Hansard, Monday, 4 March 2019

1 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider working with the Ministry of Education to share with school students the risks associated with buying health products, especially those sold online.

The Health Sciences Authority (HSA) regularly educates the public on the risks of buying health products from dubious or unknown sources, including online purchases. For example, last year, HSA ran a six-week online campaign to educate consumers on such dangers. It included an animated YouTube video to explain the risks, and pop-up advisories targeted at consumers looking for health products online.

There are also efforts targeted specifically at school students. HSA has worked with the Health Promotion Board (HPB) to include the risks of purchasing health products online in HPB's school-based educational programmes. HSA has also collaborated directly with tertiary students from the local polytechnics and universities to reach out to their peers about the dangers of buying health products online.

HSA will continue to work with HPB and the Ministry of Education to educate school students on the risks associated with buying health products from dubious online sites and the need for discernment when purchasing health products.

2 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) how does the Ministry ensure that lorries that carry sand do cover them up to prevent spillage on the roads while moving; and (b) for lorries that are found not to have done so, what are the penalties that are imposed on them.

Sand or other materials spilt from improperly covered lorries on public roads can endanger the safety of motorists and dirty our environment.

The National Environment Agency (NEA) engages sand suppliers and commercial transport companies to remind their drivers to be vigilant in keeping sand covered during transport. Commercial transport companies are also reminded to inspect their lorry fleets regularly for faulty cargo flap covers.

From 2016 to 2018, NEA took more than 450 enforcement actions against drivers for transporting sand and other materials without proper cover. Under the Environmental Public Heath (Public Cleansing) Regulations, persons conveying sand or other similar materials along a public road by vehicle without adequate cover face fines of up to $1,000 upon conviction for a first offence. Additionally, under the Environmental Public Health Act, persons who drop or spill the same on a public road would also be liable for fines of up to $2,000 upon conviction for a first offence.

Members of the public who witness sand spillage on public roads should report the incident to NEA.

Ms Joan Pereira.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. On the roads, I very often see vehicles carrying sand – both wet and dry – overloaded with these items: sand, gravel, stones. They may even be partially exposed. These pose a real danger to other vehicle users and even people. Can NEA consider working with the Ministry of Transport to deploy road surveillance technology to monitor such vehicles and take enforcement action where necessary?

I thank the Member for the supplementary question. NEA employs portable surveillance cameras to detect vehicles that spill sand or other materials on public roads. They deploy such devices at hotspots to spot and identify errant vehicles and their drivers for further investigation and enforcement. In addition, NEA does stakeouts along public roads to spot and act against such errant vehicles and drivers.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA), on the other hand, conducts routine patrols and operations to enforce against overloaded vehicles. Offenders who are caught with their trucks or lorries exceeding the maximum laden weight limit can be fined up to $1,000 upon conviction, jailed for up to three months or both.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan.

In my constituency, there are thousands of such heavy laden vehicles plying the road. Unfortunately, the feedback I have is that they are either uncovered or they are spilling debris all over the road. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether enforcement can be stepped up because 450 summonses do not seem like a lot. Every day that I drive on the road, I see a lot of such vehicles that are in breach.

The other thing is whether the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) or NEA could consider from the origin of the journey, make it mandatory for the contractor that loads the sand to carry out an inspection before the vehicle can even go out. That means, the contractor checks and ensures that the vehicle is properly covered and everything is secured before the vehicle even goes out. And if any vehicle is caught in breach, we not only go after the driver, but we also go after the contractor that allowed the vehicle to get out of the worksite in the first place.

I thank the Member for the supplementary questions, as well as for his suggestions. First, as I have said earlier, any member of the public who actually observes such spillage on the road can report it to NEA. As I had also noted, NEA does stakeouts as well as deploy portable cameras for surveillance of such acts. Very often, our portable cameras are installed at hotspots where we have received quite a number of feedback cases and tip-offs about such spillage, for instance, near large construction sites or concrete batching plants where these vehicles often ply, in order to enforce against such vehicles and the drivers.

I just wish to make a note that between 2016 and 2018, we received more than 300 instances of feedback on spillage on the roads from such trucks and lorries, and these numbers have been declining. So, the Member could follow up with NEA on the area that he is talking about.

As regards the responsibility, as I have also said, upstream, we work with the commercial transport operators as well as the sand suppliers and remind them to inspect their lorry fleets frequently while making sure that their flap covers are operational. The drivers are responsible for ensuring that the flap covers properly cover the building materials before they drive off the site. That is why our Act makes them responsible, but we work with the vehicle owners to identify who the particular drivers are.

As I have said, we will continue to see how we can engage with the commercial transport operators as well as the sand and building material suppliers upstream.

End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day.

[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [3rd Allotted Day]. (proc text)]

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head R (cont) –

[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [1 March 2019], (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Estimates be reduced by $100." − [Mr Christopher de Souza]. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]

Senior Minister of State Edwin Tong.

Chairman, I thank the Members for their speeches that were made last week and also for the various suggestions that were canvassed.

The Ministry of Law's (MinLaw's) focus is two-fold:

First, we continually update the legal framework to meet the people's needs as well as the businesses', that is, all those who call Singapore home. Fundamentally, our rule of law must remain strong. Our legal framework must have laws that are relevant and also updated.

Second, we are strengthening Singapore’s position as the premier legal services hub for Asia, and beyond. This also supports and contributes to the continuing transformation of Singapore’s economy. We must continue to have a trusted system.

I will touch on these themes, as follows, and I will begin by giving an update on my Ministry's efforts to continually update the legal framework to meet those evolving needs. Mr Christopher de Souza touched on this.

On criminal justice, we passed extensive amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code and Evidence Act last year. We have since implemented most of the measures. My Ministry also worked closely with the Ministry of Home Affairs on wide-ranging amendments to the Penal Code and other substantive criminal laws that were introduced in Parliament earlier this year. A major focus of these amendments is to enhance legal protections for vulnerable victims of crime and ensure that our criminal justice framework addresses new forms of crime effectively.

As for family justice, we set up a committee with the Ministry of Social and Family Development and the Family Justice Courts last year to build on the wide-ranging changes made in 2014. Its report will be released soon. We will consider the committee’s recommendations thereafter.

Moving on to civil justice, we amended the Supreme Court of Judicature Act in October 2018 to enhance efficiency in Court procedures and allow the Courts to better manage proceedings. That same month, two committees, one convened by my Ministry and another by the Judiciary, proposed a number of changes to enhance the efficiency and affordability of our Courts. The public consultation on these proposals concluded on 31 January 2019. We are reviewing the feedback and will make the necessary legislative amendments this year.

We will also work on legislation this year to strengthen the enforcement of civil orders.

These proposals work together, and they also overlap with one another, to ensure that our Court processes continue to provide effective access to justice. And that must remain the hallmark of our judicial system.

Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked about promoting the use of mediation for commercial disputes. First, I am encouraged to hear about his story and also his very positive experience with the Mediation Centre. This vindicates the efforts of our mediation community to enhance mediation as an effective alternative dispute resolution tool.

Litigants are currently encouraged to attempt an amicable resolution of their disputes through alternative dispute resolution (ADR). This can include mediation, neutral evaluation or even attempting to negotiate settlements privately.

Two of the changes proposed by the committees relate to ADR: firstly, making it mandatory for parties to attempt to resolve their disputes before resorting to litigation; and secondly, empowering the Court to order parties to attend ADR if the Court is of the view that the parties had failed to reasonably consider ADR prior to commencing the legal proceedings.

We recognise that ADR mechanisms, such as mediation, can be a valuable tool in resolving disputes or providing a forum for parties to ventilate key issues. We will decide how best to encourage the use of ADR after considering feedback on these proposals.

Moving on to the area of community justice, Mr Patrick Tay asked about cases filed under the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA). As at 31 December 2018, 535 applications for Protection Orders have been filed. Of these, 213 Protection Orders and 193 Expedited Protection Orders were granted. These include applications by victims of workplace harassment. Ninety-nine applications for Protection Orders were referred to the State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution. Of the 96 cases that completed mediation, 59 reached a settlement leading to a withdrawal of the application or the grant of a Consent Protection Order.

Over the same period, 12 civil proceedings for statutory damages have been brought under section 11 of POHA, while 11 applications for non-publication orders under section 15 of POHA have been filed.

Three thousand and eighty-nine Magistrate's Complaints have been filed for alleged POHA offences, while 51 Magistrate’s Complaints have been filed for alleged breaches of Protection Orders or Expedited Protection Orders. About three out of 10 Magistrate's Complaints, inclusive of those related to POHA, underwent mediation. And about 80% of these cases reached a settlement. One thousand seven hundred and fourteen criminal cases with POHA charges have also been commenced by the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

We note Mr Patrick Tay's suggestion to track the types of cases filed and will work with the State Courts to explore this further.

As for the reporting and publication of POHA cases, any person may ask for a copy of the Court’s decision. The Court may consider factors, such as whether the applicant has a sufficient interest in the action or any other legitimate reason for making the request in assessing whether to grant the request. In every POHA case, oral grounds of decision are provided to explain the Court’s reasons for its decision. As in all cases in the State Courts, full written grounds will be published if there is an appeal to the High Court on the matter.

Mr Murali Pillai asked for an update on our review of the probate and administration regime. This review is taking place against the backdrop of a whole-of-Government effort to improve the experience of citizens and also their loved ones at the end-of-life. My Ministry is working with the Ministry of Health, the Government Technology Agency (GovTech) and also several other Government agencies to develop a Moments of Life Digital Portal to support Singaporeans as they deal with their estate management matters or those of their loved ones in the end-of-life journey. Features will also include step-by-step guidance on making wills and settling post-death estate matters. A beta version will be released by the end of 2019.

On top of that, we are also considering ways in which we can simplify estate administration, how the process is for affected families, particularly where smaller estates are concerned. So, we are making the process simpler, more straightforward, less expensive for the simpler, smaller cases but, at the same time, also going upstream to help with estate management and planning prior to that stage.

Mr Christopher de Souza and Mdm Rahayu Mahzam asked about legal aid. We recently amended the Legal Aid and Advice Act to simplify the means test, provide greater flexibility to grant aid and also improve on the overall administration of legal aid. These changes will be implemented in the second half of this year.

On criminal legal aid, the number of accused persons assisted per year has risen after the Government introduced direct funding in 2015. the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme assisted almost 1,600 cases in 2018, almost four times the number of cases that were assisted pre-2015, before the Government funding. We will continue to review these schemes to ensure that persons of limited means, the right target clientele for this scheme, will remain assisted and will have access to justice.

Mdm Rahayu Mahzam also asked about supporting lawyers' low bono efforts. We are working with our partners, the Law Society Pro Bono Services and the Singapore Academy of Law, to study how we can further enhance support for pro bono and also low bono efforts.

Mr Chen Show Mao also asked about legal aid for arbitration in disputes over consumer contracts. As a general rule, legal aid is not provided for arbitration because it is a private, consensual dispute mechanism and it is typically used for high-value commercial dispute resolution. Nonetheless, I would like to assure Mr Chen Show Mao that there are several avenues available for such consumers to seek assistance and redress. Let me just outline a few.

Before consumers undergo arbitration, they can obtain free legal advice from the Legal Aid Bureau (LAB) on the arbitration clauses in the contract. This can help consumers better understand their rights and obligations under the contract, and LAB can also provide substantive advice and also legal options available to the consumer. Consumers who then wish to take their dispute to resolution by arbitration in a quick and cost-effective manner can consider the Law Society's Pro Bono Arbitration Scheme, which adopts streamlined procedures and, more importantly, waives the fees of the sole arbitrators in those cases. If the consumer wishes to challenge the arbitration clause or the arbitration award, he can apply for legal aid for representation in Court. And LAB will represent such consumers if there are legal merits in his case.

That said, if Mr Chen Show Mao is able to provide us with the specific case that he has encountered. In the example he cited last week, there is a case where a consumer is in a situation where he has got no choice over the entry into the contract. My Ministry will review the case and see what we can do to assist on a case-by-case basis. On top of that, we will also continue to monitor developments in this area with the Ministry of Trade and Industry since it concerns consumer protection and consider whether further steps need to be taken.

A number of Members have asked specifically about the intellectual property (IP) regime in Singapore, and I will turn to that next. The Minister for Finance spoke about positioning Singapore as a "Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise" for our next phase of growth, so these are quite pertinent questions which Members have raised. My Ministry's efforts in the area of IP will support this push in four major ways.

First, we are positioning our IP system to better support creators and innovators. Mr Patrick Tay asked about protecting the IP rights of creators. We will be amending the Copyright Act to better support creators in this digital age. For example, creators will find it easier to build their reputation as people who use their works will then have to properly acknowledge the creator. Creators of certain commissioned works will also enjoy default ownership of their works whereas, previously, the commissioning party would own the works.

As for innovators, innovative businesses in data analytics will find it easier to mine data for analysis. Details can be found in the Copyright Review Report, a fairly comprehensive report which was released in January 2019.

At the same time, we are also reviewing the IP dispute resolution system to make it more accessible, especially for individuals and small and medium enterprises (SMEs), so that they can more effectively safeguard their rights. We held a public consultation on proposed reforms in late 2018 and we are now studying the feedback that was received from the community for the next phase.

Mr Patrick Tay also asked about helping Fintech startups to protect their IP. Last year, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) introduced a FinTech Fast Track Initiative which accelerates the file-to-grant period of deserving FinTech patents to approximately six months, and that is in place of the usual two to four years. IPOS will extend this initiative for a further year to 25 April 2020. FinTech startups can also avail themselves of other assistance schemes available to Singapore businesses, some of which I am going to highlight.

Second, we are helping Singapore businesses in commercialising their IP rights. Ms Jessica Tan asked about this. There are various forms of assistance already available to enterprises, in particular, SMEs and startups, on IP strategy and management:

Businesses that need preliminary advice on IP strategies to support their business plans or on IP legal issues can tap on IPOS' IP Business Clinics and Legal Clinics. These are available to small businesses, individuals and sole proprietors, and approximately 600 businesses have availed themselves of the use of these clinics since 2015.

IPOS also provides specialised consultancy services on IP audit, due diligence and strategy to help enterprises identify their intangible assets and also integrate them into their own strategies for growth and expansion. About 80 enterprises have benefited from these services, with close to 90% of them being either SMEs or startups. When enterprises seek assistance in developing their IP strategy management capabilities, eligible costs may also be defrayed under Enterprise Singapore's Market Readiness Assistance Grant and the Enterprise Development Grant.

While there is still some way to go in encouraging businesses to leverage their IP growth and take advantage of the ecosystem, we have seen a number of success stories. One example is OTSAW Digital, an SME which builds autonomous robots for the security industry. IPOS assisted the company in developing its IP strategy – how to protect and manage its IP and, thereafter, exploit it, as well as other intangible assets.

OTSAW now has internal processes to identify IP that is developed and to protect it appropriately. It is also more aware of IP-related issues when negotiating with other business partners and also, of course, potential investors. The company is now expanding internationally into Malaysia, Indonesia and the Chinese markets. We are naturally excited to see them grow as they leverage their startup position, IP rights, and look forward to observing their continued success.

Third, we are making it easier for businesses to commercialise IP from the public sector. The National IP Protocol was developed and rolled out in April 2018 to encourage commercialisation of public sector IP and also research and development outputs. It streamlines IP practices in our public research institutes, universities and public agencies to reduce the time and effort needed to structure commercialisation agreements entered into with the private sector. This will foster greater collaboration between the private sector businesses on the one hand and the public sector.

Finally, and in response to Ms Jessica Tan's question on job opportunities, we have also several initiatives to develop talent and create jobs in the IP sector. IPOS has partnered SkillsFuture Singapore to develop the first national level skills development framework for the IP sector. This will be rolled out in August 2019. This framework will provide comprehensive information on the career options, skills needed for the various job roles, and also the training programmes relevant for the IP sector. This will aid in the upskilling of new entrants and also existing IP professionals.

IPOS has also partnered Workforce Singapore on the IP Professional Conversion Programme, and with SkillsFuture Singapore on the SkillsFuture Study Awards. These schemes provide financial support for the reskilling of newly-hired employees and for individuals who are seeking to deepen and broaden their skills.

We are also developing programmes to ensure that trained individuals are recognised with certifications. For example, IPOS launched a Specialist Certificate in Intangible Asset Management in January 2019 and also collaborated with the Singapore University of Social Sciences to launch a Master of IP and Innovation Management programme in 2017. This year, the first batch of 14 students is expected to graduate from this programme, with another 21 expected in the next cohort.

All these measures work towards ensuring that our legal system meets the needs of all, whether it is the man-in-the-street or businesses large or small who call Singapore home. Our legal system as a whole also plays a broader role as a supporting pillar for the next phase of Singapore’s economic transformation. On this, there are two interlocking aspects of my Ministry's efforts to provide this support.

First, we are strengthening Singapore's position as an international legal services hub.

Second, we are working to establish Singapore as a thought leader of international rule of law and pursuing international cooperation.

These mutually reinforcing efforts together underpin our position in an increasingly uncertain world as a trusted, stable centre for law and business, and I would like to elaborate on these few points now.

First, we are investing in strengthening Singapore's position as a premier legal services hub, both regionally as well as globally. This means strengthening our position as a dispute resolution centre, growing new areas to meet the demands of international legal services, and finally, promoting the use of Singapore law to meet business needs.

There are three broad categories of efforts related to dispute resolution.

First, we have been and we continue to position Singapore as a trusted and neutral forum for dispute resolution. We have done well in international dispute resolution, but we will continue to build on these efforts to further enhance our position. We are now the third most preferred seat of arbitration globally. The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) is also the third most preferred arbitral institution in the world. And SIAC, along with the Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC) and the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC), have all seen increases in caseload over the years. For SIAC, the highest caseload was 452 cases in 2017, of which 83% were international in nature. As for SIMC, as of 31 December 2018, it had received a total of 68 case filings from parties from more than 20 different jurisdictions. For SICC, 29 cases have reached SICC since it was established in 2015.

Mr Murali Pillai asked for an update on SICC. Beyond just the caseload alone, what SICC has been working very hard on is to enhance the enforceability of SICC judgments.

In 2018, our Supreme Court and the Supreme People's Court of China signed a Memorandum of Guidance on the recognition and enforcement of money judgments in commercial cases. This means that parties who have commercial dealings are much clearer on how any money judgments arising from disputes can be enforced against any other party, whether in Singapore or in China.

Mr Murali Pillai also asked about third-party funding, for an update in the area of international arbitration. My Ministry has consulted a public consultation to obtain feedback from stakeholders on how the reforms have been working in practice. We also asked if there was a need to extend third-party funding to new areas.

Generally, it has been positive. Mr Murali Pillai would be pleased to know that funders have seen an upturn in the requests for funding in Singapore and there has also been support for expansion. We are currently reviewing the overall framework, how it might work, including areas for potential extension into proceedings commenced in SICC and any appeals from SICC.

Second, we must continue to invest in order to strengthen our leadership position. We are bolstering our infrastructure to meet demand and also support growth. The expansion of Maxwell Chambers is on track. The newly refurbished building located next to it, the Maxwell Chambers Suites, will be launched in the third quarter of 2019, shortly. This will add 120,000 square feet of floor space and triple Maxwell Chambers' current size.

But it is not just about size or how big the physical infrastructure is.

We need to deepen our collaborations with international institutions. And on this score, we have attracted top arbitral institutions to set up offices in Singapore. The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, for instance, has set up a case management office here. The Permanent Court of Arbitration has its new office in Singapore, its first in Asia. SIAC has also signed memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with a number of Chinese institutions in 2018 alone. China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission, one of the leading commissions in China for dispute resolution, an MOU was signed in 2018. Likewise, an MOU was also signed with the Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration as well as with the Xi'an Arbitration Commission.

As far as mediation is concerned, SIMC signed an MOU in 2018 with the Asian Development Bank to help resolve disputes that may arise in infrastructure public-private partnership projects, and an MOU with the China Council for Promotion of International Trade Mediation Centre in January 2019.

Further to our efforts in enhancing Singapore's attractiveness as a forum for dispute resolution, we have also identified several high-growth practice areas to develop.

First, in the area of insolvency and debt restructuring. We amended the Companies Act previously and now we have got an omnibus Act that was passed in 2018, the Insolvency Restructuring and Dissolution Act. And that was the final piece of principal legislation in our phased implementation of the recommendations of the Law Review Committee as well as the Committee to Strengthen Singapore as an International Centre for Debt Structuring.

So, we now have legislation that seeks to properly balance the interests of debtors and creditors as they are undergoing restructuring in Singapore.

The Act, which we target to bring into force this year, benefits local businesses needing help, positions Singapore as a location of choice for foreign debtors to restructure and also creates new opportunities for insolvency professionals, distressed debt funds and also financial institutions.

Second, in the area of Projects and Infrastructure. We have taken steps to capture the increasing demand for legal services in this area. Infrastructure Asia, Singapore's infrastructure office, was launched in October 2018. This is an office set up by the Monetary Authority of Singapore, Enterprise Singapore, and supported by MinLaw through our Professional Services Programme Office. It provides a platform for information exchange on infrastructure opportunities in Asia, facilitates investments and financing, and gives Singapore-based infrastructure players access to these opportunities.

In the same month, we also launched the Singapore Infrastructure Dispute-Management Protocol. It helps to proactively manage differences to prevent them from escalating into disputes and also minimise the risks of time and cost overruns, all of which aimed at enhancing and improving on the large-scale infrastructure ecosystem in Singapore.

Mr Christopher de Souza has rightly pointed out that Singapore's position as an international legal services hub can be further strengthened by promoting the use of Singapore law. We agree. And Singapore law is well-placed to meet the legal needs of businesses in Asia, particularly those businesses that are previously familiar with or accustomed to using English law.

Singapore law benefits from its roots in the English common law system but has gone on to evolve to remain modern and relevant. And overlaid on our common law are legal frameworks and statutes which are often developed in very close consultation with the industry users. Those who choose Singapore law choose to do so as they wish to tap into a legal system that is not just familiar but one which is trusted, both in Singapore as well as internationally.

The promotion of Singapore law does not, however, just involve Government stakeholders, but is also driven from the ground up, by the Bar and from others within this ecosystem. For example, in October 2018, the Singapore Academy of Law and the Singapore Venture Capital and Private Equity Association launched the Venture Capital Investment Model Agreements (VIMA). This is a set of standard-form documents which make the process of structuring a deal faster, quicker and more cost-efficient for startups and venture capital firms. VIMA incorporates Singapore law as the governing law and Singapore as the chosen dispute resolution forum.

My Ministry also works with the universities to encourage research that helps to develop and strengthen Singapore law. The intent is to ensure that our law remains cutting-edge, and not just cutting-edge, but also one that meets the needs of our modern businesses. We continue to welcome views and suggestions from practitioners and businessmen alike on how we can further strengthen and enhance these laws.

Besides the efforts to strengthen our position as a premier legal services hub, we are also investing in establishing Singapore as a thought leader in international rule of law efforts and also participating in legal cooperation.

First, we want to establish Singapore as an advocate of, and a thought leader in, international rule of law efforts. The Singapore Convention on Mediation will be the first convention under the UN auspices to be named after Singapore. This reinforces Singapore's reputation brand as a forum of choice for cross-border dispute resolution and also other forms of alternative dispute resolutions. We also engage actively in international efforts to design new international rules to ensure that Singapore's perspectives and our unique circumstances are not ignored. For example, my Ministry, together with other Ministries, worked to secure Singapore's re-election as a member of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law from 2019. This will enable Singapore to continue to actively participate in the development of international trade law.

We have also worked hard to promote international law scholarship, particularly in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) law context. For instance, we supported the launch of the ASEAN Law Academy at the National University of Singapore (NUS) last year. At the same time, we must also ensure that we are a responsible global citizen, if we are to earn and maintain the trust of the international community. There are two aspects to international cooperation that I will touch on: criminal cooperation and civil cooperation.

As a sign of our commitment to international cooperation to combat transnational crime, we concluded the Model ASEAN Extradition Treaty in 2018 and launched the commencement of negotiations for an ASEAN Extradition Treaty. We also launched the commencement of negotiations on a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty with China.

We are pursuing a number of efforts in the area of civil cooperation as well. Mr Murali Pillai asked whether Singapore intends to accede to the Hague Apostille Convention. My Ministry is currently studying the possibility of doing so. We have begun discussions with stakeholders, engaged representatives from the Hague Conference about the practicalities and the steps needed in implementing the Convention.

All of these efforts translate into more opportunities for Singapore law practices. Both Mr Christopher de Souza and Mdm Rahayu Mahzam have asked how Singapore law practices are being assisted to take advantage of the opportunities created for them.

The final area that I will, therefore, cover relates to our efforts to support Singapore law practices (SLPs) to adapt. And not just that, but to go beyond and take advantage of these opportunities in this broader landscape that has been curated. Broadly, we are supporting SLPs in three ways.

First, in new business areas. To sustain their business in the face of competition and technological disruption and, as Ms Rahayu Mahzam has pointed out, law firms need to venture into new practice areas. We cannot keep holding on to the conventional ones. My Ministry will continue to help Singapore lawyers develop capabilities in high-growth practice areas. To give an example, we worked with the NUS Faculty of Law to roll out "The Project Finance Academy", a three-day practical hands-on workshop in November 2018 to take participants through the main legal considerations in structuring project financing transactions and negotiating infrastructure deals.

We also encourage and support law firms to develop new practice areas and access regional opportunities. Also, in response to Ms Rahayu Mahzam's suggestion on continuing professional development (CPD) courses, the Singapore Academy of Law and the Law Society of Singapore have been developing various CPD programmes and courses, designed in a new way, to equip practitioners interested in deepening or building practices in new areas. Some of these programmes are also approved for SkillsFuture credits. Mdm Rahayu Mahzam might like to know. We will share the feedback that has been given by Ms Rahayu Mahzam last week with the Singapore Academy of Law and the Law Society.

On Ms Rahayu Mahzam's point about providing customised consultancy services to small and medium firms, the Singapore Academy of Law's Future Law Innovation Programme (FLIP) recently launched an initiative, where, for as low as $1,500, small and medium-sized law firms can engage a consultant to review their workflows and advise how they can better harness and adopt technology to help with the process more efficiently and perhaps more importantly for these small firms also more cost-effectively.

Second, on internationalisation. My Ministry is supporting the efforts of SLPs to capture a greater share of international demand for legal services. In other words, look not just at Singapore as the market, but to go beyond Singapore, into the region and globally. Together with the Law Society of Singapore and the then-International Enterprise (IE) Singapore, we launched the Lawyers Go Global programme in February 2018.

The programme helps lawyers expand their networks outside Singapore through mission trips, training and also a branding exercise for the Singapore lawyer brand. In the last 12 months, close to 60 lawyers have participated in three mission trips. We have also stepped up our engagements in Asia. My Ministry has led our law firms and institutions on promotion trips to Asian countries. I visited China earlier this year to strengthen Singapore-China legal and judicial cooperation. During my visit, I attended and spoke at the "China-Singapore International Commercial Dispute Resolution Conference", a first of its kind, jointly organised by Singapore and China.

Prior to this visit, 24 lawyers from six leading firms in China's Shaanxi province undertook a month-long attachment in Singapore as part of MinLaw's initiative to help Chinese lawyers better understand what Singapore has to offer as a business hub for Chinese companies as well as also to help Singapore lawyers connect with their Chinese counterparts and learn about and tap into opportunities in the Belt and Road Initiative.

Senior Minister of State, if you could just wrap up. You have got one minute to go.

Yes.

Third, in the adoption of technology, we are supporting law practices to keep up to date with technology. So, Members might like to know that under the Tech Start for Law scheme, SLPs have been given 70% funding, 115 law practices of which 99% are small and medium-sized ones have collectively adopted 143 of such solutions. In the longer term, we will work with the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) to develop a broader-term roadmap for up to 2030, in identifying technologies that will impact and change the delivery of legal services.

Fourth, we continue the development of legal talent not just for lawyers but also for sub-specialists like paralegals. We continue to work closely with the law schools to ensure the law curriculum, the training, are robust and prepare our lawyers and paralegals for future generations. We will also continue to support Singapore lawyers to deepen their skills through the SkillsFuture programmes, as I mentioned earlier.

Mr Chairman, just give me a few minutes as I wrap up.

I will conclude with the question that drives all of us – what purposes must the legal framework serve?

The guillotine time is 11.55 am. So, assuming clarifications do not extend beyond that, I am happy to eat into clarification time. But only a few minutes. And counting.

All right, then I will go on. Members might like to know that since 2016, in the context of supporting Singapore lawyers, 78 Singaporean lawyers and inhouse counsel have successfully applied for the SkillsFuture Study Award for the legal sector to hone leadership skills in management of their own law firms. So, the Singapore Academy of Law and INSEAD run a Law Firm Leadership Programme. At the same time, SkillsFuture also supports qualifications for solicitors to seek admission as solicitors of England and Wales through the Qualified Lawyers Transfer Scheme.

From 1 April 2019, we will also be supporting lawyers who wish to take the New York State Bar exam, through the SkillsFuture Study Award as well.

The role of paralegals is growing and we recognise the integral roles that they and other legal support professionals play in this industry. So, we will also continue to work with the Singapore Academy of Law on its programme, Legal Industry Framework for Training and Education for paralegals. This maps out the competency and training that are needed for paralegals to move up the value chain and support legal services.

In addition, we also provided pathways for paralegals who wish to upskill and advance their career. To give an example, 80% of places in the Singapore University of Social Sciences Law School are set aside for mature students, including paralegals.

Mr Chairman, allow me to conclude now.

As I mentioned earlier, we ask ourselves: what purpose must our legal framework serve? We must have a legal framework that is fair, transparent, updated and remains relevant to the users of the system and, most importantly, underpinned by a strong rule of law. It must then meet the needs of individuals and businesses who call Singapore home. We do this through ensuring that our criminal, civil and family justice networks and frameworks are up to date and making sure that persons of limited means have and will continue to have access to justice.

Second, on a broader level, the legal framework must support Singapore’s continuing economic growth. This is especially crucial as we enter a season of global economic uncertainty. While it will pose challenges, there will also be many opportunities from these challenges and disruptions that we can reap, if we can leverage our position as a stable and trusted centre for law and businesses.

None of this, however, can be done by the Government alone. In particular, therefore, I wish to record my appreciation and gratitude to the many members of the Bar for their numerous contributions to the work of my Ministry. Many have given their time and expertise to sit on our committees, give feedback during consultations, and also collaborate with us on our many initiatives, both locally as well as overseas. I am grateful for their close involvement in all that we do, and I look forward to building on this strong relationship. On our end, we will continue to work with all stakeholders to achieve all of the objectives I have just set out. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Three minutes. Clarifications, please. Mr Christopher de Souza.

I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State. I saw quite a thick file, and if there is anything more the Senior Minister of State would like to say on SkillsFuture, legal technology use in Singapore, and regional and global outreach —

This is clarification, not an excuse for extra speech time.

In addition to those clarifications, Mr Chairman, the use of SMC is very positive. But at the same time, where we have a lot of cases settled and the settlements are kept confidential, it does impact the development of legal jurisprudence in Singapore. So, in addition to the clarifications that I asked previously, would there be a move to encourage parties who do not mind having their settlements non-confidential in nature and allow for the mediators' understanding and grounds in coming to his/her conclusion published, and quite possibly published as a judgment of Court or a decision of the SMC?

I thank the Member's question on mediation. Most mediations – and I think Mr Sitoh Yih Pin's own experience has been the same – are private and confidential for a number of reasons. People choose to look at the dispute from different angles. Mediation allows you to explore resolution of the dispute on means which are completely extralegal on different considerations, such as commercial considerations or maybe confidentiality considerations.

So, it might not necessarily add to legal jurisprudence to have those mediation agreements published. But I understand Mr Christopher de Souza's point on those cases where there might be legal jurisprudence and legal merit in doing so. With the consent of the parties, obviously, and the mediators, that can be considered.

On Mr Christopher de Souza's first point – and I welcome that because it gives me an opportunity to explain this a little bit more – we do see development in upskilling of know-how, competencies as a very important part of legal development. We have to make sure that our lawyers who come out from law school and those who come out from their practice traineeship are properly equipped for practice. Mr Christopher de Souza knows that we have been looking very closely at what we do with practice traineeship. The Committee has given a very extensive discussion on that.

On top of that, those who are already in practice, either as lawyers or those who are now serving a legal fraternity as paralegals or other support professionals, there must be ample opportunity to upskill. We are very glad to be working with SkillsFuture and the Academy of Law as well, in having a broader and more diverse mix of opportunities available and supported by SkillsFuture, so that these individuals who are already in the system can upskill themselves and enhance their career opportunities and, overall, lend to the improvement of the legal landscape that we have.

Any other clarifications? Mr Christopher de Souza, would you like to withdraw the amendment?

Mr Chairman, Sir, we have had a productive debate, first starting on Friday and then now concluding on Monday. I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State Edwin Tong for his comprehensive responses to our cuts.

Sir, Singapore continues to have an efficient and effective governance system based on the rule of law due to the hard work of many players in the legal industry. These include MinLaw, IPOS, the Insolvency and Public Trustee's Office and many other public officers.

So, in conclusion, a big thank you to Minister K Shanmugam, Senior Minister of State Edwin Tong, MinLaw and the officers for their hard work. With that, Mr Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $269,697,500 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $323,398,500 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]

Head V, Ministry of Trade and Industry. Mr Liang Eng Hwa.

Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head V of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

Sir, the uncertainty in the global economy and, more fundamentally, the fast pace of technological advancements necessitates that we constantly seek new positioning in the global marketplace, develop new niches and recalibrate our value propositions.

One value proposition that we have been very successful at is in the area of developing Singapore as a regional hub, such as in air and sea transportation, petrochemical, trading centre, finance and banking. These regional hubs have helped better connect and plug our tiny island to the rest of the world.

We should continue to invest and upgrade our physical connectivity, such as the building of Changi Airport Terminal 5 (T5), Tuas Port and the other infrastructure, to stay ahead of the pack.

While we know that many economies also have similar aspirations and many do want to model after the Singapore experience, with enough capital, there is no stopping these countries in the region from building and replicating physical hubs, such as ports, airports or other new specific theme hubs.

So, just competing on building more state-of-the-art physical infrastructure alone is not enough to maintain our superiority in the global connectivity race. We need to work on the soft attributes and continually develop the non-physical connectivity aspects in areas, such as the digital infrastructure, data risk capital, legal system and regulations, talent and so on.

In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister how we could anchor ourselves as a key node in the global trade flows. What are our plans to enhance both our physical and non-physical connectivity?

Sir, in Budget 2019, a slew of schemes and programmes aimed at helping enterprises to deepen capabilities and to scale up were announced, with particular emphasis on boosting effectiveness and achieving better outcomes from these schemes. The key words that I picked up are "scale up and growing our enterprises".

We have a diverse enterprise landscape of about 200,000 companies, from micro-enterprises to large firms, each with varying level of value contribution and labour productivity. Hence, a one-size-fits-all approach will not be an optimal strategy and not an effective use of resource.

In this deepened phase of transformation, what is needed to help promising companies are more customised approaches to support enterprise growth.

Besides the enhancement and extension of the existing schemes, such as the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG), Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) and the Enterprise Financing Scheme (EFS), the Finance Minister also announced new schemes, such as Scale-up SG, Innovation Agents Programme and so on.

Can I ask the Minister how the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) and the economic agencies intend to support and help the different sizes of companies to transform and to improve productivity?

One of the highlights of this year's Budget Statement is the tightening of the Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC) for the service sector. Understandably, the tightening of foreign workers' quota will be painful to some companies which are unable to find local workers.

There are many of the smaller companies who are still heavily dependent on foreign labour to sustain their businesses. How can we help these businesses reduce their dependence on foreign labour? How could we help the enterprises to be more labour-efficient by adopting technology and digitalisation? How can we help companies to improve productivity and be in a position to hire more local workers and to support our Progressive Wage Model?

Sir, Trade Associations and Chambers (TACs) are the key enablers in the transformation journey. By being the representative organisation with its outreach and network, TACs can be an influential multiplier and help bring more companies on board into sectoral transformational efforts, such as Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs).

In our Government Parliamentary Committee for Finance, Trade and Industry engagement with businesses as well as the TACs, the TAC leaders shared about the heavy workload and pressures they are under, subjected to, to participate in the ITM-related transformation efforts and work. They feel a great sense of heavy responsibility on their shoulders. Some TACs said that they only have about five to six headcounts in their association, and their leaders are themselves facing severe business challenges. So, the TACs need more support and encouragement.

I understand that there are schemes, such as the Local Enterprise and Association Development (LEAD) programmes administered by Enterprise Singapore (ESG), that can help TACs to play a more proactive role to drive capability development and internationalisation efforts. Can I ask what is the take-up rate so far of the LEAD programme by the TACs, and has it been effective?

Can I also ask whether those TACs that are involved in the ITMs, are they adequately resourced and ready to support the next phase of a much deeper transformational effort?

Sir, in my interactions with the businesses, some companies also told me that they are quite happy and contented with their current state of their businesses and are not prepared to take new growth risks, even despite the various attractive schemes available to them. Well, it is their business call, and we have to respect that. So, can I also ask the Minister what have we done to enthuse businesses with the external opportunities out there, the network and the trade partnership that we have established? How can we get the companies to see the better commercial returns by seeking growth, innovation and improving productivity?

Finally, I would like to hear from the Minister how MTI will prepare Singapore for the next stage of growth. What are the enablers that we need to further strengthen and create to enhance our overall value proposition?

[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]

Mr Chairman, Sir, though we achieved 3.2% gross domestic product (GDP) growth for 2018, which was actually lower than 2017 at 3.9%, there is a concern that we have achieved the 2018 growth through a declining quarter-to-quarter. The usual peak season at the end of 2018 did not happen for some of the sectors.

Into 2019, there are many uncertainties. Based on the feedback and survey of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) by the different chambers of commerce, there is some pessimism. But with a forecast of 1.5% to 3.5% for growth this year, this range is only of moderate growth. Our economy is still dependent on manufacturing. The services sector is maintaining its growth trend. Manufacturing, being a pillar of our economy, over-reliance on this sector is a concern unless the manufacturing sector transforms itself to a higher value-add.

As many local businesses are concerned with 2019, they harbour some of the hopes and dreams to go overseas. But what are the plans the Government has to implement a higher range of growth for the forecast, as well as strengthening the enterprises?

Though I believe there is some investment sense in not putting all our eggs in one basket in all sectors, we have to be selective with our limited resources. What are the specific sectors that the Government may want to look at to help uplift the growth to the higher range of our forecast?

Mr Chairman, Sir, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Economic Committee 2025 plan is well underway. And ASEAN is poised to be the fourth largest economy by GDP in 2030 as the other countries in ASEAN hit their stride in terms of economic growth. In addition to any initiatives and support from the Government, it is imperative that Singapore's well-calibrated approach to regulation is maintained so that our businesses continue to stay competitive to tap on opportunities in ASEAN. Can the Ministry provide an update on the initiatives that the Ministry has undertaken to prepare our businesses to better seize the opportunities presented by the impending ASEAN expansion?

Additionally, given that businesses face greater uncertainty and a weaker economic outlook in part due to the geopolitical uncertainty with the United States (US)-China trade conflict, is the Ministry able to share information on how it has helped our businesses seize opportunities presented by the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) since it was first announced by China in 2013? Are the planned initiatives to help businesses explore the ASEAN region different from those of the BRI?

Mr Chairman, the ASEAN region has been growing in affluence. Governments have been more willing to invest in recent years, and many are eyeing the sectors in which Singapore is leading in the region. Many of our neighbours are also doing a good job catching up with us. Batam, for example, has increased in investments to develop local shipping and manufacturing sectors. In Malaysia, they have been building up their ports and getting into the oil tanking business in a big way. Many of the oil companies are also taking up the storage tanks to store their oil cargoes.

So, too, in medicine. Penang and Kuala Lumpur, besides Bangkok in Thailand, offer competitive prices for those seeking medical treatment. The strong Singapore dollar has also been a factor in encouraging medical tourism to other locations in ASEAN. Healthy economic growth in the region is to be celebrated, but this means that we will have to do more to stay competitive and relevant. Our strategic location has given us an edge in the region, but we must take more proactive measures to enhance our global connectivity and continue to position ourselves as a key node in the global flows, especially within the ASEAN region. This will apply not only to physical connectivity like our airport and air routes but also non-physical modes. Can MTI provide updates on the Ministry's efforts to enhance our modes of connectivity in the region?

Singapore's economic transformation over the last few decades owes much to its position as a regional and global economic hub. Indeed, Singapore's economic history is rooted in its beginnings as a thriving, open port.

As we stand at the dawn of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, how can we continue to build on our status as a world-class "hub", leveraging such technologies as self-learning machines, robots, autonomous vehicles and the Internet of Things? These new technologies will generate huge waves of change, transforming the way we work, live, consume, trade and invest. The emerging technologies will exert disruptive impact on jobs, firms and overall economies at an unprecedented speed. As a small open economy, our response must be to embrace the technological advancements to come and to use them as new opportunities for ourselves.

The Finance Minister spoke about positioning Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise. I believe Singapore is well-poised to deploy our strengths towards fulfilling this vision.

However, as Mr Liang Eng Hwa said, other countries and regions are not standing still. According to innovation strategist Charlie Ang, countries and their companies can attain sustained economic supremacy if they possess leading edge, proprietary artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities. The infusion of superior AI technologies into national industries, exported products and digital platforms is likely to be the next source of national competitive advantage. McKinsey predicts that “Leading AI” countries could capture an additional 20% to 25% in net economic benefits.

I would like to ask the Minister how we can strengthen our capabilities on the data, financial, regulatory and technology fronts. What can we learn from established centres, such as Silicon Valley, whilst carving out a unique proposition that distinguishes us, Singapore, from other emerging centres, such as the Greater Bay Area? Which areas should Singapore focus our investments? How much risk are we willing to tolerate in this journey towards rapid and breakthrough innovations? What new social compact do we need to foster with our citizens as we venture boldly into unchartered waters fraught with risks and failures, but rich with untold rewards and returns?

Chairman, physical and non-physical connectivity has traditionally underpinned Singapore's success as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise. As ASEAN and the larger Asian region continues to grow, they are also becoming better connected to the world. Across the world, technology is also changing the way people and business connect with one another, as well as shortening and shifting supply chains and value chains. Therefore, it is essential for Singapore to constantly review the current and future plans for both our physical and non-physical connectivity, so that we can stay ahead of the game and tap on new opportunities.

As such, can MTI share our plans, moving forward to strengthen our ports, airports, logistics and customs clearance as well as data connectivity? Can MTI also share how we are building up our non-physical connectivity for Asia and ASEAN? In particular, can MTI provide an update on how we have strengthened our footprint in Asia through the Global Innovation Alliance, share details of the upcoming Global Ready Talent Programme and provide an update on how we can help our companies internationalise through various ESG programmes?

Mr Teo Ser Luck, you can take both your cuts together.

We have 24 Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Economic Partnership Agreements with 36 partners, including the recent European Union (EU)-Singapore FTA (EUSFTA). So many businesses, unfortunately, are unaware of what advantages these agreements bring to their businesses, especially those smaller local enterprises.

FTAs are an effective platform to encourage internationalisation of companies. However, it is unclear if any companies are tapping on it.

FTAs should also enable the efficient flow of trade volumes through technology and connectivity. There is also a need to review FTAs which may not be meeting the original objectives or did not impact the trade flows, the bilateral trades of the two countries or the region. It is also important to develop such relationships and build up new FTAs with emerging markets and countries. However, we should not jump ahead of the capacities of our local companies when building up or developing these FTAs because it may lead them to disappointment and, worse, great losses to the company.

Does the Ministry have any quantifiable indicators that measure the impact of these different FTAs, for example, the number of companies benefiting from it? And what can be done to connect our local companies to these platforms that the FTAs can potentially help them?

With the rollout of ITMs for 23 sectors, the focus has been on strengthening companies by transforming them. Transformation also meant changes in processes, business models and strategies. This will certainly impact employees at all levels within the companies that are undergoing transformation or change. There will be resistance to the change, and ITMs may not reach the level of success that would make a difference or what is expected.

I believe there are three aspects of transformation that will impact the workers directly. First, the job redesign, change in the process, change in the scope of the job. Second, job shift, the job itself is no longer available and they have to change sectors. Changing sectors also requires a mindset shift. Thirdly, job displacement, that is, when the job they had is absolutely obsolete and there is no way the workers can find any other jobs with the current skillset or even upgrading some of the skillsets to the next level. Of course, we can say it is still a mindset shift and they are unwilling to change. But how can we help these workers, how can we help these employees, especially when those whose companies are undergoing transformation change to a great level?

Sir, I would like to urge that we give importance to raising the productivity of older workers and to job redesign specifically as a means to achieve that objective by making it part of the ITMs, in addition to leaving it to the efforts of the individual employers. Could we expressly identify job redesign for older workers as a key component of each ITM? Could we set out among the suite of initiatives on improving productivity in any given industry, meaning, making job redesign for older workers part of the suite of initiatives for improving productivity in any given industry so that we may spur the collective thinking that can go into finding better solutions of job design for older workers and channel some of the industry's efforts in innovation in this direction?

Perhaps, resources could be pooled by companies in the industry to develop best practices to modify tools and equipment for use off-the-shelf by older workers throughout the industry.

As businesses in our industries think about how to change, or even disrupt processes in the workplace in order to generate greater value, on the back of better used resources, could we make job redesign for older workers a required part of the syllabus?

We know productivity is one of the four pillars supporting the growth and competitiveness plans of an ITM. Could we envision job redesign for older workers as a key component of the ITMs perhaps as a third horizontal, along with promoting infocomm technology (ICT) adoption and skills development? It can help to support the industries and produce improvements across the economy in the face of an ageing workforce.

Mr Chairman, Sir, all 23 ITMs covering 80% of the Singapore economy have been launched since March 2018. In my capacity as the current President of the Singapore Manufacturing Federation (SMF), we work at different levels to encourage manufacturing businesses to explore the different industry roadmaps.

Within our 10 industry groups, we hold regular dialogues and focus roadmap sessions without members having to provide resources and support from the transformation journey. However, almost a year on from the launch of the ITMS, from conversations with the broader SMF member base, it is apparent that awareness on the specifics of the ITMs is still lacking. Businesses also need help to cope with rapid changes in technology and new business models. Can the Ministry share if it has plans for more impactful communications and assistance to reach a wider audience and, in so doing, lend a hand to the ground efforts of TACs?

Sir, electric vehicles are the future, if Singapore is to meet its commitments under the Paris climate change accord. The Land Transport Authority's figures at end-2018 show Singapore’s electric vehicle fleet to be small. Of the 615,000 cars on our roads, only 28,000 are electric or hybrids. Of 20,000 taxis, just 104 are electric; of 137,000 motorbikes, only two are fully electric/battery-powered.

Can we not do more to promote adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles? We do have tax breaks. But other countries have introduced reduced parking, reduced road usage fees and other incentives which go further than what we currently offer. Our progress seems slow. Raising the diesel tax will not help the environment unless there are attractive, cleaner options as my colleague Mr Dennis Tan argued in his Budget speech.

Also, can we not accelerate developing a network of charging and/or battery swapping stations island-wide? In October 2018, SP Group announced they will be speeding up the installation of electric vehicle charging points and roll out 1,000 such points by 2020. But in Parliament in 2016, the Government stated a goal of 2,000 charging points. I would like to ask the Government by when the 2,000 charging points goal will be met and what will be done to root the operational know-how with Singapore firms and ensure that this can become an exportable industry.

Following on from an earlier Parliamentary Question I filed, I would also urge the Government to reconsider setting a date far into the future for a total fossil fuel vehicle ban, as the United Kingdom (UK) and France have done. A hard target in the long-term future would focus minds and get stakeholders to start planning for the inevitable, thus hastening its arrival.

Sir, in our mature developed economy, Singaporeans constantly seek new economic growth areas for a second wing of growth. Can MTI share what are the new economic growth areas that it is currently pursuing? With increased global demand for food, Singapore can capitalise on this trend even though we have limited production capacity. After all, we have the knack of turning a disadvantage into a strategic strength. We can use our investment and innovation infrastructure and regional hub status to boost efficiency, profitability and yield.

I understand that ESG, through its investment arm, Seeds Capital, has channeled more than $90 million worth of investments into early-stage tech startups with food and agri-tech solutions. Can MTI update on the progress of such investments? How does the Ministry plan to continue to develop Singapore into an urban, agricultural and ecocultural technology hub? How can we better help Singaporeans who are interested in this sector?

Mr Chairman, Sir, I spent the first eight years of my working life in the Economic Development Board (EDB) and am aware that the manufacturing sector has always been a strong anchor of economy.

The Committee on the Future Economy recommended building a globally competitive manufacturing sector, at around 20% of GDP, over the medium term. This underscores the continued importance of manufacturing in our economy. We need to press on with this sector's transformation in order to seize opportunities offered by technology and changing market demands and value chains.

The nature of manufacturing is changing. It increasingly encapsulates a value chain of activities, including services, such as design, research and development (R&D), logistics, marketing and after-sales services. The closer nexus between manufacturing and services has encouraged manufacturers to incorporate services elements into their businesses to differentiate their products and enhance their competitiveness.

In MTI's Committee of Supply (COS) last year, Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon spoke about how the global manufacturing landscape is evolving due to rapid technological developments, and quoted areas, such as robotics and industrial Internet-of-Things. What are some of the promising growth areas which our manufacturing companies can tap on as a result?

Given the pace of change, what can our companies do to capitalise on these technological developments and stay ahead as we transit to Industry 4.0? What is the Government doing to support the growth of our manufacturing sector?

Sir, I have spoken in this House previously about the need for collaboration and building an ecosystem that provides opportunities for our local enterprises to internationalise and build capabilities in the face of the emerging challenges in the market. I understand that MTI has put focus on this and extra emphasis to assist local companies in the past two years.

While I support the ongoing efforts, it is equally important for us to recognise the need to continue developing organic companies and groom them into a full-fledged business or industry. Why is it important to do so? First, encouraging the creation of many startups do not naturally translate into building an industry or development of large local enterprises. Secondly, companies that have been operating for some years in any specific fields may no longer retain the expertise after they sell out the business should the new business owner shift the company’s expertise out of Singapore.

While consolidation and acquisition of businesses are a normal process, what seems to be a trend in our successful local enterprises is the lack of perseverance in building businesses where there is product or service expertise coupled with intellectual property (IP) knowledge. Further, some of these successful local enterprises tend to cash out as soon as the opportunity arises instead of attempting to develop the business to greater heights. This, in the long run, will impede our ability as an economy to have large local enterprises that can contribute meaningfully to our GDP or our workforce.

By not expanding the base business or retaining core expertise in Singapore, it may be difficult over time for us to attract the multinational corporations (MNCs) in continuing investments in Singapore.

I have two suggestions for MTI to consider supplementing what exists today.

First, to tailor the funding and schemes to assist large local enterprises, as opposed to the current grants provision that is uniformly applied across all SMEs. For example, if the company is currently lacking in certain functional domains and the skilled expertise has to be sought from foreign talent pool in the interim, allow them to have a special quota to hire the expertise for a defined period and put in place measures that can ensure that knowledge transfer must take place to develop future inhouse expertise and the local workforce gets an opportunity to step up. Grants that are also given need to be customised and assessed on specific grounds that may not exist in today’s business context or agency's definition. Have that flexibility to review, and the agency officers who review these grants must have some level of business experience or exposure that allows them to understand commercialisation and business cases so that they can better provide these approvals not on the basis of against a checklist.

Second, create a panel of expertise that can act as consultants or mentors to startups or existing firms that wish to internationalise. ESG is providing currently a suite of services that I must say the contact leads in overseas markets have proven to be useful for some of the companies venturing abroad. However, there exists a gap for these companies that are trying to navigate the business culture differences to understand which functions within their entire operations of specific industry will be more effectively performed overseas and how they can collaborate with other Singapore companies in the global arena. Thus, I suggest we begin with the provision of a panel made up of experts from specific industries, retired or existing senior management executives from MNCs, consultants and business owners who wish to volunteer their insights or even take a stake in the companies to enable their leap towards internationalisation. This will be a tremendous help for the startups or local large enterprises.

Sir, for some time now, our economic agencies have been promoting the idea that local companies should go abroad by "hunting in packs", that is to say, by cooperating, forming consortia, sharing networks, know-how, even infrastructure and assets.

We do see this with certain countries. Japanese companies often share certain types of information among themselves relating to overseas markets. Japanese business centres are also commonplace in Asia, providing cheap, good locations for firms just starting up in Asian countries. Japanese and Korean conglomerates are also known to bring suppliers from their own countries when they go abroad.

I would like to ask: after decades of promoting the idea of hunting in packs abroad, what results have we achieved? Has competition among companies in the same industry been an impediment? What have been the successes and failures?

I have two suggestions. Would the Government consider using overseas economic offices to obtain information about commercial tenders, to be shared among relevant Singapore companies in specific industry cooperation circles, with the member firms perhaps paying a small fee to receive these alerts? This kind of tender surveillance is a very simple yet practical form of support that operationalises the idea of hunting in packs, since our Singapore companies would jointly share the cost for such tender surveillance customised to their needs.

Secondly, would the Government consider consolidating economic agency offices abroad in buildings where there are decent serviced offices, so that Government officers can be close to Singapore firms starting up abroad, to facilitate information exchange?

Mr Chairman, Sir, innovation and R&D are key enablers of success in Industrialisation 4.0.

According to the National Research Foundation, Singapore has built a cluster of globally impactful universities and specialised research institutes staffed by cohorts of researchers doing cutting-edge research. There are also numerous research collaborations with industry partners, though most are with large corporations. We are only seeing R&D investments in startups bearing some fruit lately.

The Research, Innovation and Enterprise (RIE2020) Plan recognises that Singapore needs to focus more on the "enterprise" component as our research and innovation base has firmed up. One of the four major thrusts is a sharper focus on value creation, allocating more of the R&D budget towards public-private research collaborations and helping companies to absorb new technologies to further our Future Economy and Smart Nation initiatives.

There appears to be an important gap in this whole plan. While our universities and the Agency for Science, Technology and Research research institutes have offices of technology transfer to support the commercialisation of research and innovation and enhance collaboration with companies, our Government institutions do not have such setups.

The biggest potential here is the commercialisation of military technology, as has been shown by the US and Israel. The Israelis have become renowned worldwide in efficiently effecting technology transfers to commercialise military technologies for civilian applications to benefit their economy.

Singapore is lagging behind in this area. Technology transfers have been moving one way, benefiting our defence sector. The Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) and the Defence Science Organisation (DSO) have been working with the private sector to tap into the new technologies of Industrialisation 4.0 to enhance defence capabilities.

There has been some interesting reverse flow of technology transfers though, for example, the production of mass thermal scanners to combat the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome outbreak. But there has not been a systematic push to commercialise our defence technologies, even though one in 12 scientists and engineers in Singapore is employed by the defence sector.

Economic defence is one of the six pillars of our Total Defence strategy. Our SMEs are an integral part in economic defence. Integrating them into the research and innovation sector is a key thrust of the RIE2020 Plan. One way to do this is to build a strong technology transfer ecosystem bringing together the Ministry of Defence, DSTA, DSO, ST Engineering and our SMEs.

Mr Teo Ser Luck, you can take your three cuts together.

Sir, for several years since the Productivity and Innovation Credit started, to ITM, EDG and several other schemes, there has been a focused effort to provide resources for our local companies to be strengthened and be more competitive. Also, with the merging of International Enterprise (IE) Singapore and the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING) Singapore to form ESG, there is additional support and very focused effort through direct Government help to support these companies.

The objective of strengthening our companies is to prepare them for the future and to compete effectively overseas. For several years, we have been asking them to transform to digitalise, to automate, but it is difficult for some of the companies, especially those in the services sector.

I have recently visited companies which deal in flower arrangements and packaging of flower gifts as well as small businesses that deal with preparing "chwee kueh" and other local food. I wonder how they can digitise, and they were asking me, "Since you have been in business, how do we digitise some of these processes when we have a winning formula here using a lot of labour?" For some companies, they may not be able to transform and look beyond what they already have. It is difficult for them to scale as well. But we should continue to push companies to continue to develop some ideas on how to automate the processes and also to develop their IP.

For many years, we have depended on the MNCs that are in Singapore and we form a large scale of local companies which are mainly suppliers who have not developed their own IP or their own branding that can scale them up for going overseas.

I see a few aspects as well as potential for the companies to develop. Firstly, we have to identify the nature of the product, services or the business model, make changes to those. It may not necessarily be automation or digitalisation. Secondly, it is talent and functional skills and these talent and functional skills, if these are developed with depth, they can build up the company. Third, it is leadership and mainly the mindset change of the leader.

We have to be able to foster the partnerships between the big and the small companies. But it is not just by size, although size does matter. What is more important is to match and complement the knowledge or skills of these companies. The creativity and innovation of each company complement the resources and strengths of the other company, if we draw them together into a partnership, that will strengthen them as a company as a whole.

In coming to the new year 2019, we are looking at the future, and there will be a fair bit of consolidation for some of the sectors, especially with the concern on DRC. Everybody is thinking about what to do with their own companies and their own sectors. So, it is important for us to look at some of the consolidation possibilities and combining the companies together and making them partner together.

What are the Ministry's plans moving forward to strengthen the companies? What are the Ministry's plans and initiatives moving forward to foster the partnership of these companies?

There are ways for consumers when they purchase products to be able to buy beyond their means of their income or income stream. They go into a hire purchase or instalment payment scheme, and that creates some problems.

We have tight regulations on financial institutions in their lending platforms and also non-bank lending platforms in regulating them, making sure that they do not go beyond their means to lend out to those that they cannot do the Know Your Customer survey or assess their credit readiness. But for retailers, many of them go into the credit scheme where the consumers could live beyond their means, will purchase it and pay based on instalments. We have seen many of these through our residents when we meet them during the Meet-the-People Sessions when they come forward after having encountered problems with all their purchases – whatever they have bought, have to be repossessed.

So, can the Government share if there are any regulations to tighten this, so that retailers may not over-extend their credit and consumers will not run into a risk?

Sir, allow me to declare my interest in speaking on this topic as the President of the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE).

In 2018, CASE received 1,917 complaints against businesses in the beauty and slimming industry. This makes the industry with the highest number of complaints. Of these, 1,829 are in relation to the beauty industry and 88 are in relation to the slimming industry. And this is despite CASE signing eight Voluntary Compliance Agreements with these beauty- and slimming-related businesses asking them not to breach the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act (CPFTA).

For many of these consumer complaints, they relate largely to businesses taking advantage of a consumer by exerting undue pressure or undue influence on the consumer to ask them to sign a contract, or businesses taking advantage of a consumer when the supplier or the business knows or ought reasonably to know that this consumer is not in a position to protect his own interests. So, the consumer is usually placed in a vulnerable position in an enclosed space because they are undergoing treatment at the business outlet.

So, imagine, you get a coupon telling you that you can go for free treatment or treatment at a very low price. And once you go for the treatment, midway through the treatment, the person providing the treatment puts undue pressure, tremendous pressure on you for the next one to two hours, asking you to sign up for a treatment package, or to sign a credit card for such a package. So, if you put yourself in that position, the consumer is really a captive audience where he or she is constantly being persuaded "you need further treatment", "this treatment is good for you", "signing a package would be of better value for you." Now, all these methods, Sir, are technically breaches of CPFTA.

However, from CASE's experience, when we take up an application for injunction, the Court will require a high threshold to be met before the Court will grant any injunction for breach of the CPFTA due to such unfair practices. For a consumer who had been pressured to pay for a package, the last thing he or she would wish to do is to commence legal action or go to Court to recover such payments.

Hence, in our view, it may be easier to avoid the need for unnecessary Court litigation by imposing a mandatory cooling-off period on such industries. This would provide a consumer, who had been subject to an unfair sales pressure with the right to cancel a contract within a certain period of time. The consumer can then obtain a refund of monies paid within this specified period, without this consumer needing to prove an unfair practice. This will send a right signal to genuine businesses that they should not use unfair business practices to persuade their customers to sign up for a package.

So, I urge the Ministry to consider implementing a mandatory cooling-off period for contracts entered into with businesses in the beauty and slimming industries. I was told by the Hong Kong Consumer Council that they, too, are looking into legislating for a cooling-off period for the beauty and fitness services industry.

Another area of concern for CASE is the increasing number of consumers who are purchasing from entities incorporated overseas or from entities that may not be regulated under a consumer-related legislation in Singapore. An example would be consumers who bought their holidays from Agoda.com, Booking.com, Priceline.com and sg.hotels.com. All these entities are not licensed under the Travel Agent's Act and some are not even incorporated in Singapore. Hence, they may not be regulated under existing legislation. CASE urges the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) to work with the Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) and the credit card issuing banks to raise awareness of charge-back schemes with their credit card banks. And this is because such a mechanism will allow consumers to readily lodge a charge-back in instances of business closure.

In Hong Kong, card-issuing banks are required to comply with a Code of Banking Practice which provides that credit card-issuing banks must provide for reasonable channels for consumers to submit claims and to make such pertinent information available to consumers. In addition, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority has further required all card-issuing banks to upload to their official websites, information about the charge-back dispute resolution process as well as the charge-back dispute resolution form. So, this will basically mean that consumers who have paid for their purchases using their credit card will be able to cancel the contract, go back to the credit companies and seek refund.

Sir, I would urge MAS to consider doing likewise as this will allow consumers to reduce their losses if a business were to cease operation after collecting their deposits.

Sir, a credit sales agreement is a useful system for someone who needs an important big-ticket item to own it first and pay the money over regular instalments. One example is the Courts' Flexi plan. This can be immensely helpful to the low-income. However, it can also be damaging if interest rates are high and if the said person is not financially-savvy.

Through interactions with my residents, I have been made aware of cases where some of them were baited by low upfront costs and misleading advertisements. This led to them running into arrears because they eventually find themselves unable to cope with the instalment plan. I even had one resident asking if he could use his Central Provident Fund (CPF) to service the hire purchase fees for some items purchased from a furniture store. His situation must have been quite desperate.

Marketing campaigns and advertisements are bold with their plans and claims these days. It is not uncommon to see advertisements boasting "$0 upfront" payments, especially for expensive gadgets like smart phones. Some instalment plans offer vouchers and goods-in-kind, very attractive freebies, to entice customers. Some offer payment plans spread out over 24 to 48 months, so the monthly instalment cost seems low. But it all adds up substantially. When you do the mathematics, it is much more expensive than paying for the price in full. Those who are less financially savvy are less likely to keep proper financial records. They may overestimate their ability to pay off the instalment plans.

Although credit sales advertisements are often accompanied by disclaimers about the conditions of each instalment plan, these are usually in small print. Even if the consumer has seen it, psychologically, their mind has already committed to the self-perceived good deal. Coupled this with a very persuasive salesperson when one shops in person, and that is a guaranteed transaction. Most people do not realise they have made a poor purchase decision until perhaps months later when they find themselves grappling with the payments.

So, does MTI have plans to regulate the types of marketing done by credit sales companies or even hire purchase ones to entice buyers? Are credit sales agreements regulated?

One episode on Talking Point last year showed how individuals who do not have credit cards are given credit from certain retailers to purchase goods. I find it worrying that some merchants would persuade customers into parting with their money with no care about whether they will have problems paying it off later.

One major furniture company even cited that no minimum income is required for its instalment plans. On the surface, it seems like they are doing a good deed to help those who are short on money to purchase the furniture and then pay later. But what happens later if the customers cannot afford the instalments?

Has any check been done to find out how many customers purchasing goods and services under credit sales plans had to forfeit their deposits? What will MTI do to ensure that the businesses and financial institution companies do not over-extend credit to consumers without checking their credit worthiness?

Sir, the nation-wide rollout of the Open Electricity Market last September giving households the option of buying electricity at a discount to the tariff rate is one important avenue by which Singaporeans can better manage the cost of living. This consideration is also relevant for Town Councils as such statutory organisations have also benefited from the liberalisation of the electricity market earlier.

However, on 2 January this year, the Energy Market Authority (EMA) shared with Town Councils that one player, Red Dot Power, which coincidentally was in an existing electricity supply contract with the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council, would be exiting the market. EMA informed the Town Council the retailer would cease to be able to purchase electricity from 4 January, and all accounts under the Town Council's purview would be transferred to the SP Group.

EMA also informed the Town Council that any early termination fees/charges contractually that the Town Council would have had with the affected retailer would not be applicable. While there was no interruption of electricity services, weeks elapsed before a new contract could be called for and awarded. In the interim, the wholesale SP tariff rate applied which was significantly higher than the contracted rate, at the cost of savings to the Town Council.

With individual households now able to buy electricity directly from retailers, how will EMA deal with retailers that unilaterally terminate their contracts in the retail space? What recourse do households have against such retailers that unilaterally abandon their contract or are not able to fulfil it? Would households also be barred by EMA from claiming for their expectation loss and what compensation would be available should the retail price of electricity be significantly higher at the point of termination, to the detriment of the consumer?

Finally, it was reported in today's Business Times that out of the 30 licensed electricity retailers, the 13 which were authorised to sell electricity to households and small businesses have cleared "additional regulatory hoops to ensure viability to safeguard consumers' interests." As Red Dot Power was one of them, what were these additional regulatory hoops and what went wrong?

Mr Chairman, Sir, over the years, our processes and regulations have provided a safe and predictable environment for our people and enterprises.

With the emergence of new technologies and business models, it is important to ensure that our rules keep pace. If we are not flexible in our approach, we could easily lose our competitive advantage. A regulatory environment that supports innovation and risk-taking is, therefore, vital for our future economy.

However, there will be tradeoffs involved and difficult decisions to make. Different regulatory agencies have their reasons for imposing rules and regulations. Some rules are needed to ensure safety, while others are needed to protect public interests.

But over-regulation could lead to high regulatory and compliance costs, and unnecessary delays in the processing of licence applications and maximising of business opportunities. Our regulatory framework must, therefore, strike a good and fair balance, so that our businesses can be competitive and our economy can create more good jobs.

I note that the Pro-Enterprise Panel has worked with public agencies and companies to address many of these regulatory concerns that businesses face. How does it ensure that our regulations are kept up-to-date and do not add unnecessary compliance costs for our businesses? More broadly, will our regulatory agencies be able to keep pace with the changes and develop regulatory frameworks that are needed for the future economy? Will there be more sandboxes to allow and promote new business models? What is our strategy to ensure that the Government regulations do not encumber the growth of enterprises?

Mr Chairman, this Chamber enacts laws, creates regulations and enables Government agencies to formulate rules. By updating our laws, introducing new regulations, we keep our governing framework current, effective and relevant to the needs of the society.

While many new regulations are conceived for their specific purposes, there can also be unintended effects and heightened compliance costs to those the regulations seek to serve.

According to the arguments of Brexiteers, EU regulations are estimated to cost Britain a total of $120 billion per year. The common agricultural policy alone reportedly cost £10 billion and indirect costs and by inflating food prices.

Some other economists estimate that the current regulations cost the UK 6% of its GDP. One of them, Prof Patrick Minford, said, "If Britain seizes the freedom to move away from the EU regulations, the current 6% could be cut by a third, boosting GDP by 2%."

Chairman, while we are not debating the merit of Brexit here, it suffices to recognise the duality of regulations. Regulations seek to protect but sometimes prevent. There are tradeoffs, using benefits on one hand, but also increase compliance costs on the other. High compliance costs are not just a result of the need to conform to new standards per se but also the outcome of multiple inspection stations, longer inspection time, uncertainties in the final outcome of the test.

New regulations added to existing ones can also lead to confusion. They can be onerous and costly for businesses. Already, some businesses here have found it hard to navigate in an ever increasingly regulated environment.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister if the Government has a framework to review and reduce outdated and obsolete regulations on a regular basis to keep the regulatory burden light. Would the Ministry consider applying expiry dates or sunset clauses to newly introduced regulations? How could our business associations and SMEs provide their feedback and suggestions to the Government on a regular basis with a view to improving regulations for certain industry sectors or for business in general?

I would like to ask the Minister if our Government would consider establishing a methodology to measure regulation impact on businesses, regardless of whether the regulation is introduced by MTI or other Ministries. Finally, how has the Pro-Enterprise Panel performed with respect to cutting Government red tape and improving our overall pro-business environment?

Minister Chan Chun Sing.

Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their comments, questions and suggestions.

As we manage our near-term challenges, we must also keep a close watch on the longer-term trends that will impact our economic competitiveness and continued success. Our near-term challenges include the uncertainties of US-China trade relations, the slowing Chinese economy, Brexit and various regional elections. Our medium-term and more significant challenges include shifts in global trade patterns, production chains and value chains brought about by technological shifts and geopolitics. Finally, we should carefully watch the developments in international taxation. Our future attractiveness as a choice business location will be shaped by the outcomes from ongoing discussions at international fora on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting and taxation principles for the new digital economy.

Despite the uncertain global context, there are reasons for us to be optimistic.

If we get our fundamentals right, we can further distinguish ourselves and attract global investors to come here and create better jobs for fellow Singaporeans. Our fundamentals must include: first, effective governance founded upon long-term political stability, long-term planning, and a strong tripartite relationship that enables us to overcome challenges together. Second, a global mindset. We must overcome the constraints of our geographical size by leveraging the digital economy and our connectivity, and embracing talent, technology and ideas from the world. Third, a competitive advantage in innovation, creativity and standards, but not price. We must create a virtuous cycle where research and innovation translate into commercial opportunities and gain, which then enables further innovation. This must be supported by a progressive business environment with agile regulations and a strong IP protection regime. Finally, a skilled workforce with sustained emphasis on continuous training and lifelong learning. Our workforce must have knowledge of the region to value-add when others use Singapore as a platform.

As Mr Teo Ser Luck observed, our overall pace of growth is expected to moderate in 2019, and this will be uneven across sectors. While outward-oriented sectors are generally expected to see a moderation in growth this year due to the weaker external outlook, there remain some bright spots. These include the information and communications sector, and the medical technology and aerospace segments within the manufacturing sector. Such sectors are expected to do well, in part because they can leverage our extensive connectivity, and are also knowledge-intensive sectors that capitalise on our strengths in areas like high-quality standards and a robust IP regime.

In general, domestically-oriented sectors will need to push ahead with transformation efforts to improve their value-add and raise productivity. Performance varies across firms within each of these sectors. We have seen good efforts by some firms, and will need to sustain the momentum and impetus for restructuring to uplift more firms within these sectors.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked how we can prepare Singapore for the next stage of growth. To this end, we have a four-prong strategy. First, to deepen and diversify linkages to markets; second, to transform industries to seize new opportunities; third, to strengthen capabilities of enterprises and workers; and, fourth, to empower businesses and consumers through more agile regulations and a more pro-business environment.

Let me first touch on market development on how we plan to deepen and diversify our linkages to create more opportunities overseas for our companies.

As a small economy, the world must be our hinterland. We must ensure global opportunities remain open to our businesses and people. This means deepening and diversifying our linkages to overseas markets.

We will upgrade our trade agreements to secure deeper market access and updated rules that cater to new business models and regulations.

During our ASEAN Chairmanship in 2018, we completed several initiatives to boost ASEAN's attractiveness as a business and investment destination. The ASEAN Single Window is now in place. Five ASEAN countries are exchanging trade documents electronically, with the remaining countries coming on board this year. The ASEAN-wide Self Certification Scheme will save time and costs for our businesses. The ASEAN Agreement on E-commerce, ASEAN Trade in Services Agreement and enhancements to the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement will boost digital connectivity, improve market access in ASEAN's growing services sector and reduce investment impediments.

With China, the upgraded China-Singapore FTA will provide businesses with enhanced investment protection, greater access to China's legal, maritime and construction services sectors, and improved Rules of Origin for petrochemical and plastics exports.

Next, we must expand our network of FTAs to give our companies privileged access to more markets vis-a-vis our competitors. This ensures the diversification of our markets and supply chains, to not overly rely on any one particular market.

Last year, we saw the entry into force of the historic Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. This establishes our first FTA with Canada and Mexico. A few weeks ago, the EUSFTA and Investment Protection Agreement received the European Parliament’s consent with a clear majority. This brings us one step closer to an FTA with our third largest goods trading partner and largest services trading partner. We continue to make progress on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) under Thailand's chairmanship in 2019. We are also broadening our reach by looking into FTAs with the Eurasian Economic Union, the Pacific Alliance, and the Southern Common Market in South America (MERCOSUR). For the longer term, we must increasingly take up opportunities in emerging markets by familiarising ourselves with the culture, regulations and business networks in regions that are newer to us.

Mr Teo Ser Luck asked about quantifiable indicators of how our companies have benefited from FTAs, and what can be done to increase their utilisation of FTAs.

Singapore’s trade with our FTA partners accounts for 92% of our total trade in goods and services. One of the key benefits for our companies from FTAs is tariff savings, which measure the dollar savings from our FTAs' lower tariffs for Singapore-originating goods. Our companies enjoyed tariff savings of about $730 million in 2016, a substantial increase from the $450 million enjoyed a decade prior.

Since 2016, about 1,800 companies have benefited each year from ESG's efforts to build awareness of our network of trade agreements and its benefits. These include broad-based FTA outreach sessions, assistance requested via the Enterprise Infoline and our SME centres, and customised one-to-one advisories for companies. We will continue to work with the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) and the TACs to help our companies utilise our wide network of FTAs.

Our trade agreements complement efforts by Singapore and like-minded countries to evolve international rules and uphold the rules-based multilateral trading system embodied in the World Trade Organization (WTO). A major international effort is now underway to ensure that WTO remains relevant to the modern economy. Singapore is actively contributing as a co-convenor of the e-commerce Joint Statement Initiative. The Initiative comprises 76 WTO members that have committed to negotiations to develop multilateral rules aimed at helping companies navigate the complex e-commerce landscape by reducing cross-border hurdles and giving greater certainty on regulatory rules. We welcome further collaboration with like-minded countries to push the envelope on digital trade issues to build an open, inclusive, connected and predictable regulatory environment for businesses.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Henry Kwek and Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked how we can build on our global air and sea hub status to create a unique value proposition that distinguishes us from others. I agree with the comments that we need to go beyond hardware to include the wrap-around software to distinguish ourselves.

To bolster our hub status, we need to continue to deepen our physical connectivity while building "modern", non-physical modes of connectivity to be a key node in global flows. The Ministry of Transport (MOT) will share more on our efforts to strengthen our physical connectivity while the Ministry of Communications and Information will share more on our efforts to bolster our digital connectivity.

Mr Douglas Foo also asked how the Government is helping our companies seize opportunities in ASEAN, as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) enhances integration and infrastructural links in the region.

The China-Singapore Connectivity Initiative – New International Land-Sea Trade Corridor will facilitate trade flows between Southeast Asia and Western China through Singapore. Besides reducing the time needed to transport goods between the two regions from three weeks to one, this multimodal and multifaceted economic link will improve modern dimensions of connectivity and lower costs for businesses. This includes our connectivity in terms of data exchange and customs facilitation.

ASEAN, with its rising middle class and rapid urbanisation, presents huge opportunities for Singapore companies. We have supported our companies to capture these opportunities by catalysing capability development, market access and access to manpower and financing. We will continue to facilitate our companies’ foray overseas through our network of overseas centres, which supported over 100 projects in ASEAN last year. To assist Singapore companies in their initial entry into overseas markets, we have also set up a Plug and Play Network which comprises 16 partners across nine markets globally. This includes six ASEAN markets, and we will be expanding to Myanmar this year.

In 2018, we launched Infrastructure Asia to facilitate investments and financing to support the infrastructure needs of the region. By bringing together local and international firms across the value chain to develop, finance and execute projects, this enables infrastructure players to tap on opportunities in the region. We are able to do all these because of our superior brand in terms of trust, the rule of law and our financial system.

As the economic landscape transforms, non-physical modes of connectivity will play an increasingly important role.

First, data connectivity through the exchange of digitalised trade documents. The Networked Trade Platform can help businesses save time and cost by decreasing the need for paper exchanges.

Second, we need to promote the flow of ideas and talent. Companies invest in Singapore because we have access to talent, both local and global. For Singapore to thrive, we will continue to develop our local talent, and welcome global talent, especially those with high-end digital and engineering skills, to complement our local workforce.

Mr Henry Kwek asked MTI to share more about the Global Ready Talent Programme (GRTP) and the Global Innovation Alliance (GIA).

Today, more than 50% of Singapore enterprises find it difficult to internationalise because they lack the right talent for their overseas operations. To address this, we need to build a pipeline of local talent with the requisite in-market knowledge to identify growth opportunities and navigate challenges in overseas markets.

The GRTP comprises two components – overseas internships for Singapore students, and a management associate programme for young professionals. We will focus on markets in Southeast Asia, China and India. Singapore enterprises can receive up to 70% funding support for the allowance or salary of participants. ESG will work with TACs and Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) to facilitate internship placements between companies and students.

We will also continue to promote the exchange of ideas and talent with innovation hubs around the world. Last year, on top of launching GIA in Bangkok, we also accelerated expansion plans, establishing GIA activities in France, Japan and Germany. We will continue to expand the GIA network in 2019.

Sir, our next three strategies aim to enable our companies and people to capture the opportunities from our linkages to markets.

Our industry transformation efforts are off to a good start, with productivity growing faster in the last three years as compared to the first half of the decade. Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will elaborate on how we will continue to transform our industries of today, while investing in new growth areas for tomorrow in order to benefit Singaporeans.

Over the next three years, as the overall Services Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC) and its S Pass Sub-DRC are progressively lowered, we will walk alongside, and support, our businesses for the transformation journey ahead, through the following enhancements.

First, we will extend the enhanced 70% support under EDG for another three years, till the end of financial year (FY) 2022. This will help more SMEs undertake deeper and more ambitious transformation as part of our economic restructuring.

Second, we will extend the enhanced support of up to 70% under the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) for another three years as well, till the end of FY2022. This will help the smaller companies adopt pre-scoped equipment and solutions to achieve the initial productivity boost.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa will be pleased to note that the enhancements will benefit our workers, too.

We will streamline our efforts and resources with the Labour Movement so that we can collectively reach more businesses and their workers. We will do this by merging the National Trades Union Congress' (NTUC's) Inclusive Growth Programme (IGP) into the EDG from FY2020 and stipulating local employment outcomes that we expect grant recipients to fulfil as part of such support, so every project can expect to have local employment outcomes as part of their key performance indicator.

On top of this, we will work with SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) to support successful PSG applicants in their efforts to train their workers. For us, business transformation must come together with skills uplifting for our workers. The two are mutually related and cannot, and should not, be separated.

My colleagues Senior Ministers of State Koh Poh Koon and Chee Hong Tat will elaborate on these measures. Minister Josephine Teo will also share at the Ministry of Manpower's COS debate about how enterprises across all sectors can continue to tap on the Lean Enterprise Development (LED) scheme for transitional manpower support, where needed.

Beyond industry-wide efforts, transformation begins with each and every enterprise. To tackle the challenges ahead and turn them into opportunities, we will need to level up, scale up and team up our enterprises.

For enterprises that have a proven track record of growth, strong leadership and growth ambition, the new Scale-up SG programme can support them in the next leap of growth to become our future industry leaders. ESG will work closely with these enterprises and expert partners to identify priority growth themes, provide customised guidance on the execution of their business plans, and provide access to valuable networks and connections. Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat will elaborate on Scale-up SG and our enterprise-centric approach to move away from grants to support enterprises in levelling up and teaming up to build real capabilities. And we agree fully with the comment that we need a customised approach and it will not be a one-size-fits-all approach for all our 200,000 enterprises that are of varying sizes with differing needs.

Our final strategy is to ensure that we have an ecosystem that empowers businesses and consumers. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Tan Wu Meng will speak about the enablers we are developing to support a well-functioning market. This includes creating a pro-enterprise regulatory environment, promoting competition, and protecting consumers.

Mr Chairman, I have outlined the measures in place to ensure that the Singapore economy is prepared for its next phase of growth.

By developing markets, industries, enterprises and enablers, we can be confident of overcoming our limitations of size and punching above our weight. This will include making sure that our workers keep pace with the skills upgrading necessary for them to get better jobs with better pay.

Economic growth cannot be an end in itself. It is the means by which we generate good jobs and better wages for all Singaporeans. It is the strong foundation upon which we build our social progress and mobility. And this is our social compact. Amidst global uncertainty, Singapore can once again distinguish ourselves by transforming ourselves to take advantage of new technologies and new markets. Together, we can create a better future for all Singaporeans.

Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon.

Mr Chairman, Singapore is a small and open economy. To remain globally competitive, we need to transform our industries and develop new areas for growth.

Singaporeans must benefit from the new opportunities that industry transformation brings. We have seen friction and instability arise in other parts of the world when workers feel they are left behind. We should learn from these developments and ensure that both our companies and our workers share the gains from transformation.

Chairman, allow me to provide an update on our ongoing efforts to transform our industries.

In the first phase, we have taken a sectoral approach through the 23 ITMs that have been launched. In the next phase, we will be developing synergies across sectors to build and deepen linkages between the complementary industries. In this way, industry stakeholders along different parts of the value chain can come together to innovate and ride on market opportunities.

This includes strengthening our partnerships with the TACs, which Mr Douglas Foo spoke about, through the LEAD programme. My colleague Senior Parliamentary Secretary Tan Wu Meng will elaborate further in his part of the speech.

Our transformation efforts have begun to bear fruit. For example, in line with efforts to strengthen supply chain and logistics capabilities in the Trade and Connectivity Cluster, the Centre of Innovation for Supply Chain Management in Republic Polytechnic has rolled out several initiatives. One of which, the GoLEAN Improvement Programme, helps companies systematically optimise their processes through building a culture of continuous improvement.

One beneficiary of this programme is SATS-BRF Food, a food processing and distribution company. It has improved the productivity of its core meat-cutting operations, achieving 18% manpower savings and freeing up workers to support new business initiatives. This has also resulted in shorter lead time to deliver orders, better customer service, and lower processing cost.

More importantly, by working closely with the unions, SATS-BRF Food was able to sustain these productivity improvements and thereby improve welfare for its workers. They are now able to start their shifts at more convenient times and some have seen wage increases made possible by job redesign.

Another promising growth area undergoing rapid transformation is Advanced Manufacturing, which Mr Baey Yam Keng spoke about. We are building new niches in areas, such as additive manufacturing and advanced materials, by deepening the capabilities of our companies and workers.

The Singapore Smart Industry Readiness Index was developed by EDB and leading global technical service provider TUV SUD and launched in November 2017. This is a diagnostic tool for companies to evaluate their readiness for Industry 4.

0. To date, we have awarded over 230 funded assessments and helped more than 150 manufacturing companies better prepare for Industry 4.0.

The unions have also been important partners in building our capabilities in advanced manufacturing. For example, NTUC, the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i), EDB and the Metal Industries Workers' Union have recently engaged 16 major players in the manufacturing sector, such as Epson, Seiko and Natsteel, on the adoption of the Index and the training that is available for their workers. Such tripartite partnerships are very important in ensuring that as companies upgrade to new technologies, our workers also upskill into higher value-added jobs.

At the same time, we are also developing next-generation estates, such as the Jurong Innovation District (JID), which will catalyse the Advanced Manufacturing cluster. JID will feature innovative infrastructure, such as an underground District Logistics Network, that will free up surface land and provide seamless integration with JID buildings to transform the way we deliver goods.

Beyond physical infrastructure, we are creating platforms for local and global talent to come together to exchange ideas and to collaborate.

Last October, we hosted the inaugural Industrial Transformation ASIA PACIFIC (ITAP), an offshoot of the Hannover Messe, the largest Industry 4.0 event globally. It is a platform for leading manufacturers, technology providers and thought leaders to exchange ideas and best practices. This Singapore edition attracted 15,000 visitors across 55 countries, exceeding our initial goal by 50%. We look forward to hosting ITAP again this year to profile Singapore as the regional hub for Advanced Manufacturing.

The growth of the advanced manufacturing sector will have spillover effects for emerging adjacent industries, such as electric vehicles (EVs), which Mr Leon Perera spoke about. In Singapore, players like Grab and ComfortDelgro have also been adding EVs and hybrids to their fleets, in line with the Government's push to encourage more carbon-efficient vehicles. Singapore's strong manufacturing and electronics sectors will allow us to plug into the global supply chain to meet the increasing demand for EV parts. We can also build our expertise in other nascent areas, such as self-driving software development and automotive cybersecurity. Questions on plans for charging infrastructure and the use of EVs, unfortunately, fall under MOT, so I hope the Member perhaps will raise these questions at their COS.

Mr Chairman, in addition to transforming existing industries, we will also develop a new sector that offers exciting job opportunities – agri-technology.

The food and agri-tech sector is a $5 trillion global industry that is growing rapidly, fuelled by new innovations in processes and products. Our good innovation climate, strong talent base, reputation for food safety and strategic location position us very well to capture a slice of this industry, particularly here in Asia.

Mr Desmond Choo asked how we are doing to develop this industry. Our vision is for Singapore to be a leading urban agriculture and aquaculture technology hub with a food production model that can be exported to the region.

To realise this vision, I am currently leading a multi-agency team looking at how we can better support the agri-tech industry in the areas of industry and enterprise development, R&D, manpower and regulations. This Steering Committee will work closely with industry players and associations, such as the Singapore Agro-Food Enterprises Federation, to take on board industry feedback.

As we grow this nascent sector, we will encounter new challenges that will require us to explore regulatory flexibility and innovative ways of doing things. For example, under the Singapore Civil Defence Force's (SCDF's) fire code, farms are regulated in much the same way as factories because production activities, such as packaging, are allowed onsite. However, some of the fire code requirements may not be applicable for farming activities and may constrain a farm’s operations. Local egg farm, Chew's Agriculture, faced such difficulties when seeking fire safety approvals for its new farm at Neo Tiew Road. I am happy to hear that SCDF worked closely with the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) to understand the farm’s unique operations and was willing to exercise flexibility in view of the low fire risk and site limitations.

We are also helping more of our agri-companies expand into foreign markets. For example, Sustenir, a local startup which specialises in the production of non-native plants, recently launched the first strawberries grown here in Singapore. It has worked with ESG to develop regional marketing capabilities and is expanding its operations to Hong Kong.

To catalyse agri-tech innovation and co-creation among industry players, we need to strengthen our infrastructure support. So, I am pleased to announce that we will establish a new 18-hectare Agri-Food Innovation Park (AFIP) in Sungei Kadut. AFIP will bring together high-tech farming and R&D activities, including indoor plant factories, insect farms, and animal feed production facilities. We are working with local and overseas industry players to develop this first phase of the park, which will be ready from the second quarter of 2021, with potential for future expansion, depending on demand.

Beyond the hardware and infrastructure, a talent pipeline is crucial to succeed in this endeavour. More Singaporeans, especially younger ones, are showing interest in high-tech urban farming. We are now seeing an emerging new generation of young technopreneur farmers.

We agree with Mr Desmond Choo that interested Singaporeans must be equipped with the specialised and relevant skills to benefit from opportunities in agri-tech. Our IHLs have been instrumental in driving these efforts. For example, Republic Polytechnic has launched a Diploma in Urban Agricultural Technology early this year. As the sector develops, we expect more of such course offerings from our other IHLs.

Minister Heng Swee Keat also mentioned in his Budget speech that Temasek Polytechnic will be launching a Centre of Innovation in Aquaculture. This will pool together resources, IP, infrastructure and expertise from Government agencies, IHLs and Research Institutes, which companies and practitioners can tap on to deepen their capabilities.

These developments will support our agri-tech sector in becoming an export industry. Our position as an agri-tech hub will strengthen Singapore’s economy, create good jobs for Singaporeans and buttress Singapore's food security.

Food is important to us not only as an industry. But it is something that is close to every Singaporean’s heart. Even in our communities, interest in urban farming is growing.

For instance, the Citiponics Farm @ Ang Mo Kio is a pilot project located in my own constituency in Yio Chu Kang, on the rooftop of a multi-storey Housing and Development Board (HDB) carpark at Level 6, Block 700, Ang Mo Kio Avenue 6. This is the first time we are piloting commercial urban farming on an HDB multi-storey carpark, and it is another example of how our Government agencies like AVA and HDB have exercised regulatory flexibility to support the agri-tech industry. This farm will hire local residents, including the elderly, and provide them with on-the-job training. My elderly residents from the Asian Women’s Welfare Association (AWWA) Senior Community Home are very excited to have the chance to bond with one another by exercising their green fingers and, at the same time, earn for themselves a source of income.

NTUC FairPrice at the nearby Ang Mo Kio Hub will be one of the first buyers of the farm’s produce. Planting had started last month in February 2019, with the first harvest expected in April 2019. So, residents can soon look forward to fresh vegetables that are produced by the community, in the community and for the community.

Mr Chairman, industry transformation must not be an end in itself. It is a means to expand human capabilities and open up new opportunities for our people.

In my time with the Labour Movement and in MTI working with companies and workers, I observed that some companies have yet to translate increased productivity into tangible benefits for our workers. Therefore, some workers find it very hard to see how industry transformation can benefit them.

Currently, the IGP administered by NTUC's e2i aims to address this. It helps companies kickstart productivity projects. In turn, they are required to share the productivity gains with their workers through higher wages. However, as the pace of our industry transformation quickens, we need to do more to encourage companies to move in this direction.

As Minister Chan Chun Sing mentioned, the EDG's enhanced funding support will be extended for three more years. Companies will enjoy up to 70% of qualifying costs till end of FY 2022. This is to support SMEs in undertaking deeper and even more ambitious transformation projects.

At the same time, we will merge IGP into the EDG. Mr Teo Ser Luck and Mr Liang Eng Hwa will be pleased to note that through this merger, we will encourage companies to more intentionally translate enterprise transformation efforts into improvements in workers' livelihoods. We will do so by requiring businesses embarking on EDG projects from 1 April 2020 to commit to the fulfillment of workers' outcomes. These outcomes may include wage increases, job creation, job redesign or hiring of older workers. With this change, workers' outcomes will be a mandatory consideration from the very first dollar of the EDG funding. NTUC and ESG will work closely together on the mechanisms to implement this, and we will announce details later. Mr Chairman, I will now continue in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]: The merger of EDG and IDP represents a significant change in how we approach our enterprise transformation efforts. We will encourage companies to think of how to improve their workers' skills and career prospects through transformation right at the start when companies design their transformation plans and apply for Government grants. After merger, from 1 April 2020 onwards, NTUC, the unions and ESG will work together to ensure improved productivity is translated into better worker outcomes, such as wage increases, job creation or hiring of older workers.

Through this change, we hope to send a strong signal about the Government's commitment to work closely with the Labour Movement to keep People at the heart of our transformation.

(In English): On Mr Chen Show Mao's query, the inclusion of worker outcomes into the enhanced EDG will be complemented by the efforts of the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers which was established last year. This Workgroup is studying issues relating to older workers, including how to make workplaces more conducive for them. The Workgroup's recommendations will be released later this year. In fact, many of the suggestions by Mr Chen Show Mao are not new and have already been implemented on the ground. For example, our Labour Movement's push to implement more company training committees will be one mechanism in which the Labour Movement can work with companies to ensure that workers' outcomes, including older workers', are taken into account when the company transforms.

In conclusion, Mr Chairman, to create good jobs for Singaporeans, we must press on with our industry transformation efforts, that is, enhancing capabilities, developing infrastructure and facilitating partnerships.

We put people at the heart of our industry transformation because they are our nation’s most valuable asset. By partnering unions and businesses, we can translate economic growth into real opportunities and better outcomes for all.

Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat.

Mr Chairman, business leaders must take the lead in enterprise transformation, as they know their business and customers best. The Government will provide customised support through our enterprise development schemes.

As Minister Chan Chun Sing said, our efforts are centred around three "Ups": Level Up, to strengthen companies' capabilities; Scale Up, to help enterprises grow in Singapore and abroad; and Team Up, to encourage companies to work together for win-win outcomes.

Mr Teo Ser Luck suggested that companies must level up and strengthen their capabilities. Let me touch on three aspects where companies can do so: skills training, adopting technology, and business process re-engineering.

Enterprise transformation must start with its people, to redesign jobs and upskill workers. Transformation may be technology-driven, but it should remain human-centric and people-led.

Earlier, the Minister shared that we will enhance PSG to support employer-led training. Enterprises which qualify for PSG can apply for a training subsidy to cover 70% of their out-of-pocket training expenses, capped at $10,000 per enterprise. This is on top of existing SkillsFuture subsidies and the funding for pre-scoped productivity solutions under PSG. MTI will work with SSG on the implementation.

Another priority is to encourage companies to make good use of technology. Regardless of size and sector, all companies need to embrace technology as a tool to improve productivity, reduce operating costs and develop better products and services.

Mr Low Thia Khiang suggested having more public sector research flow into industries. We share similar views. MTI has been doing this under the RIE2020 Plan. We encourage our research agencies to collaborate with industry players so that companies can benefit from the R&D and commercialise the IP. There are more than 1,500 industry projects deploying more than 1,000 technologies developed by our researchers. We want to grow these numbers over time.

Defence-related research also benefits our companies. For example, optronics technology which originated from defence research was used by an SME to measure water quality in our reservoirs. There is scope to explore having more of such collaborations. However, I am sure Mr Low Thia Khiang would agree that not everything from defence research can flow into the commercial sector, as some are classified projects to protect national security.

Enterprises can also re-engineer their business processes by harnessing the value of design and using design thinking. I look forward to welcoming Design Singapore to the MTI family from 1 April. We can further strengthen the synergies with economic agencies to grow design capabilities in our enterprises and workforce and use design as an enabler to improve Singapore’s competitiveness.

Next, we will support companies on their growth journeys to Scale Up their operations locally and overseas. We have built a vibrant startup ecosystem through a range of measures, such as financing, networks, infrastructure and mentorship. To succeed, we must remain open to ideas and talent, including attracting overseas startups and entrepreneurs, to operate here and use Singapore as a hub for the region. Several Members have made this point as well.

A number of our startups originate from the universities and polytechnics. I am encouraged to see young Singaporeans stepping forward to start their own business and turning their passion into possibilities. The nature of the industry is such that a few will succeed but many will fail, and some may even fail repeatedly.

But this is part of the learning process and what we need to build an enterprising society. It includes a "never-say-die" attitude, the courage to take calculated risks and the resourcefulness to translate innovative ideas into reality.

For enterprises that are ready to expand beyond Singapore, we will help them to develop their internationalisation capabilities and expand into overseas markets, tapping on our extensive FTA networks. For many years, IE Singapore, now ESG, has been supporting our companies in foreign markets through its overseas offices, working closely with EDB and other Government agencies.

In 2018, seven in 10 Singapore businesses surveyed by SBF have activities in overseas markets. For companies that have internationalised, overseas revenue forms nearly half of their total revenue and has grown more quickly than local revenue. Not surprising. The overseas markets have greater potential for growth.

To Mr Henry Kwek's query, ESG supported over 570 internationalisation-related projects in 2018, a 25% increase compared to 2017. We worked with partners to help our companies enter new markets. Last year, ESG added eight new partners to its Plug and Play Network, which has recently expanded to two new countries, the United Arab Emirates and Cambodia.

As Ms Cheryl Chan highlighted, these initiatives and partnerships provide large firms and SMEs with in-market support to help them with their overseas expansion.

We have seen Singapore companies taking on more ambitious projects overseas, which entail larger investments over longer periods of time. While these efforts may reap long-term returns in the future, banks may be hesitant to provide financing, given the higher level of risks. The Government will increase our support for these projects.

In his Budget speech, the Minister for Finance announced the new Enterprise Financing Scheme (EFS), which will be launched this October. EFS brings ESG's financing schemes under a common umbrella scheme, making it easier for our companies to access financing support.

The Government will raise the maximum insurance cover for overseas project financing under EFS to $50 million and increase the maximum tenure to 15 years. To support companies that are internationalising via mergers and acquisitions (M&A), the scheme will provide a higher maximum loan cover of $50 million for such projects to allow companies to quickly build new capabilities and expand overseas.

The Government will support a higher risk share for loans to young enterprises under EFS, for both domestic and international projects. We will also provide a higher risk share for enterprises venturing into challenging markets, as they do face higher hurdles in obtaining financing.

I agree with Miss Cheryl Chan that we should provide tailored support to nurture local enterprises that can grow and contribute significantly to our economy. Minister Chan Chun Sing mentioned the Scale-up SG programme to groom high-growth enterprises into future global champions. Through this programme, we will help enterprises develop and implement long-term plans tailored to their specific growth priorities in areas, such as innovation and international expansion.

For instance, a healthcare services company with overseas operations may aim to double its footprint through M&A and expand upstream by developing its own products. Through Scale-up SG, the company will receive targeted support to develop a commercially viable product prototype, as well as to shortlist and validate acquisition targets.

When these companies grow and succeed in future, I hope they will also provide opportunities to other local companies. In this way, we can sustain our scale-up efforts and grow more Singapore companies into globally competitive enterprises.

Sir, let me move to the third "Up": Team Up. As noted by Mr Teo Ser Luck and Mr Leon Perera, collaborations among enterprises can support capability development to testbed innovative solutions and form business alliances to capture opportunities here and overseas.

For example, Rolls-Royce and KA Industrial Engineering, a local SME, have worked together on an automated system for loading and unloading fan blades. Previously, the process was carried out by multiple technicians dressed in protective suits, due to the high temperatures. With the automated system, a single technician can manage the process, away from the furnace, improving both productivity and worker safety. Importantly, working with Rolls-Royce helps KA Industrial Engineering open doors to other clients.

Partnerships can be amongst enterprises of all sizes and with TACs, too. Last year, ESG facilitated over 30 collaborative initiatives and supported over 40 companies to win new projects in overseas markets.

We enhanced Partnerships for Capability Transformation (PACT) last year. This will continue to support collaborations between enterprises of all sizes. I encourage companies to band together to tap on PACT to benefit from one another's strengths, develop deeper capabilities and successfully internationalise.

Sir, let me conclude by reiterating MTI's commitment to support enterprises in their transformation journeys. Our conversations cannot start with Government agencies telling companies to buy equipment, adopt information technology (IT) solutions or appoint consultants. We should not pretend that we know what each firm needs to improve its products and services. That must come from the business owner, based on a good understanding of what his or her customers require.

Likewise, businesses should not begin the conversation by asking what grants they can obtain from the Government. We want to encourage entrepreneurs, not grantrepreneurs who seek to maximise their grant amount instead of focusing on how they want to transform and grow their business.

Enterprise transformation must start with a vision of what the business wants to achieve, what problems it wants to solve and what capabilities it needs to build to reach its goals. Then we look at what schemes and grants can best support the company. Our efforts must be enterprise-centric and transformation-focused, not scheme-centric and grant-focused.

MTI will continue to work with other Government agencies and industry partners to review our policies and processes to achieve this outcome. We believe this is effective in helping businesses to build deep capabilities and for Singapore to grow a thicker layer of fast-growing local companies.

Senior Parliamentary Secretary Tan Wu Meng.

Mr Chairman, for broad-based economic success, the Government cannot do it alone. Our TACs are crucial partners on this journey.

TACs are a store of social capital – institutional memory, industry networks, access to overseas markets. TACs help the Government to better understand the needs of our business community.

To Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Mr Douglas Foo’s queries, we support our TACs to broaden the reach of our ITMs and drive industry projects through the LEAD programme. Since its launch in 2005, the LEAD programme has supported more than 50 TACs in spearheading projects involving close to 52,000 companies.

Last year, the Association of SMEs launched the SME Cloud Exchange Network Software (SMECEN) with LEAD support. This is a cloud-based platform for companies to perform accounting and human resource functions. SMEs adopting SMECEN can reduce the average manhours per job by up to 80%, which will allow their workers to take on higher-value work, higher-value functions.

In 2017, LEAD was expanded to support a larger base of TACs. The maximum funding level was also increased from 70% to 90% of qualifying costs for high-impact projects involving multiple TACs.

I encourage our TACs to play an even stronger role. ESG will develop five-year roadmaps with TACs to help our TACs adopt a longer-term strategy to drive industry transformation.

For example, ESG is developing a roadmap with SBF to help our local businesses access overseas markets. We will support TACs to implement the roadmaps through the LEAD programme. This includes seconding our public officers to selected TACs to allow our officers to better understand our businesses' concerns as we work together as one Team Singapore.

Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat spoke about developing our enterprises. For this, we need a pro-business environment. As the Minister for Finance said during the Budget Debate, the Government must be prepared to experiment and take calculated risks. This applies to our regulations, which Mr Baey Yam Keng and Mr Lee Yi Shyan touched upon.

First, we must create an environment where new business ideas can take flight. One way is through regulatory sandboxes, where companies can learn quickly, iterate quickly. This has enabled new business concepts like dining in a "Floating Donut" in Marina Bay. When the idea was first raised or first floated, agencies had public safety and pollution concerns. But with the sandbox in place, the company was allowed to test their business concept for six months, with necessary safeguards.

Second, we want to streamline regulations to reduce costs, cut paperwork and free up resources. This is a progressive economic policy move because it is the smaller businesses which have fewer resources to navigate regulations.

Third, we will make it easier for businesses to apply for licences. Starting with the food services sector, we will pilot a one-stop portal to help automate the application process and cut down processing time as far as possible.

For example, the portal will automatically recommend a course of action for land use approvals. This will save companies the hassle of going to different agencies' websites to find out the approved land use of a particular place.

To Mr Lee Yi Shyan's query, the Pro-Enterprise Panel (PEP) and agencies have, together, developed the best practices on licensing approaches. They have also reviewed and streamlined more than 1,000 regulations since PEP’s formation in 2000, based on ground feedback and international reports on the ease of doing business in Singapore.

For example, the requirement to affix company stamps on Government forms has been removed. We agree with companies' feedback that this was outdated, unnecessary, cumbersome and time-consuming.

However, the suggestion of imposing a "sunset clause" on regulations may be too prescriptive. Agencies, too, need flexibility. What is more important is a mindset where agencies are continuously alive – alive to the idea of rules review, alive to the idea of adapting, alive to the idea of transformation. A living culture of asking "why do we have this rule?", "is the rule still needed?", "is there a better way of doing things?" Because governance is not always about adding more rules. Sometimes, we subtract, we simplify. Sometimes, we need to tidy up to spark innovation; and, sometimes, we need to tidy up to spark joy.

Besides supporting our enterprises, we want well-functioning markets that help consumers benefit from more choices and more competitive prices. Under the Open Electricity Market (OEM), households and small businesses now have more choices. At the same time, we will ensure that consumers’ interests are protected.

I would like to assure Mr Pritam Singh that retailers in the OEM are thoroughly vetted and have to satisfy a stringent set of requirements before being allowed to serve OEM consumers. For example, retailers have to consistently hedge at least 50% of their wholesale electricity price risk. Retailers must also safeguard all security deposits collected from household consumers and return them to these household consumers should a retailer exit the market.

EMA also has safeguards in place to prevent retailers from unilaterally terminating contracts, unless the retailer is exiting the market or the consumer has breached the contract terms. Retailers who wish to exit the market are expected to find other retailers to take on those consumers on the same terms and conditions. If the retailer cannot find a replacement or if the consumer rejects the proposed transfer, the supply of electricity to the consumer will not be disrupted as the consumer will be transferred to SP Group.

Mr Pritam Singh asked about the retailer who had been selling electricity to the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council. Red Dot Power was predominantly retailing to businesses. It was not involved in the full OEM launch and we understand that Red Dot Power's exit was due to cash flow issues.

I hear Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Teo Ser Luck's feedback on instalment plans. In my own constituency duties, I have seen similar situations with my residents and, in my previous role as a backbencher, I have filed Parliamentary Questions on related topics as well. So, I hear their concerns. Today, most consumer credit providers, such as moneylenders and financial institutions, are already regulated. Such providers have to adhere to rules, including borrowing limits. While retailers offering inhouse credit sales agreements are not specifically regulated today, they are still subject to general laws, like the Sale of Goods Act and CPFTA.

I agree that there should be adequate information disclosure by retailers so that consumers can make informed decisions. Enticement of consumers to over-leverage on credit should not be allowed. The Government is working with stakeholders to review industry practices and the appropriate regulatory response. MoneySENSE, the national financial education programme, also provides consumers with tips on what they should look out for when taking loans and instalments.

On Mr Lim Biow Chuan's suggestion, the Government has to balance between consumers' interests and a pro-enterprise environment. A broad-based cooling off period may potentially be subject to abuse and introduce uncertainty to businesses. There are also challenges, some quite complex, in defining the arena of "beauty and slimming" services. CASE and the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) have conducted outreach activities to educate consumers on what our consumers should watch out for before committing to purchases.

On Mr Lim Biow Chuan's suggestion for MAS to take reference from the Hong Kong Monetary Authority's approach to chargeback policies, MAS will study this. ABS has also developed Frequently Asked Questions on chargeback. MAS will continue to work with stakeholders to educate consumers on their rights and obligations when making purchases using credit cards.

Sir, generally speaking, if you are a consumer, do read the terms and conditions carefully. If you are not sure, do not be afraid to ask. Is the business reputable? What kind of financial commitments are in the contract? Think about buying from CaseTrust businesses which offer a cooling off period. Let me reassure this House that CCCS will not hesitate to take action against retailers who persist in unfair practices. Chairman, in Mandarin please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]: We also want consumers to access information more easily and compare options, and save money, time and effort. MTI is working with CASE to develop a crowdsourcing app for consumers to compare prices for groceries and cooked food. Through this app, consumers are able to share price information which benefits the wider community. Those with less time, less awareness of market prices, and less purchasing experience, will benefit the most. As for seniors without smartphones, they can still benefit through hearing of good bargains from neighbours, family members or friends who use the app.

(In English): In conclusion, economic transformation is a collective effort. It takes all of us – Government, businesses, TACs and our workers – our brothers and sisters in the Labour Movement. It takes all of us, working together, to transform our economy to succeed. Let us continue working together to create good jobs, better opportunities and a bright future for Singapore and all our fellow Singaporeans.

Any clarifications? Mr Liang Eng Hwa.

Sir, I understand that Minister Chan Chun Sing has just returned from Siam Reap, Cambodia, where he attended the RCEP Ministerial Meeting. So, probably it is timely to ask him on the latest progress of the RCEP negotiations. We have a few elections in the region in the member states. Is there enough political will to overcome the specific sensitive issues and do we have reasons to be optimistic for the agreement to be concluded this year?

Mr Chairman, let me thank Mr Liang Eng Hwa for his question. Yes, indeed, I just came back from Cambodia. In Cambodia over the weekend, the Ministers had a good discussion on RCEP. What I sense from my RCEP Ministerial colleagues is that all of them have reaffirmed their determination to try their best to conclude RCEP this year. More so than last year, they understand the strategic significance of RCEP and also the criticality of the timing of RCEP.

In a world where we see the rise of protectionism, unilateral moves by various countries and so forth, many in Southeast Asia and in the rest of Asia see the urgency to try to conclude this, not just for the economic benefits alone but also because of the positive message we want to send to the rest of the world of how we collectively believe in greater integration for the greater good of our peoples.

Over the weekend, the Ministers have agreed on a 2019 workplan which will include intermediate targets to be achieved each month for us to ensure that we get to the finishing line by the end of this year. Under Thailand's ASEAN chairmanship, we see this as a very positive development.

However, as Mr Liang Eng Hwa said, there are a few uncertainties. In particular, there are four regional elections: India, Indonesia, Thailand and Australia. From now till the end of May, these four countries will be very involved in their domestic elections. What the Ministers have directed the negotiators to focus on is to make sure that we clear as much of the technical issues as possible from now till June.

The next critical milestone for the Ministerial meeting will be in August this year in China. This will be a critical milestone because this will be a point where we will make the political decision and show the political commitment that all the 16 countries want to get it done this year.

So, the first part of the year, we will see the frontloading of the technical aspects of the work. In the third quarter of this year, we hope to see a resolution on the political direction after the completion of the four regional elections. In the meantime, the respective working groups are working hard to close off the remaining chapters and the technical issues.

Mr Pritam Singh.

Just following up with the clarification from Senior Parliamentary Secretary Tan Wu Ming on electricity retailers. I understand in the event a retailer exits from the market in the household sector, the retailer will be required, as per Senior Parliamentary Secretary's answer, to provide electricity or to find a retailer who would provide electricity at the same price. In the event that fails, I do not believe that Senior Parliamentary Secretary Tan has clarified what compensation alternatives would be available to the residents, given that they would be back on the standard SP tariff rate. In case I missed that, just a query.

I thank Mr Pritam Singh for his clarification. From the viewpoint of household consumers, one of the key objectives in the OEM is that in the event a retailer exits, that household continues to receive electricity. The power is not disconnected. As a first instance, if a retailer is exiting, they are expected to try and find an alternative supplier for that household with equivalent terms or, failing which, if the alternative cannot be found, the household reverts to SP Group as the provider of last resort in such a situation.

Mr Pritam Singh also raised a separate question, which is, whether there is a concept of expectation loss here. It is worth bearing in mind that in the current operating environment, where households may have obtained discounted rates from an electricity supplier, and subsequently, if the supplier exits, and they revert to SP Group, they have obtained savings at that point. So, I am just wondering what Mr Pritam Singh means by seeking compensation.

If I can put it in a different way. Right now, let us say, the shoe is on the other foot and the consumer decides to move on to another retailer, because the rates are more favourable than the existing rate that the consumer has bargained for. What would happen is they have to pay a termination fee and I am just wondering if there is a similar mechanism if it was the other way round. That is essentially the essence of my question.

So, there are actually two distinct scenarios in that one question which Mr Pritam Singh has raised. One scenario is, if the retailer is still in the market and the consumer decides to initiate termination of the contract, and to move to another retailer because of a better deal. In that situation, if the consumer is the one initiating the termination and moving to a different supplier, then those terms and conditions, whether there is an early termination fee, would apply.

But, in the event of the other situation, when a retailer chooses to exit the market, firstly, as I mentioned earlier, the retailer has to source around to see if another retailer will offer an equivalent plan to the existing consumers. In that situation, even then, the consumer can decide he does not like this alternative because there is another better alternative available in the market when the existing retailer exits, the consumer still has that choice. So, it depends on which situation Mr Pritam Singh is looking at for the purposes of this question.

Mr Low Thia Khiang.

Sir, I have two clarifications for the Minister. First, whether the ongoing issue with Malaysia, namely, the airspace and the port issues, if they remain unsolved, would they affect Singapore's economy? The second clarification is whether the Minister sees the defence industry having the potential to contribute to the Singapore economy.

Mr Chairman, let me thank Mr Low Thia Khiang for his two clarifications. Let me take the second one first.

Whether we see the defence industry as able to contribute to our overall economy, the answer is definitely yes. In fact, if you look at ST Engineering today, I do not have the exact numbers, but if I am not wrong, almost half of their business comes from the non-defence sector. So, there is some cross-pollination of ideas and benefits in growing ST Engineering companies. And there are examples that my colleagues have given just now. So, the answer is definitely yes. The defence industry, either directly or indirectly, through the use of the related technologies, can benefit the wider economy.

On Mr Low Thia Khiang's first question about the impact of the issues with Malaysia on the Singapore economy, there are two levels that we must always bear in mind. First, is that Malaysia is part of the wider ASEAN economy and, obviously, any uncertainties in Malaysia's economy will affect Singapore, just as it will affect the regional countries.

Our position is that we continue to look for win-win situations and win-win projects together with Malaysia because we always believe that a prosperous Malaysia that is doing well economically is good for Malaysia, is good for the region. We will continue on this mode, this kind of mental model that we are seeking win-win cooperation.

Having said that, of course, any disruption to the Malaysian economy can have and will have a significant impact on Singapore's economy, which is why, over the last few months, MTI has been encouraging our companies to seriously consider the impact of Malaysia’s political and economic trajectory. We asked and encouraged our companies to diversify their sources, their supply chains and their markets. This is part of our wider strategy to ensure that we will never be held ransom by any one particular market for our supply chains or for the market for our products and services.

So, this, we must continue to do, regardless of whether it is Malaysia or any one particular market. But the Member is right, Malaysia is our next-door neighbour, our closest neighbour. Because they are our closest neighbour, all the more we must make sure that we continue to diversify and take this issue very seriously, that our economy is never held ransom or dependent on a single source.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan.

I just wanted to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, we already have a mandatory cooling-off period for purchase of timeshare contracts. There is also what they call a free-look period for life and health insurance products. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary give a compelling reason why MTI is not prepared to consider a cooling-off period for contracts with businesses in the beauty and slimming industry?

I thank Mr Lim for his clarification. Certain considerations apply. First of these is whether the extent of commitment by the individual consumer is very substantial and whether there have been legitimate opportunities for the consumer to decline entering into a contract at that point in time.

I hear what the Member said about how someone going for a massage finds himself under the wrong kind of pressure. But we also have to bear in mind that if a consumer feels they have been wrongfully confined, if someone is trying to extract certain decisions or concessions while they are in a vulnerable position, a consumer can and should consider asking for the authorities to be alerted. If someone locks you in a room and asks you to sign a contract, I think Mr Lim Biow Chuan, being a lawyer, he also knows what the options are available. And you do not necessarily need to call in a lawyer for that. So, that is one part of it.

But more broadly, I would say there is also the need for us, throughout society, to continue sending a message, not just looking at legislative measures but also as a community of consumers and concerned citizens, about what kind of sales tactics are acceptable, unacceptable or completely beyond the pale in our society.

Any further clarifications? Mr Liang Eng Hwa, would you like to withdraw your amendment, please?

Sir, if I may say something about Mr Teo Ser Luck. I am happy that he filed so many cuts this time for MTI. He used to be helping and supporting entrepreneurs and startups when he was in MTI, and now he is himself an entrepreneur and a startup. So, this is an indication of our vibrant startup scene.

Sir, growing and transforming our economy is so very important for Singapore, so crucial. We can only now wish MTI and the economic agencies every success. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment, Sir.

[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $1,032,517,000 for Head V ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $4,755,830,400 for Head V ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]

Head Q, Ministry of Communications and Information. Mr Cedric Foo.

Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head Q of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

One of the basic building blocks of a strong nation is a vibrant economy, an economy that is driven by competitive companies with skilled and creative employees and underpinned by an efficient infrastructure. Strong business and productivity growth are preconditions for higher wages for our workers. Hence, it is critically important that our businesses, both large enterprises as well as small and medium enterprises (SMEs) receive the Government’s support to stay relevant, to innovate and to build deep capabilities to sustain growth right into the future.

Digitalisation is transforming companies, economies and our very way of life. A digital economy has many benefits for businesses. Increased productivity, reduced operating costs and higher asset utilisation are but some of these apparent benefits. In addition, technology can help us tackle issues, like an ageing population and manpower constraints in Singapore. Today, one in four of our workforce is aged 55 and above. With declining birth rates, higher life expectancy and more senior citizens opting to remain in the workforce, this ratio is poised to increase over time. Our ageing workforce compels our Large Local Enterprises (LLEs) and SMEs to embrace digitalisation to reap opportunities of the digital economy or risk falling behind.

Across many industries, new technologies are disrupting existing business models. Leveraging digital platforms, innovative companies have been eroding the market share or even replacing established companies by improving the quality, speed or price at which value is delivered. There are numerous examples of such disruptions, ranging from companies disrupted by ride sharing, brick and mortar retail stores disrupted by online 24/7 stores, traditional print media disrupted by social media platforms and so on.

Singapore has done well as we have fast and reliable broadband access and also a high penetration rate for active mobile users. However, we do have some challenges.

Even as our businesses aspire to adopt technologies, many companies, especially our SMEs, find it difficult to do so. They do need help. To begin with, SME shareholders and managers often have such questions: "How do I start the digital journey? Which areas of digitalisation will produce the best returns on investment? Who can assist me to help fund these investments? Can my employees adapt to these changes? Will it result in near-term losses?" These are but some of the many questions that our SMEs have prior to embarking on the digitalisation journey.

Some key success factors for business digitalisation are scale, large datasets, financial stamina to win market share and to create network effects. By definition, SMEs in Singapore are small and our local market is also small. Therefore, the challenges for SMEs to embark on the digitalisation journey are formidable.

Our lead enterprises or LLEs also need assistance. Being larger and operating in more markets, their challenges are less daunting. To accelerate the pace of digitalisation, the Government can set interoperability standards so that a local ecosystem of digital infrastructure that is reliable, resilient, accessible and secure can take root and thrive. Our LLEs can then leverage such shared infrastructure to transform their businesses and stay on top of rapid advances in digital technologies. Our LLEs can then be the receptacle to innovate and be our global champions, leading the way for our SMEs and startups to venture overseas.

Could the Minister lay out for this House his plans to assist our businesses, both large and small, to adopt technology and to innovate in this digital economy?

[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]

Mr Cedric Foo, you can take your next two cuts together.

Thank you, Mr Chairman. Following on my earlier cut on the need for businesses to adopt digital technologies, my next cut is on our workers and measures taken to ensure that we have sufficient talent to support a growing digital economy.

Support for our businesses can be seen as a means to enable our citizens to have good jobs and good wages, thereby improving living standards in Singapore. At the same time, in order for businesses to thrive, they need sufficient workers with digital skills, knowledge and the right attitudes to embrace the constantly evolving digital environment. This symbiotic relationship is key for a successful digital economy.

However, many countries, including Singapore, are facing a shortage of workers who are equipped with digital skills necessary for the digital workplace. To prepare our youths, basic digital skills and technology literacy have to be introduced at an earlier age. They must also be encouraged to challenge the status quo rather than accepting conventional norms, always relooking at how everything is done, thinking expansively on innovative products and solutions. More importantly, our workers have to accept that continuous learning is now a norm, and new capabilities and skillsets will have to be acquired many, many times throughout their career life, as the job market would be anything but static.

Over the last few years, the Government has put in place a range of support measures for our workers. The SkillsFuture and Adapt and Grow programmes are some good examples.

Businesses, too, must step up on training and job redesign through professional conversion programmes for employees. Typically, the affected employees, requiring skills retooling, have been loyal employees for years. Upskilling and reskilling these employees will allow the company to retain the organisational values and culture. Such workers would also have, often times, deep customer relationships that are worth retaining. It has always been the case that technological innovation destroys some jobs and replaces them with new ones. For many of our workers, especially the older ones, buzz words like "Smart Nation", "digitalisation", "machine learning", artificial intelligence ("AI") and "robotics" can be very disconcerting and intimidating. We have to do more to encourage our workers to embrace such changes and reap the tangible benefits of upskilling.

I am thinking that maybe "Natural Language Programming" for oral commands for certain robots, like in the cleaning industry, could be programmed in "Singlish".

Investments in digital talent will be critical to ensuring Singapore remains competitive. Society will be better off as we invest in our people.

I would like to ask the Minister to provide an update on the programmes and initiatives that we are implementing over the next few years so as to ensure that we have sufficient talent to support a digital economy.

Mr Chairman, according to research by Bain & Co, harnessing the collective power potential of the region's digital economies could accelerate intraregional trade and result in a gross domestic product uplift of US$1 trillion across the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) by 2025. If ASEAN countries can come together and grow as a single integrated regional digital economy, ASEAN citizens could enjoy significant benefits and improve living standards.

For example, a common e-payment platform would facilitate the ASEAN digital economy, to ensure interoperability across state boundaries and leverage the large ASEAN market for e-commerce. However, developing a common e-payment system requires close coordination and data flows across boundaries.

But there is a growing number of countries that are enacting laws and barriers that make it more expensive, time-consuming or even illegal to transfer data overseas. Governments are citing privacy and cybersecurity concerns as they are reluctant to allow a company in another country to have access to their citizens' data. This is despite the significant economic benefits that we talked about.

To minimise the risks of cyber threats, ASEAN needs to develop a secure cyberspace through building and reinforcing the framework for online security. Sharing critical information, establishing protocols to deal with hacking, coordinating cyber agencies for ASEAN members and creating a regional dispute settlement resolution are some ways to developing a secure cyberspace.

I would like to ask the Minister to share his views on how we may facilitate greater cross-border data flows.

Mr Teo Ser Luck, you have two cuts. Please take them together.

Many companies are still unprepared to go digital in the new world and in the future. And the Government has been making tremendous and focused efforts to help them go digital, coming up with several schemes and major schemes.

But, for many companies, due to their business nature and the length of time they have been in business, they are still trying to figure out which part of the process can be digitised. So, it is not just knowing when to start and where to start, there are a couple of scenarios, in my sense, that these businesses cannot see the need to change. They have been entrenched in the business for too long and they possibly have a winning formula in their business as they have built such depth in their domain knowledge that they did not see the need to change. Some things are best relied on manual labour, not because it is more cost-effective but because it could possibly give them the efficiency and the margins that they are looking for. So, they do not find the need to change and no motivation to go digital at all.

The business nature and the ecosystem around the business itself creates certain margins that they had for many years. So, status quo helps them to survive and going digital is a form of risk.

Thirdly, it is the lack of the skill and knowledge within the company, that is, of the bosses, entrepreneurs, founders, staff, workers. There is a lot of unwillingness and real intent to change. But at the same time, they are reluctant to hire talents or changemakers into a company because that means giving up some of the ownership for those decisions that they have to make. So, how do we get them to digitise? In a sense, are we prepared to allow some of them to consolidate or even fade away if they do not go digital?

There are many schemes and programmes rolled out for these local enterprises to help them in this new wave of the digital economy. But how effective have they been? And are we really seeing more and more companies coming forward? There are almost 200,000 SMEs around in Singapore but how many have taken up and gone digital?

Over several weekends, at the grassroots and the community levels, I organised several small gatherings in different locations for residents. And over time, more and more residents would join such gatherings and we find that it is getting harder and harder to do things in a manual approach, including signing up for some activities or even knowing whether they are going to come or not, as well as conducting surveys with these residents.

We figured that we should digitise the process and then make it a little bit more online that will be more accessible for them and, at the same time, easier to collect the data. Inclusive of my volunteers and the residents, not everyone is receptive to it. Of course, there are some elderly persons who find it very hard and so we will have to keep the manual process going.

But it is an important process to prepare Singaporeans in this digital world because it is not just affecting their daily lives and everything that they do in the near future, but also in finding new jobs or new opportunities in their careers as well as acquiring new skills.

My sense in this process of change is that in preparing Singaporeans to be able to adapt to this new digital world, we certainly still have a distance to go. So, how can Singaporeans be more prepared and what can the Government do to help prepare Singaporeans for this digital age in their daily lives, in finding new jobs, acquiring new skills, so that they could better adapt to this new world?

Automation, digitalisation and AI are disrupting how we live and how work is organised. As old jobs get displaced, new jobs are created that require the right attitude and new competencies. We need to unlearn and relearn if our people are to exploit the new opportunities and capture value in the new economy.

According to an October 2018 McKinsey report on the future of work in Switzerland, it is estimated that the demand for tasks requiring basic cognitive or physical and manual skills could decline by 20%. Conversely, the need for social and emotional and technological skills is to rise by about 20% and up to 50% respectively. The skill shift is also expected to exceed the regular rate at which labour and skills drop out of the market.

These findings can well apply to Singapore. Hence, it is imperative that we continue to invest in our human capital and help our people transition. We will also need to accelerate the speed at which we do so. The Government must work with businesses to ensure relevant training content and hands-on practice, culminating in real job opportunities.

I am aware of the Infocomm Media Development Authority's (IMDA's) effort in running human capital programmes. I would like to know what outcomes have we achieved so far and how does the Ministry measure the immediate and long-term success of the programmes. Do the new jobs and skills trained match well?

For individuals with no Infocomm technology (ICT) background, are there programmes in place to help them make the career switch? If there are, what is the success rate so far?

Mr Douglas Foo, you can take your two next cuts together.

Mr Chairman, Sir, on SMEs Go Digital, since the launch of the SMEs Go Digital programme during Budget 2017, the programme has helped and has developed many initiatives with the aim of helping local SMEs use digital technologies, build capabilities and participate in the digital economy.

Through partnerships with trade associations and chambers (TACs), such as the Singapore Manufacturing Federation, the programme provides SMEs with consultancy advice from specialist digital project managers to help them implement pre-approved digital solutions to transform their businesses.

As announced by Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat in Budget 2019, the programme has seen some 4,000 SMEs adopt pre-approved digital solutions offered under the programme. While this number is indeed encouraging, it is a drop in an ocean of nearly 200,000 SMEs in Singapore.

Therefore, can the Ministry provide a progress update on the SMEs Go Digital programme, particularly with respect to the minimum number of SMEs the programme is intended to reach, and how the Ministry intends to get SMEs to accelerate the adoption of digital solutions?

As the manufacturing sector advances towards Industry 4.0, the sector will increasingly require the skillset of info-communications media (ICM) professionals to harness frontier technologies to help the sector reach Industry 4.0's standards sooner. The ICM Industry Transformation Map (ITM) was launched in November 2017 with the goal of employing more than 210,000 ICM workers and create more than 13,000 professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMET) jobs by 2020.

Can the Ministry provide an update on the ITM's employment goals so far? Also, what are the Ministry of Communications and Information's (MCI's) long-term plans to attract talents to become ICM professionals?

Mr Ong Teng Koon, you can take your two cuts together.

Sir, one of the challenges of being an infrastructure provider is that you tend to be taken for granted. People assume that your services will always be available whenever they want it. They give no thought to the effort and planning that go into providing such services.

However, the moment there is any disruption, everybody is instantly up in arms. For example, consumers were outraged by a 3.5 hours' outage in Singtel's broadband services in July last year, or another similar disruption in November.

The digital economy – streaming services, e-commerce, cloud computing – is built on the assumption of uninterrupted access to the Internet. But no matter how much service providers invest to ensure 99.999% uptime, it can be undone by failure at the infrastructure level. Loss of connectivity can have potentially catastrophic business consequences as businesses are unable to access customers or essential services, such as banking, payments and so on.

Sir, what are our plans to ensure that our digital infrastructure is able to support our growing digital economy?

Sir, the rapid pace of technology advancement shows no signs of slowing. Concepts that seemed like science fiction just a few years ago are starting to impact our daily lives.

Autonomous vehicles, intelligent home automation, bots powered by natural language processing that can hold an almost human-like conversation, these things are already here. The impact that they will have on our daily lives is still not fully understood, but will surely be profound. It will shape how we live, work and play.

Singapore has invested billions of dollars to support research into such areas. The current Research, Innovation and Enterprise (RIE 2020) plan has allocated $19 billion to key areas, such as advanced manufacturing and urban solutions.

Sir, looking forward to the next decade, what is the Ministry doing to further invest in frontier technology and sharpen Singapore's competitive edge?

Mr Chairman, the SingHealth cyberattack was the largest breach in Singapore to date. On 15 January 2019, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) fined SingHealth S$250,000 and fined the Integrated Health Information Systems Pte Ltd (IHiS) S$750,000.

These punitive fines underscore the large scale of the breach and the sensitive and confidential nature of the patients' data that was lost and it is a signal to other organisations to take the necessary steps to safeguard personal data.

However, there does not appear to be any remedy or compensation available to the actual victims of the data breach. There is no obvious recourse for the ones who had their personal data stolen. In addition to fines, can we provide a way for victims of data breaches to claim compensation for the loss of personal data?

In December 2017, Uber delayed in reporting that personal information of 380,000 users in Singapore had been compromised in a breach the year before. After the breach had occurred and before Uber's admission of the said breach, it was reported that victims of the data breach were preyed upon by the hackers who used the stolen personal data to cause even more harm to the victims. It is unclear how many of those victims suffered further losses as a result of the actions of the hackers.

Is it possible to have a tribunal to allow the victims to seek compensation for any losses they might have suffered as a result of the data breach?

Chairman, the PDPC was set up in 2013 as the implementing agency for the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA). According to the PDPC's website, the number of enquiries and complaints received by it in the last four years ranged from between 2,200 and 3,300 annually. I have a few enquiries about this.

First, were the major classes of complaints related to the "Do Not Call" Registry or were they complaints about organisations not exercising reasonable care to protect personal data from unauthorised disclosure?

Secondly, what are the resource and staffing level of the PDPC to enable it to look into the kinds of cases it is facing? The Minister recently pointed out that in the SingHealth data breach, the PDPC had leveraged the findings of a Committee of Inquiry (COI) called by the Government. If another major breach were to occur and a COI is not formed, does PDPC have the resources to investigate a major case on its own?

Next, I would like to ask about outcomes achieved for complainants. PDPC has usefully published its decisions online. Where the PDPC found that organisations were in breach of their obligations to safeguard personal data, it was usual that PDPC will impose financial penalties and also give directions on how the organisations should improve its data security arrangements. Has PDPC ever assisted a victim of a data breach to obtain redress, for example, mediating a financial settlement with the organisation?

Finally, the coverage of the PDPA still excludes what is defined as "public agencies". This exclusion seems artificial when data is collected by entities under PDPA obligations and then transmitted to the Government. While I accept that Government agencies have many laws and regulations concerning data obligations, is there a convincing reason to exclude public agencies from PDPA?

Mr Chairman, during the Committee of Supply (COS) debate last week on the Smart Nation topic, Minister Vivian Balakrishnan mentioned that Singapore was going to "double down" on AI. He pointed out that AI, and in particular, deep machine learning, has revolutionised many services, including providing voice assistants, language translations, global positioning system optimisation and helping to detect fraud.

These are revolutionary developments and Singapore must continue down this path. However, there are concerns about AI being used improperly. Machines, like humans, need to be taught and trained, and this requires access to data. I have some concerns that people may not be aware of the full extent to which their personal data is being gathered and used.

The second, of course, is after this data is gathered and technology is developed, the same information in the wrong hands can lead to trouble, including in the hands of foreign actors, hackers and scammers. Has the Government considered societal concerns surrounding the use of AI and, if so, how are we addressing them?

Mr Chairman, as we make definitive strides in realising our Smart Nation ambitions, I greatly welcome the announcement of the Proposed Model AI Governance Framework. While big data, deep learning and neural networks may sound abstract, their growing deployment has real consequences for society. AI-driven automated decision-making is increasingly being used for systems and processes that determine product prices, insurance premiums and job recruitment, just to name a few. These are areas where alarms about algorithmic bias have, indeed, been raised. Issues relating to data justice, algorithmic fairness and explainable AI must thus be closely monitored to ensure that we reap the best of technology while effectively managing unintended adverse consequences. The Proposed Model AI Governance Framework is, therefore, especially timely. It will help to warrant that our drive for innovation does not leave ethicality in the dust.

By enunciating a common AI governance approach and offering a set of consistent definitions and principles relating to the responsible use of AI, we provide greater certainty to industry players. Can MCI, therefore, share its plans for ensuring that this framework is effectively disseminated across all relevant industries? How will it raise awareness of the guidelines governing the responsible use of AI and encourage their application? Are there also plans to have this framework introduced into the curriculum of students taking AI-related courses in our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs)?

Mr Chairman, Sir, I understand that the Critical Information Infrastructure (CII) sectors have been established with the express aim of improving cybersecurity so as to ensure the continuous delivery of essential services in Singapore.

I applaud the Government's efforts at safeguarding our digital sphere. This is of paramount importance as we make the transition into a Smart Nation. Recent events, both domestically and internationally, such as the cyberattacks on SingHealth and the recent hack into the Australian parliament's computer network, underscore the threats that we face, and the necessity for swift, decisive action to mitigate or neutralise these threats.

Having said this, I would like to seek some clarification in three areas: first, what are the essential public services that have been identified under the CII? Second, how will the infrastructure pertaining to these sectors be set up or otherwise modified to ensure robust cybersecurity? Third, what are the contingencies that the Government will employ in the event of a cyberattack or disruption of essential services?

Recently, I had a chat at the workspace in my constituency. The workspace is occupied by many entrepreneurs and many of them build their business using the Internet or social media as a platform. So, I had a chat with this user. He runs an e-commerce company and he told me that one day, he woke up and he realised that there was no sale within his system. He was wondering why and, actually, his system was hacked. His customer database was hacked, as well as the entire website was hacked. What happened was he had to close the business for a few days and he almost had to close the entire business.

Many businesses probably take cybersecurity for granted. If we could, we should educate more and more businesses, especially the smaller businesses and the startups which are building their businesses over the Internet, about cybersecurity. I would like to know whether the Government has any plans to help instil greater knowledge on cybersecurity and the importance of it in the near future.

Chairman, Budget 2019 has focused our attention on cybersecurity by adding the Digital Defence pillar to our Total Defence strategy. This is appropriate, coming after the SingHealth attack and the HIV Registry leak. There is one critical vulnerability that now needs addressing. In Singapore, the extensive interface between the private and public sectors means that cybersecurity for businesses is a critical vulnerability. The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) has also been relying on private companies to drive technological innovation and adaptations.

Will the Government thus consider implementing targeted initiatives to bolster the cybersecurity capabilities of businesses, especially our local SMEs, urgently? It has been suggested that the Government should provide grants for SMEs to train employees and improve cyber defences. Yes, it has also been suggested that a Government hotline be established for businesses to obtain advice and report cybersecurity breaches without adversarial treatment from the Government.

Mr Chairman, as more and more of our systems go online, cybersecurity becomes a particular concern. The two high-profile incidents this year highlight our vulnerability.

The first was the unauthorised access of SingHealth records by a foreign state actor. This highlighted that there are well-funded organisations and countries out there that may deliberately try and break into our systems.

The second involved the improper leak of the Ministry of Health's (MOH's) registry of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) patients. This highlighted that a human lapse by one of the individuals entrusted with access to the system, coupled with malicious intent by another, can lead to disastrous consequences.

These incidents show two aspects of the vulnerability of our Government systems, and it is foreseeable that both of these, external threats as well as human error by trusted individuals, are timeless issues that are almost impossible to eradicate. Against this backdrop, are there ways to assess the cybersecurity of our Government systems and better improve it?

Mr Chairman, Sir, according to the Global Cybersecurity Index 2017, Singapore topped the list as the country that was prepared against cyberattacks, surpassing the United States (US). However, despite the robustness of our cybersecurity strategy, attacks, such as the one on MOH, demands that we continue to be vigilant and steadfast in our defence against cyberattacks. Just like the other pillars of Total Defence, Digital Defence involves everyone, from individuals to businesses to the Government. Therefore, can the Ministry explain how it intends to encourage collaboration amongst industry partners to harness local cybersecurity expertise to develop secure, high-quality products that contribute towards a safe and trusted cyberspace for Singapore?

The advent of technology has brought with it new ecosystems and new methods of engagement. Technology and, in particular, the Internet, has changed the way we socialise, work and do business. These changes have brought about massive improvements by connecting people as well as increasing efficiency and productivity. However, there are people who have sought to misuse and cause harm to others on these new platforms.

Last year, Singapore's overall crime rate went up by 1.4%, propped up mainly by a surge in online-related scams. There was also a 40.3% increase in the number of crimes under the Computer Misuse Act. We have also seen several instances of cyberattacks in public domains, like the recent high-profile SingHealth cyberattack which affected 1.5 million patients. Private entities are also prime targets for digital attacks. In 2017, Uber announced that the personal information of over 57 million Uber users and 600,000 drivers were exposed by hackers. In November 2018, Marriot International also announced that cybercriminals stole data of approximately 500 million customers.

As the Government boosts the nation's cybersecurity infrastructure and strengthens the legal framework to deal with digital crime, it is important for the community to be equipped with sufficient knowledge and skills to protect themselves from online harm. Individual users, businesses and organisations need to be prepared.

As we introduce Digital Defence as the sixth pillar of Total Defence in Singapore, we must remember that in most cases, humans or computer users are the weakest link in cybersecurity. The most robust cyber defences are susceptible to breaches even by the act of that one single user, whether it is because of lax passwords, unknowingly leaking confidential data or falling prey to phishing attacks that trick users into giving up sensitive data.

In this regard, how can we improve cybersecurity awareness among citizens and businesses so that we can continue to leverage the opportunities that technology brings while minimising the threats online?

Mr Chairman, Sir, the COI investigating the SingHealth cyberattack recommended to significantly improve the competency of cybersecurity personnel.

Manpower planning and talent development strategy are critical in the national strategy to strengthen cybersecurity. In 2012, the Economic Development Board (EDB) reported that there were 1,200 cybersecurity specialists although there are 140,000 information technology (IT) professionals. After seven years, where do we stand today in terms of number and percentage of cybersecurity specialists among IT professionals? How many more are needed and being targeted?

One of the key thrusts of the National Cyber Security Masterplan 2018 is to grow Singapore's expertise in cybersecurity. The Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) has been working with our IHLs to expand cybersecurity programmes. Polytechnics and industry have collaborated to establish cybersecurity centres. IDA is also collaborating with FireEye to upskill cybersecurity professionals. EDB and NEC corporation are collaborating to develop capabilities in strategic areas through overseas attachment. ST Engineering established the DigiSAFE Cyber Security Centre to reskill those interested in a mid-career switch.

With the establishment of the Home Team Science and Technology Agency and MINDEF’s Defence Cyber Organisation, and also the public sector Cybersecurity Professional Programme and MINDEF's Cyber Full-time National Servicemen (NSF) Vocation, we now have a varied landscape for manpower and talent development in cybersecurity.

Are these different efforts being coordinated by the Cyber Security Agency (CSA) and IDA in accordance with the national strategy? Are these efforts competing with one another for a small pool of talents or complementing one another for synergies?

Mr Chairman, the anonymous nature of the Internet has led to a "disinhibition effect" where people take on an online persona that is different from their persona in real life. The disinhibition effect has been studied extensively by researchers to understand cyberbullying behaviour and other forms of undesirable online behaviour, such as trolling and catfishing. While such online behaviour is objectionable, its effect is relatively contained.

What is worrying is the emergence of deliberate online falsehoods, where the reach and potential impact of such falsehoods are widespread. The Internet has provided the perpetrators of falsehoods with a veil of anonymity and the disinhibition effect has emboldened the perpetrators to craft messages that are patently false, with the malicious intention to obfuscate the truth. The malice of online falsehood can lead to communal and racial violence, distrust in the establishment and sway public opinions on important social issues.

Singapore is not immune to the malice of deliberate online falsehoods. Some state actors and individuals have mounted falsehood campaigns to discredit our institutions, to cast aspersions on our Government and systems. These orchestrated campaigns need to be dealt with swiftly and decisively before they gain momentum.

Yet, dealing with deliberate online falsehoods require a multi-agency approach that includes combating falsehoods with facts, educating Singaporeans to discern between truth and untruth, and for media companies to play their part to weed out fake posts and misinformation campaigns.

What are some concrete steps that the Government is taking to help Singaporeans guard against deliberate online falsehoods in an increasingly complex digital and media environment?

Chairman, this House set up a Select Committee to look into the matter of Deliberate Online Falsehoods. I should declare that I participated in the public consultation by the Select Committee as part of the People's Action Party (PAP) Policy Forum.

Some of the key issues raised included: first, fake news is often plausible and interesting, which makes it likely to circulate very far; second, the truth is rarely as interesting, so corrections and rectifications do not get the same attention; third, social media and messaging platforms, such as WhatsApp, have allowed fake news to go very far; fourth, there is evidence that foreign actors have used fake news to interfere in elections, such as the US Presidential election and even the United Kingdom's (UK's) vote on Brexit; fifth, private organisations often profit from fake news, and these include not only those who deliberately create it, such as Temasek Review, but many of those who benefit from its dissemination, including platforms like Facebook which get monies from advertising revenues.

Mr Vikram Nair, kindly wrap up.

Yes. After the Select Committee's deliberation, are there any plans to introduce new measures to counter the threat of deliberate online falsehoods as recommended by the Select Committee?

Mr Chairman, I commend the establishment of the Digital Readiness Blueprint but would like to ask how it caters to the varying skillsets of Internet users.

While we, fortunately, do not have a digital access divide in Singapore, research around the world has shown that the "second level digital divide" pertaining to online skills can significantly influence how much people can benefit from their online experience. Furthermore, with our high smartphone penetration rates, we need to pay particular attention to Internet use via mobile phones.

Because the mobile Internet is centred around apps, mobile-only users who rely exclusively on mobile devices are quite distinct from mobile-first users who use mobile devices predominantly but in combination with other devices. These differing usage patterns can translate into different online experiences that reflect variances in online competencies and breadth of exposure to content. These can, in turn, shape individual worldviews and understanding of key societal issues that impact their personal lives.

How do we then map the skills covered by the Basic Digital Skills Curriculum against prevailing Internet usage trends in Singapore? Also, what plans are in place to have the curriculum regularly refreshed to take into account (a) shifting technological trends and (b) changing needs in schools and workplaces?

Mr Chairman, there are several reasons for the digital divide. The primary one is a lack of ready access to computers, smartphones and the Internet. To be applauded are initiatives, such as Home Access programmes for low-income families and Enable IT for persons with disabilities. Both these programmes have done well to provide affordable and inclusive digital access for all Singaporeans.

Another reason for the digital divide is the lack of skills, as Prof Lim Sun Sun pointed out just now, to use digital technologies safely and confidently. Besides being able to operate a device, it is also important for good cyber hygiene habits, including awareness of the negative impact of technology, such as fake news, cyberbullying and social isolation.

Yet another reason for the digital divide is the lack of willingness of some of our citizens to participate in a digital economy. High-profile cyberattacks, including the SingHealth data breach last year, have some of our citizens fearing the use of digital technologies. Yet others have been deterred when they hear of people falling victim to online scams.

Given the numerous impediments to digital inclusion, I would like to ask the Minister to share his strategies and plans to bridge the digital divide so that everyone can benefit from the digital economy.

Chairman, digital services have become an increasingly central part of our lives. We all use mobile apps multiple times each day. From games to health tracking to stock market information, we hardly even notice them anymore. They have become so fundamental to our lives that the United Nations (UN) has even spoken of protecting Internet access as a key element of protecting an individual’s rights.

However, there is also increasing concern about a "digital divide". Lower-income groups are going to be disadvantaged if they lack exposure to the digital world due to affordability concerns. Apart from lack of access to more affordable substitutes for physical services, they may also fail to acquire essential skills needed to work productively in the digital age. If children from lower-income households miss out on digital experiences, we risk creating a permanent underclass.

Significant steps have already been made to address this issue, such as the Home Access Programme, which provides eligible households with two years of subsidised fibre broadband. Free WiFi hotspots are also becoming increasingly common.

What more can we do to ensure that digital connectivity is affordable for the vulnerable and disadvantaged segments of our society?

Chairman, as we gear up for a digital economy, we must make sure that our people are able to benefit from this transformation and not be left behind. We must not inadvertently create a new inequality or widen an existing gap between those who can access and exploit the new digital technologies and those who cannot.