Teo Chee Hean
Singapore
“The second point first, Mr Speaker. Certainly, it could have been a factor. But to the Panel which reviewed the thing, it was not an acceptable excuse or reason. The agencies still have to be responsible for what they are doing, whatever season of the year it is.”
“On the balance in ACRA, I would not say it is a conflict, but you have to strike the right balance between the functions that ACRA is meant to provide, which is to have a registry which promotes corporate transparency, and you have to balance that against how you protect personal data.”
“That means, if you do find a bug or you do find a way in which you can penetrate a Government system, you let us know, and there is a bounty for it. And this is evergreen. But we also do, from time to time, have a hunting season. So, for certain of our systems, we invite white hatters to attack those systems.”
“Then, he asked when the political office holders got involved in the public communications on the Bizfile portal issue. They got involved, I think, almost as soon as it became apparent that there was public anxiety. Next question about paragraph 40 and the email to senior officers, yes, the July 2024 CM was emailed to officers.”
“In fact, we monitor the dark web for a variety of things, including this, and we have not seen any sale of NRIC numbers as such. On the question of collection and use of NRIC numbers, actually, in the communication with the Government agencies, I think it is important to know who you are communicating with.”
“So, you actually make your email address available to others. But for authentication purposes, it is quite different. You do not tell your password to others. That is something which you keep for yourself and your email service provider knows. So, there is a difference between an identifier and an authentication.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,689 lines we hold for Teo Chee Hean, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 34.
“This is why we are topping up $5 billion to the Future Energy Fund to make critical infrastructure investments and support solutions that are the most appropriate for us. Taken together, the measures I have mentioned constitute a holistic set of decarbonisation efforts. They maximise what is currently possible domestically, technologically and economically, while we work to advance the technologies and partnerships needed for the later phases of our decarbonisation journey. The next question is how to help our businesses transition to this new economy. Ms Poh Li San, Mr Dennis Tan and Ms He Ting Ru asked about costs, opportunities and the circular economy. Ms He, in particular, talked about consumption-based emissions versus production-based emissions. I should explain that currently, the world operates on a production-based emissions system. The entire United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) architecture is based around that. This is the way that we count, officially, carbon emissions for each country. And also, the methodologies for this are very well developed. 3.30 pm For consumption-based emissions, the methodologies are not standardised and they are not widely applied. And in any case, they will not be directly applicable to our carbon account under the Paris Agreement. But we are encouraging companies to start accounting for these things because, eventually, if carbon emission costs around the world rise, this will affect them also through their supply chain. So, they ought to know where their supply chain risks are. We are working with the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) and a consortium of partners to launch the Singapore Emission Factors Registry.”
“Carbon capture and storage (CCS) represents another pathway for us – one that is necessary to reduce emissions from hard-to-abate sectors. We are currently working with industry players to study the viability of cross-border carbon capture and storage projects. Achieving our longer-term targets will also require new and innovative solutions. And several of these new technologies are showing promise. We have begun to deploy biofuels, such as sustainable aviation fuel, which can be produced from food and agricultural waste. From next year, all flights departing Singapore will be required to have a 1% uplift of sustainable fuel, with the goal to raise this to 3% to 5% by 2030, subject to global developments. We are also studying the potential for wider adoption of biofuels in sectors such as electricity generation and transport. We are also building capabilities to deploy hydrogen and ammonia, including through small, pilot-scale projects, as we wait for these fuels to become commercially viable at scale. In the longer term, as the Prime Minister stated in the Budget Speech, we are studying the potential deployment of advanced nuclear energy technologies that, while nascent, could be safer than conventional reactors. We had previously announced our plans to build a pool of around 100 nuclear energy and safety experts. We already now have over 40 such experts whose priority in the coming years is to work with our partners to assess the potential for deploying advanced nuclear energy technologies safely in Singapore. In this transition to a low-carbon future, we will have to explore multiple, sometimes overlapping pathways so that we can find the right mix for ourselves.”
“We will also need to tap on cross-border solutions to overcome the limitations of being a dense and alternative-energy disadvantaged city-state. Miss Chan asked about our collaborations on electricity imports and carbon credits. We have made steady progress on both. We recently increased our indicative need for electricity imports from four gigawatts to eight gigawatts [Please refer to clarification later in the debate.] by 2035 and have awarded conditional regulatory approvals to potential partners in Indonesia, Vietnam and Cambodia for 5.6 gigawatts of low-carbon electricity imports. However, there is no transition without transmission. This is why we have been laying the crucial groundwork for the development of an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) regional power grid, which will facilitate cross-border electricity trading and increase regional energy resilience for all the countries in ASEAN. Next, carbon credits. Unlike electricity imports, credits are not limited by proximity, by distance and by physical connections. At the 2024 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) last year, we co-facilitated negotiations that delivered the full operationalisation of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. And Minister Grace Fu played a major role in that. We have also signed Implementation Agreements on Article 6 carbon credits with Papua New Guinea and Ghana and memoranda of understanding (MOUs) with more than 15 other countries. Just this morning, we signed a new Implementation Agreement with Bhutan. These win-win agreements will promote the development of carbon mitigation projects in these countries while helping us meet our emissions targets.”
“The carbon tax shapes behaviour across our economy, from consumers to businesses. The carbon tax, in a way, is a proxy for the cost of emissions by users. It reflects the cost to the economy and to the users for emitting carbon. This applies across the board, whether it is industry, or whether it is AI data centres. This then puts some inhibition on whether or not they will continue to have high emission levels and it applies a cost to the eventual users of all these services. At the same time, we do not just collect the carbon tax, we plough these tax revenues back into supporting businesses and households so that they can become greener. One example is the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA's) existing buildings incentive scheme for owners to retrofit their buildings to Green Mark energy efficiency standards. We are doing other things as well. It does not come from the collection of carbon tax, but we are doing Climate Vouchers as well. The Leader of the Opposition made some comments about that. Our current trajectory is to progressively increase the carbon tax to $45 per tonne in 2026 and 2027, with a view to reaching $50 to $80 per tonne by 2030. Of course, we will have to watch what happens on the global scene. I am heartened that both sides of this House have expressed support for a broad-based carbon tax, with the Workers' Party advocating even higher carbon taxes even sooner. We take such feedback seriously and look forward to their continued support when we adjust our carbon taxes in the future. We will continue to assess where the optimal range is. Our current tax rate is carefully calibrated to give our businesses and households time to adjust and to account for the maturation of green technologies that will allow us to decarbonise more efficiently.”
“We are on track to meet our 2030 NDC. Let me provide two examples of the progress we have made. First, on clean energy. Despite our limited land area, we have pushed hard on solar, which remains our most viable domestic source of renewable energy. I am pleased to announce that at the end of last year, we achieved our goal of 1.5 gigawatts-peak of solar deployment by 2025. This is ahead of schedule and more than triple where we were in 2020. This puts us on track to meet our target of at least two gigawatts-peak of solar deployment by 2030. To put this in context, our electrical power consumption today is around eight gigawatts. Of course, eight gigawatts is not the same as gigawatts-peak, but this puts it into context. Second, on land transport. We are working towards all vehicles running on clean energy by 2040. As of this year, we have ceased registrations of new diesel cars and taxis. Electric vehicle (EV) charging points have been installed in about half of all Housing and Development Board (HDB) carparks. Members would have seen them sprouting up all over your HDB carparks. A third of all new car registrations are electric cars. We are also on track to electrify half of our public bus fleet by 2030. We will redouble our efforts on such measures. The Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Ministry of Transport, and the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment will say more about this during their respective Committees of Supply (COS). Beyond these measures, we will need to step up efforts to study and advance a fuller suite of potential decarbonisation solutions – something which several Members asked about. One key enabler is our carbon tax, which was raised to $25 a tonne last year.”
“This summarises where we are now and our journey to get to net zero by 2050.”
“We are among just 13 countries to do so on time, out of a total of 195 countries. We have committed to reducing our emissions to between 45 and 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2035. Our 2035 NDC is an ambitious commitment. It builds on our previous target to peak and then reduce emissions to 60 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2030. Forty-five million tonnes keeps us on a straight-line trajectory from 60 million tonnes in 2030 down to net zero by 2050, aligning with the goals of the Paris Agreement. It is heartening that Members from both sides of this House have expressed support for our ambitious climate action plan and in particular, this downward trajectory of emissions, which is going to be a major challenge. Our 2035 NDC also signals our resolve to help our economy stay competitive in a low-carbon world. Having an ambitious target generates demand for new green investments and gives Singapore-based companies an edge in developing new low-carbon solutions. It also allows us to remain attractive to companies that are looking to decarbonise their operations, which are aligned with our own national goals. At the same time, as an alternative-energy disadvantaged nation, having a target range reflects the practical reality that our pace of decarbonisation depends heavily on technological developments and international collaboration. This range also recognises that we need some flexibility to manage the impact on our households and businesses while aligning with the pace of transition in the rest of the world. Miss Chan, Dr Lim and Ms Poh asked about progress toward our 2030 NDC and new measures for our 2035 target. With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute an infographic.”
“Green technology has advanced dramatically in the last two decades. Several of these technologies are now mature and mainstream, and make economic sense. They are not just cleaner but lower cost. The average levelised cost of solar energy globally, for instance, is now 50% lower than that of fossil fuels. This explains why two-thirds of global energy investment in 2024 went to clean energy technologies and infrastructure. Countries and businesses realise this, which is why despite political perturbations, there is now much greater momentum for decarbonisation than just a decade ago. Most of the world's advanced economies have been investing in decarbonisation and steadily reducing emissions. They recognise that the green transition is an increasingly important driver of growth and therefore crucial not just to the health of the globe, but also to the prosperity of their people. This brings us to nature. Climate change is no longer a future threat. It is already here, with us. Every country, all of us, can see this – drought, fires, floods, loss of crop yields, more severe storms. The last 10 years have been the hottest years ever on record. In short, the timeline to respond and adapt is being set, not by us, mere humans, but by nature. Countries and businesses which lag behind will be forced to act eventually. The longer they wait, the sharper and more disruptive a transition they will have to make. This is why Singapore remains fully committed to effective climate action. We want to put ourselves in the best possible position for the long-term challenge and the opportunities that arise. Earlier this month, Singapore submitted our 2035 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I speak as Chairman of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Climate Change (IMCCC), which coordinates our policy and measures across all sectors. And with your permission, Sir, I will take clarifications immediately after this speech. I would like to thank our hon Members, Ms Poh, Ms He, Mr Tan, Dr Lim and also Miss Chan, for their interest in this subject, which has a very long-term bearing on Singapore's development and growth. Sir, it is a difficult time to talk about climate action. The Paris Agreement in 2015 marked a breakthrough in global climate action, with countries pledging to keep global warming within 1.5°C. Although there has been unevenness in implementation, we were generally pulling in the same direction as a global community. However, the US has recently pulled out of the Paris Agreement, for the second time. This has prompted other countries, like Argentina and Indonesia, for example, to question the wisdom of maintaining their climate commitments. Dr Lim Wee Kiak has asked how these global developments will affect Singapore's climate goals. It is quite natural for countries to ask why they should continue to make these difficult changes when others are not and whether their efforts will even result in any meaningful change, without the participation of bigger players. Singapore's Climate Ambassador, Mr Ravi Menon, gave a speech a week ago at Temasek's Ecosperity Conversations. It provides a succinct and clear assessment of the global state of play on climate change, and I recommend that Members read it. Ambassador Menon points out that the main drivers of climate action are politics, economics and nature. I have touched on the political headwinds. So, let us examine the other two. 3.15 pm First, the economics.”
“Sir, perhaps instead of debating this issue in a theoretical manner, look at the practical issues, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim. Perhaps Assoc Prof Jamus Lim would join me in encouraging members of the public to do so rather than debating this in a theoretical manner. If all of us encourage members of the public to do so and tell them not to be afraid, I am sure they would do so and more of them would do more and not be hesitant.”
“Assoc Prof Jamus Lim had missed reports in the newspapers from the last few days. I was present at Home Team's National Day Observance Ceremony at the Home Team Academy and there were dozens of members of the public who had voluntarily stepped forward in emergency situations to help others. So, perhaps, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, would like to look at those news reports and see for himself.”
“The Centre gives Southeast Asia greater access to the IEA’s expertise and facilitates capacity building. The third area is transport. As an aviation and maritime hub, Singapore can play a major role in developing the infrastructure and standards for green aviation and shipping. The Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) recently launched the Singapore Sustainable Air Hub Blueprint, which takes a balanced approach on the need for sustainability and competitiveness for our aviation sector. This will help catalyse the development of sustainable aviation globally and facilitate the industry’s progress towards decarbonisation. We are also making progress on green shipping. In December 2023, we signed a memorandum of cooperation with Japan to establish the Singapore-Japan Green and Digital Shipping corridor. This complements similar partnerships with ports in the Netherlands, China and the United States (US), allowing us to support the decarbonisation, digitalisation and growth of the maritime industry. Mr Chairman, I have explained why it is in Singapore's interest to commit to climate action, outlined concrete steps we are taking as a nation to meet our ambitious climate targets, and highlighted how Singapore is stepping up to encourage regional and global action. We must stay the course in our green transition because we want to leave behind a liveable, resilient and thriving country and world for future generations of Singaporeans.”
“Our Pavilion was also home to Singapore’s inaugural youth delegation to COP28. Our young people deserve our support to apply their energy and ideas to the challenge of climate change and make a real difference. MSE will share more about how the Government is enabling youth action. The world needs to continue the momentum from COP28 to accelerate climate action. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked how Singapore can leverage our strengths as a hub to do that. Let me highlight three ways. First, green and transition finance. Asia will require an estimated US$1.7 trillion dollars in climate and infrastructure investment annually through to 2030. This substantial amount will need to be met by a combination of concessional and commercial capital. As a financial hub, Singapore is well-placed to catalyse green and transition finance for the region. As an example, at COP28, I announced the launch of a new blended finance initiative – the Financing Asia’s Transition Partnerships (FAST-P) that will mobilise up to US$5 billion from public and private sector partners to de-risk and finance transition and marginally bankable green projects in Asia. Singapore is also helping to build high-integrity carbon markets and pursuing collaboration on carbon credits under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement with various countries. At COP28, we signed our first Implementation Agreement, and this was with Papua New Guinea. MTI will share more about our efforts on carbon markets. The second area is energy. Singapore is helping to accelerate Southeast Asia’s energy transition by promoting partnerships that benefit our nation and the region. To support regional energy transition, we will establish in Singapore the first-ever International Energy Agency Regional Cooperation Centre outside of its Paris headquarters.”
“Mr Louis Ng asked about support for our research community. The Government’s Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2025 Plan (RIE2025) allocates significant funding to R&D across every pillar of the Singapore Green Plan. This ranges from low carbon energy research all the way to research in coastal protection and flood management, and covers a wide range of things. We recently enhanced funding for the RIE2025 Plan. This will facilitate the research community’s contribution to climate action. Ms Poh Li San asked how Singapore can play an active role in fostering international collaboration and catalysing global climate action. Mr Chairman, domestic action alone is necessary but not sufficient for us to succeed in global climate action. All countries and regions must do their part. This is why, under the Sustainability Action Package, Singapore supports capacity building for developing countries and brings together a diverse range of public and private sector partners to share best practices on sustainability and climate issues. Let me share a few examples of the efforts we contributed to at COP28 in Dubai. Minister Grace Fu helped broker a landmark consensus among the Parties to transition our energy systems away from fossil fuels. This is a strong signal of global resolve to pursue a net-zero future. Beyond the negotiating rooms, the Singapore Pavilion at COP28 was a hive of activity. It brought key organisations and persons from the private and people sectors together to forge new partnerships. For example, Singaporean ocean carrier Pacific International Lines and Dubai-based port and terminal operator DP World signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to jointly develop green solutions to decarbonise global supply chains.”
“The technologies underpinning CCS are not new and there is growing recognition from countries and organisations, such as the International Energy Agency (IEA), that CCS can play an important role in achieving significant reductions of industrial emissions. Countries in the region, such as Australia, Brunei, Indonesia and Malaysia, have strong geological potential for carbon dioxide storage, and some of our regional partners have announced plans to develop as regional CCS hubs. We are ready to work with like-minded partners on pathfinder projects to catalyse the development of such regional hubs. The Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) will provide more details on this. Mr Chairman, the climate transition will take a whole-of-nation effort. Ms Poh Li San asked how the Government is supporting businesses and households in this transition. Our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are benefiting from schemes that help them decarbonise and seize green economy prospects. One example is bbp – an energy efficiency solutions provider. Leveraging Enterprise Singapore’s Enterprise Development Grant and other scale-up programmes, bbp has helped businesses achieve more than $90 million of energy savings and avoid 240,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, across nine Asian markets. Of course, developing a nice business for themselves. We will continue to enhance our schemes to encourage energy efficiency among businesses and households. These include expanding the Energy Efficiency Grant to more sectors, enhancing the climate-friendly households programme that offsets the upfront costs of switching to more energy- and water-efficient appliances. MTI and MSE will update this House on their efforts in these areas in greater detail.”
“It shapes behaviour across our economy, and we continue to use the revenues to help businesses and households become greener. I am truly heartened that both sides of this House have expressed support for a broad-based carbon tax. Some have advocated, for example, from the Workers' Party (WP), much higher tax rates and sooner than what the Government is actually intending to implement up to 2030. What we are intending to implement is carefully calibrated to take into account the adjustment as needed by households and businesses and also the maturing of technologies that will make it more efficient for us to decarbonise. We are also transforming our energy mix to run on greener power. We have doubled our solar power deployment since 2021 to over 1,000 Megawatt-peak (MWp), despite our limited land area. We aim to reach 2,000 MWp by 2030, or 2 Gigawatt-peak (GWp). As a comparison, our power supply consumption right now is about 8 GWp. Of course, 2 GWp is not the same – you cannot put them side by side. We are importing low-carbon electricity, allowing us to tap renewable energy beyond our shores. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked how Singapore can capitalise on emerging technologies to support our energy transition. This year, the Government will set up a Future Energy Fund (FEF) with an initial injection of $5 billion. The FEF will allow us to plan ahead to catalyse the infrastructure investments we need to deploy low-carbon technologies, when they are viable. There is a range of things it could be. It could be hydrogen, could be ammonia, could be a number of things and we need to start doing that within the next few years. We are also looking at new solutions beyond the power sector. We have been monitoring carbon capture and storage (CCS).”
“If rising temperatures in the Arctic make this short-cut passable year-round, it could alter the flow of shipping between Asia and Europe. Our port will therefore have to be more efficient and better-connected to compete. This is why Singapore has been closely monitoring developments in the Arctic. Although Singapore is on the equator, we have been an Arctic Council Observer State since 2013 – for the last 11 years – and we contribute and participate actively in its discussions. Currently, the commercial viability of the Arctic routes remains low. It is a very difficult and treacherous route. In 2022, only 43 transit voyages were made through the Northern Sea Route, fewer than the 85 transit voyages in 2021. Still, we cannot ignore how profoundly climate change can disrupt our lives and livelihoods. For Singapore, this means not just acting now to achieve our own climate goals, but also catalysing regional and global action, so that other countries do the same. Only then can we collectively achieve our global climate action goals. As Ms Poh Li San pointed out, we emit about 0.1% of the carbon dioxide each year, but we are affected by the other 99.9%. Domestically, we have set ambitious targets. In 2022, we announced our enhanced climate targets, committing to reduce emissions by 2030 to 60 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, after peaking emissions earlier; and to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. We have essentially decided to target for the future, look at what the future will bring for us, shape our economy and our society and plan on that basis rather than doing incremental changes as we go along. Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked how we are turning our ambitions into action. Our carbon tax, which was raised to $25 per tonne this year, is a key enabler.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. Ms Poh Li San and other Members have raised important issues which I will address from a whole-of-Government perspective. Some of the details will be dealt with by the individual Ministries during their Committee of Supply (COS) debates. I speak as Chairman of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Climate Change (IMCCC). 3.00 pm Amid heightened geopolitical and economic turbulence, the world is currently on a pathway to 2.1 to 2.8°C of global warming by 2100. The Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) has been working to improve our understanding of the consequences of such a pathway. Today, we have a clearer projection. But it is a projection, because we are talking about what is going to happen for the rest of the century. The Third National Climate Change Study, released last month, forecasts the extreme climate conditions that we could experience – higher temperatures, heavier spells of rainfall, longer and more frequent dry spells. In the worst-case scenario, where global emissions continue rising rapidly, Singapore could face daily maximum temperatures exceeding 35°C almost year-round. This would be a marked increase from the historical average of 21 such days each year. Ms Poh Li San asked how we are responding to these latest projections. We take a long-term and proactive approach, and we are developing our adaptation plans. These are regularly refreshed to keep up with the latest science, to help us be ready for the climate risks we will face – whether they are physical risks such as flooding, or health risks. The physical effects of climate change also have wider implications for our economy, as Mr Dennis Tan has pointed out about the Northern Sea Route.”
“Residential security measures for Cabinet Ministers are determined by the Singapore Police Force (SPF) based on their professional assessment of the security threat and risks. This takes into account primarily the threat and risks to the Minister, including the portfolio he or she holds, and not just the residence where the Minister lives. Wherever the Minister’s residence happens to be, SPF provides the appropriate level of security. As such, the level of residential security measures and the cost vary for different Cabinet Ministers and a meaningful comparison cannot be made. SPF is not able to divulge more details, as this could undermine security.”
“The accusations of gerrymandering happen in every country where the electoral boundaries are being drawn or redrawn. Gerrymandering goes back 200 years or more in the US; what we consider the paragon of democracy today. And those accusations are still being made for gerrymandering. So, it is not an issue of whether it is a GRC or an SMC. In fact, I think as Mr Leong or Ms Hazel Poa has pointed out, it is those GRCs or those constituencies that have been won by the Opposition where it has not been changed at all. And I do not understand why the EBRC has not changed them, but perhaps, you can make a request for them all to become SMCs. That may be an interesting idea.”
“Thank you. I am much obliged, Mr Deputy Speaker. I just wanted to address a point that Mr Pritam Singh raised with regard to electoral boundaries. These are not new accusations and they exist whether we have GRCs or SMCs. I just wanted to ask Mr Pritam Singh whether he knows where the term "gerrymandering" comes from, how far back it goes, and whether or not they had GRCs in those places.”
“I have addressed this Question in my Ministerial Statement at the 3 July 2023 Parliament Sitting. [Please refer to "Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road", Official Report, 3 July 2023, Vol 95, Issue 105, Ministerial Statements section.]”
“I have addressed this Question in my Ministerial Statement at the 3 July 2023 Parliament Sitting. [Please refer to "Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road", Official Report, 3 July 2023, Vol 95, Issue 105, Ministerial Statements section.]”
“The Second Minister for Law and I have addressed this Question in our Ministerial Statements at the 3 July 2023 Parliament Sitting. [Please refer to "Rental of 26 Ridout Road ", Official Report, 3 July 2023, Vol 95, Issue 105, Ministerial Statements section.]”
“We have to bring them in and have them contributing. All Members of this House know that coming into politics entails many sacrifices – privacy, continuous exposure to the glare of the public eye, especially in this age of social media, in their careers, in family time and not always being there to watch your kids grow. If they have served well, the satisfaction of having done so is the biggest reward that makes it all worthwhile. The biggest challenge we face is to continue bringing in the best team to do the best for Singapore and Singaporeans. I am glad that today in this House, we have agreed to focus on the facts and the truth, not just on wild allegations, rumours or perceptions, but to focus on the facts and the truth. This is important so that we can build a system with a strong foundation which will help bring in good people to continue to serve in the Government to take Singapore further forward. [Applause.] 6.22 pm”
“This Government is definitely dedicated to building an inclusive, progressive society. This is the driving motivation that underpins Government policies, particularly in education, housing, healthcare and retirement adequacy. Our aim is to mobilise everyone to work together, to grow the economy, to share the fruits of growth widely, to uplift the most needy among us as well as the broad mass of Singaporeans, to bridge that divide, to uplift everyone, as Minister Shanmugam said of his own experiences. In housing, particularly, we have done more than almost any other country to secure good homes for nearly every citizen and we will ensure that there will always be sufficient and affordable HDB flats for every Singaporean household. But at the same time, we take care to keep the right balance with a whole range of housing types. We have HDB, executive condominiums, private property and, yes, including black and white houses. It needs to be so. If people work hard and do well, they should be able to aspire to live in a better home in Singapore, to continue to contribute here in Singapore to Singapore. Sir, I am 69 years old this year and have served more than 30 years in politics – 20 years before that in Public Service. My most important task in the last half a dozen years has been to help the Prime Minister to prepare not just the fourth generation of leadership, but also to make sure that we have a system in place that we are able to have a fifth generation of leaders coming in, having the time to learn, to be tested, and to gain the trust and support of Singaporeans. These are people in their 30s and 40s. Many would be at the threshold where they have a good chance of reaching the peak in their chosen careers and professions.”
“Either prove that nothing was wrong and put the allegations to rest, as we have done today, or, if the investigation turned up wrongdoing, to act on it. We have come to Parliament to present the findings. We have answered the many questions and clarifications sought. The Prime Minister has spoken about the Government's commitment to integrity and the high standards in the working of Government and in our country. Underpinning all this is an ever-vigilant CPIB. But this is not enough. CPIB is assisted by a vigilant public and a vigilant Public Service. This is what we need in order to maintain integrity, honesty and incorruptibility in our country. Members have made some useful comments and suggestions on the Code of Conduct. And as I stated earlier, we will consider, specifically, how to introduce declarations for rental property transactions for the relevant agencies and public officers dealing with land and property matters, and also have a look at this issue for Ministers and PAP Members of Parliament. Sir, upholding a system of governance with a high standard of integrity is a collective and continuous effort. We have achieved a remarkable standard. Just think about it. A member of the public would be outraged and report it if a public officer were to ask him for a bribe. More importantly, a public officer would be outraged if he were offered a bribe and would report the person who had done so. This is a virtuous circle that we must maintain and the work is never done. Finally, there was this broader point underlying this debate or this discussion, on equity, whether it is fair and how to uplift our citizens. And I believe that this is a shared aspiration of Members from both sides of this House.”
“We have explained at length what the concept of conflict of interest is, and potential conflict of interest, actual conflict of interest, and that this has been dealt with particularly in the case of Mr Shanmugam and the rental of 26 Ridout Road. There is this lingering issue of "perceived" conflict of interest. And as I have explained, if we have dealt adequately and completely with a potential conflict of interest and that there has been no actual conflict of interest, then actually, a fair-minded person will come to the conclusion that, therefore, there is no basis for a perceived conflict of interest. So, I think this concludes the first part of our discussion. There were a number of useful points raised regarding the management of state properties and land, in particular of black and white bungalows. This is an associated issue, and I think Second Minister Edwin Tong has explained this quite fully. He has addressed these points and also the various suggestions that we will be looking into improving the optimisation and the use of state land, which SLA has been doing and, in particular, those which are not yet slated for redevelopment. The second set of issues is important and it really is a reaffirmation of our collective belief in the importance of a clean Government and, for those in public service – whether elected or public officers – to act with integrity. Sir, the Prime Minister acted firmly on this matter. Although the reports he received from MinLaw and SLA did not indicate a high likelihood of wrongdoing, he nevertheless directed CPIB to investigate the matter – when he was overseas – so that the matter could be examined independently and thoroughly to get to the bottom of things.”
“I appreciate the Member's question because we have had a very wide-ranging debate and I think it is useful to bring the matters to some conclusion and to be able to structure this, what we have discussed today. The Prime Minister has given a very comprehensive statement on this matter and I do not intend to make a very long winding-up. So, what are the main takeaways? First and foremost, why are we here? We are here because there have been allegations made against Ministers for corruption and other acts of abuse of power and so on. So, this is the first issue that we have to deal with and come to a landing point on. Sir, most importantly, the CPIB has investigated the matter thoroughly, interviewed all relevant parties, including the Ministers and their spouses, looked at their phones and concluded that there was no corruption or criminal wrongdoing. The AGC has reviewed the investigation papers and agreed with CPIB's findings. There is no offence and no further action is needed. And the CPIB case is closed. There was a proper declaration and conduct by all persons involved to avoid conflicts of interest. There was also no abuse of power and no access to privileged information. The persons involved in the rental of these two properties understood their responsibilities to act with integrity and did so. And, Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a credit to our officers and the system as a whole. Members have asked for many clarifications and my colleagues and I have answered all of them. Mr Pritam Singh says no one is alleging corruption, and I am glad that he said so. There is no corruption, no abuse of power. I think the only remaining issue is the one of conflict of interest.”
“On Mr Murali's first question, I think that the Ministers, and Minister Shanmugam in this particular case, handled himself and recused himself properly. So, I have no difficulty with what he did.”
“Just two points before I hand over to my colleague. First of all, exactly. I clarified that I did not say anybody. I said any credible prospect. So, it is not just anybody, but any credible prospect. And I explained that. Secondly, this Government takes responsibility over the Code of Conduct. We do not outsource it to someone else. We believe we should take responsibility for the Code of Conduct and the conduct of our Ministers. So, we take responsibility for that. You cannot outsource this. Those are the two points I want to make.”
“If that person does something or exercises the powers that he has in a decision which affects his personal interests, then that is an actual conflict of interest. But once either one of these two is removed, then there is no actual conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest. And as I said, that if one explains it and looks at it properly, any fair-minded person will then say if there is no potential conflict of interest or actual conflict of interest because the potential for that has been removed, a fair-minded person will then say then the perception of a perceived conflict of interest should be dispelled. I think that is what a fair-minded person will come to. Those are the points that I want to make. I think I will stop there and let Second Minister Edwin Tong respond.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, since we are coming towards the end of the first theme, which is whether there is wrongdoing, conflict of interest and whether there were private benefits derived by the Ministers through abuse of power, I am very happy to hear Mr Pritam Singh saying that nobody is alleging corruption. And so, my take is that this House actually concurs that there is no wrongdoing, there is no corruption, there is no abuse of power. That is my take because that is the same conclusion that I come to, and we are at one, Mr Pritam Singh. The issue now is one of perception of conduct, of conflict of interest. So, we agree there is no corruption, abuse of power, personal benefit and so on. The issue now is one of conflict of interest, actual conflict of interest, potential conflict of interest, perceived conflict of interest. And we have gone through this a number of times. Before I go any further, again, if I said "anybody" can get the list, this is in the context of "anybody" who is a credible potential tenant. And that is clearly the context in which I made that comment. So, there is no air gap between what Mr Shanmugam said with regard to credible tenants and what I said. So, there is no difference in that. On perceptions, conflict of interest, I can only repeat what I said earlier. There is potential conflict of interest. There is actual conflict of interest. Two elements must come together for these to exist. There must be a duty coming from the position which the person holds which impacts upon the second factor, which is a private interest of that person. If those two come together, then there is a potential conflict of interest.”
“Otherwise, SLA will have to put in money every year to maintain the land, to cut the grass, to make sure there are no mosquitoes, to make sure that this conserved property does not fall down and collapse. It is a dead loss. Whereas by putting in that investment, they can get a return on investment over a number of years, which will then bring benefits to the state. These are the kinds of tradeoffs, cost-benefit analysis that SLA does, which I think the SLA officers do know and are cognisant that they need to do things which are value-for-money, good cost-benefit analysis and bring benefit to the state. I think our public officers do have integrity and they do look after the interests of the state and all of us.”
“It is a complete loss to SLA, if it does not put the property in a condition which is rentable. So, when the prospect of a tenant comes up and the tenant is prepared to offer or looks like he is a credible tenant who looks like he can offer you a decent rent, then SLA says, "I will put in the money, if the potential tenant is also prepared to put in money. And then, we can talk." The sums look large, $500,000 in round numbers, SLA says to put the building back into basic habitable condition. But many of the things that they do will last for quite a long time. For example, if the water tank is very poor condition, you replace the water tank, it will last you 10 years, at least. If you have a problem with the roof and the roof is leaking, when you replace it, do major repairs on it, it will last you at least 10 years. If you have problems with the beams and the structures because there is a lot of wood in there and you do work on it, it will last you maybe 10 years. This is amortised over a period of time. SLA does its cost-benefit analysis to see whether it is worthwhile. So, if a tenant is prepared to pay, let us say, in round numbers, $20,000 in rent, $25,000 in rent, $20,000 in rent in the first year will bring back $240,000, $25,000 will bring back $300,000. Within the first two years, the first three years, SLA will collect back somewhere between $600,000 and $750,000 – I am getting my numbers mixed up – $500,000, $600,000, $700,000 from the rental in the first three years of rental – two to three years of rental. After that, what they have done is still good for another six to seven years. So, if you have a tenant who is prepared to rent it from you for 3+3 or 3+2+2, and is reliable, prepared to give you good rental, it is a worthwhile thing to do.”
“They know what integrity means and they stand by it. And so, I think we have to give credit to our public officers, that they know how to behave and they know what to do. That is a very important aspect of integrity of the Public Service. On the Code of Conduct, I would, first, like to dispel another misconception which Mr Leong's question perhaps inadvertently perpetuates – that these are relatively cheap bungalows. It is not true, Mr Leong. It is not true. And you can see the facts for yourself that it is not true, and I hope that you will help to spread the word that it is not true. The bungalows are rented out at market rates. They are valued. Eighty-three percent of them are managed by MAs, about 17% are managed by SLA, and they are all rented out at market rates. The valuations are done by the valuation department in SLA, quite distinct and separate from the leasing department, as we have explained and as we demonstrated. They are also valued by the MAs. The agents out there have a pretty good idea what they are worth. I think we should dispel this idea completely, which I think Mr Leong Mun Wai must have inadvertently contributed to through his question, that these bungalows are going at a relatively cheap rate. I think also that Second Minister Edwin Tong has explained why the expenditure is required to set these properties, to make them habitable and rentable. I am not a property person myself, but I do some simple arithmetic. If you have a property which is not tenanted, not in good condition and cannot be rented out, you get no rent from it. But you have to put money in to cut the grass, to make sure the building, at least, remains in some decent condition, it does not fall down and so on.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank Mr Leong Mun Wai for his emphatic belief in the integrity of our Government. Sir, on the issue of conflict of interest, I think we have spent quite a lot of time explaining what needs to be there for a conflict of interest to take place. And that Minister Vivian Balakrishnan is not in a conflict of interest situation; that Minister Shanmugam was in a position of potential conflict of interest and that he took steps to make sure that he removed himself from that potential conflict of interest so that no actual conflict of interest could arise or did arise. As for the perceived conflict of interest, as I explained earlier, if one has dealt with it, that there is no actual conflict of interest, there is no potential conflict of interest, then that should be sufficient to dispel the idea of a perceived conflict of interest in any fair-minded person. That is my view. The fact that, yes, he has some power over the appointment of, whether he assesses that the CEO of SLA performed well or not, that will always be there. You cannot remove that, but that will mean that the Prime Minister, for example, cannot do anything, because he has powers over practically every agency in Singapore! I think one has to look at the realities of the situation, what steps people have taken and, most importantly, to have confidence in the integrity of the Public Service and our public officers. I think, in this case, our public officers showed a very high degree of integrity. For example, when the MA asked SLA is there some VVIP track, the SLA officer replied emphatically to the MA – no, there is no such thing. Every potential tenant or tenant has to be treated equally. This is a testament to the quality of the public officers that we have.”
“Sir, I think this is one case where Mr Giam is obviously taking what I said out of context.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thought I should make a clarification on something I had just said, which my colleagues said may possibly be misunderstood. I had earlier said that it is important to observe the spirit, rather than the letter of the Codes. I think that is open to serious misinterpretation. What I meant was, it is important to observe the spirit and not just the letter of the Code. And I think if you look at the context of what I was saying, you will appreciate the context because there are many examples that are given. You may just follow the examples, but if you do not follow the spirit, that is not good enough. So, you must follow the letter of the Code, but that is not good enough. You must follow the spirit as well. And I thought I should clarify that, in case it is taken out of context.”
“Yes, I thank Mr Dennis Tan for his question because it is an important question. But the key issue here is, was there privileged information that the Minister was seeking, and was there privileged information that he was trying to obtain? And so, I think the key issue here is that there was none. There was no privileged information that the Minister was seeking to obtain. And Minister Shanmugam explained, in his own terms, why he decided to approach the Deputy Secretary because he was doing this in an open, transparent way to tell his Ministry, "I am doing this. There is no secret about it." He could have got an agent and go and approach SLA and then later on, SLA discovers that actually the Minister was behind it. Is that better or is that worse? I think it is a judgement. In this case, I think the Minister told his Ministry and was quite open and transparent about it. And if he had got an agent to go and approach SLA, and then SLA provides information or whatever it is and, in the end, they discovered that actually the person behind it was the Minister and the Minister did not say anything about it, the question is whether that is better or worse? But in this case, it was done openly and transparently, so I think that is important. Second, as I said, was there privileged information that was asked for? And the answer is no. So, I think those are the principal issues at hand.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think I have already explained my position. Mr Shanmugam told me what he was going to do and I accepted that. I did not approve his rental; I did not take part in any of the transactions. As I explained, Mr Deputy Speaker, this is similar if you had a situation where you have a Chairman of a company or an organisation, and a director comes to him and says "I have a conflict of interest, I am declaring it, and I am taking steps to make sure the conflict of interest does not arise". Subsequently, if it is discovered, or it is alleged that that director had a conflict of interest, it does not preclude the Chairman from convening a disciplinary committee or even sitting on it, unless he was a participant in the actions of that director which resulted in the conflict of interest. So, that is the situation that I am in. It is very different if you had an organisation which convenes a disciplinary committee and the persons who convene the disciplinary committee take part in the disciplinary committee themselves and are involved parties. That is a conflict of interest. So, I think one must differentiate between the two situations, and I hope that Ms He Ting Ru is able to do that.”
“On Ms Poh Li San's second question, there is no requirement today under the Code of Conduct for the type of declarations which she is talking about. And I did mention what the Code of Conduct does say and what it covers. I will leave the rest of the questions to Second Minister Edwin Tong.”
“This idea that there is some secret list somewhere which nobody knows about, and that renting such properties confers some benefit or privilege which others cannot access. So, I think the investigation – and what I have stated and what Second Minister Edwin Tong has stated – refutes both of these; dispels both of these. First of all, there is no secret list. It is public information what properties are available for lease. SLA wants to maximise the renting out of these properties and to do its best for the state in doing so. So, there is no reason for SLA not to want to provide those properties and the list of those properties. Mr Pritam Singh earlier talked about individuals having to go to considerable expense to find out and so on. Actually, they do not have to. In the case of the company that I talked about, they did not have to pay anybody to get the list. They asked SLA, and SLA was quite happy to give it to them without charging them because SLA wants to rent out its properties. So, there is no secret list. It may not be on SPIO, but any credible tenant who wants to rent those properties will know which properties are available. Second, the properties are rented out at market and, so, there is no great benefit from being able to rent out these properties. So, let us dispel these two things and put them to rest, although Mr Leon Perera does bring them up. But I thank him so that I can explain these things quite clearly. So, I think I have addressed Mr Leon Perera's points.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I appreciate, I did not want to bring up the issue of when the Auditor-General had to be called in to look into issues and the Member is the one who brought it up. I did not want to bring up that history and link the two. But since the Member has, I may have some comments on that as well. Why not the Auditor-General and why the CPIB? Sir, the Auditor-General looks at things which have got to do with audit. Was there a misappropriation of funds? Was there a loss of funds because somebody was not doing the accounts properly and so on? That is the Auditor-General's function. To ask the Auditor-General to comment on whether or not the practices were in line with the code of conduct for Ministers, I think goes beyond the ambit of the Auditor-General. I think, eventually, the Government, the Prime Minister, has to take responsibility for that. And we are. Why do we call in the CPIB and not the Auditor-General? Because the CPIB is the agency which investigates such matters. And we know the reputation of the CPIB. It is a very thorough, it is a very independent agency and, as I said just now, it can be quite a fearsome agency. And the fact that the Prime Minister called in the CPIB to carry out this investigation on two senior Ministers shows the seriousness with which this Government and the Prime Minister took this issue. I suppose, Mr Speaker, Sir, if we had called in the Auditor-General, Mr Leon Perera would have been standing up, asking me why did you not call in the CPIB, since the CPIB is the most appropriate agency to investigate such an issue. Sir, I think that underlying a number of these questions are a couple of things.”
“I am sure Second Minister Edwin Tong would like to reply. But this is an issue of land management. As I said earlier, I think we should clear the core issue first, which is, whether there was corruption, abuse of power or conflict of interest and that is the reason why we are here today. And we should clear those issues and if any Members have any clarifications or questions on those issues, I will be happy to take them.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Ms Sylvia Lim is a lawyer as well. I explained to another lawyer earlier, Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, what conflict of interest means. Two things must come together at the same time, and this is not a legal description. It also underpins what our understanding of conflict of interest is in the Code of Conduct. There must be some official power that you have over some matter and that matter coincides with a personal interest of that person. Those two things must come together. There is an actual conflict of interest if the person with that duty, with those powers, uses them on a matter in which he has a personal interest. There is a potential conflict of interest if that person retains that power and there is a matter which is there, which is his personal interest, but no decision or action has yet been taken by that person. So, that is removed. The potential conflict of interest is removed if the person removes himself from that duty. Ms Sylvia Lim is a lawyer and I think she understands that. So, that is the import of what conflict of interest is about. And Mr Shanmugam took steps to make sure that he removed himself from those duties and powers that he had over a matter which would have been a private matter and, therefore, the two were separated and one of those two factors which must exist for conflict of interest to arise, which is that the person must have powers over that private matter, was removed. So, that is very important and I explained that earlier, and I hope that that will satisfy Ms Sylvia Lim. And as I said, there are perceptions. But once the actual conflict of interest and the potential conflict of interest have been removed, that should dispel the perception of conflict of interest in any fair-minded person.”
“So, the public sector has rules where persons in such financially sensitive positions cannot stay in that position sort of indefinitely. They have to be rotated and these are some of the rules that are in place. And I mentioned to Members that the Public Service Division is working with relevant Ministries to see how we can implement declarations specifically on rental transactions and the Prime Minister's Office will look at that as well. But these are examples which add to the guidelines. But the general principle still applies all the time.”
“For public sector transactions, there are suitability checks carried out on the counterparty and, even in this case, for the rental of state properties, there were suitability checks carried out on the prospective tenant. The Public Service also has an internal disclosure policy. An officer is required to report any wrongful practice to the head of his agency even if he has been instructed by his superior not to do so. So, he is required to report any wrongful practice that he comes across. There will be an investigation into the allegations in what we conventionally call the "whistleblower", and he will be protected if he has made the report in good faith. So, there are multiple measures in place, and it is quite different from the very rapid transactions that can take place, the transfer of funds in a bank, and that is why the banks require a PEP-type of system upfront. I should also point out that the types of checks at the agency level are only part of the system and actually do not address the fundamental issue at hand. And the fundamental issue at hand is that the onus still rests on the individual to declare and recuse himself to prevent a conflict of interest from arising. So, even if checks and processes by the public sector organisation do not flag a conflict of interest, the individual still remains responsible and will be held accountable if he is subsequently found to have a conflict of interest, abused his powers or improperly made use of privileged information. The Public Service will continue to reference the best practices in other sectors, such as the financial sector, to keep improving its system of governance. For example, once a year, officers in positions of authority over funds and so forth have to take leave and somebody else takes his place.”
“I thank the Member, Mr Deputy Speaker, for his suggestion. Financial regulators require banks to apply enhanced customer due diligence on customers that are identified to be PEPs. I have a lot of difficulty opening a bank account in another country. Banking transactions can involve – and this is the reason – the transfer of substantial funds that flow rapidly – and many times even in a day or in an hour – across borders from multiple sources to multiple destinations. The banks are, therefore, required to "KYC", that is, know their customers, and exercise vigilance to flag suspicious transactions so as to prevent money laundering and terrorism financing. Those are the two principal reasons why the PEP framework has been established for financial institutions. The considerations, Sir, are different for transactions by political officeholders and public officers with Public Service agencies. A potential conflict of interest can arise in a transaction with a Government agency, and also in making a policy or an administrative decision. So, there may have been no transaction, but a public officer or a political officeholder may be making a policy which impacts him. Or in a transaction by persons in political office or in the Civil Service with non-public sector organisations. And given the context of the work of public agencies, a number of measures have already been put in place. For key transactions, especially transactions that involve public tenders and the evaluation and award of major projects, there are already processes for public officers to declare conflicts of interest upfront.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I cited the case of the land at the tenancy at Dalvey Estate not so much to compare the area of the land but to make the point that having more land is not always an advantage. In that case, the tenant of the Dalvey Estate property was not unhappy that his land area was actually reduced. There was a reduction in land, and he was actually not unhappy that the fence line was moved in. His land area in the tenancy of the property was reduced, and SLA actually took over the maintenance of the land which would otherwise have been within his property. So, that was the point I was making. And Ms Hazel Poa may have missed my point, but I make it again. Second, on the valuation of the property, the valuation of the property is done by the professional valuers and I would not second-guess their valuation. And the valuer in SLA was asked what is the valuation of the property with the inclusion of the additional land cleared, and the valuation that was given by the Valuer was $26,500. So, that is the professional valuation from the professional valuer.”