Saktiandi Supaat
Singapore
“I have two supplementary questions. For my Parliamentary Questions that the Senior Minister of State answered earlier, I thank him for answering them because those are questions that my dialect-speaking seniors in Toa Payoh East and their families have raised to me.”
“As the Review Group has recognised, there is no "silver bullet", a holistic ecosystem-wide approach is required. The implementation of these recommendations appears to have been phased, with announcements across February, July and November 2025.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Three questions. First, given that the Section 301 actions can sometimes be broad-based, how is Singapore engaging with our US counterparts to ensure that our firms are not inadvertently affected by measures aimed at other economies?”
“Many of them do not openly express their difficulties. This is why social and emotional support must go beyond the occasional event. It must be sustained, trusted and easily accessible.”
“Would the Government consider developing a National Master Trades Accreditation framework – a national tiered certification that recognises advanced trade mastery, similar to chartered professionals in other sectors and create a new avenue for career switchers and career transition for segments of our workforce?”
“When the scheme is implemented in 2028, how will the Ministry measure success in terms of participation rates, risk-adjusted returns and improvements in retirement adequacy outcomes for CPF members?”
The complete record
Every one of 992 lines we hold for Saktiandi Supaat, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 20.
“The SingHealth episode tells us that the risks of cyberattacks and data breaches cannot be understated. Government data is not immune from these risks. In fact, they are likely to be higher value targets for malicious threats. Finally, if the new disclosure regime is aimed at supporting data-driven policy-making, operations and integrated service delivery, what is the basis of distinguishing between the 11th Schedule information which may be disclosed without consent, and other disclosures which will require the express consent of the person to whom the information relates? What percentage of taxpayers have already provided their express consent to the existing disclosure regime and how does the Government or IRAS intend to obtain fresh consent for the new, expanded disclosure regime? Has there been any public consultations with companies which may be impacted and the extent of data which may be disclosed without consent and what the data collected will be used for? I believe the Senior Minister of State has given a brief explanation on what the data will be used for, but I think my other questions are somewhat new in some ways. The third area in my speech is something that relates to the administrative flexibility that characterises the Government. As I understand it, clause 15 of the amendment Bill seeks to harmonise the accounting basis on which insurance companies prepare their financial statements. Insurance companies will no longer have to prepare financial statements on one basis for the purpose of regulatory returns to be submitted to the MAS and another set of financial statements on a different accounting basis for tax computation purposes.”
“Further, what are the main assumptions underlying the projected $170 million in additional tax revenue per year? Since the announcement of such an increase in February 2022, has the Government or IRAS detected any efforts by such high-income individuals to "offshore" their earnings? I am concerned that the lead-time before 2024 would allow companies and individuals to restructure their remuneration packages and erode the additional revenue we expect to receive. (In English): Moving on to my second area of focus. Of particular interest to me are the amendments to facilitate disclosure of tax information to support data-driven policy-making, operations and integrated service delivery. Just this year, I have spoken in this House and filed a Parliamentary Question on how we should leverage data and technology to "push" schemes and services to Singaporeans and Singaporean businesses. The amendment Bill broadens the powers of the Comptroller of Income Tax to disclose tax information to any public officer or officer of a statutory board for the performance of any official duties, in some cases without the consent of the person to whom the information relates. We have already seen how useful such tax information can be. As Minister Indranee had shared during this year's Committee of Supply debate, IRAS' data across various tax types was used to automatically disburse more than 110,000 payouts worth almost $1 billion under the Rental Support Scheme. However, there is no doubt that the tax information is highly sensitive and confidential. If we are to expect an increased flow of such information between Ministries and Statutory Boards, will there be any enhanced safeguards to protect the secrecy of the data?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Income Tax Act is one of the most frequently amended statutes in Singapore. Since the 1980s, it has been amended almost every year so as to carry out the Government's revised fiscal strategy announced in its latest Budget Statement. This amendment Bill is no different. Many of the matters of policy or principle would already have been debated in this House when the Government's 2022 Budget Statement was presented. Hence, I would just like to seek some clarifications on the specific changes proposed in this amendment Bill, before touching on a couple of issues which I believe should be considered in our periodic review of Singapore's income tax system. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] This amendment Bill does not seek to implement all the tax changes announced by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance at Budget 2022. The headline change in this amendment Bill is the announced increase in the top marginal personal income tax rate with effect from Year of Assessment 2024, where chargeable income in excess of $500,000 up to $1 million will be taxed at 23% instead of 22%, while chargeable income in excess of $1 million will be taxed at 24% instead of 22%. By my calculation, this change will only affect individuals who are making an average of more than $41,000 per month. The Deputy Prime Minister has commented during the Budget debate that we cannot sustain a tax system and hold our society together if "the bulk or all of the tax burden is borne by a small group of people at the top end". Based on current data, may I ask how many taxpayers will this change affect? What proportion of the total personal income tax collected are they already responsible for today?”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister for his answers. I have got two supplementary questions. First one is: would Minister envisage the possibility of overshooting the capacity over the next few months into the end of this year and possibly into the first half of next year, particularly if regional airports or other hubs, are seeing any delays in their opening? And that also is in relation to one of my Parliamentary Questions (PQs): what would be the assumptions underlying the projection that the number of flights will rise to 80% and above? My second supplementary question would be: the Minister mentioned that the recruitment is on track, but is it possible for us to speed up the recruitment of talent, especially since technology and changes over the past two to three years have evolved, and whether some of these technological changes mean that we need new talent locally or globally coming to Singapore?”
“From an efficiency standpoint, PDO should complement the existing pro bono efforts of our lawyers and multiply the potential reach of criminal legal aid in Singapore. As PDO is also aimed at developing expertise, building up institutional knowledge and access to expert witnesses, medical and forensic analysts and so on, will private lawyers volunteering under CLAS be allowed to tap on PDO's precedents and knowledge? This would reassure the public that there would be minimal difference in outcomes to prefer the criminal legal aid provided by PDO, or that provided by volunteer lawyers through schemes like CLAS. Finally, what were the considerations behind structuring PDO as a department of the MinLaw, with the Chief Public Defender who is appointed by the Minister for Law? I ask this primarily because I am concerned that the Chief Public Defender's decisions to grant or not grant aid may potentially be politicised especially where specific individuals or offences are involved. Such concerns would have been substantially reduced if PDO and the Chief Public Defender had been given an independent role under the Singapore Constitution. As the famous saying goes, "Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done". Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding the clarifications sought, I support the Bill. 6.51 pm”
“In terms of timing, at which point in time will the applicant be informed of the contributions that he will have to make? Save for special circumstances, any financial burden should be fully disclosed to the applicant at the outset of the legal aid application. Any uncertainty would detract from the objective of allaying our vulnerable residents' concern over accumulating legal fees; which is quite important. Moving on to the operational and structural aspects of the PDO, I understand that PDO is targeted to commence operations in end of 2022, and the aim is to start by having PDO-employed lawyers take on all of PDO's cases before PDO considers outsourcing cases to qualified lawyers at a later stage. When PDO commences operations, how many more people will be able to receive full legal representation, compared to the present average of 1,400 people who receive full legal representation every year under CLAS? I hope Senior Parliamentary Secretary can help answer that question later on. Another question I have is, what are the conditions to be satisfied before PDO will consider outsourcing cases to qualified lawyers in private practice? Is the intention for the remuneration payable to external lawyers under clause 6 of the Bill to be fixed under subsidiary regulations or will that be subject to another consultation? There is also an overlap between the space that the PDO will occupy and the space occupied by volunteer lawyers who take up criminal defence cases pro bono. Have there been any studies on whether there are particular types of criminal defence cases that private practitioners are more willing, or less willing, to take up pro bono?”
“(In English): There are some offences that the PDO will not cover and it looks like quite a long list. Some of the excluded offences appear to be offences that ordinary Singaporeans would likely get into trouble for and require legal aid for. Such as offences under the Road Traffic Act or regulatory offences under the purview of certain Statutory Boards. As clause 8(3) of the Bill allows the Minister to amend the Schedule of excluded offences, how often will the Ministry review the list of excluded offences and potentially reduce some of the exclusions, so that more people can benefit? Clause 12(8) of the Bill also helpfully clarifies that a person may still obtain legal representation from the PDO even if he is charged with multiple offences and if one or more of them is an excluded offence. However, will such an applicant be treated differently? Will he be required to co-pay a pro-rata share of the legal expenses corresponding to the excluded offences? Next, on clause 17 of the Bill which allows the Chief Public Defender to require a legal aid applicant to co-fund his legal defence, would that be the norm or the exception? In principle, some degree of balancing would be required to prevent abuse of the legal aid that is provided. Talking to some lawyers, I have heard stories of legal aid applicants who are less than cooperative with the volunteer lawyers who take up their defence pro bono, especially when the applicants need not fork out a single cent for their defence. So, a default co-funding arrangement may not entirely be a bad thing. It will of course be necessary to calibrate the amount of co-funding on a case-by-case basis considering the applicant's financial and other circumstances.”
“I understand that the income ceiling will be set at the bottom 35% of households, whose income per household member is $1,500 or lower. How were these limits determined? Is it still too low a ceiling, considering that a three- or four-member household who is just above that ceiling would still struggle to pay legal fees ranging between $5,000 and $8,000 that private lawyers may charge for simple criminal defence matters? This is especially so bearing in mind the current state of high inflation. To avoid conflicts of interest, clause 14(2) of the Bill rightly provides that the PDO must not act for more than one accused person or party in the same proceedings. However, if there are multiple co-accused qualifying for PDO assistance, how would the PDO choose which case to take up? One other issue is regarding centralising legal aid in general. With the creation of the PDO, is there an intention to centralise legal aid into a one-stop shop? Ordinary Singaporeans may not know which specific agency to approach for their matters. For example, the PDO, the Legal Assistance Scheme for Capital Offences (LASCO) and the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS) will provide legal representation for different types of criminal offences. The Legal Aid Bureau (LAB) may provide legal representation for certain civil proceedings. All these must also be distinguished from the agencies that provide free legal advice but not representation. I understand that clause 12(5) of the Bill already empowers the Chief Public Defender to refer an application to another suitable body or organisation providing pro bono legal services. Going one step further to provide a one-stop shop to direct Singaporeans to the legal aid they need – and which they qualify for – all these will definitely be helpful.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, most fellow Members will agree that a strong and consistent rule of law has contributed to Singapore's success over the years. A key aspect of the rule of law is access to justice, not just for some, but for all Singaporeans, regardless of their means. I would first like to commend the Government's readiness to regularly relook this position as our society matures and to shift its policy accordingly. Where the Government has previously taken a position that criminal legal aid should not be publicly funded, today, we are debating a Bill that would render assistance to Singapore residents if they are charged with certain criminal offences. So, we can build a fairer society based on justice and equality. Speaking as someone who is not legally trained, I would like to seek some clarifications on the Bill and the proposed Public Defender's Office (PDO). First, from the practical perspective of a person who may use and benefit from the PDO's services and second, on the operational and structural aspects of the PDO. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The law cannot just be a rich man’s game or for the wealthy. Today, there are various options for people to get free legal advice or answers. You can book appointments with legal clinics at the CDCs and CCs to talk to a volunteer lawyer. The iLAB chatbot on the MinLaw's website also provides legal information on issues related to family and divorce issues. On the other hand, there are lesser schemes for people to get legal representation in Court. This Public Defenders Bill aims to provide just that for Singapore Citizens and PRs who meet the criteria.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like to thank the Minister for his answer earlier with regard to my PQ scheduled for tomorrow. I have two supplementary questions which are related to the PQ which the Minister probably did not get the chance to answer. The first is whether the Flu Subsidy Scheme has encouraged more eligible residents to seek medical treatment. One of the reasons I asked the PQ for tomorrow is that some residents have come to me on the scheme because they have found it to be useful, especially in the current context of rising costs. The second supplementary question is with regard to the deactivation of the scheme, whether it will hamper early detection of efforts in terms of data collection for COVID-19 by MOH as well, going forward.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his answer. I have two supplementary questions. First, in regard to my Parliamentary Question (PQ). I am mindful there are multiple factors or reasons to move in regard to future packages, but in my PQ, I actually asked whether there is a quantitative or qualitative threshold that will trigger another support package, and if the Deputy Prime Minister can share, maybe not one single threshold but a few, if there are any. My second question is in regard to a resident who came to me. He is a poultry seller. The Deputy Prime Minister mentioned that we are in a more complex, bifurcated world with climate change and processes will change. The poultry seller's example for the question I am asking is, whether there could be targeted, specific help for specific sectors or merchants affected? In this example, a poultry seller, a merchant affected by supply-side changes. With future food protectionism moves and in a bifurcated world, can there be that targeted help for specific merchants that will be affected; in this case, poultry, but in the future, there could be other types of food being affected?”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister of State for his detailed answers. I have two supplementary questions. First, the reason why I am asking this question is because I am concerned about the slow, but then, eventually, rapid boil from the rising interest rates, in particular, the impact on the rising cash outlays by households and businesses, particularly from the cascading effect of the interest rate. So, my first question: is it possible to assess the rising cash outflows and its impact on households from the rising interest rates for this year and next? The second question is probably what is the proportion of Singaporean households vulnerable and likely to turn vulnerable at the margin, rather than currently vulnerable, as mentioned by the Minister of State. And what can they do now as Singaporean households and businesses mostly affected by the potentially slow, but then, rapidly boiling effects of rising interest rates, as we go forward beyond the second half of this year?”
“I am glad to know from the Minister that there are more sectors now that are benefiting from the CTP – 20 sectors – and, hopefully, we will have more sectors, going forward. My question is in regard to my Adjournment Motion which I raised in 2019 on this matter and I am raising it in the Parliamentary Question as well. With regard to the funding support for CTP, I had suggested before whether we can consider expanding CTP to support the transfer of capabilities from foreign employees currently already employed in Singapore to local employees, with the eventual aim of localising jobs, working in tandem with the localisation targets I mentioned back in the Adjournment Motion. This is because the current funding support of CTP only applies to incoming foreign specialists. So, I hope the Minister can answer my question here, whether we can consider expanding CTP to support transfer of capabilities from foreign employees currently already employed in Singapore to local workers.”
“If the experience of the United States is any indication, passing a consumer financial protection law would likely lead to financial institutions taking much more care to detect and pre-emptively stamp out instances of phishing and fraud, since losses cannot be immediately foisted off to the customer. Financial institutions would also be more inclined to pursue unauthorised purchases with the merchant and, these merchants, in turn, would be more careful in accepting potentially fraudulent payments, else they lose their right to accept that mode of payment. Rudimentary small-claims insurance schemes would also emerge, with costs often absorbed by the financial institutions themselves. Will this increase the cost of doing business? Of course. But the point is that the cost of policing e-commerce fraud and theft was always there; it was simply absorbed almost entirely by the consumer. Such a law would spread the risk among all actors in the economy: the buyer, the seller and the financial intermediary. It is an idea whose time has come.”
“Just as important, laws embed the democratic process in the way that regulatory machinations never quite can. Many other jurisdictions have specific consumer protection laws. In the US, the Fair Credit Billing Act was enacted as far back as 1974 and requires prompt written acknowledgement of billing disputes and the investigation of billing errors by creditors. In 2010, the Consumer Financial Protection Act was passed, establishing an independent agency within the Federal Reserve to regulate the offering and provision of consumer financial products. The United Kingdom Consumer Credit Act provides a number of comparable protections and, in the European Union, the Revised Directive on Payment Services encapsulates a number of regulations governing financial service providers, including requiring strong customer authentication for the majority of electronic payments. Implementing legislation for stronger consumer protection does not absolve individuals of their responsibility to practise good cyber-hygiene. But, at the very least, it will shift the burden of defending against such unscrupulous behaviour away from resting almost entirely on the shoulders of the household and bring businesses, in particular, banks, into the risk-sharing picture as well. Back in January, MAS announced a framework for the equitable sharing of losses arising from scams. This is surely welcomed and will provide additional clarity on apportioning fraud-related losses. But the framework is far from comprehensive and does not yet address aspects of consumer protection that go beyond scams. And just as we do not rely solely on mediation mechanisms, such as TADM and TAFEP, to fully govern our labour disputes, we can further support consumer rights in finance with appropriate legislation.”
“It would also examine compliance with regulations, from the standpoint of end-user. In this manner, we will have distinct departments addressing concerns raised by the consumer and producer which, in this case, is the banking sector. A Chinese wall could then shield this body from the various prudential supervision departments. In the past, there was a market and business conduct department, which ostensibly served the, and I quote, "interests of depositors, investors and policyholders". This may have since been enfolded into the corporate finance and consumer department. In either case, however, these appear to work more with market professionals and possibly sophisticated investors, rather than the retail consumer, nor does the department appear to be empowered to advocate on behalf of the consumer. But we can go beyond regulation, even the beefed-up kind I have suggested, to introduce outright consumer financial protection legislation. This can be independent of existing regulatory and consumer education efforts. Some see regulation and legislation as essentially two sides of the same coin. At risk of seeming pedantic, this is a distinction with a difference. Regulation is a function of Government agencies and the domain of bureaucrats, while legislation is debated, deliberated and realised in this House. Regulation has one clear advantage over legislation: because it falls under the purview of a governmental agency – in this case, MAS – it does not have to undergo the Bills process, it can be more nimble than full-bore legislation. By the same token, however, codifying essential principles into legislation enshrines the doctrines that we wish to remain inerrant and allows them to remain invariant to the vagaries of specific implementation.”
“Setting aside how such a multiplicity of objectives may occasionally come into conflict, the many objectives make it difficult for a single regulator to monitor and ensure coherence between them. Second, in its efforts to foster greater financial sector development, MAS may be more comfortable with allowing banks to experiment with innovations. This is not an issue, on its face, but the risk is that the costs of such innovations end up being disproportionately borne by the end user. Admittedly, supporting banking innovation and entrepreneurship requires some degree of regulatory forbearance, but, by the same token, this may, in turn, foster an aversion towards excessive or overzealous enforcement. Third, the proof of the pudding truly is in the eating. MAS has not always appeared to be aware of the blind spots, or, if it has, it has been reticent to act quickly and decisively. In the recent OCBC fiasco, MAS only announced possible supervisory actions against the bank, well after the fact, and in the wake of a public outcry over the matter. And despite well-known security vulnerabilities associated with SMS technology, MAS had continued to permit its use for sensitive functions, such as OTPs or requesting information from customers, and has only advocated the removal of clickable links thus far. Even if we wish for MAS to retain overall oversight responsibility over the financial sector, as implied by the consolidations weaved into this Bill, it is still reasonable to have an independent consumer financial protection arm, operating within the broader ambit of MAS. The financial protection arm would receive complaints from the public on consumer finance, such as deposits, mortgages, credit cards, an auto and education loans.”
“Scams and phishing operations have grown so sophisticated that the average layperson – not to mention those who are not comfortable with technology – cannot always be reasonably expected to routinely identify and proactively avoid them. To be fair, such due diligence is already exercised in limited form today, which means that it is clearly doable. Software-led detection of anomalous transactions has been employed by American credit card companies for decades. More recent advances in big data and machine learning have refined such techniques even further. These have been deployed to help thwart scam attempts even here. But absent stricter legislative consequences that would spread the costs of breaches and establish a minimum standard of care for retail banking customers, the effects of the inevitable lapses will continue to mainly be borne by the end-user. This still leaves enormous leeway for how banks currently choose to handle scam cases, with very limited recourse for the consumer. As a nation, we have never shied away from complementing regulation with legislation. There is little reason for us to revise this now. In principle, the Government has already tools to enforce greater discipline on banks to ensure that consumers are better protected. But there are reasons why the banking regulator, MAS, has been a little more reactive than proactive. First, banking regulation is but one of many, many hats that MAS wears. MAS is, simultaneously, the lender of last resort, banker to the Government, guardian of inflation, executor of exchange rate policy, promoter of financial development, overseer of financial stability and financial sector regulator.”
“As I shared with this House in February, my Sengkang colleague, Louis Chua and I conducted a simple experiment where we tested PayNow safeguards by transferring sums in excess of $1,000, the stated maximum daily transfer limit allowed without requiring token authentication. As I shared then, we were able to do so without any two-factor authentication (2FA), beyond the PIN. We have since repeated the experiment – all good science must be replicable – and I can confirm that we were still able to breach the stated limits without a token. Mdm Deputy Speaker, Part 9 of the Bill exhaustively deals with aspects of digital token service providers. However, even the most finely-tuned stipulations will be of limited efficacy if the tokens themselves are not deployed as intended. Moreover, lapses of this nature are not isolated. Another customer shared about how her mother's credit card limit was breached by almost two times, without any alert or the credit line being frozen. I have had residents share with me about how, after they had inadvertently released their banking information to the scammer, they realised their mistake and, within the following hour, called the bank to request forfeiting of further transactions. But the long hold times and, ironically, security verification procedures meant that the fraudulent transfers could take place in the interim. As experts in the financial world, banks and their staff hold a duty of care to their customers. They hold a far greater knowledge of the inner workings of illegal modus operandi – money mules, laundering, impersonation, scam rings – than the average customer. Moreover, they have access to the customer's banking history, which can be used to detect anomalies or deviations in their regular behaviour.”
“I am certain that many of us have had residents come to us for help with banking scams. For the recent OCBC phishing scam alone, I had two different residents wo reached out to me. The scams had wiped out their life savings. And I felt helpless – not as helpless as they did – but I certainly felt helpless that I could not offer more than to reach out to the banking institutions to share their side of the story, reassure them that the Police were working on resolving their cases and offer to follow up with agencies that they felt were not being responsive. But I could not tell them that Parliament was working to better protect them and others like them with the specific force of law. As online services become increasingly the norm in Singapore, the opportunities and incentives for bad actors will increase. While banking scams are impossible to completely eradiate, we can better manage the acceptable level of risk. But our legislative efforts have largely been cautionary, by encouraging individuals to exercise the appropriate cyber-hygiene, as if we needed another type of hygiene situation to worry about; or reactive, when the Police force is mostly left with belated attempts to track down and apprehend perpetrators, many of whom will never ever be found, or will fall beyond the reach of our current laws. The banking sector, to date, has appealed to the viability of self-regulation. Indeed, on paper, some of these additional protections may have helped prevent some instances of fraud, had they been operative. But many were not.”
“But I now understand that, much like the ability to return goods, no questions asked, within a stipulated timeframe or the ability to access long-term fixed-term mortgages, these features of economic life result from regulatory and legislative choices that the US has chosen. Indeed, many other OECD economies have weaved together laws and regulations that afford much more financial protection for the average consumer than we have been able to muster. Mdm Deputy Speaker, the FSM Bill of 2022 brings together a host of hitherto disparate financial sector requirements that fall under MAS into a single piece of legislation. Such consolidation is welcomed, of course, not least because it renders transparent the full scope of rules and regulations MAS oversees. The omnibus Bill is wide-ranging and touches on matters as diverse as anti-money laundering (AML) and combating financing of terrorism (CFT) provisions, requirements for technology risk management and statutory protection for financial dispute resolution agents. While I support the Bill, I will focus my remarks on Part 5, which have to do with technology risk management. I will do so through the lens of the consumer and, in particular, consumer protection. Before I proceed, I declare that I am the Chief Economist Emeritus of a wealth management advisory outfit. Banking-related fraud is pervasive in Singapore. In 2020, there were 893 reported cases of banking-related phishing activities, costing victims at least $3.3 million. And in the first half of 2021, excluding the $13.7 million loss from the OCBC episode, already 535 cases were reported, tallying at least $2.1 million. The number of scam cases has steadily risen and this trend is unlikely to retreat.”
“Is there any data or study on the number of persons who had previously been issued with a PO and who have, thereafter, returned to the financial sector? As MAS has explicitly noted, POs materially affect individual livelihoods and we must calibrate the impact of POs precisely. While it is important to prevent unfit persons from performing specific roles in the financial sector and to deter others from committing similar misconduct, we should ensure that those who have made mistakes are punished adequately for their errors, and no more. In that vein, can I ask the Minister if an individual's previous PO can be purged from the records after a specific period of time? In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, our continued success as a financial hub will depend on how we balance the strict enforcement of integrity, competence and financial soundness standards with the management of compliance costs. We must constantly revisit this balance to stay ahead of rapid technological and other developments and to keep our lead as a market-leading and trusted financial centre. I support the Bill. 7.29 pm Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Those of us who have travelled or lived in the US may be aware that if we open a bank or credit card statement and we notice an unrecognised transaction, we would simply call the financial institution, report the incident and, in most instances, the customer service officer will, eventually, remove the error transaction, often after some investigation. I used to view this as an anomalous luxury, the sort of sociocultural exceptionalism that only a global financial superpower like the US will be able to conjure.”
“And MAS' consultation response suggests that sufficient notice will be given before the PO provisions are brought into effect, even after this Bill passes into law. A key change is the broadened categories of persons who may be subject to POs, beyond employees of FIs performing regulated functions and including the service providers of FIs. Importantly, it will be a criminal offence for the FI itself, if it were to employ, or use the services of, a person against whom a PO is made. Would the defence of taking all reasonable steps to ensure compliance and reasonable belief of compliance allow FIs to simply "shift" the regulatory burden to its service providers? It would not seem fair to allow a bigger and better-resourced FI to rely on its service provider's contractual warranties and covenants, and effectively pass the regulatory burden to a smaller service provider who might not primarily operate in the regulated financial sector. Is MAS intending to create and maintain a public register of POs beyond the current publication of formal regulatory and enforcement actions taken by MAS on its "Enforcement Actions" webpage? This would make it easier for all FIs and/or their service providers to comply with the PO regime. We must also be conscious of the impact caused to individuals who have been, or may in the future be, issued with a PO. Given the expanded scope for which POs may be issued, FIs may require some clarity in the form of MAS' guidance on the specific scope of POs issued in the newly-extended areas. Any ambiguity could create employee deployment issues for FIs and may drive them to terminate or refrain from hiring persons who have been issued with a PO entirely.”
“As we are recovering from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, some have also opined that MAS should take a more supportive and facilitative approach by helping FIs scale up on TRM, instead of threatening FIs with a big stick. Considering Singapore's aim to nurture a wider fintech ecosystem, including for startups, could MAS perhaps instead consider requiring any prospective licensees to present adequate cybersecurity plans as a condition for granting or renewing licences? This was a suggestion which I had mooted in this House last year. Such cybersecurity plans could include risk management measures, such as security audits of systems and servers and regular bug bounty programmes, to identify gaps ahead of malicious hackers, facilitating job and development opportunities for local white hat hackers and other cybersecurity talents. Like the Personal Data Protection Commission, MAS could stipulate the existence and extent of such voluntary plans and undertakings as an additional factor to mitigate any penalty that is imposed on a regulated entity if a breach or disruption event occurs. Finally, the third area is to guard against the unintended effects of our regulation, especially as the market participants find ways to "shift" or "pass on" the regulatory burden. Part 3 of the Bill proposes to introduce a single, harmonised power to issue Prohibition Orders, or POs, to persons to prevent them from performing particular functions in Singapore's financial sector. This will replace the MAS' existing powers to issue POs to different individuals on different grounds under different legislation. As a preliminary question, when will this new PO regime be brought into effect?”
“Has MAS studied crypto and virtual assets sufficiently to rationalise the piecemeal guidance it has issued to respond to specific issues and to articulate its holistic strategy to regulate such assets? Another question that I have is whether MAS has considered carving out such "export" service providers from licensing and regulation under the FSM Act if they are already being regulated in another jurisdiction which enforces the FATF Standards at the minimum, for example, where their services are being provided. This would prevent duplicative compliance costs from having to comply with the multiple regulatory regimes but still meet the FATF's intent to mitigate the risk of regulatory arbitrage. Mdm Deputy Speaker, the second area is to be careful not to over-regulate and stifle the financial industry. Excessive compliance burdens can cause market participants to re-evaluate whether they should continue operating out of Singapore. Such "offshoring" not only reduces jobs and opportunities, but also hinders the development of an ecosystem in budding areas like fintech. Clause 29 of the Bill empowers MAS to impose requirements of TRM on any FI it regulates. Importantly, the maximum penalty for non-compliance with such TRM requirements is proposed to be $1 million plus $100,000 for every day that the offence continues after conviction, to signal the importance of TRM in light of the serious effects of any potential disruption. This high penalty might have the chilling effect of discouraging FIs from working with fintech startups which typically have small operations and may not be able to invest in layered and complex cybersecurity defences.”
“As I understand it, digital token service providers who are providing such services in Singapore will continue to be licensed and regulated under the more extensive requirements in the Payment Services Act, the Securities and Futures Act and/or the Financial Advisers Act. I support the implementation of the Financial Action Task Force's (FATF) recommendation to ensure that virtual asset service providers are at least regulated in their home jurisdiction for money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/TF) risks. At the same time, we should also consider other regulatory aims, such as consumer protection, prudential safety and anti-market manipulation, even for those "export" service providers who only provide their digital token services outside of Singapore. Even if a particular digital token service is being provided abroad, Singaporeans and Singapore may still be exposed to that digital token and its risks. For example, we may wish to subject Singapore token advertisers who advertise outside of Singapore to the same restrictions that had recently been issued to Digital Payment Token service providers regulated under the Payment Services Act. The high level of Internet accessibility and connectivity that Singaporeans enjoy means that we can no longer so clearly separate what is inside and outside of Singapore. Subjecting regulated digital token service providers to the same rules, regardless of whether they are providing digital token services inside or outside Singapore, would simplify compliance for them. It would avoid the situation where a single digital token service provider is potentially subject to different legislation and regimes. However, that probably turns on the following deeper questions.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, first, I would like to declare that I am employed by an MAS-licensed bank in Singapore. On this Bill, I would like to raise some clarifications and suggestions on managing the regulatory costs or burden on market participants. These are grouped into three main areas – the need for a coherent and consistent regulatory framework, avoiding over-regulation and guarding against unintended burdens on entities or individuals. The first area is the continuing push for a coherent and consistent regulatory framework. Our regulatory requirements should be easy to understand so that market participants do not have to waste time and costs trying to figure them out, or to "over-comply" on the safe side. I, therefore, applaud the efforts to adopt a financial sector-wide regulatory approach in the consolidation of some of MAS' regulatory powers into this one Bill. My first question is whether this Bill is merely the first step in a broader exercise to rationalise our regulations on a financial sector-wide basis. Will we gradually see the transposition of more pieces of our regulatory fabric into this FSM Bill, if passed? This could allow us to surface and harmonise the possible inconsistencies in related regulations or how they are implemented. There is one part of this Bill that seems to cut against a financial sector-wide regulatory approach. In Part 9 of the Bill, MAS seeks to introduce a regime to license and regulate digital token service providers based in Singapore but who provide digital token services outside Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, I am following up on the question that my residents raised to me. Over the past Meet-the-People sessions online, there were a few residents who are local small SMEs who came to me highlighting about the rise in electricity prices. And I think it is in reference to my Parliamentary Question as well on small SMEs. So, my question is, with regard to whether MTI or MOF is amenable to a lower-tier TRECS, for example, as we know, the TRECS that we have now is applied to larger SMEs and whether, in the future, there could be a lower tier. My concern is, local SMEs are very important because they employ quite a significant number of workers and we are talking about wages, jobs and unemployment. We need to address the local SMEs which employ a significant number of our local workers. And such a move, if it is amenable to MTI or MOF, in terms of a lower-tier TRECS in the future, whether that is a possibility.”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to ask two supplementary questions. First, it is in regard to what the Minister of State mentioned just now about debt servicing being in good condition. It is good to hear that. But, Mr Speaker, may I ask what is the proportion of the segment of those exposed in the population in terms of personal, unsecured loans? The second supplementary question is in regard to the domestic interest rate outlook. The Federal Reserve Bank of the US is expected to raise their rates quite significantly. The expectations are based on the committee's announcements. There will be sharp rate hikes over the course of the year and into 2023. Given that it would definitely affect the domestic rate situation in Singapore and it would be very fast, it would definitely affect households and businesses in terms of cash outlays, especially so in the current inflation environment that we are seeing now. Can the Minister of State share what is our domestic rate outlook? And I think he mentioned about the projections and scenarios, but what does it mean for households and businesses, in terms of the rapid pace?”
“Chairman, I would like to thank Minister Masagos Zulkifli, Second Minister Mohamad Maliki and Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad for answering my questions. I have two clarifications. First is in regard to the GIC-MENDAKI scholarship for Singaporean students, I really welcome the announcement. It is a good step in that direction. I need to seek further details on the scholarship. One, when will it be offered? How many recipients will be awarded the scholarship? What are the eligibility criteria? And would there be further expansion to possibly postgraduate scholarships because I mentioned that the SkillsFuture credit take-up is quite low. So, the lifelong learning efforts in the community can be enhanced even further through postgraduate scholarships as well. My second clarification is with regard to the question in my cut. What are our plans for a sectoral-based approach to enhance our PMET representations in sectors which are growing as well as sectors that are growth industries as it is now? What are our plans for corporate scholarships and partnerships because of the points that I raised earlier about low PMET numbers and the low take-up of SkillsFuture credits?”
“4% of Malay workers had utilised the SkillsFuture Credit scheme between 2015 and 2020. I have a few suggestions on that front. First, we can tie up career sharing programmes with other initiatives. I recently had the opportunity to visit a clinic where Lawyers@M³ executed Lasting Power of Attorney for my residents. We could perhaps wrap in a sharing on mid-career switch to lawyering, which can reach the applicants, as well as their children who accompanied them. Second, we can encourage our Malay/Muslim workers, especially the younger ones, to be adaptable and to try new things. Our workers should be encouraged to venture abroad, through overseas secondments and training opportunities. Third, we can facilitate interaction and cross-pollination of ideas between the Malay/Muslim workforce and the rest of the workforce, among Chinese, Indian and Malay Chambers and with corporates. There are areas where the community has subject matter expertise, for example, Islamic finance, which some of my Chinese and European colleagues are also interested to learn more. By teaching, one can reinforce his or her understanding and expertise in a particular area as well. No matter the specific initiatives we implement, we ought to have a coordinated approach to help our Malay/Muslim workers develop into a competent, future-ready workforce.”
“Mr Chairman, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, our community has many achievements, but we only have about 6% Malay workers in the PMET categories. This category usually gets a better salary. Statistics also show that a large number of Malay/Muslim women who are married or had married previously are not economically active and are an untapped labour group. We also have a shortage of Malay workers in certain sectors such as tech financing, green financing, banking, as well as in the developing sectors. So, our goal must not only be to get more people within our community into permanent jobs and to ensure that they can be upskilled to get better jobs with higher wages and job security, but to work in the developing sectors in future. Various initiatives are already underway to build a competent and future-ready workforce among the Malay/Muslim community. One example is the agreement which was signed by NTUC and Yayasan MENDAKI on 24 February 2022. Another example is M3, which leads many initiatives, including organising career fairs and providing training and career advice. What is the Government's thinking on streamlining our efforts to build a competent, future-ready workforce in the Malay/Muslim community? Are there specific detailed efforts to reallocate and concentrate more Malay/Muslim talent, both young and mature, in emerging growth sectors, such as through permanent internship opportunities and sectoral level scholarships with various corporations? We must have sectoral focus and have a deeper collaboration with the private sector. 2.15 pm (In English): We will also need to focus on cultivating a culture of learning and upskilling within the Malay/Muslim community. While the take-up rate is increasing, only 8.”
“Mr Chairman, the state of our air, sea and land transport is a reflection of our economic and the social state of our country. And we have discussed today quite a significant range on air, land and sea. I am really looking forward to all our efforts to make our air and sea hubs status thrive again: the job opportunities that Senior Minister of State Chee mentioned just now in maritime Singapore and in various other sectors, the dedicated cycling paths that are going to come on stream and also the TEL, JRL and CRL. So, in other words, a wide range of exciting opportunities in the transport sector. Before I withdraw my amendment, I would like to thank Members for their 30-plus cuts and many thanks to Minister Iswaran, Senior Minister of State Amy Khor, Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng for their responses. And also the Permanent Secretary of MOT and his team and our MOT family of agencies – CAAS, MPA, LTA. And most importantly, to all our frontline workers in the transport sector. I think they have put in a huge effort, not just over the last year but over the past two years. I have been saying this for the previous Budget cuts and discussions. So, all their hard work, conviction and passion to keep our air, sea and land hubs working well and going forward, being future-ready. With that, Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $3,704,101,400 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $7,216,684,300 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“For example, at the usage of Park Connector Network (PCN) level, we can roll out a PCN cycling and pedestrian density real-time "crowd level" map akin to NParks' Safe Distance website where it helps users avoid or navigate with the understanding it is a busy PCN peak period. Growth and Job Creation in Transport Sector We are seeing these exciting transport evolutions as we see the transport industry facing a sea change globally. International climate change objectives have intensified the race to decarbonise transport, which accounts for around one-fifth of global carbon emissions. Technological advancements are driving the evolution of smart and intelligent transport systems. We are seeing these exciting transport evolutions in Singapore as well, including the Hyundai electric vehicle (EV) plant that is coming up, the commercial air taxi services that are coming up as well. Smart technology can complement our transport system by providing last-mile connectivity where required, such as to our islands. At the same time, the COVID-19 pandemic has also shaken up the transport industry over the past two years as transport routes and norms are disrupted. While our seaport continued to post stellar results despite the pandemic, the same cannot be said about our air transport and supporting services industry, which has bled thousands of jobs since the pandemic broke. What is the projected job creation outlook in the transport sector, be it air, land or maritime? What are the emerging areas and what future jobs will be there and how can we encourage and develop local talent to join these sectors early on?”
“Mr Chairman, today, many countries in the world are talking about smart transportation or intelligent transportation systems. We are no different. Under our Smart Mobility 2030 masterplan launched in 2014, we aim to optimise transport systems and enhance commuter travel experience across Singapore with the latest developments in transport technologies. Time-wise, we are almost at the 50% mark. Could the Ministry share an update on our progress? What are the Ministry's plan and strategy to embrace, testbed and utilise new and advanced technologies to benefit commuters in Singapore or even globally? Putting aside autonomous and green vehicles, one of the centrepieces in the Smart Mobility vision is to leverage data and analytics to optimise the use of transport systems. Besides collecting information and analysing them at the backend, it is equally important to push such information to individual commuters, so that we are able to influence our user behaviour in real time. This is not new – we have long been informing motorists of road conditions through radio broadcasts and the Expressway Monitoring and Advisory System’s (EMAS) electronic signboards. 7.00 pm However, rapid improvements in technology mean there are now faster and more efficient ways to push information to commuters. We can now look to apps and websites on our mobile phone for bus arrival timings from the SBS Transit app, ERP rates from the MyTransport app and road conditions from OneMotoring. But these are only as useful as we can get commuters to use them. What is the utilisation of feedback on these informative apps? Is there an opportunity to centralise information on a single user-friendly platform, now that a global chip shortage has delayed the rollout of the Next-Gen-ERP to the latter half of 2023?”
“Perhaps the Government can consider how we can use idle state land to support this – as part of our more general plan to move our sea port westwards in the coming years. Third, we must remember that supply chain disruptions are a global problem and no one country is going to solve it themselves. So, collaboration is key. Even as we compete, we must recognise that sharing knowledge and solutions will improve the interoperability across a network of ports and enhance our resilience and reliability as a regional transport solution. Through this pandemic, I am glad that we have succeeded in developing and sharing safe crew change protocols with fellow International Maritime Organisation member states and enhanced our digital OCEANSTM initiative to shape and harmonise global data standards. We must continue these efforts to export knowledge. How does the Ministry intend to further enhance Singapore as a reliable and resilient transport node? [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Advanced Tech in the Transport Sector”
“Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of the Estimates be reduced by $100." As we hopefully look to emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic year, it is timely for us to take stock of the lessons we have learnt from the supply chain disruptions amidst the COVID-19 pandemic and how businesses are responding to the same. This will prepare us to bolster our hub status as a reliable and resilient transport node to the world. First, there is a general consensus that digitalisation is required to mitigate the risk of supply chain disruptions. To utilise our limited resources productively, we have already been focusing on digitalisation before the pandemic. But other larger and resource-rich countries will also see the same need now – whether it is using AI and machine learning to decrease dependency on human labour in critical parts of the supply chain or digitising the cumbersome paperwork that accompanies the cargo flowing through the chain. So, while I welcome the launch of our Supply Chain 4.0 Initiative to help small businesses scale up on digital and automated solutions to make supply chains more resilient and secure, we need to think about how we can continue to stay ahead as the transport node of choice. Second, the unpredictability of supply chain disruptions has led businesses to move from "just in time" to a "just in case" inventory strategy. As businesses start to keep a fair level of buffer beyond their expected inventory needs, they are also looking for integrated short-term storage solutions in addition to the efficient processing and clearance of goods at our ports. This creates a conundrum for land-scarce Singapore, where storage space at our ports or elsewhere is only available at a premium.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. I got one clarification in regard to EIP and it is addressed to the Minister. First of all, I thank the Minister for the explicit move on the EIP. It has been a long time coming to help families or individuals who cannot sell. My first clarification is about the fair offer. In what way can the Minister reassure sellers involved in this EIP appeal, on a case-by-case basis, and residents have suggested this as well, as in a buyback from HDB? But how can the Minister reassure that the price will not be too low when the valuation comes in and what is the valuation level that will be coming up? The second question is, sometimes, the seller could be seniors who stay in some of these old mature flats and they stay alone. How can HDB help them to compile these documents for submission? I know property agents may be involved, but, in some ways, how can we inform some of these senior sellers with regard to documentation? Because it looks quite onerous in terms of collecting listings for six months and all that.”
“Mr Chairman, the fact that Singaporeans of various races live and interact with one another in harmony differentiates us from many other countries. Similar to three other Members who have shared on the EIP, the unintended economic consequences of EIP have been repeated frequently, including in this House. Minorities sometimes face or perceive difficulties in selling their HDB flats at their desired price, especially where they are prevented from selling to Chinese buyers who make up a large proportion of the market. I have also heard the same from my Malay and Indian residents. Is there room for us to refine EIP so that we do not economically disadvantage our minority residents while ensuring that we do not form significant ethnic enclaves? As we move to unite larger neighbourhoods with community hubs like Our Tampines Hub and Kampung Admiralty, is it possible to loosen the block-by-block quota and enforce a second-level "cluster" or "district" quota, while still maintaining the broad principles in EIP? Better Living Environment”
“Chairman, I would like to thank the Senior Minister and the Ministers for their very detailed answers to some of our cuts. I have two clarifications. My first clarification is with regard to the risk-weighted assets question that I asked in my cut. With the efforts to incentivise carbon credits and the ecosystem, may I ask Minister for Trade and Industry Mr Gan Kim Yong whether the efforts to incentivise by introducing risk-weighted assets are a bit lower for FIs, for example, to hold on to carbon credits? As of now, I think carbon credits are regarded as a high risk and the weights in the risk-weighted asset are quite high. That is my first question. For my second clarification, I would like to first thank Minister for Transport S Iswaran for sharing that the cut-off for EV cars for COE Cat A has been increased to 110 kilowatts, thus benefiting 10 cars. But my question is with regard to my cut about the taxes – road tax for EVs. Can the Minister share a bit more how we can enhance this incentivisation of the rebate structure for EV cars on the road tax front? And the other one is on motorcars – what monitoring developments and assessments will be needed to ensure that earlier adoption incentive for electric motorcycles can be done earlier than later?”
“However, we do need to study our incentive and rebate structure to see if any revisions are necessary. For example, I understand that road tax for EVs is currently based on the simple addition of the power output of its motors and this may lead to weird situations where an EV is taxed based on a total added output of 390 kW even though it can only deliver a maximum combined output of 240 kW. Harnessing technological advancements can also promote the adoption of EVs by enhancing convenience and efficiency. Battery swapping technology has been tried and tested in markets like China and Norway and represents a more efficient proposition to users than electric charging at charging stations. This could complement our existing strategy of building more EV charging points closer to where people live. Finally, the recent episodes of personal mobility device fires remind us of how the stability our vehicular batteries can become a safety issue. We must reassure the people that EVs are a safe option before they can decide to embrace it. Can the Ministry share more about its overarching strategy to further stimulate EV adoption among road users in Singapore? Would the Minister consider introducing an early adoption incentive for electric motorcycles? 11.30 am Electric Vehicles (EVs)”
“Mr Chairman, the Government has announced that, upon review, it will bring forward the timeline for us to achieve net-zero around 2050. Pre-pandemic, transport accounted for 16.2% of Singapore's carbon emissions. This is already a lower percentage than the US, UK and the global figure, but it is still a significant piece as we look out to cut our carbon emissions. What are the Ministry's plans to reduce transport emissions on land, air and sea? A key pillar of our efforts to decarbonise our transport system is the adoption of electric vehicles, or EVs. Our Land Transport Master Plan 2040 aims to phase out internal combustion energy vehicles by 2040. To successfully do so, we must make EVs a financially sensible option for users, capitalise on rapid technological advancements and ensure that our infrastructure is integrated to support this switch to EVs. Presently, a major obstacle to private adoption of EVs is the prohibitive costs involved. Vehicle prices in Singapore are already among the world’s highest, with our COE system to control the vehicle population in land-scarce Singapore. As most electric cars have a higher power output than the 97-kilowatt (kW) threshold under CAT A, they fall within CAT B where COE prices has recently soared past $93,000. This discourages the uptake of EVs and is likely preventing a wider choice of EVs from entering the Singapore market. We may need to relook how our EVs are classified for COE purposes. Another question is whether the existing incentives and rebates for EVs are sufficient to affect consumer behaviour to the desired level. Given Singapore's car-lite strategy, we probably cannot afford to give EV owners a two-year road tax exemption like how Malaysia has done.”
“Further, given our lack of natural resources, including land, we are unlikely to have any huge wind farms or hydroelectric plants that can originate a large amount of carbon credits for sale. We, therefore, require our agencies like EDB to go out and attract project developers to bring and sell their carbon credits in Singapore with an "ASEAN Registry" of sorts set up. We will also need to train the necessary subject matter expertise in our workforce, whether through our tertiary institutions or our various work training programmes. Can the Government provide an update on our efforts to build a carbon credit trading ecosystem? Will we expect to see a detailed roadmap outlining how and when we will get there? Efforts to Transform the Energy Sector One of the most far-reaching crises today is the global energy crunch. Increased fuel consumption from an economy recovering from COVID-19, production outages and geopolitical events have driven up prices. Presently, almost 95% of Singapore's electricity is generated using imported natural gas. Hence, our push to transition into a low-carbon energy future cannot come at a more opportune time. However, given our limited size, what challenges does the Government expect with energy transition and what measures have been put in place to ensure a smooth transition? For Singapore, solar energy appears more promising than other renewable energy sources like wind or hydro. Can the Government provide an update on our solar development and deployment plans and whether there are any efforts to accelerate solar deployment? Will we look to incentivise individual households to install their own solar panels to defray their own consumption? Transforming the Energy Sector”
“Mr Chairman, Minister Tan See Leng mentioned that Singapore could harness its robust legislative commodity trading and financial services foundation to develop an international trusted carbon services and training ecosystem here. We are not the only ones interested. Other countries, like China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines, are all taking steps to establish its own carbon markets or frameworks to trade carbon credits. We need to coordinate a holistic inter-agency effort to create a vibrant marketplace with many active participants with clear ESG and carbon credit standards in place. At present, carbon markets are plagued by low liquidity, scarce financing, inadequate risk management services and limited data availability. We will need to further encourage our financial institutions (FIs) to get involved to meet the liquidity and financing difficulties. Market infrastructure should develop along with deliberate and calibrated regulation by MAS and MinLaw. For example, what would be the risk-weighted asset, or RWA, to be associated with carbon credits? For FIs holding carbon credits, will we need clearing houses to mitigate risks? At the moment, the weights are high and unclear. While the Government's decision to allow businesses to use high-quality carbon credits to offset up to 5% of the taxable emissions will help stimulate local demand for such credits, as with many other things, we must also look to cater to external demand. MTI and MFA must engage our partners to ensure that our carbon credits will be accepted in other countries, too. We may need to provide it in our Free Trade Agreements so that other countries cannot take protection and discriminatory approach.”
“Mr Chairman, I would like to thank the Ministers for their answers to my cuts earlier. I have two clarifications. First is in regard to my question. It is good to hear Ministers' answers that there are efforts to build talent and manpower by sector. But I would just like to follow up on work to enhance the supply of Singaporeans with the requisite skillsets. In terms of the Capability Transfer Programme (CTP), I am looking at the website of WSG, which mentions that one of the purposes of capabilities transfer programme is to develop a sufficient supply of Singaporeans. Can Minister explain further, whether in this year's Budget, whether there is any amount set aside for enhancements to the CTP? The second question I have is in relation to Ukraine. Since the Budget Statement was announced, a few things have happened, especially on oil prices. A lot of analysts are talking about the Russian oil price shock now, in terms of supply crisis, logistics crisis and payment crises and many crises that have emerged. The impact on eurozone growth is a big concern now. So, from an economic growth perspective and its impact on businesses in Singapore, what are our plans and concerns to help businesses, especially those that are exposed to eurozone?”
“Chairman, a topic that never gets old is how we brace Singapore's economy for the future. To that end, the Government works closely with our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), industries and the Labour Movement to equip our workforce with the skills and knowledge which companies need. The future is exciting with emerging, high-growth areas but it is also uncertain and dynamic with demand for workers and talent which is high. We cannot guarantee what will happen in five or 10 years' time. In 2018, hardly anyone saw this pandemic slowing the airline industry to a halt, including the demand for manpower and local workers as well as retention. So, we need to build in flexibility as we train our workforce to be future-ready. In providing continuous learning and training opportunities, perhaps we can model after our IHLs and structure courses that are more general, core modules that are applicable across groups of adjacent industries, together with specialised electives that are industry-specific and spend resources to reallocate talent with enhanced Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) by sector and using technology for skills matching. How will Singapore ensure that firms, both present and future, continue to have access to the talent they need to support their expansion and operations in Singapore? Growth, Human Resource and Costs”
“Mr Chairman, as a small state, Singapore’s defence depends not only on our will and ability to defend ourselves, but also the strategic friendships that we maintain with other nations. Singapore is particularly vulnerable to shocks that take place in our external environment, often due to developments outside of our control. Hence, our cooperation with like-minded partners in areas of common interest is important. As the world looks to step out of the COVID-19 shadow, I am glad to see that diplomatic meetings and engagements are starting to return. I imagine that virtual formats may not be the most conducive means to build mutual trust. The recent agreement signed at the Singapore-Indonesia Leaders’ Retreat is a good case in point. Notwithstanding that, I am sure that MINDEF and SAF have innovated new ways to keep up international engagements and advance partnerships in extraordinary times. How are MINDEF and SAF cooperating with their foreign counterparts to address common security challenges? It is also important to note that national security threats have evolved today and may now take less conventional forms. Instead of hot war or armed conflict, different threats, such as cyber attacks, hostile information campaigns and even future pandemics, might endanger our lives and livelihoods, equally or even to a greater extent. In view of that, what are the principles guiding our defence diplomacy efforts? Will we see more agreements to conduct joint military exercises and our SAF training abroad, or for other types of cooperation like the cybersecurity MOU we signed with the US Department of Defence when US Vice President Kamala Harris visited Singapore last year? Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) with Indonesia”
“Mr Chairman, businesses have suffered reduced earnings, increased business costs and cash flow difficulties as revenue became unpredictable due to COVID-19. Added to this are the global supply chain disruptions which COVID-19 has brought about. In various countries like China, COVID-19 lockdowns and labour disruptions meant that goods which could be shipped in about two weeks’ time could now take three times longer. COVID-19 outbreaks on container vessels increased freight times as these vessels were either turned away from ports or subjected to quarantine and other measures. We recently had our own episode around the Chinese New Year period where COVID-19 cases amongst SATS staff led to severe delays in cargo processing at Changi Airport. As a major buyer of goods and services itself, how has the Government supported its suppliers during this challenging period? Beyond attempting to settle the supplier’s invoice earlier than what payment terms provide for, how has the Government exercised flexibility and demonstrated solidarity with its suppliers, especially local SMEs?”
“Digital transformation has accelerated as Singaporeans learned to connect with others, including hawkers and retailers, from their homes in this pandemic. Many of my residents, including senior citizens, now interact with me over online Meet-the-People sessions and livestreamed constituency events. Technology is important as a touchpoint between the Government and citizens. The high and increasing figures in the Annual Survey on Satisfaction with Government Digital Services are commendable. It is also heartening to see that 97% of citizens and 95% of businesses were satisfied with the digital solutions rolled out by the Government during the pandemic. However, there are still many opportunities to tap on. The centralisation of functions on a single platform – like the Singpass and TraceTogether Apps – is helpful and should be further developed. If we can seamlessly integrate the services from different Government agencies using a single platform and a common pool of citizens’ data, we can utilise AI to better anticipate individual citizens' needs and push services to those who may not be aware of schemes applicable to them. Meanwhile, episodes involving the private sector have demonstrated the risks that we need to manage while going digital. The compromise of personal access details through scams, service outages due to backend technical issues, and data breaches are something we need to look out for. Finally, another gap in our digitalisation efforts is that it appears to be focused on the English language and too little on vernacular languages. How does the Public Service intend to leverage technology to deliver its services better and faster to citizens, or to improve its own productivity? Development of Public Service Officers”
“I am glad to read that our collective efforts have paid off in buttressing the recession as well as resident unemployment. We must now turn our attention to middle- to long-term goals and uplift our citizens' well-being, as well as to continue to help Singaporeans out of the long shadow of COVID-19. On that note, I support Budget 2022 which aims to secure the welfare and the future of Singapore and Singaporeans.”