Budget 2021 Committee of Supply Debate
For the past week, members of the House including myself spoke on multiple issues that concern Singaporeans and Bukit Batok residents. I am re-sharing my speeches here so that you can join me in shaping a better future for Singapore.
Prime Minister’s Office — Updating Prevention of Corruption Act
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Chairman, Singapore has a well-known reputation of being a jurisdiction that is tough on corruption.
Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) 2020 ranked our country as being the third least corrupt country in the world. Singapore is the only Asian country to be ranked in the top 10.
This hard-earned reputation and result are due in no small part to our men and women in CPIB. They deserve our gratitude for keeping corruption in check and ensuring that no one is exempted from the long arm of law even though the investigations can be difficult, arduous and may even take time.
In the 2018 Committee of Supply debate, I suggested that the main tool of the CPIB, the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), which was last reviewed more than 30 years ago, be updated to ensure that CPIB will continue to be able to handle the evolving challenge of corruption, in particular, cross-border corruption.
Some of the areas I suggested looking into include expanding the extraterritorial reach of PCA to include corporations incorporated in Singapore; to update the punishment provisions, especially with respect to corporations, and to consider enacting a provision similar to the UK Bribery Act; which is to make it an offence for corporations that fail to prevent the commission of bribery.
The Hon. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, in response, stated that a review was being undertaken.
Three days ago, CPIB issued a press statement highlighting the charging of three former employees for bribery in which the value of the subject is about $200 million. It seems to me that this case is a timely reminder of the need to review the PCA provisions to ensure that the punishment provisions serve as an effective deterrent.
One further area which I wish to highlight for review is to statutorily provide in the PCA the attribution of company employees’ corrupt actions to the company so that the company can be held liable and can be taken to task under the PCA in appropriate cases too.
As three years have passed, I will be grateful for an update of this matter.
Prime Minister Office — Strengthening Anti-Money Laundering Efforts in Singapore
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Chairman, being an international financial centre, Singapore-based banks must remain vigilant in the fight against fraud and money laundering.
In the recent past, there had been an exponential increase in dollar value of white-collar crime that has impacted on the banking system.
In the commodities trade sector, Singapore has been rocked by trade financing fraud that has led to multi-billion dollar exposures to banks. Some banks have withdrawn services from this sector totally. Traders with legitimate businesses suffered a hit as it would be more difficult for them to get credit lines.
In a response dated 5 October 2020 to my Parliamentary Question, the hon Senior Minister stated that the fraud cases have been attributed to weak disclosure practices and internal controls on the part of the companies.
What is concerning though is that, despite these weaknesses, banks have extended credit lines to such companies. On the part of the banks, there should have been more robust credit risk assessment of the companies. There should be more checks, apart from just relying on paper-based processes, as they are more susceptible to the risk of fraud. The impact of the banks’ lack of diligence is not just felt by the banks in question but the entire eco-system.
Banks regulated by MAS play a key role in preserving the integrity of our financial system. They are, in fact, required to guard against the use of their operations to facilitate any illegitimate activity, including fraud and money laundering. Failure to do so can have a serious impact on businesses and affect Singapore’s reputation as a premier international financial centre.
May I ask whether MAS has conducted a review of the banks’ actions against their regulatory requirements? How will MAS ensure that banks will take their responsibilities seriously in preventing fraud and anti-money laundering, especially in the context of fraud amounting to billions of dollars?
Even as Singapore grows in strength and stature as a financial centre, we need to make sure that our growth is rooted in a strong enforcement regime where all stakeholders are held firmly to their regulatory duties.
Ministry of Law — Impact of COVID-19 Legislation
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, “That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Estimates be reduced by $100”.
Since the pandemic hit us, the Ministry of Law spearheaded the implementation of a slew of legislative measures aimed at helping small and micro-businesses. Through the measures, many of which were introduced as Bills on Certificates of Urgency, these businesses were able to obtain relief that allowed them to conserve on cashflow and be protected from legal action.
Measures included the Temporary Relief for Inability to Perform Contracts, Rental Relief Framework, Simplified Insolvency Programme and the Re-align Framework. Like with most pieces of legislation, these are dry names but for matters vital to our economic and personal lives.
They mean the difference between a state of uncertainty and precariousness, and one of dignity and purpose. They have made a difference for large groups of people — not just owners of small businesses, but the many workers employed in these businesses and companies.
For parents, they mean the difference between paying attention to their children’s education and future, instead of worrying about food on the table; for tenants, rental relief meant they could focus on rethinking their business and relying on their landlords as trusted partners. For those who need to wind up their business, through the heartache and emotional difficulty of letting go a dream, there is the assurance of simplicity and speed.
These are not the subjects of headlines, but they are common sense writ hard into law — due to the pandemic, circumstances have changed, and not due to the fault of any party. While contracts are ordinarily written as a means to hold people fast to their promises, these COVID-19 legislative measures allow a common understanding and the general principles for re-negotiation. These require parties to work a basis of mutual trust in mutual gains, rather than a position that one party is trying to gain advantage over the other.
The COVID-19 legislation is an extraordinary effort to make law bend to the realities, and to compensate for exogenous factors such as misfortune, bad luck and in this case, a global pandemic.
The hon Minister for Law, in a memorable speech made last year in this House, informed how within just nine days, his Ministry, with the help of Government agencies, the hon Attorney-General and his officers from the Attorney-General’s Chambers and private sector professionals and lawyers, came together, conceptualised the support framework and drafted the legislation.
People in the know will acknowledge the superb quality of the legislation which had to be drafted from scratch. The team members behind the legislation, no doubt, made personal sacrifices so that Singaporeans facing an almost certain financial ruin and uncertainty will get a reprieve instead. We should not forget their contributions.
With almost a year has past, since the implementation of the first COVID-19 legislation, this may be an opportune time to recount the efficacy of and the feedback received on these measures. Have they worked as the Minister had anticipated? As we are not out of the woods yet from the economic effects of the pandemic, what further legislative measures can we anticipate in the future?
Also, is it time that we think of having a framework legislation that can be employed swiftly when the next crisis hits us? In this regard, please allow me to share a situation that happened recently in Texas, US as reported in a New York Times article dated 20 February 2021.
As Members may know, a winter storm knocked off Texas power grid and froze natural gas production. This affected millions of Texans. As a result, electricity prices, which was tied to wholesale prices and market-driven, spiked astronomically. Some Texans had to pay up to 70 times what they usually pay for the utilities.
We must ensure that we have legislative levers to be able to move swiftly to prevent such instances from happening in Singapore. I look forward to the hon Ministers’ responses to my queries. I beg to move.
Question proposed.
Ministry of Law — Modernising Probate Processes
Mr Murali Pillai: I am obliged, Mr Chairman. Sir, I have been pushing for the modernisation of probate and administration processes since the COS debate in 2017. The hon Minister responded then stating that the matter is under review by the relevant agencies. In the Straits Times article published in July 2017, it was reported that only 10%-15% of Singaporeans have made wills. Even for allowing for an increase in the percentage in the three years plus that has passed, by international standards, this is rather low. In contrast, it was reported that in 2017, the corresponding figure in UK is more than 40%.
The trouble, anxiety and financial difficulties caused by the lack of a will, especially when the breadwinner dies, is real.
The low numbers present an opportunity for us though to modernise the processes spelt out in the Wills Act enacted 183 years ago.
With the technological advancement we have made since, we should be able to provide options for Singaporeans to execute digital wills, ensuring that the wills are kept securely and acted upon upon the death of the testator in accordance with his or her wishes. At the same time, the probate and administration processes can be updated to make it fuss-free for applicants by leveraging on the Government’s archive of key documents, maybe even in lieu of court applications.
I will be grateful if the hon Minister please provide an update on the efforts to modernise and simplify the probate and administration processes by leveraging on IT.
Ministry of Law — Hague Service Convention
Mr Murali Pillai: Mr Chairman, Singapore has forged a hard-earned reputation of being one of the most preferred dispute resolution centres in the world. Over the years, the Ministry of Law has introduced a slew of measures to improve her dispute resolution framework.
To further improve the framework, I suggest the Government consider acceding to the Hague Service Convention, which is the short form for the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters. It is an old treaty that came into being in 1965. Its purpose is simple: to offer a reliable and efficient means of serving court documents from parties living, operating or based in another country.
The convention applies to service of process in civil and commercial matters but not criminal matters. Signing up for the Hague Service Convention will allow for service of judicial documents in civil matters abroad without the need to invoke time consuming and uncertain consular processes.
I would be grateful for the hon Minister’s response to my suggestion.
Ministry of Home Affairs — Supporting the Home Team Transformation
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, “That the total sum to be allocated for Head P of the Estimates be reduced by $100”.
The Home Team has developed a hard-earned reputation of maintaining a high standard of law and order in Singapore despite running a lean workforce. In the Gallup Global Law and Order Report 2020, Singapore was ranked first for the seventh year running. In the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index 2020, Singapore was ranked first in the area of “order and security”.
These are highly commendable outcomes that did not come easy. They arose through the blood, sweat and tears of our Home Team and MHA officers. They deserve the appreciation of all Singaporeans. Yet, circumstances are such that the Home Team cannot afford to sit on its laurels. I note that it has, some time ago, in anticipation of a manpower crunch, expended efforts to set up the HTX and tap on technology, robotics and automation as force multipliers.
The demands on Home Team, however, are ever rising. How is the Home Team striking the right balance between the competing demands whilst it endeavours to keep Singapore safe and secure?
The ambition of security and safety appears to be simple, but it is anything but. When the transformation in 2025 was announced in 2015, there were four planks which were discussed — manpower constraints, higher expectations of the public, increased load and emerging threats.
The demographic decline of Singaporeans has meant that there were fewer each year to take up the role of Police Officers. The ever-rising expectations of public; this is true, not just of policemen but of all public officers. But, given the nature of the work that the police do — where the darkest, most secret part of human interactions come to light — the expectations of members of the public are escalated many folds.
Our officers must be a mix of psychologist, social worker, community partner, law enforcer and a friendly but authoritative face. Added to all that — the policeman must be the hero next door. Because there is more work and more intense work, you cannot be an ordinary man or woman to be a Police Officer. The nature of crime the police now face, is not just the “traditional dangers” of crime such as violence or drug taking, but the new and rising threats such as cybercrime.
Technology gives a new twist to old threats too — for example, the terrorist threat Singapore faces today remains as high as it was about 20 years ago when ISD thwarted Jemaah Islamiah’s plans to attack an MRT station and several foreign embassies in Singapore. Just a few weeks ago, ISD once again thwarted the plans of a youth who became self-radicalised through online sources and intended to attack two mosques on the anniversary of the Christchurch mosque attacks. Today, attacks are more difficult to pre-empt or prevent.
There are also exogenous and external challenges too, because Singapore is a porous country, and a global, transport, transshipment and financial hub.
What additional efforts will be taken to invest in and upgrade the skills of our Home Team officers? How is it equipped to handle the ever more challenging cases for investigation, especially white-collar crime and scams? Huge effort has to be expended in investigations before such perpetrators can be brought to book. I do recall that the hon Minister highlighting in this House the heavy workload of our Police Investigators and that he asked for review to get a better sense of the pressure faced by Police Officers, particularly due to lack of manpower resources. How are we proposing to support our officers to ensure that not only their input will be of the highest quality in keeping with public expectation, but that their wellbeing is protected?
As I mentioned earlier, the Police has already started leveraging on technology and make significant progress. The challenge now, given the drivers for change, is to make an even more transformational change, so that these officers undertake their duties not as mere mortals, but what I term as hyper-humans — with eyes and ears of sensor systems, closed circuit television, live feeds and police cameras. They should have arms and legs of new pistols, new fighting skills, new sub-machine guns and carbines. New brains of analytics, data, increasing automation. Almost like Robocop, but perhaps a more friendly version of it.
All these require new skills and training, and people will be the key to the successful transformation. Police Officers already have hearts of steel — and we need to support, train and encourage these officers because they are few in number, even as the load becomes more heavy, the criminals more nefarious and public expectation ever higher.
At the same time, we need to ensure that there continues to be a high level of trust amongst Singaporeans on our Home Team’s integrity and professionalism. Otherwise, whatever transformation that will be undertaken will not work. I look forward to hearing the hon Minister’s plans on supporting the Home Team Transformation. Sir, I beg to move.
Question proposed.
Ministry of Home Affairs — Work for Short-Term Prisoners
Mr Murali Pillai: Mr Chairman, between 2018 and 2020, the offender population in prison on the average is 10,207 per year. Adding penal and Drug Rehabilitation Centre (DRC) releases together, on the average, 9,862 inmates were released each year for this corresponding period.
What is noteworthy is the overall recidivism rate has remained low and stable. About eight out of 10 inmates released in 2018 did not return to prison within a two-year release period. This is a good indication of the progress made in rehabilitating and re-integrating ex-inmates. By no means, however, we should think we have arrived.
One of the best ways to encourage ex-inmates to turn over a new leaf is to get them decent jobs. I am heartened to note that 93% of inmates referred to Yellow Ribbon Singapore in 2020 secured a job prior to release. This is not an easy target to achieve. Ex-inmates are debarred from certain sectors such as security and Government jobs. They face motivational issues. Lack of qualifications can be an inhibiting factor. Twenty-two percent of the convicted penal population only has primary school education or lower.
With the Government’s decision to extend the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) to ex-offenders, I believe we have a unique opportunity to match ex-offenders to get and stay in better paying jobs with better prospects.
I note the tendency amongst some inmates to take on jobs in the gig economy. I am concerned that they may, in due course, face difficulty with their housing and retirement needs if they do not accumulate sufficient savings in their CPF accounts.
I also understand that Yellow Ribbon Singapore focusses more on long-term sentence ex-inmates and not short-term sentence ex-inmates. Perhaps, this could be re-looked.
I would be grateful if the Minister could please inform this House what is the average number of inmates referred to Yellow Ribbon Singapore per year between 2018 and 2020? What is the breakdown between long-term and short-term sentence inmates? Finally, what steps have been identified to take advantage of JGI?
As we gain more success in getting our inmates better paying jobs with better prospects, we also would have made significant progress in our efforts to help fellow Singaporeans in the lower economic strata to move up the social mobility escalator.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs — Singapore as a Global-Asia Node
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Sir, Deputy Prime Minister Heng in his Budget speech highlighted that the strategy for our country to emerge stronger must involve deepening Singapore’s position as a Global-Asia node. He also signalled that Singapore must deepen its capacity to collaborate and innovate with partners around the world, especially the ASEAN countries.
It may seem incredible, but over the course of the past one year, where all eyes appear to be focused on the Herculean effort in healthcare, social compliance and understanding the virus itself, two things happened under the radar, which shows that we have kept faith with the vision and how it stood us in good stead.
First, the securing of sufficient supply of vaccines ahead of other countries. This is no small feat. And today, Singapore is in a very good position to emerge from the pandemic. We must not take for granted that a small country with no bargaining power can secure a reliable supply of such a precious commodity and provide logistics, not just for Singapore, but for others in the region.
Second, investments in Singapore have continued unabated. We have heard of expansion of global firms in Singapore. In 2020, Singapore attracted Singapore attracted $17.2 billion in investments, despite its worst recession since Independence. We are therefore in a good position to realise the ambitions of a Global-Asia node. The question arises as to how MFA can facilitate these ambitions? How does MFA’s work to enhance cooperation with these countries contribute to this imperative? Will the integration of ASEAN markets happen?
Deputy Prime Minister Heng has identified three areas for focus. The first is in the area of setting standards. Second, the area of human capital development, and the third, international business linkages.
All these rely on innovation, enterprise and technology. These must not be the esoteric domain of glass and steel in biopolis, but must flow into the conversations of coffeeshops in our housing estates, into “what I want to be when I grow up” essays in primary schools. The Global-Asia node cannot be an ambition for the few, but a lived reality for all.
Can the Minister tell us how MFA’s efforts to make Singapore as a global Asia hub, improve the daily lives of Singaporeans, especially during these difficult times?
Ministry of Social and Family Development — Supporting Youths at Risk
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Sir, youths continue to feature prominently in the crime trends involving drug abuse, secret societies involvement and criminal activities. Recently, there was also a disturbing report of a youth being self-radicalised to becoming a terrorist.
How do we help such youths through their families and other partners such as schools, self-help groups and social service agencies to build up the resilience to guard against such negative influences, ensure that each of them will be given opportunities to realise their full potential? What has been the outcome of the measures put in place to assist youth at risk thus far? How effective are they? These are the focus areas in my cut speech.
In 2016, the Government put in place the Youth-At-Risk Engagement (YARE) Framework — which is an early intervention framework to support youth-at-risk (YAR). It was to have lasted three years, with the aim of helping 900 young people through 10 service providers. These agencies would then be trained and use standardised assessment tools to their work with young people.
In 2018, the Government set up the National Committee on Prevention, Rehabilitation and Recividism (NCPR) to oversee national efforts to prevent offending, re-offending and enhance rehabilitation of offenders. The scope of NCPR includes at risk children and youth. I am a member of NCPR.
Working with people whether young or old, requires a human-centred approach, being sensitive to specific home contexts as well as the personality of the youth. Our current programmes include mentorship and sports. Mentorship was a topic that the hon MP Ms Rachel Ong touched on during the budget debate last week when she proposed that youths at risk have long term mentors. I agree with her. It will be good to understand what has been the outcome of these programmes to date? Do we need others?
Relatedly, do we have enough youth workers, and do they receive enough support? What emerging threats does the Minister see among our young people today that we need to guard against?
