Dover Forest to be used for both housing and nature; first housing project to be launched in 2022

HDB flats to be built in eastern half, with parts of western half kept as nature park

By Audrey Tan and Ng Keng Gene, The Straits Times, 30 Jul 2021

The plan for Dover Forest has been revised, with public housing expected to be launched in the eastern half next year while the western half is set aside for now to preserve its biodiversity.

The young secondary forest plot in western Singapore is zoned for residential use, but the plans were tweaked after scientific studies and nature enthusiasts flagged its conservation value.

To balance the country's needs for both housing and nature, only the eastern half of the 33ha site - almost eight times the size of the Padang - will be developed in the nearer term.

The plan is to develop about 11ha of land in the eastern half for public housing projects. The first of the flats there are expected to be launched in the second half of next year, said the Housing Board (HDB).

The development of the area, which is located in the mature estate of Queenstown, will be done sensitively and also feature 5ha of greenery - including a park with a natural stream.

The western half of the site will be set aside for now and relooked at in about a decade, HDB added. But parts of this segment, which is richer in biodiversity than the eastern half, will be carved out and safeguarded as a nature park.

Minister for National Development Desmond Lee said on Wednesday during a media conference: "HDB had originally intended to launch the entire parcel, known (also) as Ulu Pandan vegetated area or Ulu Pandan Forest, for public housing to meet pressing needs for public housing in the near term. But we have decided to review it and refine it."

This decision was made after feedback from members of the public and the findings of two separate scientific studies.

The first study, commissioned by HDB to inventory the wildlife on the site, had found that the western part of it was richer in biodiversity, comprising more large trees and threatened species.

The second study by the National Parks Board in consultation with experts modelled how the Dover plot connects with other forests in Singapore. This exercise had shown that the site was an important stepping stone for wildlife moving in from the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve north of the site, as well as from the vegetation in the Southern Ridges further down.

These factors informed plans for the site.

While other development projects have incorporated green features, these elements are usually included on an individual project basis. This is the first time vegetation on a site is being safeguarded via a broader landscape approach, in a way that will allow the plot to serve as a stepping stone for wildlife moving from other forests.

Mr Lee said: "Top of our minds was our role as responsible stewards of our land and natural environment, to meet the needs of current Singaporeans as well as future generations, while ensuring that we safeguard resources for (the future)."

The Dover Forest is bound by Commonwealth Avenue West, Ghim Moh Link, Ulu Pandan Canal and Clementi Road.

Public housing development plans for the site were released last December, with Mr Lee saying on Facebook then that Build-To-Order flats to be launched this year would be in the area.

Kwan Im Thong Hood Cho Temple Professor of Conservation Koh Lian Pin, who heads the National University of Singapore's Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions, said: "Of course I would have liked to see the entire Dover Forest conserved. But when there are competing uses of the land from housing needs, for example... the (scientific exercise) is critical for providing the scientific basis to triage which half of the forest to protect."

Cross Island MRT Line to run directly under Central Catchment Nature Reserve; Phase 1 construction commences on 18 Jan 2023

Direct route cuts travel time and is cheaper to build; tunnel will be 70 metres deep to protect reserve
By Christopher Tan, Senior Transport Correspondent and Audrey Tan, Environment Correspondent, The Straits Times, 5 Dec 2019

The MRT Cross Island Line (CRL) will run directly under Singapore's largest nature reserve, instead of skirting around it.

Announcing its decision yesterday, the Ministry of Transport (MOT) said the direct alignment will see the tunnel going 70m, the height of a 25-storey HDB block, below the Central Catchment Nature Reserve. Initial plans called for a tunnel at a depth of around 40m.

Both options - going directly under or skirting around the reserve - were considered viable after an in-depth study, but nature groups had strongly called for the skirting alignment to avoid affecting flora and fauna in the gazetted reserve near MacRitchie Reservoir.

The MOT said the direct alignment will result in total travel time being six minutes shorter than for the skirting option. For those travelling through the middle segment of the line, the direct alignment will also result in lower fares. The construction cost is expected to be $2 billion less for the direct route.

The ministry added that the direct route will be more environmentally friendly in the long run as it "has lower energy consumption".

The 50km CRL will run from Changi to Jurong, and will serve estates such as Pasir Ris, Ang Mo Kio and Clementi. It is expected to have an initial ridership of 600,000 a day when it is completed by 2031.

The line was announced in early 2013 and preliminary plans showed it running under primary and secondary forests in the Central Catchment Nature Reserve.



Nature groups, alarmed by the potential environmental harm from the construction and operation of an underground MRT line right across the reserve, suggested that it be built along Lornie Road, skirting the reserve.

The Land Transport Authority commissioned a two-phase Environmental Impact Assessment for both alignment options in 2014.

Yesterday, the MOT also outlined measures to mitigate the line's environmental impacts. Tunnelling as deep as 70m below the reserve will ensure work is carried out through hard rock, far from flora and fauna on the surface. No surface works will be done in the reserve, it said, noting that MRT tunnels are typically 20m to 30m underground.

There will be two worksites outside the reserve: one along Island Club Road and another on the western edge of the reserve across from the Pan-Island Expressway.

In a Facebook post, Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan said the Government had agonised over the alignment as the reserve is "a special part of Singapore", but skirting the CRL around the nature reserve would "cost taxpayers and commuters dearly".

Senior Minister of State for Transport Lam Pin Min told reporters "the environment assessment has shown that both alignments are feasible", but the skirting option would result in longer travel time, additional construction cost and expected higher commuter fares.

"We have therefore decided on the direct alignment," he said.



Asked about a potentially unfavourable effect the direct alignment would have on network capacity factor - a fare adjustment component which takes into account the capacity of a transport service vis-a-vis actual usage - because it goes through nearly 4km of unpopulated area under the nature reserve, Dr Lam said: "That is a separate issue... We will address that subsequently."

Former diplomat Joseph Koh, who is a nature lover, said he would have preferred the skirting alignment, but "it is reassuring that some of the measures we have advocated have been spelt out". These include tunnelling deeper.

First World Singapore, Third World Singaporeans

Why are Singaporeans a Third World people? Public figures react to Tommy Koh's comments
They have some way to go in civic-mindedness, consideration and kindness, say observers
By Linette Lai, Political Correspondent, The Sunday Times, 6 Oct 2019

Professor Kishore Mahbubani recounts a recent occasion when his maid asked for time off to go to the airport.

"Why?" he asked. Her friend had broken her arm, the maid explained, and her employer had decided to pack her off. She wanted to say goodbye to her friend who was flying home.

It is behaviour like this, said the veteran diplomat, that makes Singapore a First World country with Third World people - just as Professor Tommy Koh said last week.

"I think that's a fair way of describing it," said Prof Mahbubani, who was formerly dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.

He and other prominent public figures have, by and large, expressed agreement with Prof Koh's strongly-worded comments, with some feeling that his words were a wake-up call for Singaporeans.

Acknowledging that some progress has been made, many however believe that Singaporeans still have far to go when it comes to kindness, consideration and civic-mindedness. "Singaporeans should celebrate the fact that their country has gone from Third World to First World," Prof Mahbubani said. "But they should deeply reflect on what this means in terms of their moral responsibilities."

Added Singapore Management University sociologist Paulin Straughan: "We can't really have a First World country with Third World behaviour. It's the community that defines the country."



SPARKING A DEBATE

At the Singapore Bicentennial Conference, Prof Koh, who had laid out a wish list for the country's fourth-generation leaders, was asked what he had to say to ordinary Singaporeans. He did not mince his words in his response.

"Many of our people don't give a damn for the environment when they should. Many of our people are selfish and unkind," he said.

Prof Koh's remarks resonated with many, who pointed to the poor treatment of foreign workers and misuse of public property as examples that prove his point.

Last year, the problems surrounding bike-sharing hit the headlines, with many snapping pictures of shared bikes parked haphazardly in common areas, shoved into drains or even chained up for private use.

Others noted that Singaporeans are not known for being gracious drivers or clearing their trays at hawker centres, with critics lamenting attitudes that smack of entitlement or self-centredness.

For example, said 33-year-old Ahmad Farid Zakaria, many drivers intending to change lanes either signal their intentions at the very last minute - or don't signal at all.

"Sometimes, the driver with the right of way will just speed up to prevent another car from lane changing," the technical officer added.

"I hope the mentality of Singaporeans will become more developed, just like our city."

Singapore Together: Redefining the national conversation

Is the latest citizen engagement exercise just another national conversation? Insight looks at why it's set to be different this time.
By Grace Ho, The Sunday Times, 14 Jul 2019

In 1991, then Acting Minister for Information and the Arts George Yeo likened the state to a large banyan tree whose reach was so extensive, few other organisms could take root: "The problem now is that under the banyan tree very little else can grow. When state institutions are too pervasive, civic institutions cannot thrive. It's necessary to prune the banyan trees so other plants can grow."

But now it's 2019 and other plants have indeed grown. In fact, there is a variety of civic group "species" ranging from nature and heritage, to gender equality and animal rights.

What's more, the banyan tree of the Government itself has lost some of its "bark". Branches and roots are more intertwined within the ecosystem of all Singapore people.

Rather than standing apart, this outreach has included getting an on-the-ground take from Singaporeans in the form of feedback.

There have been national dialogues including The Next Lap (1991), Singapore 21 (1999), Remaking Singapore (2002), SGfuture (2015) and the biggest, Our Singapore Conversation (OSC).

Unprecedented in scale and reach, OSC was held a year after the watershed 2011 General Election, where the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) garnered its lowest vote share since independence.

And Singapore is now getting set for the latest citizen-state engagement, Singapore Together.

In announcing Singapore Together last month at the REACH-CNA Building Our Future Singapore Together dialogue, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat said that he and other ministers would work with Singaporeans to design and implement solutions across a wider range of issues and policy areas. These include environmental sustainability, housing, youth and social mobility.

Sceptics might wonder, though, if this is just going to be another national conversation under a different name.

But, as Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) Associate Professor Kenneth Paul Tan points out: "It is hard to avoid how closely public engagement initiatives have been linked to critical economic, political or electoral events in the nation's life."

The critical event looming is, of course, the segue to 4G leadership, which Mr Heng is poised to helm.

Insight looks at how this particular outreach is poised to be a sea change in these exercises, why there is a need for new ways to create policy and build trust amid Singapore's changing electorate, and what an expanded "democracy of deeds" - a theme in Mr Heng's outline - could look like.

Institute of Policy Studies report on Religion in Singapore 2019

Keep religion out of politics, Singaporeans say
One in four open to extremists sharing views online or at events, finds IPS report
By Linette Lai, Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 29 Mar 2019

Most Singaporeans are religious, but still frown on religious behaviour that could influence politics or disrupt social harmony, a new report by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) has found.

They also feel that having different religious views is no barrier to getting along when living in close proximity.

But the researchers noted that a sizeable proportion of people have no qualms about letting religious extremists publish their views online, or hold public meetings to talk about them.

When surveyed, one in four people said putting such views online is acceptable as long as they do not instigate harm against others, and younger respondents were even more likely to think so - possibly because of more liberal attitudes towards free speech among the young, the researchers said.

But the overwhelming consensus across all age groups is that it is unacceptable for religious leaders to incite hatred or violence against other religions.

The working paper's authors, however, noted there is a fine line between espousing extremist views that consider other faiths as enemies and making hate speech.

"How the Government navigates the desire by this significant segment of the population for freedom of speech pertaining to extremist views in future will be of interest,'' they added.

The findings on people's attitudes towards religion were part of an international study involving multiple countries. It was written by IPS senior research fellow Mathew Mathews, research associate Leonard Lim and research assistant Shanthini Selvarajan.

"Religion is an influential and powerful force, and seeps into multiple domains of public and private life," the authors said.

"Tracking the expansive reach and influence of religion is thus crucial in maintaining inter-religious harmony and surveying public sentiment in public policy."

A total of 1,800 Singapore residents aged 18 and older were surveyed for the local component of the international study.

Face-to-face interviews were carried out between August and December last year by market research company ML Research Consultants.

Participants were asked about their religious beliefs and how these influence their views on issues such as public policy, religious harmony and infidelity.

Although 80 per cent have religious beliefs, only 40 per cent said they would consider themselves to be a "spiritual person". Buddhists, Taoists and Hindus were more likely to have religious beliefs but not identify as spiritual.

Most also had at least some level of belief in life after death, heaven, hell and religious miracles.

On religious harmony, seven in 10 people said they feel people from different religious backgrounds can get along when living close together.

Even so, around 15 per cent of them said they found Muslims at least somewhat threatening. This was higher than for any other religious group.

When asked about religion and politics, most agreed religious leaders should not try to influence voting at elections or make remarks about politicians' characters.

Three-quarters also agreed the country's laws should not be based on a particular religion.

Religion was also found to influence people's views on moral issues such as infidelity, abortion and homosexual sex.

The younger and better educated respondents, as well as those with no religion, tend to have more liberal attitudes.

Foreign interference in Singapore politics: ACRA rejects company application from Thum Ping Tjin, Kirsten Han; says it has foreign funding links to George Soros

Purposes of proposed firm clearly political in nature: ACRA
It rejects company application, saying it has links to foreign funding from group with political agenda
By Joanna Seow, Manpower Correspondent, The Straits Times, 12 Apr 2018

An application by historian Thum Ping Tjin and freelance journalist Kirsten Han to register a company has been rejected on the grounds that the registration would be contrary to Singapore's national interests.

The Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA) said yesterday that the purposes of the proposed company, OSEA Pte Ltd, "are clearly political in nature".

OSEA Pte Ltd, it said, has links to foreign funding from a group led by billionaire George Soros, which was set up to pursue a political agenda the world over.

ACRA noted that OSEA was to be a wholly-owned subsidiary of a British-registered company called Observatory Southeast Asia (OSEA UK).

OSEA UK has received a grant of US$75,000 (S$98,000) from a Swiss charitable entity, Foundation Open Society Institute (FOSI), said ACRA.

FOSI is closely associated with Open Society Foundations (OSF), founded and led by Mr Soros, it added.

In a statement, the authority said that what happens in other jurisdictions is not the concern of the Singapore Government.

"OSF and FOSI, and other foreign philanthropies and groups, can fund whatever causes they like elsewhere," it said.

"In Singapore, however, our position is that none of them can be allowed to fund Singaporean organisations or individuals participating in our domestic politics. The registration of OSEA Pte Ltd would therefore be contrary to Singapore's national interests.

"Singapore's politics should be for Singaporeans alone to determine. We should not allow foreigners to interfere in how we should govern our country. Nor should we allow any group of Singaporeans to lend themselves to being used by foreigners to pursue a political activity in Singapore."

ACRA said an application was made to register OSEA Pte Ltd on Feb 8. Dr Thum - a research fellow and coordinator of Project Southeast Asia at the University of Oxford - was cited as its director and Ms Han its editor-in-chief.

Its proposed activities included organising discussion fora, workshops and other events in Singapore, such as "Democracy Classroom" sessions.

Another of its objectives was to provide editorial services to a website named New Naratif, which both are involved in.

ACRA said New Naratif has been publishing articles "critical of politics" in the region, such as articles claiming that certain governments are using violence to maintain political control, had manipulated events or framed them for political gain, and have "rigged" their electoral systems.

"The purposes of the proposed company are clearly political in nature," said ACRA.

Public Hearings on Fake News: 27 - 29 March 2018

Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods - Public Hearings
- 14 - 16 March 2018
- 22 - 23 March 2018


Day 6: 27 Mar 2018






No need for new laws to tackle fake news, say activists
They call instead for greater public access to information and more media literacy
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 28 Mar 2018

There is no need for new legislation to deal with online fabrications, said activists and content producers, as they called for greater public access to information and improving media literacy.

Their call sparked a long debate yesterday when four of them appeared before the Select Committee on deliberate online falsehoods, as one of its members, Mr Edwin Tong, sought for over five hours to convince them otherwise.

Yesterday was the sixth day of public hearings, which have so far seen 51 representatives speak since March 14. The last hearing is slated to take place tomorrow.

Mr Tong pointed out that previous witnesses - including academics and legal experts - had identified gaps in existing legislation and acknowledged that stronger laws, along with a slew of other measures such as public education, would help tackle the scourge of fake news.

He and fellow committee member Janil Puthucheary also noted that a poll by government feedback unit REACH found that about nine in 10 respondents felt there should be more effective laws to require the removal or correction of false reports.

But the panel of speakers - made up of Maruah vice-president Ngiam Shih Tung, freelance journalist Kirsten Han, The Online Citizen chief editor Terry Xu and graduate student Howard Lee - remained largely unswayed.



The four witnesses had in their written submissions argued that existing laws are sufficient to deal with online falsehoods.

Human rights group Maruah cautioned that any new laws could stifle free speech and be used to stifle legitimate, dissenting views.

Mr Xu noted that countries cited in the Green Paper on online falsehoods as introducing new laws are doing so because their existing laws "are very liberal" compared with Singapore's, "which cover all aspects of free speech".

The witnesses suggested instead more media literacy and political education, as well as a Freedom of Information Act.



Yesterday, Mr Tong asked the panel how online falsehoods, hate groups that have cropped up on social media and offensive cartoons, among other things, can be countered without new legislation.

Ms Han said repeatedly that she was against new laws, including those to compel technology giants such as Facebook and Twitter to take down content.

Police get wider powers to deal with serious incidents; Public Order and Safety (Special Powers) Act passed by Parliament on 21 Mar 2018

Powers include communications stop order; safeguards in place, says Josephine Teo
By Seow Bei Yi, The Straits Times, 22 Mar 2018

A new law that expands police powers to allow officers to respond swiftly and with greater flexibility during serious incidents like a terrorist attack was passed yesterday after a three-hour debate.

Under the Public Order and Safety (Special Powers) Act (POSSPA), the police commissioner can impose measures such as a curfew and a stop order on communications to ensure the secrecy of security operations.

But the Act may be invoked only with the authorisation of the Home Affairs Minister, Second Minister for Home Affairs Josephine Teo said yesterday, following concerns expressed by MPs during the debate on the proposed legislation.

Other safeguards are also in place to ensure the police commissioner and the minister exercise their special powers only for specified incidents, where the police are likely to be in a race against time, Mrs Teo added.

"Once the threshold of a serious incident is crossed, we must give the police sufficient latitude to act decisively," she told the House on the final day of a three-day sitting.

The new law comes in the wake of a "clear and continuing threat" of a terror attack facing Singapore, which has been cited as a target in extremist publications and videos.

During the debate, Nominated MP Kok Heng Leun, who was among 10 members of the House who spoke on the proposed legislation, expressed concern over the discretion given to the minister and police commissioner.

Mr Kok asked if there could be conditions on the use of the special powers, and cited the Internal Security Act, which requires the minister's decision to be concurred by the president on the advice of a special advisory committee.

Replying, Mrs Teo stressed that the special powers will not be used for day-to-day policing, but only for specified incidents like a terrorist act or large-scale public disorder.

"Members will have to weigh: Which is the bigger risk in a serious incident? Which has the graver consequence?" she said. "There is a risk of too much discretion, but there is also a risk of too much delay."



Mrs Teo also said that after an incident has been dealt with, Parliament can still debate if the minister and police had done the right thing and hold them to account - as was with the 2013 Little India riot.

This new law repeals the Public Order (Preservation) Act, which allowed Parliament to annul the minister's proclamation as a safeguard.

This will no longer be the case. "There is no sinister reason for this," said Mrs Teo. " Judicial review of the minister's decision to make an activation order remains an avenue to curb improper use... of his powers."

Budget 2018 debate in Parliament

Singapore Budget 2018 approved by Parliament, with Workers' Party MPs voting against it

GST hike responsible way to fund spending needs: Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat
WP votes against Budget, the first time in three decades, following heated debate
By Yasmine Yahya, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 2 Mar 2018

Windfalls and one-off gains - like the ones that led to the unexpected Budget surplus of $9.6 billion in the last financial year - cannot form the basis of prudent fiscal policy, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat said yesterday.

That is why the goods and services tax (GST), a broad-based tax, has to be raised - to fund expenses in healthcare, education and security long into the future, he said. Given Singapore's ageing population and the need to counter the terror threat, this spending is likely to recur year after year.



"The responsible way for us to fund such spending is to raise taxes. As Dr Lee Bee Wah pithily reminded us, you don't fund recurrent spending needs by hoping to strike 4D," said Mr Heng.

But the GST issue provided unexpected drama, with the Workers' Party (WP) saying it could not support a future hike without more information. For the first time in three decades, it cast its votes against the national Budget.

This came after WP chairman Sylvia Lim (Aljunied GRC) initially said the party intended to support the Budget when the vote was called, but not the announcement of a GST hike to take place some time between 2021 and 2025.

But Mr Heng made it clear that the Budget presented the Government's overall financial policy - both spending and financing options, including the GST increase.



He called on the WP to "square" its position. Mr Heng said: "Do you support all those increased spending? Or are you contradicting all your MPs' position yesterday where everyone spoke about doing more? Where is the money going to come from, and would a 2 percentage point increase help us in some ways?"

Ms Lim responded tersely: "To make it clear, we are unable to support the announcement on the GST hike."

The eight WP MPs present yesterday proceeded to vote "no" when a division - a formal recording of votes - was called.

To MPs who questioned the need for a GST hike despite the large Budget surplus, Mr Heng said it was largely due to one-off, exceptional factors. "We cannot fund our plans to secure Singapore's future on the basis of episodic windfalls," he said.

Instead, the only sustainable way to finance this was to raise taxes, he said. And a broad-based tax like the GST was deemed the most suitable.

Mr Heng reiterated that this hike would not cover expenditure needs, but would only make the fiscal gap more manageable.

On other financing options, he said the wealthy are already being taxed more, as are buyers of more expensive property.

Drawing on the reserves would not be responsible, he said, as these are needed to help Singapore weather economic storms. That left borrowing as a viable option for long-term infrastructure projects, and GST to meet recurrent needs.

Things began heating up in the House when Ms Lim voiced her suspicion that the GST hike might have been among this year's measures if the public had not reacted so negatively when the idea was floated.

"And I rather suspect myself that the Government is stuck with that announcement. Otherwise, perhaps we would be debating a GST hike today," she said.



This triggered a rebuttal from Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam, who said Ms Lim was "basically making an accusation that the Government is behaving willy-nilly, dishonestly".

Ms Lim said she did not make any such accusation and was merely raising an "honest suspicion".

To this, Mr Shanmugam said: "Does Ms Lim agree it doesn't accord with the standards of a First World Parliament and honest debate for someone to come here and start talking about (how) 'this is my suspicion. I cannot back it back'?"

Mr Heng stepped back into the debate, noting he and Ms Lim were both former police officers. "Now, I want to present myself as your witness because I have been working on this ever since I became Finance Minister," he said, adding that the GST hike was based on an honest assessment of Singapore's fiscal position.



In a Facebook post last night, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that with the passing of the Budget, the Government has laid out its mid-to long-term plans clearly.

Law passed to boost security at large events: Public Order (Amendment) Bill 2017

Organisers have to consult police on security as part of changes in response to terror threat
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 4 Apr 2017

Organisers of large-scale public events are required to inform the police at least 28 days before they are held, under a new law passed by Parliament yesterday.

The organisers also have to put in place stringent security measures the police deem necessary.

The event can be cancelled, postponed or moved to other venues if the security is severely inadequate or a terror threat is imminent.

These are among the wide-ranging powers accorded to the police by the amended Public Order Act, in a move to better protect Singaporeans at a time when the terror threat is at its highest in the region and terror groups are going for soft targets such as concerts and football matches.

Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam, in launching the two-hour debate on the changes, noted that the police now work with event organisers on a voluntary basis on such security measures.

While most organisers are cooperative, "the time has come to give the police the powers to require such measures", he said.

Hence, it is mandatory for organisers to consult the police on security needs for public events that draw crowds of more than 5,000, and private events where the crowd size is projected to exceed 10,000.

The police will make an assessment, following which the commissioner of police can declare the event a "special event" if there is a risk of a terror attack or public order incident. The organisers will then be directed to put in place security measures, said Mr Shanmugam.

The measures include placing anti-vehicle barricades, engaging armed auxiliary police officers and carrying out bag checks on those attending.

Organisers that fail to notify the police if they expect large crowds can be fined up to $20,000, jailed for up to a year, or given both punishments.

Noting how terrorists are focusing more on "soft targets", such as in the Nice truck attack during the French national day celebrations last July, Mr Shanmugam said: "When there is a risk of a potential terrorist attack at an event... it's really in the public interest that the Government does something about it, that the necessary security measures are taken. Otherwise, we are putting lives at risk."

About 200 public events attracting crowds of 5,000 or more are held in Singapore each year, with many of these security measures in place, he said. The changes will raise costs for event organisers. But it is a cost that terrorists have imposed on the whole of society, and which the Government and taxpayers are already paying, he added.

A helping hand in a foreign land: Kudos to NGOs that help Singapore's migrant workers

There are about 1.4 million foreigners working in Singapore. Most of them are work permit holders employed as construction workers or maids. While they are protected by labour laws, those who are injured or embroiled in disputes with their employers often turn to non-governmental organisations for help. On International Migrants Day today, Insight looks at the NGOs that see to the welfare of these workers and speak up for them.
By Toh Yong Chuan, Manpower Correspondent and Joanna Seow, The Sunday Times, 18 Dec 2016

Migrant workers have been with us for centuries.

When modern Singapore was founded in 1819, migrants came here from across Asia to make a living - some returned home, others stayed on, as did many other migrants all over the world.

But only recently did the contributions of migrants get global recognition.

In 2000, the United Nations proclaimed Dec 18 as International Migrants Day.

On that day in 1990, a decade earlier, the UN adopted the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. The international treaty spells out protections for migrant workers and their families.

Since then, the day has been observed by countries in the world in various ways.

Singapore does not mark the day in a big way. There are no official events held around it and it does not appear on the diary of activities of the Ministry of Manpower (MOM).

However, a number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are celebrating the day by acknowledging the contributions of migrant workers here.

These workers form a significant proportion of the Singapore population and labour force.

There are about 1.4 million foreign workers in Singapore, out of a workforce of 3.7 million and a population of 5.6 million.

This means that about one in four people here is a foreign worker. And about two in five workers here are foreigners.

The bulk of these foreign workers, about one million of them, are work-permit holders doing manual work, for example, as construction workers and maids.

Unlike top-rung foreign executives who come to Singapore on expatriate terms with their families in tow, those doing manual work receive low pay and live in dormitories or others' homes.

Without family support, they turn to non-governmental organisations for help when they run into problems.

Foreign entities need permits at Speakers' Corner from 1 November 2016

MHA reiterates existing rules and clearly sets out what foreign entities are; Singapore entities will not need permits
By Kok Xing Hui, The Straits Times, 22 Oct 2016

The authorities have made it clear that foreign entities will have to apply for a permit to take part in Speakers' Corner events, such as the Pink Dot rally, starting Nov 1.

And the likelihood of it being approved appears dim, if the issue is deemed controversial.

Said Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam last night: "In general, if it relates to controversial social or political issues, which really are a matter for Singaporeans, then it is unlikely the foreigners will get a permit."

The Ministry of Home Affairs yesterday reiterated existing rules that require foreign companies and non-governmental organisations to get a permit to sponsor, promote or get its employees to participate in events at the Speakers' Corner.

What is new is that it has now categorically set out what constitute foreign entities. They include locally incorporated or registered arms of multinational companies (MNCs) unless they are also controlled by a majority of Singaporeans. The rule is also extended to foreign entities that want to speak via tele- conferencing or pre-recorded messages at the Speakers' Corner.

But rules for local entities have been liberalised. Singapore companies and NGOs no longer need permits to hold Speakers' Corner events, or indoor assemblies. Now, only Singaporeans have this privilege.

Said Mr Shanmugam: "Speakers' Corner is for Singaporeans to articulate views, particularly when it comes to sociopolitical issues... So we needed to make that clear."

He added: "We are neutral in terms of what people can discuss and cannot, or which side people take, or which side of the argument people are supporting or against. What we are saying and where we are drawing the line is Singaporeans versus non-Singaporeans."

Sheena Kanwar of migrant workers' group HOME: She’s at HOME with fighting inequality

New head of migrant workers' advocacy group wants better protection for them
By Olivia Ho, The Straits Times, 19 Sep 2016

Barely a week into her new job, Ms Sheena Kanwar found herself being screamed at by a livid employer.

The 34-year-old had just become the executive director of the Humanitarian Organisation of Migration Economics (HOME), an advocacy group for foreign workers, at the end of July.

Her first case was that of a Myanmar maid who had run away because of her employer's scoldings.

Said Ms Kanwar: "She had very little food - just a bowl of rice a day - and she hadn't slept in a few weeks because she was being constantly screamed at."

Ms Kanwar called the employer to ask that she grant the maid a transfer, but found herself getting a tongue-lashing instead.

"That really brought home to me the sense of entitlement some people have over foreign workers' labour, over their lives."

She is no stranger to helping people in crisis. She spent five years at the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) as a senior manager, during which she helped set up Singapore's first sexual assault care centre.

But her interest in issues at a regional level prompted her to apply for the role at HOME.

HOME is one of four major migrant worker advocacy groups in Singapore. It raises awareness about foreign worker issues and runs four help centres and a shelter for workers in trouble.

Cross Island Line debate: $2 billion extra cost for alternative route skirting Central Catchment Nature Reserve

$2 billion extra cost if Cross Island Line skirts Central Catchment Nature Reserve

Route will require longer tunnels; land and home acquisitions could affect families, says LTA

By Adrian Lim, The Straits Times, 22 Feb 2016

The alternative alignment that routes the Cross Island Line (CRL) around the Central Catchment Nature Reserve (CCNR) could add about $2 billion to the rail project, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has revealed.

This 9km-long "skirting alignment" will require longer tunnels and extra ventilation facilities, it said, compared with the 4km direct route, of which 2km will cut through Singapore's largest nature reserve.

"Besides land and home acquisitions that could affect families, the extra works could incur $2 billion more in expenditure," said LTA chief executive Chew Men Leong.

In a letter to The Straits Times Forum page, signed by Mr Chew and published today, the LTA reiterated that the Government was studying both alignment options and had not made a decision.

Since a report on the environmental impact of site investigation works for the project was released recently, green groups have been lobbying hard for the CRL - a 50km MRT line that will span Jurong to Changi - to be built around the reserve, instead of through it.

However, this could entail land acquisition, as the MRT tunnels would pass through homes, businesses and buildings. Residents in Upper Thomson who could potentially be affected have called for the line to go through the reserve.

Mr Chew said the Government will consider all factors, including the engineering feasibility of both alignments, distance and travel time for commuters, cost to tax payers, and the impact on the CCNR and on businesses and families.

Details on the CRL, such as the number of stations and the construction cost, have not been announced.

Green groups conceded that the extra $2 billion and the impact on residents are significant, but called for deeper thought on the issue.

Cross Island Line: LTA's Environmental Impact Assessment Phase 1 (2016) & Phase 2 (2019) report

LTA's environment report now online
Responding to feedback, agency makes its MRT impact assessment more accessible
By Audrey Tan, The Straits Times, 20 Feb 2016

The report was open to the public, but to get information on a new environment impact assessment (EIA) for an upcoming MRT line, people had to make their way to the Land Transport Authority's Hampshire Road premises to read the 1,000-page hard copy, with no photography allowed.

Yesterday, after complaints that it was too difficult to access the study, which looked at the potential impact of soil works for the Cross Island Line if it cut through the Central Catchment Nature Reserve, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) put it online.

"In response to feedback, LTA has made the EIA report available online for interested parties who are unable to come to LTA to view the documents," the authority said in a Facebook post yesterday.

The move was welcomed by environmental groups, scientists and members of the public, who had felt the LTA was not forthcoming with the results of the study. "It is well-received news," said Mr Tony O'Dempsey, a council member of the Nature Society (Singapore), adding that the society had suggested the results be put online during its discussions with the LTA.