Hansard, 2012-07-10

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:

1 Mr David Ong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs whether the Penal Code and other criminal legislation are sufficiently adequate to protect Singaporeans from offences and crimes committed by foreigners against them, in light of incidences of foreign suspects who have absconded.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to reiterate a point that was made in this House earlier this year in reply to a Member's question. And that is that all accused persons are treated equally under our laws, regardless of whether they are Singaporeans or foreigners, and regardless of whether the victim is a Singaporean or a foreigner.

Notwithstanding some high-profile incidents in recent months, foreigners do not disproportionately account for crimes committed in Singapore.

When setting bail conditions, the Police and the Courts take a variety of factors into account to assess the flight risk of the accused. These include the gravity of the offence, the extent of the accused person's roots in Singapore and whether the person has attempted to abscond previously. Ultimately, given that guilt is yet to be established by the Courts, a balance has to be struck between ensuring that the accused person will be present to face charges, and not unduly curbing his movement.

When a person absconds, the bail sum pledged by the surety may be forfeited. The Police will arrest the wanted person if he is still in Singapore. In the event that the accused person flees overseas, Police may issue an INTERPOL Red Notice. Police forces in INTERPOL member states will then help to locate and arrest the accused person. The wanted person may then be extradited back to Singapore. Absconding from bail is also an aggravating factor which could result in a higher sentence when the accused person is later brought back to face charges against him.

I want to assure Members of the House that MinLaw, MHA and its agencies regularly review our laws, procedures and the bail system to ensure that they remain relevant to the crime situation and security needs of Singapore.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Second Minister for the assurance. There is some disquiet amongst Singaporeans over the several incidents involving foreigners injuring Singaporeans, and had absconded. I can empathise with the Singaporeans' feeling of a sense of injustice and rage as guilty foreigners flee after committing a crime. How may we strengthen the legal process, including our courts system, to ensure that justice is done? May I ask the Second Minister if he would consider tightening the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent a repeat of future flight of probable suspects involving crime of causing grievous hurt?

Sir, my next supplementary question is: can this House send a strong and clear signal of intent to protect everyone in Singapore, regardless of nationality, against bullies who take the law into their own hands and cause grievous hurt.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe the second point was an exhortation. I will deal with the first, which was a question. Can we tighten the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and what can be done? I would like to go back to the point I made in my answer to re-emphasise it. Bail is an important part of the criminal justice process that we have. In establishing bail and conditions applicable to it, the Courts have to reconcile two important considerations. On the one hand, it has to ensure that the interest of the criminal justice system is served and perpetrators brought to task. On the other hand, it also has to respect the presumption of innocence and the right of free movement of the individual until he or she is proven guilty. This is an important process. The Police works with the prosecution to make sure all the facts are brought before the Courts, so that the Courts can make a full and informed decision on the matter. What it also means is that in the process, there may be some instances where you may have flight. The objective of the exercise is to minimise flight risk so that we do not have such incidents.

As I have mentioned before, MinLaw and MHA continually review the process and we will also look at whether the bail system and the CPC can be enhanced to tighten this specifically.

2 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs if he will provide an update on the police inquiry into the case in which foreigners involved in a brawl at Suntec City in April 2010 jumped bail after being charged.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in March this year, Deputy Prime Minister Teo informed the House that the Police was conducting an internal inquiry to establish the full facts of how the Suntec case was handled and whether there were any lapses or negligence on the part of the officers handling the case.

Police has now completed its internal inquiry, and has charged the Investigation Officer who handled the case with neglect of duty. A Letter of Warning has also been issued to his supervisor.

I would also point out that the lapse was due to the error of an individual rather than to any systemic shortcomings. In general, the framework for the management of investigations is sound. The Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) require supervisors to conduct regular checks on investigations and give directions, as appropriate, to ensure that there is progress. If there is error or neglect in following established processes, the responsible officers will be taken to task, as is evident in this case.

I thank the Second Minister for the update and clarification. I am heartened to know that the Ministry is taking a very serious view from a systemic point of view to make sure that the officers discharge their duties responsibly and seriously. I would like to ask a supplementary question, which is also related to the first Parliamentary Question that hon Member, Mr David Ong, had asked.

Using this case as an illustration, in light of foreigners who have caused hurt to Singaporeans and who have absconded and jumped bail, would the Ministry consider putting in as an SOP a mandatory impounding of passports, so that the accused, though they have not been proven to be guilty, will remain in Singapore until the judgement is made? Impounding their passports would not restrict their freedom of movement in Singapore, but it would ensure that when the Courts need them, or when the judgement is made, they are in Singapore to receive the judgement. This is important in safeguarding the safety and interests of Singaporeans who might have, inadvertently, become victims of such unfortunate crime.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for her question. I want to go back to the first point that I made and the response to the previous question. First of all, our laws are quite clear – they are impartial in the way they apply to all individuals who are within our jurisdiction. Regardless of the nationality of the perpetrator or alleged perpetrator of the crime or the nationality of the victim, our laws apply equally. I want to stress that.

The second point I want to make is that foreigners are not over represented in our crime statistics. Whilst there may be some isolated cases which are highlighted, the fact remains that it is generally not disproportionate. What we need to do is to make sure that our systems and processes are well equipped to deal with the challenges.

The Member suggested the idea that if a foreigner is charged – not convicted but charged – with an offence that we make it mandatory to impound their passports. As I have said, this is really a decision that we should leave to the Courts, and not make it mandatory because there are so many considerations here. The nature of the crime, the gravity of the impact, the nature of the individuals' own ties to Singapore and, most importantly and fundamentally, we have to strike that balance between his or her right to freedom to move, especially before he or she is judged or found to be guilty. That trade-off and that judgement have to be left to the courts. What the Police and prosecution do is to do their best to make sure all the facts are produced before the courts so that the courts can make an informed decision.

Having said that, I understand the Member's intent behind this, which is to ensure that we have a more robust regime. That is why, as I mentioned earlier, we are reviewing the processes, as we do from time to time. We will see what else can be done to strengthen the framework and the procedures.

Mr Speaker, one supplementary question for the Second Minister. He mentioned in his answer that the Police have decided to charge a police officer in charge of this case with neglect. I wonder whether he is able to elaborate at this stage and give us details of what the officer was alleged to have neglected to do.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the matter is before the Police Disciplinary Board, I would rather not go into the details. It would suffice to say that there are norms and expectations in terms of duty and what the officer needs to do as part of his investigative duties. In this instance, he was found, through the Police process, to have been negligent.

3 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts whether his Ministry will consider helping to fund and upkeep the historically important "Battle Box" at Fort Canning Park as well as the ammunition store at Labrador Park in view of their key roles in Singapore's history during the Second World War.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Christopher de Souza for his interest in the "Battle Box" at Fort Canning and the ammunition store at Labrador Park, which I agree are historically significant, given the roles they played during World War II.

As part of the National Heritage Board's (NHB's) continuing efforts to promote heritage awareness, a heritage marker had been placed at "Battle Box", and another one at Labrador Park. Together with 18 other World War Two markers, they form the World War II Heritage Trail launched this year. "Battle Box" is now a private museum managed by The Legends Fort Canning Park Private Limited. Rich in flora and fauna, the Labrador Park also contains historical relics from the Second World War and has been incorporated into a nature reserve by the National Parks Board (NParks). The ammunition store is currently one of the landmarks along the nature trail, and is managed by the company GreenTube Technology Private Limited.

To address Mr de Souza's question on funding support, the two private companies can apply to NHB's Heritage Industry Incentive Programme (Hi2P), which aims to assist private museums in upgrading their galleries and programmes as part of the objective to develop, enhance and grow private and people sector players in the heritage eco-system. Under the scheme, NHB can support up to a maximum of 50% of the qualifying costs incurred, which is capped at $100,000 per project.

Given the historic significance of the two sites, NHB is ready to consider the funding requests from the two companies favourably, if the companies wish to improve visitor experience and are in need of financial support to do so.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for her comprehensive reply. My clarification, Sir, is borne out of the great significance of these two historic sites. If one visits them, one would be able to see Kempeitai writings on the walls of "Battle Box" and also a discussion leading to the surrender of Singapore which is very important for our National Servicemen to understand. Therefore, arising out of the 50% cost cap and the cap of $100,000 for running costs, in my humble view, it is quite low, especially given the important historical nature of the ammunition dump in Labrador Park and the "Battle Box" at Fort Canning. Would there be an open ness on the National Heritage Board or MICA's front to raise that quantum? I have visited both sites and I have seen, unfortunately, a depreciation in the quality of the experience over the last few years, especially for visitors.

Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for the opportunity to clarify. I think I see two questions here. One is the quantum of the programme itself and the other is the state of maintenance. I would like to clarify to the House that for these two projects, we have been speaking or discussing the possibility with the operators. So far, the operators have not expressed any interest in tapping on the Government funds. So, the issue about funding has not arisen, and has not been addressed because we need to get them interested to want to co-invest with us in this exhibition. The reason for the co-investment is that we like to see private museum operators taking an interest in having a stake in the site so that there is an investment, so that there is an ownership of the exhibition.

As to whether MICA or NHB will review and reconsider the significance of the two sites and elevated it to something else: at this moment we have gone through an evaluation programme and it did not meet the standards that is required by the Preservation of Monuments Board's criteria. But, as with most things, we will review it from time to time and we will definitely consider Mr de Souza's suggestions.

On the state of maintenance, I would just like to clarify that the operators are obliged to observe the terms and conditions listed in the leases with NParks. I would like to bring this up with my NParks and MND colleagues and make sure that there is constant monitoring of the state of maintenance at these two sites.

Mr de Souza, last question.

Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you. I do not want to belabour the point, I would like to ask a clarification on if there is no private operator who is willing to do this, then it would be my humble view that MICA does their bit and actually continues to keep these sites open, notwithstanding a private operator not wanting to have a go of it and not being able to make a profit out of it. If I am not mistaken, the ammunition store in Labrador Park does not run tours anymore unlike a few years ago. I hope that for military heritage's sake in Singapore that these sites will be opened, notwithstanding private operators not willing to operate them.

We note his support on these two sites. As I have said, we will review this from time to time and this is something that we will bear in mind.

4 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) what is the amount of funds that are granted to Mendaki for the Tertiary Tuition Fee Subsidy (TTFS) scheme each year since 2001; (b) what are Mendaki's plans to ensure the financial sustainability of funding for the TTFS for Muslim students; and (c) in the event of a deficit, what are Mendaki's plans to ensure that the welfare of our students are met.

Sir, I would like, first, to clarify that the TTFS is a scheme for Malay, not Muslim, students, as reflected in the hon Member's question. It is an educational subsidy covering the tuition fees of Malay students at tertiary institutions.

Sir, the Government provides an annual grant for TTFS, which is disbursed by Yayasan Mendaki to eligible students. The grant is calculated based on the total enrolment of Malay students in the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and prevailing fees. Therefore, there will be sufficient TTFS funding for eligible Malay students in IHLs. No deserving Malay student will be denied a tertiary education because of financial difficulties.

The amount of TTFS grant provided by the Government has increased from $35 million in 2001 to $47 million in 2012. The amounts are reflected in Mendaki's Annual Reports. Undisbursed funds from TTFS are channelled to Mendaki's Education Development Fund (EDF), which currently has $72.6 million in its reserves. The EDF is used for educational assistance schemes and other educational programmes run by Mendaki.

Sir, the revised eligibility criteria which have taken effect this year will not affect Mendaki's financial provision for TTFS. This is due to how the Government grant is computed each year. In fact, the revised criteria means that more Malay students are now eligible compared to the past. Previously, only Malay students from a family with a monthly household income of $3,000 and below qualify. With the introduction of the per capita income in the new criteria, Malay students in a typical four-member household with a monthly income of $6,000 and below would now qualify. Mendaki expects about 7,000 new and existing students to apply for TTFS this year.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have one supplementary question. Would the Minister consider extending the TTFS scheme to postgraduate programmes?

Sir, the TTFS is a Government scheme, not a Mendaki scheme. At the moment, it is restricted only to students doing undergraduate and diploma courses in local institutions. Postgraduate funding – no institutions actually fund this other than scholarships given by the institutes. So, the TTFS is meant only for students studying locally as undergraduates, and at the polytechnics.

I thank the Minister for the answers. May I find out how many Malay students have received help from TTFS and, with the revised eligibility guidelines, how many more Malay students will continue to benefit from TTFS? And my second question is: with more funds being given out through TTFS, how will this affect the implementation of other programmes or schemes under Mendaki currently and in the future.

Sir, for the last four years or so, the number of Malay students eligible for TTFS stands at about 2,200. As I mentioned in my reply, we would expect the number to increase to about 7,000. Sir, let me explain to the House that the scheme is actually quite benign towards being in favour of the students rather than towards the Government or Mendaki. If you are in the scheme, despite changes to your family income, you continue to qualify. If you are out, and there is a change in your family income and you qualify, you will come in. So, the reason as to why the numbers will go up would be simply because of students in the past who were not given the TTFS under the old criteria, would now qualify under the new criteria and they can apply. So, we expect many more students to qualify for TTFS this year. This will have, obviously, an impact on the reserves which I mentioned earlier that goes towards the EDF.

As the number of Malay students has been somewhat constant in the last few years, the reserves that we have been getting, in fact, have been coming down and they will come down significantly this year because of the fact that many more Malay students will qualify. As to whether or not this will impact Mendaki's reserves, this matter is being studied very closely by my staff. We have to wait until the new set of criteria is fully implemented this year. By the end of this year we will have the complete numbers for us to really understand its true impact, but initial calculations show that there may be a chance that we have to dip into our reserves in order to maintain our programmes. This is something in which we have to study very carefully because our commitment to the community is that all the programmes that we are implementing will continue to be implemented because they are important for the community.

Mr Muhamad Faisal, last question.

Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for his reply. The Minister mentioned that there was this amount of undisbursed fund. May I know the reasons why this fund is not being disbursed? Is it due to low numbers of applications or any other factors?

Sir, as I have mentioned in my reply, the reason why we have undisbursed funds is because the way the numbers are computed by the Government. The Government looks at the number of Malay students, looks at the total fees and then computes the total amount, but not all of them will get the subsidy. The reason is very simple – the Government wants to help Mendaki to run more programmes, and the money from the undisbursed TTFS goes into Mendaki's Education Development Fund to run other programmes which are extended to all Muslim students, and not only to Malay students. In that way, Mendaki can run more programmes.

5 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what is the amount of casino entry levies collected in 2011 and the first six months of 2012; and (b) how much of the casino entry levies collected are channelled specifically to fund measures to contain gambling ill.

Mr Speaker, in 2011, the casino entry levies collected was about $195 million. The collection stands at $93 million for the first six months of 2012. The casino entry levies are collected by the Singapore Totalisator Board (Tote Board) and used for social and charitable purposes in Singapore. The Tote Board does not specifically ring-fence the casino entry levies to fund measures to contain gambling ills.

Measures to contain gambling ills are funded separately. Since 2009, the Government has more than doubled its expenditure on containing gambling ills, from $3.8 million in FY2009 to $9 million in FY2011. Some key initiatives include the establishment of the National Council of Problem Gambling (NCPG), which administers casino exclusion, provides advice to the Government on how to address problem gambling and implements public education programmes to address problem gambling. The Government also provides grants to Voluntary Welfare Organisations, such as Family Service Centres, to defray the cost of counselling services that the VWOs provide to problem gamblers.

Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister of State for the reply. From the financial reports of the two Integrated Resorts, I understand that the profit of Marina Bay Sands (MBS), in terms of EBITA (earnings before interest, tax and amortisation) between the second quarter of 2010 and the first quarter 2012 – in just two full years' of operation – is about US$2.6 billion or about S$3.3 billion. Similarly, Resorts World Sentosa's (RWS) profit, in terms of EBITA between the first quarter 2010 and the first quarter 2012, is also in the region of about S$3.3 billion. Quite a coincidence.

So, if MBS' earnings for the rest of the year are as strong as the first quarter this year, the total accumulated profits, in terms of EBITA, will reach or exceed S$5 billion by the end of this year. This means MBS would have recovered all its initial investment of S$5 billion in less than three years. This is far better than the prediction by the Sands' President which was reported in The Business Times on 31 May 2006, whereby Sands expected to get its money back by 2017.

Mr Ang, can we come to the question, please?

Yes, Sir. The two IRs have made very good profits and contributed to Singapore's economy because of the tax they pay. In view of the above, I have two supplementary questions. Firstly, would the Government consider persuading the IRs to do more Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activity by helping the low-income group, especially those Singaporeans that are affected financially and emotionally by their family members who patronise the IRs? Secondly, would the Government consider channelling the penalties paid by the IRs into a separate pool of fund, in the event disciplinary actions are taken against the IRs, to help to fund this same group of low-income people who are affected by gambling ills? I would usually direct these questions to MCYS. Since the Minister of State for Finance is taking care of this question now, I hope she can answer us in a whole-of-Government approach [Laughter].

Mr Speaker, I would also want to thank Mr Ang for expressing the concerns of many Singaporeans with regard to problem gambling. Mr Ang has highlighted the profitability of the Integrated Resort operators because of the patronage of the casinos. I thought that perhaps, it would be useful to highlight that in tandem with the increase in profitability, the tax revenues that we collect from the casino operators have also been quite considerable. And perhaps just to provide a sense of perspective, in fact, the net increase in tax revenues from the IRs was about $900 million for FY2010 and for FY2011, the figure was about $1.1 billion. So, yes, the casino operators have made more money but, at the same time, they have contributed to our tax revenues. And through these tax revenues, the Government is able to provide support for Singaporeans in many areas and expand our resources, in terms of care, for Singaporeans. That is the first point I want to make.

Mr Ang is very right, Mr Speaker, to say that actually his questions are going to be more adequately addressed by MCYS. I would like to assure him that, in fact, his questions which relate to whether we are doing enough to deal with problem gambling are being looked at seriously. Now, before I say more about that, Members will be familiar with the stringent social safeguards that have already been put in place to minimise the impact of casino gambling. Now, these include – of course, not just the casino entry levy – but also the minimum age limit of 21 years for entry into the casinos as well as Family, Voluntary Self and Third-Party Casino Exclusions. For exclusions, for example, there are about 93,000 exclusions that are currently in force. In fact, two out of three exclusions are Self Exclusions.

Apart from these social safeguards, there are also prohibitions of casino advertising and promotion targeted at the domestic market, prohibitions on credit for local gambling in the casino and, also through public education, there is now greater awareness on harms of gambling as well as the availability of services to help those who are facing difficulties in coping and managing their gambling habits.

Obviously, these safeguards are important and are reviewed regularly. As has been announced quite recently, stronger safeguards are being considered, and the House will have the opportunity to discuss these measures as part of the Casino Control (Amendment) Bill, which has been put up for public consultation.

Mr Ang Wei Neng, last question.

Sir, I thank the Minister of State for the comprehensive reply. I noted that the Minister of State said that we spent $9 million in 2011 on measures to contain gambling ills. This pale in comparison with the $1.1 billion of tax collected from the two IRs in 2011 and also the $93 million of casino entry levies that we collected for the first six months of this year. I urge the Ministry of Finance to allocate more funds to help the society to combat gambling ills.

Mr Speaker, I would like to thank Mr Ang for raising the point again. If the problem can be resolved by us putting aside more monetary resources, that would be the easiest thing to do because we are not short on the commitment to resourcing this set of measures and safeguards that needs to be put in place. What we are, however, mindful of is that it is not just putting aside the monetary resources. It is really about identifying the interventions that will be most effective and helpful in curbing the gambling addiction. I take Mr Ang's point, and I would like to assure him that we will set aside sufficient resources and the Government is committed to doing so.

6 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower if he will consider setting up a central or decentralised Job Development, Assessment and Placement Service for Elderly Singaporeans for wider job options and proper job matching to commensurate with the job seekers' skills and physical abilities.

(for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, the Government currently provides job assessment, matching and placement services through WDA's Career Centres at the Community Development Councils (CDCs), the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) and CaliberLink. These service centres are well-equipped, easily accessible and cater to the needs of a wide range of residents living across Singapore, including older workers.

We recognise that older workers often have special requirements and needs. However, rather than a Job Development, Assessment and Placement Service for older workers only, we believe in adopting a functional approach and ensuring that our existing service touch points are sensitive to the needs and requirements of older workers too.

We aim to attract and develop career consultants to have the right experience and personal qualities to assist a wide range of job seekers. The career consultants adopt a case management approach to help each client based on their individual needs. They carry out an in-depth assessment of each client's capabilities and circumstances, before deciding how best to match job seekers to jobs or whether they need more training to become job ready.

For older workers who are job ready, career consultants are careful during the job matching process to find a good job fit and ensure that job seekers are able to meet the demands of the jobs applied for. Career Centres also actively source for a wide range of jobs across different industries that suit the capabilities and needs of older workers. For example, our Career Centres hold thematic job fairs targeted at older workers. These include North East Career Centre's Silver Job Fair and South East Career Centre's Evergreen Job Fair.

At the same time, we recognise that some older job seekers may not be job ready and require more training to update and upgrade their skills. Career consultants will work with such job seekers to identify their skills competencies and gaps, and recommend suitable training options for them to upgrade and get better jobs.

While the Government will provide quality training and employment facilitation services for older workers, honestly, our efforts will have limited effect if conditions at the workplace are not conducive for older workers. Hence, we have and will continue to encourage employers to adopt age management practices in their workplaces, such as redesigning work processes to suit the physical abilities and skills of an ageing workforce. This will enable employers to be attractive to older workers in this tight labour market. We will also continue to encourage companies to adopt fair employment practices through the Tripartite Alliance on Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP). I would emphasise that especially given the tight labour market, companies should seriously look at older workers, in terms of employment, as they represent a lot of experience and a stable workforce to tap on.

Our concerted and dedicated efforts have helped a number of older workers into employment. Of the 14,200 job seekers placed by WDA's Career Centres at the CDCs and the e2i in 2011, about 35% were individuals aged 50 and older. Nevertheless, we believe that more can be done for this group and we will continue to incorporate feedback and improve on our job matching and placement services for older workers.

Sir, I thank the Minister of State, for his response. I have three questions. Would the Minister of State agree that the typical jobs in which less educated or uneducated elderly Singaporeans are placed, are usually physically demanding jobs like the cleaners in different settings, either in their estates, in the public areas, in school settings or food courts? Second question is, would the Ministry consider proactively setting up a taskforce to look into creatively developing different types of jobs for this age group either by redesigning or ring-fencing some jobs so that they have more options, other than the cleaner jobs that many of us refer them to? Third question is, if that is acceptable, when can we expect some action or deliverables that can be visibly felt on the ground for those of us, and I am sure the Ministry too, who want to help this group?

I thank the hon Member for her concern. This is something that many of us in this House share as we do meet residents who are older, less educated and less skilled and who actually do want to find jobs. Indeed, due to the profile of the older workers, we do find that there are certain sectors that they tend to congregate in. One of the areas that we have highlighted before, in terms of the low-wage workers sector, we also do find older workers there, particularly the cleaning sector as well as the security agencies. Having said that, there are jobs available elsewhere as well – office jobs, administrative jobs – depending on the skill levels.

It is a fair comment to say, given their profile, but this is something that will change over time as education levels have improved. With every corresponding passing of years, you will have older Singaporeans who actually will be better skilled and better educated. So, more jobs will be available. The challenge really is dealing with the here and now. For the older workers today, can we explore more jobs being created in other sectors, whether by ring-fencing or redesigning to provide employment? This is something that the Member has raised, and whether we should set up a taskforce to look at it. We do encourage companies to look at redesigning their work processes to encourage older workers to come back into the job market. Having said that, a lot of these jobs probably may not fit the profile of the older workers that she is talking about, but if the Member has very specific ideas and initiatives that we should pursue, this is something we can discuss further, to see whether it is something feasible to explore, and whether the market could end up creating more jobs in specific areas for this segment of workers.

Would the Minister consider setting up a taskforce for this?

As I mentioned, I would appreciate it if we could follow up on this discussion to understand what are the specific ideas that the Member might have. We could explore whether it is something feasible. The main priority right now is identifying workers who do need jobs, and how do we match them. Her concern is whether they should have more options beyond the cleaning jobs and the security jobs. Those are perhaps more onerous. Whether we could create more of these jobs, rather than the ones that she had described earlier. That is something that we could discuss and we could take a look at whether it warrants setting up a taskforce and a specific study on that basis.

I would like to ask the Minister of State what more can his Ministry do to encourage more employers from the current level to come forward. Currently, the issue is the supply side. What else can the Ministry to get more employers to come forward to offer, not just the rank and file jobs, but the whole range up to some of these professional, managerial and executive (PME) jobs?

Generally, in terms of the effort that we have put in, both from the Government encouraging the industries and companies and the response by the companies themselves, we have seen, for example, the employment rate for residents aged 55 to 64 actually rising to an all time high, 61.2% in 2011. We foresee that the numbers would increase.

Broadly, the measures put in place include the Retirement and Re-employment Act that we have just recently introduced this year. We do expect as a result of that employment of older workers would rise across the board. We have also enhanced the Special Employment Credit to provide further incentives to companies to hire and retain older workers. We also have incentives such as to create more age-friendly workplaces and environments through the ADVANTAGE! Scheme. The Scheme will continue to provide generous funding and support to help companies train older workers, and redesign jobs and work processes at workplaces. This is something that might be feasible to help older workers who might be able to be retrained and to be upskilled to take on different jobs. And for some of these companies to design the jobs so that they are actually suitable for these older workers as well. Therefore, by improving the fit between older workers and jobs, companies can, we believe, also maximise productivity and at the same time, with the tight labour market, continue to attract older residents who are not working, into the workforce.

We provide opportunities for older workers to upgrade their skills, to remain employable. The companies and low-wage workers can tap on the Workfare Training Support Scheme which provides generous training subsidies. WDA also works closely with tripartite partners in industries with a high proportion of older workers to provide targeted training assistance and support for older workers.

There is a wide range of effort. The issue at hand, coming back to Ms Denise Phua's earlier point is whether for particular segments, especially the lower educated, lower skilled older workers, these measures would have sufficient impact. I believe there would be some impact. The question is, whether we are able to, in a very comprehensive way, uplift these workers so that in some sense we can open up the vista to better jobs rather than the present ones that they are looking forward to. We can discuss further and take a look at whether there are more concrete measures we can carry out.

The priority right now is to make sure that the measures we have in place are effective. We are quite happy to take on suggestions and, more importantly, to do the job placements so that those who want to work can find work. The next question is, are we able to qualitatively improve the range of work and jobs available? So that is something we can look at and see whether there are practical measures we can put in place, over and above what we have today.

7 Ms Mary Liew asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry has a record of the number of women employed under flexi-work arrangements; (b) if so, how many women under the rank and file category and the PME category are employed under flexi-work arrangements; and (c) how will the Ministry encourage employers to consider offering flexi-work employment to address the manpower shortage.

8 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower what enhanced measures are being considered to promote flexible work arrangements to (i) increase the availability of flexi-work for Government employees with young, elderly and disabled dependants; and (ii) encourage more private companies to offer flexi-work options for professionals, managers and executives.

(for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, may I take the next two Questions together?

Yes, please.

Flexible work arrangements are an important means for employees to manage both work and personal needs. Properly implemented, we believe that flexible work arrangements can improve employee engagement and enhance their sense of well-being and provide flexibility all round. The provision of flexible work options also avails employers to a larger pool of potential workers who might otherwise find it difficult to join the workforce. This is an important point to emphasise. We do know that there are people, especially women after having the children, are looking to re-enter the workforce but are also looking for flexible work arrangements. Given the tight labour market, we do encourage employers to consider adjusting the work arrangements to make it flexible so that you can attract a portion of Singaporeans to come back into the labour market. This can be mutually beneficial for both employers and employees.

To promote flexible work arrangements, the Government has in place a range of initiatives. This includes funding assistance schemes, such as the Work-Life Works! Fund, and Flexi-Works! Scheme, where employers receive Government co-funding when they put in place flexible work arrangements that would directly benefit their employees. These include professionals, managers and executives. More than 840 companies and their employees have benefitted from these two programmes so far, and we encourage more companies to participate and come on board.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary, Mr Hawazi Daipi, chairs a national Tripartite Committee (TriCom) on Work-Life Strategy to oversee initiatives to encourage and help employers implement flexible work arrangements. The TriCom has been working with the Employer Alliance, under the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF), to organise more fora and dialogue sessions to share effective work-life practices amongst employers. The Employer Alliance is enhancing its Work-Life Tool Kit and developing more case studies to better help employers recognise the value of enabling work-life harmony for their workers, and at the same time, to implement flexible work-life strategies. This year, the TriCom is also organising the Work-Life Excellence Award to showcase employers who have put in place good work-life practices and to encourage others to follow suit. And many of these practices are indeed practical and replicable across many of the companies.

In the course of the next two years, the TriCom will focus on fostering workplace cultures that support flexible work arrangements. One initiative that is currently being piloted is the Home-based Work and Smart Work Centres Project by IDA to take advantage of Singapore's Next-Generation broadband network to facilitate working from home or from satellite offices. While the initiative is not targeted solely at professionals, managers and executives, this group will see more options opening up to them if the pilot proves successful.

While the Government will continue to promote and facilitate the provision of work-life arrangements, employers need to take the lead in implementation with the active support of their employees as well as the unions. Employees and unions can also help the process by suggesting options and practical alternatives for the companies to take up.

We do not have comprehensive statistics on the number of employees who require and are currently employed on flexible work arrangements. Nonetheless, we are heartened that more employers are now offering work-life arrangements to their employees. For example, in 2010, 35% of establishments offered at least one form of work-life arrangement to their employees, which is up from 25% in 2007. We do foresee that this trend would probably continue.

As the largest employer in Singapore, the Public Service is taking the lead in offering flexible work arrangements to its officers. There are various schemes to help public officers better balance their work and personal needs, which can include looking after their parents, young children or dependants. Many agencies have both flexi-time and flexi-place practices that give officers options, in terms of how they carry out work alongside their personal needs. The option of a reduced-hour work week is also available to officers who are not able to take on a full work load due to their personal commitments. These flexible working arrangements complement the range of childcare and parental care leave that public officers can tap on for their care-giving responsibilities.

The Public Service has also leveraged its Work-Life Network to build a culture of workplace flexibility. The Network meets regularly to share good practices and has fora and learning journeys to enhance capability in the area of flexible workspace. In addition, the Public Service also provides resources to educate individual officers and supervisors on the new ways of work, and the responsibility and trust that needs to come about in order to implement flexible work practices successfully.

The fact of the matter is flexible work arrangements can work and has worked, and we do encourage companies to take on board and to try these arrangements. This would go a long way in engaging the workforce at the same time, in encouraging more people to return to the workforce.

I would like to thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive response. I have a supplementary question. I would like to mention that I am also the Vice Chair of the NTUC Women's Committee. The NTUC Women's Development Secretariat has been helping some 12,500 women over the past five years to rejoin the workforce.

We recognise that there is a tight labour market right now. Many of these jobs for the women are rank and file jobs. I would like to also add that increasingly, there are more demands for the PME jobs. We would like to ask the Minister of State what more can be done, together with the tripartite partners, to improve the situation. Although we have been encouraging the companies but the take-up rate has not been as encouraging as we had hoped. I would like to ask if there are any further plans to look into providing a more holistic and flexible support for companies to provide more flexible work arrangements for workers, including the PMEs, and also to reduce the dropout rates from the workforce and to retain the women within the workforce.

I would like to thank the Member for her concerns and questions in terms of what more we can do. We are quite open to suggestions and ideas about new initiatives that we can put in place to incentivise and encourage companies to go along this path.

As mentioned earlier, we do note that in terms of trends, flexible work arrangements are increasing. For example, as mentioned, the public service in a quite significant way has been embracing it, and trying to encourage it. It actually varies from sector to sector. A lot depends on the nature of the jobs, whether it allows for flexible work arrangements. But we do believe that there is still a lot of scope. For example, we do know that in the F&B industry in the developed countries, there is a lot of part-time staff. And they surge the staff numbers during peak hours, for example, during lunch time and dinner time. That kind of flexible work arrangements encourages a lot of women to come back into the workforce, who are looking at coming back to work, but perhaps not looking at full-time work. We do not notice many companies embarking on those practices here.

We do believe that with the tightening labour market, we hope that that, in itself, would incentivise companies to take that leap and to make that change. The transition, I think, is not easy. Culturally, we have used to operating on a particular basis for a very long time. We find that along with other productivity efforts, there is sometimes a bit of inertia in moving along those lines. The natural process will come from the tightened labour market and companies would begin to explore.

What we really need to do is to actively promote this. We need to highlight companies that have successfully implemented these practices in place, so that other companies can realise that it is actually quite feasible and to emulate it and to try it out. We do not have any other particular initiatives right now. We have put in place a number of programmes as highlighted earlier. We will be quite happy to take on board suggestions from Members of this House and from the public as to whether there are other measures that can be put in place. My sense is that as the labour market tightens, and companies are beginning to feel the effects, I would encourage companies to explore, for those that can, flexible work arrangements for their staff.

Thank you, Speaker, and to the Minister of State. I am very happy to hear that you are open to new suggestions to encourage the hiring of women and flexi-work arrangements. For a start, will the Ministry consider having the public sector share the age profile and gender profile of all the employees as an effort to encourage the hiring of workers of all ages, all gender and the proportion or share of flexi-work arrangements in the workforce?

I do not have the specific figures with me but that is something that I can check on, and revert to him on it.

Mr Patrick Tay, last question.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State this. Earlier on, he said that his Ministry is looking at encouraging more flexible work arrangements, but are there any targets set by his Ministry in the number of employers embarking on flexible work arrangements for employees who are parents?

I would like to thank Mr Patrick Tay for his question. We do not have a specific target per se. What we are tracking are the trends and what we do note is that the numbers are increasing. The percentage of companies that are participating is increasing and that is something that we are encouraged by. We continue to do as much as we can to get as many companies on board as possible.

9 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for National Development what rental and sub-letting rules are being applied at HDB estates to prevent the formation of foreign worker enclaves and to ensure a balanced mix of ethnicity and locals/foreigners among communities living in public housing estates on rental basis.

Sir, we do not have the equivalent of the Ethnic Integration Policy or Singapore Permanent Resident quota policy in the management of the number of foreign workers renting HDB flats or rooms. This is because unlike the sale of HDB flats for longer-term occupation, the renting of a flat or a room is a temporary housing arrangement.

Nonetheless, we have subletting rules limiting the number of subtenants allowed for each flat type. Flat owners who sublet their flats or rooms are also required to observe the terms and conditions of subletting. Should there be any disamenity created by the subtenants, the subletting approval could be revoked and the flat owners would be required to evict the subtenants.

Currently, foreign workers renting flats or rooms from HDB lessees form about 5% of the total population living in HDB flats. These include holders of Employment Passes, S- Passes, Professional Visit Passes and some Work Permit holders. Work Permit holders who are non-Malaysian construction workers are not eligible to rent HDB flats or rooms.

HDB is monitoring the situation. We will, if necessary, consider appropriate measures to discourage the formation of significant foreign worker enclaves in HDB estates.

10 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Ministry has set any specific number of high value-added jobs to secure for Singaporeans per year for the past 10 years; (b) if so, what has been the achievement so far and what will be the number that the Ministry has set to achieve for the next five years.

Mr Speaker Sir, MTI and our agencies promote and develop high value-add activities across the various industries in the manufacturing and services sectors. Our aim is to bring good job opportunities to Singaporeans, and to equip our local workers with the necessary skills to seize these opportunities.

For our key clusters, we work with various agencies – Ministry of Education (MOE), Ministry of Manpower (MOM), Workforce Development Agency (WDA) – to develop the manpower and skills needed for our industries. First, we work with MOE and MOM to align the curriculum in local educational institutions with industry needs so that young job-seekers graduate with skills that are in demand. Second, we work with MOM and WDA to put in place training programmes so that our workers can continuously upgrade their skills and take on higher skilled and higher-paying jobs. Third, we work with companies and co-fund efforts, such as training schemes and attachment programmes, to ensure the transfer of knowledge and expertise to locals, particularly in new sectors and industries where our workers may not initially have the relevant industry experience.

For new clusters that require specialised skills for which we do not have sufficient local manpower supply, foreign talent help fill the gap and facilitate the transfer of skills to locals as we build up the capability in our local workforce over time.

We do not set specific targets for new jobs for Singaporeans. It would be too prescriptive and inefficient to do so. However, we do set overall skilled job creation targets for key clusters. For instance, in 2012, Economic Development Board (EDB) expects to create between 18,000 and 21,000 skilled jobs. Likewise, Info-Communications Development Authority of Singapore (IDA) also sets skilled job targets for the Infocomm sector. As part of its Intelligent Nation 2015 Masterpan, IDA plans to boost the number of infocomm jobs by 55,000 from 2005 to 2015. This approach has worked well in helping Singaporeans secure the good job opportunities created in the economy.

At the national level, in 2011, more than 75% of the Professional, Managerial, Executive and Technical (PMET) jobs, were taken up by local workers. The investments brought in by EDB between 2002 and 2011 would have created 167,300 skilled jobs when the projects are fully implemented, and the majority of these jobs will go to locals. Based on the Census of Manufacturing Activity, more than seven in 10 skilled jobs in the manufacturing sector are filled by locals.

May I ask the Minister whether he could share, presently, which sector has produced the highest value-added job in Singapore?

Mr Speaker, Sir, in general, I would say that our overall economic strategy is to move towards higher value-added activities, across all sectors. So, even within sectors where we historically perhaps may have been doing some lower value-added activities, EDB's efforts and, in general, the MTI agencies' efforts, have moved us up the value chain to higher value-added activities.

If I take electronics as an example, there used to be electronic contract manufacturing, large scale, low margin, high volume kind of businesses. Over time, these have been phased out, but instead, we have higher value-added activities in the same sector. That includes micro-chip design, product design, semi-conductor activities, and so on. I would say that as a broad rule, we are moving in the direction of higher value-added activities across all sectors. Some of the newer sectors we have targeted, such as biomedical sciences, are examples of areas where there are also opportunities to be had in terms of high value-added jobs.

The reason I gave the preamble is to emphasise that it is not just in the new sectors, but even in our existing sectors, there is hope to create good, high value-added jobs for Singaporeans.

The following question stood in the name of Mrs Lina Chiam –

11To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the number of unlicensed tour guides caught during the last five years; (b) what is the most common nationality of unlicensed tour guides caught; (c) whether there has been an increasing influx of unlicensed tour guides to Singapore; and (d) if so, whether the Singapore Tourism Board is stepping up enforcements to curb this influx.

12 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the annual number of unlicensed tour guides detected operating in Singapore for the past 10 years; (b) how many of those detected are prosecuted; and (c) what is Singapore Tourism Board's plan and strategy to combat against unlicensed tour guides carrying out guiding in Singapore in whatever form and duration.

Question No 11, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I your permission to take Question Nos 11 and 12 together?

Yes, please.

Thank you, Sir. Any person guiding tourists in Singapore for remuneration has to be licensed by the Singapore Tourism Board (STB). Licensing ensures that tourist guides in Singapore are knowledgeable about our heritage, geography and tourism offerings, and have the requisite language proficiency and professional conduct. As at 31 May 2012, there were 2,312 licensed tourist guides in Singapore. Ninety-six percent of these guides were Singapore citizens or permanent residents. This proportion has held steady since 2007. Many of the non-Singaporean guides are guiding in foreign languages.

STB takes a serious view of illegal guiding and takes enforcement action against unlicensed activities. Unlicensed guides who are first-time offenders are issued stern warnings in lieu of prosecution, and encouraged to undergo proper training and licensing. Travel agents that engage such unlicensed guides will be similarly warned if they are first-time offenders. In addition, these travel agents will be required to implement measures to ensure full compliance, and will also be subjected to closer scrutiny by STB.

The incidence of illegal guiding had not been high in the past: there were only 11 suspected cases of unlicensed guiding out of all enforcement checks conducted between 2007 and 2010, with Singaporeans accounting for about half of these cases. However, such activity has become more apparent in recent years, which may be partly attributable to the rapid growth in our visitor arrivals. For example, feedback to STB on unlicensed guiding doubled between 2010 and 2011.

In response, STB has more than doubled the frequency of enforcement checks, to 200 spot-checks in 2011. In addition, STB has also mounted large-scale raids at key tourist spots. Three such operations have been conducted since 2011, yielding a total of 152 suspect cases. To date, 38 individuals and companies have been issued warning letters and advisories, with locals and foreigners making up about an equal share of these first-time offenders.

Nevertheless, there are some inherent limitations to STB's enforcement capabilities today, which we are addressing. First, the provisions of the Tourist Guides Regulations today are defined quite narrowly, making detection and enforcement challenging. Second, illegal guiding is neither a seizable nor compoundable offence. This means offenders cannot be penalised on the spot, and foreign offenders in particular may leave the country before investigations are complete. Third, the current penalties for illegal guiding were set in 1985 and we need to update them to maintain their deterrent effect.

To address these limitations, MTI and STB are reviewing the regulatory framework and will progressively introduce changes and enhancements. In the meantime, STB has committed more resources to increase its enforcement, and will continue to do so.

STB, as well as the Ministry, understands the concerns of the various stakeholders over this matter, and has engaged industry members as well as NTUC's Tourist Guide Chapter several times. More can and will be done, and I urge the industry and all stakeholders to work closely with STB on this effort.

Sir, I would like to ask the Second Minister how many local Singaporean guides have been displaced and deprived of their living due to this influx of foreign unlicensed guides. Does the Minister see the urgency in tackling this issue and when can we see the result to tighten this regulation?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for her question. Firstly, I think it would be wrong to assume that all unlicensed guides are foreigners. Indeed, as I quoted from the statistics, it is roughly in equal proportions, Singaporeans and non-Singaporeans or foreigners. So, we should bear that in mind when we approach this. Secondly, on what number has been displaced, I think it would be hard for me to guess because it depends on factors that are unknown to us and we really do not know how many are actually involved in this.

More important than all of this, we need to be very clear that our objective is to make sure that the tourism experience in Singapore is an authentic one for the visitors. Therefore, we want to ensure that, by and large, Singaporeans and permanent residents are the ones who are providing this – specifically Singaporeans, because they would have the experience, the knowledge and the feel for the country, which is what tourists seek when they visit a country. I think that is our primary objective. But I cannot quantify the displacement effect simply because it would be difficult to do so. We really do not know what is out there other than what is revealed by our enforcement statistics.

I am glad that the Second Minister shared earlier that his Ministry is considering more deterrent penal sanctions against unlicensed guides, including even considering whether to make the offence seizable. I have two supplementary questions: firstly, in this enhancement of the enforcement provisions, whether it also extends to meting out penalties to travel agents who hire these unlicensed guides. Secondly, STB – as what the Second Minister mentioned – in stepping up enforcement, has its limitations. Has STB considered outsourcing some of these enforcement functions? And if so, may I also suggest that those outsourced to conduct their enforcement checks should have the relevant experience in detecting these unlicensed guides because it is an industry which is quite unique and it is not easy to detect. As what the Minister has said earlier, I hope his Ministry or STB does work closely with the NTUC's Tourist Guide Chapter in the detection and prevention of these unlicensed guides.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for his questions and suggestions. I omitted in my earlier response to address a point raised by the Member Dr Lily Neo, on the timing for the introduction of measures. There is a quite range of issues that we have to deal with, so it will take us time. The intention is really to review and progressively introduce the measures. The sooner we can, and where we can move faster, we will do so. Then, there will be other elements which may require perhaps changes in regulation or legislation, in which case it may take a bit longer. Overall, I expect that in the next 12 to 18 months, perhaps a bit longer for some of the provisions, we should be able to address some of them.

On the Member's question about whether we will enhance the enforcement provisions, and to address travel agents as well, the answer is "yes". It will be a comprehensive look at the range of issues and the stakeholders in the industry. I want to inform Members that, today, the regime is such that we do have penalties against those who are illegal tour guides, those who are employing illegal tour guides and the travel agents as well, that is, the companies, the body corporate. The penalties range from fines to, in the case of travel agencies, even imprisonment and revocation or suspension of their licence.

The second point is whether STB is outsourcing its functions. In fact, today, STB already outsources its enforcement activities. The key here is to make sure that we are adequately and well resourced, and the enforcement is well targeted to ensure it yields the best outcomes. And I take the Member's point that we will continue to work every closely with the industry and other stakeholders to address some of these issues.

Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Second Minister for the clarification. I want to check whether there is an acute shortfall of tourist guides in Singapore. If indeed so, can we then encourage more to take up this trade or to try and convert those who are practising underground to come up and be converted to become fully licensed travel guides?

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the suggestion. I do not have an exact demand-supply analysis for the Member. But what I can say is that if you look at the growth in tourism in Singapore and the way which it is being compounding, and if you look at the new attractions and the enhancements of existing attractions that have taken place over the years, clearly there is an opportunity for different types of jobs in the sector, and tour guide is one of them for sure, but that is not the only path where the jobs are being created. There is a whole spectrum of jobs being created in the tourism sector.

We have tried to communicate this at different fora, at different platforms, that there is opportunity and people from different aspects or different skills background to be able to adapt to the opportunities in this sector. If you look at our polytechnics and universities, a range of programmes are being offered as part of pre-employment training, to prepare our potential workers for the market opportunities.

I think this message can be reiterated and, in fact, I would urge all Members to help us get this message out. In terms of tour guiding, in particular, I think we have got the Singapore Tour Guides Association which works with STB as well as the NTUC's Tourist Guide Chapter that has been started. These will be two other channels through which we can get this message out in a more systematic way.

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, last question.

Sir, I understand that for a local or Singaporean to become a tour guide, he has to take a course and go through a very tedious examination. I would like to ask the Second Minister whether this would also apply to a foreigner who becomes a tour guide in Singapore. If not, should we do so, and would the Ministry consider certain enforcement?

Mr Speaker, Sir, l thank the Member for the opportunity to clarify this point. The process is a simple and straightforward one, which is equally applicable to whether you are a Singaporean, PR or foreigner. Essentially, first, you have to undertake a course which is conducted by two approved entities – one is the Tourist Management Institute of Singapore and the other is the Singapore Chinese Chamber Institute of Business – if I remember correctly. They conduct the courses, and typically these are part-time courses which take about six months. Thereafter, they have the aspiring tour guides take a multi-choice question test, and then they have to take a simulated practical as well, where they will be judged for their competence. In the case of a Singaporean, he or she can then proceed to apply for their tour guide licence from STB.

In the case of someone who is a foreigner, he or she will also have to secure employment with a travel agent who will then have to get the appropriate clearances from MOM before the individual is licensed as a tour guide for Singapore. So, there is actually an additional hurdle when it comes to a foreign tour guide; otherwise the rules are all the same.

13 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Prime Minister in light of the possibility that Singapore's population will shrink from 2025 if we do not have new citizens (a) whether there is any lesson that can be learnt from the European and Norwegian countries in the way they manage their population growth; and (b) whether other measures are looked at to encourage higher birth rates.

14 Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked the Prime Minister if there are plans to enhance the Baby Bonus scheme or other plans to help improve the total fertility rate of Singaporeans.

Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 13 and 14 together?

Yes, please.

Sir, many European countries are addressing their population challenges by pursuing a mix of pro-parenthood and immigration policies. Nordic countries such as Sweden, Denmark and Norway have relatively high Total Fertility Rates (TFR) of between 1.88 and 1.

98. These countries have a broad array of pro-parenthood measures such as good childcare systems, generous leave provisions and financial support for child raising costs. We have been studying their policies in the course of developing ours.

Pro-parenthood measures may vary across countries due to differing cultural and socio-economic conditions. The Nordic countries have higher Government spending on pro-parenthood measures, but they also have significantly higher tax rates. The personal income tax rates in the Nordic countries range from 29% to 63%, and most people pay income tax there, compared to Singapore's personal income tax rates which range from 3.5% to 20%. In fact, most Singaporeans do not pay income tax because the income level at which our income tax kicks in is quite high.

The total fertility rates vary between different countries. I mentioned that in Sweden, Denmark and Norway, the range is between 1.88 and 1.

98. Among other European countries, such as Germany and Italy, they vary between 1.39 and 1.

41. Germany is 1.39, Italy is 1.

41. The US has a TFR of 1.

93. So, it is not so easy to relate directly the policies or the amount of expenditure to the TFR because there are many other factors at work.

There is one observation, though, in the Nordic countries which do have a higher TFR of 1.88 to 1.

98. A high proportion of births are to women who are not married to the father of the child. This is one main difference between their TFR and those of other countries at similar levels of development. Based on OECD reports, out-of-wedlock births made up about half of all births in Sweden, Denmark and Norway in 2010. In contrast, Asian societies, including Singapore, continue to value having children within the context of marriage. Creating a supportive environment for Singaporeans to form families and raise children remains a key Government priority.

Over the years, we have significantly enhanced our Marriage and Parenthood package, and currently set aside $1.6 billion per year for a broad range of measures. These include:

support for singles to find their life partner;

Baby Bonus cash gift and co-savings to help parents defray the costs of child-raising;

maternity and child care leave provisions to help parents balance work and family life; as well as,

measures to improve the quality, affordability and accessibility of childcare options.

Since 2001, the parents of around 350,000 children have benefited from these measures.

We have also invested heavily in areas such as education, healthcare and security, in order to make Singapore a good place for families. There are, of course, housing subsidies as well for first-time homeowners to encourage them to set up their own home, and these are not included in the $1.6 billion that I mentioned earlier for the Marriage and Parenthood package.

We are reviewing policies and measures to support marriage and parenthood, taking into account public feedback and the experiences of other countries. Over the next few months, we will be engaging various stakeholders to discuss new ideas as well as enhancements to existing measures. We welcome views and suggestions from the public on how we can improve Singapore's birth rate. I certainly encourage Er Dr Lee and Dr Intan to share their views with us.

However, we need to recognise that relying on Government measures alone would not raise Singapore's birth rate, as getting married and having children are very personal decisions that reflect broader social values and attitudes. To support and encourage Singaporeans, we will need to strengthen Singapore's pro-family environment, where employers, family members and society at large all have a part to play.

Thank you, Sir. I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister for the comprehensive answer. Definitely we are not encouraging more births out of wedlock. A good childcare system is very important. I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether there would be more support given for childcare centres because there is a lot of feedback that there are insufficient childcare centres, and also the fees have gone up tremendously over the last few months.

Yes, certainly. I think Er Dr Lee is quite correct, childcare is one of those issues which have consistently been identified by young parents as an issue, which if we could make more accessible, more affordable, would be helpful to them. There are already currently childcare subsidies. The Baby Bonus is there and it can be used for that. The Child Development Account is also used by many of the parents to help to defray the cost of childcare. Sir, in fact, childcare is one of the main ways in which the Child Development Account is used today. But we are looking at this issue again to see whether there are areas that we can improve on.

Sir, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for the extensive reply. Will the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) consider extending paid maternity leave, or better still, having paid parental leave, for both mothers and fathers? Because if you look at the Nordic countries, or even the European countries, such as Germany, Sweden and Norway, their paid parental leave is more than 40 weeks for both parents compared to our 16 plus three days.

The Member is talking about parental leave, not maternity leave? Maternity and parental leave – yes. The last we looked at maternity leave, we were very careful because there was also another group of persons who were very concerned that this would impact upon the employability of women. That was a fairly large area of concern. We wanted to make sure that we did not, through making maternity leave provisions more generous, impact on women being employed – as a result of which it would be harder for women to be employed. That is not what we want to have happen as well. And that is why we have this balance where the one additional month of the maternity leave is actually paid for by the Government.

We are open to ideas on how this can be done and I do support having some signal and some practical measures in which men are encouraged to take on a greater role in parenthood and being a present parent rather than a sort of parent from a distance.

I would like to ask a supplementary question. I would like to ask a very controversial question of the Deputy Prime Minister. Would he consider "Baby Drop", since Malaysia is doing that and we are having this population problem of not having enough babies? And since the child is born from God's love and not the fault of the parents, is it possible that the Deputy Prime Minister would consider a "Baby Drop" for Singaporeans to drop their babies off in cases where the child is born out of wedlock?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think this is – as Mrs Chiam says – a controversial area. We must be very careful when we implement such measures whether or not we end up inadvertently encouraging unwanted pregnancies and births, and causing greater problems as a result. So, I think we need to be very careful about this.

Sir, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his response. My supplementary question is with regard to the strategies that Singapore employs. Irrespective of marital status, just looking at a whole country's statistics, can Singapore not continue to model after the Nordic countries in terms of employing strategies that could also work in Singapore? Irrespective of how we calculate the statistics, whether it is birth out of wedlock or within the family context?

Let me re-phrase. We have been talking about the statistics, comparing the Nordic countries and Singapore, and how the main difference is in calculations. I mean the Nordic countries count out-of-wedlock births as legitimate births, whereas in Singapore we are looking at encouraging baby-making within the family structure. What I am trying to say is, can we not look at models across the board and strategies that have worked in Nordic countries in any case?

Yes, we are certainly looking at that, but we have to be very careful. I raised the issue of marriages out of wedlock only because we have to be careful about how we implement the measures. There may be collateral side effects. There are major cultural differences. When we look at the urbanised East Asian societies – Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong – they also have low fertility rates. They have also tried measures of various kinds. While we will certainly look at all these measures, we have to be careful of the collateral side effects, the unintended side effects on our society. And we also have to be realistic about what we can achieve.

Mr Seah Kian Peng, last question.

Sir, two supplementary questions for the Deputy Prime Minister. These are proposals which I have raised several times over the last few years. The first one is concerning a group of people who want to have children but for various reasons are unable to. IVF – can we do more for them? I know we are already extending some subsidies. Could these be further increased because this is the group of couples who want to have children?

My second supplementary question is something very uncontroversial. It is relating to paternity leave. I have argued several times in the House, I have been pushing to legislate paternity leave. I recognise the other angles, the business costs of it. But I think we should make a start somewhere, and legislating it even for as short as one day. It is an important signalling effect from the Government. After all, all of us recognise that parenting is a shared responsibility by both the mother and the father. Having talked to many residents, young couples, many of them have cited that paternity leave is something that is important to the family. I believe it is important to push that and allow our TFR to go up. I hope the Deputy Prime Minister would consider these two suggestions.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I know of Mr Seah's work in the area of families, and also particularly fatherhood, and I appreciate it very much. And these are all ideas which we will take into consideration.

15 Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for Education with regard to official textbooks for use in our schools and educational institutions, if there are (i) frameworks for the selection and approval of such textbooks; (ii) regular exercises to collate feedback in order to update and amend textbooks; and (iii) standard operating procedures to alert schools and teachers of errors in teaching materials.

Mr Speaker, Sir, MOE engages publishers to develop instructional materials based on the syllabuses. The quality of the instructional materials is maintained through a textbook review process whereby the materials are reviewed by a panel of professionals, including curriculum specialists, teachers, and academics from the universities. There are several iterations to the process before the materials are approved and listed on MOE's Approved Textbook List for selection by the schools.

MOE gathers teachers' feedback on the instructional materials every year. These feedback and suggestions will be taken into consideration for subsequent reviews of the instructional materials. In the event that errors are found in the materials, MOE will alert the publishers and work with them to rectify the errors and communicate the amendments to the schools.

I would like to refer the Minister to a recent media report that the MOE acknowledged the mistake of the wrongful use for the term "shi" in the Secondary 1 history textbooks. I would like to ask the Minister why such a mistake was not spotted for the last seven years, and what the Ministry is doing to enhance the system to prevent future slip-ups.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Baey Yam Keng for his supplementary question and for giving us this opportunity to clarify. The textbook review process was adhered to in the production of the history textbook, The Living Past – History of Ancient India, China and Southeast Asia, second edition. It was pointed out that there is an error in this textbook on the use of the term "shi" to refer to a group of landowners in China's feudal system. Let me clarify that no Chinese character was used in the textbook. Instead, the hanyu pinyin "shi" was used.

The misunderstanding arose when the person who spotted this, translated and interpreted "shi" as in the Chinese character "boshi" ("博士"). Our consultations with the authoritative sources have revealed conflicting interpretations and translations of "shi" which could either be "shi" ("士") as in "boshi"("博士"), or as in the other character "shi" ("氏") as in "xingshi" ("姓氏"), the latter referring to a broad category of nobility, including landowners. This latter usage of the word "shi" is an ancient usage and it is not commonly used today. Although the textbook presentation of "shi" could be retained, to prevent further confusion, MOE has decided that the word would be amended to simply "feudal lords", since it is an English textbook.

Sir, amending it will not affect students' understanding of ancient China's governance and social structures. We are working with the publisher to inform teachers of this amendment. Amendment stickers have been printed, and this has also been announced in the publisher's website. The publisher will also reflect the amendment in the next re-print of the textbook. Sir, I thank Mr Baey Yam Keng and members of the public for their interest in this topic.

Order. End of Question Time. Ministerial Statement. Minister for Transport.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No. 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 18, 21-23, 25 and 27 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix (Pg 428-442). Question Nos 16-17, 19-20, 24, 26 and 28-51 have been postponed to the next available sitting of Parliament.]

Mr Speaker, Sir, in January, I delivered a Ministerial Statement in this House on the service disruptions that took place along the North-South Line on 15 and 17 December 2011. More than 200,000 commuters were affected and the severity of the incidents was unprecedented.

A Committee of Inquiry (COI) was convened on 29 December, led by Chief District Judge Tan Siong Thye, with two other members, Prof Lim Mong King and Mr Soh Wai Wah. It was tasked to investigate the causes of the disruptions, as well as other factors that might have contributed to them. Based on the findings, the Committee would make recommendations to minimise the recurrence of similar incidents, and improve the management of such incidents.

The COI's report resulting from the inquiry was submitted to my Ministry on 3 July 2012. The report is comprehensive, detailing the Committee's findings and recommendations. These will be invaluable to on-going efforts to improve the reliability of our public transport system.

I want to put on record my deep appreciation for the Committee's hard work. The inquiry was demanding and challenging, given the technical nature of the issues. Prior to the start of public hearings, the Committee had to expend time and effort to equip itself with contextual and technical information in preparation for the inquiry. The public hearings started on 16 April, and lasted six weeks, concluding on 25 May. During this time, a total of 116 witnesses were called to the stand.

Apart from the Committee members, I must also thank the team that supported the Committee, including but not limited to its secretariat, resource persons, officers from the Attorney-General's Chambers, and investigators from the Criminal Investigation Department and the Air Accident Investigation Bureau. I also thank witnesses who testified at the inquiry, including expert witnesses, LTA and SMRT senior management and staff, as well as members of the public. Without them, the inquiry would not have been successfully completed.

I will first summarise the COI's key findings and recommendations, and then provide the Government's response. I will update Members on the measures that we have already taken, and further measures that we will take, to improve MRT reliability and incident management. While the COI found shortcomings in SMRT, LTA too fell short. I will also speak about the improvements that LTA must make, particularly with regard to how it regulates the public transport operators.

Let me say here before I proceed any further, that my Ministry accepts the findings and recommendations of the COI.

As the media has reported extensively on the findings of the COI, I do not intend to dwell at length on them.

The COI assessed that the immediate cause of the stalling of the trains in both incidents was damage to their Current Collector Device (CCD) shoes, due to contact with a sagging third rail. The third rail, or power rail, runs along the MRT tracks and supplies electrical current to the running trains, which draw this power through the shoes mounted on the trains. During both incidents, sections of the third rail were found to have sagged and multiple claws dislodged. These claws are a key component of Third Rail Support Assemblies (TRSAs), which hold the third rail above the track.

The incident on 15 December was initiated by a defective fastener on one of the TRSAs. This caused the claw of that TRSA to dislodge and the third rail to sag. Although trains continued to pass the sag, it rendered the two adjacent TRSAs more vulnerable to vibration. Over time, these two TRSAs, which insulators were coincidentally also defective, failed gradually. By the evening of 15 December, the third rail sag had gone beyond the tolerance limits of the trains' shoes, damaging the CCD shoes on trains passing the incident site. Some trains stalled after passing the site as they were no longer able to draw sufficient power from the third rail. At the incident site, multiple trains impacting the sagging third rail eventually caused three more claws to dislodge, such that a stretch of the third rail came to rest on the track-bed. This segment of the track then became impassable to all trains.

The COI attributes the incident on 17 December to one, or possibly more, "rogue train(s)" that suffered CCD shoe damage when they passed the 15 December incident site as the third rail there was progressively sagging. The damaged shoes of these rogue trains destabilised the third rail system at other locations along the North-South Line on 16 December, causing one third rail claw on the south-bound track between Newton and Orchard stations to dislodge and the third rail to sag. On 17 December morning, there was a train, which was traced to Train 119, that made unusually forceful contact with the third rail at the incident site, causing an adjacent claw to also dislodge. And now, with two adjacent claws dislodged, the third rail sagged further, and caused damage to the CCD shoes of this Train 119 and the trains that passed after it. Some of these trains subsequently stalled as they were no longer able to draw sufficient power.

On incident management, the COI recognised the complex challenges that SMRT and LTA faced on the two days, given the trying and unprecedented circumstances. While commuter safety was not compromised, there were lapses and gaps in the management of the incidents. Individual SMRT staff generally did their best, but the overall incident response was skewed towards train safety and operational considerations, resulting in insufficient attention to the well-being of passengers in stalled trains and stations.

The COI's key conclusion is that the incidents were preventable, had adequate maintenance measures and checks been carried out. The COI found shortcomings in SMRT's maintenance work culture, and in its overall maintenance and monitoring regime. In particular, the COI agrees with the expert witnesses that the material defects in the fastener and insulators likely took time to develop before the 15 December incident. However, they were regrettably not identified and remedied by SMRT's maintenance efforts. After the first incident on 15 December, SMRT's checks, including the checks done after MRT operations the following night − so they had two night windows − failed to detect the damaged CCD shoes on the rogue trains and the third rail sag. This allowed the 17 December incident to take place.

Sir, let me now bring the House through the COI's key recommendations to improve MRT reliability. Let me assure Members that we will follow through on all the recommendations. SMRT and LTA have already implemented or decided to implement many of the recommendations, while some others require further feasibility study. SMRT has given its initial response last week on how it is already improving its maintenance and monitoring regime and work processes. LTA, as the MRT regulator, will provide its detailed response later today.

The COI has made a number of recommendations specifically on the third rail system as this was the source of the problem in the December disruptions. We need to avoid a situation where we have two or more adjacent claw drops, as the third rail will then sag beyond the tolerance limit of the CCD shoes. This means that we must identify third rail sags and fix the sags in a timely manner. In this regard, SMRT has accepted the COI's recommendation to enhance the maintenance regime for the third rail system. Full maintenance requirements in the original MRTC maintenance manual, which includes annual TRSA inspections, will be implemented. Non-destructive tests such as ultrasound scanning have already been carried out at vulnerable stretches of the third rail, to pick out cracks on third rail joints. LTA and SMRT are reviewing the upgrading of SMRT's current Multi-Function Vehicle (MFV). The review will be completed by August this year, at which point SMRT will call for tender to upgrade the MFV. A new MFV will be acquired on top of this current MFV. In the meantime, the MFV that is deployed on the Circle Line will be redeployed for use also to the North-South and East-West Lines (NSEWL).

SMRT will explore capabilities to detect third rail sags via the installation of sensors on selected trains. Installation and testing of this mode are expected to begin by the end of this month. In addition, SMRT will study a camera-based system so that the third rail can be monitored on a real-time basis. As an interim measure, SMRT will implement stainless steel capping on TRSAs with cable ties at higher-risk areas such as high speed ramps of tight turn-outs. This will further reduce the likelihood of claw dislodgements.

The COI has also recommended that the design of the TRSAs be reviewed. Those in the older parts of the NSEWL are over 20 years old. There are now better and more robust designs which have more effective locking features. SMRT will undertake a change-out programme for the older TRSAs on the NSEWL. Fifth generation claws will be installed on the sections of Floating Slab Tracks (FST), where several of the dislodged claws were found in December. This will be completed by August. Thereafter, the current speed restrictions that we have imposed on these segments since the incidents last December will be progressively lifted. In addition, SMRT and LTA will continue to study plans to replace TRSAs for the rest of the network, and make a final recommendation on the type of TRSA that will be used before the end of the year.

Specific train components also contributed to the December incidents, in particular, severe vibrations caused by wheel defects. SMRT will monitor the condition of train wheels through the use of a Wheel Impact Loading Detection (WILD) system which automatically picks up wheel defects. This system is already in place on the Circle Line today. It will be implemented on the compass lines by December. In addition, SMRT will procure additional wheel lathes for wheel re-profiling to rectify wheel defects. To monitor all this, LTA will require the MRT operators to introduce formal processes to track indicators and analyse faults, including the number of trains in queue for wheel profile works. LTA and SMRT will also study the COI's recommendations to improve the maintenance regime for CCD shoes, and to explore means to detect defective shoes.

Beyond recommendations for specific components, the COI has emphasised the need for SMRT to strive for maintenance excellence. SMRT has assured me that it will improve its maintenance and monitoring regime. I understand that it is already taking steps to enhance its engineering and maintenance capabilities and resources, and that it has put in place a more robust maintenance regime overall.

Let me move on to talk about the regulator. Sir, it is the responsibility of LTA as the regulator to hold the operator accountable for delivering a reliable system for commuters. LTA fell short in this regard. It must do better. LTA must re-look how it can better fulfil its duties as the regulator. It must work with and also supervise more closely the operator, and strengthen its regulatory framework.

Today, the oldest parts of the compass lines have been in operation for some 25 years. Given these ageing assets and the added strain of increased ridership, the quality and robustness of the maintenance regime, especially preventive maintenance, become even more critical. Rather than relying on a corrective approach to rectify problems, we must adopt a systems approach towards maintenance to pre-emptively identify potential areas of concern.

The operator and regulator will therefore need to work even closer than before, on key preventive maintenance and upgrading plans, starting with the NSEWL, but eventually extending this same approach to all other lines as they too will age.

Earlier this year, I directed both LTA and SMRT to set up a Joint Team, comprising engineering and maintenance experts from both sides, to look into reducing disruptions and enhancing the reliability of the compass lines.

The Joint Team has briefed me twice on its findings and recommendations. They plan to reduce the number of train service withdrawals by 30% by 2013, to adopting a systems-based preventive maintenance approach and tackling key areas like, for example, the pneumatic compressors, the propulsion systems, and the brake control units of different generations of trains. The Joint Team has also identified additional areas of improvement, including systematic upgrading and replacement of infrastructure and operating assets. This illustrates LTA's evolving role. While LTA in the past would have largely left it to the operator to decide on what components to change-out as part of mid-life upgrading of the trains, LTA will henceforth jointly work with the operator on critical aspects of such upgrading programmes.

I expect LTA and SMRT to continue this new Joint Team approach in studying and implementing the COI's recommendations.

But apart from working closer with the operators, the LTA will also strengthen its regulatory framework. LTA's regulatory approach in the past has been outcome-based, with selective intervention on safety-critical aspects. Going forward, its regulatory framework will be enhanced to be more prescriptive and also to exercise greater oversight on areas that affect reliability and commuter comfort.

To exercise closer and more effective oversight over the train operators' maintenance and operations, LTA will require operators to track certain indicators so that early detection of problems and timely preventive actions can take place. This includes indicators such as the Mean Time between Failure (MTBF) of train propulsion and braking systems, incidents of dropped claws, misaligned third rails, and the number of trains in queue for wheel re-profiling works. These will give the regulator a better sense of the operator's maintenance efforts. In addition, the operators will be required to submit to LTA trend analyses and improvements plans with specific timelines to arrest and reverse faults.

The COI has also recommended that LTA impose a requirement on SMRT to conduct a Maintenance Management System audit, to identify areas of possible improvement in their maintenance regime. I fully agree. LTA will require SMRT to engage independent experts to audit their maintenance processes every three years. I have also asked SMRT and LTA to work with and consult their counterparts overseas who have to operate and regulate older MRT systems, to see what preventive measures we should put in place, and what useful lessons we can learn from them.

New Operating Performance Standards (OPS) will be introduced to better reflect commuters' experience. In particular, more stringent standards will be set on the frequency and number of delays. LTA will also review the penalty framework, which includes the maximum fine payable by the operators for regulatory breaches, so that the penalties can be more commensurate with the severity of incidents and their impact on commuters.

For incident management, the COI has called for greater clarity in the roles of stakeholders, and for improved coordination between stakeholders; improvements to various aspects of the incident management plan with an emphasis on the well-being of passengers; and ensuring incident management readiness. LTA and SMRT have taken steps to address the gaps and the lapses that were identified with regard to incident management even prior to the release of the COI report. And I am confident that both parties are better equipped today than they were a year ago to handle similar incidents.

The regulator has taken the lead to better integrate stakeholders' and transport emergency plans to ensure that there is clarity in their respective roles. Since the December incidents, LTA has worked with the operators to harmonise their incident classification levels to be consistent with LTA's. This ensures that appropriate support from all parties is rendered in accordance with incident severity. LTA will continue to review and refine these plans, and robustly test these against realistic exercises and challenging scenarios.

We have taken measures to improve the incident management plan with an emphasis on passenger well-being. When I addressed the House in January, LTA and the operators were looking into the improvement of contingency plans for train service disruptions, particularly with regard to bus bridging services and the improvement of communication to in-train commuters and to the general public. Since then, LTA has worked with the operators to provide regular bus services free of charge at designated points nearest to affected stations in the event of an extended MRT service disruption, to improve signages at the stations, and to develop more robust and comprehensive station-level plans to deal with such incidents.

The premature failure of batteries during the December incidents caused some discomfort, indeed, great discomfort to commuters. In response to the COI's recommendation to improve back-up power, SMRT has committed to instituting more battery checks, while a detailed study will be carried out to look into the feasibility of extending the current duration of back-up batteries from 45 minutes to 60 minutes.