Sun Xueling
Singapore
“We are deploying electric vehicle (EV) chargers in tandem with growing demand, within the constraints of space and electricity. As EV technology is continuously improving, we are also mindful not to overbuild as chargers can become obsolete quickly.”
“I thank Member Dr Choo Pei Ling for raising feedback from her Tengah residents. Currently, two multi-storey car parks in Tengah have EV chargers, and LTA subsidiary, EV-Electric (EVe) Charging Pte Ltd, is in the process of deploying EV chargers in another eight multi-storey car parks in Tengah.”
“The Government targets to deploy 60,000 electric vehicle (EV) charging points by 2030, which comprise 40,000 in public car parks, and 20,000 in private premises. As of March 2026, there are 30,500 EV charging points deployed in Singapore. We are on track to achieving our 2030 target in tandem with the growing demand for EVs.”
“In 2025, about 30% of Build-To-Order (BTO) blocks were completed earlier than their estimated completion dates at the point of flat booking. On average, these blocks were completed about two months earlier.”
“Yes, thank you. We agree with Dr Neo that it is important to bring together the wider ecosystem and we will consult all stakeholders. The Ministry of Transport's immediate focus is to drive the usage of drones more extensively, especially by the public sector and this is because we already have many potential use cases.”
“I thank the Member for her question. Earlier, I mentioned in my reply that the HDB notifies buyers at three junctures. This is to give buyers adequate time to plan. And that is why it is at the one year before, six months before and three months before.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,352 lines we hold for Sun Xueling, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 21 of 28.
“They not only look at the surface of things, but also the inside. On the surface, AHTC does not seem to have any problems. Yes, there are still people doing maintenance on the properties, elevators are still running, and the landscaping is still being done. However, the Members of Parliament have actually breached their fiduciary duties, caused conflict of interest, resulting in the mismanagement of the Town Council. Time reveals a person's true colour. Residents will eventually see the matter clearly. Integrity is at the centre of all values and the foundation of Singapore's society and politics. Integrity is manifested through good governance, and is what differentiates Singapore from many other parts of the world in terms of public service and the Parliamentary system. Only with integrity can we accomplish the task of serving the people and each constituency. If Members of Parliament lack integrity, the very foundation of Singapore's politics will be undermined, so will the confidence of people in our governance. When a Member of Parliament has done something illegal, whether he is not afraid to bear the responsibility or looking for excuses will be watched by everyone, including young Singaporeans. When a Member of Parliament lacks integrity and that affects residents' interest, how should the Parliament react? Should we just keep quiet on this matter, or look at it seriously and try to rectify? Our choice will also affect the political climate in Singapore and people’s trust in the Government. It will also have a profound impact on young Singaporeans' thinking. Integrity and a healthy political climate are worth all of us to defend, because we care about Singapore's future. Earlier, I listened to Mr Faisal Manap and what he has said.”
“In October this year, the High Court passed a verdict that the three Worker's Party Members of Parliament must bear legal responsibility for the loss suffered by the Town Council. If Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Low Thia Khiang are still trying to find excuses at this juncture, I feel that it will make people more confused, and it is truly regrettable. The residents trust us and give us their votes. We have a duty to take care of their needs, treat them with honesty and make sure that their interests are protected. We must ensure the proper use of the residents' money and public funds. In order to protect the residents' interest, the most important thing is to rely on an open and transparent system, such as an open tender, audit, legal processes, and Parliamentary debate. When things are in the dark, they get mouldy easily. When things are open and transparent, mistakes will be easily discovered and corrected. That is why everyone must follow the rules and due processes. They should not try to make short cuts and evade oversight. The Workers' Party often talked about transparency, oversight and accountability in the past. Yet, based on the evidence brought forth by various parties and the Court’s verdict, we see that some Members of Parliament of the Workers' Party are not at all open and transparent in handling their own Town Council affairs. What is worse, they have even tried to cover up the truth, deceive other town councillors and ask other people to sanitise the report so that they can have a veneer of truth and integrity. This has severely violated what they themselves have once espoused. How should we look at what they have said before? How can we trust their promises in future? Residents not only judge a Member of Parliament by his words, but also his actions.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, kindly allow me to speak in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] On 11 October, the High Court delivered a verdict on the AHTC case. In its judgment, the High Court stated that AHTC had decided not to call an open tender without justifiable reasons, and appointed FMSS as the management company. This was a disregard of the Town Council's interest, and a clear violation of its financial rules. The High Court has found that Mr Low Thia Khiang and Ms Sylvia Lim had breached their fiduciary duties, and Mr Pritam Singh has breached his duties of skill and care to AHTC. The Court has also found that Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Low Thia Khiang had deliberately kept the matter of appointing a new MA in the dark and made misleading statements. Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Low Thia Khiang even asked Ms How Weng Fan and Danny Loh to sanitise the reports to pass the audit. Other town councillors were also kept in the dark. The judge pointed out that these behaviours were "not transparent", "dishonest", "egregious" and "unacceptable". The AHTC saga has been going on for eight years. The problems were discovered together by various parties in the community. The financial issues of the Town Council were first discovered by auditors appointed by the Town Council itself. In 2015, AGO assessed that AHTC's governance did not pass the bar. The Town Council later appointed KPMG as an independent auditor who has found many improper payments. After that, the Town Council appointed an Independent Panel to follow up on KPMG's report, and the Independent Panel advised that the Town Council sue three Members of Parliament of the Workers' Party.”
“On the first point that the Member mentioned, I would like to clarify that we actually do not prosecute Singaporean sex workers for sex offences, for providing sexual services, because it is not an offence. But for the foreign sex workers, they have committed an immigration offence and that is why they have to be deported. On the second point about transiting out of sex work, I mentioned that we have various policies in place and this is something that the Government will also look into actively to help Singaporean sex workers transit out of the sex trade. On the last point on a dialogue, the Police, when they do come into contact with the sex workers, they do interact with them. But if he feels that there is a way for us to work even closer with voluntary welfare organisations to engage the sex workers, we will be happy to work with the Member further on this. [(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. – [Ms Sun Xueling.] (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“I thank the Member for his clarification. As I mentioned earlier, the experiences in other countries – the Member mentioned Sweden – have been mixed. There is no consensus as to whether laws that criminalise demand for paid sex actually decrease the actual demand for sex. Some studies have assessed that any change in data simply reflected changes in policing practice and the way in which sex work is organised. We mentioned earlier, and some of the other Members have also mentioned, we do have grave concerns that by criminalising sex, we drive clients and sex workers underground and we make it harder for sex workers to protect themselves or for social workers to reach them.”
“Just as Prof Fatimah Lateef, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Alex Yam said, property owners, tenants and property agents are our "eyes and ears" on the ground. These amendments are part of our efforts to promote better collaboration with the community to remain vigilant against vice activities. Neighbours, managing agents and security guards are also part of this larger community. We encourage the community to keep vigilant and report suspicious activities to the Police. One final point, to Ms Anthea Ong's comment on the use of the term "mentally defective", I acknowledge her point and we will look into this in subsequent reviews of the Women's Charter. Mr Speaker, I hope I have addressed Members' concerns. The Bill is needed to enhance our ability to deal effectively against vice activities of syndicates and individuals, especially those operating online, and to ensure better protection for our neighbourhoods from vice activities. Sir, I beg to move.”
“We are, therefore, working with CEA to ensure that property agents are aware of these legislative changes and to introduce professional guidelines to ensure that property agents help owners and tenants meet these reasonable diligence requirements. In my earlier speech, I also talked about the disciplinary action that property agents could be liable for, if they were found to have behaved negligently. Property agents are allowed to conduct checks on behalf of property owners who are unable to meet the prospective tenants in person, for example, landlords who are overseas, or elderly landlords who may not be ambulant. Apart from property agents, trusted parties, such as a family member, can also conduct these checks on their behalf. However, an owner is ultimately responsible for the lease of his own property. Owners who rely on third parties to check should verify that the checks have been completed satisfactorily, before entering into the lease agreement or allowing the prospective tenant to occupy the property. While property agents have a professional duty to advise their clients to the best of their abilities, and indeed most of them do so, the property owner should also be asking the right questions and satisfy himself or herself that the unit is being rented out in a responsible manner. To Mr Melvin Yong’s question on the use of short-term rental platforms, the owner and tenant of the property-in-use are still responsible for the reasonable diligence requirements under section 148 of the Women’s Charter. In addition, there are rules in place regarding the illegal or unauthorised use of premises for short-term accommodation. Property owners may also be liable for an offence under the Planning Act.”
“For example, as leases or sub-leases usually require them to respect the tenant's or subtenant's right to quiet enjoyment, it would be challenging to conduct surprise checks if the tenant or subtenant was not around to allow the inspection. The owner or master tenant might arrange the inspection in advance, but this would defeat the purpose of the checks since syndicates will remove any evidence of illegal activity. And as Mr Louis Ng highlighted, the owner or master tenant may not be able to determine whether the place is used as a brothel. There were also concerns about potential risks to the personal safety of the person conducting the checks, if crime syndicates are involved in the running of brothels out of these rented premises. As Mr Darryl David and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah said, those who have done their reasonable diligence should not be unjustly punished. The Members are correct in this regard. The proposed approach in the Bill for owners and master tenants to exercise reasonable diligence at the point of entering into tenancy agreements is not too onerous and is something that many are already doing today. As I said in my earlier speech, this amendment is also intended to get property owners and tenants started in asking the right questions. These will help deter syndicates attempting to misuse another person’s identity documents in order to rent a place to be used as a brothel. Mr Yee Chia Hsing asked if property owners can rely fully on property agents’ advice and to carry out the checks for them. Property agents play an important role in helping home owners and tenants comply with the law.”
“Several Members asked whether the identity checks, as a form of reasonable diligence, would be effective in deterring syndicates from renting premises for vice activities. Some said identity checks, by themselves, may not be helpful in determining the tenant’s motives, and asked if it would be fair to hold landlords responsible for tenants' subsequent actions. At the point of signing the lease agreement or releasing the premises for occupation to a tenant, if the property owner or master tenant had done what was reasonably possible to ascertain that the premises are not going to be used as a brothel, the owner or master tenant will not be liable for an offence even if the unit is subsequently used as a brothel. But the tenant or occupier could be prosecuted for an offence of keeping, managing or assisting in the management of a brothel; the Bill does not amend or abolish this offence in section 148 subsection (1). And where the tenant is not directly managing or keeping the brothel, the tenant cannot escape criminal liability unless he or she can show that he or she had no knowledge and could not, with reasonable diligence, have ascertained, that the premises are used as a brothel. The latter is an amendment in clause 12(b) in the Bill, which will make it harder for a tenant or occupant to turn a blind eye. This is a balanced approach. We had considered imposing post-transaction requirements, such as spotchecks on the unit, installing CCTVs, or checking with the neighbours. We consulted a wide range of stakeholders on this and the general consensus was that it would be too onerous to impose legal obligations on property owners to implement post-transaction checks at this juncture. Stakeholders said property owners or master tenants faced practical limitations.”
“Many social media platforms have community standards and processes for users to report such posts to the company for take-down. We thank Mr Gan Thiam Poh for his suggestion to require Internet intermediaries, such as social media providers, to do more to combat vice on their platforms proactively. MHA is also working with other Government agencies to study the issue. In doing so, we are seeking to find the right balance between our public safety outcomes, without imposing requirements that are unreasonably onerous on companies. In any case, such platforms are considered "remote communication services" under section 146A. With these amendments to section 146A, syndicates which use these social media and social messaging platforms to advertise or facilitate the provision of sexual services in Singapore, will be liable for an offence, even if the server is overseas, or even if the person posting the advertisement is overseas. Ms Anthea Ong and Mr Alex Yam asked if the higher maximum fines would be enough to deter the offenders. The higher maximum fines are part of a broader suite of amendments to better deter vice syndicates. The Bill also raises the maximum jail terms, and penalties for reoffending. Taken as a whole, this sends a strong signal to vice syndicates regarding the seriousness of the offence. In determining the appropriate maximum penalties, we took into account the penalties in other relevant legislations, such as the PHTA, which also carries a maximum fine of $100,000, imprisonment of up to 10 years, and caning, even for first-time offenders. Additionally, the prosecution can also apply to confiscate vice earnings under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act (CDSA), and we have done so in the past.”
“With the amendments to section 146A, we will be able to arrest offenders when they enter Singapore, even if they were overseas at the point of commission of the offence. If they are in a country with which Singapore has a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) or extradition treaty, it may be possible to seek their assistance for investigation or send an extradition request to the country, if this is practical or expedient. Even if there are no formal reciprocal agreements, the Police will work with our foreign counterparts to share information and conduct joint enforcement and investigation. While we acknowledge that extraterritorial laws have their limitations, the amendments to section 146A will still be an improvement over what we have today. I explained the need for these amendments in my earlier speech. To ascertain the identity of these offenders, the Police can rely on section 20 of the Criminal Procedure Code to order the production of any document or thing necessary for investigations. The Police also work with their overseas counterparts to share relevant information. I have just set out how the Police will rely on the amended section 146A to go after syndicate members overseas. The other amendment to section 146A is to allow the Police to go after syndicate members in Singapore, even if they use a remote communication service based overseas. The amended section 146A is not only applicable to syndicate members overseas. Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Melvin Yong and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked about the use of social media and social messaging platforms to advertise the provision of sexual services in Singapore. Most syndicates rely instead on dedicated websites, such as SGWolves, which was taken down last year.”
“Regarding conditional immunity for prosecution witnesses suggested by Ms Anthea Ong and Mr Louis Ng, this is an issue that needs further deliberation. We will have to take into account, holistically, the circumstances and actions of the sex worker and prevailing laws and policies. The Women's Charter is meant to protect women in general, including sex workers, from being exploited by pimps. The Police have not prosecuted any sex workers for sex work, as prostitution is not an offence. However, foreigners who work as sex workers in Singapore have also violated the conditions of their entry into Singapore and are considered prohibited immigrants under our law. We will thus have to carefully consider the impact of granting immunity to such individuals on public safety and our criminal justice system as a whole. Mr Louis Ng also shared about helping women transit out of sex work. Community partners do play an important role in helping Singaporean sex workers, be it in helping them transit out of sex work or providing social support to them. The Government will support such efforts where possible. But we must also recognise that most sex workers are foreigners, and foreigners who are prostitutes in Singapore would have flouted our immigration laws. Again, we have to carefully consider the impact of our policies on public safety and law and order. I will next address Members' queries on specific clauses in the Bill. Mr Darryl David and Mr Melvin Yong asked how the extraterritorial application of section 146A would be used in practice to target offenders based overseas. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah said the anonymity offered by some of these platforms could hinder investigations.”
“There are safe reporting channels available to victims. Persons can report to the Police or MOM via their hotlines and websites or call 999 if immediate Police assistance is required. We also have in place a victim care framework, which includes providing assistance with temporary accommodation, food, counselling services, medical care and temporary employment. Sex workers should not keep silent if they have been abused or exploited. Any sex worker who is a victim of crime should come forward and get the Police's assistance. The Police will look into all allegations of criminal offences. Support is available for prosecution witnesses, such as assistance with housing and employment. Mr Melvin Yong cited the report by the US State Department regarding trafficking-in-persons. The report misrepresents the ground realities of the trafficking situation here. MHA issued a clarification published in the Straits Times in July this year. Of the 16 alleged trafficking cases, 10 were alleged to be sex trafficking. Subsequent investigations by the Police ascertained that none of the 10 alleged sex trafficking cases was substantiated as trafficking under PHTA. MHA has also clarified this with the US directly. Ms Anthea Ong also asked about criminal compensation for sex workers who have been victims of crime. As Ms Anthea Ong has highlighted, there is already an existing legal framework under the Criminal Procedure Code. Under the law, compensation is a matter for the Courts to consider. Where appropriate cases are brought to the attention of the Police by the victim, the Police will highlight to the Attorney-General Chambers to consider making such a case on behalf of the victim.”
“Broadly, they keep a high enforcement and operations tempo at these locations. Depending on the ground issues, the Police also work with other enforcement agencies and community stakeholders to detect and deter illegal activities. I mentioned that we have in place a regulatory regime for massage establishments and public entertainment outlets, as part of our vice management strategy. It is outside of the scope of the amendments, but I will briefly talk about the principles. The Police take into consideration the Urban Redevelopment Authority's planning intent, the law and order situation of an area, and the operators’ background, before issuing licences to these operators. The operators have to comply with the licensing conditions, which include ensuring no immoral activity is carried out in the premises, and the Police conduct regular enforcement checks on the outlets. Errant operators may face regulatory sanctions or even criminal penalties under the relevant legislation. Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Alex Yam and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked for some vice-related statistics. Between 2016 and 2018, about 8,800 foreign females were arrested for vice and immigration offences. In the same period, 328 vice abettors were arrested. The number of "pop-up brothels" in operation is difficult to estimate with certainty but suffice to say that it is on an upward trend. We do not collect data on persons who purchase sexual services, as this is not an offence. So far, I have set out our law enforcement strategies. I now turn to the issue of protection and support for sex workers, which Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Louis Ng, Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Darryl David spoke about. We have tough laws against trafficking-in-persons, under the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act (PHTA).”
“The Police may not appear to respond immediately to all information received, but this is also because they will have to verify the information before conducting any enforcement action. But I assure Members that the Police value every piece of information provided by members of the public. The amendments today also demonstrate our commitment to weed out vice syndicates from residential areas. There are many channels available for the public to provide such information, including lodging a Police report or using iWitness. The same goes for sex workers who are victims of crime. Ms Anthea Ong, through her examples, also made a broader point about a perception that syndicates are getting away scot-free, in spite of sex workers coming forward to assist with Police investigations. The Police will follow up on information provided by sex workers, but as explained in my earlier speech, syndicates are finding ways to evade detection. This means that in some cases, the Police may find it challenging to identify the agents or to establish the culpability of persons involved. And this is why we need these amendments in the Bill. The Police update their enforcement strategies to remain effective. For example, they also conduct "precision" operations, to quote Ms Anthea Ong, targeted at the upper echelons of the syndicates. So, there is a broad spectrum of enforcement operations conducted by the Police: regular, sustained enforcement raids targeting vices in the heartlands, and precise strikes to disrupt the syndicates. Members of Parliament Mr Melvin Yong and Prof Fatimah Lateef asked about the vice situation at areas, such as Orchard Towers and Geylang. The Police have adopted a targeted enforcement strategy at these locations.”
“I acknowledge Mr Louis Ng's concerns about syndicates which will continue to evolve alongside changes to our laws and our enforcement efforts. But we cannot do nothing either. Where that line is crossed, the Government must intervene to safeguard our neighbourhoods. This intervention is part of our larger vice management strategy, which Prof Fatimah Lateef, Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Alex Yam and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked about. Upstream, we target platforms which may be used to facilitate vice activities by: (a) taking down and blocking vice websites as and when they are detected; (b) establishing a regulatory regime for public entertainment and massage establishment outlets, which may be fronts for vice activities; and (c) detecting and deterring foreigners seeking to enter Singapore for sex work. We also remind residents to be vigilant against vice activities by working with partners, such as HDB and CEA, to promote awareness among residents and property agents, and raising deterrence against vice activities by publicising Police's enforcement efforts. Downstream, ICA and the Police conduct raids on premises suspected of harbouring immigration offenders and vice activities; and the Police also conduct joint operations with their overseas counterparts, to target the upper echelons of these syndicates. I gave an example of such a joint operation with our counterparts in China in my earlier speech. Members also had questions about these downstream enforcement practices. I appreciate the concerns faced by the resident in the example shared by Prof Fatimah Lateef. The Police do, indeed, hope to work with eyes and ears on the ground, be it vigilant property owners, tenants or property agents, to aid ongoing investigations or uncover unreported crime.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Members for their support for the Bill. I shall first address the broader questions on the Government’s policy on managing vice, before going into questions relating to specific amendments in the Bill. First, regarding the Government's policy on vice and our vice management strategy. Mr Louis Ng asked if these amendments will only drive vice elsewhere, further underground. Mr Alex Yam gave a passionate argument for the abolition of prostitution altogether in Singapore. There are no easy answers to this. Mr Alex Yam shared that we should eradicate the exploitation of women, instead of management. He proposed abolishing prostitution. However, as Nominated Member Anthea Ong pointed out, the economic and social factors, such as poverty and a lack of realistic career options that push women into prostitution, will not go away by criminalising prostitution. She pointed out that sex workers, and empowering these women, can instead be part of the solution. We studied the approaches adopted by various countries. Some ban the purchase and selling of sex, others focus on criminalising demand and yet others have chosen to decriminalise or legalise the sex industry. The experiences of these countries are mixed, but what Mr Wong Kan Seng said 20 years ago and which Mr Louis Ng quoted, still holds true: no country has successfully eradicated prostitution. In Singapore, we take a pragmatic approach towards vice. We prioritise our efforts by: (a) ensuring organised crime groups and syndicates do not gain a foothold through vice activities; and (b) addressing public nuisance caused by vice-related activities, such as soliciting in public and vice in the heartlands.”
“If all of us can increase our vigilance and do our part, we will be able to keep our neighbourhoods safe and stop vice activities from spreading. (In English): Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“This will enable the Police to also exercise powers of arrest with respect to syndicate members who use a remote communication service for the provision of sexual services. Currently, this offence is not arrestable. To conclude, this Bill is part of our larger vice management strategy, which includes working with our partners on upstream education and deterrence. Mr Speaker, I would just like to conclude in Mandarin. (In Mandarin) [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]: These amendments are necessary to strengthen our levers against vice activities, in particular, against increasingly widespread online vice activities that have caused disamenities in our neighbourhoods and disturbances to the residents. While Government agencies actively investigate these cases to prevent vice activities from taking root in our neighbourhoods, all of us have a part to play. As property owners, we must stay vigilant when renting out our premises and not wait until after leasing to find out that something is wrong or turn a blind eye on suspicious activities. When renting out the premises, the property owners should know who the tenants are. Some people may misuse other people's identities to conduct illegal activities. Therefore, the property owner should conduct identity checks to verify that the person is who he claims to be. Property agents must also go about their work professionally and do due diligence by helping to check on the identities of the potential tenants. If they detect any suspicious transactions, they should inform the property owners and report to the Police. As a community, we can also do our part to stop vice activities from taking root in the heartlands. If we find any suspicious activities in the neighbourhood, do not hesitate to report to the Police immediately.”
“We are, therefore, amending the definition of a "brothel" to enable the Police to take effective and decisive enforcement action. Clause 2 also simplifies the onus of proof on the part of the prosecution seeking to prove that a place is being used as a brothel. The clause makes clear an existing practice on the use of indirect evidence to prove that a place is being used as a brothel. For example, chat logs of appointments being made for prostitution services to be provided at the place would be allowed to be submitted as evidence that a place is being used as a brothel. Second, clause 3 amends section 140 subsection (1)(d) to make it clear that it is an offence for a person to bring into Singapore, receive or harbour any woman or girl for prostitution. Currently, only agents who bring into Singapore, receive or harbour a woman or girl who has been procured are liable for the offence. The amendment will allow the Police to arrest a pimp or agent, even if the woman or girl is a freelance sex worker and, therefore, cannot be said to have been "procured" by anyone. Third, clause 10 amends section 146A to change the element of "operating or maintaining a remote communication service" for the provision of sexual service to that of "using" a remote communication service for that purpose. This is to make clear that our intent is to also target syndicates that use such a service, for example, vice agents who rely on messaging platforms provided by an Internet intermediary, and not the company operating and maintaining the service, such as telecommunications companies and Internet Service Providers. Lastly, clause 15 amends section 174 subsection (1) to extend the powers of arrest to the offence of using a remote communication service under section 146A.”
“For instance, if the property agent does not comply with his or her professional duties which will include conducting identity checks on the parties involved in the lease transactions, the property agent may be penalised monetarily or have his or her registration suspended or revoked by CEA. More critically, errant property agents who intentionally facilitate any lease transaction with the knowledge that it would lead to vice activities at the premises, are likely to face prosecution for abetting the commission of an offence under the Women's Charter, or other relevant laws. Lastly, we are making some miscellaneous amendments to ensure that Police enforcement remains effective against the changing modus operandi of vice syndicates. First, clause 2 broadens the definition of "brothel" to include any place that has been advertised or represented as being used for the purpose of prostitution and is likely to be used for the purpose of prostitution. Currently, a brothel is defined as a place that is used by at least two women or girls, whether at the same time or at different times, for the purposes of prostitution. Syndicates have transformed the way they conduct their business, so that they circumvent the current definition of brothel, and avoid getting caught for vice offences. Earlier, I mentioned that syndicates would rent various residential units and shift from one to another to evade detection, effectively functioning as a "pop-up". Each of these sex workers may also present herself as a lone operator. These new modus operandi make it harder to prove that the premises are being used as brothels, as currently defined, even though it is clear from advertisements online that they are being used for prostitution.”
“There is already a statutory requirement under the Immigration Act, for property owners to conduct identity checks of foreign tenants to ensure that there is no harbouring of immigration offenders. This has been in place since 1993, and property owners have largely complied. These amendments are intended to get property owners to extend the identity checks to Singapore Citizen and Permanent Resident (PR) tenants and subtenants as well, so as to guard against premises being misused for vice activities. The large majority of property owners and tenants who are law-abiding and acting in good faith will not have to worry. In each case, the Police will conduct investigations to establish the facts and take enforcement actions only where warranted. Property agents also have a critical role in keeping our neighbourhoods safe. They should discharge their professional duties responsibly, and these are aligned to the reasonable diligence that we expect of property owners who lease out their premises, and tenants who sublet. Property agents should guide property owners and tenants on what should be done in exercising reasonable diligence. And, if property agents detect any suspicious transactions themselves, they should proactively document and report the matter to the Police. We are working with the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) to provide guidelines to the industry. Last month, I met with representatives from the industry to have a dialogue on these upcoming changes, and they gave many useful suggestions on how we can partner the industry to keep vice out of neighbourhoods. Where agents are found to have been negligent in carrying out their professional duties, they may be liable for regulatory action by CEA under the Estate Agents Act.”
“Will these people be staying there, or will they be allowing other parties to use the place? Responsible property owners and tenants would already be asking these questions today when leasing out their premises. These amendments simply provide more clarity to all owners and tenants on what they should do. To help property owners and tenants understand what constitutes "reasonable diligence", we have included two illustrations. First, owners and tenants should conduct identity checks of a prospective tenant or subtenant and the purpose of the tenancy or subtenancy, through face-to-face interviews, before leasing the place. This can help ensure that the person they are transacting with is, indeed, who he or she claims to be and is not misusing another person’s identity document. Second, if the owner is overseas, he should engage an agent or trusted person to conduct these face-to-face interviews on his behalf. The owner should verify that the agent or trusted person has, indeed, carried out these checks. These illustrations serve as guides to property owners and tenants. However, whether "reasonable diligence" was exercised would eventually depend on the specific facts of the case. For example, if a property owner had already been warned by the Police that his flat could have been used as a brothel, the owner might be expected to do more to ensure that no brothel is operating at that flat. We have consulted stakeholders extensively in developing this proposal, so that property owners and tenants are not overly burdened, while still ensuring that they exercise responsibility over their premises, and that they play their part in deterring syndicates from using their premises for vice. Such checks are actually not new.”
“No one wants vice activities in their blocks or even on their streets. Clause 12 makes it clearer in law the responsibilities of owners, tenants and other parties involved in the lease of any premises. This is necessary because syndicates commonly exploit the lack of checks at the point of leasing by misusing identity documents, in order to secure premises for vice activities. For example, there have been cases of syndicates using false identities, and even a deceased person’s identity documents, to rent a property. Such misuse is problematic also because it makes it harder for the Police to track down the offenders. We want to deprive vice syndicates of operating space and safeguard the tranquility and safety of our neighbourhoods. To do so, we need the vigilance of three key stakeholders: (a) owners who rent out their properties; (b) tenants who rent from the landlords and sublet the premises to someone else; and (c) property agents who facilitate these lease and sublease transactions. For property owners and tenants, clause 12 amends section 148 subsections (3) and (4) such that: an owner who rents out, or a tenant who sublets, a place which is used as a brothel, will be criminally liable unless he or she can show that, at the time of entering into the letting of that place, he or she had no knowledge and could not, with reasonable diligence, have ascertained that the place was to be used as a brothel. A similar amendment is made to subsection (2) for tenants, lessees, occupiers or persons in charge of a place. Property owners and tenants should also start asking the right questions when they rent out their properties. For example, who are the people they are letting the place to?”
“Third, heavier penalties for second and subsequent conviction, for all vice-related offences in Part XI of the Women's Charter. Currently, only some offences carry heavier penalties for re-offending. But given the severity of vice offences, we need to take a stronger stand to better deter repeat offenders, regardless of their role in the conduct or delivery of the vice activities. The revised penalty framework is as follows. For the less serious offences, such as an offence committed by an owner whose place was used as a brothel under section 148, on first conviction, a maximum jail term of five years, or a maximum fine of $100,000, or both. This is up from the current maximum jail term of three years, or maximum fine of $3,000, or both. On second or subsequent conviction, a maximum jail term of seven years, or maximum fine of $150,000, or both. This is up from the current maximum jail term of five years, or maximum fine of $10,000, or both. For the more serious offences, such as living off the earnings of prostitution under section 146, on first conviction, a mandatory jail term of up to seven years, and a discretionary maximum fine of $100,000. This is up from the current mandatory maximum jail term of five years, and a discretionary maximum fine of $10,000. On second or subsequent conviction, a mandatory jail term of up to 10 years, and a discretionary maximum fine of $150,000. This is up from the current discretionary maximum fine of $10,000; there is no change to the current maximum jail term. The third amendment relates to promoting the responsible lease of premises, to deter "pop-up brothels". "Pop-up brothels" are on the rise, especially in residential estates. The Police frequently receive complaints from the neighbours of such residential units.”
“But a webmaster in Singapore who relies on an overseas server to host his website to deliver sexual services in Singapore, would not run afoul of this section today. Clause 10 amends section 146A so that it has extraterritorial application. The offence will be extended extraterritorially in two ways. First, it will apply to persons based outside Singapore, and second, it will apply to persons who use platforms based overseas, for example, a person in Singapore using a website server based overseas. In order for the extended offence to be made out, two conditions must be met. First, the remote communication service has to be used to offer or facilitate the provision, by a woman or girl, of sexual services in Singapore. Second, the remote communication service has to have a Singapore-link, namely, that a person physically present in Singapore is capable of having access to matters communicated using that service. This extraterritorial application for section 146A will allow the Police to more effectively target transnational vice syndicates. Second, the Bill increases penalties for vice offences in Part XI of the Women's Charter so as to more appropriately reflect the seriousness of these offences, and to better deter vice activities. There are three parts to this amendment. First, higher maximum fines to match the profits derived from vice crimes. Today, a syndicate member can easily earn $100,000 in a year, and this far exceeds the current maximum fine of $10,000. The Bill, therefore, raises the maximum fines, to take into account the potential earnings of syndicates, and also inflation over the years. Second, longer maximum jail terms to raise the sentencing benchmarks for vice offences.”
“Last year, the Singapore Police Force and China's Ministry of Public Security conducted simultaneous raids across multiple locations in Singapore and China. They arrested 36 syndicate members, including the key masterminds and agents based in China. This led to the disruption of a major vice website targeting clients in Singapore. While the Police could previously focus their resources to dismantle vice syndicates operating within certain areas of Singapore, now, these syndicates are all over the world. It is increasingly difficult and complicated to dismantle these syndicates and requires significant collaboration with foreign agencies. We need to do more to address the rise in online vice. To give a sense of how much online vice has grown in recent years: in 2015, the proportion of females arrested for online vice, compared to all types of platform, was 16%. In 2018, this proportion had increased to 55%. Another startling statistic: between 2015 and 2018, seven in 10 foreign females arrested for online vice were providing sexual services in residential estates. So, it is necessary to strengthen our levers against vice syndicates and individuals, especially those operating through online means. This will also ensure better protection for our neighbourhoods against vice activities. I will now go through the key amendments of the Bill. The first amendment targets syndicates that attempt to evade enforcement by moving parts of their operations overseas. Currently, it is an offence under section 146A if a person in Singapore operates or maintains in Singapore a remote communication service to offer or facilitate the provision of sexual services in Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill before us amends the provisions of the Women’s Charter dealing with offences against women and girls. These amendments strengthen our levers against syndicates that organise and facilitate prostitution or "vice syndicates". Vice syndicates have exploited technology to transform the way they operate, with apps and websites making it easier and more discreet than ever to: (a) advertise sexual services; (b) communicate with one another and with prospective clients; and (c) arrange payment. What this means is that: syndicates can now remotely control their operations from anywhere in the world; they can introduce layers in their operations to evade detection but retain command and control by using these e-communication and e-payment platforms; and they can easily move from one residential unit to another, by renting these units to be used as "pop-up brothels". This has brought about disamenities in the neighbourhoods and has made it more challenging for law enforcement. Let me share two examples. My first example is a typical experience faced by neighbours of units used for vice. "Mdm Jane" and her neighbours observed many unfamiliar male visitors going in and out of one of their neighbours’ units. Imagine what "Mdm Jane" must have felt to see these men loitering near her home and the impact on her sense of safety for her teenage daughter. "Mdm Jane" made a Police report, and Police enforcement uncovered two females providing sexual services within the unit. My second example highlights some of the challenges faced by law enforcement because of changes in the syndicates’ modus operandi.”
“Second, the enhancement of maximum punishments will be increased from one-and-a-half to two times, except those which are punishable with death or imprisonment for life. We will also exclude offences which have incorporated a racial aggravating factor, such as sections 298 and 298A. Clause 17 gives effect to these amendments to the Penal Code. Mr Speaker, I have given Members an overview of the key amendments which we are proposing to MRHA. These amendments are necessary to refresh our toolbox of legislative levers, so that we can continue to respond effectively to the growing threats to religious harmony in Singapore. The amendments we have proposed today are testament to the Government's commitment to continue to safeguard religious harmony, which is vital to the peace and progress that we enjoy today.”
“For religious leaders, in addition to proving that they were engaged in private conduct, there is an additional requirement that the private conduct was a domestic communication. This would cover situations where the religious leader is speaking with close family members in their household, or a small group of very close friends in his house. There will be extraterritorial coverage for these offences. If the offence is committed overseas, targets Singapore and has an impact in Singapore, this will be covered. An example would be if a religious leader in another country urges his affiliate group in Singapore to rise up and attack another religious group, this will be considered an offence. We acknowledge that it may be difficult to enforce these offences extraterritorially. But this signals our commitment to protect our religious harmony, even when the threats originate from beyond our shores. With the porting over of religion-related offences from the Penal Code to MRHA, we will repeal religion-related offences in sections 295 to 297 and remove references to religion-related offences in sections 298 and 298A of the Penal Code. We will also make related amendments to section 74 of the Penal Code. Section 74 of the Penal Code currently provides for enhanced maximum punishments of up to one-and-a-half times, where a specified list of Penal Code offences is committed in a racially or religiously aggravated manner. This includes situations where the offender demonstrates hostility towards the victim based on the victim’s religion. The scope of section 74 will be expanded in two ways. First, the scope of section 74 will be expanded to cover all offences in the Penal Code.”
“This is the case even when they speak to their followers in private capacities. As such, religious leaders will be subject to a lower threshold for offences. Clause 14 inserts the new section 17E, which introduces offences of urging violence on religious grounds against any person or group, and offences of urging violence against religious groups or persons who belong to these groups. This sends a strong signal that the weaponisation of religion to urge violence or force to be used against any person is unacceptable in our society. Because of the seriousness of the outcome, that force or violence is likely to occur, any person who commits this offence will be subjected to the maximum punishment of 10 years’ imprisonment, or fine, or both. This is the most serious offence in MRHA. Clause 14 also inserts the new section 17F, which introduces offences of inciting hatred, ill-will or hostility against a religious group, and offences of insulting a religion or wounding the religious feelings of a person. For offenders who are not religious leaders, an additional element needs to be proven for these offences, that is, that their conduct would threaten the public peace or public order in Singapore. For religious leaders, there is no need to prove this element. The defences for these offences are different for religious leaders and non-religious leaders. It will be a defence for offenders who are not religious leaders to prove that their conduct could reasonably be taken to indicate that the parties desired for it to be heard or seen only by themselves. In other words, private conduct will not be covered by the offence.”
“Some examples of remedial actions under the CRI include issuance of a public or private apology, or participating in activities that promote religious harmony. In determining the appropriate actions, the Minister will consult with the religious leaders, though the final decision rests with him. CRI is not mandatory. The alleged offender can refuse to take up this offer and the non-completion or refusal of CRI, will not be a criminal offence. At the same time, if the offender agrees to complete the remedial actions and does so, the Minister undertakes not to refer this case for criminal prosecution. CRI will not be issued to every case where an individual engages in conduct which leads to religious disharmony. The Minister will have to exercise judgement in each case to take the most appropriate course of action. For example, if the conduct is very egregious, such as when the offender incites violence, then this case is clearly not suitable for CRI. Cases of egregious conduct relating to religious disharmony used to be dealt with under the Penal Code, in section 267C and sections 295 to 298A. I will now speak about the porting over of these religion-related offences from the Penal Code to MRHA. We wanted to make MRHA a comprehensive Act which provides for a full range of legislative levers to deal with the maintenance of religious harmony. In the porting over of these offences, we approach it in two ways. First, what is the offence? An offence of urging violence against another person or group is more serious than offences of insulting or ridiculing a religion. Second, who is the offender? Religious leaders have a greater ability to influence and mobilise their followers, as compared to lay persons.”
“Second, the scope of the RO will now include requiring the individual to stop undertaking any "communications activity" relating to the religiously offensive material. This will include the removal of any material that has been posted on the Internet. The safeguards remain unchanged from what they were before. The individual and the religious group which the individual belongs to can make representations to PCRH. The RO will be considered by PCRH and ultimately confirmed, canceled or varied by the President. Clauses 2, 5 and 6 give effect to this. I will now speak about the CRI. To maintain religious harmony, it is not enough to just restrain bad behaviour. When there has been some damage, we need to find a way to soothe communal tensions and repair disrupted ties among the communities. Our experience with cases of religious disharmony is that the most effective resolution occurs when the offender displays remorse over his actions and makes amends directly to the offended party. This is frequently facilitated by their religious groups. In such cases, the benefits are twofold. First, the offender reflects on his actions and better understands the multi-religious context in which he lives; second, the offended community is given a chance to speak with and accept the apology by the offender. This goes a long way in soothing communal tensions. There is, hence, a need for a new tool in MRHA which focuses on restoration and rehabilitation. This is the CRI. Clause 13 introduces the new section 16H which gives effect to this. The CRI is offered by the Minister to an alleged offender which will set out the remedial actions that can be taken to mend ties with the aggrieved community.”
“PCRH will hear representations and review the RO after it has been issued. PCRH will be able to call any person to provide information to them and PCRH will make a recommendation to the President, who will continue to have the power to confirm, cancel or vary the RO. The additional safeguards will require religious groups to take on more work. They understand that more work is required but, at the same time, the religious groups acknowledge the importance of such safeguards. They support these amendments. Any religious group that needs more time to comply with these requirements can work out appropriate interim arrangements with the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). I will now move on to the updating of the RO that can be issued against individuals. MRHA currently provides that an RO can be issued against: (a) any individual who does or says anything that causes religious disharmony; (b) any religious leader or member of a religious group that mixes religion and politics, and any person inciting a religious leader or religious group to do so. The RO can prevent this individual from addressing religious groups, or being involved in producing or distributing publications produced by religious groups. The scope of the RO was drawn up nearly 30 years ago, before the advent of the Internet. It caters primarily to offline modes of communication. Social media has enabled offensive posts to go viral in a matter of seconds. There is now, thus, a need for the Government to update the RO to take swift action against such posts. First, we will remove the 14-day notice period for the issuance of ROs. The RO will now be issued and take immediate effect. This allows us to stem religiously offensive posts at its source quickly, before it spreads.”
“Foreign affiliation is defined in the new section 16B as an arrangement with a foreign principal where the religious group is accustomed to act in accordance with its instructions, or where the foreign principal exercises total or substantial control over the religious group’s activities. The safeguard for foreign affiliations is for disclosure purposes. We have sought to set the baseline requirements at a level that minimises regulatory burden on the religious groups. If, however, we have indications that there is a risk of foreign influence that can affect religious harmony, the proposed Bill will allow us to take more targeted actions in the areas of foreign donations and leadership. Clause 5 specifically expands the current scope of the RO under section 8 of MRHA. This allows the Government to take targeted action in the areas of donation and leadership of local religious groups where there is indication that there is a risk of foreign influence that can affect religious harmony. Under the new clause 5, an RO can be issued against a religious group to pre-empt, prevent or reduce any foreign influence affecting the religious group which may undermine religious tolerance among different religious groups in Singapore, and present a threat to public peace and public order in Singapore. The RO can impose additional safeguards on religious groups: (a) to prohibit or restrict receiving of anonymous donations, or of foreign donations by the religious group; (b) to ensure that every member of the governing body is a citizen of Singapore or prohibit a specific foreigner or PR from holding office in the governing body in the religious group. The safeguards for the issuance of the RO against religious groups will be the same as those for the issuance of RO against individuals.”
“The Minister will be able to set out other types of donations that can be exempted from disclosure requirements through subsidiary legislation. Second, on leadership. We will require the President, Secretary and Treasurer of the religious group to be either a Singapore Citizen or PR. If a religious group is incorporated as a company, the requirements will apply on the positions analogous to President, Secretary or Treasurer, for example, the Chairman, Managing Director and Directors of the company. If the religious group was set up as a partnership, the equivalent position would be the Partners. In addition to this, the majority of the executive committee or governing body of the religious group must be Singapore Citizens. Clause 13 inserts the new sections 16D and 16E which give effect to this. The leadership requirements do not apply to spiritual leaders, unless they hold such executive positions in the religious group. We recognise that there are some religious groups which would not be able to meet these requirements, such as those who serve primarily foreigners who live and work in Singapore, or which are set up as single entities operating across different countries. We have been engaging some of these groups and are prepared to consider exemptions from these new leadership requirements for them. This will be granted on a case-by-case basis, as long as there are no security concerns. Third, on foreign affiliations. Religious groups will be required to declare any foreign affiliations.”
“The Centre for Islamic Guidance was partly funded by countries in the Middle East and he was closely linked to Zahran Hashim, a radical preacher who allegedly mentored many of the Easter attack bombers. In looking at the safeguards against foreign influence, they are structured so that there will be baseline requirements which all religious groups will be subject to. If there are specific threats, the Government can take more targeted action. These baseline safeguards were developed after extensive discussions with apex religious organisations. First, on donations. We will require religious groups to disclose single foreign donations that are S$10,000 or more. Clause 13 gives effect to this. The disclosure threshold of S$10,000 was set after discussions with the major apex religious organisations. We wanted to balance the objective of preventing foreign influence and not make it too onerous at the same time for religious organisations. We are not saying that any donation below S$10,000 is not a concern. Or that any donation above S$10,000 is malicious. The Government will make assessments to determine if there is malicious foreign influence. The requirements apply to monetary donations. To reduce the administrative burden on religious groups, we have provided for exemptions to this requirement in the Bill. For example, anonymous cash donations received through donation boxes at religious institutions or received during a collection during worship rites or services are exempted. Donations received from Permanent Residents (PRs) as well as foreigners who are on long-term passes issued by the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) or the Ministry of Manpower do not need to be disclosed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will be speaking in my capacity as Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the Ministry of Home Affairs. The Minister for Home Affairs has set out the broad rationale on the need for the MRHA. He also explained why we need to amend the MRHA to ensure that it remains effective. I will now set out the Government’s position and provide details on the key amendments. There are five key areas. First, introduction of safeguards against foreign influence that affect religious harmony; second the updating of the RO; third, introduction of the CRI; fourth, porting over of religion-related provisions from the Penal Code to MRHA; and fifth, related amendments to the Penal Code. First, safeguards against foreign influence that affect religious harmony. The Minister for Home Affairs has presented examples worldwide that show how foreign influence have impacted religious harmony in those communities. We will take active steps to prevent foreign influence from affecting our religious harmony. Sir, all our major religious faiths and traditions originated elsewhere. Many of our religious organisations take guidance on key tenets of their faith from their counterparts or superiors who are overseas. Our religious groups serve both Singaporeans and non-Singaporeans. So, it is not possible to say that we cannot have foreign influence. But we must safeguard against malicious foreign influence which seeks to undermine religious harmony here. Let me provide one example from overseas. In Sri Lanka, as a result of the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings, investigations uncovered a link between extremism and funding and donations from the Middle East. The founder of the Centre for Islamic Guidance in Sri Lanka, Mohamed Aliyar, was arrested on charges related to the financing of terrorism.”
“Thank you. HDB will continue to improve their processes in engaging single unwed parents and in helping them find the best environment for their child to grow up in. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that we accept all applications from single unwed parents who approach HDB to apply to purchase or rent an HDB flat and will consider their applications holistically. We will review the various touchpoints, experience and process of the housing journey for single unwed parents. HDB is committed to doing better. I would like to assure Mr Louis Ng and this House again that applicants will not be rejected merely due to their status as a single unwed parent. HDB will approach each and every single unwed parent who puts in an application to better understand their circumstances. We seek everyone’s understanding and patience. At the heart of it, I want every single unwed parent to know that we share their desire to ensure the well-being of their children, and we will try our best to support them to this end. Lastly, I thank Mr Louis Ng for his suggestions and his work, and I hope that we can continue to work together to support our single unwed parents.”
“I hope that when our citizens interact with HDB staff and officers, there is also mutual respect on both sides. I have spoken with the HDB. They are working hard to improve their frontline services for every citizen. They handle a large volume of queries and feedback, around two million queries over the phone, walk-ins and emails every year. They have told me that they are committed to doing their work well and uphold high service standards.”
“He emphasised that single unwed parents should not be made to feel discriminated against. I wholeheartedly agree that we should review our communications and avoid unintentionally causing additional anxiety to single unwed parents who may already feel tremendously stressed by their circumstances. I have discussed this with the HDB Team, and there are a few things that we will do. First, we will conduct a comprehensive review of the various touchpoints which single unwed parents may encounter in their housing journey, from the e-applications system to our HDB branches, to improve and align our communications. Second, we will review HDB's website to explicitly state that single unwed parents may approach HDB to apply to buy or rent an HDB flat, and how they can go about submitting their requests to HDB. Third, we will also look at the inclusion of a dedicated section in HDB’s website to address common housing queries from single unwed parents. We hope that these measures will help allay the anxieties from single unwed parents. Single unwed parents and their children are our valued citizens. We are committed to do better and to engage with them better. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, when I came into politics, I was determined to always interact with my residents with respect and empathy. I am not sure if I have succeeded as much as I would like to have, but I feel that I have tried my hardest. I believe similarly that HDB's frontline staff do their best, but I suspect that the customer experience may not altogether be even. Further, policies may not always be able to cater to every single citizen’s needs, which can result in frustration on both sides. But there must always be empathy in our interactions and this works both ways.”
“In such cases, once there is a new assessment by the social worker that the applicant is ready to live independently, HDB would proceed to allocate the applicant a rental flat. So, HDB does not apply a one-size-fits all policy. Where appropriate, HDB will work closely with social workers to assess the best option for the applicant at that point in time. Next, I will touch on home ownership flats. Mr Louis Ng has suggested a dedicated scheme to allow single unwed parents under 35 years old to buy a 2-room flat from HDB. I appreciate Mr Louis Ng’s intent and understand where he is coming from. We will study Mr Louis Ng's suggestion carefully, bearing in mind that HDB also has to meet demand for new 2-room flexi flats from other applicants, such as singles above 35 years old and seniors who are looking to right-size or buy a short-lease flat. The number of single unwed parents who apply to HDB for rental or purchase flats every year is not large. We take a holistic approach for every application, as our concern is to safeguard the best interests of the child, especially in situations where the parent is single, young, not working or drawing a low, or perhaps irregular income. I want to assure Mr Louis Ng and Members of this House that HDB will not outright turn away any single unwed parent who approaches us to seek housing assistance. In every case, HDB will engage the parent to understand more about their circumstances, including their financial and family situation. When purchasing or renting a flat of their own does seem to be the best arrangement for the parent and the child, HDB will support their application. Finally, Mr Louis Ng raised a few suggestions on how we can better communicate with and engage single unwed parents on their housing applications.”
“I would like to first explain our approach towards public rental applications. We believe home ownership provides long-term stability and progress for all Singaporeans. This is why HDB reviews every application for public rental individually, to see whether the applicant can purchase a flat or stay with their family. This means working out each family’s housing budget and engaging them further to understand their situation, together with social workers if need be. Such an individualised approach is taken for all public rental applications and not just for single unwed parents. HDB receives about 7,000 public rental applications per year. But we continue to take an individualised approach towards rental applications, as each of our applicants may have unique and complex backgrounds and circumstances, which would benefit from a more in-depth look. Mr Louis Ng suggested that HDB should have some clear criteria for when single unwed parents can get a public rental flat. I agree with Mr Louis Ng that there may be some common and objective factors we can identify, for example, income. But I would like to add that income is but one indicator of the needs of the applicant. We do not rely on a few predetermined metrics to understand the applicant’s circumstances. These are guidelines, and from HDB's perspective and experience, applicants can have more differences than similarities in their circumstances. For instance, the applicant could have medical conditions, which could impede his or her ability to live independently at the point of their application to HDB. This may be highlighted to HDB by the applicant’s social worker.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Member, Mr Louis Ng, for his efforts in representing the voices of single unwed parents. He has provided useful perspectives for us to factor in, in our continuous review of existing policies. In his speech, he has provided useful feedback on how our policies are implemented, and also shared the experiences faced by single unwed parents when applying for a flat. I understand that there may be single unwed parents with us here today in the public gallery and I would like to unequivocally state in their presence that single unwed parents and their children are valued citizens in our society, and like all parents, they are respected for the love and care they provide for their children. They are no less a mother or a father, just because their child was born outside of marriage. Their children, like any other child in our society, are precious. And every parent, regardless of their marital status, ought to be treated with respect. I acknowledge that in the past, the Government was fairly strict in limiting public housing access to married couples. However, over time, this position has evolved. For single unwed parents, we hope to facilitate their efforts to build a stable environment for their children. At MND, we recognise that having a roof over their heads is a key concern. We are thus committed to ensuring that no child is left without adequate shelter to grow up in. I believe Mr Louis Ng can attest to the fact that most of the cases that he has shared with HDB have been helped by HDB. He shared earlier the case about Mary. If this is the applicant and the case that I am aware of, I would like to update that her appeal for a rental flat was approved 11 days after she first contacted HDB.”
“Without repeating the details that transpired, Minister Josephine Teo had talked about how the Ministry of Manpower has put in place practical measures to eliminate workplace violence and harassment, and also that employers must meet the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices. So, that is another means, apart from criminal law, whereby employees can seek comfort in.”
“I thank the Member for her supplementary questions. I think the third and first questions are in a way related, so I will try and handle them together. POHA was amended in May this year to clarify that entities can be liable for contraventions and that entities can be victims and seek relief under POHA. But I would like to add that in section 3 of POHA, an individual or entity must not, with intent, cause harassment, alarm or distress to another person by a series of means. There are a part (a), part (b) and part (c) to it. So, actually, the entities can be criminally liable. It is actually already expressly provided for in the provisions themselves. So, that is section 3, subsection (1), for harassment under POHA. Under section 5 of POHA, it also states that an individual or entity must not by any means use towards another person any threatening, abusive or insulting communication to another person. So, there are sections in POHA which make it quite clear that entities can be criminally liable. So, that is one set of the Member's questions. On the second question, I would just like to add that there are challenges involved in creating new rules relating to corporate criminal responsibility. I take the Member's point that there is a need to protect employees from harassment but, on the other hand, there is also a need to ensure that the burden on businesses or employers is not unduly onerous. Any proposed changes must be thoroughly thought out. This was a point that was also made by the Penal Code Review Committee in its report. Yesterday, I heard the exchange that the Member had with Minister for Manpower Josephine Teo. It was in relation to Singapore's abstention from the vote on the International Labour Organization's Convention on Workplace Violence and Harassment.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am taking this question on behalf of the Minister for Law. For part (a) of the Parliamentary Question by the Member, the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) covers both entities, such as companies and individuals. Apart from POHA, there are many pieces of legislation that cover both entities and individuals. That is the norm. The Penal Code is one example. Likewise, in the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), the word "person" refers to individuals in Part 3 and to entities, such as Internet platforms and mass media service providers, in Part 4. The law, meaning Common Law, provides for various ways of attributing vicarious liability. Nothing in POHA specifically rules this out. Likewise, there are principles laid down in case law establishing when an individual can be held criminally liable for the acts of an entity. Let me give an example. POFMA empowers a Minister to issue Directions to an Internet intermediary. If an intermediary fails to comply with a Direction without reasonable excuse, its executives may be held liable for that non-compliance if, for example, they are found to have abetted the non-compliance. They may be found to have abetted the non-compliance if they had, amongst other things, suggested, supported or encouraged the non-compliance, whether by words or by their silence. This is as per existing law. The Member's second question is whether the Government plans to move away from the present "individual criminal liability-based approach". Criminal liability can be imposed on both entities and individuals when they commit criminal offences. That is already the position in law today.”
“I thank the Member for his question. Indeed, we will welcome cost-benefit analyses, in particular, from learned Members, from academia, to understand the situation better. As I mentioned in my speech, we have already started the installation of HFADs for public rental flats. We have done this for about a year. We have a stock supply of about 60,000 rental flats. After a year of implementation, we are now at about 12,000 households. We will continue to do this. We will encourage eligible households to get on board. But when we are looking at existing households, we have to seek permission to enter the home to install the HFADs. So, like I mentioned in my speech, we will study the need to expand the existing scheme to broader groups of families. Definitely, the agencies are discussing this. Let us look at our implementation for the public rental flats, let us see what we can learn from there and then we will see how we can expand the scheme, if necessary. [(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. – [Ms Sun Xueling]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“MHA and SCDF will study them carefully and work with relevant agencies and stakeholders to ensure the continued effectiveness of our fire safety measures that will keep our public safe. Fire safety is also a collective responsibility. We cannot be complacent and take our low fire fatality rate for granted. MHA will continue with our multi-pronged approach to fire safety. So, apart from enhancing our laws, we will continue with our outreach and engagement efforts to engage and educate the public on fire safety. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Deputy Speaker: Assoc Prof Walter Theseira. Assoc Prof Walter Theseira: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for her very well-considered replies. Many Members asked the Ministry to consider mandating or subsidising various residential fire safety interventions, ranging from fire alarms to extinguishers and so forth. I understand the Ministry has, of course, already considered many of these suggestions and, at the moment, I think most of our suggestions will not be adopted. But I would like to ask whether the Ministry could consider conducting a risk-assessment, cost-benefit exercise and to publish the results of this exercise, considering some of the suggestions that we have made. There will be some reasons for this. One is that this process will enhance fire awareness, it will also allow hon Members and the public to debate these issues more carefully the next time.”
“Ms Joan Pereira, Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Christopher de Souza, Assoc Prof Walter Theseira and Ms Anthea Ong have also touched on the need for public education in their speeches. SCDF engages residents during its regular community roadshows and post-fire door-to-door engagement sessions to share fire prevention tips and what to do in the event of a fire. SCDF also leverages these community engagement platforms to encourage members of the public to step up as community responders to deal with small fires in the neighbourhood. Mr Christopher de Souza asked about the myResponder app. I am pleased to share that the number of registrations on the myResponder app has increased over the years, going up by 75% in 2018. SCDF has also developed a suite of educational materials on various aspects of fire safety, such as "how to use a fire extinguisher", "fire safety at home", typical fire hazards at residential premises and dealing with "rubbish chute fires". These materials are readily available on SCDF's website as well. At the local community level, SCDF also works closely with grassroots organisations on community outreach events. Private residential premises are also engaged through the Safety and Security Days. We thank Ms Anthea Ong for her suggestion to work with other groups in our society – the FDWs and community volunteers. Indeed, FDWs are part of our community and can be valuable assets in ensuring fire safety at homes. We are continually working to improve and enhance our outreach efforts and will take this suggestion into consideration. Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill is a major step towards enhancing our fire safety regime and the safety of the public. I thank Members for their strong support and for the suggestions raised today.”