Committee of Supply – Head X (Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth)

Mdm Chair, a few days ago, an announcement was made that the Government is planning to set up a tribunal to adjudicate what was described as "intractable community disputes". It was also mentioned that this was part of a broader framework for the management of disputes in the community. Could the Minister share more details about this broader framework for dealing with community disputes?

I understand that the aim of the framework is to promote good neighbourliness and to encourage neighbours to resolve disputes amicably where possible. Could the Minister share what additional measures might be taken to encourage more neighbours to use mediation before going to the tribunal?

Apart from dispute resolution mechanisms, is the Government also considering a change in the legal framework to deal with neighbourhood nuisance? This would include, for example, developing rules to deal with issues such as noise from neighbours and in public areas such as void decks, and also other elements of nuisance such as smoke from burning of papers and incense.

Page: 10

At the moment, the authorities are unable to do much because there are no clear rules on what are the acceptable levels of these sorts of disamenities. While reasonable people may come to some agreement on what is acceptable, if parties become unreasonable and press for their rights, it is not exactly clear where these would fall.

Exact rules may be developed as part of the community engagement that the Ministry plans to embark on in relation to the tribunal. I do believe that having such rules would be helpful, at least as a starting point for parties in their negotiations.

Madam, many Members in this House are no strangers to community disputes within our constituencies. This is perhaps expected, given the high residential density in local housing estates and personal spaces are inevitably infringed on now and then. The Community Mediation Centre (CMC) is, therefore, useful. However, those that could not make it to the CMC or could not be resolved at the CMC are the ones that can be most challenging and energy-consuming for everyone, including grassroots leaders, Government agencies and neutral innocent neighbours.

In an article in Saturday's The Straits Times, which also quoted Minister Lawrence Wong, it was stated that about 60% of meditation applications could not proceed because one party did a "no show". According to CMC's 2011/2012 Annual Report, of the cases that did go through mediation, about 30% could not be settled. A back-of-the-envelope estimation reveals that about 72% of applications have gone unresolved per year. This figure does not include disputes where both parties refuse to even try to settle it at CMC. In essence, the current CMC is not sufficiently empowered to have the teeth to bite.

Hence, I am glad that the Ministry is considering a tribunal framework and I hope that this cut will help tip the balance in favour of it. At the same time, would the Ministry consider putting in place mandatory mediation, once an application is made but prior to the tribunal hearing? In serious cases where both parties refuse to go to CMC for mediation, could neutral parties, such as neighbours, apply for mediation on their behalf, so that at least there is a way of getting them to come to the table and resolve it? This is to offer a last chance for both parties to resolve their disputes, fully knowing that the next step requires them to face a judge in Court and comply with the Court's decision, even if it is against their will. Also, this is a last shot at preserving goodwill between the parties and, therefore, preserving harmony within the community.

Page: 11

Madam, we live in a diverse society with our own individual uniqueness or quirks. Understanding the concept of co-existence and accepting our diversity is key in maintaining harmony in environments where we work, play or live in. We must not only tap on soft approaches to inculcate the right culture, but we must also be prepared to have concrete measures in safeguarding our much valued peace and harmony.

At my block visits and Meet-the-People Sessions, it is not uncommon to hear residents complain about their neighbours. For many, their relationships with their neighbours have become so toxic, having festered for so long, that they just want their neighbours to suffer, sending the Police to warn them, sending the Town Council staff to warn them, sending the HDB staff to harass them, and now, hoping to also send their Member of Parliament.

Often, the issues which triggered the disputes appear quite minor: flower pots cluttering the area, dog urine, dripping wet clothes, noisy children. By the time their disputes come to us, they would have escalated to the point where it would often be too late. Some, stewing in anger, would refuse mediation. If such a situation is left to fester, however, it not only makes life quite unpleasant for themselves, but also affects other residents and damages the community spirit in the neighbourhood.

In this regard, I welcome the move to set up a tribunal with the power to order both parties to go for mediation and to impose judgements and sanctions. But sending disputes to the tribunal should only be a last resort. While it would restore a semblance of peace in the neighbourhood, it would probably destroy the possibility of them having any kind of relationship after that. We need to focus on educating people to take early steps to try to resolve their disputes and to do it in a positive and constructive way. We should also train more people in the neighbourhoods to help those involved in conflict, and to facilitate processes that enable each person to understand another's perspective.

But how do we encourage residents to take greater ownership for private disputes? I would urge the Minister to beef up the community resources available to residents and to mount a campaign on this.

Disputes can get more complicated, however, when it involves people with mental illness. Some cause their neighbours grief by constant abuse and other

Page: 12

behaviour which can make life quite miserable for them. I would urge the Minister to strengthen the mechanism for managing disputes which involve residents with mental illness, ensuring that residents are protected and also that proper diagnosis and treatment be made mandatory for those who need it.

Madam, curries, flower pots, music, children running, incense and even alarm clocks – all seemingly innocuous, but it is often the simple things that serve as the spark for neighbour disputes. I often cite the case of two gentlemen that I have met previously, who have been neighbours for 15 years and had feuded for 13 of those years. When I met the first neighbour on my house visit, he complained about this neighbour. I also spotted a pencil line on the wall. I asked the second neighbour and realised it was the border, the de facto no man's land that no orchid or hydrangea should ever cross. They have known each other for many years, by names too flowery for parliamentary decorum, but with the help of our volunteers, we formally introduced them to each other. To our surprise, the curse was broken. Learning each other's names perhaps made the issue now too human. So, now there is peace, there is embarrassment, too, but largely peace.

This is perhaps one miraculous resolution that we have had. I joined fellow parliamentary colleagues in calling for a review of the legislation over the last year. Madam, I am heartened to hear that the tribunal has been announced and it will have additional powers proposed that will help to resolve long-standing cases.

However, I wish to ask the Minister how soon we can expect the tribunal to be in place, what are the exact powers vested with the tribunal. More importantly, I hope it does not become the first port of call. What other means have the Ministry considered to build stronger community ties, further encourage mediation and reduce the surge in neighbour disputes?

Mdm Chair, at last year's National Day Rally, Prime Minister Lee announced the setting up of the Volunteer Youth Corps to enable young Singaporeans and Permanent Residents between 15 and 35 years old, including students in ITEs, Polytechnics and Universities and young adults, to do community projects overseas and in Singapore.

Page: 13

MCCY and the National Youth Council (NYC) plan to pilot it in early 2014, and I have a few questions for the Minister.

One, what is the size of the first intake and how are we going to sustain the interest and the programme?

Two, I understand that the selection and assessment process involves essays, situational tests and interviews. Would this process deter youths who do not write and speak well or those who have to work part-time and, therefore, may not be able to spend the time to finetune an essay or prepare for interviews, from applying?

Three, the diversity of participants is important as it enhances the learning experience, and their abilities should be relevant to the project they want to work on. How will the Ministry ensure there is diversity among applicants and the selected candidates? Will funds be made available for them to ensure that they can cover transport, meals and other needs during the programme?

The programme is a meaningful endeavour and it is full of promise. Among others, it can help reduce the drop in volunteerism among youths as they progress from school to the workforce. What are MCCY's plans to keep the participants engaged upon completion of community service programmes bearing in mind the many competing demands amidst a competitive environment?

Madam, volunteerism can shape and empower youths to become active citizens. Last year, the Volunteer Youth Corps (VYC) was launched. Can the Minister give an update on VYC?

Some people have noted that VYC community partners are required to assign a dedicated staff to conduct impact evaluation, facilitate learning and reflection of VYC members even if it is for a small project. If so, criteria may favour only fairly sizeable NPOs and disadvantage smaller resource-strapped NPOs and unwittingly stumping their growth.

To encourage more bottom-up initiatives and inclusivity, can the Minister (a) level the playing field by tweaking the details of the VYC implementation; (b)

Page: 14

elaborate on other youth engagement and development efforts and how NYC will strengthen itself to cope with it; and (c) enlighten us on the plans to rally youths around our nation, in view of Singapore's 50th birthday in 2015?

Madam, in Singapore, many youths are active volunteers while they are in school, possibly because of school-based programmes and a facilitated environment. When youths graduate into the corporate world, career takes precedence, particularly for those between ages 23 and 30. Time, opportunities, support become obstacles and many drop out as a result.

However, given the rise in corporate citizenry and many companies now trying to get into CSR and understanding how to do so, youth engagement and CSR can go hand in hand but I think it needs to be structured and facilitated.

I hope that MCCY would do more to spur active corporate citizenry, invest in intermediary organisations to set up programmes and match-make employers and youths in giving through the various stages of their life. Can MCCY look into a life-stage approach to volunteerism? Can the Government agencies take the lead?

Madam, I would like to address the "bathtub effect" or the dip in volunteering when youths leave school and enter the workforce.

NVPC's Individual Giving Survey 2012 showed that volunteering rates peak when youths are in school. From a high of 55% for youths aged 15 to 19, the volunteerism rate drops significantly when they leave school and enter the workforce. I am not surprised. Young working adults have other competing priorities but we know many would still like to contribute to the community.

One way to address this issue is to integrate the spirit of giving and community involvement into the workplace and to give working adults opportunities to participate in corporate volunteering or philanthropy programmes. Corporate giving does not always have to be in monetary terms. Employees volunteering for worthy social causes represent a meaningful way of corporate giving. Will the Ministry encourage and promote such forms of corporate giving? Can the Ministry share its plans to do so?

Page: 15

Yesterday, I spoke about looking to the past and also to the future as we imagine what Singapore can be. We must also not forget to think about the values we should uphold because these will underpin the choices we make. As we approach our 50th birthday, it is timely to reflect seriously on these values and how we want to anchor our society as we enter a new phase of development.

When Mr S Rajaratnam was asked many years ago whether we can create a national identity, he said and I quote, "We must first accept the premise that it is an act of faith that a national consciousness is desirable, possible and inevitable." So, it is an act of faith and it was on this conviction and faith that our pioneers went about building Singapore and strengthening our Singapore identity.

At the same time, we hold a high ideal in Singapore, which is that the Singapore identity is open and inclusive. It is an identity that espouses unity in diversity. We do not insist on any Singaporean having to choose between his ancestry and being Singaporean. You can be Chinese, Malay, Indian, Eurasian, Jew, Parsi, Arab, whatever your origins – you can be that and Singaporean at the same time.

This is our approach to multiculturalism and this is how we have developed over the last 50 years – learning to trust and respect our different races and religions, and to live peacefully with one another.

Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap asked about more public consultations and dialogues in order to strengthen this approach to multiculturalism. And indeed, we do have many platforms for consultations and dialogues. Some of them are open, some of them are closed door, depending on the nature of the topic. Some of the sessions are with specific communities, some cover many communities, but we have many platforms as well; our schools and our public housing estates are natural platforms for interaction and mixing.

Our Inter-Racial and Religious Confidence Circles (IRCCs) promote dialogue and foster friendships across faiths and ethnicities. We have a National

Page: 16

Community Engagement Programme which brings the different communities together to discuss many issues on interaction and multiculturalism.

On occasion, some of the issues we discussed have to be done behind closed doors. That is because we know that there are sensitive issues that need to be addressed and not all issues lend themselves well to an open discussion, which may end up causing different groups to raise their demands that they want, reduce the common space that we share and raise temperatures. We do not think that is a useful approach.

We have a mix of different platforms, both closed-door and open consultations, which we will continue. And indeed, that is the approach that we have. We want to give maximum space for each community to nurture its own roots. The proviso is that these efforts must not pull us apart, but should bring us together. To cite the analogy that Mr George Yeo once gave, we want to let Singaporeans nurture our own ancestral roots, but these roots must all support the same Singapore tree. That is how we can continue to strengthen our multiculturalism in Singapore.

There are also important institutions that help to promote social mixing and multiculturalism, and strengthen our common space. Dr Teo Ho Pin spoke earlier about this in the Budget debate on the role of the CDCs. I had asked Dr Amy Khor to speak on that earlier in her capacity in the People's Association (PA) and as a mayor. But since Mr Patrick Tay was not here to file the cut, she does not have the opportunity to respond. I would just say that I agree with Dr Teo that the CDCs play an important role in strengthening social harmony, and MCCY and PA will study how best to support the CDCs to do more in this area.

One challenge we face in Singapore is that living in a crowded city heightens our sensitivity towards disagreements. Little things such as noise, smells and the use of common areas can cause unhappiness. We can find it especially difficult to get along with those who live closest to us.

Good neighbourliness is an important place to start in building harmony. I give an example of residents in Opera Estate holding an annual street party where they play games and enjoy potluck. It is a small way to bring neighbours together but has been going strong for the past 14 years, and still going strong. One of the organisers, Mr James Suresh, says, "We aren't just a loose collection of people who happen to live on the same street. We are neighbours, and when we begin to think of each other as friends, it becomes natural to care for and

Page: 17

help each other."

By showing care and concern for our neighbours, we can make Singapore a better home for all, and I emphasise community ownership, as many Members here did just now as well, because the effort has to come from ourselves. We can live peacefully together if we show consideration and learn how to give and take. To this end, I agree with many Members like Ms Irene Ng and Mr Hawazi Daipi that citizens should try to resolve their personal conflicts amicably, amongst themselves.

We have spoken to some stakeholders on managing community disputes. Many say that building strong neighbourly ties can help to reduce conflict. If neighbours know one another, they will be more likely to broach issues sensitively and come to a consensus. Most of the people we consulted called for more public education efforts to encourage consideration and graciousness in our community and we agree with them as well as with suggestions from Members to put more effort in this area because day-to-day acts of kindness will help to make our communities a more pleasant place to live.

Every day, there are many Singaporeans practising good neighbourliness and kindness in their communities. Like Mrs Chandra Sivarama Krishnan – she has been there to help her elderly Chinese neighbour Mdm Ah Ho for 20 years. Her neighbour can only converse in Chinese, but the language barrier has not stopped Mrs Chandra from reaching out. Though they can only communicate through hand signals, Mrs Chandra helps her neighbour with reading letters received in English and she explains the contents as best as she can. She also checks on her neighbour regularly to make sure that she is doing well. Once, when the electricity supply was cut off, she helped to ensure that the problem was fixed. Her story shows that kindness can go beyond the boundaries of race and language, and these are the acts of kindness we want to promote.

MCCY will continue to work closely with partner agencies like HDB and the Singapore Kindness Movement (SKM) to encourage neighbours to get to know one another to strengthen the "kampong spirit" in our urban city.

At the same time, we recognise that there are some who need help resolving tensions with their neighbours. It is sometimes useful to have a neutral party to help disputing parties communicate better. Grassroots leaders already undertake this role and they do their best to informally mediate disputes between neighbours.

Page: 18

Residents can also seek formal mediation at the Community Mediation Centre (CMC). It has a fairly good success rate. Out of the 521 cases heard last year, about 70% were successfully resolved. We believe that mediation continues to be a very important process as both parties agree on a solution, so there is ownership and responsibility to follow through. It also helps to preserve and mend relationships, so that neighbours can continue living harmoniously alongside one another. So, we also intend, as part of our enhanced framework, to increase the CMC's capacity and provide more mediation training to grassroots leaders.

However, as several Members have noted, we cannot compel people to go for mediation. Currently, 60% of the cases registered with CMC do not turn up. There are also several difficult and long-standing cases that are initially resolved through mediation but later flare up again.

Several Members spoke about some of these very difficult cases and "deadlocked disputes". I share their concerns and that is why we had earlier set up an inter-agency team involving my Ministry, together with MinLaw, MHA, MND, and the team has proposed several measures to strengthen our community dispute resolution framework.

A key part of the framework is a Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal to adjudicate difficult cases between neighbours. The tribunal will have the powers to mandate mediation, to give parties the chance to communicate and compromise. The tribunal can also make judgements and issue orders which will have to be complied with, failing which there will be consequences including prosecution. The tribunal will provide legal recourse for difficult cases and especially for aggrieved parties. But I must qualify that the tribunal should neither be the first recourse nor the main way we resolve our disputes. This would be counter-productive. We want to promote community ownership and collective responsibility and mediation should remain the first priority. Ms Irene Ng also agrees with that and several Members as well. We do want the tribunal to be there but it should be there as a last resort, for the difficult cases.

For the tribunal to work well, we will require better frontline responses to community disputes and more effective enforcement capabilities. These are complex implementation issues, which the relevant agencies are working through, and we will build these capabilities progressively, starting with a few estates, learning from the experience and then scaling up over time.

Page: 19

Mr Vikram Nair also asked about clear rules and penalties. As I have mentioned earlier, our key thrust is on public education and mediation but we recognise there are cases which do require rules and penalties. So, we are also looking at legislative amendments such as to the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act to allow the Police to take enforcement action if needed.

Ms Irene Ng highlighted that some of the more difficult dispute cases may involve persons with mental health issues and that we need to find different ways to tackle such cases. I agree with her and we are looking into this as part of the community dispute resolution framework but I would say that this is, in fact, a broader issue that requires further study into our mental health provisions, especially in the community. Again, here, the relevant agencies are looking into this, namely, MOH and MSF.

I have spoken about the importance of good neighbourliness and kindness to harmonious living. Another value that Singaporeans cherish is giving. Singaporeans are a generous people. They are willing to give of their time, treasure and energy to those in need.

This spirit of giving was certainly in our Pioneer Generation – they were prepared to serve, make sacrifices for one another and for the nation. And this same spirit of giving must continue in future generations. I think one good sign we see is in the trends of volunteerism. A survey by the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre shows that nearly one in three Singaporeans is engaged in volunteer work today, compared to just one in five two years ago. And Singaporeans are also donating more to help others.

We hope that more Singaporeans will continue to step forward. One challenge, as Mr Seah Kian Peng highlighted, is the "bathtub effect" in our volunteerism trend. Members can see it very clearly in the chart [Please refer to Annex 1.] Volunteer involvement is high among Singaporeans aged 15, in the younger age groups, but it declines sharply in their mid-20s as they enter the workplace. And participation comes back up again in their 30s, but it is still not as high as before.

As highlighted by Members, like Mr Seah Kian Peng and Miss Penny Low, obstacles to volunteering are chiefly when individuals enter the corporate world. So, we must do more to take a life-stage approach in volunteering, as Miss Low

Page: 20

said, and encourage corporate giving.

In his Budget round-up speech, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman spoke about transforming the workplace culture and our social culture in two aspects: embracing older workers and self-service as the default. I would like to suggest a third aspect, which is to make giving part of the DNA of corporate Singapore. I believe this is something which several Members also mentioned, including Assoc Prof Eugene Tan in an earlier speech.

The workplace is where individuals spend a significant amount of their time. Our workplaces need to transform, if we want acts of giving to be a natural extension of work life.

I have spoken to several corporate leaders and many have expressed interest. However, some do not know how to get involved, lack confidence that their contributions will be put to good use, or think that giving makes little business sense. Some local companies may also find it harder to get involved than larger ones, or the MNCs, which have the experience of corporate giving in other countries. They also face resource constraints and the resultant costs may not seem sustainable.

Despite these challenges, there are SMEs in Singapore who make an effort to practise corporate giving because they want to give back to society. Take for example civil engineering company Feng Ming Construction. Feng Ming has a policy of donating one per cent of the value of each contract that it clinches. And aside from cash donations, Feng Ming also organises visits to homes or orphanages, and movie day outings twice a year, with all the staff taking part. According to the Managing Director, Mr Lim Hong Beng, he does this to instil values in his staff. And he said, "If you take from society, you must give back to society. This is something I always tell my employees."

To transform our workplaces, we have to transform mindsets – that companies have the ability to give, no matter their size or their industry. When our corporate leaders set the tone, individuals in the workplace will have the opportunity to practise giving too.

Companies can also encourage other companies to be involved. One example is ABR Holdings Limited (ABR). They manage several food and beverage companies like Swensen's and Gloria Jean's, and have nurtured a spirit of giving that not only engages their own employees but also other businesses and their consumers. They use their F&B outlets for charitable

Page: 21

causes, bringing cheer to children from Club Rainbow with life threatening and chronic illnesses by hosting birthday parties for them at Swensen's. And when it comes to fundraising, ABR also ropes in their suppliers. For the World Mental Health Day last year, ABR provided dollar-for-dollar matching for donations from their suppliers to the Institute of Mental Health.

These are just some examples of how companies can leverage on the networks and resources that are already at their fingertips to do good for communities in need. I hope that more companies will start to get involved. Public sector agencies can also step forward. Making giving a workplace norm sends a powerful message. It says that giving can coexist with the demands of building one's career and family, because one can never be too busy to do one's bit for society.

So, we in MCCY plan to do more to break down these barriers to corporate giving. We will work with our partners like NVPC, as well as like-minded companies to champion a strong corporate giving culture in Singapore. This is a key priority for us in the coming year and I will share more when our plans are ready.

Finally, let me touch on our plans for youths. Several Members spoke about this, and I share their hope and optimism about our young people. We want to expand opportunities for our youths to contribute in a sustained and meaningful way. And that is why we decided to set up the Youth Corps.

Both Miss Penny Low and Mr Hawazi Daipi asked for more details about the Youth Corps. Over the past few months, we have consulted youths from our Institutes of Higher Learning as well as many community partners about what they would like to see in the Youth Corps. We have also been studying youth-related and community organisations in other countries.

We are still finalising the programme details, but for now, we envisage that it will be a one-year programme with the following key components.

First, a structured residential training programme that equips youths with knowledge and skills in leadership, project management and service learning.

Second, an overseas community project in one of the regional countries.

Third, a community project in Singapore, undertaken in partnership with an existing NGO or community group, which would be sustainable and

Page: 22

impactful and meet the needs of the community.

There is still much to be done and I have asked Minister of State Desmond Lee, who is also a board member of the National Youth Council, to chair an advisory committee comprising experienced youth leaders and members from the 3P sector to guide the development of this programme.

The Youth Corps will be launched in phases with a pilot intake in June this year; we think it is about the size of 200 youths. The pilot group will be drawn primarily from nominations by youth sector organisations (YSOs) and the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs). This first run will enable us to improve the design of the programme, and fine-tune the working protocols with different partners. So, we have brought in Outward Bound Singapore (OBS) as a key partner to implement the Youth Corps and we are also looking for other community partners to be involved.

After this first run, we will open up applications to more youths later in the year. I would encourage those who are passionate about impacting their communities to come forward and apply. We have a rigorous selection process, as Mr Hawazi Daipi mentioned, but we do not want that to be a deterrence to youths from stepping forward. We are not looking at academic qualifications. We are looking for youths with strong leadership qualities, a commitment to serve the community and a desire to learn. And we do want a diverse mix of youths in the Youth Corps. And that is why, when we do the Youth Corps programme, we look forward to a mix of students from ITE, Polytechnics and Universities coming together.

The Youth Corps will be the first national level programme of its kind. It is also a first in many steps towards more impactful youth development and engagement. To better support youth engagement in the community, NYC will strengthen its partnerships with schools and tertiary institutions, as well as other youth organisations. For example, we are working with schools to enable students to contribute their SG50 celebration ideas. I think it is something that Miss Penny Low highlighted just now. We have also developed resource kits for interactive lessons that will inspire students to organise their own activities, which can also be supported through the SG50 Celebration Fund.

In the coming months, MCCY will look at how to better engage youths through more youth-oriented spaces such as *SCAPE. All this will require more resources in NYC, so we will plan to strengthen its capacity and enlarge its reach

Page: 23

to even more young Singaporeans and youth organisations.

Finally, Mdm Chair, to wrap up, let me go back to our SG50 celebration next year. I think it is an occasion to celebrate what we have achieved, but it is also an important milestone to reflect on what we want for the future.

What will Singapore be like in 50 years' time? In the Our Singapore Conversation, many Singaporeans shared their aspirations for the future – we want a strong "kampong spirit", we want to build a caring and compassionate society; we also want to strengthen the things that bind us together, like our national heritage, our shared memories and our communal spaces. The arts, heritage and sports, which I spoke about earlier yesterday, are part of this shared identity.

At the end of the day, it is for our youths today to shape the next 50 years into the Singapore they want. This generation of youths – those who are in their teens to their 30s, they are the post-post Pioneer Generation. In other words, we have the Pioneer Generation who are above 65; the post-Pioneer Generation – I suppose it will be many of us, 40s to early 60s – and the youths today who are the third generation.

Our pioneers laid the foundations for Singapore's rapid development. The next generation benefited from their hard work, and continued to build modern Singapore. What will the third generation do?

Now, we are all familiar with the Chinese proverb that family wealth does not last three generations. It is not just a Chinese saying; in fact, similar sayings can be found in many cultures. But there are also exceptions to this. And so it is for our country – our nation's destiny is not preordained, it is what we choose to make of it.

As we celebrate SG50, I hope that our youths will take the time to reflect on what they would like to do and what kind of Singapore they would like to have in 50 years' time. Their attitudes and mindsets are important – if they take Singapore today to be the pinnacle of achievements, then the rest of the journey will be an inevitable downhill slide. But if they see today's Singapore as a springboard for new and better possibilities, if they uphold the same pioneering spirit of our founding generation, then 50 years later, we will see an even bigger and better celebration for our centenary.

Page: 24

Mdm Chair, we are investing in our youths, and I have faith in them. They are our future and we will work with them to make Singapore a good home for all generations.

Thank you, Mdm Chair. I have two clarifications. First is regarding the $20 million fund that the Acting Minister talked about yesterday to raise the extension profile of Singaporean artists and cultural institutions for the next five years. The Straits Times reported today that the fund will not be opened for application by the artists but instead it will be recipients selected by the Ministry. I would like the Acting Minister to clarify if that is so. And if not, what would be the criteria for the artists to be selected?

My second clarification is related to the traditional arts, for which I will speak in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned yesterday that NAC will have a fund to support traditional arts groups. I would like to find out – in this five-year programme – how many groups have we supported? And when the five-year programme ends next year, will the Government consider extending it so as to give more support to these traditional arts groups?

I thank the Member for the very useful opportunity to clarify what was also raised in The Straits Times' Commentary today. We already have many existing grants to support overseas performances, which operate on an open-call basis.

The new $20 million fund is meant to complement and enhance our existing efforts, and it will operate in a different way to build on what we already have. It will be quite complex if you think about it, when we want to showcase our artists overseas, we have to think about what markets to go to, which audiences we want to target, if at all, what events and platforms. And these are international events which will have their own curators and organisers. We will also have to take their views into consideration. It may be an international showing; an international platform which may be curated separately, and we have to work with international stakeholders.

So, in working and operationalising this $20 million fund, we envision that it will operate differently from existing mechanisms using an open call. I think

Page: 25

this will be more complex and it will require more consultations with the different stakeholders, including international organisers as well as our overseas missions. So, as we implement and operationalise the fund, we have to take into account these considerations. But I would like to assure the Member that one important group we would certainly want to consult is our local artists and our art community. As we work out the selection process and the criteria for the use of the fund, we will be having extensive consultations with the artists and arts groups in Singapore before we make any decisions and finalise the mechanics of the fund.

Mdm Chair, I will respond to Mr Baey Yam Keng's other question.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I thank Mr Baey for his question. Like Mr Baey, we are also very concerned about the development and future of traditional arts in Singapore. Traditional arts are an important part of our heritage. Therefore, the National Arts Council (NAC) will continue to support their development. Please allow me to take this opportunity to explain what traditional arts constitute and their current situation.

As most traditional arts are currently practised by interested amateurs, NAC's support and training will strengthen the management of the traditional arts groups and help them to become more professional. We hope this will strengthen the organisational structure of the arts groups so that they can put up better performances and attract more audiences. This is a long and arduous process which cannot be achieved overnight.

In terms of financial support, in the past five years, the Government has increased its funding under the National Traditional Arts Plan from $1.1 million in FY 2010 to over $5 million today. The increase was about five times and it was in line with the funding needs of the traditional arts. We estimate that from 2010 to end of 2014, the Government's total funding support for traditional arts would reach close to $17 million. In the past two years, under the main and seed funding programmes, our support for traditional arts has increased by more than 80%, from $1.07 million in 2011 to $1.97 million in 2013.

Page: 26

Mr Baey also asked if the National Traditional Arts Plan would be extended. Indeed, we will extend the programme after its expiration. In order to improve the efficiency of this programme, we will consult traditional arts practitioners. By then, I hope that Mr Baey and all those who are passionate about traditional arts will also give their feedback and suggestions.

Last of all, I would like to emphasise that the Government is always committed to supporting our traditional arts. We hope that through our long-term support and cultivation, traditional arts will be able to bloom and flourish.

Thank you, Madam. I have one supplementary question on community meditation. It is a point that I raised in my speech and I would like to have it addressed. The point is about whether neutral parties can help to make application for meditation, should both parties refuse to go to the meditation on their own. One of the issues now is that they have an ongoing dispute, but neither side is willing go to the meditation and it just continues. It affects the environment and the neighbours around them. I hope that the Minister can help to address this.

We will look into the suggestion. In fact, we are having a public consultation now for the Community Dispute Resolution Framework, including the way the tribunal operates, but we will be happy to take the suggestion and study this. We have not finalised but I must add the qualification that whatever measures we take, we must not undermine the personal ownership and responsibility for resolving the dispute. So, even if the application is by a third party, there needs to be responsibility placed on the parties in dispute to want to come together to resolve the dispute by themselves.

Thank you, Madam. I wish to thank the Minister for being so responsive to my continued call for greater protection of our public artworks. I have three clarifications.

The first is regarding the 25 community nodes around the island to encourage arts participation. Are we building the capacity of our own cultural officers and actively training them to work with artists and to develop new audiences? The feedback on the ground from arts practitioners is that there is limited knowledge and experience amongst, say, the PA and CDC staff on the

Page: 27

ground. How can we ensure that these key arts personnel at these 25 nodes have the relevant training and experience?

Second, regarding the $20 million Cultural Diplomacy Fund. Bringing our arts overseas requires people with the domain knowledge, experience, and the personal connections with major venues and festivals overseas, and such relationships are not built overnight. It sounds like MCCY is acting like a bridge builder. How will the Ministry build the capacity within the Government to establish these relationships and will the Ministry consider extending this funding, not just to arts groups but also to intermediaries like producers and agents who already have the domain experience in marketing Singapore artists overseas?

My final clarification and I have spoken much at this debate on the potential of tapping into our Singapore films, contemporary music and designers, which are all part of our creative industries. How will we tap on these sectors as part of our cultural diplomacy efforts? I know these sectors are not under MCCY's charge, but will funding be open to these sectors as well, as part of our cultural diplomacy efforts? And will funding be open to Singapore artists who are already based and working overseas?

Madam, I agree with the Member that capability building is an important part of this. We need to do more for capability building in terms of the cultural officers within Government itself, not necessarily just within the PA and CDC, because some of them also reside also in the libraries and some of them reside in the Esplanade which also does a lot of community outreach. So, we are looking at how we can strengthen that. That is certainly something we are focused on.

Likewise for what the Member talked about, there is a lot more bridge building that we need, as she has put it. Similarly, we will have to strengthen that part of what NAC is doing today – establishing these linkages with many of these overseas platforms. We will study whether we can extend funding and support to intermediaries, meaning to say, we do not necessarily have to do everything within Government. We can find partners that we can do the work with.

On the last point, we would certainly be open to using the fund to support the wide range of Singapore's arts and culture, not necessarily limited to what MCCY is looking at, including film, music and design.

Page: 28

Thank you, Madam. Apologies to the Minister to strain his voice for replies to two supplementary questions.

In my cut yesterday on sporting culture, I mentioned that there seems to be a need for a greater appreciation of sports as an entertainment option comparable to movies, theatres and things like that. Would the Ministry consider doing anything to help local providers of such events or organisers for such events with some support? That is, some guidance as to how to create iconic events that Singaporeans will appreciate as sports and entertainment options, rather than just participative.

My second question is related to the heartening news of the greater encouragement for the greater spirit of giving among corporates in Singapore. I would like to ask the Minister how this balances them with efforts to encourage individual philanthropy and how to strike a balance between the two elements.

On the first point, sports entertainment is something I think we want to build up. We do not have a lot of expertise in this, but that is a direction to go for some of these sports events, which can be built up to more than just sports alone but can incorporate entertainment and lifestyle. We have already done it quite well for the F1. The next major project which we are doing is the WTA Championship, and STB and various Government agencies which have been involved in the F1 are also assisting and discussing with WTA Championship organisers on how they can make that event into more than just a tennis event, but also a broader entertainment and lifestyle event. Progressively, as we build up these capabilities, we will be able to do more in other sports as well.

On corporate giving, I do not see that as detracting from our efforts to promote individual giving. They are mutually reinforcing. Many individuals who give are themselves corporate leaders, and so as leaders in the corporate, if they are good individual givers, then, hopefully, they would also take that approach in the way they manage their companies and that culture can then be translated into the workplace. The other way round as well, because if somebody who is running a company, an SME, does something within the organisation, they can take a personal satisfaction in giving, that will hopefully filter down into their own personal lives.

Thank you, Mdm Chairman. I have two clarifications. I would like to thank the Minister for not forgetting about Yishun in the community-based sporting-based facilities planning. Many residents say

Page: 29

that the swimming pool is very run-down. I would like to ask the Minister when will this be done because I did not see Yishun in the beautiful pictures yesterday.

Next question. I am very excited about the new Sports Hub. I am glad to see that there will be world-class tennis and netball events, but we seem to have forgotten about the game that has brought us three Olympic medals. When will we have a world-class table tennis competition in Singapore?

Madam, I do not have any specific details which I can provide satisfactorily to the Member. I mean these are things that we will continue to do, because Nee Soon is in the pipeline. I do not have the details with me, but we can discuss offline when it is coming. Our plan is a long-term plan and progressively it will cover the whole of Singapore.

On table tennis in the Sports Hub, we rely on organisers and promoters to bring in international events. I think if there are interested parties who would like to discuss with SSC or the Sports Hub Private Limited – the consortium running the Sports Hub – on anchoring an international table tennis championship in Singapore, we will be happy to discuss this with them.

Thank you, Madam. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary spoke about the importance of keeping our heritage alive. I know that there is a heritage grant scheme to achieve this objective. I would want to check with the Senior Parliamentary Secretary on the progress of this scheme, how many have taken up this scheme? Can he share with us the types of projects that have been supported?

The second clarification is for the Minister to see how we better profile and develop our sports ambassadors. How do we leverage on their popularity and achievements? For me, I have the privilege of listening to Mr C Kunalan sharing his achievements in school. Students may not know him, but after a session, I tell you they were totally in awe. He is a giant not only in sports, but also as a person —

Mr Ong asked about how much has been spent on the Heritage Grant scheme. In less than a year since the inception of this scheme in August 2013, $1.4 million has been spent to support 46 community-initiated and ground-up heritage projects. As to what types of projects, I will brief Mr Ong offline, because I need to give some time for my Minister to respond to the next question.

Madam, I agree with Mr David Ong's suggestion on building up more sports ambassadors. We are already doing so. There are two groups that we are doing this with. One is our current athletes. I think we can do more to profile them, and to bring them out into the community to engage young children to motivate them. There is a plan to do that. We can also do another second group, and it would be for the former athletes, including many pioneer athletes like Mr C Kunalan. Again, we will see how we can engage them better, and tap on their experience, stories to motivate and go out to engage the community, including many of our young children in schools. That is something which we are planning to do.