Tharman Shanmugaratnam
Singapore
“EDB conducts regular reviews to GIP to ensure its effectiveness in attracting only top-tier business leaders who are interested to drive the growth of their businesses and investments from Singapore.”
“MAS may vary the size of the additional capital requirement imposed on the bank and take other regulatory actions depending on the outcome of ongoing reviews. MAS requires all retail banks in Singapore to ensure that their mission critical systems supporting digital banking are resilient.”
“This question will be answered in the reply to Dr Tan Wu Meng's Parliamentary Question filed for tomorrow's Sitting. [Please refer to "Probe into Recent Disruptions of DBS' Digital Bank and Physical ATM Services and Preventive Measures Implemented", Official Report, 5 July 2023, Vol 95, Issue 107, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Ans…”
“Borrowing from the banks is one of the ways in which MAS carries out MMOs to soak up such excess liquidity. Like other central banks, MAS does this daily through an auction system, enabling MAS to withdraw liquidity through the Primary Dealers that submit the most competitive prices.”
“To mitigate consumer over-indebtedness, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) requires financial institutions (FIs) to implement a range of safeguards when extending mortgage loans and unsecured credit.”
“The Monetary Authority of Singapore imposes on external asset managers the same stringent regulatory standards for anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism that it imposes on banks.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,416 lines we hold for Tharman Shanmugaratnam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 37 of 49.
“Next, the issue of graduateoutput targets and manpower planning. This is a fundamental issue. We have this process of determining the number of students to be admitted to our tertiary institutions, polytechnics, ITEs and universities, in different course disciplines. The National Manpower Council which brings together various Ministries and economic agencies sets these targets. Let me say why this is necessary, particularly as a small country, and why we are not unique in requiring this. We do not have the large market of competition that the United States has, where you have got hundreds of universities. Without clear Government direction, although at the state level, they have got Government involvement.When you look at the United States as a whole, you have got this large competitive marketplace that is able to throw up a range of talents, specialising in different disciplines. But very few countries have that. If you take the United Kingdom, which is a reasonably large society, it has great difficulty now getting enough scientists and engineers. All the more for a small country- Singapore, Switzerland, Denmark-you cannot leave it to chance. Because if you leave it to chance, in a curious way, you end up having fewer choices in life, you end up not having a manufacturing sector, you end up not having enough high-end manufacturing to be able to provide Singaporeans with real options. Everyone would then become a service economy professional. So we have got to ensure that we maintain this breadth of disciplines in order to ensure that we provide choices for the national economy and choices for Singaporeans. And as a small economy andsociety, we have got to go about it with some degree of planning.”
“Race and religion are matters in which we will not want to see either academics or any member of the public stirring up discord. I am not sure we call it an OB marker, butwe have always been very clear about thisand it has not bothered the universities. They have understood that this is a fundamental tenet of Singapore society. It is what allows us to escape the problems we see in more parts of the world than we would have thought possible, and we intend to keep it that way.The universities need not be defensive about respecting these fundamental tenets even as they become Autonomous Universities. Can we improve? I think we can. I do not think there is enough policy research on economic and social policy issues in Singapore. I think that the quality and calibre of policy research can be improved. It does not require a liberalisation of boundaries or new rights and freedoms to be given to the universities. They have it. I will be very keen to see how we can develop a higher quality of research on policy issues. But they are doing well so far. I really must emphasise that, whether it is in the arts and social sciences, and quite obviously, in the sciences and engineering, they are doing well,and they are internationally recognised as such. 6.28 pm”
“A few faculty in Warwick were worried about academic freedom which of course makes very good noise in the international media. I would say, quite categorically, that our universities facecompetition for talent. They will not succeed in this competition for talent, for faculty as well as students if they do not respect academic freedom. Because people can move. How are they doing? Not too badly. Over half of our universities’ faculty are foreigners. And this applies as well to the social sciences whichI think is the area where we have got more of the grey issues that Dr Geh Min referred to, compared to medicine or sciences or engineering. In fact, 62% of NUS’ social sciences faculties comprise foreigners. I dothink the rankings are relevant. Yes, they are not the core of whatwe are trying to achieve. But the rankings cannot be so far divorced from the X-factor. And I think it is really impressive how NUSis amongst the top three universities in Asia, together withBeida and Todai in Japan. It does mean something. In fact, in the social sciences, it ranked number one in Asia.I agree that we donot look at it year by year,and bea bit too fast about the number. But they are doing very well andthey are the top social science university in Asia, ahead of ANU, and University of Tokyo. It must mean something.They willnot be there ifthey did not have academic freedom in the social sciences. Academic freedom is not about something imposed on the universities,it is not something which the universities urge the Government to accept, but is an obvious essential if we want to make universities great. It is not an absolute. And I say thatquite straightforwardly, without any defensiveness.”
“If you look at the top American universities, a highly disciplined system of tenure, with considerable selectivity on who gets the tenure, is the source of their reputation andsuccess in attracting good faculty - in motivating young, bright faculty, who know that they are not lookingup at anold seniority-based structure, but one based on merit and merit alone,and in ensuring that they then attract the best students to come because they know that here is a vibrant faculty being renewed - by giving some assurance of stability to the best minds. So developing this disciplined system of tenure is a critical area for the universities to decide and this is an area not just for the Senate,the management and the faculty of the universities, but also for the Board of Trustees. Thirdly, another very important issue and one where there is no iron law isthe question of whether you develop your own faculty or whether you hire from outside, mid-career.There are different models. If you look at Harvard, it thrivesona model of attracting the best from wherever they come from, mid-career. MITis a very different model. It develops its own junior faculty, hires very bright young people to join its faculty, and then tries to keep them and develop them. Our universities will have to find the right model themselves - this balance between developing their own talent and recruiting mid-careerpeople from other universities. Prof. Ivan Png mentionedWarwick.Frankly, I would not wring my hands on this issue. Academic governance was not the key issue at all in Warwick’s decision not to respond to EDB’s offer. It was essentially financial issues that they were concerned with.”
“So we are subjecting them to the discipline of the capital markets, something which provides us useful information as well, giving them the incentive to get the best possible rates on the market, but a good part of the servicing cost will continue to be funded by the Ministry. Prof. Ivan Png has askedwhat happens toall the academic governance provisions that are currently in the NUS constitution once we rescind the constitution. Let me just clarify that immediately. The First Schedule of the existing Constitution, which comprises all these academic governance provisions, will be transferred, with some modification, to the M&A of the universities. So we are not getting rid of all these provisions. It is just that there is no need to put them in the new Acts. Academic governance is a key issue. Dr Geh Min and others talked about it. In fact, this isprobably at the heart of what makes a great university. Having faculty membersthatenjoy interacting with students, including undergraduate students, and are passionate about the work they themselves are doing, is at the heart of a great university. These will be matters that the universities will have to decide for themselves and find the right internal culture for.There are several key issues. First,what you teach and howyou teach it. These are key issues for the Senate, for the top management, for the Deans and the faculty members to work out. Some universities have decided in a fairly top-down fashion, in others, bottom-up. They have to find their own identity in this respect. But the key issue, which relates to one of the questions that Dr Lily Neo posed, is how do you assess the faculty and how do you promote them.That is a critical success factor in the best universities in the world.”
“So we will make sure that there is no lack of financial schemes and resources available for qualified students to be able to further their university education even if their parents cannot afford it. We are improving some of our processes. Each of the universities is now putting in place a dedicated student financing office to help to look at each student himself or herself, what is the family situation, how can we help them, whether they should do some work in the university to earn a little money while giving them a loan ora bursary. We will look at the package in entirety.This is the way the best universities do it as well- a dedicated student financing office. Willthe universities be burdened by the servicing of their loans and bond issues, a question which Dr Lily Neo posed. The basic reason why we have moved towards a framework in which the universities, like other statutory boards, go to the capital market to fundcapital expenditures is one of efficient use of capital. It allows Ministries and the statutory boards to take into account the market pricing of the cost of capital, and it leads to a certain discipline. The Ministry will continue to provide a grant for a portion of all the universities’ strategicprojects.40% of the cost of theseprojects will be funded by the Ministry’s grant and the remaining portion they will fund by having to borrow. The universities have embraced this newfunding arrangement and are now adopting good market practice in borrowing tofinance the capital cost of their building and infrastructure projects. But there will not be undue financial burden on them in repaying the loan because MOE will, through our recurrent funding, continue to fund the universities for a substantial portion of the loan repayments and interest charges.”
“Our three universities will be not-for-profit institutions, unchanged fundamental mission. And their mission is toserve the public and national interest. I do not see them having to raise tuition fees excessively. In fact, I do not see a correlation between being corporatised and raising tuition fees. Whether they are corporatised or not, they would have to grapple with natural cost increases that happeninhigher education all over the world. But they willhave to justify their fee increases based on cost increases as well as improvements in quality. And they willnot be able to take in less qualified students who are prepared to donate or pay their way in. This is something that would be enshrined in the Policy Agreement - that admission willbe based on merit. On financialassistance,we have a whole array of schemes present. In fact, there are about 20 financial schemes presently in our universities for financial assistance. The question was asked about very needy students. They are also served, quite apart from the Tuition Fee Loan scheme which a significant proportion of students,over a third of our students, take advantage of. We also have students who cannot pay the remaining20% -but from next year, we are going to raise the Tuition Fee Loan to 90% of fees sothey only need to pay the remaining 10%- there will be some needy students who do not have the resources to pay that remaining 10% and they can apply for the Study Loan scheme, which allowsthem to fund the remaining 10%.On top of that, we have got bursaries available to students on a means-tested basis.We also haveschemes outside the universities offered by foundations, various professional organisations as well as schemes that operate at the local community level.”
“Our universities are Singapore universities, whose objective is to serve Singaporeans and our national priorities. But in order to do so, they need an international orientation. In order to serve Singapore and Singaporeans, they will need to source for the best faculty and the best students they can find internationally, on top of providing adequate places for all qualified Singaporeans. It is a very important point. Firstly, if we do not take this international orientation,we willnot be able to attract the best Singapore students to begin with. Secondly, we will not attract the best faculty, Singaporean or foreign. And if we do not attract the best faculty, our reputation as a university will go down. That is almost a mathematical identity. And if our reputation as a university goes down, the Singaporean students who go to the university will be badly served. So we have got to open ourselves to the best Asians, the best people from all over the world,eastern Europe, Iran, wherever. So they come in and provide their diversity and richness that benefit the Singapore students, spur them on, attract the best faculty, and give the university something that we think is part of the X-factor that Dr Geh Minspoke about. I would emphasise also, although it is obvious, that the corporatised universities will be not-for-profit institutions. Their fundamental missions would be unchanged. If you look at MIT, for instance, a private university, its mission is not about making profit butserving the United States. As a private university, they take it upon themselves to serve the interests of the United States. And they do so by attracting the best students from all over the world. That is the way they do it.”
“It may well be that, some time to come, we could do something like the Australianmodel where the Minister does not appoint the members of QAFU. Let us see how well the process works first, so that we have got enough public trust and confidence in this process of autonomy.At this point, our processes are working quite well. There is a set of issues which Dr Lily Neo and, to some extent, Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim have raised on access and affordability. I will make the general point that we should notfear this corporatised animal too much. It is not a drive towards commercialisation or commoditisation. In fact, on the contrary, the highest quality in the world is found in the private universities, and what we are doing is borrowing some of those lessons. I am not sure we call it an "X-factor", but there are very useful processes to be borrowed, and to do it in a publicly-funded university framework, which we think we can. But I would assure Dr Lily Neo and this House that the Ministry is committed to ensuring that there are enough university places for all qualified Singaporeans, even as NUS and NTU join SMU in becoming Autonomous Universities. We are committed to that objective, and it will be reflected in our Policy Agreements with the universities. As for foreign students versus local students, there will be no trade-off, because wewill keep to our commitment to providing sufficient places for all qualified Singaporeans. On top of that, the universities will want to take in foreign students. Why do they do it? Because it has something to do with the "X-factor". It has something to do with the diversity and richness of the student body that is essential to becoming a great university.”
“But we do need to measure some things and need annually to decide how well they are doing relative to the targets which they have set and know whattheir plans are to address gaps or to even go beyond their original targets. That is a useful process. MOE will not craftthe Performance Agreement on its own. We will do it jointly. In fact, the universities take the first crack. This is what they propose, these are their ambitions, they come to us and we then have to agree to it.It is a joint process and there will be a lot of consultation involved. The Quality Assurance Framework for Universities (QAFU), which I mentioned earlier, is not something new. It is in place. It is not unique to us. It is in place in the best universities around the world, including state universities. But there are different models, and theAustralian model is somewhat different from what we see in the UK and Europe. And I think we have a workable model in Singapore. It will assure Members for me to say that the universities themselves have found the QAFU process - so far, just NUS and NTU have been assessed or evaluated - to be extremely valuable. It has allowed them to take a step back and look at what they are doing, look at their priorities and the gaps in quality. We usually need someone coming in from outside to take a fresh look at things topoint out whatwe do not notice because we are looking at them every day. The university management and their boards have found this to be a very valuable process, as has the Ministry. So, I am confident that it is working well. Again, we have chosen the people on QAFU ourselves. The Minister appoints the members of QAFU because we wanted to make sure the right people were there - eminent, independent, credible internationally and locally.”
“These are matters for the universities to decide, not matters for the Minister to direct them on. If the Minister were to get into each and every one of these micro matters, then again, we are defeating the whole purpose of the exercise.I am confident that the universitieswill be able to work outa sensibleprotocol, a financial, managementand internal accountability protocol, to make sure that they are on the right track. The university's performanceis reviewed annually, andthat is, again, good practice. It is not unique to us when we look at some of the small European countries that are moving in the same direction. There is a 5-year Performance Agreement that is set out which gives the universities latitude toforge their own policies and directions, but it is subject to annual review because we are talking about substantial amounts of public money at stake. We fund the universities 1%of GDP. That ismore than most, or any other country I can think of. We will make sure that the way we craft these agreements on specifics, ie, Policy Agreement as well as the Performance Agreement, will not be cumbersome.I agree with Dr Geh Min that we should not be too focused on a narrow metric. It is useful to have some metrics. We cannot have the whole thing unmeasurable and look for something called an "X-factor" which we have to guess at. We need some measures. But we do not need to beexcessively focused on them, whether it is on publications ornarrow measures of research performance, for instance. We have got to allow for some fuzziness in interpreting the data. I quite agree with that.”
“MOE will work together with the three universities in articulating the policy parameters in the Policy Agreement within which the universities must operate, such as the admissions framework, tuition fees framework, how MOE will fund the universities both for teaching and research, and so on. The Policy Agreement sets out policy objectives which MOE cannot run away from. The Government cannot run away from this because we are funding the universities 75% of undergraduate education costs. We are not just talking about the private universities, but very few of the state universities internationally, eg, the Australian universities that one or two speakers mentioned, the American state universities, few come anywhere close to receiving 75% state funding. And it puts the responsibility on the Ministry to ensure that this is public money that will achieve national objectives. So, we need this Policy Agreement, and the challenge is to craft it in a way that does not cramp the universities but keeps them focused on our ultimate objectives. Beyond what we specify in the Policy Agreement, it is for each university to set its own institutional priorities and strategies and, most critically, how it will manage its academic affairs, that someMembers have touched on.Howfaculty members are hired, fired and promoted, whom to collaborate with internationally, both for student exchanges and research, etc. The whole range of academic issues that arethe flesh and blood of a university are really matters for the universities to decide, under this new policy framework. They will also have to decide on operational matters, such as the merits of whether to buy expensive chairs which have a 10-year warranty period versus less expensive chairs that have a shorter warranty period.”
“They haveenergetic, enthusiastic and passionate Council members andcapable management teams. One can already sense the buzz in the faculty as wemove into the autonomy phase.The people are in place. But that is not good enough. We need to forge a new culture. There is work to be done within the universities to forge a new internal culture, with the right interplay between top-down strategic initiatives decided on by the top management and the Board of Trustees, and the bottom-up ideas that have to bubble up from the staff or,as Dr Geh Min says, even from students. We have to find that right interplay, and each university will have a different model of the mix between top-down and bottom-up initiatives that will define its own culture. But it takes time to evolve that. And I am confident that the people we have in place are keen to evolve that culture, now that we are freeing them up from the direction of the Ministry. What are the key components that we will have to look atand craft very carefully in achieving this right balance between autonomy and accountability? First, the Policy Agreement which sets out the Ministry's strategic vision, overall directions for the development of the university sector, that will guide the universities. It is not there to cramp the universities, otherwise we will just be defeating the whole purpose of this exercise. It is really there to provide signposts for each of the universities, signposts that they would use when they formulate their own strategic goals and objectives. This will make sure that thepath is well lit as they go forward.”
“But we must start with the presumption that, as Dr Loo says, there are legacies. There are legacies of depending on Government directions and instructions and, more importantly, internal legacies that come about because of that external relationship between Government and university, and one cannot wish them away on Day One. We have to evolve. That is why the Minister for Education has to appoint the Board of Trustees, to make sure that the right people are in place. Mr Ho Kwon Ping, Dr Loo and all the other extremely capable and motivated members of the SMU Board of Trusteesare there because we appointed them to their positions. And the same would be the case for NUS and NTU. We retain public trust in this process of evolution in the universities if the Government is appointing the right people to these positions. And I agree fully with Dr Loo that 15 or 20 good people on these Boards of Trustees will do a better job than the Government, either the Minister or a set of bureaucrats. And that is the whole idea.But they are not private universities. They are publicly-funded. So we have to ensure thatthe public trusts that its money is being well spent in the service of the nation. Dr Lily Neo askedwhether the leadership teams are ready, and whetherthey are up to the task. The short answer is yes. In fact, we would not have made this major move of putting this legislation through Parliament if we did not feel we have good people in place. We have strong and active chairpersons on all our three university boards- Mr Ho Kwon Ping at SMU, Mr Koh Boon Hwee at NTU and Mr Wong Ngit Liong at NUS, all highly respected for their achievements in the corporate sector and as leaders in the general sense of the term.”
“They know it will destroy their very attraction and reputation if they will try to commercialise their product. They know that the essence of the university lies in the quality which is difficult to measure, as Dr Geh Min says.They know that. So we too will strive in various ways - whilst being efficient infinancial processes, whilst having to recover their costs -we strive to maintain that complete focus on quality,of faculty andstudents,teaching and research.We are moving away from an old model which I think has served us very wellfor our first phase of national development, but principally served us in achieving quantitative objectives, producing the technical and managerial manpower required for a rapidly growing economy, moving from that model to one that isgoing to better suit our objectiveof developing quality.As we move fromquantity to quality in education, in this instance,university education, we need a new model of governance. Because achieving that single-minded focus on quality will not be well served by a model in which the universities have to depend on the Government for key decisions and approval on a variety of issues concerning university governance. That is the essence of it. We are taking a step that is bold enough to be meaningful, but we are not leaping into a yawning chasm. We are going in with our eyes wide open and there are lights along the way.We know this is the right direction to take. And, as we build up confidence, we will see how much further we can go in granting even more autonomy. It is a process. Dr Lily Neo and Dr Geh Min raised various issues to do with this. Ultimately, many of their questions deal with this balance between accountability and autonomy, and we will evolve that balance.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, first, I would like to thank the Members who have spoken - Dr Lily Neo, Dr Geh Min,Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim and Dr Loo Choon Yong - for their very useful observations and for their support of the Bill. Before I address their specific concerns and queries, perhaps I should just make a general pointonthe concerns about what this ogre of a corporate university amounts to, what it implies for product andcommercialisation, and so on. Let me start by saying that the best universities in the world by international acclaim are not corporatised universities, but private universities, much more than corporatised universities. They are private, havetheir Boards of Trustees, are typically not for profit, and entirely autonomous of Government. Whether we will eventually get there or want to get there is something we will decide several years from now. But we are making an intermediate step, a step which may very well be appropriate even for the long term, towards state-funded autonomous universities. We are borrowing some of the lessons we have observed in the best universities in the world, which are private universities, but putting them in a framework of state-funded universities, publicly fundedandmeritocratic. Afather cannot give a phone call to the Chairman of the Board of Trustees so thathis son gets a place - that is the Singapore system.But we see no reason why we cannot, in a mainstream, publicly funded system, import the best practices of private universities, which are typically from the United States.There is no hint in these private universities, no hint amongst the alumni or students, or faculty, or employers thatthey are producing a commodity, or that they are commoditising their product.If they were to try to do that, their reputation would ebb.”
“The three University Bills to establish NUS, NTU and SMU as Autonomous Universities will lay the foundation and position our universities well to become leaders amongst universities in the Asia-Pacific and to be up to the best internationally in specific fields. This will allow our universities to be key strategic assets for Singapore, as we stake our claim in the knowledge-based economy. As the universities enhance the quality of education, MOE, together with each university, will ensure that university education remains accessible and affordable to Singaporeans. No Singaporean admitted to the university will be denied a university education because of financial constraints. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.52 pm”
“The Ministry is mindful that we want to give our universities the autonomy they need to excel, and not to be encumbered by unnecessary procedures and processes. I am confident that we will be able to find the right balance between autonomy and accountability, and that the processes of accountability will not be burdensome. Transfer provisions Parts III and IV of the NUS (Corporatisation) Bill provide for the transfer of property, rights, liabilities, employees and others, from NUS as a statutory board to the corporatised NUS. This is to ensure a smooth transition from NUS' statutory board status to its new identity as an autonomous university company. Dissolution of Academic Staff Provident Fund (ASPF) Scheme The First Schedule of the NUS (Corporatisation) Bill provides for the dissolution of the ASPF and transfer of the balance of the ASPF assets to the Central Provident Fund Board. The ASPF started at a time when the CPF did not exist. For greater cost effectiveness for the benefit of the ASPF members, the NUS Council made the decision in October 2003 to dissolve the ASPF and merge it with the CPF. NUS will bear all costs relating to the closure of the ASPF and ensure that no member is disadvantaged. NUS has also sought feedback from current and past ASPF members, and the response has been positive. MOE, NUS, MOM and the CPF Board have worked closely on this matter and the necessary legislative provisions for the dissolution of the ASPF and the subsequent transfer of balance of assets to the CPF are included in the First Schedule of the NUS (Corporatisation) Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me conclude. Our universities have done exceptionally well within a relatively short space of time - a short history. But it will take more for them to become great universities.”
“The performance of the university will be reviewed annually in the four areas of academic teaching and curriculum, research outcomes and training, contribution and service to the wider community, and organisation development matters. It would include such issues as the breadth of the curriculum that the universities are seeking to achieve, things such as the number of cross faculty modules that undergraduates are required to cover, andthe percentage of students that the universities intend to send foroverseas exposure throughexchange programmes. Thirdly, the existing Ministry of Education's Quality Assurance Framework for Universities (QAFU) that includes an on-site external validation of the university's performance by an MOE-commissioned external review panel. QAFUalready exists. It is chaired by Dr Jennifer Lee and comprises a few eminent international experts, as well as senior members of the local corporate community. This validation will be carried out once in every three to five years. The process is in place and has been working well. In order to ensure that the Autonomous Universities remain fully accountable for the use of public monies, the new clause 9 provides for the Ministry to have continued full and free access to all records relating to financial transactions of the university company, and to be able tomake such records available to the public. The Minister for Education's consent would also have to be sought for the university's functions cited in clause 7 of the Bill, such as the disposal of property, winding-up of the university company, as well as the addition, deletion or alteration of the university company's constituent documents.”
“They play several critical roles: firstly, to provide leadership and guidance on the strategic directions for the university; secondly, to appoint the President of the university and to appraise the President of the university; and thirdly, to ensure the responsible use of the university’s resources and maximise the returns on those resources. Enhanced accountability The enhanced accountability framework for the Autonomous University, as reflected in the new clause 4, will comprise the following: Firstly, a Policy Agreement to be signed between each university, in the presentinstance,NUS,and the Ministry of Education that stipulates the key policy parameters articulated by MOE which the university must abide by in order to receive Government funding. Some of the policies include the tuition fee setting framework, the framework for admissions, andadequate cost control measures to ensure that resources are utilised optimally. The Policy Agreementwill not be cast in stone, of course, and from time to time, we willreview it tomake surethat it is suitable for the directions that the university itself is pursuing. Secondly, a Performance Agreement, besides the Policy Agreement I just spoke about, which will be formulated by the university and agreed toby the Ministry of Education. This is the university's ex-ante declaration of what it is setting out to achieve in the areas of teaching, research, service and organisational development. This Agreement will be reviewed every five years. In addition, the Ministry and each university will work out and agree on the number of graduates to be trained by the university in broad clusters of disciplines on an annual basis.”
“The approach we have taken is to retain those clauses from the existing NUS and NTU Acts which are still relevant, with some modifications in the new Acts where necessary, and to include new clauses arising from the UAGF recommendations. The internal governance structures of the universities and various operational matterswill beincorporated in the university company’s Memorandum and Articles of Association (M&A), which is alsothe case for SMU in the case of the existing SMU Act. As an additional safeguard, any amendment to the M&As would require the consent of the Minister for Education, as provided for in the SMU M&A today. The NUS Bill also provides the legislative provisions to transfer NUS’ property, rights and liabilities to the successor university company, and will repeal the existing NUS Act which establishes NUS as a statutory board. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me now highlight the key clauses of the NUS (Corporatisation) Bill. Role of Government It will remain the Government’s responsibility to steer the strategic direction of the overall university sector and ensure that our three universities meet strategic national priorities. This is provided for in clause 5. Itwill largelybe operationalised through the Policy Agreement that will be signed between the Ministry and the university, as part of the enhanced accountability framework that is being put in place. Strong governance structures are critical to the success of the university. As such, the Minister for Education will continue to appoint the university’s Board of Trustees (BOT), as provided for in clause 6. We must appoint the right people as Trustees.”
“It will bring greater collective ownership and more proactive participation from amongst all the university stakeholders - theCouncil (or what will soonbe calledthe Board of Trustees after corporatisation), the university management, faculty, staff and students and, quite importantly, the alumni of the universities. The three Autonomous Universities will remainkey institutions in Singapore. The Government remains committed to providing themsubstantial funding. We want to ensure that they continue to contribute to the well-being ofSingapore and its people, not just by producing graduate manpower to support the economy, but also in propellingSingapore up the value curve of knowledge creation through a concerted investment in R&D. The new Acts for our Autonomous Universities will allowthe Ministry of Education to ensure that the university sector as a whole meets these national objectives. MOEhas the fundamental responsibility, and will work closely with the universities, to ensure that university education remains affordable and accessible and that the universities achievethe highest quality in teaching and research. Next, the issue of accountability. It is critical that we strikethe rightbalance between autonomy and accountability.We have to giveour universities the freedom to set their own directions,to differentiate themselves and to forge their own distinctive cultures. In this regard, the NUS and NTU (Corporatisation) Bills are in line with the thrust of the existing SMU Act. The new legislation aims to safeguard the Government’s strategic interest in the university sectorbut give the universities the autonomy to be nimble and responsive in a rapidly evolving landscape.The Bills are crafted with this balance in mind.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir,Members of this House will recall that at this year's Budget debate, the Committee of Supply had deliberated on the UAGF recommendations. The Government announced its acceptance of the UAGF recommendations in April this year. The move to transform NUS and NTU into Autonomous Universities marks the beginning of the next major phasein our universities’ development. As I shared at the Committee of Supply debate, we have good people in our universities, comprising the Chairmen and members of the university Councils, the key management in each of the universities, and thefaculty and staff. I am confident that, with these good people,the universities will also be able to develop an internalculture of collegiality that is characteristic of all top universities. Our experience with SMU as an Autonomous Universityhas given us confidence that the proposed model of governanceat NUS and NTU will work. But the two larger and much more complex universities, NUS and NTU, will need time to change. The change process has already commenced at the universities. Both the NUS and NTU Councils, together with their respective university management and faculty, have embarked onstrategic reviews to set their future directions in an era of autonomy. The granting of autonomy to NUS and NTU will, fundamentally, not just be about a change in relationship between Government and universities butabout a change inthe internal cultureof our universities.Autonomy isthe catalyst forthe change in internal culture.”
“This is quite unlike the traditional model of Boards in Europe where the majority of members of the Boards are internal members from within the university. In April 2004, we initiated the University Autonomy, Governance and Funding review, what I will call the UAGF review,to find an appropriate model of autonomy for our three universities. The UAGF Steering Committee, chaired by then 2nd Permanent Secretary of Education, LG(NS) Lim Chuan Poh, released its preliminary report and recommendations in January this year. Its key recommendation was to corporatise NUS and NTU into not-for-profit public companies limited by guarantee, or in short, to make themAutonomous Universities. SMU, which was already established as a public company limited by guarantee, has always been an Autonomous University. The Ministry's International Academic Advisory Panel (IAAP) met in January 2005 and discussed extensively therecommendations of the UAGF. It strongly endorsed the move to transform NUS and NTU into Autonomous Universities, just like SMU, to enable them to achieve teaching and research excellence, raise their international standing and enhance their students’ learning experience. The IAAP also made several useful observations. These included the need for university education at the three universitiesto remain accessible and affordable. There must also be greater accountability with increased autonomy. The IAAP endorsed the enhanced accountability framework for the Autonomous Universities, whichassures the public that the universities' missions remain aligned with our national strategic objectives and that the quality of university education continues to be enhanced.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." As Singaporeprogresses towards a knowledge-based and innovation-driven economy, our three universities- National University of Singapore (NUS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU) and Singapore Management University (SMU) - will have a key role to play in producing graduate manpower, enriching our human capital by providing quality education, and excelling in research to create knowledge and wealth for Singapore. Our universities are already well-recognised today. But the global university landscape is changing and changing rapidly. Our universities have to compete in this new landscape to get the best faculty and students, including the best Singaporean students. They also have to developworld-class capabilities in specific fields. To achieve this, a new model of governance for our universities is necessary, to give them the autonomy to chart new directions, to differentiate themselves, and to focus on developing excellence. We are not alone in moving in this direction. It is a global trend. For example,Japan, Denmark and Finland are reforming their universities by devolving more autonomy to them. Japan enacted the National University Corporations Law in 2003 to transform its national universities into independent administrative corporations with more autonomy. Denmark enacted a new University Act also in 2003 to transform the Danish universities into self-governing institutions, each with their own Boards of Directors and in fact with a majority of external members of their Boards (including the Chairpersons of the Boards) to advise and guide the university Rectors and management in the strategic development of the universities.”
“In this respect, industry, schools, parents and the Government all have significant roles to play in order to allow the development of on-line gaming as a healthy pastime, especially for our youths.”
“IDA's and MDA's efforts in promoting the online gaming industry are directed at the creation and deployment of content and, hence, jobs and value added for the economy, not promoting more gaming per se. IDA has always advocated moderation in online gaming in its promotion and public communication campaigns. MDA is also looking into the possibility of a classification system for computer games. To complement regulatory safeguards, there are also various initiatives to provide advice and support to individual users in cultivating good Internet and on-line gaming habits. The Cyber Wellness Task Force (CWTF) of the National Internet Advisory Committee (NIAC) is promoting a cyber wellness culture to encourage the adoption of sensible, proper and beneficial use of the Internet. There are also efforts by the TOUCH Community Services that seeks to bring the message of cyber wellness to students in Singapore. Through their "Cyberspace Risks & where U Seek Help" (CRuSH) programmes, they have educated, trained and spread online messages to over 60,000 students in more than 60 schools. The industry is also doing its part to tackle this issue. As early as 2003, the industry itself recognised the danger of online gaming addiction. Singapore's LAN gaming centre association, the Private Network Alliance (PNA), has made it their social responsibility to set up a monitoring system to track the usage of individual customers and have trained staff to identify and counsel customers who seem to spend too much time online. Global trends indicate that Internet and online gaming are here to stay. We cannot prevent people from playing online games. The solution lies in inculcating in people the right values so that they can exercise discretion and good judgement while enjoying these games.”
“The Senior Minister of State for Information, Communications and the Arts (Dr Balaji Sadasivan) (for the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts): Mr Speaker, Sir, the interest and concern on youth engaged in Internet on-line gaming in the so-called LAN shops reflects the popularity of such games. Video gaming is not new, as game arcades have been in existence for many years. LAN shops are simply arcades offering access to on-line games. These shops are regulated by both the Police and the Media Development Authority (MDA). The Police Licensing Division regulates LAN shops under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act, which defines public entertainment to include "any computer games centre in any place to which the public or any class of the public has access". Therefore, a LAN shop, as a computer games centre, must have a public entertainment licence and comply with its conditions. Amongst these are strict conditions restricting admission of students and any persons below the age of 16 years during school-hours. Further, only computer games approved by MDA are allowed. LAN shops are also licensed under MDA's Class Licence as an Internet service reseller for providing online gaming through Internet access. Besides gaming, customers could also engage in other activities, such as checking emails, surfing the worldwide web and conducting online transactions. Under the terms of the Class Licence, access to undesirable websites is also curtailed. LAN shops are however not required under both regulatory frameworks to provide statistics on their revenue or the profile and usage patterns of their customers. Hence, the Police Licensing Division, IDA and MDA do not have the statistics requested by Mdm Ho.”
“That is the approach we agree with. We are in fact infusing financial literacy concepts into our school curriculum, starting in a very simple way from upper primary levels but extending into secondary school's CME classes, as well as other subjects like Mathematics, Social Studies, and so on. I use the word "infuse" deliberately. We are not incorporating a new component to the curriculum; we are not adding on to the curriculum. But it can be woven quite naturally into a Mathematics class; it can be woven quite naturally certainly into CME. It is really part of the life skills we want to inculcate in every young child when that person becomes a young adult, not just for the sake of them being able to pass on tips to their parents. But they would eventually be heads of households and we want them to have the basics in place. So, yes, we are working very closely - MoneySENSE, together with the Ministry of Education, and various other providers are working closely. We have been training our teachers. We have been providing them with guides and examples of lesson plans. And it is being rolled out fairly effectively. INTERNET ONLINE GAMING (Monitoring in Local Area Network shops) 11. Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) how is Internet online gaming in LAN shops being monitored in Singapore; and (b) whether his Ministry has any statistics on (i) the profile and number of visitors to these LAN shops; (ii) the number of hours spent in these LAN shops by each visitor; and (iii) the revenue from such gaming activities; and (c) if so, if his Ministry will provide these statistics.”
“Sir, this is a very useful suggestion. We started off with the CDCs and I think they are learning from the experience. Both the CDCs, MoneySENSE as well as the private providers are learning from the experience. It will be a useful idea to broaden our viewership to family service centres and VWOs who have a clientele who are in need of basic advice on financial literacy.”
“We will review the funding arrangement for MoneySENSE by the middle of next year. Miss Penny Low: Sir, may I declare my interest here. I was indeed one of the people who kick-started the "Talking Dollars and Sense" programme, although I am no longer involved in it. Would the Minister consider extending that scheme itself or similar schemes to NGOs, VWOs and especially family service centres where you could do capacity building within these centres that already have a clientele of low income or needy families, or even dysfunctional families? Because certainly if we can help them to get financial problems out of their way, they would be able to get their lives together better.”
“So for the next phase of financial education, we will place special attention on those segments of the population that have low levels of financial literacy and are in greatest need of it. We will implement customised financial education programmes targeted at these segments of the population. One such areas of focus is low-income families. MoneySENSE and the Community Development Councils (CDCs) have jointly organised a programme - it is called the "Talking Dollars and Sense" programme - to educate those families who are on financial assistance schemes on basic savings and budgeting skills. The programme comprises a workshop as well as practical follow-up sessions where a trainer meets each family, one on one, over two follow-up sessions, to review their progress in managing their budgets and to help them set new targets for their savings, so that we can achieve over time a degree of self-reliance. Another ground level initiative is financial planning for families. MoneySENSE has also worked with the Securities Investors Association (Singapore) and the Singapore College of Insurance (SCI) to launch a series of "Financial Planning for Families" seminars at community clubs to teach families how to plan for retirement. This series of seminars will run for five years and will reach out to many families. We will also be launching a quarterly newsletter in each of the major local dailies and all four languages to bring useful information and tips on money matters to the general public. As for funding, the Government has allocated $3 million from the Financial Sector Development Fund (FSDF) to fund MoneySENSE programmes from October 2003 when we first started to October next year. It is a three-year programme.”
“For example, the recent MoneySENSE talk on investment-linked insurance plans attracted more than 500 participants. MoneySENSE has also published 16 consumer guides, which have been distributed very widely. Over one million copies were distributed. We have also been working with the media to disseminate financial education messages to a wider audience. Over the last two years, the local newspapers have published 85 MoneySENSE articles. MoneySENSE currently contributes fortnightly illustrations to the local newspapers to help consumers understand common financial documents, such as CPF statements and insurance policy benefit illustrations. And the broadcast media has also been very supportive of this effort. Overall, based on the outreach statistics and feedback from participants, MoneySENSE is off to a good start. The coordination amongst Government agencies as well as the strong support and commitment we have received from the various industry associations, community groups, consumer bodies, grassroots organisations and media is enabling us to bring financial education to a wide group of Singaporeans. But there is much work ahead. Earlier this year, we conducted a national financial literacy survey to benchmark Singaporeans' financial literacy. The survey identified gaps amongst Singaporeans in saving for emergencies, and planning for retirement. For example, only a quarter of adult Singaporeans had calculated the amount of money they need for retirement years. There was also inadequate understanding of common financial products such as life insurance and unit trusts, let alone things like structured deposits. The survey also revealed some wide variations in levels of financial literacy among different segments of the population.”
“Sir, in developing the wealth management industry in Singapore, MAS looks to grow the number of players in the industry, as well as the range of products and services offered in the industry. Wealth management and pension management services catering to the specific needs and demands of retirement will become increasingly important with the ageing population in Singapore as well as elsewhere in Asia. We are exploring how we can further develop the market for retirement products, including annuity products, which provide a regular income over an extended period of time. We will encourage asset managers and insurance companies to offer a range of retirement products and services, to complement the role of the CPF and meet different needs. We will also step up financial education concerning retirement needs and products, in particular. The CPF Board is developing materials which will give CPF members more information on annuities. MoneySENSE is reaching out to the public by conducting ongoing talks and, through the media, to raise awareness on retirement planning. And the National Council of Social Services is working with community groups and non-governmental organisations to develop guidelines to help the elderly make informed financial decisions. This is one of the initiatives coordinated by the Committee on Ageing Issues (CAI). This will be a continuing effort in financial education. And in that connection, Miss Penny Low has also asked for a status update on the MoneySENSE programme. Since its launch, almost exactly two years ago, MoneySENSE has organised over 100 talks, seminars, courses and workshops. These activities have attracted over 12,000 Singaporeans from all walks of life. The events are quite well attended in general.”
“MALL, a MOE website on the use of IT in education, MOE shares with schools on how to ensure the responsible use of Internet by students. Some examples include the need to set policies to handle use, misuse and abuse of Internet access by students in schools, enlisting assistance from parents, and copyright issues. Schools also draw on support from voluntary organisations. Organisations such as Touch Community Services, supported by partners such as PAGI (Parents' Advisory Group for Internet) and the National Youth Council (NYC), have been conducting cyber wellness programmes for schools, as well as for parents. MOE will monitor and assess the need to put in place additional guidelines on the use of the Internet, which will include blogs, by teachers and students. CPF FOR TERTIARY EDUCATION (Repayments) 6. Mdm Cynthia Phua asked the Minister for Manpower whether his Ministry will allow students, who used their parents' Central Provident Fund (CPF) for their tertiary education, to make repayments when they are working by deducting from their CPF accounts instead of having to pay cash.”
“Blogging is a relatively new form of communication over the Internet. However, the existing guidelines and advice on Internet etiquette (netiquette) for students on the use of email, Internet forums and chatrooms remain applicable to blogging. With the increasing use of blogs in schools, MOE has also engaged in discussion with schools on the potential use of blogs for educational purposes, as well as the need to educate pupils on the responsible use of blogs. We do not frown on blogs in schools. They allow students to express themselves freely, in an informal setting, and to make creative use of various media - text, sound, pictures and videos. But blogs are not private spaces. They are publicly accessible. Hence, schools have to educate and guide their students on responsible self-expression in their blogs, just as with the e-mail and other media for communication. Students have to be reminded to respect others, avoid posting content that is offensive or abusive, and avoid plagiarism or using copyrighted material. The specific strategies adopted by MOE to emphasise the importance of the responsible use of Internet in schools include: (i) Core training for teachers Issues and guidelines on netiquette and ethical use are integrated into core training programmes on IT integration in teaching, for all teachers in both pre-service and in-service training. (ii) Responsible use of the Internet In schools, topics on the responsible use of the Internet are included in the Civics and Moral Education (CME) instructional package. Students are taught to take responsibility for their actions, whether in cyber or physical world, as part of the values education that schools provide. (iii) Resources Through edu.”
“Upon readmission, the schools will provide guidance and counselling to the student to help him re-adjust to school life and to maintain good behaviour. STUDENT BLOGS (Guidelines) 5. Mdm Cynthia Phua asked the Minister for Education if there are any guidelines for students who set up blogs and discuss about their school activities and their teachers.”
“The number of dropouts in our primary and secondary schools has averaged about 100 a year in primary schools over the last five years, ie, from 2000 to 2004. The number of students dropping out has declined over the last five years. We are nevertheless concerned about the dropout situation. Our schools are trying to minimise the number of students who drop out, and will do more. The most important element in this is to do more proactively, before problems crop up. Schools are taking a proactive approach to engaging and guiding students and involving them in activities that interest them, so that they remain keen on school. Ms Ng also asked about expulsions. An average of eight primary students and 130 secondary students were expelled from school each year, over the last five years (2000 to 2004). Schools may expel a student if he persistently undermines school discipline; or if he commits a very serious offence, such as assault, and where allowing him to remain in the school would threaten the safety of other students; or if he is a persistent absentee. But expulsion is never a preferred option. It is done as a last resort when measures such as counselling, suspension and other disciplinary measures have had no effect on improving the student's conduct. Schools will readmit dropouts or students who have been expelled if they are keen to return and take school seriously, and provided they are not significantly overaged. The student will usually be required by the school to give an undertaking to abide by school rules and to take his studies seriously. The idea is to make sure that the student takes responsibility for his decision to return to school. He must want to learn and be a responsible member of the school. The school will help him adjust.”
“CCS helps consumers recover from serious debt problems by providing general credit management information, credit counselling and, where applicable, helping them to work out a debt repayment plan. While there are credit counselling schemes in place and we are stepping up our financial education programmes, the key remains for consumers to take personal responsibility for managing their finances and planning for the long term. SERVICE AND CONSERVANCY CHARGES OF HDB FLATS (Arrears) 3. Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many residents are in arrears of their service and conservancy charges nationwide; (b) whether the number in arrears has increased or decreased over the last five years; and (c) what schemes are in place to help residents pay off their arrears.”
“In Singapore, credit cards are generally used as a mode of payment, with only 17% of credit card debt rolled over for more than one month as at Second Quarter 2005. The utilisation rate of credit cards has also fallen from a high of 24% of credit limit to 18% in second quarter this year. The most effective solution to managing consumer debt levels is for individuals and households to learn how to manage their finances. They have to consider if they can afford to service and pay off a loan before taking it up, and understand how getting into too much debt can affect their long term financial well-being. Through MoneySENSE, the national financial education programme, we are seeking to help Singaporeans acquire the skills and knowledge to better manage their day-to-day finances, make prudent investments and plan for their longer-term needs. MoneySENSE has been working with industry associations to publish consumer guides and newspaper articles, as well as to organise events, to disseminate messages on prudent debt management. There are specific programmes for specific segments. For example, MoneySENSE is working with the Community Development Councils (CDCs) to run on-going basic money management workshops for low-income families. In addition to basic savings and budgeting skills, the workshops provide tips on prudent debt management. Ministry of Education (MOE) is infusing financial literacy concepts into the school curriculum. MoneySENSE is also working with private educational specialists to organise workshops and develop creative and fun activities to promote the teaching of financial literacy in schools. To advise and assist borrowers on debts already incurred, Credit Counselling Singapore (CCS), a non-profit organisation, was launched on 14th October 2004.”
“MAS' estimates show that Singaporean households' liabilities were about 85% in 2004, down from 96% of GDP in 2003. This ratio was lower than that in the UK and broadly similar to the US, but higher than in Hong Kong and Japan. [Household liabilities in the UK, US, Hong Kong and Japan are estimated at 91%, 83%, 60% and 64% of GDP respectively in 2004]. However, it is not possible to look at household debt without looking at household assets. The higher level of household liabilities in Singapore generally reflects a higher level of household assets as well. In fact, taking both assets and liabilities into account, Singapore households as a whole have an estimated positive net asset equivalent to about 3.7 times of GDP. This is comparable to most OECD countries. Basically, high household assets reflect our higher home ownership rates compared to other countries. The credit card charge-off rate, defined as bad debt written off as a proportion of average rollover balance, was 5.8% on average in 2003 and 2004 in Singapore. This was comparable to that in the US and lower than that in Hong Kong and Korea. [Charge-off rates for US, Hong Kong and Korea during the period were 5.1%, 7.7% and 13.4% respectively]. In the first six months of 2005, there were 1,759 bankruptcies. Of that number, 1,207 were consumers and the rest, businesses. 723 consumer bankruptcies were due to credit card debts, or 60% of all consumer bankruptcies. To put this in perspective, the number of credit card bankruptcies as a percentage of credit card users is extremely small, less than 0.05%. The majority of credit card bankruptcies were in the 31-50 years age group. 79% were male and 21% female. We do not collect data on their education levels.”
“The proportion of such students is slightly higher in engineering than in the life sciences at NUS. Overall, taking NUS and NTU students together, the proportion of such students in the life sciences is slightly higher. There is a high share of such students in both disciplines. NUS medicine and dentistry, however, attracts a significantly larger proportion of top 'A' level scorers compared with other courses, including life sciences and engineering. WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS HOUSEHOLD AND CREDIT CARD DEBTS 1. Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim asked the Senior Minister (a) what is Singapore's ratio of consumer debt and household debt as compared to countries such as United Kingdom, United States, Hong Kong and Japan; (b) what is the percentage of Singaporeans who are repaying at least one form of debt; (c) what is the percentage of Singaporeans in credit card debt; (d) what is the percentage of Singaporeans in housing loan debt; (e) what are the pre-emptive educational programmes to reduce the debt of Singaporeans; and (f) what are the help measures and repayment schemes available to Singaporean debtors to reduce bankruptcy due to these debts. 2. Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim asked the Senior Minister for the first six months of 2005, (a) what is the number of bankruptcy cases due to credit card debts; (b) what is the percentage of these credit-card linked bankruptcy cases in relation to the total number of bankruptcy cases; and (c) what are the profiles of these credit card debtors with respect to age, gender and educational level.”
“NUS and NTU take in students with various qualifications - Singapore-Cambridge GCE 'A' levels, polytechnic diplomas or other qualifications like the International Baccalaureate, or those from the region and further abroad like the UK 'A' levels. For example, in the life sciences, which Assoc. Prof. Ong has enquired about, almost a third of students matriculating at NUS and NTU do not enter with 'A' level qualifications. Further, in addition to applicants' grades in any examination, some faculties conduct their own tests and interviews to identify students best suited for the courses offered. There is therefore no neat or accurate comparison of the proportion of top students entering various faculties. Assoc. Prof. Ong may be trying to get a comparison of grades in the Singapore-Cambridge GCE 'A' levels of students matriculating in various courses at NUS and NTU. NUS and NTU, like most universities, do not release information comparing the grades of students entering specific courses of study, but I can give her a broad sense. We can look at students who get perfect or near perfect 'A' level points. A slightly higher proportion of the student intake in the life sciences at NUS and NTU falls within this category of top 'A' level scorers, compared to engineering. This is not surprising as the life sciences intake is also much smaller than the engineering intake (about one fifth the size of the engineering intake). There are in fact more students with perfect or near perfect 'A' level grades entering engineering than the life sciences, but they account for a smaller proportion of the engineering intake. We can also look at a broader base of students who do well at the 'A' levels - those who obtain at least three As (in full 'A' level subjects).”
“Mr Ahmad Khalis Bin Abdul Ghani asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs, with regard to property crimes such as housebreaking and theft, (a) what is the trend in the last three years; (b) what are the factors that contribute to such a trend; (c) whether more young offenders have been involved in such crimes; (d) whether there is a perceivable trend in the theft of handphones and what factors contribute to it; and (e) whether most of the offenders and victims of handphone thefts are young people.”
“The feedback over the last five years relating to poor indoor air quality in Singapore include thermal discomfort (30%); smells from food, tobacco, fungi and renovation fumes (21%); faulty air-conditioning systems (17%); and poor housekeeping of air handling units (16%). NEA also carries out surveys to determine the level of air quality in public places where people congregate. Examples include MRT stations, office buildings, air-conditioned food courts and shopping centres. The public feedback and NEA surveys show that many of the causes of poor indoor air quality are linked to factors like the choice of building materials, proper design and maintenance of building air ventilation system, rather than outdoor air quality. To help building managers, NEA has a set of Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Guidelines for Office Buildings, which the building managers use as a technical reference for achieving and maintaining good indoor air quality in their buildings. To expand the scope of the Guidelines to cover more building types such as schools and shopping centres, MOM, SPRING Singapore, NUS and NEA are currently working closely with the industry to develop a Singapore Standard Code of Practice on Indoor Air Quality. The new Singapore Standard will be more comprehensive and it will provide a better guide to property developers and building managements on measures needed to maintain good indoor air quality. PROPERTY CRIMES 35.”
“Dr Teo Ho Pin asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what measures are taken to ensure that outdoor air pollution will not affect indoor air quality; and (b) whether the quality of indoor air in airconditioned public buildings is monitored regularly to ensure public safety and health. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Natural air exchange occurs between a building and the ambient outdoor environment even when the doors and windows are closed. The best way to ensure that outdoor air pollution does not affect indoor air quality is to ensure that the ambient outdoor air quality remains good at all times. To this end, NEA has implemented a comprehensive air pollution control programme to reduce air pollution from industries and vehicles. This programme has ensured that Singapore's ambient outdoor air quality remains within international standards such as those set by the World Health Organisation and the US Environmental Protection Agency. Notwithstanding our good ambient air quality, transboundary smoke haze can cause elevated air pollutant levels. For such exceptional instances, the effect on indoor air quality can be mitigated by installing air-cleaning devices at the fresh air intake point of the air-conditioning system to remove the air pollutants. Such devices include filters, electrostatic precipitators and absorbents which are readily available in the market. NEA plays an advisory role in indoor air quality of various built environment. We provide advice in response to public feedback on poor indoor air quality.”
“The approach of prescribing noise limits allows the construction industry the flexibility to adopt innovative measures to minimise noise disturbances, rather than face a blanket ban on construction work that would extend construction contract periods and penalise the industry. Construction activities in the vicinity of noise-sensitive buildings such as hospitals, homes of the aged sick and schools, already have to meet more stringent noise limits. They cannot generate noise louder than the average ambient background level from 7.00 pm to 7.00 am. In 2004, NEA's data show that, while 8% of construction sites were in the vicinity of noise-sensitive buildings, less than 0.5% of complaints on noise from construction sites were from those near noise-sensitive buildings. This indicates that existing limits on noise in such areas have been complied with and are adequate. On the other hand, about 95% of construction noise complaints are from residential buildings near construction sites. NEA is currently reviewing the construction noise control measures, and will take into account the public's expectation on the quality of life and the cost impact of more stringent measures on the construction industry. In the meantime, NEA is monitoring the noise levels from construction sites and will continue to take enforcement action against the construction company when the noise levels from its construction site exceed the stipulated limits. I would like to urge the construction industry to remain considerate of neighbouring sites, particularly noise-sensitive buildings around their construction sites. INDOOR AIR QUALITY (Monitoring) 31.”
“Parents who decide to volunteer their services in their school of choice are exercising their own option, to improve their chances of getting their children in under an earlier phase than they would otherwise be eligible for. But equally important is the fact that past and present parent volunteers have contributed immensely to strengthening parental involvement in our schools. I thank them for their contributions and sacrifices, and hope that many more will come forward to partner our schools to bring about the best education for our children. CONSTRUCTION WORK (Amendment of regulations) 30. Ms Indranee Rajah asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources whether the National Environment Agency will consider amending the Environmental Pollution Control (Control of Noise at Construction Sites) Regulations to disallow construction work from being carried out near hospitals, homes for the aged sick and residential areas during the hours of 10 pm to 7 am on weekdays and Saturdays, and the whole day on Sundays. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: In a city-state like Singapore, construction activity often has to take place in the vicinity of other buildings. We need to take a pragmatic approach in regulating such construction noise nuisance, balancing the need for new development with the interest of residents in the surrounding area. Currently, the National Environment Agency (NEA) controls noise from construction sites by setting noise limits for different times of the day and night. The noise limits also vary according to the sensitivity of the areas to noise.”
“The minimum of 40 hours of voluntary service per year applies to parents who volunteer their service under the Parent Volunteer Scheme and whose children seek to enjoy priority under Phase 2B. The minimum of 40 hours of voluntary service is consistent with the objective of the Scheme to encourage parents to develop personal involvement and commitment to the school. It is equivalent to less than one hour of service per week. This minimum requirement under the Scheme is reasonable since the parent volunteer is seeking priority for his child over other Singaporean children. Parents applying to join the Scheme should satisfy themselves that they want to contribute meaningfully to the school and are able to commit the time. This is because volunteering often entails some personal sacrifice and adjustment to their other personal commitments. Parent volunteers also need to know that while we want to recognise their contribution by giving their children priority in registration, we cannot guarantee them a place in the school since admission is dependent completely on demand for and availability of school places. To ensure continuity, some schools make clear to parents before they volunteer that their services are needed for a minimum number of years, including after their children have been admitted to the school. So, again, it is important for parents to satisfy themselves that they can commit the time before they volunteer. The question of parents being "exploited" does not arise. MOE provides more than enough Primary One places for all children. All our schools are also well provided with good teachers and facilities.”
“Ong Soh Khim asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the rationale for requiring parents to perform a minimum of 40 hours of "mandatory" voluntary service in the school of choice, in the primary 1 registration exercise, in the case of a first child in the family; (b) why are parents requested to perform a further 40 hours of voluntary service in the school after the child has been given a place in Phase 2B of the registration exercise; (c) is it reasonable to expect parents who have to work a few jobs to perform such voluntary service; (d) is it reasonable to still expect parents to perform such voluntary services since schools are now on a 5-day week; and (e) have these parents been exploited by the schools as free labour in these voluntary services.”