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 30 of 49.
“Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the Ministry doing to ensure that there are sufficient taxis to cope with the rise in demand with more tourists visiting Singapore; and (b) what is the Ministry doing to address complaints about long queues at taxi stands.”
“Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat: It is important for all our traffic signs, including speed limit signs, to be visually prominent and easily understood by motorists. Therefore, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has gradually upgraded our traffic signs island-wide since 2000. All of our traffic signs are now six to 10 times more reflective than before, and conform to the United Nation's Convention on Road Signs and Signals (Vienna, 1968), with adaptations to suit the local context to ensure that motorists here can understand them quickly and intuitively. The speed limit for all roads in Singapore is 50 km/h unless otherwise stated by speed limit signs. These signs are therefore located where appropriate. While we could theoretically install more speed limit signs to make them more prominent, LTA has to be very conscious that this does not lead to unnecessary cluttering of the motorist's view and the marring of our streetscape. A balanced approach has to be adopted. LTA takes great care in ensuring that each and every traffic sign installed is optimally placed for visual prominence, taking into consideration the surroundings and the relative locations of roadside vegetation or other road elements. LTA also leverages on the regular pruning programme of National Parks Board to help ensure that signs do not get blocked by vegetation growth. The number of speed violations increased from 158,811 in 2007 to 173,028 to 2009, which is an increase of about 9% over a three-year period. However, we should note that during this period, there was also a corresponding 8.7% increase in the motor vehicle population. QUEUES AT TAXI STANDS 12.”
“This is compared to 90 new cases in 2009 and 52 new cases in 2008. During the same period, NAMS had an intake of 130 new clients, compared to 210 new cases in 2009 and 131 new cases in 2008. The more likely reason for the rise in casino exclusion orders is the greater awareness of the avenues available and willingness to seek help. When the NCPG conducted its first Public Perception Survey in 2006, public awareness of problem gambling was only 32%. It has since risen to 71% in 2009. About one in two Singapore residents are also now aware of casino exclusions. NCPG has also reached out to about 1.2 million Singapore residents through ground initiatives such as at the getai since it launched its Know the Line campaign. In order to achieve this, NCPG worked closely with its partners such as the Taoist Federation and the Singapore Buddhist Federation on ground initiatives, which include programmes at the getai during the seventh month Zhong Yuan Hui. Given the good work done by NCPG, it is not surprising that both casino exclusion orders and help seeking has been on the rise since the casinos opened. MCYS believes they indicate that Singapore residents are responding positively to NCPG's public education efforts. NCPG will continue its efforts to encourage problem gamblers and their families to consider casino exclusions as well as counseling and treatment. The Council will also continue to consult stakeholders from religious, community, grassroots and professional organisations as well to enhance its outreach. SIGNAGE FOR SPEED LIMITS 11. Mr Terry Lee asked the Minister for Transport (a) how can the speed limit signage be made more prominent to drivers; and (b) what is the trend of traffic offences relating to speeding over the last two years.”
“It is still too early to say with any certainty what has been the social impact of casino gambling. The National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) has commissioned a gambling prevalence study which should be completed in the second half of 2011. The study is a follow up on the Ministry for Community Development, Youth and Sports' (MCYS) two earlier gambling prevalence studies done in 2005 and 2008. On its part, NCPG will continue its work in two key areas: issuing casino exclusion orders and encouraging problem gamblers and their families to come forward for help. NCPG has put in place three types of casino exclusions as part of the social safeguards. These are Third-Party Exclusions which ban by fiat all undischarged bankrupts and those on public assistance from the casinos; voluntary Self-Exclusions that allow individuals to restrict their own access to the casinos; and Family Exclusions that empower families to prevent their members who exhibit problem gambling behaviour from entering the casinos. As at September this year, NCPG has issued over 35,000 Third-Party Exclusion orders. More germane to concern raised would be Self-Exclusion and Family Exclusion. Up to September 2010, there have been over 2,500 Self-Exclusion applications, close to 90% of which were applied after the casinos opened. The NCPG has also issued 194 Family Exclusion orders, and 163 of these were issued since the casinos opened. NCPG works with Tanjong Pagar Family Service Centre and the National Addictions Management Service (NAMS) to provide, respectively, counseling and treatment services for problem gamblers and their families. From January to September 2010, Tanjong Pagar Family Service Centre has had an intake of 76 new clients.”
“My Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 5, line 5: after "204(1)", to insert "or (3)(a), as the case may be,". As I alluded to in my speech earlier, this amendment will allow us to align our penalty with the Companies Act, specifically for offences relating to non- compliance with accounting standards and which are committed with the intent to defraud. Amendment agreed to. Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 7 to 25 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment, read a Third time and passed. CIVIL DEFENCE (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.28 pm”
“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. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Clauses 1 to 5 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 6 –”
“The cost of compliance for a large charity, if you spread out the cost of getting professionals, may be a tiny fraction – a small percentage of their overall revenues. But in a small charity, this will become a not-insignificant proportion of their expenditures. And I am sure Members of this House and, indeed, members of the public who donate to charities will not want to see a significant proportion of their donations expended on administrative costs. So I need to persuade Members that we cannot have one-size-fits-all, and we need instead to have the flexibility to regulate different size charities with different risk profiles in an appropriate manner. We acknowledge also the fact that even small charities should have access to professional manpower, and that is why we have launched the programme in which the smaller charities can outsource and seek shared services from professionals. In this way, we will ensure first that there are independent outsiders who are managing and auditing and overseeing the accounts. Secondly, by having shared services you reduce the unit cost of having such qualified people. In that way, we are trying to create a win-win situation where you can have greater confidence in the veracity and integrity of the accounts of even a small charity without unnecessarily inflating the cost of compliance. Sir, in conclusion, I would like to reiterate our commitment to promoting the growth of the charity sector. We will do so by adopting a facilitative and balanced and flexible regulatory framework, which will enhance public confidence without stifling the spirit of volunteerism, charity and philanthropy, which is really the lifeblood of this sector. Question put, and agreed to.”
“And this provides some level of assurance in the financial management and the transparency of the charities and IPCs concerned. Charities will also have to ensure that they have suitably qualified board members, particularly those who are holding key appointments, as Mr Teo has suggested, like Treasurers and Chairmen of Finance and Audit Committees. Whilst the Code of Governance is not mandatory, across the board for everyone, the system is one in which charities and IPCs will have to explain if they are unable to comply with the Code of Governance. This creates a situation where certainly the larger charities and those with larger income streams will find it almost impossible to justify why they do not have qualified staff or qualified board members serving in the management of the committees. On the other hand, we also have to make room for smaller charities or start-up charities, for whom access to such highly qualified and, if I may add, sometimes expensive management staff will not be available to them. So for the smaller charities, where smaller amounts of money have been raised and, in a sense, there is a lower level of risks, we will allow them to deviate sometimes from the Code of Governance but to explain and to be transparent about these deviations. So this provides for a more flexible regulatory framework, a more risk-based and more stratified regulatory environment. Ultimately what we are trying to do is to create a situation which there is more self-regulation. And as a regulator, we have to be very mindful not to overload the charities with such onerous demands that the cost of compliance becomes very high.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef and Mr Teo for their support of the Bill and, perhaps even more important, for their very astute observations on the necessity for greater professionalism and greater supervision, and oversight of the charity sector. We have 2,000 registered charities in Singapore, and the number is growing. And these 2,000 charities are also a very heterogeneous group – there are some very large and very capable charities, and also some very small charities. So I am sure that the two Members would appreciate that in our legislative and regulatory framework, we have to take into account this very diverse landscape. Mr Teo suggested making it compulsory for the positions of the Treasurer and, I believe, the Audit and Finance Chairmen on the Board of Directors to preferably possess recognised accounting qualifications and appropriate practical experience. I think this is ideal in an ideal world. He also suggested requiring the larger-sized charities to employ a Financial Director or Manager who is a qualified Certified Public Accountant (CPA), or has similar professional academic qualifications. I agree that these are important considerations and it would indeed be helpful if we had people like these available in order to help exercise appropriate control over the financial matters of charities, particularly the larger ones and those which have been granted IPC (Institution of a Public Character) status, which allows them to issue tax-deductible receipts for donations made to them. The accounts of such charities and IPCs are currently already required by current Statutes to be audited externally by a public accountant. In addition, the IPCs are also required to post their financial statements online.”
“Board members may not necessarily be involved in the day-to-day operations of the charities which they join. Hence, this is an appropriate change. This is also in line with the Trustees Act (under the Companies Act) and the Business Trust Act. This Act should send *Cols. 1623-1624. a message to everyone that even though we implement measures to tighten the regulations but, at the same time, some flexibility with a light touch approach is still required in certain situations. Sir, can I suggest that there be a roving panel of financial advisers? Charities can call and ask them for advice if they run into issues, especially financial issues. Maybe these financial advisers can be tapped upon for help before problems arise in areas of finance or accounting. This will build a solid defensive barrier for the welfare bodies and, furthermore, the charity sector in its own may lack sufficient trained personnel to perform such duties professionally. In all, Mr Speaker, I support this Bill. 4.14 pm”
“Sir, let me conclude by stating that the charity sector is an integral part of our Government’s "Many Helping Hands" approach. The charity sector plays a very important role in serving the beneficial interest of the community at large. And the Government is therefore fully committed to promoting the growth of the charity sector and we will do so by adopting a facilitative and balanced regulatory framework, which enhances public confidence without stifling volunteerism and the good work that is already being performed by the charity sector. The amendments we are making to the Act will improve the transparency of the sector and above all, ensure that donors, volunteers and the general public are protected, so that they can continue to donate and to support the charity sector with confidence. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.11 pm Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade) (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A*.] Mr Speaker, Sir, firstly, let me say that the clarification and alteration of certain terms used is indeed a welcome change. It will certainly reduce the misinterpretation of definitions within this Bill. Out of the 140 charitable bodies that were mentioned by the Minister, I would like to ask, Sir, if many of these organisations are large charities and what is the definition of "exempt charities". Clause 15 inserts a new section 32A where board members are granted relief from personal liability after the proper investigations have been carried out – I am sure many will welcome this. Many people are invited to sit on the boards of organisations related to the charity sector because of their commitment, track record and capabilities.”
“We will, instead, be incorporating its provisions into our regulations in order to strengthen our existing protection for charities and donors, and to give us more flexibility in updating them as and when necessary, according to the considerations and requirements of the charity sector and the demands of the donating public. These provisions will require the commercial fund-raiser or commercial participator to sign an agreement with a charity before embarking on the fund-raising exercise. The agreement has to spell out arrangements such as the fund-raiser’s remuneration and the time period within which collected donations have to be handed over to the charity. The provisions will also, under certain specified conditions, allow donors to cancel their payments to commercial fund-raisers or participators. In addition, clause 19 will empower the Commissioner to require fund-raisers to furnish information required for investigations, which are conducted, for example, in response to public complaints. At the moment, the Commissioner’s powers to call for documents and search records under section 9 of the Charities Act can only be exercised on documents or records that relate specifically to a charity. Holding out as registered charity or IPC We also want to deter the unscrupulous from using the good name of charities and IPCs to gain credibility and support from the public. Clause 21 inserts a new section to penalise institutions which mis-represent themselves as registered charities or IPCs, or persons acting or purporting to act for the institutions, such as their fund-raisers. This will deter them from attempting to mislead the public by pretending to be a charity or IPC.”
“In fact, they will be able to enjoy greater flexibility by being able to choose between the Charities Accounting Standard and the SFRS depending on which is more relevant. Imposing basic requirements on exempt charities Sir, under clauses 6 and 7, we will require exempt charities to keep their accounting records for at least five years, and to submit their annual reports and statements of accounts to the Commissioner every year. There are currently about 140 exempt charities. These are mainly educational institutions, hospitals or religious bodies established by an Act of Parliament or institutions that have been declared to be exempt charities under a Notification Order. These exempt charities enjoy the same income and property tax exemption as registered charities. The changes mentioned above will bring them in line with the other registered charities and encourage greater transparency and public accountability in the charity sector. Protecting donors and the public At the same time, we will enhance protection to donors and the public, so as to maintain a high level of public confidence in the charity sector. Sir, Part VII of the Charities Act on "Control of Fund-raising for Charitable Institutions" was not brought into force previously as it was deemed that the phenomenon of commercial fund-raisers and commercial participators was rare. However, over the past few years, the Office of the Commissioner has seen an increase in the number of complaints on the conduct of fund-raising appeals by commercial fund-raisers. Clause 16 will repeal Part VII, which is based on the 1992 UK Charities Act.”
“The ASC has developed the Charities Accounting Standard which is tailored specifically for the charity sector. While the Singapore Financial Reporting Standards (SFRS) remain relevant for some of the bigger charities, the Charities Accounting Standard will simplify the accounting needs of smaller charities. Over the longer term, it will also increase the level of transparency, comparability and accountability in the financial reporting of charities in Singapore. Clause 6 of the Bill allows us to put in place the regulatory framework on accounting standards for charities and IPCs, so that we can be ready when the Charities Accounting Standard is launched next year. This clause will also allow us to coordinate the requirements under the Charities Act and the Companies Act. For instance, while charities which are registered as companies will be allowed to choose between the Charities Accounting Standard and the SFRS in future, the penalty for non-compliance with the accounting standards will be similar to that under both the Companies Act and the Charities Act. At this juncture, I should also mention that I will be moving a Notice of Amendment shortly after this in the Committee stage. The Amendment will allow us to align our penalty with the Companies Act, specifically for offences relating to non-compliance with accounting standards and which are committed with intent to defraud. Here, I would like to assure Members that we have no intention of introducing overly stringent requirements that will unduly inconvenience charities. As a start, only the larger IPCs and charities which are registered as companies will be affected. Today, these IPCs and charities already have to comply with an established accounting standard.”
“This term includes volunteers serving on the charity board as well as key officers and employees of the charity, which is different from the definition of "trustees" used under the Trustees Act. In addition, under the Charities Act, the term "trusts" means the provisions that establish and regulate the purpose and administration of a charity. Again, the same term has different meanings under the Trustees Act. To reduce the possibility of confusion, various clauses of the Bill, including clauses 2, 9 to 14 and 23, replace the term "charity trustees" with "governing board members", and the term "trusts" is replaced with "governing instruments". The term "key officers" is also included where applicable, to clarify the roles and responsibilities of board members and key officers. We also want to streamline our administrative requirements to facilitate the charities’ operations. Currently, most charities have a provision in their governing instruments stating that the Commissioner’s approval is required before amendments are made to their governing instruments. In the event that the Commissioner chooses to delegate this power to the Sector Administrator, clause 3 aligns the governing instrument provision with the delegation so as to allow the Sector Administrator to approve these amendments. This allows charities to approach a single agency, which will usually be their Sector Administrator, for their general charity administrative needs. Accounting standards and audit requirements We will also be establishing the legislative framework on accounting standards for charities. The Accounting Standards Council (ASC) was established in 2007 under the Accounting Standards Act to issue accounting standards for companies, charities, co-operatives and societies.”
“This helps avoid the need for the charity and its board members to become embroiled in Court proceedings if there is a better, less expensive and more practical alternative. In addition, the Courts have broad powers to strike out frivolous or vexatious cases, including those made against charities and their board members. To provide another layer of protection, clause 15 inserts a new section 32A to apply protection currently available under various other Acts to all charity board members under the Charities Act. If the Court finds that a charity board member has acted honestly and reasonably and, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, that he should fairly be excused for negligence, default or a breach of duty, then the Court may relieve him either wholly or partly from his liability on such terms as the Court thinks fit. These existing provisions in the Charities Act, along with the new section 32A, will help provide greater assurance to existing board members, so that they will continue to serve in the charity sector without impediment or reservation. It will also send a positive signal to potential board members and, hopefully, encourage capable and well-meaning individuals to step forth and serve on charity boards. Clarifying roles and responsibilities of charity board members We also intend to clarify some of the terms used in the Charities Act. Currently, some of the terms used may not be easily understood by the charity sector. For example, the existing Act defines the term "charity trustees" as persons having the general control and management of the administration of a charity.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Charities Act was last amended in 2006 and brought into effect on 1st March 2007. Key aims of amendments The Bill before this House today has three objectives: First, to facilitate charities and charity board members in their work by providing clarity on their roles and responsibilities and to protect them from personal liability if they have acted honestly and in good faith. We hope this will encourage more good people to come forward and to contribute their time and resources to do good work for society. Second, to enhance the accountability and governance in the charity sector. This will include establishing the legislative framework for putting in place accounting standards for charities and Institutes of Public Character (IPCs). Third, and perhaps most important of all, to strengthen charity regulation to better protect donors and to maintain public confidence in the charity sector. Sir, I would now like to draw the attention of the House to the main clauses in the Bill. Protecting governing board members from personal liability Our charity board members are doing beneficial work for society, and many of them are doing so without any remuneration. These board members should enjoy some degree of legal protection if they have acted honestly and responsibly in their charitable work. The current Charities Act already provides a layer of protection. Proceedings against a charity or charity board members involving issues related to breaches of trust would require the Commissioner’s authorisation. In general, these proceedings will not be authorised if a case can be dealt with using the powers under the Charities Act.”
“As at end FY 2009, there were 2,930 cases on the Public Assistance (PA) scheme. This was slightly higher than the 2,886 cases as at end FY 2008. As at end FY 2007, the number of PA cases was 2,930. In the past three years, about 340 cases on average exited the PA scheme annually, and an average of 350 new cases was admitted each year. Approximately three out of four (73%) of PA cases who exited the scheme each year are elderly persons who had passed away or were admitted into Government-funded welfare/nursing homes. A small number who exit from the scheme each year are orphans or children of PA families who have started working and can support themselves. The majority of PA clients are supported on a long-term basis, as 85% are elderly persons and another 11% are unable to work due to illness or permanent incapacity. Besides the PA group, there is another 1,700 cases (as at mid-2010) residing in Government-funded welfare homes and receiving long-term care and support. They comprise mainly the frail elderly or those with chronic illnesses, disabilities or psychiatric conditions. Cases who require temporary assistance are helped through other ComCare schemes like the ComCare Transitions or Work Support Programme. CENTRAL BUS PLANNING (Update on consultations) 6. Dr Teo Ho Pin asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether he will provide an update on the status of the central bus planning consultations conducted by the Land Transport Authority; (b) when will the proposed changes be implemented to improve bus services; and (c) whether there are additional measures to improve bus services at Bukit Panjang.”
“This year, HDB has offered 12,600 BTO flats from January to September and 1,600 flats under the Sale of Balance Flat (SBF) Exercise in August. HDB will offer another 3,400 BTO flats in the last quarter of 2010 to bring the total new flat supply for 2010 to 17,600. HDB will also offer up to 22,000 new flats next year if demand is sustained. This will be further supplemented by the on-coming supply of Executive Condominiums and flats under the Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS), to provide more choices for the higher-income buyers. HDB will continue to monitor the market demand and adjust its supply accordingly. CO-TENANTS OF RENTAL FLATS 20. Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for National Development whether HDB can allow existing tenants of rental flats whose co-tenants have passed away to retain their flats without having to find replacement co-tenants.”
“Er Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for National Development in view of the surge in requests for Build-to-Order (BTO) flats (a) how many first-time flat buyers have applied for BTO flats at least three times but were unsuccessful; and (b) what are the reasons for their failure to get a flat. Mr Mah Bow Tan: In response to strong demand, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) increased the frequency of its BTO launches to once every month since October 2009. As a result, many applicants have been applying for multiple BTO exercises, and those who were unsuccessful have also increased. Nonetheless, for the BTO exercises in non-mature estates completed in the last one year, more than nine in 10 first-timers had a chance to select a flat within three tries. Currently, there are about 1,300 first-timers who were not able to select a flat in non-mature estates after three attempts. They would be given two additional chances on their fourth attempt on top of their original two or four chances (if they are applying to live near or with their parents). With application rates for BTO exercises moderating from about six times earlier this year to slightly over two times in recent BTO exercises in August and September, first-timers will have higher chance to select a flat in their next application. If they are still unable to select a flat, HDB will offer them help if they have urgent housing needs. I have also asked HDB to look into further increasing the chances for those with multiple unsuccessful applications, and HDB will announce the details when they are ready. HDB will spare no effort in meeting urgent housing needs. HDB has increased its supply of BTO flats to cater to the increased demand.”
“For example, the ties formed between Bukit Timah Citizens' Consultative Committee (CCC) and the Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT) Alumni Association started off with an invitation from the IIT Alumni Association to other local and immigrant organisations, including the Bukit Timah CCC, to share in their Diwali celebrations. This had since blossomed into a long-term partnership cultivated based on common interests. They now come together regularly to co-organise events for their members. Local umbrella organisations are also playing their role to rally the community to support integration. The Singapore Federation of Chinese Clan Associations, for example, had organised a networking dinner to bring together leaders of Chinese new immigrant associations and local Chinese clans to network, build familiarity and to encourage future collaborations. This inaugural effort has a chain effect and has since led to more instances of local clan associations working with new immigrant associations such as Tian Fu Club and Hua Yuan Association. These are only some examples of projects supported by the CIF. There are many more. It has been a year since the launch of the CIF, and the National Integration Council will conduct a comprehensive review of the CIF to further fine-tune the fund. In this review, we will pay particular attention to helping community organisations build up the capabilities to organise scalable and sustainable projects that promote integration. BUILD-TO-ORDER FLATS (Unsuccessful first-timers) 18.”
“The Community Integration Fund (CIF) was launched in September 2009. Its objective is to promote the social interaction of local born Singaporeans and new immigrants in order to promote better understanding and cohesion. Ten million dollars over three years was set aside for the CIF and relevant projects may receive up to 80% co-funding. To date, the CIF has attracted a total of 96 proposals from over 60 organisations. Among these, 74 proposals with a committed funding of $1.65 million have been supported. The wide variety of projects brought together organisations from the people, public and private (3P) sectors with a common interest in integration, and provided platforms for over 170,000 locals and non-locals to interact, make new friends, and collectively appreciate Singapore's unique multi-racial, multi-religious and cosmopolitan nature. For example, in April 2010, the Indian Women's Association (IWA), collaborated with the People's Association (PA) Women's Integration Network Council to organise a multi-racial and multi-cultural fun fair for families. Activities included cultural performances such as lion dance, Indian dances, folk music and Malay line dance and a saree parade involving participants of different ethnicities and nationalities. The collaboration between the two organisations – an immigrant association and a local grassroots organisation – helped to facilitate cross cultural interaction and deepen understanding amongst their members. We hope that partnerships formed will have long-term impact.”
“I am sympathetic to the Member's request. I know where she is coming from. But we must also understand that this is still, at the heart of it, a civil dispute, and that a proper forum for resolving civil disputes, in this case, is the Family Court. So, if you go to the Police Post, the Police must, by definition, advise you to go the Court to resolve this dispute, get a court order, and enforce the court order. Now, Members of the House will also know that we are on a slightly different topic but on the issue of maintenance payments and other issues, there are administrative steps that we can take to make it easier to secure court orders and to facilitate enforcement of court orders. To the extent that we are working on all that, clearly this is a related area where if we can do that, we will facilitate. But I do not want to subvert the correct forum in which disputes are settled and the authority for making those decisions. It is the Family Court and we should not usurp it or in any way short circuit the rules of justice. I think as a lawyer herself, she will appreciate the position that I have to take. 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. STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE 5.08 pm”
“The Convention requires a Contracting State to look after its own expenditures – the expenditures incurred by the central authority. I do not think that necessarily commits us to paying for all the airfare and accommodation that will often be generated from this hunt for missing children. So, I am not going to make a commitment in Parliament now that we are going to incur all those expenditures.”
“To put this in context, we are just trying to reduce and deter the complications of trans-border abduction, but there is still a lot more work that will have to be done in the domestic sphere. Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef: One clarification for the Minister. In the process that the child has to be brought back to Singapore or to one of the Contracting States, who pays for the airfare to transport the child back? Because it just so happened that last week I saw a man – an unemployed man – who actually had to come out with his own money to bring his child back from Vietnam. I wonder whether those are some of the things that may need to be sorted out.”
“If you can't, you go to Court, you get a court order and the court order will be enforced." I think underlying the Member's question is an appeal to the authorities, wherever possible, to help facilitate the mediation between parents and to make sure the court orders are enforced. I think we can certainly look into that and we should try to do better there, but I want to emphasise that that is not the subject of this Convention. So, when a person has been ordered under this Convention to bring the child back, he or she is just restoring status quo ante. There are two people in a single country who may have a dispute about custody and care of a child and they have to submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the Court and they must comply with the court order. Each respective country after that will have its own ways of enforcing those court orders. So, that is the point I wanted to make. The Member has a valid point but I did not want to conflate it into the debate on this Bill because this Bill does not resolve all the domestic problems that surround this very difficult and usually acrimonious breakdown in relationship. The only generic point I want to emphasise here is to make an appeal to all parents that we should prioritise in the best interest of their children, and that unilateral action and certainly action against the law on trans-border abduction is not the ideal way to solve the problems that have been generated by a breakdown in the relationship between parents. I think we all understand that but, having said that, we also recognise that life is not perfect, relationships can always cause problems, and in this area you actually see otherwise normal good people behaving at their very worst because emotions are so raw.”
“I thank Mdm Halimah for that additional clarification of her question. Let us go back to the example of a trans-border abduction, where, pursuant to the application of this Convention, a child has to return to the country of habitual residence. As I said earlier, it does not mean that necessarily this child be handed back to the other parent in the other country. What it obliges us to do is, where possible, where it can be done voluntarily and amiably, to persuade the parent here to bring that child back to the other country and submit himself or herself to the jurisdiction of the Court. The Court in that country will still decide on the question of access and custody. Now, in a local case, first, many of these so-called child abductions sometimes occur even before a divorce has been made absolute or even before a custody order or access order has been issued. In such a circumstance, there is no question of abduction or kidnapping because both parents have rights to access and, in fact, have a duty to take care of the child. So you cannot have a situation where one parent goes to the Police and says, "I want you to go and find the other parent because he has taken my child away." And the Police will quite rightly say, "What court order do you have? What judicial arrangements have been made?" If you have a court order which says you have custody of the child and the other parent has contravened that court order, the jurisdictional regulatory and enforcement actions will kick in. But, in the absence of that, the Police are still quite right to say, "This is a domestic dispute. The proper forum for it to be settled, first, preferably is between the two adults who are parents of this child.”
“I would like to reassure Members, and I know that even as we speak there are cases ongoing, that families who are currently undergoing Court proceedings, they will not be affected as Article 35 of the Convention states specifically that there will be no retrospective effect. So for those cases which have already commenced, we will let the law take its course.”
“And victims of abuse who need shelter while the Court proceedings are ongoing can be housed in a crisis shelter until the crisis is resolved. As I have mentioned in my earlier speech, the Convention recognises the need to protect children and to take into account circumstances where the child should not be returned to his country of habitual residence. And these circumstances include situations where there is a grave risk that the return would subject the child to physical or psychological harm. If there is lack of evidence of grave risk or harm, the Singapore Central Authority will also work closely with the overseas Central Authority to make sure that protective factors are in place before the child is returned. So, again, the point I am trying to make here is that this will have to be a multi-agency effort and sometimes even a trans-border effort in order to secure, first, the safety of the child and, secondly, the protection of the more vulnerable member of the partnership. There was another question: what if a case arises where a minor child brought here by the Singapore parent does not want to leave? Will the child's request be taken into consideration? I think I have answered this earlier. The Court will certainly listen to the child but the Court will have to take into account the age and maturity of the child and the totality of the best interest of the child. It will be a factor for consideration but it cannot be the only or substantive factor to be considered by the Court. There was another question on cases which are currently pending judicial outcomes.”
“Relevant factors that a Court may consider – I want to emphasise "may" because their discretion still takes precedence – would include factors like the age of the child, whether he or she has his own views, the maturity of the child, the child's cultural affiliations. For instance, the language he or she speaks or the place that he or she has the most links to, the country, perhaps, where he has been in school the longest, and so on. There will be many other factors. The point I am trying to make here is that, we cannot be sitting in this House hard-code all the different permutations or factors which the Court would have to take into account. The next point I want to touch is on the welfare of the Singaporean parent and the child and Assoc. Prof. Paulin Straughan has enquired as to the number of reported cases where Singaporean wives have had to flee from abusive foreign spouses. From 2007 to 2009, on average, there were 17 Protection Orders made by Singaporean wives against their foreign husbands but obviously this only refers to cases within Singapore. I do not have the statistics for cases of Singaporean women living overseas who have filed for similar protection from abusive foreign spouses. Assoc. Prof. Paulin Straughan also wanted to know how many Singaporeans are victims, how Singaporeans who are victims of abuse can be helped in the event that they face such a situation. Singaporeans who face spousal abuse can seek advice and counselling support from social workers in the Family Service Centres. If there is evidence of abuse, our child protection and our family violence mechanisms within the Ministry and in the other relevant Ministries will be activated.”
“In other words, discretion still lies with the Family Court. The next question posed by Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef was to clarify how do you define a person appealing to the Court to have sufficient interest in the matter. A person who is eligible to apply for the return of a wrongfully removed or retained child would include a person whose rights of custody have been breached or any other person where the Court exercising its discretion, feels has a right to be heard and has an interest in the outcome of the case. I do not want to excessively hard-code this because, again, I want to remind Members of the House that we do need to leave these decisions, which are difficult decisions, even in the best of times, to be made at the discretion of the Judge in the Family Court. Mdm Halimah asked a question on whether the Bill in mandating the return of a child who was habitually resident in the Contracting State immediately before that action, constitutes breach of custody or access rights, and asked me on the definition of "habitual residence". The term "habitual residence" is not defined specifically in the Bill. This is in line with the practice of the Convention and the Contracting States. In other words, it is not defined so that the Court will have discretion to determine the child's country of habitual residence and the Court will arrive at such a determination based on evidence adduced. For instance, let me correct a common misperception. The country of habitual residence does not refer to a child's domicile or citizenship or passport that the child may hold but the Court, instead, will take into account factors which determine a child's personal ties to a place.”
“The Convention recognises that the Contracting States may have their own uniquely legal and judicial arrangements and, therefore, Contracting States have the flexibility in the way they implement the provisions of the Convention. There is a permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law which will monitor the operations of the Convention in all the Contracting States. They will monitor them, for instance, by having yearly questionnaires on the state of the implementation in the respective States. There will also be special Commission Meetings which are organised and there will be reports which we will all have to submit and, based on these reports, they will do their best to ensure that there is alignment and that the objectives and the key principles and the spirit behind the Convention are fulfilled even while we know that implementational details will differ. The next question was on the issue of age. I think Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef brought up the example of an abducted child who was mentally subnormal but is now 17 years and therefore technically beyond the remit of this Convention. Mr Speaker, the Convention seeks to protect children specifically under the age of 16 from the harmful effects of parental abduction and retention. For a successful application under this Act, the child must be below the age of 16 when the application is made to the Central Authority. The age cut-off is based on the premise that children below the age of 16, by definition, are more vulnerable and in greater need of protection. But for other exceptional cases like the example she has cited, the parents can still apply to the courts under current domestic laws if there is custody or access issues to be determined.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the hon. Members for their support of the Bill and for their relevant questions and comments. First, Assoc. Prof. Paulin Straughan asked what are our considerations and why did we take so long? I think Members of this House know that the Singapore Government takes its commitments extremely seriously, in particular, before agreeing to an International Convention which will place obligations on us. We need to be very sure first that it is the right thing to do. Secondly, that we have set up a mechanism so that we can do the right thing. Thirdly, that we have consulted our stakeholders and people know what this is all about. So, it has taken us some time but we are now on the verge of acceding to this Convention. The next question was posed by Mdm Halimah and she asked why the Bill appears to name the Minister as the Central Authority. I would like to reassure her that it is the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports that will be appointed as the Central Authority. My role as Minister is to oversee that this is done properly and in accordance with the law as passed by Parliament. The Authority will, therefore, be a new department set up within the Ministry to perform its role. The next question I wanted to deal with was from Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef and she said, basically, how would we deal with the applications given that we will be dealing with trans-border disputes. If we sign on, we will be the 83rd country and there are likely to be 83 different unique legal systems in place. Well, on accession, all Contracting States are required to discharge their obligations and their responsibilities as spelt out under the Convention.”
“Sir, the Convention also requires Singapore to provide legal aid and advice to applicants who are citizens or habitually resident in a country which is party to the Convention. This has been provided for in clause 17 of the Bill. Applicants applying for legal aid and advice under the Convention will have to fulfil the same means and merits test required by the Legal Aid Bureau in Singapore. In addition, the Legal Aid and Advice Act and the Legal Profession Act will be amended accordingly. Sir, with the increase in cross-border marriages, this Bill will help deter and to resolve wrongful child removal and retention resulting from the possible breakdown of some of these marriages. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that in implementing this Convention, Singapore will facilitate the judicial or administrative proceedings necessary for the prompt return of the child in his or her best interest. This paramount principle will remain to always protect the best interest of the child. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.30 pm”
“Clause 13 of the Bill thus provides for the stay of any decision on merits of the rights of custody, care and control or access upon an application being filed to the Court. The Convention recognises the need to protect children and to take into account circumstances where the child should not be returned to his country of habitual residence. These circumstances include situations where, firstly, there might be a grave risk that the return would expose the child to physical or psychological harm; secondly, the person having care of the child was not actually exercising the custody rights at the time of removal or retention; thirdly, if the child objects to being returned and has attained an age and degree of maturity at which it is appropriate to take into account of his or her views; and fourthly, where fundamental principles relating to the protection of human rights and the fundamental freedoms are in question. In these scenarios, the Court has the discretion not to order the return of the child. Clause 12 of the Bill thus allows the Court to receive advice from persons who are trained or experienced in matters relevant to the application when considering the return of the child. Where the child has been ordered to be returned, clause 8 of the Bill empowers the Court to impose conditions or require undertakings before the child can be taken out of Singapore. In addition, for the purpose of securing the welfare of the child, clause 10 of the Bill empowers the Court to make interim orders or to give interim directions for the care and control or access to the child before the determination of the return of the child.”
“The Singapore Central Authority will monitor the progress of these applications. And under the Convention, the overseas Central Authority is obliged to facilitate the return of the child, to have the discovery of the whereabouts of the child, and the care and protection of the child. Similarly, the parent remaining in the other Contracting State can also apply to the Singapore Central Authority for its assistance to facilitate the discovery and voluntary return of the child and, where necessary, for the care and protection of the child. These are reciprocal arrangements. Apart from providing for the application of the return of a child, the Singapore Central Authority will, as far as possible, also assist in facilitating access to the child upon request by the parent whose access rights were breached. Applications to Court under the Convention Sir, I shall now describe the provisions pertaining to applications to the Court for the return of the child under the Convention. The Convention stipulates that the judicial authorities are to order the return of the child to the country of habitual residence if the Court found that the child was wrongfully removed or retained. All applications for the return of a child or access to a child under the Convention will be made to and heard by the Family Court. Clause 8 provides for this. The applicant may be the person whose rights of custody have been breached or any other person appearing to the Court to have sufficient interest in the matter. Custody rights will be determined by the Court in the child’s country of habitual residence upon his or her return. This is based on the principle that the Courts in the child's country of habitual residence are best able to make decisions on the interests of the child.”
“At present, Singapore allows for applications to the Court for orders and directions relating to custody, care and control, and access of the child when there is a marital dispute. However these proceedings often involve protracted and expensive legal battles. Acceding to the Convention will put in place the necessary mechanisms for the expeditious return of the child to the appropriate Court which will then determine the issues relating to the custody and welfare of the child. This is in line with our commitment to protect the best interests of the child. My Ministry has worked with the relevant agencies, including the Courts and the Legal Aid Bureau, to operationalise this Convention. We have also consulted various stakeholders including lawyers, legal academics and women’s groups on the draft Bill. Sir, allow me to briefly describe the key provisions in this Bill. Singapore Central Authority One of the key features of the Convention is that a Central Authority must be established in each Contracting State. This is provided for under clause 5 of the Bill. My Ministry (MCYS) will be appointed as the Singapore Central Authority. The Singapore Central Authority will be operational by 2011 once the Convention enters into force. The Singapore Central Authority’s key role is to provide information on and to facilitate matters relating to the application for the return of a child and to work with other respective Central Authorities in the other States in dealing with such applications. The Singapore Central Authority will advise and assist the parent who is remaining in Singapore to make an application to the Central Authority of the other Contracting State where a child has been wrongfully removed to or retained in.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill, when passed, will give effect to the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Convention seeks to protect the best interests of children from the undesirable effects of transborder parental abduction and retention by providing an avenue for their prompt return and resolution of transborder custodial disputes. Under the Convention, Contracting States agree to return a child who has been wrongfully removed to or retained in any Contracting State, for an orderly determination by the Courts of the child’s habitual residence on the rights of custody and the rights of access. For the Convention to apply, both countries have to be Contracting States. There are currently 82 Contracting States. Singapore is an open and globalised state. More and more Singaporeans are studying, working and living abroad and likewise there are many foreigners living and taking up residence in Singapore. It is therefore not surprising that there is an increasing trend of Singaporeans marrying foreigners, both locally and abroad. The proportion of marriages between Singapore Citizens and non-citizens has increased from 30.7% in 1999 to 40.8% in 2009. Given these trends, we can expect an increase likelihood of transborder custodial disputes. There are benefits for Singapore to accede to this Convention, in particular for the welfare and interest of children born and living in Singapore. This legal framework will allow us to secure the cooperation of other Contracting States for the return of these children to Singapore.”
“Starting 1st December 2010, the general support rate for PMET courses approved for funding will be 50% of course fees capped at $15/hour. This will cover PMETs across many industries and skills areas. In addition, the Government will increase the course fee tax relief from $3,500 to $5,500 with effect from Year of Assessment 2011. While PMETs can look forward to many more training opportunities in the years ahead, both employers and PMETs must also continue to take the initiative to upgrade so as to deepen and broaden their skills. FOREIGN WORKERS IN CONSTRUCTION SECTOR (Measures to prevent exploitation and abuse) 7. Mdm Halimah Yacob asked the Minister for Manpower in light of a recent incident where a foreign worker threatened to jump from a crane because of unpaid wages, whether the Ministry will provide an update on the measures that have been taken to prevent the exploitation and abuse of foreign workers, especially those working in the construction sector.”
“Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Minister for Manpower (a) if he will provide an update on the Continuing Education and Training system for the training of PMETs; and (b) given the upswing in the economy, how can the Ministry incentivise and motivate PMETs to go for training. Mr Gan Kim Yong: Over the last two years, MOM has been expanding Continuing Education and Training (CET) opportunities for Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians (PMETs). Overall, there are now some 300 funded training courses available for PMETs today to re-skill and up-skill themselves. From December 2008 to June 2010, an estimated 85,000 PMETs have benefited from these programmes. We will continue to expand the CET system, including CET for PMETs, which is critical to our economic competitiveness and workforce productivity. First, we will expand the range of Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) and other industry-related programmes that will help PMETs broaden and deepen their skill sets. Just over the last month alone, we added three new PMET programmes – the Productivity Initiatives in Services and Manufacturing (PRISM) programme to equip managers and supervisors with the know-how to use various productivity tools and techniques; the Precision Engineering WSQ Diploma in Mechatronics and Robotics for PMETs in the manufacturing sector to develop expertise in designing, implementing and managing different manufacturing systems; and the Small and Medium Enterprise Manufacturing Excellence (S.M.E) programme to groom PMETs in small and medium enterprises to be process improvement experts. Second, we will broaden CET funding for PMETs on an ongoing basis.”
“The amount of Government-paid maternity leave benefit disbursed in FY 2008 and FY 2009 were $65 million and $126 million respectively. The amount disbursed in FY 2009 was higher because paid maternity leave was increased by four weeks and extended to the fifth child and above in October 2008. In FY 2009 about 15,000 working women benefited from the maternity leave payment. Eighty-three percent of them were in their first or second confinements. The majority of the women (63%) were aged 30-39 at the point of delivery; while another one-third (34%) were 20-29 years. By educational profile, 44% were degree-holders, 31% had post-secondary education while 24% had secondary or below education. Mdm Halimah has asked if the criteria for Government-paid maternity leave could be relaxed to benefit more working women. I assume she is referring to employees on short-term contracts or whose contracts expire during pregnancy. Mr Seah Kian Peng had made a similar suggestion in Parliament in January this year as well as during the Committee of Supply debate in March. I am always supportive of helping working women reduce the opportunity cost of having children. In doing so we must make sure that the employability of women as well as viability of businesses are not unduly affected. Given the significant enhancements made to the Marriage and Parenthood measures in October 2008, we should allow more time to assess the impact of these measures. The Government would review if, how and when further enhancements can be made later on. TRAINING OF PMETS 6.”
“I think Mr Seah has highlighted the need for better communication and coordination. It is a suggestion that I accept. In fact, it cannot be parked under any single Ministry because, even for this issue that arose, it involved the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Trade and Industry and MCYS. What we will do is to have another committee, this time chaired by Senior Minister of State Iswaran, which will also have the requisite representation from all the other Ministries, so that such issues in future will be looked at holistically and comprehensively, taking into account the relevant concerns of all the different Ministries. I think an inter-agency/inter-Ministry approach will be more effective in the long run. 3.00 pm”
“Mr Speaker, I cannot speak for the Casino Regulatory Authority, whether they are contemplating any penalties to be imposed. There is a due process and they will make appropriate decision at the regulatory level. I am not in a position and I should not be in a position to make pronouncements on decisions of the Casino Regulatory Authority. Her second question is on work permit holders frequenting the casinos. She is right. Our current regime of social safeguards and the $100 levy were targeted at protecting Singaporeans, especially vulnerable Singaporeans, young persons and dependants, and also a reminder to the casino operators not to have local promotions. For work permit holders, my Ministry and the Ministry of Manpower will facilitate them making use of the self-exclusion orders which the work permit holders can sign onto and then it would be operationalised, so that they will not enter the casinos. I think it is in the interest of both the worker as well as the employer to encourage the work permit holder to self-exclude himself or herself from the casino.”
“Mr Speaker, I would not agree with the assertion that the CRA has been reactive instead of being proactive. We knew full well when we embarked on this project and I speak from experience, having been involved with this project since 2004, when I was Minister of State in the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) and led the project team which proposed allowing Integrated Resorts with casinos. We knew full well this was going to be a difficult challenge. We knew full well that we could prepare, we could make all the necessary preparations, we could set the legislative framework, we could set and transmit the rules and we could explain and re-explain the principle behind those rules to the operators. However, from time to time, they will test those boundaries. If and when they test the boundaries, we need to respond appropriately, decisively and quickly. If nothing else, this episode has shown that the CRA will act decisively, and will act quickly, if the need arises. But we are not just going to wait for other problems to arise. It is far more important to make sure that there is a robust system of rules and regulations and that the operators understand the thinking behind these rules. Nevertheless, because the profit motive is so strong, I do not believe there will ever be a final solution. There will always be a series of border incursions and a need to redraw and re-emphasise that line. What I am saying now is that our position, as the Government, remains unchanged. That line is where it was always meant to be. If they transgress that line, we have the necessary tools and penalties to impose on them. And because we are reviewing those rules where parts of them need to be tightened, we will tighten. I think both operators take the CRA very seriously.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the fact that we took this action conveys a very clear signal and I do not think at this point in time we lack the tools to convey clear signals and to enforce strict compliance. As I have said at the end of my reply, we will tighten the rules as necessary in the light of experience. On the Member's additional point, he is absolutely right. This signal is to reinforce the point that they are not supposed to go after the low-hanging fruit which the local market represents but, instead, focus their efforts on bringing additional tourists from abroad. His next question was whether there is sufficient awareness. There will always be a need to improve awareness of problem gambling in the community. And the National Council for Problem Gambling (NCPG) needs the active support and the participation of our grassroots organisations in the heartlands, so that the message reaches everyone who needs it and people who are vulnerable, especially people who are affected by problem gamblers within the family, know where to get help and know what avenues are available. There is much work to be done in the months ahead.”
“These late hours meant that most of the facilities at RWS were closed, except for the casino. In addition, RWS promoted its Genting Rewards programme at heartland shopping malls and the Seventh Month (Hungry Ghost) events. I am very sure they were not trying to entice hungry ghosts to the free food or the cheap food at the casino. Amongst other features, this programme allowed patrons to earn points and accumulate benefits. But these points would have to be earned in the casino. RWS also released stories of casino winners to the media. All these activities contravened the Advertising Regulations and the Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA) instructed them to stop. This pattern of casino promotional activities and the expanding network of bus services to the heartlands and the Central Business District led to the CRA’s decision to order an immediate stop to the bus services offered by both Integrated Resorts. Both Integrated Resorts will now only be allowed to provide transport for passengers from specific tourist-linked destinations which are listed in the Casino Control (Advertising) Regulations and only with the prior approval from the CRA. Mr Speaker, our action conveys a clear signal to both Integrated Resorts operators to confine promotional efforts for the casinos to tourists only. We will not allow any promotions aimed at Singaporeans, especially in our heartlands. The Integrated Resorts operators have been reminded that they must comply strictly with our rules against casino advertising to locals. These rules will be tightened as necessary in the light of experience.”
“When the Government decided to allow casinos as part of the Integrated Resorts, the key objective was to enhance Singapore’s attractiveness as a tourist destination. We made it clear that the casinos were primarily to attract additional tourists from abroad. However, we would not exclude locals entirely from the casinos, unlike some other countries. Instead, we imposed advertising restrictions and a comprehensive set of social safeguards. Our aim was to minimise the impact of the casinos on locals, to protect vulnerable groups like young persons and dependents, and to prevent the casinos from targeting locals as their principal market. This was the explicit basis on which the operators bid for the two Integrated Resorts projects, and our position remains unchanged. In the seven months since the casinos opened, there have been more than one million visits by local residents to the two casinos. These numbers fortunately appear to be stabilising as the novelty wears off but we are monitoring the trends very closely. My Ministry investigated the bus shuttle services provided by both Marina Bay Sands (Sands) and Resorts World @ Sentosa (RWS). Marina Bay Sands was offering a paid premium service at 12 pick-up points covering the Central Business District and Orchard Road. It charged premium fares but these were redeemable at food and beverage outlets, some of which were in the casino. Resorts World @ Sentosa provided free shuttle bus services at 19 pick-up points, most of which were in the heartlands and Central Business District areas. They were clearly not part of the public transport network. The buses also operated very long hours, up to 10.30 pm on weeknights and up to 2.30 am on weekends and the eves of public holidays.”
“There were some non-sporting events, for instance, nightly concerts at the Bay. All of us have done events at the grassroots level. Once you set up a stage, your marginal cost of leaving the stage there for each subsequent day is actually very low. We said, "Well, we might as well put a stage for the entire duration of the Games." On weekends and particularly when there were a few very 'hot' items, which were very popular among young people we had thousands of people, on seats or even standing around. On weekdays, or with groups which were less well-known, there would be empty seats. I went down on a day that the site was relatively empty. I asked the organisers and then myself, "should I pack up the whole place? Since there was low demand on Tuesday, shall I cancel the entire thing? Or in fact, should I treat this as incremental marginal cost; allow the show to go on and know that there would be certain days and certain acts for which there would be a full house?" In the end, the site was not full on everyday, but there were certain weekends and certain performances in which all the seats were used. So I thought it was still money well spent. ANTI-SPECULATION MEASURES FOR PROPERTIES 7. Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for National Development (a) if he will explain the basis on which the new anti-speculation measures announced on 30th August 2010 were devised; and (b) whether any assessment was done on their impact on genuine home buyers and Singaporean investors.”
“But it is much better to take heat for being transparent rather than to present people with a fait accompli. Were there some events which were poorly attended? In the initial phase, the first couple of days, we had a very peculiar phenomenon when tickets were sold out and because I was there I could see that there were still seats available. That was due to a combination of rigidity in our sale system. We sold tickets for an entire session but people may only be interested in certain segments of that session. Secondly, like Parliament, some people come late, some people leave early, it is very hard to ensure that even Parliament has a full House all the time. I then had to break Olympic protocol and put my foot down and say, "No. I am going to sell extra tickets as long as there are seats in the house." Yes, I am going to take the risk. When I do that, there will be legitimate ticket holders who would then show up and say, "I have a ticket. Where is my seat?" I decided to take that risk and I also stated without approval of the IOC that if that situation arose, these legitimate ticket holders will sit in the seats which had hitherto been reserved for officials and if need be, I would tell the officials, "I am sorry, we don't have seats for you anymore." I did this, as I said I broke rules, and may have stepped on some toes. But I did it because I did not want to deprive Singaporeans of an opportunity to watch these Games. By that point, it had also become very clear that my initial worries that the Games would not be of interest to Singaporeans were completely unfounded. In fact, I received more complaints from people who could not get into the Games than people who were not interested in the Games. So in a sense, this was a problem of success.”
“Thank you for the questions. I am not in any position to defend our under-estimation. The Member is quite right. When we compared ourselves to the other bidders and, in particular, at the end when it came down to Moscow versus us, the Moscow budget was somehow on the dot. But Moscow has hosted many Olympic Games. It has hosted Olympic Games before. It has hosted Youth Games before. They have the facilities and they know what they are doing. In our case, if I ask Members, when was the last time we hosted an international multi-sport event before 2008; Members will scratch their heads and go back, I think, to 1993, the SEA Games. I am giving an explanation and not an excuse. We were plain wrong. She is quite right. If Members look just at the cost of feeding people, moving people, transport and logistics – that already was over $40 million. Then we take into account technology. Technology, we have a reason to under-estimate because we did not think at that point in time that we were going to host the Games which were at world's standard with world-class timing and information systems. So I have no excuse for getting it wrong the first time. But I instead am trying to focus on the relevant question which was put to me after it emerged what would it really cost, which is: "if you knew it was going to cost $387 million, would you bid for the Games?" and, second, "would you get $387 million worth of value from the Games?" And once I was convinced that the answer to both those questions was "yes", I had to proceed. The other thing was to keep faith with Singaporeans, and that is why, as Ms Irene Ng recommended, I was transparent and I revealed these numbers to Singaporeans before the Games. So, yes, we took heat for that.”