of the virus, they are also slowly killing the man in the street trying to make ends meet, working in the malls, cafés, coffee shops, and retail outlets, or driving taxis, private hire vehicles – and the list goes on. The world is certainly closing in for the man in the street with each successive round of heightened measures introduced the past few weeks. I was at a coffee shop in Hougang when the news broke about the "no dining in" measure for eateries. I could feel a sense of despair hanging in the air there. I could sense the anxiety of the stall owners and coffee shop helpers as we spoke. Two workers were very worried for they know their jobs are on the line. They know there would be no plates to collect and dishes to wash come Tuesday morning. You could tell by the look in their eyes they were worried about what is to come – the bills to pay and the living expenses. The urgency and quantum of this Supplementary Budget probably sums up the gravity of the situation we are in right now.”
“Our MRT system is also facing an operating cost deficit which will grow with new rail lines that may well redistribute existing passengers rather than grow new ridership. While the fare formula has added the network capacity factor to address rising operating cost deficits, cost management is also important. Could the Ministry update us on efforts to optimise public transport services to manage costs? Some commuters will also be affected when service frequency and availability is optimised. This makes it hard for the public and hon Members to support cost management. Could we consider "win-win" solutions where we issue targeted, transitional public transport vouchers to commuters who have to bear the brunt of any service changes? Air and Sea Hub”
“The construction along the narrow stretch of the foot path is challenging and the whole process may take quite a while to complete. The lifts at the overhead bridge along Hougang Avenue 2 have been under construction for almost two years and they are still not ready. But having lift access for all which may not be an ideal solution for an ageing society like ours. If the lifts were to break down or to undergo servicing, everything would be reverted to leg power again. Sir, as we are transiting to a car-lite city, I hope the Ministry will shift the focus of our road and transport planning to be more pedestrian-centric. The rationale of having POBs to serve a car-lite and ageing society may need a rethink. I hope the Ministry can study into the possibility of converting those heavily used POBs in HDB heartlands to signalise pedestrian crossings. This will allow pedestrians with mobility issues or special needs to cross the road, come what may, even if the traffic lights are out of order. Maybe the Ministry can share what is the cost of implementing and maintaining a signalised pedestrian crossing versus retrofitting an existing overhead bridge with lifts. The issue of having too many signalised pedestrian crossings along a stretch of the road, can be easily overcome with synchronised traffic light control. And if we are talking about a pedestrian-centric and car-lite city, getting drivers to exercise a little patience would fit the overall objective quite nicely. Optimising Public Transport Fairly Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Sir, in order for our public bus system to break even, fares would have to double or costs would have to be cut in half.”
“Sir, we all know that policies, rules and regulations cannot cover every situation. I am not asking the Ministry to design a perfect traffic junction. I am asking the Ministry to take the guess work out of crossing a simple junction. Anything else, the pedestrians and motorists will have to take responsibility for. And if we are talking about cultivating patience on the road, would a split traffic junction not been ideal training ground for that? You wait for your turn to proceed. Sir, I strongly urge the Ministry to do something about those discretionary right turn junctions wherever possible because the safety of pedestrian must be at the forefront of everything in a car-lite pedestrian-centric city. Rethinking Pedestrian Overhead Bridges Sir, it was reported in the news that there are 553 pedestrian overhead bridges or POBs here in 2017. Last November, LTA announced that by 2022, 103 of them will be retrofitted with lifts. That is about 19% of all POBs that will have lift access by next year. Many Singaporeans welcome the idea of having lifts retrofitted to POBs, especially the elderly people with mobility issues, couples with baby on pram and anyone who finds climbing overhead bridges a challenge. I have written on behalf of many residents request for lifts for the overhead bridge in Hougang, in particular, the one at Holy Innocence High along Upper Serangoon Road. LTA has patiently replied to those residents, sharing about the high cost of retrofitting lifts to POBs and the priority being given to overhead bridges within 400 metres from polyclinics and hospitals. Retrofitting lifts to POBs is a challenging process in itself. Plots of land on both sides of the road would have to be acquired to make way for the lift shafts.”
“Thank you, Sir. The first cut. Sir, I have spoken about making signalised pedestrian crossings safer for all in 2013, 2015 and 2018. In particular, I have called for the discretionary right turn junction to be phased out. If one were to Google the term "discretionary right turn", a list of accidents will pop up on the screen. There is even a petition asking LTA to ban such junctions all together. LTA was reported to have taken steps to address the safety concern of pedestrians over the years. I have noticed that more traffic light junctions are being re-programmed. I spoke on the same subject time and again, because I strongly believe those horrible accidents that happened at such junction could be avoidable. Fast forward to 2020, 6 January, to be precise, a student, with the right-of-way and hidden by a vehicle waiting at the discretionary right injunction was sent flying through the air by another vehicle who did not see the young man crossing the road. That was the last straw for me. The discretionary turning on green rule is the recipe for accidents to happen because there are two green lights in operation at the same time: one for the vehicle to turn right and the other for the pedestrians to cross. How is that not dangerous to begin with? Imagine pedestrians and drivers hesitating at the discretionary right turn junction, second-guessing whether it is safe to proceed even though the lights are both in their favour. If a pedestrian could be assigned 15% blame in an accident, even though the lights were in his favour in the court of law, what is the proportion of blame for the Ministry for giving pedestrians a false sense of security a discretionary right turn, when the Green Man signal does not necessarily mean it is safe to cross any more?”
“Finally, for lift upgrading that is going to cost as much as building a new flat, would HDB consider offering the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme to these precincts to resolve this issue then?”
“Sir, the $5 billion Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) has ended and there are about 150 existing HDB blocks without direct lift access remaining. Some of us in this House had asked for periodic updates about the fate of the remaining blocks without LUP. I have also asked HDB to look into segregating these blocks into two categories: those with technical constraints and those with cost considerations. I urge the Ministry to share these numbers. The replies from HDB have been consistent, that is, HDB will continue to study and look for cost effective solutions to extend LUP to these blocks and Singaporeans in urgent need of direct lift access due to medical conditions or mobility issues can approach HDB for possible alternative housing arrangement. Sir, the wait for a definitive answer for residents living in these non-LUP blocks has to come to a finality soon. These residents have been caught in between the wait for good news or to move out for the longest time. And any housing agent would tell you that it would be tough to offload a flat without direct lift access unless the owner is prepared to take a hit on the market valuation or selling price. I have asked in this House for HDB to let these residents decide if they are willing to pay a little more for direct lift access since funding per flat has to be fair and equitable. The Ministry had informed this House that the cost of implementing direct lift access for some blocks is not marginal, with some of the costs as good as building a new flat. Sir, I would like to ask again for the Ministry to further segregate some of these costs as I believe some blocks may only need an additional lift shaft such as Block 363 at Hougang Ave 5. Let these residents decide on the share of the marginal cost.”
“In the two new BTO precincts in Hougang, the Town Council had to build extra ramps, footpaths and stairs, in addition to the few designated access points, in order to facilitate the safe movement of residents on the ground. Although it is human nature to take shortcuts, the planner should look into providing a more barrier-free integration of the new precinct to the surrounding built-up of areas at the design stage. This will benefit residents on mobility aids or with baby prams, as it is really not easy to navigate the maze-like void deck of new BTO blocks just to use the designated access point. Sir, town planning is a work-in-progress. It may be a challenge for HDB to design better void deck spaces for now but it is certainly doable to have a truly barrier-free integration of new and old precincts in a mature estate for a start.”
“Sir, it is always exciting to see new BTO developments sprouting up in the middle of an old estate. Such developments will bring in new amenities like rooftop gardens, exercise equipment, playgrounds, eldercare and childcare facilities and eateries to complement the old-world charm of mom-and-pop shops, open void decks and good old-fashioned coffeeshops. Hougang has welcomed two BTO projects over the years and we will be looking forward to welcoming another one this year. I wish to highlight some design integration issues of such new projects in the hope that future developments will take into consideration these feedback and concerns. First, I wish to highlight that the void decks of new BTO blocks are no longer functional. Residents living in these new blocks can get lost walking in their own void decks. The number of pillars and walls have literally transformed the new void decks into a maze, forcing residents to use the service road in the estate. This is certainly a safety concern for residents who need to cut across the precinct to get to their destination daily. Furthermore, due to the maze-like design, void decks, chairs and tables have become hidden in secluded corners in these new BTO blocks. Most of the time, these amenities would end up being misused by noisy drinkers, chain-smokers and rowdy teenagers to hang out in the wee hours of the night, away from prying eyes. Noise and second-hand smoke will ensue and residents will end up suffering as a result. Next, I wish to highlight that more could be done to better connect the new precincts to the older part of the estate.”
“This resident is in his early 60s and was running a regional outfit before he was retrenched. What are the chances of him getting either one of the funding options? Since gig workers are on their own, can the Ministry look into introducing a surrogate scheme so that these mature workers in the gig economy can take up specialised courses under similar funding model that sponsored employees are currently given? Member of Parliament Mr Patrick Tay has made a call for the surrogate scheme to be brought back and I second that. SkillsFuture”
“Sir, some of the workers in the gig economy today are former professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs). Some of them are mature workers who could not get back into the workforce after losing their jobs. In a survey reported in the Straits Times last November, nine in 10 full-time gig workers were looking for other jobs, and six in 10 were undergoing training or skills upgrading. Seven in 10 were worried about losing their gig jobs. Thus, the concerns of workers are relatively the same, whichever economy they are in. So, while we are advocating lifelong learning for our salaried workers to remain relevant in a changing world, we should do likewise for workers in the gig economy, in particular, the mature workers, so that they too, can have a decent shot at moving up the value chain while earning their keep as freelancers. I am particularly concerned about mature gig workers because ageism would have compounded their struggle to get back into a 9-to-5 routine. Staying in the gig economy could be their only option to make a living for a while. And the reality is, the longer they remain in the gig economy, the harder it will be for them to find a day job. So, having the right certifications may open doors to better paying gigs, which in turn, may help these mature workers find meaning in life in the gig economy. Recently, I came across a freelance trainer who wanted to upgrade himself to become a master trainer. But to get there, this person would need advance certification, and subsidies for those expensive courses are only made available for sponsored employees. That would mean that this person would need to work for a company or find a company that is willing to sponsor him.”
“I hope the Ministry can look into addressing this disparity soon. The Foreign Maid Levy Relief has to be gender neutral. Government Procurement Policies”
“Sir, no one likes to raise a child alone be it the mother or the father who has to take on the role by choice or by fate. Whether it is the case of a failed marriage or the untimely death of a spouse, the burden and responsibility of single parenthood is a long and arduous journey to undertake. I have seen a number of single parents at my Meet-the-People sessions over the years. While most of them were women, there were single fathers who came along with the children in tow. The story they share about raising their children all by themselves is a story of love and perseverance. A story that highlights the need and importance to have a support network comprising their extended family, friends and even enacted policies to make single parenthood work for them. Recently, a single father wrote to me to share about his experience about raising his two young children. While he works hard to put bread on the table for his young family and to provide for his aged parents, he found out that the taxman does not really recognise his role and effort as a single father. While the role and responsibility of being a single parent are not any lesser for a single father, the taxman does not treat a male taxpayer in the same light as the opposite gender when it comes to claiming for Foreign Maid Levy (FML) Relief. While this single father can work out the apportionment of the Qualifying Child Relief with his ex-spouse, there is no levy relief for him if he hires a foreign domestic helper to look after his young children. This single father would fit the criteria for FML relief to the letter, except for the fact that he is of the wrong gender. Anyone in his shoes would certainly use whatever that is out there to stretch his hard earned dollar to feed his family.”
“This educated resident told me he need to be careful because he knows his reflexes, cognition, memory and everything else he took for granted in the past are ageing too. Sir, could we not ask the bank to institute additional safeguards that are designed specifically for this group of users so that they will not fall victim to scammers and their hard-earned monies will not be stolen so easily in the blink of an eye? While the scammer may work on this victim for hours, the success of such scams hinges on the split-second transfer of money out of the victim's bank account. If we have cooling-off period for direct sale, can the bank offers such feature for interbank transfer on demand as well? Any change of mind for such a cooling-off service will require a visit to the bank in person. Although this sounds like a low-tech approach, you can certainly buy some time and time is what scammers do not want. I am not asking the authority to slow everything down. I am only asking the authority to get the banks to provide an option for the elderly and vulnerable to protect their life savings. The Police can only do so much to investigate after the crime has been committed. It does not have the weapon of choice to stop or slow down the scammer from laying hands on the ill-gotten gains. Sir, such scams are not going away when there is easy money to be made. It was reported in the news yesterday that the number of banking scam calls or messages went up sharply in January this year with 105 cases reported, compared to 38 cases in the previous three months combined. To me, that is a red flag for the authority to take the lead to fight scammers that capitalise on the banking system to steal from the elderly and vulnerable.”
“The speed of online banking transaction, by the time a Police report is made, the victims' money would have disappeared into thin air. Even if anyone caught here or overseas, there is very little hope for the victim to see his life savings again. Would it not be possible for the Ministry to mandate the banks to offer more protection for the elderly and vulnerable from falling victims to such scams? Would it not make sense for the gatekeeper of the conduit for interbank transfer to play a bigger role to combat such crime? Let me relate another case. One of my resident was tricked into giving out his one-time passcode in a similar tech support scam, he ended up losing his life savings in two local banks. The scammer did his homework and contacted the resident late on a Friday night. By the time this resident realised that something was not right, the bank had closed and he could only call the after-office helpline for assistance. The perplexing part of this case is that, only one bank would stop the illegal transfer while the other could not and both financial institutions are using the same international remittance network. Another one of my resident was so spooked by such scam that he asked the bank to issue him an ordinary bank card with no wireless payment feature or linked to any international debit or credit service provider. He was told there is no such card anymore, but he could request the bank to limited the transaction amount or disable the debit feature. If such feature can be disabled with a phone call, what safeguards are there to prevent scammers from reversing it? This is exactly what the elderly resident was worried about. He just wanted a simple bank card for cash withdrawal.”
“Sir, the number of scams in all involving e-commerce, loan, credit for sex and impersonation rose by 53.5% last year. There were about 9,500 scams reported in 2019 up from 6,000 over cases in the previous years. The total amount cheated in the top 10 types of scams came up to a staggering $168 million. Scamming is not only lucrative, it is also getting more sophisticated. Some scams do not put it on the nature of greed. They are disguised as service calls from telcos, banks or Government authorities. These scams capitalise on the victims' lack of knowledge on how things function in the Internet age. An innocuous core is all it takes for the scammer to try to gain remote access to the victim's computer, bank account information, personal identification number and one-time password. The end results are often heart wrenching. Victims of tech support scheme lost $13.9 million of their hard-earned savings in 2019. Just last November, a 65-year-old woman picked up a call on her landline thinking it was a customer service call from a telco. She spent over two hours on the line with the scammer and by the end of the call, over $300,000 of her savings were wiped out from her bank account. It is very painful and sad to read in the news about elderly Singaporeans being scammed in this manner time and again, despite all the effort by the Police to educate the public about such crime. In the pursuit of a cashless society and a Smart Nation, have we made life a breeze for one generation and more vulnerable for another? I am for progress but I am deeply concerned that some Singaporeans would be exposed to untold dangers in the digital jungle. Most of the scams leverage on one thing in common, to make a clean getaway.”
“Sir, the number of scams involving e-commerce loan, credit-for-sex and impersonation rose by 83.5% last year.”
“At the same time, these vouchers would actually benefit two small, owner-operated kiosks in Hougang. I hope the Government would consider supporting our mom-and-pop shops in a meaningful way in addition to the measures announced in the Budget. Extending the Grocery Vouchers scheme to our neighbourhood shops will help bring some buzz and business to the community. This is a win-win arrangement for needy residents and local provision shop owners. Finally, if there is one lesson for me to take away from this coronavirus outbreak that is gripping the world right now, it is certainly not about the blame game, the discrimination or the name-calling. It is certainly not about the grocery run, the hoarding or the hunt for sanitisers and what-have-you. It is about helping a friend in need. When China sneezes, the world will catch a flu, whether we like it or not. The world’s factory will stop. No cheap raw materials. No cheap components. No cheap clothing. No cheap produce. And no tourists. The world has to be thankful to China for being able to provide all that for the benefit of consumers everywhere. So, it is imperative that we wish China a speedy recovery. It is also imperative for the world to help China to get back on its feet as soon as possible. The sooner China recovers, the better it will be for all. So, it is heartening for me to read that Singapore has dispatched a second round of humanitarian aid to China last week. It is important that, in moments like this, a sense of common humanity that transcends border, race, language or religion must prevail.”
“Some of them would not qualify for the scheme as they are gainfully employed but homeless children are still living with them, for whatever reasons. The enhancements to the Silver Support Scheme is certainly a welcome move for elderly Singaporeans in these difficult times. Next, I have a small suggestion to make about the Grocery Vouchers scheme for Singaporeans aged 21 and above, who live in 1-room and 2-room HDB flats and do not own more than one property. These Singaporeans will receive $100 in Grocery Vouchers for 2020 and 2021. It was stated in the Budget Annex that these vouchers can be used at participating supermarkets and, to date, NTUC FairPrice, Giant and Sheng Siong have agreed to accept these vouchers. The Grocery Vouchers scheme is expected to cost the Government $16 million. Would it not make more sense for the Government to avail these vouchers for all the mom-and-pop shops instead, so as to help these small businesses tide over this difficult period at the same time? The $16 million budgeted for the scheme would go a long way to help these local provision shops but it would only be a drop in the ocean for the three big supermarkets combined. NTUC FairPrice alone had reported a group revenue of $3.45 billion for FY2018. I can understand these big supermarkets would need to agree to accept these vouchers as they would be doing a form of community service. But for those mom-and-pop shops, I am quietly confident none of them would reject these Government-backed vouchers if presented for use. I have piloted such a voucher scheme for needy residents in Hougang. Our vouchers could be exchanged for anything, including cooking oil, detergents, toothpaste, toilet rolls and so on, with the standard restriction on alcohol and tobacco products.”
“I have met such members who are receiving less than $300 a month in CPF payouts. Some are still working as they do not have extended families or children to support them. So, for those with little or no savings for retirement, the measures announced in Budget 2020 should go some way to alleviate their hardship and uncertainty. The couple illustrated in the Annex at the beginning of my speech would receive $1,400 monthly, post-Budget 2020. Although this is a more meaningful payout per month, at $700 per retiree, it is still predicated on additional family support and their own savings, something policymakers should not presume when formulating policies on retirement adequacy. For Budget 2020, I welcome the Senior Worker Support Package to help keep jobs for our senior workers and to increase their CPF savings for their retirement needs somewhere down the road. I also welcome the Stabilisation and Support Package to help keep jobs for our workers in general during this period of uncertainty. Next, the enhancement to the Silver Support Scheme is also long overdue. The expanded criteria for lifelong wages from $70,000 to $140,000 in total CPF contributions and household monthly income per person are expected to benefit about 100,000 more Singaporeans aged 65 and above. A number of my residents were shut out of the Silver Support Scheme when it was introduced in 2015 as they had more than $70,000 in their CPF at age 55. Many of them wondered how long does the Government expect $70,000 in total CPF contributions at age 55 to last when housing alone would have taken a big chunk of it, if not all of it away. And these people would share that they were low-wage earners to begin with and were living paycheck to paycheck with little savings.”
“Mr Speaker, monetary and fiscal policy can make or break a retirement dream. It would rather be meaningless for the working class to receive top-ups and transfers year after year at every Budget if there is no light at the end of the tunnel for them to realise their retirement dreams. In the illustration given in the Budget Annex, a retiree couple, both 65 years old, had only $570 a month in total to support their retirement needs, pre-Budget 2020. That is about $285 per retiree. A single person on the ComCare Long Term Assistance Scheme receives $600 a month for basic living expenses. There is no way for this couple to survive on $570 a month. The illustration went on to state that this couple has to supplement their retirement needs with family support and their own savings. What if this couple does not have family support and savings? There was a study released by two professors last year in which an elderly person aged 65 and above would need at least $1,379 a month to sustain a basic standard of living. That study has provided some food for thought about retirement adequacy. With the CPF system being the bedrock of our retirement plans, the Government expects seven-in-10 active CPF members from the 2021 and 2022 cohorts to be able to set aside their Basic Retirement Sum (BRS). That would mean that 30% of the members in these cohorts would not be able to live on their CPF payouts alone when they reach their Payout Eligibility Age (PEA) in 10 years’ time. But the more concerning part of the numbers highlighted in the Budget Annex is the six-in-10 CPF members who could not meet their BRS a decade ago. Some of these Singaporeans are on the old Retirement Sum Scheme and would have reached their PEA by now.”
“Sir, would the Ministry be looking into instituting, say, staggered school or working hours, to ease the concerns of parents, students and workers travelling during rush hours even under the current DORSCON level when more infection cases start to surface? At least, the trains will not be so crowded, travelling will be a lot safer with at least some social distancing implemented.”
“Sir, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. Does the Ministry have the actual amount that was given to PCF kindergarten, the subsidy that was given to them for the last five years, as listed in the question? My second question is: what is the Government's view on allowing these state-subsidised facility to be used for political activities like Meet-the-People sessions (MPS) and all that? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, as I mentioned in my answer earlier, the grant amount per enrolled SC child, where I think that it is more meaningful, as the amount of Government grants provided to each AOP, as I said, generally depends on the number of places and types of services provided by the operator. As the Member can see, the size of AOPs as well as the size of centres vary substantially. If the Member is aware and he goes on the ground, he would understand what I am trying to say, whereby behind the scenes. there are many differences. So, it is more meaningful for us to look at what I have shared earlier. For the Member's second question, Sir, I think a lot have been discussed in this House on the question that he has asked, so I would like to urge him to refer to those answers.”
“Yes, okay. And archives. KPMG did the forensics; they actually did a deep-dive and a lot of undeleting. We explained everything. We helped them to uncover some of the lost emails as well. If there is anything wrong with the email, we were very transparent. We did not hide. In fact, they showed us the email. We explained why some of the hard disk were recycled. And some of the things were tagged wrongly as well, and we had to explain to them, if you go into the report, you can refer to KPMG. That part, I am very clear. We did not delete accounts on purpose. One other thing is that the Senior Minister of State kept referring to our auditors finding four points. I hope the Senior Minister of State is aware that Foo Kon Tan was caught lying in the two reports about the opening balance. That was reported in the AGO report.”
“Thank you, Sir. I just want to clarify that when the Senior Minister of State said about accounts being deleted from our computers, I think —”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if you say that someone can encash a cheque with one signature instead of two, as what we have said, it is a question of integrity.”
“I would like to seek clarification from the Deputy Prime Minister. Just now, he said that when we co-sign cheques, he seemed to imply that one can encash a cheque with just one signatory under AHTC. He said that what we said that cheques had to be co-signed either by the Chairman or either one of the Vice Chairmen is not the truth. So, is the Deputy Prime Minister implying that cheques can be encashed with just one signature even though we set it up as two signatures must be there before we can encash the cheque under AHTC?”
“Factors, such as the disability mortality rate, recovery rate, disability incidence and risk profile for various cohorts, to name a few, are important information for the public, not just to determine whether Singaporeans are being charged baseline premiums or way above it, but to spur them to make informed choices to live healthily. Mr Speaker, this Government should also see considerable savings in the administration cost for CareShield Life when it takes over the respective pool of insured persons from the three private ElderShield insurers. What is the projected savings from this exercise and did the Ministry work these savings into the premium calculations? And what would be the projected profit and loss for the CareShield Life scheme under the sole administration of CPF Board, assisted by AIC? Although this is a not-for-profit insurance scheme, it does not mean that there is no profit generated. I am sure the Ministry would have crunched the numbers in the run-up to the introduction of CareShield Life. It is in the public interest that the Ministry should release such information. I am also sure that the Ministry can easily illustrate the technical details of the actuarial model for CareShield Life in simple graphics or something easy for the general public to digest.”
“The affordability of CareShield Life needs to be considered in context with MediShield Life, since both schemes are made compulsory for Singaporeans. Is there any impact study done on the adequacy of the MediSave accounts of our young working class Singaporeans with the introduction of such mandatory insurance schemes? On the same issue of affordability, may I ask the Minister again, are the premium calculations for CareShield Life heavily influenced by the MOH estimates that one in two Singaporeans aged 65 and above could become severely disabled in their lifetime? If we were to strip away the international data from the MOH estimates, how would the percentage look like? Sir, the international data cited by the Minister that 52% of Americans turning 65 in 2016 would develop a disability serious enough to require long-term care does not even apply in the context of CareShield Life as these people may not even qualify to claim under the scheme unless they cannot do three out of six ADLs. Would the Minister not agree that, using data that may not even trigger a claim under the proposed scheme to help calculate the corresponding premium to pay for an insured person would not be meaningful to begin with? So, in the interest of transparency on the affordability and sustainability of the scheme, would the Minister be able to publish a brief of the factors and assumptions made in the premium pricing model for CareShield Life? The Senior Minister of State had mentioned some of these factors in passing in his speech on the subject last year.”
“Under clause 6, subsection (4)(b) of the proposed Bill, the CPF Board may determine that an individual who is severely disabled currently may be covered under CareShield Life, but only if the individual satisfies such conditions as may be determined by the Minister in any particular case where the Minister considers appropriate. Such case-by-case basis assessment at the sole discretion of the Minister does not provide any assurance that CareShield Life is going to be inclusive for Singaporeans who need the basic protection most. And what about Singaporeans who are unable to do one or two out of three ADLs currently? Would they be able to enrol into CareShield Life or be assisted by ElderFund only, as highlighted by the Minister earlier? Sir, there are also Singaporeans who withdrew from ElderShield not by choice but by the fact that they had nothing left in their MediSave accounts to service the premiums and they had no ability to pay the premiums in cash. I am happy to note that the Minister will find ways to enrol these vulnerable Singaporeans into CareShield Life since the scheme is going to be made compulsory for all over time. Next, on the point of affordability, I would like to ask the Minister to share with the House on the impact of the introduction of CareShield Life on the adequacy of the MediSave accounts for future cohorts of Singaporeans who would be enrolled into the compulsory scheme upon attaining the age of 30. Take the case of a young father who is servicing the MediShield Life premiums for his children and himself, and perhaps even his spouse, using his MediSave account. Would this person have enough in his MediSave account to pay for CareShield Life as well or when the transitional subsidies for the scheme expires?”
“Mr Speaker, anyone who has aged parents or loved ones to look after would know that providing long-term care for the elderly, especially those who need help with ADLs, is a very daunting task. In a small family environment, the burden of care for the elderly would fall squarely on one or two members of the household. For a family with no children, such burden would exacerbate rapidly when the couple grows old and neither one of them is able to care for one or the other. At our Meet-the-People Sessions, we would have heard stories of the struggles and challenges faced by our residents in looking after the elderly, while trying to raise a family of their own and having to make ends meet all at the same time. We heard in this Chamber last year that this Government intends to focus on building an inclusive society where no Singaporean, young or old, healthy or sick, gets left behind. The CareShield Life and Long-Term Care Bill is a step in that direction. In the debate on the Motion on ElderShield and CareShield Life in the middle of 2018, the Workers' Party Members spoke in support of the rationale to strengthen our social safety net for the long-term care needs of Singaporeans. CareShield Life, as the Minister had stated then, would be a basic protection scheme for Singaporeans against severe disability during their old age and the scheme would be inclusive, affordable and sustainable. On the point of inclusivity, I would like to ask the Minister what would happen to the fate of Singaporeans who are currently disabled, mild or severe, when CareShield Life kicks in?”
“Sir, just a quick question. Would MCCY be recovering that $13 million penalty as well?”
“Sir, just a couple of questions. In 2016, when I asked the question, the amount of grant given to this minority group who did not fulfil their grant obligation came up to about $30 million. Just now, the Minister said it is about $5.5 million a year now. Is that correct? It means there is some recovery effort. Can the Minister share whether there was any actual recovery in the sense that we have managed to bring it down from $30 million to $5.5 million a year now for those grants? Secondly, can the Minister also share how MOE has tightened the recovery process because one of the answers given then was that if they were to apply for work here in Singapore, they may face some severe consequences? But then, again, these people are smart enough to gain the system and they have escaped without any consequences, so they will be smart enough not to come back here to work. Can the Minister share on how MOE intends to recover those grants given?”
“But POFMA is supposed to address falsehoods during elections.”
“Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Just a clarification for the Minister. Would the Minister agree that POFMA would not be able to prevent an incumbent party from spreading falsehood to influence the outcome of an election, as in the example I gave for General Election 2015? Also, I did mention about the alternate authority in my speech, so the Minister could check the Hansard.”
“The fact of the matter is: no one can vouch for how a future Government will act with this Bill, not just the Law Minister. I cannot, with a clear conscience, support this Bill.”
“Under this Bill, the Courts may not even need to rule if the Minister were to subsequently agree with the aggrieved party, upon appeal, that the statement concerned was indeed not false. What if the Minister were to decide to cancel a Part 3 Direction on his own initiative, days after the elections are over? In both cases, no final arbiter of truth would be required. The undeserving candidate had won. Can the results of the general elections be declared void then? Sir, the Law Minister had said in an interview that he cannot vouch for how a future government will act with this Bill. But if we knew that there is a nuclear option in the Bill, which could be abused in the future, why are we, as legislators, not doing anything about it now? Why would we want to leave a nuclear option for a future dictator to silence all dissenting voices with a snap of his fingers? As stated at the beginning of my speech, I am all for the protection of our way of life, our racial and religious harmony. I am also all for making the online businesses accountable for the spread of ideologies that threaten the social fabric of our society. What I cannot support is for this Government to slip a nuclear option into this Bill to protect itself in the name of tackling online falsehood, especially in the context of conducting a fair election. When we enact Bills that chip away our basic rights and freedoms in the name of protecting the society at large, we have to be wary about the added power we would be giving to the state in the process. That power, in the wrong hands, may kill the dreams, imaginations, laughter and creativity of the people. This Bill, in the hands of a despot, will kill democracy over time.”
“" But under this proposed Bill, if a Minister opines that it is in the public interest to issue a Part 3 Direction on a statement made against the Prime Minister, for example, that opinion would be taken at face value as the gospel truth, and justice would have to be served immediately. How is that even right to begin with? How it is not wrong in any sense of the laws that one is judged and prosecuted for something that the Courts must decide ultimately if it was indeed false in the first place? This Bill will assume the Government is always right all the time until the Courts say otherwise. As the Minister had cleverly put it, the Court is the final arbiter of truth, and the key word is "final" because, in reality, the original arbiter of truth had already spoken and issued the decree for punitive action to be taken immediately. It is easy for the Law Minister to say, and I quote, "These Ministers are elected officials, and the decisions they make could also be reflected by the people's votes during a General Election." Sir, if an unscrupulous Minister were to abuse his power under this proposed Bill right before the hustings start, and win the election subsequently, what can the final arbiter of truth do? And, as the Minister had said yesterday, the fastest time the Courts can hear an appeal in this instance is nine days, excluding weekends and public holidays. There are only nine days of campaigning, including weekends and public holidays. Elections would be over by then. And what if the alleged false statement of fact was not false after all and it could have influenced the outcome of the election? What would be the recourse?”
“So, how would this proposed Bill, if it were to be in place, deal with this false statement of fact coming from the incumbent party at the very last minute, and regurgitated by the state media to reach a wider audience without any fact checking done? Let me give another scenario. What if, during an election, some insiders were to publish serious personal allegations against the top leadership of the incumbent party, questioning their integrity and character to lead the country? Under this Bill, the Minister, Competent Authority or Alternate Authority, can easily order a takedown of the allegations in the name of public interest, knowing very well that no one, apart from the Ministers, the affected Minister and insiders themselves, would know who was telling the truth. So, would this Bill be used to silence such information which could be material to help voters decide whom to support in an election? Any statement made against an entity of the authority or its leadership, which may not be outright false but could be misconstrued in the context in which it appears, can be taken down in the name of public interest under this Bill solely at the discretion of any Minister, without having first to prove the alleged falsehood. The nuclear option would be able to silence anyone instantly at a critical time with no immediate recourse. Sir, no matter how you dissect this proposed Bill, the arbiter of truth originates from the Government and its Ministers, and the Competent Authority that reports to them. The Minister for Law was reported to have said, and I quote, "The Courts decide ultimately what is true and what is false and they will be the final arbiters.”
“The nuclear option, if abused, will actually allow the Minister to influence the outcome of an election, something which this Bill is designed to prevent in the first place. Who can vouch that an incumbent party, when faced with multiple battles on all fronts, will not resort to desperate measures to avoid losing power in a critical election? We are all against foreign intervention in our electoral process. The powers that be in this world may want to influence the outcome of elections for whatever reason and we should not allow them. But we are not alone and we should work with the social media giants to stop these foreign agents from trying to influence the outcome of our elections. But the biggest fear of someone making a false statement of fact knowingly to influence the outcome of an election may not come from an individual or from an outside source, but from an incumbent party with ample resources to shape public opinion and perception at will. The biggest contributor of misleading propaganda may come from the incumbent Government itself. So, where is the protection against the incumbent from influencing the outcome of an election under this Bill? Take, for example, at the last General Election. At the eleventh hour of the campaign, the PAP machinery sent a letter to the residents of Punggol East, stating that $22.5 million belonging to the constituency and transferred to the accounts of the WP‐run Town Council in 2013 had become unaccounted for. The letter said it was an indisputable fact that the money had gone missing from our books, contrary to what was reported by our auditors every year. Clearly, this false statement was made solely to influence the outcome of the 2015 elections.”
“One cannot shout fire in a crowded place and cause panic and mayhem in the name of free speech. I also subscribe to the fact that we are living in a very different world now. We do need to protect the society at large from being torn apart by the rise of racial and religious tensions fanned by bigots, extremists and racists. So, this Bill should be scoped with the sole purpose to protect the society from harm espoused by people with vile intentions. It should be scoped to hold companies which allow hate ideologies and messages to propagate in their systems accountable. It should not be scoped with ambiguity to protect a “big brother” government from critics, political opponents, civil societies, non-government organisations (NGOs) and online communities, in the name of tackling online falsehoods. This Government has already amassed an arsenal of legislation to block or take down undesirable materials to protect the community at large. Does it really need a nuclear option to send a shiver down the spines of men in the street, uncles and aunties, academics, critics and the society at large in the name of protecting them from online falsehood and manipulation? Sir, the ambiguity of this Bill is even more telling when it comes to the business of elections. The absolute power it bestows on a Minister to remove information that may influence the outcome of an election cannot be understated. This Bill basically allows an incumbent party, who is seeking re‐election, the sole power to remove any damaging statement made against the party and its leaders, in the name of public interest, so as to contain any political fallout.”
“Sir, if this Bill is drafted solely to target the perpetrators of hate, violence, intolerance and disdain towards another race or religion, by all means, let us do it. We should never allow such people to propagate their vile ideologies in any form or manner. This world has no place for sick people with no love and respect for life, happiness and basic human decency. If this Bill is also to hold those big, powerful online businesses accountable and responsible to stop the spread of such vile messages, by all means, let us go after them, too. These money‐minded companies cannot have the cake and eat it at the expense of our social order, racial and religious harmony. And if this Bill is drafted solely to protect our way of life, our love and respect for one another, regardless of race, language or religion, I am all for it. But this Bill is way more than that. This Bill will also give a “big brother” government considerable latitude to silence the voice of the common man in a community where he can be at ease to express his views, opinions, arts, music, political beliefs and more, without inhibition. This Bill will strike fear into the hearts of these Singaporeans who are vocal and passionate about the issues they care about most because they can be issued with a Part 3 Direction even if they do not know or have no reason to believe that the fact of what they have shared in their community could be wrong. This Bill will arm the Minister with a nuclear option to act as judge and jury to obliterate critics and opponents of the Government in a flash. This Bill, if abused, will turn Singapore into a repressive state in no time. Sir, I, too, subscribe to the belief that freedom of speech is never absolute.”
“Mr Speaker, just a quick question. The reason I asked is because these two entities are managing our Reserves and the Government is the sole shareholder. Usually, the shareholders would know the remuneration packages for the company that they own. Does the Government or anyone in the Finance Ministry know the remuneration packages for the top brass in terms of the value of GIC and Temasek?”
“They would prefer to dry their laundry elsewhere. There are a number of such ground floor units in the two HIP clusters announced for Hougang Avenues 2, 5 and 7 and they are about to go through polling soon. I hope residents living in those ground floor units can be consulted this time round before HDB proceeds to install those new racks by default. Next, I do welcome the announcement of a new HIP2 for qualifying flats at the 60- to 70-year mark. I may not be around to enjoy HIP2 but I do have faith that technology would play a big role in making those aged homes more liveable in the future. So, apart from the standard spalling concrete and water seepage issues, which will probably return with vengeance after another 30 to 40 years, I hope HIP2 can make these old flats more elderly-friendly and smarter in energy consumption and safety. I hope these old flats can be rejuvenated with better connectivity to help the elderly access e-services easily with dedicated smart devices. More importantly, I hope all physical barriers to active ageing would be removed completely by then, inside and outside the flats. Income Distribution and Public Housing Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Sir, public housing should play a role in integrating Singaporeans across all socio-economic groups. However, over time, substantial differences have developed among HDB estates. Chairman, may I have your permission to display a slide on the screen?”
“While residents can pay as low as about $300 to have their bathrooms completely upgraded with new tiles, piping and sanitary wares, they should not be made to correlate the low cost of upgrading with lower quality of fixtures or workmanship. The bulk of the costs of HIP is funded by taxpayers. The contractors are not subsidising the upgrading. These contractors are expected to deliver quality works and fixtures that commensurate with their winning bids at the very least. While wear and tear can continue over time in an old flat which has undergone HIP, spalling concrete or leaks cannot possibly resurface at the same spot shortly after the one-year Defects Liability Period (DLP). It does not make sense to the affected residents that HIP is meant to resolve such long-standing issues for about a year at the very most. 5.45 pm Although there are not many such cases reported, it certainly lends weight to the fact that the upgrading works were not carried out properly for some of these flats in the first place. Thus, affected residents should not be made to pay again if such issues were to resurface at the same spot shortly after one year. I hope HDB can look into having a slightly longer DLP for spalling concrete and water seepage problems that HIP is supposed to resolve. Next, I would like HDB to consult residents living on the ground floor before installing the new clothes drying racks in their units. The new rack compromises the safety of residents living on the ground floor as the structure will allow intruders to gain easy access into their units via the kitchen windows using the new rack as a support. Residents living on the ground floor also generally do not use these designated areas to dry their clothes as they are located right next to the bin chutes.”