Pritam Singh
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, I hear what the Minister has said. I am also sure the Minister has understood where the Workers' Party Members of Parliament are coming from. And I also would like to add that as the Opposition, we come to this House to scrutinise Bills and it is our duty to ask those questions.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I am empathetic to the arguments of efficiency and ensuring that patients can see a polyclinic doctor or consultation as quickly as possible. I understand the Senior Minister of State mentioned it is important to try and make a make an appointment so that your waiting time is within a certain period.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Just a question for the Minister of State. Does the Ministry capture the total amount of monies recovered from Singaporeans who are victims of scams?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just a point of order. I believe the Senior Minister of State, in his wrapping-up speech, referred to a speech made by a Member who did not deliver a speech in Parliament on the Bill, that is, hon Member Ms Mariam Jaafar. I would just like to confirm whether that is as per the Standing Orders of Parliament.”
“Much obliged, Mr Deputy Speaker. At the Sitting on 7 April 2026, I rose to seek a clarification on the joint Ministerial Statement on the situation in the Middle East.”
“Thank you, Speaker. The Minister of State mentioned meaningful impact a few times, so I will give an example. The KPI in the Budget Book, "the percentage of patients who waited less than or at least 100 minutes for consultations at polyclinics", for example, for each fiscal year, 2023, 2024, 2025 – the number is 99%.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,762 lines we hold for Pritam Singh, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 30 of 36.
“Can the Senior Minister of State confirm if the joint appointment of accountants was required by the Court of Appeals in CA114 of 2015, or HDB had included it as a prayer to the Court of Appeal at any point in time?”
“Mdm Speaker, Minister Yaacob Ibrahim is not in the House. Why does his name appear under "Yes"? [Laughter.] [(proc text) Thereupon, the hon Member Dr Ng Eng Hen left the seat of hon Member Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim to return to his own seat. (proc text)]”
“The second question was: does the Minister not agree that its public consultation process leaves a lot of room to be desired in view of the negative feedback the Bill has generated thus far?”
“Mdm Speaker, I have three questions for the Minister. Firstly, when was the draft Bill or some form of the draft Bill first circulated publicly? Secondly, does the Minister not agree that its public consultation process leaves a lot of room to be improved in view of the negative feedback the Bill has generated thus far? And, finally, what prevented the Ministry from publishing the feedback it collected over the last six years under the Bill and sharing it with the public as it has on its website in the case of other legislation?”
“If Alan Shadrake's stands for the worst case of scandalising contempt in Singapore's 51-year history, how can the Government justify increasing the prison term and fine by such a wide margin? The Minister commented on a recent civil case where the High Court imposed an imprisonment of eight months. It would appear that the common law is working fine. Does the Government envisage a higher quantum of fines and imprisonment terms for other contempt scenarios, like sub judice contempt, for example? Mdm Speaker, WP objects to this Bill that overstates the case for the administration of justice to the detriment of freedom of speech.”
“This is especially the case for Bills like the Administration of Justice Bill which give the Government maximum scope of action. In this vein, there are other pieces of legislation over the years that directly impact freedom of speech, too, and which have been amended to give the Government greater powers, such as the amendments to the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act of 2014, the Broadcasting (Class Licence) Notification of 2013 and, of course, the Public Order Bill of 2009. Upon a closer analysis, it is increasingly clear that the Government's recent record on civil liberties mirrors what was known in the heyday of the Cold War as "salami tactics", only that the Singapore version is slightly different and a tad more sophisticated, with the curtailing of civil liberties occurring incrementally, bit by bit, or slice by slice, one law at a time – all of which appear justifiable and innocuous when analysed in isolation. Taken together, however, they portend a clear and consistent ability of the Government to control public discourse, fair comment and criticism, should the Government choose to up the ante to tighten its stranglehold on public discourse. Viewed in totality, the Government's approach gives it significant powers to strike fear in the hearts of ordinary citizens. To conclude, Mdm Speaker, how much confidence is one supposed to take from a Bill which criminalises contempt by a fine of up to $100,000 at the High Court and a three-year imprisonment term, when the Court of Appeal in Alan Shadrake affirmed a sentence of six weeks imprisonment and a $20,000 fine in what it called, and I quote, "the worst case of scandalising contempt that has hitherto come before the Singapore Courts", unquote.”
“But shortly after the Protection from Harassment Bill was passed into law, it was the Government that used the Act to claim harassment from a member of public in a dispute over a mere patent. It is instructive to recall that during the Second Reading of the Protection from Harassment Bill, the Minister was silent about the Protection from Harassment Act envisaging the Government as a plaintiff. To then turn around and sue individuals was a completely unexpected use of the Act by the Government. And if suing an individual was not enough, the Government then proceeded to sue an online news site under the same law. Earlier this year, the Government proposed and passed amendments to the Government Proceedings Act that allowed the Government to claim costs for more than two legal officers from a plaintiff knowing that the Government has limitless resources to hire the most expensive lawyers and an entire army of civil servants and legal service officers behind it to defend any suit. The Minister in-charge did not even address why it was amending clause 9 of the Government Proceedings Act until Ms Sylvia Lim brought it to the attention of the Minister. This seemingly innocuous amendment would inevitably cause an individual to think twice about taking on the Government because of the highly prohibitive costs involved. Mdm Speaker, even the so-called "sharp edge" of judicial review is blunted when Parliament passes laws that cause ordinary citizens to think twice about mounting a judicial review action, or further strengthens the Government's hands as it can conveniently make the case that its actions are within the form and substance of the law as determined by Parliament.”
“In fact, the Government, through the AG could conceivably abuse the law by virtue of the unclear and highly interpretative words, such as "prejudge" in clause 13, and suggestions of a test with a lower burden of proof than the "real risk" test which mirrors the identical problematic drafting in clause 3. This vagueness suggests a clear and present danger for civil liberties should the Government decide to interpret the law strictly, as drafted, to muzzle alternative voices. Even worse, making sub judice contempt arrestable by way of clause 22 and thereby giving the Police powers to confiscate personal computers, amongst other things, appears to be specifically targeted at civil society activists who are not afraid to challenge the Government and who play their part in serving Singapore by contributing to a diverse public space of voices and views. Proceeding on this clause will not only compromise trust between the Government and the people in the long run, but between the people and the Police as well. At this stage, Mdm Speaker, it is useful to review the Government's record on civil liberties over the past few years in particular. In 2013, when Parliament passed the Protection against Harassment Bill, the Government canvassed many justifiable reasons for the passage of the Bill. Many were legitimate, such as protecting individuals and public servants from "indecent, threatening, abusive, insulting words or behaviour". One would have expected sexual harassment, stalking, bullying in schools to be brought to task under the law as predicted and in step with the tone of public consultation of the Bill.”
“In the Benjamin Lim case, it was the very feedback and concerns raised by the public that contributed to a review of Police procedures involving young people and minors before the case was concluded. For most lay Singaporeans, the reality is that criticising policies and facts central to a pending case will inevitably overlap to varying degrees. That is the very nature of public communication and, for the common man, it is not always easy to neatly differentiate the two. Surely, there is a place for fair comment and criticism of pending cases, and it does not necessarily follow that freedom of speech has to suffer as a result. Relying on the common law to address sub judice contempt in egregious cases of sub judice would more than suffice, so as to preserve a healthy balance between freedom of speech and public confidence in the administration of justice. There is simply no overwhelming reason to pass this Bill when Singapore's experience with sub judice contempt, in particular, has not compromised the conduct of fair trials. The near absence of case law on this matter in our legal history provides the strongest evidence of this. With the passage of this Bill into law, the Government, and specifically the AG, by virtue of clause 13, has a potentially overwhelming role in determining the balance between freedom of speech and the administration of justice. Worse, the AG only has to prove a prima facie case of contempt – an exceedingly low standard of proof. Even our judges, in whom we have so much respect, are prevented by law from refusing to grant leave should a judge deem the prima facie standard of proof to be too low and not in correspondence with the public interest on a particular case.”
“Interestingly, the Minister conceded that the judge, the facilitator in chief, in ensuring a fair trial, may not be influenced, but instead the witnesses and the whole environment may be prejudiced or influenced. However, has such a doubt ever been raised in the Singapore context where our Judiciary was so helpless as to be unable to oversee a fair trial and to assess the veracity of the evidence of witnesses? Under the current legislation, it can be argued that many Singaporeans would have conceivably been in contempt when the City Harvest trial was going on, but did their comments compromise a fair trial? Coming back to the toddler's case, what actually happened and how fast did public anger blow over? Was the judge actually influenced? Were witnesses influenced in spite of the negative feedback? Most importantly, did Daniel's parents not have a fair trial? To quote the Minister, has the situation "gone out of control" in Singapore? Mdm Speaker, as it stands, there is a real risk that this Bill would have an unnecessarily detrimental effect on public discourse of matters central to the effective functioning of a participatory democracy and that is why it is so objectionable as it stands. In reality, there are benefits in allowing the public to comment on cases pending before the Courts. For example, in the recent Benjamin Lim case, no reasonable person would argue that the Coroner would not have been able to rule fairly and this is a testament to the standing of the judicial service, legal service also, which is already held in high esteem, not just locally but internationally as well.”
“It also leaves room for the Courts to potentially introduce a test other than the "real risk" test, such as the inherent tendency test which has been summarily rejected by the Court of Appeal, albeit in cases of scandalising contempt but not sub judice contempt. Compounding this ambiguity is the introduction of the term "prejudgment", a term which is curiously not defined in the interpretation section of the Bill. What does "prejudgment" entail? Should the Minister argue that it would depend on each case, does the Minister not agree that leaving it open-ended would give the Government significant powers to alter the balance between freedom of speech and the administration of justice to its whim and fancy? Mdm Speaker, on sub judice contempt in particular, this Bill will legislate vagueness. At best, it would only serve to confuse the public and does nothing to educate the layman about what qualifies as sub judice contempt. In reality, it will shrink the common space for discussion on matters of public interest as it is typical of human behaviour to be safe rather than sorry. That alone makes this Bill bad law, negating its very purpose. Furthermore, the concerns many Singaporeans have raised over the clause on sub judice contempt ought to bring Members back to the fundamental purpose of sub judice contempt laws in the first place, which is to protect the right to a fair trial. In his remarks to the media shortly after the First Reading of this Bill, the Minister raised the recent case of the two-year-old toddler Daniel who was abused by his caregivers before he sadly passed away. The Minister correctly observed that many people were angered by the facts of the case, and the Minister queried, in such circumstances, whether a defendant would get a free trial.”
“Mdm Speaker, at paragraph 17 of the Court of Appeal judgment in Alan Shadrake, the Singapore Court of Appeal notes that the balance between freedom of speech on the one hand and the protection of the administration of justice on the other, is at the heart of the law leading to contempt. But rather than to merely codify the common law on contempt in Singapore, this Bill threatens to upset this delicate balance by extending extraordinary powers to the Government. The Minister publicly remarked after the First Reading of the Bill that it merely crystallises the current legal position on contempt, and I quote, "does not create anything new", unquote. However, the drafting of clause 3 suggests this is far from the case. If it were so, one would have expected specific reference to the "real risk" test as established in the Alan Shadrake judgment to preface the explanatory statement covering clause 3. In view of the Minister's Second Reading speech, it is clear that clause 3 does, indeed, envisage a more stringent test than the "real risk" test in cases of scandalising the Court. However, clause 3(1)(b)(i) on sub judice contempt, on a plain reading, is also open to interpretation and is hardly determinative. A broad reading of the clause with the conjunction "or" suggests that an individual could be guilty of sub judice contempt by publishing something that prejudges pending Court proceedings, by, firstly, prejudicing; secondly, interfering with; or thirdly, posing a real risk of prejudice or interference with that proceeding. Does this not potentially create different thresholds for sub judice contempt, especially since there is a dearth of Singapore case law on this matter?”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I would just like to ask the Minister specifically with regard to lifts which are above 20 years of age ‒ which, the Minister has acknowledged ‒ tend to have more maintenance-related issues. I think the point of balance for Town Councils would be to enhance contracts and, by doing so, require more regular lift maintenance. That would mean increasing routine expenditure for the Town Council. This would have to be balanced against making a decision to replace the lifts or upgrade the lifts earlier. That would, of course, entail the use of sinking funds. So, that is the real issue for many Town Councils, Page: 19 I believe. In that light, with regard to the safety enhancements that the Minister has spoken about that HDB is looking at, and because it may cost a large sum of money, does the Minister have any estimate of when HDB will come to that decision? Town Councils will have to start determining how to project their finances going forward.”
“Just a supplementary question for the Minister. The Minister identified individuals who essentially take up assignments overseas as one of the reasons which the Ministry assesses when they grant deviations from the MOP policy. What are some of the other common reasons which the Ministry assesses before it allows for the deviation of this policy?”
“Just a supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. For new Downtown Line stations, can I just confirm with the Senior Minister of State how many bicycle parking facilities will be made available at each station?”
“In view of this new environment of data analytics, will the Ministry release more data in conjunction with the insurance companies so that the public will be in a better position to track and appreciate the rising trend of claims and specifically identify areas of over-consumption? What does the Ministry do to ensure that private hospitals and doctors do not take maximum advantage of private insurance plans? Does the Ministry consider this to be a growing problem and how does it plan to mitigate it? Finally, details of the standardised B1 plan were recently made public. Prior to launch, the plan was framed as an affordable Integrated Plan providing greater choice to consumers. To this end, will the Ministry consider increasing the MediSave withdrawal limit amount for Singaporeans of all ages, especially older Singaporeans who choose this plan, so that they can be paid for completely through their MediSave account? Preventive Healthcare”
“Mdm Chairperson, the prospect of rising healthcare costs is a cause for concern, especially for the middle-income or the sandwich class. In fact, rising MediShield Life premiums will be a reality for many Singaporeans as the subsidy threshold is progressively reduced from this year up to the year 2019, when MediShield Life subsidies come to an end. MediShield Life means coverage for all, including the most vulnerable among us. In fact, when MediShield Life was introduced, it was expected to account for a bigger chunk of Integrated Shield payouts. However, this prospect was quickly put to rest with the announcement by the various insurers that any rise in the top-up portion of premiums would only be frozen for 12 months. As this moratorium will only last until November this year, what are the prospects of higher premiums next year? Can the Ministry consider informing the insurer that the moratorium should also include a freeze on riders as well, since this would have been a backdoor to work around the moratorium, insofar as keeping healthcare costs affordable as a whole? Secondly, while rising healthcare costs for a number of public reasons, such as larger bills, greater healthcare consumption and costly procedures, are a reality, can the Ministry share how it intervenes, if at all, to ensure that any rise in premiums from the Integrated Shield providers are audited by the Government? How does the Government work with the insurers to check on any unjustified rise in premiums and to what extent can the Government intervene, if and when premiums are unjustifiably raised?”
“Members will notice the waves breaking at the very edge of the foreshore with the backshore inundated with sea water. In late 2014, it was reported that the new Changi Airport was being built on higher ground to guard against rising sea levels and that it would be able to withstand more than the projected 18-inch or 46-centimetre rise in sea levels. Separately, the minimum level for newly reclaimed land went up in 2011 to 2.25 metres above the highest recorded tide from 1.25 metres. Early this week, it was reported that Nicoll Drive was being elevated by 80 centimetres. Can the Minister share what are the plans to protect our beaches and mangrove areas and other existing coastal areas from rising sea levels? Can the Minister update the House on the progress of the Government's Coastal Adaptation Study that was announced almost three years ago? Does the Minister foresee the raising of a Climate Change Fund akin to the Changi Airport Terminal 5 Fund, to build a sizeable financial buffer over a few Budgets, so that Singapore can be better ready from a fiscal point of view to address the very real and debilitating effects of climate change? Impact of Climate Change”
“Mdm Chairperson, climate change and the reality of rising sea levels are upon us. Just a couple of months ago, a friend shared with me a video clip of how far the tide had reached at an area of East Coast beach close to the old Big Splash. Mdm Speaker, with your permission, I would like to show that clip.”
“Mdm Chairperson, my question is to the Senior Minister of State. Should Indonesia be able to address safety and equipment-related concerns with regard to the management of the Flight Information Region (FIR) over the Riau Islands and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) directs Indonesia to manage that FIR, what impact, if any, will this Page: 42 have on Singapore's position as an aviation hub?”
“I believe it must be compulsory for cyclists who use footpaths and pedestrian crossings or who are near bus stops to dismount from their bicycles and walk across these areas which are more prone to accidents and heavy pedestrian traffic. In practice, the Ministry could consider how the stop line works for drivers in the US. Regardless whether there is traffic or not, every driver stops at the stop line or risks a fine. Likewise, we should implement a dismount-and-push rule for cyclists at critical areas and enforce it. In view of our crowded shared spaces during peak hours, such a clear rule is likely to make our footpaths, bus stops and pedestrian crossings safer, especially for our elderly. Page: 19 Cycling”
“Mdm Chairperson, three years ago, I spoke on increasing cycling and pedestrian safety in this House. I rise to make the same call in light of the recommendations of AMAP and the frequency of feedback from residents, especially elderly residents, about accidents and near-accidents between cyclists and pedestrians on footpaths, zebra crossings and pedestrian crossings and even bus stops. I would like to ask the Ministry, as it assesses the recommendations of AMAP, to also look at how such rules can be enforced in light of the demographic shifts taking place in our society, with more elderly and senior citizens using walkways and footpaths. Just a few weeks ago, I stood near the junction of Bedok Reservoir Road and Jalan Eunos to assess the flow and egress of residents' vehicles from Bedok Reservoir Road and their complaints of cyclists who dashed across the zebra crossing to catch the flashing "Green Man" across the Jalan Eunos pedestrian crossing. In the hour or so I was at the junction, not a single cyclist, either a foreign worker, Singaporean or PR, stopped to dismount from their bicycle. Rather, there were quite a few glares from drivers towards cyclists and vice versa. Members may also have had residents complaining about cyclists who zipped by just as they were disembarking from buses at bus stops. Mdm Chairperson, while a code of conduct to alter behaviour is a start, I am concerned that it will not go far enough even with an intense educational effort that would be required to compel a fundamental change of behaviour on the part of errant cyclists.”
“Thank you, Mdm Chairperson. My question is directed to the Minister of State on the cessation of 2G services. How many elderly Singaporeans are affected by the cessation of these services and how many of them are on prepaid plans? Secondly, for those on prepaid plans, they would likely see a rise in their bills when they re-contract, as 2G services are the cheapest, and they would have no choice but to get on 3G or 4G plan when they re-contract. Would the Ministry consider a voucher or rebate scheme in conjunction with the telecommunications companies to assist these elderly Singaporeans?”
“Mdm Chairperson, the withdrawal of second-generation (2G) phone services by April 2017 will affect up to 250,000 individuals, in particular the elderly who seek a basic device for their use and foreign workers who rely on the cheapest handsets. Customers are also likely to pay more when they transit from 2G pre-paid plans after April 2017. It is known that seven out of 10 of the 250,000 affected individuals are on pre-paid plans. Can the Minister share how many elderly Singaporeans are represented in this group? Can I enquire if IDA will consider working with the three telecoms companies (telcos) to consider a special upgrade or rebate voucher for elderly Singaporeans on pre-paid plans who would likely see higher bills after April 2017? What is the anticipated percentage of the rise in their bills after the withdrawal of this service? Can the Minister also explain how the Silver Infocomm Initiative has been rolled out and implemented to assist elderly Singaporeans who would be affected by this transition? In addition, are the outreach efforts available in Chinese dialects and the vernacular languages, such as Malay and Tamil, as well since our elderly comprise a very diverse group? Smart Nation”
“Data from the Department of Statistics show that services export grew by about 200% over the period 2003 to 2013, compared to merchandise exports which only grew about 60% over the same period. This difference shows the potential which the services sector has in the future economy. Unfortunately, the services trade balance turned negative around the year 2000 and has continued in negative territory for much of the time since. In 2015, services trade performance deteriorated, with growth rates of both exports and imports almost flat. How much of a concern are these developments for the Singapore economy? What is MTI's outlook on the impact that recent agreements, such as the ASEAN Economic Community and the TPP, will have on services trade performance? Will we be able to exploit the opportunities offered by these agreements, specifically, not just to improve merchandise trade, but also services trade? We have examined the drivers of services export. We find that three areas which contributed quite significantly to the weak balance were telecommunications, computer and information, charges for the use of intellectual property, and research and development (R&D). So, my final question is: are the initiatives for promoting R&D and innovation coordinated with specific strategies to strengthen our trade performances in these areas? Economy and Job Creation”
“Mdm Chairperson, I first spoke on the TPP and its impact on Singapore's businesses at the debate on the President's Address in 2014. Then, I had asked the Government to flesh out the opportunities and pitfalls awaiting our local SMEs when the TPP is ratified. I also suggested going at this in a big way, beyond communication with chambers of commerce and business federations, so as to encourage greater entrepreneurship amongst our people. The TPP is likely to remain on the backburner at least until a new US President is sworn into office. However, the reality of not just TPP, but all future trade agreements should be considered with the launch of SkillsFuture and the national drive towards lifelong learning. Trade agreements are sometimes conceived of as the domain of larger SMEs, multinational corporations (MNCs), tax agents and other specialists. However, it would be useful if the Government can identify areas of growth and greater access for enterprise under the TPP for Singapore, so that Singaporeans with the passion for enterprise and business can align their careers and skills upgrading plans to reap the benefits of our trade agreements. I hope the Ministry can consider this and, at the very least, organise a webpage or similar public resource for such a purpose. Services Trade Performance Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Mdm Chair, I would like to speak about Singapore's performance in services trade. The services sector's share of the economy has been rising. In recent quarters, with manufacturing in a recession and shedding jobs, it is the services sector that has held up the economy and prevented it from falling into a full-blown recession. One increasingly important aspect for the performance of the services sector is its exports.”
“Thank you, Mdm Chairperson. My question is directed to the Senior Minister of State. I am just following up on the high-key ICT issue. According to the CSNS, one of their recommendations was to implement make-up high-key ICTs. Can I just get an update from the Senior Minister of State how far SAF has gone into this? Because if I hear the Senior Minister of State correctly, it seems as if there may be difficulties in implementing this recommendation.”
“Also, are there refinements needed to the scheme? We also welcome the many advocates who support our National Service and defence movement in Singapore. These persons and organisations are representatives from businesses, institutions, individuals and even small and medium enterprise (SME) employees. How does MINDEF plan to continue to engage this important group of people and organisations and continue to strengthen our relationship with them into the future? Recognition in NS System”
“Training Safety Mdm Chairperson, one of the things that goes under the radar for many Singaporeans is the intensity at which the SAF plans and trains for war, and for operations other than war. This is not surprising as a lot of our training is done overseas in view of the shortage of training grounds in Singapore, with the SAF going to places such as Germany, France, Australia, Thailand, India, Taiwan, Thailand, Brunei, New Zealand and the US, amongst others, in addition to ad hoc exercises with countries like China. It is inevitable that with such a high training tempo, accidents and mishaps can happen, in spite of the SAF's best efforts and the best efforts of the commanders. I would like to suggest that MINDEF consider ramping up publicity of its training safety efforts for the general public's information. A section or a part of all open houses and public outreach campaigns can be dedicated to this purpose. While the information may not attract as many viewers as a Leopard tank on display, it would be an important reflection of MINDEF's commitment to safe and tough training in a realistic environment. Support for NS Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef: Madam, defence of a nation is critical. For Singapore, our position at the crossroads of global trade and travel makes it a very strategic as well as a very vulnerable location. Thus, in defending our nation, every effort, every individual counts. The SAF Volunteer Corps (VC) was introduced to enable persons who are not eligible for National Service to come forward to serve. They are altruistic individuals and they act as our defence ambassadors, doing so voluntarily. Can MINDEF update us on the initial batches of the Volunteer Corps? What has the experience been training them?”
“Mdm Chairperson, the NS training system has come a long way, helped in no small part by MINDEF's readiness to take on board the inputs of NSmen and their families. It bears repeating that NSmen are frontline soldiers and training must be taken seriously. However, for some soldiers, there are some areas of the NS training cycle that can be improved, subject to operational and budgetary exigencies. One suggestion is to consider how more NSmen can be deployed to the NS units more quickly than before; ideally not more than two years after their operationally-ready date. This would have the advantage of ensuring that the fitness levels of NSmen remain relatively high with a less steep physical training curve when preparing for the Individual Physical Proficiency Tests (IPPTs) or in-camp trainings (ICTs). Secondly, I would like to seek an update with regard to the mismatch between high and low-key ICTs for some NSmen. Some clock many low-key ICTs and fewer high-key ones, leading to a long wait before they are emplaced on MINDEF's reserve list. To what extent have SAF NS units been able to implement make-up high-key ICTs as recommended by the Committee to Strengthen National Service (CSNS)? Finally, MINDEF has been generous towards NSmen over the years, topping up our Central Provident Fund (CPF) accounts through our NS journey. However, in view of the renewed impetus towards lifelong learning and particularly SkillsFuture, can I ask MINDEF, when it next reviews its NS policies, to consider topping up the accounts of NSmen with additional SkillsFuture credits through the course of their NS training cycle in recognition of their lifelong commitment towards National Service?”
“These are all major concerns for nations, including Singapore. National militaries around the world are all on high alert. How does MINDEF ensure our armed forces stay relevant and attuned to the changing security environment and climate, with the background of all these challenges? How prepared are we to respond to such threats as a small nation with a small army? What are the other roles our personnel can play to help step up deterrence levels?”
“In fact, it is noteworthy that the section on MINDEF comprises only eight pages of the Government's expenditure control document for financial year (FY) 2016. In contrast, the section on the Ministry of Law, a far smaller Ministry budget-wise, has more than 40 pages long. There is no requirement for MINDEF to release any secret information in the prospective White Paper. But the current state of affairs is more than opaque, especially in an economic environment post-SG50, which ought to be marked by greater fiscal prudence in light of multiple national priorities, all worthy of equal consideration. A White Paper will put into perspective MINDEF's mission and requirements the one hand, and its budgetary needs on the other, in the context of the needs of a small state. Finally, Mdm Chairperson, some years ago, the Taiwanese even released a comic book version of their white paper to cultivate an interest in military service among young readers. While I am not suggesting a need to do this, the point is that a White Paper offers great flexibility for MINDEF to determine how best to get its message out. The Japanese experience with white papers is quite telling, as it moves from a limited paper in 2015 to a much more comprehensive one last year. A MINDEF White Paper can be even used to showcase the seriousness MINDEF takes in its safety regime, something I will talk about in my next cut. Security Climate and Role of SAF Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Madam, we live in an interconnected world, plagued by issues of terrorism, security threats, cyberattacks, technological warfare and many other undesirable activities. Not a month passes without some blasts, wars, disputes somewhere, which affect many innocent citizens.”
“Mdm Chairperson, over a number of years, the publication of Defence White Papers has become an increasing phenomenon in the Asia Pacific region. China issued its first one in 1998 and Japan in 2005. When informing members of the public about the immediate security environment, the strategic direction of the military and its core mission, such white papers are effective in answering why there is a need to have a strong and determined force that is able to defend the sovereignty of the country. However, what is sometimes not so well understood is the impact such white papers can have on improving and building confidence and trust among countries. In fact, before the latest 2016 Australian defence white paper was launched, Australia briefed China and Indonesia – two key partners – about its intention. In an S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) commentary this year, a local researcher noted that Australia's 2016 white paper sent a strong positive signal to Southeast Asia and potentially contributes to the region's stability and peace. More than a decade ago, the ASEAN Regional Forum suggested that defence white papers be published and exchanged. It was quite telling that the former Minister for Defence, Mr Lee Boon Yang, in 1995, quoted verbatim a section of the Australian defence white paper in this House, as a measure of the good relations between the two countries. It is my view that the wider publication of such initiatives through a white paper would serve MINDEF's interests, both nationally and internationally. MINDEF, as the largest consumer of the national Budget, will always be queried about the nature and scale of its defence expenditure. These demands will grow and are not likely to abate in the years to come.”
“Last year, the Minister for Foreign Affairs confirmed that China had indicated its willingness to work on COC and that Singapore's task is to focus on making sure how parties engage with each other on the high seas. To this end, what progress has been made on the full implementation of the Declaration of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), including cooperative projects between ASEAN and China? What is China's position on the DOC currently and has it changed, given that it has previously stressed that the DOC should precede COC, even if ASEAN's position is that both are not sequential and can be addressed together? Finally, at the 7th ASEAN Defence Ministers' Meeting, the ASEAN partners suggested some measures to promote stable military-to-military relations in the South China Sea, including a "no first use of force" agreement among claimant states, in line with the intent of the articles of the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, as suggested by Vietnam. Brunei suggested establishing hotlines to reduce tensions and misunderstandings. Can the Ministry confirm if such proposals have been implemented and whether China has been invited to join these initiatives? US-Singapore Relations”
“Mr Chairman, the tensions in the South China Sea appear to have taken a turn for the worse in 2016, manifested most acutely by the timing of China's deployment of an air defence unit on the disputed Woody Island, precisely when the inaugural ASEAN-US Summit in the US was taking place earlier in February this year. In addition, with the Permanent Court of Arbitration's ruling on the case between the Philippines and China on China's Page: 106 claims over much of the South China Sea, defined by a nine-dash line – which is expected to be released very soon – questions on the extent and legitimacy of China's claims are likely to come to the fore again, raising temperatures once more. The month of March, in fact, has seen a perceptible rise in the number of commentaries and even editorials in the local press, particularly over the last month, that mirror these heightened tensions. These developments and many others before it are taking place when Singapore is into its first year as coordinator of ASEAN-China dialogue relations. The role is a significant one as ASEAN's failure to issue a joint communique at the 45th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting in 2012 was due to developments in the South China Sea. To that end, the Ministry has wasted no time in getting down to work as coordinator, proposing a Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES), in the spirit of Singapore's reputation on this matter as an honest broker and its reputation as a constructive player in the international arena. What has been ASEAN and China's response to CUES? Separately, in 2013, the Ministry confirmed that ASEAN and China were still at the stage where they were "talking about talks" on COC.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would like to ask the Minister with regard to this announcement of the change of position vis-a-vis the collection of data from public transport video cameras and ERP systems, and I would assume ERP2.0 as well, to track the travel pattern of potential suspects, for example, can the Minister please describe to the House how the Ministry will ensure that the data will only be used for the purpose for which it was collected?”
“How can Singaporeans be inoculated against the deviant teachings of such groups? Has there been a requirement to increase the resources and manpower allocated to MHA as a result of this new wave of terrorism? Finally, can the Ministry also share how the Ministry's upcoming SG Secure initiative will be different from its predecessor, the Community Engagement Programme, to better equip and Page: 48 prepare Singaporeans and foreign workers in this new environment of terrorism?”
“Mdm Chairperson, the scourge of terrorism does not appear to be going away anytime soon. As quickly as Al Qaeda affiliates, such as Jemaah Islamiyah, faded from the public eye in the decade or so after 9/11 and after the death of Osama bin Laden, the place appears to have been taken over by ISIS-inspired ideologues with shocking rapidity. It is known that some individuals from Singapore, even our neighbouring countries, have sought to join ISIS in the Middle East and a lot of effort has been put in by Singapore to prevent not just its nationals, but Indonesian citizens, for example, from transiting through our borders to potentially join ISIS ranks. Unlike the Jemaah Islamiyah movement, there appears to be different opinions with regard to the level of threat posed by ISIS in Southeast Asia. The Prime Minister, in his recent trip to the US, alluded to the fact that ISIS has a battalion-size Southeast Asian arm called Katibah Nusantara. An RSIS commentary last year also reported that about 30 different Southeast Asian groups have pledged allegiance to ISIS. The Executive Director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies which organises the Shangri-La Dialogue in a recent Jane's Defence Weekly article was quoted to have said the threat of Katibah Nusantara seeking territory in Southeast Asia was exaggerated, even if there is some danger nonetheless. In addition, Katibah Nusantara does not appear in the media and in the public consciousness as often as Jemaah Islamiyah did previously. Can the Minister share details about the evolution and threat posed by Katibah Nusantara and other groups aligned to ISIS and how it has impacted upon MHA's work and if there have been any differences in approach in dealing with such groups from the Jemaah Islamiyah experience?”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the answer. Can I confirm if there are any plans to increase the number of nominations for these three Town Councils, considering that they have the highest number of eligible units?”
“In this context, a deeper and more sophisticated public discussion on fiscal prudence, sustainability and accountability of Budget expenditure in a more ambiguous future becomes more and not less urgent. It would also, I hazard, have the parallel effect of engendering a more inclusive citizenry that is rooted to Singapore's long-term success. Mdm Speaker, I support the Budget. 1.57 pm”
“It would also be important for any exercise in fiscal prudence to distinguish and incentivise activities that actually create something tangible that have a real trickle-down effect as opposed to economic initiatives that just "rotate around the high-finance microcosm enriching the 1% as they buy and sell existing assets to one another, bidding up their value, while failing to invest in research, products, jobs or innovation" – an apt descriptive which I read in a recent TIME magazine article that reviewed a new US primetime television show, titled "Billions". Mdm Speaker, even as our businesses are incentivised to transform, they must keep Singaporeans at the centre of their efforts. To this end, the Industry Transformation Programme should identify and thereafter even prejudice firms that are what the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) calls "double-weak firms" – weak in having a Singaporean Core and weak in their commitment to fair hiring practices and the development of Singaporeans. Likewise, these companies should be restricted from benefiting from corporate income tax rebates or tapping on the grants that go up on the business grants portal that is to be established in the fourth quarter of this year. An inclusive Singapore must be underwritten by Singapore-based companies that support the employment prospects of Singaporeans. In conclusion, Mdm Speaker, in a recent book titled, "Industries of the Future" by Alec Ross, the former innovation adviser to Hilary Clinton, portends a future where medical technology, robotics, coding, big data and so forth, will make many jobs redundant, amongst other interesting predictions.”
“For example, it would be helpful for the Government to set out how much the Productivity and Innovation Credit scheme (PIC) has actually improved productivity numbers or even spurred innovation, even as this year's Budget heralds a reduction of PIC payouts going forward. This is relevant, as even the Government has acknowledged that some companies have used their PIC credits to buy equipment they do not need. Fiscal sustainability would also require accounting for the extent of such leakage and unintended consequences as well. The lessons learnt from the shortcomings of the PIC scheme should be transferred to the Budget's announcement of the three-year $400 million Automation Support Package, specifically with regard to grants, which assist in the roll-out of new automation projects and investment allowances. This would ensure that the technologies introduced actually improve productivity as envisaged. Moving forward, and specifically on the Budget's announcement of the $4.5 billion Industry Transformation Programme with more than 20 sectors earmarked for development, it would be worthwhile to consider how companies and sectors that do the most to raise productivity, improve skills and innovation as well as promoting internationalisation can benefit more from taxpayer dollars than those who do not. One way to effect this differentiation is to consider a higher cap on corporate income tax rebates than the current $20,000 cap for companies that record real productivity gains. For example, the cap can be progressively lowered or even removed completely for companies that do not meet the policy objectives of the scheme.”
“Many Singaporeans have in the past suggested tweaking Workfare to raise the cash component. Currently, a 50-year-old employee earning $1,800 on Workfare gets an additional $9 in cash and $13 in CPF contributions every month, with the amount payable every quarter, subject to the number of months he or she remains employed. However, an important consideration in the context of fiscal prudence, and understanding such permanent schemes better could be, for example, an exercise that compares raising the WIS payout amounts as compared against the initiative announced in this year's budget which increases the income eligibility threshold from $1,900 to $2,000. How many additional Singaporeans would benefit by this threshold rise and is there scope to further raise the payouts under WIS, and if so, what would be the specific impact on the Budget, and would it be wise? Such enquiries will make the public better appreciate the trade-offs and operationalise the meaning of fiscal prudence. A second trend that often repeats itself prior to the Budget debate is the wishes of specific industries or industry leaders who call for more reliefs or taxpayer support. What we do not see much of is the debate about whether some companies have grown to expect the equivalence of constant assistance or "welfare" from the State, without the same scrutiny extended to permanent schemes for the needy or less well-off. Like permanent schemes that help individual Singaporeans, a fuller public discussion on fiscal prudence should also extend to companies and industries, and enquire whether Budget initiatives indeed achieve the policy outcomes that they were intended for.”
“To put things in some perspective, the State collects $2.2 billion a year in gaming revenue. Our vulnerable elderly deserve to retire with dignity. This must be a central social objective of the Singapore system. No discussion of financial prudence can escape the important behavioural question of ensuring our society retains a positive work ethic with permanent schemes like Silver Support and Workfare. However, this question should be posed with a sense of not just perspective, but also proportion, in view of the demographic transition in Singapore and the structural changes that come with economic transformation, both of which will become more apparent in the years to come. How can we better approach a discussion on the Budget going forward? Firstly, the evolution of technology and data analytics ought to make discussions on Budget projection generate more light rather than heat. In the same way, the Ministry of Defense (MINDEF) human resource planners can project with sufficient granularity the number of men that will serve National Service (NS) in about 20 years' time, and as a consequence, determine the force size and structure to a reasonable degree, a richer public debate on permanent schemes like Silver Support can take shape if we assess the sustainability of such schemes with a long-term perspective in mind. This would help the public better understand the overall costs and sustainability of such schemes rather than leave it to conjecture. For example, a more coherent and holistic public debate on the pros and cons of potentially expanding Workfare can also take place if the public is presented with tools to better understand how much such permanent initiatives are likely to cost years down the road.”
“Mdm Speaker, this is the first Budget that allows the Government to tap on Temasek's Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) alongside the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and GIC, presenting the Government with a cumulative total of $14.7 billion. This is a substantial increase of about 48% from the NIRC of $9.9 billion at the Government's disposal last year and has given this Government more leeway and flexibility to implement its plans, with the $3.4 billion surplus as well. Mdm Speaker, the focus of my speech is to persuade the Government to consider a deeper discussion of fiscal prudence and the trade-offs in determining our Budget priorities. By doing so, we can have a richer discussion on the Budget and my speech will seek to provide some suggestions on the contours of such a discussion. As with almost all Budget announcements made over the last few years in particular, it is usually followed by a discussion in some quarters, especially in commentaries and forum pages, about whether the Government is turning populist, if welfare is taking root in Singapore, or a combination of similar themes. Very seldom are fears of welfare accompanied by a look at the overall fiscal state of affairs and both in the short and long term. The additional details in this Budget about the Silver Support package exemplify a recognition by the Government that there are many Singaporeans – more than 140,000 of them, in fact – who are not adequately equipped for retirement and live precarious lives, perhaps, not only physically, but more significantly, even mentally. The total expenditure for this year's Budget comes up to $73 billion. The $330 million expended on the Silver Support Package will rise in the years to come because of our demographic profile.”
“I am suggesting that if the upgrading has not started, is there a prospect of locating the merged school at the Bedok North Secondary site because there is also a football field there? If I remember correctly, I believe it is an artificial turf, it is already turfed, and there is an indoor badminton hall. So, a number of facilities are already available for the community also to use. There could be savings accrued, rather than upgrading a school when the advantages are already pre-located at Bedok North Secondary School.”
“Another supplementary question, Mdm Speaker. And I thank the Minister of State for answering the questions. In view of the fact that upgrading is going to be carried out at Damai Secondary School, to be completed by the end of 2018, is there any prospect of a change of decision to move it back to Bedok North Secondary and what is the likelihood of that eventuality, since the Minister of State does recognise that there are advantages to have the merged school at the present location of Bedok North Secondary School?”
“Mdm Speaker, I have three supplementary questions for the Minister of State. Firstly, in view of the opening of the Kaki Bukit Downtown Line station in 2017 directly outside Bedok North Secondary School, would it not make the school easier to access for students and teachers, notwithstanding the larger number of bus services, which is not significant, rather than to have the school at Damai Secondary. Secondly, does the current Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) masterplan envisage a different use of the land at Bedok North Secondary School, and if not, what plan does the Ministry have for the school compound after 2018? I understand that it is still classified as an area reserved for educational facilities. Thirdly, how important a factor is the convenience of students and teachers, when MOE decides on the location of merged schools?”
“Mdm Speaker, just one supplementary question for the Minister. I understand that there are some lifts for which certain parts have become obsolete. This obsolescence takes place well before the recommended 28-year guideline for lift upgrading or replacement. Would the Ministry consider introducing a lift upgrading programme or considering a subsidy for this sort of lifts?”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. The Workers' Party wishes to record its objection to clause 5.”