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 31 of 46.
“There has been a decline in the Employment Pass (EP) holders' share of total employment in the industry over the same period and we expect further migration in this direction. Having created such opportunities, we also want to make sure that Singaporeans have a fair chance of getting them, that we are treated fairly. My colleague, the Acting Minister for Manpower, will address these concerns. But even as we chart this course to seize opportunities, we must remember that staying open as an economy is fundamental to our continued success. As a small country, we survive by doing business with the rest of the world. We compete against other major cities and developed countries. We do so and succeed by keeping our economy open, so that Singaporeans, working with international talent, can compete globally. We also cannot ask other countries to open their markets for Singaporeans and our firms while we close ours off to theirs. These are major considerations for leading organisations like McKinsey, Boston Consulting or Shell when they decide where to locate their global or even Asian headquarters. We must remain open and connected, for trade and talent flows, or risk getting left Page: 70 behind. Bottomline – Singapore cannot afford to just look inwards. Especially because we sit in the heart of Asia, we must be alive to the rising competition. We have neighbours who are teeming with energy and activity, growing rapidly and becoming more competitive. Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia and India have median ages of 25 to 38, significantly lower than ours. The competition is real and it comes from all quarters.”
“The Government will prepare every Singaporean to reach their full potential to stand them in good stead to fill these jobs that we are creating. It is painstaking work and we are doing this sector by sector to cater to diverse needs. I want to give you a couple of examples. EDB will be introducing MBA scholarships over five years under the "Global-Asia Management Programme". Why? It is to groom Singaporeans into Page: 69 leadership positions in different industries to ride on Asia's growth. When we bring in global trading companies, we also work with local Universities to ensure that the right courses are made available to Singaporeans. In this context, IE Singapore has worked with SMU and SUTD to develop programmes to build up the trading talent pool amongst our undergraduates. As part of the Precision Engineering (PE) productivity roadmap, a new PE Vocational CET (PEVC) initiative was started to provide skills-based continuous education and a certification framework for PE craftsmen. I highlight this to demonstrate that it is not just that we are trying to create these jobs. We are trying to help, through various programmes, our Singaporeans to secure those jobs. The Government will also help train Singaporeans so that we can take on, either from the very beginning or over time, more of the jobs that are being created in promising new sectors. The pharmaceuticals and biological products industry is one example that has seen such localisation. Starting from a very low base, almost zero base, the local PME share of total employment has grown significantly by about 14 percentage points in the last 10 years, reaching around a third of total employment in this industry in 2010.”
“For instance, the jobs that EDB was able to create in 2012 alone reflect the diversity of opportunities that we are trying to create and have been able to. They include, for example, Unilever – a global leader in consumer products, which offers career opportunities in regional and global digital marketing. Another example is Leo Burnett – a world-class advertising agency, but it has created a specific opportunity in Singapore in terms of generating Asia-centric consumer insights and analytics, which will inform the decisions of businesses, whether they are in the consumer products or other service sectors. Givaudan – a Swiss manufacturer of fragrances and the largest flavouring company in the world – has created opportunities in Singapore for perfume research and development, such as discovering new ingredients. We are creating attractive opportunities at all levels, including the non-PMET levels. For example, in the aerospace industry, our ITE graduates are highly sought after by companies, such as Singapore Aero Engine Service (SAESL), Rolls-Royce and UTC. These graduates are the backbone of their Aircraft Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) operations and they enjoy good career progression. Some of our young, at an entirely different end of the spectrum, may aspire to be chefs in our vibrant culinary landscape. With our tourism strategy, we have attracted many Michelin-starred chefs to open up restaurants on our shores. There are many opportunities for apprenticeship and career advancement for our aspiring chefs and, indeed, when you go to these restaurants or any other restaurant, you will meet many of them. And they have a certain glow in their eye.”
“We have much going in our favour that we can leverage on. We are in the heart of a growing Asia where opportunities abound. MNCs and global businesses are shifting their centre of gravity to Asia and, today, Singapore is a strong candidate as a location for their core operations and functions. Unprecedented rates of urbanisation in Asia are creating the demand for innovative urban and infrastructure solutions. The rise of the Asian consumer and the growth in the size and disposable income of the Asian middle class create demand for high-quality products and services. We are well-placed to capture these opportunities because they play to our strengths. Urban solutions and city planning are core capabilities that we have built up over the years in the public and private sectors. As a leading services hub, the growth of Asia will have significant spillover benefits for our sectors like trading, logistics, information, communication and media (ICM), financial services and tourism. We have the capability to host complex manufacturing processes, especially in areas where know-how and intellectual property are crucial. We are also a preferred location for manufacturing-related services, such as headquarters activities, R&D, Intellectual Property (IP) management and product lifecycle management. Most importantly, we have a growing pool of Page: 68 skilled and talented Singaporeans who are in high demand. With different pathways to success, we will have a diverse core of Singaporeans with different aptitudes, capabilities and interests, including 400,000 more PMET-level Singaporeans, in the workforce by 2030. These trends and our unique strengths and positioning have allowed us to create a diversity of jobs.”
“We are slowing down; we are stepping on the brake so that we can achieve a smooth landing. But what the Workers' Party is proposing is "to jam-brake" and put our economy in a tailspin. And our businesses and workers risk a "hard landing". Even under the Government's proposal, this Page: 67 adjustment is not easy. It will affect all of us. Businesses still have to restructure. Workers will have to upgrade their skills. And the economy will have to find a new equilibrium. And this will take time and effort. But this approach will give our businesses and workers more time to adjust, and a fighting chance to survive this transition, with assistance from the Government, which many Members have advocated. Even more importantly, this level of growth, though lower than in the past, will help us maintain a certain vibrancy in our economy. And many have asked, why do we need this? But without that vibrancy, we cannot attract the new activities or companies that can create the types of jobs that better educated and qualified Singaporeans aspire for. To draw to our shores, new growth or sunrise clusters that can provide those jobs of the future so that our whole economy can make this transition, we need that vibrance. Without that level of growth, those jobs just would not come. There are certainly other ways beyond domestic or GDP growth that we can use to create opportunities for Singaporeans outside of Singapore. And we are doing that. Our agencies, such as IE Singapore, are working with businesses to expand their external wing, and create opportunities beyond our shores. But we still need a home-based economy that is robust. Because if the mothership is not strong, and the satellites get stronger, we risk getting hollowed out.”
“It is a freeze scenario under which we might well contain the number of foreign workers – the Workers' Party is taking an extreme risk with the livelihood of Singaporeans and the survival of our businesses. Mdm Speaker, in contrast, the Government is advocating a measured and balanced approach to bring about this transformation in our economy. We are not fixated on growth, as some have alleged. Neither do we take for granted, as Ms Jessica Tan has counselled. We seek quality growth so as to create the best possible opportunities for Singaporeans. The economic aspects of this White Paper are a sharp and significant departure from the past. It will by no means be business as usual. In manpower – we are halving the growth rate to 1% to 2% in this decade, and a further reduction to 1% in the next decade, compared to 3.3% per year in the last 30 years. In GDP growth – we are hoping for 3% to 5% per year this decade, but 3% to 4% is more likely. And this is in contrast to 8% per year we have enjoyed since Independence and 5.6% in the last decade. And this will drop even further to 2% to 3% from 2020 to 2030. It is akin to a transition from the bustling economic environment of China/Shanghai to the more developed economy pace of countries like, perhaps, the US. Our productivity projections of 2% to 3% in this decade and 1% to 2% in the next, are also a stretch when we consider our historical experience, 3.1% from1990 to 2000, 1.8% in the last decade, and that is also the case when we compared it with other developed countries. But we believe that we can achieve this if we make a concerted effort. Does this sound like a government that is continuing at the same speed? Mr Low has accused us as continuing to drive at the same speed. Let me say this categorically.”
“Nearly $1 billion – $950 million to be precise – has been set aside just to support a wide range of productivity programmes. We can and we will do more. The Workers' Party's proposal – with its immediate cessation of any additional foreign manpower – is drastic and inherently very risky. It will exacerbate uncertainty in the economic environment and accelerate business closures and the offshoring of activities. Singaporeans will lose their jobs. And instead of productivity-led growth, it could easily tip our economy into a downward spiral. This abrupt move will derail our efforts to boost productivity and restructure the economy. In fact, at last year's Budget debate, Mr Low Thia Khiang warned us of this very same risk and I listened to him very carefully then – when he urged "the Government (needs) to be cautious in the restructuring process", and I further quote, "it will be a long and arduous journey to restructure the economy and increase productivity". He was – I quote again – also "worried that many small Page: 66 businessmen will eventually become unemployed". I think these were very fair observations and I am, therefore, surprised by this extreme and risky approach that is being proposed by the Workers' Party. Such a precipitous move would also send completely the wrong signal to the business and investor community, be it local or international. We would be breaking faith with companies who are already invested here and are in the process of ramping up their operations. It will damage our reputation and severely impair our efforts to attract new and different businesses which can offer precisely the kind of diverse job that better educated Singaporeans seek. In short, the Workers' Party proposal will have a chilling effect on our economy.”
“The Government, as well as many Singaporeans, are deeply concerned by the enormous burden the Workers' Party's proposal will impose on Singaporeans, Page: 65 our workers and our businesses. Let me explain. Today, our workers and businesses are already going through a difficult restructuring process as they feel the effects of our tightening manpower policies. Our businesses and the various business associations – SBF, Chambers, ASME – are feeling the pain. They cannot find enough workers and have appealed to us to ease our manpower policies. Many have talked quite openly about relocating their businesses out of Singapore. All this tightening also affects our workers. More than 1.3 million Singaporeans work in 160,000 SMEs. Many of them are concerned for their job security. They know that if the business they work in cannot keep up and make the necessary changes, it will have to close. And meanwhile, they also need to upgrade their skills as part of the productivity drive. That is why we are also investing so heavily in our workers, through retraining, so that they remain employable Notwithstanding these widespread concerns of workers and businesses, the Government has been steadfast in tightening our manpower policies. We are resolute that our economy and businesses must restructure to raise our productivity. We are very clear about that. But we want to give our businesses time to adjust because, as Mr Inderjit Singh said, SMEs need time to restructure. We are also supporting our companies through this difficult transition, and easing their burden, through various measures. To date, about 5,700 companies have benefitted from programmes under the National Productivity Fund (NPF).”
“That difference lies in how we propose to make this transition and what impact it will have on Singaporeans and our businesses. The Workers' Party has presented an extreme scenario as a plausible choice for Singaporeans. It proposes to immediately stop any increase in foreign workforce until 2020, capping it at current levels, and it further proposes that we should rely exclusively on increasing our resident workforce by 1%. What does that actually mean? In other words, the Workers' Party believes that for the rest of this decade, the only source of additional manpower for a new business in Singapore, or one that wants to expand, should be from any natural increase in the resident population, increasing the participation rate of older workers and women, and a limited number of citizenships awarded to the foreign spouses of Singaporeans – and, of course, if foreign workers are freed up elsewhere in the economy because some of the businesses close down or contract. According to their proposal, we would not even have one more foreign domestic worker in Singapore for the rest of this decade, and certainly no additional workers, especially for the construction sector, which is, in fact, critical to our infrastructure plans. This proposal is essentially the extreme "freeze" scenario painted by Deputy Prime Minister Teo in his opening speech. Ms Sylvia Lim characterised the trade-off as sacrificing 0.5% GDP growth – the Government's estimates, for one million less in our population – leading to increased quality of life and of wages. I really wish it were that simple. It is a clever sound bite, but it does not tell Singaporeans the real consequences of such an extreme and risky proposal.”
“Above all, we must be honest with Singaporeans on what these choices and trade-offs mean for all of us. That is what the Government has done in this White Paper. We have sought to strike a balance between the forces that are pulling us in different directions – the need to create opportunities for Singaporeans, now and in the future; the fundamental demographic challenges that we face; and our domestic resource constraints. It proposes a middle path that reconciles these challenges and, in our opinion, best secures options for our future. We seem to have agreement on many points – seemingly even with Members of the Opposition although they claim that column is entirely a Workers' Party proposition. In fact, it is something that all of us subscribe to and the Government has been working at. Our aim is to improve the quality of life for all Singaporeans, whose needs, aspirations and concerns should be at the heart of this endeavour. And we all agree that we must preserve and strengthen the core of Singaporeans, as the very basis of our identity. And we must create more and diverse job Page: 64 opportunities for all Singaporeans and enable more women and the elderly, especially, to join the workforce, if they so desire. We agree that productivity must be the core driver of our future growth, and that we must help our businesses make this transformation. And that we must not be over-reliant on foreign manpower. So, ultimately, we all agree that our economy must change course. It cannot be Business as Usual. But, Mdm Speaker, there is a serious difference between what the Workers' Party proposes and what the Government recommends in the White Paper.”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. The Motion for amendment standing in the name of the Member Mr Liang Eng Hwa serves three purposes. It reinforces the focus on Singaporeans who are at the core of this White Paper, for whom we want opportunities for a sustainable population and a dynamic Singapore. It highlights Singaporeans' legitimate concerns over infrastructure developments, especially in the new towns, and the need to Page: 63 ensure that the benefits of growth flow to all Singaporeans. It also recognises the dynamic nature of the environment that we have, and it calls for a review of this long-term road map, and the medium term in response to the changing needs of Singaporeans, and our evolving circumstances. For all these reasons, I rise and support the Motion. Madam, it would be an understatement to say that this debate is important. How we deal with this complex issue will profoundly affect our lives, and that of our children. The fact of the matter is – there are no easy solutions, and anyone who offers one should be challenged. We have to make some difficult choices, and these are choices in truth we would rather not have to make. And that is why the debate in this House, as well as among Singaporeans, has been passionate and intense. We have heard many well considered views, many of which were deeply felt. But it is precisely because the stakes are so high, and the passions seem to be running even higher at times, that it is incumbent upon us to be calm and deliberate in considering what is in the best interest of our people and our country. We must establish the facts, clearly understand our fundamental challenges, and seek to build consensus on a sensible way forward.”
“Madam, the Member has not quite given a clear answer but I am surmising from this that the Workers' Party's position is: you presume 1% growth in the resident workforce and, in that context, there is no increase in foreign worker numbers in Singapore, even if it means construction and other sectors that are having difficulty getting those workers from the Singapore pool, are unable to do so.”
“Madam, thank you for your indulgence. May I just clarify with the Member? Does the Workers' Party's zero tolerance for foreign workers in this period extend to sectors like construction and others where we are having great difficulties finding Singaporeans to do the job? Secondly, this implies zero immigration; meaning no new Singapore citizens or PRs. I am trying to reconcile that with the statement by the Workers' Party Chairman who advocated extending citizenship and PR to selected groups. Could the Member clarify? Page: 110”
“Mdm Speaker, I appreciate the Member's clarification. I paid close attention to this table because it is a serious proposal. And I read the Page: 107 footnote because it is quite clear from the footnote that for the period 2020 to 2030, the Workers' Party envisages some selective top-ups to compensate for any decline in the resident workforce. But there is no such clarification footnote for the period 2013 to 2020. So, it must be assumed that you are assuming zero foreign worker addition, and there is no new Singapore citizen or PR.”
“Just to be clear, the Workers' Party is advocating zero foreign workforce addition for the next eight years, including this year?”
“Mdm Speaker, may I seek a clarification from the hon Member? Am I right to infer from column one of his chart that was distributed that the implication is that under the Workers' Party's proposal, between 2013 and 2020, there will be no new additions to our foreign worker pool in Singapore? Indeed, if anything, there may be a slight decline. And secondly, that there will be no new Singapore citizens or PRs?”
“Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for his question. I must again emphasise that these statistics are in the context of how marital rape has been defined in our laws. So, there is a certain set of circumstances that circumscribe the context in which the immunity is lifted and that is the context in which these statistics are gathered. We do not know if in fact − and I think that is what the Member is alluding to − we have a total lifting of the immunity, what the instances of false reporting will be. More importantly, the context in which these sorts of assertions are made is hard to establish because of the intrinsic nature of a marital relationship. I think that is a part that we need to deal with. This is a sensitive and emotive matter. It has been discussed and debated extensively in this House in 2007, and the review will take those issues into account. It is because of its very nature and one that is involving several Ministries that I cannot give the Member a specific time frame. I can assure him that it is Page: 37 something that is given adequate priority in the Ministry's work.”
“STB will continue to focus its efforts on training, skills upgrading and supporting tourism companies in technology adoption and business process improvements. This will help companies in the tourism sector seize growth opportunities up the value chain, and equip their workers to Page: 152 provide quality service to our visitors. STB will continue to develop current tourism source markets while seeking new bright spots in Asia and beyond. STB will also aim to strengthen Singapore's position not just as a tourism destination, but also as a regional travel hub, connecting to other destinations by air and by sea. One example is the cruise industry and the potential for fly-cruise itineraries for tourists to fly to Singapore and spend a few days before seamlessly integrating with the cruise lines using Singapore as a gateway port. Regional tourism collaboration is key to realising this goal, as we work with our ASEAN neighbours to develop a strong regional cruise network. Together, these key initiatives will help us grow the sector through quality, yield-driven tourism which will generate significant benefits for local enterprises and create good jobs for Singaporeans.”
“Singapore’s tourism sector has undergone a significant transformation over the last decade, with its strongest growth in the last few years. International arrivals reached 13.2 million in 2011, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 17% from 2009 to 2011. Over the same period, tourism receipts grew at an even faster CAGR of 33% to reach a record $22.3 billion in 2011. The sector's strong performance in recent years was due in part to new tourism offerings, such as the Integrated Resorts and the F1 Singapore Grand Prix, as well as a rise in Asian tourism. We were also emerging from a relatively low base following the global financial crisis of 2008/2009. Looking ahead, global tourism growth is expected to moderate and regional competition will intensify. The sector will also need to manage and sustain its future growth within our domestic manpower and land considerations. Hence, we do not expect growth in international visitor arrivals to continue at the same rapid pace. Therefore, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) is working with the tourism industry to raise its capability in content creation and manpower development, in order to enhance visitor experience and generate quality, yield-driven tourism growth. A key thrust is to enhance our tourism "software" through better tourism content and programming. Strong content will help us derive maximum value from our tourism assets, such as the Marina Bay Cruise Centre Singapore and Gardens by the Bay, as well as the upcoming River Safari, Sports Hub and the National Art Gallery. Innovative content will also be a key differentiator to strengthen our position as a vibrant global city. Building manpower capabilities and enhancing productivity are other important initiatives.”
“(proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr S Iswaran]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee. (proc text)] [Mdm Speaker in the Chair]”
“Offensive communications in the cyberspace can vary widely from insensitive remarks made on the spur of the moment to serious forms of hate speech. Mr Desmond Lee suggested setting up a tribunal to deal with less serious cases of online posting that inflame racial or religious sentiments, as well as minor cases of cyber bullying and harassment. The Ministry of Home Affairs is currently working with the Ministry of Law and the Ministry of Communications and Information to review our legislative framework and the remedies available to victims of cyber harassment. I want to thank Mr Lee for his suggestions, which we will take into consideration as part Page: 69 of the review. Mdm Speaker, the threats in cyberspace have grown significantly over the years. They have also become more varied and sophisticated. Of particular concern are cyber threats against CII. This Bill will greatly enhance our ability to take timely and effective measures to prevent, detect and counter these threats. I want to assure the House that the enhanced powers, which come with safeguards, will be used judiciously. The powers will be invoked to avert threats that may endanger our national security, essential services and the defence or foreign relations of Singapore. The Minister will issue a certificate only after careful consideration of the implications, and after being satisfied that the measures are practical and reasonable. These measures will make our CII more robust and resilient to the growing cyber threats that we face. I urge Members of the House to give your full support to the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Bill. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.”
“Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) have been signed between various Government agencies and the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) to collaborate in many areas, from the development of courseware on IT security modules to Page: 68 undertaking joint research projects. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef highlighted cyber risks posed by insiders. The enhanced powers will cover cyber threats to national security in general and apply regardless of whether the threats originate externally or internally. We must also recognise that insider threats cannot be fully eliminated using technical means alone. Essential service operators must, therefore, adopt strong technical measures and strict internal checks and balances to minimise their exposure to such risks. And, where applicable, the Government will work with CII stakeholders to address such risks. Unlike traditional crime, cyber threats can be perpetrated very easily across geographical boundaries and jurisdictions in the physical world. As Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef and Mr Desmond Lee have rightly pointed out, it is crucial for the international community to cooperate in tackling these threats. Our security and law enforcement agencies have formed strong partnerships with their counterparts in other countries to strengthen capabilities in this area. These partnerships enable the sharing of early cyber threat intelligence and cyber defence initiatives, and thereby enhance our ability to stay ahead of the evolving threats. The INTERPOL Global Complex for Innovation slated to open in Singapore next year will also facilitate cyber research and innovation, and provide cybersecurity training and operational support for law enforcement agencies around the world. Finally, let me address other issues pertaining to cyberspace.”
“The Critical Information Infrastructure Protection (CIIP) Programme initiated in 2009 aims to better address the cyber security needs of our CII. It provides for engagement platforms and regular cyber-exercises to test and subsequently enhance our cyber responsiveness. We will also be training IT professionals to be cyber defenders and be equipped with the relevant skill sets to complement national incident responders. Let me also clarify that the NCSC is an operational centre and public education is not one of its core functions. It serves to enhance early detection and acts as a nodal point for coordinating incidents response. Phase 1 of the NCSC, which focuses on cyber monitoring of CII for the security and emergency services sector, has already been completed, and the project is on schedule. I agree with Asst Prof Tan that public education is an important component of our overall strategy. This is an area that the Government is also firmly committed to. One such public education initiative is Governmentware, an annual IT security seminar run by the Singapore Infocomm Technology Security Authority (SITSA). Apart from that, the Cyber Security Awareness Alliance, formed in 2008, leverages on the diverse strengths and resources of its members from across the public, private and people sectors, to promote the adoption of good cybersecurity practices among individuals and businesses. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef spoke on the importance of training and skills acquisition in cybersecurity. The Government works closely with the industry in these areas to strengthen our national capacity to deal with cyber threats.”
“Mr Desmond Lee asked about the compliance cost to CII operators arising from the measures or requirements. As domain owners responsible for the security and business continuity of their assets, the operators would generally be expected to bear the cost of the measures. We have put in place safeguards and processes to ensure that the measures will be reasonable and limited to what is necessary to safeguard our national security defence, foreign relations or essential services. Nevertheless, should a CII operator feel that there is a strong justification for Government funding, the operator may work through its sector regulator to explore leveraging on existing sources of funds. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef asked whether there is a deadline set for the implementation of the measures. The amended powers will take effect as soon as possible after the Bill has been passed by Parliament and the President's assent has been received. There is no single fixed timeline for CII operators to comply with measures directed by the Minister. This will vary, depending on the nature of the threat, the assessment of the CII system's risks and vulnerabilities, the type of measures required and the readiness of each sector. Page: 67 CII operators will be consulted accordingly. I will now move on to the other suggestions by Members to strengthen cybersecurity. Asst Prof Eugene Tan asked about our national strategy in dealing with cybersecurity threats and requested an update on the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC). First, let me assure the House that the Government adopts a holistic approach towards strengthening the cybersecurity of the nation. The proposed amendment to section 15A is one of the key pillars supporting these larger national initiatives.”
“To encourage CII operators to take measures proactively, Mr Hri Kumar suggested empowering the Minister to grant immunity for measures taken in advance of any directives issued by the Minister. The immunity provisions are intended to enable CII operators to take the necessary actions against a threat to our security, without being constrained by fear of liabilities arising from Page: 66 contracts or other laws. Should CII operators of their own volition identify measures which they think are necessary and are concerned that the measures could subject them to liabilities, they should put forth the recommendation to the relevant sector regulator and Government security authority for consideration. As Mr Hri Kumar pointed out, such actions taken in view of broader national interests may have implications beyond the individual CII operator. Trade-offs will have to be made at the national level, especially for measures over and above what the CII operators intend to undertake of their own accord. If the Minister is satisfied that a proposed action is necessary and there is a need to render immunity to the CII operators, a certificate can and will be issued immediately. Mr Hri Kumar also asked whether the threshold for immunity is set too low, and whether an entity should be expected to act with some reasonable standard of care. Depending on the facts of the case, if a person acts unreasonably, then it may be said that he had not acted in good faith. Put another way, requiring a person to act in good faith does not preclude the need for him to act with reasonable care. The immunity provision in the Bill is consistent with similar provisions in other legislations, such as sections 39 and 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code.”
“However, making reporting of cybersecurity incidents mandatory, at this juncture, for all companies could incur significant compliance cost. A balanced and targeted approach is needed. We need to strike a balance between national interest and commercial interest, so as to ensure that the cost imposed on the private sector is reasonable. This is why the current mandate requires only CII stakeholders to report cybersecurity breaches. Mr Desmond Lee sought clarifications on the application of sub-section 2(a), which provides for the powers under sections 39 and 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) to be exercised. The circumstances for these powers to be exercised are specified under sub-section (1) of section 15A of the CMA, that is, there must be a threat to the national security, essential services, defence or foreign relations of Singapore. Under such situations, the Minister may direct CII operators to perform these actions so as to prevent, detect or counter the cyber threat. There is no need for there to be an offence, arrestable or not, before the powers can be invoked. The powers are also not meant to be exercised for the investigation of offences. The reference to sections 39 and 40 of CPC relates only to the powers stated in these provisions. And with the amendments, the references to the specific sub-sections of sections 39 and 40 of the CPC will provide a clearer indication of the relevant powers within the legislation. For example, the Minister will be able to require the CII operators to access, inspect and check the operation of the computer. This power is found in section 39(1)(a) of the CPC.”
“Under the GSP Code agreement – the Singapore Government has signed with Microsoft – there are non-disclosure provisions for information shared by Microsoft that is commercially sensitive. We will work closely with the CII stakeholders to define the security obligations upfront, and ensure that the need for sharing of information is balanced with sufficient safeguards to protect their commercial interests. Mr Hri Kumar asked about the relationship between sub-sections (8) and (10) of the amended section 15A. In particular, he sought clarification on the purpose of furnishing information obtained under section 15A to the Police. If information obtained under section 15A reveals an offence, sub-section (8) allows that information to be given to the Police to commence investigations. Sub-section (10) does not allow that information to be admitted as evidence in court. This sub-section is intended to protect the identity of the informer and the circumstances in which the powers were invoked. Disclosure of such Page: 65 information may hinder or jeopardise efforts to neutralise the threat. However, from the information given to the Police, pursuant to sub-section (8), the Police will gather new evidence using its investigative powers. And this new evidence will be admissible in court whereas the initial information given to the Police will not be admissible. I hope that clarifies. Asst Prof Eugene Tan highlighted that "breach laws" which mandate the reporting of cybersecurity incidents, such as hacking, could potentially enhance our national sentinel by providing advance warning of further attacks. Companies and organisations can already report cyber incidents voluntarily to the Singapore Computer Emergency Response Team (SingCert).”
“Mr Hri Kumar, Mr Desmond Lee and Asst Prof Eugene Tan spoke on the need for proper management and use of the information obtained. This is yet Page: 64 another important point. Mr Desmond Lee also asked whether CII operators may be required to disclose certain confidential or proprietary information and how such information will be protected. The need for Government to access proprietary information, such as source codes for security vetting or assurance purposes, is not unique to Singapore. Indeed, it is also required in the US and UK, for example. Safeguards have been included in the Bill to prohibit information obtained under the certificate from being used or disclosed other than for the purpose of preventing, detecting or countering a cyber threat, or for the other purposes specified in the Bill. Asst Prof Eugene Tan asked if the penalties for contravention of the safeguards relating to use and disclosure of information in the Bill are too low given the sensitive nature of the information. The penalties are consistent with those provided for in similar provisions in other legislation, such as section 28 of the Electronic Transactions Act, and section 27B of the Economic Development Board Act. In addition, the Official Secrets Act may also be applicable depending on the circumstances of the case, to address the point raised by Asst Prof Eugene Tan. To supplement these safeguards, the Government will also consider entering into contractual non-disclosure agreements with vendors to address their specific needs and concerns. An example is the Microsoft's Government Security Program (GSP) which facilitates access by governments worldwide to Microsoft's product source code and other technical information.”
“Furthermore, after the Minister has issued the certificate, aggrieved parties can still have recourse to judicial review. I would also like to reassure the Members that the Government will undertake periodic internal reviews on the actions taken so that the measures can be calibrated or recalibrated as needed in future. We do not intend to have an external review panel, as suggested by Mr Hri Kumar, given the sensitivity and nature of the content. Mr Desmond Lee asked what cybersecurity measures and requirements are being contemplated and whether these could be used to intrude into an individual's privacy. Madam, let me assure the House that the powers under the Bill are not intended to intrude into privacy. The measures and requirements are mainly technical, operational or procedural in nature. For example, CII operators may be required to implement network perimeter defence devices, such as firewalls, or to perform regular vulnerability scanning of their systems to identify potential loopholes. These measures are non-intrusive with respect to personal privacy. Likewise, any information required by the Minister under the certificate to deal with cyber threats will generally be technical and not personal in nature. For example, to aid in the detection of cyber threats, the Minister may request information such as network logs on the machine transactional requests, system event logs and system audit logs containing failed login attempts. Only anonymised data would be required. The consultation process with the CII stakeholders prior to the issuance of the certificate will help to ensure that any information required is justified and not unduly onerous.”
“Mr Hri Kumar suggested setting up a panel to conduct periodic reviews after the Minister's decision has been taken to ensure that such powers have been properly exercised. Mdm Speaker, let me assure the House that the powers will be used judiciously. The assessment of whether there is a threat to the national security, essential services, defence and foreign relations of Singapore is a decision to be made by the Executive. There are adequate safeguards to ensure the reasonable and justified exercise of these powers. Section 15A circumscribes the use of the powers to situations where there is a likely threat to the national security, essential services, defence or foreign relations of Singapore. So, the Minister is constrained by the language of section 15A when acting. His discretion is not unfettered. In addition, there is a robust process of procedural safeguards to ensure that these powers are properly exercised. A consultation process will be Page: 63 undertaken with the affected CII stakeholders, where practicable. The CII stakeholders will generally be given the opportunity to make representation at three stages. The first is to the sector regulator and the Government security authority. The second is to a high-level National Committee, comprising several Permanent Secretaries. And finally, to the Minister for Home Affairs. This process will help to surface potential concerns of the CII stakeholders and any impediments that they may face in carrying out the required measures. Remedies can then be considered to address these concerns. This three-stage representation will be applied and adapted based on the prevailing threat assessment and circumstances.”
“The powers in the Bill may be exercised to direct that measures be taken when there is an assessed threat that may endanger our national security. An example is when there is credible intelligence that a new malware targeting CII has been developed, or that malware has been used against another country. If we assess the current defences of the CII to be inadequate, a certificate may be issued to direct CII operators to step up their cybersecurity measures. So that is the general approach. However, given the rapidly changing nature and complexity of the threat we are facing, it is neither possible nor practical to specify in detail the precise triggers for the activation of powers in the legislation. The proposed powers are needed to enable anticipatory actions to be taken against such evolving threats in a timely manner. So, in many instances, the level of specificity may be difficult to afford at the time of assessment. Ultimately, the decision to exercise the powers will have to be a judgement call by the Minister, informed by the assessment of the relevant Government agencies. I want to reassure the Members of the House that it is a decision that will be made only after a considered and thorough assessment of the threat and vulnerabilities. This approach is not unique to Singapore. Laws in other countries, such as South Korea and Estonia, are similarly crafted to give the enforcement agencies sufficient flexibility and also the authority to take effective actions against threats to national security, including cyber threats. Mr Desmond Lee, Mr Hri Kumar and Asst Prof Eugene Tan also spoke on the need for safeguards to prevent abuse of powers. This is an important point.”
“We have been working with the various industry regulators to reach out to the CII owners and operators to harden their systems against cyber threats. They have generally been cooperative. It is about working together in a more upstream, proactive manner. Indeed, the CII owners and regulators recognise that it is in their interests to put in place a certain level of security measures to meet their business needs so as to ensure the sustainability of services to their customers and also to protect themselves from potential financial losses arising from an attack. However, beyond the direct business impact on the individual entity, a successful attack on a CII can have broader implications. These are the externalities which, if not accounted for, could lead to a "tragedy of the commons" as Asst Prof Eugene Tan had talked about. A cyberattack can have knock-on effects, disrupt key sectors of our economy and threaten our national security, including the lives of individuals. The legislative powers in this Bill will ensure that we have the ability to promptly step up the protection of our CII to protect our national interests before damage is caused. At the same time, CII operators will not be encumbered by fear of liability as long as they have acted in good faith when complying with the Minister's directions to counter the cyber threat. Mr Desmond Lee and Mr Christopher de Souza spoke about the scope of the powers. Specifically, Mr Lee asked whether the powers in the Bill are too broad and Mr de Souza asked about the situations under which the enhanced powers may be invoked, and if the threshold levels or triggers for exercising such powers could be specified. Page: 62 Let me respond.”
“Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank all the Members who have spoken and for their general support of the Bill and its policy intent. I would endeavour to address the key points that Members have raised specifically pertaining to the enhanced powers and safeguards in the Bill, as well as some broader issues such as other measures to enhance capabilities and collaboration in tackling cyber threats. First, let me address Mr Desmond Lee's point on the need for the enhanced powers. Let me reiterate that the cyber threats that we face today are extremely malicious, with tremendous potential to cause widespread damage within a very short span of time. An example is the high-profile "July 2009 Cyber Attacks", which targeted government and financial services websites in South Korea. In an emergency measure to restore the networks that were disabled by the attacks, some 30,000 virus-infected computers were denied Internet access by Korean Internet operators, on the instruction of the Korean Communications Commission. The economic costs associated with the disruption of services Page: 61 were significant. A more recent example is the series of aggressive denial-of-service attacks on financial institutions in the US, believed to be perpetrated by a group of Iranian hackers. The attacks targeted at least 10 major banks. Their websites were flooded with massive log-in attempts which disrupted remote banking services and affected many customers. The first wave started in September last year and the attacks are still ongoing today. We need robust measures, given the prevalence and increasingly potent nature of cyber threats. This requires all parties concerned to collaborate – the Government as well as industry players and other stakeholders within the cyberspace ecosystem.”
“These enhanced powers come with important safeguards to ensure that they are used in an effective and responsible manner to protect our national interests. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 3.17 pm”
“A new sub-section (8) introduces safeguards to restrict the use and disclosure of information obtained under the Minister's certificate. The information obtained is to be used or disclosed only for the purpose of preventing, detecting or countering the cyber threat. Otherwise, the written permission of the party from whom the information was obtained would be required before it can be used or disclosed. Information can also be divulged to Page: 49 a law enforcement authority if it reveals an offence. In addition, disclosure or use will be permissible if there is a need to comply with a requirement of a court or a written law. Contravention of the safeguards prescribed in sub-section (8) will be punishable with a fine not exceeding $10,000, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both. Lastly, the new sub-section (12) expands the definition of "essential services". Currently, it covers services directly related to communications infrastructure, banking and finance, public utilities, public transportation, or public key infrastructure, as well as emergency services like police, civil defence and medical services. For the purpose of this Act, the scope of "essential services" will be expanded to include services directly related to land transport infrastructure, aviation, shipping and health services. Mdm Speaker, our cybersecurity capabilities must continue to adapt, grow and remain relevant in this fast changing cyber threat landscape. This requires the close collaboration amongst the stakeholders. The proposed legislative amendments will provide the Government with greater ability to work with our stakeholders to take timely actions against cyber threats to our CII.”
“Similarly, non-compliance with the directions of a person who is acting pursuant to the certificate issued by the Minister under section 15A will also be an offence. It will also be an offence to obstruct a person from complying with the Minister's directions to him. These offences will be punishable with a fine not exceeding $50,000, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both. New sub-sections (6) and (7) confer various immunities for acts done in good faith pursuant to the Minister's certificate under section 15A of the Act, including any direction given pursuant to such a certificate. This is necessary to ensure that those who are acting pursuant to the certificate or direction can perform their functions without being constrained for fear of civil or criminal liabilities. For example, if a malware is detected to be targeting a particular make and model of equipment used by our CII operators, the Minister may issue a certificate to the CII operators to direct that certain cybersecurity measures be taken. In the course of implementing these measures in good faith, if there is service degradation or disruption that results in the failure of the CII operators to meet their contractual Service Level Agreements with their customers, the CII operators can claim immunity in any legal proceedings against them by their customers. Information that the Minister may direct CII operators to provide to aid in the prevention, detection and countering of cyber threats will generally be technical in nature. For example, information pertaining to network design architecture, firewall rules and software algorithms, this may be required to help with the early detection of an attempted cyberattack or an ongoing cyberattack.”
“Sub-section (1) of the new section 15A empowers the Minister to issue a certificate to authorise or direct a person or an entity to take measures or comply with requirements necessary to prevent, detect or counter a threat to the national security, essential services, defence or foreign relations of Singapore. For example, a CII operator may be required to provide information relating to the design, configuration, operation and security of computers, computer programmes or computer services. This will help identify and address cyber threats and system vulnerabilities. A CII operator may also be required to report cybersecurity breaches to the Minister or an authorised public officer. This will provide situational awareness of cyber threats at the national level and help assessments on the need for further security measures. Before a certificate is issued by the Minister, CII stakeholders will be consulted on the implications, where practicable. The measures required under the certificate will be limited to what is necessary to safeguard national security, defence, foreign relations, or essential services. I want to emphasise that it is also in the interests of a CII stakeholder to proactively invest in preventive cybersecurity measures. This is because a successful cyberattack could lead to significant financial loss and reputational damage for the CII stakeholder. Hence, as domain owners responsible for the security of their assets, CII stakeholders will generally be expected to bear the cost of these measures. Page: 48 Given the severity of the threat that cyberattacks can pose to the nation, the new sub-section (4) makes it an offence if a person fails to take any measure, or comply with the directions of the Minister, under section 15A of the Act.”
“It also took into account legislative enhancements which other countries, such as the United States, Israel, Estonia, South Korea and Australia, have implemented or are considering. The amendments to section 15A will strengthen the cybersecurity of our CII by enabling the Government to take more effective and timely measures to prevent, detect and counter cyberattacks that may threaten national security, essential services, defence or the foreign relations of Singapore. This approach is no different to how we deal with national security threats in the physical realm. For example, if there is credible intelligence of a potential terrorist threat to our aviation sector, we would immediately take pre-emptive steps to enhance security measures at our airport and carriers in response to the threat. Similarly, in cyberspace, we must take proactive and upstream action against a threat before it materialises to cause any harm. The proposed amendments will Page: 47 strengthen our ability to do so. It will enhance our ability to act against cyber threats, with safeguards to ensure that the enhanced powers are exercised appropriately. Madam, let me now elaborate on the key amendments. Clause 2 of the Bill amends the long title of the Bill to reflect the substance of the re-enacted section 15A. Clause 3 of the Bill amends the short title of the Act to "Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act". These amendments will more accurately reflect the scope of the Act, including its objective of securing Singapore against cyber threats that may endanger our national interests. Clause 4 of the Bill repeals and re-enacts section 15A to enhance the powers to act against cyber threats and introduce corresponding safeguards.”
“To prevent a successful attack, we need a nimble and comprehensive response that can guard against a broad spectrum of attacks and threats. Singapore is not immune to cyberattacks of this nature. We are a highly inter-connected nation. As of 2011, 85% of Singapore households had access to broadband at home, while 81% of businesses used the Internet. With cyberspace being essential to many aspects of our lives, we are vulnerable in many ways to any breaches. In fact, we, too, have been the target of cyberattacks in recent years. For example, in the lead-up to the APEC 2009 meetings held in Singapore, there were at least seven waves of malicious email attacks which targeted members of the APEC Organising Committee and APEC delegates from various countries. While these attacks did not target our CII, they are indicative of the potential for future attacks against other Singapore targets. The cyber threats that we face today are sophisticated and malicious. Our legislative framework must keep pace with the nature of this evolving cyber threat. Section 15A of the Computer Misuse Act, or CMA, was introduced in 2003. It empowers the Minister for Home Affairs to authorise measures to prevent or counter cyber threats to our CII in the event of an outright cyberattack or where there is specific intelligence received of an imminent attack. These powers are no longer adequate, given the operating environment that I have described. To make our CII more robust and resilient against cyber threats, my Ministry has reviewed section 15A of the CMA. The review was undertaken in consultation with CII operators and regulators.”
“It is precisely because of this that CIIs are prime targets of cyberattacks. Cyberattacks on CII pose a real and present danger to all countries. Widespread damage can easily result from a single piece of malicious software or the exploitation of one point of weakness. In 2007, Estonia encountered a series of cyberattacks which lasted three weeks and resulted in widespread damage to society and the economy. It crippled the country's government and banking services for many days, while users were unable to access the Internet across a wide range of functions. In the US, the reported number of such attacks has increased 20-fold within the last two years. According to a McAfee report in 2011, nearly two-thirds of critical infrastructure companies worldwide reported regular findings of malware designed to sabotage their systems. It is estimated that 24 hours of down time from a major cyberattack would cost a critical infrastructure enterprise, on average, more than US$6 million. The technology and sophistication of saboteurs are also rapidly evolving. In July 2010, Stuxnet, a sophisticated form of malware, was discovered – reportedly responsible for infecting 45,000 industrial control systems worldwide. Many of these systems were integral to a country's critical infrastructure, such as energy, water and communication networks. Two years on, Stuxnet has been joined by other equally if not more sophisticated malware. One of them, known as Flame, has been described by some experts as being 20 times more powerful than any known cyber warfare programme, including Page: 46 Stuxnet. We can expect the potential for damage to be far more severe.”
“I look forward to your firm and fair handling of the administration and affairs of this House. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Madam, we last amended the Computer Misuse Act in 2003 to strengthen Singapore's defence against cyberattacks. Over the past decade, we have witnessed tremendous technological change. Cyberspace has become an integral part of our daily lives, and is used extensively for the delivery of a wide range of public and private sector services. At the same time, our increasing dependence on cyberspace has brought about new risks and vulnerabilities. Hence, it is timely to review our legislative framework to ensure that it remains Page: 45 relevant and effective in protecting our economy and society against cyber threats. In recent years, the number of cyberattacks across the world has risen sharply. Criminals, terrorists and state-sponsored groups have been exploiting cyberspace to their advantage. In 2010, McAfee uncovered an average of 55,000 new malicious software (or malware) threats every day. This figure is now 100,000 – double what it was just two years ago. A 2012 report by the World Economic Forum ranked cyberattacks among the top five global risks. Critical Information Infrastructure, or CII, refers to systems which are necessary for the delivery of essential services to the public in various key sectors. These sectors include energy, water, finance and banking, Government, healthcare, infocomm, security and emergency services, and transportation. Cyberattacks often occur with little warning and have tremendous potential for contagion. They can disrupt daily lives and threaten our nation's security, economy, public health and safety. They can bring a country to a complete standstill.”
“Mr Speaker, I commend the Member for her perseverance. May I first say that if the annual levy was intended as a volume discount, clearly, based on the outcomes, it is not working. So, my point is, we have debated this, this is the position we are at today. If there is a clear reason why we need to look at this in more detail because there are some specific social consequences that we are trying to mitigate, then I think we will certainly act on it. I am saying that – and it is the response I made earlier to Mr Gerald Giam as well – I think, let us not jump the gun, let us look at the facts, analyse the trends. As we have said, we give you the assurance that action will be taken if it is required. The other point on the concession – the two IRs have committed $13 billion of investment, and the basis of that was a certain set of representation that includes a 30-year concession period. That was the proposal on the table. The licence for the casinos is awarded, in the first instance, for three years and it is renewable. What that means is the casino licence is subject to performance and compliance with our laws. And if they meet those requirements and fulfil their obligations, then the CRA will renew their licence and the concession period is for 30 years. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr S Iswaran]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“Mr Speaker, I am not sure I fully understand the Member's point but let me just say this. In most regimes, they do not pay to go to their casinos. So, whether you pay a $100 or $2,000, that is part of a social safeguard regime.”
“Mr Speaker, first, for the record, I did not go on about economic benefits. I was merely stating the facts as they are. Secondly, I think we have made this point quite clear in the course of the Second Reading speech, Mr Chan's response and my response. We attach great significance to the social safeguards and we want to make sure that the social costs of having casinos in Singapore are well-contained and mitigated. So, that will continue to be our objective. The point of emphasising the competition and the threats to the economic contribution of the IRs was simply to alert Members, because the predominant tone of the debate has been to presume that the IRs will continue to operate economically at these levels, and we need to, therefore, only focus on the social safeguards. I just wanted to put in a note of caution that we should also be mindful of the fact that the competition will intensify and that, in turn, will have an impact on the performance of the IRs.”
“Sir, in general, with respect to those who are committing crimes or suspected of committing crimes, the Commissioner of Police, as I have mentioned, has the authority under the Act to impose exclusion orders; in some instances, even on an interim basis whilst things are being investigated to conclusion. As far as borrowers are concerned, it is a bit trickier because it is not always clear how to establish who is a borrower. I think that is going to be a key consideration in deciding whether you exclude. So, I think the better approach in this is through the social safeguards method. If indeed someone is borrowing from loansharks, it means that they are in financial difficulty, which means they will fall within the category of the financially vulnerable and therefore, there will be a need to investigate further into his or her circumstances and appropriate action taken, with respect to casino entry. Asst Prof Tan Kheng Boon Eugene: Mr Speaker, Sir, I was very much heartened and encouraged by the Acting Minister's response on the social safeguards. But as the Second Minister went on about the economic challenges that faced the casinos, I got rather worried. Essentially, my point is that given this tension between the need to maintain social safeguards and to ensure that the casinos are a success – while I appreciate that it is not a false dichotomy – I think we cannot deny that there is that very keen tension. So, my question is, when it comes to the crunch, what gives? Can we have our cake and eat it? Page: 1487”
“All these trains converge in the CRA, and the CRA ultimately takes a total view in evaluating a casino operator and the operator's compliance to our rules and requirements. Page: 1486 The final point on the IMAs and I would urge the Member to use the term "international marketing agent" rather than junkets because it is not just nomenclature. It is a fundamental point of reference that we want to emphasise. Having said that, first, why is there a need for junket operators? Well, simply because it is part of the industry. I know that there are some pejoratives associated with that, but that is exactly why we have the standards of probity that we have, and we seek to keep it on the straight and narrow. Secondly, does this mean that we are preparing for more IMA licences? By no means. All we are saying is that we want to have a regime in place so that everybody understands, "This is the deal if you want to come to Singapore". Just as a casino operator has licensing requirements, the IMA operators will have their own licensing and other requirements. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I am glad to hear from the Minister that the loansharks are currently banned from entering the casinos. I would like to ask the Minister if the loanshark runners and those who borrow money are banned from the casinos currently. If not, will the Minister consider that?”
“Sir, I thank the Member for his questions. First, on the Annual Entry Levy and whether it can therefore be confined to premium players. My purpose in giving the 1% statistic was to illustrate the proportionality because there was an impression created, certainly by some Members that somehow this is a gaping loophole. It is not. Secondly then, the question is – and it is implicit in the Member's question – we should not assume that just because someone buys an annual entry levy, he or she has problems with gambling. There are quite legitimate buyers of annual levies as well. So, I think the best way to go about this is, in the course of the more detailed social safeguards implementation that we envisaged, it will certainly emerge who are the people who have a problem with gambling or who are financially vulnerable. In those instances, we must seek to impose limits. If it becomes a systemic problem, then certainly we will have to consider some other measures, perhaps along the lines of what the Member has suggested. But I think it is a bit premature to think about that at this stage. Thirdly, I appreciate his verification on his point about the evaluation panel. I want to make it clear. The reason we set up this evaluation panel was precisely because this was one area which we need to think of, for the future. Because we are now approaching the end of the development phase of the IRs, and we need to think about how they are going to maintain and improve their facilities in the longer run. This evaluation panel was established expressly for that objective. The social safeguards element is well taken care of through the entire slew of measures and processes we have in place, embedded in the Act and enforced by the Ministry of Social and Family Development.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as I said, this is a relatively new jurisdiction that we have so we have a certain set of rules that we have set out. We are evolving and we have now moved another set of amendments. The IR operators are also new to our jurisdiction and, therefore, they have also been adapting. So, have they complied, by and large, in terms of setting up the systems and observing our rules? I would say that, in general, they have made a good effort to comply. However, there have been – as reported in the media – instances where they have been found wanting and in those instances, we have been prepared to take the necessary disciplinary action. Now, I cannot really give you an overall report card because that is not how we approach this. The CRA has to look at individual instances or a set of instances where breaches have occurred, what are the causative factors, what are the implications and, on that basis, impose a proportionate penalty, which is also why, in this Bill, we have moved for a higher threshold of financial penalties where there have been serious breaches. Because we do think that we need that flexibility for the CRA to be able to prescribe penalties in proportion to various kinds of breaches.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for the question. It is difficult to track the dollar flow within the casino and attribute it to the source by nationality. I think the Member would appreciate the difficulties in doing so. However, if I were to hazard a guess, what I would say is this. I think Singaporeans are making up 25% to 30% of visitorship, and the likelihood is that Singaporeans are more in the mass gaming areas than in the premium or high roller areas from a proportion point of view. Therefore, if anything, I would expect their contribution to the casino to be lower than that suggested by the percentage in visitorship.”
“The Casino Regulatory Authority has the option to vary, to terminate, to reduce the duration. There is a range of things we can do. The point about competition in the region, I think all the more we need to, therefore, be very careful in the way we go about doing this because to completely jettison, also has an implication for the reputation we have as a country. We have committed to this. The IR operators are here because we invited proposals. We have awarded those concessions. We have an obligation to see that through. However, they know that we have a specific set of expectations, not just economic but social and in terms of law and order, and we expect them to comply and meet those expectations. Page: 1483”