Hansard, 2011-11-22

Under the provisions of clause 2(d) of Article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, the following Members have been granted permission by the Speaker to be absent from sittings of Parliament (or any Committee of Parliament to which they have been appointed) for the periods stated:

The following question stood in the name of Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng

1 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports if there is a recommended approach by which help services for the poor and needy by the five CDCs and other helping hands can be better coordinated and communicated to minimise their falling through the social safety net.

2 Mrs Lina Chiam asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports with regard to the $61 million that was disbursed to 61,500 beneficiaries through the national ComCare schemes in 2010, how much did each beneficiary get each month.

Question 1, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to take Question Nos 1 and 2 together.

Yes, please.

Sir, the Community Care Endowment Fund (ComCare) provides assistance for low-income and needy Singaporeans. ComCare funding and programmes are delivered through our Community Development Councils (CDCs). ComCare beneficiaries are a diverse mix of needy Singaporeans who need different forms of assistance and for varying periods of time. Examples include elderly persons who are unable to work and need long-term assistance, families who require short-term help because the breadwinners have been retrenched from their jobs, families with members recovering from chronic illnesses and parents who require financial support so that their children can attend preschool. ComCare complements other support which the beneficiary may receive from his family as well as the help provided by various other help agencies in the community.

Mrs Lina Chiam asked about the amount of help each beneficiary receives each month. CDC officers will look at each individual's or family's circumstances, including factors such as household size and composition. Depending on the specific circumstances, the CDCs put together a package of assistance to address their needs. The help can be in form of cash assistance, free or subsidised medical care, vouchers for food, rental, utilities, service and conservancy charges, and preschool and student care subsidies. Because of this, it is not meaningful to provide an average figure on how much each beneficiary receives per month. However, we can give some typical examples.

For a family of four, where the male breadwinner with a homemaker wife and two preschool age children has recently lost his job, his family may be provided with $600 a month in cash allowances as well as vouchers for utilities and service and conservancy charges for three months. In addition, his children can receive up to $340 a month each in preschool subsidies, while the parents look for work. This is on top of the universal childcare subsidies which his children are already entitled to. For a couple where the husband has to stop working temporarily due to ill health and the wife has to be his primary caregiver, but has savings and some support from their children, he may receive $300 in cash a month while he recovers at home. They may also receive assistance for utilities and service and conservancy charges as well as rental assistance if they reside in a rental flat. For a single needy elderly without family support, he or she may receive $400 in cash allowances a month. In addition, there are other support such as free medical treatment at polyclinics and restructured hospitals, rental and utilities vouchers and community help. This additional support can amount to about $1,000 a month.

Ms Denise Phua asked how help services provided by the CDCs and other helping hands can be better coordinated and communicated to minimise their falling through the cracks. We agree on the importance of the CDCs to work with the various help services within their respective districts. Currently, this is done through the ComCare Local Networks. Today, nine ComCare Local Networks bring together various agencies comprising voluntary welfare organisations, citizens consultative committees, other social service agencies and even schools, hospitals and self-help groups. Through these networks, agencies come together to collectively identify and sort out systemic issues as well as work out processes to facilitate the referral of cases among the ComCare Local Network (CLN) partners and closing of referral loops. Working together, they are better placed to decide on the best approach to reach out to and assist the needy within their communities. Nonetheless, there is room for improvement.

More coordinated and integrated service delivery is an issue which the Ministry is looking at. We are working with our partners to identify ways in which we can adopt an even more client-centric, beneficiary-centric approach in the delivery of social assistance and services to the needy.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister of State for her comprehensive reply. I would like to ask the Minister of State if her Ministry would agree to conduct a survey of the different help agencies and find out what is happening now on the ground and how they are coordinated, so as to identify areas of best practices and improvement. I would also like to seek the Minister of State's response as to when the review would be done in order that an action plan can be developed as soon as possible to plug the gaps, so that those who fall through the cracks will be salvaged.

Sir, I want to thank Ms Denise Phua for those questions. On the question of having a survey, I would like to inform Ms Phua that we do surveys on and off, although it may not be on a large scale. We constantly ensure that we test the waters and assess the environment in order to make sure that those who need help are getting the help that is available for them. Of course, we can always look into the possibility of conducting a much more comprehensive survey in order to see whether help is reaching the beneficiaries. In fact, we did a survey of 2,000 low-income households, those in the bottom 20%, and we received some feedback from them. They are the primary targets of our ComCare assistance schemes. We found that one out of 10 of these beneficiaries do feel that they need help but they have some difficulties getting it. What is also surprising to us is that about 60% of them, although they belong to the bottom 20%, indicated that they prefer to be self-sufficient and that they do not need assistance. And so, we do have some surveys on and off to assess the situation on the ground.

On Ms Phua's second question as to when we will complete the review, this is an ongoing process. We share with the Member her sentiments that we should try to do it as quickly as possible, and that is obviously something that we are looking into. Just to reinforce the point that our primary consideration is that those who need help will get the help. They must get the help. This is where we are also strengthening our CLN, by working with the CDCs, our primary agencies, our family service centres and other VWOs. In the longer term, we are looking at other possible structures as well like, developing the service hubs. We have in mind two models. One is more programme-centric and the other is more client-centric, depending on what are the most feasible options available.

Sir, I would like to thank Mdm Halimah Yacob for the answers. I would like to ask two supplementary questions. First, would the Ministry set up a one-stop assistance centre where officers can work with community and social workers to provide details on all schemes, including those run by charitable and non-governmental organisations so as to achieve on a coordinated and targeted basis, the best way to address the needs of the poor and needy in getting the right help at the right time, like assistance in terms of housing, children's education, medical needs and financial counselling in regard to retrenchment in jobs and advice on dealing with creditors?

Secondly, to ensure that the needy who are poorly-educated and unaware of such schemes do not fall through cracks in our social safety system, will the Ministry set up a committee to brainstorm ideas for more publicity through the mass media on the financial help offered by the ComCare schemes?

Sir, I want to thank Mrs Lina Chiam for those questions. I think the crux of the issue underlining both questions is how we ensure that the needy and those who need help are able to access the help that are available to them. That is the basis of her question for having a one-stop centre and also in having a committee in order to look at these issues. On the question of a one-stop centre, the problem with having just a one-stop centre is that it can become a bottleneck. And especially when we want to make sure that the touch points that we have are spread all over the island and not just within a one-stop centre. Instead of having a one-stop centre, what we have now is a situation where we work very closely with our partners. So, we have nine ComCare Local Networks under the CDCs and through those ComCare Local Networks, we bring together all the touch points needed throughout the island. So, there are the CDCs, the family service centres, and the VWOs dealing with different areas of needs of our beneficiaries and our needy persons. All of them are brought together under the ComCare Local Networks. The ComCare Local Networks act as a focal point where it also provides a platform for all the various agencies providing help to the needy to come together to discuss and share experiences and notes on how to extend assistance and help to the needy. Instead of a one-stop centre, what we have in mind, as I mentioned earlier, is to develop service hubs. Service hubs are structures where we either have it as programme-centric or client-centric located in one location, and where we bring all the service providers together. For instance, if we need to take care of the elderly, we need to bring all the providers together, whether it is the family service centre or the VWOs taking care of the elderly needs. They will then be co-located. As Members are aware, a structure like this takes a bit of time to develop but this is one of it.

The Member's second question is whether we can have a committee. We all know very extensively and comprehensively the issues, challenges and problems that we face. It is not necessary for us to set up another committee to look into this issue. What we need to do is to identify what are some of the gaps, which we are doing right now, and also to address those concerns and issues. I must say that looking at the structures that we have, it is for the moment able to reach out to the needy and the beneficiaries. There are areas where we need to do more outreach, particularly for those who are at the bottom 20%. One out of 10 in our survey says they do face some difficulties. This is where we will then work very closely with our grassroots organisations and VWOs to work out an outreach strategy for them.

Sir, I thank the Minister of State for her reply. We are grateful for the service hubs and the CLNs, but I think what is probably lacking is an integrated information or database of those who are in need of help. Sometimes, we may or may not know who had been helped. I would like to ask the Ministry if there are any plans for a more client-centric approach in integrating information from the various agencies and make the information more accessible to the CDCs and the grassroots, so that those who come to us for help can be helped quickly and holistically.

I thank the Member for that question. We do actually have a database of those who need help and have come to seek help, not just from the Members of Parliament and the advisors, but also from the various VWOs. This database is accessible. Sometimes, the gaps are dependent on what information each individual advisor puts into the database. But the database is there. We are currently also looking at how to further enhance and improve the database.

Ms Irene Ng – last question.

Sir, the Minister of State mentioned that there are needy residents who prefer to be self-reliant and refuse welfare help. Can I ask the Minister of State for an assessment of how big this group is from the group of needy residents that have been reached out to? Also, what is the MCYS' approach towards groups of residents who are publicly going out to seek help such as by selling tissue papers or appearing very hard-up in public but, when approached by MCYS, refuse public welfare?

Sir, I just want to repeat the call that we have made repeatedly. If there are any such cases of needy residents or Singaporeans that any Member of Parliament comes across, do please refer them to us, and we will follow up or refer them to our five CDCs, so that they can also follow up with the relevant assistance and support. With regard to some Singaporeans whom we feel may need help, but they feel they can manage on their own, I think the real issue is this:That we should also respect people's desires and wishes.

As I was growing up, I belonged to the bottom 10% of the population. Very often, when I was in school, my teachers would tell me, "Why do you not go and ask your mother to go and get social welfare or social assistance?" But my mother would be terribly horrified with any suggestion that she should go and get social welfare or social assistance. Because when my father died when I was eight years old, my mother said that so long as she has two hands and two legs, we will all survive.

So, we need to respect the desires of people, even though they may be at the bottom 20%, when they say that they want to have ownership of their lives. They want to decide whether they want to seek help or not to seek help. We cannot say that just because you are at the bottom 20%, we must therefore extend our help to you regardless of whether you want it or not. I think that should not be the philosophy that we should adopt, but rather, we should adopt a philosophy where we provide them with the dignity, the support and the level and kind of assistance that they need.

3 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry would review the need (i) to impose ERP charges on weekends and (ii) to extend the ERP cordoning strategy to weekends.

I thank Mr Liang for his question. Traffic congestion at any time leads to a sub-optimal use of our road network. It undermines our quality of life, the environment, and the overall efficiency of the economy. Congestion therefore needs to be kept in check. Where possible, traffic engineering methods, such as road widening, have been implemented to relieve congestion. However, where such solutions are not available or have been exhausted, Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) has been introduced.

We have generally applied ERP based on ensuring an optimal travel speed either on individual roads, such as expressways and major arterial roads, or to the city area using a cordon concept. The cordon concept, where all routes entering the same area are priced uniformly, is necessary because the roads leading into the city area are fairly good substitutes for one another. The lack of a cordon would only lead to traffic diverting into roads that are not priced or priced lower, resulting in greater localised congestion.

The reasons for introducing ERP on Saturdays for the Orchard and Bugis-Marina Centre cordons in 2005 and 2008 respectively still stand today. Since its implementation, ERP has improved traffic speeds within these cordons and maintained them within the acceptable range. ERP rate reviews are carried out quarterly, as well as for the June and December school holidays, to ensure that ERP rates remain relevant to the traffic situation.

While the core principles of ERP remain essential, we will continue to be flexible at the margins where there is room to fine-tune the system. For instance, we recently shortened the evening ERP operating hours for gantries along the northbound Central Expressway (CTE) before the Pan Island Expressway (PIE) and the southbound Singapore River Line, taking into consideration public feedback, traffic conditions and travel patterns. In response to feedback on weekend ERP and cordon charging, and also to take into account the changes in the road network in the vicinity of Marina Centre area, we will be moving the Nicoll Highway gantry in 2012 and adjust the Bugis-Marina Centre cordon, to enable motorists to access the East Coast Parkway (ECP) via the Nicoll Highway without having to pass through and pay ERP at the cordon. In doing so, motorists will have a greater choice in choosing their travel routes and times. Motorists who want a smoother drive can still do so by paying the ERP charges. We will continue to monitor the traffic situation and fine-tune the ERP scheme where necessary.

Sir, we are talking about Saturday's ERP. It is a non-working day, a day where the office CBD crowds are not rushing to get into their offices. Perhaps the impact to economy would be less severe. I would like to ask the Minister of State whether LTA can go a little easier on Saturdays in their road management and perhaps even do a trial and see if we were to switch off the ERP on Saturdays, what will be the difference in the behaviour of road users. Perhaps we may learn something new from there in how we can manage traffic. I hope the Minister of State would look into this – whether there is a necessity to have ERP on Saturdays, given it is a non-working day.

I thank Mr Liang for his supplementary question. Let me reassure the Member that the decision to implement Saturday ERP for these areas was not taken lightly. Average speeds had deteriorated to below 20 km/h before ERP was introduced. This has since improved and speeds are now kept within the optimal range between 20 km/h and 30 km/h. Even on Saturdays, there are economic activities like the retail trade in the Bugis-Marina Centre and Orchard areas. So, taking these factors into consideration, the ERP will continue to be implemented in these areas. Having said that, ERP implementation is not static and we will continue to fine-tune it from time to time.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State: What is the speed along the CTE in the evening when the ERP is imposed and under what circumstances will the evening ERP be removed?

Sir, I do not have the exact figure with me right now but I can provide it to the Member in due course. So far, feedback on the removal of the ERP from 8.00 pm onwards has been a positive one. Having said that, I would also like to point out that there has been feedback from people who, considering that the traffic build-up after 8.00 pm will be greater, do decide now to leave for home before 8.00 pm and choose to pay the ERP to enjoy a smoother ride.

The Minister of State has just said that LTA has shortened the evening ERP to 8.00 pm and that there has been positive response. If the approach of LTA is to allow some degree of traffic congestion during non-critical hours, surely, we can consider allowing some degree of traffic congestion on non-working days like Saturdays. So, why do we not review it earlier and cut the ERP on Saturdays as well?

As I have said earlier, ERP implementation is not static and it will continue to be adjusted and fine-tuned from time to time. I understand the Members' concern on behalf of their residents, and people that they have encountered and received feedback from, to remove ERP completely on weekends and evenings. I would just like to remind the Members that in the Orchard area, before ERP was implemented, traffic speeds were lower, causing some people who used Orchard Road for shopping purposes to feel that the traffic congestion there was not within acceptable levels to them. So, we have to strike a balance and today, having introduced ERP, not at very high rates, the speeds along the Orchard Road areas on weekends have been maintained at an acceptable level.

Sir, I support the call by Mr Liang about considering the removal of ERP on weekends. The Minister of State mentioned earlier that from retailers' viewpoint, they may consider congestion on weekends as a factor that would adversely affect their business. I believe otherwise. I would actually like to suggest that LTA conducts a survey among retailers in that belt and ask them whether freeing up ERP on weekends would be a move that they support. If they do, then it will be a win-win for every sector – win for the businesses, and certainly more car owners would support this. It may be something that the entire community is advocating and they are prepared to live with the congestion that comes with it.

We are always open to suggestions. The retailers, whether they are at the Orchard Road area or the Bugis-Marina area, are very welcomed to provide their feedback and suggestions, and we will consider them carefully.

I think we will move on, otherwise I will have to start imposing ERP as well. [Laughter.] Dr Janil Puthucheary, next question, please.

4 Dr Janil Puthucheary asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA would work with SBS Transit to implement double-car trains on the Sengkang LRT system.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Member for his question. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) and the operator SBS Transit (SBST) monitor the passenger loading situation on the Sengkang-Punggol LRT (SPLRT) system closely. In recent years, ridership on the SPLRT system has increased, with year-on-year growth of about 10% from 2008 to 2011. Passenger loading levels have consequently also risen, with crowding observed during the morning peak travel at the last station on the Sengkang East loop in the direction of Sengkang Town Centre, where most commuters alight to transfer to the North-East Line.

LTA is currently undertaking a comprehensive review of the long-term capacity needed for the SPLRT system. One key aspect of this study was to determine the technical feasibility of converting the current one-car system to a two-car system, to increase the system's capacity in the medium to longer term. LTA is currently in the process of finalising the study and aims to share the findings in a few months' time.

While the study is still ongoing, LTA is concurrently looking at other possible alternatives to mitigate the crowding situation.

In the meantime, SBS Transit has implemented additional capacity enhancement measures, such as the addition of one LRT train to the Sengkang East loop during the morning and evening peak this year, which has resulted in 23 additional daily trips. As a result, commuters have seen waiting times improve from four minutes to three minutes during the peak periods. SBS Transit has also deployed Customer Service Officers (CSOs) at the Sengkang East loop to encourage commuters to consider taking the LRT in the less crowded direction, so as to optimise the system's bi-directional capabilities. One additional train has also been added to Sengkang West, resulting in reduced waiting times.

I would like to assure the Member that LTA will continue to work with SBST to monitor the passenger loading situation on the SPLRT system, and enhance the capacity and service levels where possible.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have a number of supplementary questions for the Minister of State after her very comprehensive reply. Could we have, perhaps, some indication of the time frame for the report of the comprehensive review? The second question I have is – given that there are number of new developments that are five to 10 years behind Sengkang in terms of infrastructure development and maturity as a town – Punggol being as an example – are there lessons learnt from the experience with the LRT system in Sengkang that are going to change the way LTA and the Ministry deal with public transport infrastructure in relation to population growth and development in new towns such as Punggol? Specifically, with respect to the last-mile concept for public transport which often is a friction for people to change their behaviour when a family moves in to a new location and buys a new BTO flat. This is an opportunity for them to reconsider and change their lifestyle with respect to public transport, perhaps. And very often, it is that last mile which is the determining factor. So, have there been lessons learnt from the experience in Sengkang which we will use to change either our operational approach or policy approach? And last question, would the Ministry consider either a structure or incentive system for the private transport operators to make them more likely to service this last mile in a way that our residents are likely to use even if in the short term it loses money?

I thank the Member for those questions. I will take the easier one first – how long the study will take. It is a comprehensive review and so it will take a few more months. I urge the Member to be patient. He will hear from us as soon as it is practicable.

On the question about last-mile connectivity, I am glad that the Member brought it up because it is a very important criterion in ensuring that as many residents as possible are able to gain access to public transport and find it convenient to use our public transport system. Anecdotally, and also from studies that were done in the past, one of the things that has been identified is that when a station is accessible within 400 metres of walking distance, this has been found to be the most effective in encouraging the use of public transport. Indeed, the LTA is in the process of doing a detailed study on how we can improve last-mile connectivity to make sure that as many residents as possible who may now find that last-mile connectivity is not as good as they would like it to be, can experience enhanced connectivity when they try to access the public transport network through the nearest station to them. This is also a study that is ongoing. What I can assure the Member is that the results will be known quite soon, and we shall be able to share with the public what plans there are to achieve this.

I thank the Minister of State for the answer. To Dr Janil's point on the experience of Sengkang LRT and how it can be applied to other areas, I am sure Members would agree that there has been positive feedback from the introduction of the Circle Line. Currently, the Circle Line, to my understanding, operates on a three-car system, compared to six cars for the North South and East West Lines as well as the North East Line. Does the Government intend to make a study on the provision of additional cars and carriages should the demand for the Circle Line increase in the future?

Sir, in response to the Member's question, the design of any particular line takes into consideration many factors, for example, the areas they would serve, the population density of those areas as well as how likely it is to be used by the residents for travel to different parts of the network. When the decision was taken for the Circle Line to be implemented as a three-car system, these factors would already have been taken into consideration, not just for the short term or the median term but also based on the long-term trends and patterns of where people would live. In response to this question, there are no plans to review whether the Circle Line will change from its existing three-car configuration at this point in time.

5 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources whether the NEA will review the policy of pegging hawker stall rentals to market rates.

Mr Speaker, Sir, our hawker centres actually originated from the programme in the 1970s and 1980s when we cleared street hawkers. These street hawkers who were, in a sense, resettled from the streets, therefore, enjoyed subsidised rentals. Currently, to date, the National Environment Agency (NEA) manages about 15,000 cooked food and market stalls. Of these 15,000 stalls, about 42% of them are paying subsidised rentals. So, these would be, in a sense, a legacy from the original clearance programme. For the remaining stalls, the rentals are pegged at the market rate. But having said that, these rentals are still lower than those paid in cooked food centres in private food courts.

New operators who enter the trade pay market rates, as assessed by professional valuers appointed by the NEA. These assessed market rentals are generally in the range of $100 to $1,500 for a market stall, and from $400 to $3,000 for a cooked food stall. The variation would take into account the characteristics of the centre and the popularity of the location.

We recognise that these market rates can fluctuate according to demand and supply and prevailing business conditions. My Ministry recently announced plans to build more hawker centres and this will inject a greater supply of both cooked food and market stalls into the overall equation. And I expect that this will have a downward pressure on market rentals. We are committed to ensuring that hawker centres continue to provide cheap, affordable and accessible food to all Singaporeans.

Sir, may I ask the Minister a few questions? As many Singaporeans buy their market produce from hawker centres, perhaps the Minister can clarify what is the Government's social policy of having such hawker stalls and food stalls.

Secondly, is the Government able to consider allowing the use of hawker stalls as a means to help the lower income residents operate their own small-scale businesses, so that they can become financially independent?

Thirdly, may I ask the Minister whether he would agree that a possible result of pegging rental of stalls to market rate is likely to cause hawkers to increase their food and market produce prices, and this may have an unintended effect of increasing the cost of living?

Finally, if a hawker in a hawker stall is unable to pay the increased rental, what is NEA's policy if he falls into arrears? Would it be to evict the hawker and repossess his stall or is there a way that we can allow the hawker some degree of indulgence and flexibility?

On the first supplementary question on social policy, as I explained earlier in my reply, our hawker centres came about because we were trying to clear the streets of mobile hawkers. The reason for that clearance was to first ensure public safety and hygiene, because clearly street hawkers would not have access to clean running water and would not be able to maintain the cleanliness of their used utensils, plates, forks and spoons. So the plan was to relocate all of them into a proper hawker centre. It will improve hygiene, it will also centralise the infrastructure, facilities and supplies that they need, and it will also be more convenient for the public because they will know where to go for their regular fix of hawker food.

I explained all this so that Members understand that it did not originate from a social policy. It originated from a public hygiene, safety and convenience point of view. But having said that, hawker stalls then took a life of its own and, today, they have become almost an icon of Singapore life in that you cannot imagine a Singapore without hawker centres, without access to freshly cooked food at a very affordable rate, in which people from all walks of life can get together, whether you are wearing a jacket or a tie, or in shorts, tee-shirts and slippers. That is where the social dimension came in. It did not necessarily start, nor is it even today, as an option for providing jobs for people who have no other occupations available. That almost, in a sense, is an incidental effect. In the earlier years – I think you have to go back to before the 1990s – there was a programme for people who had difficulty in making ends meet and could not find any other job, they would be allocated a stall. I think that policy was discontinued more than 20 years ago.

So, what we have today, if you look at the mix, half of them are enjoying subsidised rentals. As I said, these were legacy issues, people who previously enjoyed subsidised rentals were also allowed to transfer their entitlement to subsidised rentals to their family members. In a sense, they were the second generation hawkers. But for all the others, the Ministry at that point in time decided that it would be best and fair to allocate the stalls according to market demand. These stalls, you would have realised, do have a market value because they generate income for the operator. The fairest way of doing it was to let the market price discovery mechanism occur. And that explains the way it has worked since then. But even with that in place, because of the way our hawker centres are structured, you will find that the market rentals paid in a hawker centre are still significantly lower than that in a private food court or certainly in any restaurant. So, there is a clear difference.

The Member's other supplementary question was about the impact of market rentals on the final prices that hawkers charge their customers. I think we should acknowledge that the rental that a hawker pays in a hawker centre is one component but it is not the only factor that determines the final price that a hawker charges. This is a free market and we do not control the prices that hawkers set. Therefore, it is a combination of what the market can bear − the competition, the traffic, the number and the fame of that individual hawker – which allows him to set a price, and then determine the viability of his business. I am not convinced that we should change that free market model. But having said that, there is a supply and demand equation, and I believe that by increasing the supply, we will put downward pressure on the market rentals. But, ultimately, whether hawkers lower their prices in response to that is a market test which time will prove one way or the other. So, it is not a simple equation where I can offer a subsidised rental, control the price that he charges and ensure a social policy of ensuring that there will always be cheap food freely available to everyone. That is not the business model for the hawker centres. It has never been that, and I do not believe that will be a viable model for the future.

His final point was on arrears. NEA would obviously work with the hawker to find out why he is having difficulty coping with the rental. For instance, if he fell ill or, for some reason, his business went down because of local factors, then, of course, NEA will exercise forbearance. But, in the long run, this is a business and the revenues must be sufficient to cover the cost of doing a business, including rentals, paying for ingredients, manpower, utilities, water, etc. So, we have to be clear that this particular hawker is viable in the long term and if he is, of course, we will do our best to help him. If he is not, then, perhaps, that is not necessarily the wisest business enterprise for him and we will have to look for ways for him to exit and to look for alternative jobs or avenues, or even an alternative venue to go to where the rentals may be lower, and maybe for someone else with perhaps better business model or more tasty food or a more loyal clientele to replace him in that particular centre.

I just want to ask the Minister a supplementary question. I do not intend to haunt him like the way I haunted him in MCYS. Just building on the Member, Mr Lim Biow Chuan's concern about the cost of food in food centres, beyond market rate for the rental of food stalls in food centres, I believe that there is this practice of allowing a COV, sometimes of up to as high as $300,000. That is the transaction happening on the ground, when stalls are transferred. I believe this practice further pushes up the cost of food in food centres. This has probably taken on a life of its own. It is very unlike the HDB rental flat policy which stipulates that when there is a transfer of ownership, the HDB actually takes back the rental flat when the tenant quits. I am sure he does not approve of the additional transfer cost that is happening on the ground and I wonder what the Minister would do about this.

Sir, it is a peculiar, almost unique, feature of doing business in Singapore, in hawker centres and sometimes in coffee shops. Whenever you have this phenomenom of "coffee money" or you hear this exorbitant sum of $300,000, in fact, it should make you pause and understand that what is really happening from an economic point of view is arbitrage because of regulatory mismatch. The fact that someone else is willing to pay $300,000 in order to receive the assignment for the stall for which NEA is probably collecting a few hundred dollars or maybe $1,000 a month, illustrates precisely why we should not blindly go into artificially pegging prices in the name of subsidies. The point I am trying to make is that, in fact, subsidies distort the market and do not necessarily lead to optimal outcomes.

The policy position of the Ministry is that our hawker centres should:

be in the heartlands;

reflect tropical architecture, that means, no air-conditioning;

be operated by Singaporeans or Permanent Residents with a Singaporean dependant;

be operated by the person who has tendered or rented the stall, and this should be the hawker business and not the rental arbitrage business.

So, I am aware of these practices and we will look at how best to address these in order to take the arbitrage out of this and to focus on the business of hawking rather than the business of selling and trading and assignment of subsidised privilege which they have enjoyed for legacy purposes. But as I said, if we come back to fundamentals, there is a market price for any stall. And if the rules are applied and applied fairly, uniformly and tightly, I think we can squeeze out some of this arbitrage.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa, last question.

Sir, in view of the overwhelmingly positive response to the Government's announcement to build 10 new hawker centres, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government would now look at building more than the 10 that was announced. And maybe even within a shorter time frame, say, five years instead of 10 years, and to use the supply to eliminate the rental arbitrage that the Minister has mentioned, as we are still seeing an upward pressure on rentals.

So far, I have only announced 10. Another general rule in politics is always under-promise. I hear the Member's request and will consider it. I am not going to make any promises at this point.

6 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (a) if he would provide an update on the steps taken under the National Plan of Action against sex and labour trafficking; (b) what are the long and short-term goals of the Plan; and (c) whether the Singapore Inter-Agency Taskforce on trafficking of persons would consider providing enforcement powers for the apprehension of sex and labour trafficking syndicates operating in or through Singapore.

Sir, trafficking in persons (TIP) is a significant transnational crime. As people increasingly move across borders in search of economic opportunities, this in turn creates avenues for traffickers to exploit individuals. Singapore is a hub for economic activities, with high people flows. Hence, we are no less vulnerable than other countries to human trafficking syndicates.

Recognising that human trafficking is a threat to Singapore's security as well as our economic and social fabric, Singapore formed the Inter-Agency Taskforce on trafficking in persons in 2010. The Taskforce aims to develop a holistic perspective on the TIP situation, and identify and implement Whole-of-Government strategies to combat the crime more effectively, both locally and internationally.

The Taskforce is in the process of developing the National Plan of Action, which the Member has referred to, and it is expected to be ready by mid-2012. The Taskforce will consult stakeholders before finalising the plan. The plan will detail strategies to reduce the incidence of human trafficking in Singapore, minimise opportunities available for traffickers to exploit others, and heighten our response to trafficking cases. This strategy will have four key thrusts: Prevention of the crime; prosecution of offenders; protection of TIP victims; and partnership with other countries, embassies, NGOs and, indeed, the private sector.

On prevention, Singapore takes a comprehensive approach of strict border enforcement, thorough immigration checks, proactive enforcement and public education. Police and the Ministry of Manpower conduct frequent operations to identify victims and take any traffickers to task. Successfully prosecuted cases are also publicised in order to deter perpetrators.

Ensuring workers in Singapore are aware of their rights and the obligations of their employers is one of the most important means of preventing labour exploitation. This is done through the issuance of in-principle approval letters prior to their arrival in Singapore, and orientation and various outreach education programmes while they are in Singapore. Together, Police and MOM will continue their proactive enforcement and education activities.

On prosecution, human traffickers are firmly dealt with under Singapore laws. Police and MOM will continue to work with the Attorney-General's Chambers to press for deterrent sentences. The taskforce is examining whether new legislation is required to enhance our ability to fight human trafficking. This is the point that the Member has referred to. The taskforce will consider whether increased enforcement powers, enhanced victim care provisions and harsher sentences are needed.

On protection of victims, MCYS and MOM fund shelters and dormitories that offer protection, including accommodation, medical care, counselling and translation services. The taskforce is looking at ways to improve the victim care and support programmes.

Sir, finally, on partnerships. As the human traffickers work across state boundaries and legal jurisdictions, enforcement also requires cross-border cooperation for countries to work closely together, and the taskforce will continue to work with counter-parties in other countries, foreign embassies and partners, such as Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs), to ensure victims are identified and human traffickers are pursued even across borders and legal jurisdictions. Beyond operational issues, the taskforce will work with our partners to explore upstream measures to prevent exploitation, even in source countries.

Mr Speaker, Sir, to sum up, Singapore recognises that TIP is a significant transnational crime which cannot be eradicated easily. But we remain fully committed to taking the necessary steps, both in the short term and the long term, to fight this exploitative crime and bring the perpetrators to task.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. I have two supplementary questions: one local and one regional.

On the local one, would the Minister consider, before the taskforce convenes in mid-2012, an inter-agency approach between the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority and the Anti-vice Branch which comes under the Police, so that we can look at this holistically?

The second point, on regional, the Minister mentioned the transnational nature of the crime. Would the taskforce think of leveraging on the Interpol Headquarters, which is going to be set up soon in Singapore, to fight this transnational nature of the crime?

The third point, also on regional, the Minister talked about regional NGOs and governments. Would he consider adding regional anti-vice branches to that list of entities that we cooperate with to deter this heinous crime?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for his questions and the opportunity to clarify. Firstly, on inter-agency cooperation: indeed, that is the way the work has been done. To repeat the point: It is not that the taskforce will convene in mid-2012. The plan of action will be completed by mid-2012. That is the estimate. In terms of inter-agency cooperation, therefore, it is reflected in fact in the way even the taskforce is composed. We have the Ministries of Home Affairs, Manpower, MCYS, as well as the Police, immigration and various other agencies which have a vested interest and a role to play in this whole-of-Government effort. Indeed, that is the way we will continue to proceed. In some of the raids that have been conducted and enforcement actions taken, that has also been the case, and the Home Team agencies typically work together on many of these efforts.

Secondly, on international collaboration and whether we can leverage on Interpol, indeed, the Interpol facility that is going to be established here will be an important asset for us. But it is not just what we have in Singapore, but indeed, that is an approach that have been taken by the Police and the other agencies involved, that we need to find partners across borders because we often want to interdict at the source rather than wait for it to come to our jurisdiction. And that has been one of the key measures that has underpinned the way they have conducted their enforcement activities.

7 Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs of all ex-offenders who have re-integrated into society (a) what is the percentage of those who have been re-employed; and (b) what is the percentage of those who have been re-employed in the Civil Service, Government agencies and statutory boards.

Mr Speaker, Sir, every year, about 9,000 local offenders complete their sentences and are released from prisons and the drug rehabilitation centres (DRCs).

Those who need help with employment can approach the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises (SCORE), a statutory board under the Ministry of Home Affairs which provides employment assistance for offenders and ex-offenders in the pre-release and post-release stage.

In 2010, SCORE assisted 1,292 inmates at the pre-release stage through Placement Exercises. SCORE provided job coaching for inmates, covering topics such as interview and communication skills. SCORE also arranged for employers to interview inmates within Prisons. Of those assisted, 1,170 (91%) successfully secured jobs.

Last year, at the post-release stage, SCORE's Employment Assistance Unit also assisted 344 released offenders. Of these, 218 (63%) secured jobs. These figures are for those helped directly by SCORE. However, many offenders may look for their own employment and these numbers are not tracked.

Dr Intan Azura also asked about the employment of ex-offenders by the Civil Service. In 2006, the Public Service Division amended the Civil Service job application form to ask applicants to declare if they have criminal records, instead of whether they have ever been convicted in court. This change was made to reflect support for the Yellow Ribbon campaign to give ex-offenders a second chance in life.

Currently, those who have had their criminal records spent can declare that they do not have a criminal record when applying for a job in the Civil Service. Given this, the Public Service Division has informed us that they do not track statistics on the number of ex-offenders employed by the Civil Service.

Sir, I thank the Minister of State for the comprehensive reply. Could the Minister of State share with us what are the reasons some ex-offenders did not approach SCORE for assistance. What could be the possible reasons for some of the unsuccessful job matchings; and whether there is anything that the Ministry is looking into to improve the situation and help these ex-offenders re-integrate better into society and find a job so that they can start leading a normal life again.

Sir, SCORE tries very hard to ensure that our releasees have the best chance at rehabilitation and reintegration. This is not only looking at the job needs. We have to look at their needs for shelter, home support, social support and so forth. In addition to doing that, we also ensure that they are, as much as possible, well prepared to go back to the workforce. As I mentioned just now, of those who sought help from SCORE, 91% of them actually got a job and stayed on the job at least for a while before they moved on to another job. For those who have not sought help, we do not really know why they have not done so. But as far as we have found out from the inmates, many of them have other sources of information and also old skills that they can rely on to get jobs.

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I have met some residents of mine who were Security Officers before but they committed a crime, and they were incarcerated for a while. When they came out of prison, they wanted to go back to their former work as Security Officers, but their Security Officer's licences were revoked and they could not get them renewed. Perhaps the Minister of State could explain what were some factors that led to these licences being revoked. And is there any way for them to go back to the job that they knew they could do?

Sir, those in the security industry, they are to protect the property and the premises for which they are entrusted. Therefore, it is important for us to have people whom we can trust, not only to be the lookout for the employers, but also in addition to that, they are part of the overall security setup that we have in our homeland. Therefore, when they have committed some offences for which we think makes it not suitable for them to return to the security industry, we would not allow them to continue with the work. But given a time lapse, during which we will monitor them, we will approve their licence renewals if they do not fall back into the crimes for which they were incarcerated.

8 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for Education if the Ministry could provide free signing and note-taking services for hearing-impaired students in Government-funded institutions of learning such as the ITE, polytechnics and universities.

Sir, special needs students, such as those who are hearing-impaired, form a small proportion of the students in our education system. Nonetheless, our ITEs, polytechnics and universities have been increasing their support for students with special needs.

Academic staff do their part to provide extra support or adjust their teaching methods appropriately to meet the students' needs. In addition, fellow students have also volunteered to provide peer assistance. Let me cite two examples of what Ngee Ann Polytechnic and Singapore Management University have done to assist hearing-impaired students.

For Ngee Ann Polytechnic, a student buddy is identified to provide peer support. Academic staff provide additional teaching support such as preparing extra notes and conducting extra remedial lessons for these students. For examinations and tests, written instructions are made available to hearing-impaired students.

For Singapore Management University (SMU), hearing-impaired students are given front-row seats in the seminar rooms. Note-takers – who are current students - are assigned to help take notes for their hearing-impaired schoolmates. To facilitate lip-reading, instructors position themselves so that these students can read their lips. Lastly, instructors provide written instructions for these students in class as well as during the examinations.

Our institutions share good practices among themselves on how to provide support to students with special needs. They are committed to providing a good learning environment and educational support to all their students.

Sir, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. The inputs from students with hearing impairment or deafness in these institutions confirm that current efforts to support them are based on individual kindness, not systemic. The examples that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has quoted come from just some of the institutions who are willing to be kind. What I am asking for is something systemic, and to ask the Ministry to provide a very clear instruction to the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) to support students with hearing impairment and deafness, just like what the Minister did for character education. If MOE says it would do it, then the whole machinery gets turned on –

Ms Phua, please ask the question.

I would like to ask the Minister to provide a clear instruction to the IHLs to support our students with this disability and also to provide the resources for free signing and note-taking services, which they need very much. We cannot count on volunteers because the volunteers themselves, especially the student volunteers, have to study, and they do have other demands on their time.

Sir, the services offered by our institutions are not just based on human kindness. Yes, that is important and I think we should develop that. The students would also know that they can develop their own support system among their friends in school. The institutions actually have very structured ways to help students with disabilities, including hearing impairment.

First, they identify the students with disabilities. For example, NUS, NTU and SMU undertake pre-enrolment medical examinations to assess the disability of the students. They also require the students to declare if they have any disability, so that they can assign staff members to look out for these students. They train their staff members to be able to help such students with disabilities. That teaching and learning support is the second assistance that is given. Part of the learning support is to get students who can help their classmates in taking notes and in sharing information about the lessons taught in the class. I think these are powerful ways to help students with disabilities manage their instructions in class. Apart from that, our institutions also help provide clear written instructions to those with disabilities including hearing impairment.

I would say that generally, there is a comprehensive way in which our IHLs are helping the students with disabilities. Yes, we would want to rely on the good will of fellow students to help because they can provide a powerful support system to those who need help.

Sir, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his answer. From what I understand, the Allied Educators, especially those who are doing learning and behaviour support, are trained to deal with students with dyslexia, autism or ADHD, but not quite in helping hearing-impaired students. Will the Ministry consider training Allied Educators (AEDs) in learning and behavioural support, in learning the sign language to help hearing-impaired students in the mainstream schools?

Sir, I thank the Member for the suggestion. I do not know exactly what are the skills needed for particular students in the different schools but we know that our AEDs are given the opportunities to go for specific training to help students with learning difficulties and who may need particular assistance from the school. We are deploying more AEDs in schools and most of them come with counselling and specific skills, but when it is needed for them to have further skills to help particular students in the school, we will be able to do that.

Ms Phua, last question. Please keep it short.

Thank you, Sir. Just so we do not run the risk of providing lip service, I would request MOE to conduct a survey probably a focus group of students with hearing impairment or deafness who are studying in these IHLs, and to find out more in detail which of the IHLs are providing structured and systemic support beyond just using student volunteers. I would ask MOE to consider that.

I do not think we should go away thinking that we are not providing the needed service to students with disabilities. I have illustrated how our institutions are helping students with disabilities. I started my answer by saying that the number of students with disabilities is very small. Less than 1% of those in our IHLs. Nevertheless, each of the institution takes great care in ensuring that the students with disabilities are, firstly, identified properly; secondly, they get the right assistance, not just someone who is able to provide sign language services but, more importantly, for someone to sit with the students with hearing impairment and other disabilities so that they can get the direct assistance needed.

This is more than just providing a service where students can understand the lessons or can decipher what is being taught, but to understand what has been delivered in the class, with the follow-up assistance by fellow students who may be able to help. I would like the Member to consider thinking that this is a very powerful way of assisting students with disabilities, including hearing impairment. Nevertheless, if it is needed that we should provide further assistance, we would be able to consider that.

9 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry would make sports CCAs compulsory for all students and not just for those on the school teams; (b) how many schools offer sports CCAs to all students; and (c) what percentage of our student population is not taking part in any sports.

Sir, MOE recognises the value of sports participation in contributing to the holistic health and fitness of our students. Through Co-Curricular Activities (CCAs), such as sports, students develop social emotional competencies and strong values such as resilience, teamwork and discipline, as well as build strong friendships and bonds that are critical for a strong, cohesive and harmonious society.

Whilst engagement in sports and games is encouraged across all student segments, sports participation in school is not confined to participating in sports CCA or sports competitions. While about 30% of our students participate in sports CCA, all students participate in sports through their Physical Education (PE) lessons, school inter-class games, sports day, swimming carnival and other mass participation sports events in schools.

Schools have also tapped into the Sports Education Programme (SEP) Funds to offer learn-to-play programmes for additional breadth of sports participation. The Sports Education Programme (SEP) is an initiative introduced by MOE and Singapore Sports Council (SSC) which aims to promote sports participation in schools. The programme provides a spectrum of options that range from traditional mainstream sports to more unconventional sports such as wakeboarding, sport climbing and in-line skating. In addition, the SEP also offers a "sports leagues" category where schools can organise intra-school competitions for students to hone their sporting skills.

Besides the abovementioned, some schools have also woven specific sports modules within the total curriculum. Jurong West Secondary School, for instance, has introduced various sports programmes such as basketball, volleyball, netball, frisbee and hockey for students who are not offering sports as a CCA. This augments the overall developmental opportunities for students to be engaged in structured recreational sports.

Through the varied platforms of PE, CCA and other school-based programmes, almost all students have opportunities to participate in sports in schools.

Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether he receives feedback from students that they are interested to play certain sports but because they are not in the school team, they are therefore not given the opportunity. If so, is there any action that can be taken?

Sir, we receive feedback from all segments of society – parents, students and even Members of Parliament. [Laughter.] I can assure the Member that most students are able to take up the CCAs of their first choice, including sports CCAs. Over the past years, 72% of students have been able to take up sports CCAs as the first choice; 17% as the second choice and 6% as the third choice. What it means is that students have a lot of opportunities to take up sports CCAs that they like. But, of course, we cannot expect all students to like sports. We want to encourage students to take part in sporting activities.

I mentioned in my reply that schools make use of the SEP Fund to encourage students who are not in sports CCAs to take up sporting activities. At St Hilda's, for example, the librarians are involved in line-skating for a period of six weeks using the SEP. At Jurong West Secondary School, students who are not involved in sports CCAs get to learn one or a few of these games – basketball, volleyball, netball, hockey and frisbee. It can be just throwing of the disc but it can be very fun, and they get involved in sporting activities.

Thank you, Sir. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his answers. I scanned through the most recent book published by MOE introducing secondary school education to the public. I noticed that most schools offer, perhaps, four or five sports CCAs. I would like to ask: Does the Senior Parliamentary Secretary feel that four to five sports CCAs is enough? I also noted that a number of popular sports like football and basketball are not being offered by many of the schools as sports CCA. The second question I have is that in speaking to a number of schools, one of the problems told to me is that they do not have the budget to hire the coaches and to handle the logistics for more than the four or five sports CCAs. So would the MOE consider increasing the budget to support sports CCAs?

May I just ask why the Member thinks that four or five sports CCAs is not sufficient?

I think it is not sufficient because in a typical school, there are 1,500 students and you have only four or five sports CCAs with, say, an average of about maybe 20 members, sometimes, in the smaller sports there are 10 members participating. I do not think that is enough to go round. I personally experienced this myself or I hear this from my friends – difficulties getting our own children into the sports CCAs that they wish to simply because it is not being offered by the school.

Sir, I think the Member is talking about students who represent the schools. Yes, we do need students to represent the school in sports or games that schools have chosen. Nevertheless, students have the opportunities to learn to play the games and take part in competitive games through other opportunities – through the CCA, inter-class games, carnivals, and so on. Many schools use the SEP Fund which is an initiative of SSC and MOE. So I would like the Member to consider that taking part in sports should not necessarily be just based on sports CCAs. It should be done through PE lessons which are now more structured. We have introduced more PE lessons in primary schools now and the students have the opportunities to learn to be able to like the games and to play on their own. So playing games should not be confined to taking part in CCAs in school. We can provide more opportunities by working together with the community organisations.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan, last question.

May I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary this: I have received feedback that students who are interested in certain sports were told that they must take part in the sports CCAs to represent the school, otherwise they are not allowed to take part in the sport as a matter of leisure. Is this something that the Ministry would encourage or discourage? The other question is: can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share with us how many schools have tapped on this SEP Fund provided by the Sports Council, so that we can have a gauge as to how many schools actually use these funds to provide sporting opportunities for their students?

Sir, the second part of the question first. More than 90% of schools applied for SEP. Out of about more than 350 schools, more than 90% have applied for SEP.

On feedback from students who informed the Member that they were not allowed or they were not recruited into certain CCA since they are unable to represent the school, if he has any specific example, he can let us know. However, generally, CCAs are not just meant for students to represent school. There are sports CCAs and other CCA activities which are meant for students to learn to play and to learn to interact.

Apart from that, let me iterate that learning to play and to be able to enjoy playing certain games can be done outside CCAs. It is already introduced in structured PE lessons, it is introduced through inter-class games, inter-house games, inter-school games. I think there are opportunities but not every student can represent the school and resources are limited. I would admit a school has only one field, there is only one hall. If you want to introduce 20 games, then there will be great competition for the use of the school field. So schools will have to choose the games that can be introduced which students can learn to play, students can compete and students can enjoy playing even after they have left school. There is a choice to be made.

10 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the amount of profit that the restructured hospitals made last year from private patients; (b) whether there is excess capacity in these hospitals and, if so, how much; and (c) how many subsidised patients does a senior consultant see in a month and what proportion is this out of his total patient load.

Mr Speaker, in 2010, there were 4 million outpatient attendances at our public hospitals, of which 2.7 million, or about 67% or two-thirds, were subsidised. During the same period, there were 345,000 inpatient discharges, of which 250,000 were from subsidised Class B2/C wards; and if we include B1 wards, which also received some subsidy, this accounted for close to 85% of the total inpatient workload. Government subvention to the public hospitals for their subsidised patient services alone amounted to $2.2 billion. Generally, services that are not subsidised, such as Class A ward admissions or private day surgery, are charged on a cost-recovery basis. The public hospitals generated an aggregated surplus of about $11 million, or around 1% of the revenue, from such services in 2010.

At our public hospitals, every admitted patient is assigned a specialist who will lead the delivery of care, usually through a team-based system comprising other doctors, nurses and allied healthcare professionals. We do not monitor the workload of individual senior consultants by their subsidised and total workload.

Mr Seah also asked about the capacity in the public hospitals. Most of our public hospitals are running at about 85% capacity on average. At this level the capacity is tight and we are taking steps to address this. For example, in terms of manpower, we increased the number of specialists last year by about 8%, from 1,850 to about 2,000. We are also expanding our healthcare infrastructure. Public sector acute hospital beds increased by over 600 beds, or about 10%, over the period 2000 to 2010, with the completion of Khoo Teck Puat Hospital last year.

But bed numbers are just one measure of healthcare capacity. As our hospitals develop evidence-based care pathways to better manage patients, they are also able to reduce the average length of stay whilst at the same time improving the quality of care. These measures effectively expand the capacity of hospital beds, allowing us to admit more patients with the same number of beds.

Our public hospitals also streamlined their processes and as a result, they were able to maintain the median waiting time for admission from the Emergency Department of about 1.4 hours in 2009 and 2010, despite a 4.5% increase in admissions. They have also maintained the median waiting time for new Specialist Outpatient Clinic appointments for subsidised patients at around 28 days in 2009 and 2010, even though attendances rose by 3.5% from 2009 to 2010. For subsidised patients requiring urgent appointments, such as suspected cancer, the current median waiting time is within two weeks. But I think we can improve further.

We will continue to expand our infrastructure and manpower to meet our healthcare needs. The Ng Teng Fong General Hospital will add 700 beds in 2014. Planning for the Sengkang General Hospital has begun. Other than acute hospitals, we are also ramping up other facilities such as community hospitals and nursing homes; and we will strengthen our primary care capabilities, including the setting up of medical centres in the community to address the demand for specialist services. This is an area that Mr Seah raised in the next question. I hope I will have time to speak on this in greater detail then. I would like to reassure Mr Seah that we will continue to review our capacity to meet our present and future healthcare needs.

Mr Seah, keep it short.

I thank the Minister for his answers. Two supplementary questions, specifically, what is the capacity and what is the occupancy in Class C wards if he has that information. I am also concerned whether there are any patients, Singapore patients, who have been asked to choose a higher class ward because there are insufficient beds in Class C and, if so, how many were affected? On remuneration, I would like to ask the Minister whether there are any incentives for doctors to see Class C patients over private ones. If there are none, can I suggest that the Ministry think of how it can lower the differential between public and private patients from the doctor's salary point of view?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not have the specific occupancy rates for Class C wards but I would assume that in most of our hospitals' Class C wards, the occupancy rate is very high. For some patients, when they are admitted, the Class C wards may not be available and we would ask the patients whether they would want to opt for higher class wards like B2 or B1 wards. But if the patients are unable to afford the higher wards and if medical conditions required it, we will ward them in a higher ward and on a case-to-case basis, we will allow what we called an upgrade, an "up-warding" to allow them to be admitted so that patients will not be denied admission just because the lower class wards are full while higher class wards are available. We do what we can to accommodate them on medical grounds.

With regard to the incentive for doctors: I think doctors have to be governed and guided by medical conditions rather than monetary incentives, whether we skew them towards Class C patients or private patients. I think it is better for doctors to assess the needs of the patients and they generally look at all patients in a team-based approach so that patients are given the appropriate treatment. At the same time, we are also looking at reviewing the remuneration system for our doctors to ensure that we encourage them to deliver appropriate care for our patients.

11 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry has plans to expand the network of polyclinics so as to provide greater accessibility and to keep medical costs affordable for residents.

Minister, you have limited opportunity to answer.

Sir, today, our primary care landscape comprises both the private General Practitioner (GP) clinics and public polyclinics. The polyclinics play an important role in delivering primary care, especially to the lower income. Through the years, the Ministry of Health has ensured that our polyclinics provide the best care possible for their patients. This includes upgrading our polyclinics and equipping them with the appropriate manpower and equipment to care for their patients. Last year, we completed the upgrading of Choa Chu Kang and Toa Payoh Polyclinics. We will continue to upgrade other polyclinics, such as the Geylang and Tampines Polyclinics, in the coming years.

Even as we upgrade and expand our polyclinics, we are aware that the long-term primary healthcare burden cannot be borne by the polyclinics alone. The more logical and sustainable primary care model is to enhance the partnership between our polyclinics and GPs to provide quality healthcare that is more accessible and affordable for patients. We have more than 2,000 GPs in the community who are located near to their patients and capable of managing patients with both acute and chronic illnesses. Many of them have also taken up postgraduate courses to further enhance their skills and knowledge in Family Medicine. We have now more than 800 doctors with the Masters of Medicine in Family Medicine and the Graduate Diploma in Family Medicine. This is an invaluable resource for the country as we seek to meet the growing healthcare demands of a larger and ageing population.

We are therefore in the process of jointly developing the Primary Care Masterplan with our GP partners to enable GPs to play a bigger role in chronic disease management. To ensure affordability of care when patients see their GPs, we recently announced the enhancement of the Primary Care Partnership Scheme (PCPS) which will take effect from early next year. PCPS is a portable subsidy scheme that allows Singaporeans to receive subsidised care at private GPs and dental clinics. The age eligibility criteria will be lowered from 65 years to 40 years while the income cut-off will be raised from $800 to $1,500 per capita monthly household income to enable more Singaporeans to benefit from the scheme.

Under the draft Primary Care Masterplan, we are proposing new primary care entities to support better management of chronic diseases in the community. For example, GPs can come together to set up Family Medicine Clinics with larger spaces and onsite ancillary support services. Or they may refer their patients for ancillary support services such as nurse educators or diabetic retinal photography at neighbouring Community Health Centres. In addition, we intend to set up medical centres in the community to provide ambulatory procedures, specialists would work with GPs to co-manage patients and enable right-siting of patients from the specialist centres of our acute hospitals. We hope that our efforts in this area will result in much stronger primary care delivery and service for Singaporeans. By leveraging on both our polyclinics and GPs, we can deliver the most appropriate care to patients in the most cost-effective way.

Order. End of Question Time.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No. 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos. 18, 21-22, 24-28, 30-33, and 35-36 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix (Pg 699-710). Question Nos.12-17, 19-20, 23, 29,34 and 37 have been postponed to the next available sitting of Parliament.]

Order for Second Reading read.

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

The Income Tax (Amendment) Bill 2011 comprises two categories of legislative changes. The first category puts into legal effect the income tax changes announced in the 2011 Budget Statement. The second category covers other amendments to the Income Tax Act arising from the regular review of our income tax system. The Income Tax (Amendment) Bill was released for public consultation from 11 July to 1 August this year. MOF has revised the Bill to incorporate the suggestions accepted for implementation.

Sir, most of the tax changes in this Bill have already been debated upon in this House following their announcement in the 2011 Budget Statement. Let me summarise some of these key changes.

First, the Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) Scheme has been enhanced to encourage innovation and productivity efforts. Changes include increasing the PIC deduction from 250% to 400%, increasing the cap on qualifying expenditure from $300,000 to $400,000 per activity, and raising the cash payout in lieu of deduction to $30,000. Clauses 17, 19, 23, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31 and 33 of the Bill provide for the changes.

Second, a one-off corporate income tax rebate of 20% up to $10,000, or an SME cash grant of up to $5,000 has been granted to help companies cope with the rising cost. This is provided for in clause 61.

Third, businesses will be able to pool their tax credits for foreign tax suffered on their foreign incomes with the new Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) Pooling system. This should simplify compliance and reduce the tax payable on the remitted foreign income. This is provided for in clause 54.

Fourth, all existing maritime tax incentives will be streamlined under a new umbrella incentive - the Maritime Sector Incentive. Apart from streamlining, the umbrella scheme improves on existing shipping-related incentives by covering more shipping-related support services and new entrants into the industry. The enhancements will strengthen Singapore as an International Maritime Centre. Clauses 7, 10, 12, 43, 45, 46, 48, 49, 69(a) and 71 provide for these changes.

Fifth, a new tax deduction has been introduced to allow a company to claim for the cost incurred on acquisition of its parent company's shares, through a Special Purpose Vehicle, for its Employee Equity-Based Remuneration Scheme. This is provided for in clauses 22 and 27(b) and (c).

Sixth, start-ups will be able to claim tax deduction for expenses incurred prior to its earning any revenues. The expenses should be incurred in the accounting year before that in which it earns the first dollar of revenues. This enhancement will further relieve businesses of start-up costs. The change is provided for in clause 26.

Seventh, the tax deduction of 250% for donations made to Institutions of a Public Character, Government, approved persons and prescribed educational or research institutions will be extended for another five years to 31 December 2015. This is provided for in clause 32(a).

Eighth, the personal income tax rate structure will be amended effective from the next year of assessment in 2012. The new personal income tax schedule is more progressive. A one-off personal income tax rebate of 20% up to $2,000 has also been granted for Year of Assessment 2011. These changes are covered by clauses 68 and 70 respectively.

Finally, following an increase in the employer's CPF contribution rate from 1 September 2011, the corresponding tax deduction allowable to the employer is increased to the new CPF contribution rate of 16%. The contribution that is exempt from tax or the contribution in excess of which is deemed taxable, as the case may be, is accordingly raised to $5,000 per month. Clauses 4(b) and (c) and 16(a) provide for the change.

Sir, I shall now deal with the other tax changes covered in this Bill that arise from the on-going review of our Income Tax Act. Let me highlight four of these changes.

First, clause 3 clarifies for the avoidance of doubt that Government-Paid Childcare Leave payments received by self-employed individuals are taxable income since their introduction on 31 October 2008. This ensures consistency with the tax treatment of Government-Paid Maternity Leave payments received by self-employed women.

Second, amendments are made to the income tax appeal procedures for greater clarity and certainty in the timely resolution of tax disputes, and savings in tax compliance and administration costs. Changes include enabling taxpayers to take their case to the Income Tax Board of Review even if their case is non-taxable for that year, and extending the time to file appeals from 14 days to 30 days. Clauses 56 to 60 provide for this.

Third, the provision of the Unique Identity Number (UIN) or Unique Entity Number (UEN) will be made compulsory and extended to donors who make cash donations to IPCs through grant maker, cash donations to Government, donations of computers to prescribed institutions, and donations of art works to approved persons. This requirement was already introduced for qualifying donations made to IPCs directly. With the amendment, donors will not need to declare their donations in their tax returns in order to enjoy tax deductions on their donations. Clause 32(b) provides for this.

Fourth, to meet our commitments towards the international Exchange of Information (EOI) standard, the Income Tax Act is amended to allow Singapore to exchange information via separate EOI arrangements, where necessary. Presently, EOI can only be done through Avoidance of Double Taxation Arrangements. Clauses 62 to 67 provide for this change.

The remaining legislative changes arising from our periodic review of the income tax system are either technical in nature or relate to improvements in tax administration. With the above changes, the Income Tax Act will be enhanced and updated to better achieve our economic and social objectives. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I welcome the Government's proposal to exempt court-ordered maintenance payments to women from tax as in clause 6 of this Amendment Bill. I believe this will go some way to relieve the burdens that single mothers face in Singapore today.

However, I would like to query the Minister for extending tax relief for research and development expenditure to R&D incurred overseas. Would this not lead to an exodus of R&D activities and investments from Singapore? I also wonder how the Minister hopes to ensure that R&D activities valuable to Singapore is being carried out once it is moved overseas and that this relief is not merely used as a mechanism to evade tax.

A landmark study by Mr Ho Yuen Ping, Wong Poh Kam and Toh Mun Heng of NUS in 2009, found that the impact of R&D on growth in Singapore is not as strong as it is in other developed countries. In fact, to catch up with other developed countries, the study recommended that Singapore needs "some effective exploitation of domestic R&D activity". Instead the Government must think of ways to make it really attractive for these companies to consider putting their R&D investments in Singapore. Put simply, create more incentives locally and create disincentives for doing it overseas.

Furthermore, on the subject of tax relief, since this is part of the Economic Expansion Incentive Act being amended here, there are many ways in which the Government can be creative in addressing several problems at one go. For instance, would the Government consider giving tax relief to companies that hire disabled people, or tax relief for the purchase of gym or exercise equipment in order to promote a healthy lifestyle for Singaporeans, or for occupational health support, especially when prescribed by a doctor?

I question the preferential tax rate for Singapore Government Securities and ask how this benefits common Singaporeans since most retail investors do not trade in these securities. On the many clauses where the Minister has discretion on a case-by-case basis, may I ask whether the Minister compiles an annual report to Parliament on all cases – whether discretion has been exercised and the reasons for rejecting or approving an application?

Mr Speaker, the Gini coefficient is rising around the developed world, and Singapore is not spared. The rich are getting richer and the middle-income earners and the poor are getting poorer. We should rethink our income tax policy for the highest earners, for the top 5%. It should be compulsory for foreign earners in Singapore to pay capital gains tax.

The British Prime Minister has been seriously considering raising taxes on rich income earners to ensure better social equity. May I remind this House that the current British government is a Conservative-led government and not a Labour or Socialist government. A few months ago, the billionaires in Europe even told their governments, "Tax us more. We want to help Europe get out of the financial crisis."

Let us not wait for an economic crisis to hit Singapore before we take action. In so proposing, Mr Speaker, the Singapore People's Party is not pandering to populism; we simply believe in making things as fair and equitable as possible to reward Singaporeans for their hard work, for the greater good and stability of society in the long term.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I speak in support of this Bill. Broadly speaking, I think this Bill, which provides for substantial tax breaks in various areas, is to be welcomed at a time when we are facing a potential global slowdown. At a time when many other governments are struggling with trying to find answers or find ways to raise taxes and cut spending to deal with serious fiscal deficits, we are in the happy position of being able to offer tax breaks.

Many of these are timely and thoughtful. The corporate income tax rebate or cash grant for SMEs will hopefully help them to deal with rising costs, while the one-off personal income tax rebate would reduce the burden across the board, but the cap means that the full reduction would be enjoyed most by the middle-income and low-income groups, in so far as they are subject to tax.

There are a number of sector specific taxes, which are undoubtedly ways to assist the promotion of those sectors in Singapore. Two proposals I found particularly interesting were the enhanced deduction for research and development expenditure set out in clause 19 of the Bill and the concessionary tax rate for shipping related support services in clause 49. I will discuss both of these in turn.

One thought I have in relation to both these amendments is whilst it is good to promote both these areas, it would be helpful if we could further skew these incentives to encourage the employment of Singaporeans in both these areas specifically.

In relation to the tax incentives for research and development, I think one of the main benefits of such incentives would be to improve Singapore's reputation as a hub for research and development. In the face of the current climate of economic uncertainty, this is one way of attracting investment to Singapore.

One of the criticisms that has been levelled against our plans to attract research is the allegation that many of the new jobs created go to foreigners and, therefore, while GDP may grow as a result of the added investment, this may not necessarily translate into high quality jobs going to our citizens.

One suggestion to this proposal that may skew the incentives a little further in favour of hiring of Singaporeans in this sector would be to tighten the definition of "staff costs". For example, at the moment, one of the qualifying expenditures that may enjoy tax incentives is the deduction of "staff costs". Staff costs are defined as the salary, wages, and other benefits paid or granted in respect of employment and include expenses incurred for training or certifying the employee. If the definition of employee were confined to Singaporean employees, this would essentially mean that the hiring and training of Singaporeans in this sector is incentivised, but the hiring of non-Singaporeans does not enjoy any similar incentives.

In practice, this would mean that some companies with a large foreign workforce may in fact get fewer incentives, even after the amendments. But I think this may not necessarily be a bad thing because the training of Singaporeans would also be incentivised. And also picking up on Mrs Lina Chiam's point, I think one of her concerns was that foreign research and development may also be deducted but ironically if this foreign research and development is engaging Singaporeans, then ultimately I think that would also be to the benefit of Singaporeans. So, perhaps where the research takes place is less important but if the benefits come back to Singapore and Singaporean companies, that may ultimately still be in the best interest of our country.

The next point: Tax incentives for the marine sector. The maritime sector is one that, I think, has been important to Singapore from historic times. And coming from Sembawang, I think Sembawang Shipyard remains both an important employer and contractor for small business operators.

The shipping sector is also subject to intense competition, and our shipyards are facing competition from lower cost regional shipyards. The concessionary tax covers a very wide range of maritime-related sectors, and, I think, one which will still be an uphill battle for many of these operators to compete. I think this tax will go some way to helping them deal with the pressures of global competition. Over the past couple of months, I have met a couple of residents who were working in the maritime sector, and these residents were retrenched over the past couple of months. Usually they are able to find new jobs but they have difficulty finding similar jobs in the maritime sector. The result of this is they have to take pay cuts because their previous work experience was not directly relevant.

One thing we might do to make sure that the new jobs are created by these incentives would be to find a way to link the tax breaks to the employment of Singaporeans. One way to do this would be that in order to get the tax incentives under this, approval needs to be given by the Minister or his appointed representative. One of the considerations that might be taken into account in giving approval to companies applying for this tax break would be the composition of their workforce.

I understand that some degree of discretion is still necessary; so putting hard and fast rules may not be entirely helpful. But one factor that the Minister might take into account, depending on the individual company, would be the proportion of the workforce that is Singaporean. Additionally, it might also be helpful to require these companies to interview people referred to them by the CDC, especially people who get retrenched from the maritime sector who are looking for more jobs in that area. Perhaps guidelines could be incorporated to this effect as well internally. This is not something for legislative change but something which we can use with the current proposed legislation.

In conclusion, I would like to reiterate my support for this Bill. I think the tax incentives are going to be very helpful to the sectors concerned and, hopefully, helpful to Singaporeans who are looking for jobs in those sectors. I hope that the suggestions I have made can be taken into account when they are being implemented.

Mr Speaker, let me first thank Mrs Lina Chiam and Mr Vikram Nair for their comments. Let me respond first to the suggestion on how we could deal with the enhanced deductions for R&D under the Productivity and Innovation Incentive (PIC).

First, let me highlight that the aims of the R&D enhanced deductions are the same as the rest of the PIC. It was not about nurturing the R&D industry per se for which we already have strong incentives. It is really part of a comprehensive PIC incentive to encourage pervasive innovation and to promote improved productivity. The benefits were specifically tailored to favour the SMEs so that they can gain from this to the largest extent possible. And so, as a result, we included as many types of investments that could contribute to productivity. Six categories to be exact, including R&D. For expenditure on training, which is another category under the PIC, we do not discriminate between local and foreign employees. Again, the aim is mainly to get businesses to value skills training and upgrading as a way to improve their productivity.

To the question of why we allow R&D done outside of Singapore to qualify for the PIC scheme: We want a strong incentive for the companies to undertake R&D in the first instance; in other words, please get started on R&D, never mind where it is done. Therefore, as an exception, we have been prepared to be generous to allow the expenses incurred on R&D, whether done in Singapore or abroad, to enjoy the PIC deductions, up to the expenditure cap of $400,000. R&D spending beyond $400,000 will enjoy 100% tax deduction if done outside of Singapore and 150% if done within Singapore. So, there is a differentiation in the benefit depending on the location where the R&D is conducted, but this happens after the first $400,000 of deduction.

The thinking is that if we restricted costs supportable under the PIC to local employees' costs and to R&D conducted within Singapore only, it will make it difficult for SMEs to benefit fully from the PIC and we are less likely to achieve our objective. What is more critical is that we succeed in raising productivity and reducing manpower needs and, by doing so, wages are more likely to go up over time, and this is how the PIC aims to benefit Singaporeans.

As to the suggestions to look at the workforce composition when approving incentives for shipping related support services: Generally, tax incentives are tools to encourage companies to locate high value activities in Singapore, create jobs and bring about economic benefits. They are subject to conditions such as fixed asset investments, total business spending in Singapore, and the number and types of jobs created. Such incentive recipients, like other companies in Singapore, are also subject to foreign worker quotas and levies which are the existing policy levers to manage our dependence on foreign workers.

Let me turn now to Mrs Chiam's comments on the personal income tax regime. First, I would like to point out that our personal income tax rates are generally already low and progressive. Only 43% of our resident workforce pays income tax at all. So, the lower income earners do not pay income tax. Further, I should point out that with this round of enhancements, all tax payers will pay less personal income tax, but the middle-income earners will enjoy the largest percentage reduction in their taxes. In fact, these changes were made in line with the objective to improve our progressivity of the personal income tax. It is estimated that these changes would result in a revenue loss of $519 million. Quite significant. A sum which, in fact, could alternatively have been used to provide very targeted assistance to the needy. So, the changes have been introduced to benefit the middle-income earners, and taking into consideration that our low-income earners already do not pay personal income taxes, this is a fair approach. Sir, I hope that I have addressed the Members' suggestions and concerns; and so, on that note, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mrs Josephine Teo].

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

Order for Second Reading read.

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

The Stamp Duties (Amendment) Bill 2011 comprises eight amendments. Two amendments give legislative effect to Budget 2011 initiatives, while the remaining six amendments arise from the periodic review of our stamp duty system.

Sir, let me first touch on the provisions in the Bill that give legislative effect to the two measures announced in Budget 2011. First, stamp duty relief will be made available for a company converting into a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP), subject to conditions. This relief provides more flexibility for companies restructuring to LLPs. Clause 4(a) of the Bill provides for this change. Secondly, we will remove most fixed and nominal stamp duties of $2 and $10 on documents executed on or after 19 February 2011. This streamlines our stamp duty regime and reduces taxpayers' compliance cost. Clauses 2, 3, 6, 7(a), 8, 12 and 13 provide for this change.

Sir, I shall now deal with the other tax changes covered in this Bill that arise from the periodic review of our stamp duty policies and administration. Let me highlight two of these changes. In Budget 2010, the Minister for Finance had announced the stamp duty relief for qualifying mergers and acquisitions (M&As). Clauses 5 and 14 propose changes to align conditions for stamp duty relief, such as the qualifying period, more closely to the conditions in the income tax allowance for qualifying M&As. This will provide for greater consistency and ease compliance.

Currently, the Minister for Finance can impose conditions to be applied generally for any reduction or remission of stamp duty. Clause 11 provides flexibility for the Minister for Finance to waive these conditions for any relief, remission or exemption of stamp duty for specific cases.

The other salient provisions in the Bill serve to improve tax administration or provide clarifications to the law. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. − [Mrs Josephine Teo].

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

Order for Second Reading read.

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

The Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill 2011, or the GST Bill for short, comprises five amendments. The first three amendments give legislative effect to the GST initiatives announced in Budget 2011, while the remaining two amendments have arisen from our ongoing review of the GST system.

The draft Bill was released for public consultation in July 2011 and has been revised to incorporate feedback from the public.

Let me first touch on the provisions in the Bill that give legislative effect to the measures announced in Budget 2011.

Clause 4 of the Bill gives effect to the new GST scheme for approved marine customers to buy or rent goods at zero-rate GST automatically, so long as the goods are for use or installation on a commercial ship that is wholly for international travel. Previously, suppliers of such goods needed to maintain documentary proof of the export of the goods for GST zero-rating. With the new scheme, suppliers can zero-rate the supply of goods to these pre-approved customers without the need to maintain export documentation. This simplifies GST compliance for businesses supporting the marine industry.

The Approved Contract Manufacturer and Trader (ACMT) scheme is an existing scheme that allows local contract manufacturers to disregard services rendered to their overseas clients for the purpose of GST, even if the treated or processed goods are delivered locally in Singapore. To promote the competitiveness of the biomedical sector in Singapore, the ACMT scheme is extended to qualifying biomedical contract manufacturers.

The scheme has also been enhanced to further reduce GST compliance cost by enabling local contract manufacturers, including those in the biomedical sector, to:

disregard the services rendered on failed or excess production; and

recover GST on local purchases of goods used in the contract manufacturing process.

Clause 8 of the Bill gives effect to the changes in the scheme.

A new zero-rating relief is also introduced for specified services made to overseas persons and performed on specified goods kept in approved warehouses in Singapore. The new relief aims to encourage overseas persons to store high value goods, such as art, antiques and gold, in specialised storage facilities in Singapore, and purchase-related services, such as auction, insurance and valuation in respect of the stored goods. The GST zero-rating also covers the renting of storage units used to store such high value goods. Clauses 3 and 4 of the Bill provide for this initiative.

The remaining two amendments to the GST Act have arisen from our ongoing review of GST policies and administration.

The first change reduces the GST compliance burden of local agents who frequently import goods for overseas persons. Currently, local agents are not able to claim input GST on the goods imported for the overseas persons if the goods have undergone a treatment or process that changes the nature or form of the goods, before being supplied in Singapore. Given that any further value-add to the imported goods would have been priced into the subsequent supply and accounted for eventually, the Act will be amended to enable local agents to recover GST on such goods. In addition, local agents who are approved under GST suspension or deferment scheme would be able to use the scheme to also suspend or defer payment of import GST on goods imported for overseas persons for subsequent re-export. Clauses 5, 6 and 7 of the Bill provide for the changes.

The final change is a technical clarification of the GST rules for determining when a supply is made and thus when GST needs to be accounted for. We have simplified the rules for accounting of GST to be at the earlier of the tax invoice date or payment date in Budget 2010. This amendment clarifies that the alternative rules, that existed before the simplification in Budget 2010, will continue to apply for certain specialised transactions, such as the assignment of rights over land. This is provided under clause 2 of the Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. − [Mrs Josephine Teo].

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

Order for Second Reading read.

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

The Customs (Amendment) Bill comprises three main categories of changes. The first category seeks to enhance Customs enforcement. The second category allows Singapore Customs to share information collected under the Customs Act with domestic public agencies for the investigation and prosecution of certain offences, or when it is in the public interest to do so. The third category improves the administration of the Customs Act. Let me now highlight the key changes.

First, we will increase the penalties for tobacco-related offences. Sir, from 2005 to 2010, the number of tobacco-related customs offences increased by about 24%, while the number of repeat offenders in the same period increased by more than six times. We will introduce mandatory imprisonment for repeat offenders caught with more than 2 kg of tobacco products, and increase the minimum court fine to $4,000 for all repeat offenders, comprising $2,000 for the unpaid duty, and $2,000 for the unpaid GST.

We will also increase the court fines for first-time offenders caught with contraband cigarettes. Currently, the minimum court fine as provided under the Act is 10 times the duty and tax payable, which could at times be lower than the composition sum for minor offence cases. The minimum court fine will therefore be raised to $2,000 for first-time offenders, comprising $1,000 each for the unpaid duty and the unpaid GST. Clause 17 of the Bill provides for these changes.

We will also amend the Act to extend liability to any person who furnishes incorrect information to another for making declarations. Currently, traders may appoint third-party agents to declare their consignments. However, under the Act, only declaring agents who make false declarations may be prosecuted, but not the traders who provide the information. Clause 15 of the Bill allows Singapore Customs to prosecute traders who have provided incorrect information as well.

I shall now move on to the amendment that facilitates the disclosure of information to domestic public agencies, subject to safeguards.

Currently, information declared by traders is strictly confidential. It can only be disclosed with their consent, or if the information is necessary for the purposes of an investigation, enforcement or prosecution under the Customs Act or the Goods and Services Tax Act. This is to protect sensitive commercial data and uphold our integrity as a trading hub. However, we recognise that there may be over-riding reasons for Singapore Customs to disclose information to other domestic public agencies. These could be for the purpose of investigation and prosecution of offences under other domestic laws, or when there are national security, public health and safety concerns.

The Customs Act will thus be amended to allow Singapore Customs to disclose information to domestic public agencies, where public interests are of concern. To reassure traders that confidentiality of their trade data will be respected, comprehensive procedural safeguards will be established. Agencies requesting for customs information will be required to seek approval from the Minister for Finance. Each request will be considered carefully, and will be granted only when there is a strong justification to do so. In addition, any information disclosed to the domestic public agencies will be governed by the Official Secrets Act. Clause 11 of the Bill provides for this change.

Sir, I will now touch on some of the amendments that will improve the administration of the Act.

We will introduce a ticketing system for minor customs offences. This helps to streamline the enforcement process by automatically requiring any offender who fails to pay the composition sum to be brought to court. The offences for which the ticketing system is applicable will be prescribed. Clause 14 of the Bill provides for this change.

We will also enable Singapore Customs to appoint persons such as a taxpayer's bank or employer as an agent for recovering unpaid duties. This is similar to the provision for the Income Tax Act and GST Act. Clause 13 of the Bill provides for these changes.

The next change pertains to the use of image systems for the retention of trade documents. Traders must retain trade documents, regardless of whether these are in hardcopy or electronic form, for no less than five years. Clauses 10 to 12 of the Bill allow traders to keep an electronic image of the records instead of the original documents, at any time after the goods in question have been removed from customs control.

We will also introduce a provision to facilitate the implementation of the Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) duty. In Budget 2009, we announced that CNG will be dutiable from 1 January 2012. The Customs Act will therefore be amended to define CNG as a dutiable fuel, and to extend the three-quarter tank rule to include CNG tanks. Clauses 2, 4, 18 and 20 of the Bill provide for this change.

The remaining seven legislative changes are technical in nature. They provide greater legal clarity on the application of specific provisions within the Customs Act, and enabling clauses to allow subsidiary legislation to be made.

To conclude, the Customs Act is being updated to enhance customs enforcement, to allow Singapore Customs to share information collected under the Customs Act with domestic public agencies where public interests are of concern, and to improve the administration of the Act. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Sir, this Bill is an important one. It impacts trade flow and the movement of people. With the amendments, it is hoped it will enhance our border management and improve the ability to collaborate more with the other agencies, especially when dealing with issues related to national security, public health and safety. I do, Sir, have a few points to raise.

One, to what extent is the Singapore Customs investing in new technology and how are they adapting to the higher and more sophisticated technology of today in terms of training, skills enhancement and information technology?

Pertaining to section 31, it is stated that the Minister may prescribe the operator of authorised pier or place to comply with the Director-General's instructions. Now, will they be given ample notice and sufficient preparatory time as this may have an effect on their day-to-day operations which may require diversions? It will also be good to clarify this more precisely, for example, the circumstances under which the Director-General may prescribe the requirements and restrictions.

On sections 51, 63, 66, 82 and 143, Sir, pertaining to the refund clauses moving to subsidiary legislation, it would have been good to have drafted the subsidiary legislation for the refund clauses for licence fees before the draft amendments to the Customs Act are legislated. This way we can also gather inputs and comments from the traders as well as the public.

On clause 14, Sir, which has a new section 125A inserted on the issuance of a prescribed notice from Customs officer instead of having to go through courts, it can certainly expedite the process of issuing summonses. But does it carry the same weight? Does it mean it is easier to appeal against as it is not issued by the courts and will these prescribed notices be allowed to be compounded? In that same section, Sir, it would be clearer if provisions for minor offences and its applicability can be illustrated as examples. Also, if these minor offences would affect the trade first grading band of companies, it should at least be transparent. How?

On clause 19 which empowers the Minister to make certain regulations, one of these relates to the World Customs Organisation (SAFE) or SAFE framework of standards to facilitate and secure global trade. Can the Minister explain the rationale for this? Are there any formal agreements with our active trade partners?

Sir, globally there are also International level alerts such as The Red Flag Indicators and The United Nations Security Council Sanctions. How will these be tied in with the WCO?

One more issue, Sir, is how does Customs officer handle someone with an infectious disease at our borders? Are there SOPs, including cooperation with medical personnel? Do they have to be activated for formal assessment? And do we have isolation facilities or rooms provided to temporarily hold these people?

Finally, Sir, I also support the fine-tuning of clause 17 which amends section 128L(2) and (4) pertaining to relevant tobacco products. In fact, I would like to express my vote of thanks to the Customs officers who have been very proactive especially in my constituency pertaining to this matter. I hope they will continue their proactive work as it is much needed. With that, Sir, I support the Bill.

Sir, first let me thank Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef for her comments and queries. Sir, to the first question on the use of information technology, indeed, to keep up with the times and to tackle new challenges, Singapore Customs has had to intensively leverage on IT to enhance operational effectiveness and to better serve the trading community. In fact, this year, Customs launched Document Exchange or Doc X to enable authorised business partners to share documents securely and easily. On 1 January 2012, very soon, Customs will be launching version 4.1 of TradeNet, the latest version of Singapore's electronic data interchange system, for the clearance of trade documentation. Users who are familiar with TradeNet will know that it is not only well accepted, it is regarded in the international community as one system that has contributed greatly to the efficiency of our trade clearing procedures. These are just some examples of the continuous efforts made by Customs to stay abreast.

As to the Member's important question on how Singapore Customs keeps up with international alerts, yes, it actively monitors the relevant UN decisions and sanction list. When a trade-related sanction is imposed by the UN Security Council, Singapore Customs enforces it through compliance and audit checks on companies trading in strategic goods to ensure that Singapore fulfils our obligations. Customs officers also conduct frequent outreach to keep the trading community informed of new developments and key issues so that they, in partnership with Customs, can help to ensure that our trade flows remain secure. Singapore Customs performs dual roles in trade facilitation and supply chain security. It also works closely with other Government agencies, including the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) at the border checkpoints to maintain the integrity of our trading system and to facilitate legitimate trade.

The Member has raised a number of queries that really relate to the ICA's purview, for example, questions on bio-security and infectious diseases control at the checkpoints. These are perhaps better addressed by the ICA. So may I suggest to the Member that a PQ be filed so that a more comprehensive response can be given? This is also the case for some of the detailed clauses that at the implementation stage will benefit from fine-tuning. We would be very happy to engage the Member on those matters.

Finally, I thank the Member for acknowledging Customs' effort to combat tobacco-related offences. I thank her also for supporting the Bill.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. − [Mrs Josephine Teo].

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

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." − [Dr Ng Eng Hen].

Adjourned accordingly at

3.57 pm to a date to be fixed.

18 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts what are the measures that IDA has put in place to prevent foreigners from interfering in our local politics and affecting our domestic stability through the social media.

We are all aware that the Internet can be used constructively or it can be used for subversive purposes, as is the concern of Mr Gan Thiam Poh.

There is legislation in place to deal with anyone, be it locals or foreigners, who conducts subversive activities, either through the Internet or other means.

First, groups involved in the discussion of political issues can be gazetted under the Political Donations Act as political associations. This prohibits them from receiving funds from and falling under the influence of foreigners seeking to use them as platforms to subvert our political processes.

Second, if a foreigner uses social media to stir up ill will and hostility amongst different racial and religious groups in Singapore, or to spread seditious materials, this could constitute a prosecutable offence under the Sedition Act and/or Penal Code.

Third, the Broadcasting Act and its Regulations also give MDA the power to order websites to take down specific pieces of content that are in breach of the Broadcasting Act Class Licence, for example, if they are against the public interest, public order or national harmony. Defiance of MDA's orders may result in a cancellation or suspension of the Class License and prosecution.

We however recognise that Internet use and behaviour are evolving. We would need to constantly review if the regulations we have in place are adequate.

Apart from legislation, there can be safeguards like filtering to restrict access to undesirable or harmful content. However, we recognise that filtering is not entirely full-proof. The best safeguard is to enhance information literacy among the people so that Internet users can better discern what they come across online. Much has been done in the area of cyber-wellness and media literacy, but we can do more. MICA is working with various stakeholders to review how we can further strength information literacy. We welcome ideas from the public and MPs on how we can enhance information literacy among our people.

21 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Education (a) how will the Ministry increase capacity for, and equip teachers with, the skills and knowledge needed to implement values-driven education in schools; (b) how does the Ministry intend to support schools in their outreach to parents to partner them in this effort; and (c) how will the Ministry monitor the progress and effectiveness of this renewed emphasis on values-driven education.

22 Dr Janil Puthucheary asked the Minister for Education what efforts will be made to reach out and engage parents in driving the change in mindset and societal norms that will be required as part of the shift of our education system to one that is values-based.

Ms Tin Pei Ling and Dr Janil Puthucheary are right in highlighting the important roles of teachers and parents in our effort to sharpen our focus on values education. Values are not only taught. They also need to be "caught", through the daily routines of life in and beyond the school and role-modelling by responsible adults like teachers and parents.

Our teachers deeply appreciate their important role. The Ministry and the teaching fraternity have made and will continue to make important efforts to nurture the character and citizenship of our young. There are two key areas – teacher beliefs and teacher capacity.

First, educators have come together to re-affirm what the profession stands for. Beliefs are important, for these are the inner motivation that will make a teacher go the extra mile, to praise a child who has helped others and, more importantly, to guide a child who may have wandered down the wrong path.

In 2009, after extensive consultations with teachers, the Teachers' Vision of "Lead, Care, Inspire" was pronounced by the Director-General of Education. The Academy of Singapore Teachers was set up last year with the mission of deepening the ethos of the profession, as well as engender a culture of excellence with teachers stepping up to lead other teachers. This year, the Teachers' Creed was developed, again after extensive consultation with teachers, to set out the aspirations, beliefs and conduct expected of the profession. We will work closely with schools next year to use the Teachers' Creed to build the ethos of the profession.

Second, MOE and the Academy are working together to build teachers' capacity to implement values-education through various means. This is important, as even the best of beliefs need to be reinforced with skilful teaching and mentoring to achieve the desired outcomes.

To help beginning teachers level up, we have paired them with more experienced teachers in schools as part of the Structured Mentoring Programme to enable them to learn from their senior colleagues. To encourage professional dialogue, schools will set aside at least one hour per week for teachers to converse on instructional practice.

Schools alone cannot undertake this mammoth responsibility of building character of the young. We need the concerted effort of schools, parents and the community to succeed in this important endeavour. While parents and stakeholders like employers are generally supportive of our schools, more can be done to reach out, hear feedback, communicate, and forge partnerships.

MOE will set up a new Partnerships in Education Office (PEO) by the end of this year. PEO will support COMPASS (COMmunity and Parents in Support of Schools) in providing direction as well as coordinating efforts in our outreach efforts to parents and the community. It will build on MOE's and schools' existing outreach efforts to engage parents and the community on education issues. To better address stakeholders' concerns, regular two-way communication channels will be enhanced. These platforms of engagement and consultation will include dialogues, forums and seminars.

Schools are at the frontline in engaging parents. Hence, PEO will support schools and build their capacity in their parent outreach efforts. It will co-ordinate training and facilitate the sharing of good practices among schools. PEO will also work closely with other Ministries and voluntary organizations to provide schools with additional opportunities to form more active and constructive partnerships.

The long-term outcomes will not be known for some time. However, MOE and our schools will be able to monitor the effectiveness of our work in two main ways. First, through the collection of feedback from various sources, we will know if our students have acquired the necessary competencies or exhibit the desired behaviours. Parents and the community have an important role to play. Your feedback on the behaviour and conduct of your children at home and at play can tell us if our collective efforts are bearing fruit.

Second, through the use of tools such as the School Excellence Model, schools with good practices and outcomes in character and citizenship education can be identified and recognised. These schools can then share their good practices with other schools, so that all schools will level up their capacity.

24 Mr Zaqy Mohamad asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry will consider curbing speculation on non-landed private property by tightening the criteria on the sale of non-landed private property to foreigners; (b) whether the Ministry will consider allowing only foreigners residing in Singapore to purchase non-landed private housing; and (c) whether there is any correlation between prices of non-landed private property and prices of public and other private housing in Singapore.

Public, landed and non-landed private housing are distinct segments of our residential property market but they are inter-linked. There is some correlation in their price movements but the extents differ.

For example, over the past three years, resale HDB prices have increased by 34%. The corresponding figures for landed and non-landed private houses are 55% and 20% respectively.

While we need to cater to different population groups, we are clear that the housing needs of citizens come first. We have restrictions on foreign buying of landed properties given the limited land area in Singapore. Public housing, both new and resale flats, is reserved primarily for Singaporeans. Permanent Residents (PR) are only allowed to purchase resale HDB flats.

We have not imposed restrictions on foreign buying for non-landed private housing. Whether we should is a subject that requires careful study. As I have explained in the House last month, foreign buying is not the only factor contributing to rising prices in non-landed private housing.

The Government will provide an adequate supply of land to give Singaporeans opportunities to own non-landed private housing. This year, we have released over 14,500 units worth of non-landed private housing under our Government Land Sales programme. There are still 39,000 unsold units out in the market, equivalent to more than two years of demand.

Our property cooling measures have also moderated the rate of price increase and curbed short-term speculation in non-private land housing. Price increases for private housing have been trending down for eight consecutive quarters to 1.3% in 3Q2011 from the previous quarter. The overall number of sub-sales, which is a proxy of property speculation, has remained low.

We are monitoring market conditions closely. We are prepared to introduce further measures if needed to ensure a sustainable and stable property market. However, we have to be careful not to precipitate a loss of confidence, especially with the international backdrop of uncertainty in financial markets and weak growth in the US and Europe.

25 Mr Zaqy Mohamad asked the Minister for National Development if the Ministry will consider extending the Lease Buyback Scheme for lower-income senior citizens to include 4- and 5-room flats to help them in their retirement years as downgrading may not be viable due to the high cash-over-valuation of 3-room flats.

The Lease Buyback Scheme provides a useful option for elderly lessees of 3-room or smaller HDB flats to unlock the value of their flat.

Lessees of 4- or 5-room flats have wider options. They can sublet their flat or spare rooms, or move to a smaller flat or Studio Apartment.

Those who choose to buy a smaller flat should be able to fully pay for the flat, with net proceeds for their retirement needs. For example, a 5-room flat lessee in Jurong West can sell his flat for about $470,000 and buy a 3-room resale flat in the same town for about $310,000. This will leave him with about $160,000 for his retirement. Alternatively he can buy a Studio Apartment for about $110,000 in Jurong West, and get net proceeds of about $360,000.

Nevertheless, we will review the Lease Buyback Scheme and consider the Member's suggestion.

26 Mr Zaqy Mohamad asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) if he will provide an assessment on the REIT segment and its influence on rising rentals for industrial real estate; (b) whether the Ministry has performed any studies on the difference in rental and real estate valuations between industrial real estates run by REITs and non-REITs; (c) for the past 10 years, what is the proportion of industrial space under the Ministry that has been divested to REITs for industrial rental and whether the published rental prices have followed economic conditions well; and (d) what is the Government's assurance that industrial rents and real estate remain affordable to local businesses.

There are seven industrial REITs in Singapore, which together own about 17% or 6.6 million square metres (sqm) of the total industrial space in Singapore. The industrial REITs play a useful role in Singapore's industrial property market. For example, they develop customised facilities on behalf of some industrialists, and then lease the facilities to them. This allows the industrialists to operate in customised facilities without having to pay development costs upfront. Industrial REITs may also buy completed facilities from industrialists, and then lease the facilities back to them. These two models help industrialists lighten their balance sheet, and channel the freed-up resources into their business operations or expansion plans.

Before JTC embarked on its divestment exercise, it had 4.4 million sqm or 12.8% market share of industrial space in terms of lettable area. In 2008, JTC divested 1.2 million sqm. Initially, there were strong foreign interests. But with the onset of the financial crisis, foreign bidders stayed away and the successful bidder was Mapletree Investments Pte Ltd. In 2011, JTC divested another 0.3 million sqm in two tranches. One tranche was won by Soilbuild Group Holdings Ltd and the other tranche by Mapletree Industrial Trust.

As part of the divestment, JTC required buyers of the industrial properties to ensure business continuity for existing tenants. As a result, rental escalation caps were put in place by the buyers for the existing tenants. For properties divested to Mapletree in 2008, rental rates for existing tenants were capped at 5% growth per annum over JTC's July 2007 posted rentals for three years. For properties divested to Mapletree in 2011, rental rates for existing tenants were capped at 5% growth per annum over JTC's July 2011 posted rentals for three years. There were also discounts for tenants who had more than 10 years of continuous tenancy.

Based on publicly available information, the average gross rental of Mapletree Industrial Trust's properties has also been broadly in line with Singapore's economic conditions.

I assure Members that MTI and JTC will continue to keep a close watch on the industrial property market. Where necessary, we will release more land through our Industrial Government Land Sales programme, and implement other measures as needed, to ensure that the industrial property market remains stable and sustainable.

27 Mr Alex Yam asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) if he will provide an update on the number of juvenile offenders under custodial sentence as of 2011; and (b) if there has been an increase in the number of juvenile offenders seen at the Family and Juvenile Court in the last five years.

As at 30 September 2011, there are 168 juvenile offenders who are currently serving their custodial sentence. This comprises juvenile offenders who were ordered by the Juvenile Court to reside in the Singapore Boys' Home, Singapore Girls' Home and in Children and Young Persons Homes.

There is no discernible trend that the number of juvenile offenders seen at the Juvenile Court has increased. The number in the last five years has fluctuated, from 508 in 2006, 589 in 2007, 472 in 2008, 548 in 2009, to 406 in 2010.

28 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) whether the Ministry will raise the casino levy for Singaporeans so as to discourage them from gambling; (b) whether the Ministry will do away with the annual entry pass to the casinos; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider implementing a similar casino levy for foreign workers.

I understand the concern that Dr Lee is expressing. Indeed, even though we have put a set of casino social safeguards, let me assure the House that the Government continues to monitor and to review the situation. Nothing is cast in stone, and we are prepared to strengthen our social safeguards as need be.

The entry levy is to signal that gambling is an expense and not a means to make a living, and to discourage casual and impulse gambling. Some believe that a higher levy will be a more effective deterrence. Others worry that increasing the levy will only cause Singaporean visitors to intensify their gambling so as to "max out" the upfront cost of the entry levy. The jury is still out as to which is the likely behaviour of Singaporeans if we raise the levy.

The hon Member also suggested abolishing the annual levy. Some believe that we should abolish the annual levy because it encourages Singaporeans to visit the casinos too frequently. My Ministry shares the concern about frequent gamblers at the casinos. We are studying this issue, which is different from that of impulse gambling. We are also looking at the experience of other countries. In Holland for example, they look out for frequent gamblers and interview them. Depending on their assessment, they may subsequently limit the patron's visits to the casinos or even exclude them. Depending on our assessment of the problem, we may consider different measures to deter frequent gamblers. What we put in place eventually, if any, will have to suit our local context and meet our needs and situation.

While our safeguards are and should be stringent, they should not and cannot replace individual responsibility. Individuals must make the correct decision to gamble responsibly. In our Asian context, we also encourage families to play their part in helping their family members to do what is right. We also encourage families to apply for casino exclusion orders, which is the right instrument if their family members are gambling addicts.

Dr Lee asked about foreign workers. Many foreign workers are financially vulnerable and at risk. At this point in time, to help foreign workers avoid the perils of problem gambling, we are focusing on a targeted approach of combining education and casino exclusions. Such an approach also emphasises individual responsibility. For an individual, Self-Exclusion can be a much more effective upstream safeguard against problem gambling than even a downstream monetary quantum.

As many foreign workers face language barriers in applying for exclusions, the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) has put in place arrangements to enable employers to facilitate foreign workers' application and to encourage their foreign workers to be prudent. The results have been encouraging. As at 31 October 2011, we have more than 26,000 Self-Exclusions by foreigners in force. We expect the numbers to continue to rise. NCPG will continue to work with MOM and employers to advise foreign workers to apply for Self-Exclusion.

I have said earlier that my Ministry is prepared to strengthen social safeguards as and when necessary. One upcoming change is the tightening of advertising and promotions by the casinos. We will soon amend the Casino Control (Advertising) Regulations to make it crystal clear to both casinos that they cannot target the domestic market. The Regulations will also be widened to cover not only advertisements but any promotion of the casinos, which should prevent incidents like the heartland shuttle buses. We will make further announcements in due course.

In closing, let me assure the hon Member and this House that my Ministry is monitoring the situation closely. We do not foreclose any possibility and will evolve our social safeguards to address our needs and circumstance.

30 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the current percentage of pregnant women in Singapore who suffer from prenatal depression; (b) in comparison with the past 10 years, what has been the trend for cases of prenatal depression; and (c) whether the Ministry will allow pregnant mothers to use their Baby Bonus to fund prenatal medical checkups and treatment.

Mental health conditions can affect different segments of the population including pregnant women. A study 1 conducted at the National University Hospital in 2003 showed that the prevalence of major depressive disorders was 4.3% in both prenatal and postnatal women. Initiatives targeted at early intervention of women who may be at risk of prenatal and postnatal depression were incorporated in the National Mental Health Blueprint. Launched in 2007, the Blueprint aims to promote mental health, prevent the development of mental health problems, as well as reduce the impact of mental disorders. The mental health initiatives for pregnant women consist of mental health teams integrating into routine prenatal and postnatal care of women seen at KKH and NUH to conduct screening and intervention for mental health conditions.

Between 2007 and Mar 2011, the NUH programme screened 11,368 women for prenatal depression and 2,474 women for postnatal depression. Major depression was diagnosed in 3.0% and 3.8% of women screened for the prenatal and postnatal group, respectively. The mental health professionals provide individualised care and support for these patients and also those women screened to have increased risk of mental health conditions. There is currently no national data on trends in prenatal and postnatal depression.

The Baby Bonus Scheme comprises both the Baby Bonus cash gift and the Child Development Account (CDA), and is extended to eligible parents after the birth of their child to help parents lighten the costs of raising children. The cash gift is intended to help defray child-related expenses, while the CDA is meant to support parents in meeting the developmental needs of their children. CDA funds can be used for fees at approved institutions, which include child care, kindergartens and healthcare providers.

The Government is committed to enhancing the pro-family environment, and providing parents with broad-based support. Thus, while the Baby Bonus scheme helps parents with the post-delivery costs of child-raising, the Medisave Maternity Package (MMP) helps parents with delivery and pre-delivery expenses.

Since Aug 2004, the Medisave Maternity Package allows parents to claim an additional $450 on top of the existing Medisave limits for hospitalisation and procedure claims for delivery, to help cover pre-delivery expenses such as consultations, investigations or medications at both public and private hospitals. We will monitor and review the Medisave Maternity Package and where appropriate, explore how to help mothers-to-be to pay for expenses that they may incur during their pregnancy.

MOH is also working with the Health Promotion Board on several projects to increase public awareness on prenatal and postnatal depression. I would like to reassure Dr Lee that we remain committed to promoting mental well-being of pregnant women and mothers.

31 Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider a graduated subvention system for restructured hospitals' Emergency Department patients based on the Patient Acuity category scale instead of the current flat subvention system.

The Ministry's key consideration in funding the restructured hospitals' Emergency Departments (EDs) is to provide affordable and quality emergency services for the population.

Given the fast turnover of patients within the ED, we have adopted the approach of funding ED services on an aggregate basis, which takes into account the mix of patients seen.

The Ministry will continue to work with the hospitals to monitor the acuity status of ED patients and will adjust the funding appropriately.

32 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development if there are plans to review the existing pricing policy for HDB flats to ensure that public housing remains affordable for Singaporeans.

We must always ensure that new HDB flats are affordable to newlywed first-timers.

Since May, we have, through several Build-to-order (BTO) launches, stabilised the prices of new HDB flats. In Parliament last month, I illustrated the affordability of these newly launched 3-room, 4-room and 5-room flats for typical buyers. The BTO prices are about five years of their annual income and with Government housing grants, their monthly mortgage instalments are affordable, often with little cash outlay.

This is the approach we take to ensure affordability of public housing for newlywed first-timers.

For second-timers, the issue is more complicated as they rely more on the resale market and our influence over the resale market is indirect. The current resale prices are the results of an imbalance in supply and demand. We are taking active steps to re-balance them, but we need time.

I am nevertheless optimistic, that as we ramp up the HDB building programme, the temporary imbalance will ease. Meanwhile, we are watching the deteriorating global economic situation closely. While ground-zero is at Europe, the crisis has global implications.

Singaporeans are strongly advised to be prudent in their property purchases. The current low interest rate will not stay low forever. Any global economic recession may also affect their jobs. There is a wide range of housing options and prospective buyers should think wisely and buy within their budget.

On the other hand, existing HDB owners should refrain from cashing out their flats without thinking through their subsequent housing plans.

Our unique public housing programme has delivered the world's highest home-ownership record. With prudence and the right level of expectation, I am confident that almost all Singaporeans can afford their homes.

33 Dr Lily Neo asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) whether there is a national definition of poverty line and, if so, what is the current definition; (b) how many households fall below this line; and (c) whether more assistance can be rendered to such households.

Singapore does not have a national poverty line. Different countries adopt different approaches to help those in need, depending on their own unique situations. Some establish a poverty line to identify those who need help. For example, in the United States, the 2010 threshold for a family of four works out to be about US$1,860 (S$2,390) per month. Based on this threshold, the US' poverty rate is about 15.1%. On the other hand, other countries like Canada and New Zealand do not have an official poverty line. Canada, for instance, adopts an income threshold, determined using family expenditure data, in guiding its assessment of the populace's needs.

There is no hard and fast rule on how to determine needs. In Singapore, we take an approach of tailoring our social safety net to different groups, depending on their needs and circumstances. This approach is more flexible and no less effective than countries that choose to adopt a poverty line. Our help schemes typically cover the bottom 20th percentile of households, with the flexibility to go beyond if the family's circumstances merit special consideration. This approach allows us to provide more targeted and customised forms of assistance with real outcomes for families and individuals.

Let me elaborate on an example. For a family of four where the male breadwinner has lost his job, assistance from ComCare will help the family manage financially and put food on the table. The vouchers for utilities, service and conservancy charges given to the family ensure that they continue to have electricity, water and gas for their daily needs. The two young children can go to childcare with the help of subsidies from ComCare. This not only allows for the children to continue to attend preschool and socialise with other children, but also enables both parents to look for work. The working parents, if eligible, may receive a Workfare Income Supplement as an addition to their wages and CPF savings, as well as an encouragement for them to stay employed. Different help schemes, in this case ComCare and Workfare, complement each other to help our clients in their journey. This is what I mean by our approach to provide targeted assistance with real outcomes for families and individuals.

Dr Lily Neo has also asked whether more assistance could be rendered to needy households. The Government has regularly reviewed its assistance programmes and subsidies in anticipation of evolving needs. Over the years, we have raised the level of help given to needy households. For instance, our population is rapidly ageing and more elderly would need eldercare services. To increase the accessibility of community-based eldercare services, MCYS has extended subsidies to such services up to the 50th income percentile in October this year. We have also increased funding to senior activities centres that serve low income elderly.

We also recognise the importance of developing children. For this reason, ComCare assistance schemes for young children were enhanced in April this year to go beyond the 20th percentile of households. Therefore, a family with two young children for instance, and earning a gross household income up to $3,500 – which previously exceeded the old $1,800 household income threshold – can now benefit from such pre-school subsidies. Families can consequently focus their resources on other needs within the family.

I would like to assure Dr Neo that we will continue to review our social assistance schemes to ensure that they remain relevant to the evolving needs of the low income and vulnerable. If Dr Neo or any member of the public comes across Singaporeans who may need help, please direct them to our Community Development Council, a Family Service Centre, or call the ComCare Hotline at 1800-222-0000.

35 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower given the recent findings that jobless Singaporeans aged 50 and above stayed unemployed for longer periods (a) what is being done to help and encourage these workers in securing jobs; and (b) since 2009, how many Singaporeans aged 50 and above have approached the CDCs for employment assistance and what is the success rate of job matches for these older Singaporeans.

Job seekers or workers who require employment assistance can approach WDA's career centres at the five CDCs or the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i). Since 2009, there have been about 37,000 cases of Singaporeans aged 50 and above who sought employment assistance.

In 2010, 55% of older job seekers were placed in jobs. Those who are not placed continue to receive assistance from the career centres and e2i, such as further coaching and referrals to additional training to improve their chances of landing a job.

To put these figures in perspective, it should be noted that the unemployment rate amongst Singaporean workers above 50 remains low. It was only 2.7% in 2010, in fact a little lower than the overall unemployment rate of 3.4% then. Nevertheless, older workers who are out of a job tend to face greater difficulties in getting back into the workplace. The common difficulties faced include insufficient literacy and numeric skills, a lack of relevant skills and mismatches in expectations.

To help our older workers, we have been working closely with our tripartite partners to expand their employment opportunities and improve their employability. This involves introducing new legislation, training and re-training, job re-design, workplace improvements as well as changing the mindsets of both employers and employees.

At the broadest level, we have taken steps to ensure that our workers have the opportunity to work for as long as they can and want to. The Retirement and Re-employment Act will take effect in January next year, enabling more people to continue working beyond the current statutory retirement age of 62. Although the law will only come into effect next year, our recent survey shows that more employers are willing to re-employ eligible workers. The proportion of private establishments that allowed their local employees to work past 62 increased significantly from 64% in 2009 to 77% in 2010. The Public Service is also playing its part. Over the last two years (2009 – 2010), 1,400 officers (eight in 10 retiring officers) were offered re-employment and 83% accepted.

Besides legislation, we have put in place several schemes to encourage companies to employ older workers. This includes the ADVANTAGE! Scheme 2 introduced in 2005, which provides a grant to help companies recruit and retain older workers. This year, the Government introduced a one-off Special Employment Credit (SEC) scheme to raise the employability of older, low-wage Singaporeans. These efforts have helped to expand the employment opportunities for older workers.

Apart from these assistance programmes, we are also working with our tripartite partners to shape positive perceptions among employers and the public towards the employment of older workers. We have seen positive results. The employment rate of older workers aged 55-64 reached a high of 59% in 2010. MOM will continue to work with our tripartite partners to help older workers to secure jobs and encourage employers and customers to be welcoming of older workers and a workforce of diverse ages.

36 Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether building a road to ease traffic congestion justifies destroying the Bukit Brown cemetery which is considered a heritage site by some groups; and (b) how does the Ministry balance the needs of development with conservation.

The Land Transport Authority's proposed road across Bukit Brown is needed to ease traffic congestion in that area during peak hours. Today, the tailback on the slip road from PIE onto Lornie Road is often more than 500 metres during the evening peak hours. With new developments in the centre and north of Singapore, the Land Transport Authority expects this traffic demand to further grow by as much as 30% by 2020.

We recognise the historic and heritage value of Bukit Brown Cemetery. This is why several alternative options were carefully studied before the decision to build this road was made.

One option was the widening of Lornie Road. This however adversely impacted the existing nature reserve and also required the acquisition of private homes. The idea of a viaduct above Lornie Road or Bukit Brown was also looked at. This was found unsuitable because the building process itself would have the same if not greater impact than a road on Bukit Brown Cemetery. Likewise for the option of a tunnel, conventional excavation would have to be employed due to the required width of the tunnel and this would have an adverse impact greater than a road option. On the balance of these considerations, the road option was chosen as it posed the least adverse impact on the existing nature reserve, on Bukit Brown Cemetery, and also does not require the acquisition of residences.

There are more than 100,000 graves at Bukit Brown cemetery. The road works will be conducted in a manner to ensure that it will not affect most (viz 95%) of them. And before these works start in a year's time, an Advisory Committee formed by the Urban Redevelopment Authority will oversee the documentation of the 5% affected graves. Members of the Advisory Committee include the Hokkien Huay Kuan, Singapore Heritage Society, The Peranakan Association, and other relevant scholars and experts. Many volunteers have also stepped forward to help in this work.

The Government has always needed to make difficult decisions over competing interests, about how we use our land. This is necessary because land is scarce in an island like Singapore with its plural ethnic character and corresponding diversity of interests. Whether such choices and decisions had entailed the acquisition of private land, or communal spaces including cemeteries and religious buildings, such decisions were and are never taken lightly. This Bukit Brown road project, for instance, was delayed by several years to ensure that all the various alternative options were studied and evaluated.

We remain committed to conserving our heritage. More than 7,000 buildings, including those located in entire heritage districts such as Chinatown, Kampong Glam and Little India, as well as 64 national monuments, have been kept. Where development is needed, we will endeavour to exercise care and sensitivity to preserve our past. However, we must remain also no less committed to and responsible for meeting the practical living needs of our people as well.

1 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Prime Minister in respect of the last 10 years (a) what is the breakdown by country of origin for the number of (i) citizenships that are granted; (ii) permanent residence applications that are approved; and (b) what is the breakdown by province of origin for new citizenships granted to those from China.

From 2001 to 2010, there were on average about 13,000 persons granted Singapore citizenship (SC) annually. Of this, the vast majority came from Asia, with 49.4% from Southeast Asia and 42.1% from other parts of Asia. Singapore citizenship was also granted to applicants from the Americas, Oceania and Europe.

Average Number of SC Granted Annually for 2001-2010

Over the same period, there were on average about 48,000 persons granted permanent residence (PR) status in Singapore annually. These were also predominantly from Asia, with 49.2% from Southeast Asia and 44.5% from other parts of Asia.

The total numbers of PR and SC granted annually have decreased since 2010, following a tightening of the immigration framework.

SC applicants are not required to indicate their province of origin during the application process. Accurate data regarding the provincial origin of new citizens is therefore unavailable.

2 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower (a) what is the median amount in Singaporeans' CPF Ordinary Accounts at the age of 62; (b) how many Singaporeans are currently receiving monthly payouts from CPF LIFE and what is the median amount received by them; and (c) how many Singaporeans, upon reaching 62 years of age in 2010, did not have sufficient savings in their CPF accounts to qualify for CPF LIFE.

CPF members turning 55 from 2013 onwards and who have $40,000 or more in their CPF Retirement Account (RA) will be automatically included into CPF LIFE. Members with lower balances may opt in. There is no minimum balance to join CPF LIFE.

For older cohorts, those who are aged 55 and older have been able to opt into CPF LIFE since Sep 2009. Many such members are already receiving payouts under the Minimum Sum Scheme or have already finalised their financial arrangements in retirement. Nonetheless, more than 70,000 chose to sign up for CPF LIFE.

Among those members who have signed up for CPF LIFE, about 27,000 have passed their draw-down age and hence have started receiving payouts. As of 1 Oct 2011, the highest payout is $1,280, and the median is $260.

By age 62, many CPF members would have withdrawn any remaining balances in their Ordinary Accounts, and looking at OA balances at this age is not meaningful. The level of balances in the Retirement Account (RA) is more pertinent, since CPF members may join CPF LIFE with their RA balances. As at Dec 2010, the median amount in the RA of Singaporeans aged 62 in cash and property pledge is about $36,000.

Future cohorts will have higher RA balances as the age 55 withdrawal rule, which had allowed members to withdraw 50% of their balances even if the Minimum Sum was not met, is being gradually phased out by 1 Jan 2013.

3 Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports what are the Ministry's plans and future directions for the social entrepreneurship sector.

Social enterprises are businesses with a social mission. They play a useful role in our society. Examples include those that provide training and employment opportunities for disadvantaged groups. Others provide subsidised services for the needy, or plough back profits from commercial operations to support the social mission of their parent non-profit organisations.

MCYS offers support to new social enterprises through the ComCare Enterprise Fund, especially "Work-Integration" Social Enterprises. These are enterprises that provide training and employment opportunities for individuals from needy or disadvantaged groups, such as persons with disability, ex-offenders, youths-at-risk, persons recovering from psychiatric illnesses, etc. Since 2003, about $10 million has been disbursed to about 80 social enterprises. These have brought about benefit to needy or disadvantaged groups. For example, more than 1,600 beneficiaries have found employment opportunities in these social enterprises.

Beyond grant financing, MCYS recognises that mutual support is needed for social enterprises to progress. In 2009, the Social Enterprise Association was set up with seed-funding from the Ministry to provide voice and leadership for the sector. In addition to running networking platforms and educational programmes, the Association has also set up a Social Enterprise Development Centre in 2010 to provide business advice for social enterprises.

MCYS is reviewing its plans on how it can better support social enterprises. We hope to do more in the following areas.

First, we would like to raise awareness and knowledge of local social enterprises. We hope to work with partners like the Social Enterprise Association to educate consumers and help social enterprises better profile their products and services. This may entail creating more platforms and opportunities for them to showcase themselves to consumers.

Second, MCYS hopes to nurture greater interest and involvement in social entrepreneurship amongst youths, many of whom have an interest to further a social cause through small businesses. We will explore with schools and Institutions of Higher Learning to support student-initiated social enterprise projects, and programmes to equip youths with the competencies needed to be successful social entrepreneurs.

Third, MCYS hopes to facilitate in the areas of talent attraction and capability building. It is challenging for social enterprises to manage both its social mission and business viability. To better support social enterprises in managing its double bottom-lines, MCYS will look at developing new programmes, increasing accessibility to training, and bringing in expertise from the private sector to assist social enterprises.