Hansard, 2007-05-22

Under the provisions of clause 2(d) of Article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, the following Members have been granted permission to be or to remain absent from sittings of Parliament (or any Committee of Parliament to which they have been appointed) for the periods stated: Name From (2007) To (2007) Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim 24 May 27 May Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee 04 Jun 12 Jun 25 Jun 29 Jun Mr Lee Kuan Yew 04 Jun 12 Jun Mr Lim Boon Heng 04 Jun 08 Jun Mrs Lim Hwee Hua 05 Jun 14 Jun

ABDULLAH TARMUGI Speaker Parliament of Singapore

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

1. Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) what PSLE qualifications are needed for students to be accepted into the School of the Arts; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider

accepting students who do not fulfill these academic requirements but display true artistic potential.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when the School of the Arts opens in 2008, it will offer a dedicated six-year pre-tertiary programme in the arts and other academic subjects for students who show early talent and have strong interest in the arts. Through its arts and academic programme, the School aims to nurture not just the next generation of artists, but also creative professionals and leaders in all fields with a strong grounding in the arts. In its admission process, the School therefore adopts a holistic approach that takes into account students' artistic talent, creative potential and academic aptitude.

Of these, the School's first criterion is artistic talent. This is demonstrated at the School's two-day Talent Academy where the students' artistic talent and potential will be assessed via individual auditions or portfolio presentations, group workshops and interviews by the School's faculty, and by reputable arts practitioners and specialist educators from Singapore and overseas. The School will make its offers to students based on their artistic talent and potential. Thereafter, students will need to qualify for the Express course based on their PSLE results before they are admitted to the School. Given the rigours of the International Baccalaureate diploma programme, which prepares students for tertiary programmes in universities and colleges, a student's academic aptitude, in addition to his or her artistic talent, serves as an important second criterion.

Nonetheless, I wish to assure this House that the School will take into

special consideration individual cases of students who have been assessed at the Talent Academy to have outstanding artistic talent and potential, but are unable to fulfil the PSLE admission requirements. For instance, five of the 97 students who have been identified by the School and have accepted the School's offer to join as Year 2 students in 2008 are such exceptionally talented students whose previous PSLE results did not qualify them for the Express course. Once admitted, the School is committed to develop all the students' potential - artistic or academic - to the fullest. Students with exceptional artistic talent but lacking in academic achievements will receive additional coaching to help them bridge the gap.

Sir, I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. I would like to ask the Minister why there is a minimum PSLE qualification as a criterion for entering into the School in the first place and how a minimum PSLE qualification is in line with an arts education, and whether or not the Minister will consider lowering the overall PSLE aggregate score for the next intake of students.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as I have said in my main answer, the School of the Arts is not just to train artists or arts professionals. It is to train young Singaporeans who are talented in the arts, and to give them the opportunity to develop both their artistic side and also their academic side. Having said that, we understand that there is interest among some students who may not have the academic ability but who have demonstrated that they have the artistic talent. As I have said earlier on, we would certainly consider this on a case-by-case basis. But I think we should not embark on a School of the Arts on the basis that it has no interest in fostering academic excellence - that anyone who has an

artistic capability or interest will be welcomed, regardless of their academic achievement.

We should start a school on the basis that it has to meet expectations, and it has to serve a range of student population and their parents. Mind you, these are 13-year-old kids - these are not adults - coming to the School of the Arts. Their parents will also be very concerned if they send children to a school which has no emphasis on academic excellence. How many parents would be prepared to embark their children on a course of study at age 13, which will channel them narrowly in one single direction and have no option to do other things? I think we should give the parents this reassurance - that the School of the Arts is, in fact, a comprehensive school, a school that offers academic excellence and, at the same time, develops the artistics side of their children. In that way, we can ensure that the School will do well, that it will provide good service, and that it will bring up young generations of Singaporeans who are equally well-versed in academic subjects as well as in their artistic area. If we do not do that, I think we are headed in the wrong direction and we will not give the School the opportunity to develop fully.

2. Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Law what measures will the Government take to ensure that en bloc property sale committees exercise transparency, act fairly and do not abuse its powers.

Sir, all en bloc sales without 100% owners' consent must be approved by the Strata Titles Board. Advance notice of an

application for en bloc sale must be sent to all owners. An owner who does not agree to the en bloc sale can file an objection with the Board. The Board takes all objections seriously and examines them very carefully. For example, if there is an objection on the method of distribution of the sale proceeds, it will look into how the method of distribution was determined. As another example, if an objection is raised on the sale being by private negotiation, the Board may look into the reasons why it was not done via a tender exercise.

Hence, I would like to assure Mr Chiam that the Strata Titles Board is not a mere rubber stamp which approves an en bloc sale application just because the required 80% or 90% majority has agreed to the sale. Indeed, the Board will dismiss the application if it is satisfied that the transaction was not done in good faith and in an aboveboard manner. Thus, the Board had, on two occasions, dismissed the applications because the procedures set out in the legislation were not complied with.

Sir, we are always reviewing the procedures to see how they can be improved. For example, in 2004, as a result of feedback received, we improved the process by requiring regular updates on the number of owners who had executed the Collective Sales Agreement to be put up in the development in the four languages and also requiring that the CSA be signed by the required majority within 12 months, so that all owners, whether or not they have signed the CSA, will not be kept in suspense for an indefinite period.

Nevertheless, MinLaw believes that there is room for some tightening of the en bloc sale procedures. This is why, during the recent Committee of Supply debate, the Minister for Law announced that a study team reviewing our en bloc sale legislation had made some important

recommendations, for which MinLaw would put out a paper for public consultation. One of the proposed changes is that the setting up of an en bloc sale committee must be done at a general meeting convened by the management corporation. Not only will this make for better accountability, it will also serve as notice to all owners of a possible en bloc sale initiative being started.

The public consultation closed recently on 12th May. We received quite a lot of feedback. We are now evaluating the feedback received. I expect that many useful points will be incorporated into the final amendment Bill.

Sir, the sale committee is perhaps the most important component in the en bloc sale process. It appoints the agent to sell the whole development and it also appoints the solicitors, and I think it has got a duty to appoint the valuers. Therefore, it must be properly appointed. Usually, an en bloc sale involves millions of dollars, and I think their responsibility is very great. So, I hope the Minister will incorporate some statutory measures to make sure that the sale committee is properly appointed.

Sir, as I have said in my main reply, Mr Chiam will be very pleased to note that this is a key recommendation of the proposed consultation. Proposal No. 3 says that the sale committee must be properly constituted at a general meeting where members will be informed, notice served, and they come and elect the sale committee. Indeed, another suggestion that we are looking at is that the minutes of the sale committee should be posted on the notice board so that all owners, whether majority or minority, will be kept au fait with the discussions.

Sir, I wonder if the Minister can make it possible for some of the flat owners to exchange one for one; in other words, their old property to exchange for a new one, when the new ones are developed, in the same place. Usually, for the older citizens who stay in a place for a long time, they would like to remain there. But, of course, that is not possible unless they exchange one for one. I think they also do not like the hassle of finding alternative accommodation. I wonder if the Minister can incorporate this provision into the law.

Sir, this is one area where we should leave it to the owners to decide, because not all owners may want a replacement flat. Different people have different considerations. But I know on the ground that owners who want a replacement, in fact, negotiate with the developers who are buying the property. This has happened in some of the developments. So, let the owners negotiate with the developers and get a deal that suits them.

3. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Education if he will provide an update on the measures that our education institutions have in place to identify and manage students with early psychosis who may pose a danger to fellow students or staff.

Mr Speaker, Sir, psychosis is a mental health condition that can distort a person's perception of reality. A person who has this illness may show other symptoms such as hallucinations, disordered thinking or abnormal behaviour. It is a treatable condition and full recovery is possible, especially when

it is detected early and given the appropriate medical treatment.

Our schools have in place a tiered referral system, under which students who exhibit signs of problems in their psychological or mental well-being are referred for help.

At the first tier is the teacher. If the teacher detects anything amiss, she will provide the child with the necessary support, including referring him or her for further intervention by the trained teacher counsellors (TCs), part-time or full-time school counsellors (PTSCs or FTSCs), who form the second tier of support.

Complicated cases are referred to the third tier of support, which usually involves intervention from mental health professionals from external agencies, such as the Child Guidance Clinic in the IMH.

Follow-up support is also a crucial component of the treatment plan to help individuals with psychosis recover and reintegrate back into normal daily life. When these students return to school following treatment, the school personnel work closely with the parents to provide the appropriate socio-emotional support. Teachers also take the cue and advice from the psychiatrist regarding the student's readiness to resume the various daily activities in school, as well as monitor his/her post-hospitalisation or post-treatment behaviour.

To better equip our school personnel to support students with psychotic disorders, training courses have been organised for the full-time school counsellors in the secondary schools and junior colleges/centralised institute this year. The training includes signs and symptoms of psychosis and ways to engage the student, his or her parents and the other teachers. The different sources of support provided by the Institute of Mental Health under the Early Psychosis Intervention Programme (EPIP) and ways

to re-integrate the student back to school are also covered in the course.

Our ITEs, polytechnics and universities have also set up similar systems for detecting and supporting troubled students. These include providing training on the signs and symptoms of psychosis, and how to support and refer such students to the appropriate helping services. Some have also established close collaboration with the Institute of Mental Health through the EPIP.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the MOS for providing a comprehensive answer to the Question. It was reported in USA Today on May Day itself that up to 14.9% of the United States' college students have clinical signs that satisfy clinical depression. And amongst these, 38% are taking medication and 25% are in other forms of therapy for depression. I would like to ask the MOS: is the Ministry of Education actively collecting data and monitoring the trends of psychiatric disorders amongst students in our schools and the varsity? And with reference to the unfortunate incident in Virginia Tech in Maryland, what more can be done to detect these students and treat them early?

I think the data that we have shows that in 2006, only 31 out of a total of 7,155 cases of schizophrenia, which is the most common form of psychosis, were diagnosed for patients under 18 years by the Child Guidance Clinic of the Institute of Mental Health. That is the data that we have right now. With regard to what happened in the University of Virginia, as I have mentioned in the reply, our polytechnics, universities and institutions of higher learning actually have a system in place where there are people who are on the lookout for such developments or such symptoms arising. The difference of course is that we hardly have instances

where people have access to weapons which I think, in part, accounted for the tragedy that happened in the United States recently.

I would like to ask the MOS whether there are any programmes in place in schools, not only to train the counsellors and the teachers, but also to raise awareness amongst students about the challenges and problems that students with psychotic problems face, because the feedback I get is that such problems do carry a stigma and some of these in the schools can result in the student being isolated, marginalised or picked upon, and that does not help in their rehabilitation. So I think a much broader-based awareness problem is necessary to be put in place for teachers and students as well. Are there any plans to do that or are there already programmes of this nature in schools?

I think the areas that we are actually paying greater attention to right now will be dyslexia, autism as well as, for example, other behavioural problems which are more common based on the incident rates compared to what we know of psychosis. The full-time school counsellors are still an early element in terms of their introduction into the schools and certainly, we are working towards making the full use of this capability and resource in the schools to further educate our school children in all these different signs and symptoms that they should look out for, as well as to also help them understand how to better work with some of these children who may display such signs and symptoms over time.

Sir, I would like to find out whether there are such programmes or whether staff in the preschool arena are being trained to identify such cases because we know that

some of these cases actually surface very early on and the earlier the intervention is done, the better it is because the preschool area is one of the areas where these programmes are lacking.

Specifically on psychosis, international studies from countries like Australia and US indicate that the onset of psychosis occurs most commonly in late teenage and young adult years, from 16 years and onwards. At least, in reference to this particular area, I do not think we will want to be introducing any specific programmes into the preschool level at this point in time.

4. Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Education in light of the recent report where a girl was stripped and beaten by her friends in school, (a) how often do such incidents occur in schools and what is the Ministry doing about it; and (b) whether there is a way for parents to help.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me assure the House that MOE views such incidents seriously and that such incidents of extreme bullying are infrequent.

We have provided schools with comprehensive guidelines to manage discipline in schools. Within these guidelines, each school formulates its own set of specific rules and measures taking into account the student profile. The focus is on ensuring a safe school environment for all pupils.

Our schools manage discipline through a combination of proactive and intervention measures. The preferred approach is to prevent such incidents. We have programmes to raise students' awareness of potential discipline problems including bullying and to equip pupils with

the knowledge and skills to handle challenging situations, such as help-seeking, self-management, relationship management and responsible decision-making.

Schools also intervene to manage bullying and other forms of misbehaviour. Depending on the seriousness of the offence, schools use a combination of counselling, mediation and disciplinary measures to educate and correct offenders. We have full-time and part-time School Counsellors to complement the efforts of teachers to help both the bully and the bullied through counselling and mediation. Schools may also resort to disciplinary measures, which range from corrective work, detention, suspension to caning.

Certainly, parents are important partners not only in this but in all aspects of education. The schools welcome and value the support of parents when dealing with disciplinary cases. Such parental support will help the children better learn from the experiences. It will also make the effort to prevent and resolve the cases more effective. In addition, for those bullied, we would encourage the parents to alert the school of such incidents as soon as possible so that the authorities can take necessary action to deal with them.

I thank the MOS for his reply. He mentioned that incidences are infrequent which I am glad to hear although, from my own feedback, it seems to be increasing. I want to ask the MOS whether, based on the statistics that we have collected, we are seeing an increasing trend. And if so, what more can we do from the Ministry, the schools and even the teachers?

We have a school offences module and bullying is classified as a serious offence. In 2005, the average number of incidents per

1,000 pupils was 3.4, ie, 3.4 incidents per 1,000 students in the primary and secondary schools. In 2006, this was 3.7 incidents per 1,000 pupils. So I would classify this as infrequent. The way we have approached it is not to prescribe specific measures that schools should undertake to deal with this problem, but we give them a range of possibilities and the schools will then adapt and adopt this, depending on the profile of the students. Some even resort more to disciplinary measures. Some may prefer to use the approach where they go through mediation, counselling, restorative conferences and so on, in order to try and bring about a reconciliation between the bullied and bullying.

Just one final supplementary question. In terms of the nature of the cases of bullying that are being reported, do we see that the intensity has taken a different fold? I also want to caution the Ministry that these are known cases. I think there are many unreported cases which may not be captured.

We note the last point and certainly, we are mindful that for every incident that is reported, there may be a certain number that may not be reported or classified accordingly. The incident that the Member was referring to was a very serious incident where not only was the young lady threatened, but there was possible extortion in this particular incident as well. I want to say that for most of the incidents of bullying that we come across, they are of a very different nature altogether and such extreme incidents of bullying are even more rare.

The following Question stood in the name of Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim -

5. To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs whether he can provide an update on the measures taken to manage the increasing number of drink driving cases.

Question No. 5, Sir.

Sir, the number of persons arrested for drink driving increased by about 30%, from about 2,930 persons in 2004 to 3,730 persons last year. For the first quarter of this year, SPF arrested 920 persons for drink driving, an increase of 22% over the same period last year. Slight injury accidents related to drink driving also increased, from about 200 cases in 2004 to 260 cases in 2006 while fatal and serious injury accidents related to drink driving have remained stable over the past three years, registering 38 cases, 28 cases and 32 cases in 2004, 2005 and 2006 respectively.

Sir, Traffic Police (TP) has intensified its efforts to curb drink driving, adopting a three-pronged approach, that is, legislation, enforcement and education.

Legislation is constantly reviewed to ensure that they remain relevant and provide adequate deterrence to road users. In 1990, MHA strengthened the Road Traffic Act (RTA) to increase the penalties for drink driving, in particular, to impose mandatory jail term for repeat offenders. In 1996, when breath alcohol concentration measurement equipment became more reliable, the RTA was amended to include the use of breath alcohol levels as evidence. A provision was added that as long as a driver has a blood or breath alcohol concentration higher than a prescribed limit, he would be guilty of an offence.

The Traffic Police will complement tough laws with rigorous enforcement

efforts to curb drink driving. Hence, road blocks are conducted island-wide every night with more road blocks conducted on weekends, holidays and during the festive periods, when motorists are more likely to drink and drive.

Sir, education to influence the mindset of road users is a more effective long-term solution towards reducing drink driving cases. As part of TP's on-going effort to spread anti-drink driving messages, TP and the Police Licensing Division have implemented a new scheme that requires selected classes of liquor licence holders to display anti-drink driving posters at their licensed premises starting 1st July last. These anti-drink driving posters serve to remind patrons of the serious consequences of drink driving. All classes of liquor licence holders will be included in the scheme in December this year.

In recent years, TP has also adopted a targeted approach in its anti-drink drive education efforts. For example, TP has been working closely with the key stakeholders to drive home the anti-drink driving message. Some key initiatives include arranging with taxi operators to provide taxi services at various entertainment outlets, country clubs and restaurants, and appealing to hotels, discotheques, pubs, karaoke lounges, night clubs and other entertainment outlets to look after their drunk patrons by arranging for taxis or car jockeys to send their patrons home.

Anti-drink driving messages have also been disseminated through various platforms, such as television commercials, radio broadcasts, newspapers, banners, posters and other forms of outdoor advertisements.

Sir, let me say that all of us can play a part to curb drink driving. For example, when friends visit a pub, they should designate someone amongst them to drive. Make this the "cool thing" to do.

Family members can constantly remind their loved ones not to drive when they drink. Indeed, if anyone sees friends and loved ones who have drunk try to drive, they should stop them. As in the case of drugs, we must adopt a zero tolerance approach to drink driving.

6. Prof. Thio Li-ann asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) what steps have been taken to address the concerns expressed by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, which oversees the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), in its 2001 Concluding Observations on Singapore's Initial and Second Periodic Report; (b) what has been done to promote CEDAW principles to the public and private sector and to disseminate the Committee's Observations to Singaporeans at large; (c) whether the Government will consider withdrawing any of its reservations to CEDAW; and (d) whether it has adopted the recommendation of the Committee to study reforms in relation to Muslim personal law in other countries with similar legal traditions and, if so, what are the findings of such study.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore is committed to the advancement and well-being of women. Following our presentation to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women in 2001, the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports (MCYS), together with the Inter-Ministry Committee (IMC) on CEDAW, have been reviewing our policies, laws and services

to meet the changing needs of society and our women.

These include:

Amending our nationality law so that a Singaporean woman can transfer nationality to her child when she marries a foreigner and the child is born overseas. A Constitution (Amendment) Bill was passed on 19th April 2004.

Removing the quota on the intake of female medical students in 2003 to give men and women equal opportunity to read medicine at the National University of Singapore.

Addressing gender wage differentials by issuing a Tripartite Declaration, by the Ministry of Manpower (MOM), National Trade Unions Congress (NTUC) and Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF), on Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Performing Work of Equal Value in November 2002. We also ratified the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention 100 on Equal Remuneration to signify our commitment to equal pay for equal work.

Encouraging equality in gender roles in the family through our parenthood programmes so that both men and women, fathers and mothers are able to harmonise work and family life. The measures include childcare leave for both parents, longer maternity leave and financial support for the family.

Regarding the Committee's concern about the low representation of women in politics and decision-making positions, we have seen some improvements. In 2004, 12% or 10 out of the 84 elected Members of Parliament were women and five out of the nine Nominated Members of Parliament (NMPs) were women. Following the May 2006 General Elections, 17 of the 85 MPs, or 20% of them,

are women. And of the 17, four hold political office. Five out of nine NMPs are women.

In the public sector, as at January 2006, women constituted 56% of the civil service and formed 54% of the officers in the Division 1 and Superscale categories. As at February 2007, four out of 18 Permanent Secretaries are female and there are eight female Deputy Secretaries out of a total of 27 Deputy Secretaries.

The CEDAW reports and the Committee's Concluding Comments have been posted on the MCYS website for public information.

The reservations to CEDAW are to five Articles, namely:

Articles 2 and 16, which require States Parties to take all appropriate means, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices that constitute discrimination against women;

Article 9, on the granting of equal rights with men to acquire, change or retain nationality;

Article 11, which requires States Parties to take steps to eliminate discrimination in employment; and

Article 29(1) which provides for disputes to be submitted to arbitration.

Singapore has studied the possibility of withdrawing the reservations and decided that it is necessary and important to retain them. For example, in recognition of our multi-racial and multi-religious society, the reservations on Articles 2 and 16 are needed to protect the rights of minorities in the practice of their personal and religious laws. Besides consulting

MUIS, the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore, Syariah Court and the Registry of Muslim Marriages, consultations were also held with women's groups and Muslim women's groups.

Most combat vocations in the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) are open to women, such as in the areas of artillery, signals and air defence. However, Singapore has entered a reservation under Article 11(1) as women are excluded from a very small number of combat vocations, such as those which require considerable physical strength. Operational and safety considerations are also taken into account to safeguard the welfare of women and their unborn children from hazardous occupations.

Singapore's reservation to Article 29(1), which is expressly permitted by Article 29(2) of the Convention, was entered to maintain Singapore's right to its domestic policies.

With regard to the reservation on Article 9(2), the Singapore Constitution was amended in April 2004 to allow Singaporean women to transmit citizenship by descent to their foreign born children. We are currently reviewing this reservation.

The Muslim authorities have followed up on the Committee's recommendation to study Muslim personal law reforms in countries with similar legal traditions. Research is still on-going.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I like to also thank the Nominated MP, Prof. Thio, for moderating the CEDAW session with women's groups on 21st April 2007. Both the IMC members and participants had commended her for her professional and even-handed management of the queries and comments at the session.

Sir, I thank the Minister of State for her

very detailed response. I would like to ask whether she thinks that the principles of CEDAW, which talk in terms of eliminating gender discrimination, should be incorporated into the educational curriculum, so that children from a young age can be taught not to adopt gender stereotypes.

Mr Speaker, Sir, regarding the attitude of boys and girls, I am glad that gender stereotyping is not an issue in the school curriculum. I also understand that, today, boys and girls can choose any topic like home economics, design or technology courses. There is no discrimination.

Another very important factor is the home. Today, we have domestic assistants or helpers at home. We need to balance the role of the boys and girls at home. When preparing meals in the kitchen, for example, children should help each other irrespective of gender.

Besides this, my Ministry, through the Family Life Education and Lifeskills, which are key components in Civics and Moral Education, also encourage both husband and wife, father and mother, to share their parenting role in bringing up their children. I think the father's role at home is very important.

I understand that through the media, the newspapers and so on, we also try to ensure that a balanced image of both women and men is portrayed. The same treatment applies to all textbooks and education materials. For example, I understand that women are shown playing soccer and some publications show female MPs debating in Parliament, just like what we are doing now.

Sir, we will do our best to have a multi-pronged approach to avoid gender stereotyping.

7. Prof. Thio Li-ann asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports whether the Government will consider acceding to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women to promote the implementation of treaty rights and obligations.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has considered this issue carefully and decided that we would not accede to the Optional Protocol. It is described as 'Optional' as States Parties are not obliged to accede to it. The majority of signatories to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women have not acceded to this Optional Protocol. The provisions of the optional protocol infringe on a nation's sovereignty by enabling the United Nations CEDAW Committee to consider complaints from an individual or group within the State's jurisdiction who claims to be victims of violation of CEDAW and commence inquiry procedures pursuant to these claims.

In Singapore, the Government Ministries, the Courts, and ultimately Parliament, are well able to investigate complaints of discrimination, provide redress, and ensure a legislative and policy framework that ensures that women enjoy full and equal rights. There is still work to be done, but we will do it ourselves in our own way without foreign interference. This remains a fundamental principle of governance in Singapore.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State whether her Ministry actually receives any complaints

from Singapore women who feel that their rights under CEDAW have been violated and, if so, what kind of action is taken.

Sir, so far, we have not received any specific complaints in this area, but we do organise periodical feedback. I am sure the women MPs also organise various feedback. REACH, under the chairmanship of Dr Amy Khor, conducts a lot of tea sessions with women and women's groups. I myself, under the Women's Desk, which is the national women's machinery for Government to oversee women's issues, together with the inter-Ministry committees of other Ministries, oversee all these areas. And in each Ministry, they have a formal channel to monitor any complaints. We also have an independent judiciary system to receive any complaint if people want to go through this channel

8. Er Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for National Development, following the recent hike in housing property prices, whether he will consider raising the salary cap for prospective buyers of public housing to allow more people to qualify for the purchase of a flat directly from HDB.

Mr Speaker, Sir, currently, only households earning not more than $8,000 per month are allowed to buy a flat directly from HDB. For extended families buying a subsidised HDB flat to stay together, they will enjoy a higher household income ceiling of $12,000 per month.

The purpose of the income ceiling is to ensure that the Government's limited public housing subsidies are given to

those who need them more. With the current income ceiling, about eight out of 10 Singaporean households can qualify for housing subsidies. This is more than generous by any standard.

Families whose household income exceeds the income ceiling have various other housing options available to them. For example, they can buy resale HDB flats from the open market, as these are not subject to any income ceiling. Those with a monthly household income of up to $10,000 can also buy a new Executive Condominium (EC) unit with an EC Housing Grant.

Nevertheless, we recognise that there may be cases deserving special consideration. For example, a household that exceeds the income ceiling marginally may have heavy financial commitment arising from the medical expenses of a family member. For such situations, HDB may exercise flexibility on a case-by-case basis to allow deserving households to purchase a subsidised HDB flat.

My Ministry will continue to monitor and review its policy on income ceiling to ensure that the majority of citizen families can enjoy subsidised public housing.

9. Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for Transport, in view of the recent announcement on the increase in Electronic Road Pricing rates, (a) how much does the Ministry expect to collect in a year; (b) why is the price increase necessary; and (c) what is the money collected to be used for.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the objective of the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) system is to keep our roads free-flowing.

It does so by using price to spread traffic to other times and to alternative routes that are not as congested and, in this way helps to optimise the utilisation of our entire road network. To fully realise the benefits of the ERP system, the rates are set such that traffic on our roads and expressways flows smoothly, neither overly congested nor under-utilised, and allowing for maximum traffic to be carried.

As traffic conditions change over time, ERP rates will have to be reviewed and adjusted from time to time. Hence, the LTA carries out reviews of the traffic conditions quarterly, and the ERP rates are adjusted accordingly. Reviews are also conducted during the June and December school holidays when ERP rates are adjusted downwards in recognition of the lower traffic volumes during the school holidays. LTA's recent ERP quarterly review showed that the city-bound CTE speeds have dropped below the threshold of 45 kilometres per hour. Hence, the ERP rates have to be adjusted upwards to bring about the optimal usage of the CTE throughout the day.

As for ERP revenue, Government collected $91 million in FY 2006. The revenue collected goes into the Government's Consolidated Fund, which funds the various Government programmes for the benefit of all Singaporeans.

Sir, at one debate in this House, I pointed out that although the price had increased at the Braddell Road gantry, the congestion was still present. I wonder whether the Government is willing to hold a feasibility study before it increases the fee at a gantry, to ensure that the fee increase will, in fact, solve the problem, which is what is intended.

Sir, allow me to explain how the ERP pricing is done and the whole philosophy behind it. First of

all, let me state

that without the ERP system, the CTE would today be in gridlock. If we were to take the case of the most congested period of the north-bound CTE, for example, for the period from 6.30 pm to 7.30 pm, the traffic speeds have actually improved from, before the implementation of the ERP, about 26 kilometres per hour to 48 kilometres per hour. Secondly, motorists, by and large, consider the entire journey experience in deciding whether to use a particular route. Hence, to determine if the ERP charge at the gantry on the north-bound CTE needs adjustment, we measure the average speed over the distance from the Bukit Timah entry to the Ang Mo Kio Avenue 1 exit. In this case, the existing ERP gantry is somewhere mid-stream between the start and the end of this stretch. It is possible that on parts of this stretch, the speeds may well fall below 45 kilometres per hour from time to time. However, over the entire stretch, the average speeds would be above 45 kilometres per hour.

10. Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for Manpower if he will review the lowered maid levy issue and implement a new set of maid levies to reflect the economic status of employers and take into account the needs of their children and the elderly so that those who can afford to do so will pay more and those who are less well-off will pay less or are even exempted from paying the levy.

Sir, the foreign domestic worker levy has been reduced over the past few years from $345 in 2003 to $295 in 2005. In addition, a concessionary levy of $200 is already in place for employers who have young children or elderly members, and

later this year, for those who have disabled in their family. As previously announced, both the normal and concessionary levy will also be further reduced by $30, with effect from 1st July 2007, to $265 and $170 respectively.

Sir, our present system of allocation of maids favours the rich. Some rich people have as many as five maids. But some Singaporeans who are poor and who are really in need of maids cannot qualify even for one maid. So maybe the Government would like to change the system where it is more equitable to give those who are really in need of the maids a chance to have a maid.

Sir, we should not look at employing a foreign domestic worker as an entitlement. If Mr Chiam's concern is that this household who cannot afford a foreign domestic worker because of the levy should be assisted, then I think we have to be very prudent in our approach. It would not be desirable for foreign domestic workers to be hired by low-level families who have problems making ends meet. We have to be careful in managing the number and, at the same time, the welfare of foreign domestic workers because, when they are here, we want them to be well taken care of and well protected, and they should not be exposed unduly to the possibility of not being paid by the low-income family. I think we have to be very prudent in our approach in employing foreign domestic workers.

Secondly, hiring foreign domestic workers should not be the only solution for our households. There are already assistance schemes administered by the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports. There are schemes and programmes run by voluntary welfare organisations, in conjunction with the

Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports, to help children and the elderly, or the households who need assistance and who may not be able to afford hiring a maid.

Sir, surely the Government can build a more equitable system. For those who can afford, I think it is fair to make them pay, even two or three times. They can afford it. While those who are really in need, I think they should be given a maid, especially the husband and wife who are earning a living and they have children at home, and also there are elderly people to be taken care of sometimes. So can the Government not think of a system which is equitable - take from the rich and give it to the poor?

Sir, we have to be fair to the foreign domestic workers too and we must make sure that they are well taken care of while working in Singapore and they are paid on time while working in the household. I do not think it is an issue of being equitable. For the different households and some of whom may need extra assistance, they are already paying concessionary levy and, as I have mentioned earlier, the amount of concessionary levy has been reduced over the years. This should be able to help those who may need some extra assistance from the Ministry of Manpower.

One final question, Mr Chiam.

I think we are not talking about the payment to the maid. We are talking about the maid levy. So those people who can pay the maid levy should be made to pay. And those poor people who cannot afford, I think they should be given some concession because they have to make a living for themselves, their family and their elderly parents. That is the point of my question. Is it not possible whereby the wealthy should be made to pay for the less wealthy?

Sir, the levy is not a tax system. The levy is meant to regulate the number of foreign domestic workers in Singapore. And we have to have a levy system to ensure that only those who can afford it would be able to employ a foreign domestic worker. For those who may need some assistance but cannot afford to pay the salary of the foreign domestic worker and/or the levy, then they should find other assistance schemes which are already made available by our Government agencies. We should not treat employing a foreign domestic worker as the only solution to all the problems in the household.

11. Prof. Thio Li-ann asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) what financial and non-financial assistance are available to the vulnerable sectors of society, such as widows with children who are unable to work or are otherwise unemployable and whether there is systematic aid, as opposed to ad hoc aid; and (b) whether his Ministry will actively co-operate with civil society groups such as Wicare, in ensuring that resources are provided for and do in fact reach those most in need of help.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for her concern about this issue. The Government, grassroots organisations and the voluntary welfare organisations have multiple financial and non-financial schemes to help low-income and needy Singaporeans cope with difficult phases of life and achieve self-reliance.

The ability to work is key to achieving self-reliance. Our schemes are therefore designed to encourage and support work. Examples of such schemes are the

Centre-Based Financial Assistance Scheme for Childcare (CFAC), and the Student Care Fee Assistance (SCFA) Scheme that enable parents to work while their children are cared for. The Kindergarten Financial Assistance Scheme (KiFAS) helps the low-income and needy to offset the cost of sending their children to kindergarten. The Baby Bonus can also be used to help defray the educational and medical costs of their children.

Those who are able to work, but need help to find employment, will be assisted under the ComCare Fund's Work Support Programme. They will receive employment assistance and financial assistance in addition to help with childcare and student care arrangements. Case management and employment-related training is also available. As at December 2006, 273 widows were on Work Support, the majority of whom have children.

We must also remember that the extended family has an obligation to support relatives who are less well off. This has been a key survival instinct for Asian societies, and we must maintain this noble tradition.

In extremis, those who are unable to work, and have no family support may be placed on the Public Assistance Scheme. As at December 2006, seven widows with young children were on the Public Assistance Scheme.

As part of our 'Many Helping Hands' approach, my Ministry works very closely with voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs).

The Family Service Centres (FSCs) and many VWOs provide many social services to vulnerable families, including specialised services, such as casework, counselling and support groups, to single parents, including widows, and their children.

The CDCs also actively work with VWOs and grassroots organisations to provide help to the needy. For example, the North West CDC has established a referral system with Wicare, to refer needy widows to Wicare to participate in Wicare programmes, while Wicare would refer needy widows to the CDC for financial assistance. In January 2007, for example, WiCare referred seven needy children to North West CDC, so that they could benefit from North West CDC's distribution of stationery and gift vouchers to needy students. The other CDCs also have similar referral systems with various VWOs and community groups within their districts.

More is being done to strengthen the cooperation between the CDCs and voluntary welfare organisations through the Comcare Local Networks platform. This platform will enable us to identify any gaps, and share ideas on how to more effectively reach out to the needy amongst us. All of us have a part to play.

12. Dr Lam Pin Min asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the take-up rate of the Green Mark Incentive Scheme (GMIS) by private developers since its implementation in December 2006; and (b) whether the scheme can be extended to include developments with gross floor area of less than 5,000 square metres and, if not, what are the reasons.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Green Mark Incentive Scheme (GMIS) was launched in December last year. BCA has approved nine applications since then. BCA ex

pects the number of applications to increase as many developers and designers have expressed interest in the scheme.

The main purpose of GMIS is to encourage developers and building owners to go for a higher Green Mark standard in their new building projects. To qualify for the incentive, a development has to attain at least the Green Mark Gold standard.

For a start, given the funds available, BCA has limited the incentive scheme to the larger developments, that is, those with gross floor area of more than 5,000 square metres, where there is ample scope and flexibility to incorporate green building designs and technologies. BCA is monitoring the response to the scheme, and will review its qualifying criteria after some time.

I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether there are plans for MND to mandate the use of environmentally-friendly green building technologies in future Government buildings and, secondly, whether he could provide an update on the $50 million research fund set up in 2005 for the construction and real estate sector to promote green building technologies.

Sir, on the question of mandating environmentally-friendly buildings, as of now, we want to promote the developers through incentives. I think we always want to try to encourage them so that there is greater buy-in rather than mandating them. Once you start mandating, I think the assumption is that they are not willing to do it and we are trying to tell them to do so. I think we will look at this programme and take a look at how the incentives work and work from there onwards. I do not have the information regarding the research fund as of now. But I would like to give the Member information later on.

13. Er Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for National Development, in view of the public consultation exercise, whether there is a need for further amendments to the proposed changes to the Building Control Act.

Mr Speaker, Sir, MND will be proposing amendments to the Building Control (BC) Act, with a view to enhancing the standards of safety, quality and professionalism in the construction industry. Many of the proposed amendments follow from the recommendations made by the Committee of Inquiry (COI) for the Nicoll Highway collapse, and the Joint MND-MOM Review Committee on Construction Safety.

The key amendments to the BC Act include regulating temporary earth retaining structures and other major geotechnical works, licensing builders, building a core of skilled localised workers, and requiring the appointment of site supervision teams. Other amendments include aligning the penalties of the BC Act to those of the Factories Act and other Acts, as well as making provisions to enable the Minister to convene formal inquiries and impose minimum standards on environmental sustainability.

As the proposed amendments have wide-ranging ramifications on the industry, the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) has consulted the industry stakeholders extensively over the last two years. In the latest round of consultation, BCA has received feedback on the draft Bill from the various industry associations, including the Singapore Institute of Architects (SIA), Institution of

Engineers Singapore (IES), Association of Consulting Engineers Singapore (ACES) and the Singapore Contractors Association Limited (SCAL).

Most of the feedback sought clarifications on the proposed amendments. There were also suggestions to refine the draft Bill and on the implementation details. MND and BCA will take these suggestions into consideration when finalising the draft Bill and drafting the detailed regulations.

14. Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Manpower (a) for which industries has the Commissioner of Labour exercised his powers under section 41A of the Employment Act to exempt employers from compliance with the Act since the enactment of that section; (b) how many employers have been granted exemptions; and (c) what obligations were exempted and what are the justifications for these exemptions.

Mr Speaker, Sir, section 41A of the Employment Act allows the Commissioner of Labour to grant two types of exemptions.

The first type gives flexibility to companies to provide for working hours that differ from what is specified in the Act. In 2005 and 2006, a total of 280 employers were granted such exemptions, for a maximum period of two years. They include security guard agencies, manufacturing, logistics and printing companies. To safeguard the well-being of workers, MOM will only approve such exemptions if the employer has obtained the consent of the employees to extend their overtime hours, demonstrated

compliance with other Employment Act provisions, shown a good track record in maintaining safety, health and employment standards, and secured the agreement of the unions in the company, if any.

The second type of exemption applies to a smaller number of employers who experience high volatility in the volume of work. For them, the requirements of the Employment Act, which assume a standard number of hours to be worked on a daily basis, would not be practical. For the workers, it is also not in their interest to earn a very low basic salary, but have a very high component in overtime pay, as their monthly income becomes highly unpredictable. The exemptions granted under section 41A enable these employers to pay the workers even when they are not needed to work, and to offset such payments against any overtime pay that may arise when the volume of work is high. In 2005 and 2006, 10 employers were granted such exemptions, also for a maximum period of two years. They were involved in activities, such as aerospace, the performing arts, manufacturing and logistics.

Sir, in the parliamentary debates in 2004, when this section was debated for passage, the Minister had indicated to the House that the Commissioner of Labour would require the employers applying for exemption to show how the profits which they have made from more efficient use of manpower would be shared with the workers. I would like to ask the Minister of State how the Commissioner of Labour monitors this, what does he require the employers to submit, and what is the follow-up to ensure that these benefits are shared with the workers.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when an employer submits an application for exemption, the employer would be required to submit the whole scheme of arrangement, including how it intends to share the profits or savings out of this flexible arrangement. Once that is established, the Ministry of Manpower will continue to monitor and to get feedback from the employer, as well as from the union, if the company is unionised, to ensure that this scheme is adhered to. For companies and employers who violated the Employment Act or the approval given by the Commissioner of Labour, action would be taken against them.

Sir, could the Minister of State also tell us whether the Commissioner of Labour has actually rejected any applications from employers, and also whether there have been any objections from unions in relation to any particular application?

Mr Speaker, Sir, of course, the Commissioner of Labour has received many applications from time to time and, where the applications do not warrant special consideration, these applications have been rejected, and every time when an application is submitted, the unions involved in that company have always been consulted. When the schemes do not warrant special consideration, the unions would also voice their objection.

Sir, just to follow up. Could the Minister of State please elaborate on whether there have been objections from unions and, if so, how many objections have there been? Also, in terms of the applications, which the Minister of State says were rejected by the Commissioner of Labour, do we know how many had been rejected in the last few years since the enactment of the section?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not have the specific number in hand. If the Member is interested, we will obtain the number for her.

The following Question stood in the name of Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim -

15. To ask the Minister for Education (a) whether there are plans to enhance awareness and encourage the adoption of the new Malay syllabus for Primary One to Four students to private education institutions teaching Malay Language as part of their syllabus; and (b) whether the review of the Malay Language curriculum looked into the needs of students with learning difficulties, such as dyslexia.

Question No. 15, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Education (MOE) publishes the syllabi of all subjects on the Internet. The Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board also publishes information of all examination subjects on its website.

In addition, MOE invites Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS) to attend briefings on changes in the ML syllabi and examination formats. For example, MUIS officials were present for the launch of the new Primary One to Four Malay Language Syllabus on 26th April 2007. We understand that MUIS shares the information with the madrasahs, which make use of our ML syllabus and textbooks to prepare their students for PSLE.

The new ML curriculum provides for differentiated learning by students with different levels of proficiency in the language. Students with learning difficulties, including dyslexia, are being supported on a holistic basis by Special

Needs Officers deployed in our schools and with expertise from relevant organisations like the Dyslexia Association of Singapore. In other words, the support is not limited to a particular subject, or, for example, the Malay Language, but to a whole range of different subjects altogether. Students with severe learning difficulties may also be given exemption from offering mother tongue language at national examinations.

16. Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) what is the cut-off time for outdoor performances in non-residential areas on mainland Singapore and what is the rationale for the timing restrictions under the public entertainment ad-hoc licence; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider easing the timing restrictions for outdoor performances, especially musical performances located in a non-residential area, so as to make Singapore a more vibrant city.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Media Development Authority (MDA) licenses arts entertainment events and, if these are staged outdoors, the MDA will seek advice from the police concerning the cut-off time. The MDA will determine the eventual timing for the event after considering all other factors.

Sir, factors considered in deciding on the cut-off time for outdoor arts entertainment events include proximity of the event location to residential areas, nature of the event, potential crowd size, and any past record of noise-related complaints from similar events. Going by past performances, and advice from the Police, the specified cut-off times for outdoor performances in non-residential areas range from 10.30 pm to 2.00 am.

MICA is committed to developing Singapore into a more vibrant and exciting global arts city. We will exercise flexibility in considering requests for later cut-off times for outdoor performances, especially if they are held in non-residential areas. This will need to be done on a case-by-case basis.

Sir, I have a feedback. For one of the events in March which was held on top of the Market Street Carpark on a Saturday night, I was only given up to like 10.30 pm. What are the main considerations and would the Ministry actually consider extending this cut-off time for all events in non-residential areas or outdoor performances to at least, say, 2.00 am?

Mr Speaker, Sir, as I have said, if a performance is held in an area where there are no residential premises nearby and there are unlikely to be any disturbances caused to other neighbouring areas, then we could consider appeals for extension. In fact, MDA had in the past received such appeals and they have, in some cases, where the condition warrants it, granted extension.

Let me give you the example of the case of World of Music and Dance (WOMAD). It was held at Fort Canning. The cut-off time for this particular event was extended to 4.30 am because, in the case of Fort Canning, there was nobody nearby who would be likely to complain about noise nuisance. So although the normal cut-off time is 2.00 am, on special appeal and because of the special occasion, MDA was able to consider granting the organisers' request to have it extended to 4.30 am.

We have also other events where we have considered extending the cut-off time. Another example that I can cite

would be a pop rock concert called Good Vibrations. Originally, the organiser wanted to hold it at an open vacant lot at Ophir Road. Of course, there were residential areas nearby. So the recommendation was to have it ended at 10.30 pm, so that it would not cause any disturbance to the residents and, in fact, there was also a hospital nearby. But when they appealed for extension of time, MDA was able to work with the organiser and say, "Look, if you move away from this location and go somewhere else, we will certainly consider a longer performance period and extend the cut-off time." Eventually, they were persuaded and they went to Fort Canning and were able to have the event continued until 1.00 am.

So we will consider every such appeal on a case-by-case basis. We will study the nature and location of the event and also the past record, how they had performed, and whether the late night or early morning events held at such places had given rise to any noise complaints. If there are no such concerns, we are quite happy to accommodate and to work with the organisers so that their proposals can be accommodated.

17. Dr Lam Pin Min asked the Minister for Health (a) if he will provide the incidences, mortality rates and morbidity rates of invasive pneumococcal disease in children over the past five years; and (b) what factors will bring about the introduction of pneumococcal vaccination in the National Childhood Immunisation Programme.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) is not a notifiable disease, we do not have the information on its incidence rate in

Singapore. But we do have the hospitalisation data, and that has been on a downward trend. Between 2004 and 2006, the hospitalisation rate for IPD has declined by almost a third. Last year, there were 55 cases of hospitalisation of children aged five years and below due to IPD.

IPD is not a major cause of morbidity in Singapore. As a comparison, there were some 20,000 cases of hospitalisation of children below the age of five each year.

In terms of mortality, there were three deaths from IPD in the past five years. That translates to a mortality rate of less than one per 100,000. Over the same period, there were about 700 deaths among children in this age-group.

Our IPD hospitalisation rate of 26 per 100,000 for children under five years of age recorded in 2006 is significantly lower than the US' rate of 97 per 100,000 which was recorded in 1998/1999, before the US included pneumococcal vaccination into its childhood immunisation programme. The US has since brought down its rate to 24 per 100,000 in 2003, which is comparable to our rate. So they are 24 per 100,000 and we are 26 per 100,000. The US experience shows that universal pneumococcal vaccination does not eradicate IPD.

Nonetheless, as the vaccine is safe and effective, vaccination is a viable option. However, for mass vaccination, its high cost is a major constraint. Currently, there is one manufacturer, and it costs up to $480 to vaccinate one child. Compare this to the existing childhood vaccination programme where the most expensive vaccination, ie, for diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough, which are the major causes of childhood morbidity and mortality in the past, together cost $40 per child.

So we will continue to monitor the cost-effectiveness and, if and when more competitively priced vaccines become available and significantly alter the cost-benefit ratio of pneumococcal vaccination, we will consider its inclusion in the childhood immunisation programme.

I would like to thank the MOS for the comprehensive answer. I think besides mortality, pneumococcal infection can also result in permanent morbidities, such as brain damage and permanent deafness. I was just wondering whether the cost of immunisation outweighs the cost to the society in cases where they develop brain damage and deafness in the long term.

Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to clarify that even though the vaccine is not included in the immunisation programme, it is available. So it is an option that parents who want to immunise their child can do so. But when you talk about mass immunisation, that is, without exception, every child that is born here, then we would have got to look at the cost-effectiveness of things and weigh it against how many people are likely to contract such a disease, and looking at the hospitalisation data to see whether or not that is the best course of trying to prevent some of the complications that Dr Lam mentioned. Certainly, in terms of the treatment of the cases that have surfaced, there would be every attention paid to it. We will continue to monitor the cost-effectiveness of it. We do not exclude this as a possibility but it is to look for a time where if the cost comes down to a level that can justify its inclusion, then we can consider it.

18. Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim asked the Minister for National Development if the Ministry will consider

extending the operating hours of Outdoor Refreshment Areas at HDB premises in suburban HDB estates that were originally designed as eating houses to further enhance the vibrancy of these locations.

Mr Speaker, Sir, currently, operators of HDB eating houses are allowed to operate Outdoor Refreshment Areas (ORAs) at their shopfronts from 6.00 am to 11.00 pm daily. The restriction in the operating hours of the ORA is necessary to prevent disamenities to residents, as the majority of these eating houses are located below HDB flats.

HDB has sought to meet the needs of both eating house operators as well as the residents by allowing the operation of ORA, but with appropriate conditions, such as restriction on operating hours. At a recent consultation session conducted by HDB to review and streamline ORA guidelines, the participants, comprising eating house operators and residents, had also proposed to retain it, so as not to cause disamenities to the neighbourhood and to maintain its residential character.

Nevertheless, there is no restriction on the operating hours within the eating house premises. They can continue to operate beyond 11.00 pm.

Sir, I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary if he can consider extending the operating hours of these ORAs in certain parts of the suburban estates just to add some vibrancy and perhaps use some discretionary exercise in allowing some of the ORAs to be extended, say, by one hour during weekends, especially when many residents watch football matches at the coffeeshops.

Sir, I think the current operating hours for ORAs are generous enough, up to 11.00 pm. As mentioned in my main response, it is trying to strike a balance between the needs of the residents in the neighbourhood as well as the operators of the eating houses. As much as we have tried to meet the request, often-times, there will be complaints or feedback that come across in terms of noise pollution. As of now, we are concerned, and we are quite comfortable with the fact that the hours given for ORAs up to 11.00 pm are quite sufficient to meet the needs of both parties.

Order for Second Reading read.

2.50 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Financial Procedure (Amendment) Bill before the House seeks to amend section 7(3) of the Financial Procedure Act to remove the need for the President to determine or authorise the investment of public moneys in securities or other instruments. The Minister for Finance, instead of the President, would determine or authorise the type of securities or other instruments in which public moneys may be invested. This amendment covers Government's investments managed by GIC. MAS has made similar amendments to the MAS and Currency Acts, which were passed in Parliament on 12th February this year, such that the MAS Board, instead of the President, would now approve investments in new securities and instruments for MAS' investments.

The rationale for this amendment is that the responsibility for approving

categories of investments is an executive function that appropriately resides with the Government, instead of with the President. Investment risks are better assessed and managed by Government and its investment agencies, since risk management is part and parcel of regular investment decisions and operations.

As such, the proposed amendment recognises that the role of the President is in the overall safeguarding and protection of past reserves rather than in approving specific categories of investments and assessing the risks involved in each category or each type of security. The President also approves the Board and CEO appointments of our key investment agencies, which include GIC Pte Ltd. The Government will also continue to report investment performance on past reserves regularly to the President.

The President has been consulted and agrees with the above amendments.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read.

2.54 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill 2007 comprises two groups of changes. The first group related to changes announced in Budget Statements 2006 and 2007. The second group covers other amendments to the Goods and Services Tax Act arising from regular reviews to improve our GST system.

A public consultation on the Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill that was drafted for the 2006 changes was conducted from 8th September to 6th October 2006. The draft Bill has been revised to incorporate the suggestions made by businesses.

GST budget changes

Let me first highlight the amendments related to the budget changes.

GST rate increase

To broaden our tax base, and to enable the Government to grow our economy and implement Workfare and other initiatives to strengthen social cohesion, the GST rate will be increased from 5% to 7% with effect from 1st July 2007. This change, which was actively discussed in this House during the recent Budget Statement debate, is reflected in clause 2 of the Bill.

Zero-rating treatment for prescribed tools used in the manufacture of goods for export

Presently, the supplies of tools made to overseas clients but used in Singapore for the manufacturing process attract GST. To enhance the cost-competitiveness of local manufacturers and to recognise that such tools are business inputs and do not constitute private consumption per se, the supply of prescribed tools made to overseas clients will be zero-rated, if the tool is used in Singapore exclusively for the manufacture of goods for export. Clause 5 of the Bill reflects this change.

GST exemption for prescribed Shariah-compliant financing arrangements

To promote Shariah-compliant financial activities in Singapore, the effective return arising from the provision of prescribed Shariah -compliant financing arrangements, in relation to the purchase of non-residential property, will be exempted from GST. The change will harmonise the GST treatment of prescribed Shariah -compliant financing arrangements with their conventional loan product counterparts to ensure a level playing field. This change is provided in clause 11 of the Bill.

Deemed input tax credits for insurers

Presently, there are no input tax credits for insurers on cash payments made upon the occurrence of an insured event even under an insurance contract. As a result, GST is collected on gross premiums which are not reflective of the true value-add of insurance services. To capture the true value-add and to reduce the business costs of insurers, insurers will be allowed to claim deemed input tax credits on cash payments made under certain insurance contracts that are subject to GST. Clause 6 of the Bill reflects this change.

Reduction of record-keeping period from seven years to five years

Presently, GST-registered businesses are required to keep GST records for seven years. To reduce business compliance costs and to support enterprise and entrepreneurship, clause 8 of the Bill amends the GST Act to reduce the record-keeping period from seven years to five years. This change is in line with the general move to reduce the record-keeping requirement for businesses down to five years to provide consistency for businesses.

Other tax changes

Let me now move on to the second group of tax changes covered by this Bill. These amendments arose from our regular reviews to improve the GST system.

Advance Rulings System

Firstly, the advance rulings system. To provide greater clarity and certainty to taxpayers, an advance rulings system for GST will be formalised and enshrined in law with effect from 1st July 2007. Any ruling issued under the advance rulings system will bind the Comptroller of Goods and Services Tax to apply the statutory provisions in the manner as set out in the ruling. Clauses 10 and 12 of the Bill provide for binding advance rulings, the circumstances under which the Comptroller shall, may or may not provide the rulings, and their fee structure. This is similar to the advance rulings system for income tax, which was introduced last year. Under the advance rulings system for Income Tax, a non-refundable application fee of $525 is payable on the application for rulings. A further fee of $131.25 per hour is payable for any time beyond the first four hours, spent in considering the ruling by IRAS. More information on the fees for Income Tax rulings is available on IRAS' website.

Revise GST rules for zero-rating of advertising services

Secondly, to revise the GST rules for zero-rating of advertising services. Sir, to simplify GST rules, the zero-rating treatment for advertising services will be revised from one that is tied to the advertising subject, to one that is tied to the nature of advertising services.

Where the nature of advertising services relates to concept development, artworks and media planning, the supply will be zero-rated when it is made contractually to and for the benefit of an overseas person.

Where the nature of advertising relates to the sale of media space or airtime, the supply will be zero-rated when the advertisement is circulated outside or substantially outside Singapore. This change is reflected in clause 4 of the Bill.

Time limit for claims relating to over-declaration of output tax in repayment returns

Thirdly, the time limit for claims. Presently, there is no time limit provided in law for claims relating to over-declaration of output tax in repayment returns. To provide clarity to taxpayers and to align with the reduced record-keeping period, the GST Act is amended to provide for a time limit of five years for claims of refunds relating to over-declaration of output tax in repayment returns. The amendments are provided in clauses 7(b) and 9 of the Bill.

Consequential amendments arising from the reduction of GST record-keeping period

Fourthly, consequential amendments. Pursuant to the reduced GST record-keeping period, the time limits for GST-registered businesses to reclaim input tax that is paid late to suppliers and for the Comptroller to raise additional assessments will be revised to five years. Clauses 3 and 7(a) of the Bill reflect these changes.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.05 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate on the Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill.

At the outset, let me declare my interest. My firm PricewaterhouseCoopers provides GST consulting services.

Sir, I speak in support of this Bill, which seeks to improve, among other things, the efficiency of administering and collecting GST. I also commend the Ministry of Finance and the Inland Revenue Authority for the public consultation process which took place before the Bill was presented in Parliament.

Having said that, there are two points I would like to raise. The first point is on the public consultation process itself, and the second point relates to the proposed implementation of an advanced rulings system.

Let me start with the public consultation process. In seeking public comments, the Ministry stipulated that the scope of the public consultation was to obtain feedback on areas of the draft legislation that needed greater clarity. However, many were disappointed that the consultation exercise was not intended to be a consultation on the policies, judging from the following statement in the Ministry of Finance's website at the time, and I quote, "The policies have already been decided through the due process." We were left guessing as to what constituted "due process".

In this respect, I would ask the Minister to review the scope of any future public consultation, as there could be policies or matters relating to the fundamentals of the tax system that perhaps needed to be aired with the public at large. There are many cynics out there. So, if you give them reason to believe that you have already decided on a policy and are merely going through the motion of consultation on the peripheral issues, you will undermine the whole objective of getting public "buy-in".

On my second point, the present Bill proposes to introduce a new section 90A in the Goods and Services Tax Act. Specifically, section 90A intends to implement an advanced rulings system for

GST, which requires the payment of a fee to the Comptroller of GST.

I recall that when the proposal was first made in the Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill 2006 released in September last year, there were reactions from tax practitioners and others that having to pay for a GST ruling gives the wrong signal in a self- assessment system like the GST, whereby taxpayers have to determine the correct amount of GST to account to the Government. I remember this being discussed in the Business Times in an article on 7th November 2006.

Perhaps, at this juncture, I should explain, for the benefit of Members, the difference between the two main systems of tax collection - the official assessment system and a self-assessment system. Under an official assessment system, a taxpayer provides information to the tax authority to apply the law and calculate the tax liability. In Singapore, income tax operates on this system, where as long as there is full and complete disclosure, the taxpayer has discharged his or her responsibility.

With self-assessment, the responsibility to determine the correct amount of tax to pay is shifted to the taxpayer. The Singapore GST system operates on a system of self-assessment, which means that it is the responsibility of a GST-registered business to prepare its GST returns accurately and on time.

A self-assessment regime should make it easy for businesses to understand their tax responsibilities and obligations, because the tax department has effectively shifted the responsibility for determining the correct amount of tax to the taxpayer. However, in Singapore, there is a concern that many businesses may not fully understand their responsi

bilities under a self-assessment system, which is still a relatively new system. This is borne out by the amount of tax and penalties collected from GST audits by the IRAS, which is consistently higher than that collected from income tax audits. Clearly, businesses in Singapore need more help from the IRAS to meet their obligations in a self-assessment environment. Paying for advanced rulings is not consistent with this objective.

While some jurisdictions charge for advanced rulings, we should take the cue from countries like Australia, which conducted a review of its income tax self-assessment regime in 2003. In considering the role of the Australian tax office and the provision of rulings, the Australian Treasury 2004 discussion paper questioned whether the tax office should continue to provide private rulings free-of-charge. The final review report concluded that private rulings should not be charged for. What it said was that, and I quote, "... within a self-assessment environment, taxpayers have the right to know the manner in which the tax laws apply to their circumstances (rather than being a privilege that would justify charging a fee)."

In its response to the public comments, the Ministry of Finance has said that the charging of a fee is to deter frivolous requests and that the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore would continue to respond to normal inquiries. I am not aware of the number and types of inquiries that the IRAS receives on a daily basis, but it would be difficult to see how its workload can be reduced if there is uncertainty in the law that requires a ruling. It is better to flush out problems and uncertainties upfront rather than for businesses to grapple with these uncertainties in computing their GST. After all, with the increase in the GST rate, the amount of tax collected will increase substantially and the IRAS should prepare

itself for the extra workload to help businesses get their GST computation right the first time.

The Ministry has also commented that with the proposed fee, the GST ruling will be legally binding on the IRAS. On this point, I cannot recall circumstances where the IRAS has withdrawn its rulings in the past, unless, of course, the facts of the case and the law changed.

In conclusion, Sir, I support the Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill. I would, however, request the Minister to consider the two points I have raised on fundamental issues of open and comprehensive public consultation and the administration of a tax which is fast becoming an important source of tax revenues.

3.10 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Workers' Party opposes clause 2 of the Bill which raises the rate of goods and services tax to 7% with effect from July. We have already articulated our reasons in the Budget debate in February and I do not intend to repeat them here.

Sir, following up on what was mentioned by the Nominated Member, Mr Banerjee, I also have a clarification concerning the charging of a fee for advanced rulings, and this is more in relation to the quantum of fees to be charged. It seems, from the Schedule, that a trader who is seeking an advanced ruling is being charged time cost, as the initial fee of $525 for the first of four hours will be supplemented by an hourly fee of $131 per hour beyond the first four hours. The trader is also expected to reimburse the Comptroller for any external consultations which he may need to make in making the advanced ruling.

I would like to ask the Minister of State whether the trader would actually

have an estimate of the approximate fee that he may have to pay for his application. Secondly, how strictly is the time cost enforced, in the sense that if the authorities are slow, would they be prepared to give a discount on the time that they have spent?

3.12 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill.

I welcome the amendments to section 21, especially those relating to overseas advertisements. While the amendments relating to the promulgation of advertisements outside Singapore extend the existing provisions of zero rating for exports and international services, I am heartened that they have now included overseas advertisements. Certainly, this new amendment will, I believe, contribute significantly to two critical areas. The first is to support Singapore's effort at becoming a media hub. I hope these amendments will attract more advertising agencies and media houses to locate in Singapore, as the advertisements they book for their clients out of Singapore will be zero rated.

Secondly, these amendments will enable and encourage our local companies to promote their products and services in international markets, thus supporting further our globalisation drive. By zero rating international advertisements, our local companies can drive and coordinate more effective international marketing and promotion programmes out of their home offices.

Sir, I am also heartened by amendments to section 21A, which relate to the zero rating of tools and other supplies from the manufacture of goods for foreign persons. I believe these amendments will help drive down the cost of doing business for our local companies doing sub-contract work for foreign companies.

The effect of zero rating will help make our local sub-contractors more competitive.

In this regard, Sir, I wish to ask if such zero rating will also apply to manufacturing tools by Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and contract manufacturers. Both of these sectors are fast growing and attractive markets for our local companies, both large and SMEs.

Sir, the amendments to the Fourth Schedule to provide for exemption for Islamic financing is another exciting development that I fully support. These amendments will no doubt support the growth of Islamic financing, which is attracting a great deal of interest in the business community. My only question is, why is this exemption restricted only to non-residential property transactions? Why can we not extend this to other forms of business financing as well?

Members may be interested to know that Islamic financing and banking is not just for Muslims. In other countries which also practise Islamic finance, many financial institutions have reported that between 30-40% of their Islamic financing clients are non-Muslim companies. Because Islamic finance is not based on an interest rate paradigm, these companies have found that they enjoy greater predictability in their budgeting and they can protect themselves against sudden changes in interest rates. Sir, I hope the Minister for Trade and Industry can seriously consider extending this exemption to other areas of Islamic financing, therefore creating a new impetus to the development of this very promising sector.

Sir, on this note, I rise in support of the Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill.

3.15 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, first, I would like to thank the Members for the support of the Bill. Let me take the questions in turn.

Sir, the comments by Mr Banerjee on the advance ruling and the implementation issues are well noted and well taken. Currently, as he has noted, IRAS gives GST advice free of charge but these are not legally binding on the tax authorities. The proposed Amendment Bill will allow businesses who want certainty to obtain an advance ruling that is legally binding. IRAS therefore levies a fee for advance ruling because more work is needed to do the necessary due diligence and such ruling applications are generally more complex than enquiries and require more detailed analyses. I would like to assure him and Ms Sylvia Lim that the fees are based on a cost recovery basis of the resources needed in issuing the ruling. We are charging a fee, as he has pointed out, in order to deter frivolous requests. The rulings are usually specific to the company and provide the company with tax certainty. Let me recount the experience of the Australian system. When they implemented this legally binding advance ruling system, there was actually an overwhelming increase in the number of requests and therefore the deterrent nature of the levying of a fee is in place.

The details of the charging will be reviewed over time, and I would like to give assurance that the applicants will not be charged beyond what is the fair rate, in terms of the actual time used. Let me assure Mr Banerjee and Ms Sylvia Lim that even with a GST advance ruling system, taxpayers can continue to approach IRAS for non-binding tax advice on GST queries. And IRAS will continue to educate taxpayers on the correct GST treatments through the e-Tax guides. To date, IRAS has published more than 60 e-Tax guides on the website, clarifying all

the various treatments that are applicable to GST.

On Mr Banerjee's point about consultation, let me assure him that MOF had carefully considered the various policy changes proposed in the GST Bill, including the advance GST ruling, before we launched the draft Bill for public consultation. So the public consultation is not limited to only the actual process itself. But I agree with Mr Banerjee that we should have made it clear that we welcome feedback, not just on the drafting of the legislation for compliance, but also on the policy changes as well. And I would like to assure him that MOF values the feedback/inputs from the public and the business community, and we will continue to take them into account.

Mdm Ho has raised two points on the zero treatment for prescribed tools in the manufacture of goods for exports, whether it is applicable to Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and contract manufacturers as well. The answer is yes. They will be able to zero-rate the supply of tools if they satisfy the prescribed conditions. The main conditions are that the tools must be supplied to an overseas person and used to manufacture goods for export.

On her other point of exemption from GST for Islamic financing, I would like to assure her that this would not be restricted to only non-residential properties transactions. Currently, Islamic loans and deposits as well as sale and lease of residential properties are already exempted from GST. Only Islamic financing arrangements involving non-residential properties would attract GST. Hence, with the proposed Bill, the effective return earned by financial institutions on the sale of non-residential arrangements under qualifying Islamic financing arrangements would now also be exempted from GST. So this is really to close the loop.

I agree with Mdm Ho that Islamic financing is a promising growth area for Singapore and MOF will actively monitor the developments and consider the need for exemption of GST for new forms of Islamic financing arrangements when they are proposed.

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. - [Mrs Lim Hwee Hua].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read.

3.21 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Rationale

Singapore today enjoys strong economic growth accompanied by plentiful new jobs - last year was an all-time high of 176,000 jobs, of which 90,900 went to local residents. The economic prospects continue to look promising. We have a strong investment pipeline with a number of large infrastructural projects being completed over the next few years. Growth is broad-based across all industry sectors, especially finance, info-communications, marine and process industries. As projected, an estimated 450,000 jobs will be available in the next five years if the economy grows between 4.5% and 6.5% each year. These positive outcomes are a result of confidence in our

economic and labour policies which are business-responsive and pro-growth.

Together with NTUC and employer organisations, we have established practices for a flexible labour market, which includes the judicious use of foreign labour to meet rapidly changing manpower demands. Our labour policies and harmonious industrial climate have resulted in jobs for all. Our employment rate is already one of the highest in the world - 76% of working-age Singaporeans are in employment. The strong labour market will get even tighter, as our economy grows. The number of workers needed to sustain this economic growth has exceeded the local supply.

The ability of our companies to access foreign manpower is a comparative advantage. But our foreign worker policy cannot be based on a laissez-faire approach, which will be detrimental to our overall progress. To protect the well-being of foreign workers, we have imposed conditions on employers for their housing, remuneration and medical coverage. We also carefully identify where foreign workers are needed most and allow them into selected industries. We constantly monitor the labour situation and make fine adjustments to maintain the equilibrium between our economic competitiveness and other social objectives, to enable locals to compete for jobs. For example, we allow more foreign workers in the construction and marine sectors where locals are less inclined to work; we allow a lower proportion in the manufacturing and services-related industries, and almost none in community-based shops and stalls. We have also taken a more liberal approach, with lesser controls, towards foreigners with better qualifications and skills. This is intentional, to attract skilled labour for which there is a global shortage.

Workers seeking better employment opportunities abroad is an integral feature of globalisation and benefits both sending and receiving countries. But we should also recognise that there are syndicates which exist in many countries that seek to exploit vulnerable foreign workers. Many exact payment through empty promises of work, only to leave them hapless and stranded in dire straits, especially in those countries which have porous systems or weak enforcement. And from time to time, it happens here and is picked up by the press. This is a continuing problem and discussed in many global forums each year. I recently attended a United Nations High-Level Dialogue on International Migration and Development - that was the name of this meeting - in September 2006, which highlighted the problems of illegal employment and mitigating measures needed to be taken by both the source and receiving countries. Employers in Singapore who fall prey to the temptation of cheap labour in order to make a quick profit, can exacerbate this problem of illegal employment. As our economy grows, we can expect the proportion of foreign workers to increase with labour demands, and, with it, the temptation to illegally employ foreign workers. Other countries have found that illegal employment can escalate rapidly, if not nipped in the bud. So Members may have read, for example, that President Bush is pushing through a Bill for tighter border controls but in accepting the problem as a fait accompli, legitimising the status of some 12 million illegal immigrants already in the US. We cannot afford the number, even a fraction of that number. Malaysia, nearer home, is also exploring new laws to strengthen the regulation of its foreign workforce and curb the trafficking of illegal immigrants.

For Singapore, as a small island, we need to be vigilant and manage our foreign worker population well, to ensure that it continues to contribute positively

to our economy. We need a robust system with effective laws, enforcement and safeguards against the illegal entry and employment of foreign workers and ensure that their well-being is protected. We have therefore in recent years expanded MOM's Employment Inspectorate and built up capabilities in intelligence, operations and investigations, among other areas. This has enabled us to step up enforcement in targeted sectors, such as the food and beverage as well as cleaning sectors, where there were higher incidence of illegal employment. We have also enhanced promotional and outreach efforts to educate employers and workers about employment and immigration regulations.

To better manage the foreign workforce in Singapore, my Ministry has reviewed the Employment of Foreign Workers Act, or EFWA. This Bill amends the EFWA to increase the penalties for selected offences, introduce new offences and augment the powers of Employment Inspectors to facilitate enforcement efforts.

We will also take this opportunity to rationalise the legislative authority for all work passes. Currently, Work Permits and S-passes are regulated through a different statute from the Employment Passes. This Bill consolidates the legislative authority for all work passes under the EFWA, and renames it to the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, or EFMA, to reflect its broader coverage. With the consolidation, the EFMA will be the key legislation governing the employment of foreigners at all levels in Singapore.

I will now highlight the significant provisions of the Bill.

Illegal employment

As I had earlier highlighted, the illegal employment of foreigners remains a

problem. Their errant employers evade levy payments, deploy these workers illegally, and ignore conditions imposed to protect their well-being. The number of illegal foreign workers arrested has increased from about 2,148 in 1995 to 2,868 in 2006. Currently, the penalties for illegal employment and levy evasion are bundled, ie, a minimum fine equivalent to 24 months of the foreign workers' levy and a maximum fine equivalent to 48 months of levy or imprisonment of up to a year or both.

Clause 8 of the Bill amends section 5 and introduces stiffer penalties specifically for the illegal employment of foreigners - there will be now a maximum fine of $15,000 or imprisonment of up to a year or both, for each case of illegal employment. For multiple charges, any fines imposed would be cumulative, whereas the jail terms may be ordered to run consecutively or concurrently depending on the court's discretion. A mandatory jail term of between one and 12 months will continue to apply to repeat offenders. Any penalties imposed will be over and above the restitution of any levy evaded by such employers. Similarly, clauses 13 and 9 respectively amend sections 10 and 6A to impose the penalty of a maximum fine of $15,000 or imprisonment of up to a year or both on foreigners who are illegally self-employed, and on occupiers who permit a foreigner without a valid work pass to enter and remain at their workplaces.

Offences of deception

Next, offences of deception. We have made work pass applications user-friendly by allowing submissions through fax, mail or electronically. Work pass criteria are also made known to companies so that they have greater certainty to plan for their manpower needs. Some, knowing these rules, which are now made explicit, may choose to work around the system

through fraud. The number of foreigners who obtained their Employment Passes and "S" passes through illegal means, by either using fraudulent documents or over-declaring their actual salaries, has increased by nearly four-fold from 97 cases in 2005 to 374 cases in 2006. These workers have entered our system illegally and, if left unchecked, these abuses will over time undermine the integrity of the entire system. Accordingly, clause 22 increases the penalties for such offences, which include the provision of false information, the illegal trade and alteration of work passes and the possession of forged work passes, to be similar to those for illegal employment, which are a maximum fine of $15,000 or 12 months' imprisonment or both.

Clause 22 also creates a new section 22(2) which requires any employer, foreign employee or self-employed foreigner who knows or has reason to believe that an offence of false declaration has been committed, to furnish such information to MOM. For example, MOM investigators have come across cases where either the employer or employee, or both, are aware that false information pertaining to the qualifications held by the worker, or the salary to be paid, is being supplied to MOM as part of the work pass application process. However, because they use the services of a third party to submit the application, they choose to keep quiet about the breach. The new section 22(2) will allow MOM to reduce the number of fraud cases. The obligation on parties with knowledge that a deception is being perpetrated to report such knowledge to the authorities is not a new one. For example, it is an offence under the Bankruptcy Act for a bankrupt to fail to notify the authorities if he is aware that a false claim of debt has been lodged by any person under the bankruptcy. But let me assure the House that MOM has no intention of using this

new provision to prosecute minor, technical breaches. Rather, we would want to target those who have committed violations to circumvent our controls.

Powers of Employment Inspectors

To ensure better enforcement, the investigative powers of the Employment Inspectors are also enhanced. Similar to enforcement powers enjoyed by immigration officers under the Immigration Act, MOM's Employment Inspectors will be empowered under clause 21 to arrest without warrant both local and foreign suspects for offences of greater severity, namely, illegal employment, the active deception offences, as well as the obstruction of MOM's investigations. They will also be empowered to seize any offensive weapons when making arrests. New sections 21A, 21B and 21C are introduced under clause 21 to prescribe the manner of arrest, the proper use of restraints, and the procedure for the search of arrested persons. These are similar to the provisions in the Criminal Procedure Code.

Other amendments

This Bill makes other administrative and technical amendments to allow better administration of the Act. Clauses 10, 19 and 21G respectively clarify the application, issuance and renewal procedures for work passes, specify the circumstances and manner in which the employer or the foreign employee should inform MOM of address changes, as well as stipulate the mode of disposal of documents or articles seized during investigations.

For consistency, certain provisions that are currently under the Immigration Act are also replicated under this Act, including the exemption of the decisions of the Minister and Controller of Work Passes in relation to the issuance, suspension and revocation of work passes from judicial review.

The proposed amendments introduced under this Bill will enhance the regulation and protection of our foreign workforce. It will help minimise the number of illegal workers and their negative social and economic consequences, even as our workforce grows. A well-managed foreign workforce with proper safeguards for their proper deployment, health and well-being is important to ensure that our economic growth is sustainable and virtuous over the long term.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.35 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, in Singapore, we recognise and affirm the contributions of migrant workers towards our economic development. Migrant workers, together with our local workers, have enabled our economy to sustain the growth momentum and helped us attract investments and grow industries. Take the local factories and restaurants, for example. They would not have survived without the number of foreign workers or employees who make up the shortfall in our local workforce. In turn, these workplaces continue to provide our local workers with employment opportunities.

Sir, NTUC is concerned about the welfare of all workers, local or migrant. The labour movement has always recognised and accepted the need for foreign workers to supplement our limited human resources, and appreciates their contributions to Singapore's economic development. Thus, the labour movement has constantly called on the Government to strengthen efforts to stamp out the problem of unscrupulous employers who use non-documented workers and ignore the conditions imposed to safeguard workers' well-being. Illegal or non-documented migrant workers are most at

risk of abuse and are without protection. To safeguard both the interests of local and foreign workers, we should not allow any foreigners to work in Singapore illegally or being illegally redeployed.

While a large majority of our employers are responsible employers and treat their migrant workers well, there are some black sheep who will ill-treat their migrant workers, as seen from the isolated incidents that continue to be reported in our media. Thus, I strongly welcome the amendments. I think the mandatory one-month jail sentence for second conviction of any employer employing foreign employees without valid work passes is a strong enough signal. But I wonder why MOM did not impose mandatory sentence on those who give, sell or forge work passes. I think MOM should.

Sir, the situation of migrant workers in Singapore, primarily a host or receiving country of migrants, is generally good and we should continue to make Singapore the choice destination for migrant workers from the region. But, at the same time, I hope that MOM would also regularly review and strengthen the legislative protection for our local workers. We should not allow any disparity in the treatment of locals and migrant workers, and being perceived as giving more protection to migrant workers than locals. Our world Number One workforce deserves a world-class legislative protection and work conditions.

Sir, currently, the employers of work permit holders are required to ensure the well-being of all their migrant workers under the work permit conditions provided by the Employment of Foreign Workers Act (EFWA). I think MOM should also increase the penalty against employers who breach these work permit conditions. At the present moment, the penalty is a fine of up to $5,000 or a jail term of up to six months. I also hope that the list of

the work permit conditions be revised regularly to enhance protection. I would also like to know whether MOM would include an amendment to safeguard workers against ill-treatment by unscrupulous employment agents, rather than just employers.

Besides regularly monitoring the situation and reviewing the foreign manpower management framework and relevant legislation, I think the Ministry should also explore practical ways to reach out and generate awareness in helping migrant workers better understand and exercise their rights in Singapore. It is also important for the Ministry to reach out to and generate awareness among the SMEs so that they would understand their legal obligations.

Sir, at the end of the day, revised legislation and regulations are just means to an end. More responsible employers and caring workplaces will remain as the key to safeguard the welfare of our workers, regardless of nationality and background.

Sir, I support the Bill.

Sir, I rise in support of the amendments proposed under the Employment of Foreign Workers (Amendment) Bill.

The amendments have a two-fold purpose: firstly, to consolidate the various legislative authority for all work passes under the Employment of Foreign Workers (Amendment) Bill and, secondly, to increase the penalties for selected offences, introduce new offences and enhance the powers of Employment Inspectors to facilitate enforcement orders. The increase in penalties will ensure that those who violate the Act will be sufficiently deterred, as otherwise the

Act will lose its effectiveness and offences will continue to be committed with impunity. We certainly need a strong regulatory regime in order to provide better protection to our foreign workers, otherwise our image and ability to attract global talents will be affected.

Overall, the amendments will provide a more coordinated and coherent approach in regulating the employment of foreign workers. Under the current regime, some aspects of the regulation are governed under the Foreign Workers Act and the other aspects are governed by the Immigration Act, which is under the ICA. This is not only confusing for companies and workers, but I am also sure it increases the complexity in regulating foreign manpower on the part of MOM, the primary agency in dealing with workers of all nationalities.

Sir, Singapore's development today would not have been possible without the contributions of our foreign workers. They have contributed much to our efforts to develop into a world-class, dynamic and globally competitive workforce, ranked as the number one workforce by BERI for many years. Hence, our broad approach and strategies in managing foreign manpower is on the right track, and this Bill will further strengthen and enhance our position.

However, I have a number of observations to make and some clarifications to seek from the Minister.

I notice that a new definition has been inserted under section 2 of the Act. A new word "employ" has been inserted. The word "employ", as defined by the Bill, means to "engage or use the service of any person for the purpose (a) of any work; or (b) of providing any training for that person, whether under a contract of service or otherwise, and with or without salary".

I would like to seek a clarification from the Minister on the exact meaning of this provision, as it seems to be very broad, particularly the words "engage or use the service of any person for the purpose of providing any training, whether under a contract of service or otherwise, and with or without salary". This provision can be interpreted to mean that it is acceptable for an employer to bring in foreigners as trainees, without having to employ them under contracts of service and without having to pay them any salary.

If this is the interpretation, then there are serious concerns of the potential for abuse and whether this would open the door for really cheap foreign workers to come in as trainees, to the detriment of local workers. I hope that this is not the intention of the law, and it would be of great help if the Minister could clarify this point in this House.

This clarification, Sir, is also important in view of the recent announcement made by MOM that, with effect from 1st December 2007, undergraduates and graduates from overseas will be allowed to work here for short stints. They can work for up to six months and are not restricted to specific types of work. They are also not subject to minimum salary requirements, as mentioned in the MOM's press statement. Although the intention is to encourage more foreign students to come to Singapore and sink their roots here, the issue is whether this greater liberalisation of foreign students coming here to work, coupled with the new definition which I alluded to earlier on, will open the door for cheap labour in Singapore.

In fact, I think that the law should provide for the reverse, ie, anyone being employed in Singapore as a student, trainee or otherwise, should be considered as employees so that they are covered under the Employment Act and are paid

salaries before work passes can be issued to the employers.

Broadly, Sir, our strategy in employing foreign workers to augment our local workforce is a right one. Last year, although we created 176,000 jobs, we were not able to get Singaporeans to take up all the jobs and, as the Minister mentioned just now as well as on various occasions in the past, about 450,000 jobs would be created over the next five years. As a result, last year, almost half the jobs had to go to foreigners. Whilst I support this flexibility, I would also like to suggest that the Minister continue to monitor the impact of this policy of greater flexibility in the use of foreign manpower on our more vulnerable workers, specifically our low-wage workers, the older workers and the women who are currently out of the labour market. The last two categories were also touched upon by the Tripartite Committee on Employability of Older Workers. The tripartite partners have been collaborating very closely in order to assist our older workers and low-wage workers through job redesign and skills upgrading. It is important that our foreign manpower policy augments these efforts and not weakens them, as the concern is that the easy availability of foreign workers may discourage some employers from embarking on these initiatives. We have seen the great increase in the use of cheap sourcing and contract workers, and this has generally led to a decline in wages of these workers. We have done a fair bit for our low-wage workers, particularly with the introduction of the WIS, but that is not the panacea, as having a job and earning better pay is the real, long-term solution for our low-wage workers.

Sir, one common complaint that I hear from our women who want to go back to work is that there are just not enough part-time and flexible work options for them. This is one area where employers need to put more efforts and be more

innovative in helping our women who want to work to return to the workforce or to help those who are currently in the workforce to continue working. I hope that the easy availability of foreign workers will not dampen our efforts to retain and attract women back to the workforce.

Sir, the other category of Singaporeans that I am concerned about is the older PMETs. The picture is still not so rosy for them, despite what the statistics show. I welcome the WDA's efforts to introduce a new programme, called the Professional Conversion Programme (PCP). I would like to urge MOM to consider scaling up this programme to cover more sectors and reach out to more older PMETs who are facing the squeeze. This is important as the greater liberalisation of the "S" passes from an initial start of 5% to 10% and then to 15%, barely two years later, would mean that employers now have greater access to younger and better educated foreign workers who can be employed on lower pay, for a longer period and from any part of the world.

Sir, I support the need to have foreign workers to uphold our own local workforce to meet the needs of our economy, but I would, at the same time, like to urge MOM to monitor the situation closely so that our more vulnerable workers are not affected and also our efforts in other areas, such as promoting the employment of older workers and women under the back-to-work programmes, are not compromised.

Finally, Sir, I agree with the amendment to paragraph 13, that a work pass holder shall not allow any other person to have possession of his work pass. But the law is unclear about what happens if it is the employer who insists on keeping his workers' work passes, as is usually

the case as some fear that their workers will moonlight or abscond. Greater clarity on this would have been useful. I would also like to urge MOM to communicate and educate our foreign workers on the changes under this law and the new penalties and how it would affect them, so that they are not caught by surprise, and that the greater protection that is intended to be accorded by this Bill will reach them and benefit them.

On this note, Sir, I support the Bill.

3.43 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to rise in support of the Bill.

Sir, it is said that strong fences make good neighbours. Nowhere is this more true than in the area of people relations.

Sir, these amendments make former grey areas into black and white. It requires both employers and fellow workers to observe a stricter worker regime. For example, it requires an employer of an employee or self-employed foreigner, who is aware of the commission of a false declaration offence, to notify the Ministry of Manpower. So, once one is aware of false information being supplied to the Ministry, as part of the work pass application process, one now cannot keep quiet.

The proposed amendments are necessary. I support them for three key reasons. First, to ensure the employers do not flout the rules and, in the process, create an uneven playing field for themselves against others who are good and compliant employers.

I support it also because it will be a step forward in ensuring that it does not lead to a displacement of local workers in favour of foreign workers, a point which Mdm Halimah and Mr Yeo Guat Kwang have also made.

I also support it because, at the same time, it will serve to safeguard the well-being of foreign workers themselves. Indeed, as our country progresses and with the strong economy that is fuelling strong job growth, we have to be mindful of such concerns. All too often, we know the sentiments expressed by some Singaporean workers that their jobs are slowly but surely being taken away by foreign workers.

Sir, I declare my interest as the Advisor to the Amalgamated Union of Public Daily-Rated Workers (AUPDRW). Most of them are in the vector control unit and many of them are actively cleaning the streets. From a membership of some 30,000 in the past, they now have less than 10,000 members, and it looks like this will continue to decline. How is this so? Well, much of the work has gone to foreign workers. Understandably, there is some frustration and not a little resentment towards these workers. They tell me: why do they get the latest machines? Why do they sit around on buggies when others, ie, the local workers, are in the drains clearing out the rubbish by hand? They cost less to employers. They also get free transport and housing, whereas the AUPDRW workers have to pay for everything. So, in the end, some of our local workers may lose out.

3.45 pm

Madam, these are the raw emotions of workers on the ground and such amendments to the Bill may not reach their ears. However, I believe that such tightening of the rules is necessary to demonstrate our sincerity towards regulating the sector. It also shows that there is a genuine and fully costed demand for workers which will reflect their true market cost. It helps us to explain to our local workers that

their foreign colleagues are not under-cutting the market in devious ways and through no fault of theirs, but that of their employers. It also serves to ensure that good and compliant employers are not disadvantaged. So the proposed amendments to this Bill address and allay such concerns. But it is just the beginning. The enforcement must now follow and be up to par. For sure, good rules, if strongly enforced, are the first step towards good labour relations.

Madam, I support the Bill.

Order. I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 4.10 pm.

Sitting suspended accordingly

at 3.49 pm until 4.10 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.10 pm

Debate resumed.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, those who have been following recent events in Singapore will know that the construction industry has emerged from the shadows of the past. It has, in fact, seen a growth of 7.3% at current market prices for the first quarter of 2007. This is a great achievement compared to the last nine years where demand was low and unmoving.

Various factors contributed to this increase; certainly, the Government's economic policy, the push for more infrastructure projects, granting licences for the Integrated Resorts, and so forth.

As a

result, the property market also responded positively, and a host of en blocs added to the demand for more construction activities, and hence more foreign workers.

Broadly, I am in support of the Bill to amend the Employment of Foreign Workers Act. However, there are aspects of the proposed amendments which I would like to share my views.

The rapid demand for new hotels, offices and houses put a demand on the contractors and developers to meet pressing deadlines. What this means is that they have to get the materials and commit more workers to the site. Delays can be very costly and result in penalties. Nonetheless, I agree that this pressing need must not be met at the expense of social order and security by allowing illegal overstayers to continue working in Singapore. But I would like to address certain issues that I feel would require greater attention to.

The proposed Bill will empower the Employment Inspectors to arrest without warrant both local and foreign suspects for severe EFWA offences. Such offences include illegal employment and provision of false information, to name a few. This power is further set to be absolute in terms of enabling these officers to enforce the proper use of restraint similar to that in the Criminal Procedure Code. I find that it would be prudent that such actions, when necessary, be enforced solely on the offending foreign workers. The use of handcuffing, detention and respective actions under the state code paints a too harsh picture for employers and company staff. The restraints to be applied should take into account whether or not the suspect is likely to attempt to flee. I think this will not be necessary for Singapore employers. Such actions will only seek to demean an employer and punish his integrity and reputation, even

before he is given a proper chance to explain.

Foreign workers, though wanting to provide a living to support themselves or their families or for whatever reasons, are fully aware that entering a country illegally is a crime in itself. Desperation may be a powerful weapon. The reasoning loses meaning for an offender to consider fleeing arrest. Therefore, I feel that this exercise of power should be used and authorised only by the Police or any other senior staff of the Employment Inspectorate on a case-by-case basis.

The amendments proposed will see harsher penalties enforced. A maximum fine of $15,000 or 12 months' jail or both will be added on top of the current illegal employment penalty. I urge the Minister to consider a reduction in the enhanced penalties. With the large workforce on sites, the multiplier effects of the original penalty would have dealt a serious blow to the financial performance of any contractor, let alone the enhanced penalties.

The objective of the proposed amendments, I believe, is to serve as a deterrence to would-be offenders. I feel that there is sufficient deterrence as of now. Unless the intention is to close down the contracting firms altogether, then imposing such heavy penalties will have the intended effect.

I know that owners of these companies often delegate the groundwork to their operational managers. It will be too heavy a price to put on the owners should there be an oversight on the part of their managers. The increase in penalties enforced without proper justification at first sight will be duly unfair to these companies and workers.

Next, I want to dwell on the need to return the work pass after its cancellation.

Today, we have modern technology which can easily trace whether or not a work pass is valid or has been cancelled. Why is there a need to return the cancelled work pass, when what matters is that the data in the Government records is updated? We are putting an additional imposition on the employers to recover the cancelled work passes and forward them to the Ministry of Manpower. Even for our passports, when they expire, we can just get a replacement without having to return the one that is cancelled.

Lastly, I want to know whether the Minister will consider allowing the work pass to be more generic so that the holder can multi-task and be allowed to perform related tasks, when necessary. As a country, we encourage job enlargement and multi-tasking, and I propose that the work pass of foreign workers be given a more generic role. For example, a construction firm should be allowed to use a worker at a work site to service his machines and equipment at another premises, so long as it is owned by the same company.

Madam, on this note, I support the Bill.

4.22 pm

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I rise to support the Bill in general, although I have concerns about certain amendments which relate to how administrative actors under the Employment of Foreign Workers Act are held accountable in the exercise of their statutory powers. My major concerns are with the amended section 7.

The current Government policy is to encourage both highly skilled and unskilled foreign workers to come and work in Singapore to meet the labour shortfall. Laws must be lined up with the objectives behind labour policies for this

to be successfully realised. As a major labour importing country in Asia, Singapore should recognise and honour the contributions made by foreign workers to our economic growth. These include those employed in low-paying jobs as domestic workers and workers in the construction industry who often face hazardous work conditions.

As a nation and aspiring civil and civil rights society, we must ensure that aliens and strangers who come to work in our midst are not oppressed or mistreated as disposable commodities. Indeed, the need to address issues of migration and migrant labour is a global one. Closer to home, Singapore and other ASEAN states adopted the ASEAN Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers in January 2007. The Declaration acknowledges the need to promote the dignity of migrant workers, to redress abuses and recruitment malpractices they are vulnerable to and to ensure they enjoy decent working and living conditions. In translating these aspirations into reality, we have promises to keep and miles to go before we sleep.

The Employment of Foreign Workers Act underpins the regulatory environment for managing foreign workers. The Act was designed to deal with the problems caused by employers seeking to evade regulatory measures, like the foreign worker levy, by illegally employing foreign workers without work passes or overstayers.

The current amendments under scrutiny pay some attention to issues of enforcement. The new section 22 introduces new offences involving active deception in the sale, forgery or unlawful alteration of a work pass. Aside from heavier fines and lengthy imprisonment terms, the amendments also confer extensive powers upon administrative officials to arrest without warrant.

Under the old section 21, a police officer or employment inspector may arrest without warrant any person reasonably believed to be employed in Singapore while not in possession of a valid work permit. The amendment to section 21 extends this power of arrest without warrant beyond illegal workers, to include employers hiring foreigners without work permits, or who flout existing work permit conditions. It adopts a more holistic approach of targeting all culpable actors.

The power to arrest without warrant is far reaching as it affects personal liberty through bodily restraint or physical incarceration. Personal liberty is a fundamental liberty guaranteed to citizens and non-citizens under Article 9 of the Singapore Constitution. This requires that in depriving a person of personal liberty, this must be done in accordance with law. Laws must satisfy a constitutional standard of fairness.

This sort of broad discretionary power conferred by the Employment of Foreign Workers Act reflects the general expansion of centralised powers wielded by the administrative state. Discretion is essential to any regulatory regime. It allows an administrative official a legitimate margin of autonomy to apply his professional expertise to a case to ensure a good decision. Nevertheless, in a rule of law state, the need for checks and balances must be appreciated as discretionary power may be misused.

This harks back to the old conundrum of the problem of power, which raises two issues. First, governments must be empowered to govern effectively. Second, governmental power must be restrained to prevent abuses. As James Madison, the father of the US Constitution, noted, "If men were angels, no government would be necessary." How

ever, men are not angels. While citizens may hope for the best to be ruled by a wise and benevolent platonic philosopher king or Confucian jun zi, prudence requires precautionary measures.

Law and legal institutions must be constructed to deal with worst-case scenarios - to leash the leviathan or absolute sovereign state that Thomas Hobbes wrote about, which wields formidable power that may be a precipice deployed. How then shall we bind the leviathan? One way to prevent the arbitrary abuse of discretion is to set conditions identifying when discretion may be legitimately or unlawfully exercised. A popular conception of discretion must be compatible with the rule of law, and must appropriately balance the values of fairness and efficiency. A statute can provide clear guidelines in this respect, as in new sections 21A, B and C. For example, handcuffs can only be used for specified purposes, excluding punishment. Further, to be lawful, the power to arrest and to search arrested persons must be exercised with strict regard to decency.

I raise my reservations chiefly in relation to the amended section 7 which governs work pass applications. The Controller has the power to grant or refuse to issue these permits or to vary the conditions. Although there is no constitutional or statutory right to be given a work permit, this still represents an important interest or privilege at public law, as the grant or refusal of a work permit implicates livelihood issues. The Controller cannot wield absolute power in handling work permit applications and must be accountable for how power is exercised. It usually falls to the court as the independent and impartial branch of the Government to determine when administrative actors, like the Controller, are acting within the four corners of their statutory powers as a matter of administrative law. The court will seek to

ensure that the decision-making process satisfies common law test of rationality and fairness. Indeed, this is a facet of the rule of law, as the Court of Appeal stated, in the case of Chang Suan Su versus Minister for Home Affairs, the notion of a subjective or unfettered discretion is contrary to the rule of law. All power has legal limits and the rule of law demands that the court should be able to examine the exercise of discretionary power.

Under the current Act, if, for example, the Controller refuses to issue a work permit, section 7(4) provides an aggrieved employer a statutory remedy of appealing to the Minister. The Minister's decision is said to be final and cannot be questioned by any court. If this finality clause is literally interpreted, it would seem that the buck stops with the Minister, as part of the Executive branch. As the statute is silent, it is unclear whether an aggrieved applicant could still go to the courts to apply for a judicial review of the Controller's decision. Or under section 7(4), did Parliament intend only the Minister could correct a defective decision made by the Controller? If so, the aggrieved individual would hit a dead end in terms of remedies if the Ministerial appeal fails, and there would be no significant judicial role in controlling the bureaucracy.

This sensitivity arises as case law from other jurisdictions suggests that while there is a presumption that the aggrieved individual should first use an available statutory remedy rather than go for judicial review, that individual can apply for judicial review after unsuccessfully exhausting a statutory remedy. So, if the Controller does not grant a work permit and if the Minister upholds the Controller's decision, the aggrieved individual can then take the matter to court. Indeed, there are Commonwealth cases which have allowed individuals in appropriate cases to proceed directly to courts without even using an available

non-judicial remedy, such as appealing to a Minister.

If the Controller's decision under the terms of the Employment of Foreign Workers Act is subject to judicial review, what are the grounds on which a decision may be challenged? There are conventionally three grounds of judicial review or three arrows which an individual can shoot in challenging the making of a decision. There are two substantive grounds of review - illegality and irrationality - and one procedural ground of review, that of procedural impropriety which concerns procedural fairness. A decision found to be illegal, irrational or procedurally improper is ultra vires or unlawful.

In sum, under the existing Act, it was unclear whether an aggrieved person could bypass the section 7(4) procedure of appealing to the Minister and go straight to court to ask for judicial review on any of the three grounds as described. Singapore's case law is, I think, not conclusive on this matter.

Under the new statutory regime, the old section 7(4) is substantially retained and recast as the new section 7(5). Persons may still appeal to the Minister from an adverse decision of the Controller, and the Minister's decision shall be final. In addition, a new provision amending section 7(6) is introduced. This provides that judicial review in a court of law does not lie against any decision of the Minister or Controller except for questions relating to compliance with any procedural requirement of this Act governing such decision.

What is the effect of this new provision? Two points are worth mentioning. Firstly, if my reading is correct, it seems that this provision clarifies the problem of whether section 7 decisions made by the Controller and Minister concerning Work Pass applications are subject to judicial

review. It appears that the answer is yes. Therefore, there are two remedies for section 7 decisions made by the Controller where an existing work permit is revoked. Firstly, an appeal to the Minister and also applying for judicial review. Secondly, the new section 7(6) is a limitation clause. While it allows the judicial review of the Minister's and Controller's decision under section 7, it also truncates or limits the scope of judicial review and therefore weakens this check on administrative action. As stated, there are generally two heads of substantive review and one head of procedural review. New section 7(6) limits judicial review by precluding the substantive review of section 7 decisions. Only limited review is allowed to ensure procedural requirements are complied with. Effectively, the two arrows of substantive reviews are not available and only one arrow remains to challenge the decision for non-compliance with procedural requirements. I wonder what these procedural requirements might be and hope that the Minister can clarify this.

At any rate, an aggrieved applicant under section 7(6) may only apply for limited judicial review. If the rule of law postulates that the court should generally have the final say in determining the limits of legal power, then section 7(6), to some extent, departs from this principle. So it is understood. The reason why courts are usually the final arbiter on questions of law flows from the constitutional principle of the separation of powers. In Singapore, where the Cabinet effectively controls Parliament, the Legislature and Parliamentary Executive are fused, rather than separated. Thus, the exercise of judicial review by an independent judiciary to control the Executive branch assumes greater importance. By limiting the role of judicial review in controlling administrative action, the rule of law is qualified in so far as it seeks to ensure meaningful legal

restraints on the exercise of political or administrative power. This does not mean that administrative actors like the Controller are not subject to checks. It just means that faith is primarily placed in the hands of non-judicial bodies like the Minister to control the Controller and secondarily to the courts. The presence of political rather than legal checks is quite typical of countries where Parliament is supreme. But, in Singapore, the Constitution is supreme.

If substantive judicial review is ousted under section 7(6), one might imagine a worst case scenario where there may not be a judicial remedy for a double dereliction of duty. Hypothetically, what would happen if the Controller acts in bad faith or acts irrationally in cancelling a work pass because the applicant has frizzy hair which he personally dislikes. Allegations of bad faith or irrationality are substantive errors and cannot be reviewed under the Act which only allows judicial review for procedural errors. Further, what happens if an aggrieved applicant appeals to the Minister who does not apply his mind to the matter and just agrees with the Controller's decision without carefully re-examining the case. The Minister could be acting unlawfully by failing to use his discretion but, again, would be exempted from judicial review, as this is a matter for substantive review. What other remedies are then available?

Limitation clauses which curtail judicial review may be found in other statutes. One that springs to mind is the Internal Security Act. Under section 8(b)(2) of the ISA, no judicial review lies against decisions of the President or Minister except for questions relating to compliance with any procedural requirements set out in the ISA. The proposed new section 7(6) bears a strong resemblance to this clause. Here, again, the reduced scope of judicial review qualifies the rule of law. However, a stronger case for limiting judicial review under the ISA

compared to other Acts on at least two grounds can be made. First, ISA is an extraordinary law whose chief goal is to deal with acts undermining state security. Many states today have enacted laws permitting detention without trial to deal with terrorist threats. Such laws substantially curtail due process rights, placing the state above rather than under law. However, this derogation from the rule of law is justified on grounds of necessity of national security. Of course, national security must not be lightly invoked as the justification for limiting basic rights, as this must relate to an exceptional rather than an ordinary state of affairs.

Many countries grapple with striking the appropriate balance between liberty and security, not just Singapore. In this process, it is argued that judicial review should be limited as judges are not security experts and should stick to questions of law, not politics or security. Indeed, such matters should be entrusted to the Minister who is expected to act in a politically responsible manner.

Secondly, the Constitution is the supreme law and under that, Article 149 gives Parliament extraordinary legislative powers to enact anti-subversion laws. The ISA was enacted and legitimated under this constitutionally mandated special power, even though the ISA clashes with other constitutional provisions as it limits judicial review and suspends the enjoyment of certain fundamental liberties. I am concerned that section 7(6) of the Employment of Foreign Workers (Amendment) Bill does not stem from this sort of extraordinary legislative powers stemming from Article 149 of the Constitution. While the Employment of Foreign Workers (Amendment) Bill is designed to serve the national interest of Singapore, it is surely not a matter of national security. I wonder if the Minister could elaborate on why it is necessary to limit judicial review in respect of decisions taken by the rele

vant administrative actors under section 7 of the amended Act.

We should be careful not to depart too readily from the constitutional law principle that administrative action should generally be subject to the legal control of the courts through judicial review, rather than relying on non-judicial methods of control, such as ministerial appeals. Both of course can co-exist. In fact, this would enhance the prospect of ensuring fair dealing between the individual and administrative state.

My final point is a suggestion on how to strengthen the statutory remedy of appealing to the Minister in relation to section 7 decisions. By analogy, judges are required to furnish reasons for their judgements which enable counsel to decide whether there are sufficient grounds for appeal. So, too, an aggrieved applicant under the EFWA needs to know, for example, why the Controller decided to revoke a work pass or to debar a person from applying for a work pass for a fixed period. This would help the applicant to evaluate whether or not to make an appeal. In certain Commonwealth jurisdictions, the common law has evolved the duty requiring administrative actors to give reasons for their decision. Of course, an administrator may informally choose to give reasons. However, it would be prudent to follow the best administrative law practices abroad where the duty to give adequate reasons has been codified by statute. Giving reasons is one of the fundamentals of good, open and rational administration. Further, telling a person why his application was rejected is to treat him with dignity, rather than impersonally as a member of a faceless mass of people.

I hope these considerations will be taken into account, if not for this Act, for future laws which confer regulatory powers on the administrative state which affect the lives and interests of citizens

and foreign nationals dwelling within our borders. Such procedural safeguards will enhance the construction of good administrative procedure, promote good governance, protect interest and fortify the rule of law.

Other than the reservations expressed, I support the amendments in general.

4.40 pm

Madam, I appreciate comments from Members of this House. First, I thank Members for affirmation of the widespread support for this Bill. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang said he strongly welcomes it, and there are other similar supporting statements that we are moving in the right direction, and MOM appreciates that. If I may address certain issues directly.

Mr Yeo, and some other Members, asked whether this Bill does, through perception, give the impression that we are protecting foreign workers more than local workers. The answer is, of course, no. This is not the only Act that provides protection for our citizens. We have the Employment Act and other measures as well, in terms of the Workfare system, etc. So it should not be seen narrowly in that sense.

Mr Yeo particularly welcomed the mandatory one-month jail for repeat offences and asked why similar offences of fraud or deception did not have such onerous penalties. The penalties are never cast in stone. We review them from time to time to see whether they are sensible or not. If you take what Ms Lee Bee Wah said, in fact, she responded on the opposite end, that it was too harsh. So there is a balance to be struck. But since I touch on the subject, let me just say that the penalties are never crafted de novo. We have to take reference from

what the previous penalties were as well as in reference to other countries.

So are our penalties harsher, which is a point asked by Ms Lee Bee Wah? The answer is no. For example, the first conviction is a fine of up to $15,000 or 12 months' imprisonment. For Taiwan, the penalty is three years' imprisonment. So it is certainly much harsher. In Malaysia, it has 12 months' imprisonment; in South Korea, it is the same. So there is, if you like, a benchmark. At the end of the day, we will see how effective it is. I agree with Members that this allows us to implement the framework for enforcement is also important.

Mdm Halimah asked some questions. First, let me thank her for saying that this is a more coordinated and coherent framework. We agree. We wanted to consolidate the Acts together. Members would know from the statements that the enforcement was in two Acts - the Immigration and Employment of Foreign Workers Acts. It was not only cumbersome but administratively complex sometimes. So we have consolidated them today. She asked for this new definition of "trainee", whether it was meant to liberalise our policy. The answer is obviously not. This is a legislation to tighten up enforcement. The reason is that we are pre-empting, in other words, as employer and employee relationship changes, for example, like the personalised Employment Pass. This is a legislative umbrella to bring all foreign workers into and to apply the framework. So that was the main reason, and is certainly not a liberalisation. In other words, they would still have to comply with our Work Pass rules. But somebody can claim that he is not designated. He is outside the system and, therefore, he is not under this ambit. That particular clause clarifies it. We can dictate what kind of relationship it is and what you are, and then put you under this umbrella. That was the purpose for it.

Mr Seah Kian Peng basically agrees with the law and he supported it, and he said the majority will comply. I thank him for his comments.

Let me address some points made by Ms Lee Bee Wah, in terms of powers of arrest. Let me just state, as some Members have noted, that under the Immigration Act - this is not new - MOM Employment Inspectors are already empowered to arrest without warrant local employers for EP offences. We can already do so for Employment Pass offences. But that was because it was under the Immigration Act. The Immigration Act governs the Employment Pass whereas the S Pass, Work Pass are under the EFWA. Therefore, we have consolidated them. We have just broadened and rationalised this. This is not something new. But, in effect, yes, she is right. We can also arrest local employers who commit offences for Work Pass and S Passes.

There were some concerns that now that we are given these enhanced powers, she conjured up images of offenders being handcuffed and then found out to be wrong. That can happen, and I would say that we are also concerned about this. We deliberated long enough whether actually we wanted these powers. The issue is not whether he is senior or whether he is authorised. The issue is training. I want to assure Ms Lee Bee Wah that

MOM too is concerned. Therefore, for checks and balances, we have harmonised our procedures with the Criminal Procedure Code, which is put in sections 21A, B and C. But, more importantly, our employment inspectorate officers are also trained to discharge these new powers professionally. In other words, we are not Dirty Harry, running around and just handcuffing people. That is not the idea. We want to be bound by SOPs and to be fair and judicious in the use of the power of arrest, just as we have under the current Act. To minimise

overnight detention, the Act actually provides for the release of arrested persons on bail or personal bond. So I am very mindful of this as Minister. I want to make sure, and I have asked my staff, "Are you comfortable? Have you benchmarked yourself with the police and other people?"

Indeed, we are not alone, in terms of enforcement agencies who have this power. There are other agencies who also have powers of arrest without warrant. Customs officers, you know, but IRAS officers too. IRAS officers are able to arrest without warrant but, of course, it is done by SPF or Immigration officers for persons caught leaving Singapore without paying outstanding tax payments. Yes, we are concerned and, therefore, we want them to be properly trained, so let me assure Ms Lee Bee Wah about that.

Ms Lee Bee Wah has also said that the penalties of $15,000 and 12 months' jail are too harsh. Let me just clarify that it is not imposed on top of the existing penalty. Basically, we just separated the levy restitution and, yes, we have stiffened that with a $15,000 fine and 12 months' jail, but, as I benchmark with other countries, as I have mentioned, it is not overly harsh.

Ms Lee also asked why we need to return invalid work passes. The main reason is so that they would not be used for fraudulent purposes. The work pass has a premium in the market. Even if you disfigure it, people can still say that, "This is a work pass." So, that is the main purpose. It is a practical one.

Ms Lee has asked whether MOM allows work permits to be used for workers in the construction sector to be used more generically. I have liberalised it. Previously, they were only allowed to work in one worksite. We have, firstly, liberalised that to say that they can work

in any worksite. Secondly, MOM has liberalised it to say that, with the workers' consent, they can work for more than one employer. That is basically just to increase productivity, with the caveat that safety of the foreign worker is protected and that the foreign worker agrees to it himself. So, yes, we have liberalised it.

Let me now touch on the points which Prof. Thio Li-ann mentioned. Let me first thank Prof. Thio for that wonderful dissertation. That was a very useful lesson in legalities, and I was quite thankful I did not take up law. Medicine is much simpler - a patient is well, not well, alive. But it was a very useful thesis on how complex it is, and I take her point: how do we want to craft our legislation in this House, the Bills that we want to enact, how much discretion, what should be under judicial review, how much powers do we give, etc. These are weighty things which shape our society.

First, let me assure Prof. Thio that the Controller will not withhold a work permit for someone because he does not like the colour of the hair. I have not, but, if you do know of any case, please let me know and I will act upon it, and subject to your review. But the purpose for excluding certain aspects from judicial review has its reasons. And, as Prof. Thio rightly pointed out, this Act is not the only one; the Immigration Act is an example of one where we have to protect certain national interests.

Prof. Thio has asked - I stand corrected but this is what I understood it - what can be excluded from judicial review. Our intention was that the Minister's and Controller's decisions relating to the issuance, revocation and suspension of work passes are excluded from judicial review in this scope. The actions outside the scope of section 7(6) are still subject to review, and that due

process has been observed can be subjected to it. The reasons for this are obvious. Supposing we have information that someone might be engaging in suspicious activities, it may be hard to prove. They went through due process, they applied for the work permit, but, based on that information, I might not want to give it to that person. I can be subjected, if we do not have this rule that the issuance of the revocation can be subjected to judicial review. There are other circumstances. But this is not meant for frivolous use. There are specific aspects which we find that this is useful.

With that, Madam, let me thank Members again for their comments.

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 Ng Eng Hen].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

5.50 pm

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move,

That, pursuant to Article 41 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, the Speaker shall be paid with effect from 1st April 2007:

a monthly salary and allowance equal to 50% of 1.48 times the salary and allowance payable to a Senior Administrative Officer on the minimum point of the Ministerial Range 4 (MR4) as specified in the Senior Administrative Officers' Scheme of Service;

a non-pensionable annual fixed bonus pegged at the norm Performance Bonus rate of a Senior Administrative Officer on the minimum point of the Ministerial Range 4 (MR4) as specified in the Senior Administrative Officers' Scheme of Service; and

a GDP Bonus pegged at the GDP Bonus rates payable to a Senior Administrative Officer on the minimum point of the Ministerial Range 4 (MR4) as specified in the Senior Administrative Officers' Scheme of Service.

Madam, on 9th April 2007, the Minister in charge of the Civil Service announced the revision of salaries and allowances for the Civil Service, including the political, judicial and statutory appointment holders. As Article 41 of the Constitution states that the Speaker shall be paid such salary as Parliament may from time to time determine, the House needs to pass a resolution to put into effect these salary revisions for the Speaker and Deputy Speakers.

The Speaker's full remuneration, like those of Ministers and other elected officeholders, is pegged to the salary scales of the Senior Administrative Officers' Scheme of Service. Parliament is asked to approve this Motion to fix the Speaker's remuneration to 50% of the full-time rate in line with the current part-time arrangement of the Speaker.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That, pursuant to Article 41 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, the Speaker shall be paid with effect from 1st April 2007:

a monthly salary and allowance equal to 50% of 1.48 times the salary and allowance payable to a Senior Administrative Officer on the minimum point of the Ministerial Range 4

as specified in the Senior Administrative Officers' Scheme of Service;

a non-pensionable annual fixed bonus pegged at the norm Performance Bonus rate of a Senior Administrative Officer on the minimum point of the Ministerial Range 4 (MR4) as specified in the Senior Administrative Officers' Scheme of Service; and

a GDP Bonus pegged at the GDP Bonus rates payable to a Senior Administrative Officer on the minimum point of the Ministerial Range 4 (MR4) as specified in the Senior Administrative Officers' Scheme of Service.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move,

That, pursuant to Article 42(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, each Deputy Speaker shall be paid with effect from 1st April 2007:

a monthly allowance equal to 15% of the monthly salary payable to the Speaker; and

a GDP Bonus pegged at 50% of the GDP Bonus rates payable to the Speaker.

Madam, the allowance payable to the Deputy Speakers had been set at a percentage of the actual salary received by the incumbent Speaker. In line with the recent salary revisions announced by the Minister in charge of the Civil Service for Ministers and civil servants, the Deputy Speakers will also be paid a GDP Bonus. Parliament is asked to approve the Motion, which will peg the Deputy Speakers' allowance to 15% of the Speaker's part-time salary and 50% of the GDP Bonus rates payable to the Speaker.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That, pursuant to Article 42(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, each Deputy Speaker shall be paid with effect from 1st April 2007:

a monthly allowance equal to 15% of the monthly salary payable to the Speaker; and

a GDP Bonus pegged at 50% of the GDP Bonus rates payable to the Speaker.

Resolved,

"That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." - [Mr Mah Bow Tan].

Adjourned accordingly at

Six minutes to Five o'clock pm

to a date to be fixed.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs for each of the last ten years (a) how many cases were investigated by the police involving allegations of sexual intercourse between a female minor and a male who was below the age of 21 years where the male claimed to have reasonable cause to believe that the minor was above (i) 16 years and (ii) 18 years; and (b) of these cases, how many were not the first case against that male.

Under section 140(5) of the Women's Charter, the presence of reasonable cause to believe that the girl was above the age of 16 years shall be a valid defence on the first occasion on which he is charged with an offence of carnal connection under section 140 (1)(i).

We do not actively track the breakdown of the number of cases where the defence of mistaking the age of the victim was invoked. From anecdotal accounts, it is not common for accused persons to use mistaking the age of victims as a defence for their sexual offences.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs for each of the last ten years, how many cases were investigated by the police involving allegations of an offence under section 376 of the Penal Code where the person alleged to have committed an offence (i) intentionally deceived the victim as to the nature of the acts in question; and (ii) intentionally induced the victim to consent to those acts by impersonating a person known to the victim.

Rape cases where deception was used in the course of committing the offence under section 376 of the Penal Code are not separately noted and recorded. Nevertheless, based on anecdotal accounts, cases where accused persons had intentionally deceived the victims into sexual intercourse or intentionally induced the victims to consent to sexual intercourse by impersonating a person known to the victims, are not common. This is backed by what can be culled from the compilation of facts in the preliminary reports submitted by the Investigation Officers when rape cases are reported.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs for each of the last ten years (a) how many convictions were there for offences under section 143 of the Penal Code; and (b) of these, how many were sentenced to imprisonment and how many were sentenced to five or more months of imprisonment.

The number of persons convicted, imprisoned and those who were sentenced to five months' imprisonment or more under section 143 (Punishment for unlawful assembly) of the Penal Code, for the last 10 years (1997 to 2006), is provided in the table below.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs, in view of the proposed Penal Code (Amendment) Bill issued for public consultation in November 2006 which proposes to increase the maximum sentences for certain offences as set out in the Schedule to the Bill, for each of the last ten years, (a) how many convictions have there been for each of those offences; (b) how many involved sentences of imprisonment; and (d) how many sentences were at 80% or more of the maximum duration of imprisonment permitted.

The overall aim of the punishment framework is to reduce crime, protect society and maintain law and order. Several factors are taken into account in proposals to increase the maximum imprisonment terms of offences in the Penal Code.

The number and trend of convictions for each offence are only one of these factors. Indeed, this number may fluctuate from year to year in line with the overall crime rates for any particular year.

Also, it is not meaningful to base our decision whether to increase the maximum imprisonment terms on the number of sentences in the past which have hit 80% or more of the maximum sentences. Taking such an approach would disregard the facts and circumstances of the case which the Judge would have taken into account in considering what is the appropriate sentence to be meted out.

Apart from the number and trend of convictions for each offence, the other considerations taken into account in deciding on the maximum sentences are:

a. Punishment should reflect the severity of the offence and serve as a deterrent;

b. The need to maintain proportionality between the offence and the punishment;

c. The type and quantum of punishment should provide sufficient flexibility to our Courts to mete out an appropriate sentence in a particular case, rather than to amend the law to adjust the punishment every now and then;

d. The need to maintain relativity in the punishment for related offences within the Penal Code;

e. The need to maintain relativity in the punishment for similar offences covered under different statutes;

f. The need to retain mandatory minimum punishment and to abolish it where it is no longer necessary to retain them; and

g. The need to reduce the gap between 10 years or life imprisonment for double-limb penalty provisions.

As for the specific details requested for, the Police does not have such ready statistics in the form requested.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs if he can give a breakdown of new citizens and permanent residents by country, gender and profession for the last three years.

Over the last three years, ie, from 2004 to 2006, an average of about 49,000 persons were granted permanent resident status in Singapore while an average of about 11,000 persons were granted Singapore Citizenship. These new permanent residents and citizens were predominantly from South-East, South and East Asia. We also get immigrants from diverse places such as the Americas, Oceania and Europe. In terms of gender, males account for slightly less than half of the foreigners who were granted PR and SC.

The majority of foreigners who were granted PR and SC on their own merits were predominantly professionals, managers, executives and administrators. Our records show that almost 60% of new permanent residents and about 80% of new citizens held such professions.

asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources how effective is the Corrective Work Order in reducing littering problems in Singapore.

The Corrective Work Order (CWO) is enforced against recalcitrant litterbugs, and persons who have committed serious littering offences that may give rise to vermin infestation, mosquito breeding and other public health problems. The CWO is conducted four times a year, on average. It has been effective as a deterrent. Since the introduction of CWO in November 1992, 4,336 CWOs have been issued to littering offenders. Only 3% (or 135 offenders) were caught littering again after performing CWO. In addition to enforcement, to address the littering issue, my Ministry will continue to promote environmental ownership as the key to keep our environment litter-free.

asked the Minister for Education if he can provide an update on the efforts to educate students on fire safety measures and whether fire safety is included in the school curriculum.

Fire safety is emphasised as part of school safety to all pupils. To ensure that pupils know the actions to take in such an emergency, fire drills are conducted twice a year in schools. Each fire drill is preceded by a briefing to all staff and pupils on fire safety measures. As part of the preparation for lessons in the Design and Technology workshops and practical sessions in the Science laboratories, pupils are taught fire safety measures. Uniformed Groups like the National Civil Defence Cadet Corp (NCDCC), NPCC and NCC offer training on the use of fire extinguishers and on appropriate ways to fight a fire. Schools also leverage on media reports of fire occurrences and use platforms such as School Assembly to raise such safety awareness in pupils.

asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports for each of the last ten years (a) how many marriages between Singaporeans and foreigners were registered in Singapore; (b) how many of these marriages were between

Singaporean men and foreign women; and (c) what were the 20 most common nationalities of (i) foreign men who married Singaporean women and (ii) foreign women who married Singaporean men.

From 1997 to 2006, an annual average of 5,200 marriages between Singaporeans and foreigners were registered in Singapore. The annual figures for the period are at Table 1.

4,445

5,102

5,172

4,823

5,058

4,929

4,566

5,411

6,777

6,359

For the same period, an annual average of 4,200 marriages between Singaporean men and foreign women were registered in Singapore. The annual figures for the period are at Table 2.

ges

3,592

4,143

4,129

3,834

4,117

3,988

3,647

4,358

5,611

5,202

The most common origins among foreign spouses who married Singaporeans from 2004 to 2006 are listed at Table 3. We only have a breakdown by origins from 2004.

Alphabetical Order

Australia

Australia

Bangladesh

Brunei

Canada

Cambodia

France

Canada

Germany

Hong Kong

Hong Kong

India

India

Indonesia

Indonesia

Japan

Italy

Korea

Japan

Mainland China

Mainland China

Malaysia

Malaysia

Philippines

Netherlands