Hansard, 2008-05-26

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 (2008) To (2008) Mr Liang Eng Hwa 25 Apr 27 Apr 01 May 04 May Miss Penny Low 25 Apr 02 May 04 Jun 12 Jun 15 Jun 16 Jun Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim 26 Apr 04 May Mdm Ho Geok Choo 27 Apr 03 May 08 May 09 May Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman 27 Apr 29 Apr Mr S Iswaran 29 Apr 03 May 05 May 09 May 20 May 26 May 05 Jun 19 Jun Mr Lim Hng Kiang 01 May 04 May 29 May 07 Jun Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee 02 May 02 May 21 May 23 May Dr Lily Neo 03 May 10 May RAdm [NS] Lui Tuck Yew 03 May 04 May 06 May 11 May Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam 03 May 06 May 09 May 09 May 17 May 18 May 24 May 28 May Mr Goh Chok Tong 05 May 09 May Column: 2721Dr Ng Eng Hen 05 May 09 May 12 May 16 May Mdm Cynthia Phua 06 May 18 May 28 May 31 May Dr Ahmad Mohd Magad 07 May 10 May 14 May 17 May 27 May 31 May Mr Gan Kim Yong 07 May 09 May 31 May 01 Jun Mr Alvin Yeo 08 May 11 May 15 May 18 May 27 May 13 Jun Mr Ang Mong Seng 08 May 11 May 21 May 24 May Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng 08 May 10 May 26 May 26 May Dr Ong Chit Chung 08 May 09 May 12 May 13 May 27 May 29 May Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon 08 May 27 May Dr Balaji Sadasivan 09 May 12 May 15 May 31 May Mr George Yong-Boon Yeo 10 May 18 May 21 May 23 May 24 May 26 May Mr Zainudin Nordin 10 May 16 May 23 May 25 May 02 Jun 07 Jun 18 Jun 21 Jun 24 Jun 28 Jun Dr Ong Seh Hong 12 May 14 May 26 May 30 May 06 Jun 22 Jun Mr Arthur Fong 13 May 16 May Mr Wong Kan Seng 13 May 14 May Er Lee Bee Wah 15 May 17 May 30 May 02 Jun 06 Jun 21 Jun Mr Seah Kian Peng 15 May 17 May 11 Jun 22 Jun 25 Jun 28 Jun Mr Heng Chee How 16 May 24 May 10 Jul 14 Jul Assoc. Prof. Kalyani K Mehta 16 May 22 Jun Mr Lee Yi Shyan 16 May 18 May Mr Abdullah Tarmugi 18 May 22 May 09 Jun 15 Jun Column: 2722Mr Charles Chong 18 May 23 May 30 May 06 Jun Mr Hawazi Daipi 18 May 20 May Dr Lee Boon Yang 18 May 21 May 01 Jun 06 Jun Mrs Josephine Teo 19 May 22 May 01 Jun 13 Jun Mr Lim Boon Heng 19 May 24 May Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat 19 May 01 Jun Mr Seng Han Thong 19 May 22 May Er Edwin Khew Teck Fook 22 May 28 May Mr Ong Kian Min 22 May 26 May Prof. S Jayakumar 22 May 24 May Dr Fatimah Lateef 24 May 05 Jun Prof. Thio Li-ann 25 May 31 May Mdm Halimah Yacob 26 May 16 Jun 25 Jun 29 Jun Mr Lee Hsien Loong 26 May 26 May Mr Lee Kuan Yew 26 May 26 May 02 Jun 07 Jun Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien 27 May 29 May 18 Jun 21 Jun Mr Mah Bow Tan 27 May 05 Jun Mr Wee Siew Kim 28 May 29 May 04 Jun 07 Jun Mr K Shanmugam 30 May 01 Jun Mr Khaw Boon Wan 31 May 11 Jun Mrs Lim Hwee Hua 01 Jun 15 Jun Dr Lam Pin Min 02 Jun 08 Jun Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee 04 Jun 08 Jun Dr Lim Wee Kiak 08 Jun 10 Jun 30 Nov 15 Dec Ms Ellen Lee 10 Jun 17 Jun Mr Sin Boon Ann 14 Jun 20 Jun Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan 18 Jun 21 Jun

Dr Ng Eng Hen

Mr Charles Chong

ABDULLAH TARMUGI Speaker Parliament of Singapore

The following Bills were assented to by the President of the Republic of Singapore on the date stated:

5th May,2008 (1) Infectious Diseases (Amendment) Bill (2) Economic Development Board (Amendment) Bill ABDULLAH TARMUGI Speaker Parliament of Singapore

1. Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Senior Minister how has the strong Singapore dollar helped the average Singaporean to keep high inflation at bay.

2. Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Senior Minister what is the key to Singapore's success in maintaining a strong Singapore dollar policy and how it has contributed to keeping Singapore competitive.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos. 1 and 2 together?

Please do.

Mr Speaker, Sir,Singapore adopts an exchange rate-centred monetary policy to maintain price stability for sustained economic growth. Given the small and open nature of our economy and our dependence on trade, the exchange rate has an important impact on domestic prices. This regime, in place since 1981, has served us well. For example, domestic inflation has been low over a sustained period, averaging 1.7% over the period 1981 to 2007, compared with an average of 5.5% for the OECD countries.

The objective of our monetary policy has always been and will continue to be focused on maintaining price stability over the medium term. An environment of low and stable inflation helps preserve the purchasing power of Singaporeans' income and savings. It also provides a stable and conducive environment for businesses to undertake long-term investments, thus enhancing competitiveness and job creation, and providing the basis for sustained economic growth. In turn, the success of our economic growth strategy, which leverages on global and financial market integration, has supported the continued appreciation of the domestic currency consistent with the economy's strengthening economic fundamentals. These include prudent fiscal policy and a large reserve position, flexible product and factor markets, as well as a robust and sound financial system and domestic corporate sector.

Since 2004, MAS has adopted a policy of targeting a modest and gradual appreciation of Singapore's trade-weighted exchange rate, amidst robust economic growth in the economy. In its last two policy announcements in October 2007 and April 2008, MAS said that it would allow a stronger appreciation of the Singapore dollar, through a steeper slope and an upward re-centering of its policy

band, respectively. This was a considered and measured response to counter the inflationary pressures that were building up, while providing support for sustainable economic growth. In the current environment of high global inflation, MAS' exchange rate policy of a strong Singapore dollar has helped to reduce the cost of our imports. For example, between January 2007 and March 2008, global food prices – measured by the IMF food price index – surged 50% whereas the domestic cost of food imports rose by a much lower 14%.

While MAS' exchange rate policy stance has helped to dampen the effects of global food and oil inflation, we cannot insulate ourselves completely from the effects of higher world prices passing through to the Singapore economy. MAS has to strike the right balance in the setting of its exchange rate policy taking into account both inflation and growth considerations, mindful in particular that external demand conditions have weakened especially in the G3 markets.

The Government has therefore adopted a multi-pronged strategy to cope with inflation, which was announced as early as February this year in the Budget speech. Besides monetary policy, some of the other measures include the diversification of food sources to minimise spikes in prices due to supply disruptions from any one country, as well as raising public awareness of cheaper food choices and substitutes. At the same time, the Government is providing direct assistance to Singaporeans who are adversely affected by the higher cost of living. In addition to the GST Offset Package introduced in last year's Budget, the Government has also announced other relief measures this year, such as Growth Dividends and personal income tax rebates, targeted especially at lower- and middle-income Singaporeans. Together,

these schemes would help defray a large part of the increase in the cost of living that households would experience this year.

Sir, three supplementary questions. I would like to ask the Minister whether there is a clear economic argument from MOF that can be carried to the masses, to assure them that this policy has indeed protected them from some form of inflationary erosion and is probably the best approach that we can take for now.

The second question is: are there any foreseeable downsides of maintaining a strong Singapore dollar? For instance, how is a strong Singapore dollar affecting our exports?

The third question is: has strengthening the Singapore dollar actually affected our tourism industry in any way?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the key message we want to get through to Singaporeans is that we face global inflation – energy prices are up, food prices are up, wage costs in some countries have also gone up. Therefore, there is no way we can completely insulate ourselves from these global forces. What we can do, as I explained in my answer, is a multi-pronged approach. First, we have a stronger Singapore dollar so as to dampen import inflation. Second, we look at supply constraints and release some of these supply constraints which cause some domestic cost increases, whether it be office space or residential land, and even labour constraints and also new sources of food so that we are not impacted by any disruption from any single country. Third, of course, is a more direct fiscal approach of assisting lower income and middle-income Singaporeans directly through the various policies and distributions like the Growth Dividends and the GST offsets.

I think this broad strategy works, as it has panned out. Compared to many countries where the inflation rate is much higher, our inflation rate here is still high compared to our recent history but lower than what other countries have faced, and lower than if we had done nothing. I think this is a considered approach and it has gone some way to mitigate the impact. But we cannot completely shield ourselves and we cannot hope, over the next few months, to bring our inflation down to 1%-2% as we were very accustomed to, because the global trends have changed.

Second, as I have mentioned, we need this balance – a strong Singapore dollar helps to lower imported inflation but, at the same time, it affects our exporters who have to compete. The saving grace is that, being a global phenomenon, the competitors of our exporters also face cost pressures and therefore the situation is not as bad as in the 80s where Singapore alone faced much higher inflationary pressure and cost pressure compared to our regional surrounding countries. The situation today, in the light of a more widespread inflationary and higher cost trend, is that our exporters are keeping up.

Third, the impact on tourism. We have been fairly successful in attracting tourist arrivals to Singapore and so tourist arrivals have continued to grow at a fairly decent 4%-5%. Our biggest constraint is really the shortage of hotel rooms and this is part of the supply constraint that we face in different sectors of our economy. To this end, URA and STB have been very active in promoting new sales of sites and we should see the entry of additional hotel rooms soon and that will help alleviate the pressure in the tourism sector and help bring us to the target that we are aiming for, which is to double the visitor arrivals by 2015 and to triple tourism earnings by 2015.

Mr Speaker, may I ask the Minister whether there is an upper limit or threshold on the Singapore dollar's appreciation to mitigate inflation, after which it will be counter-productive or it will result in side-effects?

As our MAS' policy statement puts it, we strive to aim for a modest and gradual appreciation. This means that we try to prevent sharp volatility of the Singapore dollar so as to create as stable a condition and environment for both importers as well as exporters as much as possible.

Sir, the Minister said that the Government takes a multi-pronged approach to mitigate high inflation in Singapore. But I thought there is one particular approach that the Minister had not considered or it is not up in the Government's sleeves, and that is, the tax-cut approach, for instance, cutting GST rate or petrol tax.

Mr Speaker, Sir, our approach is aimed at the medium term. The GST adjustments that we put in are necessary to have a better balance between direct and indirect tax. So I do not think it is useful for us to tweak the GST tax rate in response to a short-term phenomenon which is the cost increases we face. I think we should look for an array of tools or instruments with a medium-term outlook.

The petrol tax is, in fact, very modest if you compare it to many countries, particularly in Japan or Europe. Our petrol tax rate is not out of sync compared to other countries.

Sir, the Government had previously predicted that inflation would actually ease off in the second half of this year due to the effect of the GST hike last year being dissipated over the year. Given that now there is an unprecedented

inflation in food and oil, does the Government see a risk in inflation rate in the second half of this year not actually easing off?

Mr Speaker, Sir, that is still our central scenario, that is, in the second half of the year we should see an easing-off of inflationary pressure both for domestic reasons as well as for external reasons. For domestic reasons, because of the way we calculate the inflation, the impact of the GST, it would ease off after July and also the impact of the annual values of HDB flats. For external conditions, you can see that the sharp run-up of food prices, for example, the momentum ought to ease off towards the second half of the year or, at least, this is what most analysts are projecting.

3. Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what measures are being taken by ASEAN and Singapore, in particular, to assist the people of Myanmar in the aftermath of the cyclone disaster; and (b) whether the Myanmar junta has welcomed humanitarian relief from ASEAN.

4. Miss Penny Low asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what is the Government's position on the catastrophe deadlock between the Myanmar junta and the foreign aid agencies; (b) what can Singapore, as a member of ASEAN, do to help bring the much needed aid to Cyclone Nargis victims; and (c) what can our residents, which include Myanmar nationals, do to help the catastrophe victims.

5. Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) whether

the delay by the Myanmar government in accepting foreign aid for people displaced by Cyclone Nargis and allowing the entry of foreign aid experts to assist with basic relief efforts, breaches the spirit of Article 1 [Purposes 7 and 11] and Article 2 [Principle 2(i)] of the ASEAN Charter; and (b) if so, what can Singapore, as a member and present Chairman of ASEAN, do to ensure that the spirit of the ASEAN Charter will be adhered to by Myanmar once the Charter's ratification process is completed.

6. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what measures are being taken and what safeguards are in place to ensure that aid contributed by Singapore and Singaporeans reach the victims of Cyclone Nargis; and (b) what is the Government's position on the legitimacy of the referendum conducted by the junta in the immediate aftermath of the cyclone.

Mr Speaker, Sir, please allow me to take Question Nos. 3 to 6 on Cyclone Nargis together as they are related.

Yes.

Mr Speaker, Sir, to answer Miss Penny Low and Ms Irene Ng, we recognise the critical situation in Myanmar in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis and the necessity for the Singapore Government to assist the Myanmar government and people in its recovery efforts. To this end, we had contributed a first tranche of humanitarian assistance package worth US$200,000. This included medical benefits, drinking water, water purifying tablets, tents, groundsheets, blankets, sleeping bags and emergency food parcels. Delivery of this first tranche of aid was completed on 10th May 2008. And Singapore was also part of the ASEAN Emergency Rapid

Assessment Team (called ERAT) in Myanmar to assess the situation. We also despatched a 15-member medical team to help the Myanmar people on 22nd May this year which has since grown to 24.

Sir, Singapore had earlier offered to despatch our DART (or Disaster Assistance Rescue Teams), medical doctors and Chinooks to assist the Myanmars in their rescue operations. However, these offers were not taken up by the Myanmars. Like the rest of the international community, Singapore recognises that no one country alone can handle a crisis of such scale and magnitude. In our capacity as ASEAN Chair and with the agreement of the Myanmar government, we took the initiative to convene a Special ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Meeting (AMM) on 19th May to discuss how to further help Myanmar. Myanmar participated as a full member at this meeting, including attending the joint press conference where ASEAN's efforts were announced.

The meeting achieved several important outcomes. First, to address the immediate needs, Myanmar agreed to the rapid deployment of medical teams from all the ASEAN countries. Second, based on Foreign Minister Nyan Win's detailed briefing of the damage caused by Cyclone Nargis and the help required, it was clear that Myanmar's needs are beyond what itself or ASEAN can provide. ASEAN members have therefore agreed to help channel international assistance to Myanmar. We have established an ASEAN-led coordinating mechanism to facilitate the effective distribution and utilisation of assistance from the international community. ASEAN Secretary-General Surin will lead a Task Force, which will work closely with the UN and a central coordinating body in Myanmar, in the setting up of this coordinating mechanism.

Yesterday, ASEAN and UN had also convened an ASEAN-UN International

Pledging Conference. The aim was to focus on the needs of those affected by the cyclone, and seek international support and financial assistance for the international humanitarian response to meet the most urgent challenges, as well as longer term recovery efforts. At the Pledging Conference, Singapore pledged a further US$5 million worth of assistance to Myanmar's relief, recovery and reconstruction efforts. In addition, we also offered assistance in the form of the continued deployment of medical teams, logistics support, heavy-lift helicopters, and water purification units. The assistance package will extend to the reconstruction of cyclone-affected areas. Private individuals, companies, and NGOs in Singapore will also do their part.

Beyond the Singapore Government's efforts, Singaporeans have shown that they have a big heart by their various contributions to the Myanmar people. Organisations like the Singapore Red Cross, Mercy Relief, Salvation Army (Singapore), World Vision International (Singapore), the MUIS-initiated Rahmatan Lil Alamin (or Blessings-to-All) Committee and the Golden Pagoda Buddhist temple have collected donations from Singaporeans, Myanmar residents and others in Singapore. These funds have been used to buy relief supplies for the Myanmar people.

To answer Mr Siew Kum Hong's question, Singapore, along with other donor countries, have handed over the aid to the Myanmar authorities overseeing the aid effort. This aid is intended for the victims of Cyclone Nargis and should be used as such. But we must accept the fact that there is no alternative to working through the Myanmar authorities. They know the local situation better than anyone else, and will have to be accountable to their own people. The alternative is not to give any aid. With the setting up of the ASEAN coordinating

mechanism, the distribution of aid should become more systematic.

Mr Siew also asked about the legitimacy of the referendum. Although some countries have questioned the fairness of the referendum, we are not in a position to judge. Our diplomats in Yangon were invited along with other diplomats to visit polling stations. While they saw nothing exceptional, they were not able to evaluate the integrity of the entire process. Singapore was disappointed that the main opposition party, the NLD, did not take part in drafting the final draft constitution. However, we do see the establishment of a clear timetable to democracy in Myanmar, however imperfect, to be a step forward. Right now, our focus should be to help the Myanmar people through this very difficult period after the cyclone. We are opposed to the politicisation of external aid.

Finally, Sir, I thank Mr de Souza for pointing to the principles and purposes of the ASEAN Charter, which all ASEAN member countries, including Myanmar, signed last November. Members would be aware that Myanmar and three other ASEAN countries (namely, Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand) are still in the process of ratifying the ASEAN Charter. With the Charter entering into force, we do expect ASEAN member countries to subscribe to the values and standards spelt out in the Charter. It is based upon these values and standards that ASEAN has stepped in to assist Myanmar as a member of the family, and we expect Myanmar to cooperate fully with ASEAN and the international community.

Does the Senior Minister of State agree that the Myanmar junta's earlier response towards humanitarian relief has been hard-line and struck a discordant note, especially given the ASEAN spirit and the

ASEAN Charter that we are all going to sign on? Can I ask the Senior Minister of State whether he thinks that the lack of responsibility on the part of Myanmar to assist its own people, in fact, makes it harder for ASEAN to function as a grouping with moral standing on the international stage and whether the Senior Minister of State will see to it that when Myanmar does sign on the ASEAN Charter the ASEAN members will put pressure on Myanmar to make clear that such behaviour is really not to be tolerated?

I think we all know the history of Myanmar's participation in ASEAN. It is not easy, but to call it hard-line – I am not sure myself. But Myanmar is facing difficult times, especially with Cyclone Nargis. But the fact that Myanmar has agreed to join in with the AMM in Singapore last Monday and the fact that when the Secretary-General of the United Nations met with Senior-General Than Shwe and he agreed to allowing aid officers and volunteers to come in has shown progress. So I think let us take it a step at a time. And I think if the Charter is ratified, of course we have better grounds to get and expect better cooperation.

Assuming the ratification process is completed, how would the behaviour of the Myanmar government sit with Article 36 of the Charter and one would appreciate that Article 36 of the Charter says that the collective motto of ASEAN shall be One Vision, One Identity and One Community? What is Singapore's position on this as Chair and member of ASEAN?

I think Singapore, as Chair of ASEAN, has always taken the approach that we need to understand where each member of ASEAN comes from. ASEAN has taken a long time to come to this stage today where we can gain the kind of

understanding and cooperation. I think members will remember how we have moved, step by step, in terms of political cooperation in facing some of the more difficult issues and challenges in the earlier days. But now I think ASEAN is also recognised as a group which has greater cohesion and greater sense of unity. Myanmar has been a challenge to ASEAN and whether it is a question of the demonstrations and the way the authorities in Myanmar responded to the demonstrations and now Cyclone Nargis, I think they have been found wanting by the international community. But at the same time, we also know that we have to get the understanding, trust and confidence on the part of the Myanmar government in order to ensure better cooperation and a better working relationship. And there has been progress, both in the context of the aftermath of the demonstrations and also Cyclone Nargis now. We are confident that Myanmar will also recognise the need to adhere and to answer to the spirit of Article 36 which the Member mentioned just now.

I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether ASEAN has a duty of care to the cyclone victims in Myanmar and, if so, why did they take two weeks to convene the Special ASEAN Foreign Ministers' meeting. If ASEAN has a duty of care to the cyclone victims, has ASEAN's credibility been put on the line because of the delay in getting full and proper access of aid workers to the cyclone victims?

While it took some time for us to convene a meeting, it did not mean that nothing was done. In fact, we have been able to send in earlier tranches of aid and we have been making steady progress in attending to those needs. While some may see it as ASEAN's credibility being put to question, I think ASEAN also recognises the

challenges posed by having to deal with a regime that has its own way in dealing with such situations. But as I mentioned earlier on, there has been progress made, and I think we should work on those developments and progress and ensure that we get the most out of those opportunities to help the Myanmar people.

I have three supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. Firstly, I would like to ask whether the Ministry has sought clarifications from the Myanmar Generals on whether it is true that relief items have been diverted for sale on the market and in their place, inferior items, including, in some cases, rotting foodstuffs, sent to cyclone victims. Secondly, I would like to ask what sort of assurances we will require from the Generals before we release the additional $5 million of aid that we have promised. And, finally, Sir, the Senior Minister of State has stated the Ministry's opposition to the politicisation of aid, and I absolutely agree that aid commitments should not be linked to the issue of democracy in Myanmar. Having said that, does the Government have a position on the timing of the referendum taking place so soon after the cyclone?

On the question of distribution of aid and also whether it is true that food was rotting away, yes, I have also seen news reports on it. I am afraid I do not have an answer to that, but we will check on it. On the question of assurances on the US$5 million aid, in fact, during the conference yesterday, there were quite a number of countries which also were willing to pledge more, but they also wanted some assurances in terms of distribution and also in terms of what we consider as the needs of the Myanmar people. So I think the ASEAN mechanism which they have started work on – they had a back-to-back meeting yesterday after the conference – will look into all these

questions, including to ensure that assistance that has been pledged or provided will be going to the rightful destination, which is the Myanmar people. So, we will do our best to ensure that the donations either from the Government directly or money collected through our people will be well-utilised and well-distributed. On the question on the referendum – the last question which the Member asked, I think I mentioned just now that while we were disappointed that the NLD were not party to the drafting of the constitution, we believe that it is an internal matter decided by the government of Myanmar. While we have been invited to observe the referendum being carried out, we will have to see how the development evolves, and we will have to take it, again, step by step.

Some time at the end or during the ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Meeting, the Minister remarked that we would know "what ASEAN means to Myanmar and what Myanmar means to ASEAN". In a crisis, we know that crisis can either make or break a community. So after all the deliberations that we have held, can the Senior Minister of State clarify whether we have actually advanced as an ASEAN Community or we are taking three steps backwards?

I think clearly we have advanced as an ASEAN Community. I think if one were to recall the kind of challenges that we have faced over the last 40 years, you will see that there were big challenges when we were the original 5, original 6, before we became 10 in ASEAN. There were a lot of difficult problems. Even on the economic front, I think we have made tremendous progress in coming out with the ASEAN Community, which the Charter was signed at the last ASEAN Summit in Singapore. So, I think there are a lot of

pluses as far as ASEAN is concerned, and this is recognised the world over. In fact, during my trips to other regions, they even look up to ASEAN as a model, as an example of a regional grouping. We can be proud of the progress we have made. But as far as the issue of Myanmar in ASEAN is concerned, I think there are clearly challenges, problems if you like, which I think we have to continue to face. But eventually on the issue of Myanmar within ASEAN, I think ASEAN has made progress. For example, at the last ASEAN Summit and also at the meeting on the Myanmar cyclone we had on last Monday, even in those situations, cases we have shown that ASEAN can work together with Myanmar and Myanmar is willing to play along with ASEAN. But, also, at the same time we also have to understand some of the concerns that ASEAN has, which Myanmar has, facing the international community. So I think clearly there has been a lot of progress but there are certain challenges we have to face together as a group in ASEAN. And I think we will continue to make progress.

Mr Low, last question.

Thank you, Sir. I would like to ask, since Myanmar joined ASEAN, what contributions have Myanmar made to ASEAN and whether it value adds to ASEAN as an entity in its reputation internationally or, rather, it has become a burden to us.

Myanmar has already been accepted as a member of ASEAN, the ASEAN 10. Sometimes we wish that as though life can be so perfect that we want everything to be rosy

and nice. But I think it is also part of our life challenge that when we have problems, we have to learn to cope with problems and those challenges. And I think ASEAN has proven that despite the setbacks we have faced in terms of some of the attitudes from countries that are outside ASEAN in wanting ASEAN to move faster

in some areas, as far as Burma is concerned, wanting to put more pressure on Myanmar, I think we as a group has shown that we have our way of dealing with things, our ASEAN way. So, the fact that Myanmar continues to be a member of ASEAN, to me, is a contribution. As a group we want to remain united despite the challenges, despite the problems, we want to show that we can also work out the challenges but I think there are occasions where we need more time and better understanding. But more important, I think we need to build on trust and confidence between Myanmar and ASEAN, and also between Myanmar and the rest of the international community.

7. Dr Lam Pin Min asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs if he will provide an update on the disciplinary actions against those officers assessed to be culpable in the Mas Selamat incident.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Dr Lam Pin Min asked for an update on the disciplinary measures taken against the officers responsible for Mas Selamat bin Kastari's escape from the Whitley Road Detention Centre. As I informed Members on 21st April 2008, I had ordered the Commissioner of Police and the Director of the Internal Security Department (ISD) to investigate the operational lapses related to the escape and to ascertain individual accountabilities. I also stated that even while this process took its course, I had instructed the Director of ISD to replace several officers at the WRDC whom the Committee of Inquiry (COI) and the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) had identified as being responsible for the escape of Mas Selamat. In addition,

subsequent to my Statement on 21st April, I also replaced the supervising officer in ISD whom the Superintendent and the WRDC Administration reported to. I will explain his role later and why I replaced him.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is an established framework for the disciplinary action inquiry process. This includes allowing the officer to defend himself against the charges, and giving the officer the right to appeal, if he is found guilty by a disciplinary body.

The Commissioner of Police and the Director of ISD have reported to me that they have completed their respective disciplinary inquiry processes against a total of eight officers.

The Police has charged the two Gurkha Contingent (GC) guards who escorted Mas Selamat. They have pleaded guilty and have been demoted in rank.

ISD has charged six officers. The six officers have acknowledged their culpability and accepted the sanctions meted out. Let me now elaborate on them.

The Superintendent of WRDC has been dismissed from service. The Deputy Superintendent of WRDC has been demoted in rank with a corresponding pay cut. They are the two most senior officers in charge of the ground management of WRDC. They hold Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) equivalent ranks of Lieutenant-Colonel and Major respectively. The daily administration and operations of WRDC come under the direct charge of the Superintendent, the most senior officer on the ground. The Deputy Superintendent is the next most senior officer assisting the Superintendent to manage the work of WRDC staff and ensure their compliance with established procedures. These two officers have been held accountable for the lack of supervision over their subordinates

implicated which resulted in lapses that enabled Mas Selamat to escape.

The Superintendent has also been charged and held accountable for failing to take appropriate action on discovering that the ventilation window in the Family Visitation Block toilet was unsecured. He should have instructed the renovation contractor to install grilles on the ventilation window. It was a serious error on his part instead to order that the handle of the window be sawn off, in the mistaken belief that this was a sufficient security measure.

The Special Duty Operative who handled the family visit when Mas Selamat escaped has been dismissed from service. She failed to take immediate and decisive action when alerted by the guards, which could have prevented the escape of Mas Selamat. She also did not observe proper procedures, for example, in the accurate registration of clothes that were personal to the detainee and WRDC-issued ones. That was why Mas Selamat was able to wear more than one layer of clothes on the day of his escape.

The Special Duty Operative's supervisor failed to obtain a proper security assessment of the detainee's use of the Family Visitation Block toilet. He was issued a letter of reprimand and relieved of all supervisory duties. This supervisor is a senior officer holding the equivalent rank of Inspector of Police or Lieutenant in the SAF. The letter of reprimand will be entered into his service records and will have a negative bearing on his future career, such as his performance appraisal, promotion and awards.

Two other WRDC officers have been served with departmental letters of warning. These will be lodged as adverse entries in their service files and will have a bearing on their future careers. One of the

two is the Technical Officer who was responsible for the CCTV upgrading at WRDC. Although the new CCTV system had not yet been commissioned at the time of the incident, he should have exercised due care to ensure that the vendor had correctly carried out the instructions so that the system was recording.

The Chief Warder is the eighth officer who has been disciplined. She was served a letter of warning. It was the Chief Warder who approached the Superintendent to allow the detainees to use the Family Visitation Block toilet. Although this officer was not directly involved in the incident, as an experienced officer, she should have considered the security implications of allowing detainees to use the Family Visitation Block toilet.

Sir, I had said in this House on 21st April that, in ascertaining accountability, we would examine the roles not just of the junior officers but also the supervisory and management levels of WRDC. Therefore, apart from looking at those who were directly or indirectly responsible for the escape, the Director of ISD and the Commissioner of Police have looked at all relevant officers who may be liable further up the chain of command, regardless of their rank or grade.

The WRDC Superintendent and the WRDC Administration staff report to a Command Director in ISD. This Command Director is the supervising officer, or the ISD Officer-in-Charge (OIC), whom I said earlier was replaced along with the officers identified in the COI report and CID investigations as being responsible for the escape of Mas Selamat. The ISD OIC is a statutory appointment specified in the Detention Centre regulations. The Superintendent of WRDC reports to him on the smooth running of WRDC.

The current ISD OIC for WRDC holds a superscale rank equivalent to a Senior

Assistant Commissioner of Police or a Brigadier General in the SAF. He is a Command Director who reports directly to the Director of ISD. He oversees a directorate of several distinct functional divisional units. WRDC is one of these functional units.

The COI found that the ISD OIC had properly discharged his duties and was not at fault. The COI's view is that it is necessary for the ISD OIC to delegate his statutory responsibility, given his full-time job as a Command Director. The COI observed that the ISD OIC had in fact made several improvements to the WRDC. He instituted proper systems and procedures and also recruited a full-time Superintendent with the requisite experience and qualifications to take charge of the administration of WRDC.

I accepted the COI's assessment that the ISD OIC is not at fault. Nevertheless, I decided to relieve this Command Director of the ISD OIC appointment. This was done on 24th April 2008. Even though he was not responsible for the lapses of the specific officers down the line, he bears responsibility on account of his statutory appointment as the Officer-in-Charge of the WRDC. Although this Command Director has not been subjected to disciplinary action, the incident and his removal from the OIC appointment will have a bearing on his performance appraisal.

I would like to thank the DPM for the comprehensive answer. Personally, I am very satisfied with the honest and candid answers provided by the DPM in his Ministerial Statement during the last sitting and I have received many feedback affirming this. Notwithstanding this and the fact that the COI has ascertained that there are no criminal activities or negligence in any individual, the escape of Mas Selamat is indeed an unfortunate incident that can be attributed to several

grave lapses. I would, therefore, like to seek the following two clarifications from DPM.

We know that there are basically two main groups of culpable parties, those who did not conform to the existing SOPs and those that did not exercise due diligence in fulfilling their duties of ensuring the operational functionality as well as the physical security of the facility. I would like to ask the DPM:

Are the blame and disciplinary actions apportioned commensurate with the level of responsibilities and culpabilities of each individual officer?

Are there avenues and processes in place to allow these officers involved to seek redress or clarification on the disciplinary actions meted out and, if so, are the officers satisfied that the outcome is fair and just, and whether there are any appeals lodged by any of these officers?

Sir, the disciplinary process is such that when an incident like this happens, an investigation has to be carried out. At the department level, an investigation has first to be carried out, and this was done. Then, the officers concerned who are found to be culpable would be served with a letter telling them that they are liable for certain negligence or whatever activities which they should have done but not done. The officers would then be given an opportunity to appear before the disciplinary committee or the person in charge of the disciplinary proceedings. They would also be given the chance to explain themselves. The disciplinary body would then come to a decision. A decision will be made whether to sanction or not to sanction those persons found liable. If they are sanctioned, then they also have a right of appeal within 30 days of the sanction.

All these steps were taken by the disciplinary body, and the officers concerned

have been sanctioned, as I have just explained. They, too, of course, will also have the 30 days to appeal. This is within the appeal period. So far, no appeals have been made by any of the eight officers.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the DPM for describing the approach that MHA had taken. But has any action been taken or contemplated against the Director of ISD? Also, for the DPM to perhaps give the House an assurance that

the morale at ISD is maintained and safeguarded as it is a very important institution safeguarding our security and also that, right now, we need to concentrate our efforts in recapturing Mas Selamat in case of reprisals.

Sir, Mr Arthur Fong's question boils down to the question of accountability and at what level accountability should rest. Indeed, this question of accountability has been raised many times since the escape happened. When things go wrong, Sir, those who are responsible for the incident must be held accountable. Responsibility is determined based on a set of objective tests to establish fault, the underlying reasons and any mitigating circumstances, and we have to consider the following issues. First, did the officer in question fail to discharge his duties and thereby cause Mas Selamat to escape? Second, what were the reasons for the failure? Was there a lapse in the judgement or sheer negligence? Was there a deviation from approved systems and processes or were there systems and processes faulty, to begin with? Third, if another officer of the same level or experience and professional accomplishment is placed in the same circumstances, would he have similarly failed to discharge that duty?

In the disciplinary inquiry conducted by the Commissioner of Police and the

ISD, all these objective tests of responsibility were rigorously applied, not just on the officers who are directly implicated in Mas Selamat's escape but also on their supervisors, and all the way up the management ladder. Supervisors have a duty to control and ensure that the subordinates discharge their duties after due consideration. Failure on the part of the subordinate to discharge his duty indicates that the supervision of him was not complete. Of course, if the subordinate fails, it does not mean that the supervisor is automatically at fault and so on. The supervisor must show that he has reasonably discharged his supervisory duties.

Mr Fong asked whether the Director, ISD, should not be held accountable and disciplined for Mas Selamat's escape. This is an assessment which I, as the Minister, have to make. I considered the matter and found no basis to justify this. Indeed, as Head of the Department, the Director, ISD, has broad responsibility over the actions and performance of the whole organisation, but to ascribe to him culpability over the lapse which such broad responsibility is, in my view, an unreasonable and overly onerous burden. Let me explain why.

Based on the COI report, the lapses which led to the escape of Mas Selamat were not due to departmental-wide systemic or policy failures. The COI found that the systems and protocols in the WRDC were generally sound but specific individuals had failed to abide by them in this case and it was a degree of lack of supervisory vigilance as well. It was not shown that the Director, ISD, was aware of any of these lapses but took no action to rectify them. Neither was it shown that he ought reasonably to have known of these lapses.

I have informed this House on 21st April this year that the Director, ISD, told me that he accepted responsibility for

what had happened, and that I told him that I have full confidence in him and that he must carry on. I also told Members that I have informed the Prime Minister who agreed with this view. The Director, ISD's immediate task is to follow through with all the recommendations of the COI and prevent another slackening of vigilance. He will ensure that the recommendations are satisfactorily implemented and report to me the progress.

Allow me to conclude by saying this. As we take to task those who are responsible for the lapse, we must always be mindful to be both fair and just to all concerned. Punishment must be based on dispassionate reflection of what is reasonable and fair to those culpable or liable. Otherwise, it will lead to grave injustice. This would only serve to undermine morale and the commitment of all other officers and, eventually, the strength and the effectiveness of the organisation itself. I believe this is surely not the outcome sought by Members of this House.

Mr Fong also asked about the morale of the officers. Indeed, ISD officers were most upset by the escape of Mas Selamat. The officers, particularly those in the WRDC, feel that they have let down Singaporeans who have high expectations of the ISD and especially because they always held themselves to the highest standards of professionalism. However, as professionals, they are also determined to learn from this setback and redeem themselves to regain the public's trust and confidence. Members of the House can rest assured that while the reputation and morale of the ISD officers had taken a beating, they have continued to hold their heads up and remain focused in the mission of keeping Singapore safe and secure. Members should also rest assured that we will not let this incident affect the recognition and development of deserving ISD officers.

Sir, I wonder if the DPM could clarify. For the officers who were eventually dismissed and demoted, were they given the opportunity to be represented by somebody during the proceedings, which is usually the case for such civil service proceedings?

Yes, the right to have somebody represent them. It is not just restricted to those who were dismissed. All officers who were charged for particular offences and they have to appear before a disciplinary board have the right to get somebody to represent them.

Sir, ascribing culpability is not an exact science and I agree with the Minister that we have to make sure that we are just. In the interest of transparency and justice, can I ask the Minister, since the COI has found that the ISD OIC is not responsible for the lapses, why are we then relieving him of his duties and making it plain that his career is now at stake or there will be some impact in his career? While I know that there are some members of the public who want to see heads roll at the highest levels, can I ask the Minister whether he can assure the public that these measures taken are, in fact, based on objective facts and we are not doing this as a political exercise because, if it is a political exercise, then sometimes, the danger is that some heads are rolling for the wrong reason? Can I also ask the Minister whether the Gurkhas are also investigated in terms of their accountability in the role of the lapses?

My final question is: with the replacement at the top at WRDC, can I ask the Minister to assure us that they are more than equal to the task, especially in tightening security, as well as taking on the new challenges that the Minister has spelt out in the last Parliament sitting?

Even though the OIC of ISD was found to be not culpable by the COI, I decided to replace him because he has a statutory function to ensure the smooth functioning of the WRDC. So, in terms of institutional responsibility, as far as that role is concerned, I decided that I should find another person to do the job. For the officers who replaced those who have been moved out or who have been dismissed, I believe that the Director, ISD, will choose people very carefully to ensure that they are equal to the task. On the GC officers, the same procedure took place and the Commissioner of Police also looked at the GC officers beyond the two guards and the conclusion of the disciplinary body is that there was no need to go any further.

Sir, I would like to ask DPM, going forward, for the benefit of the remaining staff, how does the management intend to distinguish the following in staff policy: (a) Clear expectations versus job responsibilities; and (b) conformance to SOP versus empowerment. Hence, Sir, what mitigating measures will be considered to review the punishment that has been meted out to the culprits?

I did not quite get the last question that Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked. Can she repeat it please?

In view of the two earlier questions with regard to specific expectations versus job responsibilities, and conformance to SOP versus empowerment to job incumbents, how would we take these two questions in the context of reviewing the circumstances that have led to the punishment that is meted out to the culprits, whether there would be some mitigating measures to be taken from the two questions asked?

For the disciplinary body that looked into this issue, officers

who have mitigating reasons would have submitted them to the disciplinary body. I am not here to second guess what they did because I was not present at the inquiry process, so I would not be able to answer the last question. But as regards the other two questions about expectations and job responsibility, I think a job is not just what is written down in the job description. To do that is a very simple thing. He just follows the job description, but a job means that he has to put himself into it and, he has to dedicate himself to the role that he is expected to perform, and that is the expectation that people may have on him. Therefore, even if it is not written down in the job description, I think when a job needs to be done because it is an important job to do, then the officer ought to do it. It is the same thing about conformance and empowerment. Conformance is not for conformance to rules or conformance to job descriptions. I think what a good officer needs to do is when he does the job, the job descriptions simply give him a guide as to what is expected of him but when he is on the job, he does what is necessary to do the job right the first time.

Mr Speaker, Sir, on a related issue, may I ask DPM whether he is still of the opinion that Mas Selamat is still at large in Singapore?

Sir, I said on 21st April that we have no information that Mas Selamat has left. It is the same position that we still hold today. We have received no information from our foreign intelligence partners in the region that Mas Selamat has appeared on their shores. We have no information specifically on where he could be, but we cannot work on the assumption that he is no longer in Singapore. Therefore, we have to work on the assumption that he is still in Singapore, and all the necessary border security measures ought to be in place.

8. Mr Arthur Fong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs for each year from 2005 to 2007 (a) how many motorists were summoned for seat belt infringements; (b) how many deaths were related to drivers and/or passengers not wearing seat belts at the time of the accident; and (c) how many motorists were given summonses for not securing infants (baby capsules) or children (booster seats when required) in vehicles.

Mr Speaker, Sir, about 5,109 summonses were issued by Traffic Police in 2005 for seat belt offences compared to 3,973 summonses and 3,198 summonses in 2006 and 2007 respectively. Also, over the past three years, an average of four persons who died in road accidents were found to be not wearing seat belts, of whom three were drivers. It is not possible to state definitively that the deaths could have been avoided if the person had been wearing a seat belt, but it is clear that the wearing of seat belts reduces the risk of fatalities. Over the past three years, the number of summonses issued for failure to use child seat restraints or approved ones averaged around 30 summonses each year.

Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding the statistics and the law requiring the use of seat belt, it would appear that the enforcement of the law perhaps needs some stepping up. Not being caught does not mean that there are no violations on the road. Can the Minister assure us that there is some stepping up of this, as we have seen a lot of writers in the Forum stating that they

have seen people on the road or parents being lackadaisical in putting their kids in seat belts?

Sir, I think this is one offence where personal responsibility on the part of wearing seat belts and parental accountability on the part of using a child restraint or child booster are paramount. Whilst the Police can enforce, unlike other offences where the offence is more visible, eg, moving vehicle or even illegal parking which tends to endanger other people, I think not wearing a seat belt is not so easy to detect and essentially is one where personal responsibility and personal or family safety are involved. Yes, indeed, the Police will enforce as it has done, but I will take this opportunity to call upon all Singaporeans, in particular in the light of the current debate on seat belt usage in other settings, to take this to heart and to say "what shall I do about it". Because if we do love our loved ones, including young children who may not have a choice as to whether or not, for example, to have child restraint, I think this is a very timely reminder to all of us that we can do more to ensure that this traffic rule is complied with.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I just wanted to ask the Minister whether the four deaths are due to not putting on the back-seat seat belts or not putting on the front-seat seat belts. The reason is because the public tends to be lax in terms of the back seats. If that is the case, then there is a targeted education on this part itself.

Public education is all-encompassing. Indeed, Mdm Cynthia Phua is right that some people may feel that if they are in the back seat they are safer, because they have got the front seat to buffer them. But we know that is not true because in a car accident, you can also be a projectile

and endanger others in the car as well. Out of the average of four deaths over the past three years – I have mentioned the figures per year – about three were for drivers who were in the front seat and one for passengers in the back seat.

9. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the safety requirements before a bus is allowed to transport students; (b) whether the Ministry will look into enhancing the safety standards for school buses; (c) whether it will require special reinforcing of the vehicle frame before the vehicles are allowed to run as school buses; and (d) whether it monitors the driving performance of bus drivers who ferry school children.

10. Mdm Cynthia Phua asked the Minister for Transport (a) what steps are being taken to enhance the protection for students while travelling on school buses; (b) what are the interim safety measures to be implemented immediately; (c) why school buses are not required to install seat belts for its passengers; (d) what is the outcome of the review of the requirement of 30 children to an attendant in our school buses; and (e) whether the Ministry plans to impose a guideline of having an attendant for children below the age of 10 in our school buses.

11. Mr Sin Boon Ann asked the Minister for Transport whether safety belts in school buses are necessary and, if so, whether the Government will consider a financial assistance plan to help school bus operators install safety belts or new seats with anchor points for safety belts so as to expedite the process of implementing safety belts in school buses.

12. Er Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Transport what is the cost of installing a safety belt to each seat in a school bus.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos. 9 to 12 together, as they relate to the same topic of seat belts for school buses.

Yes, please.

Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Mdm Cynthia Phua, Ms Lee Bee Wah and Mr Sin Boon Ann have raised questions relating to safety measures in place for school buses, whether seat belts should be installed in school buses and the cost of installing seat belts in school buses. Let me assure them that we share their concerns about the safety of children travelling in school buses.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) already has in place various safety measures for school buses. Every school bus is required to meet vehicle construction and safety standards before it is allowed to be registered here, and is required to undergo compulsory periodic inspections. Buses are subject to a speed limit of 60 km/hr.

School bus drivers are required to attend a training course and take a test in order to be issued a Bus Drivers' Vocational Licence. LTA screens the Driving Licences of bus drivers annually, and will suspend or revoke the Vocational Licence of drivers whose Driving Licences have been suspended or disqualified.

When ferrying young children to and from kindergartens or childcare centres, it is compulsory to have a licensed attendant to look after the children, irrespective of the number of children in the bus. As for buses ferrying older

children, an attendant is also required if there are more than 30 children being ferried. LTA has reviewed this, and based on its safety assessment, maintains that the current rule is appropriate.

To enhance the safety of children during boarding and alighting, all school buses are required to install hazard lights that are automatically activated when the bus stops to pick up or drop off children. These buses must also have a reflective triangular "Children Crossing" sign with red blinking lights at the rear, to alert other motorists that children could be crossing the road.

Let me now turn to seat belts. LTA's study has shown that seat belts will enhance the safety of passengers who take small buses. LTA has also studied the effectiveness of seat belts for big buses, but found that big buses, by virtue of their design, size and weight, are better able to absorb the impact of a collision than a small bus. This is why countries that mandate seat-belts for school buses usually impose it on only small buses.

Hence, as announced by the Minister for Transport on 17th May 2008, the LTA will mandate that all new small buses must be installed with seat belts. LTA is working out the details with the relevant stakeholders and will announce them soon. As for existing small buses, this is more complicated. They have different designs and seat configurations, and LTA needs to take these into account when working out how best to retrofit effective seat belts in existing small buses. Sir, I would like to reiterate that effectiveness is important as the aim is to enhance safety and not just simply install seat belts. LTA is engaging safety experts and consulting the motor industry, and expects to complete the study in three to six months. Schools, parents and school bus operators will also be consulted

before implementation because there will be operational implications.

As to the cost of installing seat belts, a set of lap belt costs about $25 each, while a seat integrated with three-point seat belts costs between $250 to $500, excluding the cost of installation. Installation costs vary significantly depending on the design, seat configuration and condition of the bus. The other cost element is the reduction in the capacity of the bus. With seat belts, a seat that could previously seat three children can now only seat two. I would like to inform the House that LTA will work with the bus operators and other stakeholders to keep any cost increase to a minimum.

Sir, I have a couple of supplementary questions. The question of safety in school buses and the use of seat belt was first mooted some years back in this House. I would like to ask the Minister why it has taken LTA such a long time to come around to the conclusion that safety belts in buses are therefore necessary in new buses that they are going to put on the roads.

Secondly, given the relative low cost, which I understand is the case, of installing seat belt, why can the authority not insist on its use as an interim measure until fuller studies are carried out? We know from the tragedies which just happened a couple of months back that one girl was safe because she hung on to the handle of the seat, while the other child unfortunately died because he did not do so. If there had been lap belts, I think the situation could well have been different and the boy's life could have been saved as well. So, why can interim measures not be given? And if these are very small part of the cost component, why can assistance not be given to existing operators to tide them through this difficult period?

As for the reduced capacity, there could be reduced income for bus operators. But I suggest that these are measures which are necessary to take into account the safety and the lives of the children. And for future incomes, perhaps we should let market forces decide since new buses are going to have reduced capacity if you want to install seat belts anyway.

Sir, indeed, the question of seat belts for buses had actually been looked at since the issue was last raised in 2006. As Members can appreciate from the various discussions and debates in the media as well as outside of the House, this is a very complicated issue because it is not simply a question of just imposing the implementation of seat belts on buses. There are many issues to be considered because it has implications in terms of, firstly, the technical feasibility, whether, for example, do we use two-point which is the lap belt, or do we use the three-point belt; secondly, the implications for the buses themselves, because not all buses can be retrofitted with seat belts; and, thirdly, the implications in terms of both the reduction in capacity as well as the need to phase-in the implementation for existing buses.

Although the installation cost may sound low, as I have given the numbers, the implications are actually quite tremendous because it relates to whether buses can indeed be fitted out. So, it is not just a straightforward issue of imposing it as an interim measure. Even if we want to do it as an interim measure, we will still have to go through the technical studies of whether all buses can be done so in a straightforward manner.

Mr Sin has raised the question of who should essentially pick up the tab of both the installation cost as well as the

increase in operating cost per passenger when implemented. While the idea of asking for subsidies may seem to be a rational one, quite apart from the introduction of distortion to what would have been otherwise the correct market pricing for the provision of school bus services with seat belts, there is also the question of equity or the amount of help that families would receive. If subsidies, for example, were introduced across the board, then families in real financial need will actually receive less because subsidies will also be received by families who do not need these subsidies.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask two supplementary questions. First question: what is the Ministry's stand if bus operators want to pass this cost of installing belts to the parents? I read from some of the response in the newspaper that says that it will increase the bus fares to as much as 50%. Is this increase justifiable, based on $500 per seat belt?

Second question: I am quite disturbed by the response from the bus operators that whenever we talk about safety, they talk about cost. Currently, LTA allows them to carry three students on a bench which is meant for two students when they install a seat belt. So, does it compromise the safety aspect?

Sir, currently, the provision of school bus services is actually determined directly by the schools themselves, where they would tender out the process and evaluate the school bus operators on the basis of many factors - the quality of services provided by the bus drivers and the attendant, where appropriate, pricing as well as many other issues. And that is something which we would certainly allow the free market to operate.

As to whether there is a justified basis for the operators to pass on the entire

cost, what LTA would do is to work directly with all the stakeholders to minimise such cost increases. But, at the end of the day, the imposition of the seat belt rule would have cost implications and someone would therefore have to pick up the tab.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think many people are very worried – like what my colleague here has mentioned – about the cost. They are worried that the school bus operators may take this opportunity now to profiteer by increasing the monthly school bus fares excessively. What measures are in place now by MOT to ensure that any bus fare increases are scrutinised properly and are justified? Will MOT now consider implementing a system similar to the Public Transport Council to review any proposal by the school bus operators to increase fees rather than to just let them regulate themselves?

One more supplementary question. I am sure every single school bus must have its licensed capacity. For boats, if they want to carry so many passengers, they make sure that they have enough life rafts. Likewise, if a school bus is licensed to carry 20 children, make sure that there are 20 seat belts.

Sir, in terms of whether MOT will regulate what school bus operators charge, the current system of schools tendering out the process and choosing bus operators works rather well. I think there is no real reason why the Ministry should now intervene and attempt to regulate these services because the needs of individual schools are actually quite different. The Ministry, through macro intervention, might not actually be able to do that better.

As to the issue of licensing the capacity and the number of seat belts, this will be part of the study that I have referred to, especially for existing buses.

For small new buses, going forward, the position is very clear. This would be based on the three-point seat belt rule and to be applied to all new buses. The real challenge is actually with the existing buses and we will have to take this into consideration as we review the study.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not understand the Minister's reply on the two-point seat belt as regards the technical requirement per se, ie, to put in a two-point seat belt is much easier than a three-point seat belt. I can understand that for new buses, there is a requirement. The cornerstone of all these arguments is safety and time does not permit you to delay, in terms of the installation. Can the Minister give us a specific date as to when a temporary measure, like the two-point seat belt, be implemented for the existing buses?

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I reiterate what I said just now that for existing buses, the focus is on safety and not just on the implementation of the installation of seat belts. The debate is still open as to whether lap belts provide sufficient protection, and to simply impose this as an interim measure is not wise. Therefore, we would rather have that be borne out through a proper study than to have bus operators and, perhaps, even passengers incur interim additional costs, when the position is still not clear.

Last question, Mr Sin Boon Ann.

Sir, I am just curious to understand the Senior Minister of State's point that it is a question of effectiveness of safety if you put the two-point belt as opposed to three-point belt. Can I just ask the Senior Minister of State if this is actually borne out by any studies as to whether or not this is safe or lacking in safety if you put a two-point belt as opposed to a three-point belt? I would have thought that, whether it is two-point

or three-point, as long as you can actually improve the safety, even by a margin, because technical constraint of the buses does not allow for a three-point safety belt, then the immediate thing is, as my colleague says, to implement this system first, ensure safety and then talk about the niceties of a three-point safety belt in newer buses as we move along. It has been four years since we discuss this subject in the House. If we had taken effective and immediate steps, then I think a lot of these accidents or mishaps could have been avoided.

Sir, if I may answer the second point first. Essentially, as I said, there is really a whole range of issues and what the Ministry has done was, over the last two years, to narrow it down to small buses and that is by no means a simple conclusion to arrive at. As regards the two-point versus the three-point system, it is still being debated. If one were to assume that, therefore, as a safety measure, to simply go ahead with the imposition of the two-point belt rule, we would actually close out the possibility of school bus operators who may opt to replace the fleet, when we do decide on the three-point belt rule. So to incur additional costs by imposing something as an interim measure, only to settle on the final position later, I think that would be rather unwise.

13. Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Transport what action is taken to address the current problems faced by many motorists with respect to being fined for improper payment of Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) charges given that they may be attributed to faulty CashCards, In-vehicle units or ERP gantries.

Sir, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and the Network for the Electronic Transfers (Singapore) Pte Ltd (NETS) are working closely together to assist motorists who have encountered problems with the Electronic Road Pricing or ERP payments. Motorists, whose CashCards or In-vehicle units (IU) are found to be faulty, will get a one-for-one replacement free. LTA will also waive the administrative fee for the ERP violation.

In addition, LTA and NETS have announced an arrangement for the integrated testing of NETS CashCard and the IU at LTA's authorised inspection centres from this Wednesday. This will provide motorists a convenient one-stop solution to resolve problems encountered with ERP payments.

Sir, I understand from a recent press release by MOT that there are about 250 to 300 such incidents per month. My supplementary question is whether MOT considers this to be an acceptable number and, secondly, how we can further reduce the inconvenience to the people who are affected by such system faults?

Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to put the problem in perspective. Currently, there are about nine million ERP transactions in a month. So, the 250 to 300 cases really represent a small percentage of 0.003% of the total transactions. But having said that, it is the intention of both LTA and NETS to reduce the inconvenience for motorists who have been affected by these ERP problems because of technical issues. With the integrated one-stop checks, motorists will not have to keep going down to the LTA and, therefore, avoid the inconvenience of having to make additional trips to get a waiver of the administrative fee.

Sir, I agree that, statistically, this is not a very significant

number, but for a first-class transport system that we are aspiring to, I think we should strive for zero defect. I hope the MOT will impose that as a KPI.

Sir, I would say that it is impossible to achieve a zero-defect policy. But I would add at the same time that for the ERP system as a whole, LTA does have a standard, which is a system availability of 99.7%. I think that is a high enough standard for the system as a whole.

14. Er Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Education what are the criteria used by schools to appoint bus operators to transport students.

Mr Speaker, Sir, safety and well-being of pupils have always been the top priority when schools select school bus operators. Schools are guided by the following criteria in the selection of school bus operators:

Firstly, schools will select operators who comply with all safety measures as stipulated by LTA for the safe transportation of pupils. These safety measures require the operators to ensure that there is no overcrowding and no standing passengers on the bus. These operators are to provide bus drivers who would adhere to the speed limit of 60 km/h. They will also have to ensure that their buses that are less than 10 years old pass the compulsory annual inspections while those that are more than 10 years old pass the half-yearly inspections.

Schools also require a bus attendant be provided for each bus with more than 30 seating capacity. The bus attendant

would oversee orderly behaviour by pupils and that safety measures are adhered to by pupils. They also assist pupils in embarking and alighting from the bus. Schools also select bus operators on the basis that they are able to provide the necessary services to the school in terms of number of buses, area of coverage, proposed route plan, pick-up and drop-off time and other operation services as required by the schools. Selection is also based on the charges offered at competitive prices that can best serve the pupils and schools.

Sir, I would like to ask two supplementary questions. Are the seat belts requirements spelt out by the schools when they call for tender? We notice that those school buses that fetch international school students have seat belts, but most of the buses fetching the local students do not have. There is a double standard. The second question: what is her view of a row of seats for two students but squeezing in three students? Is there any compromise on the safety?

You have two minutes left, Ms Fu.

Mr Speaker, I do not wish to continue the debate on school bus safety from MOT to MOE. Safe to say – sorry for the pun – that we do follow the safety requirements as set by LTA on school buses. We allow the selection of school bus operators to the schools for the principal reason that there are different requirements set by the schools. Some of the parents have specific requirements that are best met by each of the individual schools to tailor the service level that they require by the operators.

3.00 pm

Order. End of Question Time.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No. 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos. 15-16, 18-23, 25-27 and 32-33 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix*. Question Nos. 17, 24, 28-31 and 34-36 have been postponed to the next available sitting of Parliament.]

*Cols. 2767-2786.

"to amend the Singapore Totalisator Board Act (Chapter 305A of the 1999 Revised Edition) and to make consequential amendments to the Betting Act ( Chapter 21 of the 1985 Revised Edition) and the Common Gaming Houses Act (Chapter 49 of the 1985 Revised Edition)",

presented by the Senior Minister of State for Finance (Mrs Lim Hwee Hua); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

Resolved,

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

Adjourned accordingly at Two Minutes past

Three o'clock pm to a date to be fixed.

asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) whether all the key positions for the Youth Olympic Games (YOG) organising committee have been filled; and (b) if he will provide an update on the progress of the preparations to-date given that the 2010 YOG is less than two and a half years away.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) awarded the hosting of the inaugural Youth Olympic Games to Singapore on 21st February 2008. Since then, the Singapore Youth Games Organising Committee (SYOGOC) has been set up to specifically oversee the planning and delivery of the Games over the next two years.

In March 2008, Mr Ng Ser Miang, International Olympic Committee Executive Board Member in Singapore, was appointed as Chairman of the SYOGOC Board. 21 other members from the public, private and people sectors have also been appointed to the SYOGOC Board. At the executive level, BG Goh Kee Nguan has been appointed as the CEO of SYOGOC. The other key leadership positions in SYOGOC have been identified and 6 out of the 13 senior executives are already on full time employment, with the rest joining the team later. The hiring of the core personnel required for planning and preparation is also ongoing. SYOGOC has adopted a phased approach for staffing, tapping on an initial group of core personnel to identify specific functional requirements before additional staff are brought in for operations. Besides permanent staff, SYOGOC is looking at contract services as well as volunteers to carry out its tasks. SYOGOC is also well supported by the various Ministries and government agencies in terms of officers assigned full-time to SYOGOC to help organise the Games.

The planning and preparations for the YOG are on track. Last month, a seminar with the IOC was held in Singapore for transfer of knowledge, and a detailed project schedule has been developed with clear milestones for this major endeavour. In particular, the construction of the Youth Olympic Village is on track and the schedule of upgrading works for the competition venues is also being finalised. More meetings with the International Sports Federations will be taking place to discuss the technical requirements for the different sports. We have also started development on some of the Culture and Education programmes such as the Schools-NOCs Twinning Programme and the Olympic Education package. The Ministry of Education, together with SYOGOC, will launch the Schools-NOCs Twinning Programme and the Olympic Education by the end of this year. SYOGOC will also be sending a team to observe and learn from the management of the Beijing Olympic Games.

asked the Minister for Health why the enforcement and control of hand, foot and mouth disease cases are not extended to private education providers for toddlers, young children and religious schools such as Sunday school in churches.

Hand Foot Mouth Disease (HFMD) is a notifiable disease. By law, a doctor is required to report all cases of HFMD to my Ministry, including information such as the childcare centre or the school the child is attending. We investigate all clusters of HFMD cases to determine the extent of disease transmission and whether the institutions should be closed to contain the infection. If a cluster were reported in a school run by a private or a religious provider as described by Ms Ellen Lee, we will investigate.

In practice, given the longer exposure time and greater intensity of interaction, transmission risk is higher in the following institutions and they have therefore administrative arrangements to report their HFMD clusters to my Ministry:

All childcare centres under the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports;

All playgroups under the People's Association; and

All kindergartens, special education schools, primary schools, secondary schools, junior colleges, religious schools, private regular schools and foreign system schools under the Ministry of Education.

This arrangement will cover almost all of the children who are cared for outside of their homes.

HFMD is spread through direct contact with the bodily secretions of an infected person or indirectly through contact with contaminated items. Children may be infectious before they show any symptoms. A significant proportion of infected children remain asymptomatic, but they are also infectious. The risk of transmission will therefore exist whenever children congregate and if good hygiene is not practised.

The only way to prevent transmission is to maintain a high standard of personal and environmental hygiene. Parents have an important role to play: set personal example of good hygiene standard, teach the children to do the same, and keep them at home should they fall sick.

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) if he will provide an update on the vision of making Singapore an education hub; (b) whether there exists a conducive eco-system that allows education services in Singapore to flourish; (c) whether the recent rise in property prices and operational costs has affected efforts to attract reputable institutions to locate in Singapore; (d) what is the present total number of foreign students in Singapore and the long term target of this number; and (e) whether the current immigration policy is in line with and "friendly" towards the objectives set for the education hub.

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in view of our plans to be an international education hub (a) how many foreign students his Ministry intends to attract over the next three years; and (b) what are the plans to provide sufficient affordable accommodation for these students.

The Global Schoolhouse initiative was launched in 2002 with the objective of developing Singapore into a Global Schoolhouse, comprising a rich diversity of quality education institutions and programmes at all levels from pre-school to post-graduate study, and attracting an interesting mix of students from all over the world. Today, Singapore hosts more than 16 leading international institutions, as well as 41 preparatory and boarding schools (comprising 38 foreign system schools and three privately funded schools) in Singapore.

In recent years, we have successfully attracted a range of reputable foreign institutions to set up their campuses in Singapore. Besides leading foreign universities such as INSEAD and University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, we have also brought in renowned institutions, such as University of Nevada Las Vegas, New York University Tisch School of the Arts, Cornell University and Duke Graduate Medical School. The market for international education is growing quickly, especially in Asia. Singapore has many strengths: high education standards, secure and high quality living environment and our unique East-meets-West, cosmopolitan city. This puts us in a good position to secure high quality educational institutes. The strong growth in the number of international students in Singapore is evidence of the growing demand in this market – there are 86,000 international students studying in Singapore currently as compared to 50,000 students in 2002. We foresee similarly strong growth in the years to come. There is potential to grow to 120,000 international students over the next three years and to 150,000 international students in the longer term.

The Global Schoolhouse initiative is only possible because we have adopted a whole-of-government approach to develop this area with the support of many government agencies across different ministries. Besides EDB, others include the Ministry of Education, the Monetary Authority of Singapore, the Singapore Tourism Board and the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority, just to name a few. All our agencies work together to enhance Singapore’s educational ecosystem and allow the delivery of quality educational services. For example, the introduction of the recently announced “EduTrust” is an initiative that

was rolled out by the Ministry of Education. EduTrust builds on the standards that had been achieved through CaseTrust, by providing the necessary regulation required to bring the private education sector up to the next level of development.

We also adopt an open immigration policy to allow legitimate students to easily pursue their education in Singapore. The government through SLA, releases suitable sites to private hostel operators, to increase the supply of hostel accommodation. This ensures an adequate supply of affordable accommodation for the growing community of international students. We are thus confident that the Global Schoolhouse initiative is well on track to create a vibrant education hub in Singapore.

asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many people who registered for HDB's Design, Build & Sell Scheme (DBSS) flats at Boon Keng lost their booking for the flats and their deposits (in terms of option fees) because they failed to secure their loans from HDB or the banks; (b) whether HDB processed the loan applications before or after the applicants paid their 5% option fee; and (c) how many flats remain unsold as a result of cancellations due to whatever reasons.

Applicants for DBSS flats are required to pay a booking fee amounting to 5% of the flat price upon booking. This is similar to practices in the private property market, as DBSS flats are built by a private developer. This booking fee is fully refundable if applicants are subsequently found to be ineligible to buy a DBSS flat. If they cancel their application although they are eligible, they would have to forfeit one-quarter of the booking fee.

According to the developer of the DBSS project at Boon Keng Road, there were 21 cases of cancellations as at 15th May 2008. 13 cases were on grounds of ineligibility, such as exceeding income ceiling, ownership of private property or not meeting the minimum occupation period for the current flat. These applicants will be refunded their booking fees in full.

Out of the remaining eight cancellations, five cancellations could be related to financing reasons while three were due to health-related reasons. Of the five financing-related cases, only one had applied for and was granted an HDB loan after booking the flat. The other four cases did not apply for an HDB loan, although one of them did enquire at the HDB loan counter.

Buying a flat is a major financial commitment, and applicants are advised to work out their finances before committing to a flat purchase, including checking on their bank or HDB loan eligibility before booking a flat.

Since 1st January 2007, HDB requires those who need mortgage financing to first obtain an HDB Loan Eligibility (HLE) Letter from HDB or a Letter of Loan Offer (LO) from the banks before they commit to a flat purchase. For the Boon Keng project, flat buyers had more than one month from the launch of the project to work out their finances before the start of the booking exercise.

asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many cases under HDB's Reduced Repayment Scheme were approved in 2006, 2007 and 2008 respectively; and (b) whether HDB has any plans to enhance the scheme so as to reduce the number of cases of flats being repossessed.

The HDB has in place various financial assistance measures to help flat owners who are in temporary financial hardship. The Reduced Repayment Scheme (RRS) is one such measure, whereby the monthly mortgage instalment is reduced for a limited period not exceeding two years. From 2006 to 2008, HDB has granted the RRS to about 24,000 households.

The financial assistance measures are meant to give the lessees some time to tide over temporary financial difficulties. They are not meant to be long-term solutions. Lessees whose financial situation has deteriorated must be prepared to make lifestyle changes such as sub-letting a room, include another working family member as a joint owner or downgrading to a smaller flat. Enhancing the RRS for such lessees will not help, as they will still be unable to pay the mortgage installments once the assistance comes to an end.

HDB will give ample time, advice and assistance to allow lessees to work out a realistic long-term financial solution. For example, HDB can help by offering another concessionary loan to facilitate downgrading.

Unfortunately, not all lessees in financial hardship are receptive to advice and some are even reluctant to take action to prevent their arrears from accumulating. In such cases, HDB will have no choice but to compulsorily acquire their flats so that the lessees do not end up in greater debt. I must stress that compulsory acquisition is the last resort to help these households, taken only after all other measures have been exhausted.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs whether the Ministry has plans to review the law on mandatory caning of foreign workers who overstay as a result of rogue labour agents.

23. Mr Gautam Banerjee asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (a) in the last 12 months, how many foreign workers were caned for overstaying; and (b) whether caning of foreign workers, particularly if they are innocent victims of unscrupulous labour agents, will affect Singapore's relationship with the countries from which these workers come from.

Mandatory caning of at least three strokes for foreigners who overstay 90 days or more was introduced in 1989 to curb the immigration offender problem. Our experience prior to 1989 had shown that a mandatory imprisonment term of at least six months alone was not sufficiently deterrent. With the introduction of mandatory caning, the mandatory minimum imprisonment term was reduced from six to three months. In 1995, the law was again amended to remove the requirement of imposing a sentence of at least three months.

Mandatory caning remains a necessary deterrent in today's context. Long term overstayers who stay here illegally pose social problems. In addition, not being able to work legitimately in Singapore, they may turn to crime. It is therefore necessary for our immigration laws to remain stringent to deter would-be immigration offenders.

The mandatory caning provision applies only to overstayers who have overstayed for more than 90 days, in other words, these are deliberate law-breakers. Foreign workers who are victims of scams, whilst deserving of support, should not overstay in Singapore or work illegally. Being cheated is not a valid reason for anyone, foreigners included, to break our laws. Instead, they should report their plight to the authorities immediately. In this way, they can work with Police to apprehend labour agents in Singapore who are involved in such scams.

This is one reason why MOM has stepped up its outreach efforts to educate employers and workers on our employment and immigration regulations. For example, it has published a guidebook in various languages which highlights the penalty of mandatory caning for overstaying

1. This is given to workers at the Work Permit Services Centre when they collect their work permits. In addition, MOM conducts regular dormitory road-shows to reach out to foreign workers.

For these reasons, we do not think it is necessary to review the law on mandatory caning for overstayers at this point in time.

We do not track the number of foreign workers allegedly cheated by rogue agents who were subsequently caned for overstaying. In any case, we do not think that the caning of foreign workers will affect our relationship with the countries from which they come.

All persons, whether local or foreign, are subject to our laws and will be punished accordingly if they do not abide by them. This approach likewise applies to Singaporeans who commit offences in other countries. I believe countries whose nationals come to Singapore to work understand this principle. Our relations with them are good. For foreigners who are detained for overstaying, the authorities will facilitate consular assistance if they wish to speak to their consular representatives.

1 The penalty of overstaying including mandatory caning for overstaying beyond 90 days is set out clearly under the section “Singapore Laws & You” of the guidebook.

asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts in light of the '10TouchPoints' competition held in 2007 which promotes innovation and creativity in the redesigning of objects for daily use (a) whether the winning entries have

been adopted or adapted by public agencies and corporations; (b) if so, what is the success rate; and (c) if not, does the Ministry plan to promote its design solutions to both the public and private sectors.

10TouchPoints was an exercise to improve the design of public amenities. The top 10 items for design improvement were identified from public nominations and voting. 400 nominations were received and over 17,000 votes cast. These 10 everyday items, namely bicycle dismounting system, bus stops, drains and canals, hospital signage system, mailboxes, multi-purpose ID card, playgrounds, public toilets, recycling bins and takeaway meal boxes, were then put to the designers for their redesign.

A Jury Panel led by distinguished designers from Singapore and overseas was appointed to evaluate the design proposals. Out of the 10 redesign categories, the Jury Panel recommended five winning design proposals. From the five winners, two designs are being implemented, and the other three are being kept in view by the sponsoring agencies for implementation in the future.

For instance, the winning design for recycling bins, which cleverly uses the items to be recycled as its appearance, were put on trial along Orchard Road in December 2007 by the National Environment Agency (NEA) in collaboration with other agencies. The design team for the bins is also concurrently working with Waterways Watch Society 2 and NEA for potential adaptation nationwide.

In addition, the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) has awarded a design contract to adapt the recycling bins for implementation in the three terminals of Changi Airport, and this is scheduled for rollout in September 2008.

We are also happy to note that the National Parks Board had taken an interest in Roy Pang's bicycle dismounting design to encourage cyclists to dismount at specific points along a cycling path. The Board is studying the idea with the designer.

Aside from the tangible outcomes highlighted above, 10TouchPoints has helped to raise the awareness of how good design can enhance the functionality and aesthetic quality of such common items for all users. DesignSingapore takes a long-term view in promoting design awareness. It plans to run the 10TouchPoints campaign once every two years. The second 10TouchPoints will be launched in early 2009.

2 The 'Waterways Watch' is a special volunteer group with the mission of formulating and implementing an on-going action plan to assist in keeping the waterways of Singapore clean and free of pollution, as well as initiating and organizing on-going activities aimed at educating the public on the importance of keeping the waterways clean. The WaterWays Watch Society has been registered with effect from 27th May 2000 as a charity under the Charities Act, 1994.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower in light of the intrinsic value in the contribution of homemakers, whether he will consider extending the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme to housewives who have no income by staying at home to look after their children and having a maid/childcare is too costly for them.

The objective of the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme is to encourage older low-wage Singaporeans to work by supplementing their income. Therefore, a person is eligible for WIS only if he has worked as an employee or as a self-employed person, and met the WIS eligibility and work criteria. We acknowledge that homemakers do make important contributions to the family. However, WIS is not the right scheme to help them.

Nevertheless, if the spouse of the homemaker is working, he will be eligible for WIS if he satisfies the criteria. Husbands of homemakers are further eligible for tax relief. Homemakers with children do receive other forms of help from the Government, such as centre-based subsidies if they place their children in licensed infant care and childcare centres. They may also receive foreign domestic worker levy concessions of $95 a month if they have children below the age of 12. They also benefit from government surplus sharing schemes such as the Growth Dividends, GST Credits, utilities and conservancy rebates and other measures announced from time to time.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry intends to introduce a mandatory rest day for foreign domestic workers and, if not, why.

The Ministry of Manpower is committed to safeguarding the well-being of foreign domestic workers, or FDWs, in Singapore. As part of the Work Permit conditions, employers are responsible for the well-being of their FDWs, including the provision of adequate rest. Employers who fail to comply with this requirement can be fined up to $5,000 and/or jailed up to six months. They will also be barred from hiring another FDW.

In addition, the accreditation bodies have, in 2006, introduced a standard employment contract for FDWs. All accredited employment agencies are required to use this standard contract. The standard contract requires employer to stipulate the number of rest days per month, and zero is not an option. Employers are also required to compensate their FDWs salary, should the FDWs work during their rest days.

This is a more practical approach than legislating a fixed number of rest days per month for FDWs, given the unique nature of domestic work. Households that have for example disabled family members who require constant attention may find it difficult to release the FDW for a prescribed period every month. Therefore, allowing households the flexibility to work out an employment arrangement with their FDWs, including paying their FDWs for not taking their rest days, is a more sensible approach. Nonetheless, MOM encourages employers to grant FDWs rest days regularly, wherever possible.

As a result of our education and enforcement efforts, together with other measures to enhance the protection of FDWs, most FDWs are happy working in Singapore according to a recent survey, and the reported cases of abuse have remained low. There is therefore no need at this point for MOM to legislate a mandatory rest day.

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry aside from the two-three months of utilisation of the pit building for F1-related activities, what are the plans for the use of the building and its immediate surroundings for the remainder of the year.

The pit building is attractively located within the Marina Bay and next to the Singapore Flyer. Amongst its closest neighbours are the future Gardens by the Bay and Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort. STB intends to maximise the use of the building and its immediate surroundings, during the months when it is not used for the race. The pit building could be put to a variety of business and leisure uses such as events, corporate training programmes, conventions and even art exhibitions. STB is exploring various options and targets to announce plans by September 2008.

With four months to go before the F1 race in September, the priority now is to ensure timely completion of the pit building. Construction works are on schedule, and the pit building should be completed by early-July.

The race promoter and the many Government agencies involved in this project are now entering the final stages of preparation for our inaugural F1 race and we look forward to a successful event.

asked the Minister for National Development (a) why the Malay Village has not been able to thrive since its inception; and (b) how the new plans to revamp it will be an improvement from the past.

The Malay Village site was sold to Malay Village Pte Ltd for a commercial development, on a 20-year lease which commenced on 27th September 1991. The lease will expire in 2011. It is a private development and Government has no hand in its operations. As such, I am not able to comment on its business performance.

Under the new Draft Master Plan 08, which URA unveiled on 23rd May, the Paya Lebar area will be comprehensively redeveloped into a commercial hub called Paya Lebar Central, where new commercial floor space for retail, office and hotel use will be located.

The site occupied by the Malay Village will be re-parcelled for more optimal land use. A substantial portion of the site will be reserved for a new civic building that will house a variety of amenities, including a Community Club, the Community Development Council office, and possibly a Community Library. A new open plaza space, about the same size as the open atrium space at HDB Hub, will be created next to this civic building. This space will allow for community uses, including activities related to the Hari Raya celebrations. Another portion of the Malay Village site will make way for an improved road network to reduce traffic congestion in the area.

To retain the ethnic character of the area, a new pedestrian mall will be created along Geylang Road to accommodate more stalls during the annual Hari Raya bazaar.

In summary, the comprehensive redevelopment of Paya Lebar Central into a new sub-regional commercial hub will allow us to cater to new commercial and civic uses, while retaining the rich Malay heritage of this area.

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether he will provide an update on the investigation into allegations that a Singapore trading company had been involved in North Korean exports of weapons to Myanmar.

We take proliferation issues seriously and the allegation of a Singapore link in the export of rocket launchers to Myanmar has been thoroughly investigated. There is no evidence that any Singaporean company was involved in the alleged transaction, or indeed that the transaction in fact occurred. Our agencies will continue to monitor the situation closely and undertake enforcement actions, if necessary.

asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry is satisfied that the air quality at residential estates where sand and gravel stockpiles are located is within healthy levels; and (b) whether there are measures that can be taken to further reduce the quantity of dust particles blowing into the housing estates.

Stockpile sites are chosen with several considerations in mind. A key consideration is to minimise environmental impact on the surrounding areas.

Our stockpiles are meant to be static stocks, which means that once they are built up, there will be minimal activities at the sites. Once the materials settle down and compact, and there will be negligible dust dispersion from the sites.

While the stockpiles are being built up, the air quality in their vicinity is closely monitored. For example, in the recent build-up of the stockpile in Lim Chu Kang, our Ambient Air Monitoring study showed that the 24-hour average reading for PM10 (particulate matters less than 10 micro-metre in size) was well within the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set by the USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency).

Dust suppression and mitigating measures are also put in place during the building-up of the stockpiles. These include the deployment of water tankers and sprinklers system to clean the delivery truck tyres and surrounding roads.

We are satisfied that the air quality in the housing estates near to all our stockpile sites is within healthy levels.

asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry is reviewing the provision of subsidies for home-based healthcare services to help families who prefer to keep their sick elderly at home and, if so, when will this be implemented.

We are supportive of families who want to care for their sick elderly at home. A wide range of community-based long-term care services, such as day rehabilitation and dementia day care, are available. Depending on their household income, the patients may qualify for varying levels of subsidies for such care. In addition, we are engaging General Practitioners to provide subsidised outpatient medical services to the needy elderly.

We have also made subsidies available for home medical and nursing services for needy patients who are unable to leave their homes because of their disabilities. However, these services are very costly to provide.

Long-term care will grow and its funding will pose significant burden to both families and society. That is why we introduced ElderShield and its Supplements and we encourage Singaporeans to subscribe to them. With payouts in cash, patients can then decide if they want their care to be at home or in an appropriate institution. The former may be preferred by some families but it will be more expensive. Government subsidy for the needy will have to bias towards the less costly option. But this is an evolving issue and regular reviews are necessary as we understand the subject and the needs of the patients better. We will do more where practical, but we need to ensure that it is sustainable.

asked the Minister for Finance in view of the $407 million of Growth Dividends paid out on 30th April 2008, how much, in absolute figures and as a percentage of the total, was received by each decile of households in Singapore as arranged by household income.

The estimated amount of first instalment of Growth Dividends received by each decile of households on 30th April 2008 is in Table 1.

received by

Decile

1st - 10th

11th - 20th

21st - 30th

31st - 40th

41st - 50th

51st - 60th

61st - 70th

71st - 80th

81st - 90th

91st - 100th

Average GD per household member

$195

$140

$135

$130

$130

$125

$125

$110

$105

$80

Average GD per household

$365

$460

$450

$445

$455

$435

$415

$360

$305

$195

% GD received by households in decile

9%

12%

12%

11%

12%

11%

11%

9%

8%

5%

Note: Eligibility for Growth Dividends and amount received were estimated based on the latest available data on resident household profile in 2007. Only Singapore citizens aged 21 and above were eligible. Older citizens received more.

Households in the lower deciles received a larger absolute amount of Growth Dividends than those in the higher deciles, except households in the lowest decile which have on average one third fewer persons compared to other households

1. On an individual basis, members in these households received the most. The average amount received per household member declined steadily from the lowest to the highest household income deciles.

In observing the progressivity of benefits such as the Growth Dividends, it is important to note that household income on its own does not provide the best indication of a household's economic status. For instance, households which include retirees may fall within the lower income deciles where the households earn little or no income, but they may have accumulated more wealth than others. This is why in determining the amount of Growth Dividends each individual should receive, we have used both the Annual Income (AI) of the individual and the Annual Value (AV) of his home, which is a proxy for the individual's wealth.

Besides the Growth Dividends, households will also receive other benefits in 2008, including the 2008 payment of the GST Credits and Senior Citizens' Bonuses, Utilities-Save rebates, Service and Conservancy Charges rebates, rental rebates, top-ups to the Post-Secondary Education Accounts for students and CPF Medisave top-ups for the elderly. These benefits have been designed to provide more help to lower and middle-income households.

1The average household size for households in the lowest decile is 2.3 compared to the average of 3.5 for all households.

asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports how many women had applied for maintenance orders last year; (b) what more can be done to assist women to recover maintenance due to them and their children from errant ex-spouses; and (c) will the Ministry consider appointing a Government agency to collect and chase after those who do not pay up akin to the situation in Australia and Ontario.

In 2007, there were about 6,300 applications for maintenance orders. Fifty-four percent of these (3,450) were for enforcement of existing orders, 27% (1,700) were fresh applications, 16% (1,000) were variations and 3% (195) were suspension and rescission applications. A majority of applications, 88% (5,600) in 2007, were made by women.

Singapore law places emphasis on husbands to discharge their responsibilities. Women can take action against their ex-husbands if they fail to discharge their financial responsibilities. The Women's Charter allows any woman to apply for a maintenance order at the Family Court, if she cannot get a reasonable maintenance from the man. Single mothers can also claim maintenance from the child’s biological father for the upbringing of her child.

There is recourse to ensure that ex-husbands with means comply with the maintenance order. Should he fail to pay the maintenance, the wife, ex-wife or child can file a Magistrate's Complaint to begin enforcement proceedings. It only costs $1 to file such a complaint. If the ex-husband fails to make one or more payments required under the maintenance order, he may be issued an attachment of earnings order, or fined and/or jailed2 and/or have a garnishee order made against him by the Court. An attachment of earnings order is an order that a portion of the man's salary be deducted by his employer and paid directly to the ex-wife each month. A garnishee order is an order requiring a third party, eg, a bank, who is due to make a payment to the man, to pay to the woman or child instead.

I am not convinced of the need to set up a Government agency to collect and chase after those who do not pay up. Having said that, there is some merit in exploring how we can better help women in their claims against errant ex-spouses as well as discourage irresponsibility among men. We will work with the Family Court to explore how to strengthen the enforcement of maintenance orders for such cases.

We must bear in mind that any measure put in place should reinforce the message that the ex-spouse should be accountable for his actions and obligations. The State cannot and should not play the role of surrogate father.

2The (ex)husband may be sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month for each month he defaults on paying maintenance.

asked the Minister for Law whether and to what extent the Bail Court constituted in 2007 has succeeded in (i) its aims; and (ii) more persons being released on bail pending investigations, trial or appeal.

Whether the Bail Court has succeeded in its aims:

The Bail Court was set up in 2007 in order to provide a dedicated process to deal with bail review applications by accused persons. Managed centrally by a judge, the Bail Court seeks to bring a consistent approach to bail conditions and quanta of bail set (with the aim generally to, where possible, reduce the bail amounts), reduce time spent in remand and ensure that review applications are dealt with expeditiously. At the same time, it was also intended that there would be an individualised and offender-specific assessment made for each bail review application. The setting up of a specialised Bail Court thus sought to strike a proper balance between the rights of the accused, the victim and public interest. I am informed by the Subordinate Courts that the Bail Court is meeting its stated objectives. Bail reviews are now conducted daily, from Monday to Friday. The extensive use of video-link facilities has speeded up applications by the accused or through his counsel. In about 30% of the cases it dealt with, the Bail Court has reduced and/or varied bail terms. The Subordinate Courts also work with the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS) and the Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore (ACLS) to have volunteer lawyers present, where necessary, to assist the remandees in the bail review applications.

The Subordinate Courts have published online the "Bail Guidelines", a comprehensive and useful guide on how bail decisions are made by the Courts, describing factors the Courts take into account, and the general bail formulae. To assist the general public, the Courts have provided information on the bail process and the responsibilities of a surety through the Subordinate Courts Practice Pamphlet.

Whether more persons being released on bail pending investigations, trial or appeal:

The Subordinate Courts have not kept the data of the number of persons released on bail prior to 2007. It may not be a meaningful exercise to compare whether more persons have been released now on bail compared with any previous year(s). Each bail application must turn on its own specific facts. Whether there is a successful application depends on a variety of factors including: whether an application for bail is made in the first place; the specific facts of the case, including the gravity of the offence; and the Court's assessment of the likelihood of the accused jumping bail. What the setting up of the Bail Court has done is to ensure that there is a dedicated and centrally managed process to deal with bail review applications, to achieve a consistent and expeditious approach towards such applications.

Nevertheless, the Member may wish to know that from May 2007 (when the Bail Court was first set up) to April 2008, 5,981 cases were fixed for bail review in the Bail Court and 52% of the cases were bailed out (ie, 3,154 cases). The Subordinate Courts closely track the cases of accused persons who are not bailed out and try and ensure that such cases are disposed of fairly and efficiently.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower (a) if he will provide an update on the progress made by the Work Group co-chaired by his Ministry and LTA to review the safety of workers transported on lorries; and (b) when will the recommendations of the Work Group be implemented.

The Work Group to review the safety of workers transported on lorries was announced by the then-Minister of State for Transport and Finance, Mrs Lim Hwee Hua, in Parliament on 6th March 2008. Co-chaired by the Land Transport Authority and Ministry of Manpower, the Work Group convened its first meeting on 18th April 2008. It comprises industry representatives such as the National Safety Council of Singapore, the Singapore Contractors Association Ltd, the Singapore Logistics Association, the Singapore Transport Association, the Singapore School and Private Hire Bus Owners' Association and the Association of Singapore Marine Industries as well as Government agencies, including the Ministry of Transport, Traffic Police and the Defence Science and Technology Agency. The Work Group will review the current practice of transporting workers and look into ways to enhance the safety of workers.

The Work Group is expected to complete its report and begin implementation of its recommendations before the end of 2008.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower (a) if he will provide an update on the progress made in securing one rest day a month for foreign domestic workers through the standard employment contracts drawn up by the Association of Employment Agencies and CaseTrust since 2006; (b) whether the Ministry is satisfied with this progress; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider legislating mandatory rest days to ensure more effective enforcement and better protection for foreign domestic workers.

The Ministry of Manpower is committed to safeguarding the well-being of foreign domestic workers, or FDWs, in Singapore. As part of the Work Permit conditions, employers are responsible for the well-being of their FDWs, including the provision of adequate rest. Employers who fail to comply with this requirement can be fined up to $5,000 and/or jailed up to six months. They will also be barred from hiring another FDW.

In addition, the accreditation bodies have, in 2006, introduced a standard employment contract for FDWs. All accredited employment agencies are required to use this standard contract. The standard contract requires employer to stipulate the number of rest days per month, and zero is not an option. Employers are also required to compensate their FDWs salary, should the FDWs work during their rest days.

This is a more practical approach than legislating a fixed number of rest days per month for FDWs, given the unique nature of domestic work. Households that have, for example, disabled family members who require constant attention may find it difficult to release the FDW for a prescribed period every month. Therefore, allowing households the flexibility to work out an employment arrangement with their FDWs, including paying their FDWs for not taking their rest days, is a more sensible approach. Nonetheless, MOM encourages employers to grant FDWs rest days regularly, wherever possible.

As a result of our education and enforcement efforts, together with other measures to enhance the protection of FDWs, most FDWs are happy working in Singapore according to a recent survey, and the reported cases of abuse have remained low. There is therefore no need at this point for MOM to legislate a mandatory rest day.