Vivian Balakrishnan
Singapore
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not issue advisories on wait times at overseas airports. Travellers may wish to monitor airline and airport websites, as well as news reports for real-time information on wait times and potential disruptions at specific airports.”
“When the conflict in the Middle East deteriorated and commercial flights were halted in March 2026, the Singapore Government mounted four repatriation flights from Muscat, Riyadh and Jeddah to bring stranded Singaporeans home.”
“The Government has stepped up public engagement to explain our foreign policy fundamentals and responses to key international developments to Singaporeans and to hear their views. We do this through dialogue sessions across segments of society, including students, youths, businesses and community leaders.”
“And the larger point during the Committee of Supply was that precisely, because the world is in such a difficult, prickly, volatile and dangerous state, actually, if we keep our wits about ourselves, we maintain unity and we continue to have this clear eye-realistic, but principled, approach, there are many opportunities for Singapore.”
“Well, in short, I completely agree with you. And that is why we have indeed been hosting these events and in your own capacity as a national athlete and also as an official now, you have seen how it works in practice.”
“Since 2022, about half of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) employees are women. The proportion of women in senior appointments has remained stable at about a quarter. We recognise that overseas postings are disruptive for officers with families, especially female officers who bear greater caregiving responsibilities.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,437 lines we hold for Vivian Balakrishnan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 27 of 49.
“Page: 901 Even as we take a tough stance against irresponsible high-rise litterers, we must continue to work with partners like the Town Councils and the Singapore Kindness Movement to promote good neighbourliness, responsible behaviour and social graciousness in our schools and our community. We should not let up on efforts to cultivate the right social values that will help us make this a clean and endearing home. Page: 901”
“High-rise littering is a threat to public safety, damages the environment and a nuisance to neighbours who have to cope with stains on clothes, windows and floors. Common items thrown include cigarette butts, food waste and tissue paper. NEA has received an increasing number of feedback cases over high-rise littering – from 2,499 in 2008, to 5,700 feedback cases as at end-September 2012. To counter this trend, NEA has in the last month installed surveillance cameras in HDB blocks where residents have been faced with persistent high-rise littering incidents. To date, NEA has installed surveillance cameras at 70 locations in 17 HDB estates, such as Pasir Ris, Punggol, Bukit Merah and Boon Lay. These cameras have enabled NEA to identify and initiate action against two offenders so far. If convicted, high-rise litterers can be fined a maximum of $1,000 and/or be issued a Corrective Work Order (CWO) not exceeding 12 hours. NEA's observation is that the high-rise littering situation has improved in areas where the cameras have been deployed. Surveillance cameras are deployed only as a last resort if education and community outreach efforts fail to address the problem. We are mindful of residents' privacy and have put in place the following measures: (a) The surveillance cameras are focused only on the external facade of the suspects' housing units; (b) A general notice is issued beforehand to the residents of the affected block to inform them about the deployment of the cameras; and (c) Only authorised personnel have access to the recordings. There are strict protocols in place to govern the viewing and copying of the footage, and to ensure that the recordings are used only for enforcement against high-rise litterers.”
“Yes, thank you, Sir. I am about done. I am sure many more got away with it. That is why I am also asking for us to consider two things: one is to deputise senior members of non-government organisations, and maybe even for grassroots organisations, to act as enforcement officers, to have a warrant card and to be properly trained as the Member has mentioned. Also, unfortunately, I think it is time for us to review the fines and penalties regimes for littering. Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for the time. Let me once again reaffirm, on behalf of everyone here today, that we intend to keep Singapore clean and green, to be one of the best cities in the world, to be an accurate reflection of our values and of the type of society that we want to be. We will continue to need the support of all Singaporeans. We will have a zero-tolerance policy to litter, and we will review our approach to cleaning and to the penalties and enforcement actions for littering. I thank the hon Member. This has been a thoughtful and heartfelt motion. I look forward to continuing this journey with the support of Members of all parties in this House.”
“We have even created apps which will allow people to photograph and send notifications, for example areas with litter. The DPC then has to scramble to make sure a response team resolves it and uploads the picture that shows the problem has been resolved. Page: 898 Public education and community engagement are also part of the solution. We have in place an enforcement regime against littering offenders. Between 2011 and August 2012, we caught 17,627 people for littering.”
“It is called I Love my Singapore. Snap the good, the bad and the ugly. This is to encourage people to take photographs and nowadays everyone has camera in his phone. Take pictures of the good and the bad hygiene practices, upload it onto the Facebook page and then we will have an online voting contest for the "best" – I use the word best in inverted commas – photo. By encouraging everyone to participate in this, we actually achieve the point which Er Dr Lee mentioned. We need to tell everyone and especially the minority of us who are prone to litter that you will be seen. Someone, somewhere has seen you, snapped it and we will detect it. We also know that litter attracts more litter. This is almost like fertility. You have one clump of litter outside the lift lobby or the void deck. Miraculously, it reproduces itself. But again, you stop to think about it. Most people do not want to be the first person who drops that piece of litter at the lift lobby or the void deck. So, that is why it is very important that we make sure the environment is clean to begin with. That is why NEA, Town Councils and all the Government agencies still have to work very hard. We made an important step in April this year when we set up the Department of Public Cleanliness (DPC). The DPC will integrate the cleaning of all public areas including roads, pavements, drains, parks, vacant lands so that no public area will fall through the cracks. If anyone does detect any area which seems to have slipped through the cracks because of inter-agency coordination, please let me know. We have to make sure that we start with a clean slate. The DPC has also been paying close attention to public feedback.”
“Such programmes enable our young people to understand first-hand the challenges of cleaning. But I think more important than that, if you stop to realise that every single piece of litter that you picked up is because someone else just could not be bothered and dropped it. Except for leaves on the road, everything else is caused by your fellow men. The purpose of having a Know Cleaners Day – and Er Dr Lee mentioned she is leading one such effort in her own constituency – is that it, in fact, makes you appreciate how selfish a small minority of people in our community are, and how the rest of our community, directly or indirectly, are having to carry that burden. Page: 897 We also agree that it is about creating a social norm. You know in life, people do not just respond to carrots-and-sticks, penalties and fines. Many of our actions as human beings depend on impulse, habit or on peer pressure. Think about these things. Impulse – spur of the moment, just chuck it. Habit – I have always dumped tissue paper outside my flat, so I just carry on. Peer pressure – everyone else does it, so what is the big deal? So, you see, merely increasing fines by itself or having more advertisements on television will not be sufficient. And I totally agree with Er Dr Lee on that point. Just as we had previously organised the "Broomstick Brigades", we now work with the Members of Parliament, with the advisors, with the grassroots, the residents' committees, community leaders to remind everyone and to create peer pressure to maintain a clean environment. As Er Dr Lee graphically described – in fact we have more means today than ever before to identify, deter and, if it need be, to shame the recalcitrants amongst us. The Public Hygiene Council has an on-going competition.”
“If you look beyond their anger, in fact, it springs from a sense of wounded pride that their neighbourhood does not meet the standards which they hope for. So, as Members of Parliament, I think we have to recognise and accept that their anger, in fact, is righteous anger. And we need to respond appropriately. We launched the refreshed Keep Singapore Clean movement last month and I suggested that these future movements be led from the ground by the Public Hygiene Council, the Singapore Kindness Movement, the Keep Singapore Beautiful Movement. These movements were built up on past efforts of the NEA's litter-free ambassador programme and other campaigns like "Let's do the Right Thing, Bin It" campaign. The anti-littering mindset needs to be inculcated from a young age and we need to underline the importance of this programme by making sure we reach out to schools and to young people. Let me cite a good example. The Keep Singapore Beautiful Movement has developed a Know Cleaners Day – spelt K-N-O-W. It is a pun. "No" cleaners and "knowing" cleaners. Basically, the youths take on the role of cleaners in order to better understand the work and to appreciate the efforts put in by cleaners. In June this year, the youth became cleaners for a day in Tiong Bahru Food Centre. They encouraged their patrons to return their trays and to clear up after they finished their meals. The response was very positive and more than 200 members of the public returned their trays on that day. Whether we can maintain that is the big question. In July, the Movement partnered the ITE College East to organise a Know Cleaners Day where hundreds of students and staff took on the task of cleaning their own campus.”
“He said that everybody can learn and acquire the habit of treating common user areas as one's own home to be kept clean and maintained. These are words 44 years later but still relevant and we are still challenged by that. The Keep Singapore Clean message was broadcast through the mass media, stamped even on letters from the Government and statutory boards. At that time, the Government brought volunteers out onto the streets. They called them "Broomstick Brigades" to clean up the common areas of our constituencies. I can see from recent media reports that some residents have started to undertake their own cleaning brigades albeit only in the vicinity of their homes or outside their common corridors. We need to have more of such efforts. We need Members of Parliament to take the lead in this because we need to rediscover, reaffirm our civic values as individuals and as communities. We need to teach everyone that we have to pick up after ourselves, whether that means picking up rubbish within the home or outside in the common corridor or any neighbourhood. That is not something to be embarrassed about or to be ashamed of. That is a simple act of civic responsibility. Page: 896 Keeping Singapore Clean has become a well-known slogan. We even have a reputation for being a fine city. Some tourists still buy those T-shirts and we laugh about it. In fact, there is a serious point behind this. I am glad that, in fact, Singaporeans do take pride in the fact that we are a clean city and that we are a fine city. Even now, I receive – and I am sure many of you receive – many calls and e-mails from Singaporeans and especially from our constituents when the neighbourhood is littered. Some of them are very, very angry and get almost personal.”
“Quite frankly, Singapore today is a clean city, but is it a clean city, or a cleaned city because of our army of 70,000 cleaners? The National Environment Agency (NEA) has for many years – if you go to the website, you would see the tagline – been stating that "A clean city is a strong reflection of our moral and civic values". But clean cities do not just come about by chance. As citizens, we must individually and collectively take responsibility for the cleanliness of our homes and our neighbourhoods, because this is something intrinsic within us. It is a reflection of what we hold to be important in our lives. Er Dr Lee mentioned that one in five of our households today in Singapore have domestic help. I cannot help wondering how many of us – let us be equally honest – make sure that our children are taught to pick up after themselves. Or do we wittingly or unwittingly communicate that there is always going to be someone to clean after a Singaporean. Think about that. The NEA survey in 2010 found that 63% of Singaporeans would not litter but the troubling finding is that one-third of Singaporeans would litter if they think they could get away with it. We have to find a way to deal with this problem. In fact, it is a problem caused by a minority but the burden is borne by the majority of us who have to deal with a polluted, dirty and unhealthy environment and ultimately have to also bear the cost of imposing these burdens on to cleaners. Every single Member of Parliament is involved with a Town Council. We all know that this is a problem which we all carry. This cuts across party lines. Mr Lee Kuan Yew first launched the Keep Singapore Clean campaign in 1968.”
“Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank the hon Member for a quintessential Lee Bee Wah speech, brutally frank, but straight from the heart and from a good heart. I just want to make five points. First, I believe, as Singaporeans, we need to reaffirm our vision to ensure that Singapore remains one of the cleanest and greenest cities in the world. This is an ambition that we must maintain. Second, we must start with an honest appraisal of our values, our attitudes, our mindset, our behaviour and our sense of collective responsibilities. Third, I echo Er Dr Lee's point that this has to be an all-out effort by all segments of our society to prevent, to detect, to deter and to enforce against littering and to use the many new technologies which are available. Fourth, litter attracts litter. That means we have to make sure that we have a litter-free environment to start with. Fifth, that the time has come for us to review our penalties and fines, unfortunately, for this scourge. Let us start with the first point. A clean and green Singapore. This was the outcome of an ambitious vision by our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Singaporeans at that time believed in and supported this vision and over 44 years, as Er Dr Lee has mentioned, we transformed our city through meticulous cleaning, assiduous public campaigns, and strict enforcement. Page: 895 Today, a clean city is not unique. There are many clean cities in the world. But a clean city is a source of competitive advantage and it is a badge of honour. And I am sure that all Members would agree that this is something that Singapore cannot afford to backslide on. Having said that, let me also equally, honestly state that we can and must do much better.”
“Page: 822 I hope the Member appreciates that there is a limit to how much we can do but we will work with our partners in the region to maximise the pressures on these companies. Another thing which we can do is to also highlight positive examples. For instance, there are Singapore-based companies with operations in these regions. We need to approach them and say, "Well, are you willing to open up your operations and subject them to scrutiny and certification perhaps by a non-governmental organisation, who will vouch for your sustainable and responsible way of doing business?" That way, you start encouraging some who are already complying to do more, to do it better. And you will then put more pressure on those who are not yet willing to subject themselves to that level of scrutiny. I am afraid that there is no magic bullet to this problem. Page: 822”
“Sir, as I said earlier, there are several evidential difficulties with this. First, if you looked at the list of concessionaries, you would realise that there is a whole web of companies, shell companies, subsidiaries, joint ventures and a variety of business arrangements behind the clearing of land and the planting of oil palms. So, that is the first level. At the second level, in order to achieve prosecution in court, you need to have caught the person in the act. Circumstantial evidence, probability, may not be sufficient. The third difficulty is that these are local crimes and need to be prosecuted in local jurisdictions. In this case, the jurisdiction is that of Indonesia. We do not have extra-territorial jurisdiction as far as haze and environmental concerns go, at this point in time. Therefore, I do not want to jump the gun and I do not want to make promises or threats which we cannot fulfil. But I think we need to accumulate evidence and there needs to be transparency, public pressure and, ultimately, commercial pressure – meaning which products are bought or not bought, knowing the origins and how the products are made. This is an approach that has worked very well for the timber industry. In the case of the timber industry, with DNA analysis these days, they can analyse which forest the wood in this table came from. This has put the commercial loggers on notice that they have to embark on and pursue business in a sustainable and responsible way, otherwise, they face commercial sanctions. We have to explore using this approach to apply relevant, subtle, or maybe not so subtle, commercial pressure on these companies to clean up their act.”
“What we can do more of now is to introduce more transparency, list out who owns which pieces of land, list out the number of hotspots which are occurring in real time in those pieces of land, and then, after that, this requires the involvement of consumer groups, non-government organisations and international organisations who all have a stake in this value chain. I think that is the only effective way, because you can pass all the laws you like in the respective governments, but if you cannot enforce your laws and you cannot ensure that people comply with regulations and rules which are common sense, this problem will keep recurring. Page: 821 I just want to explain that there are limits to how much we can do from the point of view of the Government of Singapore. We will do our part to work with a larger network of stakeholders to try to mitigate this problem.”
“At the heart of this problem is not the environment. It is economics. It is far cheaper for these companies to pay someone a few dollars and for a jerry can of fuel to clear the forests. The only problem is these forests which are being cleared are on peatland, which has millions of years' worth of organic materials trapped in the soil. So, when you burn a forest on peatland, you also set alight organic carbon which has accumulated over millions of years. It is, therefore, extremely tragic that the widespread clearance of forests in Borneo and Sumatra for the sake of plantations has, in fact, led to far greater carbon released into the air than any potential savings from the use of bio-fuels or alternative uses of the agricultural products. Sir, I state this as a context so that Members understand that it is really economics which is driving this. Until and unless economic pressure is felt by the companies that are operating these, they will not change their behaviour. What we can do now with current technology, with the ready availability of satellite imagery and of real-time hot-spot monitoring and then persuading the Indonesian government to release and publish those concession maps, it now allows us to ask relevant questions to the relevant companies, "Why are there so many hotspots in your areas?" Of course, there will be times when this is purely the result of an act of nature. Beyond a certain point, we really have to make the point that this is a man-made disaster. And it is a man-made disaster that is occurring because of short-term gains and the greed on the part of operators on the ground; making the rest of us pay the price in health and in the environment, because of this greed and short-term actions.”
“While pre-warning systems and information sharing are useful, what Singaporeans are more concerned about is the haze problem that happens every time there is burning in Sumatra. The moment they burn, we will have to pray that the wind will blow it away, pray that there is more rain! With the recent increase in hotspots exceeding that of 2006, is there anything else that we can do to further reduce this?”
“Progress in the region's fight against this continued chronic problem requires strong commitment from all ASEAN countries, effective enforcement of laws on the ground, close and cooperative partnerships among the countries, and the support and the pressure that international and non-government organisations can bring to bear on the stakeholders. Page: 820 Going forward, our countries would need to scale up successful practices and projects where applicable. We will work with Malaysia and Indonesia on joint collaborations in the Jambi and Riau provinces, which are the provinces closest to us, in order to build up their capabilities for fire detection and suppression. At the recent 8th Conference of the Party (COP8) to the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution which was held in Bangkok just last month, the ASEAN Ministers agreed to work to ensure that plantation companies utilise zero-burning techniques for land clearing. We are also exploring the use of satellite imagery over-laid on concession maps in order to identify those companies whose concession areas experience excessive hotspot activities which, whilst not necessarily conclusive, would certainly be suggestive that they are using fire clearing as a cheap way to clear land before planting. All commercial companies must comply with the laws of their host countries and be held accountable if they cause transboundary haze pollution. They will face both potential legal prosecution at the local level as well as adverse consumer reactions internationally. We need to bring appropriate pressure to bear in order to deal with this intractable recurrent problem. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply.”
“Singapore has also initiated and hosted the first MSC Forum in October 2009 to facilitate the sharing of best practices, to promote collaboration with external partners and to assist in resource mobilisation. During our 10 years as Chairman, a second Forum was also held in May 2012, which provided a forum for countries to explore public-private partnerships as well as innovative financial schemes to promote sustainable forest management and to mitigate undesirable land clearing practices. Er Dr Lee has specifically asked about the Regional Haze Training Network (RHTN). This network serves for haze-related collaboration and training, as well as a central depository of information on the resources and the expertise of our countries, to tackle the haze. Since the network's inception in February 2011, two training courses have been conducted for 26 officials from all the MSC countries. A course on the "Interpretation of Satellite Imagery" was conducted in November 2011, and another course on "Peatland and Haze Management" was jointly organised by the Singapore Environment Institute and the Environment Institute of Malaysia in May 2012. Going forward, this network will organise more workshops, to focus on air quality monitoring and haze control. The Indonesian government has allocated funds to fire-prone provinces and initiated several pilot projects to assist in preventing land and forest fires. This, in fact, resulted in a steady reduction in the number of hotspots since 2006. Unfortunately, this year, there has been a spike in the number of hotspots, and the figures for this year now exceed that of 2006. So, there has been considerable backsliding.”
“Transboundary smoke haze is usually brought over by prevailing southern or south-westerly winds from the land and forest fires in Sumatra, and usually at this time of the year when the weather is drier. Singapore has been actively promoting regional collaboration to address this problem in the southern ASEAN region since 1997. This culminated in the signing of the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution in 2002, that is, 10 years ago, and its subsequent ratification by all ASEAN Member States, except Indonesia. In 2006, Singapore initiated the sub-regional Ministerial Steering Committee (MSC) on Transboundary Haze Pollution and this group comprises Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand and focuses specifically on the problem of haze in the Southern ASEAN region. Members meet twice a year to discuss measures to prevent, monitor and mitigate land and forest fires in the region. Page: 819 Since taking over as MSC Chair in 2010, Singapore has facilitated various initiatives targeted at enhancing fire detection, prevention, monitoring and suppression, as well as building capacity within the countries, to tackle this problem. For example, to improve the early warning and fire prevention systems, Indonesia and Malaysia are refining the Fire Danger Rating System (FDRS) through the addition of more automatic weather stations for data-gathering. To strengthen the early warning system further, we have established the ASEAN Specialised Meteorological Centre (ASMC), which is hosted in Singapore, and this has promoted closer collaboration and, just as important, information sharing through a stronger network amongst the environment and meteorological agencies of the countries.”
“I would like to reassure the House that no cleaner is going to lose the job because we all are more gracious and more considerate, and clean up after ourselves. In fact, there is going to be a structural and chronic shortage of cleaners in the future. This is not a problem which we are going to solve simply by opening the floodgates or even trying to pay people more. Let me assure the House this will not result in unemployment amongst cleaners. In fact, the opposite is going to be the situation in the future. Page: 705”
“We are re-launching tray-return in the last quarter of this year. So, within the next few months, you should see some work in some of the centres. All the new centres will certainly have this, and then we will have to retrofit. We have altogether 107 hawker centres, so it is not something I can do overnight. But the more important message is to flag out behaviour and social norms for Singaporeans. Singapore may be a clean place but it is often due to the hard work of the cleaners rather than the consideration and behaviour of us, Singaporeans. We need better role models and I can think of countries like Japan, Korea, and I have heard, nowadays, even Taiwan, are cleaner, not because they have more cleaners but because people are more considerate and more gracious. That is a harder message but it is one which I hope I will have support from Members of this House, both from the Opposition and the Government to push through. We need that and I think the Opposition, now that you are running Town Councils and hawker centres and cleanliness in your own areas, I think you will agree with me this is an issue which we all need to work together on.”
“Page: 704 Thirdly, we need enlightened employers who will pay people a fair wage, improve working conditions, invest in the necessary training and automation.”
“Together with like-minded partners, such as the Singapore Kindness Movement, we aim to launch this refreshed initiative at a few hawker centres in the latter half of this year. This initiative will require both customer involvement as well as the provision of tray-return facilities to improve accessibility and the convenience of doing this. Existing centres will need to be retrofitted with tray-return facilities and, certainly, new hawker centres will be designed with these facilities in mind. The cleanliness of our hawker centres is important not just for public health but also for the viability of our stall-holders' businesses, for the dining and quality of the experience of the patrons. All of us who operate either a business or patronise hawker centres need to do our part. The future for the cleaning industry as a whole is that all of us are going to have to learn to cope with fewer cleaners. This means the different stakeholders will each have to play their respective roles. For instance, as patrons, as customers, we will all have to be more gracious and more considerate, not only for the burden of the cleaners but also for the patrons to join us at the table or eat subsequently at the same table as us. I would point out that it is very wrong to take the attitude that this is a paid-for service, therefore, I do not need to return the tray or I do not need to clean up the mess that I leave behind. I think we should flag this out as simply ungracious and inconsiderate behaviour. Secondly, the owners of such facilities – certainly, in the case of hawker centres, NEA will play a role – will have to pay more attention to better design and to improving the workflow so that it is easier to maintain a place and keep it clean.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the cleaning industry is at an inflexion point. Cleaning used to be characterised by very tough working conditions and low pay. Consequently, few Singaporeans, especially younger Singaporeans, were or are willing to enter this industry. With our recent moves to tighten the supply on foreign labour, this industry is going to have to restructure, and restructure significantly. Our vision is for our cleaners to have a fairer and higher wage and to have better working conditions. NEA is working with the Hawker Associations as well as Town Councils to engage better and more reliable cleaning companies that are willing to pay fair wages and to train their personnel and provide the necessary equipment. Page: 703 The ultimate goal is for all hawker centres to only engage accredited cleaning companies. Efforts are currently on-going on multiple fronts to improve the standards and professionalism of the cleaning industry. We launched the NEA Clean Mark Accreditation Scheme back in July 2010. There have also been other incentive schemes to support job re-design and better equipment in order to raise productivity and professionalism so that these jobs can pay better and be more attractive. Besides increasing cleaning standards through accreditation, we also need to encourage patrons of hawker centres to reduce the reliance on cleaners by returning their used crockery and utensils in order to speed up the cleaning process. To be honest with you, there have been several campaigns in the past but these have been of limited success. We are reviewing the lessons learnt from these past efforts to see how we can better re-launch a tray-return initiative that is sustainable for the long term.”
“The executive summary of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Ambient Air Quality is available on the NEA website at http//app2.nea.gov.sg/topics_air.aspx.”
“The National Environment Agency (NEA) currently has a network of 11 air monitoring stations on the mainland of Singapore to measure ambient air quality and another two stations to measure roadside air quality. All the air monitoring stations are located at ground level except for the station at Newton which is located at the roof (above 25th Floor) of the Environment Building. The 11 air monitoring stations are operated in accordance with international guidelines. The locations of the air monitoring and roadside stations are indicated in the Table and Map below. As the state of air quality has an impact on our health and quality of life, we recognise the need for the public to have more frequent updates on air quality. Since 24 August 2012, the PSI and PM2.5 readings of the five regions (North, South, East West, Central) have been reported on the NEA website at http//app2.nea.gov.sg/psi.aspx or "myENV" mobile application three times a day at 8.00 am, 12.00 noon and 4.00 pm to help the public better plan their activities for the day. Health advisories for the five regions will be issued whenever necessary. NEA will also increase the frequency of reporting on air quality to hourly ones in the event of significant transboundary haze. NEA is currently in the process of enhancing its air quality monitoring network. The enhancement will include the development of predictive modelling capability for tracking air pollution plumes and the forecast of air quality. The enhancement will also build capabilities to provide more frequent updates on our air quality for public information. These enhancements will be introduced in stages over the next three years.”
“The public can contact the NEA call centre at 1800-2255632, Contact_Nea@nea.gov.sg or "myEnv" mobile application to provide feedback on these issues.”
“Under the Environmental Protection and Management (Vehicular Emissions) Regulations, it is an offence to leave the engine of a vehicle idling when the vehicle is stationary, other than due to traffic conditions. Leaving the engine running when the vehicle is stationary results in fuel wastage and unnecessary emission of exhaust gases. Offenders are liable for a maximum fine of $2,000 for the first offence and $5,000 for the second and subsequent offences if convicted in court. An average of 320 advisory notices a year has been issued in the last three years and to date 12 drivers have been offered notices of composition fine of $70. The National Environment Agency (NEA) has adopted the approach of educating and advising drivers to switch off the engines when their vehicles are stationary. NEA has been working with large fleet operators, such as taxis and bus companies, the Singapore Transport Association, Singapore School & Private Hire Bus Owners' Association and National Association of Travel Agents Singapore (NATAS), to educate their drivers on this. NEA has issued a total of 5,841 advisories in the last three years. We note a rising trend of feedback, with NEA receiving 2,021 feedback on idling vehicles in 2011, up from 1,902 in 2010 which shows that the public is becoming increasingly intolerant of inconsiderate motorists. Mr Fang can rest assured that my Ministry and NEA will continue to promote greater compliance through our educational efforts and enforcement actions against those who idle their engines. NEA will also continue with its dialogue sessions with fleet operators and the NATAS, to remind drivers to switch off the engines when their vehicles are stationary. Members of the public can also help us spread this message.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to make a clarification. On 8th March 2011, during a parliamentary sitting, Ms Denise Phua suggested extending the foreign domestic worker levy concession to include children with disabilities who are older than 12. I would like to clarify and indeed I am pleased to inform Ms Phua that the concession is already available to all persons with disability, regardless of age. This scheme is administered by the Centre for Enabled Living. A clarification to the media was issued on 9th March. DEPOSIT INSURANCE AND POLICY OWNERS' PROTECTION SCHEMES BILL Order for Second Reading read. 2.48 pm”
“Finally, the Bill also makes consequential amendments to the Education Endowment and Savings Schemes Act and the Income Tax Act by substituting the word "children" with the word "child" wherever it appears. Mr Speaker, Sir, my Ministry will work with relevant agencies to effect the payments as expeditiously as possible. As the number of children involved is large, we will disburse the Credits in batches. The children with existing CDAs can expect to receive the deposits by June this year. For those who do not have a CDA currently, we will notify them to open a CDA and they have up to the 30th June 2012 to do so in order to receive the Credits. Sir, with this amendment, the Child Development Credits can now be provided from time to time into the Child Development Accounts of young Singapore citizens when there are surpluses to be shared with Singaporeans if and when passed by this House. It is a tangible expression of the Grow and Share theme of this year's Budget. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Dr Vivian Balakrishnan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. Column No : 4699 Column No : 4699 CIVIL LIST (Motion)”
“By this change, cash grants that are appropriated by the Government under the Supply Bill law can be paid into a CDA for use according to the purposes of the Scheme. Third, a new section 3(1)(c) facilitates the making of financial provision by or on behalf of parents, whether or not the child is eligible for a co-savings arrangement under the Scheme. These contributions made by the parents can be used for expenses as approved under the Children Development Co-Savings Regulations, such as the child's pre-school, childcare or medical expenses. Lastly, a new section 3(1)(d) refers to the recent amendments made to section 3(1) by the Women's Charter (Amendment) Act 2011, which allows for the matrimonial assets divided between parents who have divorced, separated or had their marriages annulled, to be transferred into the child's CDA. The transfer of matrimonial assets into CDA would now be applicable to all children with a CDA, instead of only children who are eligible for the co-savings arrangement under the previous Scheme. As a result of these changes, clauses 6(b), (c) and (d), which amend section 3(2) of the Act, allow for new Regulations to be made subsequent to the passing of this Bill. The Regulations will specify the different types of benefits accorded to different groups of children; and enable parents to make contributions to their child's CDA. The Regulations will also stipulate eligibility for Government matching contributions to savings made to these accounts; the payment of monies to a child; as well as the amount, mode, manner, terms and conditions of any such payment.”
“We will also go one step further to allow the trustees of all citizen children to deposit monies into the CDAs on a voluntary basis should parents wish to save for their children's pre-school and medical needs through these accounts. Sir, the primary function of the CDCA will still be to encourage married couples to have more children through the Baby Bonus and Leave Schemes. This continues to remain so even after today's amendments. The amendments will allow the CDA to also be used as a conduit for the disbursement of the Credits and to ensure that these Credits are used in ways which would directly benefit the child. As such, there is no change in the eligibility criteria for receiving matching Government contributions for parents' deposits made into the CDAs, which will remain available only to children who are eligible under the Marriage and Parenthood package. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me explain the specific amendments in this Bill. Clause 2 repeals the current long title of the Act and re-enacts a new one to reflect the additional features of the Scheme. Clauses 3 to 5 of the Bill refer to the renaming of the Act and Scheme as the Child Development Co-Savings Act and the Child Development Co-Savings Scheme. This will align the name of the Scheme with the name of the cash grant, which is, the Child Development Credit. Clause 6(a) modifies section 3(1) of the Act to spell out the Scheme in greater detail. First, the new section 3(1)(a) retains the co-savings feature of the Scheme as an incentive for the promotion of marriage and parenthood. Second, section 3(1)(b) facilitates the provision of cash grants made by the Government from time to time for the development of children.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, in his Budget speech, the Minister for Finance introduced the Child Development Credit as part of the Grow and Share Package. The Credits will be paid into the Child Development Accounts (CDAs), which most children already have. For those who do not currently have accounts, they will be able to open a CDA in order to receive their Credits. Consequently, every Singapore citizen child aged six years old and below will be able to have a CDA into which the Government may provide top-ups from time to time. This is similar to how the Government makes top-ups into Edusave accounts for school-going children. For this year's Package, all Singapore citizen children who are born from 1st January 2005 and 31st December 2011 will receive a Child Development Credit of either $300 or $400, depending on the annual value of their trustee's home. In fact, the Minister of Finance has been very generous. If you conceive a child now, you can just about make it to collect the Credit. Parents will not need to make any contributions to the CDA in order to receive these Credits. The Credits can be used for the same purposes as specified in the current CDA and these include meeting the costs of the child's or his/her siblings' fees at Approved Institutions under the Baby Bonus Scheme such as childcare centres, kindergartens and special education schools, early intervention programmes, healthcare institutions as well as MediShield or Medisave-approved private integrated plans. We need to amend the Children Development Co-Savings Act (CDCA) in order to allow all citizen children six years and below to open a CDA.”
“Sir, I agree with her clarification, and I just want to reaffirm that we do allocate more resources for people who need more help.”
“Sir, the Minister of Defence is here. Maybe I should ask him to answer, but I will take the risk of answering on his behalf. I do not think MINDEF sees the rehabilitation of wayward youths as its mission. And another point is that, according to our Enlistment Act, it is only at the age of seventeen-and-a-half years that a person can be legally obliged to enlist. Before that, sixteen-and-a-half is a voluntary enlistment. But, in any case, among the three Ministries – MHA, MCYS and MOE – there is already much that we can do. Give us some time. Let us see what impact these comprehensive and integrated approaches have on dealing with youths who might otherwise go on the wrong path.”
“Sir, I will consider it. But I must say that at Cabinet we are under pressure because we have so many campaigns. We must not overdo it or there will be campaign fatigue. But on a more serious note, Members will realise that the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) has actually embarked on a series of public education efforts. Some videos and advertisements have been introduced. I think they are of high quality and I am making traction on the ground. But we will continue to study the Member's proposal.”
“Sir, I thank Ms Lim for her clarification. As much as I look forward to seeing the refined Workers' Party position on social safety net, I think we will give them a chance to refine their definition and we can debate upon it at the appropriate juncture. But let me reiterate that we do agree that there will be people with greater needs and those needs need to be met. We are saying that we will meet those needs through a combination of family responsibility, community support and targeted Government subsidies. What I have tried to show, and I think I have been able to convince all Members, is that there is no shortage of resources. Fortunately, because we have organised our society properly, we have been successful, and this Government has been able to generate surpluses which allow me to stand here and say that we can look after those who need help. But the way we do it will be done and calibrated in such a way that it does not take away the incentive to work, the responsibility to look after your family and the community's response to help your fellow men, fellow women or children in need. On that, I think we are all universally in agreement.”
“Sir, I thank Mr Seah for that question. We are actually monitoring the effects of the casinos on our society on a monthly basis. I am still receiving reports. I know exactly how many people have gone in. I have not got to the stage of knowing exactly who, but close to it. And we are also monitoring it downstream for the impact. So I do not need to give him a timeline to say I am going to review it in one year. I am monitoring this in real time. Let me just address the point on foreign sports talent. I totally agree with the Member. We will investigate that case and take appropriate action.”
“And I also agree, although I did not refer to it in the earlier discussion, that there is a need for MOH and MCYS to sort out our mean-testing frameworks, so that we do not have adverse incentives or awkward situations where someone may actually receive higher subsidy for care in a wrong site, and there will be bureaucratic games later on. This is something which I hope in the next one year, MCYS and MOH will sort out. But I totally agree with the Member's principle which is, wherever possible, allow people to age in place. Our subsidies must not distort that principle. I will adopt the same approach for homes for adults with disabilities. Er Lee Bee Wah: Mr Chairman, I was told that taking time off during National Service for our national athletes is very much dependent on their immediate superior. It is always quite a hassle, especially if the person is transfered from one unit to another unit and he has to appeal all over again. I would like to ask the Minister if his Ministry will take up this issue of National Service with MINDEF to come up with something that is more transparent and more assuring for our national athletes, instead of kicking the ball back to me.”
“Mr Chairman, I am very grateful for those three points which I totally agree with. With respect to signing the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Singapore takes all its treaty and convention obligations very seriously. We are not the sort of people who sign on to something, pretend that it is being done and then not do anything. Our approach is to do everything first, and when we are sure that we can fulfil both the spirit and the letter of the Convention, that is when we sign on. That is the reason why we have delayed, in a sense, our signing on to this Convention. But I dare say that even if anyone were to audit us now, we are actually doing fairly well as far as the additional support and opportunities for people with disabilities to be integrated into the mainstream are concerned. They are not there yet but we have made progress. The other point that I totally agree with the Member is that even as we expand the capacity, we must pay attention to quality. There will be due diligence. The Member is aware that we have a baseline study. As a doctor, what always breaks my heart is when people offer desperate parents untested, sometimes quack treatment, and prey on the parents' desperate sense of hope. We will make sure that we will continue to test everything and have an evidence-based approach through the sort of treatments which are available and certainly through the services which are subsidised by us. The Member has my assurance on that. On the homes for disabled adults, again, I totally agree with the Member. Our model, first line, should still be for an ageing person, disability or otherwise, to age at home.”
“When we first started out on this journey – in fact, it was five years ago when the Minister of State Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon said, many people said, "No, no, no, it won't work." The VWOs do not talk to the politicians because they do not want to get involved in politics. And the grassroots said, "Well, I don't know what the VWOs do. All I know is if people come to me, every week in MPS, I send them off." And it is a black hole. Then we have to triangulate between the CDCs who administer Government schemes at the local level, the VWOs who actually are doing the frontline work and the MPs who are hearing requests and petitions. The ComCare Local Networks are now functional in all the districts. And I know in different divisions, there are different levels of detailed synergy going on. But the point is, there is information. I do know now that MPs have the phone number of the social worker in the area. They know who the social worker is. I know that social workers do meet MPs and families and there is now a greater appreciation of the fact that you need a coordinated consistent approach. But where I will disagree with her, and perhaps I am misreading her, is the assumption that the Government is the solution. Government cannot be the solution. Government has to be part of the solution, and I spent sometime explaining this because it is key to the way we organise ourselves, not just the welfare, the social safety net, it is the key to how we organise ourselves as Singapore and the key to our success. Sir, I am sorry for the rather robust and long explanation.”
“The key thing then is when you want to provide help, there are several questions which come to your mind. First, what help is needed? What resources? Who delivers? How is it delivered? In our case, first, we want the individuals to be self-reliant if at all possible; second, families to step in to support one another; third, the community comes in; and, last, the Government as the ultimate safety net. And you will notice in my expenditure of the Ministry, I said more than half a billion dollars is going for social safety. But half of that comes from the community, and that is the way it should be. Now, when you bring this down one level of resolution, who actually delivers help? And here let me get down to brass tacks. When you are dealing with a dysfunctional family, a battered spouse or a wayward son, apart from their parents, who are the other candidates to give advice, to cajole, to persuade, to move, to change behaviour, or to transmit values? Let me ask you this: in all honesty, is it a politician who every five years is looking for votes? Is it a paid civil servant for whom this is just one more job? Or is it people with a heart, people like Denise, who may not talk very much but do very, very much to help on the ground? Our approach, specifically in the case of FSCs, is we want the FSCs to be the frontline. Those are professional social workers with moral authority, properly trained and, yes, they do need more resources and I will provide more resources. They do need to be properly recognised and equipped, and I will do that. Yes, there is a need for better coordination and a clear example of coordination at local level is the ComCare Local Networks.”
“I am glad that the Member is not criticising social workers and FSCs. I am glad that she recognises that some children in vulnerable families need additional assistance and, in fact, we have no disagreement on that. What I tried to explain in last three hours, and I think I have convinced the vast majority of Members in this House is that there is no question of lack of support for those who are poor, the poorest of the poor or dysfunctional families or those who are facing multifaceted problems. What I differ with her is in the solution. Perhaps, I am misreading her. Let us go back to basics – first principles. Whose responsibility is it to look after children? Parents. I almost feel like calling for a division on that. What is the role of the family? Is it to nurture, to educate, to transmit values, to provide for education, needless to say, to provide food and opportunities for the future? It must be so. Having said that, we recognise that sometimes, and it is not anybody's fault, some people and some families will need help. Now, the key thing, when you provide help, is not to inadvertently erode the values, the behavioural patterns and the organisation of families and community that have brought us here so far. That is why that article from Australia, published in today's Straits Times, about an outsider looking at us, is worth reading because it reminds us not to forget that it is about thrift, sacrifice and values and getting yourself organised on the ground. And it is not just me. It is because this Government believes in it. We do not have a permanent, unconditional needs-based social safety net. The Workers' Party used to say that. They have stopped saying that. Because even they, I suspect, have refined their position on social safety net.”
“It is just as important for minorities and especially their leaders to resist a segregationist approach. In other words, even as we assert our rights to be different, to be distinct, to pursue our own way of life, we must never do so at the expense of segregating our communities from the mainstream in life. Because if we do that, it is not the majority that will lose, it is the minority communities. I am flagging this out as an issue, but I want to end by stating that fortunately for us, we have been very blessed to have national leaders, founding fathers, who believe that a secular and fair system, in fact, provided protection of religious people and religious minorities, provided the platform for all of us to pursue our dreams and achieve our best. At the same time, we have religious leaders who have adopted a principled and pragmatic approach to life in a small, densely populated, highly heterogeneous society. And as Singapore goes forward in the next couple of decades, with an ageing population, with globalisation and the increased challenge that poses opportunities, the potentially widening income gaps, and with greater immigration, all these issues are still in play. I want to end by making this point that the foundational challenges and the foundational principles on which Singapore is constituted remain in play. In fact, we will face continued challenges in the future and it is worth our while, as Members of Parliament, as community leaders, bearing this in mind that even as we debate and argue and push for solutions, do not inadvertently shake the foundations for our survival and our continued prosperity and progress for everyone, regardless of race, language or religion.”
“It is not just relationships at the top but with relationships across the entire strata of society. Sometimes, in Singapore and even in this House, I think we take this for granted. We do not appreciate how extraordinary we are, how special and precious what we have is. For example, I know of no other country in the world where 89% of every single mosque, church and temple is represented at a local level in the community. Members of this House will, of course, realise that I am talking about the Inter-Racial and Religious Confidence Circles (IRCCs). In many other countries, not even very far from here, attempts at inter-faith dialogues are fraught with danger and politics always supervenes to interfere. Here, we take it for granted. We have apex leaders at the top of the religious organisations as well as religious leaders on the ground meeting not only us, but also meeting each other, organising joint activities and visits, expounding and explaining their different faiths to each other and, more important, behind the scenes, away from the glare of media, resolving problems on the ground. I say this because these are real-life examples of integration at its best, and an integration model that works. 2.45 pm In Singapore, we have created common secular spaces whilst protecting more private religious and personal spaces. And we have to get this balance right, especially in a multi-racial country where there is a majority and there are minorities. We have to give the minorities the assurance that their identities, cultures and values, and religions are not under siege, they are free to practise and express themselves fully. This is a very crucial component. But we must, and now I am speaking from the point of view of a person from a minority group.”
“In our dinner discussion, he said that there are two types of social capital – bonding social capital and bridging social capital. Bonding social capital is that which exists between people who are alike – same race, language, religion, school and political party. Bonding social capital is useful for the members of a group, sometimes we put to less useful uses when it is used to secure an unfair advantage over others. Bridging social capital refers to the networks and the relationships amongst people who are different – different languages, races, ideologists, needs and perspectives. In the case of Singapore, there is a special challenge for us to build bridging social capital. It has been so since Independence. Even our Independence was forced upon because of a pursuit of this ideal of a multi-racial, fair and justice society. Even now, 45 years later, this challenge still remains in place. In the case of Singapore, we have adopted an approach based on multiple layers. We have constitutional and legislative provisions. Our Constitution provides for and recognises the special position of the Malays. It also provides that all of us are equal with common laws. We have provisions like the Presidential Council for Minority Rights. We have an Act on the Maintenance of Religious Harmony. We also have policies. For instance, the Ethnic Intervention Policy administered by HDB to ensure that every estate and block is a microcosm of Singapore. They are no ghettos in Singapore. But building a multi-racial, multi-religious, harmonious and inclusive society is not just about the constitution or laws we have passed in this House, and it is not just about policies that Ministries implement. It is also about mindsets, attitudes, norms of behaviour and relationships.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, we have another long session over two days with wide-ranging issues ranging from cohesion, looking after the poor and disabled, gambling, vulnerable members of society, dysfunctional families, strengthening social service sector and sports. This rightly reflects the diversed work of MCYS. I just wanted to focus the last five minutes on one key theme: Singapore needs to remain an open, fair and inclusive society. This theme pervades many of the arguments that we have had in the House over the last few days and, indeed, in MCYS. Whether the issue is about disability; differences on the basis of race, language, religion; differences between a wealthy and not so wealthy; differences between foreign sports talents and local sports talents; foreign talent, local talent, and so on and so forth. It is useful for us to keep this perspective in mind: decide whether Singapore needs to remain an open, fair and inclusive society. If Members agree with me and our future survival depends on us maintaining this, then, I hope Members will also agree with me that the key thing is to maintain integration, not assimilation, not uniformity and not selfish pride but to integrate all the different threads and make up Singapore society. The key thing is that it is about people and about relationships. Some sociologists call this social capital. The quality, strength and resilience of relationships in a network add value. Two weeks ago, I had dinner with a Harvard professor, Robert Gertner. He has written extensively on social capital in America. He is now going to spend about a month or a month and half with us because he finds us of particular interest.”
“Let me just quote from his article, he says, "The sacrifices, the thrift, the hard work, the determination were all part of a national undertaking." I believe and I am sure Members of this House will agree so long as we stay true to these values, the collective will of our people gives us strength, gives us the competitive edge to deal with the challenges ahead, to succeed and to succeed gloriously and, at the same time, to be inclusive and to uplift the weakest and the most vulnerable members of our society.”
“The casino operators by now know me well and they know that we are quite prepared to act decisively and abruptly, if need be, in order to stop them from targeting the domestic market, whether it is trying to advertise or to increase accessibility by shuttle bus services or casino promotions during the Seventh Month or publicity of winners on their websites. I have a good functional relationship with the operators so when we speak or discuss things, things usually happen. I do not want to be complacent but I do not want Members to run away with the idea that this thing has gone out of control. We are watching very, very closely and, if need be, we will strengthen measures further. 1.30 pm Let me just conclude by saying if we look at this term of Parliament, we have invested considerably in the social services sector. We have brought together resources. We have professionalised people. We have uplifted standards of governance in organisations in order to address the diverse needs in our society. But our journey does not stop here. We have committed to building an inclusive society in Singapore – one that is cohesive, actively engaged and takes responsibility for looking after our weakest and our most vulnerable. At the same time, we must not lose our core values – self-reliance, family responsibility, hard work, community support. These are key foundations of our society. These values have propelled us from third world to first. An article that was published in The Australian last week, and I believe it has been carried in today's Straits Times, "Proof of welfare's multiple failings" written by an aboriginal Australian, I believe, social worker. He reminded Australia, "Don't look at the US or look at UK, within this region, look to Singapore as an example".”
“They are professional social workers, they are properly trained, as highly motivated as doctors although not as well paid as doctors, doing their best to fix problems. When you are dealing with social work problems, it is not just a person, it is the family. Even when you are dealing with a family, often it is a community. There is a very, very heavy burden on the social workers. I would hesitate to criticise social workers. My response is to provide more resources for more support so that social workers can fulfil the already heavy and onerous tasks which are on their shoulders. I think the Member would agree with me on that point. In response to Mr Seah Kian Peng's question on welfare homes, my Ministry will build a new welfare home and we should target this to be ready by 2014. Our current welfare homes are not full yet, but I want to ensure that we always have some slack, so that gives the assurance that our social safety net has sufficient flexibility to deal with fluctuations and volatility in economic cycles. Let me end with some words on problem gambling. I totally agree with the three Members that we must not normalise gambling in Singapore. We must not make it fashionable. We must not make it a badge of honour. We should continue to assign it the vice that it is. It is a human weakness. It is not a means of getting a living. It is not a means of getting rich. Members have raised questions on the adequacy of our social safeguards. We actually do have a comprehensive system which is unmatched anywhere in the world. If I can reiterate: a ban on minors; a casino entry levy; the casino exclusion orders which currently exclude, I think about 33,000 people; disallowing gambling on credit; and, having strict advertising and promotion rules.”
“We will use this to support social workers who want to develop and further their careers either to become specialists or, for the more senior ones, to become supervisors. Ultimately, I hope to see more leaders – leaders not chosen by me but peer-selected leaders – who are role models, who are repositories of wisdom and experience, who can lead the profession. One of the key legacies which I want to leave behind is to put the social work profession on a high and stable pedestal – you are professionals, you are key people who fix hearts and fix relationships and you deserve the remuneration, the resources and the recognition that, perhaps, for a long time we have under-delivered. I hope social workers will agree with me that we have made considerable progress, we will continue to push forward. Let me now move on to Family Service Centres (FSCs). We are going to build more Family Service Centres and we are going to elevate their standards. I announced last year that we will build five new FSCs by 2013, bringing the total number to 41, and the first three will be at Chai Chee, Telok Blangah and Tampines. The FSC at Chai Chee has already begun operations. The centre at Telok Blangah will be ready by end of the year. For the third new FSC at Tampines, we have invited agencies to submit proposals and I believe there is keen interest to run this centre. The two remaining FSCs will be in Admiralty and Punggol, and they should be ready by 2012 and 2013 respectively. I feel a need to respond to Dr Lily Neo's point. I am not sure whether I misheard her, but I want to give the Member the assurance that FSCs are not like doctors dispensing pills without making a diagnosis. Let us give them the recognition and credit that they are due.”