Vikram Nair
Singapore
“I thank the Minister of State for the answer, as well as forming a workgroup to look into this issue. I think it is worrying that platform workers have a much higher rate of workplace injuries than many other groups and I think compensation is one component, but does the Minister of State think any interim measures are needed while the wo…”
“I thank the Minister of State for the answer. I think it is an improvement from the last time this question was asked two years ago, which was 17 minutes and 164 minutes. So, there is improvement. But a one-and-a half-hour waiting time is still quite long.”
“Thank you, and I thank the Minister of State for flagging the answer to me as well. So, I have a supplementary question. The answer was that the Ministry is engaging the digital service providers as well as preparing advisories for parents.”
“I thank the Minister of State for the response and to explain that the OCHA Directions are being issued to Telegram as well. The only reason I mentioned Telegram specifically is it seems to emerge in a whole range of crimes, including selling of drugs, etomidate, sexual crimes, scams.”
“It seeks to enable efficient cross-border travel while retaining Singapore's legal framework and ensuring that foreign officers cooperate within defined limits. It also provides for reciprocity, so that Singapore officers can exercise similar functions in Malaysia.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I note that amongst the different sources of energy, diesel prices have risen much higher than electricity prices. And diesel fuels many commercial operators, including buses and lorries, which feeds into many other sectors.”
The complete record
Every one of 760 lines we hold for Vikram Nair, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 16.
“I thank the Minister for the update on the complete renewal taking place for many of our equipment. I am interested to know how much and to what extent these modifications will be developed in Singapore through our local defence industries.”
“For example, if fighter planes of one country are perceived to have improperly crossed into the territorial air space of another country and that country responds by shooting down the plane, that could quickly lead to retaliation and escalation and both countries may find themselves on the path to war. The current exchanges between India and Pakistan are an example of how quickly a conflict can escalate once one party engages in the use of force. Given the high risk of conflict breaking out, it is important for regional militaries to establish mechanisms to build trust, strengthen confidence and minimise conflict in the region. At the Committee of Supply (COS) debate last year, the Minister for Defence spoke about creating a Code for Unplanned Encounters for military aircraft. Could MINDEF provide an update on this and any of the confidence-building measures that were introduced to reduce the risk of conflict escalating in the region? Dispute with Malaysia and Island Defence”
“Chairman, ASEAN is the cornerstone of our regional security architecture. It has promoted an avenue for Southeast Asian countries to meet and discuss areas for mutual cooperation. While most people are familiar with ASEAN as an economic forum, ASEAN is also an important platform to come together on defence matters. The ASEAN Defence Minister's Meeting (ADMM) was one of the primary pillars of these. In recent years, however, relationships among ASEAN appear to have become more strained for several reasons. First, the rivalry between the US and China also seems to be putting pressure on ASEAN countries as some come under pressure to choose in this rivalry. Second, on matters related to the South China Sea, there appears to be a growing risk of a divide among ASEAN members as some of them are direct claimant states in this matter, while others have differing views and different economic incentives in this. Third, terrorism is a growing security threat and, with fighters returning from the Middle East to the region, there is a pressing need for cooperation to manage this threat. In 2018, Singapore assumed chairmanship of ASEAN and ADMM. What have we achieved with our Chairmanship of ADMM in 2018? Code for Unplanned Encounters for Air Many countries in the Asia Pacific have overlapping maritime and territorial claims. As tensions escalate among claimant states, there is a real risk of miscalculation on the ground. As militaries become more advanced, the cost of any conflict will be grave.”
“SAF also has a wide range of resources and capabilities it has developed over the years, as well as a variety of different operations that it engages in. This is necessary to deal with the wider spectrum of threats we are facing, as well as the more messy nature of warfare. However, even if these demands on SAF continue to grow, as mentioned earlier, it faces constraints in terms of having less space to train. More and more SAF training areas and camps are being converted to other uses, particularly residential and commercial uses. The announcement in relation to Paya Lebar Airbase was one example of this. I am aware that SAF has adapted to this in many ways. This includes the more productive use of land for training, such as multi-storey rifle ranges and centralised conducting of training activities, such as Basic Military Training and reservist training. SAF has also leveraged on its good relationships to train in territories overseas and this has helped train in capabilities that we may not be able to train in Singapore as well. Most NSmen and reservists would have some experience of training overseas. These efforts are, indeed, commendable. However, I remain concerned as more and more training areas are given up for other uses. How does SAF overcome its training area limitations and ensure that it continues to have sufficient land to house its facilities and conduct its training? [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Defence Diplomacy”
“Fresh in Singaporeans' minds would be the fact that Malaysia still has two vessels in our waters. Although both sides have made efforts to de-escalate since, there does not appear to be an easy resolution or end to this matter. And if matters escalate – we hope it will not be necessary – but the SAF may have to get involved. On the other end of the technological spectrum, the threat of terrorism remains present. There are an increasing number of foreign fighters returning to the region from the wars in the Middle East and they remain a potential source of terror here. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has also set up in Indonesia and there were reports of attacks being planned on Singapore from there. The issue with terror attacks is that they are targeted at the civilian population, unlike conventional warfare, and could strike anyone, anywhere. Against the backdrop of these threats, the SAF faces two primary challenges. The first is falling cohort sizes, meaning that we are probably going to have fewer people coming into National Service. The second is reduction in available areas for training. Singapore already has a very significant disadvantage in terms of size in any conflict. And our only hope appears to be that if we rely more on automation and sophisticated equipment systems, we may be able to compensate for this somewhat. 5.45 pm And it is in this context that I ask about the future of the SAF. In view of the variety of threats we now face, how does SAF ensure it remains an effective fighting force capable of defending Singapore? What new capabilities will SAF be introducing over the next few years to meet the new security challenges? Training Areas I earlier discussed the wide variety of threats SAF was facing.”
“Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head J of the Estimates be reduced by $100". In 2017, we celebrated 50 years of National Service (NS) and Singaporeans of all generations joined in. The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) has been an integral part of Singapore and we are all either serving National Servicemen (NSmen) or family members of one. Yet, the SAF was set up over 50 years ago and much of the training involved training in jungle warfare which reflected the terrain of our region. Yet, the nature of our region and the nature of our threats have evolved significantly over the years. If we start with the threats, the SAF was set up against the backdrop of the Cold War, and the struggle with the communist insurgents in the region was one of the main focuses. The Cold War is over. In its place, we see new rivalries and tensions. The strategic competition between the United States (US) and China has intensified and it appears to be a new great power rivalry. Tensions in the South China Sea continue and no swift resolutions appear to be in sight. The Korean peninsula, probably one of the last legacies of the Cold War, remains volatile. And although Trump and Kim are having a second summit, there does not appear to be any firm commitment to denuclearise on the part of North Korea. India and Pakistan have always had tensions between them, but the events in the last few days are particularly worrying, especially because of how fast the conflict seems to be escalating. Against this backdrop, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries have also been spending more on defence, and these are our immediate neighbours. Defence spending has doubled from 2003 to 2016.”
“The question is for Minister Josephine Teo. The Minister has prepared a good discussion on all the different initiatives by the National Population and Talent Division. But I am just curious. What is the root cause of the fall in TFR over the last three years despite all these initiatives?”
“Mr Chairman, the Singapore Government is leading the way in making Singapore a Smart Nation. GovTech is ensuring that more and more Government services are available online and are easy to use online. This is commendable. However, a Smart Nation may be led by a smart Government, but it will also need a "smart" private sector to take full advantage of the progress. In this respect, how is the Government involving the private sector and the tech community in this Smart Nation drive? What new initiatives can we expect in the coming year? Smart Nation and Digital Inclusion”
“Chairman, in 2015, we had a bumper year in terms of babies in Singapore and a rise in our TFR. However, since then, Singapore's TFR seems to have dropped to an all-time low of 1.16 in 2018. This is despite the fact that the Government has put in place a wide variety of incentives for people to marry and have children. According to Singapore's population data bureau, we have a large number of people of childbearing age and coming to childbearing age, yet more are choosing not to get married and have children. Have any studies been done on why this is so? I understand from previous COS debates that many young people have a desire to settle down and get married. Yet, it appears they are not doing so. What are the challenges faced, particularly by young adults, in marriage and parenthood? Is there anything that may be done to address these challenges? Family – Reaffirming our Values”
“However, the fact remains that there are two Malaysian vessels in our territorial waters and, if there is any escalation or threat to our sovereignty or territorial integrity, we have to ask ourselves the uncomfortable question of what we will do. There are also more insidious threats to our country lurking beneath the surface. The cyberhacking on SingHealth by a foreign state actor still leaves me with a feeling of unease as it is clear there are sophisticated, well-funded entities out there operating against us. There is also growing evidence of foreign interference in elections, with particularly startling reports that both during the last US presidential election and the United Kingdom's (UK's) Brexit vote may have been influenced by fake news originating from sources outside both those countries. For most Singaporeans, these threats are not foremost on their mind, probably the same way none of our forefathers could have imagined how the world may have changed 100 years ago. Yet, I think it will be important for us to imagine these scenarios and to be able to deal with them, both as a Government and as a people. Without security and preparation for the threats of the future, all our prosperity may end up being meaningless. I am grateful this Budget has provided well for our security needs and I look forward to addressing these matters in more detail during the Committee of Supply (COS).”
“One wrong move and damage on an unprecedented scale could be unleashed. Militarised non-state actors are also becoming an increasing threat. The threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is pervasive, not just in the Middle East where it holds territory, but also in our part of the world where it has terror cells and, most worryingly, online. Many countries, including Singapore, has self-radicalised individuals who may plan or take part in terror activities. The events that have taken place over the past few nights between Pakistan and India – two nuclear powers – show how these dangerous trends may collide. The sequence started when an Indian military base was subject to attack from a terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed operating from within Pakistan and 40 people were killed. India retaliated by carrying out a bombing operation in Pakistan which it claimed was targeted at a Jaish-e-Mohammed training camp. Pakistan denied there was any training camp operating there and has since retaliated. There have been firefights in Kashmir and Indian aeroplanes have also been attacked, with one Indian Air Force (IAF) pilot allegedly captured. Matters are clearly escalating quickly. And this is particularly worrying because both are nuclear powers and the consequence of any miscalculation would be dire. Closer to home, I am grateful that matters seemed to have cooled down with Malaysia. And I think this has been, thanks to the hard work of our leadership team at multiple levels, including the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Transport and Defence.”
“As one of the last speakers in this debate, I would like to emphasise that I think it is important for us to remain committed to our security needs and to anticipate and deal with the new threats we face. Multilateralism is under unprecedented challenge and nationalism is on the rise. In the post-World War II era, institutions, such as the United Nations (UN), the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and, subsequently, the World Trade Organization, were set up to facilitate multilateral cooperation on the most important matters for countries, namely, security, trade and financial systems. Regional alliances for security and trade continued to develop during this period and Singapore is involved in many of these alliances. These provided important opportunities for Singaporeans and Singapore businesses to thrive. However, in recent years, multilateralism is starting to lose its support amongst the developed world who set up these institutions. The United States (US) has pulled back from multilateral treaties, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and is cutting back on its financial support for the UN. The European Union (EU) is under threat with Brexit, and the pro-Europe leaders, such as Chancellor Merkel and President Macron, are facing unprecedented threats at home. A corollary of this is rising nationalism, and nationalist parties are getting increasingly popular. In the absence of a strong multilateral threat against the use of force, countries may be more inclined to take unilateral action against one another or against non-state actors in another state’s territory, which is a tinderbox. This is particularly dangerous as more and more nations militarise and even develop nuclear capabilities.”
“The atrocities that followed in the Japanese Occupation left an indelible mark on that generation on what it feels like to be helpless in the face of aggression and our Pioneer Generation (PG) recognised that security was a prerequisite for prosperity and acted accordingly. Today, Singapore is more prosperous than many of our forefathers would have dared imagine. We have a gross domestic product (GDP) per capita that is higher than most developed countries, including the old colonial powers, and our people are well-educated and enjoy amongst the longest life expectancies in the world. Singaporeans have high expectations, of course, but happily, we have a leadership that is ever ready to try and meet this challenge. In this year’s Budget, the Minister identified three megatrends that would shape the coming decade, namely, a shift in global economic weight to Asia, the emergence of new technologies and an ageing population in Singapore. These are important trends that provide both challenges and opportunities, and this year’s Budget is carefully considered to meet the challenges posed by these trends. In particular, this Budget focuses on helping people and businesses in a wide variety of targeted areas to better equip our workers and the population for the challenges ahead. For most Singaporeans, the bread-and-butter economic issues remain of primary importance and this Budget addresses them creatively and effectively. I am also grateful that this Budget provides generously for our security and defence needs, though this has received less attention in the course of the debate the last two days.”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Budget. This year, we celebrate our Bicentennial, 200 years from the arrival of Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles, and rather fittingly, the Budget has made provision for this important milestone. Let me start with a snapshot of how the world may have looked from Singapore midway during this period in the 1920s and 1930s. At the time, the British were probably the most powerful nation in the world, overseeing an empire stretching from North America to Australia, covering vast portions in Asia and Africa. The British Empire, at its peak, held sway over 23% of the world’s population and covered 24% of the Earth's total land area. It was called the empire on which the sun never set because the sun would literally be shining on some part of the British Empire at any given point in time. Singapore was part of an immense global empire and was a hub for merchants, traders and workers from around the region to make a home. It was around this time that many immigrants came here, including the Chinese, Indians and Malays from other parts of the archipelago. Many of the founding fathers of independent Singapore were born during this period, including Mr Lee Kuan Yew, as were my grandparents. Singapore was the impregnable fortress of the British Empire in the east. At this time, it would have been unthinkable that the British Empire might end, or that anything might happen to Singapore. Of course, the fall of Singapore in 1942 changed just about every assumption that the people of that era held about the British Empire.”
“A few questions on this topic. First of all, ASEAN is a group that works by consensus. So, is there division amongst ASEAN members on this matter? Second, related to that, does division on this matter prevent us reaching agreement on other points which are more important? And, if so, is this a matter that should rightly be because ASEAN Ministers spend a lot of time on it and if it sours relationships and prevents ASEAN moving on other matters where agreement can be reached?”
“I thank the Minister. As a serving NSman, I think incidents like this move us very strongly because we know it could be us or any other people serving with us. In relation to this, I have two questions. In any organisation like the army, we know the work we do is inherently risky and, if any human error is made, incidents can happen. Are there any other models of other armies, for example, where they have been able to achieve zero training deaths? I think the Minister mentioned as Minister for Manpower, he looked at other countries. Are there any armies we can learn from? That is the first question. The second question is: if this incident is the result of, say, human error rather than systemic lapses, is there a need to halt training across the whole system? My concern, of course, is the message we may send to other parties who would be looking at us to see whether the Singapore army is able to deal with adversity. Most serving NSmen I have spoken to remain ready to serve and ready to go forward.”
“I thank the Ministers for the comprehensive replies and the report which has been a very good learning experience for all of us. But the one elephant in the room, of course, is the decision that was made not to name the perpetrator. I have two questions related to this. First of all, what actions, if any, can be taken against the perpetrators of such attacks? And if the answer to this is "none at the moment", can we change our domestic laws at least, so that if any of these perpetrators are within our jurisdiction, we can take action against them?”
“Minister, I applaud Singapore's approach in taking a calm, sensible approach to the problems. But one of the things that causes me great concern is that there definitely have been very constructive sounds coming out of MFA, and after the meeting on 8 January 2019 with Minister Saifuddin, there was a commitment to de-escalate. Yet, less than two days after that, five vessels came into our waters. Shortly after that, the Johor Mentri Besar came in. So, it may well be that the Minister's counterparts are sincere, but does that reflect the entire Malaysian government? If they are not able to properly control or represent the rest of the Malaysian government, what can Singapore do in the event we get further intrusions into our waters or airspace? Obviously, one option is bilateral discussions, which we are doing. But if one side is being sincere, and the other side is not, or is not able to follow through with actions, what can we do? I would be grateful for the Minister's thoughts.”
“I thank the Minister for the comprehensive view of MFA's work. It is important for us to stand up for multilateralism at a time when nationalism is on the rise everywhere. The question I have relates to some of the issues that arose from the SingHealth enquiry. Do we still have to worry about foreign interference in our local politics? And if so, what could be the best steps our people could take to prepare to deal with that?”
“I thank the Minister for sharing the Committee of Inquiry's Report. I think the next steps are all quite logical. But one of the things that struck me – this was a trainee who, for all intents and purposes, appeared healthy to everyone, even completed the exercise and then passed out after that. There are many situations where tough training pushes people to the limits. So, are there any thoughts about looking at exercise-specific instructions? For example, if you are doing, say, trench-digging, where you would not sleep for a number of nights, you might be a little bit tired; you might be a little bit disoriented. But does that require the same procedures – what is normal, what is not? And maybe something more attuned to specific exercises, particularly those that are higher, I guess, that test people more, may be useful as well because it will probably be different in different exercises.”
“I believe Minister Iswaran mentioned that this has many analogies to a terror attack. And certainly, in dealing with the terrorists, the Government does have powers, for example, under the Internal Security Act, to investigate and detain without evidence that would stand up in a Court of law. And the national security reason is why you would not want to put it in the Court of law. Does the Minister think we need similar frameworks to deal with cyber threats?”
“I thank the Minister for the clarification. I just wanted to clarify two further points. First, I understand that Ben Davis was called up to play for Singapore but he was never capped, which meant he was never fielded for Singapore. But is it correct that all those who, in fact, played for Singapore have found a way to do their National Service duties alongside representing the country? That is the first question. Second, even where national athletes are deferred, is it always pegged to representing the country at a specific game, for example, rather than just open-ended?”
“Mr Speaker, I thank both Ministers for their Statements. I think this shows the seriousness of the matter that the Ministers themselves take every death seriously. As a serviceman myself, I think tough training is absolutely important. One of the things that I think was a little bit troubling and which came out in social media as well, both in relation to CFC Dave Lee as well as to CPL Kok was the allegation of abuse, abuse of power. I think both Ministers are clear that this should not happen. My suggestion would be that National Servicemen be given an opportunity, perhaps a whistleblower's channel, somewhere outside the respective units perhaps directly to the Ministry, in the event there is such abuse or fear of such abuse, especially if the fear is that the unit's culture encourages that, in which case they would be afraid of reporting within the unit. That is one suggestion.”
“Even as countries appear to lean away from multi-nationalism, I think it is the strong standing of our leaders and the reputation of Singapore, the diligence of the many people in our Foreign Service and our trade representatives who have helped us get a listening ear from the senior leaderships in other countries. I think it is important for us to continue to build these relationships and for the next generation to also continue to nurture them. Our position as ASEAN Chair in the coming two years is a golden opportunity. If ASEAN countries can come together more strongly, this may set a positive example for other regions. I understand that our objectives include committing to a rules-based regional order and to tackle issues, such as cybersecurity, transnational crime and terrorism. If we can get important achievements in these, it will be a signal to the rest of the world that multilateralism is still relevant and still important. If we can get further economic integration, that will also be an important achievement. I think the best way to sell the message that multilateralism is still an important part of our world is to show that we can thrive through multilateralism. Even as Singapore's 4G leadership comes to the fore, I certainly hope that the previous generation of leaders will stay around to nurture relationships and to help guide and lend a helping hand, where possible, because human relationships are very important. If someone else comes on board, I think it will be necessary for them to learn as well. So, in the face of countries getting increasingly more insular, I certainly hope that Singapore and Singapore's leaders will continue to prevail as a voice for multilateralism and integration in this world.”
“I am sure, if it had, she would have highlighted this as an important development as well, given that our relationship with Malaysia is one of our most important bilateral relationships. My heartiest congratulations to Prime Minister Mahathir, who has prevailed against all odds and is set to be Prime Minister again. Singapore is a small country with no control over what happens in other countries and changes in other countries take place at paces that they dictate. While other countries may change their minds on how far they wish to engage, I think Singapore still needs to find a way to stay relevant. In this regard, another thing that happened last week – which was a pleasant surprise to many of us and a huge honour for Singapore is that Singapore was picked as the venue for the historic meeting between President Trump and President Kim, a move that may spark a thaw in what is probably one of the last legacies of the Cold War. I think even as countries change and governments' outlooks in the world change, what has helped Singapore and certainly with the generations of leaders so far is a way to stay relevant in this ever-changing world. This is built largely on relationships that have been developed over the generations. In relation to Malaysia, I think Prime Minister Lee was one of the first to congratulate Prime Minister Mahathir on his appointment as Prime Minister. I think it was important to reiterate that many of the projects that have been developed are in both countries' interests to pursue. One of Singapore's greatest assets has been the strong standing of our leaders and the many relationships that have been built up over the years.”
“Together, these institutions have brought down trade barriers in many countries, including Singapore, which have benefited and grown. These institutions were also complemented by regional organisations that are focused on bringing down internal barriers and facilitating trade. The bigger alliances included ASEAN in our region, the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in America, and, the most comprehensive integration, which was the European Union (EU). The President's Address highlighted important events that seemed to suggest a global shift from this trend and I will elaborate on some of these. The US was once a champion of free trade but, following the last election, has started pulling back from some of these treaties, including the TPP and now the Iran Nuclear Deal, and even NAFTA appears to be under reconsideration. The EU had been considerably expanding both its membership and its areas of coverage, but Brexit – or the British voting to leave EU has marked an important swing away from this trend. This is unprecedented in EU history and, although the EU looks like it will survive Brexit, it is clear that the concerns that triggered the British decision to leave were also resonating in other parts of Europe. I expect these challenges will continue. Even as developed countries appear to be becoming more inward-looking, China has taken a different approach. It has reiterated its intentions to become a world player. Its Belt and Road initiatives are being rolled out, providing large amounts of capital to developing countries, both near and far. At the time of the President's Address, the Malaysian elections had not yet taken place.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion of Thanks. While Singapore faces many challenges in the coming years, it is good to see a clear identification of the issues we need to address and the road map for dealing with these challenges. And notwithstanding these challenges, I am also heartened that there is still an important part of Singapore's plans to secure a place for ourselves in the world. Singapore's success in the previous decade has been built upon being an open economy and staying relevant in an ever-changing world. Almost immediately after Independence, Singapore's economic plan was to engage with the world, to bring in investments, to be a platform for trading, and EDB and other institutions helped to build Singapore's economy. Singapore's security was also built having strong defence relationships with countries both near and far. These important relationships were developed because Singapore had an outward focus from the get-go. One of the growing trends that is of concern to us is growing insularity in many parts of the world. In Singapore's early years of Independence post-World War II, the global architecture was being set up. The Bretton Woods institutions, including the World Bank and the IMF had been set up in the 1940s, a few decades before our Independence. And the trend was very much to support investment and growth in the developing world. At that time, the western powers had realised that it was necessary for the whole world to prosper in order to ensure that peace would continue. In parallel with the Bretton Woods institutions, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) oversaw the liberalisation of world trade and this Agreement eventually developed into the World Trade Organization.”
“Are there any safeguards in place for defendants to filter out unmeritorious prosecutions at an early stage, rather than only after an extensive hearing?”
“Earlier, Members, including Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan, have mentioned, that the Kho Jabing case sets out these considerations in some detail. My own reading is that the current amendments are really codifications of what was set out by the Court of Appeal. This is important because it prevents abuse and makes it very clear that, in fact, appeals are exceptional. However, there is one clarification I would like to make on this. Most key amendments appear to be what are the positions taken by the Court of Appeal already, save for one, and that is the limiting of re-opening to a single application. What is the reason for this one-bite rule? And what happens, for example, if important new evidence becomes uncovered after this one additional chance is exhausted? Finally, I would just make a few comments on the abolition of committal hearings. As the Senior Minister of State mentioned in her opening speech, this is a process that has been there for most criminal hearings where the prosecution has to set out that it has enough evidence to make its claim. This is generally a mechanism for the defendant to get out of having to go through a long protracted criminal process if they can establish upfront that the prosecution does not have much of a claim. I understand, as some of the Members who spoke earlier have highlighted as well, that, in Singapore, the prosecution generally tends to be quite prudent in bringing forward actions and generally tends to get past this threshold without much difficulty. This process tends to be just one that is an unnecessary process at the moment. Removing this makes the process more efficient. But notwithstanding the care which prosecutions are commenced, I would like to seek the Minister's assurance on one matter.”
“So, if you just wanted the DPA as a sweet-heart deal, then that is not going to happen because there will be conditions set for this. One risk that such agreements have is that they may be perceived as letting companies off the hook easily and this may create outrage, especially if some egregious corporate wrong takes place and the company is not punished because of the DPA. My own views would be that it would be important that, even if the DPA is in place but some serious wrongdoing has been done, some wrongdoers, preferably the key mastermind behind the wrongdoing, would be taken to task for this. On the whole, the DPA is an interesting tool to give to the prosecution and this should enable them to deal particularly with corporate crimes. I would like to clarify one point. There is no requirement for the Court to give reasons for approving the DPA. In England, Courts are required to give reasons. Would the Senior Minister of State explain why Singapore has deviated from the English practice in this regard? The third aspect – and this has been touched on by other Members earlier – it is the measures to prevent abuse of Court processes, particularly in relation to appeals. In relation to appeals, there are two competing addresses. On the one hand, we want finality of the process. So, if a hearing has taken place and the Court has pronounced on it, the number of times you can re-open the case should be limited. The countervailing consideration is, if important or material evidence comes up, say, after the conclusion of a hearing and, in criminal cases where this can have life or death affecting some cases, it will be important for a Court to be able to consider that.”
“So, it is important for us to make sure that victims are not afraid to come forward. The second aspect that I would like to talk about is DPAs. DPAs are a work-in-progress in Singapore and it is interesting to add to the criminal process. DPAs are essentially agreements, I anticipate, most likely, with companies, to allow them to get an agreement not to be prosecuted now but to defer that if they cooperate. The logic of the details is quite simple and I think the commercial incentives it intends to promote is this: it is basically to support and encourage whistle-blowing. So, if a new management, for example, comes and takes over a company, it has two options. The first option is to blow the whistle and expose the wrongdoing but, if they do that, there is a chance that the authorities may then prosecute the company. The second option, of course, is to keep quiet and do nothing but that, of course, means the wrong may not go unpunished and that undermines the criminal process. With the DPAs, this actually creates an interesting option for new management that comes in, because, in a sense, they are starting with a clean slate. They have the option to report the crime and discuss with the prosecution and try and get an agreement of this sort in place and exchange for cooperation in order to report on wrongdoings that had taken place before they had come. So, this, in a way, allows prosecution against the company to be deferred but, at the same time, for the wrongdoing to be investigated and for the wrongdoers to be taken to task. This, I think, will be a powerful deterrent for potential wrongdoers. The requirement for Court approval and publication of the delay also keeps the process transparent.”
“This includes allowing the victim to provide evidence by video although I think the details on how the adversarial system would preserve in this context are not yet available. There are also measures − interesting measures − to prevent the victim from seeing the accused in Court, including the provision of a screen, but this does not necessarily mean that the accused will not be able to instruct his lawyers. So, again, it is to protect the victim. There are also procedures to hold part of the hearing in-camera, meaning out of the public eye, but not necessarily out of scrutiny of the adversarial process. So, I think there are well thought-through changes that will take away a lot of the stress the victim faces while, at the same time, giving the accused the opportunities he would need to challenge the evidence, as necessary, because, as some other Members have mentioned earlier, it is important that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. But one must not underestimate the stress that victims face and I think there is a much broader societal cost to this as well. One of the things that surprised many people, certainly myself, was the #me-too movement which came to life after the allegations against Harvey Weinstein. And what was surprising was the number of prominent individuals who came forward to say they were victims of sexual abuse, but who had never themselves decided to make complaints prior to this or put themselves through the process. An even scarier case is that of Larry Nassar, the coach in the US who has been convicted of molesting young student gymnasts. So, this is really scary because these are conduct that could have gone unpunished and even unreported for years because victims were afraid to come forward.”
“Mr Speaker, I declare my interest as a dispute resolution lawyer who sometimes advises on criminal matters. This Bill makes important and wide-ranging changes in criminal procedure, which will enhance the administration of justice in a variety of ways: first, it provides greater transparency in the investigative and evidence-gathering process; second, it provides better protection for victims of crimes; third, it provides more incentives for whistle-blowers to come forward; and fourth, it makes important improvements in the process before the Courts. I will touch on a few areas. The first is the protection for victims or complainants in sexual and child abuse offences. The past few weeks, we have seen newspaper reports of serious sexual offences being committed against young people and even some shocking ones against older people. A common trend in many of these cases is that the victims are afraid of reporting the offence for a variety of reasons. These include the stigma of being the victim of sexual abuse, the fear of both the perpetrator as well as the potential stress of going through the legal process and potentially having to relive the process once again in Court as the victim’s evidence gets challenged in the adversarial process. As Court lawyers, we all know that a defence lawyer's job is to discredit the victims, so this creates a natural tension. Some of these fears, the law cannot fully remove. But what we can do is to take what steps we can to reduce that fear. And a number of the important amendments in this Act include the amendments to make the Court process less intimidating for the victim, though, hopefully, not compromising the opportunity for the accused to challenge their evidence.”
“This is also picking on the healthier choice point. Any progress we make towards encouraging people to take healthier choice is good. But I would like to make two suggestions. The first suggestion is that we move from just healthier choice to actually healthy choice, because some things that are labelled "healthier choice" may not, in fact, be healthy. In fact, I understand Milo is considered "healthier choice", but people may be misled into thinking that means it is healthy. Likewise, many breakfast cereals which have lots of sugar are also labelled as "healthier choice" even though that just means they are healthier than something else, but they are not healthier than, say, bread, even white bread. So, I think it may be good to have absolute standards. And the second suggestion is: whether we want to take this even further and encourage or require companies to label sugar content in full, given if that is what the main focus is.”
“Chairman, let me pick up on PSB programming. The PSB contestable funds scheme has been very important in developing quality local content across different languages – English, Malay, Tamil or Mandarin. Shows that may not have been otherwise economically viable have been developed in Singapore and much appreciated by our own audience. Many of these PSB programmes have been part of our television and have developed a very strong audience. While television remains a dominant medium, changing media consumption patterns have many viewers going online. I must confess that I watch most of my own local programmes on Toggle. Besides free-to-air TV, what other platforms is the Government working with to extend the reach of PSB programmes to engage Singaporeans?”
“Chairman, the future is in digitalisation, as many of my colleagues have been pointing out. The Government is taking the lead in going digital and, thanks to the efforts of the Government Technology Agency (GovTech), more and more Government functions are going online and getting tailored to our needs, making it easier and easier for us to use. Everything, from tax returns to customs clearance, is amongst the easiest and most user-friendly in the world. The Government is also providing extensive encouragement and support for SMEs to digitalise. It is likely that more and more will do so, both to provide better services for consumers and also to improve productivity for the shrinking workforce. However, the reality of digitalisation is that not everyone will be comfortable with the changes or able to adapt. Many of us here may have already gone to the trouble of forgetting passwords and having 40 to 50 to remember. But these problems are minor, compared to those who may not have education, English in particular, and those who may not even be able to work on a computer. There are many, particularly the older and less educated, who have difficulty accessing some digital services. Singapore has one of the highest mobile and Internet penetration rates. However, while the penetration is high, it is still not complete and there are many who are impecunious who do not have Internet access or mobile phones maybe because they have not paid their bills. So, this, too, may impede some of their access to mobile services. How can we ensure that Singaporeans of all ages and backgrounds are not left behind as the economy digitalises? Preparing the Elderly for Digital TV”
“I would like to thank Minister Ng Eng Hen for sharing a compelling view on our defence and the importance of it remaining sustainable, and comforting us that it will be sustainable for the upcoming years, Minister Ong for sharing with us on NS and the important evolutions taking place, and Senior Minister of State Mohamad Maliki for sharing with us on psychological defence. And, of course, to all the people in MINDEF, SAF and all our servicemen. Thank you very much. I seek leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $14,238,100,500 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $761,000,000 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“This clarification is in relation to the unconventional threats. I think Senior Minister of State Mohamad Maliki painted quite a graphic picture of the threats these provide. My concern was whether we should be doing more. First of all, in relation to the video on terrorism, for 99% of people, they will be disgusted by that video. But there might be a very tiny percentage, 0.001%, and perhaps a lone wolf who would be inspired by it to commit acts of violence. Notwithstanding how strong our psychological defence is, all it takes is one person to get influenced by it to carry out the terror attack. The countervailing risk, of course, is that other people may generalise and say, "This is what Muslims do" which, I think in Singapore, that is not a big issue. But it could be, if our psychological defence is not strong. There is actually very strong reason to identify and take steps to weed out such videos either by, first of all, finding out the source; and secondly, potentially, to take legal action against the people who put up and circulate this. Secondly, in relation to fake news, I think the example of halal pork was also again very compelling. It surfaced in 2007. Obviously, it is divisive because it suggests NTUC trying to sell pork to Muslims. It was untrue. NTUC clarified. But then it surfaced again six or seven years later. But this shows the power of fake news. Fake news is sensational, therefore, it gets circulated. The truth is rather boring. It does not get circulated. So, the truth is almost always triumphed by fake news. Could we take further steps to identify the creators of these fake news and take other actions against them? Psychological defence is resistance. But if we can eliminate the virus, that is even better.”
“The most shocking of the recent allegations, in fact, occurred in the greatest power, the US, where allegations are being made in some quarters in the US that there was Russian interference in their elections. It is already common ground that there was a great deal of fake news being circulated in the last US elections, with candidates on both sides being victims of fake news stories. Is MINDEF concerned about this threat of fake news for our defence, particularly where it comes from state actors? If so, what steps does MINDEF intend to take to combat threats from fake news? SAF Volunteer Corps”
“Chairman, the world today is increasingly interconnected. The Business Times reported that 70% of Singaporeans are active social media users on the go, more than double the global average. This means that Singaporeans are also more easily exposed to false news and pressures found online, which could tear our social fabric. The threat of fake news is pervasive and insidious. On social media, articles and stories usually go viral and get circulated because they are sensational or they corroborate one's own beliefs and views. However, it is not always possible to verify the truth of stories being circulated. This makes it fertile grounds for the spreading of fake news. To make matters worse, fake news is also usually profitable. Revenues generated online are usually correlated to eyeballs and circulation, not the truth or quality of the stories involved. One just needs to share sensational stories without having to pay journalists to actually investigate and report the truth. Thus, in an environment where purveyors can make profits by keeping costs low and getting wide circulation, traditional media companies that do real investigation and report real news, which is usually less sensational, are suffering, with readerships dropping for traditional news providers. This is a double whammy because it means that fake news ends up circulating, while real news requires paid subscriptions, is suffering and struggles to counteract the fake news. An even more worrying development is the allegation that state actors may also be involved in using fake news to influence the politics of other countries. Our Foreign Minister had very kindly confirmed that this was the case in Singapore as well, but he was probably too diplomatic to name the state actors involved.”
“Defence expenditure has also been rising in the region in the face of growing security concerns, meaning all our regional neighbours are also building up their armed forces. As forecasted in the Budget Debate earlier, we will be moving into a period when our population will be ageing and our needs for social spending will be rising at the same time. Some have suggested, happily, not inside this House, cutting the defence Budget, a move that I would find worrying, given that security and defence are existential for us. What are Singapore's security plans in the face of the threats we face, and is our defence spending going to be adequate and sustainable in the face of these threats? Peacekeeping”
“Although our defence force remains strong and credible and our defence alliances strong, the security environment remains fraught with risks and uncertainties. As we had discussed in the earlier debate on foreign affairs, these threats are wide ranging and serious. The threat of terrorism continues to spread with growing incidents of radicalised individuals and fighters returning from the Middle East to the region. Attacks have taken place in major European cities but, closer to home, in Indonesia as well. The Korean Peninsula saw aggressive nuclear testing by North Korea barely a few months ago, and while ties remain warmer now, the nuclear risk remains. Matters in the South China Sea have also calmed down a little, but there is no clear resolution in sight for the differences here, though, hopefully, parties can agree upon a code of conduct. And today, security threats are increasingly taking on new forms, including self-radicalised terrorism and cybersecurity. These are complex and unpredictable, and take place below the threshold of war, and we may have to invest adequately to deal with such emergent threats. While these threats linger, they take place against a backdrop of a risk that the US may reduce its role in the region. So, it is clear that we must continue to invest in defence. Our Pioneer Generation had the foresight to invest in defence, and the "peace dividend" we have enjoyed over the last 50 years is the backdrop which has allowed Singapore to grow and thrive. Today, we are one of the wealthiest countries in the world. 10.15 am Given our small size and the existential need for defence, defence spending has been a significant part of our Budget.”
“Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head J of the Estimates be reduced by $100". Singapore's need to develop its own defence capabilities came almost as suddenly as our Independence. Shortly after our Independence, the British forces who had been stationed here announced they would be pulling out ahead of schedule and Singapore would be responsible for its own defence thereafter. This precipitated the start of National Service in 1967 and the focused development of Singapore’s armed forces. As a small country, security is always a challenge. If it comes to a war, it is generally assumed that a big, well-resourced country will prevail over a small one. Unlike our neighbours who had larger populations, larger land mass and natural resources, when Singapore gained Independence, we were poor, had many pressing needs and competing challenges. But the Government of the day knew that from the day we started, we needed a strong defence force and that there would be no economic future, no security without one. Thus, they invested in defence even though it was difficult. The building of a strong defence force was also coupled with the building of strong defence ties and the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA) with Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom (UK) in 1971 was one of the earliest defence arrangements we entered into. This has been built on later with further important defence and training arrangements, including with other regional countries and big powers. These alliances have been built in the mutual best interest of all involved and Singapore needs to be a strong and valued partner in order for other countries to want to form alliances with us.”
“I would like to record my thanks to the Minister, the Senior Minister of State, Minister of State and, of course, all the MFA staff carrying our flag in many, many countries around the world. Thank you for doing us proud. I seek leave to withdraw my amendment, Mr Chairman. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $476,502,000 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $26,000,000 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“I would like to thank all the officeholders for a relatively positive update, with good relationships everywhere. But let me just focus on one point that the Minister flagged out. And that was the threat of fake news. Is there any concern that the Minister has about fake news, say, from foreign state actors or players that we may have to be concerned about?”
“Our aim is to connect people and economies seamlessly across the region. It is also critical to lead the way in keeping the economic integration vibrant and the region competitive. The Minister for Foreign Affairs said, "We gain more by working together". Several initiatives are in the framework and I would like to highlight three. One, the formation of a network of ASEAN Smart Cities. Here, boosting cybersecurity is also in the pipeline and on the agenda. Secondly, a model ASEAN Extradition Treaty; and thirdly, an ASEAN-wide self-certification regime, where ASEAN citizens will be considered for preferential treatment. Can we have details, sustainable goals as well as timelines for some of these proposed initiatives and what are some of the challenges we can expect to face? Also, knowing that ASEAN comprises nations in various stages of development, modernisation and urbanisation, the harmonisation and alignment, as well as contributions, will have differences and will surface discrepancies. How is Singapore planning to handle these?”
“Sir, ASEAN originally started with a small group of non-Communist Southeast Asian countries. At that time, during the Cold War, ASEAN was an important alliance where countries were largely aligned on political matters and sought to foster cooperation and economic growth together. When the Cold War ended, ASEAN grew and welcomed more countries into the alliance, focused on economic growth and cooperation. This was the era that Francis Fukuyama described as being the "End of History", by which he meant the end of historic contests of ideologies. In recent years, though, ASEAN's plans have grown and there have been plans for greater economic integration, including a common market for goods and services. At the same time, differences have emerged among members on certain issues, such as the South China Sea, making it difficult for them to reach consensus. In 2018, Singapore will take the reins of the ASEAN Chairmanship. This is an important opportunity for Singapore to exercise leadership and contribute to ASEAN's role in the region. What are our priorities for our year as Chairman? To maintain ASEAN’s relevance and value, it will be important that we continue to strengthen the economic integration to tap the potential of a market of over 600 million people with a rapidly growing middle class. What can ASEAN do to remain forward-looking to chart a better future for the region? Finally, I have highlighted some of the challenges and I am sure my friends will highlight more later. What will ASEAN do to get through both its internal and external challenges, and what can we, as Chair of ASEAN, do to help foster consensus on these difficult issues? Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Sir, Singapore is chairing ASEAN this year.”
“Regional Architecture Singapore has traditionally been an important participant in regional agreements and partnerships. These include both formal frameworks, such as the founding of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and their other related work as well as dialogues to bring together important partners. Our Shangri-La Dialogue for Defence is one good example of this. Recently, there have been media reports on the revival of the "Quadrilateral Security Dialogue" among the US, Japan, India and Australia to deepen security cooperation and to coordinate alternatives for regional integration. These four countries are good friends of ours and have a shared commitment to the existing "rules-based order" as a key mechanism for protecting and projecting their own principal security and economic interests. It seems like it would be helpful for Singapore and, potentially ASEAN, to engage and support such initiatives. What is MFA's view of how Singapore and ASEAN will be affected by such regional initiatives? [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Shift in Global Economic Weight”
“Around the world, other national and international challenges abound. Countries are grappling with transnational terrorism, sluggish economies and structural challenges of demographics and integration, and the worrying trend of growing nationalist sentiment. These issues are often interrelated. The growing threat of terrorism has been spurred by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which has been fighting primarily in Iraq and Syria. They have mastered the art of using social media to radicalise individuals. The wars themselves have caused record numbers of refugees to flow outwards, including to places like Europe. This, in turn, has led the local politics in these countries to become increasingly nationalistic and unfriendly to immigrants and refugees, often characterising them not only as economic threats but also as potential breeding grounds for terrorists. This has led to the growth and popularity of far-right movements in many developed countries. Another hallmark of our times is the development and democratisation of technology that would have been unthinkable just a few decades ago. Anyone and everyone can publish information online. At the same time, individuals, companies and governments have almost all their private information in digital form, making it potentially easy to access such information, both legally and illegally, by hacking and gaining access to existing databases. We are not yet fully cognisant of the effects that technologies, such as digital media, will have on us and our societies. What does MFA see as the major challenges facing Singapore? How can Singapore continue to navigate and protect our interests in an increasingly complex and uncertain geopolitical environment?”
“Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head N of the Estimates be reduced by $100." As in previous years, I would like to kick off the debate with a broad overview of developments in international affairs and ask the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) for its views on their potential implications for Singapore. In 2017, the geopolitical landscape continued to evolve rapidly. China’s strategic and economic clout remains on an upward trend. Members would have noted China playing a more active and assertive role in global affairs in recent years. The Belt and Road (B&R) initiative continues to play a growing role in regional and global development, supporting infrastructure investments and big projects. China is clearly becoming an outward-looking global power, ready to play a bigger role in the world and many countries hungry for investments appreciate this. At the same time, observers have juxtaposed China's rising prominence on the international stage against perceptions of the declining United States (US) influence in the region. The US' decisions to pull out of key multilateral deals, like the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), also support this concern that the US is becoming more inward-looking and less interested in taking the lead on global issues. Closer to home, unresolved tensions persist on the Korean Peninsula. Barely a few months ago, the North was escalating its nuclear testing and boasting that it was getting close to having a nuclear weapon and intercontinental ballistic capabilities. It appears that the two Koreas are trying to ease tensions at the moment, which is to be welcomed, but the underlying issue of nuclearisation of North Korea remains.”