S Iswaran
Singapore
“The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) has incorporated the requirements of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) 2020 regulation in its Prevention of Pollution of the Sea (Air) Regulations 2022. The Regulations are applicable to Singapore-registered ships and all other ships while they are in Singapore waters.”
“The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) plans to progressively roll out the charging infrastructure for electric harbour craft operations in the Port of Singapore from 2025.”
“Since 2018, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has imposed minimum bicycle parking provisions covering different types of developments. The requirements are determined by multiple factors, including the developments’ use, location and gross floor area (GFA).”
“I had addressed similar Parliamentary Questions by Mr Gerald Giam on 29 November 2022 and 10 January 2023, as well as in my Ministerial Statement on 8 May 2023. The Member can refer to these past answers and statement as there has been no material change in the allocation of Certificates of Entitlement.”
“To encourage the uptake of electric cars, the Government has rolled out the Electric Vehicle Early Adoption Incentive and enhanced Vehicular Emissions Scheme. When taken together, it provides up to $45,000 off the Additional Registration Fee of an electric car upon registration.”
“The Land Transport Authority studies all potential changes to the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) system carefully, including conducting sensitivity analysis where appropriate.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,300 lines we hold for S Iswaran, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 18 of 46.
“Mr Speaker, the investments made by companies is commercially confidential. I am not privy to their details nor able to give the Member a response. Secondly, in terms of whether there are any subsidies or grants by the Government for investments made in the state, the answer is no. 1.30 pm”
“For example, coarse language must not be used in children's programmes, and scenes depicting the consumption of liquor or tobacco products are also disallowed unless an educational point is being made. For children's programmes, sponsors are not permitted to incorporate their names into programme titles or segments, nor superimpose logos or signs into programmes.”
“Over the last three years, free-to-air channels broadcasted about 90 hours of children's programmes per week. Of these, six hours were in Chinese, 78 hours in English, three hours in Malay and four hours in Tamil. Over the same time period, an average of more than 70% of children’s programmes per week were educational in nature. Some examples of locally-produced educational programmes include: (a) Junction Tree: Singapore's first bilingual series for preschoolers, which uses vocabulary-based learning strategies and original songs to make mother tongue learning fun for young children. The programme was produced in consultation with educators and language experts; (b) Shahrukh and Warsan: An International Emmy-nominated history-themed Malay drama series about two children travelling back to the days of Singapore's founding fathers; and (c) Train Your Brain: A Mandarin, info-educational series that adopts an interactive approach and experiments to explore the way the brain works. Mediacorp has made children's free-to-air content accessible on Toggle. To better engage young viewers on this digital platform, Mediacorp has consolidated children's programmes across the four languages onto the Toggle Kids' page. Toggle offers a safe digital environment that parents can trust. Mediacorp has also improved the site such that children can navigate Toggle easily. Content on free-to-air television channels are self-regulated by the broadcaster based on Codes issued by the Info-communications Media Development Authority. The Content Code for Nationwide Managed Transmission Linear Television Services Code requires children's programmes on free-to-air channels to be wholesome and promote good social and moral values, and respect for law and order.”
“Specific to enterprises, CSA has developed publicly available cybersecurity resources, such as the Be Safe Online Handbook, which outlines steps that enterprises should take to strengthen their cyber defences and enhance digital risk management. School-going youths are also an important target group to establish good cyber hygiene practices from an early age. For example, CSA has collaborated with the Personal Data Protection Commission to produce a series of Cyber Safety activity books which have benefited four cohorts of Primary 5 students, with more than 200,000 copies distributed. Also, with the support of the Ministry of Education, CSA has developed a Cybersecurity Awareness Skit, which is expected to reach about 24,000 students at close to 40 secondary schools. Even as the Government continues to do more to create a safer cyberspace, organisations and individuals must take responsibility for their own cybersecurity. Everyone has a part to play in safeguarding our digital domain.”
“In cyberspace, our defences are only as strong as our weakest link. Cybersecurity is, hence, a collective responsibility shared by the Government, private sector, individuals and the community. To enable this, the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA) has conducted various targeted engagement and outreach efforts to members of the public, enterprises and students to promote cybersecurity awareness and the adoption of good cybersecurity practices. Every year, CSA runs nationwide cybersecurity awareness campaigns to highlight the importance of cybersecurity and provide cyber hygiene tips. These include conducting roadshows in the heartlands and talks in schools and community centres. The 2018 cybersecurity awareness campaign called "Cyber Tips 4 You", promoted four cyber hygiene practices: (a) use a strong password and two-factor authentication; (b) use antivirus software; (c) update software as soon as possible; and (d) watch out for signs of phishing. In addition, a Cyber Savvy vending machine has been making its rounds at the public libraries since November 2018. Library-goers can learn about good cybersecurity practices and win a small gift by attempting a quiz. More than 60,000 quiz attempts have been recorded so far. CSA will deploy more machines for outreach in community, commercial and school settings. The Singapore Computer Emergency Response Team (SingCERT) also issues advisories to alert the public and enterprises on cyber threats and provides advice on remediation and preventive measures. Members of the public and enterprises can sign up for advisories at www.csa.gov.sg/singcert.”
“To help organisations, including NGOs, improve their cybersecurity posture, CSA enhances cybersecurity awareness and promotes good cybersecurity practices through channels, such as the GoSafeOnline portal (www.csa.gov.sg/gosafeonline) and the Singapore Computer Emergency Response Team's (SingCERT's) portal (www.csa.gov.sg/singcert). At the VWO sector level, agencies, such as the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and the Office of the Commissioner of Charities (COC), play an important role in building up capabilities among VWOs to protect confidential data and mitigate cybersecurity risks. For example, some VWOs that administer programmes that are funded by MSF use an integrated case management system that protects clients’ data in accordance with Government IT security policies, while COC is working with potential partners to provide subsidised IT security audit services for charities, including VWOs. The Government is committed to helping NGOs, such as VWOs, establish resilient IT security frameworks to safeguard confidential data. NGOs and their senior leadership must also play their part to ensure that the risks in relation to data protection and cybersecurity are adequately addressed. This is necessary so that they can continue to uphold the high level of trust and confidence that their stakeholders have placed in them.”
“On 8 May 2019, the Police and the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) were informed of a ransomware incident on the Singapore Red Cross' (SRC's) blood donor database. The database contained the details of about 4,300 donors who booked appointments to donate blood via SRC's webpage, including their name, contact number and email address. According to SRC, its investigations have found that the perpetrator exploited a weak administrator password that left the webpage vulnerable to unauthorised access. Nevertheless, investigations by the Police and PDPC are ongoing. Voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs), such as SRC, are non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that provide services that benefit the community, and hold data about donors, volunteers and beneficiaries. It is, therefore, important that NGOs put in place the necessary data protection and cybersecurity safeguards to maintain the confidentiality of such data. While NGOs do not need to comply with Government information technology (IT) security guidelines, there are national-level and sector-level frameworks and resources to assist them in enhancing the protection of their systems and data. At the national level, all private sector organisations, including NGOs, are subject to requirements under the Personal Data Protection Act. PDPC also provides such organisations with guidelines and guides on how to comply with their data protection obligations. Examples include the guides issued by PDPC and the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA) to assist organisations in securing personal data on electronic medium and managing data breaches.”
“Additional digital literacy skilling support is also provided through initiatives, such as the Silver Infocomm Junctions, as well as Digital Clinics. Our support programmes are regularly refined to keep up with the needs of low-income families.”
“The Home Access Programme and National Education University Personal Computer (NEU PC) Plus Programme are programmes by the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) to support low-income households to have access to and use of digital technologies. The Home Access Programme provides two years of subsidised broadband to the bottom 10% of households without school-going children. More than 12,000 households have benefited from the programme since September 2014, contributing to 98%1 of resident households having Internet access at home. In a survey conducted in 2016, nine in 10 households indicated that they have benefited from the programme, and seven in 10 stated that they were excited to try out new technology and were confident in using the Internet. Another round of survey is being conducted this year. The NEU PC Plus Programme provides a subsidised PC with three years of free broadband to the bottom 20% of households with school-going children or with persons with disabilities. More than 40,000 low-income households have benefited from the programme since November 2006, contributing to 98%2 of resident households with school-going children having computer access at home. Nine in 10 households indicated in a 2018 survey that the programme has benefited them. Seven in 10 primary school students and eight in 10 secondary school students also shared that the programme has aided their learning process and helped them to complete their school work independently. Beyond the provision of broadband access and PCs, there is also a need to equip individuals with digital literacy skills. To support this need, beneficiaries of the Home Access Programme are offered introductory training to acquire basic digital skills.”
“The Government has also adopted the Digital Service Standards to ensure that digital Government services are inclusive by design, and accessible to groups, such as the visually impaired. These standards were recently enhanced and published in October 2018, and we regularly review them to ensure that all Singaporeans can benefit. We are committed to continually ensure that our Smart Nation journey is inclusive to all Singaporeans, including persons with disabilities, and we will do so by working with the people, public and private sectors. One such platform is the cross-sectoral workgroup that the Ministry of Social and Family Development launched this year to promote independent living through technology and design, in the home setting as well as within the community. The workgroup is co-chaired by the Minister of State for Social and Family Development, Mr Sam Tan, and the President of SPD, Ms Chia Yong Yong.”
“A key priority of Singapore's Smart Nation strategy is to ensure all Singaporeans can participate in and benefit from our digital transformation journey. This is reflected in the Digital Readiness Blueprint that the Ministry of Communications and Information launched last year. Over the years, the Government has ensured that vulnerable segments of our society are included in our digital transformation journey. Initiatives, such as the Infocomm Media Development Authority's (IMDA's) National Education and Workforce Personal Computer (NEU PC) Plus and Enable Information Technology (IT) programmes, and the Assistive Technology Fund administered by SG Enable, provide support for persons with disabilities in their use of technology. For persons with disabilities living in a low-income household, the NEU PC Plus Programme enables them to buy a PC at a subsidised rate, while the Assistive Technology Fund subsidises the cost of assistive technology for purposes, such as early intervention, education and training. In addition, the Enable IT programme encourages the adoption of Infocomm and Assistive Technologies (IT/AT) to enable independent living. We regularly refine and update our initiatives and are ready to tap on opportunities to deliver better outcomes. The development of assistive technology is such an opportunity that has the potential to make big improvements to the way persons with disabilities complete tasks and activities. As a new initiative to enhance the Enable IT programme, IMDA recently supported the Society for the Physically Disabled (SPD), a charity which supports people with disabilities of all ages, to set up four IT/AT satellite loan libraries to better provide polytechnic students with access to IT/AT.”
“My Ministry and the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) have been working closely with SingPost to improve its operations and service delivery. In February 2019, SingPost announced immediate measures to improve service quality, such as extending delivery hours to Saturdays, hiring more postmen, and reducing delivery of non-core services, such as advertisement mail. SingPost recently announced further plans to improve its service delivery. These include increasing the number of postmen to better manage their load, having dedicated teams to conduct doorstep deliveries to improve efficiency, and extending doorstep delivery to evening hours to increase their success rate. SingPost will invest in technology and automation to increase the efficiency of postal processes and support its postmen better. There are early signs of improvement. SingPost has seen a 30% drop in the number of letter and parcel delivery complaints in May 2019 compared to April 2019. Across post offices, SingPost has also observed an improvement in customers' satisfaction, with its customer experience score improving from 8.2 in December 2018 to 8.8, on a 10-point scale, in May 2019. While SingPost's efforts to address its service delivery issues are in the right direction, these would need to be sustained. My Ministry and IMDA will continue to hold SingPost accountable for delivery, even as we work with them on longer-term improvements, such as enhancing our postal infrastructure.”
“The Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) is the result of a lengthy and thorough process of consultation and public discussion. The Ministry of Communications and Information and the POFMA Office have been working closely with colleagues from other Ministries to put in place processes and workflows to execute the law when it comes into effect later this year. Ministers, supported by their officers, have the requisite expertise in their diverse domains to assess, firstly, whether a statement is false, and secondly, whether it is in the public interest to act against it. The determination of "falsehood" is well-established in law, and Ministries can seek views from the Attorney-General's Chambers on such points of jurisprudence if in doubt. Ministries will also be supported by the POFMA Office, which will provide technical advice to ensure consistency in the implementation of the Act. POFMA will not affect regular conversations and interaction, nor honest participation in public discourse by citizens and civil society. If someone unknowingly shares a falsehood, they may be asked to carry a correction if public interest is involved. Criminal prosecution will be reserved for malicious actors who intentionally create or spread falsehoods, knowing that it can harm society. The Government will work with and support partners in their information and media literacy programmes to ensure that people have the instincts and skills to look out for falsehoods and be circumspect when they share information online. A discerning and well-informed public is the best defence against online falsehoods.”
“I have previously stated that our plan is to begin the rollout of 5th Generation (5G) infrastructure next year. As of now, we expect to continue as planned with the deployment of 5G in Singapore. Meanwhile, we are closely monitoring developments, consulting stakeholders, evaluating the technical aspects, and piloting use cases for 5G. The Infocomm Media Development Authority has been seeking the industry’s views through a public consultation which concludes tomorrow. These initiatives and their findings will inform our decision and help us to work with the telecommunications companies and other stakeholders to commence the rollout of a resilient and secure 5G infrastructure in a timely manner.”
“By vesting in Portfolio Ministers the authority to issue directives and providing for judicial oversight, the Bill strikes the best possible balance between the needs for swift action, accountability for decisions and the requisite domain expertise to make quick assessments. In drafting this legislation, we have engaged the tech companies and other stakeholders and sought to incorporate their concerns where possible. We also continue to have constructive discussions with the tech industry on a broader range of issues of mutual interest. Ultimately, the scourge of online falsehoods is an ever-present and evolving threat. That is why legislation is not enough. We need a concerted whole-of-nation effort, from citizens, industry, stakeholders and Government and, in particular, a well-informed and discerning citizenry is the first and most important line of defence against online falsehoods. I hope that all Singaporeans will join us in this important effort, give their full support to the intent of this legislation and the impact it seeks to have in raising the quality and integrity of discourse in the digital realm and help to raise the digital readiness and strengthen the Digital Defence capabilities of our society. [Applause.]”
“To do so, we will continue to support ground-up efforts by interested members of the community and student groups and invest in resources and efforts to build up digital literacy. There have been many community efforts already in this regard. Ms Joan Pereira and Dr Intan Mokhtar spoke about the need for media literacy for the young, and digital literacy for the elderly. Various Government agencies, such as the National Library Board, Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Defence, provide information literacy resources to students, adults and seniors. The Government also launched Digital Defence as the sixth pillar of Total Defence this year, with the call to be secure, alert and responsible online. The Media Literacy Council runs the Better Internet Campaign and provides seed funding for youth-led initiatives to address digital literacy and cyber safety and security. There are also collaborations among our local universities, tech companies and media companies to enhance media and information literacy, such as the hackathon called, quite dramatically, “Fake News Must Die” and it was held in late 2017 supported by Google, our institutes of higher learning and mainstream media. Over time and taken together, these measures will empower citizens to make informed decisions on their consumption of information and to be more discerning on multifaceted issues, thereby helping to grow an informed citizenry. Sir, let me conclude by emphasising a few key points. First, it is abundantly clear that we need a new and fit-for-purpose set of regulatory tools to deal with the challenge of online falsehoods in the digital age. This legislation is a pragmatic response to that challenge, providing for a set of calibrated measures.”
“Mr Seah Kian Peng asked quite eloquently yesterday whether we are asking too much of the proposed legislation and too little of ourselves. He raises a very important point. Amid the heat and dust generated by this vigorous debate on this Bill, we must not lose sight of the larger point and, that is, legislation is necessary but it is by no means sufficient in the fight against online falsehoods. Ultimately, our first and most important line of defence against online falsehoods is a well-informed and discerning citizenry, equipped with tools to combat online falsehoods. The SC highlighted the role of trusted fact-checking initiatives in combatting deliberate online falsehoods, and recommended that different media organisations, and partners from other industries, consider establishing a coalition in Singapore to debunk falsehoods swiftly and credibly, as well as to provide support to such fact-checking initiatives. The Government agrees that it is important to have such fact-checking initiatives in society. However, such initiatives should go beyond fact-checking to ensure that the discourse is authentic and responsible, and citizens are well-informed of the principles of engagement. Over time, through the collaborative efforts of different parties and agencies, we envisage a tighter nexus between the different entities, including academia and journalists in Singapore, so that high-quality information can reach the general public to engender greater understanding of current affairs and complex issues. These efforts will also be aligned with the Government’s commitment to support the growth of a robust and vibrant information ecosystem, with a variety of entities contributing to the overall effort.”
“The Competent Authority will regularly review these Codes of Practice and Annexes to ensure that they keep pace with developments in technology, market environment and user behaviour and preferences. Prof Lim Sun Sun said that we should approach these tech companies under a "collaborate framework". Where there are falsehoods that affect the public interest, defensive action should and must be taken and we need to have regulatory tools to deal with the problem. However, there is also scope for collaboration. And that is why we have sought to deeply engage the tech companies throughout this process. Ms Irene Quay asked if we could consider legislative routes taken by other countries, where companies are tasked to proactively monitor and filter content. I would say in response that this is neither necessary nor desirable. We do not want to outsource the responsibility for our national and public interest to private companies. Neither is it necessarily even in the interest of the tech companies. Faced with broad demands and heavy penalties, companies would be compelled to be excessively cautious. It also increases compliance costs. For example, it has been reported that following the passing of the German law, one in six of Facebook moderators is now based in Germany. Left to independently interpret Government objectives, companies would be accused of being politicised and biased by their users. Since 2018, Twitter and Facebook have been dogged by accusations of "shadow-banning" conservative opinions. In contrast, our approach is for the Ministers to assume the responsibility. They will issue unambiguous and detailed directions for the companies then to carry out. I want to turn to non-legislative measures.”
“The tech companies are an important part of Singapore's business ecosystem, especially our digital economy. Our value proposition to tech companies is anchored on several factors and that includes our political stability, our rule of law, conducive business environment, international connectivity and our skilled workforce. This is why the major tech companies have continued to expand their operations in Singapore in the past years. We continue to have regular engagements with the technology companies on a broad range of issues pertaining to investments, research and development, talent development and other collaborations of mutual interest. With respect to this Bill, our officials have been working with the tech companies that are most affected to incorporate their comments and feedback and, where possible, work together on solutions. We have sought to incorporate their feedback into the main body of this Bill. We are working with the tech companies in developing the Codes of Practice, and the Competent Authority will also work with the intermediaries to develop company-specific Annexes to the Codes. And this is important. Why? Because these Annexes will clarify how each intermediary will operationalise the broad outcomes, principles and objectives of the Codes, taking into account the unique characteristics of each intermediary’s platform, its existing systems and measures to combat disinformation, technical capabilities, as well as effectiveness. In other words, some of these will have to be customised because of the nature of the different intermediaries, and those will be captured in the Annexes to these Codes of Practice.”
“Among other things this would require intermediaries to use reasonable verification measures to prevent inauthentic accounts or bots from being created or used for malicious activities. Second, these Codes will enhance the transparency of political advertising. Intermediaries will have to ensure that political advertisements disclose who the source is. This encompasses Election advertising and advertisements on issues of public interest or controversy in the Singapore context, including those pertaining to race or religion. Third, the practice will also require deprioritising online falsehoods. This will ensure that credible content is given prominence and/or falsehoods are prevented from gaining prominence. Ms Joan Pereira has asked about the Codes and how they were being developed. The scope of these Codes of Practice takes reference from international norms, including the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, as well as, we have been having consultations with companies and international experts. All of these will inform the final formulation of the Codes of Practice. The implementation of the Codes will be targeted and graduated, and the focus will be on ensuring that intermediaries have adequate systems and processes in place. When breaches occur, the Competent Authority will consider factors, such as the seriousness of the breach, whether there has been a pattern of similar breaches, and whether it reflects systemic deficiency in processes, and whether intermediaries' efforts to remedy the breaches are adequate. There has been a question, and some Members have articulated this: how or whether this Bill will affect Singapore's attractiveness as a technology hub and our relationship with the tech companies.”
“So, we will establish a new POFMA office within IMDA which will be the Competent Authority. As enumerated in section 6(2), a key function of the Competent Authority is to give effect to the instructions of the Ministers. IMDA's experience in administering BA and other content regulation policies, and its regular interaction with the media and technology companies will be relevant to the administration of this Bill. This POFMA Office will support the Portfolio Ministers with technical advice on the precedents, the types of levers available, the feasibility and the effectiveness. The Competent Authority will thus help provide consistency across the Government in the implementation of the Bill. This office will also work with technology companies on the Codes of Practice and monitor compliance with the directions and Codes. Apart from the measures proposed in the legislation, there is also a need to address issues upstream. Upstream safeguards like authenticity of users and transparency of advertising are issues that technology companies are also trying to address in different ways. The more we can work with tech companies on such upstream systems and processes, the less we will need to take action downstream. To that end, clause 48 of the Bill empowers the Competent Authority to issue one or more Codes of Practice. These Codes will apply only to prescribed digital advertising and Internet intermediaries, and we are now developing them in consultation with these intermediaries. The Codes aim to, first, prevent and counter the misuse of online accounts where malicious actors act behind online anonymity.”
“I fail to understand how this encroaches on the rights of the individual, how it has this purported chilling effect that many Members of the Opposition claim. Certainly, given the safeguards and the due process that I have outlined, I do not see how this can be seen as Ministers having excessive powers. Mr Png Eng Huat also talked about the Election period. I do not know whether he has read section 52 of the Act. That section provides clearly for Alternative Authorities during the Election period. So, the Member's entire speech about conflicts of interest during the Election is addressed by that section because, during the Election period, the Ministers from different Ministries will appoint their Permanent Secretaries or the equivalent senior officials to act and exercise the authorities under this Bill. Sir, Prof Lim Sun Sun suggested that Ministers should nonetheless also be guided by independent advisory panels. There is nothing in the Bill that prevents Ministers from consulting and seeking views from experts outside of their Ministries, where necessary and the circumstances permit. In addition, certain broader powers, such as those to block funding and access to online locations under part 5 of the Bill, are given only to the Minister for Communications and Information as these decisions have broader implications, beyond individual Ministries, for Internet users, the industry and the digital infrastructure. Let me now turn to the Competent Authority. Under section 6(1), the Minister may appoint a Statutory Board or senior official as the Competent Authority. Hence, to administer the Bill, we intend to establish a new POFMA Office – it may not be the most literary elegance – but it is calling a spade a spade.”
“The individual – since we decide to focus on individuals, taking up the case made by Mr Low Thia Khiang and other Members of the WP –then has a choice: you comply with the Direction, or you disagree and you appeal to the Minister. You apply to the Minister for either a cancellation or a variation. If the Minister decides a Direction is still valid, then the individual can still appeal to the High Court within the prescribed period. Now, what then on the part of the Executive? If the individual does not comply with the Direction, the competent authority will commence investigations, or may commence investigations for non-compliance with the Direction under section 15 of this Act. Reasonable excuse is a defence to the criminal offence of not complying with the Direction. The outcome of the investigation will be presented to the Public Prosecutor in the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) for decision on prosecution. If the Public Prosecutor decides to proceed, the matter will be brought to the Courts, and the Court will then decide on guilt and penalties. So, this process is one where there is very clear due process. I fail to see how one can jump to the conclusion that Ministers are judge and jury, or indeed exercise nuclear options. Also, the Courts decide on the penalties, not the Ministers. And, the right to comment, that is the right to free speech, continues in the course of this process until and unless it is subjudice. In other words, the individual can, and other interested parties can, put up online commentary to say that: I am the subject of POFMA action, or as Prof Lim Sun Sun put it, "I am being POFMA-ed", and you can take it up as a commentary and discussion.”
“The Minister, supported by his Ministry's officials and resources, would have the requisite domain expertise to make an assessment and act quickly to stem the potential harm arising from an online falsehood. Accountability is ensured as aggrieved parties can take action in Court against the Minister's decision. They are also answerable in Parliament. Therefore, in assigning the powers under the Bill to Portfolio Ministers, the Bill, I humbly submit, appropriately and correctly locates authority with accountability, supported by the requisite knowledge and expertise to make expeditious decisions, which are essential when you are dealing with the virality of online falsehoods. I am, therefore, somewhat surprised by the allegations, bordering on the melodramatic, of some WP Members of Parliament who suggested that this Bill allows Ministers to arbitrarily decide what is true, to impose penalties on individuals, and to suppress any commentary. This is completely not the case. Let me break it down for Members. First, the primary focus of this Bill is not individual per se; it is actually the larger tech platforms. Having said that, content often originates because of individual action and, therefore, you cannot completely exempt it from the focus of this Bill. So, assume someone puts up something online that is a falsehood. The Minister – the Portfolio Minister – has to decide if it is false and if it is in the public interest to act against it. If so, he has to then decide to issue a Direction, whether it is a correction or takedown, depending on what is the appropriate course of action.”
“It will allow readers to make informed judgements, draw their own conclusions about the arguments that are being made and promote a more vigorous online discourse. As we have explained, the Disabling and Stop Communication Directions will only be used in extreme cases where there is a threat of serious harm. Some have expressed concerns whether the powers under the proposed legislation will be used judiciously. I would cite for Members' reference our experience with the BA about which there were similar concerns. Since the inception of the class licence scheme under the BA in 1996, IMDA has issued only 39 takedown notices. Members can do the math. It is slightly more than one a year on average. I think that is certainly not overreach. There has been much debate over who should wield the powers under this Bill. Sir, there are three main considerations behind the proposal in this Bill. Firstly, as many have spoken, we need swift action against an online falsehood, given their virality and potential to cause harm. Secondly, and I think this is crucial, consequently, we need deep domain knowledge to expeditiously assess whether there is an online falsehood, and if it is in the public interest to act. This is important, especially because online falsehoods can occur in domains as diverse as healthcare, finance or security. And if each of these cases we expect one single authority to render a judgement in a timely manner and take expeditious action, I think that is a very tall order. Finally, the third consideration is that there must be accountability for the exercise of these powers. I would argue that vesting the authority in Portfolio Ministers with the availability of judicial oversight, as proposed in the Bill, best meets all three considerations.”
“So, against this backdrop, we need new modes of engagement with the digital information landscape to ensure that our citizens are well-informed and equipped to navigate the vast and diverse online terrain, discern truth from falsehood and engage in meaningful discourse and make informed choices. Some Members have asked how today's tools fall short. Our present laws, which were mainly conceived in the era of print and broadcast media, were not designed to address the issue of online falsehoods. For example, there are powers under the Broadcasting Act (BA) which regulates all broadcast content to issue takedown notices and block websites for public interest or security reasons. However, in administering the Act, IMDA has found these to be blunt tools. It would mean blocking an entire online platform for a single falsehood, which Mr Low Thia Khiang may think it is all right. But it runs completely contrary to our desire for proportionality and calibrated regulatory interventions. That is why this POFMA legislation is necessary. It is an essential and important addition to our regulatory architecture that introduces a calibrated set of measures to deal with the virulence and virality of online falsehoods. The powers under the Bill range from Targeted Corrections, to General Corrections and, ultimately, Stop Communications or "takedown" Directions. These powers, as have been emphasised several times, can be exercised only if, firstly, there is a false statement of fact and, secondly, it is in the public interest, as defined in the Bill, to act. Within this spectrum of measures, our preference, in the main, is to issue correction directions. The merits of juxtaposing the facts with falsehoods should be self-evident.”
“Any action to do so would be ill-advised and inimical to our interests. Why would any Minister want to put in jeopardy, jobs for Singaporeans and opportunities for our businesses? That just does not make good economics nor good politics. Moreover, these kinds of decisions would also be subject to intense scrutiny and it will be called out by a highly connected citizenry, as well as the tech and media organisations who have a substantial presence in Singapore. So, we have an ecosystem that relies or derives great value from the flow of information and data. And that ecosystem itself is going to be a natural check against any tendency to act or overreach. So, what then is our intent? As Minister Shanmugam has explained in detail and many Members of this House have agreed, this surge in the flow of information is a double-edged sword. It can be used to educate, foster understanding and build trust. But it can also be abused to spread falsehoods, sow discord and harm society. At the same time, technology companies' algorithms, policies and design features have made it easier for echo chambers to be created and exploited. We face the most serious challenge in the digital realm because advances in technology have greatly increased the volume, reach and impact of online information flows. In the past decade alone, global cross-border data flows have risen 64 times. A further three-fold increase in Internet traffic is forecast from 2017 to 2022, and global mobile data traffic will increase seven-fold.”
“Our mobile population penetration rate, at about 150%, is among the highest in the world. As for Internet broadband, the wireless penetration rate for our population is over 200%. And the wired household penetration rate is 93.5%. The Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) reported that there has been a doubling of mobile data consumption in Singapore between 2016 and 2018. So, simply put, Singaporeans are highly connected and voracious consumers of data. Connectivity and data are also essential to our digital economy. From 2012 to 2016, Singapore's cross-border data flows grew by 65% per annum to reach 24,000 gigabits per second, the highest per capita compared to other highly-digitalised economies. The Ministry of Trade and Industry's (MTI's) Economic Survey of Singapore in the third quarter of 2017 reported that between 2005 and 2015, our share of global merchandise trade remained stable at about 2%, that is, the trade in goods. But our share of the global trade in digitally-deliverable services nearly doubled from 3.5% to 6.5%. The major global technology companies (FAANGs) have a significant presence in Singapore. We also have a vibrant news and media ecosystem. More than 60 media organisations are accredited in Singapore, and large media organisations, including BBC, Bloomberg and Thomson Reuters, have their regional offices in Singapore. So, it is unambiguous and undeniable that the flow of data and information, like the flow of goods, services and capital, is vital to our economy and to our society. And that is why any suggestion that this Bill is aimed at curtailing the online flow of information, or that it will be used by Ministers to make arbitrary decisions, is wholly unfounded and completely off the mark.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, let me start by saying I rise in support of the Bill standing in the name of the Minister for Law. My views are informed by my Ministry and its agencies' experience in administering current content-related legislation, in dealing with tech companies across a spectrum of issues, working with industries on the digitalisation of our economy and nurturing digital readiness in our society. Sir, the digital information age has had a profound impact on our work, leisure and communication patterns. Let me illustrate. A recent Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) study found that while broadcast and print media remain relevant, there has been a pronounced shift towards online news consumption. More than 96% of Singaporeans below the age of 50 regularly get their news from online sources. Similarly, and perhaps more starkly, 79% of Singaporeans in their 50s and 63% of those in their 60s, use online news sources, compared to 35% and 10% just five years ago. Most consumers of online news typically access at least four or more digital sources. These sources are of varying reliability, ranging from the online version of mainstream media like Channel NewsAsia (CNA) and The Straits Times, to international news media like Cable News Network (CNN) and the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), and social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. Closed messaging services like WhatsApp and WeChat have also become prevalent with more than 50% of Singapore residents using them to communicate and share information. These trends will only gather pace and intensify, in tandem with the growing reach and accessibility of technology. Singaporeans are avid users of technology.”
“Speaker, I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. First, in terms of the 5G network infrastructure, the approach is simple. IMDA, on behalf of the Government, will eventually call for proposals. The infrastructure itself, as with 3G and 4G, will be owned and deployed by private sector companies, in other words, the telcos, who are licensees of IMDA. That would be the approach we will take. It is not different to the approach that has been taken in other parts of the world. I will take the third question next – are we open to more telcos? The Member would be aware that we concluded an exercise a few years back which brought in a fourth mobile telco operator. Right now, our focus is on the deployment of 5G, working with the existing suite of telco players that we have in Singapore. Finally, on vendor restrictions, which I think is the question the Member is asking, our focus is on ensuring that our network is resilient, diverse and, therefore, able to accommodate different types of scenarios and is robust. And we want to ensure its reliability through these elements. So, that is our focus and we are engaging with the industry in consultation to assess how best to achieve that objective for, not just individual networks, but for our system as a whole.”
“Mr Speaker, fifth generation (5G) technology and networks will be a critical part of Singapore’s Digital Economy. I announced at the Committee of Supply debates earlier this year that we plan to commence the rollout of 5G mobile networks by 2020. We are on track to achieve this target. Today, the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) launched a public consultation on the appropriate regulatory framework, spectrum allocation and other policies associated with 5G. To further differentiate Singapore’s 5G strategy, we also aim to advance innovation in secure 5G applications and services in tandem with our 5G network deployment process. One important aspect of this is developing key 5G use-cases, especially for enterprise applications, that we can potentially export to the rest of the world. IMDA has been leading this effort, engaging industry players and Government agencies in early trials and test-bedding. The feedback gained through IMDA’s public consultation will inform our policies to facilitate the 5G network rollout and help identify innovative and impactful 5G applications. I encourage all industry players and other stakeholders to actively participate in this consultation.”
“The number of complaints received by the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) and the telecommunication companies (telcos) concerning poor customer service by telcos has shown a decreasing trend over the past five years. IMDA requires telcos to look into every complaint and see how they can serve their customers better. IMDA also tracks consumer satisfaction of telecommunication services through the Consumer Awareness and Satisfaction Survey (CASS). The 2018 CASS showed that consumers were generally satisfied with their telcos, and consumer satisfaction has improved in several areas, including hotline waiting times, the time taken to resolve complaints, and the competence of customer service officers. An April 2019 poll of non-English speaking individuals conducted by IMDA also found that respondents were generally satisfied with the customer service by telcos. To address the needs of elderly customers, several telcos now allow customers to make appointments for telcos to call them back so that they do not have to wait on the line for too long. In addition, when receiving calls on their hotlines, the telcos will arrange for elderly customers to be served by officers who can speak the same language or dialect.”
“The Police Licensing and Regulatory Department requires any person who provides closed-circuit television (CCTV) installation or maintenance as a service to have a Security Service Provider licence under the Private Security Industry Act. These licensees must undergo security screening to ensure they are fit and proper persons to provide security services. In addition, under the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), organisations are required to notify individuals of the purpose and obtain their consent to collect, use or disclose their personal data, including those captured by CCTV recordings. Also, organisations are required to protect personal data in their possession or control by making reasonable security arrangements. The Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) has issued advisory guidelines to help organisations deploying CCTVs comply with PDPA. The advisory guidelines provide examples of good practices, such as placing notices at points of entry to a building or prominent locations in a venue, where individuals are able to read the notices prior to the collection of their personal data by CCTVs. Organisations that install CCTVs but fail to notify or obtain consent from an individual for the collection of his/her personal data, or fail to protect such personal data, are liable for breaching PDPA. PDPC will investigate and take enforcement action for breaches, which include issuing directions and imposing financial penalties.”
“The timeframe for telephone number porting depends on the telephony service and type of customer involved. Operators are required to complete the porting of mobile telephone numbers within one working day. Operators are also required to complete fixed-line number porting for consumers within five working days. A longer timeframe may apply in some instances. For example, where consumers are porting their fixed-line telephone number while also switching their fibre broadband provider, it would take at least an additional three working days for the incoming provider to activate fibre services before the number porting process can begin. If the number porting process takes longer than expected, the subscriber still receives services from the outgoing operator before the number is ported and, hence, is charged fees under his or her contract. Subscribers who are aggrieved can, nevertheless, approach the relevant operator for recourse, including for an adjustment or waiver of the bill. The Infocommunications Media Development Authority (IMDA) will also step in to safeguard the consumer interest where necessary.”
“Since 2014, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) successfully facilitated a resolution between the complainant and the relevant organisation in 866 instances. In addition, one case was sent to mediation with the mutual consent of both parties. The settlement terms are confidential.”
“All CII owners must fulfil their legal obligations under the Cybersecurity Act, including establishing cybersecurity awareness programmes for their employees, contractors and vendors, and participating in cybersecurity exercises to validate their responses to cyber incidents. Our cyber defences are only as strong as our weakest link. Every individual plays a critical role in safeguarding our cyberspace. The Government will continue to work with the private sector, individuals and the community to instil a strong cybersecurity culture and strengthen Singapore's Digital Defence.”
“The Government is committed to build a strong cybersecurity culture in Singapore, both in the Public Service and the private sector. Training our people to be aware of cyber threats, and effectively detect and respond to malicious cyber activities, is key. Within the public sector, the Government had introduced an information technology (IT) security awareness programme in July 2018. It is mandatory for all public officers to complete the course by end of the year to educate all public officers of emerging cyber threats and the cybersecurity measures to take. There is also an annual Cyber Safe Cyber Ready Conference to enhance cyber awareness within the Public Service, and regular cyber exercises to sharpen the IT security incident response of our public sector agencies. These measures build up our public officers' understanding of cybersecurity. Within the private sector, the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA) enhances cybersecurity awareness and practices through a variety of channels, such as talks, conferences and CSA's GoSafeOnline portal. CSA has also developed resources, such as the Be Safe Online Handbook launched in 2018, which explains what organisations should do to enhance their cyber defence capabilities, such as using only authorised software and updating systems regularly. CSA's "Cyber Tips 4 You" programme also educates the public on four essential cyber hygiene practices to adopt – to use a strong password and two-factor authentication, use anti-virus software, update software as soon as possible and to watch out for signs of phishing. Additional requirements are placed on enterprises that own Critical Information Infrastructure (CII), which are computers or computer systems supporting the provision of our essential services.”
“Yes, and has the Member also looked at Instruction Manual (IM) 8? Because when we look at them holistically, it will be clear that the issues with data, whether it is a breach or misuse, is when I can argue that there is a kind of continuum here. But let me assure Members that when you have a breach of data, you have to establish why it occurred. If it is because of misuse, there will be a certain set of actions. If it is because your systems were not in place, it has to result in a different set of actions to correct the systemic errors. If there were certain people accountable for that systemic error, then they have to be held to account as well. So, there is a flow in the way this will proceed in terms of action against Government organisations. The second point on regular IT audits, why did they not throw up such issues in the past, I think that is an age-old question. You can have audits. It is not just in IT. You have it in financial audits, you have got quality audits, but you still have incidents. This is because it is human beings running the system and, from time to time, it can happen. What is important is that when they occur, we learn from these incidents and set them right, and be transparent about what we are doing and how we are going about it.”
“When the Member says that the "Act" does not refer to data breaches, only data misuse, is she referring to the Public Sector (Governance) Act or is she referring to PDPA?”
“May I just seek a clarification from the Member, Speaker?”
“Finally, on the point on financial penalties, and the Member makes the point about signalling effect, I would say that, first of all, in fact, I think the term "ownself check ownself" was coined by a Member of her party. So, if you fine yourself, you do ask the question, what is the signalling effect there? It is far more important that the signalling effect is that you are taking this issue seriously and holding relevant people accountable. So, that is why, in the way we go about this, the penalties are focused on the individuals, officers, who have made decisions or taken actions which were deemed to be not compliant and, therefore, there are the consequences that I spelt out. Having said that, when you take action against an organisation in the public sector, the reputational impact on that organisation and leadership is significant. I think the Member will concede that that, in itself, is also a major signalling point, because no organisation, public or private, wants to have its reputation tarnished. Having said that, we are prepared to look at all means to ensure there is clear accountability and ensure that, in the public sector, we have the highest standards of data security. That is why this committee has been set up, and we will be open to suggestions. If the Member has interesting ideas on this, we would be happy to hear from her.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her questions. Firstly, on whether the PDPC's investigations would be concurrent, the answer is yes. But clearly, we would have to be informed by what is happening also in some of the other activities because they have some inter-related factors. But the answer is, the investigations will proceed concurrently. The second question is what the establishment of the Public Sector Data Security Review Committee means. I think the Member is trying to score a political point here, and I want to make it categorically clear. The Government has been working – and that is why I said so in my answer – consistently working and improving data security standards. There is a list of things that we have been doing over the years and this has been explained in the House many times in response to the Member's questions and that of many other Members as well. The key point here is that, because there have been a series of these incidents in recent times, the Prime Minister and the Government have assessed that we need to take a holistic look again. That does not mean that what we have is inadequate or lacking. But what it does mean is that we should ensure that we put a total effort to ensure that we leave no stones unturned in ensuring the highest standards are met in the public sector when it comes to data security. If there is something that is to be learnt, whether it is from best practices in the private sector or from global companies, that is something we will be very happy to learn from and incorporate in the Government's practices.”
“Nevertheless, recent data-related incidents have underscored the urgency to strengthen data security policies and practices in the public sector. Therefore, the Prime Minister has convened a Public Sector Data Security Review Committee to conduct a comprehensive review of data security practices across the entire Public Service. This includes measures and processes related to the collection and protection of citizens’ personal data by public sector agencies, as well as vendors who handle personal data on behalf of the Government. While individual agencies are investigating and taking action on the specific incidents, this Committee will undertake a comprehensive review across the public sector and incorporate industry and global best practices to strengthen data security. This review will help to ensure that all public sector agencies maintain the highest standards of data governance. This is essential to uphold public confidence and deliver a high quality of public service to our citizens through the use of data. The work of this Committee will complement our efforts to achieve our Smart Nation vision. The Public Sector Data Security Review Committee will submit its findings and recommendations to the Prime Minister by 30 November 2019.”
“In order to enable a whole-of-Government approach to the delivery of public services, personal data has to be managed as a common resource within the public sector. The considerations are different in the private sector, as there is no such expectation of a holistic approach to the delivery of commercial services across private organisations. Citizens have the same recourse for a data breach in the public sector as with PDPA. Where citizens suspect that their data has been mishandled by a private sector organisation, they can lodge a complaint with PDPC, or with GovTech, if a public sector agency is involved. In practice, there are no wrong doors, and the complaint will be directed to the relevant agencies for follow-up. Affected individuals can also seek mediation or take civil action against the organisation or agency which mishandled the data. The Member has asked whether tangible penalties should be imposed on public agencies for public accountability. Public officers who flout the Government’s data security rules and are found to have misused or disclosed data in an unauthorised manner, could be held criminally liable under PSGA. The penalties include fines of up to $5,000 or a jail term of up to two years, or both. It is not meaningful to impose financial penalties on public sector agencies because the cost of such penalties would ultimately have to be borne by the same public purse. Mr Speaker, over the years, the Government has progressively enhanced security measures to safeguard sensitive data. The Government has also increased the number and types of internal IT audits to check on agencies’ data access and data protection measures.”
“Mr Speaker, with regard to the incident involving HSA, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) is investigating Secur Solutions Group Pte Ltd, which is a private company and vendor of information technology (IT) services to HSA. If found to be in breach of the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), PDPC will take the appropriate enforcement actions against the company, such as issuing directions and imposing financial penalties. The Senior Minister of State for Health has earlier outlined the review of HSA’s data security policies and practices that is being undertaken. As HSA is a Government agency, the Smart Nation and Digital Government Group is also conducting an investigation into the incident. Ms Irene Quay has asked if it is justifiable that public agencies are exempted from PDPA. Implicit in the Member’s question is the presumption that public sector agencies are not accountable for their data protection practices or not held to a high standard because the PDPA does not apply to them. That is wrong and simply not the case. Public sector agencies are subject to a different piece of legislation and other regulations. In particular, public sector agencies have to comply with the Government Instruction Manuals and the Public Sector (Governance) Act (PSGA). Collectively, they have comparable if not higher standards of data protection, compared to PDPA, and similar investigations and enforcement actions are taken against data security breaches. I have previously explained in Parliament why we have adopted this approach. To reiterate, PDPA does not apply to public agencies because there are fundamental differences in how the public sector operates, which requires a different approach to personal data protection when compared to the private sector.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 13 and 14 together, please?”
“Mr Chairman. I am not aware of such cases.”
“Mr Chairman, I think it is a very useful insight from Senior Minister of State Sim Ann's earlier reply. In fact, the digital platforms are very effective in reaching certain demographics. And the growth in e-books and the borrowings are largely being driven by a younger demographic. But I think, in general, as Senior Minister of State Sim Ann says, borrowings in physical books also continues to hold its own. So, I think we are in a good situation and we want to encourage the reading habit through whichever channels in order to broaden the reach. In that vein, the Member's second question about the National Archives, we agree with him fully. In fact, the Archives have a very rich treasure trove of information. And one of the things that we are doing in the course of this year, as I highlighted, is digitalising the content and then finding ways to propagate it with the larger population. So, videos, which will be put out by NLB through its platforms, are going to be one important channel. In fact, much of the Archives' material is already available digitally. We will certainly pursue the option of seeing how we can go in in a more targeted way, for example, to schools. But at the same time, I would just urge all Members to also propagate the message. I am sure all Members have downloaded the NLB app and are using it actively. And I hope then that you will also continue to share that experience with all your constituents and others you are interacting with.”
“I hope that Members felt more than a tinge of nostalgia watching those images. Mr Chairman, my Ministry will continue to create opportunities for all Singaporeans in a digital economy and help Singaporeans of all ages embrace technology. We will endeavour to keep our cyberspace safe and secure and enhance Government communications to foster an engaged Singapore. Through the efforts of the National Library and Archives, we will foster a deep understanding of our shared journey from the past to the present and aspire to build a better Singapore, our home, in the next 200 years and beyond. We look forward to working closely with all Singaporeans as MCI perseveres in its mission to connect Singaporeans to one another and to a better and brighter future.”
“Our Community Oral History Committees, representing the Malay, Chinese, Indian and Eurasian communities in Singapore, have had more than 100 volunteers document over 160 hours of interviews for our national oral history collection. One such volunteer interviewer is 31-year-old Ms Sushma Somasekharan, an auditor and classical Indian vocalist who recently interviewed her first music teacher, the accomplished Carnatic singer Dr Bhagya Murthy. Thanks to Ms Sushma's interview, we gained valuable insight into the Indian classical music scene in the 1980s and how it evolved with a uniquely Singaporean twist because, in those days, Dr Murthy apparently had to learn to sing in Malay and Mandarin to cater to a multiracial audience as well. When the revamped National Archives Building at Canning Rise opens next month, I hope Ms Sushma and many other potential archivists will make good use of its new facilities, such as the three new oral history recording studios in the building. The Oldham Theatre in the National Archives of Singapore (NAS) building will become accessible to members of the public, featuring regular screenings of curated films by the Asian Films Archive. NAS will also launch an online system that allows members of the public to request digital images of Singapore in its early days. I hope these commemorative events will ignite the interest and passion among Singaporeans to discover more about our past and ourselves. Mr Chairman, the NLB and NAS have done tremendous work as custodians of Singapore's heritage and memories. With your permission, I would like to play a video to showcase their good work.”