Singapore

Sectoral median wages and wage shares

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how does Singapore compare with developed economies in terms of median monthly wages and wage shares; (b) how do the biomedical sector, general manufacturing sector, and the accommodation and food services sector in Singapore compare with their counterpart sectors in developed economies in terms of sectoral average monthly wages and sectoral wage shares; and (c) how does Singapore compare with developed economies in terms of productivity growth and median wage growth.

In January 2013, during my Parliamentary speech on the debate on the Population White Paper, I had said:

The generous supply of foreign workers has lowered the bargaining power of local workers, forcing them to accept lower wages in order to be competitive. This has led to much of the benefits of our stellar GDP growth accruing to company profits instead of workers’ wages. Our workers’ wage share as a percentage of GDP is relatively small compared with most other developed countries. In 2011, just 42.3% of Singapore’s GDP went to workers’ wages (SingStat 2012, 9). In contrast, according to OECD data, the wage share is 47.5% in Australia, 49.2% in the European Union and 52.3% in Canada (OECD 2011).

On 23 May 2013, the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) published an article “A Look at Wage Share and Wages in Singapore” in their Economic Survey of Singapore (First Quarter 2013).

The MTI article wrote:

Some argue that this shows that workers in Singapore are underpaid, and that Singapore’s economic growth has disproportionately benefitted multinational companies and capital owners at the expense of workers. This article…finds that higher wage shares do not necessarily translate to higher wages.

The Straits Times did a report on this MTI article (“Lower wage share doesn’t mean wages are lower: Salaries are correlated with productivity, says MTI”, Straits Times, 24 May 2013), stating:

Over the years, this trend has led economic watchers as well as the Workers’ Party to argue that Singapore’s workers are underpaid and that economic growth has benefited companies at the expense of workers.

During the 8 July 2013 sitting of Parliament, I asked the Minister for Trade and Industry for more information regarding median wages in different industrial sectors in Singapore and their wage shares vis-a-vis those in developed economies. This was my question and the answer I received.

—————–

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how does Singapore compare with developed economies in terms of median monthly wages and wage shares; (b) how do the biomedical sector, general manufacturing sector, and the accommodation and food services sector in Singapore compare with their counterpart sectors in developed economies in terms of sectoral average monthly wages and sectoral wage shares; and (c) how does Singapore compare with developed economies in terms of productivity growth and median wage growth.

Mr Lim Hng Kiang (Minister for Trade and Industry): Between 2007 and 2011, Singapore’s wage share of GDP averaged at 41.5 per cent. This was lower than the wage shares of many developed economies, which were typically at 50 per cent or more (see Table 1 below).

Over the same period, the PPP-adjusted real median gross monthly income of full-time employed residents in Singapore was $2,7204, higher than the median income of workers in developed economies such as Germany and the United Kingdom, but lower than that of workers in economies like the United States.

Between 2007 and 2011, the PPP-adjusted real average monthly wages of workers in Singapore in the biomedical cluster, general manufacturing cluster and the accommodation & food services sector were $4,880, $2,840 and $1,640 respectively (see Table 2 below)5. The corresponding wage shares were 6.8 per cent, 52.3 per cent and 56.0 per cent respectively.

While the average wage and wage share in Singapore’s general manufacturing cluster tended to be lower than those of developed economies, our average wage and wage share in the accommodation & food services sectors were comparable with those of other economies. A similar comparison for the biomedical cluster could not be made as comparable wage and wage share data for this cluster were not available for the other economies.

Singapore’s labour productivity growth from 2007 to 2011 was 0.2 per cent per annum, slower than that in many developed economies such as the United States, Germany and Hong Kong, but comparable with the United Kingdom, Italy and Spain (see Table 3 in the Appendix). Productivity can be affected by economic cycles, and should be viewed over a longer period of time. Our labour productivity growth from 2002 to 2011 was 2.4 per cent per annum. This outpaced the labour productivity growth in developed economies such as the United Kingdom, Germany, and the United States.

The growth in the real median gross monthly income of full-time employed resident workers in Singapore was 2.6 per cent per annum over the period of 2007 to 20116. This was faster than the real median income growth for workers in developed economies such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, and Hong Kong.

⁴ Income data were averaged across 2007 to 2011, Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) adjusted, and expressed in constant 2011 dollars.
⁵ Wage data were averaged across 2007 to 2011, Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) adjusted, and expressed in constant 2011 dollars.
⁶ For the ten-year period ending 2011, real median gross monthly income of full-time employed resident workers in Singapore grew by 1.3 per cent per annum. However, comparable data for other economies were not available before 2005. We hence made comparisons for the growth from 2007 to 2012.

——————-

Source: Singapore Parliament Reports (Hansard)

New licensing framework for online news sites

On 8 July 2013, Parliament debated the Government’s new licensing framework for online news websites. These are the questions I asked the Ministers for Communications and Information and his responses.

On 8 July 2013, Parliament debated the Government’s new licensing framework for online news websites. These are the questions I asked the Minister for Communications and Information and his responses.

—————–

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) how many times in the past has MDA directed Internet Content Providers to remove content from, or prohibit access to, websites because of objectionable material in violation of the Internet Code of Practice; (b) what are the content of these materials; and (c) whether the Internet Content Providers have complied with MDA’s directive and, if not, what action has MDA taken against them for non-compliance.

Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim (Minister for Communications and Information): Madam, Members have raised questions about various facets of MDA’s new licensing framework for online news sites. I will answer them in terms of its rationale, what MDA introduced, its expected impact, and the notice period given for the change.

Madam, a “healthy” public discourse, in Mr Chen Show Mao’s words, must be grounded in accurate facts. This is true whether the discourse takes place online, or in the physical world. Entities that publish the news have a duty to ensure that the news is accurately and fairly reported because they provide the basic elements of information upon which individuals make decisions or form judgements and opinions on any matter. Hence, traditional news providers in broadcast and print have always operated under individual licensing.

As the media landscape converges, news is published not only in print and broadcast, but also on the Internet. As online sites have become a more significant source of news, our regulatory framework has to evolve to keep pace with the changing landscape. The new licensing framework seeks to place online news sites and traditional news sites on a more consistent regulatory basis, while recognising that they are not identical.

Mr Pritam Singh asked whether MDA considered the efficacy of introducing rules that apply to traditional media, into the online space. I would like to stress that we have never taken the approach that the Internet space is to be unregulated. If online conduct leads to offences under the Penal Code or other laws of the land, the persons responsible are held accountable. As far as other content is concerned, we have regulated with a light-touch through the Class Licence Scheme, introduced in 1996. This has not changed, Madam. The new licensing framework affects only 10 sites, and they are subject to a few more specific obligations under their licence, commensurate with their role as news providers.

In the new licensing framework, online news sites will be individually licensed if they (i) report an average of at least one article per week on Singapore’s news and current affairs over a continuous period of two months; and (ii) are visited by a monthly average of at least 50,000 unique IP addresses from Singapore over the same two months. Requiring these news sites to take up individual licences also places a stronger onus on the licensees operating these websites to be aware of their legal obligations, and to report incidents and occurrences responsibly.

The online news site licence will require licensees to adhere to a set of content standards which are no different from existing standards under the Internet Code of Practice and Class Licence. These content standards are meant to safeguard racial and religious harmony, public order, as well as good taste and decency. I wish to stress that nothing in the content standards prevents licensees from commenting on Government policies. Since the content standards have not changed, licensees will enjoy the same freedom of expression they have hitherto enjoyed under the Class Licence Scheme. Fears that the new licensing framework will stifle Internet freedom are unfounded. The vibrant online environment that critics purport to cherish emerged under the same set of content standards in the Class Licence Scheme.

There are only two additional requirements which will be imposed on licensees. Firstly, when directed by MDA, they have 24 hours to take down content which is in breach of the content standards. This is important, as news on these high-reach sites can go viral very quickly and have a detrimental impact on society if they undermine racial harmony or raise public order concerns.

Secondly, licensees have to provide a $50,000 performance bond. A similar requirement is imposed on other individual licensees, such as niche TV licences. This is to ensure that licensees exercise their best efforts to keep their websites free of prohibited content and when there is such content, to remove it expeditiously within the timeframe of 24 hours when directed by MDA. The performance bond need not be provided in cash to MDA, but can be in the form of a banker’s guarantee, or insurance. None of the licensees of the 10 sites have raised any concerns with posting the performance bond.

Madam, we do not expect the new licensing framework to affect in any way the operations of the 10 online sites identified for individual licensing.

Several Members have asked about the scope of the licensing framework and the types of sites that will be covered.

In general, bloggers, Internet commentators and niche sites provide their personal perspective of issues, and do not regularly report on the news and current affairs of the day. As a result, they have not been determined to be reporting on Singapore news and current affairs, and so these websites do not fall within the scope of the licensing framework. However, should these websites morph into online sites reporting on Singapore news, MDA will have to separately assess if they meet the two criteria for licensing. For now, MDA is working with the organisations that own the 10 sites. MDA is not considering individually licensing any other sites at this point in time.

Some sites claim that if subject to individual licensing, they will not be able to furnish the $50,000 performance bond, or even a guarantee. I would like to make three points here, Madam. Firstly, the $50,000 performance bond was set in view of the financial means of the 10 identified online sites. Secondly, the MDA has already stated that if the performance bond is beyond the financial means of a future licensee, it is willing to consider the specific circumstances of that licensee and adjust the performance bond accordingly. The key is that the performance bond must provide a meaningful incentive to the licensee to make the best effort to comply with the licensing conditions. Thirdly, and in response to Mr Zaqy’s question, it would not be a sound regulatory approach to exempt entities on the basis that they intend to operate non-commercially. Our rationale for this new licensing framework is based on the special responsibility that news providers hold. This responsibility is not diminished simply because the operators choose to operate on a non-profit or non-commercial basis, if they indeed set themselves out as providers of news content.

Another concern expressed by sites not identified for individual licensing is that it has a “chilling effect” on their activities. I think, Madam, this is far-fetched. In any case, I do not think they are so easily ‘chilled’. I have already explained that the MDA will set a reasonable performance bond commensurate with the financial position of a future licensee. The intention is not to prevent the site from operating under a licence. On the contrary, the intent is to allow a qualifying site to continue to operate, under an individual licence.

Members have asked about the manner in which the licensing framework was implemented and whether the potential licensees were engaged. The licensing framework is a refinement of the existing Class Licence Scheme which Internet content providers are already familiar with, and is not a major shift. The 10 potential licensees were informed of the new licensing framework before it was introduced, and MDA’s engagement with them on the exact terms of the licence is on-going. The entire process of engagement, which started in May, is expected to take four to five months, after which the licence will actually take effect. This, Madam, should provide sufficient time for the industry to give its feedback on the detailed licence conditions.

The Government is committed to wider consultation on issues that affect the public. Over the past few months, Singaporeans have given their views on various Government policies as part of “Our Singapore Conversation”. However, in this instance, the licensing framework only applies to a small number of news sites and does not affect the overwhelming majority of Internet content providers. Besides, content standards have remained unchanged and the licence will not impact the public in general. So therefore, when implementing the framework, we did not feel there was a need for wider public consultation before the licensing framework was announced. Nevertheless, Madam, we will continue to engage stakeholder groups on this issue to allay any concerns that they may have.

As to whether the framework would be extended to overseas-based websites, the issue will be studied further in tandem with planned amendments to the Broadcasting Act. The broad intent is to ensure that overseas broadcasters that are specifically targeting Singapore will be covered under our regulatory frameworks. This has become imperative with technological advances increasingly blurring the line between local and foreign broadcasters. However, we recognise that this is a complex issue and will therefore consult widely before tabling the amendments to the Broadcasting Act in Parliament sometime next year.

Madam, let me now deal with the remaining issues raised by Members.

Mr Gerald Giam asked about past issuance of takedown notices by MDA. Since 1996, MDA has issued 24 take-down notices. One instance was for a religiously-offensive video, 21 were for pornographic content or advertisements soliciting sex or sex chats, and two were for inappropriate gambling-related content. MDA has not encountered any instance where a site-owner has refused to comply with a take-down notice. The track record has shown that, notwithstanding that the same contents standards have been in existence since 1996, MDA has not directed websites to take down content just because it is critical of the Government. There is therefore no cause for concern that the new online news licensing framework would reduce the vibrancy of online discourse or negatively impact the promotion of a more active and engaged citizenry.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad suggested setting up an independent body to review sites to be included in the licensing framework, content to be taken down, as well as hear appeals from licensees. MDA has convened panels drawn from members of the community, to help it provide input on community standards. However, Madam, it would be wrong in principle for MDA to abrogate its regulatory responsibility, and to pass decisions such as whether an entity should be licensed, to another body. There are already established processes for parties aggrieved by a regulatory decision under the Broadcasting Act to seek redress.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad also asked whether media accreditation is a potential end-result of the licensing framework. Accreditation is accorded to news organisations that cover government events and functions regularly to facilitate their work. Accreditation is not compulsory for news-related organisations to engage in news-gathering and many organisations do operate without seeing the need to apply for accreditation. The criteria considered before accreditation is conferred include the reach or distribution of the media organisation and its professional standing. Accrediting media organisations and licensing news sites are assessed and determined on very separate considerations.

Madam, in conclusion, I want to reiterate that the new licensing framework is designed to enable identified sites to move seamlessly from the existing class licence to hold an individual licence. The rationale for the change is based on the special responsibility that news providers have, because the news they produce is used by the public to come to informed decisions and opinions on matters of public interest. The licensing framework places traditional news providers and online news providers on a more consistent regulatory framework. We do not expect the new framework to have any effect on the degree of expression that currently exists in the online space. Since the introduction of the Class Licence framework in 1996, the MDA has shown itself to be balanced and restrained in the exercise of its powers to regulate online content. It has never used them to order the removal of content that is critical of Government policy or Government Ministers. Concerns that the Internet will be stifled are thus far-fetched and will prove to be unfounded in due course.

——————————

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Madam, I thank the Minister for revealing that there have been 24 take-down orders since 1996 and that all of these take-down orders have been complied with. May I just ask: Were these take-down orders complied with within the time frame that MDA gave? If not, which are the sites that did not comply? Second question is since the Class Licence Scheme is working fine, why does the Government see a need to introduce this new scheme so urgently?

Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: For the 24 sites that I mentioned earlier, they were subject to the Class Licence rules. Under the Class Licence rules, there is no time frame for the take-down. It is defined as “the best effort”. We worked with the website owners, discussed with them, and in most cases, the take-down was almost immediate. Out of the 24 cases, I was told by my staff, 23 cases were public complaints. People saw something on the sites which they did not agree with – it had to do with sex or gambling. The site that was featuring the video on “The Innocence of Muslims” took us some time to work through because it was hosted by a different entity altogether.

On the change, I mentioned earlier that the Class Licence Scheme has worked and – you are right. But the environment has changed; the landscape has changed. There is now a growing number of online news sites, reporting. I mentioned the example of Yahoo, but The Global Mail from Australia has been operating as an online news site.

Let us anticipate that this will grow, and put a framework in place. The framework is not so onerous. Yes, you may argue that the $50,000 bond is a challenge. As I mentioned in my reply, we will work with the companies. If they really cannot meet that, then there are other ways in which we can overcome that.

The 24-hour take-down order was really because of the nature of online news. If it goes viral and it creates havoc and panic, we need to be able to take it down within 24 hours. Even then, as I mentioned in my reply to the media when I met them after the announcement, MDA will be flexible, we will seek to understand your circumstances. You may need to take some time. We are not going to ramp this down their throat and say “You must take it down, whatever the case may be!” There may be other constraints that they are facing. And we will work with them to understand their circumstances.

The fact that there is a notice, they know that they have to behave responsibly. I think is an important point for all of us, so that we can sleep better that these sites are doing their work responsibly because they are reporting news. And news – we must all agree – is an important part of our lives and we make decisions based on the news. We have to make sure they report accurately and responsibly.

Mr David Ong (Jurong): Mdm Speaker, two supplementary questions. One, is to ask the Minister how confident the Ministry is in compelling global online news sites to remove objectionable content in breach of the MDA’s content standards within 24 hours notice, given their internal take-down regime as well as time zone differences? Secondly, why should the online news sites’ performance bond of $50,000 be pegged to the same requirement of niche TV broadcasters?

Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: For the Member’s second question, I have mentioned in my reply when we looked at what criteria we wanted to impose on the online news sites, the performance bond has worked well for the niche TV licensees. Again, the $50,000 I mentioned in my reply was based on the financial means of the 10 sites. We think the idea of a bond is very important because it will hold them accountable to their actions. As I mentioned in response to Mr Giam earlier, we will be very flexible and work with the companies. If they cannot meet those requirements, we will see how best to come to an arrangement which is mutually acceptable both to MDA and the licensee.

On the first question as to whether 24 hours is a reasonable time frame for the take-down order for companies, again, we are not going to rush in and make sure we clamp them down within 24 hours. We will have to work with them. But it is something which we think is important, to hold them accountable for, whether they make the best efforts. MDA will definitely have to study each case because each company is different. So we will seek to understand the merits of their case, and if they really cannot do it within 24 hours, we can be flexible about it but at least they recognise that this is objectionable content, and that they have to take it down, and they have to make their best effort to do so. We will then see what we can do to ensure that they meet this requirement.

——————-

Source: Singapore Parliament Reports (Hansard)

Ensuring indoor air quality during occurrence of haze

On 8 July 2013, Parliament debated the Government’s response to the perennial haze problem. These are the questions I asked the Minister for National Development and Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, and their responses (Part 3 of 3).

————————–

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development during this haze period, whether BCA is taking any steps to inspect the air-conditioning and mechanical systems of commercial and industrial buildings to ensure that the indoor air in these buildings does not contain an unhealthy level of contaminants.

The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Lee Yi Shyan) (for the Minister for National Development): Mdm Speaker, under the Building Control Act and Regulations, building designs are required to comply with the performance requirements for fresh air intake and air change specified in the Singapore Standard called SS553. This is the Code of Practice for Air-conditioning and Mechanical Ventilation in Buildings. The design standard in SS553, such as air change and fresh air intake, are based on the standards published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), which are internationally recognised standards.

After any buildings are completed, building owners are responsible for the operation and maintenance of the buildings. For office buildings, building owners may refer to NEA’s “Good Indoor Air Quality in Office Premises” guidelines and Singapore Standards SS554, which is the Code of Practice for Indoor Air Quality for Air-conditioned Buildings. The SS554’s requirements are also aligned with international best practice. For example, guidelines on filters to protect building occupants from airborne particulate matter are aligned with test methods published by ASHRAE.

The recent extreme haze level was unprecedented. The 24-hour PSI hit a high of 246, while the previous high was 142 in 1994. At such a high level of outdoor pollution, the building owners may have to monitor its indoor air quality and take steps to minimise open contact with the outdoor fresh air and also to take steps to maintain air filters more frequently if the haze is a prolonged situation.

We have earlier commissioned a multi-agency team – involving NEA, BCA, MOM, MOH and MSF and local research institutes – to review the indoor air quality of various premises to determine if the current Codes of Practice need to be further refined. More measures may be introduced based on this study.

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Mdm Speaker, I appreciate the Senior Minister of State’s explanation of the regulations in place. My question was: During this period of the haze, were there any extra steps to enforce or monitor building owners to ensure that they actually do what they are supposed to do.

Mr Lee Yi Shyan: Mdm Speaker, I would just like to clarify that, currently, both BCA and NEA have no regulations on indoor air quality per se. What NEA has introduced is a code of best practices that building owners would want to adhere to for maintaining their air conditioning in office buildings. These are guidelines.

Instead of running the risk of over-legislation, we have to, in this instance, depend on the indoor users — the office workers and those people working in the air-conditioning environment — to take some responsibility and make sure that they provide feedback to the owners and the facility managers for building maintenance.

So this is a premise that we are working on and it has worked well. Whether we would want to refine subsequent best practices for indoor air quality, we will have to wait for the technical study that is being carried out. Necessarily, we would require quite a bit of data support to establish the difference between outdoor and indoor air quality. And, of course, as a technical standard, the Member will appreciate that it has to be implementable and also measurable when we publish the standards.

—————————-

ADVICE ON WAYS TO REDUCE LEVEL OF INDOOR AIR POLLUTION

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) whether the Ministry can provide more advice to parents with young children (including newborns) and pregnant women on how to reduce indoor air pollution levels; and (b) what advice can the Ministry provide to households, childcare centres, kindergartens and schools on the appropriate types of air cleaning devices that may be needed to reduce the level of indoor air pollutants during the haze period.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: During the smoke haze episodes, the main air pollutant of concern is particulate matter.

When the outdoor haze situation deteriorates, young children and pregnant women are advised to stay indoors and reduce their activities. Doors and windows should be closed to reduce the entry of outdoor air pollutants. Fans and air conditioners could be helpful for air circulation. Any activity that generates more particles and particulate matter indoors such as cigarette/cigar/pipe-smoking, burning of candles, vacuuming, dry dusting and sweeping should be avoided.

During the periods of haze, air cleaners may be helpful in households, kindergartens and childcare centres. There are three main types of air cleaners which remove particulate matter: mechanical air filters, electrostatic precipitators and ionisers. Ozone-generating cleaners should be avoided as ground-level ozone is a harmful pollutant. As soon as the outdoor air quality improves to healthy levels, windows could be opened to enhance natural ventilation.

More information is available at the NEA Haze website at www.haze.gov.sg.

——————-

Source: Singapore Parliament Reports (Hansard)

Safeguarding Singaporeans’ health during occurrence of haze

On 8 July 2013, Parliament debated the Government’s response to the perennial haze problem. These are the questions I asked the Health Minister and his responses (Part 2 of 3).

—————-

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the increase in the weekly number of respiratory, heart, eye and skin problems reported at polyclinics, private clinics and hospitals since the onset of the current haze situation compared to the weekly average in the month before; (b) how many private clinics have signed up for the Government scheme which offers subsidised treatment for haze-related illnesses; (c) what is the Ministry doing to ensure that more private clinics participate in this scheme so that more Singaporeans can benefit from it; and (d) what are the details of the Ministry’s contingency plans to cope with the expected surge of patients with illnesses caused by the haze.

The Minister for Health (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Mdm Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 21 to 23 together?

Mdm Speaker: Yes, please.

Mr Gan Kim Yong: Madam, Dr Lam asked about the short and long-term effects of air pollution. For healthy individuals, short-term exposure to haze may cause temporary minor irritation of the eyes, nose, throat and skin. Such irritation typically resolves on its own in most cases.

However, the haze particles can aggravate lung diseases, cause asthma attacks and acute bronchitis in people who already have chronic lung diseases, and trigger off heart attacks and irregular heartbeat in people with heart problems. Thus far, there has been no clear evidence of long-term health effects of short-term haze, like that we have experienced.

Mr Gerald Giam asked about the impact of the haze on healthcare services. So far, the impact has been manageable. When the haze was more severe in the week of 17 to 23 June, we saw a 16% increase in polyclinic attendances for relevant conditions compared to the week before, but attendances at hospital accident and emergency department did not show any significant increase. The air quality improved in the last week of June and polyclinic attendances correspondingly decreased to just 4% higher than the level before the onset of haze. Attendance at A&E departments for the relevant conditions actually decreased by 23% in the last week of June.

Ms Lee asked about N95 masks. The N95 masks are not specifically designed for use by children, nor have they been certified for effectiveness for such use. To be effective, N95 masks need to maintain a well-fitted seal at all times, which may be difficult to achieve in young children who are smaller and of varying sizes. It is possible for the older children who may be able to fit smaller sized N95 masks for adults. Parents who wish to buy these masks for their children should ensure proper fit and usage of the mask.
When haze reaches unhealthy levels, children should really be kept indoors as much as possible. This has been communicated to the public through various platforms including the mass media and online media. Since schools reopened last week, MOH has been working with the Ministry of Education and schools on the various mitigation measures, based on the health advisory of the day.

Dr Lam and Mr Giam asked about long-term measures to protect the health of Singaporeans. The Ministry of Health has worked with our healthcare institutions to put in place plans in three areas, to ensure that we are “haze ready”.

First, managing the expected surge of patients at our polyclinics and hospitals for haze-related conditions. The Ministry has already implemented a special scheme where those who suffer from respiratory problems or conjunctivitis because of the haze need only pay $10 when they seek treatment at participating GPs. The scheme applies to Singaporeans aged 18 years and below, or 65 years and above, and those in low-income groups. The scheme will enhance the accessibility and affordability of primary care for haze-related conditions.

There are now more than 600 GP clinics participating in this scheme. Information on the participating GP clinics is on the MOH website, and also shared through community organisations. The Agency of Integrated Care (AIC) has been actively reaching out to individual GP clinics to encourage them to sign on. To increase awareness amongst members of the public, posters have been distributed to GPs so that the participating clinics can be easily identified.

The Ministry of Health had also earlier worked with the hospitals to retrofit suitable spaces within the hospital campuses to ready additional bed capacity in the event of a demand surge due to an increase in dengue cases. We have stepped up efforts to transfer stable patients from the hospitals into community hospitals and nursing homes to free up acute bed capacity.

Should the haze worsen and there is a need to free up bed capacity further, non-urgent services and elective cases at the hospitals may be scaled back.

Secondly, we will take care of the patients in our public sector hospitals and healthcare institutions so that they are not adversely affected by the haze. If the haze situation is bad, these institutions will close their windows and doors to reduce the inflow of dust particles. And if necessary, air coolers and fans will also be used to improve the ventilation for patients in non-air conditioned wards.

For especially vulnerable patients, we will put in place air purifiers to help reduce the impact of the haze on these patients during significant haze.

We will also facilitate home delivery of medication for chronic patients if necessary so that they can get their needed medication without having to visit our clinics.

Third, our hospitals and polyclinics have adequate equipment and supplies, including adequate medication stocks, on standby to support the continuation of critical services. Our hospitals also have plans in place to ensure adequate manpower to staff critical services such as the A&E, Intensive Care Unit and operating theatres.

At the national level, we are re-building our stockpile of N95 masks so that we will be ready should there be a disease outbreak during this period.

————————–

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Madam, now that the haze seems to be behind us at least for this year, will the scheme offering subsidised treatments for haze-related illnesses continue or will it be revived when the haze comes back again? Is there a certain threshold PSI that will trigger off the scheme and will the GPs who have signed up this year continue to be on the scheme next year?

Mr Gan Kim Yong: Mdm Speaker, I would hesitate to say that the haze is over for this year as I think Dr Vivian Balakrishnan has reminded us all that the dry season is not yet over so we have to remain vigilant and to be well prepared. So, for the time being, the scheme will still remain in place and will be reviewed again at the end of the dry season to see whether it is necessary to be continued, whether we will re-introduce it next year or we could refine the scheme to make it a better scheme when the haze does return. We hope it does not, but in the event that it does return, whether we will need the scheme or whether we need a different scheme. We will look at the situation at that point in time but for the time being, this being the dry season, the scheme will remain in place.

——————-

Source: Singapore Parliament Reports (Hansard)

Long-term strategies for dealing with environmental aspects of haze

One of the big causes of anxiety among Singaporeans was the unavailability of N95 masks at the height of the haze. How will the Government ensure in the future that its stockpile of face masks gets to the distribution points faster? Since the Minister said that the ratification of the ASEAN Haze Agreement is being held up not by the Indonesian central government, but by the Indonesian House of Representatives, the DPR, are there any plans to engage the Indonesian legislators directly to persuade them to ratify the agreement expeditiously, for example, by engaging them at the upcoming ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly?

On 8 July 2013, Parliament debated the Government’s response to the perennial haze problem. These are the questions I asked the Ministers and their responses (Part 1 of 3). The other two parts will be published over the next few days, together with questions and answers to my other Parliamentary questions during this sitting.

————————-

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Non-Constituency Member): Madam, I have two questions for the Minister of Defence. First, one of the big causes of anxiety among Singaporeans was the unavailability of N95 masks at the height of the haze. How will the Government ensure in the future that its stockpile of face masks gets to the distribution points faster? Secondly, are there any laws in place that require retailers to ration the sale of essential products the moment such emergencies break out, rather than a few days after the fact, so as to mitigate the effects of hoarding, and to ensure that the genuinely vulnerable people get the necessary protection that they need?
Dr Ng Eng Hen: They are relevant questions. In terms of anti-hoarding laws, I will leave it to MTI to answer, because there are some Parliamentary Questions based on that subject. What have we learnt from the run on masks or the panic buying of masks: if you look at what happened, based on that particular day – 21 June — the number of people that really ought to have been wearing masks was nowhere near the masks that were sold. This was anticipated demand, exactly as the Member has said. They were thinking, “What if the haze lasts for week and I am the last one without a mask in Singapore?” That fed into a frenzy. Why was there a difficulty in getting the masks from these warehouses where we had 9 million to the distributors: there was a reason. The masks that were stocked up by MOH were not for the public. They were for their healthcare workers. By the way, that stockpile is quite important, in case the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) viruses come here and infect us. So they were meant for health workers to make sure that there was sustainability and the way that they were stored, and so on and so forth, assumptions were made on a particular rate of use. There are very few systems that are prepared for a situation where from one day to the next, your demand of masks is 5,000 and the next day, 1 million. Very few distributors will stock that amount. If they do that as a business model, many of you would say that they would not survive. There are reasons for it.

Back to the Member’s question on how do we plan ahead: first, we have stocked up our masks, not only for the haze, but for contingencies like MERS or SARS or other infectious diseases. Secondly, MOH will be looking at packaging and see how we can roll it out in terms of our distributorship chains. All in all, it did not reflect badly on our system that we were able to react fairly quickly, including using the SAF to move the masks from the warehouses to the constituencies and retailers like NTUC Fairprice activating their supply chain to get the masks straight from the warehouses to their retail outlets including to other retailers, shows that there is a certain nimbleness or robustness in our system. We can do better but we did not do that badly.

————————-

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: On the subject of engaging all levels of government in Indonesia, since the Minister said that the ratification of the ASEAN Haze Agreement is being held up not by Indonesians’ central government, but by the Indonesian House of Representatives, the DPR, are there any plans to engage the Indonesian legislators directly to persuade them to ratify the agreement expeditiously, for example, by engaging them at the upcoming ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly?

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: Unfortunately, my colleague from Foreign Affairs is not here but certainly, if Members of this House meet your colleagues in DPR, by all means, please persuade them of the wisdom of ratifying that agreement.

——————-

Source: Singapore Parliament Reports (Hansard)

Parliamentary questions on haze, online media licensing and workers’ wages

Parliament sat today (8 July 2013). I asked 5 questions for Government ministers to answer and followed up with a further 4 supplementary questions during the course of the sitting. The questions covered the haze issue, the new online news media regulations and wages of workers in Singapore.

*1. To ask the Minister for Health (a) what is the increase in the weekly number of respiratory, heart, eye and skin problems reported at polyclinics, private clinics and hospitals since the onset of the current haze situation compared to the weekly average in the month before; (b) how many private clinics have signed up for the Government scheme which offers subsidised treatment for haze-related illnesses; (c) what is the Ministry doing to ensure that more private clinics participate in this scheme so that more Singaporeans can benefit from it; and (d) what are the details of the Ministry’s contingency plans to cope with the expected surge of patients with illnesses caused by the haze.

*2. To ask the Minister for National Development during this haze period, whether the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) is taking any steps to inspect the air-conditioning and mechanical systems of commercial and industrial buildings to ensure that the indoor air in these buildings does not contain an unhealthy level of contaminants.

3. To ask the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) whether the Ministry can provide more advice to parents with young children (including newborns) and pregnant women on how to reduce indoor air pollution levels; and (b) what advice can the Ministry provide to households, childcare centres, kindergartens and schools on the appropriate types of air cleaning devices that may be needed to reduce the level of indoor air pollutants during the haze period.

*4. To ask the Minister for Communications and Information (a) how many times in the past has MDA directed Internet Content Providers to remove content from, or prohibit access to, websites because of objectionable material in violation of the Internet Code of Practice; (b) what are the content of these materials; and (c) whether the Internet Content Providers have complied with MDA’s directive and, if not, what action has MDA taken against them for non-compliance.

5. To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how does Singapore compare with developed economies in terms of median monthly wages and wage shares; (b) how do the biomedical sector, general manufacturing sector, and the accommodation and food services sector in Singapore compare with their counterpart sectors in developed economies in terms of sectoral average monthly wages and sectoral wage shares; and (c) how does Singapore compare with developed economies in terms of productivity growth and median wage growth.

The answers to these 5 questions, together with my supplementary questions and the Ministers’ answers, will be published on the Hansard (the official Parliamentary record) after 18 July 2013. (Search for “Gerald Giam” in the keyword search box.)

Online news licensing discussion on CNA’s “Talking Point”

I took a call from Channel NewsAsia’s “Talking Point” last night to discuss the Media Development Authority’s latest online news website licensing regime. This is the video clip of the segment where I gave some of my views on the new scheme and asked the Minister some questions.

Credits: Channel NewsAsia Talking Point and 154thmedia2013.

Internet regulation déjà vu

Would the Government want to be seen to be “shutting down” websites like TOC and TRE, which are known to express very independent and sometimes sharp views against government policies? That does not seem tenable, unless of course the Government is prepared to suffer ridicule, both domestically and internationally. And if these sites are faced with no choice but to shut down, what do you think all their writers are going to do? They will set up their own blogs, of course! In fact, many of the most-read socio-political blogs were set up and are run by TOC alumni.

Reading about the Media Development Authority (MDA)’s new ruling requiring online news websites to be licensed individually, and the strong statement in response issued by a group of prominent bloggers, gave me a sense of déjà vu from a few years ago.

Back in 2007, the Government announced that it was setting up the Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society, or AIMS – not to be confused with AIM, the $2 IT company owned by the PAP – to study the “far-reaching social, ethical, legal and regulatory implications” of online media, and “make recommendations to the Government on how these issues should be managed”.

AIMS was to be headed by Mr Cheong Yip Seng, the former Editor-in-Chief of the English and Malay Newspapers Division at Singapore Press Holdings (SPH). I had not entered politics yet, but was an active political blogger. My fellow bloggers and I were aghast! The setting up of AIMS seemed like an insidious way of regulating the free-wheeling Internet, starting with a committee which we figured would, in all likelihood, recommend to the Government a host of ways to clamp down on free speech on the Internet.

With this concern in mind, 13 socio-political bloggers, which included the likes of Choo Zheng Xi (then-editor of The Online Citizen [TOC]), Alex Au (aka Yawning Bread), Cherian George (the communications and media professor from NTU) and myself, decided to issue a petition to the then-Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, Dr Lee Boon Yang, voicing our strong objections to the regulation of political content on the Internet. We also called for the repeal of Section 33 of the Films Act, which banned all “party political” films. The letter was made public and the media nicknamed us the “Bloggers 13”.

What developed subsequently was actually quite heartening. Mr Cheong’s committee decided to buck government convention: they actively engaged us bloggers, Mr Cheong and some of his committee members attended our public forum, they noted down feedback we had posted online (and reflected it in their report), and even gave us embargoed copies of their report, before inviting us to attend their press conference (presumably so we could blog about it).

Most importantly, the AIMS report released in December 2008 was, in our opinion, balanced and surprisingly progressive. It laid out four principles: (a) Government regulation should be used as a last resort; (b) “Free-for-all” is not feasible; (c) Shifting the focus from regulation towards engagement; and (d) Community participation is key.

On point (a) about non-regulation, this is what AIMS wrote in its introduction to the report:

One of the long-standing debates about the Internet is whether it should and can be regulated. Given the borderless nature of the Internet, it is difficult to enforce laws regulating the Internet across different jurisdictions.

Hence, one principle is to avoid regulating what is arguably “unregulable”. Laws are important, but they should be used only as a last resort. As the maxim goes, “legislate in haste, repent at leisure”. Using laws as a first measure to deal with online problems is unwise as the Internet and its users are continuously evolving and can creatively route around laws and regulations, especially if they are not well thought through.

— AIMS Report (2008), “Engaging Media, Challenging Old Assumptions”, p. 7

The detailed report went further:

…AIMS recognises that twelve years have passed since the Class Licence Scheme was first established in 1996. We have reviewed the matter and feel that changes are in order for these reasons: First, the rules unnecessarily deter free speech. Second, it has hardly been enforced. Third, Singaporeans deserve more political space. We therefore make the following recommendations:

(a) Lift registration requirement for individuals, bodies of persons and political parties

AIMS recommends the removal of the registration requirement for individuals, bodies of persons and political parties that provide any programme for the propagation, promotion or discussion of political or religious issues relating to Singapore through the Internet websites.

(b) Make processes of the Class Licence Scheme more transparent

The Media Development Authority (MDA) should study how to make the existing processes more transparent to assuage netizens’ concerns that these rules are in place to clamp down on them. For example, details of MDA investigations should be made public so that people can judge for themselves whether the processes and decisions were fair.

— AIMS Report (2008), “Engaging Media, Challenging Old Assumptions”, p. 16

These were among 26 recommendations that AIMS made to the Government. The Government accepted only 17 of them.

This latest MDA requirement for 10 websites, including Yahoo! Singapore News, to register for individual licenses, and to post a $50,000 bond, seems to fly in the face of some of AIMS’ recommendations. Many people are naturally taken aback, and it is not just bloggers and netizens who are riled up. I have heard some harsh words from people who normally hold the Government in high esteem — and some groans from journalists.

For now, the new regulations, in and of themselves, probably have a limited effect on free speech. Apart from Yahoo!, all the other sites are owned by SPH and Mediacorp — no tears shed for them. Yahoo! itself is not a small outfit and should have no problem complying with the regulations — $50,000 is but a fraction of what they just paid for Tumblr. However, the concern is that other volunteer-run websites like TOC and more free-wheeling sites like TR Emeritus and The Real Singapore would soon fall under the Sword of Damocles that is now hanging over them. (Full disclosure: I was a former deputy editor of TOC, but stepped down when I joined the Workers’ Party [WP] in 2009.) TOC has already stated that it will shut down if asked to register and post the bond. The MDA has responded to say that TOC does not meet the criteria, even though TOC itself believes it does, and has produced web stats to prove it.

This latest move from the Government has raised many questions and concerns. When Parliament next sits, you can expect WP MPs to be asking the Minister for Information and Communications many of these questions, and pressing him for a response.

Ordinary heroes

As tragic as the Boston Marathon bombings were, and continues to be — at the time of writing, police are still searching for the second suspect following shoot-outs which have killed one police officer and critically wounded another — one thing that has amazed me is how heroes have emerged from among ordinary bystanders at the scene of the bombings.

Photo: AP

There was Carlos Arrendondo (photo above, in cowboy hat), who with the help of another bystander, tied a tourniquet around the thighs of victim Jeff Bauman (in wheelchair) who tragically had both his legs blown off. Bauman himself was a hero in his own right, not just for surviving the blast, but for providing FBI agents valuable leads to one of the bombers from his hospital bed.

Then there was a medical doctor, Chris Rupe, who had just completed the marathon minutes before the bombs went off but turned back despite fears of further bombs going off. He then proceeded to provide emergency treatment to victims, many with dismembered limbs, for about an hour.

Another bystander, Bruce Mendelsohn, who was in the building next to the bombing, ran downstairs and attended to several victims with shrapnel wounds and mangled limbs, then went back up to his office — and threw up.

I hope a disaster like this never happens in Singapore, but I know it’s not a matter of if, but when. Even if it isn’t a terrorist attack that hits us, such “war scenes” can occur as a result of a horrific traffic accident or industrial disaster. The Hotel New World collapse in 1986 comes to mind, even though I was just a primary three student when it happened.

But the question that occurred to me is: Are we ready for this?

No, I’m not asking if our emergency services and police ready — with all the resources pumped into the Home Team, I am sure they are sufficiently prepared.

What I wonder is if ordinary Singaporeans are prepared to be first responders, attending to the wounded during an emergency before paramedics arrive on the scene. How many of us have been trained in first aid and CPR, or in the use of an AED? Will bystanders here stare in shock until the ambulance arrives, or will they rush forward and apply first aid during those crucial moments when victims may be losing a lot of blood and time is of the essence? Do all our schools conduct first aid training for students? (I know some do.) Are all our citizen soldiers trained in CPR? (During my time, I recall only being trained when I went for my advanced infantry course, not during Basic Military Training.)

I think it will be useful for as many Singaporeans as possible to be trained in basic first aid, so that they can respond to emergencies before the paramedics arrive. We shouldn’t always “leave it to the authorities” — no matter how competent they may be, they cannot be everywhere, all the time.

The Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) offers a free first aid training at its four division headquarters under the Community Emergency Preparedness Programme. They even have their course notes available for download here.

Equally importantly, if you see something suspicious in public areas, call 999 immediately. Don’t wait for someone else to do it. As the catchy US Department of Homeland Security advice goes, “If you see something, say something.”

Access to pay and tax records for processing of Medifund

To ask the Minister for Health whether Government restructured hospitals are currently able to tap into patients’ CPF or IRAS records (with their consent) to process Medifund and other applications and, if not, when will the hospital systems be enhanced to spare patients the hassle of submitting their payslips, CPF statements or tax returns.

Question for the Minister for Health on the 8 April 2013 Parliament sitting.

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Minister for Health whether Government restructured hospitals are currently able to tap into patients’ CPF or IRAS records (with their consent) to process Medifund and other applications and, if not, when will the hospital systems be enhanced to spare patients the hassle of submitting their payslips, CPF statements or tax returns.

Mr Gan Kim Yong:

Since last year, with consent, the Public Hospitals are able to tap into patients’ and their families’ records of income at CPF and Annual Value of residential property at IRAS, and use the information for financial counselling, means-testing for subsidies, and applications for Medifund or other assistance.

Nevertheless, there is still room for improvement. For example, CPF data does not capture the income above $5,000. We are currently working on tapping into IRAS records for full income data and we hope to implement it by early next year. We will continue to improve our processes and train our staff to minimise administrative hassle for patients and their families.