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 4 of 34.
“Mr Chairman, Sir, climate change is a real and existential threat. The latest findings from Work Group 2 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s Sixth Assessment Report, which were released last week, assessed that the impacts of climate change are more apparent and will affect us more severely than previously thought. We are already seeing some of these effects – stronger and longer heat waves, unprecedented droughts and floods, rising sea-levels and storm surges affecting communities all over the world. In the past year, international resolve to take urgent and decisive action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions has grown. In November 2021, as part of the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) Glasgow Climate Pact, it was agreed that all Parties should aim to achieve global net-zero emissions by mid-century, in order to keep the 1.5-degree goal within reach. Members of this House have also called for more decisive action on climate change. Indeed, since 2021, this House has debated two Motions on climate change. This House has acknowledged climate change as a global emergency and called on the Government to accelerate efforts against climate change. Members made several suggestions, including increasing the carbon tax substantially, green financing, creating green jobs and strengthening corporate accountability. Mr Chairman, Singapore has taken important steps to contribute to the global effort to tackle climate change.”
“The Government requires vendors to implement cybersecurity and data protection measures that are benchmarked to industry standards, such as the US National Institute of Science and Technology’s National Checklist Program. For example, vendors are required to install updated anti-virus software on the endpoint devices used to process Government data. These measures are reviewed every quarter to ensure that they remain relevant and are aligned with the latest practices. To complement these standards, we have also implemented recommendations from the Public Sector Data Security Review Committee (PSDSRC) to clearly specify cybersecurity and data security requirements in vendor contracts and to conduct regular audits for compliance. The Government audits vendors regularly and those that handle more sensitive and critical systems are audited more frequently. Vendors managing the most classified and sensitive data are audited annually while those handling less classified and sensitive data are audited once every two or three years. Vendors are required to submit a remediation plan within two weeks after the release of the audit report to address all audit findings. The Government will impose penalties on the vendor if data is leaked. Repeat offences will be taken as an aggravating factor when determining the severity of penalties and may result in harsher penalties, such as seeking liquidated damages from the vendor, contract termination or debarment from all Government contracts for a period of time. In cases of deliberate or reckless mishandling of personal data, the negligent vendor may also be found criminally liable under the Personal Data Protection Act.”
“We are also testing other use cases in residential areas, such as monitoring playground activities within housing estates, so that residents may feel more assured of playground safety. The approach for LaaP will be decided after GovTech completes the evaluation in 2023, together with the completion of the trial. Internationally, other cities are also still testing smart lampposts or deploying them on a very limited scale. We have not seen any city-wide implementation of smart lampposts that can mount multiple types of sensors yet. Sensor data collected in public spaces under the LaaP project may be shared across public agencies. Such sharing of data is governed by the Public Sector (Governance) Act (PSGA) and the Government Instruction Manual on Infocomm Technology and Smart Systems Management. The PSGA sets out the purposes under which public agencies may share data with each other. The PSGA criminalises the unauthorised disclosure and improper use of information. Individuals who are found guilty of doing so are liable to a fine not exceeding $5,000, or imprisonment of up to two years, or both. The Instruction Manual sets out how public agencies and officers should manage and protect data, including personal data.”
“The Lamppost-as-a-Platform (LaaP) project was started in late 2017 to explore the technical and business feasibility of using lampposts to mount sensors. The project is organised into two trials to cover brownfield and greenfield site use cases in commercial, industrial and residential environments. Later this month, GovTech will complete the first trial of LaaP, which covers commercial and industrial brownfield sites in Geylang and One-North. The second trial, in the residential greenfield site in Punggol Northshore estate, will start in April 2022. With the near completion of the first trial, GovTech has assessed that the mounting of sensors on lampposts is technically feasible and has also established the various cost components and drivers. GovTech has developed a lamppost infrastructure design that converts a normal lamppost into a shareable LaaP that can accommodate multiple sensors. This is important as agencies deploying sensors in the same locations can share the same LaaP infrastructure and avoid duplicating the resources and time to set up their own infrastructure. However, we will start to retrofit all lampposts only when suitable large-scale use cases with cost-effective benefits can be identified. These use cases can then form the anchor demand to roll out LaaP more widely. The second trial in Punggol Northshore, a greenfield site, will give GovTech more information on the business and technical feasibility of LaaP. Greenfield sites without any pre-existing lampposts, present the opportunity to design and build a new integrated LaaP that is more compact and durable by having the cables and equipment housed inside the lamppost casing, as opposed to being on the exterior under the retrofitted design.”
“The agreement between both countries is to bring into force all three agreements simultaneously. There is good reason for it. It is because the negotiations were conducted concurrently and it has achieved a good balance of benefits across all three agreements. Hence, both countries have agreed that the best way to resolve these three outstanding issues is to discuss them together, come to agreements on them at the same time and then to bring them into force concurrently. That will provide a resolution to all these three outstanding issues at the same time. I think that will bring many benefits to both countries so that it will reduce any chances of misunderstandings and provide a very strong basis for future cooperation. I should say that in any negotiation, of course, each side would want to push for its maximum benefits. But to have a good outcome, each side also has to look at the wider benefits, the wider interests that come from working together and arriving at an agreement, rather than not having an agreement. So, I think that in these negotiations, both sides took that view – that it is actually in our shared interest, in our enlightened self-interests, to come to an agreement on these three outstanding issues so that we can progress our bilateral relations on a broader front.”
“On bringing the three agreements into force simultaneously, as I have said in my Statement, both Prime Minister Lee and President Jokowi have expressed the desire to bring these three agreements into force as soon as possible. Each side will have to go through their own domestic ratification processes, and I do understand that Indonesia has already commenced this process. We are also going through the process on our side.”
“Mr Speaker, as I have said, our focus right now is to get the ratification done through the domestic processes of both sides. This is an indication of how both countries can work together and work their own domestic processes for the joint benefit of both countries. Each of the agreements lasts for 25 years – the DCA and the FIR Agreement. If there are disputes, both sides will consult and reach an amicable settlement. What happens after 25 years is that the existing arrangements will continue until we reach a new agreement. For the FIR, Singapore will certainly continue to discharge its responsibilities to provide air navigation services in a safe and efficient way for civil air traffic.”
“The signing of this set of agreements and our ability to resolve long-standing and complex bilateral issues in an open and constructive manner demonstrate the strength and maturity of our bilateral relations. I would like to thank my counterpart Coordinating Minister Luhut and the teams of Ministers and officials involved on both sides who have worked hard to attain the best results in the best interests of both countries. I am confident that, when implemented, these agreements will create opportunities for even closer collaborations in civil aviation, criminal matters and defence cooperation, and also pave the way for us to advance our bilateral relations with Indonesia with friendship, mutual trust and confidence. Mr Speaker, Sir, I will now request that Minister S Iswaran make his Statement.”
“This agreement and the principles underlying it provide a good basis for future cooperation where each side brings something to the table and we work together to create a larger outcome, where the whole is bigger than the sum of all its parts. We certainly hope and have confidence that, after 25 years, this same spirit will prevail. We had a capable and cohesive negotiating team, who identified our interests clearly and pushed for them energetically and diplomatically. We had capable and committed negotiating partners, too, on the Indonesian side, who also worked very hard to push for their interests. But both sides also knew that we had a shared interest in closer bilateral cooperation and the benefits that that would bring. As a result, we were able to reach a good set of agreements that are win-win. The most important factor to ensure that Singapore always has a good hand to bring to the table in any negotiations, is to have a strong, clear thinking, trustworthy and capable Government which is supported by a united people. It is this trust and unity of our people behind us that allow us to conduct negotiations with consistency and confidence. This provides the foundation for building good relations and creates a conducive environment for negotiations, so that we can arrive at a good outcome. Mr Speaker, in closing this Statement, it has been my honour and privilege to work with our Indonesian counterparts and witness our bilateral relations strengthen over many years, from the 1970s onwards. It gives me particular satisfaction to have played some part in this latest chapter in our long-standing cooperation.”
“The negotiations to arrive at this set of agreements under the Expanded Framework involved many rounds of negotiations since 2019, made even more challenging by the fact that most of the negotiations were carried out during the COVID-19 period. Our negotiators spent many weeks in quarantine as a result of that and we have many Zoom meetings. We were able to reach agreement between Prime Minister Lee and President Jokowi because both had a strong desire to resolve these issues decisively and amicably, based on the Framework they endorsed. This set of agreements represents a win-win outcome. They are balanced, mutually beneficial and durable agreements for the long haul. They will provide a strong foundation to further strengthen our bilateral relations. Both sides are currently going through their respective domestic processes to ratify these agreements. Both Prime Minister Lee and President Jokowi have expressed the desire to ratify and bring these agreements into force simultaneously, soon. Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Pritam Singh asked what will happen at the end of the 25-year duration of the FIR Agreement. I should first say that the duration of the FIR Agreement, 25 years, will provide a durable and firm basis for cooperation in this important area for a generation or more. The focus of both sides now is to implement this set of agreements by bringing all of them through our respective domestic processes and, in the case of the FIR, subsequently, to ICAO. This agreement shall remain in force for 25 years and shall be extended by mutual consent if both countries find it beneficial to do so. Singapore and Indonesia recognise that we will always be neighbours and that we should continue to work together as partners.”
“Our hope is that the ET will also be helpful to Indonesia's own efforts to prevent suspected criminals from fleeing overseas and for them to be apprehended in Indonesia. Even without an ET, we already work closely with Indonesia to tackle these criminal matters. The ET will complement our existing cooperation with Indonesia through the ASEAN Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (ASEAN MLAT) and other multilateral treaties that we are party to. It also adds to Singapore's extradition arrangements with many jurisdictions across the globe. More fundamentally, the ET reflects both countries' commitment to work with international partners to combat crime and uphold the rule of law. This will help to enhance Singapore's role as a responsible and effective member of the international community, with a positive impact on our already good standing and reputation as a global financial hub. Mr Speaker, I have covered in some detail the scope of the agreements under the Expanded Framework to help Members of this House better understand how the conclusion of this set of agreements is a significant milestone for Singapore-Indonesia relations and is beneficial to both countries. We have had negotiations on these issues since the 1990s. Singapore has always approached these discussions with our close neighbour Indonesia with sincerity and in the spirit of cooperation. We strive to reach a balance of benefits, taking into account each other's rights and interests. This was our approach in 1995 and in 2007, when we had previously reached agreement on these issues, though the agreements had subsequently either lapsed or could not be implemented for reasons beyond our control. We have maintained this same spirit and approach through the years.”
“The DCA will strengthen cooperation between our armed forces and advance our bilateral defence relations. It will facilitate the discussion and oversight of new areas of defence cooperation between our two defence establishments. The SAF has been conducting its training in the designated South China Sea Danger Area (SCSDA) since the 1960s, when the area was international waters. Subsequently, parts of the SCSDA became Indonesian archipelagic and territorial waters and airspace under UNCLOS. However, the SAF's training activities in such areas continue, as a right provided for under Article 51 of UNCLOS. When the DCA comes into force, it will provide clarity on the arrangements for the SAF's training in Indonesian archipelagic and territorial waters and airspace, with full respect for Indonesia's sovereignty over its territory, while preserving Singapore's rights. The third agreement we signed was the Extradition Treaty or ET. Under the ET, Singapore and Indonesia will grant extradition for a comprehensive list of extraditable offences covered by the treaty, in accordance with the laws of both countries and subject to the requisite safeguards and provisions in the ET. The ET is substantively similar to the treaty that we had signed in 2007. The only change is in its retrospective application to extradite fugitives for crimes committed 18 years ago, as compared to 15 years in the 2007 agreement, starting from the time that the ET comes into force. This change was made at Indonesia's request. We believe that the extension will provide more flexibility in the scope of cooperation for both countries. The benefits of the ET to both countries are clear. It will strengthen cooperation between our law enforcement agencies in combatting crime.”
“Singapore's interest was the present and future needs of Changi Airport, which Indonesia accepted. The FIR Agreement that we concluded under our Expanded Framework addressed these key considerations. Singapore and Indonesia agreed to realign the boundary between the Singapore and Jakarta FIRs, largely taking into account Indonesia's archipelagic and territorial baselines, which were deposited with the UN in 2009. Indonesia will also delegate to Singapore the provision of air navigation services in portions of the airspace within the realigned Jakarta FIR, to ensure that present and future traffic to Changi Airport and nearby Indonesian airports continue to be managed safely and efficiently. The delegation arrangement will last for 25 years and shall be extended by mutual consent if both countries find it beneficial to do so. When all the agreements under the Expanded Framework have been ratified through our respective domestic processes, Singapore and Indonesia will jointly seek ICAO's approval for these new FIR arrangements. We believe that the FIR arrangements will benefit the aviation sectors of both countries and airspace users in the region. Minister Iswaran will elaborate further on the specifics of the agreement in his Ministerial Statement. On military training, the Singapore and Indonesian governments agreed to ratify and bring into force the DCA and the Implementing Arrangement between the SAF and the Indonesian Armed Forces for the Military Training Area in Indonesia – both agreements as signed in 2007. Our two defence establishments have enjoyed decades of close friendship. As common security challenges become more complex, we need to work together closely all the more.”
“The Framework laid out a set of considerations and principles, and acknowledged that the core interests and rights of both countries must be recognised and respected. In the course of the negotiations, in April 2021, at Indonesia's request, we expanded this Framework to include the ET. Our two countries have worked together on this issue before. It was in our interests to reach an agreement on the extradition of fugitives that would strengthen our bilateral cooperation in tackling criminal matters. The inclusion of the ET would help conclude a set of agreements on these three outstanding issues that would be acceptable to both sides. The set of agreements under the Expanded Framework for Discussions was carefully negotiated to achieve a good balance of benefits for both sides which are durable and for the long haul. It is underpinned by full respect for the sovereignty of both countries. It is in accordance with international law, in particular, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and protects our mutual interests. At the Leaders' Retreat, both governments also exchanged letters undertaking to bring the three agreements that we have reached – on the FIR, Extradition and Defence Cooperation – into force simultaneously. Let me now touch on each of the agreements. FIR arrangements are established under ICAO for the purpose of managing civil aircraft in order to ensure the safety and efficiency of air traffic and to advance international civil aviation. Members would be aware that Indonesia had expressed its desire to realign the FIR boundaries in accordance with its expanded territorial waters which include archipelagic waters newly provided for under UNCLOS in 1982.”
“Thank you. The FIR, extradition and military training issues have been on our bilateral agenda for several decades. I had been personally involved in handling some of these issues at various points in time during my previous career in the SAF and, subsequently, as a Cabinet Minister. Over the years, we have been working with successive Indonesian governments to resolve these issues. We first signed agreements on the FIR and military training 27 years ago in 1995, but the FIR Agreement could not be implemented due to external factors in the process of submitting it for approval by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The 1995 military training agreement was implemented but lapsed after a few years. In 2007, we made another attempt and concluded agreements on the DCA and ET, and agreed to implement them simultaneously. However, the agreements were not ratified by Indonesia. In 2019, President Jokowi was elected to a second term. Prime Minister Lee and President Jokowi enjoy a good relationship, and our two countries and governments have strong ties. Both leaders were of the view that the conditions were right to discuss and resolve the outstanding issues decisively, in an open, constructive and mutually beneficial manner. Prime Minister Lee and President Jokowi tasked me and Coordinating Minister Luhut, whom I know well, to put maximum effort into this. We worked out a Framework for Discussions as a basis for our two governments to discuss the FIR and Singapore's military training in the South China Sea. This Framework was endorsed by Prime Minister Lee and President Jokowi at the previous Leaders' Retreat in October 2019 to resolve these two issues separately but concurrently.”
“With your permission, Mr Speaker, may I please ask the Clerks to distribute an infographic on the agreements under the Expanded Framework for Members' reference?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Indonesian President Joko Widodo held their Leaders' Retreat on 25 January 2022 in Bintan, Indonesia. This was our first Leaders' Retreat since the start of COVID-19. It was also significant because the Leaders witnessed the signing by the respective Ministers of a set of agreements on three long-standing bilateral issues under an Expanded Framework. These agreements are: first, an Agreement on the Realignment of the Boundary between the Jakarta Flight Information Region (FIR) and the Singapore FIR; second, a Treaty for the Extradition of Fugitives (ET); and third, a Joint Statement between the Defence Ministers on the 2007 Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA). My Indonesian counterpart, Coordinating Minister for Maritime Affairs and Investments, Luhut Pandjaitan, and I also signed an Exchange of Letters in which our governments committed to bring these agreements into force simultaneously. Following the Leaders' Retreat, several Members have filed Parliamentary Questions, regarding the nature of the agreements and their impact on Singapore. Minister Iswaran and I will address Questions for Oral Answer filed by several Members, namely, Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Ms Poh Li San, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Mr Melvin Yong, Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Mr Pritam Singh and a Question for Written Answer filed by Miss Cheryl Chan from today's Order Paper, as well as the Question for Oral Answer filed by Mr Gerald Giam1 for a future Sitting. I will cover the principles upon which the Expanded Framework was negotiated, the main elements of the agreements, their implications for our bilateral relations and the implementation of the agreements. Minister Iswaran will elaborate with further details on the FIR Agreement.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 1 to 6 as part of the Ministerial Statements to be delivered by me and Minister for Transport Mr S Iswaran later in the Sitting, please?”
“Development times tend to be short for simpler systems, especially those that can reuse existing infrastructure and components from GovTech’s tech stack. For example, SafeEntry was developed within weeks because it was able to tap on components within the National Digital Identity platform. For larger, more complex projects, development times are longer. The average time taken to develop the initial product release for larger projects was between one and two years over the past five years. For contracts with longer duration, the Government will consider building flexibility into tender specifications to mitigate against technological obsolescence. For example, our website vendors, who are a part of our central bulk tender, are required to notify us when products or services are becoming obsolete and to propose alternatives. The Government regularly consults industry experts on best practices for project development, such as via the Government’s STACK-X developer conference. Many of our products, such as the SingPass and TraceTogether apps, are developed using the Agile Development Methodology, where we build a Minimum Viable Product and then continually improve it based on user feedback.”
“The Singpass profile allows users to view their personal information and provides a trusted digital identity for secure transactions. We will add data to the user profile if there is demand for such data fields, where such data has accurate and complete digitalised records and where there are fewer concerns over data privacy. We have not yet included details of spouses or parents, given the potential sensitivities. When displaying the personal information of another adult, it is typical for consent to be sought. Automatic inclusion of such information presumes consent, even if relations are estranged. There could also be changes in personal details, for example, name change, that individuals prefer to keep private. Such considerations would have to be addressed first. As for digital education records, more will be included in the Singpass profile as they become available. At the time of the current implementation, the national General Certificate of Education Ordinary “O”, Normal “N” and Advanced “A” Level records have been digitalised. We are looking into how the records from our local Polytechnics and Universities can also be progressively digitalised.”
“The Government has also stepped up training for officers in ICT roles to equip them with the requisite competencies to perform their duties well, such as determining the appropriate level of rights needed for vendors and officers in different job roles.”
“The Report of the Auditor-General for FY 2020/2021 highlighted observations of weaknesses in IT controls, including the management of account and user access rights. The root cause of these observations is human error. To help address this, the Government has progressively introduced tools to automate processes in IT controls. For account management, since November 2020, 33 agencies have implemented a tool that automatically notifies system managers of employee movements, so that they can be prompted to close the relevant user accounts. This is an interim measure. SNDGG will be implementing a technical solution that also automates the removal of accounts. Agencies will onboard onto this technical system, known as the Central Accounts Management (CAM) system, from January 2022 onwards, with all applicable systems onboarded by end-December 2023. Similarly, we are automating the log management processes. The log of privileged users’ activities can accumulate to over 100,000 records within weeks. SNDGG is implementing the Automated Baseline Log Review (ABLR) system across the Government. ABLR uses analytics to sieve out a much smaller set of potentially irregular events, allowing reviewing officers to focus their efforts. As of 1 August 2021, over 600 systems have already been onboarded onto this system. All high priority systems will be onboarded by December 2022, with the remaining systems a year later. We will continuously improve our IT control tools, to make better use of automation, analytics and AI. That said, not all processes can be fully automated. The use of automated tools will enable agencies to dedicate more bandwidth and management attention to processes that require human intervention.”
“I think I had already answered that question. We have had one person and that person was on the scheme for two years. When a person is being considered for candidacy and also potentially for political office, there are no guarantees, as each of us in this Chamber knows, and there are the political ups and downs. Pay is not usually one of the things that they will tell you upfront. But it surely is one of the considerations for a person who has got commitments, a young family and a promising career ahead of him which he is quite sure of. To come in, to take the vagaries of politics and to give that up is a big sacrifice. So, we want to reduce that and help him in the transition. But as I had said, we have individuals who are prepared to come in and give it up. And we have individuals who are prepared to come in and accept that they will take a lower salary in their appointment in political office, even though they have had a two-year transition period to help them over the commitments that they have.”
“Speaker, Sir, I think there is a lesson to be learnt here between philosophy and methods. The philosophy, we can agree on. We all want a multiracial Singapore. We want Singaporeans to live together in multi-racial communities, not in segregated communities. I think even the WP agrees on that; the Leader of the Opposition says so too. But how do we get there? Those are methods. Methods can be adapted and changed. But we have the same philosophy that we want a multi-racial society Singapore, integrated housing, well-integrated communities and schools. We are more likely to get there with the HDB policies that we have today, with EIP, rather than what the WP is proposing. In fact, their manifesto says abolish it now; although the Leader of the Opposition seems to have shifted away from that because he realises that that is untenable. Are we more likely to achieve an integrated Singapore by having integrated housing or to abolish the EIP as the WP would propose today and have segregated housing. And then, how do we learn how to live together again? That is the question I have, Sir. I am glad to hear the Leader of the Opposition say that we should all not exploit the issues of race and religion for political purposes. I applaud that. 4.11 pm”
“I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition whether he agrees with me that these are matters of great sensitivity and have to be handled with great sensitivity, rather than be exploited for political purposes?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I had not intended to speak or ask any questions on this very important subject, but I thought that since I have slightly more white hair than most people here who have been speaking, I thought I would share a perspective. I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition whether he thinks we should allow ethnic enclaves to form and just to see what happens, by abolishing the EIP today; and then, reach a situation where we were 50 years ago, 60 years ago, at the point of Independence; and then, try and correct it when all the problems arise? Or whether we should take what he calls a pre-emptive but the measures that we are taking today, to avoid such a situation arising? So, are we more likely to arrive at a situation where Singaporeans learn to live with each other on a daily basis by making sure that we live in an integrated way on a daily basis in our estates? Or are we more likely to do so if we allow Singaporeans to live in segregated estates? And also, are we more likely to level everyone up if we are able to identify the issues that each of the communities in Singapore may face and therefore have more targeted programmes for them? Or to ignore the differences? The Leader of the Opposition says we should be race-blind or race-neutral and just treat everybody as though they are exactly the same. And then, are we likely to arrive at a good solution, where we reach this eventual outcome? Or are we less likely to do so? And Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition whether he agrees with me, because he mentioned more Members of Opposition in the House would lead to better outcomes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the AAR will probably be more broad-ranging than the COI, which by its normal construct, will usually be defined in a very specific way. The Government intends to do a very broad-ranging AAR on all aspects because there are many aspects to this particular pandemic from which we can learn good lessons for the future.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we have not determined the precise form in which such a review will take. But we certainly want to learn all the lessons that we have, including those which can be submitted by members of the public who have views and informed views particularly. In my career in the Public Service, I have been the subject of, the convenor of, and participated in many inquiries of various kinds. It must suit the purpose for which we set up these inquiries or reviews for. In my experience, a Commission of Inquiry (COI) is probably best suited to look into a singular event that has occurred in a specific moment or instant in time, such as a building collapse and a major accident. But I do not think the pandemic fits well into such a situation. It is an ongoing and evolving event. It is not over yet. In fact, many lessons have already been learnt along the way, not necessarily though formal AARs or a COI, but because of actual ground experience in which the agencies have adapted and adjusted their response, both in order to be more effective but also in response to an evolving virus and evolving situations. As you can see, our testing, our ring-fencing, our safe management procedures, our procedures for incoming travellers – all have changed and adapted along the way. You can see this learning process continuing. We want to make sure that when we reach a new normal, this process is properly documented so that we are ready for the next round, just as we did not have a COI for SARS but we learnt many valuable lessons from it which allowed us to be better prepared for COVID-19.”
“We have to think ahead and we do have plans for this. This may well be what Mr Pritam Singh was thinking. I do not know because I do not know the specific reference.”
“The Government's position on nuclear power is quite clear and we have said so several times. We are not foregoing this as a long-term option, and we do not give up any of the options that are available. However, we do not see the current generation or the coming, in fact, even one and a half generations down, of nuclear power plants as being suitable for deployment in Singapore. But we are keeping a very close eye on new developments in nuclear power plants to see whether sometime in the future, as their safety and their capabilities improve, with inherent safety of nuclear power plants, might make them viable or feasible for Singapore. But we keep an open mind on this. We are looking even at nuclear fusion and tokamaks. We also have to study, and I am not sure whether this is in fact the study that the Member had referred to. We fund a research centre for nuclear and nuclear safety in Singapore, in order to keep a watch on all these issues including nuclear safety. Although we may not develop a nuclear power plant in Singapore, our neighbours may well do so. So, we need to understand the safety implications of nuclear power plants within a certain radius of us. The other thing which we need to be prepared for – and this may well be the subject of the study; I do not know which study Mr Pritam Singh is referring to – is that we need to be prepared for nuclear contamination in Singapore, either through a nuclear accident somewhere in the region or by deliberate action, say a terrorist action with a dirty bomb. We have to look at how we clean up such a device or such nuclear radioactive substances that have been dispersed in Singapore, say by terrorist action – how we collect them and how we clean them up. We actually have plans for such a thing.”
“Could I just ask Mr Pritam Singh whether he is saying the Government should study nuclear power as an option?”
“I think Mr Louis Ng would probably agree with that.”
“Indeed, Madam, I think inherent in the series of questions that Mr Louis Ng asked, are all the trade-offs that we have to balance when we try and achieve the targets that he is talking about. One of the things which we have to consider is whether we want to import electricity. Other jurisdictions, for example, claimed to have to achieve this target, but actually, they are importing nuclear energy from their neighbours. Is that something which Mr Louis Ng thinks is a good idea? There are different things that we need to do. When we are considering importing clean and green energy from other countries, there are also other considerations which we have to take into account. All these things, inherently, have trade-offs. Our targets, our LEDS by 2050 are based on what we can control ourselves and all the things that we are doing in all the different sectors within our control. We will do that to bring our emissions down by half. Roughly speaking, half of what we emit, we can control. The other half depends on what other people do and whether or not we are able to develop the technologies, some of which do not exist today; whether we are able to get importation of electricity; whether we are able to get carbon markets to work properly. Those are not things which are wholly within our control. And as Mr Louis Ng said himself, even if we did all that, we have to consider the other consequences of all those actions. These are imponderables which we need to consider with the passage of time. I am not in the business of bursting bubbles. And I certainly do not want to create a bubble which future generations will have difficulty trying to meet. We do not make promises which would cause future generations problems in trying to keep as well.”
“Thank you, Mdm Chairman. I would just like to take the opportunity to correct two dates which I mentioned in my speech. First of all, we are halving our emissions by 2050. I may have misspoken and said "2030". And when I referred to sea-level rise of one metre, it should be 2100, not "2010". I think the future is going to be upon us faster than we think. Thank you very much, Mdm Chair.”
“I am confident that by rallying together as one, we will rise to the challenge, re-invent Singapore and create a brighter and sustainable future for all Singaporeans. [Applause.]”
“Mdm Chairman, I have outlined the principles which have guided our considered, committed and collective strategy on climate change – first, supporting and galvanising global action; second, finding synergies and addressing our trade-offs with creative solutions; third, turning constraints and challenges into new opportunities; and fourth, planning many decades ahead to prepare for the future and taking action now, and not waiting for the future to be upon us. But most important of all, we need to overcome this existential challenge together, as a whole-of-nation. Ms Hany Soh asked how the Government intends to achieve this whole-of-nation effort. Mdm Chairman, I am heartened that on 1 February this year, this House unanimously passed a Motion moved by Mr Louis Ng and his fellow Government Parliamentary Committees (GPC) Members, that acknowledged the seriousness of the global threat of climate change and called for action. This augurs well. Last month, five Ministries collectively announced our Singapore Green Plan 2030. The Green Plan reflects this Government’s aspirations and commitment towards sustainable development for us. Many Singaporeans, especially young Singaporeans, are motivated and energised by this vision and want to play an active role. And our desire is to partner every Singaporean to transform Singapore into a glowing global city of sustainability. My colleagues from the respective Ministries will be elaborating on the initiatives under the Green Plan and responding to the specific comments from Members. Our enhanced NDC, LEDS, and Green Plan have set challenging and ambitious goals for Singapore.”
“Ten years ago, in 2011, we had raised the minimum level for new land reclamation by an additional metre to take this into account – to bring the minimum reclamation level of new land to two metres above the highest ever recorded tide in Singapore. Taking early action will often cost less in the long run, than trying to raise land levels or put in protection later. Minister for Sustainability and the Environment will be elaborating on our plans. Being prepared for the future also includes developing new sustainability solutions, not just for ourselves but also for the rest of the world. Our $25 billion five-year Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2025 Plan includes a significant portion for Urban Solutions and Sustainability (USS). R&D plans in our USS domain include enhancing our resilience in energy, water and food, and developing more cost-effective solutions to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. We will also increase our R&D efforts in the use of renewables and emerging low-carbon technologies such as hydrogen and carbon capture, utilisation and storage, a subject which Miss Cheryl Chan is very knowledgeable about and spoke very lucidly on. We will also develop solutions against rising sea levels, urban heat island effects, and other challenges brought about by climate change. As a “living lab”, we will continue to serve as a test-bed for innovative solutions that can be exported globally in cities around the world.”
“As Deputy Prime Minister Heng said in his Budget speech, the Government will be reviewing the trajectory and level of the carbon tax, post-2023, in consultation with industry and expert groups. We seek a carbon tax level that will incentivise companies and consumers to switch to carbon friendly products, services and activities, while promoting industry innovation and new green growth. There are already significant new investments in sustainable industries in Singapore. I just spoke abut Neste. Hyundai is constructing a research and development centre and electric vehicle pilot production facility in Singapore. These examples illustrate how Singapore can leverage and is leveraging our strengths in R&D, advanced manufacturing and logistics to create more opportunities and good jobs for Singaporeans. In addition, we are taking steps to establish Singapore as a centre for carbon credits trading and services, for sustainability consultancy, and to play a significant role in green finance for sustainable development in a growing Asia. In fact, we are calling on Prof Koh Lian Pin on his expertise to help us develop in this area. This will also create new high quality jobs. We are similarly taking a proactive approach to protect ourselves from the effects of climate change. This requires forward planning as climate change threats require solutions that span many decades. We have not been sitting on our hands. In fact, we are taking significant steps to protect ourselves from a rise in sea levels of up to one metre, which can be upon us by 2100.”
“He and his unions are doing the actual work – they are doing the work helping workers to cope with this challenge and make the transition. The switch to cleaner energy will reduce demand for more carbon-intensive fossil fuels. However, demand for sustainable fuels and higher value-added petrochemical products and specialty chemicals will grow. The modern green eco-system needs such products, such as in solar panels, batteries, thermal insulation for buildings, durable and light-weight parts for electric vehicles. And we are investing in sustainable energy too. Neste, the world’s largest producer of renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel, is expanding its production capacity here. They are already here, and they are expanding their production. When completed, Singapore will be home to Neste’s largest renewable products plant, creating new jobs. Many of the major energy and chemical companies in Singapore have also committed to reach net zero by 2050 and Singapore will partner them in this shift. The public sector will lead by example, by embarking on a comprehensive whole-of-Government programme, called GreenGov.SG, to reduce our resource footprint and carbon emissions, and to enable the rest of the economy to do likewise. The Minister for Sustainability and the Environment will speak more about this later. At the national level, our comprehensive carbon tax, which covers 80% of Singapore’s carbon emissions, one of the most comprehensive coverages in the world, encapsulates these trade-offs by better aligning the real cost of carbon emissions with the emitter. Mr Sharael Taha asked about our plans for carbon tax and the resulting impact.”
“We actively engage A*STAR and our Institutes of Higher Learning to develop novel, resource efficient approaches for food and water. These will help us break out of our constraints to secure our food, through careful long-term planning and innovations in policy and technology, and keep costs affordable while minimising carbon emissions. In that one long sentence, we can see the dilemmas and the trade-offs that we have to make in each one of the steps that we take. Third, economy and jobs. Since the time Mr Lee Kuan Yew called for us to create a metropolis out of mudflats, we have always balanced development, conservation and the environment. This is reflected in Singapore being among the best 20 countries in the world today in terms of Emissions Intensity (EI), that is, emissions per GDP dollar. We have been able to grow our economy, create jobs, while keeping our emissions per GDP dollar one of the lowest in the world. And this is in spite of all of our constraints. I listened very carefully to the speeches made by all the Members, but was particularly struck by the thoughtful analyses made by Ms Mariam Jaafar and Prof Koh Lian Pin. They have deep knowledge of these areas and they understand well the trade-offs as Singapore seeks new ways to grow our economy within a carbon-constrained envelope, and how we can balance conservation, development and jobs. They have made several good suggestions and useful proposals which we will certainly study very closely. Mdm Chairman, companies will have to adjust their business models. Our workers have to shift to jobs in new areas of growth. One example is the energy and chemicals sector. Mr Abdul Samad, who is with us in this House, will be well aware of this.”
“There are many competing land users, as we have debated in this House over these last few weeks. But we do strive to maximise solar energy by aggressively deploying panels on the rooftops of suitable HDB blocks. My colleague, the Minister for National Development will update us on this later. Nationwide, we aim to deploy at least two Gigawatt-peak (GWp) of solar power in Singapore by 2030, which supplies energy equivalent to the consumption of about 350,000 households for a year. We look for synergies. To supplement our limited land, we are also using our reservoirs for floating solar farms, something which several Members asked about. This allows us to use our reservoirs not just for water but also for solar power and to provide green lungs for recreation and water activities as well. 11.30 am Last year, the new solar farm at Tengeh Reservoir began construction, and this will be among the world’s largest such facilities. It will generate enough solar power to meet the demands of our five local water treatment plants, making Singapore one of the few in the world to have a fully green waterworks system. Second, securing our water and food supply is a key national priority. We are making significant progress for water. When I hear Members speak about recycling, do not forget that water recycling is recycling too, and we are one of the leaders in the world in water recycling. And when we count water recycling, our recycling rate is really very high. Last year, our desalination plant in Marina East commenced operations – our fourth such plant. We are making a major push for food security as well. Deputy Prime Minister Heng announced the new Agri-Food Cluster Transformation Fund for technology adoption in our agri-food sector.”
“Unfortunately, COP-26 did not take place in Glasgow last year due to COVID-19. But our officials have continued to work actively on important international issues, such as rules for carbon markets and more stringent reporting of national emissions and climate action. We are also actively shaping multilateral discussions on reducing international transportation emissions, as suggested by Ms Mariam Jaafar. At the same time, we have been carefully planning and implementing, in an integrated and coordinated long-term manner, the measures we need to take domestically for a low carbon future. As a small country with limited alternative energy sources, land and manpower, our trade-offs are much starker than what most countries face. Our carbon emissions set real cross-cutting constraints on our development and the daily lives of Singaporeans. We need to find ways to break out of these constraints through careful long-term planning and innovations in policy and technology. We look for synergies to give ourselves the space to grow, but when it is needed, we also have to make well-considered, real trade-offs. Miss Rachel Ong, Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about these trade-offs and how we are pursuing decarbonisation despite our constraints. Let me cite a few examples. First, land use. Singapore is both a city and a country. Within our small land space, we need to accommodate not just housing, parks and commercial centres, but also power plants, reservoirs, air- and sea- ports, and industries. The trade-offs are real, and often the choices are difficult. We cannot wish these away. For example, unlike bigger countries, we do not have large plots of land for extensive solar farms.”
“We will press ahead with the measures which are within our control, and we will halve our emissions by 2030. But how soon we can achieve net zero, that means eliminate the other half, depends not only on what we do but it depends on what is done internationally in areas such as evolving and maturing key technologies, as well as international collaboration on key areas, such as carbon markets as well as the import and export of green electricity. We will continue to review our climate goals with the aim of achieving net zero emissions as soon as viable. Allow me, Mdm Chairman, to take a step back to explain the thinking and guiding principles behind how we approach this global crisis. For a small island city-state like Singapore, climate change poses an asymmetrical challenge. While Singapore contributes around 0.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions, the totality of global emissions, 100%, including the other 99.9%, affects us too and often, more seriously than it affects larger better endowed countries. So, we must do our best to tackle climate change, but ultimately, we depend on a collective global effort to address the issue at a global level. Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about what Singapore is doing to promote this global collaboration. Singapore has been working hard to strengthen consensus and galvanise climate action regionally and globally. This has been especially critical at a time when the multilateral system is under strain from protectionism and unilateral action, further exacerbated by the challenges of COVID-19. Singapore is often called upon, as a knowledgeable, fair and honest broker, to facilitate discussions to forge consensus for the work under the UNFCCC and its implementation rules.”
“Mdm Chairman, climate change is the defining crisis of our time. In 2020, the world had to battle record-breaking forest fires, the most active Atlantic hurricane season on record until they ran out of alphabets to name the hurricanes, more frequent floods and droughts and other weather events leading to large-scale devastation. As a low-lying island, Singapore remains fundamentally vulnerable to the impact of climate change, which poses an existential threat to us. We take a considered, committed and collective approach to the global climate crisis. My colleagues from five Ministries which are taking key measures for climate action in our Green Plan, are collectively responding to the points that Members have raised during this Budget debate and Committee of Supply and presenting the comprehensive action we are taking to put words into action to fight climate change. I chair the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Climate Change which was established in 2007 to coordinate a whole-of-nation response. While we respond as individual Ministries, we have a collective thought out action plan behind this. This Committee has two important tasks. First, to formulate and execute our national plans to prepare ourselves for the impact of climate change. Second, to ensure that Singapore contributes to global climate action. Last year, we submitted our enhanced 2030 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) and our Long-Term Low-Emissions Development Strategy (LEDS) under the Paris Agreement – our NDC and our LEDS. We made these commitments, well aware that they are challenging, given our national circumstances. Mr Louis Ng, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Ms Poh Li San will be glad to know that the goals which we have set are not meant to be static.”
“A range of private and public sector service providers are involved in post-death administrative matters. The Ministry of Health, Public Service Division and the Smart Nation and Digital Government Group launched the My Legacy portal in January 2020. The portal, currently in beta testing, aims to be a one-stop platform for end-of-life, palliative care and post-death matters, and to make planning easy and convenient. This is part of the LifeSG initiative to integrate and bundle Government and private sector services, to help citizens access services and information that are relevant to them. The portal has a My Legacy Vault feature that allows users to plan, store and share legal, healthcare and estate matters securely with the people they trust. This includes storing of financial information such as CPF nomination status, bank account details, insurance policies, and legal documents such as Lasting Power of Attorney. Users can designate trusted persons such as family members to access these documents, with the option to also allow access before death has occurred, to facilitate post-death administration matters.”
“Eligible households living in smaller HDB flats benefit more as they receive a larger quantum of U-Save rebates, and typically have smaller annual utilities bills.”
“The impact of climate change is far reaching. The change in global weather patterns can cause second and third order effects. The Government has regularly highlighted these effects in its annual updates to Parliament during Budget, in answers to questions from Members of this House, and most notably in 2019 when the wide-ranging and long-term impact of climate change was addressed by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in his National Day Rally. Detailed reports in conformity with our international obligations are also available, such as Singapore’s Long-Term Low-Emissions Development Strategy and Singapore’s latest Biennial Update Report submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in March and December 2020 respectively. These publicly available reports and updates provide information on the strategies and steps that the Government is taking to address the social and economic impacts of climate change on our people. Apart from urban heat, these studies and strategies cover areas such as rainfall, coastal inundation and protection, and food and energy security. These steps take into account the needs of all segments of our population, including the low-income and the vulnerable. For example, measures to mitigate our emissions exact a cost on households and the economy. To minimise this cost burden for the low income, the Government has introduced incentives to support lower-income households in purchasing more energy efficient appliances. To help households adjust to the impact of the carbon tax on their electricity and gas expenses, eligible HDB households are given an additional $20 GST Voucher – U-Save on top of the regular U-Save rebate each year from 2019 to 2021.”
“There are about 600 website domains belonging to Government agencies. They provide informational and transactional services to the public, including those operated by subcontractors. For greater convenience, Government digital services are being grouped together for easier access through common access portals such as LifeSG and GoBusiness. All Government websites are required to be designed for access from both desktops and mobile computing devices such as tablets or smartphones. However, there are functionalities and services that cannot be delivered on a smaller screen effectively, such as those requiring extensive input and documentation (e.g. filing of Form IR21 for tax clearance). These functionalities and services will be disabled for access via mobile devices, and users will be informed upfront that the service is not available on mobile devices and thus best accessed from desktop devices. Eligible members of the public may apply to IMDA's Home Access (HA) scheme, which subsidises broadband connectivity and a computing device for low-income households; or the Mobile Access for Seniors scheme, which subsidises personal mobile phones and plans for lower-income seniors. Alternatively, members of the public may access Government digital services in-person at PA's Citizen Connect Centres located at selected Community Centres, and at Our Tampines Hub's Public Service Centre, where internet-accessible devices are available for public use. For members of the public who are unable to make use of online services, offline options remain available at physical counters.”
“In fact, I am very gratified that many Members have made very strong arguments for a comprehensive and even carbon tax that is applied across the whole economy as a very effective way of implementing carbon emission controls. In fact, a number of Members have advocated substantially higher carbon tax rates than we are applying today, and I hope that this will smoothen the passage of any such measures in this House when they are discussed in the future. [Applause.]”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I had not intended to speak on the subject, but after listening to so many speakers, I am truly gratified at the support for environmental action and climate change that is coming from all sides of this House. As the Chairman of the IMCCC, I have never seen such overwhelming support in so many years and I am glad that it is so forthcoming. I would like to make one clarification on carbon tax because there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding even among normally well-informed Members of this House on carbon tax in Singapore. There has been a comment that the carbon tax in Singapore is very narrowly focused and only affects a few industries. In fact, the carbon tax in Singapore is one of the most comprehensive in the world. If one looks at it, you can see that we have chosen to apply the carbon tax at key nodes of carbon emissions in Singapore so that this tax will flow through evenly to the rest of the economy. This makes the implementation of the carbon tax and the administrative load on companies, especially SMEs, very low. By selecting these key nodes and applying the carbon tax there, for example, the power companies and the key emitters in industry, we have been able to cover 80% of emissions in Singapore, and this is an extremely effective way of doing so. The remaining 20%: the highest proportion of the remainder actually comes from transport fuel emissions, which are already fairly substantially taxed in Singapore. So, our coverage is even higher than 80% when one talks about the carbon tax coverage. I just wanted to make this clarification so that there is no misunderstanding in this House about how we have implemented the carbon tax.”