Sylvia Lim
Singapore
“Thank you, Speaker. I have a supplementary question for Senior Minister of State on PF. It was pointed out in the FATF report that representatives of foreign flag states have a very low understanding of their PF obligations.”
“Thank you Speaker. I have noted what the Minister is proposing that the House do. I am not standing up to object to it. But I think it is important for me to also state that my response on some of the issues that she mentioned, I have made them on 14 January during the debate on the Motion of the Leader of the Opposition, and I do not thi…”
“Thank you, Speaker. A clarification for the Minister. I think it is quite clear that we are not denying that services were provided and residents had benefited from the services. I also would say that we do appreciate that MND did this internal review to undercover this problem, if I can say that.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have one clarification for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, and that is on the necessity for the retrospective legislation.”
“Sir, regardless of which country may have primary jurisdiction over a particular case, both governments may feel pressured to retain cases involving their own nationals. This could be for various reasons, such as the differences in law and punishments or to give their nationals better access to justice in their home countries.”
“One clarification for the Minister. This is in relation to when Singapore may have to give up its primary jurisdiction to Malaysia to investigate incidents and particularly on clause 39(2).”
The complete record
Every one of 1,794 lines we hold for Sylvia Lim, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 36.
“Mr Speaker, this is the Government's fourth Budget in four months. While there is a need to focus on pumping oxygen into the economy, we must squarely face what the crisis has taught us if we are to truly emerge stronger. I would like to focus my speech today on what the COVID-19 virus has shown us about blind spots and the implications for long-term recovery. I will then comment on two specific Government measures. First, blind spots and recovery. As the COVID-19 situation wears on, we are beginning to understand more about the different impact it has on the various segments of society. In Singapore, we see how the mantra of "stay home and save lives" may actually harm some who are forced to stay home. Homes that are small or overcrowded are unpleasant environments to remain in for most of the day. It was reported that domestic violence cases recorded by the Singapore Police rose by 22% since the circuit breaker measures started while the NGO, AWARE, disclosed that calls about family violence in April this year were more than double those of April last year. As far as work is concerned, we see essential workers outside battling the virus while highly paid persons stay safe at home, being classified "non-essential". Singapore's foreign workers dormitories have become "ground zero" for the battle. And the fight is not over. Globally, evidence has emerged that women are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. For instance, a United Nations report on 9 April concluded that the COVID-19 pandemic has a "shadow pandemic" exacerbating gender inequality. How so? Domestic violence has spiked in other countries as well. In terms of economic impact, there has been significant employment loss for women, who hold the majority of insecure, informal and lower-paying jobs.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have three supplementary questions for the Minister for National Development. The first question is, is the Government aware that there are residents who have contracted to sell their existing homes in the expectation of moving to their new homes by a certain timeline before the circuit breaker measures were announced? Some of these residents would, therefore, be impacted in the sense that if their new homes are not ready for them to move in by the designated time to leave their current homes, they would have to find alternative accommodation. That is the first question. The second question is, I am glad the Minister has said that the authorities would be prepared to exercise flexibility in granting shorter term rentals. Would he be able to also assure Singaporeans that URA and HDB would aim to give timely replies to such applications, for example, say within a week, because time is of the essence in such cases? Finally, Sir, on the issue of the cessation and soon-to-be phased resumption of construction works, I believe that BCA in May issued some guidelines about the phased resumption of construction including renovation works. According to the phases announced, works by individual households are placed in tier D, which I think is a tier that is termed "can be delayed". It is indicated that such works may only resume in August. Based on Minister's statements in press conferences, I would like him to confirm that even if the works are in a phase that BCA is not prioritising, if the contractors can show that they are able to comply with BCA's safety requirements, that BCA would consider such applications even if they are in the subsequent tiers for earlier resumption or commencement.”
“It is important for these changes to campaign rules to be made known publicly and to political parties as soon as possible, so that candidates and parties have sufficient time to make necessary preparations and to source for service suppliers. When will the ELD make known the exact changes? Lastly, whatever changes are made, it is also critical that these modifications do not result in an escalation of campaign costs. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, it is right that the Prime Minister's Office prepare to provide a safe environment for the holding of the General Elections and we appreciate the rationale for the Bill. I look forward to the Minister's clarifications on the matters I have raised regarding the timing of the General Elections, the modified procedures and campaigning.”
“To this end, will the ELD implement any safeguards to prevent any attempt to influence voters on these buses from any person or even amongst the voters themselves, for example, by recording the journeys on CCTV or by imposing strict no-communications rules on board? Sir, apart from what is in the Bill, what other practical measures is the Elections Department (ELD) likely to take to safeguard public health on Polling Day? It will be useful if the ELD can share its thinking, so voters know what to expect. For instance, will voters' temperatures be taken? Will they be issued with masks, hand sanitisers and gloves and would polling booths be disinfected regularly, as was done in the South Korean election? How much more is likely to be spent on an election with such additional requirements? Another critical aspect is safe distancing. How will this be implemented at the polling stations? For instance, past practice shows that voters tend to congregate at the polling stations early in the morning, and by lunchtime the polling stations are quite empty. Will voters be advised to spread themselves out this time? What else can the Elections Department (ELD) share on the practical considerations? Finally, the Bill does not cover how the campaign methods will be modified. On the issue of campaigning, Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean had told this House on 25 March that in view of the pandemic, campaign methods will need adjustment. For example, there may possibly be live streaming of videos on the Internet or more television time for candidates.”
“Could the Minister also clarify why the Government requires at least two voters from the same constituency to be staying at the same boarding premise, before a special polling station will be set up? One more query on this. For such voters confined to boarding premises, clause 6(3) states that the Minister may provide for the marking of votes remotely, that is, the voter need not turn up at the special polling station but may mark his vote, for example, in his room and hand his vote securely to the Returning Officer (RO). There may be a good intention behind this, but it adds a risk to the voting process. What safeguards will there be to ensure that the marked ballot paper is not tampered with or lost and has been duly included for counting? Next, transporting of electors. According to the Explanatory Statement to the Bill, it may become necessary for the Returning Officer (RO) to arrange for dedicated buses to convey electors subject to COVID-19 Stay-Home Orders to the special polling stations that are not their places of accommodation, in order for them to cast their votes. Clause 7 thus provides that in such a situation, the usual prohibitions against transporting electors to and from polling stations will not apply. Sir, I appreciate that this is a practical matter that ELD may need to provide for. However, it is useful to bear in mind the rationale for the prohibition on transporting electors in the first place, to ensure that on Polling day, voters may be casting their votes of their free will without undue influence or pressure.”
“According to the Explanatory Statement to the Bill, this provision would also cover those who are on five days' medical leave due to having acute respiratory symptoms earlier. From what I understand from the South Korean election, voters under quarantine were facilitated to vote, but only after 6.00 pm when the polling booths had closed to the general public. This arrangement protected other voters but also ensured that quarantined voters could vote. Sir, we do not know the numbers of persons who may be subject to such orders at any time. If there were to be a cluster of infections in a certain area, there could be a significant number of voters for a particular constituency that could fall within this category. A significant percentage of absent voters may affect the outcome of the poll, especially in a close contest. I would like the Minister to clarify what commitment the Elections Department (ELD) is making to voters under Quarantine or Stay-Home Orders. Is the ELD not able to commit to giving all such voters the opportunity to vote? Next, voters confined to boarding premises. Clauses 4 to 6 deal with voters who are confined to boarding premises which are not their ordinary residences, such as hotels, apartments and dormitories. I welcome the ELD's proposal to provide special polling stations at or near these premises to facilitate the voters' right to vote. On this, clause 5 states that the Returning Officer (RO) may establish a special polling station, where there are two or more voters form the same constituency in the same boarding premises. The use of "may" suggests that the RO may decide not to establish such special polling stations. What is the ELD's intention as to when it will or will not do so?”
“This is a welcome provision, as it will enable a prospective candidate to still contest the election even if he or she is temporarily unable to attend at the Nomination Centre. One question that comes to mind is that by the time the candidate needs to utilise this provision, he would already be ill or under a quarantine or stay home order. How will he be facilitated to execute the Power of Attorney? For example, will a lawyer be allowed access to the candidate to witness the document? Another question relates to who can be a candidate's representative. It is provided in clause 9(3) that a representative should be a Singapore citizen who is entitled to vote at the election and duly authorised under a power of attorney. That being the case, I would like the Government’s confirmation that there is no objection to a representative being a fellow GRC candidate or an assentor or subscriber already present at the Nomination Centre. Next, I move on to the arrangements as to Polling Day. First, voters under Quarantine or Stay Home Orders. Clause 3 provides that voters who are under quarantine orders or stay home orders are excused from voting and that they cannot leave their designated places of home unless the Returning Officer makes arrangements for them to vote. If the RO does make such arrangements, the voters may then choose to vote. It seems to be then that there are two uncertainties here. First, it is not clear that the RO will definitely make arrangements for such voters to vote, and second, even if such arrangements are made, voters may choose not to vote. I am concerned about whether this clause will result in significant numbers of people not voting, when they may not be medically ill but simply ordered to be confined as a precaution.”
“Mr Speaker, holding a national election in the midst of a health pandemic carries some risk. The Prime Minister has not yet announced when the impending election will be called and by the Government’s own assessment, the COVID-19 situation in Singapore is not yet at a satisfactory phase. The Workers’ Party has previously called on the Government to be judicious in deciding on the timing of the election, bearing in mind the twin priorities of public health and upholding democratic principles. Sir, there continues to be unhealthy speculation on the ground as to when the Elections will be held. We note that the recent South Korean election was held at a time where the outbreak showed clear signs of declining cases, underscored by mass community testing. Meanwhile, medical experts here have opined that to be certain that we have turned a corner, a sustained decline in cases to zero or near zero, supported by wide testing, would be needed. As we debate this Bill, this is the elephant in the room. Can the Government clarify what progress needs to be made on the virus front before a General Election will be held? Coming back to the Bill itself, the provisions cover the processes for Nomination Day and Polling Day. The Workers’ Party will support the Bill but I have some queries and concerns about how the provisions will be operationalised. First, on Nomination procedures. Clause 9 modifies Nomination proceedings to cater for the event that a candidate is subject to a quarantine or stay home order, or is hospitalised or ill so as to be medically unfit to attend the Nomination in person. The provision allows the candidate to appoint a representative to file his nomination papers in his stead.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have one clarification for the Minister for Health and one for the Minister for Manpower. For the Minister for Health, regarding his answer to what metrics the Government is using to decide whether to loosen the circuit breaker measures, he gave quite a comprehensive answer. But he did not mention this recognised indicator used by other countries called the effective reproduction number (or RE) of the virus in Singapore. For instance, the New Zealand Prime Minister told her country that they were able to ease their lockdown measures because the RE of the virus in New Zealand had gone from 2 to 0.48, meaning that a person is likely to infect less than one other person at that particular time. So, I would like to ask the Minister for Health whether our Government is actually tracking the RE of the virus in Singapore and if he could make that known and, if it is not, then why is the Government not using that indicator. For the Minister for Manpower, she touched earlier on the viral outbreak in the dormitories and how it might have been spread through contact, such as within dormitories and also at the construction sites. I would like to ask her whether the Government has also tried to ascertain the origin of the virus in the dormitories. For example, could it be linked to the workers returning from China?”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have a supplementary question for the Minister for Trade and Industry. We have received feedback from some residents who operate businesses in essential services that under the tightened circuit breaker, they were asked to suspend their operations, whereas they know of others in the same industry who were not asked to do so. So, could the Minister share how MTI actually comes up with these guidelines or restrictions for companies? And why is it that there appears to be companies in the same industry that do not get the same instructions from MTI, in essential services?”
“He then tried switching to be a mini-bus driver but due to the lack of tourists, he had to abandon that idea. To make matters worse, his wife had concurrently lost her job, too, as she worked in the travel industry. And to top it off, they have two children aged 14 and 12 to raise. This family's experience is, unfortunately, becoming more common and affecting more industries. For instance, we know of a tentage contractor who has recently had to fold as there have been no temple dinners for months. Mr Speaker, there is no doubt that the COVID-19 pandemic has wreaked economic havoc globally and governments need extraordinary measures to cushion citizens through it. We will support the Government's proposed measures and I look forward to the Government's clarifications on the queries I have raised about the Jobs Support Scheme and the measures to assist displaced workers. Finally, as we enter into a month of circuit breaker and possibly beyond, we shall surely miss the time spent together with our extended families, friends, colleagues and others we hold dear. This is also a time for reflection and appreciating what we may have taken for granted all this while. 3.41 pm”
“In the context of the Jobs Support Scheme, could the Minister clarify what would constitute abuse by an employer? Next, I move on to assisting retrenched and unemployed workers. To assist retrenched and unemployed workers, the Resilience Budget offers the Temporary Relief Fund and the COVID-19 Support Grant. The Temporary Relief Fund has been announced to be a one-time $500 cash payout in the month of April while the COVID-19 Support Grant gives three months of support at $800 per month for three months. The intention behind these measures is to put cash into the hands of households where jobs have disappeared, and I agree with that. I have a clarification on these schemes. It is stated that to qualify for the payments, the job loss must be due to COVID-19. Does the applicant have to prove the causal connection between COVID-19 and the job loss? For instance, take an employee of a company which had been incurring losses even before COVID-19 broke. If he is terminated by the company now, will his application for assistance be rejected because it is arguable that his job loss was not caused by the virus outbreak? If that is the case, it would seem very harsh as it is going to be very difficult for him to find a new job in the current environment. Sir, in early March, I met a man who was in his 40s wearing the ubiquitous bright green t-shirt of GrabFood delivery workers. I assumed he had been doing such assignments for some time and asked him how it was going. To my surprise, he said that he had just started with Grab that very day and narrated the turbulence he faced since the start of the year. In January, he was working as a restaurant manager but, due to poor business, the restaurant had to close.”
“However, it was pointed out in a Business Times article on 3 April that contractors who provided MICE-specific products and services to those venues, would only get the 25% base level wage support. Such an anomaly should be reviewed as each industry has a supply chain and eco-system that will be similarly impacted. The situation is even more acute with the circuit-breaker policy in place. It would also be opportune for the Government to clarify how the JSS will directly benefit workers since the wage offsets are paid to employers rather than to the employees. Deputy Prime Minister Heng has urged employers who receive the JSS to hold on to their workers. However, prior to the Resilience Budget, many employers had already initiated their own cost management schemes by asking employees to take salary cuts. For instance, some airline staff have been asked to go on no-pay leave for varying periods. With airlines now getting 75% wage offset from the taxpayer, is there any obligation on employers to review these no-pay leave arrangements reached earlier, to see if they are still justified after the wage offsets? To take another example, retail shops have had minimal sales and some employers have asked staff to work reduced hours and accept pay cuts. Over the weekend, after the circuit-breaker policy was announced, employers in non-essential services have told staff that their job situation was not assured. To be sure, employers without revenue have to make tough choices and I understand that. To that end, I note that Deputy Prime Minister Heng's speech included a hope that those who receive support will use the resources wisely and responsibly, and that the Government will not hesitate to take action against any abuse.”
“The Resilience Budget before this House had a price tag of $48 billion. Together with the first package announced in the Unity Budget in February, the total of about $55 billion amounts to about 11% of our GDP. This is within the GDP range of the packages previously announced by some other governments. I also note the further support measures just announced in the Solidarity Budget, which bring the total package to about 12% of GDP. As mentioned by Workers' Party Secretary-General Mr Pritam Singh earlier, we will vote in support of the proposed Government measures. That said, we have some questions about how the sums add up and whether some of the monies will go towards achieving their intended purposes. We are also concerned that large corporations who receive taxpayer help do not engage in irresponsible behaviour once recovery resumes. My other colleagues will speak on some of these aspects. My speech today will focus on seeking some clarifications on the measures to soothe employment and income disruptions. First, the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS). In the Resilience Budget, the Government announced wage support for local employees to cover nine months of wages. This is to be paid to the employers, set at a base support level of 25%, with 50% support for food services and 75% for aviation and tourism-related sectors. There have been calls for the Government to widen the definitions of qualifying businesses in the various sectors as each sector has an eco-system of suppliers of goods and services that will rise and fall with the industry. As an example, the industry for Meetings, Incentives, Conventions and Exhibitions (MICE) is listed in the Budget for enhanced wage support at 75% but only for operators of purpose-built MICE venues.”
“Mr Speaker, to say that the COVID-19 outbreak has been a curve ball for the world must be the understatement of the century. In a span of two months, the viral outbreak has seen countries, rich and poor, scrambling to come to terms with understanding the health impacts of the disease and how to effectively contain its spread. Social distancing measures have upturned economic and social activity. Today, 6 April, is a milestone in Singapore as most businesses prepare to shutter their premises in line with Government directives, something that has not happened in my lifetime. What is enough to deal with the impacts of the virus? At one level, the health consequences on most people are manageable, with serious consequences falling on mainly the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions. As such, it was recently pointed out by Harvard Prof Michael Sandel that one could theoretically make a choice that economic and social activity should be kept up as only a minority of people would become seriously ill. However, he warns that making that choice would be a purely utilitarian calculation that is detrimental to the common good, as there is a moral dimension that is immutable. We are all members of society and the key question is: "What do we owe one another?" There is also the concern that the healthcare system should not be overwhelmed. With our own rising caseload from local transmissions, I agree that the circuit breaker directive announced last Friday is necessary. To ease the economic pain caused by COVID-19, G20 leaders have agreed that governments should utilise available tools to minimise the economic and social impact. To this end, many governments have announced support packages to help businesses and households.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have two clarifications for the Minister for Health. First, it is concerning the lethality of the virus. Earlier, he mentioned that if persons are young and healthy, even if they catch the virus, they are likely to get away with mild symptoms, such as a cough. And to get a sense of perspective, there have been some leaders overseas who have given a rough figure to say that 95% of the population need not worry about serious complications from COVID-19. It is just a 5%. So, I would like to ask the Minister whether he agrees that based on the experience we have had in Singapore, that this 95% to 5% proportion is also what we have seen in Singapore, meaning that only 5% who encounter the virus are likely to have serious complications. The second clarification is, could he give some information on the profile of the ICU patients with COVID-19? We know so far that the two deaths have concerned those who are elderly and with pre-existing conditions, but are there also significant numbers of patients in the ICU who are younger and do not have pre-existing conditions?”
“Sir, my next clarification relates to clause 20 on building inspections and remedial works. Clause 20 provides for situations where the Commissioner of Building Control requires an owner to inspect and take remedial actions in respect of a potentially dangerous building, exterior feature or fixed installation, or a building product that carries a safety risk. The Bill will remove the need for such inspections and works to be overseen by qualified persons and simply require them to be done by appropriate persons. This will expand the class of persons who do such work beyond architects and professional engineers. What is the thinking behind apparently relaxing this requirement as we are dealing here with potentially dangerous structures and safety concerns? Will the Ministry provide guidance as to the alternative qualifications that such an appropriate person should have? 2.40 pm”
“An exterior feature could have been unsafe from the point of construction; alternatively, it could become unsafe over time due to wear and tear or lack of maintenance, in which case, Town Councils will have to bear some responsibility. During the MND COS, I note that Minister had clarified that if an HDB block had a falling façade that could be attributed to a construction fault, HDB should pay the cost of rectification. This is eminently reasonable. In fact, the proposed section 25H makes clear that if a person responsible for an exterior feature can show that the defect was caused by materials or work supplied, the person responsible has a defence to a charge of failing to maintain the feature. What is the implication of removing HDB from the definition of “person responsible” for maintaining an exterior feature? The second question relates to the inclusion of the Town Council’s contractor as a “person responsible”, if that contractor has charge and control of the management and maintenance of the common property. Does this phrase mean a Town Council’s Managing Agent, where a Town Council has outsourced its operations to an MA? The same section makes it clear that for private property, such as condominiums, managing agents are persons responsible together with the owners. Could Ministry explain why, for HDB estates, the phrase “managing agent” is not used? Sir, clarity on who is responsible is necessary, as persons responsible have onerous duties under the Bill. These duties include the need to comply with BCA’s Notices to Maintain under the new section 25E, at their cost. They also have duties to report safety incidents under the new section 25B, and failure to perform these duties carries heavy responsibilities.”
“Mr Speaker, I appreciate the rationale of this Bill to enhance public safety and accessibility of buildings. As an urban and densely built-up society, public safety of building structures and fixed installations are critical. That said, these measures will entail costs, which will be a concern to those responsible, including Town Councils. Member Mr Fasal Manap, who chairs the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council, will elaborate further in his speech. I wish to seek clarifications on two particular aspects of the Bill. The first clarification is on the maintenance of exterior features of buildings. This Bill simplifies the definition of “exterior feature” to mean any permanent feature of a building that is installed on, forms part of or projects outwards from the roof or exterior of the building, and such other features that may be prescribed in the regulations. This is an improvement from the existing definition which contains a laundry list of features. I note that the Bill changes the definition of the person responsible to maintain these features. Under the existing Act, it is stated that for HDB blocks, the person responsible to maintain exterior features is either the HDB or the Town Council, depending on who the Minister designates for that feature. By this Bill, clause 2(q) will amend the law to remove HDB as a person responsible for the exterior feature, and place the responsibility on the Town Council or a contractor engaged by the Town Council who has charge and control of the management and maintenance of common property. I have two questions relating to this. First, what is the rationale of removing HDB from the definition as a person responsible for the exterior feature? Does this amendment change the responsibility of HDB towards problematic features?”
“Singapore ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2013. The Government has also issued Enabling Masterplans and the leadership of some colleagues in this House towards realising this vision is well-known. Recently a disabled resident asked me to raise the topic of training and employment prospects for persons with disabilities. The Government has had schemes to boost the hiring of persons with disabilities, including the latest announcement of the Enabling Employment Credit, to provide stronger wage support for open employment. Non-governmental organisations also have initiatives such as sheltered workshops to provide training and employment. In a recent Parliamentary answer, MOM stated that the resident employment rate of persons with disabilities in the working age of 15 to 64 was about 29%, with the resident unemployment rate at 13%. What is the Government’s assessment of how far Singapore has implemented the UN Convention, particularly Article 27 on Work and Employment? Support for the Special Needs Community”
“Sir, I have several residents who are COVID-19 patients and our thoughts are with all patients for strength and a speedy recovery. On the treatment front, a resident who was a SARS patient told me that a medical team visited her recently to obtain some blood samples to aid the COVID-19 cases. Some medical experts overseas have opined that using convalescent blood plasma from former SARS patients could assist very sick COVID-19 patients but was unlikely to be deployable on a larger scale. Could Ministry elaborate on the thinking and efforts on this front? As for containment, the World Health Organization has opined that it would take 18 months to develop a safe vaccine. As the virus is assessed to be spread by droplets at close range, containing the spread via separation measures like quarantine appears to be appropriate. What are the preliminary assessments of the effectiveness of the Government's strategy so far? COVID-19 - Planning for Future Threats”
“As these checks by the agencies would presumably have been done on the PIE viaduct project as well, does the collapse of the structure and the facts found by the court indicate any loophole that needs to be plugged? Is there a need for agencies to play a larger role in regulating building projects to ensure public safety? PMETs in Construction Sector”
“Sir, under the Building Control Act, proposals for building works will need to be submitted to the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) for approval. I understand that the Act will soon be amended to expand the types of projects that require BCA approval, to include major alteration or replacement works to fixed installations. In assessing whether or not to approve such works, the BCA will examine the certifications and other paperwork of qualified persons (QPs) engaged by the project owners. To what extent does BCA itself verify the soundness of these certifications? The incident of the PIE Viaduct Collapse in 2017 is illustrative. In that incident, one person was killed and 10 others injured. To date, various professionals associated with the project have been charged and convicted in court. The QP admitted to having engineers with inappropriate experience, failing to check design assumptions and being aware of errors in calculations by the engineers. An accredited checker for the viaduct admitted that he had failed to check the designs or perform calculations for the corbels. In a Parliamentary answer in July 2018, MND elaborated on its standard procedures when dealing with building projects. The Ministry stated that at the plan submission stage, the BCA performs a sampling check of the plans and design calculations of selected key structural elements, to ascertain that the QP and the Accredited Checker had carried out the design and checks in accordance with building control legislative requirements. MND further stated that at the construction stage, BCA would conduct targeted inspections on structural works.”
“Chairman, I have a clarification concerning Project Wolbachia, the mosquito study. The first is that, I think it has gone through a few phases now. And from what I understand to date, it has not been deployed in any dengue clusters. My clarification first is, is there any rationale for not deploying it in dengue clusters thus far? The second clarification is, earlier Minister Masagos mentioned that there is an intention to expand the project to larger areas. Does he foresee, for example, in the coming months that this will also involve dengue clusters in the expanded project?”
“In the light of these developments, has the Government adjusted its dengue containment strategies, both short-term and long-term? Also, how has NEA coped with the manpower challenges of such outbreaks and leveraged technology to augment its manpower? Vector Control”
“While COVID-19 takes our immediate attention, dengue continues to be a persistent challenge that also deserves significant attention. Indeed, dengue case numbers for the beginning of this year have spiked against the same period last year and there are several live clusters in certain estates in Aljunied GRC. Residents remain concerned even as they appreciate the diligence of NEA teams in the area. The warmer weather in the coming months could lead to an even higher mosquito population. In an update in January, NEA has noted the threat from the DENV-3 serotype, a strain of dengue not dominant in more than 30 years. Dengue strains have, in the past, switched from DENV-1 and DENV-2, but NEA has noted a recent increase in DENV-3 cases in three large dengue clusters in Singapore. While NEA has stated that it is still too early to say that there had been a switch of the dominant serotype, low herd immunity towards the new strain will leave Singaporeans vulnerable to a large outbreak. In terms of anti-dengue strategy, there was previous discussion about the prospects of a dengue vaccine. However, recent experience from other countries which have tried a vaccine has cast doubts about its efficacy and highlighted potential health risks. Controlling the mosquito population may have better and more immediate prospects. Project Wolbachia is a promising technology for vector control, where infected mosquitoes are deployed for sterile breeding. The project has been expanded in Singapore but it is still under study and is not deployed in existing dengue clusters. Long-term, with climate change and global warming, mosquitoes are poised to breed faster, and the virus replication may also be accelerated.”
“It seems a waste to channel the balances for housing and retirement when its primary purpose was post-Secondary education or the account holder is young. I hope MOE will at least look at case-by-case applications and appeals. Lifelong Learning for a Gig Economy”
“The Post-Secondary Education Account (PSEA) is a useful mechanism for young individuals to help defray the cost of their education. However, I am perplexed by the strict limitations placed on PSEA usage. In a recent Parliamentary answer, MOE has said that the Ministry was concerned about the quality of the courses, the relevance to the industry and the outcomes to the graduates. Although this is fair enough, it should be remembered that we are talking here about an individual's account balances, and not about subsidies. I recently came across a resident who needed to use his PSEA funds for a course in an aeronautical university that has collaborations with the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore, the Air Force and Singapore Airlines. 7.00 pm With such extensive local industry partnerships, quality and industry relevance should be less of a concern. The resident was in the final year of his course, when his father, who sponsored his studies died suddenly. As his father had remarried, the funding for his studies was abruptly cut off after his death. His mother was of limited means. He had hoped that MOE would enable him to tap on the more than $3,000 balance in his PSEA to pay his remaining course fees, but this was turned down. Monies that are left unutilised in the PSEA when the account holder turns 31 will be transferred to his CPF Ordinary Account. MOE confirmed in January that over the past three years, about 90% of PSEA accounts had balances transferred to the CPF. Although the amount of the balances transferred appears modest, tapping on these sums to complete tertiary studies would be welcomed, especially for those less well-off.”
“For these mid-career transitioners, the passion to take ownership of their own futures should be commended. Yet, such mid-career transitioners may have multiple financial commitments and will hesitant to dig into a significant portion of their current liquid savings to undergo unsubsidised and costly re-education and re-skilling. It is in this context that I am suggesting that the Government look into the feasibility of enabling CPF members to tap on their CPF savings to fund their re-education and re-skilling. I agree that retirement adequacy will always be the over-arching aim of the CPF savings scheme. However, re-skilling potentially leads to better salary outcomes and could pay for itself. This is important at a time where retirement and re-employment ages are moving up. 2.30 pm The Government could always put in safeguards, such as has been done with the CPF investment schemes. For CPF members currently in their 40s and 50s, there are probably significant numbers whose CPF savings exceed their applicable Minimum Sums, even before they reach 55. The Government could consider enabling these members to make such withdrawals. Contribute-As-You-Earn (CAYE)”
“Chairman, during the debate on the Budget Statement, I had asked whether it was time to consider other approaches to support mid-career transitioners, such as enabling CPF members in their 40s and 50s to tap on their CPF savings to chart their own continuing education and re-skilling. The Minister had responded briefly to reject the suggestion, stating that the cost of training was not the main issue and that retirement adequacy should not be undermined. I would like today to elaborate on why cost has been an issue for some, and why such a proposal need not affect retirement adequacy. We are all aware of the Adapt & Grow initiatives and how they dovetail into the Government's Industry Transformation Maps. These give effect to the broad national plan to enable the workforce to have relevant skills to take on jobs that are projected to be in demand now and in the future economy. I appreciate the deliberations, consultations, planning and resources that have been devoted to this national endeavour, which has helped many mid-career employees find meaningful work in new industries. Indeed, many courses endorsed under these frameworks are relatively low-cost and accessible. However, there are also other mid-career transitioners who will not be content with these offerings. Some have remarked to me that to set themselves apart in a soft job market, they did not want a certification that so many others were already getting but to chart their own paths. Some may already have tertiary qualifications and wish to do post-graduate courses in new areas conducted by overseas universities or professional bodies. Others may want to venture to work abroad, where the skill areas in demand may not be the same as those under Singapore's economic transformation plan.”
“However, I have encountered some in the balance 30%, who expressed difficulties in finding work through the schemes despite their best efforts. To what extent is success hampered by capacity issues, that is, insufficient job openings, or is matching of jobs to applicants the bigger issue?”
“Chairman, mid-career transitions may be one of the most daunting experiences for workers. I will touch on the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) and career transition schemes. First, the FCF. Four years ago, my colleague, Member of Parliament Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap, highlighted that the original FCF needed enforcement measures. Anecdotally, some mid-career transitioners have experienced being called up for third or fourth interviews with employers, but sensing from the body language of interviewers that everyone was "going through the motions" to tick boxes before applying for work passes to hire foreigners. I believe that the Minister is well aware of some employers who treat the FCF as, to quote her, "a paper exercise". The announcement in January that MOM is enhancing the FCF is welcome. In particular, I note that MOM has started to charge employers in court under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act for making false declarations that they had considered local applicants fairly before trying to apply for a foreigner. However, it seems that in recent years, most of the discrimination cases came to the Ministry's attention through whistle-blowing. Is the Ministry going to step up proactive detection of its own? My second point relates to career transition programmes. Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) and Career Support Programmes (CSPs) are key planks of the Government's Adapt and Grow initiative to help mid-career transitions. In his Budget round-up speech last week, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat assessed that the results were encouraging. He highlighted that career coaches worked with about 27,000 jobseekers every year and in 2018, managed to place about 70% into new jobs within six months.”
“Chairman, in 2016, the Government published a document called "Singapore's Cybersecurity Strategy". The strategy has four pillars. One, to strengthen the resilience of our critical information infrastructure; two, to mobilise businesses and the community to make cyberspace safe; three, to develop a vibrant cybersecurity eco-system comprising a skilled workforce, technologically advanced companies and strong research collaborations; and four, to step up efforts to forge strong international partnerships. Since 2016, much has happened to focus us on our cybersecurity vulnerabilities. What is the Government's current assessment of the implementation of Singapore's cybersecurity strategy and how far has the Cyber Security Agency (CSA) contributed towards grounding the four pillars of the four strategies? Next, CSA's mandate enables it to direct owners of critical information infrastructures on the essential cybersecurity measures to be adopted and to provide professional consultancy and direct assistance to them, where necessary. How does CSA ensure that its officers have the necessary expertise to devise credible regulations and guidelines? This is particularly needed in vendor management as it is common for data owners to outsource data management to third party providers. I know move on to a query on the role of CSA viz a viz the public sector. Under the Cybersecurity Act regime, owners of critical information infrastructure include the Government, as it is running various essential services. Last year, the Government convened a public sector data security review committee which recently issued its report on enhancing public sector data security. Could the Minister clarify what CSA played in this review? Cybersecurity”
“Thank you, Chairman. Two clarifications for the Minister for Defence regarding our purchase of the F-35s. Earlier, the Minister mentioned that US Congressional approval has been obtained for the purchases. Do I understand that this is the in-principle approval that is needed and that the formal terms of the sale and purchase are still being negotiated and finalised? That is the first clarification. The second clarification concerns his acknowledgement that there had been some technical issues with the plane and he mentioned that, to ensure that our defence dollars are well-spent, the timelines that are available to us will be useful. Could he elaborate a bit more about this aspect?”
“Chairman, MINDEF previously informed Parliament how it attempts to maximise Singapore's defence dollars, through the purchase of only items it needs, retrofitting existing assets and so on. Could the Minister for Defence elaborate also on its acquisition decisions – how MINDEF assesses the reasonableness of the prices quoted by vendors and ensures that it receives fair value for money on its purchases? At stake in these decisions is hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. More importantly, they involve the lives and safety of our men and women in uniform and, ultimately, Singapore's security. A key issue is that unlike other products and services involved in Government procurement, defence articles may not be freely market-tested due to the confidentiality of specifications or dependence on specialist contractors. Systems sold at a certain price point may be subject to expensive after-sales maintenance and upgrade packages with proprietary and protected information. After all, contemporary defence platforms can be highly tailored and involve the integration of multiple systems overseen by large numbers of vendors and sub-contractors. An example is the US F-35 programme. As of January, Singapore's purchase of up to 12 aircraft for an estimated US$2.75 billion is undergoing the US Congressional approval process. However, the programme has been dogged by cost overruns and questions about reliability. There were also issues regarding the leak of confidential data that required costly redesigns and retrofits from various vendors and subcontractors. This is just one well-known example about a single programme. My question is broader. Can MINDEF elaborate on how it injects rigour into its procurement decisions to ensure value for money? Training Safety”
“Mr Chairman, East Asia is again becoming a site for more intense power contestation, particularly in the South China Sea. Worryingly, some of this competition is taking on more militarised characteristics region-wide. Such developments have the unfortunate consequence of prompting other regional actors to adopt more militarised stances. They include arms acquisitions and more muscular positions over disputes.These developments challenge stability and freedom of access, even if they do not directly involve Singapore. Could the Minister for Defence update the House on the Government's strategy for navigating this increasingly complicated security landscape? Deterrence alone cannot fully address these concerns, and defence spending needs to be within prudent limits. In particular, what role should be played by the SAF on a routine basis and during contingencies and how is the SAF working towards these objectives? Defence Diplomacy”
“Chairman, I do believe that this matter is worthy of further consideration, but at this juncture, in the interest of time, I would like to thank the Attorney-General's Chambers for its work and I beg leave to withdraw the cut. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $197,113,500 for Head B ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $5,764,000 for Head B ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Thank you, Sir. I have some clarifications for Senior Minister of State. First, may I just get his confirmation that he actually acknowledges that this principle of separation between the Chief Prosecutor and the Chief Government legal advisor is taken in other jurisdictions. That is one. Secondly, I think he would probably be aware that a former Attorney-General had actually written an article about this issue in The Straits Times in 2017. And he actually suggested also that the separation be introduced into the system as a matter of design, not because currently there are major issues now, but to pre-empt future problems, and citing that in other countries' pressure on prosecutors, perhaps by an unscrupulous Executive is not unknown. So, from a system design perspective, it is something that is good to consider. The third point is that he mentioned that it is quite difficult to remove the Attorney-General and cited the Constitutional provisions. But at the same time as well, if the Attorney-General is appointed for a short term, then his contract will just lapse and in that sense, he will be removed after a short period of time or his service will be terminated. So, is it not worth considering actually, to introduce a certain continuity in the term of the Attorney-General, so that he can see through certain matters that are of concern of public interest. At the same time, the former Attorney-General who wrote the article highlighted a frequent change of Attorney-General does affect the morale of the Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPPs). So, I would like the Senior Minister of State's comment on that.”
“The Constitution originally envisaged the Attorney-General to hold office until 60 years of age, and was later amended to allow Attorney-Generals to hold office for a specific period. In the recent past, some Attorney-Generals had held office for short terms of two to three years. I suggest that the Government introduce a minimum term of appointment to enable the Attorney-General to enjoy some security. As to what period is suitable, we could take reference from the period currently set for the appointment for the Auditor-General, which under the Constitution is a six-year term. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“The AG has the responsibility to decide on criminal prosecutions on behalf of the state: who should be charged, who should be let off with a warning, who should have their charges reduced or compounded and so on. He is arguably more powerful than a High Court judge, as his exercise of discretion is done in private and is un-appealable. As Public Prosecutor (PP), the Attorney-General is expected to be fiercely independent and have no hesitation to bring charges against the most powerful office-holders if the circumstances warrant. The rule of law, which we hold so dear, depends on it. In order to further strengthen the system and shore up the independence of the Public Prosecutor, I ask the Government to consider splitting the two roles I have described, to reside in two different offices, so that the person who is Public Prosecutor is not the same person taking the Government's instructions in non-criminal matters. I believe this separation exists in other countries to enhance the independence of the PP's office. From my understanding, the dual role of the Attorney-General was drafted into the Constitution at a time when our legal manpower was more limited. Today, we have many senior legal minds. Already within the Attorney-General's Chambers organisation, besides the Attorney-General himself, we have two Deputy Attorneys-General and a Solicitor-General. It would appear that we can assign the role of Public Prosecutor to the Attorney-General and the role of Government's legal advisor to one of the Deputy Attorneys-General or to the Solicitor-General. Sir, in addition, to further buttress the standing of the Attorney-General, he should enjoy some security of tenure.”
“Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head B of the Estimates be reduced by $100". Chairman, I filed this cut to suggest a review of the role of the Attorney-General, with a view to making our legal system even more robust. I would like to suggest that the Government consider a change in the Constitution, to split the current dual role of the Attorney-General into two separate offices, to be held by different office-holders. Let me explain why this would improve the current arrangements. Currently, under Article 35 of the Constitution, the Attorney-General is entrusted with two roles that require him to behave quite differently. On the one hand, under Article 35(7), he is the chief legal advisor to the Government. It is provided that the Attorney-General is to "advise the Government upon such legal matters and to perform such other duties of a legal character, as may from time to time be referred or assigned to him… and to discharge the functions conferred on him". In this advisory role, the Government is his client and it is the Government who will decide what should be done. The Attorney-General may have to take certain courses of action even if they go against his own advice. On the other hand, he has a pivotal public role in criminal matters. Article 35(8) provides that the Attorney-General is the Public Prosecutor and vested with power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for any offence. Sir, the extent of this power, and the responsibility associated with it, cannot be over-stated.”
“Deputy Speaker, I have two clarifications for the Minister. First, it is regarding my suggestion on the use of CPF. I have actually filed a cut for the MOM Committee of Supply (COS), so please let me elaborate more at the time, and I will be interested to hear the Minister's response then. The second clarification is that I am glad to note the Minister saying the Government still keeps an open mind on solutions, including insurance. On the ground, we are getting feedback that some of the mid-career professionals who try to tap on the existing Adapt and Grow Schemes are still finding difficulties getting a job after some time. So, how confident is the Government moving forward that you will be able to handle and find solutions for everyone who applies under those schemes?”
“Another measure for consideration is some sort of redundancy insurance. This has been previously debated in this House, with the Government calling it, "not a crazy idea", but preferring its current approach of job creation and reskilling. How confident is the Government that its existing schemes will be able to find solutions for everyone who applies? Today's economic climate illustrates how such insurance could provide a stabiliser to workers, to soften the cliff-edge that they face with job disruption. Suffice to say for now, Sir, that the Government would need to reassess its approaches periodically, as economic and technological realities change. If the anxiety of citizens is not taken seriously enough, the door to populism and nativism will widen. Mr Speaker, I have tried in this speech to sketch out how globalisation has largely been a boon, especially to Asia and to Singapore. The forces of globalisation also pressure us to constantly up our game, reskill and be prepared to be uprooted to stay relevant. This transition is not easy, and I appreciate that the Government has poured in resources to support Singaporeans in reskilling and career transition. However, the anxiety and insecurity aspects will also need to be addressed adequately, in order to shore up the concept of unity which is the theme of this Budget.”
“Seeking assistance from Government agencies also positions the citizen as someone applying for help, which can be a humbling experience. All this can be a tremendous mental and emotional strain on the whole family. To illustrate, I know of one retrenched man who has still not told his wife that he lost his job some months ago. Every day, he leaves home as usual and comes back at the usual time, while trying to find another job. In dealing with the long-term structural shifts, the Government has devoted significant resources to enable workers to skill up and transit to other industries. This is certainly needed. But is it time now to consider other measures too that Singaporeans can tap on more seamlessly, and for security and peace of mind? It had always been a tenet of this Government to promote self-reliance among Singaporeans. Singaporeans, too, prefer to be self-reliant and not have to seek Government assistance at every turn. With the weak economic outlook and soft job market, it may be the time to re-examine some policy approaches. For instance, I know of some mid-career employees who had been laid off and turned to Government agencies for assistance, but were unable to secure work for months, a point Ms Jessica Tan alluded to earlier as well. Some of them wanted to chart their own reskilling towards a professional qualification in another field, which would require a significant cash outlay. One measure, which I think should be considered, is allowing more liberal use of Central Provident Fund (CPF) savings for education and reskilling. This would be reasonable for CPF members whose savings already exceed the applicable Minimum Sums. I will speak more about this at the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) Committee of Supply debate.”
“The World Bank highlights that governments need to pay attention to the aspect of human security, such as through targeted poverty reduction and social safety nets. Sir, I believe the Singapore Government knows this literature all too well. Though the Government does not label its initiatives in terms of alternative globalisation, some of its policies, including in this Budget, seek to mitigate the harsh impacts of economic liberalisation on Singaporeans. There are various schemes for targeted poverty reduction, for example, through rebates and other financial transfers weighted in favour of the poor. There are also important social safety nets, such as retraining and reskilling efforts, which it is now redoubling on. Yet, as Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat acknowledges, workers have anxiety, especially those in their 40s and 50s. It is useful to unpack the source of such anxiety. Workers in their 40s and 50s are at a stage of their lives when they can least afford income disruption: they have children to raise, mortgages to pay and elderly parents who may be ailing and need financial support. Disruption can come anytime, through industries being off-shored elsewhere, or by being displaced through foreign competition within Singapore. To this end, I agree with the Government's effort in this Budget to boost the hiring of locals and mid-career transitioners, by reducing the S Pass sub-dependency ratio ceiling (DRC) in the Construction, Marine and Process industries. Despite all these efforts, mid-career workers' anxiety will be hard to assuage. Why? Transitions into new industries take time. There could be mismatch between openings and applicants.”
“Though some far-right groups in the world today seem to reject globalisation outright, this is not constructive, as it is simply not possible to unwind today's world of interconnectedness and multipolar supply chains. The most useful debate today is between the Neoliberalists, who overwhelmingly believe in the global free market, and the Reformists, who argue that global capitalism can be a force for good only when accompanied by policies that promote equitable growth, human security and sustainable development. Today, three decades after globalisation took off, the protestors' core concerns are being recognised in the halls of power. Climate Change is on the international agenda and in this Budget. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development has sponsored work on subjective well-being and social welfare. Green financing is gaining momentum, with European Union (EU) law requiring large companies to publish climate-related financial disclosures. International financial institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, have had a rethink about their policies, too. This is especially so after the experience of the Asian Financial Crisis and the collapse of Latin American economies that took their advice. It is now acknowledged by these institutions that different countries are at different states of readiness, that there can be no universal set of rules for everyone. Indeed, the relative success of China and India in the era of globalisation has been attributed to their opening up of their markets in an incremental manner, giving local enterprises and workers time to adapt. The lessons from the 1990s show that governments have an important role to play to actively manage globalisation for their respective countries.”
“Mr Speaker, the Government has called this year's Budget, a "Unity Budget". Following from the theme of unity, the focus of my speech today is Unity Amidst Disruption. Of all the areas covered by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat's Budget speech, I was especially interested in the section on Navigating Long-Term Structural Shifts. He acknowledged the global decline in support for globalisation, with protectionism and nativism on the rise. On my part, I have been studying the phenomenon of globalisation for a while, and I would argue that the main debate today is not between those who support or reject globalisation. Instead, it is a more nuanced and constructive debate about the kind of globalisation we should strive for that would improve human welfare in a sustainable way. Those who advocate such human-centred globalisation are sometimes called "alternative globalisers". At the outset, I should say that Singapore has been a major beneficiary of globalisation, with the Government providing leadership in this endeavour over the years. We have benefited from open trade, foreign investment and becoming a global financial centre. We are increasingly becoming a global knowledge hub. While these benefits are undeniable, the question is how the "losers" from globalisation are treated. In 2006, when Singapore hosted the World Bank meetings, we were met head-on by protestors who came from abroad to make their customary presence felt at these meetings. While some may see them as disruptive and a nuisance, it is increasingly acknowledged that their underlying concerns were valid. These were concerns about the excesses of global capitalism, such as market destabilisation, exploitation of workers in poorer countries and the destruction of the environment through pollution.”
“Mr Speaker, my clarification is for Minister Lawrence Wong on whether he can elaborate on what Singaporeans who are returning from China through Changi Airport can expect. The reason I am asking this is I have a resident who came back from Wuhan but through another airport and he is currently under home quarantine with his family. He told me that it was a very stressful experience for him and his family at the airport because he and his family with young children were basically kept in a locked room for about four hours waiting for vehicles to arrive to bring them back and so on. I wonder if the Minister could elaborate about what Singaporeans coming back through the airport, through the Chinese routes can expect, whether the processing time of four hours, for example, is normal or has it been more streamlined? And whether passengers coming from Hubei and other airports are treated differently?”
“Of course, it must be said that the cause of such tragic outcomes may not be the inadequacy of healthcare services but other causes, such as the nature of the illness itself or inherent risks of certain medical procedures. Nevertheless, healthcare is an area where there is asymmetry of knowledge, with patients placing high trust in professionals. It is critical that the public must be assured that investigations into complaints are fair to the consumer and independent of professional and institutional interests. At the same time, professionals need justice as well. And we recall the High Court's decision in July last year to reverse the conviction on an orthopaedic specialist by the Singapore Medical Council. To this end, can the Senior Minister of State elaborate on how this Bill will enhance confidence in the fairness of the quality assurance processes for all parties? My final point, Sir, concerns the implementation of the NEHR system. I note that during the public consultation on the Bill, a lot of time was spent dealing with the issue of potential data leaks. This is understandable in view of recent incidents. In responding to the feedback, the Ministry stated that patients concerned about the confidentiality of their medical data could possibly opt out of having their data inputed into NEHR by healthcare service providers. Could the Ministry please update the House on the status of this opt-out option? Sir, I look forward to the clarifications from the Ministry on the points I have raised.”
“So, I would like him to confirm that emergency ambulance services and such related conveyance services would be actually included for regulation under phase 2. Related to that, in last year's Committee of Supply when I raised this issue, the Senior Minister of State mentioned about price transparency that the Healthcare Services Bill would include this issue in its regulation and it would mandate the publication of common fees charged, as well as give more transparency to the bill components to be paid by consumers so that they would know upfront what those costs would be. So, do I take it then that with regard to private ambulance services, this would be actually done under phase 2? If that is the case, then when would that be done? And in the meantime, would there be anything put in place to protect consumers? For example, are we still relying on the Voluntary Accreditation Scheme to try to get some standards into that industry? Next, Sir, I move on to the important issue of quality assurance for consumers. The Bill states upfront in the explanatory statement and the Minister also mentioned earlier that one of the Bill's aims is to strengthen safeguards for the safety and welfare of patients who receive healthcare services. Since the day I became an elected Member of Parliament nine years ago, I have, from time to time, come across families who have been devastated by unsuccessful medical procedures. Some of their family members died unexpectedly while others sustained permanent disability in their prime and have been lying in rehabilitation hospitals for years.”