Hansard, Monday, 4 August 2014

1 Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what are the gaps that have been identified in the National Library Board (NLB)'s book acquisition and review processes in addressing public complaints; (b) what are the current guidelines for book disposal, including pulping, and whether they will be reviewed; and (c) how does NLB promote the active involvement of parents in book selections for their children.

2 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Communications and Information if he will (a) explain NLB's selection processes governing the purchase and classification of books for circulation and if there is a dedicated selection committee to oversee this process; (b) clarify whether the book entitled "Who's in My Family" that was pulped was approved by this selection committee or any other individual or committee before appearing on the shelves for the public to access; and (c) explain what procedures were followed and what committees were consulted before NLB arrived at the decision to pulp the book.

3 Assoc Prof Tan Kheng Boon Eugene asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what are the learning points from NLB's recent withdrawal of three titles from its children's collection; (b) what are the "community norms" in Singapore that guide NLB in the acquisition and review of titles for its collection; and (c) how the NLB can avoid being caught in future contests over values.

4 Ms Faizah Jamal asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) whether the review process for library materials will include a notice on the NLB website of withdrawn books and the reasons for so doing for transparency; (b) who are the external parties envisaged in the review process that will be invited to give feedback to NLB; (c) whether he can give an assurance that this exercise will be as diverse and inclusive in terms of views and that it will be open and transparent and for the public to be continually informed; and (d) whether he will give an assurance that NLB will remain secular in all its procurement of library materials and in its policies and decisions.

Page: 13

5 Ms Janice Koh asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) how can the process of content regulation for publications be made more transparent to the public; (b) whether NLB can publish a quarterly list of challenged, withdrawn and reclassified books in the National Library; and (c) whether MDA can publish a quarterly list of publications that have been prohibited from sale by booksellers.

6 Ms Janice Koh asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what are the roles and objectives of the National Library; (b) whether NLB's collection policy should be subject to existing community norms; and (c) as a member of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), how is NLB committed to upholding its core values of free and equitable access to information, ideas and works of imagination.

7 Mr Nicholas Fang asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether there is a standard procedure for Statutory Boards, such as NLB, for the communication of decisions that can potentially have significant social impact, such as the recent move to remove three titles from the National Library's children's section.

8 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Communications and Information with the recent removal of three children's books from the National Library (a) what system is in place to screen the content of all books at the National Library before they are released for lending to the public; and (b) what are the general guidelines for a book to be cleared before it is put up for public lending.

Mdm Speaker, with your permission, may I take the first eight questions together, please?

Yes, please.

I thank Members for their questions. My response would be in three parts. First, I will touch on the library's role in society; second, I will discuss National Library Board's (NLB's) processes and how these might be improved; and third, how we move on from this episode.

Our libraries serve Singaporeans of all ages from all walks of life. To promote reading, learning and information literacy, NLB maintains comprehensive and high quality collections for the reference library, for the adult sections of the public library, and for the children's section of the public library. NLB recognises that its collections must cater to a broad range of interests, tastes, reading levels, cultural and social backgrounds.

Page: 14

NLB also recognises that its role goes beyond providing a place for reading. It strives to provide spaces where communities can come together and learn together.

NLB cannot impose a one-size-fits-all approach to its different collections. The Lee Kong Chian Reference Library at the National Library provides a comprehensive collection of library materials, with a special emphasis on Singapore, to preserve our cultural heritage and to support research. Its materials are housed in the Reference Library and are not for loan. Its content guidelines allow for an extensive range of ideas and opinions.

NLB's approach for the adults' section of the library is that it will be in compliance with Singapore laws and regulations. It will, therefore, not acquire publications that are prohibited under the Undesirable Publications Act. It will also not acquire publications that incite hate or violence, or cast aspersions on any racial or religious groups, for example.

Madam, it is impossible to keep every known title in its collection. Some curation is required, and NLB is guided by the principle of maintaining a comprehensive and high quality collection. Materials in the adult's collection will also not be inhibited by the possibility that materials may be accessible to children or teenagers. It is NLB's philosophy that the responsibility for guiding and directing the use of such materials by children and teenagers rests with their parents or guardians.

With the children's section of the public libraries, NLB adopts a more cautious approach. The children's library covers a wide range of developmental stages and reading levels, from zero to 12 years old.

NLB encourages parents to actively partner their children in their reading or their visits to the library. However, it must also be recognised that, in reality, for many different reasons, it is not possible for kids in the children's library to be supervised at all times. Many will thus browse the shelves unsupervised. NLB also recognises that many preschools organise visits to its libraries and, in those situations, a whole class will be supervised by only a few teachers. Titles from the children's collection are also provided to some preschools and kindergartens to help them provide greater variety of books in their kindergarten libraries.

For this reason, NLB's approach is to take special care in its children's collection, to ensure that the books are age-appropriate. The assessment of age-appropriateness should take into account community norms.

For example, we observed from the 2013 Our Singapore Conversation survey that 55% of the 4,000 respondents surveyed rejected same sex marriage, compared to 24% who were

Page: 15

neutral and 21% who accepted same sex marriage.

It is not NLB's mandate to challenge or seek to change these norms. Community norms are subjective and will evolve over time, especially as our society becomes increasingly diverse. A REACH survey conducted after the NLB decision was first made known showed that 52% of respondents agree that books promoting values that are not in line with traditional family values should not be made available in the children's section of the public libraries. A further 23% were neutral on the issue and 21% disagreed.

The Government pays close attention to community norms. This is the right approach. We will continue to run polls from time to time, and actively listen to how Singaporeans debate various issues. Therefore, we must also enhance our processes to ensure that our collections best meet community norms. I will speak more about this later.

Madam, NLB is an active member of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). IFLA has members from over 150 countries with diverse cultures, as well as government and legal structures. By adopting a differentiated approach for the reference, adults and children's libraries, NLB seeks to apply the principles and philosophy of IFLA, adapted to the local context. This is because in every society, libraries must be responsible to the communities they serve.

Let me now touch on the queries regarding NLB's selection and review processes.

The NLB runs a wide network of 25 public libraries across Singapore, with about 35 million loans per year. To make sure Singaporeans' reading demands are met, the libraries bring in about a million new items a year.

Within NLB, there is a team of selectors. To ensure new books are made available in a timely manner as expected by NLB's patrons, selectors refer to reviews and synopses to decide what the library should buy. With the high volume, it is not possible to read every book from cover to cover during the selection process.

NLB also considers public feedback in building up its collection. Any member of the public can submit a recommendation for a book that is not in the collection.

Now, let me explain the book review process. There are two ways NLB reviews its collections.

First, NLB regularly reviews about 5,000 books a year internally. This is part of NLB's regular work in putting together booklists for their programmes and festivals. Secondly, the

Page: 16

public may also provide feedback on books to be reviewed. Each year, NLB receives about 20 such requests. Regardless of whether the review is initiated internally, or via public feedback, the book will be read by staff, supplemented by research based on book reviews and recommendations in trade journals. NLB staff also make reference to lists, such as the American Libraries Association's list of challenged books. They then make recommendations to withdraw or retain the books for final decision through an internal approval process.

Mr Pritam Singh asked specifically about the book "Who's In My Family". That book was reviewed through the process which I have just described.

Let me touch on the issue of how books are disposed of. Today, it has been NLB's standard practice to recycle books when they are torn or worn. They, therefore, applied this same practice to books withdrawn on the basis of content that is not age-appropriate. The REACH survey showed that while 52% of respondents agreed that books that promote values not in line with traditional family values should not be made available in the children's section of the public libraries, only 22% thought that the books should be destroyed.

I think that was a reasonable point of view. It reflects a deep-seated respect in our culture for the written word. It is for this reason that I had asked NLB to transfer "And Tango Makes Three" and "The White Swan Express" to the adults' section. NLB's key objective in ensuring the children's library is age-appropriate can still be achieved.

Madam, I am confident that NLB has learnt from this episode and will improve its processes. Let me highlight three important areas.

First, NLB will ensure that the team selecting books for acquisition and the team reviewing books are different. At the moment, this is not clearly spelt out. It is a good practice to segregate these responsibilities and I believe it will also lead to greater public confidence in the review process.

Second, we should retain the existing system in which NLB staff make professional judgements on the suitability of a title for any collection. Making such assessments is not an exact science. It would be most regrettable if NLB staff making such assessments as part of their duty and acting in good faith, are attacked by those who are unhappy that a particular decision did not go their way. This is why I had announced that NLB should set up an advisory panel, to help NLB staff to take into account the broader concerns of the community. Such a committee should represent a cross-section of society and include members from the literary community. An advisory panel will also help improve the communication of the rationale for review decisions – something that Mr Nicholas Fang raised. This is also the experience of MDA, which relies on various consultative panels to provide input to its

Page: 17

classification decisions.

NLB will be working out further details of the advisory panel in the weeks to come.

Third, NLB will establish a clear process to deal with books that have to be withdrawn. For books that are in good condition but were withdrawn due to controversial content, NLB would consider other options than pulping. I do not want to prejudge their review, but one possibility is to place them in a more appropriate section of the library for lending, as was finally done in this case. Other possibilities are to place them in the reference library, or to put them up for sale or donation.

Ms Janice Koh has asked if NLB could publish a list of challenged books and if MDA could similarly publish a list of publications that are prohibited from sale.

Let me address the queries pertaining to MDA in the area of regulation for publications. Madam, the publications industry is largely self-regulated. In assessing whether a publication is suitable for importation or distribution, importers, local publishers and retailers refer to content guidelines issued by MDA and the Undesirable Publications Act (UPA). These documents can be found on MDA's website. MDA also engages importers and local publishers regularly, to ensure that they are aware of the content guidelines.

MDA steps in when there are public feedback or complaints, or when importers refer publications to MDA for advice. If MDA assesses that a publication is in breach of the UPA or content guidelines, MDA would advise the importer or retailer not to import or distribute the publication.

Given that importers, publishers and retailers, by and large, self-regulate based on the UPA and content guidelines, it would not be meaningful to publish a quarterly list of publications that have been disallowed for sale.

In NLB's case, the immediate priority should be to establish the advisory panel, which can complement NLB's review process. At this point, NLB has not decided whether to publish a list of challenged titles.

Madam, I would reiterate that this would not be the last time public institutions like NLB would face such controversy. We have learnt much from this experience and we will continue to work with Singaporeans, such as those who will be appointed to NLB's advisory panel, to better understand and balance the different views of different groups.

Page: 18

Mr Baey Yam Keng.

Thank you, Madam. I agree with the Minister that we should leave it to NLB staff's professional judgement in deciding what books to select for its collection. I would like to ask the Minister when the books in question were withdrawn or transferred to the adults' section this year, what was the staff's professional judgement of the books to be deemed suitable at that time for the children's section. And why did NLB then decide to reverse the decision – first to pulp it; and subsequently, to transfer it to the adults' section – when a member of public gave the feedback? How is NLB accounting? I think NLB has not stood up to give an account of why the initial decision was made because I am sure there are a lot of literature and reviews about these books because they have also faced some controversy in other countries.

My second and last question is, referring to MDA's decision not to allow the import and sale of a certain volume of the Archie comic series, I know that NLB is letting that volume remain in its collection. This discrepancy between two Government agencies – one to allow the sale, for public to make a considered decision to purchase a copy, versus allowing it on public shelves – does the Ministry have a view on this, and should there be streamlining between the practices of the two agencies?

I thank the Member for those two questions. In the first case, as Members may have known, we acquired the books, especially "And Tango Makes Three" in 2005, before the book even made it to the American Libraries Association list. In fact, it was reviewed internally in 2009, some years after it was acquired. At that time, NLB decided to retain it. This time round, we received feedback and, therefore, the book was reviewed with a fresh pair of eyes. Noting the current environment, they decided internally, based on their professional judgement, that it is best to be withdrawn. The process that I had mentioned earlier in my reply was adhered to, to the letter and spirit, to ensure that we go through the due process.

Going forward, as I had mentioned earlier, they will have an advisory panel to be able to allow them to test their judgement and views on a particular book to a wider cross-section of the community. I think we can improve the process, no doubt, but I am confident that what they have done so far, for these many, many years in terms of reviewing books which are up for feedback, has been done with the best professional judgement that they can make under the circumstances.

As to the Member's second question, the first thing we have to remember is that it was not the intention that the MDA decision should determine how NLB should decide on a particular book. The reason is very simple: in Singapore, bookshops are opened to all patrons. In fact, there are no age restrictions at the point of sale, as practised in some other counties.

Page: 19

MDA has to take this into account when it decides on a particular book, whether it finds it objectionable or not.

In the case of NLB, as I had mentioned earlier, we have different collections. This allows us to apply a differentiated approach that gives us flexibility to decide on some materials which may be unsuitable for one age group to be placed to another section.

So, our position in the Ministry, together with NLB, is that the judgement finally has to be made by NLB, taking into account feedback and inputs from various different sources. But, finally, NLB will have to make it in the best interest of the patrons who come to NLB to seek the books that they want. There is, in fact, no reason for us to harmonise the two systems. We draw from each other primarily because the two institutions deal with actually an entirely different audience. The way we see it is that NLB will see what MDA decides and then they make their own decisions. Sometimes, they may coincide; sometimes, they may not.

In the case of the Archie book, the NLB actually purchased it before MDA made the decision. Now that MDA has made a decision, NLB has decided to review the book. And once we have set up the advisory panel, we will review it before we decide on what to do with that book. Again, this is something which I do not want to prejudge. I will leave it to NLB and the soon-to-be-formed advisory panel to decide on the future of that particular book.

I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. Firstly, in this House last month, in answer to Nominated Member of Parliament Laurence Lien regarding how the Government wishes to engage with diverse views of the community, Minister Lawrence Wong had said that we should exercise restraint, moderation and mutual respect and have open dialogue. In view of this reply, would the Minister agree that in view that NLB had made the decision really hastily, and in view of the fact that it already knows that there was controversy not just in Singapore but elsewhere, should NLB not have then paused and taken a step back before making that decision, and especially to use the word "pulp", which creates tension not just within the LGBT community and the literary community, but also with members at large?

Secondly, by actually making a decision to put the books in the adults' section – although I agree that is far better than actually pulping it completely – would this not, as a society of diverse races, views and ages, marginalise a group of people that may not necessarily fit into the model of the traditional family of father, mother and children, especially since things are changing organically, as the Minister also recognises?

Page: 20

Thirdly, I would also like an assurance from the Minister that, going forward, NLB, as a Government agency, would continue to stay secular not just in its procurement of materials but also in all its policies and decisions.

Madam, to the hon Member's last question, I would like to assure her that we are a secular Government. But we also look into community norms. We have to see how society is shaping up because we do not operate in a vacuum. We adopt secular policies. We stay true to that but, at the same time, we operate in an environment where there are people of different races and religions. So, we have to take our context into account.

Let me answer both the questions together because I think they are somewhat related. I will answer the issue on pulping later on.

It is not true that we were making the decision hastily. Feedback came in, we looked at it, we used the best possible judgement that we had with the best available information that was available to NLB to make that decision. As I admitted in my reply, we could have made the process slightly better and we plan to do so with the advisory panel. We recognise that there are different views in society. There are different groups with different interests and we have to take that into account. In fact, the NLB does so in all of its dealings. For example, they have their meet-the-customer sessions. They meet different groups who have interests in the Library's work. They meet MOE and other civil society groups that may be interested to have discussions with them and they are happy to do so. But going forward, as I said earlier, with that advisory panel drawn from a wide cross-section of society, it will give NLB an additional source of inputs for them to make their decision. But I have to say here that, finally, the decision has to be made by NLB.

As I mentioned in my reply, it is not an exact science. We do our very best. Sometimes, we will not get the best decision possible out there; sometimes, we will get it right. But at the same time, on balance, we will do our best to try and seek as much feedback as possible. So, the advisory panel will serve us in that particular avenue and we will continue to do so, to draw as much input as possible. It is not the intention of NLB to exclude any group in society. But we cannot pretend that we can have every possible book in the universe in the Library. It does not happen anywhere in the world. Some curation is possible because we need to draw certain lines. In our case, because we are a multi-racial and multi-religious society, some books which incite racial hatred, we will never allow into our Library.

So, let us not pretend there is no censorship. There is, because we need to make sure that we protect society and also observe our community norms. We are very clear about that. But we also recognise that society is changing and, therefore, NLB will have to take its cue from the various sources I mentioned earlier, including now with the new advisory panel,

Page: 21

to make its final decision on whether a book should be withdrawn.

Madam, I would like to ask the Minister whether there was a sustained period of astroturfing in the form of emails or letters, all unusually appearing around the same time, which led to the announcement from NLB that the books in question were pulped in response to public feedback in the first instance.

Secondly, are there any communication guidelines that the Ministry issues to Government bodies on how to deal with or differentiate regular feedback from what appears to be orchestrated feedback from interest groups? If not, are there plans for the Government to introduce such guidelines?

Thirdly, with regard to the Minister's remarks on the advisory panel, would the Minister consider the process of an appeal with regard to decisions made by the advisory panel?

Madam, I did not answer Ms Faizah Jamal's question on pulping. As I mentioned in my reply, that is the standard practice that has been used in most libraries for books which are withdrawn because of being torn or worn out. The vast majority of books that are withdrawn from our collection fall into that category. In fact, only a small number of books are withdrawn because of controversial content. The practice of pulping or recycling is not exceptional. It is being used in other parts of the world. Some books which are outdated, for example, IT books, we take them out and then we either sell them or put them up for sale for donation or even export them overseas, if there are countries that may want to use them.

As I mentioned earlier, going forward, for books which are withdrawn for controversial content, we will consider other options other than pulping. Again, I do not want to prejudge. I will leave it to NLB, which is undertaking its review process at the moment, to decide what it will do in such cases.

To Mr Pritam Singh's question whether or not there was astroturfing, it is difficult for me to say exactly, but there was obviously a lot of input that came in during that period of time. NLB and other Government agencies will probably have to take all of these into consideration and then decide what is the best course of action.

It is difficult for all of us to say whether or not that this is a bona fide feedback or this is basically something which is planned. We should leave it to the agencies. They know what to do. They have been in this business for a long time to exactly determine what is the appropriate course of action. I think we cannot be very, very prescriptive in this day and age when, as the hon Member rightly pointed out, astroturfing is possible. I am sure that all the

Page: 22

agencies, including the agencies under MCI, are aware that these are things which can happen and, therefore, they have to take these into account when they come to making a decision on the matter.

On the advisory panel, at the moment, it is difficult for me to say whether we should have an appeals panel. We are already taking one step further to have an advisory panel. I would rather prefer, at this point in time, for all decisions to be made by NLB. Do not forget – this is an advisory panel to advise NLB on whether a book is appropriate or not for its collection. The decision finally rests on NLB and I would rather prefer to leave it to NLB to do that because this is the practice for most libraries across the world. The library and the librarians make the decision on what is the best course of action for a particular book. In fact, this is what we do in most of our panels. Advisory panels are set up to advise the agencies. We have only one appeals panel, which is in the film appeals panel. Everything else is just an advisory panel and we would like to retain it that way.

Mdm Speaker, I have three sets of supplementary questions for the Minister.

Firstly, in a complex plural society where the socio-cultural context is still gradually shifting, whose community norms is NLB basing its policies on? Is there only one standard set of community norms that prevails? What assurance do we have that, in the future, NLB shall not flinch from its basic purpose as a custodian not of morality but of learning, knowledge and access to a wide range of information? What assurance do we have that NLB will not take the easy way out and only bring in books that will never offend?

Secondly, with regard to transparency, can the Minister ensure that there is transparency in the review process, as well as in the deliberations of the advisory panel, so that the public can be kept informed of the recommendations made to the National Library?

Finally, I understand that one of the three books that have been challenged was previously removed or even destroyed. Now that the other two have been put back on the adults' section shelves, will that last book – I believe it is "Who's in my Family" – be replaced on the adults' section shelves as well?

To the Member's last question, I am not sure whether that is the best course of action at this point in time. I want the NLB to move forward in terms of the review process. At the same time, we welcome any recommendation. If we find the book suitable, we will acquire it and put it on the shelves.

Page: 23

To the Member's first question – whose norms are we looking at – our norms, society's norms. As I had mentioned in my reply, the norms will change over time and, therefore, we rely on Government polls and feedback channels and the meet-the-customer sessions that NLB holds from time to time for us to get a sensing.

The Member asked me for an assurance as to whether we will flinch or not. It is difficult for me to give the Member the assurance. But as long as we recognise that what we want to do is to try and serve as wide a section of the community as possible and we will continue to do so. Some books that I mentioned earlier we will never bring in because they will incite hatred. Between those extreme right and left books that we will never bring in, there is a vast set of collection that we will have to decide on. And because the Library has differentiated collections, this allows us that flexibility and we will continue to do so. It is in our interests to provide as wide a reading list as possible to Singaporeans. Therefore, as you will see in the adults' section, we have themes which we will never put in the children's section because we recognise that adults have the ability to differentiate.

So, I will give the Member the assurance that at least under the current administration, we will continue to do so to ensure that we can try and collect as many books as possible to make available all these books to as wide a section of Singaporeans as possible.

I do not think we should prejudge NLB's intentions. At the end of the day, they will do their best. As I had mentioned in my reply, this is not an exact science. Having the advisory panel is a good step to allow NLB another source of inputs to their decision-making process. Will they get it right all the time? I will not give you that assurance. But we will try our very best to draw as much inputs as possible for us to make a decision.

On the transparency of the review process and whether or not we will make known the decisions of the advisory panel, again, I do not want to prejudge. I will let NLB work it out. Certainly, I think we will draw as many inputs as possible in that review process and then see what is the best way forward.

Madam, I view the library as a safe space. It is important in any society to have such safe spaces in which contesting ideas can find a platform to engage. So, I am concerned that in this particular episode, the NLB was sucked into a contest of values. I wonder whether the NLB will now have procedures to avoid being caught in such a tussle.

As the Minister recounts, "And Tango Makes Three" was acquired in 2005. In 2009, it passed an internal review. I would like to ask the Minister what changed between 2009 and 2014, in terms of community norms, that required the library to withdraw the book from its

Page: 24

collection. I hope NLB will not flinch from making hard choices, particularly when perhaps the easiest way now going forward, in terms of acquisition, is to just opt for "safe" titles. If that is the approach that NLB is going to take, a very timorous approach, then I think society will be a lot poorer and we will not be able to manifest this diversity that Singapore stands for.

I would like to assure the Member that I do not think we will just go for safe titles. We have been able to expand our adult collection significantly, bringing in titles which may be controversial to some groups in society but we realise that we have to give those who visit the adults' section the option for them to make that decision.

I think the Member's description of NLB being caught in a tussle may not be appropriate. I agree with him that when we reviewed it in 2009 and we decided to retain it, it was then looking at perhaps the discussion at that point in time. Things have changed – a fresh pair of eyes took a look at the book again, there was feedback from the public. And they decided maybe it was not appropriate for us to have the book in the children's section. So, my sense is that I do not think that NLB has shifted significantly. But obviously, as I mentioned, because it is not an exact science, you have a different group of people reviewing the book compared to those that were reviewing it in 2009, they have their own views. They make their own decisions and, therefore, they decide.

But at the same time, we recognise that this process is never foolproof, so, I am repeating myself: we are now trying to improve the process with the advisory panel as much as possible. I do not think NLB will flinch in future but we have to take into account the concerns of the community and how best to go forward. And I repeat here again, we may not get it right sometimes. Please do not ignore the fact that NLB has been doing good work for how many years. They have served millions of Singaporeans, they have done their very best to do their job as best as possible. And, in fact, NLB, if I may say so, is one of those Government institutions that have received the highest numbers of compliments compared to complaints, because they have done their jobs well. So, let us not ignore the contribution of NLB to building up a reading culture and raising the literacy of Singaporeans.

This is an episode that we will learn from and will move forward from. I thank the contributions of Members, both in and outside the House, on how we can move the process forward. But finally, as I mentioned earlier, NLB will have to make its own decision and we will have to live with that decision, whether we agree or not.

Mdm Speaker, I thank the Minister for the very detailed and systematic explanation. It contrasts quite significantly with the initial replies that we, in the media, and, to a certain extent, the public, were receiving from NLB in the immediate aftermath of news emerging. The fact that the Minister is repeating himself

Page: 25

also speaks to the complexity of an issue like this.

I refer to my original question to the Minister which basically asks if there is an actual standard of procedure for communicating such information of such decisions with the relevant background, with the relevant context so that people can immediately appreciate the significance, the reasons or the rationale behind it, especially when it involves issues of community norms, of learning, of knowledge and the restriction of such things in our social space.

I agree with the Member that we can improve our communications and procedures. As I have said, going forward, we will learn from this experience and do what we can to try and explain as much as possible our decision-making process.

9 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the buffer of "net assets" that are used by the Government to ensure that Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS) interest rates are paid to the CPF Board even in years when GIC's returns are weak refers to (i) past Government reserves requiring Presidential assent for drawdown, (ii) current Government reserves or (iii) current or past reserves accumulated by GIC or MAS; and (b) what limitations apply to the use of these net assets.

Mdm Speaker, I thank Mr Gerald Giam for his question.

Let me first reiterate the basic framework that enables the Government to ensure that Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS) obligations are met. The Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board invests CPF members' savings in Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS), which are guaranteed by the Government. This assures that CPF savings are safe, regardless of financial market conditions. The interest rates on SSGS also match those on CPF savings, so that CPF members will receive the annual interest rates that they are promised, including the minimum 4% to 5% interest on Special Account, Medisave Account, Retirement Account (SMRA) balances and the 2.5 % to 3.5% interest on the Ordinary Account balances, that they receive this even when market interest rates fall to low levels. So, the interest rates on SSGS match these interest rates on CPF savings regardless of financial market circumstances.

The Government pools the SSGS monies with the rest of its funds, such as proceeds from issuing Singapore Government Securities (SGS) in the markets, that is, the tradable securities in the markets, as well as unencumbered assets that reflect past Government

Page: 26

surpluses and receipts from land sales. These co-mingled Government funds are first deposited with MAS as Government deposits. A major part of these funds, being of a longer term nature, are then periodically transferred to the GIC to be managed over a long investment horizon.

Before GIC was formed in 1981, the Government's monies, including those derived from SSGS, were managed by MAS. MAS continued to manage a good part of the monies, especially during the first decade after GIC was formed, while GIC built up its capabilities for long-term global investment in diverse asset classes. Currently, GIC manages a major part of the Government's funds, including those derived from long-term liabilities, such as SSGS.

Importantly, GIC is not managing SSGS or CPF monies on their own, but a combined pool of Government funds, including a significant sum of unencumbered assets. This is why the GIC's mandate is to take calculated investment risks aimed at achieving good, long-term returns on the Government's funds, without regard to the Government's liabilities. It is precisely because the GIC is managing a combined pool, which includes a significant amount of unencumbered assets, that it is able to invest for the long term, take risk in expectation of long-term returns, without regard to the Government's specific liabilities.

GIC has achieved good long-term returns to date. However, as investment markets are uncertain and volatile, GIC's returns over shorter periods could be low or even negative. The Government is able to absorb these short-term market risks because it has a strong balance sheet. It has a substantial buffer of net assets that enables it to meet the obligations on its liabilities, including its SSGS commitments.

The Government's net assets, or its assets in excess of its liabilities, are the Government's reserves, as defined under the Constitution. The bulk of the Government's reserves are those accumulated during previous terms of Government, also known as its Past Reserves. It is the Past Reserves that the Constitution seeks to safeguard, especially through the powers vested in the President.

In particular, the Constitution guards against profligate spending, which can draw down Past Reserves. The President can withhold his assent for the Supply Bill if the Government intends on its annual Budget to spend more than its Current Reserves, in other words, reserves accumulated during the current term of Government.

The Constitution also enables the President to state and gazette his opinion if he considers that the Government has entered into liabilities that will likely draw down Past Reserves. This scenario could, for example, arise if the Government were to set interest rates on SSGS at artificially high levels, without reference to market interest rates, and above what

Page: 27

can reasonably be expected to be earned in investment returns on the Government's funds over the long term. This would run down the reserves systematically and deliberately. The President has not been put in a position where he has had to state such an opinion. CPF and SSGS interest rates are set with reference to returns on similar market instruments, and are both fair and sustainable.

The scenario of entering into liabilities that will lead to a systematic and deliberate drawdown of reserves should not be confused with the fluctuations in the value of the reserves due to market volatility and cycles that happen all the time. Volatility and cycles are part and parcel of the investment world. Indeed, the GIC's mandate is to take risks aimed at achieving long-term returns, in full knowledge that the Government's portfolio will be exposed to market risks that could mean weak returns or even declines in value on a mark-to-market basis for a time, before cycles reverse and values rebound.

Hence, although GIC's returns over the last 20 years – ending March 2014 – have averaged 6.5% in USD terms, or 5.3% in SGD terms, it has experienced several years where its returns were low or negative – several years during that 20-year period. To take the most recent episode, the Global Financial Crisis led to a significant reduction in GIC's annualised five-year return ending March 2013 – that is, as of a year ago – to just 0.5% in nominal SGD terms. But moving just a year forward to March 2014, its five-year annualised return rebounded strongly. This volatility is part of the market. It was also seen in comparable market portfolios.

The President and the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) have full information about the size of the reserves and all of the Government's financial assets and liabilities. What matters in determining if there will be a likely draw on Past Reserves is whether Government has entered into liabilities that are sustainable and will not result in a systematic erosion in the reserves. It is not the short-term fluctuations in investment returns due to market risks that matter here – even if these ups and downs in investment returns, taken together with the Government's SSGS and SGS obligations, imply fluctuations in the value of net assets.

A decline in investment returns or a drop in the market value of assets in the course of market cycles is not considered a draw on Past Reserves that the Constitution seeks to guard against, because any strategy of investing the reserves for long-term returns must mean taking investment risk and will involve ups and downs in market value of the portfolio, not just from one year to another but very frequently within the year.

The only way to avoid fluctuations in the value of our reserves is to avoid taking investment risk, for example, by investing all of our assets in cash-like instruments. However, this will mean accepting low returns over the long term, and indeed returns that would likely

Page: 28

fall below the interest rates on SSGS and even SGS over the long term.

To summarise the point, what the Constitution guards against are actions that lead to a systematic erosion of reserves, not the investment of reserves in order to gain long-term returns, which must involve investment risk and fluctuations in market value.

Let me return to the basic features of the system. The Government's strong balance sheet enables it to take investment risks and ride out the market cycles that are inherent in investing for the long term. It has a significant buffer of net assets, with important benefits for Singapore. These net assets enable the Government to guarantee CPF savings and pay fair interest rates on CPF savings despite financial market cycles. The Government's significant net assets, on which we expect to earn long-term returns, are also why we have a significant stream of investment income in the form of NIRC (Net Investment Returns Contribution) on our Budget each year, which can be used to meet important spending priorities.

Mr Gerald Giam.

Thank you, Madam. I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for the answers. I have three supplementary questions. GIC has reported that over the 20-year period ended 31 March 2014, the GIC portfolio has generated an average annual real return of 4.1%. Does this figure take into account the interest payable to CPF for the SSGS? Second question: can the Deputy Prime Minister explain what is the mechanism by which the investment returns from GIC are transferred back to the Government and then to CPF? Does the GIC only return the NIRC to the budget and then leave it to the Government to disburse the SSGS principal plus interest to CPF using net assets? And third question: specifically, on the eight years in the past 20 years, where GIC's investment returns were below what the Government pays on SSGS, were these shortfalls funded from the Government's net assets or from the GIC's assets?

First, let me explain that GIC is managing Government assets. It is not GIC's assets. GIC is a fund manager, so the assets are assets on the Government's balance sheet, rather than on the GIC's balance sheet. When the GIC reported that it has earned a real return over 20 years of 4.1% on an annualised basis, it is referring to the return on the total assets that it is managing for the Government.

The NIRC which enters the Government's budget is computed after netting off what is payable on the Government's liabilities, SSGS and SGS. That is already netted off. So, what enters the Government's budget, which is up to 50% of the expected investment returns, is

Page: 29

after the Government has paid what is necessary on the liabilities.

And as for the eight years within the last 20 years, which was what I had stated in response to Mr Gerald Giam's question at the previous Sitting – just to reiterate, that is, eight years in the previous 20 years ending 2013 – that is when, in fact, the GIC's returns on the total assets that it is managing fell below the SSGS rates. That, by definition, would have meant that net assets would have been lower than otherwise because the Government has fixed obligations on its liabilities and because of the fluctuations in returns on its assets.

10 Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether measures are taken to ensure that Singapore Airlines (SIA) would avoid flying over zones of conflict; and (b) whether any SIA flight was using the flight route over Ukraine where MH17 was shot down on the day the incident happened on 17 July 2014.

11 Assoc Prof Tan Kheng Boon Eugene asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether SIA had been flying over Ukraine until the MH17 incident on 17 July 2014; (b) if so, which SIA flights had flight paths that used Ukrainian air space, and why SIA was flying over eastern Ukraine given Ukraine's heightened conflict with Russia and that Ukraine had closed its airspace between ground level and 32,000 feet; and (c) whether the Ministry exercises oversight over Singaporean airlines as to their flight paths, especially over or near zones of armed conflict.

12 Mr Yee Jenn Jong asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether any Singapore-owned airlines have flights over conflict zones; and (b) whether the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) has a process to constantly review and advise the re-routing of flights to avoid flying over such zones, even if such flights are permitted by international civil aviation authorities.

13 Mrs Lina Chiam asked the Minister for Transport whether any SIA planes crossed over the war zone in eastern Ukraine en route to Singapore at about the same time when MH17 was shot down.

14 Ms Tan Su Shan asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will take any new precautionary measures to ensure the safety of passengers flying in and out of Singapore, especially on routes flying over areas of conflict following the recent downing of MH17.

Page: 30

15 Mr Nicholas Fang asked the Minister for Transport what are the regulations governing Singapore flag carriers when it comes to the use of flight routes over war zones around the world.

Mdm Speaker, with your permission, I would like to take Question Nos 10 to 15 together, please.

Yes, please.

Let me first start off by expressing my deepest condolences to the families of those who were on board flight MH17. Indeed, we all know and agree that this was a terrible tragedy.

Let me now move on to address the queries raised by Members. They are related to how Singapore carriers plan their flight routes, whether they flew over the same airspace in Ukraine as MH17 and how the Government exercises oversight over Singapore carriers in their flight planning.

Let me start off by providing an explanation on the management of airspace. Under today's international civil aviation system, states are responsible for the oversight and management of the airspace for which they are providing air traffic services. From time to time, a state providing air traffic services may restrict or prohibit aircraft from flying over certain parts of that airspace. These restrictions may be imposed for various reasons, including military requirements and meteorological events, such as the presence of volcanic ash or adverse weather conditions. All these restrictions must be publicly communicated to airlines, other states and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as soon as possible.

Ukrainian airspace lies on the major air routes between Europe and Asia. In particular, it lies on the most optimal route for aircraft travelling between Europe and the Middle East, South Asia and Southeast Asia. At the time of the incident, it was, therefore, being regularly and heavily utilised by many airlines. These include, for example, Qatar Airways, Emirates, Etihad, Air India, Finnair, KLM, Lufthansa, Virgin Atlantic, Swiss Air, Thai Airways, as well as SIA. On the other hand, airlines plying routes between Europe and North Asia typically do not need to use Ukrainian airspace as it does not lie on the most optimal route between those two regions.

The airspace over Ukraine is divided into several Flight Information Regions, or what is known more commonly as FIRs. One such FIR is the Simferopol FIR over Crimea. In April this year, ICAO issued an advisory for airlines to avoid the Simferopol FIR airspace, due to a

Page: 31

potentially unsafe situation with both the Ukrainian and the Russian authorities claiming to be controlling that airspace. There were similar advisories issued by the US, Ukrainian and European authorities for the Simferopol FIR.

MH17 was downed in a different FIR, the Dnipropetrovsk FIR in eastern Ukraine. I think it is easier to refer it to the eastern Ukraine FIR from now on. In technical terms, it is the Dnipropetrovsk FIR.

The Ukrainian authorities on 1 July 2014 issued a prohibition for commercial flights from ground level to 26,000 feet in this particular FIR in the eastern Ukrainian region. On 14 July 2014, almost two weeks later, this prohibition was extended to 32,000 feet. No reason was given by the Ukrainian authorities and they continued to allow commercial flights in this airspace above 32,000 feet.

The Ukrainian authority is in the best position to assess the threat to commercial flights over its airspace. Indeed, under international law, Ukraine is responsible for putting in place measures to ensure the safe passage of civilian aircraft. Since the Ukrainian authorities continued to allow commercial flights in Dnipropetrovsk FIR above 32,000 feet, no other national authorities, no regional aviation bodies, nor ICAO, had provided any advisories to avoid that part of the Ukrainian airspace.

The responsibility for flight planning lies with airlines, which are required to take into account all necessary information to ensure the safe conduct of their flights. Such information includes airspace restrictions or prohibitions, weather conditions, safety and security considerations and advisories from international and regional bodies.

Singapore carriers, such as SIA, utilise sophisticated computer-based flight planning systems to help in their flight planning. They also continuously conduct risk assessments on their flight routes. Experienced and trained specialists evaluate the integrity of the flight plans and make adjustments based on real-time information. They take into consideration advisories from national authorities and international aviation bodies, as well as information shared by partner airlines and the wider airline industry. The decision is then made by the carrier on whether to impose limitations on its flights through a particular airspace, even if the national authority managing that airspace may not have issued any advisories. Throughout this process, the safety of the passengers and crew is paramount.

I should highlight that SIA, as part of its safety assessment process, had proactively avoided overflying certain conflict areas even if the airways were available for use. For example, in early March 2014, weeks before ICAO and other authorities issued advisories on the Simferopol FIR that was closed in April, SIA had in early March already made its own

Page: 32

safety assessment and adjusted its flight routings to avoid the airspace above Crimea. In addition, for several years now, SIA has proactively avoided flying over certain conflict areas in the Middle East, even though the airways there have been available for commercial flights and even though various other carriers continue to use them. I believe that Singapore carriers will always put safety first and will not compromise on the lives of passengers and crew.

With regard to the airspace in which MH17 was flying, SIA had relied on the information available and kept its flights clear of the restricted heights. However, as there were no restrictions for flights above 32,000 feet or any information suggesting threats to aircraft at those heights, SIA, like many other airlines plying between Europe and Asia, had continued to use that airspace. At the time of the downing of MH17, flight SQ351 from Copenhagen was estimated to be approximately 90 km away. As soon as SIA received news of the incident, they immediately re-routed all their flights to avoid Ukrainian airspace entirely.

Since the incident, many have expressed concern over the safety of flights overflying conflict areas. I wish to assure the House that safety is and remains of paramount importance for civil aviation in Singapore.

The international community, led by ICAO, is urgently reviewing the issues and potential responses to be pursued with respect to civilian aircraft operating to, from and over conflict areas. We will participate actively in these efforts to make air travel safer and more secure.

Moreover, as the regulatory authority, CAAS requires Singapore carriers to put in place a robust flight planning process to ensure the safe operations of flights. The CAAS does this through the Singapore Air Operator Certificate Requirements it issues, which requires Singapore carriers to take into account all necessary information for the safe conduct of their flights. In addition, CAAS also requires Singapore carriers to have in place the appropriate organisation structure, processes and systems. Audits and checks on compliance with such procedural and organisational requirements are conducted regularly. Furthermore, CAAS will promptly update Singapore carriers with safety or security information issued by relevant national and international aviation authorities. When necessary, CAAS may provide additional guidance to Singapore carriers.

Following the MH17 incident, CAAS has requested Singapore carriers to review their risk assessment of flight operations over conflict areas.

Let me conclude. International civil aviation requires an aircraft to traverse multiple countries and no single authority would be able to provide all the information on the situation outside its jurisdiction. Countries need to rely on one another and need to work

Page: 33

together in order to ensure the continued safety of civil aviation. CAAS is looking into measures to enhance the sharing of safety and security information among national aviation authorities and airlines. Airlines can then plan their flight routes and assess the risks involved, more robustly.

The downing of flight MH17 is a horrible tragedy and we hope that it would never happen again. As a nation, we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with our neighbours and we express our deepest sympathies to the families of all the victims.

Ms Irene Ng.

Thank you, Madam. Our thoughts go out to the families of the victims of MH17. I think we should learn the lessons from this tragedy as it highlights the vulnerability of carriers flying over conflict zones, especially those with sophisticated weaponry.

Can I ask the Minister, according to the flight tracking website, Flightradar24.com, SIA is one of the most frequent operators flying over the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine. It flew 75 times in a week before MH17 was shot down, in contrast to 48 times by Malaysia Airlines. Would the Minister agree that SIA should have tightened its own risk assessment earlier and adopt a stricter protocol on flying over conflict zones, given that several airlines, such as British Airlines, Korean Air, Qantas and China Airlines had all re-routed flights from as early as March when Russian troops invaded Crimea?

I understand the Minister's point that the authorities have to take the signals and the advisories from the national authority overseeing the conflict areas. But can I ask the Minister whether it is possible for our Singapore aviation authorities to improve their intelligence on the ground, so that they can assess the safety of the conflict zones and avoid those where there are potential hazards?

Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for her supplementary questions. Indeed, SIA is one of the more frequent users of the airspace over eastern Ukraine, more so than Malaysia Airlines, mainly, in part, because we have so many flights to and from Europe.

On whether we should have followed the example of Qantas, Korean Airlines, British Airways and so on in avoiding this area, I think for Korea to Europe, the most natural and optimal flight route actually does not require them to fly over the Ukrainian airspace. They are in a different geographical part of Asia and it is mainly the Southeast Asian, South Asian, Middle Eastern countries that are on the most direct route between Europe and these areas

Page: 34

that would require overflight of eastern Ukraine.

For Qantas, they have a stopover in Dubai enroute to London, which I believe it is probably the only area in Europe that they fly to now using Qantas Airlines. And that flight path, again, does not require them to overfly the eastern part of Ukraine, whereas the partner airline, Emirates, which they have a code-share with, actually flies over eastern Ukraine, whether it is to parts of Europe or to New York on their flights. British Airways, indeed, avoided Ukrainian airspace for their flights to our part of the world, but British Airways has also decided and, very recently, affirmed their decision that they will continue to fly over Iraq, which is an airspace that many airlines have decided not to fly over.

There is no one example that we can follow. Each airline would have to make its own best judgement, taking all factors into consideration.

On improving intelligence on the ground, we will try our best, but our airlines operate to many parts of the world and there are conflicts in many parts of the world as well. We will try and improve on this, but it is not so easy or always possible to have direct and accurate intelligence with all that we can do.

Madam, national civil aviation authorities have every incentive to keep their airspaces open because they earn overflight fees. In this case, when you look at the Ukrainian national authority, there were tell-tale signs that things were not right. I find it incongruent that the airspace could be opened beyond 32,000 feet but not below 32,000 feet. I think that is a tell-take sign. And prior to that, the downing of MH17, in June and July, there were at least four incidents in which aircraft were shot down over part of this airspace in Ukraine. If this information is not enough to persuade SIA and CAAS that it would be risky to fly across eastern Ukraine, then I do not know what is.

It is important to recognise that even though other airlines may fly over this airspace, we should not take the view that what is good enough for them is also good enough for SIA. We need to recognise that there is no single global authority that is responsible for keeping the skies safe. Ultimately, it is down to each individual airline and the national civil aviation authorities.

Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for his supplementary question. On the incentives for national authorities, I think it may be a bit too presumptuous to harbour the belief that they are motivated only by commercial considerations because of the money they collect from overflight of aircraft. I do believe that many, if not most of all, are concerned over safety of civilian aircraft. And, certainly, if they were to take a longer

Page: 35

term look at things, any time a serious incident of this nature happens, everybody avoids the airspace thereafter, and in the longer term, it does them no good.

On whether given what we now know about what happened in eastern Ukraine, why CAAS and SIA did not take more stringent measures – much, much more stringent than what other airlines were doing – I guess it goes to show that 20-20 hindsight is more prescient in those who operate from the side lines. And we just have to make sure that we take these factors into consideration, we look at what other airlines are doing, we look at what other regional authorities and the warnings that they are issuing and we take all that into consideration. Let us not forget that when the Simferopol airspace was closed, ICAO, FAA, the European authorities came up very quickly and all of them made recommendations, advisories or prohibitions on the use of that space.

SIA had already decided some weeks before that, because of the confusion over who was really in charge of the airspace, that it was better for them to avoid Simferopol FIR. Even after the Ukrainian transport aircraft was downed, three days before 17 July, the only advisory that came up was from the Ukrainian authorities. No other national body, no other regional grouping, actually came up to express an advisory or to prohibit the use of the space. Indeed, as I mentioned, there were also other airlines that were using it, including airlines from the US, Europe, Asia and so on.

So, we will have to make our own best decisions for ourselves because if you are to avoid every area with conflict, I think it would be very difficult for us to continue flying to many parts of the world.

Madam, I join the Minister in offering condolences to the families who had lost their loved ones. I would like to ask the Minister what sort of internal expertise is there within CAAS to evaluate flight risks and to gather intelligence and whether there are plans to strengthen this particular department.

The next supplementary question is whether there are other Singapore Government agencies that are proactively evaluating risks over conflict zones and sharing this information actively with CAAS.

CAAS draws from a variety of different sources, most of all from its interactions with other national bodies, as well as regional groupings. Airlines, too, would rely not only on the advisories given but on the exchange of information with other fellow airlines on what they are doing, what they are avoiding, what they are continuing to fly over. Overall, I think we probably have better insights into what is happening in our part of the world. So, nearer home, I think we watch it and we know it best. Further away, I think you

Page: 36

will have to rely on bodies that are closer in geography to those parts of the world and exchange views and information with them. But as we have known from recent issues released from ICAO, they are looking urgently at setting up a senior task force to look at how the process around the world can be strengthened.

I thank the Minister for his very good answers. I have two supplementary questions. This is pertaining to pilots. Have any pilots or airline personnel made known their reservations to CAAS about flying over the war zone in Ukraine? Secondly, what is the alternative route now for SIA flights to fly to Europe?

I am not aware of any pilots who have made known their concerns flying over war zones. It is not being brought to my attention. What happens now is that for flights to and from Europe, SIA and indeed almost all airlines, have avoided flying over Ukrainian airspace completely. What it means is that this requires approximately a 30-minute deviation from the most optimal flight route. So, depending on which part of Europe SIA flies to, they may choose to fly to the north of Ukraine or south of Sevastopol, over the lower southern part of the Black Sea, in order to reach their designation. But it involves approximately a 30-minute deviation from the most optimal flight path.

16 Mr Zaqy Mohamad asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what is the cause of the record number of dengue cases in recent months; (b) what are the reasons for the spike despite many efforts in public education and regular checks by NEA; (c) whether NEA's measures and industry practices are still relevant to combating dengue; (d) whether the Ministry will consider heftier fines and more severe action for dengue-breeding culprits, such as construction companies that pose a high risk of causing dengue outbreaks to large populations, including the reimbursement of medical bills for citizens affected by the outbreak that they cause.

17 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what steps, if any, are being taken to make the Sanofi dengue vaccine available in Singapore as soon as possible; (b) what timelines have been set for assessing the applicability to Singapore of controlling the mosquito population by infecting the male Aedes mosquitoes with the Wolbachia bacteria; and (c) what other methods are available in the pipeline and what resources are being committed by the Ministry to evaluating these other methods as counter-dengue measures.

18 Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources whether the penalties for mosquito breeding can correspond to the size and scale of the breeding ground found, whether in households, public areas, construction sites or other

Page: 37

areas.

Mdm Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 16, 17 and 18 together, please?

Yes, please.

There have been more than 12,000 reported dengue cases so far this year in Singapore. This current epidemic has actually been ongoing since 2013 and it is driven primarily by three factors. First, we experienced a switch in the predominant dengue serotype. Currently, it is dengue serotype Type 1. This dengue Type 1 virus spreads more rapidly than the other strains in Singapore and, in fact, now accounts for about 90% of all current infections. It is at a historic high. The second factor is that our population, in general, lacks immunity to dengue infection. This is a paradoxical result of our previous success, as a cumulatively low incidence of dengue in the past means, by definition, most of us would not have had prior exposure and, therefore, lack immunity. Third, the mosquito Aedes aegypti is still endemic in Singapore in spite of all our efforts over the past decades.

The dengue risk is amplified during the current hot season and this is because in times when the weather is hot, the maturation cycle of the mosquito accelerates and there is also a shorter incubation period of the dengue virus within the mosquito itself. Data from the National Environment Agency's (NEA's) 3,000 gravitraps which we have deployed island-wide has also shown a doubling in the population of adult Aedes aegypti mosquitoes since May 2014.

Consequently, source eradication, or the elimination of mosquito breeding, remains our primary strategy. This year alone, NEA has conducted more than 1.9 million house or premise inspections and deployed more than 1,000 gravitraps in dengue clusters for mosquito-control purposes, in addition to regular fogging and space-spraying in certain hotspots.

As Mr Zaqy Mohamad has noted, poor housekeeping at construction sites poses a dengue risk to both their own workers onsite, as well as residents in sites adjacent to the construction site. NEA has therefore increased inspections and taken stringent enforcement action against errant contractors whose sites breed mosquitoes. Sixty-two Stop Work Orders have been issued this year alone; 14 contractors have been prosecuted in Court and are liable for a maximum fine of $20,000 for the first conviction. Penalties have also been levied on homeowners, Town Councils and other landowners whenever breeding is found within their premises for which they are responsible. The fines levied this year have ranged from $200 for a home owner, all the way to $39,000 for a construction contractor. We will study

Page: 38

the suggestion, which some Members have put up, for us to increase penalties further.

However, all Singaporeans must also continue to stay vigilant and we must keep our homes free of breeding habitats. We have found more than 4,000 breeding habitats in residential premises this year alone, in the first seven months and this shows that there is frankly, still quite a lot more that we can all do to reduce the risk for our own families and our neighbours.

NEA's Environmental Health Institute (EHI) is also working closely with international and local researchers to develop and evaluate new tools and new strategies to deal with dengue. One interesting proposal which we are studying right now utilises the Wolbachia bacteria. When a male mosquito infected with Wolbachia bacteria mates with a female mosquito, no viable progeny is produced. Hence, we are currently studying the feasibility of using such Wolbachia-infected male Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in order to suppress the overall population of mosquitoes in Singapore. I have appointed a Dengue Expert Advisory Panel which consists of both international and local experts to provide scientific advice to us on the safety and effectiveness of this technique in our local context. But as this is a novel biological intervention, I want to give you the assurance that we will not embark on field trials unless it is very clear that safety can be totally assured.

NEA also works closely with HSA to monitor the development of dengue vaccines and I think there has been some publicity on this recently. In fact, according to media reports, Sanofi, which is a pharmaceutical firm, has been conducting Phase 3 clinical trials in Southeast Asia. HSA will review the Sanofi vaccine with the appropriate experts when Sanofi applies for approval to market their vaccines later on. Once the vaccine has been approved and registered, it will then become available through the medical clinics and hospitals. However, I also want to caveat this point – that we will not approve vaccines unless we are sure it is safe and effective.

I want to end by saying that our NEA officers – every day, there are about 850 of them going around homes – they have been working very hard on the ground to create a safe environment for Singaporeans. I want to thank all the NEA officers. And I urge everyone here and outside this Chamber to support the officers and to do whatever they can and whatever we can, in order to protect ourselves and our loved ones from dengue.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad.

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. I also thank him for considering the heavier penalty fines. I have a number of residents who are also asking whether NEA would look into channels in which they can facilitate claims of

Page: 39

medical fees and costs should there be construction sites and construction companies that have been found to be guilty of breeding mosquitoes and spreading dengue to the nearby housing estates. But more along the lines of public awareness, as I went around Chua Chu Kang – which had one of the record number of dengue outbreaks – I found that most of my residents were actually very aware of NEA campaigns and the five-step Mozzie Wipe-out, and if you go around, it is probably hard to find trace in flower pots, for example. They have removed these and have done all they can, but yet, 80% of the breeding sites are found in the homes. Is there a gap somewhere? Or are there some new developments that we have been missing and should be looking into? What more can we do, basically, to help this situation?

I thank the Member for the two supplementary questions. Let me deal with the latter one, which is what more can we do in our homes? In fact, you have hit the nail on the head, that it is often the areas which we take for granted, that are literally right in front of us, that we miss. Therefore, it calls for us to first, be aware, and I think the Member is right, people are aware that they are confronting a major epidemic. But to translate that awareness into regular actions in our homes, systematically comb through and look for those breeding sites, that part is much harder, because it requires everyone to do it.

We can have 850 officers, we can have 1.9 million inspections in seven to eight months, but it is not possible for NEA officers to be everywhere all the time. So, this is where I really require the assistance and the support of homeowners, contractors, Town Council officers and indeed all the Members in this House as well. One factor which we have found that helps is that the Member of Parliament takes a serious interest in this – walks the ground and mobilises people, to look in their own neighbourhoods, in the common corridors, in their homes. It does make a difference. I do not have any magic bullets; I do not have any easy solutions, but I need the cooperation of everyone in this House and indeed all Singaporeans.

The first supplementary question was on what further legal sanctions are available against errant contractors. First, let me put it this way: we have a legal regime. If they are breeding mosquitoes, we will hold them liable, we take them to court, we prosecute them. The standard of proof needed is as long as I can show that they were breeding mosquitoes, that should be sufficient for me to secure a conviction. I think the Member is asking to go beyond that. For a resident to be able to claim medical fees or indeed, compensation from an errant contractor, this is going to be far more problematic, because you would have to establish that it was failure to maintain proper housekeeping which led to that particular population of mosquitoes, which then were the key vector that resulted in infection in this specific individual. That is a much harder level of proof. I am not aware of any case that has yet succeeded in Court.

Page: 40

I need to emphasise that even if the breeding or the infection has been amplified in a construction site, in order for it to keep going, it requires that there was breeding of mosquitoes in the surrounding residential homes. So, again, it brings us back to the point that we all need to exercise vigilance in our own homes. It is not enough to just point fingers at the contractors, or indeed, just to point fingers at your neighbours. We all need to do our part, and if we all do our part, I think we can make a difference.

Mr Baey Yam Keng.

Thank you, Madam. I note the Minister's point that he is reviewing whether to increase penalties for mosquito breeding. But I would like to point out that there is a difference between water trapped in the laundry pole-holder and stagnant water in an ill-maintained and unused private swimming pool. Hence, the difference in potential of mosquito-breeding in these different water bodies. Also, with a smaller volume, there is probably a higher concentration of mosquito larvae, leading to easier detection upon inspection by NEA officers. Would the Ministry consider tiering the penalty fees to better reflect the different risks posed by poor housekeeping, according to different scales, even within residential homes?

I think that is a reasonable suggestion, which I will study.

Mdm Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister if he would consider making known the list of pest control companies that are involved in the construction sites that have been found to be breeding mosquitoes. This is something like a black list so that people will know who are the ones who did not do their jobs well. They are supposed to check every week and take action.

Secondly, these pest control companies use a lot of low-skilled and foreign workers. I wonder what is the training regime for these workers. Is there constant training for these workers to do their job right?

Madam, I thank the Member for that question. First, there is a training regime. In fact, all the workers engaged in vector control have to be licensed and we have to ensure that methods which they are using are safe for themselves – because they will be exposed to chemicals – as well as for the residents nearby. So, there is a regime in place.

I take the Member's first point about whether there should be greater transparency. So, if we find mosquito breeding in construction sites, we must know who the developer is, who the contractor is, who the subcontractors are and which vector control companies are

Page: 41

involved. I think this is something worth studying in greater detail.

Mr Png Eng Huat, last question.

The Minister mentioned about some vaccine from Sanofi. But there was one announced recently in the newspapers on 31 July 2014. It is called Celgosivir and supposedly, it is derived from natural compounds. Can the Minister elaborate on this and are we looking at this and accelerating the development of this vaccine?

I thank the Member for that question and I beg the indulgence to give a bit of medical details. First, on the vaccine. The media reports were about the Sanofi vaccines. A multi-centre Phase 3 trial was conducted in children in various parts of Southeast Asia. It showed some promise, but to be honest with you, my frank opinion is that it is not good enough. Why do I say that? It showed reasonable effectiveness – about 75% for Type 3 and Type 4 serotypes of dengue. Against Type 1, which is the current problem we are having, it was only about 50% effective. Against Type 2, it was only about 35% effective. Those rates of efficacy are not, in my opinion, good enough. There is a further theoretical risk with incomplete vaccination. The theoretical risk is that if you have had prior infection, or if you have prior immunity to one of the four serotypes and you get a second infection with a different serotype, there is a theoretical risk of you having a higher chance of contracting hemorrhagic fever or shock syndrome.

Until further clinical data is available for us to be sure that the benefits outweigh the risks, I do not think MOH and HSA will rush into approving the vaccine. I think the precautionary principle has to apply and that is why, although I agree with the Member, the long-term solution to dengue is a vaccine. We need to spend more work to get the right vaccine out there and then assure ourselves that it is safe before we can issue it. In the meantime, it is the hard, laborious work of source-eradication and the hard work that our officers embark on.

The other report the Member referred to was the use of this anti-viral material called Celgosivir, which is derived from a plant. In fact, some of our local researchers have done some studies on that. Again, these are very, very early days. I think they are only in Phase 1 trials, which means establishing whether it is safe or not. They have not gone on to prove efficacy, that means whether it is effective.

I am glad that we have a reasonably good research, scientific and medical community in Singapore which is focused on this. But I want to say that it would be premature to conclude that we can rely on vaccines and anti-viral medications to solve our problems. For the foreseeable future, which is for now and for the next couple of years, we need to all work

Page: 42

hard on the ground to eliminate mosquito breeding.

19 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for National Development whether the Government will consider relaxing some property cooling measures, such as those relating to Additional Buyer Stamp Duty, so that Singaporeans who meet the total debt obligation cap of 60% can upgrade their properties whilst remaining financially prudent.

Madam, as a former dengue patient, I note the theoretical risk, that should I, bad luck, be struck again with a different strain, there is a raised risk of complications. So, please keep Singapore mosquito-free.

Madam, the property market cooling measures are intended to keep our housing market stable and sustainable. They aim to encourage financial prudence among home-buyers and moderate property prices.

Various concessions are already in place to benefit upgraders. For example, Singaporean married couples can enjoy a refund on Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty if they sell their existing home within a stipulated period after the purchase of their second home.

Similarly, an upgrader may qualify for the highest Loan-To-Value limit of 80% on his second loan if he is able to provide documents to his bank to show that he will be selling his existing home. This enables him to be treated as a borrower with no outstanding housing loans.

The existing concessions are reasonable and sufficient. Any move to relax the cooling measures, including by broadening these concessions, is premature under current market conditions. Such a move could lead to an upswing in demand, which would increase the number of transactions and raise housing prices. This would not be welcome to Singaporean home-buyers, particularly those with aspirations to upgrade.

Order. End of Question Time.

[ Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 21, 23-24, 28-29, 33-36, 39-40, 43-46, 48-51, 54-55 and 58-60 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. Question Nos 20, 22, 25-27, 30-32, 37-38, 41-42, 47, 52-53 and 56-57 have been

Page: 43

postponed to the sitting of Parliament on 5 August 2014 .]

Page: 44

[(proc text) "to amend the Road Traffic Act (Chapter 276 of the 2004 Revised Edition)", (proc text)]

[(proc text) presented by the Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]

Page: 45

[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]

Mdm Speaker, this Bill concerns the constitution, jurisdiction and powers of the Family Justice Courts and the administration of justice in these Courts. I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time".

It will establish a new Family Justice Court in line with the recommendations of the Committee for Family Justice and represents the Government's and the Courts' commitment to fundamentally improve the Family Justice system.

I would like to stress at the outset that the Committee's recommendations are not aimed at making it easier for couples to get divorced. The grounds for which a divorce may be filed will not be changed. Couples must be married for at least three years before they can file for divorce on the ground that their marriage has broken down irretrievably. That remains untouched.

Families should be saved as far as possible and disputes should be brought before the Courts only as the last resort. But if the marriage has irretrievably broken down and the family ends up in the Court system, the Court process should not worsen the anguish for the family.

The Committee for Family Justice was established last year and comprises representatives from the Government, the Courts, social services and the legal fraternity. The Committee was set up in the wake of rising divorce and annulment rates. In 2013 alone, there were a total of 7,525 divorce and annulment cases. That represented a 4% increase from the 7,237 cases in 2012 and a more than fourfold increase from the numbers in the 1980s.

After extensive consultations with the stakeholders of the family justice system, as well as a month-long public consultation exercise, the Committee released its recommendations on a new framework for the family justice system last month.

Its key recommendations can be summarised in three points. First, provide better support for families to resolve disputes. This is to be achieved through a robust and

Page: 46

integrated network of assistance and support for families, leveraging on existing community touch points and strengthening the capabilities of our Family Service Centres.

Second, create a comprehensive specialist family Court structure with enhanced Court case management policies and processes, as well as Court powers. The Court will be empowered to adjudicate and resolve family disputes more effectively so as to lessen the trauma and acrimony involved. Processes, particularly for matrimonial proceedings, will be significantly streamlined to reduce unnecessary delays and cost.

And third, to protect the best interests of the child as the interests of the child should be paramount.

The Government has accepted the Committee's recommendations. These will form the basis for the overarching structure of the new family justice system moving forward.

This Bill implements the Committee's recommendations concerning the establishment of the Family Justice Courts. This will be a comprehensive specialist Family Court structure comprising: (a) the Family Division of the High Court; (b) the Family Courts; and (c) the Youth Courts.

The objective of creating a specialist family Court structure is to centralise the administration of family-related Court proceedings and strengthen expertise in the management and resolution of family-related disputes.

Let me highlight the main features of the new Family Justice Courts. First, the Family Justice Courts will hear the entire range of family and juvenile matters. This includes divorce, applications for personal protection orders, adoption and guardianship cases, probate matters and matters relating to children and young persons.

The Family Courts will carry out the functions currently performed by the District Courts and Magistrates' Courts in the Family and Juvenile Justice Division of the State Courts. The Youth Courts will perform functions now performed by the Juvenile Courts of the State Courts. The Family Justice Courts will be helmed by the Presiding Judge of the Family Justice Courts (PJFC), a Judge or Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court. This will ensure a high standard of leadership and signals the importance of the Family Justice Courts.

A pool of District Judges and Magistrates will be specifically designated to hear family and juvenile related cases in the Family Courts and the Youth Courts. The Family Justice Courts will also have its own central Registry to receive, assign and manage all family and juvenile-related cases for greater efficiency. Besides Court officers to support the usual Court

Page: 47

functions, there will be counsellors, social workers and psychologists to provide a full suite of services to support the operations of the Family Justice Courts.

Second, the Bill gives the Family Justice Courts new powers. It empowers the Courts to order parties to undergo mediation or counselling, or to participate in a family support programme or activity as the Court may direct.

In proceedings involving the custody or welfare of a child or involving any person, the Bill also allows the Family Justice Courts to, where necessary, appoint a registered medical practitioner or psychologist or counsellor or social worker or mental health professional to examine and assess the child or person so as to prepare expert evidence for those proceedings.

Third, the Bill consolidates rules relating to the procedure and practices of the Family Justice Courts under the Family Justice Rules. The Court process can be daunting for families, particularly those who are not legally represented. Unrepresented parties often face difficulties completing and filing Court documents and following Court processes properly. And even when there are parties represented by lawyers, the inherently adversarial nature of the Court system is also not suited to resolving family disputes as it often exacerbates the acrimony involved.

In addition, some of the existing procedure and practices have resulted in disputes taking much longer than necessary to resolve. Issues that are not relevant to the Court are allowed to drag out Court time unnecessarily.

Generally speaking, there are two key issues to be dealt with in divorce proceedings: one, the division of matrimonial assets; two, if there are children, the issue of the marriage then relates to the custody, care and control of the children. Those are really the only two issues.

The affidavits and other evidence presented before the Court should really deal directly and squarely to the determination of these issues. Unfortunately, affidavits often contain irrelevant material to the disputes or disputes at hand. Parties spend inordinate amount of time and money preparing, ploughing through and replying to long affidavits from each other. Sometimes, there are multiple rounds of exchange of affidavits. All these translate into higher legal costs and for the children and the parties involved, unfortunately, a whole lot more stress.

There is also room for the number of, and time between, pre-trial conferences to be reduced. The intention behind the new Family Justice Rules is to improve on all of these. We

Page: 48

see this as a very important step, a key part of the changes that are being made. In fact, the heart of the matter is the Court proceedings and simplifying these Court proceedings is going to be essential. The Rules will simplify and streamline the processes and practices, empower the Family Justice Courts to adjudicate and resolve family disputes more holistically and without undue delay. Hopefully, that will help reduce the trauma and acrimony involved in the divorce process.

To this end, we will be putting in place: (a) differentiated case management process; (b) judge-led approach to adjudicating family disputes; and (c) simplified and streamlined Court processes.

The differentiated case management process will streamline case management by assigning cases to different tracks, depending on the issues involved. Urgent cases where family and child safety issues are involved may be put on an expedited track. Complex cases may require more rigorous, specialist attention and may be placed on a separate track.

The judge-led approach will place the Judge at the centre of the process. Judges will lead and control the pace and direction of each case, in a manner tailored to the needs and sensitivities of each family. They will also assess if there is still room for the dispute to be resolved amicably with additional help, for instance, through mediation or counselling. The judge-led approach will be an improvement over the existing adversarial approach towards resolving family disputes.

The Committee also suggested several improvements to Court procedure and practice, including:

Simplifying Court forms;

Developing user-friendly standard forms and templates, for example for affidavits, with strict requirements on the type of content that may be included in the affidavits to ensure that only relevant evidence is adduced;

Consolidating and reducing the number of Court documents to be filed;

Limiting the number of affidavits and pages that may be filed; and

Reducing the number of pre-trial conferences to be held.

Page: 49

These improvements can help reduce cost and expedite the resolution of family-related disputes.

A new Family Justice Rules Committee, or FJ Rules Committee, will be set up by the Courts and that Committee will consider how suggestions can be implemented. The new set of Rules will be put in place sometime later this year or by early next year. Prior to their introduction, the Rules Committee constituted under the Supreme Court of Judicature Act may make Rules of Court relating to the procedure and practices of the Family Justice Courts.

I would like to highlight at this juncture that I will be moving an amendment to the Bill, at its Committee stage, to make clear the ability of the Rules Committee to do so. I will also be moving two other amendments to the Bill to clarify that provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Children and Young Persons Act presently applicable to the State Courts, District Judge or the Registrar of the State Courts will also apply to the Family and Youth Courts. This corrects a drafting omission.

Mdm Speaker, in conclusion, this Bill will establish a new Family Justice Act in line with the Committee for Family Justice's recommendations. This Bill does not make divorces easier. That is not our intention. What it does represent is the commitment to transform our family justice system, so that we may help troubled families resolve their disputes with as little emotional trauma and scarring as possible.

We cannot always prevent marriages from breaking down or families from getting into disputes. However, what we can do is to help families resolve their issues, either by mending the relationship, or if that is not possible, by helping them move on with their lives.

The Family Justice Courts will be an integral part of that process. Through simplified and streamlined processes and practices, enhanced case management and the judge-led approach, the Family Justice Courts will seek to play a central role in helping families through this area of the law. Madam, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Dr Chia is not here yet. Ms Sylvia Lim.

Madam, this Bill builds upon the specialisation of the existing Family Court set up in 1995 to pull together more family-related matters such as youth-at-risks and probate cases to be handled by the new Family Justice Courts. An important aspect

Page: 50

of the new Family Justice Courts is that their approach should be different from other Courts, less adversarial, enabling the judge to probe beyond the symptoms to find the root cause of problems.

The Family Justice Courts should thus be judicial bodies with therapeutic and diagnostic orientation. To this end, I am glad to see some indication of this in the Bill. Clause 17 provides that the Family Justice Courts will have, attached to them, officers including counsellors, social workers and psychologists to support its work. Under clause 26(9), the Family Court can also order any person to undergo mediation or counselling or to attend family support programmes or activities.

I am in general support of the Bill, but I have two concerns. The first relates to clause 10 on hearings in camera and the second, touches on the Courts' use of assessors under clause 27.

First, hearings in camera and open justice. Clause 10(1) provides that sittings of the Family Justice Courts shall be heard in camera unless the Court orders otherwise. This will be a significant departure from the open justice concept applicable to the other Courts, maintaining the Courts as open and public and to which the public shall generally have access. Having a closed court is also a change from the current situation pertaining to family cases where many family-related proceedings are heard in open court such as divorces, contested maintenance applications and protection orders and contested inheritance cases. Even in the current Juvenile Court that handles cases of youths in trouble, the Children and Young Persons Act permits the presence of bona fide representatives of news agencies.

What is the rationale for this change? There is one paragraph in the report on the recommendations of the Committee for Family Justice, stating that family cases were private matters which should not be covered by the media, hence the provision for in camera hearings.

Personally, I used to support such as starting point and I still see the need for in camera hearings for some types of family cases, particularly those involving children and other vulnerable persons. However, the issue is not straightforward and there is a significant downside as seen from the experience of family courts elsewhere.

First, is it clear that the media should not report family cases at all? It should be remembered that there is a wide spectrum of media. While we may justifiably dislike media angles that are intrusive, sensationalist and inaccurate, there is a clearly a place for accurate, fact-based reporting of family-related Court disputes which serve an important public education purpose. An accurate media report can increase public awareness of family law,

Page: 51

rights and obligations. There will also be a greater understanding of family law principles, for example, what constitutes a valid will, the laws of inheritance and so on.

It is in public interest that the layman has some understanding of family law principles and how the Family Court works, since it is an area of law touching all our lives directly. While some Family Court judgments may continue to appear in the law reports such as Singapore Law Reports, such reports are not usually accessible to the man in the street, who would still rely on the mass media for information.

Secondly, one of the hallmarks of an open justice system is that the general public is able to observe and scrutinise how the Courts function. Clause 10 takes this away. There is a risk that the secrecy surrounding the Family Justice Courts may undermine public confidence in it. In the UK, for instance, the secrecy of family court hearings attracted controversy and suspicion of whether judges had been fair to parents or had simply accepted reports of social workers and hearsay evidence. In January this year, in an attempt to balance the situation, the President of the Family Division of the UK High Court and Court of Protection, Sir James Munby, instructed judges to permit media publication of their judgments as far as possible even if the identifying details are anonymised.

Madam, notwithstanding the good intention behind clause 10, I am concerned that having private hearings as a default position for family cases will lead to less public understanding of family law and potentially a mistrust of the Courts. I believe clause 10(1) is too wide in scope. The Government should monitor its effects very closely and review it for greater transparency. Even if clause 10 remains as it is, I call upon the Family Justice Courts to make additional efforts to release its papers and decisions in the public domain to promote greater public understanding of family law and instil confidence in the Family Justice Courts. To this end, the Courts could consider working with journalists who understand family law issues to put up accurate media reports on a regular basis.

Next, use of assessors by the Family Court. My second clarification concerns clause 27 which allows for judges to summon assessors of special skills and experience to assist them in decision making. This is a useful provision which recognises that even experienced family law judges will benefit from social work or healthcare professionals to make good decisions.

My clarification concerns clause 27(2) which states that if assessors are appointed, their remuneration will be "costs in the proceedings". I assume this means that the remuneration of these experts will have to be paid by the losing party. If so, this will increase the cost of family litigation, a highly undesirable outcome. In addition, this does not seem fair as the expert was summoned by the Court itself, having deemed it fit to do so. Should the

Page: 52

Government not be paying for these assessors instead of passing the costs to the parties?

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. In Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Statistics released last week by the Department of Statistics (DOS) showed that divorce cases in Singapore rose 4% last year compared to two years ago. Divorce cases have continued to rise over the years from 1,721 in 1980 to last year's 7,525, a 4.5 times increase in 34 years. This is a very worrying trend.

The family is a country's foundation. A broken family is not just a personal problem, but also a country's problem. As the saying goes, "A peaceful family will prosper"; with a harmonious family, people can work and study with peace of mind and their business would be booming. As a result, the country would prosper as well.

To protect and strengthen the family ties, the Government has always been promoting pro-family lifestyles by formulating pro-family policies and measures, such as giving newly wed couples preferential treatment. The problem is, it is easy to fall in love but difficult to live together. American writer John Gray has used the euphemism of men being from Mars and women from Venus to describe the differences between men and women. These differences can cause misunderstanding and relationship issues. To overcome various issues arising from a marriage, even the most loving husband and wife must remain enlightened and understanding, care for and support each other to ride over times of difficulty.

I am pleased to see that most Singaporean families are able to withstand pressure. When I visit households, I often see touching scenes such as loving aged couples, devoted kiasu parents and multi-generation families living in the same block or area. Having seen so many people savouring the joy of family life, I can feel its value and importance strongly.

There are also a small number of dysfunctional families. Leo Tolstoy said in the very beginning of Anna Karenina that all the happy families are similar but unhappy families have their own unique problems. Our elders also say every family has some difficulties to deal with. Divorcees or people in the midst of divorce proceedings come to see me at the Meet-the-People Sessions, usually seeking help in accommodation, finance and children's education. Some bring their children along to see me. The confused, tired and helpless look on an innocent and young face makes my heart ache. As the saying goes, "Even an upright official can't settle a family quarrel", as the reasons behind a divorce can be complicated and it will not be easy for relatives, friends or even Members of Parliament to try to mediate. The Government can only provide more marriage and family counselling services and improve

Page: 53

legal processes to prevent the escalation of conflicts and reduce the anguish of family members.

The main recommendations proposed by the Committee for Family Justice led by Senior Minister of State Indranee include the following:

establish the Family Justice Courts through the new Family Justice Bill. Family Courts and Youth Courts under the State Courts, as well as the Family Division of High Court, will all come under the Family Justice Courts to improve the efficiency of family justice administration;

strengthen the case management process; empower the Courts to adjudicate and resolve family disputes more effectively;

couples with under-aged children will have to go through compulsory counselling before proceeding starts, so that they understand the impact of divorce on their children;

appoint children's representatives or social workers to attend the Court proceedings so as to better protect the children's interests in the divorce process;

a judge-led approach to reduce acrimony and disputes;

family justices cases will go through different tracks depending on their different nature to ensure trial efficiency;

introduce a new accreditation framework so that trained lawyers can become qualified family justice practitioners;

strengthen social services by setting up four branches specialised in divorce in addition to the current three branches specialised in family violence to provide dispute settlement and counselling services.

I support all the above recommendations. I think the Committee has taken into consideration a wide array of issues both within and outside the legal boundaries. I have one suggestion, however. Although it does not come under the ambit of the Family Justice Bill, it relates to marriage. I raise this issue at today's debate hoping that the Minister can give it his serious consideration.

Page: 54

To reduce the likelihood of a marriage ending up in divorce, we must improve our marriage counselling system. Currently, for Singaporeans and PRs, only a couple aged between 18 and 21, or if one of them is below 18, have to go through marriage counselling before they can get permission from the Registry of Marriages (ROM) to marry. I suggest all couples applying to get married must attend pre-marriage counselling courses. The courses will help them understand the importance of marriage and parenthood. Some people might feel that getting married itself is already complicated enough with the preparation of the wedding banquet, applying for a flat, selecting a honeymoon package and health check and so on. Having to attend the compulsory marriage counselling course would be too troublesome! I would say that attending the pre-marriage counselling course is as important as learning how to drive before you can drive safely on the road. The most basic consideration is to avoid accidents. The courses can prepare the couples psychologically so that they can cope with challenges in their married life.

Many couples spend a huge amount of energy planning a grand wedding. In recent years, this fad has become even more extravagant. The venue, menu, bride's car, wedding gown and suit, and jewellery have to be carefully selected. Some couples even borrow money to have a dream wedding, resulting in financial difficulties later. Actually, the most important is to affirm feelings for each other and know his or her personality, character, values, purpose of life and family background. They must reach mutual agreement in terms of how to handle money, raise children and live with other family members; otherwise, they would surely quarrel frequently after getting married. These should be the things that must be prepared carefully before marriage. As the saying goes, "It takes 10 lifetime's efforts to sit on the same boat and 100 to become a couple" – to meet and become a couple is, indeed, a destiny which we must cherish. I hope Singapore couples can all understand this and treat each other sincerely. I support this Bill.

Madam, I welcome the recommendations of the Committee of Family Justice in facilitating the resolution of family disputes in a timely and effective manner. As a former counsellor, I am glad to note the purpose towards developing a problem-solving family justice system where families are better assisted to resolve their own respective disputes and children better protected, after the follow-up of a broken marriage.

There were, on average, about 7,500 divorces in the three years between 2011 and 2013. The child is more often than not the party most affected in the event of a broken marriage. Thus, it is imperative that in any family justice system the laws concerned should bear in mind and protect the best interest of the child.

Page: 55

On this note, I welcome the direction of the Committee in placing greater emphasis in protecting the interest of the child in the event of a family dispute. During the course of my previous work as a family counsellor, I had often been stuck at the brutality of a broken marriage and how children often became victims of the emotional tussles between the spouses.

Many of these innocent children were often scarred and left confused by the irresponsible and conflicting behaviours of their respective parent. It troubles and saddens me greatly to see young lives at the receiving ends of arguing spouses and broken marriages. They certainly deserve more protection from the law and I am heartened at the recommendation made by the Committee towards protecting the best interest of the child and this, in the process, will strengthen the family justice framework.

Madam, as part of the Committee's recommendation on community support and solutions, the establishment of a specialised agency and the introduction of pre-filing consultation sessions were raised. The next part of my speech will touch and expand further on the above two recommendations.

I welcome the move of establishing Divorce Support Specialised Agencies to complement the work of existing family violence specialised agencies in the management of the family disputes.

At present, there are many voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs), family professionals and community partners that are very passionate in their field of work and would be most willing to provide such services at short notices. However, their good work and best intentions are often hampered by issues pertaining to funding and the funding processes.

As a former counsellor, I have previously sat in many discussions pertaining to these issues and I hope that MSF and, in particular, the National Council of Social Services, can carry out a thorough review of the funding processes and provide more timely and adequate funding towards the running and operations of these specialised agencies. As a Member of this House, I am willing to work together with the relevant agencies and provide my inputs on this matter.

Madam, I am of the view that for many of the social challenges in this country, it is best to tackle them upstream rather than making ratification when the problem has occurred and requires immediate attention. On this, I am glad to see the introduction of pre-filing consultation sessions as part of the recommendations made by the Committee. While the pre-filing consultation sessions can help parents to understand the importance of co-

Page: 56

parenting and the practical issues arising in a divorce that may have an impact on their children, it is also important to provide divorcing spouses with adequate information on the processes and challenges involved in a divorce.

On this, the Ministry may want to consider providing options for divorcing spouses to undergo counselling sessions with family professionals with the view to making these sessions compulsory in some instances.

The Syariah Court, for instance, has been conducting the Marriage Counselling Programme (MCP) for divorcing spouses since 2004. While many divorcing spouses tend to dismiss such a procedure, given that they have more or less made up their minds, it is important that these sessions are not seen just as tools to salvage the marriage but more about helping divorcing spouses to better acquaint themselves with the challenges of life after a divorce, such as assuming the parenting role of a single parent and other ancillary matters, such as maintenance and housing complications. This would then prepare divorcing spouses with the necessary tools and information to cope physically, emotionally and psychologically for the Court processes and their respective lives after they divorce as a custodian parent or a non-custodian parent and the legal obligation that accompanies their respective new roles. It is hoped that this initiative would lessen the pain and turmoil of all the parties involved, in particular, protecting the welfare and interest of the young charges.

Madam, at the same time, the Government should consider encouraging marrying couples to attend marriage preparation or guidance courses. Through these courses, a couple would have a better understanding of what constitutes a marriage under the existing legal framework while at the same time be empowered with the relevant knowledge and skill sets to manage the challenges of a married life, especially under demanding life circumstances.

In a controlled environment, the assistance of a professional may also be useful in helping the couple to better understand and appreciate one another. Prior psychological and emotional preparation goes a long way in building a more resilient family unit and thereby reduces the potential harm inflicted on one another. For a start, a parent module can form part of the marriage registration process at the Registry of Marriages (ROM). Madam, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Recently, when I conducted a Meet-the-People Session (MPS), a resident, Mr A, expressed his disappointment towards the family justice system. Mr A said that although he and his ex-wife were given joint custody for their child, the Care and Control rights were given to his ex-wife, while Mr A was given access rights. Mr A said that there have been situations where his ex-wife did not allow him to meet their child. Mr A then reported this to the Syariah Court but he was informed that the Syariah

Page: 57

Court has no power to take enforcement measures. When Mr A lodged a complaint to the Family Court, he was then informed that the Court Order for his divorce case was issued by the Syariah Court, and therefore, the Family Court could not take any action.

In such situations, after speaking to several lawyers, I understand that the Syariah Court does not undertake enforcement due to the lack of manpower. I was also made to understand that for such cases, in order to obtain justice, Mr A has to make a magistrate's report.

Madam, I think that such processes should be improved because it will bring about unnecessary pressure or additional pressure, whereby such additional pressure will further complicate matters between the parties involved, especially for the children.

Hence, it is my hope that this matter will be given the due attention in order to alleviate the pressure amongst the parties involved, especially the children.

(In English): The strength and the social resilience of Singapore depend on the well-being of the families that form the fabric of the society. On this front, Government policies play an integral role and at times, the crucial arbiter determining a stable or broken marriage. I would cite the example of Mrs A whom I counselled during the course of my previous work as a counsellor.

Mrs A and her husband tried to apply for a flat for their young family but they were unable to do so as her husband had outstanding housing arrears. Mrs A's husband had previously bought a flat before his marriage under the Single Singapore Citizen Scheme. As a result of losing his employment, he committed arrears and eventually had no choice but to let go of his house. When the time came for Mrs A and her husband to settle down with their six-year-old daughter, they were advised to file for a divorce by HDB. It was upon their divorce that Mrs A was eligible to purchase a house under the Single Scheme and thereafter, she married the same husband that she had divorced.

Despite my appeals to the relevant agencies in my capacity as a counsellor at that point in time, HDB did not allow Mrs A and her husband to apply for a flat without having to undergo a divorce. All these had the effect of leading both Mrs A and her husband to lose faith in the system and, subsequently, to my knowledge, they went through a divorce.

Madam, while undergoing the stringent and deliberate due processes, Government policies should, at the same time, take into consideration the humanistic aspect of its implementation. When it comes to issues surrounding families and all the complexities that accompany them, it is important to be flexible in its execution and lenient, whenever

Page: 58

possible. With that, I support the Bill.

Mdm Speaker, I support the Family Justice Bill. I welcome the aim of the Bill, as stated in the joint statement of MinLaw and MSF, to "provide better support to families to help them resolve disputes" by streamlining the process through the Family Justice Courts and providing various support channels through the community touch points and the setting up of the divorce support specialist agencies in due course.

More importantly, in my opinion, is the aim of making the process less adversarial, reducing the acrimony and the tussle which invariably hurts everyone concerned, especially the most vulnerable parties – the children.

As someone who has myself gone through the divorce process at a time when my own two daughters were very young, I can attest to a time of mental and emotional confusion. I can also attest to the amount of mental and emotional effort, energy and time it takes to get back on my feet and to feel "whole" again for my own sake as a single mother and for the sake of my children as we rebuild our lives as a threesome. So, I speak from personal experience.

Madam, I seek the following clarifications from the Minister.

Firstly, with regard to the proposed pre-filing consultations. This is a good way to ensure that from the very start, the parties know not only what the issues are, that they would have to work through with people who are in a position to provide the advice they need; for some, this can provide a reality check on the position they plan to take.

However, Madam, this is also a time of great confusion and it is probable that parties may not always be in a state of mind to fully understand many of the issues at this stage, even with the specialists present. Could the Minister clarify if such consultations are to be one-off and, if so, could these consultations continue to be provided both during and after the final judgment if it comes to pass? I would argue for the consultations to be made available throughout the divorce process so that all the parties concerned continue to get the support they need, and they and the Courts, understand fully the differentiated impact on different family members.

Further, in a report by the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) titled Singapore Social Health Project 2013, it is found that new personal protection orders filed

Page: 59

against family members range between 2,500 and 3,000 annually. PAVE, a family violence specialist centre recorded a total of 1,200 cases of domestic violence between April 2010 and March 2011. Such is the reality of domestic abuse in Singapore.

In such cases where there have been abuse and violence, I would urge the Minister to provide for such pre-filing consultations, and, indeed, any consultations, to take place safely in the interest of the abused parties, especially the children, by doing away with the need to have face-to-face contact, for instance, with the use of video uplinks.

Secondly, with regard to the aim of the Family Justice system for a "judge-led approach", I seek assurance from the Minister that this process will be less and not more inquisitorial. And if so, I seek clarification whether judges will be given training to equip them for what would necessarily have to be a less intimidating approach if legal training is not sufficient, because ultimately, the aim is the empowerment of the parties concerned.

Thirdly, I welcome the proposal to train community touch points to identify those with family problems and the proposal to establish divorce support specialist agencies. With domestic violence being a reality in Singapore, I would urge that this training and support include the ability to be aware and sensitive, and to recognise and be cognisant of abuse in all its forms including psychological abuse, and to respond accordingly when giving advice and support.

Fourthly, I welcome the proposal for the accreditation of lawyers in non-legal aspects, for example, knowledge of social services. Since this is not meant to be mandatory, could the Minister clarify how lawyers would be encouraged to do so? Further, I would suggest that all professionals, not just lawyers, connected to the family justice system, be given similar access to knowledge of fields beyond their own, so that they are familiar with the various services. I also seek assurance that such support be available under the Syariah Court system to avoid a two-track system.

Finally, Madam, while streamlining the process, and providing access to the legal, financial and counselling support to the parties and the children as envisaged under the Bill are commendable and while the Government, the community and the family must do all they can to support families to ride through this challenging period of their lives, sometimes, the best thing to do is for the spouses to go their separate ways.

I would, therefore, urge that unless support agencies are specifically religious in nature and parties know what they can expect from such agencies, that other agencies, especially Government-linked ones, remain secular in their approach, advice and support. I would also urge that agencies adopt a non-judgemental stance for what is still perceived by the

Page: 60

community as a stigma. Divorce is still seen as a failure on the part of the parties and the recent controversies over what community norms of a family mean does not make it any easier for the parties concerned.

I would argue that beyond the Bill, there has to be greater education, awareness and acceptance of the different types of families, not just the so-called traditional one of "father, mother, two children".

Further, just as I applaud the change in name from Juvenile Court to Youth Court as it recognises the derogatory implications of the word "juvenile", I would also urge that we all be mindful of the words used to describe divorces like the phrase "broken families". I speak from experience when I say single parent families are not necessarily broken, just as so-called "traditional families" are not necessarily "whole".

Madam, I also speak from experience when I say that in such emotionally-fraught times, it is important for the parents to stay grounded and centred. While the parties navigate their way through the challenges, sometimes, all it takes is for one parent, one spouse, one adult to stay centred. Children take their cue from adults, and if at least one parent can learn to access their own inner resources, this is where the "less acrimonious, less ugly" aim of the Bill is truly realised.

So, beyond the practical legal, non-legal and counselling services that are envisaged under the Bill, I would strongly suggest parties be given access to proven life skill techniques to enhance self-empowerment and esteem to navigate the changes that are to come with the separation, the healing and forgiveness that need to happen for all parties so that they can continue with their lives with as little rancour as is humanly possible under the circumstances.

At this point, I declare my interest as a facilitator of self-empowerment workshops where participants, some of whom may well be going through divorce processes themselves, are taught life affirming skills and a mindset shift from a victim mentality and the blame game to one of self-determination. I have found that, invariably, people find strength in themselves that they do not know they have as a result of this painful period in their lives. More importantly, they also find it in themselves to look a little more kindly on those who may have hurt them, even as the healing continues. It is after all, a process. It is after all, also how one perceives and responds to a situation, not the situation itself that will ultimately lead to healing and wholeness.

Finally, Madam, the work should not start here. Relationships with others do not start with a marriage; it starts with a relationship with oneself. If you do not know how to have a

Page: 61

life-affirming relationship with yourself, you surely cannot have one with someone else. The fact that domestic abuse is such a reality in Singapore shows that many people are ill equipped to handle the anger, the resentment, the exhaustion from daily stresses. Many are unable to deal with themselves.

Madam, we have been very good at educating our citizens on the practicalities of life. We would do well as a society to also weave life skill lessons on self-reflection, self-esteem, self-empowerment, skills on anger and stress management in our homes, our schools, at our workplaces, our healthcare and family services and in our communities; skills that we so desperately need in this country if we are to keep the fabric of our society strong.

Mdm Speaker, I welcome this Bill which seeks to enhance the framework of the family justice system in Singapore.

This Bill is very much inspired by the recommendations of the Committee for Family Justice, co-chaired by Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah and then Judge of Appeal Justice V K Rajah. There were extensive consultations and I note the broad support for the proposals from the key stakeholders. So, this proposed law is off to a good start.

I welcome this Bill as championing a major and much needed revamp of our family justice system. This Bill should be read in conjunction with the July 2014 Recommendations of the Committee for Family Justice report – which Members have referred to fairly extensively – as much of the details relating to workings of the family justice system are covered comprehensively there. This Bill provides the skeletal framework but the meat of the revitalised family justice system is to be found in the Committee's report and recommendations. It should be mandatory reading for all those concerned about family justice.

While we have, over the years, sought to improve access to justice and reduce the adversarial factor when marriages fail, this Bill marks the culmination of a concerted attempt at institutional re-design to put in place a framework and infrastructure to better help and support families. Madam, marriages may fail and end but familial ties and needs persist, especially for children who are minors, and parental duties and responsibilities continue as well.

Part II of the Bill provides for the establishment of the Family Justice Courts, comprising the High Court (Family Division), the Family Court and the Youth Court, to hear all family-

Page: 62

related proceedings.

I welcome the renaming of the current Juvenile Court to the Youth Court and its coming under the Family Justice Court. The Youth Courts will hear cases involving the Children and Young Persons Act. The Bill also provides, where necessary, in clauses 26 and 35 to empower the Family Justice Courts to direct parties to undergo mediation or counselling, as well as participate in available family support programmes.

I hope the institutional redesign, which is a major plank of this Bill, will provide the impetus and support for a specialised pool of judicial officers and Court staff with deep interest, nuanced expertise and broad experience to handle family cases and those involving children and youths. I welcome clause 17 of the Bill to this effect for the recognition given to these officers of the Family Justice Courts.

Madam, this Bill should create and sustain an ecosystem of family law experts and family specialists, including psychologists, counsellors, social workers and mental health professionals, all working together to provide a holistic solution that can bring parties to work together even if they are going their separate ways.

Resolving disputes, especially intractable ones and when relations have completely broken down, is certainly an integral part of the family justice system. But even then, this Bill must challenge all those in the family justice system – including the litigants – to protect families, especially minors, and to ensure that the fundamental responsibilities of families and parents continue to be fulfilled.

With the forthcoming establishment of a third law school in Singapore with a focus on community law, there should be a stream of dedicated legal professionals for family law broadly conceived.

In law school admission interviews every year, I am always struck by how applicants speak enthusiastically and sincerely about criminal and family law. But that fervour seems to dissipate very quickly while the students are in law school.

I call upon the two law schools to continue to enthuse students about family law and to raise the status and profile of the subject in our law schools. While I do not teach family law, my continuing interest in this area of the law is very much due to the tutelage of Professors Leong Wai Kum and Debbie Ong, my family law teachers in National University of Singapore (NUS). In addition, our law schools must sustain teaching and research of family law from an interdisciplinary perspective.

Page: 63

The allure of family law is not as attractive as the material lure and glam factor of corporate law. In its next phase of work, I hope the Committee for Family Justice will look into how family law teaching and scholarship can be promoted not just in our schools but in our institutions of higher learning and within the Bar. As this Bill demonstrates, a wide array of expertise is required, many of which are not found within the legal sector.

While law is a key driver, the reality is that family justice cannot be just about family law and procedural rules alone. Too much reliance on the law will likely result in mechanical outcomes that may well serve the Court system in terms of case disposal performance indicators but contribute little to heal the rifts within family. Both form and substance are of utmost importance in our family justice system.

Madam, the Bill does not tell us how the Family Justice Courts will go about delivering family justice that is fit for purpose in today's context. But we can gather from the Family Justice Committee's recommendations and report that the Family Justice Courts will adopt a robust and integrated network of assistance and support, as well as enhanced Court management processes including a Judge-led approach. Taken together, they should enable the Courts to resolve family disputes more effectively.

The touchstone of effectiveness, however, must not exclude the imperative to help lessen the trauma and acrimony involved in the divorce process and in ancillary proceedings. Litigation is not the ideal vehicle for resolving family problems. Should families, however, seek recourse to it, our family justice system must endeavour to reduce the acrimony quotient and not unwittingly contribute to the downward spiral of frayed ties.

There is a future that still needs to be lived post-marriage. Divorce does not mean the end of familial duties and commitments such as parenting. I should add that we should not go away thinking that acrimony and continuing conflict is the inherent and inevitable result of a marriage breaking down. I believe Court statistics will be able to support the assertion that the majority of couples are able to sort things out without going to Court. We should not create the inaccurate impression that acrimony must be the order of the day when marriages break down.

In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister how the Family Justice Courts will be assessed on its effectiveness. As public funds are involved in the administration of justice, the need for Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will always be there, but I hope the Court administrators will instead subject the Family Justice Courts to KPIs that are focused on holistic problem-solving, despite the difficulty in quantifying how the Family Justice Courts has better protected and supported fragile families, especially minors caught through no

Page: 64

fault of theirs in the dispute.

Madam, I now turn briefly to the centrality of a child's best interests and welfare in our family justice system. It might seem trite to reiterate the best interests of the child as it is enshrined in our substantive law. While this Bill's focus is on the constitution, jurisdiction, and powers of the Family Justice Courts and the administration of family justice, it is crucial that the child's interests are protected and represented robustly in Court proceedings. Too often, the "child's interests" is bandied about flippantly such that we lose sight of its core meaning and effects. I hope that the Family Justice Rules Committee, provided for in clause 46 of the Bill, when drafting the Rules to guide Court procedures and practices will reinforce the child's interests in both form and substance.

Madam, a marriage, in essence, is a private matter between two persons. Nevertheless, the state of marriages has profound societal and public policy implications. Hence, the family is regarded as ‘the basic unit of society' in Singapore's Shared Values and the importance of the family is regularly underlined in official discourse. The state of the family is also conceived to intimately affect the state of the nation. This is premised on the belief that the "good family" will take care of itself and, in turn, the nation-state – as a collection of good families – will then be strong as well.

The family is also regarded as the formative source of social capital in a communitarian society. To quote the Shared Values White Paper published in 1991, a "fundamental building block out of which larger social structures can be stably constructed". In this social reproduction process, the family then is the incubator for the reproduction of values and norms desired in our society.

Even as we strengthen the social safety nets, the family remains the first recourse for help and a bastion of resilience when an individual falls on hard times, with the state intervening only as a last resort.

The first survey on the state of family life conducted by MSF last year indicated that family life remains important to Singaporeans even if divorces show a gradual upward trend. What is heartening from the MSF survey is the headline finding that more than eight in 10 parents with teenage children or younger were satisfied with their relationship with their children as well as with their family life.

We still have much work to do in the area of family justice. I therefore look forward to the next stage of the Committee's work, which includes the enforcement of maintenance orders, a longstanding problem. In this regard, it would also be timely for a major review of the Women's Charter, first enacted in 1961 and with many amendments since its

Page: 65

promulgation to keep it updated. I hope the Government will review and revamp the Women's Charter with the aim of enacting a Family Charter, an omnibus family legislation by consolidating the various legislations pertaining to the family and children.

Mdm Speaker, I support the Bill and look forward to it transforming family justice in Singapore for the good of our families and of our society.

Order. I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 4.20 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 4.00 pm until 4.20 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.20 pm

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]

Mdm Speaker, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Statistics recently released by the Department of Statistics (DOS) showed that the number of divorce cases rose by 4% compared to two years ago at 7,525 in total. Since 2004, Singapore's divorce cases have been rising continuously, with only a slight dip in 2012. Overall, the rising trend is clear, which is worrying. Of the failed marriages, the average marriage span is 10.3 years. Couples married under the Women's Charter tend to divorce after five to nine years of marriage. Reasons for divorce commonly cited are unreasonable behaviours and separation over three years.

I support the reform of family justice. I think ordinary Singaporeans would agree too. The two core reforms are to save the marriage and family as much as possible. But when the family dispute has unavoidably come to the legal stage, what we should do is to reduce the suffering brought by the whole process. To reduce the acrimony commonly seen in family justice cases, the Family Justice Courts under the new family justice system will put the children's interests first and help people in divorce seek legal aid and counselling. If the children are still young, the counselling will be compulsory. Young children are the hapless

Page: 66

victims of their parents' divorce and are helpless in preventing it from happening. They do not know how to resolve the conflict, fear and helplessness in their hearts; they can be manipulated by their parents and used as a tool to achieve the parents' agenda. Hence, the law must be on the children's side, protect them and help them continue with their studies in a not-so-ideal environment so that they can still live a healthy and deserving life.

Reports online said that this reform would reduce Singapore's divorce rate because people pondering divorce would have to put in more resources and time to face counsellors, children's psychologists and legal professionals, and thus would hesitate to divorce. Personally, I do not agree. Every now and then, we see families, even with double income, who are unable to cope with the rising cost of living, including children's education expenses and parents' medical expenses. This leads to constant quarrels between couples who eventually choose to separate or divorce. As a family lawyer, I often think that for couples in the midst of separation, financial counselling should be the foremost solution. Providing this kind of resources to people who need it would be truly conducive for couples to give up the thoughts of separation.

The Bill reminded people of one issue that is not included and that is the disputes between adult children and their aged parents. Recently, we often hear this catchy song about the PGP played on TV. I thought, what about those pioneers who have dementia or reduced mental capacity? Who will safeguard their interests when they face family and monetary disputes? When aged parents have to face their children in Court because of monetary disputes, will the law protect them like it does for the children through counselling and mediation?

(In English): Mdm Speaker, in my speech earlier, I touched on my reasons for supporting the Bill. I am very happy that it puts children's interests first and that it upholds the family as the basic building block of our society. Feedback from my colleagues as well as community leaders is that this Bill makes them proud that they are Singaporeans.

One of them related it to The World Bank report entitled Judiciary-led Reforms in Singapore which begins with the remark that "Singapore is widely recognised as having one of the most efficient, effective judicial systems in Asia, perhaps in the world." It then asked the question as to how the judiciary changed so successfully and quickly. Listed among lessons from Singapore's reforms was the centrality of strategic thinking and business planning to institutional success. The report concluded, among other things, that we have created multi-disciplinary teams; enhanced user coverage and outreach; built administrative service capacity; increased access to justice and improved efficiency. Reforms also emphasised the need to direct targeted interventions in areas in urgent need of improvement. All these observations, I thought, explained why the recommendations

Page: 67

produced by the Committee for Justice made for a powerful and persuasive read.

There is no doubt that our judicial system has improved lives and increased public confidence in the rule of law. However, I have been approached by some colleagues, particularly family lawyers, who are concerned about the Family Court's power to appoint, in proceedings involving the custody or welfare of a child or involving a person, a registered medical practitioner, psychologist, counsellor, social worker or mental health professional to examine and assess the child or person for the purposes of preparing expert evidence.

A common question asked is whether these professionals would be required to have undergone a certain period of legal training before they are appointed by the Family Court. Another question relates to how younger family law practitioners who have yet to establish themselves could better equip themselves for their new role. I look forward to Minister's clarification for it is necessary that the family lawyers should themselves be convinced that their role remains relevant in the new Family Court system.

Mdm Speaker, if I may just put forth my view on the point put forward by the Member for Aljunied GRC, Ms Sylvia Lim's arguments just now, when she said that Family Court cases and Youth Court cases should be made more transparent for the public to know what went on through the decision-making process.

I declare my interest as a family law lawyer and I believe that amongst today's list of speakers, I could be the only one who is practising family law and, therefore, I speak from a position of authority. I have also been appointed as an advisor to the Panel of Advisors in the Juvenile Court and, therefore, I know that parties involved either in divorce proceedings or in a Juvenile Court processes usually do not want non-related parties, particularly people who have got no contributions to make to the decision-making processes, to be involved in the hearing of their cases. Most people do not want their cases to be known to the public, especially for parties who are undergoing acrimonious proceedings.

The fact that they have ended up in Court shows that they need the Court to solve the differences for them. They do not need other people to know why the marriage have failed, why certain things were done to each other and why certain decisions were made regarding their children. They do not need the public scrutiny as these are personal experiences that are best not shared in public and therefore, public criticism will only add to the wound of the divorcing parties and to the parents who have children charged in the Youth Courts.

A panel of advisers usually are made up of educators, counsellors, lawyers, psychologists and sociologists and these people are more than qualified to assist the judge in coming to a decision on what should best be done to help the youth in trouble. No parent

Page: 68

want the public to know that their children have run afoul of the law and that it is because they were unable to bring up their children properly – they had poor parenting skills – that had led to the children running afoul of the law. As such, I would like to urge the Minister not to consider opening up hearings in the Family Courts as well as the Youth Courts to members of the public.

Ms Sylvia Lim, you want to seek a clarification?

Yes, Madam, a clarification for the Member. Does the Member not agree that as far as the Juvenile Courts are concerned, there are already provisions under the Children and Young Persons to prevent the identification of juveniles below 16?

Mdm Speaker, in reply to that, I do know. But the fact is that when you have people or third parties in the Court who are watching the proceedings, know what is going on, in itself is already a breach of that privacy and therefore, it is not to be encouraged.

Mdm Speaker: Dr Maliki, you wish to seek a clarification?

Yes, Madam, thank you very much. Madam, I would like to seek clarification from the Member, Mr Faisal Manap. In his speech earlier, if I heard him correctly, he highlighted a case of a resident. And he made the statement that HDB officers had actually advised his resident to seek or file for a divorce in order for her – I think, the lady – to take advantage of housing subsidy or in applying for a flat. This is quite a serious allegation against an HDB officer. I would like to seek the Member's clarification if that was what he had said; and at the same time, whether he thought that that was something not quite right because I do not think any HDB officer would do such a thing. We will not allow any HDB officer to do such a thing.

If he had thought it was not right for the officer to have said that, whether he had sought any clarification from HDB to ascertain whether such a statement was made by the officer? Can I seek clarification, please?

Madam, I would like to clarify that the incident happened when I was a counsellor. It was not a resident but a client at that point in time who received counselling from me. I did mention in my speech that I wrote to relevant agencies to seek help on behalf of the client but the outcome was negative. This is what I got according to the client that I had counselled at that point in time. She told me verbally on

Page: 69

this issue. So, that was, at that point in time. I wrote an email to REACH to highlight the issues to REACH where REACH channelled my feedback to HDB. And HDB said that due to the policy, they were not able to assist in this matter.

Thank you very much, Madam. As Mr Faisal Manap is a counsellor, I am, too, a social worker. In our handling of cases, we do ensure that statements are made correctly and we do clarify that. I think it would be incumbent upon us as social workers also to ascertain and as we advocate for our clients, that the facts are correctly stated. It would be useful if Faisal had asked the client at that point in time, even if he was a counsellor. Nonetheless, I think what is important is for us to clarify and I wish to seek Mr Faisal's cooperation to give us the details of that case for us to ensure that we seek direction from HDB that no such incident had taken place. If the incident did take place, we will take relevant action against the officer in charge or the officer concerned.

Madam, firstly, it happened a few years ago and I do not have the file with me right now because I am no longer a counsellor. And secondly, I did get the consent from the client; basically she is disagreeing in terms of me disclosing the information. That was why I actually wrote on her behalf without disclosing her identity to HDB at that point in time which was about a few years ago to clarify the matter.

Madam, it is very important for Members of the House to understand if you highlight cases in this House, you have to be prepared to disclose all information because this House is an important Chamber. We cannot hypothetically or even highlight cases that do not want to be identified. I think we have to be clear about that because I do not think allegations of such a nature can be allowed to go past without verification. I hope Mr Faisal would be able to then get back to the resident and ask the resident for permission for us to clarify this situation. If not, I hope the case that was highlighted here should not be considered seriously in this Chamber because I do not think it is fair for us to allow this Chamber to hear of such a case without us clarifying the facts of the case.

The case happened a few years ago. I do not have any contacts since I am no longer doing counselling. But again, I just used that as one example, in a way, of many cases I have encountered of such difficulties faced by Singaporeans, especially those who are going through a divorce. Again, I would like to say that I do not have the details, not my resident, but my client at that point in time.

Mr Manap, the point here is this: it is quite different to say HDB rejected the appeal, to saying that, it was the advice of the HDB officer that the couple should divorce. It is two different things. So, since you have cited the person and you said you got also approval to raise the issue, the question asked by the Minister of State is whether you can

Page: 70

provide particulars so that he can verify and prevent it from repeating, happening again, if the situation is indeed correct as you have said in this Chamber. Dr Maliki.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. That essentially is the point. I do not think Members of the House should highlight cases that we are not able to clarify, because these are very serious statements that are being made against our civil servants. Our civil servants serve the community, serve the residents, serve Singaporeans with dignity. And I think if such allegations are made, we must be given the chance to clarify. If the Member is not able to do so, I do not think the Member should be allowed to continue highlighting such cases in this Chamber.

At that time, I had no intention to disregard the good work that had been done by our civil servants and our Public Service. It is just that I wanted to give feedback about the experience that I had encountered during my counselling, the difficulty faced by the client at that point in time.

Madam, I do not want to belabour the point. But I think what is important is for the Member to understand the context of this Chamber. It is very important for us to continue to uphold the integrity of this Chamber as well as that of our Civil Service.

The Member highlighted a case and made a very serious allegation that HDB officers actually asked the couple to divorce. Nobody would do that. The cornerstone of the HDB housing policy is the family nucleus. We want the families to stay together. For such allegations to be made in this Chamber, it is very serious. And I do not think we should allow each Member to make such comments or allow such cases to be highlighted even if the cases were cases handled several years ago. We handle many cases over the years and we would make sure that we have some integrity in terms of articulation of the background of the cases, verify the facts before we make such statements in this Chamber.

I think the points have been clearly made by both sides. And what I do want to say is that although Members are covered by parliamentary privilege, it is important that when incidents are cited, particularly involving Government agencies, public servants, that the particulars can be provided so that there can be checkings done, or to verify the veracity of the facts. And that will really help to improve the debate in the House. It adds credibility to the whole process in the House as well. Having said that, I think we should proceed with the debate. Ms Jessica Tan.

Page: 71

Madam, thank you for allowing me to speak on this Bill. With the establishment of the specialist Family Court, the Bill sets out to provide better support to families to help them as they resolve family disputes.

As we all know, there are really no winners in cases involving family disputes or divorce. Unlike commercial and other cases which seeks to get the most of the contesting party, taking the same adversarial approach with family disputes does not lead to the resolution of the dispute and conflict. What is important is that the family justice system reduces acrimony and help families resolve the disputes early.

I am glad to see that the Bill sets out measures to reform the family justice system and to protect the interest and welfare of the child if there are children involved. These include expanding the mandate of the existing counselling and psychological services of the State Courts; also appointing Child Representatives which could take the form of lawyers appointed to be the child's advocate or a social worker or medical expert as required; and enlisting the assistance of social and psychological service professionals to protect the best interests of the child.

As noted by many Members of this House, with the recent report of the 2013 trends of divorces in Singapore, this Bill together with the recommendations of the Committee for Family Justice is clearly required. While we should support the formation of the specialist Family Court and the objectives outlined in this Bill, I was glad to hear Minister reaffirm and reassure the House that the approach taken is to save families and marriages as far as possible and it is not to make it easier for couples to divorce.

While recognising that the Courts should not be the first point of dispute resolution, it is important that when the family dispute is brought to the Courts, the tone set on how the case would be handled, to enable the resolution of the dispute early and the protection of interest of the children where they are involved, is key.

The sad reality is that most divorce and family dispute cases are emotionally charged and as a result, positions taken are not always in the best interest of resolving the dispute. I have seen several cases at our Meet-the-People Sessions where couples involved in divorce proceedings dispute over asset division and contest custody and restrict access to children by the other parent. This may not take into account the impact that it may have on the child. Unless the safety and well-being of the child is compromised, it cannot be right to deny a child access or relationship with either of the parent.

Madam, from the perspective of the families that will have their cases handled by the new specialist Family Court, can the Minister elaborate to the lay person on what positive

Page: 72

differences it will make for families involved? How will this change result in efficient due process for the families involved?

The recommendations of the Committee for Family Justice recognise the importance that family lawyers play in family proceedings and calls for accreditation. In family dispute cases, clients often do turn to their lawyers for guidance and counsel, more than for just legal advice. There is recognition that the lawyer's advice could either escalate the conflict or in some cases, help resolve it faster. And often time, family lawyers do need specific skills outside of their mastery of law, for example, in counselling, mediation and emotional conflict resolution skills.

To enhance the family law practice, the recommendations of the Committee is to introduce a new Family Law accreditation scheme where lawyers will undergo specialist training for handling matrimonial cases in the new framework. Lawyers who undergo this training will receive the Family Law Practitioner (FLP) accreditation. I note that while accreditation is recommended, it will not be mandatory for lawyers practising family law.

While the role of family lawyers and their skills set are important, I guess the real question also is: will the family justice system be able to attract the right talents, that is, the right lawyers to practise family law, given that family law may not always be the most attractive specialisation for lawyers?

More holistically, the issue is how the Family Court will be executed to bring together the different parts within the judicial process, and equally, if not more important, the pre-Court process and support provided to families for counselling and dispute resolution? While the Bill makes provision for the establishment of the specialised Family Court, to effectively support families in distress in a more proactive and pre-emptive ways, there needs to be synergies between the various agencies in providing community support, specialist agencies support as well as pre-filling consultation support. These were part of the recommendations of the Family Justice Committee.

The recommendations for strengthening the community touch-points, social services, legal assistance and pre-filing consultation sessions, need to work hand-in-hand to achieve the objectives of effectively supporting families in dispute. Can the Minister elaborate what measures would be taken to facilitate the synergies between these various agencies, requiring them to work together for the intended outcomes?

From the many cases that we see during our Meet-the-People Sessions as well as when constituents approach us for help, it is clear that families in disputes often do not know where to turn to for help. For many families handling disputes, the legal process can be

Page: 73

extremely daunting, especially for those who are not legally represented. There are many involved in family disputes that are not able to afford to engage a lawyer but at the same time, do not qualify for legal aid. These recommendations to enhance the Court management process with pre-filing consultation sessions, differentiated case management, and simplified forms and procedures as outlined with the introduction of the "Court Friend" to give practical support will help the unrepresented and will also help in making the Court process simpler and smoother and, most importantly, achieve the better outcomes for families in dispute.

Madam, I support the Bill as it is timely and will provide the appropriate support to families in dispute to resolve conflicts.

Mdm Speaker, I stand to speak in support of the Family Justice Bill. This Bill sets out to restructure the Court's divorce processes to better serve the needs of families in distress.

Divorces are unfortunate outcomes that some couples face in their marriages. The parties, especially with children involved, are often so aggrieved with hardship and mental anguish during such times that many also end up with depression. Children suffer the most when their parents are going through divorce and their interests must be taken care of during such trying periods of their lives. The recommendations in this Bill for simpler and better divorce proceedings are indeed welcome and will make the divorce processes less agonising for affected families.

The other thrust of the recommendations of this Bill is to save marriages where possible. This is timely when the trend of divorce has been climbing. Last year, divorces hit the second highest annual figure on record. May I suggest that there are avenues for prevention of breakdown of marriages at early stages? For instance, at pre-filing consultation sessions for couples, marriage counsellors should be provided to counsel and to solve acrimonious issues in the hope that couples can come to terms and resolve their differences. Related agencies such as Family Service Centres should always prioritise early detection of troubled marriages and refer such couples for early counselling with qualified marriage counsellors.

I would like to suggest that for the initial stages of divorce proceedings, when couples are made to attend compulsory mediation and counselling, as suggested by the Committee, a less intimidating venue like a Community Centre rather than the Family Justice Courts should be used. The environment for such processes should be more relaxed and less acrimonious, so that the parties can share thoughts and feelings with each other and with

Page: 74

the counsellor or mediator freely. To hold it in a Court of law would make parties feel very formal and rigid.

The interests of the child should be paramount in divorces. Children and young people should be given age appropriate information to explain what is happening. This should be offered to them as early as possible.

It is good that a child representative be appointed for the child's view to be represented in divorce proceedings. However, I would suggest that the trained representative should always visit the child in the home environment to better understand the needs of the child and also to evaluate which parent can take better care of the child after the divorce. There are situations where one dominating parent will overwhelm the child into taking a position against the other in a custody battle. A child may also be compelled by the dominating parent and appear so willing to follow that parent, that the other parent gives up the fight for the sake of not wanting to hurt the child. The dominating parent may be awarded custody to the detriment of the child.

In other words, the trained representative must be able to "see through" such situations and render a correct report about the family situations. The trained representatives must therefore be like a social worker looking into the child's actual situation and making the correct recommendations to the Courts.

I agree that the frontline personnel at hospitals and Family Service Centres should be trained to identify and refer divorce-headed families to the appropriate agencies. After identification by the frontline, there must be avenues for good follow-up by specialist agencies with personnel trained in the legal processes and procedures of the Family Justice Court. Particularly, they should know what the Court expects them to present and how to present it.

But training frontline personnel will take time and we may not have the critical number of them to be able to service the increasing number of cases. Perhaps, Madam, private doctors should be roped in to identity and to refer as well. At this juncture, I want to declare that I am a general practitioner (GP). There are about 2,000 GPs presently and their outreach can be extensive. GPs usually have good relationships with patients who are more willing to share personal difficulties they are facing. GPs are also able to pick up the tell-tale signs of mental anguish or depression and to probe more into the causes. This is particularly relevant in detecting psychological trauma showing withdrawal symptoms, abnormal or changed behaviours in young children who cannot express themselves verbally. Such cases can be referred early to related specialist agencies to get assistance, in order to protect the well-

Page: 75

being of the children.

On the reporting of cases of abuse, may I ask the Minister whether it can be made easier for doctors to report suspected cases of child abuse? Doctors sometimes tend to not report even when they are suspicious. This is because in the event of Court prosecution of the child abuser, doctors who lodged the complaints will be called as witnesses. The other reason is infringement of doctor and patient privilege and confidentiality. May I ask if this Bill will grant the doctor a waiver expressly to erase any doubt?

Will the Minister consider appointing a related specialist agency for doctors to refer all suspected abuse cases to trained social workers or medical personnel, preferably those trained in psychology? These personnel should have Court skills, including how to provide high quality assessments of clients, especially victims of physical abuses. This will relieve referring doctors from attending Court cases or having to provide full medical records on the patients for Court purposes.

Lastly, although there is a temptation to quicken the pace and expedite an end to broken marriages by simplifying process, it may also lead to undesired results. There is a saying, "Justice hurried is justice buried". There had been cases where after a lengthy process in the divorce proceedings, parties cool down and are prepared to compromise better. We should not try to over simplify matters just to settle the issues faster. We should treat each case based on its own merits and do justice to all parties concerned, especially when children are involved. Sometimes, it may be necessary to let the due process of law take its course and try to avert too much suffering by providing opportunities for parties to rationalise and allow extra judicial processes to work out the best solution for all. Mdm Speaker, I support the Bill.

The Minister for Law.

Mdm Speaker, I thank Members who have risen in support of the Bill and for their suggestions on how we can better protect troubled families. I will respond to some of the questions raised by Members in the course of their speeches.

Ms Sylvia Lim spoke about hearings in camera under clause 10 of the Bill. I think one approach or philosophy is that all proceedings should be open. The key question – and nobody will argue with that as a general statement – is whether there should be exceptions made in specific situations. There are other jurisdictions which have gone this way of holding it in camera. The Committee, after extensive consultations with stakeholders in this field of

Page: 76

law and family disputes, felt that the full entrails of family disputes should not be laid out in public, really, to protect children. So, you have, on one hand, the general approach that by reason of publishing in the media, people would get a slightly better understanding of the family law, and against that, specific direct negative impact on a large number of children – 7,000 divorces and a number of them will have children. So, it is a question of judgment and I think there is much to commend the Committee's approach, which we accept. It is a position which the Court can, otherwise, order. The Court can say this matter should be heard in public.

Second, Ms Lim also spoke about the Court's power to order costs in the proceedings for the remuneration of assessors. The parties can, first, object to the assessors being appointed and, second, the Courts only appoint assessors if necessary. The Bill gives the Court discretion as to how the costs are to be paid. The Courts, under this new approach, are taking on a more investigative and direct role to reduce the acrimony, shorten the proceedings and reduce a lot of the legal work that would otherwise take place and, in fact, do a fair bit of the work that the parties might otherwise engage lawyers to do. So, overall, the intention is that costs should go down, as can be seen from the Committee's approach.

Ms Jessica Tan asked what positive difference the new Family Justice Courts will make for families. As I had mentioned during my earlier speech, with the new Family Justice Courts, it is hoped that family disputes will be resolved more efficiently, with less delays, reduced legal costs and, in a way, lessens the trauma and acrimony involved.

Ms Ellen Lee was of the view that the Bill ought to have considered extending the conciliatory approach to disputes caused by sibling rivalry over inheritance and disputes between parents and children over assets.

The Bill's conciliatory approach represents a fairly significant change in how we view and resolve family disputes. Let us see how it plays out in the context of the family dispute that happens most often, before assessing whether it can be extended to cover other areas.

Ms Lee touched on family law practitioners and asked how the roles of social workers, psychologists and child experts are defined in the new Family Court system. Different players will work towards reducing acrimony between parties and where children are involved, putting the child at the forefront and protecting their best interests. To that end, the Bill allows the Court to order, where appropriate, expert assistance from social and psychological service professionals to be provided during its decision-making process to achieve these objectives. These professionals do not need to be trained in the law.

Page: 77

The Committee has also recommended that the Counselling and Psychological Services of the State Courts be expanded with enhanced resources to better represent the voice of the child in Court proceedings.

Ms Ellen Lee and Ms Jessica Tan spoke about the impact the Bill may have on lawyers practising family law. Ms Tan queried if, on the whole, we will be attracting the right talent to practise family law. Ms Lee asked what resources younger family law practitioners will have to equip themselves better for their new roles.

The family lawyer's role will remain central to the delivery of quality and timely justice. That said, it must evolve to effectively manage legal disputes which are in reality symptoms of a family's underlying emotional, financial and other practical problems. Family lawyers must understand how to use dispute resolution mechanisms, such as counselling and mediation, to deal with the underlying family conflict, in order to reduce acrimony between the parties. Litigation really should be the last resort.

Family lawyers also need to be trained on the new judge-led trial environment and less adversarial techniques. The Family Law Practitioners or FLP accreditation will, we hope, be a key to achieving this. Specialist training in both legal and non-legal aspects of family practice leading to the FLP accreditation will equip lawyers to practise family law more effectively and in a manner that is consistent with the ethos of the new family justice system.

While FLP accreditation would not be compulsory, we would encourage all who practise family law to be accredited. The details of the Family Law Practitioner accreditation are being worked out and announcements will be made in due course.

Some Members – Dr Chia Shi-Lu, Ms Faizah Jamal, Dr Lily Neo, Assoc Prof Eugene Tan – provided suggestions on how we may provide better support for families to resolve disputes generally, through for instance:

strengthening community touchpoints;

pre-filing consultation sessions, including end-to-end support for families;

the judge-led approach to adjudicating family disputes;

protecting the best interests of the child; and

Page: 78

training and accreditation of the different players in the family justice system.

I thank Members for their suggestions. The general thinking underlying these suggestions – that of better protecting and supporting families – is aligned with the Government's and the Judiciary's commitment to transform the Family Justice system to achieve these objectives.

At the same time, I sound a note of caution that our Government's resources are not the solution to all problems. For example, Ms Faizah Jamal's suggestion that counsellors and support be provided end-to-end. The Court has a discretion on the matter, but have a care because the process should not start taking on a life of its own. It is open, for example, for the parents to engage counsellors and they should be encouraged to do so. The Courts' focus should be on the dispute. The state is not always best placed to do these things and the Courts should be mindful of that.

This Bill implements one aspect of the Committee's recommendations, namely, the establishment of the Family Justice Courts. It relates to the constitution, jurisdiction, powers and administration of these new Courts.

Accordingly, in response to Dr Lily Neo's question as to whether the Bill waives doctor-patient privilege and confidentiality, the Bill does not deal with that issue as it does not relate to the establishment of the Family Justice Courts. We will, however, look into Dr Neo's suggestion on making it easier for doctors to report suspected cases of child abuse while bearing in mind their professional ethical obligations. MOH and the medical professionals will have something to say about that.

Aside from setting up the new Family Justice Courts, the Government is currently reviewing, with a view towards implementation, other aspects of the Committee's recommendations which fall outside the scope of this Bill.

Some of these recommendations relate to areas which Members have spoken on and we will consider the suggestions put forth by Members today. Where appropriate, we will also refer suggestions, such as Assoc Prof Eugene Tan's suggestions on the reform of the Women's Charter; Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Mr Faisal Manap's suggestions on marital and parenting counselling, to the respective agencies and Ministries.

On Mr Faisal Manap's anecdote of his constituent trying to enforce a Syariah Court Custody Order, I think either the constituent has given the wrong facts to Mr Faisal or he has misunderstood the facts because he said that the District Court said they cannot enforce a

Page: 79

Syariah Court Order. That is quite inaccurate. And most people will know that it is inaccurate.

Syariah Court Orders are treated as District Court Orders for the purpose of enforcement under section 53 of the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA). All that the constituent who approached Mr Faisal needed to have done is to have filed a Magistrate's complaint because the Syariah Court Order is treated as equivalent to the District Court Order for the purpose of enforcement and the District Courts would enforce it. So, the suggestion that there were no resources to do it, I am not sure that – perhaps, the constituent who spoke with Mr Faisal honestly believed it, but it is just not true.

What the constituent may have understood, perhaps wrongly, is that if he had gone to the Syariah Court and said, "I want to enforce this order", the Syariah Court would have said to the constituent, "Look, we do not have the resources for it", which is true because it is not within their jurisdiction to enforce. The enforcement has to be done through the District Courts. And all the lawyers who practise Syariah Law will know this and a lot of others will know it. So, to help the constituent, what Mr Faisal can do is refer him to the appropriate authorities; it is all in the law.

The other anecdote about HDB's advice to its constituent, I think Dr Maliki took that up. But again, I am not sure I understood the facts clearly. My understanding, the way Mr Faisal said it, was that the person who spoke with him had arrears owed to HDB. Now, if that is so, did he sell the flat and still have arrears owing, and then, still wanted a second subsidised flat from HDB? That happens sometimes – constituents come and see us. They have taken the subsidy, they have sold the flat, they have spent the money, they have not paid HDB and then they come back and they said, "Can you help me buy a second flat; I am married?" I can see the plea for discretion to be exercised but if those are the facts and discretion is exercised, then of course, a lot more people will sell their flats, take the money and not pay HDB. These subsidies are taxpayers' funds after all at the end. So, one has got to balance it.

The Family Justice system is not just about the law or the legal system. It is about the various interfaces – pre-Court, post-Court – that touches the family. How we bring together the different moving parts, as Ms Jessica Tan said, will be key. I would also like to assure Assoc Prof Tan that the relevant agencies will be assessing the effectiveness of the present round of reforms in due course to see how we can improve further.

We are committed to a comprehensive implementation of the Committee's recommendations and will release details of the same when we are ready. Thank you, Mdm Speaker.

Page: 80

Ms Sylvia Lim.

Thank you, Madam. I have three clarifications for the Minister. The first is concerning the rationale for in camera hearings which he addressed in his reply. He mentioned that the primary justification was to protect children and in my earlier speech, I did agree that, that was a legitimate reason. But does he not agree that under the current Bill, the in camera hearings would apply to many more hearings than is currently the case including cases of probate, mental capacity and so on which do not involve children at all?

Second clarification is whether the Ministry is aware of some of the issues faced by Courts and other jurisdictions, Family Courts in particular, when they make their hearings private? What were some of the controversies that surrounded the confidence in the Courts and how could these be mitigated?

Third clarification is, I would like to ask the Minister whether he agrees that it is important for the public to have an understanding of the principles of family law and how the Courts work. And to this extent, I like him to comment on my suggestion that at the very least, the Family Justice Courts should readily make their judgments available for publication by the media, of course, with any necessary redaction of sensitive particulars so that the public can have a greater understanding of these principles which affect all our lives.

Let me take those three points. First, yes, under the current Bill, the in camera proceedings apply to more proceedings beyond those that simply involves children and the justification is similar. There is a difference between public interests and what the public may be interested in. There is public interest in the fair and efficient administration of justice. When you do that, you need to look at which cases should be handled in public and which cases should be handled in private.

The fact that a probate matter or some other family dispute is handled in private, I think, really does not impact on public confidence. As I have said it, it is a question of judgment. The Committee, after extensive consultations, including with family law practitioners, came to the view and we think that is the correct view. I am not saying that there cannot be another view but I have set out my view. The fact that other jurisdictions have done this, shows that it is a view that can be taken legitimately.

Second, am I aware of issues faced in other jurisdictions? Whenever you have a question of judgment and you take one view as opposed to another view, there will always be a group of people who would prefer a different approach. That is what has happened in

Page: 81

some of the jurisdictions. In our own view, our Courts have excellent standing. Our Courts deliver justice and we believe that the public will substantially support an approach where in family matters, the issues are dealt with in private. Unless there is public interest, which the Courts can decide, there is no reason for it to be in public.

Third, whether the public should have a better understanding of family law matters, I think it is a little tenuous, really, in support of Ms Sylvia Lim's argument that it should be public and it should be in the media so that the public could have a better understanding of family law processes. I do not think that logic quite works. I tend to take a different view. But certainly, the public should have better understanding, not just of family law areas, but of criminal law, other areas. And the Courts regularly have exhibitions and they set out in ways in which the public can easily understand the processes. And anyone who is interested in the processes would be able to go and check what the processes are.

Madam, I just like to make some clarifications. Basically, I would like to apologise in this Chamber for the issue that I have brought up just now, without being able to verify further in terms of the claims made by my previous client. It is not my intention to give a negative impression of any of the Public Services or Government officers. So, I will be more careful in future not to bring up such cases. And I apologise.

Mr Faisal Manap, thank you and we accept that. That will go into the record.

Yes, Madam, one clarification for the Minister concerning the regular publication of judgments of the Family Justice Courts. I would like to ask him again, whether it is possible for the Family Justice Courts to work on some sort of regular collaboration with the media so that they can regularly report judgments touching on family law issues for greater public awareness. He mentioned that the public can check it up, but how many members of the public really know how to check these things up on their own? So, I think there is scope for the Courts to work with the media in a responsible way to ensure that there is dissemination of principles of importance on a regular basis.

Where there are principles of law involved which are important for the general development of the law, I am sure the Courts will bear that in mind. We have not quite decided how they can put it out but there are a variety of ways in which the Courts put out their cases. They can do Family Law Digests, they can do Criminal Law Digests, case law has precedence. We need to develop a body, or the corpus of law which has been developed, would need to continue to be developed at the Family Court level and the High Court level. Obviously, that must continue. Precisely what details, what cases are published, whether it is published in the media, those are things I would rather not do by dicta standing

Page: 82

here, because I do not know what kind of cases will come up. The person best placed is really the judge dealing with any individual case. And they must have the discretion to do what is right in their appropriate cases.