Hansard, Monday, 7 July 2014

I have to inform hon Members that I have on 2 June 2014 communicated to the President the Address of Thanks agreed to by resolution of this Parliament on 30 May 2014.

Page: 15

1 Mr R Dhinakaran asked the Minister for Transport what are the key considerations for the change in the public bus transport model and what will be the initial investment by the Government in this model.

2 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Transport how his Ministry envisions the new bus contracting model in which operators will bid for a package of routes through competitive tendering as being able to achieve better service and affordable fares to commuters as well as the plying of buses on less lucrative but necessary routes.

3 Mr Teo Siong Seng asked the Minister for Transport whether the Government has made a provision in the Budget for the new bus contracting model and, if so, whether the budget will be made transparent to the public.

4 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Transport under the new Government contracting model for public buses (a) how does the Government plan to buy back the public bus infrastructure and operating assets currently owned by the two public transport operators (PTOs); (b) how will the value of these assets be assessed; (c) how will the Government ensure that the PTOs do not profit from the disposal of these assets; and (d) how will the Government fund these asset purchases.

5 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether the Government expects to make an operating loss over the long term under the new Government contracting model for public buses; and (b) approximately how much operating subsidies the Government expects to inject into the public bus system each year.

6 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether the Government has any plans to extend the new public bus contracting model to the MRT system; and (b) whether the Government is satisfied with the current MRT ownership and operating model.

Mdm Speaker, with your permission, I would like to take Question Nos 1 to 6 together, please.

Yes, please.

Page: 16

As announced in May, we are moving the public bus industry from the current privatised model to a Government Contracting Model.

We have been studying this move as early as the Land Transport Master Plan in 2008. Under the current model, the public bus operators rely on their fare and non-fare revenues to pay for their operations and buy operating assets, such as buses. When fare revenues are uncertain, as it has been in recent years, operators may be reluctant to expand capacity ahead of demand, or to improve service levels beyond regulatory standards on their own accord. This was why the Government had to step in with the Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP) in 2012 to quickly raise service standards and to add capacity, even as we worked towards a more sustainable bus industry model.

Under the proposed Government Contracting Model, LTA owns the buses, plans the routes and engages private bus operators through competitive tenders to run the services. This will enable us to respond more quickly and effectively to changes in ridership and commuter needs. The model also allows for more operators, potentially even overseas ones, to compete for the contracts. Bus operators will need to compete on the basis of costs and service quality. Over time, this will lead to the provision of better bus services in a cost-competitive manner, thereby benefiting commuters.

Mr Dhinakaran, Mr Gerald Giam and Mr Teo Siong Seng asked whether the Government is setting aside a budget for the new bus contracting model and how much the Government will subsidise bus operations. I think it is probably not in the Government's interest to reveal any budget that we may have set aside and how much we are prepared to subsidise before the tenders are issued and the returns are seen, as this may well skew the bids against us.

The eventual amount of subsidy will crucially depend on whether fares and bus service standards are set realistically. Regardless of industry model, the cost of the overall bus system has to be paid for either by commuters in the form of fares, or taxpayers in the form of Government subsidies. There surely is no free lunch. Therefore, we have to strike the right balance. The Government is committed to ensure the affordability of public transport fares. However, regular fare adjustments are still necessary to ensure the overall financial sustainability of the public transport system.

Likewise, new bus routes and higher service levels have to be assessed judiciously. Even today, we receive many requests to run bus routes that have low ridership. From the point of view of the select few who benefit, these bus routes are, of course, "necessary". But if we run too many of these routes throughout the system, either higher fares or more Government subsidies will be required.

Page: 17

Mr Giam asked about how we intend to treat the current bus assets owned by the two incumbent public bus operators. We will discuss this issue as part of our negotiations with SBST and SMRT on the nine bus packages that they will continue to operate after 2016.

Finally, Mr Giam may perhaps not be aware that we have already implemented the New Rail Financing Framework (NRFF) starting with the Downtown Line last year, even before the announcement of the public bus contracting model. In fact, the Government Contracting Model for buses brings us closer to the NRFF, where the Government, instead of the operator, owns the operating assets and is responsible for major capital asset investments.

Mr Gerald Giam.

Thank you, Madam. I have four supplementary questions, three of which are related to each other. First is how does the Government ensure that there is genuine contestability and competition among the operators so that they will be kept on their toes to constantly improve service quality and efficiency? How will it ensure that the new model will not see the same few players dominating the market?

Secondly, how will the Government ensure that it is easy for new players to enter the market and also easy for non-performing operators to exit?

Thirdly, how many new players does the Government plan to allow into this market?

Fourthly, does the Government have plans to set up a corporatised, not-for-profit entity like a National Transport Corporation or Transport for London, that manages the assets in the day-to-day operations of the bus network, while leaving LTA to play the regulatory and planning role, as this could lead to greater efficiency and accountability and minimise the risk of regulatory capture?

Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. Perhaps, I will start with a reply to how we would encourage new players to enter the market and then I will go into the specifics of contestability and how many new players.

One important thing is to lower barriers to entry, which is why we decided that as we embarked into the Government Contracting Model that it would be best for LTA to purchase and own the buses. For each package, you may be looking at perhaps 400 to 500 buses. For 400 buses, you may be looking at $150 million and $200 million dollars – quite a significant capital investment if it has to be invested by a new player.

Page: 18

We do not want to preclude the possibility of operators that are already in the local market running private buses quite efficiently who may be prepared to make a bid for one of these packages, provided we lower the barriers to entry.

How do we ensure genuine contestability? Well, to have as many bidders as possible, to make the bidding as simple as it can be so that your evaluation is as straightforward as possible.

There is another reason why we have decided to purchase and provide the buses. Because we intend to have a five-plus-two option – five years, with the option for an operator, if he is successful and performing well, to extend for another two years. So, this is five-plus-two. After that, it is re-tendered.

Obviously, the lifespan of a bus extends well beyond the five or seven years. If an operator were to bring in their own buses, then the challenge is how do they cost this into their bid? Do they bring in second-hand buses, meaning the lifespan would run out by the time they finish; or do they bring in new buses knowing that this could disadvantage operators from certain countries, for example, the European countries, because they are on the different side of the road? And so the buses that they use here may well not be so suitable if they were to use them in some other place, like back in their home countries.

So, genuine contestability comes about from lowering the barriers to entry, making sure that you have got competitive bids, structuring the tender so that it is as clear and as simple as possible so that when you evaluate, you can evaluate across a common base line, so that the potential operators do not need to price in too many areas of uncertainty.

As to how many new players, we are actually open to this. The initial part is that three of the 12 packages will be put up for tenders and we will then negotiate with SBST and SMRT to run the remaining nine packages. Over the longer period, the intent is to put up all 12 packages for tender. Whether we continue to have two, three or more players will depend on the returns that come in.

On the not-for-profit entity and whether there should be a corporate player to own the buses, we do not see a necessity for that at this point in time. Basically, it is really the same model that we are trying to adopt as for rail. In rail, we provide the infrastructure, we provide the first set of rolling stock and the operator then subsequently buys it over at the right point in time. The bus industry had been operating on quite a different model in the past because the operators used to have to pay for the depots, buses and everything. What we are trying to do here in the Government Contracting Model is to provide as much as possible the same

Page: 19

kind of support to the bus industry as we did to the rail industry in the early years.

Madam, I thank the Minister. I would like to ask a supplementary question. How do you plan to structure the subsidies for various bus route segments, and whether this kind of subsidy system will be transparent before the tender takes place?

First, I thank the Member for the very perceptive question. It is not clear at this point in time that all the packages will require subsidy or how much the subsidy is going to be. Essentially, what will happen is that the operators will bid, most likely, on the cost to run a bus on a per-km basis. We may contract them to run, for example, a million km. So, there is a certain price that we will have to pay them for doing so.

Under the gross cost model which we are adopting, all the fare revenues will be collected and it will come to the Government. Of course, if the fare revenues do not match what we have to pay to the operator, there will be a need for a subsidy. Or if the fares do not go up enough in subsequent years, even as the cost may go up based on what is built into the tender returns, then there would be a need for a subsidy. So, we do not yet know at this point in time.

What we will know when the tender returns come in is that we have asked the potential bidders to run a package of routes that we are already operating today. That package of routes, based on the number of buses, frequency and service quality, will let us know what is the revenue that is collected. We will also know how much we have to pay each of the bidders and we can then match the revenue collected for this package of routes with what we have to pay to the successful tenderer. That will determine whether we need to provide a subsidy or not. Hopefully, that results in a higher degree of transparency in terms of how we award this, based on a competitive tender.

The Minister discussed eventual subsidies. How will the Minister ensure that this endeavour is financially sustainable in the long term? Lower fares could mean higher subsidies. How will the Minister attempt to ensure higher productivity among service providers to allow for affordable fares and, therefore, sustainable subsidies in the long term?

Mdm Speaker, I want to thank the Member for a very important question because I think financial sustainability of the industry is something that we have to pay a great deal of attention to.

Page: 20

I would look at it in several ways. One is to make sure that we judiciously assess all the requests that come in, whether it is to operate new routes or to improve service standards. Because if you operate more and more new routes and the ridership is low, well, the Government and indirectly the taxpayers take on the burden of making sure it is financially sustainable. If you run too many new routes where the ridership is low, then subsidies will, of course, have to go up because the operating cost will exceed the fare revenue that you can collect. That is number one – to make sure that you are quite careful about what you agree to in terms of the new routes. So, we have LTA now working out on a framework that we can perhaps all agree on, on what is the threshold that a new route ought to meet before we can agree for it to be operated, or, if you are prepared to test the new route for a certain number of months and it does not cross the threshold, then I think we will have to sometimes make a painful decision to cut that route and eliminate it.

The second has to do with service standards. If you run a service where the headway is one bus every 10 minutes, the cost is less than if you were to run it every five minutes. We all know that. The more frequently you run the buses, the higher the cost will be. So, we again have to be quite judicious when we raise service standards to make sure that we do not over-step and, hence, ultimately, result in a much bigger bill in terms of the subsidies that we have to pay.

I think the third thing is really to look at regular fare increases. From the middle of the last decade, I think we have actually allowed operating cost to well exceed the fare increases that were taking place each year. For example, from 2005 until 2012, when we had the Fare Review Mechanism Committee's work and we suspended any fare increases thereon, 2005 to 2012, the annual fare increase was, on average, 0.3%. We know, of course, that wage increases were much higher than this 0.3%; likewise, fuel cost. So, there will be a need for us to make sure that we have regular fare increases of the right quantum. In this, we will continue to be guided over the next few years by the formula that has been established by the Fare Review Mechanism Committee led by Mr Richard Magnus, as well as the decision that the Public Transport Council will make with regard to each and every fare increase.

Mr Teo Siong Seng, next question, please.

7 Mr Teo Siong Seng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the restructured bus contracting model starting from the second half of 2014 will be the new business model going forward for Government outsourcing projects in other public services such as the MRT and healthcare sectors where the Government is to own and pay for the

Page: 21

infrastructure while the operators will focus on improving efficiency and service levels.

Mdm Speaker, Mr Teo Siong Seng has asked whether the contracting model which the Government has adopted for public bus services will be adopted for other public services, such as the MRT and healthcare.

The contracting model where the Government owns and pays for infrastructure and private sector operators bid for service contracts is relevant for public transport. As pointed out earlier by the Minister for Transport, we have moved in a similar direction for the MRT with the implementation of the New Rail Financing Framework for the Downtown Line.

The contracting model is one of a range of possible public-private partnership models that can be adopted, depending on the specific circumstances and our objectives in each case.

In healthcare, the Government retains the role of the dominant provider of hospital beds, about 85%, so as to influence the supply of hospital beds and better manage cost increases. Through this approach, the Government is also able to set a benchmark for pricing for the private sector. However, since the 1980s, the Government has also corporatised the public sector hospitals and other healthcare institutions. This has enabled efficiency gains and helped keep costs down for patients and taxpayers.

Moreover, a contracting model is in place in the nursing home sector. The Government funds the development costs and owns the buildings which house our nursing homes but leases them out through a competitive bidding process. The Government selects the operator who can best provide good quality care at affordable fees. This helps to reduce the barriers to entry into the nursing home sector and gives access to a wider range of interested operators, including voluntary welfare organisations, which provide nursing home care that is partially subsidised through charitable donations.

Another model of public-private partnership is in NEWater and desalination plants. The private sector operators are able to take on the upfront costs and risks in constructing, owning and operating these plants, with the Government purchasing water according to a pre-negotiated pricing structure. This provides room for private sector ventures and innovation and yet allows us to obtain competitive prices for water.

In summary, the model adopted in each area will differ according to specific circumstances and objectives. We will continue to have a mix of business models that allows the Government, where appropriate, to leverage on the strengths of the private sector to

Page: 22

provide high standards of public services at affordable cost.

8 Mr Zaqy Mohamad asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what is the outcome of the investigation into the breach of SingPass IDs and passwords; (b) what measures have been taken to prevent future breaches of security and assure Singaporeans of the continued confidentiality of their personal data; (c) how is the Government planning to improve IT security measures for citizens using online services; and (d) what can be done to improve IT security awareness of citizens, particularly among citizens who are less Internet-savvy.

9 Ms Mary Liew asked the Minister for Communications and Information in view of the recent possible compromise of SingPass accounts (a) whether there are plans to introduce additional security measures to protect citizens' data; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider further educating the less computer-savvy Singaporeans on the importance of online security and the choice of appropriate passwords.

10 Mr Yee Jenn Jong asked the Minister for Communications and Information in respect of the recent security breach of SingPass accounts (a) what additional interim and permanent measures are being put in place to ensure that the operator carries out its operational roles, particularly in the monitoring, investigation and flagging of suspicious activities on the platform; (b) what is the latest update on the Ministry's investigations into the breaches, including when the full findings will be released; and (c) whether efforts have been made to find out whether the security breach is larger than the 1,560 accounts reported.

Madam, with your permission, can I take Question Nos 8, 9 and 10 together, please?

Yes, please.

Mdm Speaker, SingPass is a password system for the public to identify themselves when using various Government e-services. Launched in 2003, SingPass is part of the e-Government masterplan initiatives spearheaded by MOF and Infocomm Development Authority (IDA).

Since its launch in 2003, various security improvements have been implemented. For example, since September 2012, the SingPass system requires users to enter strong passwords when the password is changed. Strong passwords must include a combination of

Page: 23

letters and numbers and contain eight to 24 characters. For Government e-services that require online payment, users must further authenticate themselves using the systems put in place by their financial institutions.

In November 2007, SingPass introduced the Immediate Reset (IMR) feature. This allowed users to reset their password online immediately. The need for IMR arose when users wanted to use an e-service but realised they forgot their password. Before IMR was introduced, SingPass users could only reset their passwords at the physical SingPass counters located at CPF Board offices or at the community centres located across the island. Alternatively, they could submit an online request to reset their SingPass and a password would be mailed to their registered addresses within four working days.

To activate the IMR, the user must login using SingPass and provide (a) the answers to two security questions; and (b) his mobile number. When using IMR to reset the password, the user will be required to: (a) provide his Name, NRIC and the Date of Issue of his NRIC, and (b) answer the two security questions. A one-time password would then be sent to his mobile number. This one-time password enables the user to set a new password. After the password is reset through IMR, a notification letter would be sent to the user's registered address to inform him this had been done.

On Monday, 2 June 2014, IDA was informed that the SingPass helpdesk received 11 calls from different members of the public reporting that they received a SingPass Reset Notification Letter even though they did not request for any password reset. Due to the alertness of these 11 SingPass users, IDA was able to initiate an immediate investigation. IDA detected that the one-time passwords of these 11 accounts were sent to a single mobile number at or around the same day. Further checks revealed that 1,560 accounts had also been linked to a small number of mobile phone numbers. As a precaution, IDA immediately ordered that these SingPass accounts should be deactivated. Affected users were notified by a letter via urgent delivery to their registered addresses. IDA has also alerted and has been working with other agencies on the affected SingPass accounts. As reported, investigations revealed that six fraudulent transactions involving work permit applications were made from three affected SingPass accounts. MOM has since contacted the affected users and cancelled the applications involved. Should other fraudulent transactions be found, Government agencies will contact those affected.

Arising from the incident, IDA also initiated a further round of review of the different layers of protection at the network and application level. The system was also scanned for any undetected vulnerabilities. No vulnerability was uncovered. The perpetrator may have obtained the users' SingPass credentials through other means.

Page: 24

One possibility is the widespread use of simple passwords. For example, in October 2013, Adobe reported that its system was hacked, leading to the disclosure of millions of user accounts. When security experts examined the published passwords, it found millions of users were using weak passwords such as "123456", or the word "password". Another possibility is that malware was installed in users' computers, thus allowing the perpetrator to see the user's keystrokes.

Members have asked how security can be improved. My Ministry will work with MOF and IDA to further enhance security measures for SingPass and introduce stronger authentication using second-factor authentication (2FA) for e-services involving sensitive data or transactions.

Besides 2FA, IDA will also further enhance SingPass. In April this year, a new contract was awarded to implement a new SingPass system by Q3 2015. The new SingPass system will require even stronger passwords. We are also looking into allowing users to define their own usernames instead of the current NRIC or FIN number. In addition, the new SingPass will come with more advanced analytics capability to identify anomalies in login transaction patterns so as to mitigate any potential security risks. Agencies will be required to implement 2FA for e-services involving sensitive data or transactions. More details on the 2FA implementation will be available in the later part of the year. IDA will work with the SingPass operator to improve the processes in handling customer queries and helpdesk services provided to SingPass users.

We are also exploring mandating more frequent password changes for SingPass accounts. This may mean a slight increase in the number of cases where users cannot immediately use some e-services because they forgot their password. We seek the public's understanding and patience for this. These additional authentication steps will allow for greater peace of mind when performing sensitive online transactions.

While IDA enhances the security at the SingPass end, we also need the assistance of Singaporeans to secure their own systems. In particular, malware can disclose even strong passwords to perpetrators. Hence, users need to maintain basic computer hygiene practices, such as making sure that their computer software and anti-virus software are always updated.

Over the years, the Singapore Government has also stepped up efforts to foster better cyber security practices of businesses and individuals. IDA has partnered the industry through the setting up of the Cyber Security Awareness Alliance and embarked on various cyber-security awareness and outreach activities. My Ministry will continue to work with IDA and all Government agencies to improve IT security awareness of our citizens. This year, Madam, IDA will be partnering with the National Crime Prevention Council to produce an

Page: 25

episode of CrimeWatch enacting a cybercrime case.

I thank the Minister for the clarification. I have a few supplementary questions. Is the Ministry quite confident that the accounts breached are the only ones that are breached? Secondly, I hear the Minister saying that SingPass itself is not breached but, basically, the likelihood is that it comes from other sources. The bigger question would then be this: how do we instil confidence in our citizens that the e-services are secure? Of course, the two-factor authentication is not a new technology. The banks have implemented this before. Why has the Government not considered this earlier?

I thank the Member for the questions. I agree with him that it is important for us to continue to build trust in the system. As I mentioned earlier, the investigation revealed that there were no vulnerabilities that were uncovered within the system. Having said that, we also agree that the system can be strengthened. As I had mentioned in my reply, all of us have to work in partnership and, therefore, we hope that ordinary Singaporeans who are using the SingPass accounts can first use stronger passwords and, secondly, check at their own end whether their computer software, especially the anti-virus software, is updated frequently.

On the Member's question about why we have not been using second-factor authentication, bear in mind that there are three million users in terms of SingPass accounts of varying capabilities and expertise in understanding the use of the Internet and, therefore, we have to balance the ease of use and the practicality. But we recognise that Singaporeans are now in favour of further authentication. Therefore, we are now mandating for all those services involving sensitive data and transactions to use the second-factor authentication.

I would like to ask the Minister: SingPass is used by 3.3 million users for over 340 Government e-services. So, it is rather worrying that it has been for so long supported by just a single level of authentication. I would like to ask:

Has there been any detected attack on SingPass in the past and did any breach happen?

What is the timeline for the implementation of the two-factor authentication and whether there will be any costs that would be borne directly by the users because of additional hardware that it may need?

Page: 26

What is the status of the One-Key National Authentication Framework Programme that was launched two years ago?

On the last question regarding the One-Key National Authentication Framework Programme, I do not have the latest figures. I would be happy to update the Member on the adoption rate for the one-key programme.

I agree with the Member that it is worrying that we are having a lot of transactions and we have not adopted second-factor authentication. That is why IDA has, in fact, been working with the various agencies to mandate it and to make it a possibility. In terms of the timeline, I had mentioned that everything should be in place by the third quarter of next year. [Please refer to "Clarification by Minister for Communications and Information", Official Report, 7 July 2014, Vol 92, Issue No 7.]

In terms of the cost, we do not think there will be any cost on the part of the user. There will be a cost, of course, on the part of the operator and the various agencies involved. In terms of attacks, we have not seen any attack on the SingPass accounts in the past, but there have been one or two breaches, especially in the applications of Work Permits and MOM discovered it even before the latest breach and they have cancelled these immediately. Obviously, people out there are trying to get into the accounts because it leads to some things which they want and we have to continue to strengthen the infrastructure.

11 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether the Personal Data Protection Commission condones financial institutions' termination of the contractual relationship with their customers if their customers do not give consent for the use of their personal data for marketing or general transaction purposes.

Madam, the Personal Data Protection Commission does not condone unreasonable behaviour by organisations. The Commission will look into customers' complaints on contract termination by organisations to assess if those actions were reasonable.

The Commission recognises that if an individual does not provide consent for the use of their personal data for marketing or general transaction purposes, it may be difficult for an organisation to continue to provide the service. For such cases, it may be reasonable for the contractual or business relationship to cease. However, Madam, the Commission also notes that there may be termination cases that would be construed as unreasonable. For example,

Page: 27

it may not be necessary for customers to consent for secondary purposes, like marketing, in order for a financial institution to provide services, such as processing banking transactions. In such cases, the Commission will take up the matter further with the organisation in question if it receives a complaint.

I thank the Minister for the assurance. Very often, banks send out lengthy new terms and conditions without highlighting the main changes and expect the customers to accept the changes. While it appears that the oversight of banks' terms and conditions is under the purview of MAS, I hope the Personal Data Protection Commission could intervene when the terms and conditions relate to Personal Data Protection.

Some banks claim that they are governed under the banking secrecy law and thus will abide to stricter confidentiality clauses. However, the banking secrecy law largely governs the confidentiality of financial transactions and not the customers' contact details which could be used by the banks through their business partners. Thus, would the Minister consider mandating the banks:

to provide the customers an option to receive marketing materials from the company alone and NOT from the bank's affiliated companies or business partners; and

not to have clauses in the terms and conditions that contain threat to terminate the agreement with the customers when the customers disagree with their data protection policy in lock, stock and barrel?

I thank the Member for the suggestion. Currently, there is an ongoing consultation on the rules for the banking sector. I will take these suggestions and forward them to the Commission, together with the Association of Banks of Singapore which is conducting the consultation to consider the Member's suggestion. I do agree with him that we need to try and find ways to ensure that, at the end of the day, the customers are protected not only in terms of their interests but also their data. So, I will bear in mind his suggestions.

12 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Education what are the Ministry's plans to ensure that students in our schools are protected from sexual predators.

Mdm Speaker, MOE expects all our educators to know and to uphold the standards of conduct expected of them. We take a

Page: 28

serious view of any form of misconduct, particularly those involving students. At the same time, we educate our students about their right to safety and protection.

For all educators, MOE has made clear our expectations that they are to conduct themselves in a manner that upholds the integrity of the profession and the trust placed in them. We have a stringent selection and screening system in place for teachers, including an interview by a panel of experienced senior educators. Besides intellectual and interpersonal qualities, individuals are also assessed for their motivation, sense of responsibility, understanding of accountability and commitment to the ethos of the teaching profession.

When educators formally enter the service, there are a number of platforms to remind them of the values and beliefs that define the teaching profession and to reinforce the expectations of educators' conduct. These platforms include induction briefings for Beginning Teachers, discussion of case studies at the school level for all teachers and milestone programmes for key personnel.

In 2012, in consultation with the fraternity, MOE codified the values, beliefs and conduct expected of educators. The Code of Professional Conduct for Educators was shared with all educators in 2013 to provide guidance on how educators are expected to carry themselves. Importantly, the Code sets out the boundaries educators are to observe in their relationship with students. Using the Code, school leaders have continued to conduct regular conversations with their staff to deepen the ethos of the profession.

Despite these efforts, some educators have transgressed and fallen short of the standards of behaviour expected of them. The teaching fraternity has expressed outrage at these cases. MOE takes a very serious view of such misconduct by educators. My instruction is that if there is any complaint of improper behaviour, each and every case must be thoroughly investigated and, where there is evidence of violation of the Code or of criminal behaviour, the officer involved will be dealt with severely.

MOE and the teaching fraternity are determined to uphold the trust and confidence that parents and the community have in our educators. MOE will work with schools to intensify the communication and engagement with teachers on the Professional Code of Conduct, make explicit the professional boundaries that must not be breached in educators' interactions with students, as well as step up vigilance to safeguard and protect our students.

MOE is also going through the past cases of such incidents to draw relevant lessons from these.

Page: 29

Students need not and should not be passive victims. Our schools teach them their right to safety and protection so that they can recognise unacceptable behaviour and seek help. At the Primary level, students are taught how to recognise abuse, to identify types of behaviour that are of concern or are socially unacceptable and how to seek help. At the Secondary level, students are taught what constitutes sexual grooming, how to protect themselves from others with malicious intent and help-seeking skills.

We also seek the support of parents. Your close relationship and conversations with your children may enable early signs of problems faced by them to be detected for early intervention. We share your concern to ensure that your children are protected from sexual predators.

In conclusion, I wish to emphasise that there is a strong collective will and commitment among the whole teaching fraternity, schools and MOE to uphold the trust placed by parents and students in educators. We are deeply disappointed with the cases of misconduct that have happened. While we cannot completely prevent human failings, I want to assure Members that we do not tolerate such wrong-doers. Whenever we uncover any case of sexual misconduct between educators and students, they will be thoroughly investigated and the transgressors will be severely dealt with.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan.

Madam, I want to thank the Minister for the assurance. I think the assurance is important to parents because we all want to be assured that when we send our children to school, they would be placed in a safe environment. The challenge is also that students are vulnerable and teachers are placed in a position of trust.

Can I ask the Minister whether MOE would consider taking up engaging more parents to help them to look out for signs that their children are emotionally affected when they are in school? The Minister has highlighted the fact that he would appeal to parents to be involved as well. But as I understand it, there is no formal engagement of parents such that they, too, are alerted to signals that their children are emotionally involved.

The other thing that I was wondering is whether MOE would consider implementing a buddy system where a group of teachers can look out for each other when they feel that one of them has succumbed to temptation through too close a contact with their students.

Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member Mr Lim Biow Chuan for his suggestion. First, on engagement with parents, indeed, that is our intention. As I had mentioned in my reply, we do want to engage our parents in helping them to detect signs of

Page: 30

problems faced particularly by teenagers. We will work together with COMPASS as well as with the Parents' Support Group in this effort.

On the Member's second suggestion of a buddy system, we do have a buddy system, particularly for beginning teachers. Every beginning teacher has a mentor and school leaders at various levels are expected to guide the teachers under their charge. But we will study if a more formalised buddy system can be put in place.

Madam, I just want to highlight to the Minister that the latest case involved a former Head of Character and Citizenship in a Secondary school. So, perhaps the Minister could extend it to beyond just trainee teachers to even senior teachers.

I thank Mr Lim for his suggestion. Indeed, we will look into all these.

Minister Yaacob.

Madam, thank you very much. I just want to clarify a reply I made to the hon Member Mr Yee about the timeline. [Please refer to "Breach of SingPass User Accounts", Official Report, 7 July 2014, Vol 92, Issue No 7, Oral Answers to Questions section.]

I do not want to confuse the matter. The timeline for the third quarter of 2015 is for the replacement of the current SingPass system which was provided for in a tender called in April this year. The two-factor authentication is something which I mentioned earlier. We are now asking all agencies with online transactions and sensitive data to implement two-factor authentication. The timeline is left to the agencies. They will actually reveal the timeline in the latter part of this year.

13 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the original objective of introducing co-curricular activities (CCA) in schools; (b) whether the Ministry is aware that many schools are pressuring students on CCA because they want to meet the Ministry's key performance index; and (c) whether the Ministry will allow students to take part in CCA without having to go for public performances or to take part in any competitive events.

Madam, co-curricular Activities (CCAs) are an integral part

Page: 31

of holistic education. They provide an important platform for students' character development while allowing them to discover and develop their interests and talents.

Students can take part in CCAs without having to go for performances or competitions. Schools offer a range of CCAs to meet the needs of the students. While there are CCAs that provide more competition experiences, students can choose from the many that are recreational or focus on serving the community, for example, the Interact Club or the Service Learning Club.

Some schools also offer modular CCAs or recreational sports CCAs, where students do not represent the school in competitions. I can give Members two examples. Jurong View Secondary School, for example, offers recreational football and badminton as CCAs, and St Hilda's Secondary School offers recreational volleyball and netball as CCAs.

Beyond CCAs, many schools offer enrichment programmes in sports and the arts that provide students with quality exposure but which do not culminate in competitions or performances. In certain CCAs, particularly those related to music and dance, public performances are useful platforms to enrich the experiences of students, helping them to develop confidence and a mindset of excellence.

While competitions should not be overdone, they have a place in developing attributes, such as grit, determination, resilience and teamwork.

MOE does not set Key Performance Indicators for schools in CCAs. Earlier, schools had received recognition in the form of awards for aesthetics, uniformed groups, sports and academic value-added. From 2014, MOE has simplified the recognition system and these awards have been removed. Instead, the emphasis is on recognition of school's quality practices in delivering a holistic education, such as the best practice award for Character and Citizenship Education. Revisions have also been made to the Singapore Youth Festival since 2013 to better emphasise the process of learning and enjoyment of the arts.

MOE will continue to work closely with schools to strike a good balance for students' holistic development. While schools do strive to meet students' diverse needs by providing a range of CCAs, it is not feasible for every CCA to be in every school. We recognise and we encourage parents, students and schools to keep the channels of communication open as they monitor students' development through the different learning activities so that they benefit from a well-balanced education.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. Very often, I receive feedback from parents that, in preparing for their annual school concert, their children will have to

Page: 32

practise until late at night and, very often, many days a week. Is there anything that MOE can advise the school accordingly, so as not to over-tax the students?

Next, I have many residents who took up table tennis during the PCF programme and then went to Primary school. Many Primary schools do not offer table tennis as a CCA and the reason I think is because of funding. I would like to ask MOE whether there is any additional funding that the school can apply for if there is a certain demand, for example, if many students are asking for table tennis as a CCA.

In my reply, I mentioned that we work with schools to ensure that CCA is not burdensome. CCA is part of the holistic development of the student and their education, but we will advise schools as appropriately as possible if they have overdone certain things in certain CCAs. On specific CCA type, for example, table tennis, we leave it to the school to decide on which sports they want to promote or teach the students. We give them a block fund and we leave it to them to decide on the sports, aesthetics or the arts that they want to promote. But if a school needs to have an additional CCA or sport, for example, to promote or open to their students, then they can raise funds on their own so that the students can benefit.

14 Mr David Ong asked the Minister for National Development what is the rationale of requiring young couples to repay the Additional Housing Grant when they fail to go through with the purchase of the HDB flat as a result of a breakdown in their relationship or marriage.

Madam, the additional CPF Housing Grant (AHG) is to help eligible first-timers buy their first flat. And that is why if the couple does not eventually buy the flat, they will have to return the grant to the Government.

The individuals can subsequently apply for the grant again with their new partner for their next flat purchase, subject, of course, to the prevailing eligibility conditions.

Madam, I would like to thank the Minister for his reply. Two supplementary questions. For low-income applicants to return the disbursed Additional Housing Grant, especially in cash, can be quite a huge burden when they annul their marriage as a result of a failed relationship. This is on top of forfeiting the 5% down payment. Can the Minister share with us whether there are other schemes in place to help these financially-challenged individuals to repay the Additional Housing Grant? And can the Ministry also review this penalty of forfeiture fee or accrued interest for low-income individuals who may

Page: 33

need to defer the Additional Housing Grant repayment?

Madam, I think a penalty for cancellation of home purchase is a common industry practice. The only difference is in the quantum. I believe that in the private sector, if you cancel your plan to purchase a condo or house, they charge as much as 20%. In the case of HDB, it charges 5%, which I think is quite reasonable.

How do we help isolated cases who are in such a situation? We do help because we take into account their situations. There are several ways – sometimes by cash instalments, or if they do not have enough savings in the CPF because they are young couples, they will in due course build up their CPF savings and we can allow future payment from their CPF. Those are some of the things that we do to help.

Fortunately, the number of such cases is small. When I was looking at some of the data a few weeks ago, my sense is that in a hot market, like the last three years when property prices were going up, many couples were actually not ready for relationship but they decided to jump in, thinking that they might not be able to afford a flat when they eventually get married. But now that we have stabilised the market, we notice such data has been coming down. So, the trend is a good one.

My advice to young couples is that, at your age, you have maybe 50, 60, 70 years ahead of you. I guarantee you there shall be many property bubbles and busts, but work on your relationship. So, hopefully, while there may be several property cycles, your relationship is always permanent.

Like in my case, two weeks ago, my wife and I celebrated our 37th wedding anniversary. I think that is what couples should try to work at. Do not make a decision about whether to jump in for your BTO, thinking that you may not be able to afford a flat. We will make sure that there is always a flat that you can afford, at least within your budget. We can say it with great confidence because we have two major levers: we control the construction programme; secondly, we set the price. So, do not worry.

Mdm Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, for a couple who annul their marriage and they have to repay the Additional Housing Grant (AHG), is it true that if the couple consists of one Singaporean and one PR, the AHG is recovered from the Singaporean? I have one case of a resident who is in this situation. And if it is so, what is the reason behind it?

Page: 34

I suppose we should recover the grant from whoever receives the grant.

15 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider revising the criteria for Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) to allow blocks built after 1989 to be eligible for NRP.

Madam, the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) was introduced in 2007 – that was seven years ago – to enhance selected HDB precincts at the block and the neighbourhood level, for the benefit of the residents. These include physical improvements, such as drop-off porches and communal facilities like precinct pavilions. As older towns have a greater need for such upgrading, we give priority to those built before December 1989. Those which have already undergone the Main Upgrading Programme (MUP), Interim Upgrading Programme (IUP) or IUP Plus are also excluded from the NRP.

Based on this set of criteria, 187,000 flats are eligible for NRP. Of these, 100 NRP projects have been selected so far. When completed, these projects will benefit residents in 140,000 flats, or 75% of the eligible flats. So, we are at the third-quarter mark.

Our residents have responded to NRP positively. Many participated actively in the consultation process, giving us useful ideas and suggestions on the improvements that can be made to their neighbourhood through the upgrading programme. We are very encouraged by their strong support.

Now that we have crossed the three-quarter mark, it is timely to review the selection criteria. We understand that residents in blocks built just after 1989 may feel that their blocks are also ageing but they have just missed out on NRP and they wish that NRP can also be extended to them. I think this is understandable.

So, we will review the selection criteria and see how the NRP can be extended also to blocks built in the early 1990s. If and when we do make such an extension, we will give priority to towns which have not benefited from MUP or IUP, like the one in the Member's constituency.

I thank the Minister for the good news. Like the Minister just mentioned, given rising expectations from the residents, especially when they see the facilities in newer HDB development, could the Minister possibly share a tentative

Page: 35

timeframe for this review process?

Madam, we are reviewing. The Member knows I am a fast worker. [Laughter].

Madam, I would like to ask the Minister, since he is reviewing the NRP programme, can he also review the cost cap for each precinct? With the rising cost of construction and building today, we have had occasions when the NRP actually has to be re-tendered because of bursting the budget.

That is a sensible suggestion.

16 Mr Arthur Fong asked the Minister for Defence among the 532,000 permanent residents (PRs) in 2013 (a) how many children of these PRs upon reaching 18 years old (i) have served or are serving National Service (NS); (ii) did not serve NS; and (b) how many in this group have relinquished their PR status.

Madam, the Member asked a number of questions related to Permanent Residents (PRs) who serve or do not serve NS and he based his question on the total number of PRs in 2013. In my reply, let me first say that the total number of PRs in Singapore in 2013 or in any year, is not the appropriate population to base the query or the answers on, for the simple reason that that number includes individuals who are not liable for NS. For example, they include female PRs and first generation PRs. It also includes male PRs who have already completed their NS and/or those who have not reached the age of 18 years to serve full-time NS. But I understand what the query is, so I will give the answer to them.

The majority of NS-liable PRs serve NS. Over the past five years, about 7,200 males who had become PRs under the sponsorship of their parents, what we term as second generation PRs who are liable for NS, were enlisted for and served NS. So, over the last five years, 7,200 males. Over the same five-year period, about 2,600 second generation PR males renounced their PR status, prior to serving NS. As MINDEF has cautioned, these ex-PRs who have not served their NS, will face serious adverse consequences when they subsequently apply to study or work in Singapore

Page: 36

17 Mr Yee Jenn Jong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development since 2001 (a) what percentage of the Child Development Co-Savings Scheme budget allocated for babies born into households of 1-room to 3-room flats, 4-room flats, 5-room and executive flats, and private property respectively, have been disbursed; (b) what percentage of children in each of these household types have received the full co-matching amount; and (c) what are the reasons for the differences in take-up rates amongst these groups, if any.

Mdm Speaker, since 2001, close to 300,000 Child Development Accounts (CDAs) have been opened for Singaporean children. From 2001 to 2013, the Government had disbursed $1.4 billion of co-savings into the CDAs.

MSF does not track the opening, matching and usage of CDAs by housing type. The Ministry is mindful that low-income families face more challenges in opening and depositing savings into the CDAs of their children. We work through touchpoints, such as the Social Service Offices and Family Service Centres, to encourage these families to save up for their children. We also support initiatives by the community, such as the OCBC Starter Scheme, which contribute additional funds into the child's CDA to help low-income families kick-start their CDA savings. We encourage more such initiatives.

I thank the Minister for the answer and I noted that the Ministry does not track the adoption by income level. I hope that there could be more data tracked on this because we want to understand how the lower-income families have participated in this programme. I would like to ask the Minister if the Ministry has evaluated what are the key reasons why people do not take up this programme and what more can be done.

Mdm Speaker, first and foremost, let me clarify. There is usually a period of time given for various families to top up the account to enjoy the co-savings programme by the Government. So, for some of the more recent cohorts, it would be too premature for us to say that they do not fully top up the amount because they still have some time to go before their top-up actually ceases.

For those earlier batches, the usual reasons are awareness and ability. So, for both awareness and ability, we have to tackle the issues head on. For awareness, we enlist the help of all the community partners to go out and let the families know about such a scheme. For ability, that is where community efforts like the OCBC Starter Scheme comes in very useful, because for every $50 that some of these low-income families save over a six-month

Page: 37

period, OCBC will contribute $100 at the end of the period. On top of that, the Government will do a matching one-for-one, up to $150 in this account.

I thank the Minister for the reply. I would like to ask whether it is still relevant to insist on co-matching. Can we find other ways to encourage those who can afford it to put more into their children's education by, say, having higher interest rates for co-matching the amounts that they put in? Is it possible for us to remove this co-matching criterion totally, so that we can help the lower-income families?

Sorry, can I clarify the Member's query? He wants to raise the interest rates and wants to do away with the co-matching? What exactly is the solution?

The first part will be: can we totally do away with co-matching? Of course, if the reason for co-matching is that you want the parents to participate in the programmes, for those who can afford it, maybe we can create some other schemes to reward them for putting more into the account. But for the lower income families, in order to help them, can we not have co-matching at all?

Do away with co-matching?

Yes.

For everyone?

Yes.

Okay, let us take a step back on this one. I think when the scheme was conceived, the aim of the scheme was to encourage families to save up for their children. So, I think that remains a relevant policy objective, which is to encourage families to save up for their children. Having said that, of course, we understand that some of the lower-income families may not have the ability to save up, and we will have to use other policy instruments and community help schemes to help them, encourage them to save up. But I am not sure, because of that, we want to do away with the entire co-savings scheme. I am not sure about that.

For every policy intent and policy instrument, generally, we know that if you have one policy intent, you need a policy to do that, and it is very difficult for us to achieve many policy intents through one instrument. So, in this particular case where lower-income families are unable to save up as much, I think we should look at how we can help them to save up. But the philosophy of getting the families, to encourage the families to save, I think that remains

Page: 38

relevant and that should be our objective.

The following question stood in the name of Mr Gan Thiam Poh –

18 To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Government has plans to further enhance the legal framework and regulation of e-commerce and online sales (local and overseas) to better protect the interest of consumers.

Question No 18.

(for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Singapore's consumer protection laws cover both purchases made in physical stores and on online platforms. Consumers are protected under the Lemon Law, which took effect in September 2012. The Lemon Law does not distinguish between local and foreign online retailers, and applies if the transaction stipulates Singapore law as the governing law or if the transaction is concluded in Singapore. However, the Lemon Law covers only the purchase of physical goods and not virtual goods or services.

Under the Lemon Law, when the product purchased by the consumer turns out to be defective, he may pursue two stages of recourse. Consumers can first ask the seller to repair or replace the product within a reasonable period of time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer. If the seller is unable to do so, consumers can request for a reduction in price or a full refund. We will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the Lemon Law and review the regulatory framework if necessary.

MTI will continue to work with the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) to strengthen consumer education and encourage consumers to make informed choices when making online purchases. Consumers who come across unfair trading practices of online retailers can report them to CASE.

19 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) if he can give an overview of the extent of illegal hawking, if any, in Singapore; (b) what actions are taken against such offenders; and (c) what assistance is given to vulnerable Singaporeans who cannot afford hawker licensing costs but want to remain self-reliant.

Page: 39

Mdm Speaker, NEA has to take action against illegal hawking in order to ensure that food and goods sold do not pose a risk to public health or the act of illegal hawking does not cause public nuisance. Two thirds of the 655 illegal hawkers found in the first six months of this year were foreigners. Under the current regime, composition sums of $300, $400 and $500 will be offered for the first, second and third-time offenders respectively. Upon the fourth and subsequent offences, the illegal hawkers will be prosecuted in Court. Illegal foreign hawkers may also be banned from entering Singapore.

The financial circumstances of Singaporeans engaged in illegal hawking will be investigated. Where appropriate, they are referred to the Social Service Offices of MSF and the Community Development Councils (CDCs) for job and financial assistance.

20 Mr Nicholas Fang asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources whether the recent weather patterns in Singapore have prompted a change in the Ministry's assessment of the potential return of transboundary haze this year.

Singapore is currently in the Southwest Monsoon season which typically extends from June to September. During this period, the weather is supposed to be generally dry and warm although there will be short-duration thundery showers on some days, and I am sure many Members of this House can attest to that. For the next few months, drier conditions are expected. If there is uncontrolled burning of peat land and forests in Sumatra or Kalimantan, the winds may bring transboundary haze to Singapore.

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has indicated that there is a 60% likelihood of El Niño being established between June and August this year, and the probability may rise to 75%-80% for October to December this year. This means potentially an extended dry season with a higher risk of transboundary haze.

There has, unfortunately, been an escalation of hotspot activities and a corresponding onset of intermittent transboundary haze in Peninsular Malaysia in mid-June 2014. I saw this for myself when I drove from Ipoh back to Singapore two weeks ago. The number of hotspots in Sumatra, mostly in Riau, had increased to as high as 143 on 24 June 2014.

Indonesia will have to step up its fire prevention, mitigation and fire-fighting efforts. Singapore has offered our assistance to Indonesia to help them with their fire suppression. The Transboundary Haze Pollution Bill which I will be introducing shortly will also

Page: 40

complement regional efforts to address this annual scourge. Any long-term solution to this perennial issue will require political will and effective cooperation amongst all the countries in the region.

NEA has been issuing daily haze forecasts since 16 June 2014 and we will continue to monitor the situation and update Singaporeans.

Apologies to the Minister for asking him to predict the weather. I think it has been proven historically that that is almost impossible to do. But given the unpredictability of the current situation, is there a need to reassess or change the way that Singaporeans are being advised to prepare for the haze in the months going forward?

I thank the Member for that supplementary question. I think after our experience last year, Singapore and Singaporeans are far better prepared if anything untoward were to occur this year. Singaporeans are aware that haze can come. It can arrive unpredictably and very quickly. Literally, it takes about six hours from the onset of the plume in Riau to be brought across the narrow straits to us. Masks have been distributed. In fact, Temasek Cares and SingPost have distributed masks to every household. In addition, over the last two weekends, we have been distributing WeCare packages, especially to low-income and needy families. So, they know that if the worst were to occur, preparations are in place.

Similarly, amongst the Civil Service, all the different agencies concerned, the Haze Task Force has met; all the plans are in place. We hope, of course, that they would not need to be activated but, if need be, we will do so.

21 Mr David Ong asked the Minister for Law (a) whether the measures introduced by the Registry of Moneylenders in recent years have had an effect on the amount of loans taken from moneylenders; and (b) whether these measures have restricted access to credit.

Mdm Speaker, we amended the Moneylenders Act in 2008 to modernise the regulation of moneylending whilst safeguarding the interests of borrowers.

Page: 41

In 2011, we introduced further measures to enhance protection for borrowers. These included a requirement for licence applicants to pass a written test, as well as advertising restrictions as we were concerned that excessive advertising might induce unnecessary borrowing.

In 2012, we imposed a moratorium on the issuance of new licences. The number of moneylenders had grown from 172 in 2008 to 249 in 2011. Since the moratorium, the number of moneylenders has declined to 185, as of 1 June 2014. We also prohibited moneylenders from charging upfront fees and required moneylenders to disclose the Effective Interest Rate of loans to borrowers.

Our aim is to maintain a balance in protecting borrowers, especially those of lower income, yet ensuring that there is reasonable access to credit from licensed sources. The value of loans granted grew from $189 million in 2008 to $480 million in 2011. It declined to $346 million in 2012 but rose again to $478 million in 2013.

At this juncture, I would like to make a clarification. During my Ministry's Committee of Supply debate on 8 March 2013, we had said that the number of moneylenders fell from 249 in 2011 to 209 in 2012, and that the value of the loans fell from $480 million to about $260 million over the same period. I wish to clarify that the value of the loans granted in 2012 fell to $346 million, and not $260 million [Please refer to the Official Report of 8 March 2013].

As previously mentioned in this House, we are in the midst of reviewing our moneylending policies. We have set up an Advisory Committee on Moneylending to help us with this effort. It comprises economists, representatives from the financial industry, Moneylenders Association of Singapore and VWOs which counsel distressed borrowers, namely, Credit Counselling Singapore, One Hope Centre and The Silver Lining. As we undertake this review, I would like to reiterate the importance of finding the right balance between protecting borrowers and preserving their access to credit.

Thank you, Madam. I just want to thank the Senior Minister of State for her clarification. Just a quick supplementary question. Could you share with us the amount of licensed moneylending in relation to the total consumer credit market, say, over the past year? And how extensively would the Advisory Committee be engaging in terms of its key stakeholders, so that the balance between protecting consumer interest as well as access to credit is preserved?

For the first part of the question, I do not have the information with me. Perhaps, the Member could file a separate question on that. The second aspect of the question relates to the scope of the recommendations for the Advisory Committee on

Page: 42

Moneylending. Essentially, the idea is to ask them to do an overall review because in the past couple of years, Members in this House had raised various questions on access to credit, on interest rates, how we can safeguard and protect borrowers, especially low-income borrowers. But, at the same time, you also do not want to prevent access to this kind of credit for those borrowers who cannot normally access the type of credit you can get from banks and financial institutions. The Committee will have a wide mandate and, in fact, if Members have suggestions or concerns, they should feel free to send their suggestions and comments to MinLaw for the Committee to look at.

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

22 To ask the Minister for Law (a) how many pawnshops have been established from 2011 to 2013; (b) what is the total amount disbursed by these pawnshops; and (c) how many defaulters could not redeem their items as they could not meet the repayment of their loans.

Question No 22.

Mdm Speaker, 43 new pawnshops were established from 2011 to 2013. Of these 43 pawnshops, 38 were set up by existing operators: 36 were from chains, while two were from businesses with two outlets. The remaining five were set up by new entrants into the industry. The industry grew from 163 pawnshops in 2010 to 204 in 2013.

The total amount of pawnbroking loans granted per year was $4.9 billion in 2011, $7.1 billion in 2012 and $5.5 billion in 2013. Such loans included loans which were refinanced using the same collateral.

Over the same period, around 95% of pledges were redeemed by pawners. Pawners may choose not to redeem their pledges for a variety of reasons. For instance, the pawner may simply wish to monetise an item that he owns. The Registry of Pawnbrokers does not track the reasons for the non-redemption of pledges.

23 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Prime Minister in light of the discovery of unused ballot boxes that are not disposed of in a proper manner during the last presidential election (a) whether the Elections Department has studied the prospect of treating all ballot boxes, used or unused, as controlled items until the point of destruction in all future elections; and (b) what changes has the Elections Department introduced to its processes to prevent the

Page: 43

occurrence of a similar incident in future.

Mdm Speaker, may I answer this question on behalf of the Prime Minister.

Mdm Speaker, I had answered a question from the Member Mr Pritam Singh on the same issue last September. The ballot boxes discovered in August last year were used and empty ballot boxes that were not disposed of in a proper manner. There are no implications on the secrecy of the vote or the integrity of the election process.

The Elections Department has since reviewed and tightened their work processes to ensure that, after every election, all used and empty ballot boxes are accounted for and included in the general disposal of other debris and discarded items. When such boxes are in use to contain ballots, with proper seals, they should and are, indeed, accounted as controlled items. When such boxes are not in use, with no proper seal, they are not controlled items and we do not need to classify them as such.

24 Mr Laurence Lien asked the Prime Minister whether the Ministry will consider introducing a law to transfer funds from dormant accounts in financial institutions to a fund that can be used for charitable and community projects.

Madam, I am taking this question on behalf of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister in-charge of the MAS.

Madam, account holders are the rightful owners of their funds even when their accounts are considered dormant. They should be able to fully recover their funds once they are properly identified.

There is no common definition of when an account is considered dormant and there is usually no time limit for filing a claim on the funds in such an account. If a financial institution has ceased operations in Singapore, it would set up trust accounts with other financial institutions to hold funds from its dormant accounts for possible claimants.

Page: 44

MAS is working with financial institutions on ways to trace and encourage holders of dormant accounts to come forward and claim their funds. MAS will also review the need for a policy on managing dormant accounts and unclaimed funds, taking into account practices in other jurisdictions.

Madam, I would like to thank the Minister for his reply. I would like to just point out an example in the UK, where in 2008, they introduced the Dormant Bank and Building Society Act which gives the government the right to collect and distribute unclaimed money from dormant accounts after 15 years for the benefit of the community while protecting the rights of customers to reclaim the money by setting aside a pot of funds in case these account holders come forward to claim their money back. They have implemented this over the last six years to great success, releasing a lot of funds, more than £600 million, to the Reclaim Fund Limited, which funds charitable causes and is still able to fulfil account holders who step forward after 15 years to claim back their monies. So, would the Government consider a similar legislation for Singapore?

Madam, as I have said, MAS will review the policy of managing dormant accounts and unclaimed funds and we will look at the experiences of other jurisdictions, including the one in the UK.

I would acknowledge that there are dormant account laws and these are quite common in developed jurisdictions. Not everyone has it. For example, Germany does not have it; Hong Kong does not have and neither do we. But there are jurisdictions with dormant account laws and, typically, these dormant account laws, the focus is on protecting the owners of the fund and removing the burden from the financial institutions in managing these funds.

The dormant accounts are usually untouched for several years – 10, 15 years or more. In many instances where they have these laws, when the funds are unclaimed, they are, in fact, transferred to the national treasury. The UK is an exception where they allow some funds, not everything, to be transferred over to a spending account which are then used to provide funding for some charities.

We will have to study these experiences, how it has been in the UK, what are the experiences in other countries as we think about reviewing our policy on managing dormant accounts.

Page: 45

25 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the same medicines sold in our public hospitals are significantly more expensive than those in neighbouring countries, such as Malaysia and Thailand; and (b) if so, how can the price differential be narrowed to make medicines more affordable to Singaporeans.

Madam, the cost of goods and services differ across countries for a number of reasons, such as distribution costs, exchange rates, purchasing power of the country and pricing strategy of suppliers. These similarly apply to medicines and are factored into the pharmaceutical firms' pricing of medicines.

For the above reasons, the retail prices of medicines in Singapore are generally higher than in some of our neighbouring countries. To help keep medicines affordable for patients, our public healthcare institutions tender jointly for the majority of their drugs in bulk to enjoy economies of scale. Savings are reflected in the overall pricing of medicines sold to patients in the public healthcare institutions.

Subsidies are available for standard drugs, to further lower the cost of medicines for subsidised patients. These are drugs on the Standard Drugs List (SDL) and the Medication Assistance Fund (MAF). Some drugs are subsidised at 50% off the non-subsidised prices, other drugs are priced at no more than $1.40 for a week's supply. The MAF helps lower- to middle-income patients who require relatively more expensive drugs, such as those for treatment of cancer, with up to 75% subsidy.

MOH regularly reviews and seeks to improve the affordability of drugs for our subsidised patients. In April this year, 13 new drugs were added into the SDL and MAF, including those used in the treatment of childhood leukaemia and rheumatoid arthritis. We are further enhancing drug subsidies for Singaporeans. From 1 January 2015, lower- to middle-income subsidised patients at the Specialist Outpatient Clinics and polyclinics will receive 75% subsidy, up from the current 50%, for their subsidised drugs. Pioneers will enjoy an additional 50% off for their subsidised drugs.

We will continue to review our policies to ensure that healthcare remains affordable for Singaporeans. For needy patients, they can also apply to Medifund for financial assistance.

Page: 46

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

26 To ask the Minister for Health if the means-testing process for the Community Health Assist Scheme should take into consideration other assets such as bank deposits.

Question No 26.

Madam, today, the means-testing process for the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) uses the per capita monthly household income as a way to assess a household's means. This allows the Government to better target subsidies at households who need them more. The income criterion is set such that up to half of Singaporean households qualify for the scheme. For households without any income, the Annual Value (AV) of their residence is taken into consideration as a proxy of their means.

In designing the household means-testing process, we need to strike a balance between being more precise in assessing applicants' means and keeping the process simple for applicants and also administratively practical. While having additional criteria like a household's ownership of other assets like bank deposits will provide a more complete assessment of means, this will make the application process much more onerous.

We thank the Member for her suggestion. My Ministry will continue to regularly review the means-testing process and criteria to ensure that the scheme reaches out to those who need it.

27 Mr Yee Jenn Jong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Ministry will provide a national data bank on commercial rentals, including effective rents with variable components, and, if so, when.

Since April 2014, the Government has released more detailed rental data on retail and industrial space through URA and JTC respectively. URA has released median rentals of retail space by street names, while JTC has released average rentals of Multiple-user Factory space by planning regions. All the additional information is available on the URA and JTC websites.

Page: 47

The Government has announced that we will work towards publishing more detailed rental data for retail space by the end of 2014. This will add to the existing information available on the rental market and help businesses make more informed decisions during lease negotiations.

Mr Yee, we only have two minutes, so make it very short.

I thank the Minister of State for the answer. First, I would like to ask whether the Ministry agrees with the staff paper that was recently published by the Ministry that REITs do not impact the rents in the retail sector. Secondly, is there any target that the Ministry is setting to try to keep the retail rent rises to a more manageable manner? Is there any internal KPI that the Ministry is planning to achieve with all the measures it is taking?

For the benefit of the Member Mr Yee, I have also mentioned in public before that REITs have some signalling effect for the landlords and developers around the area when the rental increase or decrease happens. So, there is some signalling effect although REITs in themselves are not a dominant factor or may not be a dominant factor in the influence of all in the market itself. But we do recognise that there is a signalling effect.

As for monitoring of the rental changes, we are monitoring very carefully and that is exactly why before the end of the year, we want to make sure that we publish the rental index – more detailed, more specific, make it clearer – so that the tenants and landlords can make more informed decisions when they do their lease negotiations. I think the principles behind this, whatever measures and approaches that we roll out, is to make sure that there is a fair practice and they would enhance the business practice that will help the market as a whole.

Order. End of Question Time. Ministerial Statement. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]

Page: 48

Mdm Speaker, thank you for allowing me to make this statement. May I have your permission to display the slides which I will refer to during my statement?

Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. On 8 December 2013, a riot took place following a fatal road traffic accident along Race Course Road in Little India. The riot was the worst public order disturbance in Singapore in more than four decades.

On 13 December, I appointed a Committee of Inquiry (COI) chaired by former Supreme Court Judge G Pannir Selvam with three other members. The COI's Terms of Reference are shown on the screen.

Over the past six months, the Committee examined testimonies from 323 witnesses. It offered to interview all 57 foreign workers who were to be repatriated, and interviewed the 20 who accepted the offer. The Committee visited the scene of the riot, foreign worker dormitories and other places where foreign workers congregate during their days off work. It also conducted open hearings lasting 24 days and heard testimonies from 93 witnesses.

The COI submitted its report to me on 27 June. The report was made public on 30 June and my Ministry also sent the report to Members of this House via e-mail on the same day. The COI report describes what happened that night and analyses factors that contributed to the riot. It also makes several important recommendations and observations to improve the management of such incidents and to reduce the risk of such incidents recurring.

I would like to put on record my appreciation of the Committee's hard work in undertaking an open, searching, thorough and comprehensive Inquiry. I also thank the team of investigators, legal officers and civil servants that supported the COI, as well as witnesses who gave evidence at the inquiry.

Let me first summarise the COI's key findings before providing the Government's response to the COI's recommendations.

Page: 49

The COI found that the riot was triggered by a fatal road traffic accident and that the victim's own actions were primarily responsible for the accident. The victim was intoxicated, had lost his balance and had fallen under the bus while running in the bus driver's blind spot. At the time of the accident, the time-keeper was neither on the bus nor near it.

The COI concluded that the primary or triggering cause of the riot was the occurrence of this fatal accident. However, a confluence of other factors fuelled its subsequent escalation.

First, the COI attributed the escalation of the riot to the crowd's misperception that the accident was caused by the bus driver and the time-keeper. The crowd also misperceived the actions of the first responders from Police and SCDF, whom the crowd saw as protecting the bus driver and the time-keeper instead of arresting them.

Second, the COI's view is that some of the workers at the scene that night could have carried a "cultural psychology" of "retributive justice" that spurred them to take the law into their own hands.

Finally, the COI assessed that alcohol was a major contributory factor to the nature and escalation of the riot.

The COI had also carefully examined other possible causes of the riot. Based on the evidence gathered, the COI concluded that the riot was not a result of dissatisfaction among foreign workers with their employment and living conditions in Singapore. Nor was the riot premeditated or planned. It was also not related to ethnic or any endemic form of discrimination.

The COI pointed out that while the riot was a shock to many Singaporeans, it was not as severe as many others that had happened in other parts of the world. There was no loss of life, no prolonged fighting between Police and the rioters, and it was dispersed relatively quickly. The riot remained contained in a small area. Arson of private property and looting did not occur. No shots were fired by the Police, and neither tear gas nor water cannon was used on the rioters.

The COI thus concluded that the overall outcome of the SPF response was good, but it would have been better had it not been for the overturning and burning of Police cars, ambulances and emergency vehicles.

Twenty-five people were arrested at the scene that night. More than 400 persons were called up for subsequent further investigations. Eventually, 25 persons were charged, 57

Page: 50

were repatriated and 213 warned and given advisories. To update Members, of the 25 charged, 14 have been convicted and sentenced, the most recently this morning. Eight of these 14 have completed their sentences and have also been repatriated. The cases of the other 11 charged are still in progress.

On the Home Team's response that night, the COI commended the SCDF officers for performing their duties well. The officers demonstrated quick thinking and common sense in departing from standard operating procedures to adapt to the changing needs on the ground. The COI also assessed the Police's overall response to be relatively swift and efficient. In the first phase – which was the initial response and extrication of the deceased's body and the evacuation of the driver and time-keeper – the responding officers did a commendable job of handling the situation.

The COI was of the view that during the second phase, from 10.15 pm to 10.45 pm, while the ground commander felt that his best course of action was to hold his position until the arrival of the SOC, this should have been re-evaluated when the SOC was late in arriving, as the situation on the ground was changing and the response should have been adjusted accordingly.

The COI's view was that there were opportunities for Police to intervene and take decisive action during this period from 10.15 pm to 10.45 pm. The COI stated that the rioters were destroying property and pelting the officers with objects, but the COI did not agree that it was a life-threatening situation, or that the officers would have been in severe danger had they moved in to stop and arrest the rioters at that time.

The COI's analysis will be useful for Police's review of their doctrines and procedures, and provide inputs for Police's scenario-based training for dealing with public order incidents. These will help our officers and commanders hone their incident management skills. The COI arrived at its assessment based on a reconstruction of all available information collected after the riot by a team of investigators.

On the other hand, on the night of the riot itself, as commanders and officers arrived at the scene as quickly as they could, they faced a highly charged and rapidly evolving situation. They made their decisions in the heat of the action, and under time pressure, based on the information they had available. The Police Divisional Commander who assumed incident command arrived on the scene at 10.11 pm. A few minutes after that, the rioters started flipping cars over and setting them ablaze with the first at 10.28 pm. The commanders and officers that night did not have the benefit of hindsight. Their decisions and actions have thus to be evaluated in that context.

Page: 51

Mdm Speaker, it is not always possible to take the analyses done after the fact and substitute them for the judgement that the commanders and officers had to make on the ground that night. We will not be able to know definitively what the outcome would be if a different course of action had been taken during this phase, given the emotional crowd which was volatile and prone to misperceptions.

Mdm Speaker, the commanders and officers that night did the best they could in the circumstances they faced, with the information they had on hand. Although there was destruction and damage to emergency vehicles, the riot was brought fully under control within two hours of the initial accident, contained within the immediate location, without loss of life or serious injury, and without the use of lethal force, including firearms. The area was re-opened to people and traffic by early the next morning, a few hours later.

Mdm Speaker, a riot on the streets of Singapore is unacceptable. We have to take preventive action to minimise the likelihood of such a riot occurring and improve our capability to deal effectively with a riot if one does occur. Anyone who takes part in a riot must know that he will be dealt with firmly in accordance with the law.

The COI made eight recommendations under two main categories – Strengthening the Home Team and Measures to Manage Congregation Areas. The COI's recommendations have provided an independent perspective of the measures necessary to minimise the likelihood of a riot and to better prepare ourselves to respond to any such incident.

The Government accepts all of the COI's recommendations. The COI's recommendations address weaknesses and areas that we have to improve on, provide validation of several of our ongoing plans which address the COI's concerns, sharpen our focus on what the priorities should be, and provide impetus for us to do more in certain areas and to implement them sooner. We have also not waited for the COI's report to act, but have implemented various improvements since the riot on 8 December, some in the days immediately following the incident. I will now address the action the Government is taking on the security-related aspects of the COI's recommendations. My colleague, the Minister for Manpower, will address the foreign manpower issues after my statement.

In making recommendations on the Home Team's response to public order incidents, the COI took into account how SPF's focus and resourcing had evolved with Singapore's security needs. From the mid-1970s, Singapore witnessed a rapid reduction in the number of public order incidents. Consequently, SPF gradually shifted its focus and resources from riot control to other priorities, such as crime prevention and community policing. In 1983, the number of riot control troops was reduced from 12 to eight, and from 63 to 46 officers

Page: 52

per troop.

The SOC was established in 1992 and, after 2001 in particular, became a dual-response force for anti-terrorism, in addition to public order incidents. In 2004, the size of each SOC troop was reduced from 46 to 35 officers, but this was balanced with more intensive training and by improvements in equipment and technology.

The COI's view is that SPF's progressive shift of resources was a positive development. However, the COI's view is that, given the riot, Police must re-assess the likelihood of having to deal with large-scale public order incidents and strengthen the ability of its forces to do so.

Let me come to each of the COI's recommendations.

The COI's first recommendation is to improve Command, Control and Communications, or C3 capabilities, to help ground officers build a better picture of the ground situation, especially in rapidly changing scenarios.

This is an important area that needs to be improved. Police have an ongoing programme, started a few years ago, for a major upgrade of its C3 systems. Two key projects are now near completion and ready to be commissioned this year. A new Combined Operations Room will be ready in end 2014. It will be equipped with tools to track the deployment of Police resources, as well as dashboards and information management systems for improved awareness of the ground situation.

The new Police C3 system is also targeted to enter service in end 2014. It will bring more advanced communications, imaging and mobile computing technology to officers at the frontline, through mobile devices with data and voice communications. The on-scene ground commander will be able to receive collated information pushed to him from the Combined Operations Room. This will help him to build a better picture of the situation to improve his decision-making. The new Combined Operations Room and C3 system will strengthen Police's capability for incident management, and to marshal and deploy forces better to deal with rapidly developing situations.

Police have also started trials for body-worn and vehicle-mounted cameras. All Police fast response cars will be equipped with cameras by end 2015. The streaming of live video from vehicle-mounted cameras will help to establish a real-time situation picture that both frontline responders and operations centres can use. The cameras will also capture evidence for post-event investigation and the identification of perpetrators.

Page: 53

Police are also studying how the Combined Operations Room can make good use of publicly-posted messages and images on the Internet or social media, as these can provide early indications and valuable information on a developing public security situation. This will also enable Police to quickly clarify and dispel any rumours or untruths, which can otherwise spread very quickly and create alarm or undesirable reactions.

The second recommendation is to appropriately train and equip frontline officers to respond to public order incidents.

Police will review what further capabilities our frontline officers need as first responders to deal with public order incidents. This will include a review of the training and equipping of officers. As our frontline officers have multiple policing duties, we will have to tailor their capability and training at a level appropriate for first responders and their mission. Should there be a large-scale public order incident that frontline officers, with their training and equipment, cannot fully deal with on their own, they will have to contain it, and call upon fully-trained SOC anti-riot troopers to quell it. I will speak next about how the SOC will be upgraded to respond more quickly and decisively.

The third recommendation of the COI is to increase the SPF's manpower resources, including the Special Operations Command, so that they can better manage mass congregation areas, such as Little India, and be ready to deal with large-scale public order incidents. The COI also said that, however, quality rather than quantity should be the major consideration in augmenting the force.

We will increase the size and capability of the SOC. In fact, we will double it. We need such a specially trained and equipped force to deal with large-scale public order incidents and the heightened terrorism threat, as well as to manage more mass events that require high-level security.

Currently, the SOC deploys two Police Tactical Troops (PTTs) on round-the-clock standby duty. We intend to increase the number of troops from eight to 12 so that we can put a third SOC troop on standby all the time. This additional troop will be configured for rapid deployment on lighter and more mobile platforms. We will also increase the number of officers in each troop from 35 to 44, and provide them with additional equipment to improve their sense-making and operational capabilities. This will enable each troop to deal more effectively with a wider range of situations and crowd-size. In total, we will add 300 officers to the SOC, doubling its current strength of deployable frontline troopers. We will commence the build-up immediately and progressively build up its capabilities over the next two to three years.

Page: 54

On overall Police manpower, between 2008 and 2014, more than 1,000 new posts have been added to support new initiatives, such as frontline Community Policing, Safer Roads and investigations. More than 97% of these additional posts have been filled. Overall, Police have increased its headcount by about 15% over the past 10 years from about 9,000 to about 10,300 officers. Police require more posts for new frontline demands, such as a new Police Division Headquarters and two new Neighbourhood Police Centres, in line with shifts in our population. At the same time, Police will continue to review their structures and processes so that officers can be more effectively and productively deployed to where they are most needed.

To continue to attract and retain good officers, Police have enhanced their employment terms and provided more upgrading and education opportunities for in-service officers. SPF has also raised the retirement age of uniformed officers from 50 to 55, and re-employed more retired officers. More civilian officers have also been recruited to take on specialised roles, for example, in forensics and cybercrime, to complement uniformed officers.

However, there are natural limits to how much further we can grow the force without compromising standards. Indeed, the COI has recognised this and made the observation that quality rather than just quantity should be the major consideration in augmenting our force of fully-fledged Police Officers. Like other organisations or companies, it is not easy to hire and retain officers of good quality.

Besides our regular Police officers, we also tap on full-time National Service officers, for example, in our Public Transport Security Command, NSmen, volunteers and community partners. In addition, Police deploy Auxiliary Police Officers to carry out duties of a more specific nature that do not require a fully-fledged Police officer who is trained to deal with a multitude of situations.

Besides increasing manpower, Police have also been using improved deployment strategies, such as Community Policing, to build stronger partnerships with the community to fight crime. Police have also invested in technology as a force multiplier. For example, in the past two years, more than 18,000 Police Cameras have been installed at 3,300 HDB void decks and multi-storey car parks. These have been effective in deterring crime. All 10,000 HDB blocks will have Police Cameras by 2016. This combination of better operational deployments and applying technology have contributed significantly to keeping crime low and solving cases. For example, the number of unlicensed moneylending harassment cases has been cut by more than 50% compared to five years ago.

Page: 55

The fourth recommendation is for SPF and SCDF to continue to build on their ability to respond in a concerted and co-ordinated manner to public order situations.

The COI reported that the response to the riot demonstrated strong teamwork and collaboration between the SPF and SCDF units in the first phase of extrication and rescue.

Mdm Speaker, Police, SCDF and other Home Team agencies work closely on the ground daily when responding to incidents, and have jointly developed protocols to handle major incidents. We will continue to integrate and enhance the capabilities of frontline first responders through joint standard operating procedures. These joint SOPs are also validated and improved through regular joint exercises.

The fifth recommendation is for SPF to look into generally cutting layers of approval or time needed to activate essential resources to respond to public order incidents and other emergencies.

The COI found that the approval process for activating the SOC was one factor that slowed their arrival. The Police have since then shortened the approval process. Prior to the 8 December riot, the activation of SOC troops required the concurrence of the Director Operations of Police. There were two key reasons for this procedure. First, the deployment of the SOC is a high-signature move and the assessment should be done by a more senior officer. Second, the Director Operations is better placed to assess the overall national needs and priorities when there are competing demands.

Police have made the process for activating the SOC for a public order incident more direct. Division Commanders can now activate the first SOC troop while alerting Police Headquarters at the same time. Traffic Police will also be simultaneously activated to facilitate the SOC's speedy movement to the incident location.

Mdm Speaker, may I have your permission to request the Clerk to distribute the handouts?

Yes, please. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members. Please refer to the Annex.]

Thank you. I now move on to the COI's recommendations to manage foreign worker congregation areas. This is the sixth recommendation of the COI, which is to install additional lighting, safety and surveillance devices in areas which see large congregations of foreign workers, in addition to making better basic facilities available to

Page: 56

those who congregate there.

Mdm Speaker, I had mentioned in my statement to Parliament in January this year that several measures had been progressively implemented in Little India since October 2006 to improve the physical environment; that is, prior to the 8 December riot in 2013. These included installation of backlane lighting, additional railings along Serangoon Road and operating the Little India Bus Services for workers.

Since 2009, Police have deployed auxiliary police officers and private security officers in Little India to manage anti-social behaviour. In 2011, these numbers were increased and, since then, there have been 81 officers deployed on weekends.

Agencies will continue to work together to improve infrastructure and enhance safety in Little India. We are currently installing additional lighting in 44 locations in Little India. LTA has concreted the grass patch at Tekka Lane and similar works are ongoing for a 10-metre wide strip of the field abutting Hampshire Road for use as a passenger waiting area for the Little India Bus Services. Permanent shelters and queue heads will be provided by the first quarter of 2015. Any change in the capacity of the Little India Bus Services will be gradual and in line with other whole-of-Government measures for Little India. Agencies will also look at various issues, such as bus service timing, to spread out demand and avoid crowding.

For better traffic management, Lembu Road has, since 8 June 2014, been closed to vehicular traffic every Sunday from noon to midnight. Campbell Lane will be converted into a pedestrian mall by the first quarter of 2015. Two new traffic lights will be installed along Serangoon Road and will be synchronised with existing crossings. These measures will enhance road safety and smoothen pedestrian and vehicular traffic flow.

Prior to the 8 December riot, there were 113 Police Cameras in public areas and HDB blocks in Little India. Since then, we have more than doubled the number to 250 Police Cameras. All 41 HDB blocks in Little India now have Police Cameras. Police will progressively install another 88 cameras in public areas between now and December 2015. This overall trebling of the number of cameras, beyond what was initially planned within this timeframe, will provide greater deterrence to crime and anti-social behaviour and allow Police and enforcement agencies to deploy their officers more effectively and forestall or respond more quickly to incidents.

Police have stepped up their presence in Little India since the riot with an additional 20 to 30 Police officers deployed every weekend along with a dedicated SOC troop. This is complemented by the 81 APOs and private security officers currently deployed there on weekends. To sustain an increased presence in the longer term, Police is looking at increasing

Page: 57

the number of APOs and private security officers deployed in Little India from the current 81 to 93 officers. Police will continue to monitor the situation and calibrate the manpower and other measures deployed accordingly.

Public agencies have also been working together to address issues in other foreign worker congregation areas, such as Geylang. Let me take Geylang as one example. There will be stricter enforcement of licensing and parking rules, and 252 more cameras installed in Geylang by end 2016, compared to the 47 existing ones. We will also be enhancing the street lighting at 36 back alleys in Geylang.

For these congregation areas, Police will continue to conduct frequent patrols and enforcement checks to maintain law and order. In Geylang, for instance, an SOC troop conducts weekly anti-crime patrols to augment existing police resources patrolling the area. Police will also continue to deploy APOs to project additional uniformed presence at congregation areas.

The Minister for Manpower will speak later on the COI's seventh recommendation to make more services and amenities available to foreign workers outside of congregation areas, and to work with local community stakeholders on measures to reduce congestion at congregation areas.

The COI's eighth and final recommendation is to more strictly enforce against public drunkenness and set in place alcohol restrictions in hotspots where large crowds typically indulge in heavy drinking and, therefore, where a triggering incident could spark a breakdown of public order.

Prior to the riot, MHA had already embarked on a wider review of measures to control the sale and public consumption of alcohol, to address concerns of public order and disamenities.

Between October and December 2013, stakeholders and the general public were consulted on proposals to designate no-alcohol zones at some public places; and shorten the sale hours of liquor at retail outlets. Six hundred and twenty four persons participated in the e-Poll, and 337 pieces of written feedback were received. We also conducted focus-group discussions with members of the public and representatives from retail and public entertainment outlets. The majority supported such proposals.

The second phase of consultation was launched via the REACH portal on 16 June 2014 to seek the public's views on possible models for limiting the sale and public consumption of alcohol, drawing on examples from other countries and cities. This will help us to develop a

Page: 58

model that best suits Singapore's needs and which will be effective and sustainable. This second phase of consultation will end on 31 July 2014.

Since the implementation of the Public Order (Additional Temporary Measures) Act on 1 April 2014, 163 individuals were found consuming alcohol in public during prohibited hours. They have been issued with Police advisories. Two liquor establishments are under investigation for contravening licensing conditions. Police has been consulting closely with the Little India Shopkeepers and Heritage Association, residents and Advisers to implement the measures as smoothly as possible. Feedback on the alcohol restrictions from residents has been generally positive.

In formulating the new measures on the sale and public consumption of alcohol, we will take into consideration public and industry feedback, the COI's recommendations and our experience from the alcohol restrictions in Little India. We will introduce the necessary legislation within the next six months before the Public Order (Additional Temporary Measures) Act expires in March 2015.

Mdm Speaker, let me thank the COI once again for its thorough and comprehensive work in the past six months. The COI adopted an open and transparent process. It sought submissions from the public, all of which were taken into account in the COI's deliberations. The public hearing was conducted in open court, with no restrictions on media or public attendance.

The COI came to the conclusion that the overall outcome of the SPF response was good. There was no loss of life, no prolonged fighting between Police and the rioters, and the riot was dispersed relatively quickly. While the COI found that the Home Team had generally performed well in quelling the riot, it has also identified areas for improvement and put forth recommendations which the Government accepts. We will implement all the recommendations. Since the riot, we have already started to strengthen our capabilities and enhance our operational effectiveness.

Mdm Speaker, the riot was the most serious public order incident Singapore had seen in over 40 years. Home Team officers were called to action; they quelled the riot and restored calm in Little India that night. But there were wider efforts beyond Little India and in the days that followed which helped to maintain calm and stability in Singapore. Members of this House, including Minister Lui Tuck Yew, Ms Denise Phua and Minister Iswaran walked the ground together with grassroots leaders in Little India to reassure the residents and local community. Other Members of this House did the same to reassure residents in their own areas, while other Members, including Minister Shanmugam, Minister Iswaran, Mr Vikram Nair and Mr Dhinakaran, together with staff from the High Commissions of India and Bangladesh, visited dormitories to engage the larger community of foreign workers who

Page: 59

were not involved in the riot.

Non-governmental organisations and employers stepped up efforts to assist workers. Operators of recreation centres and dormitories organised more programmes and provided more services for foreign workers. Singaporeans generally responded in a rational and calm manner. All these efforts helped to ensure that there were no spill-over tensions after the riot and helped us restore normalcy quickly. I would like to thank everyone who contributed to this community effort.

Mdm Speaker, Minister for Manpower Tan Chuan-Jin will now address the foreign manpower issues in relation to the COI's recommendations and observations, after which, Mdm Speaker, with your permission, we will both address any matters that Members may wish to raise. Thank you.

Minister Tan.

Mdm Speaker, Deputy Prime Minister Teo provided MHA's response to the findings and recommendations of the COI into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2014. I will now respond to the part that touches on the management of the foreign workforce in Singapore.

I am glad that the COI has established that the underlying cause of the 8 December riot was not systemic dissatisfaction with employment and living conditions in Singapore among foreign workers. I think we can all agree that the process of inquiry was robust and the evidence and testimonials furnished to the COI by non-government organisations, civil society activists and, more importantly, the foreign workers themselves, helped us see things in a proper perspective.

The COI has also concluded that, by and large, we have a good framework in place to protect foreign workers. This includes regular reviews to ensure that legislation is adequate and appropriate. Most Members would be aware that over the last few years, we have enacted a series of legislative changes to the Employment Act, the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act and the Employment Agencies Act to better protect workers.

The COI's findings have also been corroborated by the interim results of another survey conducted after the riot by an independent survey company Nexus Link, and commissioned by MOM and the Migrant Workers Centre (MWC). Again, the results are consistent with the COI findings and showed that the vast majority of foreign workers, over 90%, expressed high

Page: 60

levels of satisfaction with working in Singapore and planned to continue working here after their current employment stint. Over 80% said that they would recommend Singapore to their friends and relatives as a place for work. Satisfactory pay and working and living conditions were the top three reasons cited for recommending Singapore as a place to work.

In addition to these survey findings, the fact is that over 70% of foreign workers renew their contracts after the first two years. Taken together, these pieces of evidence suggest that the majority of foreigners continue to consider Singapore an attractive place to work. Ultimately, what the workers themselves say and do matter. The COI report puts to rest the more speculative causes for the riot that were offered by some critics and that were echoed blindly by some sections of the foreign media. These same critics often propagated this, painting a negative picture of our agencies, of Singaporeans and of Singapore at large to not just our internal local audience but to the international audience as well.

Significantly, the Indian media, which had a more direct interest in this issue and more access to the workers, on the whole reported responsibly and fairly on the Little India riot. As the Foreign Minister has noted, this incident has not affected our bilateral relations with India.

While the COI has found no evidence of systemic mistreatment of foreign workers, they have pointed out that there might nonetheless be a minority of errant employers who mistreat their workers. I have stated this before in this House: mistreatment does exist. In an earlier statement in Parliament, I have also cited the number of egregious cases. While any case should not be tolerated, the numbers are exceedingly small. My Ministry treats feedback on mistreatment of workers, whether local or foreign, very seriously and we will investigate such employers. If there is clear evidence that any employer or any other person has breached the law, we will not hesitate to take the necessary enforcement actions. I might add that workers who provide false information – and that occurs as well – must also be held accountable.

I accept fully the COI's observation that there is always room to improve the situation. Indeed, that is so. We certainly do not take the current state of affairs for granted and will be implementing the thoughtful recommendations in the COI report.

The COI has recommended that more services and amenities be made available to foreign workers outside of congregation areas like in Little India. This is something that we are already doing, and intend to step up on. Indeed, providing for the needs of foreign workers requires strong inter-agency coordination overseen by an inter-Ministerial committee, covering issues like housing, transport and security. Efforts are on-going to speed up the construction of dormitories which, beyond providing adequate living space, have built-in amenities and recreational facilities to take care of the daily basic living needs of

Page: 61

workers. The new dormitories which are being launched are required to be self-contained, with adequate space set aside for living and gathering, as well as the provision of facilities like mini-marts, gyms, canteens and TV rooms and, of course, WiFi, which is very important. Over time, we aim for more workers to be accommodated in such self-contained housing facilities which will reduce the need to travel far for basic services.

We also recognise that this is not simply an issue of providing hard infrastructure. Soft infrastructure matters and operators of dormitories have a role to play. As I have previously mentioned, MOM will be establishing a regulatory framework for large dormitories that have a larger impact on their surrounding communities. I am pleased to note that from our engagements with industry, the operators are on board with us on this. My Ministry is working through the details and will provide more information of this regulatory framework in the coming months.

The Government is also pressing on with efforts to establish more dedicated recreation centres for foreign workers. There are four today – in Soon Lee, Kaki Bukit, Woodlands and Penjuru. We will increase their number in tandem with the increase in our foreign workforce numbers. These centres provide a wider range of amenities that individual dormitories may not be able to, such as remittance and banking services, supermarkets and sports facilities. We will work closely with local community stakeholders in shaping the amenities and services available at these centres so that workers do not need to go far to get access to these services.

The COI has also suggested that more effort be made to educate foreign workers on issues, such as their rights and protections, avenues for them to seek assistance and local social norms. Currently, we already make an effort to push out essential information to workers before they enter Singapore and throughout their stay here. Information on key salary components is included in the In-Principle Approval letter which employers must send to their in-coming workers in their home countries, in their own languages, before they depart for Singapore.

As part of the Work Permit card issuance process, a comprehensive guidebook is given which covers workers' legal rights and responsibilities, channels for assistance provided by Government and non-government organisations, as well as social norms. Workers who have problems can always approach MOM for help at our Services Centre. Workers who approach us for assistance can be assured that due effort will be taken to safeguard their interests and well-being.

During their stay, road-shows are conducted by Government agencies at dormitories and key foreign worker gathering spots. Newsletters are also regularly distributed to keep workers updated on our latest initiatives or policy changes. Much of our engagement of

Page: 62

foreign workers is conducted in the workers' native languages.

Nonetheless, we do accept the suggestion by the COI and will look into how our outreach to workers can be further improved. For example, we are looking to create more targeted and easier to understand materials so that key messages can be put across to foreign workers more simply. We will also look to extend our reach through collaboration with partners like student volunteers, many of whom have expressed an interest in befriending foreign worker groups.

Even as we undertake to effectively manage the foreign workers in our midst, the broader lesson is that foreign worker numbers cannot grow in an unabated manner. In line with the recommendations made by the Economic Strategies Committee in 2010, we have begun to moderate the growth of foreign workers to more sustainable levels, with a greater emphasis on productivity improvements. We have also taken deliberate and progressive steps to raise the quality profile of our foreign workforce and help businesses reduce their reliance on low-cost foreign labour. This is painful but it is a necessary adjustment we are making to restructure our economy, and the Government has introduced the $5.9 billion Quality Growth Programme in Budget 2013 to help our businesses and industries to make this transition.

The foreign workforce tightening measures have slowed foreigner growth significantly. Excluding construction and domestic workers, the foreign worker growth rate was halved from 9.4% in 2011 to 4.6% in 2012, and halved again to just 2.3% in 2013. For construction, manpower has grown over the past few years in large part to support the ramp-up of construction projects, including essential transportation, housing and healthcare infrastructure for Singaporeans. We will continue to build in the coming years, but in a more manpower-lean manner, with many construction productivity measures being introduced.

In conclusion, the COI has rightly pointed out that the riot was a unique event, perpetuated by individuals who were not representative of the majority of responsible and law-abiding foreign workers. The COI's findings have made clear that negative generalisations about the foreign workforce have no place in our society.

I believe that Singaporeans genuinely appreciate the contributions of these workers and wish to co-exist harmoniously with them. On our part, the Government will continue to nurture, to manage such spaces; as well as to manage the overall numbers to minimise impact on the local community.

Mr Hri Kumar.

Page: 63

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I have three questions for the Deputy Prime Minister. First, the Deputy Prime Minister mentioned that the SOC force will be increased by 300. The Police Commissioner justified during the hearing that he needed an additional 1,000 officers in the force and the COI spoke of recruiting quality than of quantity.

As the Minister has accepted all the recommendations, could the Deputy Prime Minister clarify how he intends to recruit such numbers given the tight labour situation, and particularly, how long he anticipates the Ministry will need to bring the numbers up to an acceptable level?

Second, in the meantime, does the Ministry have any interim or temporary measures to address the manpower deficit?

Finally, Mdm Speaker, on a separate note, I have read and heard a number of commentaries about what the Government should do in order that similar incidents like these will not happen again. That sentiment concerns me because I do not think the Minister or anyone can give that assurance to this House. Perhaps, the Deputy Prime Minister could clarify, even with the successful implementation of all recommendations, what he sees is an acceptable or reasonable response to similar incidents in the future.

I will respond to the Member's questions in reverse order. I have spoken quite a lot on manpower already. I should clarify that that was what the Police Commissioner testified. It is not what the COI recommended. The Police Commissioner, together with staff in the Ministry HQ, are discussing how to deal with the manpower issue. I will come to that.

The Member asked a very interesting question. I have responded to the COI's recommendations in the sequence and the order in which the COI made its recommendations, as it is easier to understand the actions taken from that point of view. But it may not be as intuitive if you are looking at it from what the Police and other agencies actually do on a daily basis and how they would minimise the likelihood of a riot and how do they deal with it. So, I will now discuss what we are doing in that sequence rather than the sequence of the recommendations.

Since 8 December 2013, we have already made important improvements to strengthen the Home Team's capability to respond better and more quickly to public order incidents. These capabilities will be further strengthened in the months and years ahead. Let me put it

Page: 64

now in the sequence of how the agencies and the Police would actually deal with situations with the new resources and new capabilities that we have.

First, we now have more Police Cameras in critical locations, not just in Little India but in other areas. In critical areas, these cameras will enable Police to make better and faster appreciation of a developing situation. In fact, it will allow the Division and Combined Operations Room (COR) to take actions even to forestall a situation from becoming something more serious and to make deployment decisions earlier.

For example, if you see a crowd build up or if you see a group of people starting to get a bit rowdy, you can actually respond to that more quickly and diffuse the situation before it becomes something more serious. And then with a better appreciation of the total situation that is provided by the cameras at one central location, it is easier for the Police to deploy the various forces that they have and to coordinate their activities better. So this is what it means in operational terms on, say, a typical crowded weekend. And having seen what has happened, they can also make a call if they need other resources more quickly, such as the SOC.

The second point is that Police have shortened the approval process to activate the SOC. The combination of these two means that the need for additional resources, such as the SOC, can be appreciated earlier and the call can be made earlier, cutting down the time to respond, which is one of the key issues that the COI quite rightly pointed out.

Third, the new Combined Operations Room and the new C3 system will be operational by the end of this year. They will strengthen Police's incident management and enable Police to marshal and deploy forces better to deal with rapidly developing situations and provide a better and quicker response. So, not just in one locality, but even if they have a number of different incidents to manage around the island.

Fourth, commanders and officers on the ground will be able to communicate better with the new communications and C3 system. I have been involved in many operations myself and the communication system is never enough to meet operational needs. We need to improve the communications and C3 system, so that the ground officers will be able to communicate better with each other. They will be better able to coordinate and adjust their responses as they will have a better picture of what is happening, where the on-scene forces are as well as those that are arriving to assist them.

The Police have also revised its doctrines and protocols on communications for a major incident. Additional networks will be made available to provide communications during a

Page: 65

major incident. This will help manage and reduce congestion of the communication networks.

Fifth, as I have mentioned, we will be doubling the size and capability of the SOC progressively over the next two to three years. This will provide us with a more capable, flexible and faster response capability.

Sixth, the lessons learnt from this incident, which the COI has analysed, will enter into the review of training and doctrines and in equipping of our frontline officers. The scenarios and possible responses painted by the COI will also enter into doctrine development, and the training of our officers and commanders.

I have gone into some detail in my statement and also in this response because we take the lessons from this incident seriously and we take the recommendations of the COI very seriously. And MHA and the Police will implement the recommendations vigorously.

In my statement, I have also stated what complementary measures we are taking in congregation areas in general and also specific to Little India. With these efforts, we will be able to minimise the likelihood of a riot taking place while at the same time, improving our capabilities to contain and quell a riot quickly if one does occur.

But Madam, I have visited a number of cities, both in western countries and in eastern countries, to look at their public order and counter-terrorism forces, C3 systems and contingency planning and deployment. Even in cities with the most intensive 24-hour sensor and C3 coverage of critical areas and officers present on the ground to respond all the time, they have not been able to guarantee that there are no incidents.

Just as Singaporeans did not expect the riot to break out on 8 December arising from a fatal road accident, a public order incident can be sparked off by a single trigger or a confluence of factors. It is not possible to predict or foresee to the last detail every possible incident that can arise. But we can and we will need to work on minimising the chances of a riot taking place while at the same time improving our capabilities to quell a riot if it does.

I have spoken at length on the manpower issues and how we are dealing with them. These are not unique to the Police or the Home Team. Every organisation in the public sector and the private sector is dealing with these issues: productivity, recruitment, retention; how we can use our people better; where we can save manpower and re-deploy it to other areas. In the Police Force, we will do that as well. I have outlined some of those measures earlier. But we are quite confident that we will be able to strengthen the SOC with the additional 300 troops in the next two to three years' time.

Page: 66

Thank you, Madam. Mr Lui Tuck Yew and I are the Members taking care of different parts of Little India and we want to register our thanks to the Home Team which has supported the residents and us even before the riot.

Despite the alarming physical damage and the death of one man, we are very grateful that the riot was quelled the same night. Mornings after were back to normal and post-riot measures were decisive and effective and sent a strong message that we do not tolerate such riots. Again, we want to officially thank and salute the Home Team for its contribution, including the ground commander from Tanglin, who, I believe, has done what he could in the heat of action and without the benefit of hindsight.

My question is this. I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he has taken consideration of the residents' response to what has happened in the last six months. In the last six months, the majority of our residents, including some restaurants and temples, have found measures, such as the alcohol sale and consumption restrictions, increased Police presence, improved transport arrangements – all measures which are very, very useful. There is a strong appeal to have these measures sustained for the long term. It has never been more peaceful.

I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister if the residents' appeals could be given stronger and heavier weightage, compared to general voices from the public; in developing, especially the permanent measures in the residential zones and even the nearby zones.

I have been heartened by the Manpower Minster's promise to ensure that the foreign workers' interests are looked after as well.

I want to also speak up for the businesses which had depended primarily on the foreign workers in Little India. I want to ask if the Minister or the relevant agencies would give priority for the Little India businesses, since more basic services, such as grocery, remittance businesses, are being set up as part of the new strategies in the workers' dormitories.

First of all, Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank Ms Denise Phua and also her colleague Mr Lui Tuck Yew for the very active involvement that they have taken in the concerns of the residents and stakeholders in Little India. It has been very helpful to us because it helps us to understand and work with the stakeholders better.

Many of the measures I described are of a long-term nature: the bus service improvements, the queuing systems, the road traffic management. We will continue to monitor and work together with Ms Denise Phua and other stakeholders to see how we can

Page: 67

improve and adjust as we go along.

The major issue which Ms Phua may be concerned about is the alcohol measures – measures and hours. These are still being looked at in great detail. As we look at new legislation, we will certainly take into account the concerns that have been so eloquently expressed by Ms Phua and together with the other views that have been expressed by others who have an interest in this matter.

Mdm Speaker, in response to Ms Dennis Phua's suggestion, in principle, we do welcome the participation of businesses in Little India as they may bring unique value to the foreign worker clientele. In fact, we understand that such collaboration is really ongoing. So, we do urge Little India businesses to proactively approach dormitory operators to market services and to convince them of the value that they could bring. This is something we are supportive of.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I have two questions for the Deputy Prime Minister. The first is the Committee of Inquiry was critical of the ground commander's actions, particularly in what was called the Second Phase of the riot. What is the Deputy Prime Minister's view on this? What actions will they take in relation to the ground commander, if any?

The second is probably the flip side of the question. The Committee was also quite complimentary of the overall result that was achieved and also singled out certain Police officers for praise. Will anything be done to recognise the efforts of these Police officers?

I had given MHA's assessment and perspective on the COI's comments on the Second Phase of the operation, particularly between 10.15 pm and 10.45 pm that evening. The COI had put forward a more interventionist course of action that the officers might have taken that night during that half-hour period.

The purpose of an inquiry after an event has occurred is to determine what happened and how things could be done better. The COI has indeed carried out a thorough analysis and put forward its views on what could have been done in such a situation with full knowledge of all the information and the facts. The assessment put forward by the COI, as I had said earlier, would be very useful to be entered into the doctrine development process, training, scenario injects or scenario-based training for officers and commanders. They would be able to consider issues, such as how would you best bring a situation under control and, if you intervened and if you took certain actions, would it cause the situation to escalate or to de-escalate? Or what relative strength of forces is needed to carry out particular

Page: 68

courses of action?

But the COI arrived at the assessment based on a reconstruction of all available information after the riot. When I evaluate the actions of the commanders and officers on that night, I have to look at the context of the situation that they faced that night and the information that they had available.

Riots are dynamic situations which call for dynamic responses. This is a point which the COI also made. It is thus important for us to consider the dynamic and rapidly unfolding situation that night and the situation faced by the commanders.

On the night of the riot, the officers arrived at the scene as quickly as they could. As they arrived, the commanders and officers came into the midst of a highly charged and rapidly evolving situation. In fact, some Home Team officers were injured by the actions of the crowd very early on, even during Phase 1. The officers and commanders had to make decisions in the heat of the action, under time pressure, based on the information they had available before them at that time. The Police Division Commander, as I had mentioned, arrived at 10.11 pm. Shortly after that, a few minutes after, the riot flared up and, by 10.28 pm, the first cars were flipped over and set on fire.

The commanders and officers did not have the benefit of hindsight and all the information available. We know what happened that night and what decisions had been taken by the officers on the ground. But we will not be able to definitively know what might have happened if a different course of action had been taken. We cannot be sure that it will definitely be better. We do not know if it might be better or the outcome might have been worse. Because we know that the crowd was emotional and prone to misperceptions.

Mdm Speaker, as I said, it is not always possible to take the analyses done after the fact and substitute them for the judgement that the commander or the officers had to make on the ground at that moment in time.

The actions of the Police also have to be seen to be proportionate and fair. In fact, I would say that the day after the riot, because the actions of the Police were seen as proportionate and fair, it helped also to restore calm and confidence among all parties – Singaporeans, foreign workers and the whole community. If the Police's actions were seen to be excessive, I think it would have caused a new set of issues and concerns.

I would also like to make an additional point. This is the issue of how much forces you need when you are assessing whether to take action. When you are able to have the force advantage, you can choose the amount of force to use and calibrate it better. You decide

Page: 69

whether to escalate. When you have to intervene and you do not have a force advantage to engage a mob, matters can quickly escalate to the use of lethal force. In that situation where you do not have the force advantage, it is actually the mob that decides whether there is an uncontrolled escalation and not the officers.

There will be situations where engaging is necessary, even without the force advantage, for example, when lives are at imminent risk. But I think that it is not so easy to substitute an analysis after the fact for the judgement that officers have to make on the ground.

So, I have evaluated the actions of the commander and the officers that night, and I do not find them wanting.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. Madam, I have six clarifications for Deputy Prime Minister Teo. The first clarification concerns the issue of manpower shortage. I think it is not a new issue and we have discussed this in Parliament for quite a number of years. As Deputy Prime Minister mentioned, the first time it was taken seriously in that sense was in 2008. That was when the House had to face the fact that there were several security lapses, for example, the escape of Mas Selamat, ICA clearing people with the wrong passport and people escaping from Court. And now we find that we are confronting this issue again because of another major incident, meaning a riot.

I would like to ask Deputy Prime Minister Teo whether he himself was personally surprised at the Commissioner's statement that, in his assessment, 1,000 more officers were needed by the Police to be effective. Is this indicative of any communication gap between the heads of departments and the Ministers, for example?

In one of my recent Parliamentary Questions (PQs) in 2012, I had asked the Government about policing resources, in particular, about community policing. And the Government did not seem to quite agree that there was a serious under resource problem. And yet during the COI, we find the Commissioner talking about robbing Peter to pay Paul to find resources, the SOC saying that they could not arrest people because they did not have enough manpower.

So, I would like to ask the Minister whether he was surprised at this assessment by the Commissioner of Police and whether this indicates a communication gap. And also, whether there is some other more holistic way that the Government assesses resource deficiencies rather than to act because of incidents that occurred of such a nature?

The second clarification concerns one of the findings of the COI about the causes of the riot. The COI mentioned that one of the main contributory factors was a misperception by

Page: 70

the crowd that they were being discriminated against by the responders and so on. There were some quotes by workers asking if their lives were worthless and so on. I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether he agrees that it is important for us to look at the way we do our law enforcement on our foreign workers. In other words, are we harsh towards them or do we give them a certain level of respect?

In this regard, I would like to cite two examples: one is that I filed a PQ in 2008 —

Ms Lim, if you could just seek your clarification and not to make speeches.

Madam, I will try. In 2008, for example, when there was an incident of an attack of a woman at Clementi Woods, what the Police did was to round up the nearby construction workers, 200 of them, to take blood samples from them. Looking at the methods used, I mean, there may be an impression created that there is a certain stereotyping, for example, by the Police in their actions. Commissioner of Police also mentioned that in Geylang, there was hostility and antagonism towards the Police. Would the Police be looking at their policing methods?

The third question is about training of the frontline officers. The COI recommended that the frontline officers should also be trained and equipped to deal with some public order disturbances. I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether he agrees that no amount of training really can be a substitute for actual practice in policing such incidents. In this light, would he consider, for example, that the Police should allow more peaceful protests in Singapore in certain designated roads, so that the Police can actually, on a regular basis, test their policing capabilities in terms of policing cause-based crowds? Riots, of course we do not want that, but they progress, basically, from some sort of cause-based protest. I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether he would consider that.

The fourth clarification is whether the Police will be looking at drawing up specific incident management plans for hotspots, such as Little India. It was not clear from the COI findings whether there was any incident management plan drawn up prior to the incident. So, is this something that the Police are looking at?

Fifth, if you look at the map, there is a boundary between two Police Divisions in Little India. I think that Race Course Road is a boundary. On the west side, it is policed by Tanglin; and on the eastern side, it is policed by Central. Will the Police be looking at whether this can be a complication as in, if something were to happen, who is to take charge, for example? Did this boundary, for example, cause DAC Lu, in the sequence of events, to try to marshal resources from "E" Division, when "A" Division resources were actually quite nearby? Would

Page: 71

the Police be looking at whether a more seamless management of such hot spots under one division would be a better way?

Last of all, the riot control doctrine was discussed during the COI and we were told that the incident manager was supposed to assess the crowd intent, sentiments and so on. I would like to ask whether there was actually in the plan the requirement to provide a psychologist or other assistance to the incident manager to help him make this kind of difficult assessment.

I will try to answer the six questions that Ms Lim has raised, in reverse order. Riot control doctrine and whether or not a psychologist is useful: part of the training of the riot troopers and the commanders, in particular, is to understand crowd psychology. But whether we will have a psychologist actually next to the riot control commander to advise him continually, I am not sure that that is necessary or practical. But they have to understand crowd psychology in terms of how to deal with a crowd.

I had a long talk with the SOC officers when I visited them prior to the riot and again after the riot, and they explained to me some of the approaches that they used in riot dispersal, and a lot of that involves crowd psychology.

On the boundaries, I think the suggestion, the observation that Ms Lim makes is a valid one. Police are looking at this issue of where to draw the boundaries. Of course, wherever you draw the boundaries, you can have a problem. Because as Ms Lim pointed out, perhaps the Commander of "E" called the "E" Division resources, and did not call the "A" Division resources. But supposing it had been drawn all within one division, then you could have said "Well, the boundary is so close by, how come you did not divide it into two, so that the resources of both divisions could be called?" So, there is always a boundary issue whenever you have such issues.

But on the incident response that night, I have looked carefully at the COI report and I have also looked carefully at the Police's AAR Report, the boundary issue did not seem to figure very prominently. Both division commanders actually came on the scene, they were able to coordinate and decide who is in charge. They called in forces from both divisions. But having said that, I think it is a valid consideration whether the boundary can be drawn at another place, but wherever you draw the boundary, you will have boundary problems.

Contingency planning for that night, yes, indeed, there were contingency plans. For example, the Police activated a contingency plan that allowed them to call the fast response cars from around the island to respond quickly to the location. That is one of the contingency

Page: 72

plans that the Police have, which they actually activated that night.

On whether we want to deliberately allow protests and demonstrations in order to give the Police and the SOC practice, perhaps Ms Lim might want to go one step further and, say, allow the protests to get out of hand, so that they get a little bit more practice.

Why?

But why not, since you want to give them practice?

Madam, the answer is obvious. We do not want damage to property or loss of life, but peaceful protests are arguably a freedom and civil liberty we want to project.

We can see the logic, or lack of it, in purposely allowing protests and demonstrations just in order for the SOC to practise. But I should say that one of the reasons why I do want to increase the size of the SOC is because we do have more events in Singapore, large-scale events, and you do not really need to deliberately allow protests to take place in order to give the SOC practice. A typical football match and other events like that already provide the SOC quite a lot of activity and action. Quite frankly, I do not think many Singaporeans would want to see more chaos, demonstrations on the streets disrupting their daily lives and also taking up resources which can be used for other purposes.

On the second point on misperceptions. Yes, indeed, there were different views expressed during the COI on how one could interact with people with different cultural backgrounds. Indeed, that I think is an important and valid consideration. We will provide more cultural background orientation for officers, including auxiliary police officers, who have to deal with and interact with people from different cultural backgrounds on a regular basis.

On the manpower issue, I think I have spoken at some length on this already, both in my main statement and in response to Mr Hri Kumar. Basically, the manpower issue is not one which is faced only by the Police, MHA or the Government. Anyone who runs an organisation in Singapore knows that we face a manpower situation which we all have to deal with. No problem is going to be solved just by asking for more manpower. Whether you work in an MNC, a company or the Government, you know you are not going to solve your manpower requirements just by asking. But we also know that there is no harm in asking, so we all ask anyway. But that is not the solution and we all know that.

I have outlined the various solutions and approaches which we are taking to deal with the manpower issue. But the realities are quite stark. In the coming five years, we will have

Page: 73

fewer young Singaporeans entering the workforce than in the past five years. So, the issue is not going to get simpler and it is not going to be solved simply by asking, though there is no harm asking.

Mr Nicholas Fang.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. Two questions for the Deputy Prime Minister. It is heartening to hear that the SOC force will be doubled and increased. I would just like to ask how will the emphasis in terms of their dual responsibilities of maintaining public order as well as counter terrorism operations be delineated and where will the emphasis be placed given that it does send a strong signal to the rest of the world whichever side that we place the emphasis on.

A related question to that: instead of increasing instances of disorder here or given the lack of frequency of such incidents relative to other countries, is there a potential for deploying our forces for more exchange or training in other countries in neighbouring partners to gain greater exposure?

One question for the Manpower Minister. It is heartening to hear that there will be efforts taken to improve the lives of foreign workers here and also to help them to understand life in Singapore a bit better. Will this ever come into contradiction or tension with the long-term aim of keeping such a workforce transient and not necessarily encouraging them to sink roots in Singapore?

We do send our officers for training, for exposure, for exchanges with other forces. In fact, in the development of our SOC, we have benefited a lot from the experiences of others – equipment, doctrine, training and so on – because they have a lot more experience of this and practice than we do. But it is not common for forces to send their nationals to enforce the law in other countries. So, we do have exchanges regularly, but actual enforcement is another matter.

On the balance between terrorism and public order, this, indeed, is one of the issues which we have to face in building up any force. Do you build up a force which is dedicated only for a particular task? Because then your force is designed and trained only for that and you do not use it for anything else. And if you have another requirement, you build up another force for that. That may not be the most effective way of doing so because you may not have to deal with both simultaneously. They both may have to be on standby. You may want to actually deploy a larger force to deal with one contingency should it occur. Therefore, we do carefully judge what kinds of missions we can give the forces that we have and we train them to be multi-purpose; but we also try not to over-task them because then they will

Page: 74

be jacks of all trades but masters of none.

Mdm Speaker, in response to the Member's question, I think it is important for us to look after our foreign workers. In fact, it behoves us to look after all our workers, whether local or otherwise. So, that is why legislation is in place to make sure that they are adequately looked after.

It is also important to make sure that enforcement takes place fairly. It is also important to make sure that education takes place, so that they understand their rights and to make sure that their welfare is looked after. And also to educate them on the social norms. It is also important for Singaporeans to understand that. So, that is where opportunities to create opportunities for interaction and mutual understanding is required as well. But is this mutually exclusive with the fact that the foreign workforce is transient in nature? I do not think so. It is a right thing for us to do as a society. Bearing in mind that it is still a transient workforce, it does not mean that we should not do these things.

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang.

Madam, while working and housing conditions were not the cause of the Little India riot, we cannot take for granted that a riot may not occur on such basis. So, I would like to ask the Minister for Manpower whether there is a severe shortage in supply of housing for migrant workers. And how would MOM ensure that there is an adequate supply of housing for migrant workers, as well as how to further improve the living conditions of all the migrant workers? We also have to actually ensure that the employers proactively and actively play their role to ensure that they manage the foreign workers well in their workplaces.

Mdm Speaker, this issue of a lack of adequate accommodation crops up regularly. There has been a lot of misunderstanding from the media, in spite of our clarifications. It is a worthwhile opportunity for us to surface this again.

Of the 770,000 non-domestic work permit holders, almost half of them are Malaysians who commute to work daily and, therefore, do not need dormitory beds, or those in the manufacturing and services sector who are allowed to rent and live in HDB flats and in private estates near the places of their work. The more relevant group pertaining to dormitories is the remaining half, who are the non-Malaysian construction, marine and process workers – about 90% of whom are already housed in purpose-built dormitories, factory-converted dormitories and quarters on construction sites. A vast majority of these housing premises are within regulatory norms. These dormitories are not of uniform standards. I think that is something that we acknowledge but, as mentioned, over the next

Page: 75

few years, the aim is to speed up the construction of more purpose-built dormitories to ensure that the daily basic living needs of foreign workers are better taken care of. Over time, the aim is for a vast majority of this group of workers to be accommodated in such self-contained housing facilities. These efforts have already started a number of years ago, and will continue unabated.

Mdm Speaker, at four different paragraphs – paras 150, 157, 158 and 199 – the COI stated that SCDF performed its duties well on that night. Overall, SCDF responded to the riot relatively swiftly. The responding officers, led by ASP Tang and Lieutenant Neo, did a commendable job and, lastly, there was also effective command. My point is that while we debate what more could have been done, what improvements can be made, I believe it is important that this House also puts on record the bravery of the officers who conducted themselves courageously on that night. To this end, I would like to clarify whether it is the intention of MHA, in its post-mortem of the COI report, to commend the officers who carried out their duties professionally and bravely.

Mdm Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank the Member for recognising and encouraging the good work done by our officers. This is something which we will certainly consider.

Madam, I have three questions for the Minister for Home Affairs and one question for the Minister for Manpower. In my question directed at MHA during the Committee of Supply debate this year, I asked about the cultural training given to law enforcers. The Second Minister replied to say that a structured training programme is in place to ensure that APOs are able to meet operational needs. In light of the COI report which states that APOs and SPF officers should be given some basic training in cultural sensitivity, to this end, is the Ministry looking into amending the training programme for officers who patrol areas frequented by foreign workers? And if so, what is the scope of the cultural sensitivity training that the public can expect?

Second question – until new laws on the regulation of public consumption of alcohol in general are passed, is there a plan to introduce the restrictions on alcohol consumption in Little India to other places frequented by foreign workers, such as Geylang and the Golden Mile Beach Road areas, since the cause of the Little India riot may potentially be replicated in other areas where large congregations of foreign workers gather?

Third question – how does the Ministry plan to encourage greater awareness of section 18 of the Miscellaneous Offences Act, as recommended by the COI?

Page: 76

To the Minister for Manpower, the COI report states that it supports better initiatives to improve accommodation facilities available to foreign workers here, as small improvements can significantly better workers' lives. To this end, how many dormitories currently comply with the URA's 2012 revised amenity provision guidelines covering all dormitories that house between 50 and 5,000 workers which require a minimum living space of 4.5 sqm per worker? When does MOM expect all dormitories to comply with the requirements set out in these guidelines? Will similar guidelines covering minimum living space be extended to employers who house their workers in other accommodation? And here I am referring particularly to marine, process and construction workers. Would MOM consider more regular monitoring of foreign worker accommodation for those workers who do not reside in large dormitories, who may be less likely to be aware of their rights in general, notwithstanding the efforts of NGOs and MOM so far?

We do not currently have any plans to impose alcohol restrictions in other areas, between now and the time that we put in the new legislation. We have explained during the passage of the Public Order (Additional Temporary Measures) Bill that we do not currently have the laws to allow us to do that in any case. And I recall that when we were debating the Public Order (Additional Temporary Measures) Bill, Members were of the view that we should take measures after having taken into account overall considerations and feedback from other stakeholders all over Singapore, unless the Member is suggesting that we should go ahead and introduce additional temporary measures in other areas right now.

On cultural training, yes, we will do so. I mentioned that just now, and this will have to be tuned for each different group and will include things like cultural attitudes, perhaps some language training and so forth. But it is also important to mention that on MOM side, there may also be culturalisation training for foreign workers who come to Singapore, so that they also understand our social norms and will abide by them.

On section 18, the Police will continue to enforce section 18 in a judicious way.

Minister Tan.

Mdm Speaker, in response to the Member's question, I think we are particular about living conditions, as I had stated. But I think URA, as part of the Inter-Ministerial Committee, is reviewing and making sure that the requirements for accommodation are suitable for our foreign workers. The majority of the purpose-built dormitories today do meet the requirements. For those that do not, we do inspect and we do follow up to make sure that has been done.

Page: 77

In the same way, the regulatory framework that we announce shortly will also be looking at some of these measures. MOM will continue to monitor and inspect. A large part of it will also come from NGOs and other interested parties who do have information that will feed back to us. I have been to some of these checks and inspections as well. We do find egregious accommodation, and that will happen. That comes from information that is shared from the public as well as NGO groups. But when these are found, we will deal with them accordingly. So, this is something that is ongoing and we definitely pay attention to them.

Mr Patrick Tay. This is the last clarification before I ask the Deputy Prime Minister to sum up.

Thank you, Madam. I have two questions – one for the Deputy Prime Minister and one for the Minister for Manpower.

I want to ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether MHA or the Government will consider utilising the SAF as well as the Gurkha contingent to augment and handle public disorder and low-intensity conflict situations, as both are well-trained and equipped.

My second question: I have a large population of foreign workers living in Simpang Lodge, which is less than 400 m from the many HDB flats in my Nee Soon East Constituency. Besides over-crowding the public feeder services during rush hour, residents also shared that they congregate around void decks, grass patches and staircases in the neighbourhood, and complained about littering, alcohol consumption, illegal tapping of WiFi, cycling on pedestrian footpaths. In fact, I thank MOM for working with our Nee Soon East grassroots and various local agencies but I am asking if more can be done, including passing of rules and laws, to mandate not just new but existing dormitory operators as well as employers to ensure eradication of some of these challenges and disamenities that may in some instances fall outside the purview of existing laws and regulations.

Deputy Prime Minister or Minister Tan?

Mdm Speaker, with regard to Simpang Lodge, it is something that we are putting in effort, together with the various agencies. For example, apart from MOM, there are also SLA, SCDF, CNB, the Police as well as our NSE CCC. Let me just illustrate some of the measures that have been put in place and the efforts that are being undertaken. We educate foreign workers through roadshows. The last was held, for example, in February 2014, and two more of them in July 2014. We also conduct house-to-house visits and advise residents to secure their WiFi network. Since this effort commenced, the number of unsecured WiFi networks has dipped. Obviously, we are in that estate for those who are going to the nearby Housing Board estate in order to tap on these unsecured WiFi. Obviously,

Page: 78

the numbers will also drop accordingly.

Reviewing liquor licences, especially those in the near vicinity of the dormitories frequented by foreign workers, is something we are looking at. We are studying a proposal to convert vacant state lands beside the dormitories into recreational sports areas for foreign workers; the need for more CCTVs in the area; more frequent visits by uniformed officers and engagement with foreign workers on crime-related issues; frequent engagement with dormitory management on security-related matters. We are also stepping up on enforcement efforts against anti-social behaviour, such as littering and urinating in public.

So, it is a combined effort to keep the situation in check. But from a broader perspective, I think the solution really is to enhance these facilities in dormitories around the country so that the workers themselves have access to these dormitories. In fact, from our survey, we have found that many workers do actually stay on in the dormitories, in large part because one of their objectives in coming to Singapore is to work hard and remit monies back home. And one way is to save money. Some of them, from time to time, will go out, but when there is good access to some of these facilities within the dormitories, many of them do stay within their dormitories. So, that is the approach that we are taking, going forward. But, meanwhile, in areas where there are disamenities that are happening, we work closely with the local communities and other agencies to minimise disruption and inconveniences to residents.

Deputy Prime Minister.

Thank you, Madam. With your permission, I will respond to Mr Patrick Tay and then I will take a few minutes to round up.

Yes, please.

The Gurkha contingent was alerted and put on standby on the night of the riot. As the situation was brought under control speedily by the SOC when it arrived at the scene, it was assessed that the deployment of the Gurkha contingent was not necessary.

Generally, if a large-scale public order incident occurs, the SOC troops will be activated in the first instance to handle the incident. The Gurkha contingent may be activated to provide additional support if the public order situation escalates and more forces are required, for example, in a very large-scale incident involving very many people or if there are a number of incidents occurring in different areas.

Page: 79

As for the SAF, we generally do not deploy military forces in peacetime for public order duties. As the situation was brought speedily under control that night, it was not appropriate and also not necessary to activate the SAF. In very serious situations where the resources of the Police, including the Police divisional forces, the SOC and the Gurkha contingent, are not sufficient, there are laws to provide for the civil authority to call upon SAF resources to assist and support the civil authority to maintain public order. But I must emphasise that this will only arise in very serious situations.

Mdm Speaker, I thank Members for their support for the Government's response to the COI report. Their comments and suggestions have helped to bring out key points and allowed Mr Tan Chuan-Jin and myself to explain the pertinent issues more thoroughly. And thank you for letting me wrap up this important discussion by making a few observations.

Mdm Speaker, on the night of 8 December 2013, a riot broke out following a fatal road traffic accident and it was the worst public order incident in Singapore in more than four decades. The COI report described what happened that night but, as several Members have pointed out, it is also important to recall what did not happen that night. The COI pointed out that while the riot was a shock to many Singaporeans, there was no loss of life, no prolonged fighting between Police and the rioters and it was dispersed relatively quickly. The riot remained contained in a small area. Arson of private property and looting did not occur. No shots were fired by the Police and neither tear gas nor water cannon was used on the rioters.

Mdm Speaker, the situation would have been totally different if we had woken up the next morning and the "Nos" in my previous sentence had been "Yeses". Singaporeans and our foreign workforce could have been deeply traumatised. The news would have echoed around the world. We would be grappling today with whether the use of force could have been avoided.

Mdm Speaker, a riot on the streets of Singapore is unacceptable, even with all the "Nos".

I would like to thank the Chairman and the members of the COI once again for its thorough and comprehensive report.

The Government accepts all of the COI's recommendations and will implement them vigorously. The actions that my colleague the Minister of Manpower and I have detailed today to implement the recommendations will enable us to minimise the likelihood of a riot occurring and improve our capability to deal effectively with a riot, if it does.

Page: 80

Mdm Speaker, one recurring theme in our deliberations today and also in the COI's proceedings and report, is the dedication and the quality of our officers. Beyond quantity, it is, ultimately, quality that counts. It is the quality of the officers and their dedication and commitment that make the key difference. That night, the commanders and officers responded to the call and rushed to the scene, arriving as quickly as they could. They showed dedication to duty and courage as they faced a large, emotionally-charged crowd with a volatile temperament – a crowd whose mood and actions could have suddenly changed with any new trigger, misinformation or misunderstanding.

Our officers and commanders were steadfast in carrying out their mission. They responded when called upon, worked together with their fellow officers, and put themselves in harm's way to manage, contain and eventually quell the riot – a difficult task in the circumstances they faced.

On behalf of the officers in the Home Team, I would like to express my thanks to the Members who have offered encouragement and expressed their appreciation to our Home Team officers and to their commanders.

Several Members have suggested that we recognise the officers for their dedication to duty that night. The Government will consider recognising the Home Team officers who answered the call to action to quell the riot that night in the face of personal danger and under difficult circumstances. We will also see how we can recognise particular officers who stood out for their outstanding response during the riot.

Mdm Speaker, the work of our Home Team officers is difficult and challenging. They work round-the-clock and often put themselves in harm's way to keep Singapore and all of us and our families safe and secure. The encouragement and support from Members of this House and from Singaporeans make a real and positive difference, not just to those who were called to action that night but to all Home Team officers. It means a lot to them that their efforts are appreciated and recognised. I am confident that, with your support, they will continue to do their utmost to keep us safe and secure.

The Home Team and other Government agencies, we have all learnt valuable lessons from this incident. By implementing the COI's recommendations, we will be better prepared – the Home Team, the Government as well as Singapore will emerge readier and stronger from this incident. Mdm Speaker, thank you.

Order. I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 5.10 pm.

Page: 81

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 4.50 pm until 5.10 pm.

Sitting resumed at 5.10 pm

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

Page: 82

[(proc text) "concerning conduct which causes or contributes to haze pollution in Singapore, and to provide for related matters", (proc text)]

[(proc text) presented by the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Dr Vivian Balakrishnan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]

[(proc text) "to confer on the Attorney-General certain functions in addition to functions conferred by or under the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1999 Reprint) and any other written law, and to make a related amendment to the Legal Profession Act (Chapter 161 of the 2009 Revised Edition)", (proc text)]

[(proc text) presented by the Senior Minister of State for Law (Ms Indranee Rajah); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]

[(proc text) "to amend the Land Acquisition Act (Chapter 152 of the 1985 Revised Edition) in relation to the application of the betterment levy, operational improvements, and non-lot acquisitions in strata developments and to make related amendments to the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (Chapter 30C of the 2008 Revised Edition)", (proc text)]

[(proc text) presented by the Senior Minister of State for Law (Ms Indranee Rajah); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]

Page: 83

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

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

The Radiation Protection Act was first enacted in 1973 to control the import, export, sale, transport, possession and use of radioactive material and irradiating apparatus. The Act was repealed and re-enacted in 1991 to include, among other amendments, the control of non-ionising radiation.

In 2007, the Act was again repealed and re-enacted to transfer the roles and functions of the Centre for Radiation Protection (CRP), as the administrator of the Act, from the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) to the National Environment Agency (NEA). The 2007 Act was also enacted to prepare for Singapore's ratification of the Additional Protocol to the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The Act has served us well over the years and is crucial to ensure that radioactive material and irradiating apparatus are stringently regulated and managed. Singaporeans today go about our daily lives without having to worry about the risk of being exposed to unnecessary radiation from the use of radioactive material and irradiating apparatus. This would not have been possible without the Act.