Yip Hon Weng
Singapore
“But we must also keep building our trust. It is the only infrastructure a small country cannot afford to lose. Every generation since Independence has earned our place in the world. Our responsibility is to see that the next generation is given the chance to do the same.”
“It can reinforce Singapore's role as a trusted financial centre, a gateway to Asia and a platform for long-term growth. But at the end of the day, we should also be clear about how success will be measured in practical terms. How much incremental daily trading volume are we seeking to generate?”
“I thank the Minister of State for his reply. While the US dollar remains dominant, some economists have suggested that the global monetary system may gradually become more fragmented and multi-polar over time.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his reply. Given reports that some firms are slowing workforce expansion due to cost pressures due to the situation in the Middle East, has MOM observed any corresponding shift in firms hiring preferences between local workers and our foreign workforce?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her reply. Many Singaporeans are already facing rising premiums year after year. As we have seen recently, even with cheaper riders, base premiums continue increasing. So, households may still have to pay more overall.”
“Because this is not just a technology transition, it is a workforce transition. The establishment of the Tripartite Jobs Council is an important step in ensuring that this alignment happens in practice. Technology will move. Markets will adapt. But we must be clear about the future we are building.”
The complete record
Every one of 873 lines we hold for Yip Hon Weng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 18.
“What safeguards are in place to prevent this? How will the Ministry ensure a balance between the scheme's financial sustainability and maintaining affordability and accessibility for all, regardless of health status? I also urge the Government to consider the broader implications. Will premium loading inadvertently leave those who need protection the most without adequate coverage? We must not allow a policy designed to provide security to end up creating new challenges. By the time HPS is needed, how many members will have had to dip into their CPF to pay off their loans? Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, I call on the Minister to ensure transparency in how premiums are adjusted, as stated in section 32A(3). This is critical to avoid arbitrary decisions, especially when it comes to reducing premiums for residents whose health improves. A clear and understandable framework will foster trust and fairness. How frequently will CPF Board review these premiums and how will such reviews be communicated to members? Fourth, Mr Speaker, Sir, I seek clarity on the types of conditions that will be covered under the expanded scheme. The inclusion of individuals with serious pre-existing conditions is commendable. However, I ask for more clarity on the conditions that will be covered and how these assessments will be made. I understand that eligibility is not based on a predefined list of conditions. Instead, it depends on the severity, prognosis and control of the condition, alongside the individual's overall health profile. However, many HPS applications in recent years have been rejected due to common pre-existing conditions like cancer, stroke or kidney failure. These are not rare conditions. They are the unfortunate realities faced by many of our residents.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the CPF (Amendment) Bill we are debating today is about securing the future of our residents. Imagine a family's breadwinner is suddenly struck by illness or disability. Overnight, their world is turned upside down. The breadwinner can no longer provide, medical bills start piling up and anxiety sets in. In these difficult times, the last thing anyone should fear is losing their home. Yet, for many families, this fear becomes a reality when health crises strike unexpectedly. The proposed expansion of HPS is a significant step toward addressing this concern. It offers a critical safety net for residents, helping them to manage the financial responsibilities of home ownership, especially in light of rising costs and uncertain circumstances. While I support this initiative, I seek clarity on several aspects to ensure these provisions truly protect the financial well-being of our residents, without creating unintended burdens. First, Mr Speaker, Sir, I am concerned about the introduction of premium loading for residents with higher health risks under the HPS insurance scheme. While I understand the need for financial viability, this amendment risks increasing costs for those least able to bear them. Premium loading based solely on health risks could be seen as penalising residents for becoming ill. Is that truly fair? Section 32A of the Bill allows CPF Board to impose additional premiums. I urge the Minister to explain the rationale behind this measure and, more importantly, how will it impact low-income and elderly residents who are already grappling with healthcare expenses? Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, I worry that this policy may disproportionately affect individuals with pre-existing conditions and those from lower-income groups.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his reply. I have two supplementary questions. First, how does the Ministry ensure that the public perception of incidents like the recent case does not inadvertently narrow the range of candidates willing to serve, particularly those who may have offered different perspectives due to a private sector background? My second supplementary question pertains to this. Given that many private sector professionals are accustomed a different business culture, how does the Ministry plan to ensure that the existing measures for navigating potential conflicts of interests are aligned with these cultural norms while at the same time maintaining public confidence?”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his reply. I have two supplementary questions. While the criteria for bullying classification seem clear, are there concerns about under-reporting of bullying cases? Secondly, will there be more channels for the reporting of bullying in schools for students, parents and teachers to report such cases?”
“Their plight highlights the need for not only legislative protection but also a fundamental shift in societal attitudes. With this Bill, they will feel greater security knowing they have insurance coverage – a safety net we hope they never have to use. They will feel more at ease navigating the roads, knowing they will not be unfairly penalised or subjected to abuse from impatient customers. Ultimately, we must foster a society where platform workers' contributions are recognised, their voices are heard, and their well-being is prioritised. This, Mr Speaker, Sir, is the true measure of a just, kind and compassionate society – one that values the dignity and contributions of every individual. I support the Bill.”
“I also urge the Senior Minister of State to provide clarity on how this Bill compares with international regulations, elaborate on potential unintended consequences and mitigation strategies, and commit to continuous engagement with stakeholders throughout the implementation process. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is a significant catalyst for positive change. But it is just one piece of the puzzle. For it to truly succeed, we need a national shift towards recognising and respecting the dignity and value of work for our platform workers. We must actively promote a culture of respect for all workers. There should be targeted initiatives to educate the public about the crucial role platform workers play in our economy and foster greater respect. Businesses must treat platform workers as valued partners, providing them with appropriate facilities and access to amenities to improve their working conditions. Lastly, we must find opportunities to publicly recognise and celebrate the efforts of platform workers and other service workers through awards and appreciation events. Mr Speaker, Sir, every hardworking individual should be treated with dignity, regardless of their circumstances – whether they are making ends meet, between jobs, or working on the side. This echoes the sentiments expressed by President Tharman during his campaign, where he emphasised the importance of respect for all members of the Singapore society. It also aligns with our Prime Minister's call for a "reset" in our social compact, urging us to strengthen our sense of collective responsibility and build a more inclusive and cohesive nation. I began my speech with the story of my two elderly personal mobility device riders.”
“Will this Bill significantly impact transport and food costs for residents? While we should be prepared to contribute to a stronger social compact and support our platform workers, it is important for the Government to provide clear insights into the potential cost implications. This will also help consumers to calibrate their expectations. This will also enable relevant organisations and Ministries to proactively prepare and implement support measures for those with genuine needs. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, many of us use the services of platform workers – whether it is booking a Grab ride, ordering Foodpanda, or receiving online shopping deliveries. We enjoy these conveniences from the comfort of our homes with just a few clicks on our phones. Their work provides us with ease in our hectic lives. The gig economy has transformed our work landscape, offering flexibility while presenting challenges our traditional labour laws were not designed to address. As we continue to navigate these uncharted waters, we must strike a balance between preserving the flexibility that attracts individuals to this sector and at the same time providing essential protections that safeguard their well-being and livelihoods. This Bill represents a promising first step towards achieving this balance. I urge the Ministry to consider the proposals I have raised today. We must prioritise mental health support, ensure robust protection against threats and abuses, and foster inclusive dialogue to empower workers to participate actively in shaping policies that affect them. Furthermore, we need to address long-term career development, particularly for older and senior workers, by providing avenues for skills upgrading and facilitating transitions to more sustainable career paths.”
“We should consider incorporating provisions within the Bill or formulating guidelines to protect platform workers from such abuses, ensuring their safety and well-being while on the job. Fourth, Mr Speaker, Sir, our platform workers must have access to inclusive dialogue. Ensuring that platform workers have a stronger voice in policy-making, especially in areas that directly impact them, is critical. We need to create more platforms where platform workers can openly share their experiences, concerns and give suggestions. This will allow them to actively contribute to discussions on policies that affect their livelihoods. This Bill is a positive step with the introduction of the platform work associations, giving workers a stronger voice. However, these associations should also have the legal powers to take action against abusive customers. Mr Speaker, Sir, I now turn to the broader policy implications and potential implementation issues of the Bill. As we navigate the complexities of regulating the platform economy, we should learn from the experiences of other leading global cities. Can the Senior Minister of State share how this Bill compares with similar regulations in other jurisdictions? What lessons were drawn from international examples? Also, what guided the Ministry's decision to adopt or not adopt certain approaches seen in other countries? How do these choices reflect Singapore's unique labour market dynamics and specific challenges? Can the Ministry also share insights into potential unintended consequences, such as increased operational costs for platform companies leading to a reduction in earning opportunities for workers? What measures are in place to mitigate these risks? How were these considerations balanced during the drafting of the Bill?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to address the welfare of platform workers, starting with their long-term career development. Many platform workers see their current work as a temporary solution rather than a sustainable career path. The physical demands of delivery work and its potential impact on long-term health is a reality we must acknowledge. This is especially pertinent for platform workers in their senior years. We need to create opportunities for them to upgrade their skills and transition to new careers. This empowers platform workers to explore alternative job opportunities within or outside the gig economy. While the Bill addresses immediate concerns, what is the long-term vision for the sector? Can the Senior Minister of State elaborate on why certain long-term measures, such as continuous skills upgrading programmes, were not included in this Bill? What are the potential consequences for our future workforce if we do not address these critical aspects now? Secondly, Mr Speaker, Sir, our platform workers need better mental health support. Platform work often involves long hours, isolation and pressure to meet demanding targets. This can significantly impact mental well-being, especially when earnings are volatile. We must champion greater mental health support for platform workers. This includes access to affordable counselling services and peer support networks. Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, we must protect workers against threats and abuses. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for riders to encounter verbal abuse, especially when delays occur. My two elderly residents shared their experiences of such incidents. They can be emotionally distressing and financially detrimental, as negative reviews can directly impact their income.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a few weeks ago, two elderly male Yio Chu Kang residents came to see me at my Meet-the-People Session. Both were food delivery riders. They asked for my help to appeal a fine imposed by LTA for riding their personal mobility devices on the pedestrian area at Ang Mo Kio Hub. I asked them why they chose to ride on the pedestrian path, knowing that it was against the law. They said they were in a hurry to complete their deliveries. More importantly, they feared for their safety on the main road. With the bus interchange nearby and large vehicles frequently turning into Ang Mo Kio Hub, they felt unsafe riding alongside traffic. Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe many Members here have encountered similar cases at their Meet-the-People Sessions. This situation highlights the complex realities platform workers face daily. They are often caught between the need to earn a living and the need to comply with regulations. My two elderly residents, like many other platform workers, do not earn much. They are deeply concerned about the unpredictable nature of their earnings, often affected by fluctuating platform algorithms. I also appealed to the Social Service Office for financial assistance on their behalf. However, a more sustainable solution lies in creating a predictable and reliable income stream for these workers. This should be coupled with workplace safety and healthcare insurance to give them greater peace of mind. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Platform Workers Bill is indeed a step in the right direction. The provisions on mandatory CPF contributions, insurance coverage and dispute resolution mechanisms are commendable. Nevertheless, I have a few clarifications regarding the Bill.”
“This Bill represents our opportunity to rewrite the energy story as we did with water. If we get it right, if we balance innovation with caution, protect our most vulnerable and remain steadfast in our commitment to sustainability, we can transform our energy landscape. We can reduce our dependence, diversify our sources and lead the world in the transition to low-carbon energy. Just as Singapore became a global leader in water management, we have the potential to become a beacon of energy resilience and sustainability. The world is watching. Our success could inspire other nations to follow suit. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is not just about securing our energy future. It is about setting a standard – one that shows the world how a small, resource-scarce nation can rise to the challenge, innovate and lead by example. I support the Bill.”
“These are key pillars for our economic stability and resilience. This Bill is Singapore's declaration that we are serious about tackling the global climate crisis. It positions us as a leader in the global energy transition. It attracts investment, creates new jobs and enhances our competitiveness in the green economy. However, for this Bill to truly succeed, we must address the potential challenges it poses. We need clear safeguards for managing the risks associated with the FEF. We must ensure social equity is not sacrificed and that vulnerable households are protected from rising energy costs. We need to prioritise long-term sustainability and phase out carbon-intensive stopgap measures. Transparency, accountability, and market fairness are not just desirable, they are essential. The Minister should clarify how potential market distortions will be addressed. Greater transparency is needed in managing the FEF. Finally, we must ensure that this legislation remains adaptable and relevant in the face of rapid technological change. Mr Speaker, Sir, as we consider this Bill, it is worth reflecting on Singapore's journey with water – a story of resilience, innovation and foresight. Not long ago, we imported all our water, just as we do with our energy today. That dependence made us vulnerable. But through bold initiatives, strategic investments and a relentless focus on sustainability, we turned that vulnerability into strength. We diversified our water supply, developed NEWater, invested in desalination and championed water conservation. Today, Singapore is a global model for water sustainability. The parallels with our current energy landscape are striking. We are heavily reliant on imported natural gas, just as we once were with water.”
“This raises concerns about how the fund will be managed. Can the Minister share more details on the mechanisms to ensure transparency and public accountability in the fund's management? Singaporeans need to trust that our resources are being used wisely and effectively. Fifth, Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill's impact on energy market dynamics needs clarity. The provision allowing EMA to direct key facilities could affect market fairness. Oversight is necessary. However, we must be careful not to stifle innovation or discourage new entrants. What measures will prevent market distortions or monopolistic behaviour? How will the Ministry ensure EMA's expanded powers do not create an uneven playing field? Several electricity suppliers have recently folded. How will this Bill support a truly open and competitive electricity market? We should encourage more low-carbon energy suppliers to enter the market, giving consumers more sustainable choices. Some power plant generators are owned by foreign consortiums. How does EMA plan to work with these players to ensure fair and transparent centralised gas procurement? Will rates be standardised across all generators to ensure fairness? Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, the energy sector is evolving rapidly. We must ensure our laws evolve with it. A static framework risks being outpaced by new innovations and market realities. What plans does the Ministry have for regular reviews or updates to this Bill? It is critical to ensure it stays relevant as technology advances. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Energy Transition Measures and Other Amendments Bill because it is essential to Singapore's energy future. It strengthens our energy security, supports low-carbon projects and ensures a stable, reliable energy supply.”
“Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, transitioning to low-carbon energy should not come at the cost of social equity. We cannot let the burden of this transition fall on those least able to bear it. Has the Ministry fully assessed the impact on vulnerable groups? The Bill does not currently include measures to shield low-income households from energy cost increases. Many Singaporeans are already feeling the squeeze due to high cost of living. Will they bear even higher energy costs without seeing the benefits? Green hydrogen currently costs three to five times more than natural gas. The long-term benefits of reducing reliance on imported fuels are clear. But we need to address the immediate impact on energy affordability. How will the Government ensure vulnerable groups are not left behind in this transition? Microsoft is buying solar power from public buildings in Singapore. Why is this solar energy not used to subsidise energy costs for low-income households? When public buildings generate renewable energy, should the first priority not be the public? Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, we must balance long-term sustainability with immediate needs. Supporting fast-response generators and energy storage systems is critical for grid stability. But relying too heavily on carbon-intensive systems like diesel generators could undermine our sustainability goals. Why are these generators part of our energy mix? How does this align with our low-carbon commitments? We need a clear roadmap to phase out these stopgap measures for more sustainable solutions. Fourth, Mr Speaker, Sir, transparency and public accountability are the bedrock of public trust. The FEF, as proposed, gives the Minister significant control with some limited public oversight.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I declare that I work in a global investment firm with interests and investments in energy-related businesses. This Bill marks a pivotal moment for Singapore's energy future. Our reliance on imported natural gas – 95% of our energy mix – makes us vulnerable to global market shifts. This is not just an energy issue. It is a matter of national resilience. We must diversify our energy sources. The need is not just pressing. It is essential. This Bill aims to reduce that reliance by shifting to cleaner energy. It is a step toward a future where Singapore controls its energy destiny. However, I have several clarifications on the Bill. First, Mr Speaker, Sir, innovation is vital, but it must come with guardrails. The FEF is promising. But we must tread carefully with investments in untested technologies. Are we betting on the future with enough safeguards in place? What safeguards are in place to manage these risks? Could the Ministry also provide more details on how projects are selected for funding? How will the FEF integrate with existing initiatives like the Emerging Technology Grant? Avoiding overlap is not just about efficiency. It is about ensuring every dollar drives real progress. We also need to ensure that the research we fund is practical for Singapore. For example, the Directed Hydrogen Programme relies on hydrogen produced overseas. Does this align with our goal of energy independence? Should we not focus on solutions that we can scale right here at home? On low-carbon hydrogen, it was reported that Singapore will have at least nine hydrogen-compatible power plants by 2030. Hydrogen is expected to meet 50% of our power needs by 2050. Are there updates on these plans? The clock is ticking. We need to see progress.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. While the focus has been on food affordability for consumers, how does the Ministry assess the impact of increasing hawker stall rentals on small business owners and aspiring new entrants into the hawker trade? And what are the kind of support that are given to these groups amidst these rental increases?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his very comprehensive reply. I have a short supplementary question. Does the Ministry have any plans to make the mpox vaccine available and free for vulnerable groups of the population, such as the elderly, who may not have taken the smallpox vaccine previously or immunocompromised patients?”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his response. In instances where recipients of the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme may face immediate financial difficulties, why did the Ministry decide not to streamline short-term financial support with the scheme? Also, will the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) work with the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and the SSOs to process the Jobseeker Support scheme together with other financial assistance schemes?”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his reply. My question pertains to immigration. While automation and biometrics are vital in modern immigration processes, there may be concerns about over-reliance on technology. Can the Minister elaborate on the rationale behind the current level of automation and how does it ensure that human judgement remains integral in identifying potential threats?”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for her response. My supplementary questions pertain to public confidence in Government digital services. What measures are in place to ensure that public confidence in Government digital systems is maintained, especially in the wake of outages like the CrowdStrike incident as well as the Ministry of Education's Mobile Guardian cyberattack? Secondly, how does the Ministry plan to communicate resilience efforts to the public to reassure them of the reliability of Government services?”
“The Bill should include guidelines and legal protections to prevent unintentional non-compliance, fostering inclusivity and confidence in the food donation system. It should also incorporate mandatory training for food donors, equipping them with the knowledge and skills needed to handle food safely. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill has the potential to be more than just a legal safeguard. It can serve as a catalyst for positive change in how we approach food waste and food security. It aligns perfectly with the spirit of Forward Singapore, where sustainability is a key pillar. By addressing these key areas and working collaboratively with all stakeholders, we can build a more sustainable and compassionate society in Singapore. I support this Bill.”
“Nonetheless, as much as we strive for careful sorting and quality control, there are always inherent risks associated with redistributing food that are deemed commercially unsellable or nearing its expiry date, particularly when problematic food products are unintentionally overlooked during the sorting process. The Good Samaritan Food Donation Bill would play a vital role in addressing these concerns, providing legal clarity and peace of mind for those involved in such initiatives. While the Bill is a significant step in the right direction, I believe that addressing the points and questions that I have raised today will further strengthen its effectiveness. For instance, to truly shift behavior on a larger scale, we should go beyond merely removing legal barriers. Offering tangible incentives, such as tax benefits, logistical support and public recognition, could significantly motivate more eateries and bakeries to participate in food donation efforts. Clear labelling is another important aspect that should be mandated. The Bill should also explicitly extend legal protection to community fridges and food rescue initiatives, which play a critical role in reducing food waste. Providing these groups with legal assurance would encourage their growth and amplify their impact. Additionally, this Bill must address the issue of food allergies, which pose significant risks if not properly managed. Clear guidelines for allergen labelling are essential to protect those with food allergies, ensuring that they have safe access to donated food. Given Singapore's multicultural society, it is also equally important to respect religious dietary requirements in food donations.”
“How will its implementation impact Singapore's overall food security and waste management strategy and contribute to our national sustainability targets, such as the "30 by 30" food sustainability goal set by MSE? A clear understanding of the Bill's intended impact beyond the immediate legal implications would be invaluable to all stakeholders. It will enable us to identify potential synergies, areas for future refinement and opportunities for collaborative action. This can empower businesses, organisations and individuals to play a meaningful role in building a more sustainable and food-secure future for Singapore. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, in Yio Chu Kang, we have seen, first-hand, the power of community action on reducing food waste. Our Food Rescue programme, run entirely by volunteers, sees about 60 dedicated individuals, many of them youths from nearby schools, including Presbyterian High, Nanyang Polytechnic, the Institute of Technical Education Central and so on, coming together every fortnight to volunteer their time in the name of sustainability. They help to collect imperfect or expiring food from wholesale centres and shops that would have otherwise gone to waste. They sort out and throw away parts that cannot be eaten and redistribute the good and edible portions. We have about 200 regular residents who participate in this programme. Both our Prime Minister and Senior Minister Lee have witnessed how our Food Rescue Programme works during their visits to Yio Chu Kang.”
“These situations, often involving catering or bulk cooking, can increase the likelihood of issues, such as undercooking, improper storage and prolonged exposure to hot weather, a concern further amplified by Singapore's rising temperatures. It is also precisely such events, where large volumes of food might otherwise go to waste, that could benefit most from the food donation framework established by this Bill. Therefore, we must be particularly vigilant in mitigating the risks. I urge the Government to consider incorporating targeted guidelines and training for donors handling large quantities of food, emphasising best practices for safe storage and transportation. Perhaps the Bill could incorporate provisions for mandatory training programmes or certifications for frequent food donors. These programmes could be developed in collaboration with relevant agencies, like SFA, providing donors with the knowledge and skills to handle food safely throughout the donation process. Additionally, raising awareness among recipients about the importance of thoroughly reheating donated food, where possible, before consumption, could further minimise the risk of foodborne illnesses. Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, I seek clarifications on the Bill's broader implications. The Bill has the potential to be more than just a legal framework. It can be a catalyst for positive change in how we, as a nation, approach food waste and food security. To fully realise this potential, I believe it is vital that the Ministry provides us with a broader perspective. What are the long-term goals and strategic vision underlining this Bill?”
“For example, Muslims are required to consume Halal food and Hindus and many Buddhists abstain from consuming beef. Therefore, I urge the Government to outline guidelines for donors to follow, preventing unintentional non-compliance with these various dietary standards. Clear and accurate labelling of ingredients, particularly when it comes to potentially "sensitive" ingredients like beef or pork products, is paramount in empowering recipients to make informed choices. Resources should also be made available on proper handling and labelling, to ensure that food intended for halal consumption remains untainted. But in cases where this is not practical or where such oversights occur despite best efforts, does the Bill offer legal protection for donors who unintentionally provide food that does not align with a recipient's religious dietary needs? Addressing this aspect thoughtfully will not only demonstrate our commitment to inclusivity. It can also instil greater confidence in the food donation system, encouraging wider participation from both donors and recipients. Sixth, Mr Speaker, Sir, it is equally critical that we ensure faithful compliance to food safety and hygiene. The success of this initiative hinges on maintaining public trust in the safety and quality of donated food. Therefore, I seek clarification on how the Bill will ensure that food donors are well-informed and fully compliant with existing food safety and hygiene laws. Recent incidents, such as the mass food poisoning cases involving the Singapore Civil Defence Force Academy and Bytedance, serve as stark reminders of the risks associated with large-scale food handling.”
“I seek clarification on how this Bill addresses the potential for allergic reactions, particularly, in situations where donors may not be fully aware of the allergen content in the food they are donating. Among food-insecure groups, those with allergies already face an uphill battle in balancing their dietary needs with financial constraints. While some might suggest that individuals with allergies could simply avoid donated food with unclear labelling, this ignores a critical aspect of food insecurity. By denying themselves access to potentially safe and nutritious food due to a lack of information, individuals with allergies are deprived of economical choices that could significantly ease their burdens. To mitigate health risks associated with allergic reactions, I urge the Government to consider implementing guidelines for clear and consistent allergen labelling, wherever possible, within the framework of this Bill. Collaboration with health authorities to develop a standardised allergen labelling system, perhaps drawing from existing regulations requiring businesses to declare known food allergens on their food labels, would be invaluable. This could be done for common allergies, like seafood, nuts or gluten, if they are known to be present in the donated food. Furthermore, greater efforts could be made to educate food donors on best practices for minimising allergen consumption risks, such as avoiding cross-contamination and providing accurate ingredient information. Fifth, Mr Speaker, Sir, as a multicultural society, we must respect and accommodate the diverse dietary needs of our population, especially those with specific religious or cultural requirements.”
“A visible and clear "consume by" label could minimise the risk of foodborne illnesses arising from miscommunication or forgetfulness. Such labels would serve as a visual vivid reminder, even after verbal communication has taken place. This could empower recipients to make informed decisions about food consumption. It can also provide an additional layer of protection for well-intended donors. It would also foster greater trust and transparency within the food donation ecosystem. However, practicality is key. We must consider the feasibility of implementing such labelling requirements, particularly for smaller businesses involved in food. A balanced approach, perhaps, with exemptions or tailored guidelines for different types of food donations, may be necessary. Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, greater clarity is needed on the Bill’s stance on community fridges and food rescue initiatives. While we strive to ensure the safety and suitability of donated food, we must also recognise the valuable contributions of initiatives operating at the community level. These initiatives often involve collecting and redistributing food that might be aesthetically imperfect or nearing its "best by" date. However, they are still safe for consumption. Does the Bill explicitly extend liability protection to these prevalent endeavours? Explicit inclusion would provide these groups with much-needed legal assurance and encourage their growth. This allows them to expand their reach and impact on minimising food waste in addition to supporting vulnerable individuals. Fourth, Mr Speaker, Sir, we must not overlook the critical issue of food allergies. These can present significant, even life-threatening risks, if not managed carefully.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is an important step towards reducing food waste, increasing food availability for food-insecure communities and developing a more sustainable and compassionate society in Singapore. While this Bill has noble intentions, I have several clarifications. First, Mr Speaker, Sir, while the Bill seeks to address liability concerns, we must also consider the practical aspects of encouraging greater participation. The intent alone, while admirable, may not be sufficient to shift behaviour on a larger scale. What specific incentives or support mechanisms are being considered to motivate eateries or bakeries to donate their surplus food? Although liability protection is a step forward, it is essentially removing a barrier; we must now provide and encourage people to be more active. To this end, I urge the Government to consider tangible incentives. Tax benefits for food donations, like those already in place for charitable giving, could be effective. Subsidies for logistical costs associated with donated food, particularly for smaller businesses, could also boost participation. Furthermore, public recognition programmes, perhaps, a "Food Rescue Champion" award, could incentivise businesses through positive reinforcement. By incorporating such proactive measures, we can transform this Bill from a shield against liability, into a sword actively combating food waste. Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, clear and consistent communication is paramount to ensure clarity and safety for recipients. Beyond merely requiring donors to inform recipients about handling requirements and consumption time limits, we should consider mandating information labels on donated cooked food.”
“A thorough understanding of the comparative analysis with international best practices and the implementation of robust evaluation and review mechanisms will further strengthen this Bill and ensure its long-term effectiveness in safeguarding Singapore's financial integrity. I support this Bill.”
“Given the sensitive nature of financial data, I believe it is paramount to address any potential privacy concerns comprehensively. Fifth, Mr Speaker, Sir, it is important to understand how we measure up to international standards and best practices. The Bill aims to align with recommendations from FATF. Nevertheless, it would be valuable to understand how Singapore's approach compares with international best practices. Can the Ministry provide a comparative analysis highlighting why certain FATF recommendations were adopted while others were not? Sixth, Mr Speaker, Sir, it is essential to ensure that the measures introduced in this Bill remain effective in the face of constantly evolving financial crimes. What mechanisms are in place to review the effectiveness of the new measures and make necessary adjustments? Regular evaluation will ensure that the legislation remains relevant and effective in combating evolving financial crimes. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore has long been recognised for its commitment to upholding international standards in the fight against financial crime. This year alone, we have seen a slew of Bills introduced to tackle various aspects of financial crime, demonstrating our unwavering dedication to this critical issue. Despite these Bills, we have also seen a rise in the number of people wanted for money laundering and financial fraud in Singapore. While I commend the Government for its efforts in introducing this Bill, I believe that it is essential to carefully consider the potential impact on specific groups, ensure operational feasibility and cost-effectiveness and establish robust safeguards for privacy and data protection.”
“Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, while I understand the necessity of robust customer due diligence measures, I am also mindful of the potential operational challenges and financial burden these measures may impose, particularly on smaller enterprises. The amendments proposed rigorous customer due diligence measures for casinos and other entities. Has the Ministry conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the operational feasibility and financial burden these measures may impose on smaller enterprises? Understanding the rationale and considerations behind implementing such stringent measures across diverse business sizes is critical. Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, the success of this Bill hinges not only on the strength of its provisions, but also on the effectiveness of its implementation. The Bill emphasises coordination amongst various Ministries and agencies, such as the Gambling Regulatory Authority which oversees the Casino Control Act, amongst others. What measures are in place to ensure seamless coordination and avoid potential jurisdictional conflicts? Can the Minister elaborate on the framework designed to facilitate this interagency collaboration? Fourth, Mr Speaker, Sir, while I recognise the necessity of information sharing to combat financial crime, it is critical to ensure that individual privacy is protected. The Bill also addresses the sharing of information among Suspicious Transaction Reporting Officers and regulatory bodies. What safeguards are in place to protect individuals' privacy? How do we ensure that the information shared is used solely for its intended purpose? Is there a timeline when information shared needs to be destroyed after its intended use?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill represents a significant step in strengthening Singapore's fight against financial crime. The proposed amendments, aimed at enhancing law enforcement capabilities, streamlining asset management and aligning regulatory frameworks with international standards are commendable. While I support the Bill's overall objectives, I would like to seek some clarifications. First, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have some queries with regard to the potential impact on specific groups. For instance, the reduction of the transaction threshold for customer due diligence checks in casinos, from S$10,000 to S$4,000, raises questions about its effect on small business owners and patrons who rely on these establishments for legitimate recreational or business purposes. In particular, whilst $4,000 is not an insignificant amount, the much-lowered sum of $4,000 may reduce the attractiveness of the casinos to tourists. They may be put off by the additional due diligence process. Can the Minister provide data or studies that justify this reduction and its projected impact on these stakeholders? We should find a balance between allowing the genuine punters who are here to enjoy the thrill of gambling versus those who are here to game the system and wash their ill-gotten gains in criminal activities. Otherwise, we will be suffocating the very clients who are essential to the casinos to keep afloat and contribute to the tourism traffic in Singapore. Furthermore, the money launderers from the recent high-profile cases or convictions know that they will keep a wide berth from using Singapore as their playground. There is no lack of alternatives in the region for them to move around.”
“We must also ensure that robust measures are in place to sustain the high standards of surveying work that are synonymous with Singapore. Firstly, the timing of this Bill in relation to the still developing ARS scheme raises concerns that must be addressed. Secondly, we must safeguard the interests of our Singaporean surveyors against unfair competition and ensure genuine reciprocity in professional mobility within ASEAN. Thirdly, stringent verification of qualifications and rigorous quality assurance mechanisms are non-negotiable aspects of upholding our professional standards. Only through careful consideration, thorough planning and a commitment to transparency can we ensure that this Bill achieves its intended goals of regional integration, without compromising the interests of our local surveying professionals. I support this Bill.”
“Given that laws, regulations and even established methodologies can vary among countries, should we consider mandating that ASEAN surveyors, before practising here, undertake a mandatory familiarisation programme? This programme could focus on Singapore-specific surveying regulations, legal precedents and common practices. Additionally, Mr Speaker, Sir, are the instruments and technologies used in other ASEAN nations directly compatible with our own standards and systems? If not, how do we ensure uniformity and accuracy when integrating data collected using potentially disparate methodologies? Should foreign surveyors be required to utilise equipment that aligns with Singapore's standards while operating here? This, again, highlights the need for a comprehensive integration process, perhaps through the mandatory familiarisation programme I proposed earlier. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, let us take a moment to consider the importance of land surveyors and land surveying. In a small and densely populated nation like ours, where land is an invaluable and finite resource, the role of land surveyors is critical. They are the guardians of our boundaries, ensuring the precise demarcation of every square metre. Their meticulous work underpins our property ownership records, our construction projects and even the management of our underground infrastructure. The very foundation of our built environment relies upon the expertise of our land surveyors. While I commend the intent behind the Land Surveyors (Amendment) Bill to foster greater collaboration and professional recognition within ASEAN, I believe it is imperative that we proceed with a measured and cautious approach. We must thoroughly examine the potential implications on our local surveyors.”
“How will we ensure that ASEAN-based surveyors possess the necessary qualifications and competencies for the scope of work required in Singapore? Will there be stringent and transparent verification processes in place to validate their credentials and ensure equivalence with our local standards? Moreover, I believe it is critical to address the issue of quality assurance. Will the work of foreign surveyors be subject to rigorous oversight by our local registered surveyors? To guarantee accountability and maintain the highest levels of professional rigour, should we consider mandating that a local registered surveyor co-signs the work of foreign surveyors engaged in projects within Singapore? Should there be any dispute on the work of these foreign surveyors, what recourse do potential clients have? Mr Speaker, Sir, beyond these key areas, I believe there are additional considerations that warrant our attention. Firstly, we must carefully examine the potential economic implications of this Bill on Singapore's surveying industry. Have we conducted a comprehensive impact assessment to fully understand how local surveyors and businesses, particularly smaller firms, will be affected by the increased competition? Secondly, we must address the question of potential differences in technological and methodological standards between Singapore and other ASEAN countries. Do such discrepancies exist? If so, how will we address them to ensure consistent, high-quality survey work across borders when projects involve professionals from different nations? Maintaining our standards of precision and accuracy necessitates a clear understanding of how we will navigate these potential differences.”
“Firstly, on the issue of competitiveness, have our ASEAN counterparts announced similar bills or schemes in their jurisdictions? If not, by being the first, will Singapore inadvertently disadvantage our local surveyors? The possibility of lower-cost ASEAN-based surveyors competing for jobs in Singapore could negatively impact the livelihoods of our local professionals. I urge the Ministry to clarify what measures are in place to protect our surveyors from unfair competition and ensure a level playing field. Furthermore, the principle of reciprocity must be carefully examined. Our local surveyors will be required to register with LSB to perform work overseas under this scheme. Yet, are our ASEAN counterparts equally prepared to accept Singaporean surveyors? Will our professionals face any red tape, bureaucratic hurdles or barriers in these foreign jurisdictions hindering their ability to compete for projects fairly overseas? Clarity on these reciprocal arrangements is essential to ensure that this Bill truly fosters mutually beneficial professional mobility within ASEAN. Do we know of any other ASEAN jurisdictions which may be implementing such an arrangement soon? Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, we need to uphold the highest standards of professional practice within the Singaporean surveying sector. While we seek greater regional collaboration, we should never compromise on the quality of surveying work conducted within our nation. To maintain these high standards, it is essential to ensure that foreign surveyors entering our market are adequately qualified and their work meet our stringent requirements. This raises the question of verification.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in response to the introduction of the Land Surveyors (Amendment) Bill 2024. I appreciate the Ministry's efforts to elevate and integrate Singapore's surveying profession within the ASEAN framework. The proposed amendments, particularly those facilitating the ASEAN MRA and the introduction of the ASEAN ARS, hold significant potential for strengthening the profession in Singapore and the region. However, while the Bill aims to enhance the mutual recognition of land surveyors within ASEAN, I have several clarifications on the Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, let us first consider the timing and rationale behind these proposed amendments. The Bill seeks to amend the Land Surveyors Act 1991. This is primarily to allow for mutual recognition of survey works under MRAs. I note that the ASEAN MRA on surveying services was signed in 2007. However, even after 17 years later, the detailed scheme has not been fully established. Why has there been such a notable delay in finalising the MRA? Is it prudent to implement this Bill when the details of the scheme remain unclear? Without the finalised details, how can we ensure that the mutual recognition arrangement will be beneficial and fair to our local surveyors? Can the Minister provide a timeline for when the details of the ARS scheme will be announced? Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask about the potential impact of this Bill on our local surveying professionals. We should support the vision of a more integrated ASEAN surveying landscape. Nonetheless, we must ensure that our local surveyors are not inadvertently disadvantaged by this process. Opening our market to ASEAN-based surveyors raises several concerns.”
“Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. Given that the acquisition involves a very well-established social enterprise, what considerations did MAS take into consideration regarding the potential shift in corporate culture and mission alignment post-acquisition? And secondly, looking ahead, how does MAS plan to monitor and evaluate the long-term outcomes of this acquisition in terms of social impact and financial inclusion?”
“We will also have a better picture of who are behind companies to ensure greater accountability and ease for culpability, should there be any illicit activities. These Bills are Singapore's commitment to ensure that companies operate within a framework that is not just stringent but also just. By establishing high standards of regulation, we are not only fortifying our defenses against financial crimes, but also enhancing the attractiveness of Singapore as a premier business hub. Increased trust and transparency are the cornerstones upon which businesses thrive and the two Bills are a beacon that signals to the world that Singapore is synonymous with integrity. They are a crucial step in safeguarding Singapore's financial system against misuse and in preserving the sanctity of our economic sovereignty. I support both Bills.”
“What provisions are in place to ensure that the day-to-day function of corporations or individuals who wish to incorporate new corporate entities are not disproportionately inconvenienced by these new regulations, which may reduce the number of CSPs in the short term? Are there additional financial costs to businesses? It is critical that our approach to combat financial crimes does not inadvertently cause more detriment to us. We must ensure that while casting our net wide to catch the perpetrators, we do not entangle ourselves in red tape and undermine our business efficiency. Our efforts should be precise and targeted. What are the risks that these new measures will deter potential investments by individuals seeking to relocate here? In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, the provisions in both Bills are indispensable in the wake of the massive money laundering cases that have recently come to light. These cases have imparted valuable lessons, emphasising the pivotal role of CSPs in our business ecosystem and their inadvertent link to money laundering activities. CSPs may be used, on purpose or heedlessly, to create complex corporate structures that can obscure the true ownership and control of assets. This makes it difficult to trace illicit funds. It is important for CSPs to maintain a high standard of compliance. This is to prevent their services from being misused for money laundering or other illicit financial activities. By ensuring that the particulars of controllers, nominee directors and shareholders are meticulously maintained and regularly updated, we are establishing a robust framework that deters illicit activities and fosters a more transparent business environment.”
“The inclusion of an appeal process for service providers to challenge decisions made by the Registrar is commendable. It establishes a robust system for review and ensures that fairness and due process are upheld. How will the CSP Bill ensure that the appeals process upholds the principles of fairness and transparency? In this connection, clause 23(2) of the CSP Bill states that a person who appeals the decision of the Registrar must specify the grounds of appeal. However, it is unclear if the Registrar will provide the grounds of the Registrar’s decision. The lack thereof may hinder the said person from submitting substantive grounds of appeal. Fifth, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we must comprehend the extent of these Bills' impact on businesses and proactively provide support to alleviate any foreseeable negative consequences. Has the Ministry conducted an assessment on the administrative and financial impact of these amendments on businesses? In recent months, we have seen a surge in new bills and policies introduced in response to the increase in financial crimes. However, there is a concern that businesses may struggle to keep pace with these rapid changes. Providing a clear implementation timeline empowers companies to proactively plan and adapt to the new requirements of the Bills. How will the Registrar ensure timely updates and accuracy in the registers? What support or guidance will be available to companies, especially small and medium enterprises, as they adapt to the new regulatory framework? Are there provisions in the CLLP Bill to assist businesses to transit to the new regulatory framework, such as training or grants? Sixth, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we must remain cognisant of our duty to serve the public interest without causing undue disruption.”
“Foreign entities are expected to have the same standard as local entities when it comes to registering their nominee directors. How will ACRA ensure that such registration is correct regarding foreign entities? Moreover, given the recent surge in money laundering cases, it is also critical to understand how the lessons learnt have been woven into the considerations of these Bills. How have insights from these cases shaped the registration and information-sharing criteria? Given that financial crime prevention is one of the key goals, what specific outcomes are expected in this regard? How will the success of these measures be quantified and evaluated? Second, Mdm Deputy Speaker, for these Bills to be truly effective, awareness and enforcement are necessary to ensure regulatory compliance. It is imperative that the regulatory actions and enforcement mechanisms outlined are not only stringent but also practical and implementable. How will the enforcement mechanisms outlined in the Bills discourage malpractice among service providers? What steps will be taken to monitor and warrant compliance? Can the Government also provide more details on the prescribed frequency and form of notifications to registrable controllers to ensure ample notice and awareness? Third, Mdm Deputy Speaker, it is important to strike a balancing act between transparency and data protection. In enhancing transparency, how does the CLLP Bill balance the need for openness with the protection of sensitive information? What measures are in place to prevent unauthorised access to the registers of nominee directors and controllers? Fourth, Mdm Deputy Speaker, can the Minister elaborate on mechanisms in place for appeals and legal protections?”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, both Bills are significant commitments to our ongoing efforts to fortify the foundations of corporate governance in Singapore. In recent times, our headlines have been marred by high-profile cases of money laundering. This is alongside a worrying trend in cybercrime. These incidents are not just isolated events; they are symptomatic of a larger issue that threatens the very fabric and integrity of our economy. These Bills are tabled with the presumption that they will serve as a bulwark against the misuse of our financial system. By regulating CSPs, we are taking a significant step towards safeguarding our economy from the perils of money laundering, proliferation and terrorism financing, which are critical for maintaining national and international financial integrity. In a globalised era where cross-border operations are the norm, mandating that foreign companies lodge returns on their registers sends a clear message that Singapore is committed to a level playing field where every corporate entity, both local and foreign, are held to the same stringent standards. While the intentions of the Bills are clear, I have several clarifications. First, Mdm Deputy Speaker, how will the Bills concretely improve transparency and accountability within CSPs, LLPs and all relevant business and companies? Mandating the registration of CSPs is a commendable move to maintain industry standards. However, it is imperative that these criteria emphasise not just qualifications, but also the reliability and integrity of the entities. Can the Minister elaborate on the mechanisms that will be employed to vet and verify the qualifications of CSPs? What mechanisms are in place to ensure that the information provided by company controllers is accurate and up-todate?”
“Ensuring that our information collected is updated is a critical part of this process. While I support this Bill, I urge the Ministry to address these concerns and provide a clear implementation plan with support mechanisms for businesses. Let us ensure that Singapore remains a competitive and compliant global financial centre through this digital transformation, but also one that is inclusive and protects data privacy. I support this Bill.”
“Both pieces of legislation aim to enhance our audit regulatory regime and introduce measures for better compliance with professional requirements and standards. This is a testament to our continuous efforts to strengthen our regulatory framework and maintain the highest standards of corporate governance. As someone who is not an accountant by training, but who has studied financial markets and econometrics, and works in an international investment firm, I view these changes as necessary and important from a private sector perspective. However, as mentioned above, I urge the Ministry to consider the following. First, digital inclusion. We must ensure a smooth transition for all stakeholders, including those with limited digital literacy or Internet access. SMEs, the backbone of our economy, may consider particular support to adapt to the new requirements. Second, data privacy. The Bill must have robust data protection measures aligned with international best practices to safeguard against breaches and misuse. Third, long-term effectiveness. We need a plan to monitor and evaluate the long-term impact of these changes to ensure that they achieve their objectives without unintended consequences. Singapore is an established international financial centre and we aspire to project ourselves further, to be a leading global financial centre in the world. Unfortunately, we have been recently hit by a series of high-profile money laundering cases. This Bill will tighten and enhance our measures vis a vis corporate governance, which will hopefully minimise such cases moving forward. In doing so, we will improve investor confidence in Singapore, in a world now increasingly fraught with uncertainty, especially with digitalisation and cybercrimes.”
“Are there specific countries or frameworks that influenced the drafting of this Bill? Understanding this can provide valuable insights into the strengths of our Bill and areas where we can improve. It can also help us ensure that Singapore remains competitive and compliant with international norms. Further to the above, I am heartened by the exclusion of residential address from public disclosure, if contact address is available, pursuant to the proposed new section 30C. In particular, the new provisions would prevent the misuse of the residential address of company officers. Such misuse may include the use of such residential address for the purposes of harassing officers for perceived wrongs of the company. Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, we must commit to a process of continuous monitoring and evaluation to ensure the long-term effectiveness and impact of the changes introduced by this Bill. Can the Minister explain the mechanisms that will be put in place to monitor and evaluate the long-term effectiveness and impact of these changes? We need robust systems that allow us to track the outcomes of our legislation and make necessary adjustments over time. Furthermore, how will the Ministry ensure that the Bill's objectives are being met without unintended negative consequences? Legislation, no matter how well-intended, can sometimes have unforeseen impacts. It is our responsibility to monitor these impacts and take corrective actions when necessary. Continuous monitoring and evaluation are essential for adapting and improving regulatory frameworks over time. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to draw parallels between the ACRA Bill and the Accountants (Amendment) Act, which I also spoke on in 2022.”
“An effective way to address the concerns of businesses and render the necessary support, is clear implementation and transition periods. This will give stakeholders time and resources to adapt. Can the Ministry provide detailed insights into the planned implementation timeline? A clear and manageable transition plan is critical to ensure that stakeholders are adequately prepared for the changes, reducing potential disruptions. We need to understand how these changes will be rolled out and over what time period. Furthermore, what support mechanisms are in place for entities to transition smoothly to these requirements? Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill must address data privacy concerns, while ensuring alignment with international standards. The Bill provides for the sharing of information, including personal data, with authorised information service providers and other public agencies. This is a matter of great significance, especially in an era where data breaches are increasingly common and global concerns about data privacy are at an all-time high. Can the Ministry elaborate on the specific measures that are in place to safeguard this data against breaches and misuse? In this data age, data is an asset, but it can also be a liability if not handled with the utmost care. We must ensure that the Bill aligns with the best practices in data security. We need robust data protection measures that not only comply with our national standards but also stand up to international scrutiny. As we strive to enhance our corporate regulatory regime and data management practices, it is critical that we benchmark ourselves against the best in the world. How does this Bill align with international best practices in corporate regulation and data management?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill represents a significant step forward in our journey towards digital transformation. Notwithstanding, I have several clarifications. First, Mr Speaker, Sir, the new regulations must ensure digital inclusion and smooth implementation for all stakeholders. The Bill mandates the use of electronic transaction systems for interactions with the Registrar. This move towards digitisation is commendable. It streamlines processes and increases efficiency. However, we must also consider the potential accessibility issues that may arise. There are individuals and small business owners who may lack digital literacy or access to reliable Internet services. The digital divide is a reality we must acknowledge and address. It is our responsibility to ensure that the benefits of digitalisation are accessible to all, regardless of their digital literacy or Internet accessibility, and that no one is left behind. We must consider and mitigate any negative impact on SMEs. SMEs are the backbone of our economy, providing employment, fostering innovation and contributing significantly to our gross domestic product (GDP). Therefore, for any regulatory changes, we must consider the potential impacts on these vital entities. While the Bill aims to streamline regulatory processes, I would like to ask what specific considerations have been taken to ensure that SMEs, which may not have the same resources as large corporations, are not disproportionately burdened by the new requirements? Specifically, these businesses may lack the resources to quickly adapt to new regulations. The costs of compliance can also be disproportionately higher for them. We need policies that support, rather than hinder these businesses.”
“Fifthly and finally, we must assess the global implications of the Bill. Singapore's attractiveness to foreign investors and its global standing as a transportation hub should not be compromised. In closing, while supporting the Bill, we must address these concerns to strike a balance between security, innovation, business viability, transparency and global competitiveness. We must ensure that the Bill enhances rather than hinders our transport sector's growth and resilience. Let us work together to strengthen our transport sector without impeding its progress and global competitiveness. I support the Bill.”
“How will this Bill affect our attractiveness to foreign investors and our overall standing in the global transport industry? We need to ensure that the Bill does not create unnecessary friction with our international trade partners who rely on Singapore's efficient transport system. Can the Government assure that the Bill will not unfairly disadvantage foreign companies, compared to local firms? Maintaining a level playing field is critical for attracting and retaining foreign investment in this vital sector. In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill seeks to enhance Government oversight over critical companies in our air, land and sea transport sectors, recognising their pivotal role in Singapore's economy and resilience. However, as we deliberate on this Bill, several key considerations emerge. First, we must balance security measures with fostering innovation within these firms, safeguarding our reputation as an innovative hub. Amendments to the Bill should aim at nurturing innovation while upholding security imperatives. Second, potential impacts on businesses necessitate scrutiny. The proposed designated entities regime may impose bureaucratic hurdles and deter investment, potentially affecting stock trading and operational efficiency. We need clarity on compliance costs and timelines for approval processes. Third, concerns arise regarding competition and consolidation within the sector. We must ensure that the Bill fosters healthy competition, preventing monopolies or duopolies that could stifle innovation and raise costs for consumers. Fourthly, transparency and an effective appeal process are paramount. The Minister's broad powers require clear justification and accountability mechanisms to prevent misuse.”