Motions · 2024-01-10 · 第 14 届国会
构建包容安全数字社会
Building an Inclusive and Safe Digital Society
议员质询数字化进程中信任危机与网络安全挑战，强调诈骗等网络危害日益严重。政府回应强调新加坡数字经济发展成就及前瞻性基础设施建设，承诺采取全社会协作应对数字风险。核心争议在于如何平衡数字化发展与保障公众安全及信任。
关键要点
- • 数字经济快速增长
- • 网络诈骗威胁加剧
- • 需全社会协作应对
支持数字化并强化网络安全
推动数字信任与安全建设
"Scams often operate in the dark corners of the digital realm, exploiting vulnerabilities and thriving in unsuspecting spaces."
参与人员（19）
- Jamus Jerome Lim
- Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim
- Gerald Giam Yean Song
- Hany Soh
- Hazel Poa
- Mariam Jaafar
- Mark Lee
- Minister for Manpower and Second Minister for Trade and Industry
- Nadia Ahmad Samdin
- Ong Hua Han
- See Jinli Jean
- Sharael Taha
- Sylvia Lim
- Tan Wu Meng
- Tin Pei Ling
- Usha Chandradas
- Vikram Nair
- Wan Rizal
- Yip Hon Weng
完整译文（中文）
Hansard 英文原文译文 · 翻译日期：2026-05-02
下午1时31分
陈佩玲女士（麦波申选区）：先生，我请求动议，“本院重申我们致力采取全民参与的方法，通过建设包容且安全的数字社会来维持信任。”
【程序文本】*该动议亦由沙拉尔·塔哈先生、苏翰妮女士、陈洁莹女士及任国强先生联署提出。【程序文本】
议长先生，通讯及资讯政府议会委员会（GPC）由人民行动党议员陈洁莹女士、德索萨先生、任国强先生、沙拉尔·塔哈先生、苏翰妮女士及我本人担任主席组成，现提出此动议。新加坡正处于国家数字化进程的关键阶段，我们必须面对可能侵蚀对关键机构及个人信任的挑战，而这些信任对国家的成功与凝聚力至关重要。
新加坡历来不惧变革。独立后短短数年内，我们从传统的内需型经济转型为由跨国公司推动的出口导向型工业化。随后，新加坡战略性地转向发展现代服务业，并在生物医药等新兴领域进行了大量投资。新加坡还提前大量投资基础设施建设，以便在浪潮来临时能够乘势而上。
这种前瞻性思维，加上勇于探索未知领域的勇气，取得了成功，并由团结且高度信任的民众所支持。我们的国内生产总值（GDP）人均从1965年的500美元增长到1990年的13,000美元，2022年更达到83,000美元。数字化已成为全球现实，对新加坡尤为重要。2022年，我们的数字经济占GDP的17.3%，高于2017年的13%。
随着我们继续转型，拥抱数字化带来的机遇，并在日常生活中深度融入数字领域，我们面临的挑战也日益增多。数字环境日益危险，网络诈骗、勒索软件、深度伪造、虚假信息及其他恶意网络活动激增。加之手法迅速演变，形势持续严峻。
诈骗如同蟑螂，常在数字世界的阴暗角落活动，利用漏洞，在不知情的空间中滋生。它们灵活、迅速进化，善于伪装，难以彻底根除。正如我们以为已识破最新诈骗手法时，更复杂的新威胁又会出现。
诈骗案件的激增即是明证。2022年举报案件达31,728宗，比2021年增长32.6%。2023年1月至8月，因恶意软件诈骗造成的损失超过2060万美元。
值得注意的是，一项全球研究显示，新加坡不幸承受重大损失，诈骗受害者平均每人损失4031美元。对部分新加坡人来说，这可能是沉重的积蓄损失。
在麦波申选区，我遇到多位诈骗受害居民。2021年底，一位年轻居民陈女士分享她及他人如何在未收到或提供一次性密码（OTP）的情况下，信用卡遭遇欺诈交易而蒙受损失。
她引用说：“即使没有证据显示消费者收到银行发送的OTP（例如电信公司的短信记录），银行仍要求客户支付这些欺诈交易款项，而未调查OTP是否可能被转移。消费者因在与银行的争议中处于劣势，常常承担高达五位数的支付责任。”
作为普通公民和消费者，通常难以从电信公司获取短信信息或历史，受害者往往在银行、电信公司、新加坡金融管理局（MAS）及警方之间反复奔波。
另一个例子是，我遇到一位年长居民余先生，他在网上投资骗局中受骗，该骗局声称得到时任资政尚南古拉达南的背书。他不懂网上信用卡交易，结果被诈骗数千元信用卡账单，经济拮据的他储蓄账户仅剩数百元，身心俱疲，担心失去一切。
鉴于其困境，我们成功说服银行免除其债务，但有多少此类善意豁免是可能的呢？
这些只是我在麦波申遇到的部分显著案例，我相信我的议会同事们也有许多类似例子。这些案例促使我们提出此动议。
此外，全球人工智能（AI）军备竞赛加剧，引发对伦理考量可能被忽视的担忧，强大的科技公司为赢得竞争不惜一切代价。这种激烈竞争可能忽略社会不平等问题，包括数字技能差距扩大，加剧人口分裂。
此外，如果机构仅专注于利用AI或其他新兴技术提升生产力，而不同时投资于劳动力培训和再培训，普通民众可能会对技术进步带来的损失感到恐惧，而非期待其带来的益处。这种恐惧反过来会阻碍新加坡的发展。
关键基础设施和基本服务的可信度也影响公众对个人数据安全的信心。新加坡99%的居民家庭接入互联网，互联网普及率居世界前列。这证明了新加坡的进步，但也意味着我们更易受到网络威胁。
2023年星展银行多次数字服务中断、公积金因安卓恶意软件诈骗损失及公共医疗个人数据泄露等事件，影响了大量民众，进而影响公众对数字世界的信任。这些问题若任其发展，将破坏信任。
无法信任所接收的每条信息、每笔交易、每个声音及每张图像令人瘫痪。信任是社会的基石，因为在困难时期，个人需愿意暂时牺牲个人利益以换取集体利益。信任对价值创造交易的发生、创意的分享及不被压制至关重要。
因此，若我们不明确立场并积极管理这些问题，风险是公众对数字世界失去信任，从而失去便利带给公民的好处及生产力和创新对国家经济的益处。
基于此背景，我们决定提出此动议，重申本院致力采取全民参与的方法，通过建设包容且安全的数字社会来维持信任。
在演讲开头，我已说明提出此动议的背景，并强调信任的重要性及加强数字社会信任应为动议的最终目标。请允许我详细阐述动议中的“安全”与“包容”原则。
关于“安全”，安全的网络环境对建立数字社会信任至关重要，因为它直接影响人们参与数字交易和互动的信心与意愿。
安全网络环境的基础包括：第一，数字交易的信任
首先，我们需要可靠的数字基础设施，为安全、可靠及可访问的数字服务提供基础。
系统不可靠、频繁中断或基础设施存在漏洞，会使用户对交易安全产生怀疑，阻碍数字信任的增长。因此，各行业组织必须有意识且系统地纳入优先提升信任的措施和做法，贯穿整个数字交易过程。
第二，我们需迅速有效打击诈骗和欺诈行为。诈骗通过利用毫无戒心的用户侵蚀信任，导致财务损失，破坏对数字交易的信心。
第二，解决网络威胁。网络安全威胁，如恶意软件导致的数据泄露和身份盗窃，增加用户的恐惧和怀疑。隐私泄露及未经授权访问个人信息也会使个人犹豫参与数字活动。因此，我们必须确保相关政策和能力不断演进，以应对猖獗且快速变化的网络威胁。
第三，抵制网络伤害。网络伤害包括网络欺凌和骚扰，对个人心理健康和福祉有现实影响，阻碍其潜能发挥。此外，儿童和老人等弱势群体尤易受网络伤害影响。因此，我们必须促进尊重和负责任的行为，实施保护弱势群体免受剥削的措施，从而在所有用户群体中培养信任。
第四，有意义的人际连接。线上与现实世界的互联常影响现实人际关系。我们应致力创造更积极的线上体验，使人际连接在数字化进程中依然有意义。
第五，数字包容。最终，人们若感到安全，参与意愿更强。因此，我们必须创造安全的网络空间，允许广泛参与，方能实现真正包容的数字社会。
简言之，安全的网络环境是建立数字社会信任的基石。这种信任反过来促进数字生态系统的成长与成功，积极影响个人线上线下生活。
关于“包容”，包容性通过确保数字化利益惠及所有人，促进公平、公正及共同进步，从而建立数字社会信任。
关键包括：第一，基本服务的可及性。随着政府、医疗、金融及电信等基本服务日益转向数字平台，必须确保所有人均可访问。
第二，数字技能赋能及缩小社会差距。我们必须赋予公民数字接入权及正确技能，积极参与数字社会。须注意避免在数字熟练者与非熟练者间制造新差距。如此，个人包括弱势群体能获得信心，驾驭数字平台，减少数字鸿沟，增强其参与数字技术的信任。
第三，适应各年龄层的职场演变。我们必须使工作岗位和职场适应快速变化的数字环境，同时确保劳动力具备正确技能，使所有人无论年龄或背景均能有意义地贡献。
第四，增强公民参与。我们必须确保数字平台和环境安全、友善且尊重，如我先前所述，使公民不因持不同意见而害怕被“取消”，不被剥夺发声权或有意义的线上参与。
第五，拥抱多样性。我们必须确保数字界面设计包容，使所有年龄、语言及身体状况的公民均能舒适自信地参与数字空间。
为实现安全且包容的数字社会，每个人都需发挥作用。因此，我们通讯及资讯政府议会委员会与多位人民行动党议员提出13项行动呼吁，敦促全民参与，使网络空间对所有新加坡人更安全、更包容。
我将先介绍五项行动呼吁，其余由我的GPC同事及人民行动党议员深入阐述。
第一，政府牵头建立与业界的信息共享机制，借鉴“英国反诈骗”模式。
鉴于竞争性质，企业通常不愿合作共享信息和最佳实践，而这些本可助力及时干预或执法打击诈骗及数字威胁。讽刺的是，这种合作本可促进学习和业务改进。
然而，企业更愿意与政府共享数据和经验，政府可对信息进行匿名和汇总。因此，我们需要更强有力的框架，促使公私部门共享诈骗信息，实现更快的侦测和干预。
借鉴“英国反诈骗”允许业界共享情报并合作开展反诈骗行动的做法，我们政府应牵头建立类似的信息共享机制。我的同事维克拉姆·奈尔稍后也将对此发表演讲。
第二，政府进一步整合专业知识，优先资源以监管和执法保障网络安全。新加坡政府在打击诈骗和网络伤害方面已做大量工作，包括立法更新、引入守则及新工具供企业和公众使用。
2022年成立反诈骗指挥部，主要银行人员与警方同址办公，促进诈骗侦测和举报，令人鼓舞。但打击诈骗和网络伤害的更广泛工作仍需政府各部门及私营机构如银行、电信公司等协调合作，这些机构职责和资源优先级各异。
因此，监管和执法网络安全方面仍有进一步整合专业知识和资源优先级的空间。我的同事叶汉荣稍后将在演讲中具体谈及利益相关者协调。
第三，设备制造商和数字服务提供商应加强防范恶意软件的保障，确保其产品设计和默认状态即安全。
我们见证了因恶意软件导致的手机诈骗案件增多。这些恶意软件威胁普通用户难以察觉。即使有公众教育，个人也难以判断手机或设备是否被攻破。即便是科技行业人士也难以判断。
因此，设备制造商和数字服务提供商应主动告知消费者检测到的漏洞，强化防范恶意软件的措施，确保产品设计和默认状态安全。从另一个角度看，增强透明度和安全使用的明显努力将提升客户信心，促进销售，双赢局面。
第四，银行和电商平台应采用更强的认证方案，如快速身份在线（FIDO）通行密钥，保障账户安全。
许多数字服务提供商仍使用传统密码等易受钓鱼攻击的认证方式。随着不法分子手法演进，银行和电商平台凭借强大技术能力，有责任保障客户账户安全，应采用抗钓鱼认证，如FIDO通行密钥。
第五，每个人都能为建设安全、友善且包容的新加坡数字社会贡献力量。随着我们在线时间增加，数字与现实世界融合，我们在任一领域的行为都可能对另一领域产生深远影响。
最终，我们应自问希望数字世界呈现何种环境？若我们期望现实世界安全、包容、友善和尊重，数字世界为何应不同？我的同事维克拉姆·奈尔稍后也将对此发表看法。
在同事们稍后深入讨论网络伤害时，我想强调确保网络空间思想和言论自由安全的重要性。互联网有放大少数声音的力量，若被误用，可能淹没或取消持不同意见或仅仅不同的人。因此，我们呼吁每个人继续秉持线上线下的友善和尊重价值，超越自我，伸出援手帮助有需要者。
在我开场演讲后，人民行动党议员们将聚焦其余八项行动呼吁。请允许我简要列出。
追究社交媒体服务对有害内容和恶意广告传播的责任。我的同事纳迪亚·桑丁、万瑞扎尔和玛丽亚姆·贾法尔将对此进行阐述。
接下来，审视针对未经授权交易诈骗受害者的处理方式，要求较大的参与者在防止损失和分担后果方面做出更多努力。我的尊敬同事苏翰仪和叶汉荣也将对此进行讨论。
要求社交媒体服务和应用分发服务加强年龄验证措施，更好地保护年轻用户免受有害内容的影响。我的尊敬同事纳迪亚·萨姆丁将就此发表讲话。
要求社交媒体服务和应用分发服务提高对用户举报平台有害内容的响应时效。我的尊敬同事纳迪亚·萨姆丁也将对此进行讨论。
要求基本服务提供者确保无障碍服务，惠及所有人。我的同事陈洁仪、纳迪亚·萨姆丁和叶汉荣将就此发表讲话。
推动企业和社区组织提升对基本数字技能的认知，并与公共部门合作，帮助缩小数字技能差距。我的尊敬同事陈洁仪、苏翰仪、莎拉尔·塔哈和玛丽亚姆·贾法尔将就此发表讲话。
推动公共、私营部门及个人之间建立更紧密的合作伙伴关系，深化对青少年和老年人数字素养、诈骗及网络危害教育的关注。我的尊敬同事达里尔·大卫、万日扎尔、莎拉尔·塔哈和叶汉荣将就此发表讲话。
最后，加强努力，打造面向未来的职场，培养更具数字化能力的劳动力。我的尊敬同事莎拉尔·塔哈也将对此发表讲话。议长先生，请允许我用中文说几句话。
（中文）：【请参阅方言发言。】自独立以来，新加坡一直无畏地突破现状，勇于在相对较短的几十年内进行转型和改革。
我们的国家已从主要专注于国内部门的传统经济，发展为由跨国公司驱动的出口导向型工业化，再到现代服务业和新兴投资领域的发展，以保持竞争力。
新加坡还进行了前瞻性的基础设施投资，使其能够抓住机遇。
加上人民的团结、高度信任与合作，新加坡才能达到今天的成就。
然而，数字化转型带来的机遇增加的同时，我们也面临日益严峻的挑战。
网络威胁，如诈骗、勒索软件、深度伪造和虚假信息迅速增加，显著提升了数字环境中的风险。
俗话说，层次越高，魔鬼越大。
这些网络威胁就像永不言败的蟑螂。
此外，全球在人工智能（AI）领域日益激烈的竞争引发了潜在伦理妥协的担忧。
强大的科技公司可能不惜一切代价争夺胜利，这可能导致忽视社会不平等。
此外，关键基础设施和基本服务的可信度也会影响公众对个人数据安全的信心。
如果不加以控制，这些问题将侵蚀信任。人们将无法信任他们接收到的每一条信息、进行的每一笔交易、听到的每一个声音和看到的每一幅图像。
这是一个令人担忧的局面。我们如何继续生活？我们如何前进？
当然，世界上没有绝对的事物，现实世界中没有完美。
现实生活中，我们不会因为害怕遇到意外而不出门。
然而，信任是构建社会基础的关键因素，因为生活中困难是不可避免的。
在这些时刻，我们可能需要暂时牺牲个人利益，以换取社会的集体利益。
信任在创造价值的交易和分享思想中也至关重要。
因此，如果我们不明确立场并积极应对这些问题，可能会失去公众对数字技术领域的信任，导致民众便利性的丧失，以及经济生产力和创新利益的流失。
在此背景下，我和人民行动党议员决定提出本动议，提出13项行动呼吁，以重申议会通过政府、企业和人民的共同努力，建设包容且安全的数字社会，维持信任的承诺。
（英文）：随着技术不断发展，新的诈骗和网络威胁手段也将出现。我们可能无法完全根除这些风险或威胁，因为它们如同蟑螂般难以消灭。但如果我们能做得更多，如果每个人都愿意承担更大份额的责任，我们就能保护更多人，减少对普通市民的伤害或损害。
总之，要维持信任并建设包容、安全的数字社会，不能仅靠单一政府、实体或个人的责任。随着新加坡继续迈向数字社会，公共和私营利益相关者必须作为一个整体国家协作，管理风险，应对挑战，互助共赢数字未来。议长先生，我恳请动议通过。[掌声。]
【程序文本】提案已提出。【程序文本】
议长：林秀玉女士。
下午1时58分
林秀玉（阿裕尼） ：议长先生，我今天的主题是恢复数字领域的信任，以应对信心危机。关于恢复信任，我将谈及诈骗和人工智能。
首先是诈骗。我对通讯及资讯部部长张燕玉去年12月接受《联合早报》采访时谈及该部今年重点工作深感兴趣。她强调了恢复数字空间和电信领域信心的紧迫需求。
关于诈骗，尤其是电话诈骗，资讯通信媒体发展局（IMDA）披露，新加坡每年接收约16亿国际电话，其中约四分之一即3亿通被怀疑为诈骗电话，并在去年头九个月被电信公司拦截。
拦截3亿通电话是惊人的数字。但我推测还有许多诈骗电话未被拦截。我们的父母、居民和我们自己都可能成为潜在受害者。
自我在九月中旬就诈骗损失及银行客户权益发表讲话以来，形势进一步发展。
积极方面，我注意到银行似乎采取了更多措施防止诈骗并阻止诈骗进行。我无法过分强调为何银行尤其需要这样做。银行盈利丰厚，拥有资源和专业知识，可以做更多保护和侦测诈骗的工作。
同时，诈骗者的作案手法不断演变，利用受害者心理。从冒充刑事调查局（CID）和银行职员，到现在冒充新加坡金融管理局（MAS）官员。涉及Paylah!的钓鱼诈骗有效伪造了通常由星展银行发送的短信。
今年元旦，我也收到一条关于从我的Paylah!账户提取289元的短信，并附有链接，提示若非本人授权可点击停止交易。因当时正忙于工作，我未仔细审查短信便点击了链接。链接引导我输入银行凭证时，我顿悟并立即停止操作。
不幸的是，一些收到同样短信的居民后来绝望地来到民众见面会（MPS）。总的来说，我不得不承认这些有组织的犯罪分子一定有非常优秀的顾问。
即使是我们认为非常安全的储蓄方式，如中央公积金（CPF）和定期存款，也无法完全防范诈骗和恶意软件。这正在改变人们对数字交易的看法。
对此，我注意到三家本地银行现提供的“资金锁定”选项，是一项实用功能，可将资金锁定，只有亲自到银行才能提取。我自己也选择了此项服务。但从宏观角度看，“资金锁定”实际上承认数字空间并非完全安全。
我不想夸大其词，但我认为如果政府监管机构不加强干预，我们正走向数字银行信心危机。
当然，客户也需尽责。客户需保持警惕，防止被骗。但我们应时刻牢记，不应对公众期望过高。正如《海峡时报》9月22日论坛页一封信所述，人们不可能时刻保持高度警惕，因为警觉程度可能受多任务处理、压力、疲劳或药物影响。
根据IMDA去年11月发布的新加坡数字社会报告，78%的60岁以上长者使用电子支付进行在线交易，但仅44%对此群体对识别诈骗持中度信心。99%的人担心成为诈骗受害者。这些数据表明诈骗威胁非常真实，且需要做更多工作。
议长先生，我承认政府正致力于恢复数字空间信心。MAS一直在加强对银行的监管，且在预防和损失分担方面需做更多。我之前已谈及此事，今天不再赘述。我也向MAS提交了关于诈骗损失风险分担框架的意见。
议长先生，鉴于银行与消费者之间的议价能力不对等，MAS应意识到公众期待其作为银行监管机构，确保银行负责任且合乎道德地行事。
过去几个月，我收到一些公众怀疑的反馈，认为银行利益总是优先于客户。我希望MAS能证明这种看法不正确。
关于数字通信和服务的更广泛问题，我认可《在线刑事危害法案》（OCHA）在防止诈骗方面的潜力。该法案赋予执法部门主动发出访问阻断令和应用移除令等权力，要求互联网服务提供商保护公众免受诈骗及其他恶意网络活动侵害。关于OCHA，期待了解所有条款何时生效。
此外，我注意到通讯及资讯部长宣布成立多机构小组，名为数字基础设施与服务韧性安全工作组（简称RSD工作组）。该工作组负责监督国家数字服务的公众信心事务。
虽然RSD工作组的成立是重要进展，但其成员构成中未见MAS代表。鉴于银行是数字基础设施和服务的重要组成部分，MAS是否应加入该工作组？
议长先生，我的同事林正杰和严杰辉稍后将详细阐述诈骗及责任分担问题。接下来谈谈人工智能。
2023年普遍被认为是ChatGPT进入全球视野的一年，人人开始探索其潜力。随着AI技术日益成熟，焦点转向如何大规模部署AI工具。从让AI执行特定任务，AI工具已从分类AI发展到生成式AI，能创造内容，如模仿亲人声音。进一步发展为交互式AI，能与人类互动推理，做出影响工作和生活的重大决策。
去年，政府发布了《新加坡国家人工智能战略2.0》。报告承认AI既有巨大潜力，也存在风险。风险包括AI可能助长诈骗，如利用深度伪造技术传播虚假信息等。
据CNA报道，2023年新加坡深度伪造视频的出现率较前一年激增500%。我们应高度警惕AI的陷阱及AI监管的必要性，确保新加坡人网络安全。
议长先生，我相信政府正密切关注AI潜在风险。政府成立了AI验证基金会，去年发布了题为《生成式AI：信任与治理的影响》的讨论文件。该文件面向政府和企业高级领导，倡导更多讨论与合作，构建可信且负责任的生成式AI生态系统。文件列举的生成式AI新兴风险包括错误产生、版权侵权、传播有害内容和网络威胁。除这些风险外，AI导致的失业和虚假信息也将侵蚀公众对数字领域的信任。
全球范围内，人们开始质疑是否真的希望AI进一步发展。越来越多的人担忧创造更强大的AI工具可能取代人类功能，甚至控制人类互动。这种担忧也来自AI行业内部。
例如，美国有一个名为生命未来研究所的非营利组织，其多学科国际团队致力于改善AI治理的政策工作。今年3月，该研究所发起请愿，呼吁暂停GPT-4之后的AI开发。请愿获得超过33,000个签名，包括多家AI公司CEO。
一些重要反思问题包括：（a）是否应允许机器用可能的宣传和虚假信息淹没我们的信息渠道；（b）是否应自动化取代所有工作，包括有意义的工作；（c）是否应开发非人类智能，最终可能数量超过、智商超越并取代我们。
其他知名思想家警告，依赖AI工具处理信息和思考可能导致人类推理和分析能力的丧失。就我个人而言，世界重大决策外包给AI工具的想法是不可接受的。
展望未来，如何利用AI同时确保人类掌控将是重大挑战。技术应为我们服务，而非成为我们的主人。我们应花时间反思正在发生的事，不应让技术失控。为此，政府需持续投入能力建设，确保AI有效监管。
议长先生，容我总结。今天的发言主题是恢复数字领域的信任。我强调了网络诈骗和AI风险对信任的严峻考验。今天的动议提出应采取全社会方法，通过建设包容且安全的数字社会来维持信任。我支持该动议，因为我认同每个人都有责任。
然而，基于上述理由，我认为政府和企业有责任领导这项工作。
议长：陈武铭博士。
下午2时10分
陈武铭（裕廊） ：议长先生，我原本无意在本次辩论中发言，但多位金文泰居民谈及本动议的及时性，我觉得应分享几点看法。
我今天将谈诈骗的消费者保护角度，其次更广泛地谈AI时代的形势及新加坡的生存能力。
首先谈诈骗问题。议会各方普遍认同这是严重问题，尤其在数字银行时代，长者们成长于面对面柜台交易的时代，如今却可能因远在新加坡之外的诈骗者轻点设备而损失银行账户和毕生积蓄。
这是严峻问题，尤其在新加坡这样快速从第三世界跃升为第一世界的社会，长者们成长于数字化之前的时代，如今却生活在数字接入和数字技术的世界。这是关于消费者保护的第一点。
尽管议会两边议员呼吁采取更多措施审查银行对客户的待遇，我想再次呼吁MAS及相关部门，重申我此前多次在议会提出的观点，即对涉及银行客户在线被骗储蓄的诈骗，应采取消费者保护的视角。
近期，MAS已有相关努力——最初称为风险分担框架或风险分配框架，视评论者角度而定。但关键点是：我们对银行消费者安全的处理方式，不应与市场上其他更有形产品的消费者安全相差太远。
正如我不久前向MAS国务部长所述，若一家公司有消费产品，若有人被陌生人诱骗错误配置该产品，导致人身伤害或财产损失，甚至损失毕生积蓄，我们知道消费者保护的做法会是怎样。
我们看到车辆方面，如果车辆设计存在缺陷，容易导致人为错误或人为错误造成灾难性后果，该车辆必须召回，制造商将受到非常严肃的处理。
昨天，在向通讯及资讯部长提交的关于操作系统的书面质询中，值得注意的是，某一操作系统几乎占据了警方知悉的所有网络银行诈骗案件，而另一种不同的操作系统在该议会书面答复中报告的数字中几乎没有出现。因此，我们再次看到这些消费产品之间的情况截然不同。
我再次呼吁政府关注消费者保护，确保制造商以及包括金融机构在内的服务提供者承担责任，这种责任方式不应与社会其他领域有太大差别。
如果你的家庭拥有一辆汽车，而该车设计存在问题导致人身伤害或你失去全部积蓄，你知道制造商必须做什么。如果你家厨房有一台家用电器，有人能骗你按错按钮，导致有人受伤并失去积蓄，你也知道对该家电的处理方式会是怎样。
我呼吁政府、金融管理局及其他机构认真审视金融机构和银行，问问自己：银行、电信公司和科技公司在数字世界中是否承担了与实体商品提供者在物理世界中相当的责任？这是我发言的第一部分，议长先生。
我发言的第二部分将谈论人工智能时代以及新加坡需要如何适应。我去年在总统致辞辩论时谈过这个话题。去年初，我谈及人工智能时代，那是一个令人谦卑的时刻，因为演讲发表后在网上稍有传播，我估计全球大约有十多万人观看——并不算多。但我们开始收到来自世界各地的邮件和信息，有美国的，有非洲的，触动了人们的心弦。但这不是关于那次演讲，而是关于新加坡对世界的意义。当人们看到我们的议员，无论是部长、官员，还是不同派别的后座议员，关注未来世界的样貌时，人们会关注新加坡的思考，并希望我们能找到前进的道路。
因此，关于人工智能和深度伪造问题，我也有一些建议供政府考虑。其中一些我曾在议会质询和演讲中提出过，但让我再次重申。
深度伪造问题将成为全球民主国家的严重问题——因为如果我们无法轻易辨别真假，就无法拥有正常运作的民主。无论哪个政党执政，没有这种审议性民主讨论的基本基础，都无法治理任何国家。
这意味着，作为社会，我们需要预先应对这一问题。不久前，首相在Facebook帖子中提到，有一个深度伪造视频显示他试图推销某些投资产品，那是个假视频。但那只是深度伪造1.0。往前推三年、五年、十年，随着计算能力提升，你可以想象那些深度伪造将多么逼真。因此，作为社会和政府，我们不能回避，必须预先采取行动应对深度伪造问题。
我呼吁政府研究电子水印内容的方法，即所谓的“人类证明”，无论是证明与AI机器人交易时是人类，还是与可能由AI提供答案的科技公司在线互动，关键是我们需要确认内容是真实且由人类产生的方式。
我们还需要继续从源头做起，正如我昨天在质询时间对教育部长所说的。从小培养和教育我们的年轻新加坡人、我们的子孙后代，让他们更加意识到深度伪造的存在及其微妙之处。
简而言之，前不久一位来自金文泰的年轻朋友分享了他对深度伪造的担忧，说“你知道，有些看起来有点可疑”。但关键是，第一步是培养健康的怀疑精神，感知某些东西可能有点“可疑”，同时不失去对社会前进能力的信心。
这当然是全政府的努力，需要多方面着手，包括教育、监管、社会规范，确保科技公司也承担责任。但我们必须迅速行动，因为一旦魔鬼完全脱瓶，马已逃走，重建这些规范和重塑我们社会的民主进程将更加困难。
总之，议长先生，我有两个关键点，但根本上是从人民的视角看问题。
第一，从消费者的视角看，确保数字领域和金融领域的公司，包括零售银行服务，在线上对消费者保护的态度与我们对家庭中线下有形产品的消费者保护态度一致。
第二，同样从人民的视角看，在我们必须应对深度伪造的世界中，培训和教育人民更好地识别，以保护新加坡这一宝贵理念，在一个不断被人工智能颠覆的世界中。
我还想强调一点，我们需要加倍投资于政府和产业的人工智能能力。虽然提到了人工智能路线图2.0，但有时我们也应问自己，是否可以有更高的雄心。
根据公开信息，如果我没记错，不久前不到十年前，微软向OpenAI投资了10亿美元。当时看似很大一笔投资，但回头看，这笔投资相当划算，考虑到OpenAI的发展。这也呼应我几年前在预算辩论中提出的观点：有时我们提前投资市场，投资某些今天看似脆弱但未来可能高回报的技术能力，意味着我们能在未来获得红利。
如今许多大型科技公司，无论是苹果、谷歌、Meta（前Facebook），在早期都不被看好为稳妥投资。但那些愿意下注的人获得了丰厚回报，成为今天的科技巨头。
因此，随着我们进入人工智能和数字世界技术的下一个阶段，让我们思考哪些投资今天看似脆弱，但未来能让新加坡成为世界级能力强国。
议长先生，感谢您允许我发言。我支持田佩玲女士的动议。[掌声]
议长：陈洁仪女士。
下午2时22分
陈洁仪（东海岸）：议长先生，我们通讯及资讯全职议员倡导所有利益相关者承诺建设包容且安全的数字社会，因为技术进步改变了我们的生活、工作和娱乐方式。这些变化带来了便捷和快速的访问能力、连接和互动能力，带来了好处，也带来了新的能力和机会。
正如我们在新冠疫情期间所见，数字连接使人们能够持续获取及时信息、服务和沟通。企业和工作得以继续——虽然是虚拟的。
越来越多的生活服务通过数字方式提供。从日常任务如叫出租车或私家车、点餐或预订餐厅、支付、获取信息或导航，到访问和办理政府服务及银行交易。甚至获取折扣也需要扫描二维码或上网。某些机构的求职申请和面试也在线进行。最新新闻一发生就能数字化获取，甚至实时更新。
如果个人被数字排斥，他或她将无法及时获得信息、服务及其好处。因此，确保没有人被落下，在我们日益数字化的过程中尤为重要。
虽然《新加坡数字社会报告2023》令人鼓舞地显示，新加坡99%的家庭拥有互联网接入，且即使是老年人中数字技术和技能的采用率也更高，但信息通信媒体发展局的研究显示，虽然新加坡人更愿意尝试新技术，但只有55%的18岁及以上人士和24%的老年人知道如何使用带有语音识别、虚拟或增强现实等新兴技术的设备和应用。
新加坡采取数字优先但非数字唯一的策略，作为核心组织原则，既利用创新潜力和生产力，又确保不熟悉数字技术的人不会被排除在基本服务之外。
但在继续提供非数字选项的同时，我们必须努力鼓励和使尽可能多的人参与数字化。如果不这样做，在数字优先但非数字唯一的社会中，不使用数字的人将错过数字带来的便利、及时性和好处。
举个简单例子，社区发展理事会（CDC）代金券的领取方式说明了这一点。你可以去社区俱乐部（CC）领取实体CDC代金券。这样做需要你在开放时间内抽时间去CC。如果幸运的话，没有排队，你也不用等就能领取代金券再使用。相反，如果你用Singpass在线“领取”CDC代金券，只需一分钟甚至更短时间，就能继续使用代金券。
这一点适用于我们进行的许多其他交易，如银行业务。你可以去银行办理交易，但需要出行和时间，还必须在银行营业时间内进行。通过网上银行，你可以随时随地办理。
这引出了数字安全和韧性这一关键点，影响信任和采用。你听过前面所有发言者谈到的担忧、风险和危险。但我想补充几点。
数字包容不仅仅是接入。它必须伴随有效且安全使用数字技术的能力，以及对数字环境和平台安全性与韧性的信任，才能真正受益。这包括保持网络安全的重要技能，如如何安全互动、如何保护个人隐私、如何有效搜索和辨别信息。
新技术的日益使用确实带来风险，防范网络风险、诈骗和虚假信息的保障措施对于增强信心和信任至关重要。
随着诈骗者使用更复杂的技术和工具，受害人数和损失金额显著增加。特别令人关注的是未经授权的交易。
虽然已有包括立法在内的措施保护网络空间免受有害内容侵害，政府机构也持续与关键服务和数字平台提供者合作，防止、检测和追回诈骗资金，但仍需更多努力保障数字交易和在线交易安全，保护弱势用户。
谈到弱势用户，我们往往想到老年人和数字技能较弱者。遗憾的是，我曾接触过既有老年人也有年轻人被骗失去积蓄，向我求助。
最近，一位20多岁的年轻居民来找我帮忙，她努力攒钱，花了几年时间积累储蓄，但因一次在线交易不幸失去所有积蓄。更糟的是，她的银行账户信息和信用卡资料被盗，导致未经授权的信用卡付款。
基本上，这意味着随着新技术和复杂工具的出现，用户的数字素养不足以防范数字风险。我们必须对政府、平台运营商、电信公司和设备制造商提出更高要求，提升安全标准，加强用户在其平台和服务上的在线安全。
但在谈论危险和风险的同时，也存在机遇。随着我们对所有大型参与者和关键利益相关者提出更多要求，我认为这也是新加坡平台和服务提供者的机会。新加坡是一个先进市场，连接水平高，如我之前所述，居民拥有智能手机的比例也高。根据我引用的报告，老年人拥有智能手机的比例已升至89%。这为平台和服务提供者利用新加坡作为创新基地，应用并展示更高安全标准提供了机会。我敦促所有参与者这样做，因为随着政府推动措施，如果所有参与者齐心协力，将是尝试新事物的绝佳机会，正如陈武明博士所说，真正让新加坡成为数字空间中重建信任和信心的展示窗口。
正如我所提，建立数字采用的信任和信心至关重要。我还想补充一点，《新加坡数字社会报告2023》显示，55%的15岁及以上新加坡人愿意接受使用技术带来的风险，而60岁及以上人群中仅有33%。所以，人们意识到风险，但我们现在需要管理这些风险。
现在让我谈谈用户角色和公众教育。产业参与者和政府在加强数字安全、保障和提升使用这些应用和在线系统人员的数字素养方面发挥重要作用。公众教育和为特定群体如老年人和弱势群体提供数字素养培训已见成效，促进了采用。但仍需更多持续努力，因为数字空间不断变化。
但我想强调的是我们每个人的角色。我们必须提醒自己，保护自己在现实生活中的做法也应应用于数字世界。例如，在现实生活中，我们让某人进入家门前会核实身份，不会让可疑或不认识的人进门。我们不会将身份证、银行账户信息或ATM卡交给不认识或不信任的人。同样的原则和做法必须应用于线上和数字设备及应用的使用。否则，无论采取何种措施和立法提升数字安全，都无法保护我们在数字交易中的安全。因此，我们每个人都必须尽责。
让我谈几个其他点。
虽然数字素养使我们能进行数字交易，但人们在交易遇到问题时，获得帮助解决问题的能力有时相当具有挑战性，因为目前支持渠道的结构。除非你是诈骗受害者，否则大多数提供的服务热线需要较多导航。优先支持诈骗受害者是必要的，但数字服务用户在交易遇到问题时也需要支持解决交易问题。
我同意鉴于人力、成本和能力限制，提供支持具有挑战性。但随着商业和政府服务越来越数字优先，我们需要重新思考支持模式，寻找更有效方式，为用户在数字交易遇到问题时提供及时支持。这将增强数字信任和信心。尤其是涉及资金交易时，可能引发用户焦虑，无论年轻或年长。
我还想谈谈数字包容的另一个方面，即参与机会的能力。新技术领域，包括人工智能，具有赋能新能力、引发变革、创造新方式和新机会的潜力。
新加坡继续制定雄心勃勃的计划，利用新技术促进增长，为我们的人民和企业带来利益。一个例子是新加坡第二个国家人工智能战略（NAIS 2.0），该战略于去年12月由副总理黄循财发布。它概述了人工智能的机遇与风险，同时也阐明了我们建设一个值得信赖且负责任的人工智能生态系统的雄心和承诺，通过人工智能推动创新和增长，并赋能我们的人民和企业理解并参与人工智能。但这也需要新的治理模式。
所以，我的观点是，要实现这些雄心勃勃的计划，我们需要具备新技术和网络安全领域技能的人才。为什么？这是为了构建深思熟虑的设计和解决方案，真正从这些新技术中受益。这也意味着为新加坡人创造优质就业岗位。但要抓住这些机会，需要新的技能。组织必须投资支持员工构建新技能，教育机构必须为学生和在职人员准备这些机会，所有年龄和职业阶段的个人必须开放学习并抓住新机会。政府和私营部门必须投资培养深厚技能。
新技术将带来新的工作方式，这不仅仅是技术问题。我们需要新的思维和理念。这让我想到了多元化劳动力的问题。多元化劳动力能够让组织利用不同的视角、技能和经验，因为发展新理念、在数字社会中成长和繁荣需要这些。这是可能的。在此，我想对雇主和组织强调，我们必须利用资深员工丰富的财富和经验，将其纳入多元化劳动力中，使我们能够找到新方法，年轻人和年长者共同利用技术创造新的工作方式。
现在让我总结一下。虽然我们讨论建设包容和安全的数字社会，但本议案的核心是我们的人民。这不仅仅是成为数字先进社会，拥有最佳基础设施、政策、技能或卓越水平和技术采纳。所有这些都是必要的，但包容和安全的数字社会的目的是确保每个人都能积极参与并受益，使生活更美好，没有人被落下。但要实现这一目标，需要我们所有人尽力促成包容、可信赖和安全的数字社会。
议长先生：副教授林志明。
下午2时37分
副教授林志明（盛港）：议长先生，议会中的其他成员，特别是我尊敬的朋友林秀燕女士，之前已经阐述了为何金融管理局（MAS）的共享责任框架（SRF）不充分且不公正的理由。
虽然我支持现有议案，但我将在今天的发言中详细说明为何该框架在目前构想下，仍然根本不公平，与其宣称的公平分担目标形成鲜明对比。
官方新闻稿描述该框架时指出，我引用：“所有各方都有责任保持警惕并采取防范诈骗的措施。”金融机构需要实施强有力的控制措施，保护客户账户，检测并打击可疑交易。客户需要采取预防措施，不轻易泄露银行凭证，并保持网络卫生。损失将根据各方未履行责任的程度进行分配。
表面上看，这一切似乎合理。但实际上，诈骗几乎总是针对链条中较弱的一环，在本案中即是脆弱的消费者，而非相对装备更好、技术更先进的银行或电信公司。因此，所谓公平分担框架实际上更多是责任分配，而非公平分配损失。损失发生时，消费者往往承担绝大部分。换句话说，只有当责任分配公平时，我们才应期待该框架产生公平结果。
任何在市场上讨价还价买鱼或蔬菜，或与雇主谈判薪资，或参与家务分配讨论的人都深知权力差异的重要性，以及最终“蛋糕”如何被分割。
这不仅是猜测。大量关于谈判理论的文献表明，拥有权力的一方在谈判中往往占优势。在明确对抗的谈判中，经典模型显示更有耐心且能先发制人的一方拥有优势。
即使考虑到各方看到合作利益并将其纳入谈判，结果仍然严重受制于各方相对谈判力。此外，更能轻松放弃谈判的一方往往表现更好。
仔细观察涉及诈骗索赔和解的双方，很明显谁拥有更大权力、耐心和坚持立场的能力，那就是银行。
金融机构不仅规模更大。如果他们能证明在执行诈骗转账时没有失误，目前可以合理拒绝承担任何损失。即使发生核销，通常也只是机构资产负债表中的一小部分。
相比之下，诈骗往往对存款人造成毁灭性打击。极端情况下，可能是个人全部积蓄，甚至可能让无辜的“洗钱人”背负沉重债务。那么，什么样的分配最能体现分配正义？
虽然存在差异，许多人认为50/50分配或接近此比例，是大多数谈判情形下唯一公正的解决方案。重要的是，50/50分配不应被视为双方承担相等的名义份额，而是指各方承担与其承受能力相称的负担。
这就是为何政府需要介入，为存款人提供更强有力的法律保护。最简单的法律可能是限制诈骗交易责任的最高金额。
我曾在去年关于《金融服务与市场法案》的发言中提出此点。这里我将详细说明为何这样做不仅有助于纠正客户与银行之间的权力不平衡，也为何这是根本公平的。
议长先生，政府于2022年初首次向议会透露正在制定损失分担框架。年底时解释进展比预期慢，发布被推迟至去年中。金融管理局最终于10月发布联合咨询文件，但范围极为有限，仅涉及网络钓鱼诈骗。
更重要的是，该框架提议采用“瀑布式方法”，即金融机构和电信运营商仅在“未履行各自规定职责”时承担全部损失，若被认定已履责，则无需向消费者赔付。
遗憾的是，这种方法将免除金融机构和通信公司业务成本，只要他们履行了职责。虽然这不排除其他解决机制，如金融行业争议解决中心（FIDReC），但在初步责任分配上仍显轻率。SRF基于努力分配，而非结果。换言之，只要金融机构或电信运营商能证明已满足某些义务——坦率说，这些义务甚至不全面——其损失份额不会是半数，甚至不会是三分之一或四分之一，可能是零。这显然不公平。
打个比方，想象两辆车并排行驶。两位司机都有责任不超速并保持车道。如果前车突然刹车，后车应保持安全距离。但如果两车并排行驶，有孩子突然跑到其中一辆车前方，若一车为避让而转向，另一车未让路，很难说只有一方应承担事故责任。
金融诈骗虽然通过良好系统设计和尽职调查可在一定程度上预防，但几乎不可避免，无论双方多么努力。正如上述比喻，责任很少能明确归咎于一方。因此，双方共同承担部分损失是公平的。
当然，这样的立法可能被视为鲁莽。批评者常用的论调是，保护客户免受诈骗后果会降低他们采取必要防范措施的意愿，即所谓的道德风险——一方受保护，另一方则更少谨慎。
虽然我原则上理解此论点，但粗暴应用此理论存在问题。首先，这种论调对新加坡人的能动性信心不足。毕竟，谁愿意成为诈骗受害者？
即使后果有限，大多数人仍会积极采取措施防范犯罪，即使没有明显回报。此外，就像大多数保险计划中的共付额，只要储户需承担一定合理损失——比如最高100元或500元——就难以说消费者激励与打击诈骗不一致。
我们不应认为只有灾难性损失才会促使个人保持必要的网络卫生。没人愿意输给骗子100元，如果能避免的话。
当然，这也可能被不法分子利用所谓的受害者保护来直接诈骗银行。但这对任何保险欺诈都适用，已有成熟机制识别并打击此类滥用，尤其当损失更公平分担时。
这自然引出长期间接好处：让双方承担部分损失的制度可能带来金融生态系统一系列有利发展，使其更具韧性。
金融机构将更加重视防范网络钓鱼和诈骗。由于不能将大部分损失成本转嫁给消费者，他们将更积极追查可疑交易，不再容忍用非法资金进行的未授权购买。
诈骗检测和防范工具已存在多年，但生成式人工智能的广泛应用使最新算法的快速部署成本更低且更先进。商户和银行将更加谨慎实施自身防护措施，以免失去电子支付或转账资格。诈骗保险计划可能出现，且因法律要求所有金融机构参与，市场将迅速扩大，保持保险成本合理。
这些发展可能是使系统实现真正公平损失分配的意外但受欢迎的副产品。
政府似乎意识到此类保险机制的潜在好处。在最初讨论公积金相关诈骗时，陈振声部长表示对此类机制持开放态度。但次日，相关部委声明“无意”考虑保险计划。
虽然我理解定价可能最终过高，但令人疑惑的是为何保险概念至少不值得更深入研究。毕竟，即使是有限责任保险——限制诈骗赔付最高金额——也优于完全缺乏此类保护的体系。
议长先生，我的发言大部分聚焦于供应方措施。最后，我将谈谈为何需求方措施虽有边际效用，但终究不足。
银行已与金融管理局及新加坡银行协会合作，独立实施某些功能，为在线交易增加摩擦。例如，在达到每日最大转账限额或其他关键账户功能后实施冷静期；移除电子邮件或短信中的可点击链接。
但值得注意的是，这些措施自2022年1月推出以来，若以过去两年诈骗持续增长为鉴，单靠这些措施仍不足以遏制金融诈骗潮。
银行还可考虑采取其他障碍措施。例如，要求某些账户持有人群，如老年人或技术不熟练者，加入一项计划，指定一名可信赖的个人（如亲属）作为第二把钥匙，需批准异常交易。但这几乎肯定会带来冲突和控制问题，比如即使是善意的家庭成员也可能限制他人使用自己的资金。
同样，冷静期仅在受害者意识到或接受自己被骗时有效。诈骗者常利用受害者的信任、天真或不安全感，巧妙规避此类保护措施。
除非我们认为自己绝不会成为受害者，否则请记住许多诈骗者是极其高明的骗子，甚至专业人士也可能上当，正如警方心理服务部门2018年研究所示。
议长先生，政府提出的损失分担框架是确立金融诈骗责任的进步。但基于我所述理由，我认为其未能实现公平的根本承诺。这导致数字交易信任逐渐流失，若不迅速解决，可能引发在线支付和数字金融的信心危机。
为重建信任，监管机构应要求金融机构和通信公司实际承担损失，消费者责任上限设为100元或500元，以应对不可避免且不幸的损失。这不仅公平，也有助于长期推动系统向更稳健方向发展。
议长先生：纳迪娅·萨姆丁女士。
下午2时53分
纳迪娅·艾哈迈德·萨姆丁女士（宏茂桥）：议长先生，我支持本议案，并声明本人是SG Her Empowerment董事会成员，该非营利平台致力于推动性别平等，赋能新加坡各阶层个人。我的发言将引用性犯罪事件。
议长先生，我代表受害者和幸存者发言。
大约五年前，SG Nasi Lemak电报群组成立。成千上万张未经同意的女性和女学生的色情照片和视频被分发给超过44,000名成员。
大约半年前，一位TikTok内容创作者制作的约会节目因对特殊需求人士的敏感度不足及似乎利用他们而遭批评。
大约一个月前，一位65岁的新加坡退休老人15天内失去了全部积蓄。我的一位居民的祖母在六天内通过115笔交易被骗走积蓄。这都是网络诈骗的结果。
上周，有报道称英国警方正在调查一起涉嫌在元宇宙中对一名青少年虚拟化身进行团伙强奸的案件。
这些仅是部分例子。对许多人来说，数字世界提供了认同感、联系和便利。不幸的是，它也可能导致网络虐待、网络喷子和痛苦的诈骗，尤其对脆弱群体造成严重伤害。
社会变化比以往任何时候都快，新技术影响生活方方面面，从下班后的电子邮件，到班级的WhatsApp群聊，再到轻点屏幕共享位置。新冠疫情也推动了我们的世界大部分转向线上，从买菜到Zoom会议。
但仅有技术接入和使用能力不足以应对危险。我们必须超越此点，迈向数字福祉和数字公民意识，让每个人都感到被包容并有能力安全参与网络空间。
政府为此已采取了重大举措，特别是在数字接入方面，并坚决反对利用技术实施的性暴力。例如，信息通信媒体发展局（MCI）的“数字生活基金”资助包容性项目，赋能所有新加坡人拥抱数字化。
2023年7月，信息通信媒体发展局（IMDA）实施了《网络安全行为准则》，要求指定的社交媒体服务提升新加坡的网络安全，遏制其平台上传播的色情内容、暴力内容、自杀及自残内容。
然而，营造更安全的网络空间需要全社会共同努力；今天我将围绕内容、沟通和网络习惯这三个“C”展开发言。
每天，大约有3400万个视频上传到抖音（TikTok），1500万个数字版电报（Telegram）消息被发送。我们的现代社会渴望内容，也热衷于创造内容。我想强调三个后果——除了越来越多的朋友可能会挨饿，而手机镜头先“吃”了饭，为了发Instagram故事，因为如果你不发，事情真的发生了吗？
首先，算法为创作者提供了接触大量观众的机会。但对完美内容的策划可能损害自尊。研究显示，社交媒体的使用似乎在延续负面身体观念和加剧饮食失调方面起作用。年轻女孩和男孩被推送关于不切实际的身体期望和激进节食的视频和建议。
这种滤镜生活的观念也制造不满，加剧社会比较。为了快速获得点赞而制作视频的压力，也可能导致未经核实或耸人听闻的内容，真相为流行度让步。
其次，一些用户，包括易受影响的未成年人，为了获得认可而制作暗示性内容，有时受到同龄人或恶意行为者的怂恿。这与成年人内容创作者不同，后者对自己的行为有控制并意识到后果。
我呼吁平台和应用加强年龄验证措施，更好地保护年轻用户免受有害内容侵害，并实施更完善的验证和限制措施。
当然，在数字赋权的社会中，仅仅禁止青少年使用设备或没收设备是不够的。我们还必须为他们创造一个安全的环境，让他们在好奇时有依靠，并在不幸情况下获得可信且有效的支持。
第三，我谈到了许多社交媒体渠道销售、鼓励和传播未经同意及非法获取的色情材料。几个月前，我们被一则令人震惊的新闻震撼：七名男子早在2010年就在一个网络论坛相识，讨论共享妻子的幻想并付诸行动，甚至直播这些行为。
我们能采取哪些措施防止施害者实施如此恶劣的行为，保护作为母亲、姐妹和朋友的女性和女孩？如何追究网络论坛和社交媒体服务的责任？他们允许有害内容流传的时间越长，且服务器位于海外时响应用户举报的时效性越差，我们如何防止此类事件再次发生？
最重要的是，良好的网络习惯始于建立在尊重基础上的富有同情心和安全的线下世界。网络性伤害事件往往涉及权力和羞辱元素。为了控制受害者，性暴力施害者往往采用操控和胁迫等手段。
施害者不一定从行为本身获得满足感，而是赋予男性权力的意义，这可能凌驾于行为目标之上。
因此，我们创造、规范和传播关于女性的内容至关重要。我们如何推广基于能力的性别平等信息，超越刻板印象、物化和过度性化？
除了内容，网络空间也是我们相互交流的场所。但在一个陌生人多于沟通、观点分歧且迥异的世界里，我们如何营造一个尊重的空间？
遗憾的是，我们经常看到带有种族主义或粗鲁言论的评论。有时这些伪装成“友好评论”，或由匿名喷子账号发布，其创作者在现实生活中可能不会当面发表此类言论，但在网络背后却感到有恃无恐。
虽然他们的怨气可能真实存在，但我们必须在数字教育方面做得更好，使人们不失去基本的同情心和包容心，并理解愤怒发言的后果。
我们如何突破算法和过滤气泡，这些机制似乎无一例外地确认我们已有的信念和偏见，同时隐藏挑战我们思维的内容？这种气泡导致社会极化和分裂，甚至现实生活中的朋友也无法接纳不同的观点或频率。
关于网络习惯及我们如何将社交媒体融入日常生活，存在两个极端。一方面是对技术的恐惧，阻碍参与，例如老年人会刻意避开只接受电子支付的摊位；另一方面是个别人可能沉迷社交媒体，过度消费内容或参与网络赌博。
我们如何更好地装备各年龄层和不同素养水平的个体，培养积极的网络习惯？先生，社区发挥着作用。基于社区的数字干预和创新是我们作为人民能够承担责任并解决这些问题的关键途径。例如，NUGU是一款基于群组的应用，已被用来改善自我调节的智能手机使用，且效果显著。在我的选区正山-实里达，一群名为正山查帕朗俱乐部的青年以多种语言和方言为长者举办一对一数字工作坊，提升他们的数字素养。非营利组织如新加坡网络青年也发挥重要作用。2022年启动的“安全上网倡议”旨在培养中学生更安全的网络习惯，迄今已覆盖33,944名学生。
除了项目，归根结底是培养积极且值得信赖的互联网文化。这对确保每个人都能充分参与尤为重要，包括有特殊需要的朋友。研究显示，网络生活可能为自闭症等个体提供安全感。在数字空间，他们对沟通和参与方式拥有更大控制权，促进了互动中的平静感。政府还能做些什么来装备和赋能特殊需要人士，实现数字参与和独立生活？
技术可以成为伟大的平衡器，让你在网上社区找到患有相同罕见疾病的支持者，或在线约会，或在虚拟现实中游览现实中可能永远无法见到的地方，或成为团队游戏中的英雄。但这只有在特殊需要人士能够利用辅助技术并以符合其世界理解方式学习数字技能时才能实现。
数字赋能计划自启动以来已服务多少人？是否有计划进一步搭建数字结构，例如创建专门网站，培育无障碍和包容性的在线平台？
当然，社会努力必须辅以严格的政策和执法。随着技术进步速度加快，监管者难以跟上步伐，在灰色地带，事实上的规则有时由不一定以公众利益为重的主导者制定。
从数据隐私、内容监管、网络伤害到人工智能，欧盟（EU）、美国和澳大利亚等司法管辖区也在制定新规。然而，这带来了自身的复杂性。数字空间并不总是止于物理边界，数字治理和法规的碎片化可能导致法律拼凑，恶意分子利用漏洞游走，例如隐藏在复杂IP地址背后的诈骗者。
最终，受害的往往是无辜者。除了有效调查，我们如何更好地为网络诈骗受害者提供情感和心理支持，帮助他们应对深刻的失落感和不公？
执法同样关键，社交媒体平台发挥重要作用。2023年7月，谷歌推出了YouTube优先举报者计划，授权社区合作伙伴接受培训，评估违反YouTube社区准则的内容。这些优先举报者包括Touch和SG Her Empowerment等组织，能够直接向谷歌举报内容，使问题内容优先审查。
通过让社区在内容审查和建立信任安全方面发挥更大作用，有助于打造更具韧性的互联网文化。先生，请允许我简短地用马来语发言。
（马来语）：[请参阅方言发言。] 在当今世界，我们不断被技术包围。技术帮助我们，但也可能伤害我们。我们的数字社区必须建立彼此信任，无论年龄和背景如何，方法包括：
理解算法如何运作，谨慎避免沉迷于算法，以致不再考虑其他观点。我们也可能因所展示内容而陷入狭隘观点，这类内容可能在社会中制造紧张。因此，培养健康的网络习惯非常重要，以便我们能在日常生活中受益于技术。
其次，即使在屏幕后也要谨慎沟通。技术让许多人有机会表达他们关心的问题，但也成为网络伤害的平台。根据本地独立非营利组织SG Her Empowerment（SHE）的一项研究，五分之三的新加坡人经历过网络伤害或认识经历过的人。隐藏身份的能力让许多“键盘侠”有了信心，敢于在线发表评论，而现实中不敢直接对人说或做。许多此类案件被举报，其中一起涉及2021年对本地女性阿萨提扎（宗教教师）的猥亵调查。谨慎沟通，以及提高对网络伤害受害者的意识和支持，必将对我们努力为社会各阶层创造安全网络空间产生重大影响。
（英语）：先生，每一次技术进步都伴随着风险。问题不在于如何阻止潮流，而在于我们如何迅速改变作为数字社区的相互尊重和保护方式，作为在线世界的平等参与者。为此，我希望国家继续推进灵活、协作、包容、赋能且以人为本的国家数字战略。
议长先生：副教授拉兹瓦娜·贝古姆。
下午3点08分
副教授拉兹瓦娜·贝古姆·阿卜杜勒·拉希姆（提名议员）：议长先生，感谢尊敬的议员陈佩玲女士与沙拉尔·塔哈先生、苏涵妮女士、陈洁茵女士和任亚历克斯先生共同提出这项重要动议。
陈佩玲女士在发言中提出了若干策略，强调需要采取全面的全民方法，与私营和公共部门合作，建设包容且安全的数字社会。
我支持这项动议。我的发言来自教育视角，聚焦共同责任、意识和问责。
2014年，新加坡启动了智慧国计划，愿景是打造“一个人们能够更有能力过上有意义且充实生活的国家，技术无缝支持，提供激动人心的机会给所有人”。
多年来，我们取得了良好进展，在医疗、交通、金融和教育等关键领域实现显著转型。新加坡因其成功而闻名。根据瑞士商学院管理发展研究所发布的2023年智慧城市指数，新加坡是亚洲最智慧的城市，全球排名第七。
议长先生，这是了不起的成就，我们的持续成功依赖于包容性以及确保所有新加坡人都能从定义智慧国格局的技术进步中受益的承诺。然而，我们必须做得更多，确保无论年龄、种族或社会背景，每个人都能充分受益于数字服务，并能有意义地参与数字世界。
在分享我对建设包容且安全数字社会的更多看法之前，我想指出一些担忧。
先生，随着我们迈向数字互联的未来，网络安全威胁增加。数字诈骗攻击上升，去年新加坡遭遇了3200万次此类攻击。根据新加坡警察部队数据，2023年上半年，诈骗和网络犯罪案件接近2.5万起，比2022年同期增长近70%。值得关注的是，这些犯罪受害者中超过50%是20至39岁的年轻成年人。
诈骗手法也在变化。就在上周，媒体报道了美国发生的一起网络绑架诈骗案，受害者是一名17岁的外国学生。
数字空间并不免疫于现实世界存在的社会问题。网络骚扰、歧视和仇恨言论普遍存在，影响各年龄段和不同背景的人士。
根据本地独立非营利组织SG Her Empowerment最近的一项调查，报告个人经历过网络骚扰或歧视的受访者中，52%年龄在15至24岁之间。同一调查显示，五分之二的受害者报告因骚扰或歧视经历至少遭受一次严重后果，包括身心健康问题和自杀念头。
议长先生，数据表明年轻人风险更大。这一点由尊敬的议员陈洁茵女士和纳迪娅·桑丁女士强调。数据也显示我们意识到问题的严重性，并正逐步通过强有力的立法和监管来缓解局势。
此时，我要赞扬政府的积极主动，持续关注这些问题。同时感谢众多社区机构持续支持犯罪受害者并提供预防教育项目。他们的参与强化了与社区部门合作的重要性。采取全民方法时，必须认识到社区机构在与受害者及潜在施害者合作中的作用。
既然我已指出当前挑战，接下来分享我的潜在策略。
首先，数字信任。议长先生，数字进步时代带来创新、连接和经济扩展的诸多可能。但要释放这些潜力，需要信任和共同责任。与大多数由私营部门驱动技术创新的国家不同，新加坡政府在此领域扮演核心角色。这种做法取得显著成果，使新加坡处于全球前沿。
例如，凭借超过50万个警察监控摄像头和基于网络的警察门户，新加坡被视为世界上最安全的国家之一。众所周知，安全是马斯洛需求层次中的基础需求。在新加坡，我们很好地满足了这一需求。
随着我们继续拥抱数字化，也在积极推动公民参与，注重共创。但我们还需努力培养共同责任感，培育积极公民意识。议长先生，请允许我举例说明。
作为新加坡社会科学大学公共安全与安保项目负责人，我与多组学生合作，解决网络犯罪、诈骗，特别是技术促成的性暴力问题。我自豪地分享，自2020年以来，我项目的学生在社区机构支持下，开发了多个社区参与项目，提高公众对技术促成性暴力的认识。
该项目的关键经验之一是需要让年轻人积极参与，利用他们的社交网络提高意识。
通过让可能使用数字服务并可能受到其伤害的人参与，提出并实施有效机制防止非法行为，年轻人还能通过教育潜在施害者帮助解决行为根源。这类举措也为可能经历心理健康问题的年轻人提供了寻求帮助的机会。
其次，数字素养。议长先生，要建设安全的数字社会，政府和企业必须在国内外合作，优先保障网络安全。然而，尽管政府和包括企业在内的私营部门有责任，网络安全攻击往往针对消费者。因此，提升消费者的网络安全意识至关重要。
赋予个人在数字世界中导航的知识和技能是根本的。随着我们推进智慧国计划，重点放在创新和提高生产力的同时，我们应同步加强全民的数字素养。通过这样做，我们可以确保每个人，无论年龄或背景，都能利用技术的优势，同时了解相关风险。
同样重要的是认识到，赋权不仅仅是拥有做某些事情的能力。它还涉及培养负责任的行为和问责制。这不仅仅是向个人分享和告知“该做与不该做”的事情。需要做更多工作，真正赋予个人在数字世界中保护自己和他人隐私的能力和责任感。
前进的一种方式是考虑引入对负责任的网络行为的激励，无论是通过表彰计划还是其他实质性奖励。积极的强化可以激励公民积极为社区福祉做出贡献。
第三，数字公民身份。议长先生，所有使用电子设备上网并与他人互动的人都是数字世界的数字公民。数字公民身份要求个人在网上负责任地行事，遵守法律，保护隐私，管理声誉，并考虑自己的网络行为如何影响自己、熟人及更广泛的数字社区。议长先生，请简短用马来语表达。
（马来语）：[请参阅本地语言发言。]数字公民身份指的是个人在使用技术和虚拟世界时负责任且审慎行事的概念。
父母在塑造一代在数字世界中明智且负责任行事的人方面发挥重要作用，通过提供良好的指导和支持。
在此背景下需要教给孩子的价值观包括法律意识、保护隐私、管理声誉，以及考虑其网络行为对自己和全球数字社区的影响。
（英语）：在新冠疫情期间，数字工具的使用成为必需。数字工具使世界得以继续运转，通过远程工作保持经济活力。成年人并非唯一受益者，儿童和年轻人广泛依赖数字工具进行教育和娱乐。
当时我们处于危机模式，必须迅速反应和即兴应对。现在环境稳定，父母和教师应支持并指导孩子如何在网络环境中安全且负责任地沟通与协作。
正如所有孩子都需要父母和教师的帮助成为好公民，今天被称为数字原住民的年轻人也需要指导，学习如何在数字世界中应用公民原则。推广数字公民价值观，强调同理心、宽容和包容，将促进积极的网络文化，确保安全且更和谐的数字社会。
议长先生，总结来说，构建一个安全且包容的数字社会是一项复杂挑战，需要全民参与，包括个人、社区、政府和企业的合作。通过提升数字信任、推进数字素养和培养数字公民文化，我们可以为未来奠定基础，使每个人都能参与并在数字世界中茁壮成长。
让我们共同塑造一个新加坡，一个智慧国，同时也是一个安全国，数字社会体现人类最美好的品质——一个有韧性、包容且基于平等与尊重原则的社会。基于此，我支持该动议。
议长先生：何丽莹女士。
下午3时20分
何丽莹（马西岭-裕地） ：议长先生，为了建设一个包容且安全的数字社会，三方主体必须各尽其责。正如拉兹瓦娜副教授刚才与我们分享的，基于相互信任和共同责任，企业和社区伙伴持续为用户提供在快速变化的数字社会中所需的技能，或为无法使用数字技术的人提供无障碍选项，同时帮助遏制网络威胁，如诈骗，并教育公众。
我很高兴注意到近年来，我们伍德格罗夫的多个社区伙伴已努力使数字社会对社区所有人更具可及性。一个很好的例子是位于伍德格罗夫福春邻里中心的POSB伍德兰西分行。翻新后，该分行现仅提供全天候24小时自助银行服务，分行员工仍在正常营业时间内为客户，尤其是长者，指导如何使用新型柜员机访问所需服务。该分行还设有社区空间，专门举办多语言讲座和研讨会，旨在进一步教育居民有关数字银行和电子支付服务。
我还要感谢新加坡数字办公室（SDO）的数字大使们，他们在2023年支持了伍德格罗夫共12场以长者为中心的社区活动，如长者嘉年华和数字技能提升工作坊。
尽管福春社区中心的SG数字社区中心因正在进行重大升级工程而关闭，SDO仍与基层组织紧密合作，在伍德格罗夫多个地点设立流动柜台，提高居民对数字技术的认识并激励他们采用数字技术，提升数字技能。
然而，许多伍德格罗夫的长者告诉我，尽管他们现在配备了智能手机，能够使用Facebook和WhatsApp等应用与家人朋友保持联系，但他们仍对独自探索和使用数字世界感到担忧。这不足为奇，因为他们不断听闻新加坡同胞因网络诈骗遭受巨大经济损失的令人心碎的故事。
一个令人警醒的例子是我一位60多岁的伍德格罗夫居民，他因冒充诈骗损失了近80万新元的夫妻积蓄。这笔钱原本是他们朝觐朝圣和退休后生活的保障。
面对几乎每天都有类似诈骗新闻和轶事报道，我们如何确保新加坡人，尤其是长者，对各种数字平台的安全性建立足够信任，开始自信使用，同时保持对不断演变风险的警惕？
我认为大型机构，如银行和电商平台，需要做更多工作防止网络诈骗造成损失并承担相应责任。正如陈武明博士早前所述，方法应以消费者保护为中心。
就在两天前，我在每周的“与民会面”时接待了伍德格罗夫居民余先生，他分享了自去年6月以来与银行的不愉快经历。当时，余先生在网上预订酒店时，因在假冒网站输入一次性密码（OTP）而中招恶意软件。他发现信用卡被未经授权扣款超过6000新元后，立即联系银行客服要求终止交易。但客服告知，由于款项尚未被诈骗者接收，他必须等到下一个月账单作为证据后才能对欺诈交易提出异议。
余先生采纳了客服建议。近六个月后，银行调查完成后回复，要求他承担50%的未经授权交易金额。更令人气愤的是，银行在书面回复中提醒他“务必妥善保管凭证，并参考银行网站了解防诈骗信息”。
因此，余先生对银行拒绝及时终止欺诈交易感到不满和困惑。他还能做什么或做得更好？遇到类似情况的人应如何应对？
与此同时，另一家银行在一篇新闻报道中被采访时表示，其客户因恶意软件诈骗损失全部积蓄，银行同样认为客户“仍是最有效的防线，强烈敦促客户在不断变化的威胁环境中保持警惕和谨慎”。
我不同意两家银行的立场，即他们方便地期望个人客户自我防范。采取这种做法可能阻碍更多人成为数字社会的积极参与者，并导致更多人对银行的信誉失去信心。
所有利益相关者都有共同责任承诺采取全民方法，通过建立包容且安全的数字社会来维持信任。因此，银行可以且应该做更多贡献，如采用更好的反网络钓鱼解决方案、改进身份验证、对异常交易保持高度警惕，以保障账户安全并防止诈骗发生。
我之前提到的那对因冒充诈骗失去全部积蓄的长者夫妇的子女告诉我，银行本可以做更多防止未经授权交易发生。银行应关注客户的常规银行行为。该夫妇的账户多年无取款活动，直到诈骗者通过两笔大额交易取走超过50万新元。银行应在放款前致电确认异常请求。
还有其他方案可帮助保护资金免受诈骗。去年11月，华侨银行推出名为“OCBC Money Lock”的反诈骗安全功能，允许客户锁定账户资金，只有在银行验证客户身份后才能解锁。这是个好举措，我希望金融管理局（MAS）能强制所有新加坡银行推广此功能，并鼓励长者注册。
此外，MAS还可考虑与银行和保险公司合作，推出类似存款保险计划的保险方案，任何银行账户持有人均可购买，以在遭遇网络诈骗时保护资金。
同时，我们应加强金融机构与社区的合作。华侨银行的“数字银发族”计划，以及星展基金会与资讯通信媒体发展局（IMDA）合作的数字素养项目，都是此类举措的典范。如果与前述措施结合，银行还可利用这些工作坊推广“资金锁定”功能和反诈骗保险，鼓励长者注册。我希望这些工作坊能像SDO举办的那样便捷易得，我也将探索如何帮助伍德格罗夫居民受益。最后，请议长允许我用普通话总结。
（普通话）：[请参阅本地语言发言。]近年来，诈骗不断演变，尤其是网络诈骗。不断变化的诈骗手法让许多新加坡人，尤其是长者，感到焦虑和无助。
新加坡并非唯一的诈骗目标国。随着技术进步，全球各国都面临如何打击诈骗的棘手问题。
去年10月，《海峡时报》报道，全球因诈骗造成的年损失高达1.4万亿美元。澳大利亚2022年损失约26亿新元。邻国马来西亚去年12月报告，1月至11月损失高达13亿令吉。
我们如何防止自己成为下一个诈骗目标？一些长者采取“视而不见，听而不闻”的方式以求安全，即根本不尝试。
我认为这绝非理想，会让他们在快速变化的数字社会中更加落后。如今，在中国等国，网购和移动支付已成为社会不可或缺的一部分，现金支付迅速成为过去。
总之，打击诈骗需要全社会共同努力，公众需保持警惕，及时了解各种诈骗类型，政府资助的信息渠道提供支持。同时，企业如银行应协同提升数字安全防护。我们共同努力，提升公众信心，培育包容且安全的数字社会。
议长先生：宝拉女士。
下午3时32分
宝拉女士（非选区议员）：议长先生，我发言支持该动议。
进步新加坡党（PSP）认同建设包容且安全的数字社会需要全民参与。随着社会数字化，网络诈骗种类增多，降低了许多新加坡人对数字工具的信任。关于人们瞬间失去毕生积蓄的恐怖故事屡见不鲜。
去年，我父母将半生积蓄交给我存入我的银行账户，而非他们自己的，因为他们不相信自己的账户资金安全。他们对银行账户资金安全的信任是有生以来最低的。我相信许多先驱和独立世代的新加坡人有同感。
多年来，政府一直推动新加坡人实现财务自立。对大多数人来说，自己的储蓄是维持生活尊严的依靠。储蓄安全受到威胁对我们来说是大事。鉴于问题严重，我认为政府可以做更多工作保障公民储蓄安全，培养强烈的消费者保护文化。
拟议的共享责任框架（SRF）要求金融机构和电信公司承担相关职责以减轻网络钓鱼诈骗，并在职责被违反时向受害者赔付，是朝正确方向迈出的一步，但只是初步。SRF存在两个主要问题。
首先，SRF范围有限，仅涵盖网络钓鱼诈骗，不包括恶意软件诈骗、冒充警察诈骗、投资和恋爱诈骗等其他诈骗类型，保护范围较窄。例如，最近一户家庭因下载恶意软件购买有机鸡蛋而失去积蓄，SRF对此无帮助。
其次，金融机构和电信公司需履行的职责极为有限。SRF要求金融机构执行四项职责：
一、数字令牌激活后至少设12小时冷却期，期间禁止高风险活动。
二、发送数字令牌激活和高风险活动通知警报。
三、通过短信、电子邮件或应用内通知向消费者提供出账交易通知。
四、提供24/7举报渠道和自助功能，供消费者及时阻止账户的在线支付转账。
这四项职责不足以激励金融机构主动保护客户，消除系统中的潜在欺诈风险。虽然消费者的警惕和个人责任是防诈骗的重要防线，但普通消费者的资源远不及金融机构。
金融机构有能力通过监控交易和检测可疑支付流动来更好地保护消费者。个人罕见或从未进行的大额海外交易应立即触发金融机构系统的警报。这不会影响经常进行此类交易的企业，鉴于金融机构IT基础设施的规模和能力，实施难度不大。
与新加坡框架相比，英国等司法管辖区已趋向于要求银行对诈骗受害者进行全额赔偿，除非消费者存在欺诈或重大过失。澳大利亚和欧盟也考虑采用此模式。
我承认全额赔偿存在道德风险问题，因此建议银行与消费者共同分担责任。
在评估网络诈骗问题时，存在金融安全与便利性和生产力之间的权衡。一方面，如果银行对任何损失完全不承担责任，那么由于节省人力成本，银行将仅凭金融激励越来越多地转向数字金融交易和服务。数字金融交易的成本表现为更容易损失大量资金，而这部分成本由银行客户承担，尤其是最脆弱的群体。此外，银行掌控其银行应用程序和支付流程中的安全功能，但客户无法控制这些功能，却为任何不足之处买单。这显然是不平衡的，因此不可持续。
在考虑金融安全与便利性和生产力之间的权衡时，监管机构可能难以为所有人划定统一的界限。例如，当华侨银行在其银行应用中引入禁止下载可疑应用的安全功能时，一些客户提出了投诉。可以预见，不同客户会有不同需求，但不必一刀切。
我敦促政府考虑建立一个多层次系统，提供不同安全性与便利性的选择。银行可以提供不同版本的银行应用和流程；例如，一个版本具有最高安全功能但便利性较低，且在不受共享责任框架（SRF）覆盖的网络诈骗案件中，银行承担75%的财务损失赔偿。另一个版本安全功能较低，便利性较高，银行承担50%的赔偿，满足需要更大便利性的客户。
银行可以根据不同的责任水平调整其应用和流程中的安全功能。例如，银行可能需要重新评估要求使用独立实体令牌的利弊。尊敬的议员林秀玉女士此前提到过从银行获取令牌的困难。虽然令牌对银行来说是额外成本，但它提供了额外的安全保障，需要第二个设备来授权交易，而不仅仅是可能被恶意软件劫持的手机。以最近涉及的“蛋”诈骗案中的家庭为例，如果当时要求使用实体令牌，该家庭可能不会失去他们的全部积蓄。
银行是私人商业实体，预期会在投资额外安全措施时进行成本效益分析。但政府可以通过施加损失分担安排来改变其成本效益分析，从而影响其决策。
赔偿金额可设定上限，最高赔偿金额相当于基本退休金额。
在此模式下，银行和客户共同承担因诈骗造成的损失责任，双方都有激励保持警惕。客户可以选择自己舒适的安全级别。银行将有动力根据其安全能力推动在线交易，从而确保数字金融交易的发展更加平衡和全面。赔偿上限有助于限制银行的风险敞口，同时确保对最脆弱群体给予最大保护。
另一个应承担职责以减轻诈骗风险的机构是中央公积金局（CPF），许多新加坡人的毕生积蓄存放于此。令人担忧的是，最近出现了诈骗者控制用户的Singpass和银行账户后清空CPF账户的趋势。直到2023年6月，CPF局和GovTech才为某些CPF电子服务引入了Singpass面部验证作为升级认证挑战。
2023年10月，我的同事梁文伟先生曾就为何CPF网站未实施银行常用的安全措施（如交易限额和终止开关）提出议会质询。令人欣慰的是，自2023年11月30日起，所有55岁及以上CPF会员将默认设定每日在线CPF提款限额为2,000新元。
然而，该默认每日限额仍可随时在线调整至最高200,000新元。这包括已激活CPF提款锁的会员，该锁会立即将每日提款限额设为0。
更改提款限额需通过Singpass面部验证。我想请政府确认，面部验证是否可以通过使用诈骗受害者的照片来通过？是否会加强保护措施，要求已激活CPF提款锁的会员必须亲自到CPF服务中心更改提款限额，类似银行资金锁账户的安排？
我们对银行施加的保护储户储蓄的同样职责，也应同样施加于CPF局，以保护CPF会员的退休储蓄。
最后，我想谈谈Singpass。我们已见到诈骗者如何控制受害者的Singpass。我担心Singpass中存储的大量信息，如家庭成员、教育背景、收入和CPF信息等。如果诈骗者控制了受害者的Singpass，是否会获得关于个人及其家庭成员的非常全面的信息，从而设计更多诈骗手段？这些广泛的信息是否必要？政府是否考虑重新引入Singpass的实体令牌？议长先生，请用中文发言。
（中文）：[请参阅本地语言发言。]议长先生，进步新加坡党支持今天的动议。建立包容且安全的数字社会对我国至关重要。近年来，诈骗案件激增，令许多市民深感忧虑。
去年，我的父母将一半积蓄分存到我的银行账户以保管，担心他们可能成为诈骗受害者，失去辛苦赚来的钱。我相信许多老年市民有同样的感受。
多年来，政府倡导市民自力更生。因此，对许多市民来说，储蓄是确保他们有尊严生活的唯一手段。网络诈骗严重影响了市民对储蓄安全的信心。政府可以做更多工作来保障市民储蓄和保护消费者。
根据新加坡金融管理局（MAS）和信息通信媒体发展局（IMDA）发布的共享责任框架，金融机构仍缺乏积极保护消费者和消除系统内潜在诈骗的足够激励。
进步新加坡党敦促政府考虑实施多层次共享责任框架。在该框架下，消费者可以在安全性和便利性之间做出权衡。
例如，消费者可以选择使用具有高安全功能的银行应用，虽然可能带来不便，但在发生诈骗损失时，银行必须承担75%的损失。如果消费者选择安全功能较低的应用，银行承担的损失比例将较低。这将为消费者提供更多选择，同时激励银行提供更安全的在线交易，在我国数字化与安全之间取得更好平衡。
（英文）：议长先生，作为一个国家，我们需要采取积极和全面的方法打击诈骗，创造一个包容且安全的数字社会。
诈骗对受害者造成严重后果。除了经济损失，受害者还会遭受心理和情感创伤，如因被骗而感到羞愧。其家庭成员也会受到经济影响，例如法律上可能需赡养因诈骗失去毕生积蓄的父母的子女。
当人们失去毕生积蓄，无法独立生活，必须依赖救济和慈善生存时，社会最终将承担这笔账单。
全球反诈骗联盟最近的一项研究显示，新加坡在每位受害者因诈骗损失金额方面居世界首位。这使新加坡人成为诈骗者最具吸引力的目标。
作为一个国家，我们还有很多工作要做，以创造更安全的数字社会。让我们共同努力实现这一目标。
议长先生：玛丽亚姆·贾法尔女士。
下午3时48分
玛丽亚姆·贾法尔女士（森巴旺选区）：议长先生，阁下，我首先声明本人是管理咨询公司的董事总经理兼高级合伙人，业务涉及数字和人工智能领域。
感谢尊敬的议员陈佩玲女士及通讯及资讯政府议会委员会其他成员促成本次辩论，议题对我们所有人都极为重要。我想几乎每个人都经历过听闻居民因网络诈骗而失去毕生积蓄的令人心碎的故事。
我刚当议员时，一群女孩的脸被合成到在新加坡及邻国社交媒体上传播的色情照片上，她们的呼吁让我震惊至深。我将永远感激尚穆根部长和拉哈尤国务部长协助加快司法进程。
最近，在我与兀兰区长者交流，鼓励他们注册“更健康的新加坡”计划时，发现不少长者因害怕诈骗而忽视卫生部的短信。我还发现他们大多依赖Singpass应用中较不安全的密码认证，部分原因是不懂使用，部分原因是不信任生物识别认证。
我支持之前同事们关于维持信任、建设包容且安全数字社会的许多观点。我参与本次辩论，是因为我认为人工智能，尤其是生成式人工智能（GenAI）的迅速发展，对包容且安全数字社会的影响值得特别关注。
议长先生，在我四月的答谢动议演讲中，我谈到了人工智能和生成式人工智能的机遇与风险。我当时说：“人工智能的进步既令人兴奋又令人担忧……我们需要让我们的人工智能战略、政策和人才跟上飞速发展的步伐。所以，让我们系好安全带。”
在网络空间，人工智能和生成式人工智能的快速发展带来了许多风险：错误信息和虚假信息、缺乏透明度、隐私问题、伦理问题、数据泄露、偏见、经济不平等、版权侵犯、安全风险、权力集中等。
生成式人工智能的可访问性使任何互联网用户都能操纵工具及其生成的内容，可能带来灾难性后果。例如，虽然像ChatGPT这样的聊天机器人现在专门训练以拒绝诸如“如何制造脏弹”等有害提示，但仍可能被冒充研究论文或电影剧本写作的恶意行为者欺骗。
假新闻、假图片在网络信任与安全中并不新鲜。但随着我们从有趣的换脸应用和相机滤镜，转向深度伪造技术被用于有害用途（如涉及我们总理的投资诈骗）的快速扩散，显然人工智能为网络信任与安全开辟了新领域。
如今，我们被敦促对网络上的信息保持谨慎和怀疑，质疑所见一切。但问题在于，有人问，我们是否应默认不信任？这是一个非常严肃的问题，我希望议会所有成员都能深思。
想想那位没有打开卫生部“更健康的新加坡”报名短信的阿嬷。在商业领域，有公司已禁止生成式人工智能工具进入其系统。当“默认不信任”变成“不信任和退出”时，会发生什么？
议长先生，信任是任何数字社会的基础。它赋予我们在线互动和交易的信心。它是推动创新和采用的必要条件，以实现数字和人工智能的巨大益处。如果我们希望人工智能提升新加坡的经济和社会潜力，如果我们希望新加坡及新加坡人在开发、部署、采用和创新技术方面处于前沿，我们需要人民确信他们使用的产品和服务是安全的。如果我们要乘坐赛车，就必须信任刹车。
几乎所有主要平台都设有某种刹车或安全保障。安全保障可以采取政策、实践和工具的形式，如健全的社区准则、内容审核政策以及确保数据具有代表性并剔除偏见。
机器学习和人工智能本身将在创建新型安全保障和建立信任方面发挥强大作用。机器学习工具可用于设计隐私和信任机制，检测并阻止欺诈交易。它们还可以根据风险比例调整权衡。
人工智能工具还能减少偏见——包括人为偏见和渗入机器学习模型的偏见。通过识别和测量偏见，它们使平台能够采取措施减少歧视和偏见，或去偏算法。一个著名例子是Airbnb，利用数据和机器学习减少对黑人客人和房东的歧视，促进平台包容性。
议长先生，人工智能时代已经来临。我在四月的演讲中表达的立场未变。应对相关风险不能是恐惧和瘫痪，而应是装备自己以知识、策略和工具来应对这些风险，包括利用人工智能本身推动我们前进。
为此，我提出五点建议，基于同事们的部分建议，以在人工智能时代通过建设包容且安全的数字社会来维持信任。
第一，加强安全保障，追究社交媒体服务对有害内容、诈骗和恶意广告（包括人工智能生成内容）传播的责任，保护消费者，尤其是儿童。
网络安全和诈骗是全球性问题。虽然对受害者来说永远感觉不到及时，但政府正积极采取措施保障安全和包容。
2023年2月通过的《网络安全法》及2023年7月IMDA发布的《网络安全守则》加强了监管框架，要求社交媒体服务采取预防措施防止网络伤害。政府还推出了一系列防范网络诈骗的措施，包括备受关注的共享责任框架，计划今年实施。
政府采取的做法是通过参与和利用多种手段，不仅是立法，还有自愿采用行为准则和工具，确保措施有效且可持续，然后再强制执行。这种做法有助于建立信任和支持，减少常见的阻力。
事实上，新加坡是全球最早引入法规，确保指定社交媒体服务采取预防措施保障网络安全的国家之一。相比之下，英国《网络安全法》因政治危机延迟了五六年，难以推进。
一些打击诈骗的措施，如强制所有字母数字短信发件人ID在新加坡短信发件人ID注册处（SSIR）注册，在许多其他司法管辖区难以实施。
尊敬的议员林秀玉女士曾表示，如果政府监管机构不加强干预，我们正走向数字交易和银行业务信心危机。我相信政府已采取重要措施，也相信他们会继续采取更多措施。我希望部长能更新最近宣布措施的实施情况，并分享政府可能探索的额外措施，包括可能扩大对其他平台如在线技术平台的限制范围。
然而，这是一个快速发展的领域。与人工智能生成内容相关的网络伤害，如深度伪造，可能未被现行法律充分涵盖。
新加坡对人工智能监管采取务实态度——我会这样表述：我们不应急于监管尚未充分理解且解决方案尚不明确的领域。相反，采取参与、测试不同方案和建设能力的方式，同时认识到立法终将到来。这是一种明智的做法。
尽管如此，政府应继续审查《网络安全法》中针对人工智能生成内容的安全保障和条款是否充分。目前，我想请问部长是否计划近期引入任何针对人工智能的保护措施，特别是我呼应许多人对深度伪造的担忧。
放眼全球，英国《网络安全法》已将传播深度伪造色情内容定为非法，平台需迅速采取行动将其移除。美国行政命令旨在建立检测人工智能生成内容和认证官方内容的标准和最佳实践，商务部负责制定内容认证和水印指导。
似乎有一种势头推动着审查防范有害深度伪造的保障措施，并厘清责任归属。正如尊敬的议员陈武明所指出的，这也对民主本身构成风险。
确实，有呼声要求在任何与人工智能的互动中，无论是文本、图像还是语音，人工智能都必须声明其身份。此外，我们还必须考虑如何支持那些因深度伪造而被利用形象并受到伤害的个人受害者——这是一种极具创伤性的经历。
第二，推动全国范围内的合作伙伴关系，涵盖在线生态系统中的所有利益相关者，教育并赋能我们的人民，尤其是年轻人和老年人，提升他们对诈骗、网络危害和数字素养（包括人工智能素养）的认识。
虽然科技平台可以且必须做得更多，但建设一个包容且安全的数字社会需要更多利益相关者的共同努力。这些利益相关者包括政府、公共部门、私营部门、科技平台，还有电信公司、银行、人工智能公司及其他提供在线产品和服务的公司、执法机构、家长和照顾者、学校、社会服务及社区组织，而最核心的则是个人自身。
人工智能素养指的是一套能力，使人们能够批判性地评估、有效沟通并与人工智能协作。昨日，陈振声部长分享了教育部如何通过培养学生的人工智能基础知识、促进安全和负责任地使用人工智能、采取防范人工智能风险的措施以及教授网络健康技能（如评估信息和识别假新闻）来为学校和高等教育机构的学生做准备。
早期儿童教育中对人工智能素养的兴趣正在萌芽，并取得了一些积极效果。一些研究强调，早期人工智能素养可以改善儿童发展的多个方面，如创造性探究、情感探究和协作探究。有观点认为，通过设计良好的人工智能玩具和服务，如PopBots、Zhoria、Quickdraw，幼儿可以探索与人工智能相关的概念，发展他们的数字和人工智能素养，即使他们可能不了解背后的知识。另一些观点认为，鉴于幼儿已经在使用设备和平板电脑，重要的是他们即使在年幼时也应掌握某些数据素养元素，如理解个人数据和数据隐私的概念。
然而，也存在疑问，比如是否能为早期儿童教育开发适龄课程、早期儿童教育者自身的准备情况以及对不平等和包容性的担忧。部长是否认为早期儿童人工智能素养值得深入研究？
第三，政府应率先通过公共服务中的高价值应用大规模部署人工智能，并推动在线信任与安全的研究。
最近发布的《国家人工智能战略2.0》，我希望届时能在议会得到充分讨论，阐述了“为新加坡及世界公共利益服务的人工智能”的愿景。重点将放在引导人工智能解决重大挑战，不仅是本地的，还有全球性的，如气候变化和人口健康，同时赋能个人、企业和社区以自信、明辨和信任的态度使用人工智能。
政府计划在公共服务和产业中推动有意义的应用案例，以对我们的生活产生巨大影响。我敦促政府大力推动在公共服务中大规模部署高价值应用案例。人工智能本身不仅能创造价值，还能提升政府内部能力，因为多学科产品团队将学会调整和部署解决方案以应对出现的弱点，政策团队也将通过实践学习如何防止有害活动的传播并制定有效法规。
我们处于一个令人羡慕的位置，政府赢得了经过数十年努力建立的强大信任。如果政府在部署这些高价值应用案例时，能够透明地披露其价值和风险，推动在线信任与安全的研究，构建和测试诸如“设计即信任”技术（如水印和内容认证）等工具，并在公共部门的应用案例中使用这些工具，新加坡可以为私营部门和全球政府树立榜样。
第四，引领数字经济中负责任人工智能的采用。负责任人工智能是一种全面的方法，涵盖人工智能系统的开发、评估和部署全过程，确保其安全、可信和符合伦理。它要求透明说明产品何时及如何利用人工智能，算法如何影响决策，以及采取了哪些措施来减轻偏见、隐私侵犯和其他风险。负责任人工智能的价值不仅在于风险缓解，还能增强组织与客户之间的信任，确保客户所使用的产品和服务是安全的。
公共部门和数字经济各行业部署人工智能解决方案的公司，无论是在开发产品和服务还是供应链人工智能，都应在构建和部署人工智能解决方案的同时，落实负责任人工智能。由于负责任人工智能需要具备不同专业、经验和背景的团队成员，并且需要组织各级的合作，首相和首席执行官本人必须从高层领导，推动并持续投资和关注。
最后，加强国际合作，涵盖在线安全、人工智能治理和安全。鉴于网络空间的全球性，推动对话、分享知识和合作解决方案至关重要。提升包容性人工智能治理和互操作性，实现我们共同的可信人工智能目标，是新加坡必须承诺并可发挥关键作用的领域。
早前林瑞华议员提到的AI Verify开源，实际上是一种促进国际合作的方式，也是在该领域争取知识领导权和合法性的体现。在相关各方存在一定紧张关系时，这一点尤为不易。
类似气候变化等全球性问题，新加坡在某些方面已走在前列。傅瑾芳部长在历届联合国气候变化大会上领导第六条和减缓谈判令人印象深刻。部长能否提供我们在人工智能治理和安全领域参与的最新情况？
议长先生，我想以感谢今天参与维护我们网络空间安全、包容和可信的多个部门和跨部工作组结束发言。我知道这有时感觉像是在玩打地鼠游戏，有时感觉是无偿的工作。我希望全国人民能响应号召，各尽其责，继续缩小网络空间与现实空间之间的信任差距。议长先生，我支持该动议。
议长先生：部长陈志凌博士。
下午4时07分
人力部部长兼贸易及工业部第二部长（陈志凌博士）：谢谢议长先生。我想借此机会回应议员潘慧珠女士的指控。她早前提到公积金账户被清空的说法不属实，是不准确的。我们的公积金结构是，在55岁时，退休账户内有基本退休金额度，只有超过基本退休金额度的部分才能从公积金普通账户或特别账户提取。
我们的公积金保障措施不亚于银行所采取的措施。话虽如此，任何属于公积金成员的金额都是宝贵的、辛苦赚来的，对我们来说至关重要。因此，公积金局不断审视和改进安全措施，同时保持成员的灵活性。
公积金局还与整个政府紧密合作，确保安全措施严密。议员也可放心，自2023年6月实施Singpass面部验证后，未发现任何未经授权的损失。
至于其他倡议的细节，我将留待张燕芬部长在总结时说明。
议长先生：秩序。我建议现在休息，暂停会议，下午4时30分继续主持会议。
会议于下午4时09分暂停，至下午4时30分恢复。
会议于下午4时30分恢复。
[副议长（陈淑莹女士）主持]
建设包容且安全的数字社会
[辩论继续]
副议长女士：嘉迈尔先生。
下午4时30分
阿裕尼区议员严彦松先生：副议长女士，复杂的网络诈骗日益猖獗，给受害者带来严重的经济损失，这一问题影响着各行各业的新加坡人。全国各地，无论年轻或年长、技术熟练或不熟悉技术的居民，都成为这些诈骗的受害者。我曾见过选民因诈骗失去全部积蓄，甚至定期存款账户也被清空。有些人和子女或父母共用账户，给家庭带来双重打击。这些事件显示出我们共同面临的脆弱性。虽然我自认为技术较为熟悉，但我也不得不承认，成为受害者的威胁时刻存在。
许多受害者向我描述银行的回应令人沮丧。举报诈骗后，他们常收到含糊或不明确的回复，银行以保密为由提供的信息有限，有时仅给予部分赔偿。警方有时告知资金已被转移至海外，无法追回。
这些诈骗的技术性质令人担忧。驱动下载攻击和更先进的零日漏洞利用，使恶意软件能在用户几乎无操作的情况下安装到手机上，利用操作系统和应用程序的漏洞。
鉴于这些复杂攻击，相关部门对每起举报的诈骗调查程度如何，尤其是涉及屏幕读取和键盘记录恶意软件的案件？若调查不彻底，难以确定责任，确保无辜受害者不承担非其过失的损失。默认责任是否落在受害者身上，由他们承担大部分经济损失？
诈骗已成为推动全民数字接入的重大障碍，尤其影响老年群体。我遇到许多老年居民，他们害怕使用网上银行或在线支付，担心被骗。因此，尽管数字银行方便，我也不敢鼓励他们使用，因担心他们一旦成为诈骗目标，可能失去全部积蓄。
这种情况导致了阿裕尼区议员林瑞华所称的数字银行系统信心危机。除非当局更有效地解决诈骗问题并建立更强的消费者保护，否则我们推动全民数字赋能的努力将付诸东流。
政府应对诈骗的有力工具之一是《网络刑事危害法》。该法允许政府指示在线平台禁用涉嫌诈骗的账户。议会去年7月通过该法，但今年才开始逐步实施。
《网络刑事危害法何时能全面生效？鉴于新加坡每天平均发生87起诈骗，每延迟一天，都会让许多受害者错失救济时机。
银行必须承担更大责任保护客户。我呼应林瑞华女士早前呼吁，银行应恢复为所有客户默认提供实体令牌作为多因素认证措施。多因素认证依赖“你知道的东西”和“你拥有的东西”的组合。但当手机被恶意软件感染，允许诈骗者查看屏幕和键盘输入时，这种系统就退化为单因素认证，使得拥有密码的诈骗者能绕过额外安全层。因此，恢复实体令牌将重建关键的第二道安全防线。
金融管理局（MAS）必须更积极果断地解决银行系统中的诈骗问题，保护消费者。在我与MAS沟通为受害选民争取权益时，发现MAS倾向将关键案件转交银行跟进，而非直接代表受害者处理和解决问题。这种委托过程使银行承担确定责任归属的重任，即机构还是受害者应对诈骗负责。这种做法令人质疑调查的公正性和有效性。
我还观察到MAS对金融机构违规行为的执法态度存在差异。一方面，MAS对银行在线银行和ATM服务短暂中断施加严格限制和额外资本要求等惩罚措施；另一方面，在处理诈骗案件时，缺乏同等的决断力和严谨性。
MAS应要求银行以同等强度和严谨性应对诈骗，保护消费者利益，正如他们对系统中断所做的那样。
诈骗受害者需要来自MAS等知识丰富且公正机构的全面解释，说明诈骗如何发生，银行、电信公司、客户及其他实体在诈骗发生和防范中的角色。这将决定责任归属及损失承担方。
此外，责任不应仅限于金融机构、电信公司和消费者。社交媒体公司和手机制造商也应对其平台的安全负责。所有在新加坡销售的手机应默认禁用侧载应用，并使终端用户难以绕过关键安全功能。社交媒体平台应建立流程，在接到通知后迅速删除欺诈性帖子。
信息通信媒体发展局（MCI）披露，约37%的居民不定期更新设备，许多可能是技术不熟练的用户。期望所有人都具备技术能力保持设备更新是不合理的。因此，消费者保护策略必须基于大量用户不会更新设备的前提，设计额外安全层以保护这些用户。
应设立中央机构监督所有诈骗调查和应对工作。我了解反诈骗指挥部（ASCom）及其官员的重要工作，但鉴于ASCom隶属于新加坡警察部队商业事务部，我认为其无法对政府整体反诈骗工作负责。那么，谁最终对政府的反诈骗工作负责？
总结我的建议如下：第一，银行必须大幅提升消费者保护责任，包括为客户提供实体令牌。第二，MAS应更积极介入，明确银行、数字平台的诈骗责任，并支持受害者。第三，《网络刑事危害法》需尽快全面实施。第四，政府应加强对科技公司平台和设备安全的问责。最后，应设立中央反诈骗机构，监督并最终负责政府的反诈骗工作。
副议长女士，我们正处于反诈骗斗争的关键时刻。我们对这一祸害的应对，将体现我们保护公民数字时代权益的决心。让我们迅速果断行动，保护人民，也保护我们自己。我支持该动议。
副议长女士：施珍丽女士。
下午4时39分
提名议员施珍丽：谢谢副议长女士。感谢我的议会同僚提出这项动议。
1970年，经济学家米尔顿·弗里德曼提出了一个根本性问题：“企业在社会中的角色是什么？”他在《纽约时报》发表观点称，“企业的社会责任就是增加利润。”
此后，这一叙述塑造了企业的发展。幸运的是，社会责任投资者的崛起打断了这一叙述。社会责任投资者要求企业承担更高的社会责任标准。这反过来推动了企业社会责任和环境、社会及治理（ESG）目标作为新优先事项的出现。
针对该动议，我想将弗里德曼的问题更新至当今背景：在数字驱动的经济和社会中，什么是具有社会责任感的企业及其在社会中的角色？作为劳工权益倡导者，我想强调三个令人担忧的趋势，并提出三点我们作为社会可以如何应对的建议。
首先，技术将变得更加复杂和强大。我们许多人都欣赏诸如预订或购物应用程序等技术带来的便利。为了换取便利，我们可能同意这些应用背后的公司重新营销我们的数据。
鉴于数据的流动性，用户可能会发现自己成为未经请求的营销信息的接收者，因为公司试图从新的消费者群体中获利。许多人因缺乏知识或能力而难以摆脱无休止的营销信息网络。这种挣扎给不断被广告淹没、常常被诱导在应用上花费更多时间和金钱的个人带来了心理压力。我们如何在数字时代培养一种尊重商业伦理的准则？
其次，技术将变得更简单但更复杂。一方面，移动技术结合人工智能工具将开启服务前线人员生产力的新纪元；我们确实看到资源被定制并触手可及，服务前线人员在与客户互动时能够使用。另一方面，工人也可能被技术挟持。许多工人既是用户又是操作员，对技术的工作机制了解不足或几乎不了解。如果公司只培训工人以便部署而非员工发展，公司更换技术供应商的决定可能导致现有工人在短时间内难以掌握新技术。这个故事的结局往往是工人被裁员，而公司则以工人技能与业务需求不匹配为由免责。
我们如何减少因信息不对称而导致的工人不稳定性，并取而代之地培养公司与工人之间的共同责任感，以增强工人在数字经济中的职业寿命？
第三，技术和网络伤害的关注使我们更加意识到自己的权利。然而，许多人不确定如何行使这些权利。虽然企业意识到需要征求用户对数据隐私的同意，但默认隐私设置往往难以操作。尝试完全退出默认设置更具挑战性。此外，同意默认设置的用户可能不了解这些设置允许或意味着什么。
在这方面，不难理解这些公司的默认心态，正如记者泽伊内普·图菲克奇所言：“期望用户接受他们所提供的内容，不知道自己的选择，或没有持续的警惕来跟踪可用选项，无论这些选项多么有限。”
科技公司的工人，无论是自由职业者还是员工，也未能幸免。事实上，工人可能被要求或感到有义务下载雇主或公司的应用程序，并始终同意更新应用程序的请求，却不知道每次更新都可能重置他们的数据隐私设置，取消之前的退出选择。
随着越来越多公司转型为数字化企业，我们如何引入监督机制，确保公司在获取数据隐私许可的过程中负起责任并保持透明？这三个趋势的核心是我们对具有社会责任感的企业及其在数字经济和社会中的角色的期望。
我想为该动议关于建设包容和安全数字社会的叙述贡献三点建议。
为应对未经请求的营销的有害影响以及用户对所交出数据的无力感，我建议监管机构采取积极措施，教育企业尊重用户权利。例如，具有社会责任感的公司应确保默认设置优先保护用户隐私和自主权。这意味着用户必须能够无限制地访问自己的数据隐私设置。
必须为陷入不良数据隐私设置的用户提供帮助渠道，使其能够摆脱掠夺性公司的陷阱。这种帮助可以采取由公私部门合作管理的帮助台形式。
监管机构应考虑对顽固不化的公司施加惩罚性措施，并建立防护栏，遏制表现出掠夺性行为的公司。
为应对技术创新和变革带来的工人不稳定性，我敦促公司采取前瞻性方法。例如，他们可以与工会和行业机构密切合作，提高工人的数字和技术流畅度。
在这方面，具有社会责任感的公司应与工会和机构合作，持续为员工提供培训和在职学习，以提升员工在不同技术间的流动性。这将积累工人的数字资本，是工人在数字时代延长职业寿命的关键。
正如弗里德曼的叙述因社会意识的兴起而被重塑，作为工人和用户，我们有责任做出改变。
我鼓励工人和用户通过工会和协会等代表机构团结起来，提出我们对数字时代企业社会责任的更新期望。
通过与政府及志同道合的企业和组织密切合作，利用三方框架，我们可以建立更新的标准，合法化规范，成为安全包容数字社会的基石。副议长女士，我支持该动议。
副议长女士：万瑞扎尔博士。
下午4时48分
万瑞扎尔博士（惹兰勿刹选区）：副议长女士，我支持该动议。在数字技术渗透我们生活各方面的时代，今天的动议比以往任何时候都更具相关性。
作为一名教育者和有青少年及儿童的父亲，我深刻意识到数字世界的影响。我们的责任不仅仅是技术进步，还包括保护年轻一代的心理健康和福祉。
数字世界改变了教育和交流，提供了无与伦比的学习和连接机会。人工智能是这一变革的关键推动者。人工智能通过个性化学习和实时反馈，彻底改变了教育体验。
在网络安全方面，人工智能可以检测潜在危险。它能识别网络欺凌模式，标记不当内容，甚至提供主动且迅速的干预，保护我们的年轻用户。
正确利用时，人工智能是强大的盟友。然而，人工智能的部署也面临挑战。通过深度伪造或其他操纵内容传播网络欺凌的滥用令人担忧。
此外，如果人工智能系统未按伦理开发，可能继承偏见，导致歧视性做法或对某些群体保护不足。
隐私是另一个关键问题。利用人工智能保障安全与尊重个人隐私权之间的平衡微妙，需要谨慎处理。
数字世界的另一个重大挑战是网络欺凌的惊人普遍性。2020年一份全球报告揭示了影响全球儿童的“网络大流行”。
在新加坡，这一问题尤为令人担忧，研究显示，40%的8至12岁儿童面临网络欺凌风险，青少年的风险更高。促成因素包括智能手机普及、过度使用社交媒体和高频率游戏活动。
阳光行动联盟（AfA）的一项在线调查证实了类似比例的青少年经历网络欺凌，导致深刻的情感创伤。社交媒体与年轻用户焦虑和抑郁等心理健康问题的关联日益明显。我们的责任是确保数字接入不损害儿童的心理健康和福祉。
女士，请允许我分享一个轶事，关于一名中一学生艾莎，她的数字世界经历反映了网络伤害的多面性，她的年龄与我女儿相仿。
像许多同龄人一样，艾莎活跃于多个社交媒体平台。尽管年龄尚小，她轻易通过伪造出生日期绕过了年龄验证流程，这在许多平台的注册程序中是常见的疏漏。
在这些平台上，艾莎遭遇了诸多挑战。尽管这些服务声称有严格的内容过滤，她仍接触到不当内容。这种暴露扰乱了她，扭曲了她对社会规范的理解。此外，她遭受网络欺凌。起因是一张无害的人工智能换脸照片被发布在线。匿名账户的骚扰信息、公开嘲笑和羞辱成为日常折磨，深刻影响了她。
转折点是学校介入，注意到她突然退缩和学业成绩下降。学校与她的父母密切合作，解决她在线上遇到的问题。但问题是：是否为时已晚？
显然，虽然学校的数字素养教育和家庭的家长参与至关重要，但需要更负责任和严格的政策来补充这些努力。
在这方面，我想强调涵盖学校、家庭和互联网的三管齐下方法，我们正在实践。
首先，在学校，我们必须继续巩固数字素养和网络健康教育的成功，这被全球专家誉为“黄金标准”。我们必须继续培养伦理和有意识的数字参与文化。我们的孩子必须理解网络世界的复杂性，辨别真伪，建立健康的数字关系。
诸如网络隐私、识别错误信息以及理解数字媒体的伦理和心理影响等主题至关重要。我们必须继续创造性地将这些数字素养项目融入各级教育体系的核心课程中。这种整合不应仅限于信息技术课程，而应适当融入所有学科，确保孩子们将数字技能和伦理作为教育的基本组成部分。
其次，在家庭，必须加强家长在数字安全方面的参与和教育。家庭环境同样关键，塑造儿童的数字体验。家长和监护人必须充分了解情况，更重要的是积极参与。可通过定期研讨会和资源实现，赋能他们在家中营造安全的数字环境。
这些举措应侧重于教育家长了解网络风险、适当的内容监控（许多人对此羞于启齿）以及与孩子开放沟通其网络活动和体验的策略（这项技能不易掌握，但对孩子成长至关重要）。目标是促进学校与家庭的协作，确保数字安全和使用的讯息与实践一致。
最后，副议长女士，是互联网本身。数字体验的门户必须加强。必须采取严格措施保护儿童免受网络伤害，实施适龄内容过滤，并对数字平台加强监管，营造更安全的数字环境。政策和法规必须强有力，要求社交媒体服务和应用开发者承担责任。
因此，我赞赏信息通信媒体发展局（MCI）推出的《网络安全行为准则》，该准则对数字内容和互动进行管理，旨在创造更安全的网络环境。该准则要求在新加坡具有广泛影响力的社交媒体服务如Meta和谷歌建立系统和流程，保护用户，尤其是儿童免受网络伤害。
然而，尽管社交媒体服务和应用开发者针对年轻用户制定了政策，但仍存在关键缺口，即准确确定用户年龄的挑战。除了自我申报外，这些平台需要可靠的年龄验证措施，因为现有系统易被绕过。
因此，我敦促社交媒体服务和应用开发者加强年龄验证措施。他们必须更加警惕，保护年轻用户免受有害内容影响。
此外，社交媒体服务应改善对用户举报的响应速度，确保对标记的有害内容迅速采取行动。值得考虑这些服务移除有害内容所需的时间，我们是否应设定具体时限，并对不合规者实施更严格的惩罚？
艾莎的故事强调了建立强有力年龄验证系统、有效内容过滤和平台对网络欺凌采取积极措施的重要性，以保护我们的孩子。
作为立法者，我们必须支持并执行这些举措。我们必须确保社交媒体服务和应用开发者遵守这些做法，并不断调整策略，应对新兴的网络安全挑战。女士，请用马来语发言。
（马来语）：[请参阅本地语演讲。]先生们，我们生活在一个快速发展的数字时代，数字技术触及我们生活的方方面面。
然而，我们必须确保这个数字世界是一个安全且包容的空间，尤其是为我们的年轻一代。
在建设包容和安全数字社会的努力中，我提出三大战略步骤，
第一，在学校，重要的是将数字素养纳入课程。这不仅是教会如何使用技术，更是关于数字伦理、网络安全以及负责任地导航数字世界的技能。
第二，在家庭，家长的角色至关重要。他们需要具备知识和资源，营造安全的数字环境，并成为孩子数字教育的合作伙伴。
第三，在互联网，我们应加强进入数字世界的门户。这意味着应加强立法和政策，确保社交媒体服务和应用开发者承担更多责任，保护我们的孩子免受有害网络内容影响。
信息通信媒体发展局最新推出的《网络安全行为准则》是改善网络安全，尤其是儿童安全的重要一步。
通过这种方法，我希望我们能作为社会共同努力，建设一个不仅技术先进，而且充满和平、理解和包容的数字领域，特别是为我们的年轻一代。
（英语）：女士，最后，我呼吁服务提供者、立法者、教育者、家长和科技行业采取行动。我们必须共同制定政策、教育课程和技术解决方案，保护我们的数字空间。
确保儿童在数字世界的安全是共同责任。我的愿景很简单——看到我们的孩子能够安全探索、学习和成长，无惧恐惧和伤害。基于此，我支持该动议。
副议长女士：王华汉先生。
下午4时59分
王华汉先生（提名议员）：女士，鉴于近期新闻报道突出深度伪造的危险及诈骗案件的上升，今天的动议时机确实恰当。
今天提出的动议有两个关键重点——我们的数字社会既包容又安全。
2018年至2022年间，诈骗案件报告增加了五倍。预计2023年诈骗损失可能再次超过五亿新元。电子商务、求职和网络钓鱼诈骗迅速成为通过流行渠道如通讯应用、社交媒体和在线购物平台最常见的诈骗类型。
显然，随着社会数字化程度加深，营造安全的网络环境至关重要。近期出现了大量网络钓鱼网站和移动应用。诈骗者创建几乎无法区分真伪的假网站。假网站诱骗用户输入凭证，目标是使用通讯、电子邮件和银行服务的用户。诈骗者常用链接缩短器使链接看似合法。
识别假网站的一种方法是仔细检查域名。合法域名的例子是“.gov.sg”，诈骗者无法复制。"Go.gov.sg"是政府机构使用的官方链接缩短器，用户首次点击缩短的政府链接时会被提示暂停并检查浏览器地址栏。政府还发布并更新可信网站列表，明确提醒公众注意政府网站URL中的“.gov.sg”。
为了更全面的方法，政府是否可要求消费者银行和通讯服务发布类似明确的警示，并实施类似“暂停并检查”功能的措施？2022年1月，新加坡金融管理局（MAS）和新加坡银行协会（ABS）宣布了加强数字银行安全的额外措施。其中，新加坡银行已取消向客户发送的电子邮件或短信中的可点击链接。
现在问题来了——在仍然存在涉及可点击链接的网络钓鱼诈骗的环境下，我们如何确保所有零售银行用户，尤其是老年人，了解这一举措？此外，这些措施并不适用于非银行金融机构，如数字投资平台。政府是否可以考虑扩大这些措施的范围，确保为零售客户服务的非银行金融机构也遵守相同的标准？毕竟，当诈骗者的企图失败时，这符合终端用户和服务提供者的利益。
在考虑了网络安全之后，我想现在将注意力转向本动议同样重要的另一原则。在接下来的发言中，我将提出一些问题，以确保我们的数字社会也对弱势群体具有包容性。随着日常生活逐渐数字化，这一点尤为重要。如今，互联网已成为一个重要且无可比拟的数据来源。我们议会中的所有人都会毫不犹豫地在网上搜索信息或通过社交媒体添加内容。在日常生活中，通过智能手机进行即时支付已成为习以为常的事情。但对社会上的一些人来说，情况并非如此。
根据信息通信媒体发展局（MCI）的数据，新加坡的老年人在使用技术进行无接触支付等用途时仍然感到困难。对于60岁以上的老年人，这种困难更为普遍。由信息通信媒体发展局（IMDA）于2020年6月设立的新加坡数字办公室（SG Digital Office，简称SDO）开展了“老年人数字化”计划，旨在帮助我们的老年人轻松自信地驾驭数字环境。鉴于一些老年人仍对使用技术表示犹豫，政府能否澄清这些计划是否成功实现了其目标，以及还能做些什么？
接下来谈谈我们有感官障碍的朋友们，需要更多关注以确保他们在我们发展所谓的数字社会契约时不会被落下。我将先谈及聋人社区的关切，然后讨论与视障人士相关的问题。
去年九月，我曾提出议会质询，询问政府是否会考虑在重要的政府现场直播电视广播中提供新加坡手语（SgSL）翻译服务。回复中指出，自2020年4月起，信息通信媒体发展局已要求具有重大国家和公共利益的电视广播必须配备新加坡手语翻译。这一举措标志着包容性迈出了关键一步，诸如国庆集会和预算演讲等活动确实变得对聋人社区更为可及。然而，也有一些重要的现场直播活动缺少新加坡手语翻译，或者仅在延迟播出中提供。
例如，在最近的2023年总统论坛中，据我了解，新加坡手语翻译未能实时提供，仅在延迟播出中出现。尽管2023年总统选举是新加坡十多年来首次有竞争的总统选举。
疫情爆发初期的关键现场直播，如最初的新冠肺炎简报，也缺乏手语翻译。虽然后来简报中提供了手语翻译，但我们必须认识到聋人社区在那些早期极度不确定的时刻所面临的挑战和不安环境。
除了电视广播外，还有反馈指出聋人社区面临的劣势。如今，在我们的数字优先但非数字唯一的服务模式中，仍有政府服务涉及面对面或电话互动。这包括向建屋发展局（HDB）报告公寓损坏、咨询卫生部（MOH）或医疗集团，或处理中央公积金局（CPF）、移民与关卡局（ICA）、陆路交通管理局（LTA）等问题。这些服务对聋人来说并非完全可及。聋人往往不得不自费聘请手语翻译，以便通过这些渠道与政府机构沟通。
鉴于这些持续存在的挑战，我们很容易对聋人社区产生同情。他们自然会感到，在日常生活的社会参与、获取基本服务或时效性信息方面，落后于听力正常的同龄人。我知道并感谢服务新加坡（ServiceSG）与新加坡聋人协会（SADeaf）之间正在进行的合作，以解决这些可及性挑战。尽管如此，我们仍需继续推动包容且及时的解决方案。我们必须确保随着世界数字化，聋人社区中没有人感到被落下。
我将在发言的最后部分代表视障（VI）社区提出问题。根据《赋能蓝图2030》报告，大约61%的高流量政府网站是可访问的。这些高流量网站定义为每年访问量至少一百万次的网站。《赋能蓝图2030》正确地承认了数字可及性存在的差距，承诺设计政府服务的可访问网站和应用程序。此外，还旨在提高非政府部门对电子可及性的采用。
尽管如此，许多视障人士仍反馈数字不可及性是一个大问题。视障人士以不同方式消费数字内容。对于视力低下或完全失明的人，他们使用一种称为屏幕阅读器的软件。屏幕阅读器是一种文本转语音软件，将用户的手机或电脑变成会说话的机器。它扫描所有可用文本并大声朗读内容。对于图片和按钮，屏幕阅读器需要清晰、用户友好的标签或替代文本，以实现有意义的音频播放。
与视障社区交谈时，他们反映通过屏幕阅读器访问新加坡数字内容的体验充满不一致。例如，最新更新的HealthHub应用程序，据说盲人用户不再像以前那样能够访问该应用。之前，该应用程序按钮标注清晰，使盲人用户能够轻松预约医院或无缝支付账单。更新后，按钮变得无标签，屏幕阅读器只能宣布“按钮”或“无标签图形”，没有任何有用的上下文。目前，盲人用户只能通过试错方式导航应用，导致效率低下且常常令人沮丧。
幸运的是，情况也有积极的一面。视障用户报告称，其他政府网站如税务局（IRAS）和中央公积金局（CPF）的体验良好，显示只要关注和考虑得当，我们的数字服务确实可以实现可访问性。
除了政府服务，许多本地公司的网站和应用程序对屏幕阅读器不友好。对大多数人来说，使用政府服务并不是我们在线活动的主要部分。视障人士同样参与多样的在线互动。
《网络内容可访问性指南》（WCAG）是确保在线内容对残障人士可访问的国际标准。在新加坡，我们的数字服务标准（DSS）与WCAG 2.1的AA级别保持一致。WCAG标准有三个符合级别：“A”为最低，“AA”为中级，“AAA”为最高。
新加坡的DSS框架仅适用于政府机构。新加坡没有立法要求公司使其产品和服务对残障人士可访问。也没有直接激励措施促使公司为所有用户或消费者实现可访问性。
缺乏这些措施，公司在其在线产品中往往不会充分考虑弱势群体。例如，一些电子商务网站使用拼图或滑块来验证用户是否为真人。这些方法通常不符合WCAG标准的基本“A”级别，该级别要求提供替代的挑战-响应认证，以适应不同类型的感官感知。类似例子导致残障人士在使用最简单的在线服务时经常依赖他人。他们也渴望像你我一样拥有独立管理日常活动的自主权。
在我们的实体建筑环境中，有建筑与建设局（BCA）无障碍规范，为新开发项目设定最低无障碍要求。BCA管理的无障碍基金为改善建筑无障碍提供资本激励。这些措施惠及所有人，包括身体残障者。
随着商品和服务日益数字化，在数字领域实施类似标准和激励措施以确保所有人的可访问性变得同样重要，甚至更为重要。我完全同意尊敬的议员陈佩玲女士在开场发言中的观点：为什么数字世界要与现实世界不同？
放眼海外，新加坡可以借鉴国际上已建立的在线可访问性框架。例如，2019年欧盟指令为消费者银行和电子商务服务等设定了可访问性标准。该指令确保服务设计易于残障人士使用。关键措施包括以所有人都能感知的方式提供信息。这意味着为非文本内容提供替代方案，使用易读字体，确保高对比度，并允许文本间距可调。
从在线可访问性框架转向，我们还必须确保未来的设计师接受有关可访问用户体验设计和数字包容性的教育。为了迈向数字可访问性成为常态的未来，必须从任何新数字项目的起始阶段就融入这些原则。周到的，或者说通用设计，必须考虑到具有多样使用需求的人群。
在讨论了各种挑战和包容性数字设计的必要性后，我想提出三项关键建议。
第一，是否可以考虑要求非政府的关键服务，首先是高流量在线平台，遵守类似DSS的可访问性框架？
第二，为鼓励小型企业，政府是否可以考虑扩大生产力解决方案补助金（PSG）的范围，支持网站、移动应用、数字产品和服务的开发与改进，使其对所有人可访问？
第三，政府是否可以与高等院校合作，确保未来的网页设计师和程序员接受充分的数字可访问性培训？
通过实施这些建议，我们将迈出重要步伐，确保视障社区有一天能在数字社会的各个方面实现全面包容。
副议长女士，我们今天讨论的问题——确保安全、支持老年人、照顾聋人和包容视障人士——都强调了全社会共同努力的必要性。政府虽居领导地位、树立榜样并推动议程，但我们也需要企业、程序员、用户体验设计师和终端用户在实践中落实，保障网络活动安全，自信地参与数字环境。
我与社区中的人们一样，希望通过共同努力，这个数字乌托邦不再是梦想，而很快成为现实。我支持本动议。
副议长女士：叶汉荣先生。
下午5时16分
叶汉荣先生（义顺-蔡厝港选区）：副议长女士，人工智能驱动的数字领域为连接、成长和进步提供了前所未有的机遇。它推动我们的经济，赋能我们的社区，并以无数方式丰富我们的生活。但像任何前沿领域一样，数字世界也隐藏着危险和挑战。
我今天站在这里，为一个我深切关心且亟需关注的事业发声：确保我们的老年人拥有一个安全且包容的数字世界。
副议长女士，我们的银发一代建设了我们所知所爱的狮城。他们辛勤工作，付出巨大牺牲，为国家的成功奠定了基础。如今，当他们步入人生暮年，我们有责任确保他们能在一个日益由科技塑造的世界中享受劳动成果。然而，对许多老年人来说，数字革命带来了挑战。复杂的界面、繁琐的在线流程以及无处不在的网络诈骗威胁，可能让他们感到不知所措和被排斥。
鉴于社会快速发展和数字化推动，许多人可能别无选择，只能通过数字方式进行交易、沟通和保持联系。虽然许多老年人拥有智能手机，但并非所有人都知道如何有效使用。他们可能难以理解数据与Wi-Fi的区别、数字令牌和密码管理等基本概念。
我从亲身经历中理解这一点，帮助我的父母在手机上设置新账户。下载应用和创建账户只是第一步。真正的挑战在于驾驭复杂的功能、登录和验证流程。即使有耐心和反复练习，记住步骤也不容易。故障排除、担心被锁定——他们有太多问题，这不仅是一次性解决。幸运的是，我的父母有我。但还有无数其他人，在数字鸿沟中没有熟悉的声音引导他们。
我在义顺-蔡厝港的见选民活动中目睹这些挣扎。想象一下谭女士，她一生养育家庭，却因缺乏实体渠道或清晰信息，难以访问在线政府服务支付账单。
想象林先生，我们国家独立的老兵，靠微薄资源诚实谋生，如今面对钓鱼邮件感到无助。
想象阿末先生和他的妻子，他们是社区的支柱，靠勤劳和友善微笑经营椰浆饭店，供养五个孩子上学，退休梦想却因诈骗者的狡猾应用一夜间吞噬了他们的积蓄，令他们无助且心碎。这些不是假设，而是义顺-蔡厝港乃至新加坡无数老年人的真实经历。
数字鸿沟不仅是便利问题，更是获取基本服务、财务独立和社会联系的障碍。缺乏适当的数字素养和支持，我们的老年人面临被落下、孤立和被剥削的风险。多年来，新加坡数字办公室（SDO）已做了大量工作，装备老年人必要的数字技能。我想了解目前已覆盖多少老年人，还需覆盖多少？我们如何衡量成功？进展是否足够快？
衡量老年人的数字素养不应仅仅是统计参加的工作坊或下载的应用数量。就像学习烹饪作为生活技能需要持续练习一样，使用数字工具也需要持续的实践、进步和探索。然而，数字领域的风险更高。一次错误点击可能导致多年辛苦积蓄化为乌有，难怪老年人会感到恐惧和怀疑。这造成了一个残酷的矛盾：一方面鼓励老年人依赖数字，另一方面却责备甚至嘲笑他们因错误而付出的代价。想象一下，当承诺的便利突然变成潜在危险时，他们的困惑心情。难怪一些老年人尽管取得初步进展，最终选择完全退缩。
遗憾的是，副议长女士，数字世界也存在恶意行为者，他们利用老年人的脆弱性。从虚假投资计划到冒充诈骗，这些掠夺者利用信任，造成财务和情感伤害。深度伪造技术的兴起更凸显了保护老年人免受网络掠夺者侵害的必要性。
我们最近看到针对总理和副总理等高层人物的深度伪造视频，推广可疑投资计划。这些恶意行为不仅制造混乱，破坏对网络信息的信任，还利用老年人易受骗的弱点。我们不能让老年人成为容易的目标。我们必须为他们提供知识和工具，使他们能够安全自信地驾驭数字环境。
本动议正确指出，弥合数字鸿沟和打击网络诈骗需要多管齐下、全社会共同努力。我有以下建议。
首先，副议长女士，我们必须继续赋能老年人。我们已经开始这段旅程，必须坚持下去。为老年人建立数字素养是一项持续工作。我们需要可持续、有趣的项目，融入他们的生活。项目应根据他们的需求和兴趣量身定制，由可信赖的导师一步步指导，帮助他们回忆并培养信心。
这些持续的旅程将使老年人逐步释放技术的全部潜力，一次点击或一次轻触。关键是赋予他们批判性思维能力，鼓励核实信息来源，在网络空间更具辨别力。不仅仅是转发信息；要检查电子邮件地址，绝不分享密码。更重要的是，我们的老年人必须培养持续学习的心态，并对技术和新威胁保持警惕。
第二，副议长女士，我们必须为我们的长者建立支持系统。专门的热线和支持网络对于长者寻求数字问题帮助和无畏举报诈骗至关重要。为应对网络诈骗的普遍现象，政府能否考虑设立一个集中管理这些支持网络和热线的机构？我们能否考虑类似市政服务办公室（MSO）或OneService应用程序的模式？
第三，副议长女士，我们必须加强执法力度。执法机构必须积极打击针对长者的网络犯罪，将犯罪分子绳之以法，并遏制未来的诈骗行为。我们知道长者常常向他们的国会议员求助，以加快警方调查追回损失资金。然而，一旦犯罪分子获得资金，追回资金显然非常困难。我曾在本院呼吁执法机构设定时间表，向居民，尤其是受网络诈骗影响的长者，更新相关事项的进展。
我的一位长者居民R女士曾写信给我，表达她在向我的国会选区服务处举报诈骗后等待结果的沮丧。她的话反映了这些情况带来的情绪负担，我引用她的话：“目前有什么进展？我感到不安、压力大且担忧。这是我辛苦赚来的钱。我需要更新信息。我需要拿回我的钱。”我们的长者应当得到及时的更新，并有信心我们的流程能够带来结果。
第四，副议长女士，我们必须改善基础设施和网络韧性。我们需要重新审视对未经授权交易诈骗受害者的处理方式。将此类交易的全部责任归咎于诈骗受害者是不公平的。虽然教育至关重要，但在当今复杂的数字环境中，损失可能源于系统本身的漏洞。大型企业，从电信公司到银行及应用开发者，都必须共同承担责任，投资于强有力的安全措施。
近期政府的干预和努力值得欢迎。然而，升级我们的基础设施和生态系统仍需更多时间和资源。部长能否分享一些进一步加强网络韧性和基础设施的计划？
在此，我想问，我们对抗金融诈骗的努力与香港、纽约和伦敦等其他城市相比如何？中国的情况又如何，那里甚至老年公民也能轻松使用在线支付？借鉴国外的最佳实践可以帮助我们建设一个更安全、更包容的数字生态系统，让便利不以牺牲安全为代价。
副议长女士，虽然我们努力弥合数字鸿沟并保护长者的网络安全，但建立和维护他们对我们工作的信任至关重要。这需要我们在处理他们关切时保持透明，也需要迅速果断地采取行动打击这些威胁，表明我们真正致力于他们的福祉。
及时回应他们的焦虑和挫折，比如向R女士提供调查更新，能够重申他们对我们机构和流程的信心。通过优先保障他们的安全和赋权，我们可以建设一个数字未来，让长者不仅感到被包容，更感到被保护和被尊重，成为社区中有价值的一员。
与此同时，长者和弱势群体不应承担数字进步的代价。虽然建设网络韧性需要时间，但基本服务必须保持可及，即使这意味着提供实体选项。我们不能在庆祝数字便利的同时，让我们的长者被落下，感到不便和沮丧。
最后，副议长女士，请想象一下。谭女士自信地使用在线表格，面带微笑地支付账单，无需他人帮助。林先生与远方的孙辈们欢笑相聚，科技将他们连接在一起。艾哈迈德先生享受在线购物的便利，无需担心会因此失去毕生积蓄。
这不仅是一个愿景；这是我们可以向长者许下的承诺，一个数字世界，在这里他们不会被落下，而是被赋权和拥抱。这一旅程需要行动，而非空谈。我们必须加快数字素养计划，为每位长者配备所需工具。我们必须建立一个集中支持网络，成为他们数字焦虑和恐惧的单一联络点。我们必须对那些针对长者的犯罪分子采取迅速果断的行动，追究其责任。
让这成为我们今天的承诺：我们将携手银发一代弥合数字鸿沟。我们将编织一幅数字画卷，让他们的声音被听见，关切被回应，安全被保障。这不仅关乎技术，更关乎尊重、包容和尊崇他们所建立的遗产。
让我们共同建设一个数字新加坡，让每位长者，从谭女士到林先生再到艾哈迈德先生，都能自信地迈向未来，获得赋权，成为社区中受尊重的一员。副议长女士，让我们支持这项动议，让我们将这一承诺变为现实。
副议长女士：乌莎·昌德拉达斯。
下午5时28分
乌莎·昌德拉达斯女士（提名议员）：副议长女士，我支持这项动议，我也特别想谈谈我们社会在构建安全包容的数字社会时如何考虑我们的长者。今天许多尊敬的议员都提出了这一点，我也想补充我的看法。
根据年度《人口简报》报告，新加坡65岁及以上公民约占人口的19%。预计这一数字将增加，到2030年，约24%的公民将达到65岁及以上。这是一个庞大的数字，我相信本院的每个人对此都相当熟悉。
我们的方针是让新加坡成为“数字优先”社会，而非“仅数字”社会。因此，我们需要确保非数字选项——在我们选择提供的情况下——是有效且周到的。这一点并不新鲜，过去本院多次提及和认可。
我想补充两点。首先，在构建包容性的背景下，我想再次强调需要整体考虑数字体验，而不仅仅是具体服务和应用的功能。让我们退一步，思考一下——对于一位试图安享退休生活的长者来说，当前更大的数字环境是什么样的？
尽管银行创下了利润纪录，但它们仍以成本因素为由，决定取消实体支票或对其使用收费——而这是一种几代新加坡人习惯的支付方式。
许多银行分行关闭，自助视频柜员机取代了人工柜员。医疗预约、处方续配、健康记录——这些都可以通过HealthHub和Health Buddy等应用访问。商店、超市和咖啡馆开始无现金支付，智能手机应用也用于积分收集和折扣分配。去餐厅时，很可能需要扫描二维码查看菜单，有时甚至点餐和付款。虽然你的整个生活浓缩在小小的智能手机中，但你还会担心被诈骗者盯上。
所有这些数字举措虽然提高了效率，但不一定改善了长者的整体体验。或许有人会说，不熟悉银行、医疗等领域技术发展的老年人应当接受教育提升数字技能，或依赖可信赖的家人帮助。但这种做法忽视了几个事实。
首先，它忽视了并非每个人都有可以依赖的照顾者。对一些长者来说，亲自办理银行业务或购物可能是他们一天中唯一的社交活动。
其次，尊严和自主权对健康老龄化至关重要。没有人愿意觉得自己是负担，或需要重新学习才能继续独立完成多年来一直能做的事情。
虽然报告数字显示越来越多长者参与数字交易，但其中有多少实际上是由照顾者、朋友或家人代为完成的？
我认为，应允许希望继续使用非数字选项的长者按他们习惯的方式生活。他们可以选择学习数字解决方案，但应是渐进的，按自己的节奏进行。
我承认有许多良好的学习途径，如“长者数字行动”计划，政府在这方面做得很好。但我们必须记住不要进展过快。
这一理念呼应了欧盟基本权利机构《确保数字社会中公共服务的可及性》报告中的原则。报告指出，虽然“成员国应积极支持所有为各年龄段老年人开放终身学习机会的举措……但个人不应被强制要求掌握访问数字服务所需的数字技能。”报告还指出，公共管理部门应始终为无法或不愿掌握这些技能的公民提供其他访问渠道。
议长先生，真正的包容性关乎选择和自主权。即使在变化的世界中需要适应，个人也需要做出积极选择去学习新技能。其社区则需提供适宜的环境支持这一学习。
这当然不是说我们都应成为拒绝技术进步的“卢德分子”。事实上，技术有许多方式可以用来创造包容性和保障长者安全。
新加坡的数字准备蓝图强调以用户为中心的设计，这非常正确，但我们需要以更广泛的视角应用这一思维，而非零散地实施。我们需要设身处地为不同群体的长者考虑，认真思考他们各自的生活体验，并思考技术如何帮助他们。
这引出我的第二点，即艺术相关举措如何助力提升长者的数字素养、包容性和安全性。我想分享三个例子。
2021年，新加坡国家美术馆启动了一个名为“人民画廊”的精彩项目。通过增强现实（AR）技术，美术馆将心脏地带社区的25多个组屋空地墙面转变为虚拟艺术画廊。
你只需用手机摄像头对准空地墙上的二维码，国家收藏的艺术作品便会如同挂在墙上一样呈现眼前。观众可以暂时超越现实，享受美丽艺术品的体验，且无需支付一分钱。只需打开手机摄像头即可。
这是一种易于使用的技术，我认为我们可以在不同场景中同样轻松应用，例如老年诊所的医院候诊区，长者需长时间等待。漫长的等待可能给长者带来巨大压力，无论他们是独自一人还是有照顾者陪伴。接触数字艺术可能缓解部分紧张情绪，同时帮助长者熟悉数字工具。这是技术包容性、易用性和合理应用的绝佳示例，真正服务于长者的实际需求。
下一个例子是技术在痴呆症护理中的应用。艺术家兼程序员Eugene Soh就是这一领域的从业者。他利用虚拟现实（VR）技术帮助患者应对痴呆症。在他的社会企业Mind Palace中，Eugene和团队能够虚拟带领养老院居民前往熟悉的地方，如他们的旧居、社区，甚至是虎豹别墅和牛车水等兴趣点。团队还可将家人融入VR场景，帮助老年患者触发记忆，缓解社交孤立，拓展身体界限。
不仅如此，考虑到佩戴VR头盔可能不受长者欢迎且存在传播病毒风险，Mind Palace决定将整个房间改造成沉浸式互动环境，通过动作传感器实现健身和冥想体验。总之，整个体验完全无接触，符合用户需求和偏好。
迄今为止，Mind Palace已进行数百次试验，并在多个养老设施建立了五个永久沉浸式房间。这又是一个基于解决方案和以用户为中心设计思维的优秀范例。
正如Eugene对我所说，他的创造力是一种冲动，是利用技术促进讲故事和表达的方式，旨在触及有需要的社区，带来积极影响。
最后一个例子是香港汇丰银行去年11月举办的艺术展，旨在提升公众对防范诈骗和网络诈骗的意识。展览中有一件艺术品利用换脸技术，向参观者展示他们的形象如何被转换成著名本地名人。该展品旨在教育参观者识别深度伪造视频通话诈骗。
在新加坡，政府与YouTube上的知名创作者合作，提高诈骗意识，并通过音乐视频等创新媒介传播信息。这确实是提高数字原住民意识的良好举措。但我本周早些时候也注意到，星展基金会和POSB已与歌台表演者合作，娱乐并教育长者数字素养。
我赞赏这些举措，并希望政府关注新加坡庞大的艺术社区及其人才。富有创意、娱乐性和富有同理心的讲故事方式，能够更好地向社会不同群体，包括难以触及的长者群体，推广数字素养。
在我们朝着智慧国目标迈进，追求包容性和安全的同时，别忘了两点：第一，设计思维应始终以整体和同理心方式应用，尊重长者的完整生活体验；第二，在全国家政府策略中，尤其是在资金和资源分配时，别忘了艺术家和创意人才在打造数字社会包容性和安全性方面的重要作用。
议长先生：沙拉尔·塔哈先生。
下午5时39分
沙拉尔·塔哈先生（巴西立-榜鹅）：议长先生，我感恩我们生活在一个高度信任的社会，这种信任超越了种族、语言、宗教和差异的障碍。值得注意的是，这种信任也延伸至我们的机构。根据2023年埃德尔曼信任度研究，我们的政府仍是新加坡最受信任的机构。
只有建立信任，我们才能保持团结。根据2022年皮尤研究，75%的新加坡受访者表示他们在新冠疫情后感到更加团结，位列13个国家之首。这在一个日益分裂、对国家和政府机构信任难以获得的世界中尤为显著。
多年来，我们通过共同工作和面对挑战，维持了人民、政府、组织和企业之间的高度信任。
然而，这种信任脆弱，若我们的分歧被操纵，信任可能迅速瓦解。种族或宗教紧张、日益扩大的收入差距、假新闻、深度伪造视频（正如同僚谭博士所述）、感知的不公和未解决的焦虑，都可能轻易破坏我们多年来精心建立的信任。因此，我们的政府议员团在本动议中呼吁本院重申承诺，采取全国家方法，通过建设包容和安全的数字社会来维持信任。
我们如何确保在全球数字化加速的背景下，每个人都感到安全并融入社会？我们如何应对威胁社会凝聚力的虚假信息？我们如何打击基于技术的诈骗？我们如何提供平等且公平的机会，确保机会不仅惠及少数顶层人士？
我想重点谈三个关键点，以帮助通过建设安全包容的数字社会来维持信任。
首先，重新定义就业。重新定义就业至关重要，因为就业格局正在演变。这个格局多面且动态，新加坡的任何企业主都会告诉你，由于人口有限和人口老龄化，我们在获得合适人力方面面临挑战。
反复提到，到2030年，新加坡每四人中就有一人年龄超过60岁。目前，老年人的工作通常是体力性质的，比如清洁工和泵站工作人员，可能是因为现有老年人缺乏数字技能。然而，与我们现在所经历的不同的是，我们的年轻老年人现在具备数字素养，可以以不同的方式继续为经济做出贡献。
在一次家访中，我遇到一位50出头的居民，她为公司做账。她分享说，自新冠疫情以来，她就没有去过办公室。她希望自己能够一直这样工作，直到退休后很久。她希望继续工作，因为她喜欢与人互动，但也想花时间陪伴孙辈。
新冠疫情加速了新加坡灵活工作安排的概念。三方公平与进步就业实践联盟（TAFEP）已分享了灵活工作安排的指导方针。现在，某种程度的远程办公已被职场普遍接受。然而，工作分享、错峰上下班、兼职工作尚未被真正广泛采纳。
那么，我们如何将所有这些不同元素结合起来，利用数字化满足未来老年人退休后拥有有意义就业和舒适工作生活平衡的需求，满足未来退休人员继续积累退休资金的需求，以及满足我们经济的人力需求？
为此，我们必须采取结构化的、全国性的整体方法，重新思考就业的定义，鼓励灵活的工作安排，如工作分享、错峰上下班、兼职工作（在可能的情况下），以真正释放具备数字能力的年轻老年人的潜力。此外，残疾人士和重返职场的妈妈们也能从这些安排中受益，有助于促进包容性，同时确保经济活动持续进行。
其次，虽然我们的数字连接性值得称赞，但我们必须确保每个上学的孩子都拥有数字访问权和未来经济所需的数字技能。
最新的新加坡数字社会报告显示，通过DigitalAccess@Home和NEU PC等计划，新加坡所有家庭的互联网连接率达到99%，有上学孩子的家庭中有98%拥有电脑。在基层层面，我们与社区合作伙伴合作，为低收入家庭提供数字访问。例如，在巴西立东，我们与施耐德电气合作，向低收入家庭的孩子分发了100台笔记本电脑。
然而，我感到惊讶的是，尽管有这些项目，只有98%的有上学孩子的家庭拥有电脑。这意味着每100个有孩子上学的家庭中仍有两个家庭因各种原因没有电脑。
这令人担忧，尤其是考虑到这些家庭很可能来自低收入家庭。我们如何确保所有有上学孩子的家庭都能拥有电脑？
确保连接性和数字设备的可访问性无疑是优先事项，我们还必须确保教育系统在小学和中学阶段就提供必要的数字技能。毕竟，当新加坡推行义务十年教育时，目的是确保我们的上学孩子具备未来所需的基本知识和技能。
通常，较富裕的家庭会送孩子参加编码、人工智能、增强现实和机器人等额外课程。尤其是在年幼时，接触这些昂贵的课外活动可能对低收入家庭来说难以负担，他们在获取资源、了解和学习这些关键数字技能方面面临障碍。这加大了有与无之间的技能差距。我们如何确保所有青少年都有平等机会接触并发展这些数字能力？
我们能否确定基本数字技能，如基础编码、机器人技术、应用人工智能、网络安全和数字健康，将其纳入小学和中学的核心课程，使所有学生都能在早期接触这些必备数字技能？我担心如果不这样做，来自低收入家庭的孩子将在未来经济中处于不利地位。
因此，听到陈振声部长昨天表示教育部正在准备学生发展人工智能基础知识，我感到欣慰。我希望我们能在学校正式教授更多数字技能。为减轻学生的学业负担，我建议将这些主题作为核心课程中的非考试内容，同时替换掉未来经济中可能不那么关键的内容。
提供一个平台，提高对数字经济所需技能的认识和知识，正是M 3 @巴西立-榜鹅（PRPG）希望实现的目标之一。通过我们的项目，如M 3 数字化、3D制造工作坊、辅导计划、学习之旅和HashTech，M 3 @PRPG希望装备孩子们，尤其是来自低收入家庭的孩子，了解这些技能及未来经济中的可能机会。
没有这样的平台，低收入家庭的孩子如何了解数字经济所需的技能，更不用说受到启发去从事这些不断发展的行业的职业？议长先生，请用马来语。
（马来语）：[请参阅方言发言。] M 3 @巴西立-榜鹅的优先事项之一是为我们的学生，尤其是低收入家庭的学生，提供学习、尝试和提升数字领域技能的机会。只有通过尝试，学生们才能培养兴趣，并立志将其作为职业继续发展。
项目如M 3 数字化和3D制造空间，学生们学习3D打印；M 3学习之旅，学生参观工程和技术公司；以及#Hashtech项目，学生学习仪表盘制作、网络安全和人工智能；所有这些都为学生提供了获取数字技能的平台。
一个例子是3D制造挑战赛的冠军队伍。获胜团队由马来西亚阿拉伯伊斯兰学校的学生组成，他们利用3D打印制作了一个玩具直升机。
另一个例子是#HashTech比赛的亚军队伍，由三兄妹Nurul Musfirah、Nurul Shahzanie和Nurul Zahirah组成，他们展示了一个人工智能平台，帮助人们更好地了解新加坡目前可用的各种支持计划。
祝贺所有学生，我也感谢M 3 @巴西立-榜鹅、MENDAKI、MUIS、MAEC、MMiT和MM工程的所有志愿者，为我们的学生提供提升数字技能的机会。
几个月前，作为ITE学院4PM Bestari奖和韧性奖的评审团成员，我被这些学生克服挑战的决心和毅力深深感动。他们中的许多人还在攻读应用人工智能和网络安全等各类专业领域的深造。
对我们的学生说，请继续追求数字知识。我们的社区必须继续鼓励学生探索和提升在新经济中必不可少的数字技能。
（英语）：从数字包容转向保护新加坡人免受网络诈骗的需要。我感谢跨部委官员在打击诈骗方面的持续努力。虽然许多议员谈到了防止诈骗，我将简要谈及两项诈骗后的恢复工作。
首先，我们能否审视处理未经授权交易诈骗的方式？许多诈骗源于受害者被误导授权的交易。然而，有些诈骗是在未授权交易的情况下执行的。我们能否审视这种方式，使金融机构对未经授权交易的诈骗承担部分责任？
其次，鉴于诈骗案件数量庞大，仅2023年1月至6月就有超过24,000起诈骗案件，且诈骗复杂，仅有10,000名常规警员，调查需要时间是可以理解的。然而，在调查期间，受害者的银行账户可能被冻结。如果这是受害者的唯一账户，这对受害者来说非常困难。我们能否审视冻结银行账户整个调查期间的流程？
总之，议长先生，新加坡在一个日益分裂的世界中，始终是团结的灯塔。然而，信任是脆弱的，如果不加以培育，将会动摇。负责任地利用数字进步对于维持社区内的信任至关重要。让我们共同努力，建设一个安全、包容和值得信赖的数字社会，确保无人被落下。议长先生，我支持该动议。
议长：李马克先生。
下午5时53分
李马克先生（提名议员）：议长先生，今天我们聚集一堂，讨论国家的未来和数字时代，必须认识到数字化在塑造繁荣、高效和互联的新加坡中的重要性和相关性。虽然我们关注其带来的挑战，但拥抱数字转型的好处不可否认，是国家进步的关键。
数字化是经济增长和创新的关键驱动力，开启了新市场和新机遇的大门。它提升了运营效率和生产力，彻底改变了企业的运营和全球竞争方式。它使企业能够提供更好的客户体验，利用数据分析制定更有效的策略和服务。
虽然数字化可能导致部分工作岗位自动化，但它也创造了新的岗位。欧盟委员会报告称，每消失一个因数字化而失去的工作岗位，数字领域会创造2.6个新岗位。
数字化在环境可持续性方面也发挥重要作用，通过创新解决方案减少碳足迹。企业在新冠疫情期间展现的韧性，很大程度上得益于其数字能力，这凸显了数字准备的重要性。这种准备不仅确保危机中的业务连续性，还增强了我们适应和在变化环境中繁荣的集体能力。
随着新加坡坚定迈向智慧国愿景，我们的数字转型之旅不仅要以技术进步为标志，更要以包容性和安全性为特征。这种整体方法对于确保数字化的好处对社会所有成员都可及且安全至关重要。
企业是新加坡数字社会的重要支柱。许多企业正在采用或开发数字产品和服务，更好地满足消费者需求，在人力紧缺的情况下，通过自动化实施数字解决方案以简化运营，提高效率。
在数字交易和互动成为我们日常生活不可或缺的一部分的时代，数字信息的安全性已成为全球用户，包括新加坡用户的首要关注点。新加坡人越来越关注企业如何处理他们的数字信息。2018年SingHealth数据泄露事件在公众意识中留下了深刻印象。
另一个个人事件——我一位拥有工程和建筑公司的密友经历了一次突显数字时代严峻现实的事件。他的公司遭遇了勒索软件攻击，黑客窃取了公司服务器和所有工程蓝图，并加密锁定。这次攻击使他的运营陷入停顿，损失不断增加。
为了夺回控制权，他被迫支付了16万新元的赎金。然而，财务损失不仅限于赎金，停工和运营中断造成的损失也极为严重。遗憾的是，他的经历并非孤例，许多人默默承受着类似的痛苦。
这是一种日益增长的复杂网络攻击趋势，令商业界深感忧虑。这些事件提醒我们数字基础设施的脆弱性和对强大网络安全措施的需求。然而，在快速变化的数字环境中，实现数字包容和安全需要大量的资金、时间和人力投入。这对资源有限的公司尤其具有挑战性。
根据新加坡工商联合会（SBF）2022/2023年度最新全国商业调查，64%的企业对采用新技术的高成本表示担忧。此外，无论规模大小，企业都面临着员工技能提升以跟上技术进步的需求以及缺乏管理专业知识以有效推动技术变革的挑战。
尽管企业在应对网络安全挑战方面的信心有所增长，今年有80%的企业表示有信心，而去年为74%，但中小企业（SMEs）仍落后于大型企业。最新数据显示，78%的中小企业对其安全措施保护免受网络威胁表示有信心或较有信心，低于大型企业91%的信心水平。
此外，新加坡中华总商会（SCCCI）2023年调查显示，32%的中小企业优先加强对网络威胁的韧性，较2022年的11%显著增加，表明中小企业部门对网络安全的意识和承诺在不断增强。
今天，我旨在解决企业，尤其是小型企业中普遍存在的观念和担忧，即实施数字安全和网络防御成本过高。我将介绍和讨论各种量身定制、易于获取的自助工具和协作资源，旨在以经济有效的方式提升企业的网络安全水平。
由新加坡网络安全局（CSA）打造的互联网卫生门户（IHP）是一个综合平台，供企业使用自我评估工具。这些工具旨在评估公司网站、电子邮件服务和域名配置的安全性。评估后，IHP提供量身定制的可操作建议，使企业能够有效提升整体互联网安全态势。
此外，IHP通过发布互联网卫生评级表增强透明度。该功能简化展示了各种数字平台的网络卫生状况。通过提供这些关键信息，它赋能企业和消费者做出明智的数字平台使用决策，从而增强数字交易的安全性，防范网络威胁。
对于准备深化网络安全承诺的中小企业，CSA提供网络安全健康计划。在该计划下，网络安全顾问充当中小企业的虚拟首席信息安全官，进行网络健康审计并制定定制的网络安全健康计划。为鼓励参与并减轻财务负担，符合条件的中小企业可获得高达70%的共同资助，使先进的网络安全更易获得且负担得起。
适当的网络风险管理对于中小企业自信地推进数字化之旅至关重要。由信息通信媒体发展局（IMDA）开发、新加坡工商联合会管理的“首席技术官即服务”（CTOaaS）计划是“中小企业数字化计划”的一部分，旨在增强这种信心。通过CTOaaS，中小企业可访问经验丰富的数字顾问共享池，提供全面咨询和项目管理服务，帮助中小企业识别和弥补数字化差距，抓住机遇，确保更安全高效的数字转型。
缺乏内部IT专业知识或专门资源的中小企业从该服务中获益良多，获得了针对其需求量身定制的数字解决方案和培训路线图。该计划确保中小企业能够获得市场验证的、具有成本效益的解决方案，确保它们不会在我们共同迈向包容且安全的数字社会的进程中被边缘化。这是数字进步民主化的一大步，使所有企业，无论规模或资源如何，都能参与并贡献于我们的数字未来。
鉴于现有举措，我想向政府提出一些建议，以进一步支持我们的中小企业：开发针对数字化新兴且关键领域（如网络安全和人工智能）的行业特定资源。
通过与行业协会和企业密切合作，这种方法可以显著加速中小企业向包容且安全的数字社会的转型。这些资源应涵盖行业特定的培训和评估计划、基线工具及相关解决方案。
此外，正如近期新加坡工商联合会（SBF）与毕马威（KPMG）2024年预算建议中强调的，政府可以考虑调整现有的资助计划，以支持中小企业采用这些工具和解决方案。例如，采用分层支持方式，对采用先进的人工智能和区块链技术给予更高额度的资助，可能有助于企业在数字化路线图上超越基础的流程和运营自动化。此外，鉴于本地IT人力资源紧缺，也可以考虑扩大现有计划，支持那些为提高运营和成本效率而在新加坡境外进行开发工作的数字项目。
另外，建立一个专门的援助渠道，供中小企业在应对潜在的网络安全或人工智能治理违规时寻求帮助，将提供安全保障，确保中小企业在需要时获得支持。这一全面战略不仅能保护我们的企业，还能赋能它们自信地拥抱数字未来。
随着技术在我们日常生活中变得更加不可或缺，对技能型人才的需求也相应演变。培养员工的学习和创新文化至关重要。作为领导者和利益相关者，我们必须认识并解决员工的担忧，为那些可能因快速数字变革而感到不知所措的人提供安慰和支持。
我们必须继续大力投资于员工培训，确保每个人，无论起点如何，都有机会成长和适应。这不仅是为了跟上数字社会的步伐，更是为了赋能他们在其中引领和创新。通过促进持续学习、提供支持和指导、鼓励创新，我们不仅能提升个人职业发展，还能推动整个行业乃至国家的集体进步。
因此，企业必须认识到，培训员工不仅仅是跟上技术进步的步伐，更是战略性地提升他们的技能，以充分释放技术应用的潜力。当员工熟练且灵活时，整个公司将获得显著收益。
例如，Utracon Corporation通过参与CTO即服务（CTOaaS）计划，利用专家建议实施针对性解决方案，显著提升了项目实时监控能力并促进了团队协作。这一案例凸显了投资员工成长的更广泛价值，带来了公司运营效率和创新能力的提升。
为了帮助企业继续致力于提升员工技能，正如SBF-KPMG预算建议所提，政府也可以考虑通过引入资助计划，支持与员工技能提升及采用新技术（如人工智能和机器学习）相关的费用，并提供一个安全便捷的集中平台，供中小企业访问这些技能提升服务。
最后，在当今数字时代，我想强调，客户信息的伦理处理已超越了单纯的法律义务。这是建立信任和维护企业诚信的根本要素。作为客户数据的守护者，我们必须遵守最高的伦理标准，确保每一条信息的收集、存储和使用都充分尊重隐私和同意。
这意味着要透明公开我们的数据处理方式，为客户提供明确的选择，并采取积极措施保护其信息免受泄露和滥用。通过承诺这些伦理实践，我们不仅符合法规要求，还能强化声誉，培养客户忠诚度，并促进更可信赖的数字生态系统。议长先生，我想用中文结束发言。
（中文）：[请参阅本地语言发言。] 总之，在我们应对建设包容且安全的数字社会的复杂性和机遇时，让我们采取全面的方法。这不仅包括投资稳健的技术和基础设施，还包括培养持续学习、创新和伦理实践的文化。
通过这样做，我们确保迈向智慧国的旅程充满信任、安全和包容，惠及社会中的每个人和每个企业。让我们共同承诺，创造一个数字进步等同于更安全、更繁荣且伦理扎实的新加坡的未来。
（英文）：议长先生，我支持该动议。
议长：维克拉姆·奈尔先生。
下午6时11分
维克拉姆·奈尔先生（森巴旺）：议长先生，新加坡向数字化社会的转变令人瞩目。过去几年，政府和社会关键角色紧跟并利用技术，使我们的生活更美好、更简便。
曾几何时，我们每个人都必须保留所有重要文件的纸质副本，包括出生证明、身份证、驾驶执照、健康记录、结婚证、银行账户对账单和公积金对账单。如今，所有这些信息都可以通过手机上的应用程序轻松获取。
Singpass应用程序方便地将我们连接到大多数官方记录，而所有主要银行也通过手机应用提供大部分服务。对许多人来说，可能不再需要携带现金或钱包，也无需排队到邮局、银行、自动取款机或AXS机，因为几乎所有支付都可以通过手机随时随地完成。
甚至营销和购物体验也发生了彻底变化，在线商店将购物体验带到指尖。我们现在可以在家中或乘坐公共交通时购物。事实上，当我与一家在线零售商的主管交谈时，她提到相当大比例的购物者是在早晨上厕所时完成购买的。
这些变化也显著改变了我们的商业格局，亚马逊和阿里巴巴等在线巨头取代了Borders和Robinsons等实体零售商。对于小企业来说，在Shopee和Lazada等平台展示商品使他们无需实体店面即可销售，而对于拥有实体店面的商家，线上销售成为补充销售的重要方式。
该动议强调了数字化过程中需要解决的两个重要问题：包容性和安全性。让我先谈谈包容性。
对于那些在线并通过网络获取服务的人来说，生活从未如此轻松。对年轻人而言，上网似乎是天性。我女儿大约四五岁时就学会了在我妻子的手机上下载游戏，不久后她又学会了在线购物，所有这些都没有我们教她。
另一方面，我确实认识许多未完全上网且感到困难的年长居民。银行开始关闭分行并引导客户使用自动取款机和AXS机时，我曾收到更多分行开放的请求。现在，银行也在减少自动取款机，习惯现金交易的居民发现操作更困难。许多小商户也是如此，尽管许多熟食中心和组屋商场的店铺已实现数字化，但仍有少数未采用在线支付或记录系统。这其中包括一些受过良好教育的人士，甚至有些资深医生仍偏好多年沿用的传统做法。
政府各机构已推出多项举措以缩小数字鸿沟，吸引更多人进入数字世界。例如，信息通信媒体发展局（IMDA）推出的“摊贩数字化”计划，补贴摊贩将业务搬到线上并接受数字支付，成功将许多社区摊贩带入数字世界。“长者数字化”计划则针对长者，在社区各地提供课程，培训他们使用手机访问各种功能和服务。
我相信这些举措正在发挥作用，但为了更好地发挥效果，我认为需要全社会共同参与，鼓励身边的人参加课程、上网并提升数字能力。每当居民请求增设自动取款机时，我会解释我们面临的挑战，同时温和地引导他们使用网上银行应用，迈向数字化。
动议的另一个备受关注的方面是数字安全。这涉及多个层面。
一方面是系统安全，包括保持系统运行和防范网络威胁。例如，我们的部分银行系统曾多次宕机，导致交易无法进行。对于主要依赖数字支付的人来说，这可能带来问题。比如银行支付系统宕机时，只有该银行数字支付方式的人该怎么办？
我曾在系统首次宕机时遇到小麻烦，当时我在商店，只得退货回家。虽不算大问题，但如果我们继续数字化，这类问题必须重视。
更重要的是恶意网络威胁，包括黑客攻击和勒索软件，组织可能遭受系统入侵、信息被盗，随后被勒索付款。许多公司和机构存有大量个人信息，如果存储系统不安全，个人可能面临攻击风险。对此，我认为必须确保收集个人数据的机构能够保护这些数据。
第三个方面，也是本院许多发言者最关注的，是网络诈骗。我在本院多次谈及此问题。
诈骗问题复杂多面。首先，诈骗者大多位于新加坡境外，这使得本地执法机构难以采取行动。新加坡警方与国际刑警组织及其他机构紧密合作，但追踪众多诈骗的具体来源仍有难度。
其次，受害者通常被利用信任。诈骗类型包括求职诈骗、恋爱诈骗和投资诈骗。本院部分议员认为诈骗泛滥正在引发数字化信心危机，我对此持不同意见。
我认为数字化是一列高速列车，大多数新加坡人都已上车。诈骗受害者往往过于信任，轻信来电和信息，从而陷入骗局。
在工作中，我曾接触一名恋爱诈骗受害者。她通过网络交流和一次见面爱上了一人。最终，该人据称去世，留给她一笔巨额遗产。然而，为了领取遗产，她不得不且确实为各种所谓官方用途定期付款。她向我求助时，已损失超过一百万新元。她仍难以相信自己被骗，仍希望有遗产等着她。
诈骗者本质上是试图盗窃的罪犯，数字化只是让他们更容易实施诈骗。我不认为数字化信心存在危机，而是消费者必须学会更加谨慎和警惕。正如现实生活中我们会注意不随意放钱包和手机、不外出时锁门，数字世界中也应如此小心。
第三个挑战是诈骗损失应由谁承担。我们普遍同情受害者，他们被利用，失去毕生积蓄或重要资金。我在“面对面会议”中遇到的受害者故事令人心碎。有人呼吁更多损失应由电信运营商、银行或其他相关大公司承担。
这种做法有几个吸引点。我们都认为大公司比个人更能承受损失，也希望施加更大压力促使大公司采取必要防范措施。但我想指出，如果过度倾向此方向，存在一些风险。
首先，每家大公司，包括银行和电信，都需从客户获利。如果诈骗损失大部分由它们承担，必然会从客户身上回收成本，可能导致价格普遍上涨。
其次，这可能意味着服务提供商对客户采取更具侵入性的监控措施。例如，如果电信公司对通过电话或WhatsApp的诈骗负有责任，可能不得不加强对私人通话和信息的监控，以识别诈骗。我们希望银行在多大程度上对指令和交易进行二次审查？
第三是道德风险问题。如果人们认为损失会由他人承担，他们可能会减少防范措施。
综合考虑，新加坡采取了三管齐下的反诈骗策略。
首先，采取上游措施，包括ScamShield过滤和阻止诈骗信息，短信发件人身份注册制度标记未注册的可能诈骗者。我想我们许多人已采用这些措施。
其次，新加坡警察部队（SPF）采取下游措施，追查诈骗团伙。据《海峡时报》报道，至少有一次诈骗被成功破获，避免了超过1260万新元的损失——虽是九牛一毛，但方向正确。
新加坡警察部队还开始与银行合作应对诈骗。例如，2023年3月与华侨银行合作，利用机器人流程自动化识别潜在诈骗者。金融管理局（MAS）也参与此举，与银行紧密合作，加强反恶意软件控制、故障监控和检测能力。主要零售银行已提升安全措施。显然，大型机构和政府正积极打击诈骗。
当然，最重要的是第三方面——公众教育。我认为新加坡警察部队、网络安全局、MoneySENSE和银行利用多平台向居民宣传，许多议员也在选区举办讲座和对话，鼓励下载ScamShield并警示诈骗风险。
新加坡还参与全球合作打击诈骗。若想获得他国协助，我们必须发挥作用。
近期新加坡展开大规模打击行动，逮捕大量人员，我相信这笔资金大部分来自境外犯罪。虽然具体细节尚未公布，但这显然是国际合作的一部分。
这是全球性问题，英国、澳大利亚和美国等国也采取类似措施打击诈骗。令我关注的是英国的“Stop Scams UK”，这是由企业主导的合作项目，涵盖主要银行、信用卡运营商及亚马逊、谷歌等大型在线企业。
在英国，诈骗是最常见的犯罪，受害概率是其他犯罪的两倍。值得注意的是，这是一个私营部门主导的倡议，部分原因是英国法律要求银行赔偿授权推送支付（APP）诈骗受害者。APP诈骗指受害者被冒充者欺骗付款。通过将潜在责任置于私营企业，激励它们合作遏制APP诈骗。现在的关键是该措施是否有效，或是否会增加道德风险和诈骗发生率，我们应持续关注。
尽管方法看似激进，英国目标是减少诈骗10%。他们并不雄心勃勃，也不声称能完全根除，只是希望降低发生率。这是我们必须面对的问题，且需采取必要防范措施。
在新加坡，政府可能需要主导这些举措和相关立法，为行业参与者设定合理风险分担。金融管理局的风险分担框架是一个起点，若有需要，可审视和调整，以平衡各方风险分配。我相信，财务上利益一致的行业合作总体上是明智的做法。
议长先生，数字化对我们所有人的生活都很重要，通常来说，它使我们的生活变得更好、更便捷。我们必须拥抱并乘风破浪。我认为回避数字化不是一个选项。然而，在乘风破浪的过程中，我们需要尽可能让每个人都参与进来，也就是包容性，同时要意识到这带来的新危险，即安全问题。因此，我支持这项动议。
议长先生：议会领袖。
英文原文
SPRS Hansard 原始记录 · 抓取日期：2026-05-02
1.31 pm
Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson) : Sir, I beg to move*, "That this House reaffirms our commitment to adopt a whole-of-nation approach to sustain trust by building an inclusive and safe digital society."
[(proc text) *The Motion also stood in the names of Mr Sharael Taha, Ms Hany Soh, Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Alex Yam. (proc text)]
Speaker, Sir, the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Communications and Information, comprising People's Action Party Members of Parliament Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Christopher de Souza, Mr Alex Yam, Mr Sharael Taha, Ms Hany Soh and me as the GPC Chair, is moving this Motion as Singapore comes to a point in our national trajectory towards digitalisation where we must confront challenges that could erode trust in institutions and individuals pivotal to our nation's success and cohesion.
Singapore has always been unafraid of transformations. Over a relatively short period post-Independence, we transformed from a traditional, domestically focused economy to export-led industrialisation facilitated by multinational corporations. Subsequently, Singapore strategically pivoted towards developing modern services and made substantial investments in emerging sectors like biomedical industries. Singapore also invests heavily in building up our infrastructure ahead of time so that when the wave arrives, we are ready to ride it.
This forward-thinking approach, combined with the courage to explore uncharted territories, has proven successful, bolstered by a united and high-trust population. Our gross domestic product (GDP) per capita grew from US$500 in 1965 to US$13,000 in 1990 and to US$83,000 in 2022. Going digital is a reality around the world and it is imperative for Singapore. As it is, our digital economy contributed 17.3% to our GDP in 2022, up from 13% in 2017.
As we continue to transform and embrace the opportunities presented by digital transformation and immerse ourselves in the digital realm for our daily activities, we are confronted with a growing set of challenges. The digital landscape is becoming increasingly perilous, marked by the surge in online harms such as scams, ransomware, deep fakes, misinformation and other malicious cyber activities. Compounded by rapidly evolving tactics, the situation poses a constant challenge.
Much like cockroaches, scams often operate in the dark corners of the digital realm, exploiting vulnerabilities and thriving in unsuspecting spaces. They are agile, quick to evolve and adept at camouflaging themselves, making it challenging to eradicate them entirely. Similarly, just as we believe that we figured out the latest scamming trick, new and more sophisticated threats emerge.
The rising prevalence of scams demonstrates this. Reported cases reached 31,728 in 2022, marking a 32.6% increase compared to 2021. Between January and August 2023, losses due to malware scams exceeded $20.6 million.
Notably, a global study reveals that Singapore, unfortunately, bears a significant brunt, with scam victims in the country experiencing an average loss of US$4,031 per individual. This could be a substantial loss of hard-earned savings for some Singaporeans.
In MacPherson, I have encountered several residents who were victims of scams. In late 2021, one young resident, Ms Tan, shared about how she and others lost money to fraudulent transactions on her credit card when she did not receive or provide to anyone her one-time password (OTP).
Quoting her, "Even without evidence that the consumers have received the OTP sent by the banks, that is, through a history of incoming message from the telco, banks requested customers to make payment for the fraudulent transactions without investigating whether the OTPs could have been diverted. Frustrated by their disadvantageous position in dispute against banks, consumers oftentimes bear the burden of making up to five-figure payments for these transactions."
As an ordinary citizen and consumer, it is typically difficult to retrieve information or history of SMSes from the telecommunications company (telco) and the victim usually finds themselves to and fro between the bank, telco, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the Police.
In another example, I met my elderly resident, Mr Yee, who fell prey online to an investment scheme supposedly endorsed by then Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam. He did not understand how credit card transactions work online and consequently was charged several thousand dollars in fraudulent credit card bills, which he could ill-afford as he only had a few hundred dollars left in his savings account. He was under tremendous stress as he was frail and worried that he will lose everything.
We managed to get the bank to waive it, given his dire circumstances, but how many such goodwill write-offs are possible?
These are just some of the notable cases that I have come across in MacPherson and I am certain my Parliamentary colleagues have many similar examples as well. Such cases are compelling motivation for us to move this Motion.
Moreover, the escalating global artificial intelligence (AI) arms race raises concerns about potential compromises on ethical considerations as powerful technology companies prioritise winning at all costs. This heightened competition may lead to a disregard for addressing social disparities, including the widening gap between the digitally know-how and the digitally know-nots, exacerbating divisions within the population.
Additionally, if institutions solely concentrate on leveraging AI or any emerging technology for enhanced productivity without concurrently investing in workforce training and re-training initiatives, ordinary citizens could grow fearful of what we will lose more than being hopeful of what we can gain from technological advancements as a society. This fear, in turn, can impede Singapore's progress.
The trustworthiness of critical infrastructures and essential services also plays a role in shaping public confidence towards the security of their personal data. With 99% of resident households in Singapore connected to the Internet, we have one of the highest internet penetration rates in the world. This is testament to Singapore's progress, but it also means that we are all the more susceptible to online threats.
DBS' repeated digital service disruptions in 2023, Central Provident Fund (CPF) savings lost to Android malware scams and personal data breaches in public healthcare – these incidents affected a significant portion of our population and in turn, affect the public's trust in the digital. These issues, if left to fester, will undermine trust.
Not being able to trust every information received, every transaction made, every voice heard and every image seen is paralysing. Trust is fundamental in a society as there will inevitably be difficult times when individuals need to be willing to temporarily sacrifice individual interests in favour of collective societal benefits. Trust is important for value-creating transactions to happen, for creative ideas to be shared and not be suppressed.
Hence, if we do not make a clear stand and actively manage these issues, we risk losing the public's trust in the digital world, thereby losing out on the benefits of convenience to citizens and benefits of productivity and innovation for our national economy.
Against this backdrop, we decided to move this Motion to reaffirm this House's commitment to adopt a whole-of-nation approach to sustain trust by building an inclusive and safe digital society.
At the onset of this speech, I have explained the context for why we have moved this Motion. I have also emphasised why trust is important and strengthening trust in a digital society must be the end goal of this Motion. Allow me to elaborate on the "safe" and "inclusive" tenets of this Motion.
On "safe", a safe online environment is crucial for building trust in a digital society because it directly influences people's confidence and willingness to engage in digital transactions and interactions.
Underlying a safe online environment are: number one, trust in digital transactions
First, we need reliable digital infrastructure so as to provide the foundation for secure, reliable and accessible digital services.
Unreliable systems, frequent outages or vulnerabilities in the infrastructure make users skeptical about the security of their transactions, hindering the growth of digital trust. Thus, the organisations across all sectors must intentionally and systematically incorporate measures and practices that prioritise and enhance trust throughout the entire digital transaction process.
Second, we need to combat scams and fraudulent activities swiftly and effectively. Scams erode trust by exploiting unsuspecting users, leading to financial losses and undermining confidence in digital transactions.
Number two, addressing cyber threats. Cybersecurity threats, such as data breaches and identity theft via malwares, contribute to fear and suspicion among users. Privacy breaches and unauthorised access to personal information can also make individuals hesitant to engage in digital activities. Hence, we must ensure that related policies and capabilities continually evolve to keep up with the rampant and fast-changing threats online.
Number three, countering online harms. Online harms, including cyberbullying and harassment, have real-life consequences on individuals' mental health and well-being, hampering their potential. Further, vulnerable groups, such as children and the elderly, are particularly susceptible to online harms. Hence, we must promote respectful and responsible behaviours and implement measures that protect vulnerable groups from exploitation, thereby fostering trust among users of all demographics.
Number four, meaningful human connections. The interconnectedness of online and physical worlds often influence real-life relationships. We should focus on creating more positive online experiences so that human connections remain meaningful even as we go digital.
And number five, digital inclusion. Ultimately, people will be keener to participate if they feel safe. Hence, we must create a safe online space that allows broad-based participation if we are to achieve a truly inclusive digital society.
In short, a safe online environment is a cornerstone of building trust in a digital society. This trust, in turn, contributes to the growth and success of the digital ecosystem, positively impacting both online and offline aspects of individuals' lives.
Moving on to "inclusive", inclusivity builds trust in a digital society as it ensures that the benefits of digitalisation are accessible to all, fostering a sense of fairness, equity and shared progress.
Key to this include: number one, access to essential services. As essential services such as Government, healthcare, finance and telco services increasingly transition to digital platforms, these must remain accessible to everyone.
Number two, digital skills empowerment and closing social gaps. We must empower our citizens with digital access and the right skills for active participation in the digital society. We must be mindful of not creating new gaps between the digitally savvy and those who are not. By doing so, individuals, including the vulnerable, can gain the confidence to navigate digital platforms, reducing the digital divide and fostering trust in their ability to engage with digital technologies.
Number three, workplace evolution for all ages. We must evolve jobs and workplaces to keep up with the fast-changing digital landscape, whilst ensuring the workforce continues to have the right skill sets, so that everyone can contribute meaningfully, regardless of age or background.
Number four, enhancing citizen participation. We must ensure that digital platforms and environments are safe, kind and respectful as I have had earlier articulated, so that citizens are not denied their voice or meaningful online participation for fear of being "cancelled" just because one holds a different view from a vocal few.
And number five, embracing diversity. We must ensure digital interfaces are inclusive by design so that citizens of all ages, languages and physical conditions can comfortably and confidently engage in the digital space.
To achieve a safe and inclusive digital society, everyone needs to play a part. Hence, our GPC for Communications and Information, together with several People's Action Party (PAP) Members of Parliament (MPs), have set out 13 calls to action, urging a whole-of-nation approach to make the online space a safer and more inclusive one for all Singaporeans.
I will first cover five calls to action, while my fellow GPC members and PAP MPs will speak in greater depth on the rest.
First, Government to take the lead to set up information-sharing mechanism with the industry, modelled after "Stop Scams UK".
Companies, given the competitive nature, are fundamentally unwilling to cooperate and share information and best practices, which could help with timely interventions or enforcement against scams or digital threats. Ironically, collaboration on this front would have catalysed learning and improvements to their operations and business.
However, companies tend to be more willing to share data and experiences with the Government, which could then anonymise and aggregate such information. Hence, we need a stronger framework for public and private players to share information on scams, to enable faster detection and intervention.
Taking a leaf from the "Stop Scams UK" that allows industry players to share intelligence and collaborate on scam-related initiatives, our Government can and should take the lead in setting up a similar information-sharing mechanism with the industry. My hon colleague Vikram Nair will also touch on this in his speech later.
Second, Government to further integrate expertise and prioritise resources to regulate and enforce online safety. The Singapore Government has done much to combat scams and online harms, from legislation updates, introduction of codes to introducing new tools for companies' and public's use.
It is also encouraging to note the establishment of Anti-Scam Command in 2022 and co-location of major banks' staff with the Police to facilitate scam detection and reporting. But the broader efforts in combatting scams and online harms still necessitate extensive coordination across various Government agencies and departments, and private institutions, such as banks and telcos, which may have varying mandates and resource priorities.
Hence, there is scope for further integration of expertise and resource prioritisation in regulating and enforcing online safety. My hon colleague Yip Hon Weng will further touch on this and specifically on stakeholder coordination later in his speech.
Third, device manufacturers and digital service providers to strengthen safeguards against malware and ensure their offerings are safe by design and default. We have seen an increase in prevalence of scams enabled by malware on users' mobile devices. These malware threats are difficult for everyday citizens to detect. Even with public education, it will be difficult for individuals to know if their phones and devices have been compromised. Even someone who is in the tech industry will find it difficult to know.
Therefore, device manufacturers and digital service providers should be proactive in informing consumers of vulnerabilities detected and in strengthening their safeguards against malware to ensure that their offerings are safe by design and default. From another perspective, greater transparency and evident efforts in enhancing safe use will bolster customer confidence and drive sales. So, it is a win-win.
Fourth, banks and e-commerce platforms to adopt stronger authentication solutions like the Fast Identity Online (FIDO) passkeys to keep our accounts secure.
Many digital service providers continue to use authentication methods, such as traditional passwords that are vulnerable to phishing. As bad actors evolve their methods, banks and e-commerce platforms with their powerful tech capabilities have a responsibility in keeping their customers' accounts secure and should thus be adopting phishing-resistant authentication, such as FIDO passkeys.
Fifth, everyone can play their part in making Singapore's digital society safe, gracious and inclusive. As we spend more time online, the digital and physical worlds are converging and our actions in either realm can have a profound impact on the other. Ultimately, we should ask ourselves what kind of environment do we desire to see in the digital world? If we desire safety, inclusiveness, kindness and respect in the real world, we should also aspire to create the same online. Why should the digital world be any different from the real one? My hon colleague Vikram Nair will also speak on this later.
As my hon colleagues engage in deeper discussions on online harms later in their speeches, I wish to highlight the need to ensure a safe space for freedom of ideas and expression online. The Internet has the power to amplify the voices of a vocal few. If this ability becomes misguided, it risks drowning out or cancelling others who hold a different opinion or who are, simply, different. Hence, this call of action calls on every one of us to continue upholding the values of kindness and respect online and offline, to look beyond ourselves and reach out to others who may be in need of help.
Following my opening speech, the remaining speeches by our PAP MPs will focus on the remaining eight calls of actions. Allow me to briefly list them.
Holding social media services accountable for the proliferation of harmful content and malicious ads. My hon colleagues Nadia Samdin, Wan Rizal and Mariam Jaafar will be covering this.
Next, reviewing the approach to victims of scams by unauthorised transactions, with larger players doing more to prevent losses and share consequences. My hon colleagues Hany Soh and Yip Hon Weng will also be covering this.
Requiring social media services and app distribution services to step up age assurance measures to better protect young users from harmful content. My hon colleague, Nadia Samdin will be speaking on this.
Requiring social media services and app distribution services to improve timeliness in responding to user reports on harmful content on their platforms. My hon colleague Nadia Samdin will also be covering this.
Requiring essential service providers to ensure accessibility for all. My colleagues Jessica Tan, Nadia Samdin and Yip Hon Weng will be speaking on this.
Driving corporates and community organisations to promote awareness of essential digital skills and partner public sector to help close digital skill gaps. My hon colleagues Jessica Tan, Hany Soh, Sharael Taha and Mariam Jaafar will be speaking on this.
Driving stronger partnerships between public, private and individuals to deepen focus on educating our young and old on digital literacy, scams and online harms. My hon colleagues Darryl David, Wan Rizal, Sharael Taha and Yip Hon Weng will be speaking on this.
And finally, strengthening efforts in establishing future-ready workplaces for a more digitally-savvy workforce. My hon colleague Sharael Taha will also be speaking on this. Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.
( In Mandarin ) : [ Please refer to Vernacular Speech .] Since Independence, Singapore has always been fearless in breaking through the status quo, and daring to transform and reform over the relatively few decades.
Our country has evolved from a traditional economy primarily focused on domestic sectors to an export-oriented industrialisation driven by multinational corporations (MNCs) and then to the development of modern service industries and investment emerging sector to maintain our competitiveness.
Singapore has also made forward-looking investments in infrastructure development, enabling it to seize opportunities as they arise.
Coupled with unity, high trust and cooperation of its people, Singapore has been able to reach where it is today.
However, the increasing opportunities brought about by a digital transformation, we have also faced increasingly severe challenges.
Cyber threats, such as scams, ransomware, deep fakes and misinformation are rapidly on the rise, significantly increasing the risks in the digital environment.
As the saying goes, the higher the level, the greater the devil.
These cyber threats are like cockroaches that will never say die.
Furthermore, the escalating global competition in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) has raised concerns about potential ethical compromises.
Powerful technology companies may prioritise winning the competition at all costs and this potentially leads neglecting social disparities.
Additionally, the credibility of critical infrastructure and essential services can also affect the public's confidence in their personal data security.
If left unchecked, these issues will erode trust. People will not be able to trust every piece of information they receive, every transaction they conduct, every voice heard and every image seen.
This is a worrying scenario. How do we live on? How do we proceed?
Of course, there are no absolutes in the world and in the real world, nothing is perfect.
In real life, we do not refrain from leaving our homes for fear of encountering accidents.
However, trust is a key factor in building the foundation of society as difficulties are inevitable in life.
During these times, we may need to temporarily sacrifice personal interest in exchange for the collective interests of society.
Trust is also important in conducting transactions that create value and sharing ideas.
Therefore, if we do not clearly set our position and actively address these issues, we may lose trust in the public in the area of digital technology, resulting in the loss of convenience for the people, as well as productivity and innovation benefits for our economy.
In this context, I and the Members of Parliament from the PAP, have decided to propose this Motion, presenting 13 calls to action to reaffirm Parliament's commitment to build an inclusive and safe digital society through the combined efforts of the Government, businesses and the people to sustain trust.
( In English ): As technology continues to develop, new methods of scams and cyber threats will also emerge. We may not be able to totally stamp out such risks or threats as they are like cockroaches. But if we can do more, if everyone is willing to take on a larger share of the responsibility, we can protect more people and reduce the harms or damage to the ordinary citizen.
In conclusion, to sustain trust and build an inclusive, safe digital society in Singapore, cannot be the responsibility of a single Government, entity or individual. As Singapore continues to advance towards a digital society, public and private stakeholders must collaborate as a whole-of-nation to manage the risks, address the challenges and help each other thrive in the digital future. Sir, I beg to move. [ Applause. ]
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker : Ms Sylvia Lim.
1.58 pm
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied) : Mr Speaker, my topic today is about restoring trust in the digital arena to tackle a crisis of confidence. On restoring trust, I will touch on scams and AI.
First, scams. I read with interest about an interview given by Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) Minister Josephine Teo to Lianhe Zaobao in December on MCI's priorities for this year. Among other things, she underscored the urgent and pressing need to restore confidence in the digital space and telecommunications.
On scams and in particular scams through phone calls, Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) has revealed that out of the 1.6 billion international calls received in Singapore each year, about a quarter or 300 million were suspected to be scam calls and were blocked by telcos in the first nine months of last year.
To block 300 million calls is a staggering statistic. But I would surmise that many other scam calls would have gotten through. Our parents, residents and we ourselves are all in the pool of potential victims.
Since I spoke this House in mid-September on scam losses and doing right by bank customers, the landscape has evolved further.
On the positive side. I note that banks appear to be taking more steps to prevent scams and to stop scams in progress. I cannot over-emphasise why banks of all people need to do this. Banks are making healthy profits and have the resources and expertise to do more to protect and detect scams.
At the same time, the modus operandi of scammers has continued to evolve and leverage on victim psyche. From impersonating Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and bank officers, they now impersonate officers from the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). Phishing scams involving Paylah! have been effective in spoofing SMS messages typically sent by DBS Bank.
On New Year's Day this year, I, too, received the SMS about the withdrawal of $289 from my Paylah! account and a link to stop the transaction if it was unauthorised. As I was in the midst of some work then, I did not scrutinise the message carefully and clicked on the link to stop the transaction. The link then brought me to a page to enter my banking credentials, whereupon I had my Eureka moment and stopped in my tracks.
Not so fortunate were some residents who received the same SMS who then came to the Meet-the-People Session (MPS) in desperation. All in all, I have to conclude that these organised criminals must have very good consultants.
Even modes of savings we thought were very safe, like our Central Provident Fund (CPF) monies and fixed deposits, are not safe against scams and malware. This is leading to a change in thinking about digital transactions.
On this, I note that the "money lock" options now offered by the three local banks are a practical feature to ringfence funds that can only be withdrawn by a physical visit to the bank. I myself have opted for this. But from a helicopter perspective, "money lock" is actually a concession that the digital space is not that safe.
I would not like to exaggerate the situation but I would say that we are moving towards a crisis of confidence in digital banking, without stronger intervention by Government regulators.
Of course, customers need to do their part. Customers need to be wary and alert to prevent being scammed. However, we should be ever mindful not to expect too much from the public. As stated in a Straits Times Forum page letter on 22 September, it is not always possible for people to be on full alert against scams as one's level of alertness could be affected by multi-tasking, stress, fatigue or medication.
According to the IMDA's Singapore Digital Society Report last November, 78% of seniors over 60 used e-payments for online transactions but only 44% of the same group was moderately confident about identifying scams. Ninety-nine percent were worried about becoming victims of scams. These numbers show that the threat of scams is very real and that more needs to be done.
Sir, I acknowledge that the Government is working on restoring confidence in the digital space. The MAS has been working on further regulating banks and more must be done on prevention and loss sharing. I have spoken on this previously and shall not repeat myself today. I have also made a submission to the MAS on the risk-sharing framework for scam losses.
Sir, given the unequal bargaining power between banks and consumers, the MAS should be mindful that the public look to it as the bank regulator to ensure that banks behave responsibly and ethically.
Over the last few months, I have received skeptical feedback from some members of the public that the banks' interests will always be protected at the expense of the customer. I hope that the MAS will demonstrate that this is not true.
On the more general issue of digital communications and services, I acknowledge the potential of the Online Criminal Harms Act (OCHA) to prevent scams. Among other powers, the OCHA will enable law enforcement to proactively issue orders such as access blocking directions and app removal directions to require internet service providers to protect the public from scams and other malicious cyber activity. On OCHA, it would be good to know when all the provisions will be effective.
In addition, I note the announcement by the Minister for Communications and Information on the setting up of a multi-agency group called the Task Force on Resilience and Security of Digital Infrastructure and Services – what I call the RSD task force. The work of the RSD task force is set to oversee matters of public confidence in the country's digital services.
While the set-up of the RSD task force is an important development, I note that its stated composition does not mention any representative from the MAS. Since banking is such a big part of digital infrastructure and services, should MAS not be on the task force?
Sir, my colleagues, Jamus Lim and Gerald Giam will elaborate more on scams and the sharing of responsibility later. I move on to artificial intelligence.
Twenty twenty three is generally hailed as the year when ChatGPT came into the world's consciousness and everyone started exploring its potential. The focus is now shifting to how AI tools can be deployed at scale as AI develops in sophistication. From asking AI to carry out a specific task, AI tools have gone from classification AI to generative AI where content is created, like mimicking voices of loved ones. It has further developed into interactive AI where AI tools can interact with humans to reason and arrive at watershed decisions affecting work and personal lives.
Last year, the Government published Singapore's National AI Strategy 2.0. In it, the report acknowledged both the vast potential of AI to do both good and bad. The bad aspects included how AI could amplify harms such as enabling scams using deepfakes, spreading this information and others.
According to CNA, the prevalence of deepfake videos in Singapore jumped 500% in 2023 compared to the previous year. We should be acutely aware of AI's pitfalls and the need for AI regulation to ensure that Singaporeans remain safe online.
Sir, I believe the Government is closely watching for the potential pitfalls of AI. It has set up the AI Verify Foundation, which published a discussion paper last year entitled, "Generative AI: Implications for Trust and Governance". The paper was stated to be targeted at senior leaders in Government and business, advocating for more discourse and collaboration on building an ecosystem for the trusted and responsible adoption of generative AI. Among the emergent risks of generative AI listed by the paper were the making of mistakes, copyright infringements and the spreading of toxicity and cyber threats. Apart from these emergent risks, the fact that AI will lead to drop losses and disinformation alone will erode public trust in the digital arena.
Across the world, the fundamental question of whether human beings really want to go further with AI is being asked. There is growing concern about creating more powerful AI tools that may replace the human function and even control human interactions. The concern comes from those in the AI industry as well.
For instance, there is a non-profit organisation based in the United States (US) called the Future of Life Institute. Its multidisciplinary international team engages in policy work aimed at improving AI governance. In March this year, the institute launched a petition calling for a pause in AI development beyond GPT-4. The petition gathered more than 33,000 signatures, including those of CEOs of AI companies.
Some of the big questions identified for reflection include the following questions: (a) whether we should let machines flood our information channels with possible propaganda and untruth; (b) whether we should automate away all jobs including, the fulfilling ones; and (c) whether we should develop non-human minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart and replace us.
Other prominent thinkers have cautioned that reliance on AI tools to process information and to think may result in the potential loss of human reasoning and analytical ability. Speaking for myself, I must say that the thought of major decision-making in the world being outsourced to AI tools is simply unacceptable.
Moving forward, the need to harness AI and yet ensure humans are in charge will be the big challenge. Technology should be our servants and not our masters. We should take time to reflect on what is happening and not let technology run away unbridled with us in toll. To this end, having effective regulation for AI will require the Government to invest in constant capacity building.
Sir, let me conclude. My speech today was on restoring trust in the digital arena. I have highlighted that online scams and the risk of AI have put trust under a microscope. The Motion today posits that a whole-of-nation approach should be taken to sustain trust by building an inclusive and safe digital society. I am able to support the Motion as I agree that everyone has a role to play.
Nevertheless, for the reasons I have stated, my view is that it is incumbent upon the Government and businesses to spearhead this effort.
Mr Speaker : Dr Tan Wu Meng.
2.10 pm
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong) : Mr Speaker, I had not originally intended to intervene in this debate and speak, but a number of Clementi residents had been sharing about the timeliness of this Motion and I feel I should just share a couple of perspectives.
I will speak today about the consumer protection angle to scams and secondly, more broadly, on the landscape in the age of AI and Singapore's survivability.
Firstly, on the issue of scams. There is, I would say, agreement on all sides of the House that it is a serious issue, especially in the era of digital banking, where senior citizens who grew up in a world of face-to-face counter transactions now can have their bank accounts and life savings depleted at the click of the device by a scammer far away, outside of Singapore.
This is a serious issue, especially in societies such as Singapore, where we progressed rapidly from third world to first and seniors growing up in the pre-digital era today exist in a world of digital access and digital technology. That is the first point about consumer protection.
Even as Members on both sides of the House call for additional measures to scrutinise how banks treat their customers, I would like to once again call upon the MAS and the relevant authorities, to call upon and make the point I have raised previously in this House on multiple occasions, which is that there needs to be a consumer protection approach to scams involving banking customers who get scammed out of their savings online.
In recent times, there have been efforts by the MAS – initially called the risk sharing framework or risk allocation framework, depending on how commentators look at it. But the key point has to be this: the norms that we approach consumer safety in banking, the approach to consumer safety for banking should not be too different from consumer safety in other more tangible areas of the marketplace.
As I shared to the Minister of State from MAS not too long ago, if today, a company had a consumer product and if somebody could be tricked by a stranger into configuring that product wrongly so that there was either bodily harm or damage to property resulting in the loss of someone's entire life savings, we know what the consumer protection approach would be.
We see that with vehicles, where if there is a design flow in the vehicle that predisposes to human error or catastrophic outcomes of human error, that vehicle has to recall, that manufacturer is dealt with in a very serious way.
Yesterday, in a written question to the Minister for Communications and Information on operating systems, what was quite notable was that a certain operating system accounted for virtually all of the online banking scams made known to the Police, while a certain different operating system did not figure very much in the figures reported in that Parliamentary written answer. So, again, we see quite a different situation between these consumer products.
Once again, I call upon this Government to take a consumer protection focus and make sure that manufacturers as well as service providers, including financial institutions, are held accountable in a way that is not too different from other sectors of society.
If your family owns a car and there is a design issue leading to bodily harm or loss of your life savings, you know what the manufacturer must do. If there is a home appliance in your kitchen and someone can trick you into pressing the wrong button so that someone is injured and loses their life savings along the way, you know what the approach will be when it comes to that home appliance.
I call upon this Government, MAS and the other agencies to take a hard look at the financial institutions and banks and ask: are the banks and telcos and technology firms shouldering enough responsibility in the digital world that tangible goods providers shoulder in the physical world? So, that is the first part of my speech, Mr Speaker.
The second part of my speech will be on the age of AI and what Singapore needs to do to adapt. I spoke on this last year, during the debate on the President's Address. Early last year, I spoke on the age of AI and it was a humbling moment, because after the speech was delivered and it got a little bit of viral traction online, I think, just a little bit over 100,000 people around the world watched it – not that many. But we started getting emails, messages, from people around the world. Someone from the USA wrote to me, someone from Africa wrote in as well and it touched a chord. But this is not about that speech. It is about what Singapore represents to the world. When people see our Parliamentarians, whether our Ministers, office holders, whether our backbenchers of various persuasions, looking to the future about what the world will be like, people look at what Singapore is thinking about and they want us to try and find the way forward as well.
And so, on the issue of AI and the issue of deepfakes, I have a few suggestions as well for the Government to consider. Some I have put forward before in Parliamentary Questions and in my speeches, but let me just reiterate again.
The issue of deepfakes is going to be a serious matter for democracies around the world – because if we can no longer discern easily what is real and not real, you cannot even have a functioning democracy. No government, regardless of which political party they come from, will be able to govern in any country without that fundamental basis for deliberative, democratic discussion.
That means, as a society, we need to deal with this pre-emptively. The Prime Minister not too long ago, in a Facebook post, talked about how there was a deepfake of him trying to sell certain investment products, a fake video. But that is just deepfake 1.0. Project that forward three, five years, 10 years, with more computing power, you can imagine how authentic those deepfakes are going to be. Therefore, as a society and as a government, we must not shy away from moving pre-emptively to address the issue of deepfakes.
I have called upon this Government to look at ways of electronically watermarking content, so called "proof of human", whether it is proof of human when someone transacts with an AI bot, with a tech firm online that may be giving answers by AI, but the broader point is that we need ways to confirm that the content is real and is a human.
We also need to continue moving upstream, a point which I made to the Education Minister yesterday in Question Time. From young, we will have to continue training and teaching and bringing up our young Singaporeans, our children and grandchildren, to be even more aware of deepfakes and how subtle they can be.
In short, as a young Clementi friend not too long ago, this young Clementi friend was sharing about his worry about deepfakes, saying, "You know, look, some of these look a bit sus", suspicious. But the whole point is, the first step is to have that healthy scepticism to sense when something might be a bit "sus". To sense, while at the same time not losing faith in society being able to move forward.
It is of course, a whole-of-Government effort, there needs to be many ways to look at it, education, regulation, social norms, making sure tech firms are held accountable as well. But we need to move on this very quickly because by the time the genie is completely out of the bottle, the horse has bolted, it is much harder to rebuild these norms and reconstruct the democratic process in our society.
So, in summary, Mr Speaker, just two key points, but fundamentally about seeing through the eyes of our people.
The first, seeing through the eyes of our consumers and making sure that firms in the digital space and in the financial sector, retail banking services, they treat consumer protection the same way online as we would treat consumer protection for an offline tangible product in the home, around the home.
Secondly, likewise seeing through the eyes of our people in a world where we have to cope with deepfakes, training, educating our people to see better, so that we can safeguard this very precious idea that is Singapore, in a world that is continually being disrupted by AI.
One last point I wanted to make is that we need to double down our investments in AI capability in our Government and in our industry as well. There has been mention of the AI roadmap version 2.0, but sometimes let us also ask ourselves, can we have even higher levels of ambition?
From public domain information, if I recall correctly, not too long ago, I think less than a decade ago, Microsoft pumped $1 billion investment into OpenAI. It seemed like a big amount then, but in hindsight, it seems like it was a quite a good deal at the time, given what OpenAI grew into. This also links to a point I made a few years back during a Budget debate. Sometimes when we invest ahead of the market, invest in certain technological capabilities which may see tenuous today, but which could have high yields tomorrow, it means that we are able to get those dividends later on.
Many of the big tech firms today, whether Apple, Google, Meta, back then known as Facebook, would not have seemed sure bet investments in their very early years. But those who were willing to make those bets yielded substantial dividends and today our tech powerhouses.
So, let us think about that as we move into the next phase of AI, the next phase of tech in the digital world for Singapore. What investments can we bet on that may seem tenuous today but which could put Singapore in a position to be a world power of such capabilities in years ahead.
Mr Speaker, I thank you for your indulgence in allowing me to speak. I stand in support of the Motion by Ms Tin Pei Ling. [ Applause. ]
Mr Speaker : Ms Jessica Tan.
2.22 pm
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast) : Mr Speaker, our GPC for Communications and Information is advocating for commitment of all stakeholders to build an inclusive and safe digital society as the pace of technological advancements has changed how we live, work and play. These changes have enabled ease and speed of access, ability to connect or interact, bringing benefits as well as new capabilities and opportunities.
As we saw during the COVID-19 pandemic, digital connectivity enabled people to continue to access timely information, services and to communicate. Businesses and work could continue – albeit virtually.
Increasingly, access to many services for living are digital. From everyday tasks such as booking a taxi or private hire car, ordering food or making a restaurant reservation, making payments, getting information or directions, to accessing and transacting Government services and banking transactions. Even to get discounts requires you to scan a QR code or go online. For some organisations, job applications and interviews are done online. The latest news is availably digitally as soon as it happens or even as it happens.
If an individual is digitally excluded, he or she will not get timely information, services and its benefits. It is therefore important to ensure that no one is left behind as we become increasingly digital.
While it is encouraging to see in the Singapore Digital Society (SGDS) Report 2023 that 99% of households in Singapore have Internet access and there is a higher adoption of digital technology and skills even amongst seniors. However, a study by IMDA showed that while Singaporeans are more willing to try new technologies, only 55% of those aged 18 and above and 24% of seniors know how to use devices and applications with emerging technologies such as voice recognition, virtual or augmented realities.
Singapore takes a digital first but not digital-only approach as a central organising principle to harness the innovation potential and productivity but still ensuring that those who may not be comfortable with using digital technologies not be excluded from essential services.
But while we continue to provide non-digital options, we must work to encourage and enable as many as possible to participate digitally. If we do not, what it will mean in a digital first but not digital only society is that those who do not use digital will miss out on the ease, timeliness and benefits that digital can offer.
Let us just take a simple example of the collection of the Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers to illustrate the point. You can get the physical CDC vouchers by going to a community club (CC). To do so, you will be required to make time to go to the CC when it is open. If you are lucky, there is no queue and you do not have to wait in line to get you CDC vouchers at the CC before you can use them. If instead you "collect" your CDC vouchers online using your Singpass, it would take you a minute or even less and you can proceed to use your CDC vouchers.
The point applies to many other transactions that we do like banking. You can go to the bank to get your transactions done which requires travel and time. It also has to be done during the opening hours of the bank. With online banking, you can do so anytime, from wherever you are.
This now brings me to the critical point of digital safety and resilience which impacts trust and adoption. You heard from all the previous speakers about the concerns, the risks, the dangers. But I would like to just make a few points on this.
Digital inclusion is more than access. It must be accompanied with the ability to use digital technologies effectively and safely and trust in the security and resilience of the digital environment and the platform in order for someone to really benefit from it. This includes important skills to stay safe online such as how to interact safely, how to protect your personal privacy online and how to effectively search for and discern information.
The increasing use of new technologies does have its risks and safeguards against cyber risks, scams and misinformation is vital to increase building confidence and trust.
With the increasing use of sophisticated technologies and tools by scammers, the number of persons affected by and amounts lost to scams is significant. Of particular concern are unauthorised transactions.
While there are measures including legislation that have been introduced to safeguard the online space from harmful content and Government agencies continue to implement strategies with critical services and digital platform providers to prevent, detect and recover monies lost to scammers, more still needs to be done to secure digital transactions and online transactions and protect vulnerable users.
When we think of vulnerable users, we tend to think of seniors and those less digitally savvy. Sadly, I have had both seniors who lost their life savings to scams as well as younger individuals who had been scammed, approach me for assistance.
Recently, a young resident in her 20s came to see me for help as she had worked hard to save her money, and had spent a few years building up her savings, but as a result of an online transaction she made, unfortunately she lost all her savings. To add to it, she had her bank account details and credit card credentials stolen which resulted in unauthorised credit card payments as well.
Basically, what it means is that with the new technologies and sophisticated tools, user digital literacy will not be sufficient to safeguard against digital risks. We must put more demands on Government, on platform players, telcos and device manufacturers to do more to improve the standards of security to enhance online safety of users on their platforms and for their services.
But as we talk about the dangers and risks, there are also opportunities. As we put more demands on all the larger players, and the key players and stakeholders, I will say that there is also an opportunity for platform and service players in Singapore. Singapore is an advanced market with high levels of connectivity, as I have shared earlier, and also high levels of residents owning smartphones. The number of seniors owning smartphones has increased to 89%, as per the report I cited earlier. This provides platform and service players an opportunity to use Singapore as a base for innovation to apply and showcase higher standards of security. I do urge all players to do this, because as the Government pushes the measures, if all players come together, it will be a great opportunity for us to try new things, as Dr Tan Wu Meng had said, to really make Singapore that showcase to bring trust and confidence back in the digital space.
As I have mentioned, it is key to building trust and confidence for digital adoption. I just want to make another point that, the Singapore Digital Society (SGDS) Report 2023 did say that 55% of Singaporeans aged 15 and above are willing to accept the risks that come with the use of technology and only 33% amongst those aged 60 and older. So, people are aware of the risks. But what we now need to do is to manage that.
So, let me now also talk about the role of users and public education. Industry players and Government play a big role to strengthen digital safety and security and digital literacy of persons using these applications and online systems. Public education and efforts to equip people with digital literacy, especially for certain segments like seniors and vulnerable segments, have been effective and have helped adoption. But more needs to be done and more efforts need to be continual because the digital space does not stay static.
But, I do want to make a point about each of us and the role that we have to play. We do need to remind ourselves that what we do to protect ourselves in our physical interactions should also be practised digitally. Take, for example, in our physical lives, before we let someone enter our homes, we would check on who they are and we would not let anyone suspicious or someone we do not know into our homes. We would not give our NRIC details, bank account information or ATM card to anyone we do not know or trust. These same principles and practices must be applied when we are online and using our digital devices and applications. Otherwise, no matter what measures and legislation are in place to improve digital safety and security, they would not be able to protect us in our digital transactions. So, we all have to do our part.
Let me now touch on a few other points.
While digital literacy allows us to transact digitally, one of the areas when people do hit issues with transaction is the ability to get help to resolve these issues can, sometimes, be quite challenging, given how access to support is currently structured. Unless you are a victim of fraud or have been scammed, most helpline numbers provided take quite a bit of navigation. Prioritising support for those who have been scammed is necessary. However, users of digital services when faced with issues during their transaction, do also need support to resolve their transaction issues.
I do agree that it is challenging to resource support given manpower constraints, cost and capacity. But as commercial businesses and Government services become more digital-first, we need to rethink the model of support and find more effective ways to provide timely access to support for users when they encounter issues with their digital transactions. This will reassure and build digital trust and confidence. Especially when transactions involve monies, it can cause anxiety for users, young or old.
I do want to touch on another point about digital inclusion and that is about the ability to participate in opportunities. New areas of technologies, including AI, have the potential to enable new capabilities, cause disruptions, of course, but create new ways of doing things and generating new opportunities.
Singapore continues to have ambitious plans to leverage new technologies to grow and bring benefits to our people and businesses. An example is Singapore's second National AI Strategy (NAIS 2.0), which was recently launched last December by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong. It outlines both the opportunities and risks of AI. It outlines also our ambition and commitment to building a trusted and responsible AI ecosystem, driving innovation and growth through AI and empowering our people and businesses to understand and engage with AI. But it will require new governance models as well.
So, my point is, to realise these ambitious plans, we will need people with skillsets in new areas of technology and cybersecurity. Why? It is to build thoughtful design and solutions to really benefit from these new technologies. What it also means is good jobs for Singaporeans. But in order to take advantage of these opportunities will require new skills. Organisations must make investments to support their employees in building new skillsets, educational institutions must prepare our students and those in the workforce for these opportunities, individuals of all ages and career stages must be open to learning and taking on new opportunities. There must be investments by the Government and the private sector to build deep skills.
New technologies will allow for new ways of doing things and this involves more than technologies. We will need new thinking and ideas. And this brings me to a point about a diverse workforce. A diverse workforce will enable organisations to leverage different perspectives, skills and experiences because you need that to develop new ideas to grow and thrive in a digital society. This is possible. On that note, I do want to make a point to employers and organisations that we must tap on the vast pool of wealth and experience of senior workers and bring that into that diverse workforce to enable us to find new ways, both young and old, to create new ways of doing things with technology.
Let me now conclude. While we discuss building an inclusive and safe digital society, core to our Motion is our People. It is not about being a digitally advanced society with the best infrastructure, policies and skills or level of excellence and technology adoption. All these are necessary, but the purpose of an inclusive and safe digital society is to ensure that everyone can actively participate and benefit to make their lives better and that no one is left behind. But in order to achieve this, it will take all of us to do our part to enable an inclusive, trusted and safe digital society.
Mr Speaker : Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
2.37 pm
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang) : Mr Speaker, others in this House, in particular, my hon friend Ms Sylvia Lim, have previously articulated reasons as to why the MAS' Shared Responsibility Framework (SRF) is inadequate and unjust.
While I support the Motion as it stands, I will elaborate in my speech today on why, as currently conceived, it remains fundamentally unfair in stark contrast to its stated aim of equitable sharing.
The official press release describing the framework states that, and I quote, "All parties have responsibilities to be vigilant and to take precautions against scams." Financial institutions need to implement robust controls to safeguard customer accounts and to detect and clamp down on suspicious transactions. Customers need to take precautions to not frivolously release their banking credentials and to practise cyber hygiene. Losses would then be assigned according to how far each party falls short of these responsibilities.
All this sounds reasonable on its face. But, in practice, fraud is almost always perpetrated on the weaker link in the chain, in this case, the vulnerable consumer, more often than not, than on the relatively better-equipped and technologically sophisticated bank or telecoms company. Hence, the equitable sharing framework becomes less about fairly distributing losses, but about distributing responsibilities. Losses, when they occur, would appear overwhelmingly borne by the consumer. Put another way, we should only expect the framework to yield equitable outcomes if the fair assignment of responsibilities were all that mattered.
Anyone who has bargained over the price of fish or vegetables at the market or negotiated a salary or a raise with an employer or taken part in discussions over the distribution of chores or workload would know full well how power differentials matter massively and how the altar, how the pie ends up being split.
This is not mere speculation. A large literature on the theory of bargaining shows that those in possession of power, tend to do better in negotiations. In cases where the bargaining is explicitly antagonistic, canonical models suggest that those who are more patient and are able to make the first move possess an advantage.
Even when we allow for the possibility that players see the benefits of cooperation and embed this in their negotiations, the outcome remains heavily conditioned by each party's relative bargaining power. Moreover, those who are better able to walk away tend to do better.
If we look carefully at the two parties involved in negotiating a settlement over fraudulent claims, it is clear who has the greater power, patience and ability to hold firm to their offer, and that is the bank.
Financial institutions are not only larger. If they can simply demonstrate that they have not erred in effecting a fraudulent transfer, they can currently credibly insist on refusing any share of the loss altogether. And write-offs, when they do occur, are typically only a small fraction of the institution's balance sheet.
In stark contrast, scams are often ruinous for the depositor. At the extreme, they could constitute either an individual's entire life savings, or worse, it could saddle an unwitting "mule" with onerous debt. What is the split then that best reflects distributive justice?
While there are variations, many have concluded that a 50/50 split or something close to it, is the only just solution to most bargaining situations. Importantly, the notion of a 50/50 split should not be seen as one where each party takes an equal nominal share. Rather, the notion of an equal split suggests that each is made to bear a burden that is commensurate with what they are able to afford.
This is why the Government needs to step in to empower depositors with a more robust set of laws that offer financial protection to consumers. At the simplest level, these could be laws that limit liability on fraudulent transactions to a pre-specified amount.
I had previously raised this point in a speech on the Financial Services and Markets Bill delivered last year. Here, I will elaborate why doing so will not only help redress the power imbalance between customers and banks, but also why it is fundamentally fair.
Mr Speaker, the Government first shared with this House that it was working on a loss-sharing framework early in 2022. It explained closer to the end of that year that it was taking longer than expected and the release was further postponed in the middle of last year. MAS finally published a joint consultation paper in October, but it was extremely circumscribed to deal only with phishing scams.
Perhaps more importantly, what the framework proposes is to adopt a "waterfall approach", where financial institutions and telecom operators will only bear the full losses when they "fail to discharge their respective prescribed duties" and will not require payouts to be made to consumers if they are deemed to have done so.
Alas, this approach will absolve financial institutions and communications companies from the costs of business, so long as they have done their part. While this does not close the door to other resolution mechanisms, such as the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre (FIDReC), it remains too cavalier in apportioning liability in the first instance. SRF is a split based on effort, not outcomes. Put another way, should there be a realised loss, as long as the financial institution or telecom operator can demonstrate that they have satisfied a certain set of obligations – which, to be honest, is not even exhaustive – their loss share will not be half. It would not be a third or even a quarter. It could well be zero. This cannot be fair.
Think of it this way. Imagine that there are two cars driving side-by-side on the road. It is the responsibility of both drivers not to drive beyond the speed limit and to stay in their lanes. Should one car brake suddenly and it is ahead, the following car should always maintain a safe distance. But what if the cars were side-by-side and a child were to run out in front of one of them? If one of them were to swerve to avoid an accident and the other fails to yield, it is hard to say that only one of the cars should bear responsibility for the crash.
Financial fraud, while preventable to a certain extent with sound system design and due diligence, is almost certainly likely to occur, regardless of the best efforts of either party. Much like the analogy that I just shared, there will seldom be clear-cut pinning of blame on one party versus another. If so, it is only fair that both sides bear some of the costs of the loss.
Such a legislative may, of course, seem foolhardy. The standard line trod out by critics is that protecting customers from the consequences of scams must mean that they are less likely to take the necessary precautions to safeguard against falling for them. This is what is often referred to as moral hazard – since one side is protected, one takes less care.
But while I am sympathetic to the argument in principle, a crude application of this theory is problematic. For starters, this kind of argument places too little faith in the agency of Singaporeans. After all, why would anyone wish to fall victim to a scam?
Even if they bore only limited consequences, most of us would take active steps to counteract crime, even when we do not receive a clear pay-off. Furthermore, just as we co-payments in most insurance plans, so long as savers are required to absorb at least some reasonable amount of loss – say, an upper limit of $100 or $500 – then it is hard to claim that the consumer incentives are not well-aligned with combating fraud.
We should not think that only a catastrophic loss would be sufficient for individuals to practise the necessary amount of cyber hygiene. Nobody would rather lose $100 to a scammer, rather than none, if they can avoid it.
Of course, this opens up the possibility that unscrupulous scammers may use this very notion of victim protection to defraud banks directly. Yet, this is true for any form of insurance fraud and there are well-established mechanisms for identifying and clamping down on such abuse, which would emerge when losses are more equally apportioned to both sides.
That naturally brings me to the sort of indirect long-run benefits to having a system where both sides are made to bear some of the losses. Such a law would also likely lead to a sequence of favourable developments in the financial ecosystem that could render it more robust.
Financial institutions would take more care to police phishing and fraud. Since they can no longer pass on most of the costs of losses to consumers, there would also be more pressing incentive to chase down transfers made to suspicious counterparties and they would no longer condone unauthorised purchases made with ill-gotten money.
Fraud detection and prevention tools have been around for a long time. But the widespread rollout of generative artificial intelligence has made the rapid deployment of the latest algorithms both less costly and simultaneously more sophisticated. Merchants and banks, in turn, would apply more caution as they seek to implement their own safeguards lest they lose the right to accept payments or transfers electronically. Insurance schemes to cover fraud would likely emerge. And since all financial institutions would be involved by law, the market would deepen rapidly keeping such insurance costs sufficiently low.
Such developments could well be the unintended but welcome side effect of making our system recognise a truly equitable distribution of losses.
The Government seems to be aware of the potential benefits of insurance mechanisms of this nature. In his initial discussion of CPF-related fraud, Minister Tan See Leng suggested an openness through such mechanisms. However, this was walked back the very next day with the Ministry stating that it had and I quote, "no intention" to consider insurance schemes.
While I appreciate that pricing could ultimately be prohibitive, one is left to wonder why the notion of insurance does not, at the very least, warrant a deeper and further study. After all, even the limited liability insurance scheme – one that caps the maximum amount of fraud-related payout – would still be preferable to a system that is entirely bereft of such protection.
Sir, I have focused most of my speech on what can be done on the supply side. I will close with a discussion on why demand side measures, while useful at the margin, are ultimately inadequate.
Banks have already independently implemented certain features to introduce additional frictions into online transactions in collaboration with MAS and the Association of Banks Singapore (ABS). One is to implement a cooling-off period after a charge is made to the maximum daily transfer limit or other key account features. Another is to remove clickable links in emails or SMSes.
But it is noteworthy that while these were first rolled out in January 2022 and if the continued proliferation of scams over the past two years are any guide, these measures alone remain insufficient to stem the tide of financial fraud.
Another step banks can consider: introduce their own hurdles. For example, one could require certain classes of account holders, such as the elderly or less tech-savvy to opt into a scheme where they designate a separate individual, such as a trusted associate or a family member as a second key who will need to provide approval for transactions that are anomalous. But this will almost certainly bring problems of conflict and control of their own, such as when even well-meaning family members impose restrictions on others' use of their own funds.
Similarly, cooling-off periods only work to the extent that victims are even aware or accept that they have been scammed. There are many instances of careful instructions by scammers building on the trust, naivety or simply insecurity of the victims that lead them to consciously circumvent such circuit breakers.
Unless we think that we surely will never fall victim to such schemes, recall that many fraudsters are extremely skilled confidence artists and even professionals may succumb, as a study by the Police Psychological Services Division conducted in 2018 has shown.
Mr Speaker, the loss sharing framework proposed by the Government is a step forward in helping establish liability on financial fraud. But for the reasons I have offered, I do not believe that it fulfils its fundamental promise of being fair. This has led to a steady erosion of trust in digital transactions, one that if not addressed expeditiously, could result in the crisis of confidence over online payments and digital finance.
To rebuild trust, regulators should require actual loss absorption by financial institutions and communications companies with an upper limit to consumer liability of $100 or $500 when losses are perhaps inevitably and unfortunately realised. This will not only be fair but help evolve the system in the long run to a more robust one.
Mr Speaker : Ms Nadia Samdin.
2.53 pm
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio) : Sir, I rise in support of the Motion and would like to declare my interest as a board member of SG Her Empowerment, a non-profit platform that champions gender equity to empower individuals from all segments of Singapore and my speech will cite incidents of sexual crimes.
Sir, I speak on behalf of the victims and the survivors.
About five years ago, SG Nasi Lemak Telegram group was first created. Thousands of non-consensual sexually explicit photos and videos of women and schoolgirls were distributed to more than 44,000 members.
About half a year ago, a dating show created by a TitTok content creator garnered criticism for its lack of sensitivity in the way it featured and seemed to exploit individuals with special needs.
About a month ago, a 65-year-old Singaporean retiree lost her life savings in 15 days. For one of my resident's grandmother, it was lost over 115 transactions and six days. This was the result of an online scam.
In the last week, articles report that the UK police are investigating a reported case of alleged gang rape of a teenager's virtual avatar in the metaverse.
These are but some examples. For many, the digital world offers validation, connection and convenience. Unfortunately, it can also lead to cyber abuse, trolling and painful scams that is often debilitating, in particular, for vulnerable individuals.
Society is changing more rapidly than ever, with new technologies affecting every aspect of life, from emails after work hours to WhatsApp group chats for classes and sharing locations at the tap of the screen. COVID-19 also pushed much of our world online, from grocery shopping to Zoom meetings.
But access to these technologies and competence to use them is not enough to deal with the dangers. We have to go beyond this, towards digital well-being and digital citizenship for every individual to feel included and empowered to safely participate in the online sphere.
The Government has been taking great steps to this end, in particular, towards digital access and taking a stand against technology-facilitated sexual violence. For example, MCI's Digital for Life Fund funds inclusion projects that empower all Singaporeans to embrace digitalisation.
In July 2023, IMDA's Code of Practice online safety came into effect, requiring designated social media services to enhance online safety in Singapore and curb the spread of sexual content, violent content, suicide and self-harm content on their platforms.
However, it will take the whole-of-society to create a safer online space; and today I will speak on content, communication and cyber habits, three Cs.
Every day, an approximate 34 million videos are posted to TikTok and 15 million Telegrams are sent, the digital kind. Our modern society craves content and loves to create it. I would like to highlight three consequences – other than the increasing occurrence that some friends may go hungry while the phone camera eats first, to post Instagram stories because if you did not post it, did it really happen?
First, algorithms open up opportunities for creators to reach large audiences. But the curation of perfect content may be harmful to self-esteem. Studies have shown that social media use appear to play a role in perpetuating negative body concepts and exacerbate eating disorders. Young girls and boys are pushed videos and tips on unrealistic body expectations and radical diets.
This idea of a filtered life also creates discontent and intensifies social comparisons. Pressure to create videos which draw quick likes also can lead to unverified or sensationalised content where truth is sacrificed for popularity.
Second, some users, including impressionable miners create suggestive content for validation, at times egged on by peers or malicious actors. This is different from adult content creators who are in control of their actions and aware of consequences.
I call on platforms and apps to step up age-assurance measures to better protect young users from harmful content and have not placed better verification and restriction measures.
Of course, it is not enough in an empowered digital society to simply elect to ban our youths from using their devices or confiscate them. We must also create a safe environment for them to turn to during their curiosity and to receive trusted and effective support in unfortunate circumstances.
Third, I have spoken about the number of social media channels selling, encouraging and circulating non-consensual and illegally obtained sexually explicit materials. A few months ago, we were shaken by the disturbing news of seven men meeting on an online forum as early as in 2010, before discussing their wife-sharing fantasies and turning their plans into action, even live streaming these acts.
What steps can we take to prevent such heinous acts by perpetrators and protect women and girls who are also our mothers or sisters and our friends? How can we hold online forums and social media services accountable? The longer they permit such harmful content to circulate and improve timeliness in responding to user reports where servers are located overseas, how can we prevent such incidents from happening again?
Most importantly, good online habits start from a compassionate and safe offline world built on respect. Incidents of sexual online harms often involve elements of power and humiliation. In order to gain control over their victims, perpetrators of sexual violence tend to resort to practices, such as manipulation and coercion.
Offenders may not necessarily find the act gratifying in itself, but in the meaning attributed to power for men and this may override the goals of such acts.
To this end the kind of content we create to regulate and amplify about women is key. How can we promote gender equity messages based on merit and move beyond stereotyping objectification and hyper-sexualisation?
Beyond content, the online space is also a place for us to converse with each other. But in a world of strangers who comment more than communicate and hold different and divergent views, how do we create a respectful space?
Often times, regretfully, we see comments expressing racist or rude remarks. At times, these are disguised as fairy comments or posted by unnamed troll accounts whose creators would perhaps not make such comments to a person's face in real life, but feel empowered hiding behind the veil online.
While their grievances may be authentic, we must do better in digital education such that our people do not lose basic compassion or tolerance for each other and understand the consequences of their words posted in a rage.
How do we reach beyond algorithms and filter bubbles which seem to confirm our existing beliefs and biases without exception, while hiding content that challenges our thinking? Such bubbles lead to a polarised and fragmented society where even real-life friends are unable to engage with ideas or opposing frequencies that are different from their own.
On cyber habits and how we integrate social media in our day-to-day lives, there are two ends of the spectrum. First, the fear of technology which prevents participation such as seniors would deliberately avoid stalls that exclusively use e-payments; and on the other hand, individuals who may get addicted to social media and excessively consume content or participate in online gambling.
How can we better equip individuals of all ages and literacy levels with positive cyber habits? Sir, the community plays a part. Community-based digital interventions and innovations are key ways through which we as a people can take ownership and do something about these issues. For example, NUGU, a group-based application has been used to improve self-regulated smartphone usage and has been proven effective. In my constituency, Cheng San-Seletar, a group of youths known as the Cheng San Chapalang Club held one-on-one digital workshops in various languages and dialects for seniors to boost their literacy. Non-profits, such as Cyber Youth Singapore, play an important part too. The Surf Safe Initiative was launched in 2022 to cultivate safer cyber habits among secondary students and to date has reached 33,944 of them.
Beyond programmes, ultimately, it comes down to the fostering of a positive and trusting Internet culture. This is particularly important towards ensuring that every individual can participate fully, including our friends with special needs. Studies have shown that the online life may provide a sense of safety, for example, for individuals who autism. In the digital space, they have increased control over their communication and engagement styles, fostering a greater sense of tranquility during these interactions. What more can the Government do to equip and empower persons with special needs towards digital participation and independent living?
Technology can be a great leveller, where you find support in online communities who have the same rare disease as you or date online or visit places in virtual reality that you may never get the chance to see in real life or be the hero in a team game. But this can only happen if persons with special needs can tap on assistive technology and learn digital skills in a way that is tailored to their understanding of the world.
How many individuals has the Digital Enablement Programme served since its inception? Are there plans to further scaffold our digital structure, for example, by creating specialised websites to cultivate accessible and inclusive online platforms?
Of course, societal efforts must be bolstered by rigorous policies and law enforcement. As the velocity of technological advancement increases, it can be hard for regulators to keep pace and in the grey zone, at times, the de facto rules are set by dominant actors who may not have the public's interest at heart.
From data privacy, content regulation, online harms and AI, jurisdictions from the European Union (EU) to the US to Australia have also been developing new regulations. However, this comes with its own complications. The digital space does not always stop at physical borders and the fragmentation of digital governance and regulations may see a confusing patchwork of laws where malicious individuals exploit and play in the gaps, for examples, scammers who hide behind confusing IP addresses.
At the end of the day, it is the innocent victims who suffer. Beyond effective investigation, how can we better provide emotional and mental support to victims of online scams who may feel a deep sense of loss and injustice?
Enforcement is also key and social media platforms play a major role. In July 2023, Google launched the YouTube Priority Flagger programme, which empowers community partners by training them to assess content that violates YouTube community guidelines. These priority flaggers include organisations such as Touch and SG Her Empowerment, who are able to flag content directly to Google, allowing problematic content to be prioritised for review.
By having the community play a bigger role in reviewing content and building trust and safety, this leads to a more resilient Internet culture. Sir, briefly, in Malay, please.
( In Malay ) : [ Please refer to Vernacular Speech .] In today's world, we are constantly surrounded by technology. Technology helps us but it can also hurt us. It is important that our digital community builds trust in each other, regardless of age and background, by:
Understanding how the algorithm works and exercising care to avoid becoming so immersed in the algorithm until we no longer consider other views. We may also become entangled in narrow-minded views because of what is being shown to us, and such content can potentially create tension in society. Therefore, it is important for us to cultivate healthy online habits, so that we can benefit from the use of technology in our day-to-day lives.
Second, communicate judiciously, even when we are behind a screen. While technology has given many people a chance to speak out about issues that they believe in, it has also become a platform for online harms. According to a study conducted by SG Her Empowerment (SHE), three in five Singaporeans have experienced online harms, or know someone who experienced it. The ability to conceal identities behind a screen has given confidence to many "keyboard warriors", thus emboldening them to make comments online in a way that they do not dare to say or do to someone directly. Many such cases have been reported, one of which involved a lewd survey on local female asatizah in 2021. Communicating judiciously, as well as having better awareness and support for victims of online harms, will certainly have a big impact as we try to create a safe online space for all segments of society.
( In English ): Sir, every technological advancement comes with its risks. The question is not how we stem the tide but how we can rapidly change the way we respect and protect one another as a digital community, as equal participants of an online world. To this end, I hope that as a country, we continue to pursue a national digital strategy that is agile and collaborative in approach as well as inclusive, empowering and human-centered.
Mr Speaker : Assoc Prof Razwana Begum.
3.08 pm
Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim (Nominated Member) : Mr Speaker, I thank the hon Member, Ms Tin Pei Ling, for moving this important Motion together with Mr Sharael Taha, Ms Hany Soh, Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Alex Yam.
Ms Tin, in her speech, suggested several strategies and emphasised the need to adopt a comprehensive whole-of-nation approach, working together with private and public sectors in developing an inclusive and safe digital society.
I stand in support of this Motion. My speech comes from an educational perspective and focuses on shared responsibility, awareness and accountability.
In 2014, Singapore embarked on the Smart Nation initiative, with the vision to develop a "Singapore where people will be more empowered to live meaningful and fulfilled lives, enabled seamlessly by technology, offering exciting opportunities for all".
Over the years, we have progressed well, with notable transformation in key domains such as health, transport, finance and education. Singapore is recognised for its success. According to the 2023 Smart City Index published by Swiss Business School, Institute for Management Development, Singapore is the smartest Asian city and the seventh in the world.
Mr Speaker, this is a remarkable achievement and our continuous success is contingent upon inclusivity and our commitment to ensuring that all Singaporeans benefit from the technological advancements that define our Smart Nation landscape. We must, however, do more to guarantee that everyone, regardless of age, race or social background, fully benefits from digital services and is able to meaningfully participate in the digital world.
Before sharing my perspective on what more can be done to build an inclusive and safe digital society, I would like to note some concerns.
Sir, as we move toward a digitally interconnected future, cybersecurity threats have increased. Digital fraud attacks are on the rise, with Singapore receiving 32 million such attacks last year. According to Singapore Police Force data, in the first half of 2023, there were close to 25,000 scam and cyber crime cases, an increase of almost 70% from the same period in 2022. Point of concern, more than 50% of the victims of these crimes were young adults aged 20 to 39.
Tactics adopted by the scammers are also changing. Just last week, the media reported a cyber-kidnapping scam that took place in the US. In that case, the victim was a 17-year-old foreign student.
The digital space is not immune to the social issues that exist in the physical world. Online harassment, discrimination and hate speech are widespread, affecting individuals of all ages and from diverse backgrounds.
In a recent survey conducted by SG Her Empowerment, a local independent non-profit organisation, 52% of respondents who reported a personal experience of online harassment or discrimination were between 15 and 24 years of age. In the same survey, two in five victims reported experiencing at least one severe consequence as a result of the harassment or discrimination, including physical and mental health issues and suicidal ideation.
Mr Speaker, the data shows that young people are at greater risk. This was highlighted by the hon Member Ms Jessica Tan and Ms Nadia Samdin. The data also shows that we are aware of the extent of the problem and that we have been progressively trying to mitigate the situation with robust legislation and regulations.
At this juncture, I would like to commend the Government for being proactive and for constantly keeping track of these issues. I would also like to thank the many community agencies who continue to support victims of crime and provide preventive education programmes. Their involvement reinforces the need to work collaboratively and in partnership with the community sector. As we adopt a whole-of-nation approach, it is crucial to recognise the role played by community agencies in working with victims and potential perpetrators.
Now that I have highlighted some of the current challenges, I would like to share my thoughts on potential strategies.
First, digital trust. Mr Speaker, the era of digital advancement presents many possibilities for innovation, connectivity and economic expansion. Yet, to unlock these potentials requires trust and shared responsibility. Unlike most other nations where technological innovation is driven by the private sector, in Singapore, the Government has taken a central role in this space. This approach has yielded notable results, placing Singapore at the forefront of global advancements.
For example, with over half a million Police surveillance cameras and web-based Police portals, Singapore is regarded as one of the world's safest countries. As we know, safety is fundamental in Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Here, in Singapore, we have met this need very well.
As we continue to embrace digitalisation, we have also been working towards the active engagement of citizens. We have been focusing on co-creation. However, we also need to work towards cultivating a shared sense of responsibility and nurture active citizenry. Mr Speaker, let me provide an example.
As the Head of Public Safety and Security programme at Singapore University of Social Sciences, I have been working with several groups of students to address issues of cyber crime, scams and specifically, technology-facilitated sexual violence. I am proud to share that since 2020, students from my programme have, with support from community agencies, developed several community engagement projects to raise awareness on technology-facilitated sexual violence.
One of the key learning points from this project is the need to engage young people to be proactive and to tap on their connections to raise awareness.
It is critical to foster a culture of inclusivity by involving those who are likely to use digital services and be harmed by such services, as well as suggesting and implementing effective mechanisms to prevent unlawful behaviours, young people are also able to assist to address the root causes of such behaviours by educating those who may become perpetrators. Such initiatives also provide opportunities to engage young people who may experience mental health issues to come forward and seek assistance.
Second, digital literacy. Mr Speaker, to build a secure digital society, governments and businesses must cooperate both domestically and internationally to prioritise cybersecurity. However, while the Government and the private sector, including companies, have a role to play, cybersecurity attacks are often directed at consumers. As such, consumer cybersecurity awareness is critical.
Empowering individuals with the knowledge and skills to navigate the digital world is fundamental. As we progress with our Smart Nation initiative, with a focus on innovation and increasing productivity, we should simultaneously strengthen digital literacy for all. By doing so, we can ensure that everyone, regardless of age or background, can harness the benefits of technology while understanding the associated risks.
It is equally important to recognise that empowerment is not just about having the power to do certain things. It is also about developing responsible behaviours and accountability. It is more than just sharing and informing individuals the "dos and don'ts". More needs to be done to truly empower individuals to act and be responsible in safeguarding their privacy and the privacy of others in the digital world.
One way to move forward is to consider introducing incentives for responsible online behavior, whether through recognition programmes or other tangible rewards. Positive reinforcement can motivate citizens to actively contribute to the well-being of their communities.
Third, digital citizenship. Mr Speaker, everyone who uses electronic devices to go online and interact with others is participating in a digital world as a digital citizen. Digital citizenship requires individuals to act responsibly online by adhering to the law, protecting privacy, managing reputation and considering how one's online behaviour impacts on oneself, acquaintances and the broader digital community. Mr Speaker, briefly in Malay, please.
( In Malay ) : [ Please refer to Vernacular Speech .] Digital citizenship refers to a concept where individuals are responsible and act judiciously when using technology and in the virtual world.
Parents play an important role in shaping a generation that acts wisely and responsibly in the digital world by providing good guidance and support.
Values that need to be taught to children within this context include awareness of the law, safeguarding privacy, managing reputation, as well as considering the impact of their online behaviour on themselves and the global digital community.
( In English ): During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of digital tools became a necessity. Digital tools allowed the world to continue moving, to remain economically viable by allowing work to be done remotely. Adults were not the only recipient of this advancement. Children and young people relied on digital tools extensively for education and for play.
We were in a crisis mode then, and we had to react and improvise quickly. Now that we are in a stable environment, it is important that parents and teachers support and guide children on how to communicate and collaborate safely and responsibly in online environments.
Just as all children need help from their parents and teachers to become good citizens, today's young people, known as digital natives, also need guidance to learn how to apply citizenship principles in the digital world. Promoting digital citizenship values, emphasising empathy, tolerance and inclusivity will foster a positive online culture and ensure a safe and more harmonious digital society.
Mr Speaker, in summary, constructing a secure and inclusive digital society is a complex challenge that requires a whole-of-nation approach, including cooperation among individuals, communities, governments and businesses. By increasing digital trust, advancing digital literacy and nurturing a culture of digital citizenship, we can lay the foundation for a future where everyone all can engage and thrive in the digital world.
Together, let us shape a Singapore, a Smart Nation that is also a safe nation, with digital society embodying the finest qualities of humanity – a society that is resilient, inclusive and founded on the principles of equality and respect. With this, I support the Motion.
Mr Speaker : Ms Hany Soh.
3.20 pm
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee) : Mr Speaker, in order to build an inclusive and safe digital society, the 3Ps must each play their part. And as what Assoc Prof Razwana has just shared with us earlier, it is with mutual trust and shared responsibility, with corporations and community partners continuing to equip users with the right skillsets to function in this rapidly-transforming digital society or providing accessibility options for those who are unable to do so, while helping to deter online threats, such as scams, and educating the public about them at the same time.
I am pleased to note that in the recent years, several of our Woodgrove community partners are already making efforts to make this digital society more accessible for all in our community. One good example can be found in the POSB Woodlands West branch, situated in Woodgrove's Fuchun Neighbourhood Centre. After its renovation, the branch now exclusively offers self-service banking options that are available 24/7, with branch staff continuing to be present during the bank's usual operating hours to guide customers, especially our seniors, on how to access their desired services with the new teller machines. The branch also features a community space specially for conducting talks and seminars in various languages that aim to educate residents further regarding digital banking and e-payment services.
I must also register my appreciation for the Singapore Digital Office (SDO)'s Digital Ambassadors who, in 2023, have supported a total of 12 senior-centric community events in Woodgrove, such as our Seniors' Carnival and digital upskilling workshops.
Notwithstanding that the SG Digital Community Hub at our Fuchun Community Centre had to be closed due to the Community Centre's ongoing major upgrading works, the SDOs continue to work closely with our grassroots organisation to operate roving counters at various Woodgrove locations to raise awareness and motivate our residents to adopt digital technologies and enhance their digital skills.
Despite these efforts, however, many of our seniors in Woodgrove have shared with me that, notwithstanding that they are now equipped with smart phones, they are still apprehensive about exploring and navigating the digital world on their own, even though they are now well capable of using mobile apps like Facebook and WhatsApp to stay in touch with their family and friends. This does not come as a surprise to me, as they are constantly made aware of heart-wrenching stories from fellow Singaporeans who have suffered great financial loss after falling prey to online scams.
A sobering example comes from one of my Woodgrove residents in his late 60s, who had lost close to $800,000 of his and his wife's life savings due to an impersonation scam. The amount was meant to enable the couple to go on their Haj pilgrimage and to see them through their remaining years after retirement.
With news and anecdotes of scams like these being reported on an almost daily basis, how do we ensure that Singaporeans, especially our seniors, attain sufficient trust in the safety of the various digital platforms to begin to use them confidently, yet remain vigilant against the ever-evolving risks?
I believe that large organisations, such as banks and e-commerce platforms, will need to do more to prevent losses from online scams and bear their consequences. Just like what Dr Tan Wu Meng had shared earlier, the approach ought to be consumer protection-centric.
Just two days ago, I attended to one of my Woodgrove residents, Mr Yu, during our weekly Meet-the-People Session, where he shared about his unpleasant experience with his bank since June last year. Back then, Mr Yu was making an online hotel booking when he fell prey to a malware by entering his OTP on a bogus website. He promptly contacted the bank's customer service upon discovering several unauthorised transactions amounting to over $6,000 charged to his credit card. But despite his request to terminate them immediately, Mr Yu was advised by the bank's customer service officer that because the monies have yet to be received by the scammer, he would have to wait until he received his next monthly statement of account as proof before raising a dispute on the fraudulent credit card transactions.
Mr Yu took this officer's advice. Almost six months later, the bank replied after completing their investigations to inform him that he is expected to bear 50% of the unauthorised transacted sum. To add insult to injury, the bank in their written response reminded him "to always take care of your credentials and refer to the bank's website for more information about how to protect from scams."
It is, therefore, understandable that Mr Yu remains aggrieved and perplexed as to why the bank had refused his request to terminate these fraudulent transactions in time. What else could he have done or done better? What should others who find themselves in similar situations do?
Meanwhile, in a recent news article where another bank was interviewed after one of its customers lost his entire life savings due to another malware scam, the bank likewise took a similar position that their customers "remain the singular most effective defence and strongly urged them to exercise vigilance and caution in this ever-evolving threat landscape."
I disagree with the position taken by the banks in both cases, in that they conveniently expected their individual customers to fend for themselves. By taking such an approach, it could deter more from becoming active participants in our digital society and cause more to lose faith in our banks' credibility.
It is the joint responsibility of all stakeholders to commit towards adopting a whole-of-nation approach to sustain trust by building an inclusive and safe digital society. Therefore, the banks could and should do more to contribute, such as adopting better anti-phishing solutions, improving authenticity verifications, and being extra vigilant towards abnormal transactions to keep accounts secure and prevent the likelihood of scams.
The children of the elderly couple I spoke about earlier who had lost their entire life savings due to an impersonation scam, have shared with me that banks could have done more to prevent these unauthorised transactions from taking place. Amongst other efforts, the banks ought to have paid more attention to each customer's regular banking patterns. In their parents' case, the couple's bank account had zero withdrawal activity for years until the scammers wiped out over half a million dollars of their savings through two large transactions. The bank should have made calls to them to seek confirmation on the abnormal request before releasing the funds.
There are other solutions that may help in terms of safeguarding funds against scams. In November last year, OCBC introduced its anti-scam security feature called OCBC Money Lock, which allows customers to lock away funds in their bank accounts and can only be unlocked after the customer's identity has been verified by the bank. This is a good initiative which I hope MAS can mandate to be rolled out across all of the banks in Singapore and to encourage sign-ups by our seniors.
In addition, MAS can also consider working with banks and insurance companies to introduce an insurance scheme akin to the concept of Deposit Insurance Scheme, which anyone with a bank account can purchase to protect their monies in the event that they fall prey to an online scam.
Concurrently, we should also step-up collaborations between financial institutions and our community. Upskilling workshops, such as OCBC's Digital Silvers programme, and the digital literacy partnership by DBS Foundation and IMDA, are prime examples of such initiatives. If deployed in conjunction with the previously mentioned measures, the banks can also make use of these workshop as opportunities to promote and encourage seniors to sign up for the "money-lock" features as well as enrolling for the anti-scam insurance to protect funds in their bank accounts. I hope that such workshops can be made easily available, just like those run by the SDOs, and I will explore how I can best help my Woodgrove residents benefit from them. In conclusion, in Mandarin, please, Mr Speaker.
( In Mandarin ) : [ Please refer to Vernacular Speech .] In recent years, scams continue to evolve, especially online scams. The ever-changing scam methods have made many Singaporeans, especially the seniors, feel very anxious and helpless.
Singapore is not the only country targeted by the scammers. As technologies progress, countries all around the world are facing the thorny issue of how to fight scams.
In October last year, The Straits Times reported that globally, the annual loss due to scams is a staggering $1.4 trillion. In Australia, in 2022, the loss amounted to about S$2.6 billion. Neighbouring countries, like Malaysia, reported in December last year that between January to November, the amount of loss amounted to as high as RM1.3 billion.
How do we prevent ourselves from becoming the next target of these scammers? Some seniors have adopted the "see no evil, hear no evil" approach to stay safe by not trying at all.
In my opinion, that is certainly not ideal and will cause them to fall behind even more in keeping up with the fast-paced transforming digital society. Today, in countries like China, online purchase and mobile payments have become an integral part of Chinese society, with cash payment becoming quickly a thing of the past.
In conclusion, combatting scams require a whole-of-society effort, starting from the public being vigilant and remaining up to date on the types of scams in the wild, assisted by Government-funded information outlets. Meanwhile, corporations such as banks should also work in tandem to enhance digital safety nets. Together, we can work our way towards boosting public confidence, and nurture an inclusive and safe digital society.
Mr Speaker : Ms Hazel Poa.
3.32 pm
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member) : Mr Speaker Sir, I rise to speak in support of the Motion.
The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) agrees that a whole-of-nation approach to build an inclusive and safe digital society is very much needed. As society digitalised over the past decade, there has been an increase in the prevalence of many varieties of online scams which has lowered the trust level of many Singaporeans in digital tools. Horror stories abound of people losing their life savings in a twinkling of the eye.
Last year, my parents gave me half their life savings to put in my bank account, not in theirs, because they are not confident of not losing it to scams. Their trust level in the security of their money in their bank account has never been so low in their entire lives. I am sure that many other Pioneer and Merdeka Generation Singaporeans share my parents' sentiment.
Over the years, the Government has been promoting financial self-reliance by Singaporeans. For most of us, our own savings is what we have to rely on to meet our expenses and to live in dignity. Any compromise to the security of our savings is a big deal to us. Given the gravity of the issue, I feel that the Government can do more to safeguard citizens' savings and foster a strong culture of consumer protection.
The proposed Shared Responsibility Framework (SRF), which assigns financial institutions and telcos relevant duties to mitigate phishing scams and requires payouts to affected scam victims where these duties are breached, is a step in the right direction, but it is just a baby step. There are two main issues with the SRF.
Firstly, the SRF has a limited scope. It only covers phishing scams and does not cover the whole range of other scams including malware scams, Police official scams, investment and love scams. Its protection is thus rather limited. For example, in the recent case of a family losing their life savings due to downloading malware when they tried to buy organic eggs, the SRF does not help them at all.
Secondly, the duties that financial institutions and telcos are required to carry out are extremely limited. For example, under the SRF, financial institutions are directed to perform four duties:
One, impose at least a 12-hour cooling period after activation of digital token during which high-risk activities cannot be carried out.
Two, send notification alerts for activation of digital token and conduct of high-risk activities.
Three, provide outgoing transaction notifications by way of SMS, email or in-app notification selected by the consumer.
Four, provide a 24/7 reporting channel and a self-service feature for consumers to promptly block online payment transfers from their accounts.
These four duties do not create a sufficient incentive for financial institutions to proactively protect their customers and to remove potential for fraud from their systems. While vigilance and personal responsibility of the consumer are a critical line of defence against scams, the average consumer has less resources to protect themselves against scams as compared to financial institutions.
Financial institutions have the capacity to do more to protect consumers against scams with systems to monitor transactions and detect suspicious payment flows. Large overseas transactions by individuals who rarely or never perform them should immediately trigger alarm bells within the systems of financial institutions. This would not affect businesses that regularly perform such transactions and would not be difficult to implement given the scale and capacity of the IT infrastructure at financial institutions.
In contrast to Singapore's framework, jurisdictions like the UK have moved towards mandating full reimbursement to scam victims by banks, except in cases of fraud or gross negligence by the consumer. This model has also been considered in Australia and the European Union (EU).
I acknowledge that there are moral hazard issues with a full reimbursement and would thus like to suggest a co-sharing of liabilities between the bank and the consumer.
In assessing the issue of online scams, there is a trade-off between financial security on the one hand and convenience and productivity on the other. If banks are totally not liable for any losses, then they have only financial incentives to move more and more towards digital financial transactions and services due to the savings in manpower costs. The cost of digital financial transactions come in the form of greater ease of losing huge amounts of money, and it is being borne by bank customers, especially the most vulnerable. In addition, banks are in control of the security features in their banking apps and the payment processes, but customers, who have no control over those, pay the price for any inadequacies. This is clearly not balanced and hence not tenable.
In considering the trade-off between financial security and convenience and productivity, it may be difficult for the authorities to draw a line for everyone. For example, when OCBC introduced security features in their banking app that prohibited the downloading of suspicious apps, there were complaints from some customers. It is foreseeable that different customers will have different needs. But there is no need for a one-size-fits-all.
I urge the Government to consider a multiple-tiered system with different levels of security versus convenience. Banks can offer different versions of banking apps and processes; for example, one with maximum security features and low convenience, and it comes with a 75% reimbursement of financial losses by the banks in cases of online scams not covered by the SRF. Another with lower security features and comes with a 50% reimbursement for customers who need greater convenience.
Banks can adjust the security features in their apps and processes to commensurate with the different level of liabilities. For example, banks might want to re-evaluate the benefits of requiring a separate physical token. The hon Member Ms Sylvia Lim had spoken previously about the difficulties of getting one from the bank. Whilst the token is an additional cost for banks, it provides the added security of requiring a second device for the authorisation of transactions, not just a handphone which can be hijacked by malware. Using again the example of the family involved in the recent egg scam, if a physical token had been required, the family might not have lost their life savings.
Banks are private commercial entities. They are expected to conduct cost benefit analysis in evaluating any investments in additional security measures. But the Government can alter their cost benefit analysis by imposing a loss-sharing arrangement, which can lead to a different decision.
Reimbursements can be subject to an upper limit of a loss amount equivalent to the basic retirement sum.
Under such a model, both the banks and their customers share the liabilities of any losses due to scams and they both have incentives to be vigilant. Customers can choose the level of security they are comfortable with. Banks will have incentives to push online transactions in line with their ability to provide security, thereby ensuring that the development of digital financial transactions is a more balanced and holistic one. The maximum limit on reimbursement helps to limit the banks' exposure and at the same time, ensure that the most protection is given to the most vulnerable.
Another institution to which duties should be assigned to mitigate scams is the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board, where many Singaporeans' life savings are held. It is very worrying that recently, there has been a trend where CPF accounts were emptied by scammers who had taken control of the user's Singpass and bank accounts. It was only in June 2023 that the CPF Board and GovTech introduced Singpass Face Verification as a step-up authentication challenge for certain CPF e-services.
In October 2023, my colleague Mr Leong Mun Wai asked a Parliamentary Question regarding why the CPF website has not implemented security measures commonly implemented by the banks, such as transaction limits and kill switches. It is heartening to know that with effect from 30 November 2023, a default online CPF withdrawal limit of $2,000 a day will be applied to all CPF members aged 55 and above.
However, this default daily limit can still be adjusted to any amount up to $200,000 at any time online. This includes those CPF members who have activated the CPF Withdrawal Lock, which instantly sets the daily withdrawal limit to $0.
Singpass Face Verification is required for changing the withdrawal limit. I would like to ask the Government for a confirmation on whether the face verification can be passed by using a photo of the scam victim. Would it strengthen the protection to require CPF members who have activated the CPF Withdrawal Lock to change the withdrawal limits in person at a CPF service centre, similar to the arrangements for the banks' money lock accounts?
The same duties that we impose on banks to protect the savings of bank customers should also similarly be imposed on the CPF Board to protect the retirement savings of CPF members.
Finally, I would like to talk about Singpass. We have seen examples of how scammers can take control of victims' Singpass. I am concerned about the wealth of information available in Singpass. Information like family members, education background, income and CPF information and so on. If scammers took control of victims' Singpass, would they not gain very comprehensive information about individual victims and their family members, to enable them to device more ways of scamming? Is this wide range of information necessary and would the Government consider re-introducing physical tokens for Singpass? Mr Speaker, in Mandarin please.
( In Mandarin ) : [ Please refer to Vernacular Speech .] Mr Speaker, the Progress Singapore Party supports today's Motion. It is crucial for our country to establish an inclusive and secure digital society. In recent years, there has been a surge in fraud cases, causing much concern among many citizens.
Last year, my parents split half of their savings into my bank account for safekeeping, fearing that they might fall victim to fraud and lose their hard-earned money. I believe many elderly citizens share the same sentiment.
Over the years, the Government has advocated self-reliance amongst citizens. Therefore, for many citizens, their savings are the only means to ensure they can live with dignity. Online fraud has seriously affected citizens' confidence in the safety of their savings. The Government can do more to safeguard citizens' savings and protect consumers.
Under the Shared Responsibility Framework released by the MAS and IMDA, there is still insufficient incentive for financial institutions to proactively protect consumers and eliminate potential fraud within their systems.
The Progress Singapore Party urges the Government to consider implementing a multitiered Shared Responsibility Framework. In this framework, consumers can make trade-offs between security and convenience.
For example, consumers can choose to use a banking application with high security features, which may inconvenience them. But in the event of fraud losses, the bank must bear 75% of the losses. If consumers choose an application with lower security features, the losses borne by the bank will be lower. This will give consumers more choices and, at the same time, incentivise banks to provide more secure online transactions, striking a better balance between digitalisation and security in our country.
( In English ): Mr Speaker, as a nation, we need to adopt a proactive and holistic approach to fight scams and create an inclusive and safe digital society for all.
Scams have serious consequences for victims. Beyond financial losses, victims also suffer from mental and emotional trauma, such as the embarrassment of having fallen for a scam. There are also financial implications on their family members, such as a child who may by law be responsible for the maintenance of a parent who has lost their life savings to a scammer.
Society must ultimately pick up the tab when people lose their life savings to scammers and the ability to live independently and must instead rely on handouts and charity to survive.
A recent study by the Global Anti-Scam Alliance revealed that Singapore has the dubious honour of being the country with the highest amount lost to scams per victim. This makes Singaporeans the most attractive targets for scammers.
There is much more we can do as a nation to create a safer digital society. Let us all work together to achieve this.
Mr Speaker : Ms Mariam Jaafar.
3.48 pm
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang) : Mr Speaker, Sir, I first declare my interest as a managing director and senior partner of a management consulting firm that does work in digital and AI.
I thank the hon Member Tin Pei Ling and other members of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Communications and Information for securing this debate on an area of pressing importance for all of us. I think almost everyone here shares my experience of hearing gut wrenching stories of residents who have seen their life savings wiped out by online scams.
In my early days as an MP, an appeal by a group of girls whose faces had been superimposed on sexually explicit photos spreading on social media not only in Singapore but in neighbouring countries shook me to the core. I will forever be grateful to Minister Shanmugam and Minister of State Rahayu for their assistance in expediting justice.
More recently, in my engagements with Woodland seniors to encourage them to sign up for Healthier SG, I found a not insignificant number of seniors were ignoring the messages from the Ministry of Health (MOH) as they were afraid of scams. I also saw that most of them were reliant on less secure password authentication on their Singpass app, partly because they did not know how to use and partly because they did not trust biometric authentication.
I support much o f what colleagues before me have said on the need to sustain trust and build an inclusive and safe digital society. I join this debate because I believe the implications of AI and, in particular, the lightning fast development of generative AI (GenAI) on an inclusive and safe digital society deserves special consideration.
Mr Speaker, in my speech on the Motion of Thanks in April, I spoke about AI and GenAI – the opportunities as well as the risks. I said then, "The progress in AI is both exciting and worrying at the same time... we need our AI strategies, policies and people to keep pace with the breathless development. So, let us buckle up."
In relation to the online space, the rapid development of AI and GenAI poses many risks: misinformation and disinformation, lack of transparency, privacy concerns, ethical concerns, data leaks, bias, economic inequalities, copyright violations, security risk, concentration of power and more.
The accessibility of GenAI allows anyone on the Internet to manipulate the tool itself as well as the content it can produce, with potentially devastating consequences. For example, while chatbots like ChatGPT are now specifically trained to reject harmful prompts like "how to build a dirty bomb", they can still be fooled by bad actors pretending to be doing a research paper or writing a movie script.
Fake news, fake images – they are not new in online trust and safety. But as we move from fun face swapping apps and camera filters to the rapid proliferation of deepfakes being used in harmful ways, such as investment scams featuring our own Prime Minister, it is clear that AI presents a new frontier in online trust and safety.
Nowadays, we are urged to be careful and skeptical of what we take in and do online, to question everything we see online. But therein lies the rub. Some have asked, are we now to be distrustful by default? This is a very serious question, one that I hope all of us in Parliament will reflect upon.
Think back to the Ah Ma who did not open the Healthier SG enrolment SMS from MOH. In the business world, there are companies that have blocked GenAI tools from their systems. What happens when "distrustful by default" turns into "distrust and drop-out"?
Mr Speaker, trust is the basis for any digital society. It is what gives us the confidence to interact and transact online. It is needed to drive innovation and adoption in order to reap the considerable benefits of digital and AI. If we want AI to uplift Singapore's economic and social potential, if we want Singapore and Singaporeans to be at the vanguard in developing, deploying, adopting and innovating technology, we need our people to be satisfied that the products and services they consume are safe. If we are going to ride in a racecar, we have got to trust the brakes.
Most, if not all major platforms, have put in some form of brakes or safeguards. Safeguards can take the form of policies, practices and tools, such as robust community guidelines, content moderation policies and ensuring that data is representative and scrubbed for bias.
Machine learning and AI itself will play a powerful role in creating new types of safeguards and building trust. Machine learning tools can be used to ensure privacy and trust by design and to detect and block fraudulent transactions. They can also be tuned to make the right tradeoffs in proportion to the risks involved.
AI tools can also reduce bias – both human bias as well as bias that has crept into machine learning models. By enabling the identification and measurement of bias, they allow platforms to take steps to reduce discrimination and bias or to de-bias the algorithms. A well-known example is Airbnb, which has used data and machine learning to reduce discrimination, for example, against black guests and black hosts and promote inclusion on its platform.
Mr Speaker, the age of AI is upon us. My position has not changed from when I made my speech in April. The response to the associated risks cannot be fear and paralysis, but rather to equip ourselves with the knowledge, strategies and tools to navigate these risks, including to use AI itself to keep propelling us forward.
To that end, I offer give suggestions, building on some of the suggestions of my colleagues, to sustain trust by building an inclusive and safe digital society in the age of AI.
First, increase safeguards and hold social media services accountable for the proliferation of harmful content, scams and malicious ads, including AI-generated content, to protect consumers, especially children.
Online safety and scams are global issues. While it will never feel timely enough for those who suffer from the harm, the Government is proactively taking steps to safeguard safety and inclusion.
The passing of the Online Safety Act in February 2023 and the subsequent release of the Online Safety Code by IMDA in July 2023 have strengthened the regulatory framework, holding social media services accountable to take preventive measures against online harm. The Government has also rolled out a series of measures to protect against online scams, including the much discussed Shared Responsibility Framework slated to be implemented this year.
The approach taken by the Government has been one of engagement and utilising a range of levers, not just legislation but also voluntary adoption of codes of practice and tools, to ensure effectiveness – and I would add sustainability – before making them mandatory. It is an approach that engenders trust and buy in, helping to take away some of the usual impediments to move.
Indeed, Singapore was one of the world's first to introduce regulations to ensure designated social media services take preventive measures to ensure online safety. In contrast, the UK Online Safety Act was delayed some five to six years, falling victim to political crises making it very hard to move.
Some of the measures to combat scam such as the mandatory registration of all alphanumberic SMS sender IDs with the Singapore SMS Sender ID Registry (SSIR) would be hard to pull off in many other jurisdictions.
The hon Member Sylvia Lim has said that we are moving towards a crisis of confidence in digital transactions and banking, without stronger intervention by Government regulators. I believe the Government has taken important steps, but I also believe they will continue to take more. I hope the Minister will provide an update on the implementation of recently announced measures and share additional measures the Government may be exploring, including expanding potentially the scope of some of the restrictions on other platforms such as online technology platforms.
However, this is a rapidly evolving space. Online harms related to AI-generated content such as deepfakes may not be sufficiently covered by current laws.
Singapore has taken a pragmatic approach to AI regulation – we should not rush to regulate what we do not yet understand, when the solutions are not yet clear – is how I would articulate it. Rather, the approach has been, again, one of engagement, of testing different solutions and of building capacities while recognising that legislation will come at some point. It is a sensible approach.
Notwithstanding, the Government should continue to review the adequacy of safeguards and provisions in the Online Safety Act to protect against AI-generated content. At this point, I would like to ask the Minister if she is looking to introduce any AI focused protective measures in the near future. In particular, I echo the concerns said by many on deepfakes.
Looking around, the UK Online Safety Act has made transmitting deepfake pornography illegal and platforms will need to quickly act to remove them from their platforms. The US Executive Order seeks to establish standards and best practices for detecting AI-generated content and authenticating official content, with the Department of Commerce tasked to develop guidance for content authentication and watermarking.
There seems to be momentum behind reviewing the safeguards against harmful deepfakes and parsing out accountability. There is also the risk, as highlighted by the hon Member Tan Wu Meng, on democracy itself.
Indeed, there are calls to require that in any interaction with AI, be it text, image or voice, the AI has to declare that it is AI. In addition, we have to think of how to support individual victims whose images may have been exploited in deepfakes and harmed – a highly traumatic experience.
Second, engage in a whole-of-nation partnership between all stakeholders in the online ecosystem to educate and empower our people, especially the young and the old, on scams, online harms and digital literacy, including AI literacy.
While the tech platforms can and must do more, an inclusive and safe digital society requires the concerted effort of many more stakeholders. These stakeholders include the Government, the public sector, the private sector, the tech platforms, but also telcos, banks, AI companies and other companies offering products and services online, law enforcement agencies, parents and caregivers, schools, social services and community organisations, and at the centre of it all, the individuals themselves.
AI literacy refers to as a set of competencies that enables people to critically evaluate, communicate and collaborate effectively with AI. Yesterday, Minister Chan Chin Sing shared how the Ministry of Education (MOE) is preparing students in our schools and IHLs by developing their foundational knowledge of AI, promoting safe and responsible use of AI, measures to guard against the risks of AI and teaching cyber wellness skills, such as evaluating information and identifying fake news.
There is nascent interest on AI literacy in early childhood education, with some promising effects. Some studies have highlighted how early AI literacy can improve many aspects of child development, such as creative inquiry, emotional inquiry and collaborative inquiry. Some argue that with more well-designed AI toys and services such as PopBots, Zhoria, Quickdraw, young children could explore AI-related concepts and develop their digital and AI literacy, even if they may not know and understand the knowledge behind it. Others argue that since young children are already using devices and tablets, it is important that they attain some elements of data literacy even at a young age, such as understanding the concepts of personal data and data privacy.
Yet, there are also question marks like whether age-appropriate curriculums can be developed for early childhood, the readiness of early childhood educators themselves and concerns over inequalities and inclusiveness. Does the Minister see AI literacy in early childhood as a worthwhile investigation?
Third, Government to lead the way by deploying AI at scale through high value use cases in public services and advancing research into online trust and safety.
The recently launched National AI Strategy 2.0, which I am hopeful will get a good airing in Parliament in due course articulates a vision for "AI for the Public Good, for Singapore and the World". The focus will be on directing AI towards addressing big challenges, not just locally, but globally like climate change and population health, as well on empowering individuals, business and community to use AI with confidence, discernment and trust.
Among other actions, the Government seeks to pursue meaningful use cases in both public services and industry that will deliver outsized impact to our lives. I urge the Government to make a big push to deploy high value use cases, at scale, in public services. Not only will the AI itself create value, it will build capability within the Government as multi-disciplinary product teams will learn to make adjustments and deploy solutions to address weaknesses that surface and policy teams will learn how to prevent the spread of harmful activities and to shape effective regulations by doing.
We start in an enviable position, where there is strong trust in the Government, hard earned over decades. If the Government is transparent on the value as well as the risks as it deploys these high-value use cases, if we are able to advance research into Online Trust and Safety and build and test tools and solutions, such as "Trust by Design" technologies like watermarking and content authentication and use these tools in these use cases in the public sector, Singapore can set an example for the private sector and governments around the world.
Fourth, take the lead in adopting responsible AI across the digital economy. Responsible AI is a holistic approach to developing, assessing and deploying AI systems in a safe, trustworthy and ethical way that spans the full product life cycle. It entails being transparent about when and how products leverage AI, how algorithms influence decisions and the steps being taken to mitigate bias, privacy violations and other risks. The value of responsible AI goes beyond risk mitigation; it can strengthen trust between organisations and their customers, assuring customers that the products and services they consume are safe.
The public sector and companies across sectors in the digital economy deploying AI solutions, whether in developing their products and services or supply chain AI , should operationalise responsible AI as fast as they build and deploy AI solutions. Because Responsible AI demands teams of individuals with different expertise, experiences and background and cooperation across the organisation at all levels, the Prime Minister and chief executive officers themselves leading from the top to drive and sustain investment and focus is required.
And lastly, increase the international cooperation on Online Safety, including AI governance and safety. Given the global nature of the cyberspace, driving dialogue, sharing knowledge and cooperating on solutions is important. Boosting inclusive AI governance and interoperability to achieve our shared goal of trustworthy AI is something that Singapore must commit to do and can seek to play a key role in.
The open sourcing of AI Verify, cited by the Member Ms Sylvia Lim earlier, is actually a way of promoting international cooperation and putting a claim on some intellectual leadership and legitimacy in this space. Non trivial, when parties involve actually do have some tensions.
Another global issues like climate change, Singapore has led the way on some fronts. Minister Grace Fu's leadership of negotiations on Article 6 and mitigation at successive COPs come to mind. Can the Minister provide an update on our participation in the AI governance and safety space?
Mr Speaker, I wish to end with a thank you to the many agencies and task forces across multiple Ministries involved in keeping our online space safe, inclusive and trusted today. I know it sometimes feels like you are playing whack a mole. It sometimes feels like a thankless task. I hope the nation will rise to this call for each of us to play our part in order to continue closing the trust gap between the online and physical space. Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.
Mr Speaker : Minister, Dr Tan See Leng.
4.07 pm
The Minister for Manpower and Second Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng) : Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to take this opportunity to address the Member Ms Hazel Poa's allegation. And to address the point that earlier, she mentioned that CPF accounts have been emptied. That point is not true. It is inaccurate. The way we have constructed the CPF, is, at 55, you have the Basic Retirement Sum within the Retirement Account. So, only amounts above the Basic Retirement Sum can be withdrawn from the CPF Ordinary Account or Special Account.
Our CPF safeguards are no less stringent than what banks have put in place. That being said, any amount belonging to any CPF member is precious, is hard-earned and is most important to us. And that is why CPF Board constantly looks into and constantly reviews the ways to improve security, whilst preserving flexibility for our members.
CPF Board also works very closely with a whole-of-Government to ensure this is kept tight. The Member may also take comfort in knowing that after the Singpass facial verification implementation in June 2023, no unauthorised losses was observed.
I think for the balance of the other initiatives, I will leave it to Minister Josephine Teo who will provide a summary at the end.
Mr Speaker : Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.30 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.09 pm until 4.30 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.30 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]
Building an Inclusive and Safe Digital Society
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker : Mr Gerald Giam.
4.30 pm
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied) : Mdm Deputy Speaker, the rise of sophisticated online scams and the resulting financial devastation on victims is a critical concern impacting Singaporeans from all walks of life. Across our nation, residents, both young and old, tech savvy and not, have fallen victim to these fraudulent schemes. I have met constituents who have lost their entire life savings to scammers, with even fixed deposit accounts being cleared out by these criminals. Some have joint accounts with their children or parents, doubling the impact on families. These incidents demonstrate a concerning vulnerability that affects us all. While I consider myself relatively tech savvy, I have to admit that even I feel the looming threat of becoming a victim one day.
Many victims I have spoken to describe a disheartening response from their banks. Upon reporting the fraud, they frequently receive responses that are frustratingly vague or non-committal. They offer little information citing banking secrecy, and at times, a goodwill payment that does not fully cover the loss. Victims are sometimes told by the Police that the funds had been transferred overseas and nothing further can be done to retrieve the funds.
The technical nature of these scams is deeply concerning. Drive-by download attacks and the more advanced zero-day exploits make it possible for malware to be installed on phones with little or no user action. These methods exploit vulnerabilities in operating systems and applications.
In view of these sophisticated attacks, how far do the authorities investigate each reported scam, especially those involving screen reading and key logging malware? Without thorough investigations, it will not be possible to ascertain fault and ensure that innocent victims are not held responsible for losses that they did not cause. Is the default blame then placed on the victims, who have to bear most of the financial loss?
Scams have emerged as a formidable obstacle to advancing digital access for our citizens, particularly in our senior community. Numerous elderly residents I have encountered expressed a fear of using internet banking or online payments because they are apprehensive about falling prey to scams. Consequently, I find myself hesitant to advocate the use of digital banking to them, despite its convenience, due to the real risk of them losing their entire life savings if they are targeted by scammers.
This situation has precipitated what Member for Aljunied, Ms Sylvia Lim, as she describes, as a crisis with confidence with the digital banking system. Unless the authorities address the issues of scams more effectively and establish stronger consumer protections, our extensive efforts to transition all our citizens into a digitally empowered society will come to naught.
One tool the Government has on hand to deal decisively with scams is the Online Criminal Harms Act. This will allow the Government to, inter alia, direct online platforms to disable access to accounts suspected to be involved in scams. Parliament passed this Act last July. However, it is only set to be progressively rolled out this year.
When will the Online Criminal Harms Act be fully operationalised? Given that an average of 87 scams are taking place every day in Singapore, each day of delay will be one day too late for many scam victims.
Banks must shoulder a greater responsibility in protecting their customers. I echo Ms Sylvia Lim's earlier call for banks to reintroduce physical tokens as a default measure for multi-factor authentication for all their customers. Multi-factor authentication relies on a combination of something you know and something you have. However, when phones are compromised by malware, allowing scammers to view screens and keystrokes, this system collapses into a single factor. This allows scammers who have access to the password entered by the user to bypass the additional security layer. Therefore, bringing back physical tokens will reinstate the crucial second layer of security.
MAS must more assertively and decisively tackle the problem of scams in the banking system to protect consumers. In my dealings with MAS, when advocating for constituents victimised by scams, I have observed that MAS tends to forward these critical cases to the banks for their follow-up instead of directly addressing and resolving the issues on behalf of victims. This delegation process then places the onus on the banks to determine who is at fault, the institution or the victim, for the occurrence of the scam. Such a practice raises serious concerns about the impartiality and effectiveness on the investigation.
I have also observed a discrepancy in MAS' approach to enforcing actions on financial institutions for different violations. On one hand, MAS imposes very punitive measures like restrictions on acquisitions and additional capital requirements on banks when there are brief downtimes in online banking and ATM services. On the other hand, this level of decisiveness and rigour is markedly absent in addressing scam cases.
MAS should require banks to tackle scams with the same level of intensity and rigour as they do in safeguarding consumers interest for system outages.
Scam victims need a comprehensive explanation from a knowledgeable and impartial entity like MAS about how the scam occurred. This explanation should detail the roles of banks, telcos, customers and other entities in both the occurrence and prevention of such scams. This will determine who is responsible and who should bear the loss, the cost of these fraudulent acts.
Furthermore, responsibility should not be limited to financial institutions, telcos and consumers. Social media companies and mobile phone handset manufacturers should be held accountable for securing their platforms again scams. All handsets sold in Singapore should be required to disable side loading of apps by default and make it difficult for end users to override critical security features. Social media platforms should be required to have processes in place to remove fraudulent posts soon after being notified.
MCI has revealed that a notable proportion of residents, approximately 37%, do not regularly update their devices. Many of these may be less tech savvy users. It is not reasonable to expect that everyone will have the technical proficiency to keep their devices updated. Therefore, consumer protection strategies must be designed on the premise that a significant number of users will not know how to keep their devices updated and should incorporate additional layers of security to safeguard these users.
A central agency should oversee all scam investigations and responses. I am aware of the Anti-Scam Command (ASCom) and the important work their officers are doing. However, given that ASCom is a department under the Commercial Affairs Department of the Singapore Police Force, I do not think it can be held accountable for whole-of-Government efforts to combat scams. Who therefore, is ultimately accountable for the Government's anti-scam efforts?
To summarise, my recommendations as follows. First, banks must significantly increase their responsibility towards consumer protection, including by providing physical tokens to customers. Second, MAS should take a more active role in acertaining responsibility for scams carried out on banks, digital platforms and supporting victims. Third, the Online Criminal Harms Act needs to be fully operational operationalised without further delay. Fourth, the Government needs to hold technology companies more accountable for their security of their platforms and devices. And finally, a central anti-scam agency should oversee and be ultimately accountable for the Government's anti-scam efforts.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, we stand at the critical juncture in the battle against scams. Our actions in the face of this scourge will determine our commitment to protecting our citizens in the digital age. Let us act swiftly and decisively to protect our people and indeed, ourselves. I support the Motion.
Mdm Deputy Speaker : Ms Jean See.
4.39 pm
Ms See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member) : Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. I thank my Parliamentary colleagues for putting forth this Motion.
In 1970, economist Milton Friedman asked a fundamental question, "What is the role of business in society?" In response, he submitted an argument to the New York Times stating that, "The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits."
Since then, this narrative has shaped the growth of corporations. Thankfully, the narrative was interrupted by the rise of the socially conscious investor. The socially conscious investor demanded that corporations be held accountable to higher standards of social responsibility. This has in turn, led to the emergence of corporate social responsibility and ESG, or environmental, social and governance goals as new priorities.
In response to the Motion, I would like to update Friedman’s question to today’s context: In a digital-driven economy and society, what is a socially responsible business and its role in society? As a Labour advocate, I would like to highlight three trends that are worrying and offer three suggestions of how we could respond as a society.
First, technologies will get more complicated and powerful. Many of us appreciate the convenience that technologies such as booking or buying apps bring to us. In exchange for the convenience, we might consent to our data being re-marketed by these companies behind these apps.
Given the fluid nature of data, users might find themselves at the receiving end of unsolicited marketing messages as companies seek to profit from new consumer segments. Many individuals struggle to extricate themselves from the never-ending web of marketing messages as they lack the knowledge or ability to do so. The struggle imposes mental strain on individuals who are constantly inundated by advertisements and often tempted to spend more time and more money on the apps. How might we cultivate a respectful code of ethics for commerce in the digital age?
Second, technologies will get simpler yet more complex. On the one hand, mobile technology coupled with AI tools are set to herald a new age of productivity for service frontliners; we do see resources being customised and at the fingertips of service frontliners when interacting with customers. On the other hand, workers can also be held hostage by technology. Many workers are users and operators, and unexposed or underexposed to technology's working mechanics. If companies train workers only for deployment rather than staff development, a firm’s decision to change technology provider could render its current cohort of workers struggling to become competent in a new technology within a short timeframe. This story would end with the workers being made redundant and the firm let off the hook when the firm cites incompatibility of worker skills and business needs.
How might we reduce worker precariousness arising from information asymmetry and in its place, cultivate a sense of shared responsibility between companies and workers to enhance workers’ career longevity in a digital economy?
Third, the spotlight on technology and online harm has made us more aware of our rights. However, many of us are less certain of how to exercise them. While businesses are conscious of seeking consent from users on data privacy, default privacy settings are often onerous to navigate. It is even more challenging to attempt a complete opt out from the default settings. Furthermore, users who consent to the default settings might not be aware of what the settings allow or mean.
In this regard, it would not be far off to consider that the default mindset of these companies to be, and I quote journalist Zeynep Tufekci: "to expect users to accept what they are given, not know their options or not have the constant vigilance required to keep track of the available options, however limited they may be."
Workers of technology companies, whether freelancers or employees, are also not spared. In fact, workers might be required or made to feel obliged to download their employer's or company's app and to always accede to requests to update the apps, unknowing that each update could reset their data privacy settings and void previous opt-outs.
As more companies transform into digital for businesses, how might we introduce oversight into the processes by which companies obtain data privacy permissions to ensure accountability and transparency? Central to the three trends is our expectations of what is a socially responsible business and its role in a digital economy and society.
I would like to contribute three suggestions towards the Motion's narrative of building an inclusive and safe digital society.
To address the harmful effects of unsolicited marketing and the powerlessness that users experience in relation to the data that we hand over to the companies, I would suggest that regulators take a proactive approach to educate companies on respect for user rights. For instance, a socially responsible company would ensure default settings favour user privacy and autonomy. This means that users must have unrestricted access to their own data privacy settings.
There must be avenues for users trapped in unsavoury data privacy settings to get help to set themselves free from the snares of predatory companies. Such help could be in the form of a helpdesk managed by public and private players working together.
Regulators should consider imposing punitive action on recalcitrant companies and establish guardrails to keep in check companies exhibiting such predatory behaviour.
To address the precarity of workers in the face of technological innovation and disruptions, I would urge companies to adopt a forward-looking approach. For instance, they could work closely with the unions and sector agencies to dial up the digital and technology fluency of their workers.
In this regard, a socially responsible company would work together with unions and agencies on continual training and on-the-job learning for their workforce to improve workforce mobility across technologies. This will build up workers' digital capital and is key to workers' career longevity in the digital age.
Just as Friedman's narrative was reshaped by the rise of social consciousness in society, the responsibility is upon us as workers and users to make a difference.
I would encourage workers and users to unite under representative bodies, such as the unions and associations and to put forth our updated expectations on the social responsibilities of businesses in the digital age.
By working closely with Government and like-minded businesses and organisations and leveraging the tripartite framework, we can establish updated standards and legitimise the norms to form the bedrock for a safe and inclusive digital society. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion.
Mdm Deputy Speaker : Dr Wan Rizal.
4.48 pm
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar) : Mdm Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. In an era where digital technology permeates every aspect of our lives, today's Motion holds more relevance than ever.
As an educator and a father to teenagers and young children, I am acutely aware of the impact of a digital world. Our responsibility goes beyond technological progress. It involves safeguarding our young generation's mental health and well-being.
The digital world has transformed education and communication, offering unparalleled opportunities for learning and connection. A key player in this transformation is AI. AI has revolutionised the educational experience by personalising learning and providing real-time feedback.
In online safety, AI can detect potential dangers. It can identify patterns of cyberbullying, flag inappropriate content and even offer proactive and swift interventions to protect our young users.
When harnessed correctly, AI is a powerful ally. However, the deployment of AI has its challenges. The misuse of perpetuating cyberbullying through deepfakes or other manipulative content is a growing worry.
Furthermore, if not developed ethically, AI systems can inherit biases, leading to discriminatory practices or inadequate protection for certain groups.
Privacy is another critical issue. The balance between leveraging AI for safety and respecting individual privacy rights is delicate and requires careful navigation.
Another significant challenge in the digital world is the alarming prevalence of cyberbullying. A global report from 2020 brought to light a "cyber pandemic" affecting children worldwide.
In Singapore, this issue is particularly concerning, as studies show that four in 10 children aged eight to 12 are at risk of cyberbullying, a risk that increases for teenagers. Contributing factors include widespread smartphone ownership, excessive social media use and high gaming activity.
Reinforcing these findings, an online survey by the Sunlight Alliance for Action (AfA) revealed that a similar proportion of youths experience cyberbullying, leading to deep emotional scars. The link between social media and mental health issues like anxiety and depression in young users is increasingly evident. Our responsibility is to ensure that digital access does not compromise our children's mental health and well-being.
Madam, allow me to share an anecdotal story of Aisha, a Secondary 1 student, not much different from my daughter's age, whose experience in the digital world reflects the multi-faceted nature of online harms.
Like many of her peers, Aisha was active on various social media platforms. And despite her age, she easily bypassed the age verification processes with a falsified birth date, a common oversight in many platforms' registration procedures.
On these platforms, Aisha encountered a barrage of challenges. Despite these services claiming to have stringent content filters, she was exposed to inappropriate content. This exposure disturbed her and skewed her understanding of social norms. Furthermore, she faced cyberbullying. These were sparked after a harmless AI face swapped picture of her was posted online. Harassing messages and public ridicule and shaming from anonymous accounts became a daily ordeal, deeply affecting her.
The turning point came when the school intervened, recognising her sudden withdrawal and decline in academic performance. They worked closely with her parents to address the issues she faced online. But the question is: was it too late?
It became clear that while digital literacy at school and parental involvement at home were crucial, more accountable and stringent policies were needed to complement these efforts.
In that regard, I would like to highlight a three-pronged approach encompassing schools, homes and the Internet, which we are practising.
Firstly, in schools, we must continue to build on our successes in digital literacy and cyber-wellness education, recognised as the "gold standard" by experts around the world. We must continue to instill a culture of ethical and mindful digital engagement. Our children must understand the complexities of the online world, discern fact from fiction and build healthy digital relationships.
Topics like online privacy, recognising misinformation and understanding the ethics and psychological impact of digital media are crucial. We must continue to creatively integrate these digital literacy programmes into the core curriculum of our education system at all levels. This integration should not be limited to just IT lessons. Rather, it should be woven into the fabric of all subjects, where appropriate, to ensure that our children are equipped with digital skills and ethics as a fundamental aspect of their education.
Secondly, in homes, the engagement and education of parents in digital safety must be intensified. The home environment is equally critical in shaping children's digital experiences. Parents and guardians must be well-informed but most importantly, actively involved. This can be achieved through regular workshops and resources that empower them to create a safe digital environment at home.
These initiatives should focus on educating parents about online risks, appropriate content monitoring, which many are shy to do and strategies for open communication with their children about their online activities and experiences, a skill not many are willing to do but is crucial in a child's development. The aim is to foster a collaborative approach between schools and families, ensuring consistency in the messages and practices regarding digital safety and usage.
Finally, Mdm Deputy Speaker, is the Internet itself. The gateway to digital experiences must be fortified. Stringent measures to protect children from online harm, age-appropriate content filters and stricter regulations on digital platforms are necessary to create a safer digital environment. Policies and regulations must be robust, holding social media services and application developers accountable.
Therefore, I applaud MCI for the Code of Practice for Online Safety, which is crucial in governing digital content and interactions to create a safer online environment. The Code mandates social media services like Meta and Google, which have significant reach in Singapore, to establish systems and processes to shield users, especially children, from online harm.
However, while social media services and application developers have policies specifically for young users, a critical gap remains, the challenge of accurately determining the age of users. Beyond self-declaration, these platforms need reliable age assurance measures, as the current system is easily circumvented.
Therefore, I urge social media services and application developers to intensify their age assurance measures. They must be more vigilant in safeguarding young users from harmful content.
Furthermore, it is essential that social media services improve their response time to user reports, ensuring that flagged harmful content is acted upon promptly. It is worth considering how long these services take to remove harmful content and should we establish a specific timeframe for them to take down such content. Should we implement stricter implications for non-compliance?
Aisha's story underscores the importance of a robust age verification system, effective content filtering and proactive measures against cyberbullying by these platforms to safeguard our children.
As legislators, we must support and enforce such initiatives. We must ensure that social media services and application developers comply with these practices and continually evolve their strategies to address emerging online safety challenges. Madam, in Malay, please.
( In Malay ) : [ Please refer to Vernacular Speech .] Sir, we live in a rapidly-evolving digital age, where digital technology touches every aspect of our lives.
However, we must ensure that this digital world is a safe and inclusive space, especially for our younger generation.
In our efforts to build an inclusive and safe digital society, I propose three strategic steps,
First, in school, it is important to integrate digital literacy into the curriculum. This is not just about teaching how to use technology, but also about digital ethics, online security and the skills to navigate the digital world responsibly.
Second, at home, where the role of parents is critical. They need to be equipped with knowledge and resources to create a safe digital environment at home, as well as becoming a partner in their children's digital education.
Third, on the internet, we should fortify the gateway into the digital world. This means that legislation and policies should be tightened to ensure that Social Media Services and application developers shoulder more responsibility in protecting our children from harmful online content.
The latest initiative by IMDA, including the Code of Practice for Online Security, is an important step to improve online safety, especially for children.
Through this approach, I hope we can work together as a society to build a digital domain that is not only technologically advanced, but also one that has peace, understanding, and inclusion for all, especially for our younger generation.
( In English ): Madam, in conclusion, this is a call to action for service providers, lawmakers, educators, parents and the tech industry. We must work together to create policies, educational curricula and technological solutions that safeguard our digital spaces.
Ensuring the safety of our children in the digital world is a shared responsibility. My vision is simple – to see our children safe to explore, to learn and grow without fear and harm. With that, I support the Motion.
Mdm Deputy Speaker : Mr Ong Hua Han.
4.59 pm
Mr Ong Hua Han (Nominated Member) : Madam, in light of the recent news coverage highlighting the dangers of deepfakes and the rise of scams in general, the timing of this Motion is, indeed, fitting.
The Motion tabled today has two key thrusts – that our digital society is both inclusive and safe.
Between 2018 to 2022, scam incidences have been reported to increase fivefold. Losses to scams in 2023 will likely again cost us more than half a billion dollars. E-commerce, job and phishing scams have quickly become the most prevalent scam types through popular channels like messaging apps, social media and online shopping platforms.
Clearly, as our society becomes more digital, having a safe online environment is of utmost priority. Numerous phishing websites and mobile applications have emerged recently. Scammers create fake websites that are almost indistinguishable from the real ones. Fake websites deceive users into entering their credentials, targeting those who seek to use messaging, email and banking services. Link shorteners are frequently used by scammers to make these links appear legitimate.
One way to identify fake websites is to carefully examine the domain name. An example of a legitimate domain name is ".gov.sg", which cannot be replicated by scammers. "Go.gov.sg" is the official link shortener used by Government agencies and users are prompted to pause and check their browser address bar when they click on the shortened Government link for the first time. The Government also publishes and updates a list of trusted sites and clearly highlights that people should look out for ".gov.sg" in the URL of Government websites.
For a more holistic approach, would it be feasible for the Government to require consumer banking and messaging services to publish such clear advisories and implement measures similar to the "pause and check" feature? In January 2022, MAS and the Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) announced additional measures to bolster the security of digital banking. Among these measures, banks in Singapore have removed clickable links in emails or SMSes sent to customers.
Now, the question arises – in an environment where phishing scams involving clickable links still take place, how do we ensure that all retail banking users, particularly seniors, are aware of this initiative? Furthermore, these measures do not apply to non-bank financial institutions, such as digital investment platforms. Could the Government consider widening the scope of these measures to ensure that non-bank financial institutions serving retail customers also conform to the same standards? After all, it is in the interest of end users and service providers when scammers fail in their attempts.
Having considered online safety, I would like to now turn our attention to the other equally important tenet of this Motion. In the rest of my speech I will raise certain issues to ensure that our digital society is also inclusive to disadvantaged groups. This is especially important as daily life becomes digitalised over time. Today, the Internet has become a significant and unparalleled source of data. All of us in this Chamber would not think twice to search something up on the web or add to its content through social media. In day-to-day living, instant payments via our smartphones are second nature. For some in society, it is not quite the same.
According to MCI, seniors in Singapore continue to find using technology for purposes, such as contactless payment, a challenge. For seniors over the age of 60, this struggle is even more prevalent. The SG Digital Office (SDO) set up in June 2020 by IMDA runs a Seniors Go Digital programme that aims to help our seniors navigate the digital landscape with ease and confidence. Given that some seniors still express hesitancy over the use of technology, can the Government clarify if such programmes have been successful in achieving their objectives and what more can be done?
Moving on to our friends with sensory disabilities, more attention is required to ensure that they are not left behind as we develop what we call our Digital Social Compact. I will begin by addressing the concerns of the deaf community, followed by a discussion on issues relating to the visually impaired (VI).
In September last year, I asked a Parliamentary Question on whether the Government will consider providing Singapore Sign Language (SgSL) interpretation services during significant Government live TV broadcasts. It was noted in the reply that since April 2020, MCI has required TV broadcasts of significant national and public interest to be accompanied by SgSL interpretation. This move marked a crucial step towards inclusivity and events, such as the National Day Rally and Budget speeches, have, indeed, become more accessible to the deaf community. However, there had been significant live events where SgSL interpretation was absent or only provided in a delayed broadcast.
For instance, during the most recent Presidential Forum in 2023, I understand that SgSL interpretation was not available in realtime but only in a delayed broadcast. This was despite the fact that the Presidential Election 2023 was the first contested Presidential Elections in over a decade in Singapore.
Critical live broadcasts, such as the initial COVID-19 briefings during the outbreak of the pandemic, also lacked sign language interpretation. Although it was eventually provided in later briefings, it is essential we recognise the challenging and unsettling environment the deaf community faced during those early, deeply uncertain moments.
Beyond TV broadcasts, there has also been feedback highlighting the disadvantages faced by the deaf community. Today, in our digital first but not digital only approach, there are still Government services that involve face-to-face or phone interaction. This includes reporting flat damage to HDB, consulting MOH or health clusters or addressing issues with CPF, ICA, LTA, among others. These are not fully accessible to the deaf. The deaf often have no choice but to hire a sign language interpreter at their own expense in order to communicate with Government agencies through these channels.
Given these persistent challenges, it is easy to empathise with the deaf community. It is natural for them to feel that their social participation in day-to-day living, access to essential services or time-sensitive information lag behind those of their hearing peers currently. I am aware and grateful for the ongoing collaboration between ServiceSG and SADeaf in addressing these accessibility challenges. That being said, it is necessary that we continue to push for inclusive and timely solutions. We must ensure that no one in the deaf community feels left behind as our world becomes digital.
I will use the final part of my speech to highlight issues on behalf of the visually impaired (VI) community. According to the Enabling Masterplan 2030 report, about 61% of all high traffic Government websites are accessible. These high traffic websites are defined as those with at least one million visits per year. The Enabling Masterplan 2030 rightfully acknowledges the existing gap in digital accessibility. It commits to designing accessible websites and applications for Government services. Additionally, it aims to raise the adoption of e-accessibility by the non-Government sectors.
Despite this, on the ground, many of those with VI continue to provide feedback that digital inaccessibility remains a big issue. People with VI consume digital content in a different way. For those with low to no vision remaining, they use a type of software called a screen reader. A screen reader is a text-to-speech software that turns a user's phone or computer into a talking machine. It scans all available text and reads the contents out loud. For images and buttons, the screen reader needs clear, user-friendly labels or alternate text to enable meaningful audio playback of screen content.
Speaking with the VI community, their experience with accessing digital content in Singapore via their screen readers is riddled with inconsistencies. For example, following the latest update of the HealthHub application, I am told that, unfortunately, blind users can no longer access the app like before. Previously, the app featured well-labelled buttons, enabling blind users to easily book hospital appointments or make bill payments seamlessly. After the update, the buttons somehow became unlabelled and the screen reader could only announce "button" or "unlabelled graphic" without any helpful context. Currently, blind users are left to navigate the app by trial and error, leading to an inefficient and often frustrating experience.
Thankfully, there is a brighter side. Visually impaired users have reported positive experiences with other Government websites like IRAS and CPF, showing that with the right focus and consideration, our digital services can, indeed, be made accessible.
Apart from Government services, many websites and applications from local companies are not screen-reader friendly. For most of us, consuming Government services is not the most significant proportion of our online activity. This also applies to those who have visual impairments, who engage in diverse online interactions.
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) is an international standard to ensure online content is accessible to persons with disabilities. In Singapore, our Digital Service Standard (DSS) aligns with WCAG 2.1 at the AA level. The WCAG standards have three levels of conformance: "A" being the minimum; "AA" being mid-range; and "AAA" is highest.
The DSS framework in Singapore applies exclusively to Government agencies. We do not have legislation in Singapore that requires companies to make their products and services accessible to persons with disabilities. There is also no direct incentive for companies to make them accessible for all users or consumers.
Without these, companies do not spare enough thought or consideration for disadvantaged groups in their online offerings. For instance, some e-commerce websites use puzzles or sliders to verify that users are, indeed, human. These methods often do not meet the basic level "A" of the WCAG standard, which requires alternative challenge-response authentication to cater to different types of sensory perception. Examples like this cause persons with disabilities to frequently find themselves relying on others when using the simplest of online services. They, too, yearn for the autonomy to independently manage their day-to-day activities like you and I.
In our physical built environment, we have the BCA Accessibility Code, which sets minimum accessibility requirements for new developments. The BCA-administered Accessibility Fund provides capital incentive to improve building accessibility. These measures benefit everyone, including the physically disadvantaged.
As goods and services become more digitalised, it becomes equally if not more important to implement similar standards and incentives in the digital domain to ensure accessibility for all. I fully agree with the hon Member Ms Tin Pei Ling in her opening speech: why should the digital world be different from the real one?
Looking abroad, Singapore can draw inspiration from internationally established frameworks for online accessibility. An example is the 2019 EU Directive, which sets accessibility standards for consumer banking and e-commerce services, among others. This directive ensures that services are designed for easy use by persons with disabilities. Key measures include providing information in a way that can be perceived by everyone. This means offering alternatives to supplement non-textual content, using easily readable fonts, ensuring high contrast and allowing adjustable spacing in text.
Shifting our focus from online accessibility frameworks, we must also guarantee that future designers are educated on accessible user experience design and digital inclusion. To move towards a future where digital accessibility is the norm, it is crucial that these principles are integrated from the very beginning of any new digital venture. Thoughtful, or should I say, universal design, must be considerate towards those with diverse usage requirements.
Having discussed various challenges and the need for inclusive digital design, I would like to propose three key suggestions.
First, could we consider requiring non-Government, essential services, starting with high traffic online platforms to conform with an accessibility framework similar to DSS?
Second, to encourage smaller businesses, could the Government consider expanding the scope of the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) to support the development and improvement of websites, mobile applications, digital products and services and make them accessible to all?
Third, could the Government work with Institutes of Higher Learning to ensure that future web designers and programmers are sufficiently trained on digital accessibility?
With the application of these suggestions, we take significant steps towards ensuring that the VI community will, one day, enjoy full inclusion in every aspect of our digital society.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, the issues we have addressed today – ensuring safety, supporting the elderly, accommodating the deaf and including the visually impaired – all underscore the need for a whole-of-nation approach. While the Government takes the lead, sets the example and facilitates this agenda, we also need corporates, programmers, UX designers and end-users to implement this in practice, safeguard online activity and confidently participate in the digital landscape.
I share the hope of those in the community that with a concerted effort, this digital utopia will not remain a dream, but soon become reality. I support the Motion.
Mdm Deputy Speaker : Mr Yip Hon Weng.
5.16 pm
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang) : Mdm Deputy Speaker, the digital realm, powered by AI, offers unprecedented opportunities for connection, growth and progress. It fuels our economy, empowers our communities and enriches our lives in countless ways. But, like any frontier, the digital world also harbors hidden dangers and challenges.
I stand before you today to advocate for a cause close to my heart and one that deserves our urgent attention: ensuring a safe and inclusive digital world for our senior citizens.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, our Silver Generation has built the Singapore we know and love. They worked tirelessly, sacrificed immensely and laid the foundation for our nation's success. Now, as they navigate the twilight of their lives, it is our duty to ensure they can enjoy the fruits of their labor in a world increasingly shaped by technology. However, for many seniors, the digital revolution presents challenges. Confusing interfaces, complex online procedures and the ever-present threat of online scams can leave them feeling overwhelmed and excluded.
Given the rapid pace of society and the push towards digitalisation, many may have no choice but to go digital to transact, communicate and stay connected. While many seniors possess smartphones, not all know how to use them effectively. They may struggle with basic concepts like data versus wi-fi, digital tokens and password management.
I understand this from first-hand experience from helping my parents set up new accounts on their handphones. Downloading the apps and creating the accounts, is but the first step. The real challenge lies in navigating the maze of features, logins and verifications. Even with patience and repetition, committing the steps to memory is not easy. The troubleshooting, the fear of getting locked out – they have so many questions and it is not just a one-time fix. My parents, thankfully, have me. But, what about countless others who face this digital divide without a familiar voice to guide them?
I witness these struggles at my Yio Chu Kang Meet-the-People sessions (MPS). Imagine Mdm Tan, who spent her life nurturing her family, grappling to access online Government services just to pay a bill, due to a lack of accessibility to physical options or clear information about it.
Picture Mr Lim, a veteran of our nation's independence who built an honest living from little resources, now feeling a gnawing helplessness as he struggles to decipher a phishing email.
Consider Mr Ahmad and his wife, pillars of our community, building their lives on hard work and friendly smiles. Years of working at their nasi lemak store, saw their five children through school, only for their dreams of retirement to vanish in a single tap. A scammer's cunning app devoured their life savings, leaving them helpless and heartbroken. These are not hypothetical situations; these are the lived realities of countless seniors in Yio Chu Kang and across Singapore.
The digital divide is not just a matter of convenience; it is a barrier to essential services, financial independence and social connection. Without proper digital literacy and support, our seniors risk being left behind, isolated and vulnerable to exploitation. Over the years, the SG Digital Office (SDO) have done much to equip seniors with necessary digital skills. I wish to ask for an update on how many seniors have been reached and how many more do we need to reach? How do we measure success? Are we moving fast enough?
Measuring digital literacy for seniors should not be a mere tally of workshops attended or apps downloaded. Just like learning to cook as a life skill takes more than a single class, using digital tools as a life skill too, requires sustained practice, advancement and exploration. The stakes, however, are higher in the digital realm. A misguided click can vanish years of hard-earned savings, understandably instilling fear and doubt. This creates a cruel contradiction: urging seniors towards digital dependence on one hand and then, blaming or even mocking them for the costly mistakes made. Imagine the bewilderment, when the promised convenience suddenly morphs into potential peril. It is no wonder that some seniors, despite making initial progress, choose to retreat entirely.
Sadly, Mdm Deputy Speaker, the digital world also harbours malicious actors who prey on the seniors' vulnerabilities. From fake investment schemes to impersonation scams, these predators exploit their trust, inflicting financial and emotional harm. The rise of deepfakes further underscores the need to shield our seniors from online predators.
We have seen recent troubling instances of deepfakes targeting high-profile figures like our Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, promoting dubious investment schemes. These malicious attempts not only sow confusion and erode trust in online information, but also prey on seniors' susceptibility to such scams. We must not let our seniors become easy targets. We must equip them with the knowledge and tools to navigate the digital landscape safely and confidently.
The Motion rightly puts that bridging the digital divide and combating online scams require a multi-pronged, whole-of-nation approach. I have the following proposals.
First, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we must continue to empower seniors. We have started the journey and we must persist. Building digital literacy for seniors is an ongoing work. We need sustainable, engaging programmes woven into the fabric of their lives. Programmes tailored to their needs and interests, where trusted mentors guide them step-by-step, refresh their memories and nurture their confidence.
These ongoing journeys will empower seniors to slowly but surely unlock the full potential of technology, one click or one tap at a time. It is about empowering them to build critical thinking skills and encourage source verification to be more discerning in the online space. Do not just forward messages; check email addresses and never share passwords. Importantly, our seniors themselves must inculcate a mindset of continuous learning and exercise vigilance about technology and new threats.
Second, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we must build support systems for our seniors. Dedicated helplines and support networks are critical for seniors to seek assistance with digital issues and report scams without fear. To address the prevalence of online scams, can the Government consider a centralized agency managing these support networks and helplines? Can we consider something like the Municipal Services Office (MSO) or the OneService App?
Third, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we must strengthen enforcement. Law enforcement agencies must actively crack down on cyber criminals targeting seniors, bringing them to justice and deterring future scams. We know seniors often approach their MPs for help in expediting police investigations to recover lost funds. However, once perpetrators acquire money, retrieval is understandably difficult. I have previously advocated in this House for timelines for law enforcement agencies to update residents on such matters, especially seniors impacted by online scams.
Mdm R, a senior resident of mine, wrote to me and expressed her frustration about waiting for an outcome after reporting a scam at my MPS. Her words reflect the emotional toll these situations take, and I quote, "What is the update so far? I feel restless, stressed and worried. It is my hard-earned money. I need the update. I need my money back." Our seniors deserve timely updates and having the confidence that our processes can deliver results.
Fourth, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we must improve our infrastructure and cyber resilience. We need to review the approach to victims of scams by unauthorised transactions. Placing the sole blame on scam victims for such transactions is unfair. While education is essential, in today's complex digital landscape, losses can stem from vulnerabilities within the system itself. Larger players, from telcos to banks and app developers, must share responsibility and invest in robust security measures.
The recent government interventions and efforts are welcome. Nonetheless, more time and resources are needed to upgrade our infrastructure and ecosystem. Can the Minister share some of the plans to further strengthen cyber resilience and infrastructure?
On this note, I wish to ask how does our fight against financial scams compare to other cities like Hong Kong, New York and London? What about in China, where even elderly citizens are known to navigate online payments with ease? Learning from best practices abroad can help us build a more secure and inclusive digital ecosystem for all, where convenience does not come at the cost of vulnerability.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, while we diligently work to bridge the digital divide and protect our seniors online, building and maintaining their trust in our efforts is paramount. This requires transparency in how we address their concerns. It also demands swift and decisive action to combat these threats, demonstrating that we are truly committed to their well-being.
A timely response to their anxieties and frustrations, like providing updates on investigations to Mdm R, reaffirms their faith in our agencies and processes. By prioritising their safety and empowerment, we can build a digital future where our seniors feel not only included, but also that they are protected and are valued members of the community.
In the meantime, seniors and vulnerable citizens must not bear the brunt of digital progress. While building cyber resilience takes time, essential services must remain accessible, even if it means facilitating physical options. We cannot celebrate digital convenience while leaving our elderly behind, inconvenienced and frustrated.
In conclusion, imagine this Mdm Deputy Speaker. Mdm Tan confidently navigating online forms, a smile on her face as she pays her bills without needing help. Picture Mr Lim laughing alongside his grandchildren in a distant land, brought together by technology. Mr Ahmad, enjoying the convenience of purchasing online without fearing that he will lose his life savings from it.
This is not just a vision; it is a promise we can make to our seniors, a promise of a digital world where they are not left behind, but empowered and embraced. This journey requires action, not just words. We must accelerate digital literacy programmes, equipping every senior with the tools they need. We must establish a centralised support network, a single point of contact for their digital anxieties and fears. We must hold accountable, those who target our seniors with swift and decisive action.
Let this be our pledge today: we will bridge the digital divide, hand in hand with our Silver Generation. We will weave a digital tapestry where their voices are heard, their concerns addressed and their safety enshrined. This is not just about technology; it is about respect, inclusion and honouring the legacy they have built.
Let us, together, build a digital Singapore where every senior, from Mdm Tan to Mr Lim to Mr Ahmad, walks confidently into the future, empowered and as valued members of our community. Mdm Deputy Speaker, let us support this Motion, let us make this promise a reality.
Mdm Deputy Speaker : Ms Usha Chandradas.
5.28 pm
Ms Usha Chandradas (Nominated Member) : Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of this Motion and I, too, would like particularly to speak about the way our society has considered our seniors in the creation of our safe and inclusive digital society. This is a point that has been raised by many other hon Members today and I would like to add my views as well, to this discussion.
According to the annual Population In Brief report, Singapore citizens aged 65 and above make up around 19% of our demographic. That figure is expected to increase and by 2030, around 24% of our citizens will be aged 65 and above. These are large numbers, and by now, I am sure everybody in the House is quite familiar with them.
Our approach is for Singapore to be a "Digital First" society, and not a "Digital Only" society. Accordingly, there is a need to make sure that our non-digital options – where we choose to provide them – are effective and thoughtful ones. Again, this is not a new point at all, it has been addressed and acknowledged in this House many times in the past.
I would like to add two further points to the discussion. First, in the context of building inclusivity, I would like to re-emphasise the need to think about the digital experience as a whole and not just in respect of the functionality of specific services and apps. Let us take a step back and consider for a moment – what does the larger digital environment look like right now, for a senior trying to live out their retirement years?
In spite of posting record profits, banks continue to cite cost factors as the reason why they have decided to do away with physical cheques or to implement charges for their use – never mind that this is a mode of payment that generations of Singaporeans have been used to.
A number of bank branches have closed and self-service video teller machines have replaced human bank tellers. Medical appointments, prescription refills, health records – these are all accessible through apps such as HealthHub and Health Buddy. Shops, supermarkets and cafes have started to go cashless and smartphone apps are also used for the collection of points and allocation of discounts. If you go to a restaurant, chances are that you have to scan a QR code to access the menu and sometimes even to order and pay. And while your entire life is condensed into your tiny smartphone, there is an additional fear and worry that you will be targeted by scammers.
All of these digital initiatives, while improving efficiency, do not necessarily improve overall experiences for our seniors. It is perhaps easy to say that elderly folks unfamiliar with technological developments in banking, healthcare and other sectors should simply be educated on how to improve their digital skills or seek to depend on trusted family members for help. This approach, however, ignores a few things.
First, it overlooks the fact that not everyone has caregivers whom they can rely on. For some of our seniors, doing their banking or shopping in person might be the only form of social interaction that they have in a single day.
Secondly, dignity and agency are imperative in ageing well. No one wants to feel like a burden or like they need re-education to just continue on with functions that they have managed independently for years.
While reported figures may indicate that more seniors are engaging in digital transactions, how many of these are in fact carried out by caregivers, friends or family members on their behalf?
There is a case to be made, I feel, for allowing seniors who wish to carry on with non-digital options to simply live out their lives as they wish in the way that they are used to. They can learn to adopt digital solutions if they want, but they should be gradual and they should do this in their own time.
I acknowledge that there are many good avenues for learning, such as the Seniors Go Digital initiative, and the Government has done well here. But we must remember not to move too quickly.
This idea echoes a principle that can be found in the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights report entitled "Ensuring Access to Public Services in Digital Societies". In this report, it says that while "member states should proactively support all initiatives by opening lifelong learning opportunities to older persons of all ages... individuals should not be obliged to acquire the necessary digital skills for access to digital services." The report then goes on to state that public administrations should always provide other access channels for citizens who cannot or do not want to acquire these skills.
Mr Speaker, Sir, true inclusivity is about choice and agency. Even if adaptability is required in a changing world, a positive choice needs to be made by a person to acquire new skills. His or her community then needs to provide the right environment for this learning to take place.
This is, of course, not to say that we should all be Luddites who reject technological advances. In fact, there are many ways in which technology can be deployed to create inclusivity and safety for our seniors.
Singapore's Digital Readiness Blueprint emphasises the need for user-centric design, which is absolutely spot on, but we need to remember to apply this thinking in an expansive way and not just in a piece-meal fashion. We need to step into the shoes of our seniors in all the different demographics, seriously think through each of their respective lived experiences and apply our minds to how this technology can help them.
This brings me to my second point, which is about how arts-related related initiatives can assist in building digital literacy, inclusivity and safety for our seniors in our digital society. Three examples come to mind, which I would like to share with you today.
In 2021, the National Gallery Singapore launched a superb project called The People's Gallery. Here, through the use of augmented reality (AR) technology, the gallery transformed more than 25 HDB void decks across heartland neighbourhoods into virtual art galleries.
All you had to do was point your phone camera at a QR code on a void deck wall and an artwork from the National Collection would appear before you as if it had been hung on that wall. In one magical swoop, viewers could suspend physical reality for a moment and enjoy the experience of having a beautiful piece of art appear right in front of them. They did not have to pay a single cent. All they had to do was simply turn on their phone cameras.
This is technology which is easy to use and something that, to my mind, we could use just as easily in different scenarios, for example, in hospital waiting areas of geriatric clinics, where elderly folk are required to wait for lengthy periods of time. These long waits can create huge amounts of stress for seniors whether they are alone or with caregivers and it is quite possible that access to digital art could alleviate some of that tension while familiarising our seniors with digital tools. This is a great example of how technology can be inclusive, easily accessible and applied in a way that makes sense in order to serve the real needs of our seniors.
The next example I would like to talk about is the use of technology in dementia care. Artist and programmer Eugene Soh is one such person who is working in this space. Specifically, he helps patients to cope with dementia using virtual reality (VR) technology. In his Mind Palace social enterprise, Eugene and his team are able to virtually transport nursing home residents to evocative places which are familiar to them, such as their old homes or neighbourhoods or even places of interest such as Haw Par Villa and Chinatown. They are also able to incorporate family members in created VR scenes, which helps the elderly patients to trigger memories, relieve social isolation and expand their physical boundaries.
But that is not all. Being mindful of the fact that wearable VR goggles may not be attractive to seniors and may come with the risk of spreading viruses, Mind Palace decided to convert entire rooms into immersive interactive environments where interaction with fitness and meditative experiences is done via motion sensors. So, to summarise, the whole experience is totally contactless and in line with what users of this service require and prefer.
To date, Mind Palace has conducted hundreds of trials and built five permanent immersive rooms at various eldercare facilities. It is, again, another great example of solution-based and user-centric design thinking.
As Eugene described to me, his creativity is a compulsion. It is about using technology as a way of facilitating story-telling and expression, in a way that can reach out to communities in need in order to do some good.
The final example I would like to refer to is that of HSBC Bank in Hong Kong, which last November, organised an art exhibition aimed at promoting public awareness on fraud prevention and online scams. Amongst others, the show featured an art piece that leveraged on face-swapping technology to show exhibition visitors how their images could be transformed into those of famous local celebrities. The point of this exhibit was to educate visitors about deepfake video call scams.
In Singapore, the Government engages with popular creators on YouTube to raise awareness on scams and disseminates information through innovative mediums such as music videos. This is indeed a good step in the right direction to raise awareness amongst digital natives. But I also read with interest earlier this week that the DBS Foundation and POSB have engaged with getai performers to entertain and educate seniors on digital literacy.
I applaud these steps and I hope that the Government takes note of our large arts community in Singapore and the talents that they have to offer. Creative, entertaining and empathetic storytelling can result in much better outreach on digital literacy to different segments of society, including harder to reach groups like our seniors.
While we progress in our Smart Nation goals towards inclusivity and safety, let us not forget these two points: first, that design thinking should always be applied in a holistic and empathetic manner to honour the full lived experiences of our seniors; and secondly, in our whole-of-nation Government strategies, especially when we think about the allocation of funding and other resources, let us not forget the important role that our artists and creatives play in crafting inclusivity and safety within our digital society.
Mr Speaker : Mr Sharael Taha.
5.39 pm
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol) : Mr Speaker, Sir, I am grateful that in Singapore, we live in a high-trust society where our trust transcends barriers of race, language, religion and differences. It is notable that this trust extends to our institutions. Based on a study by the Edelman Trust in 2023, our Government remains the most trusted institution in Singapore.
Only with trust, can we remain united. In a 2022 Pew Research, 75% of Singaporeans polled shared that they felt more united after COVID-19, topping the list of 13 countries. This is remarkable, considering an increasingly divided world where trust for state and government institutions is hard to come by.
We have been able to maintain a high degree of trust between people, Government, organisations and businesses through many years of working and facing challenges together.
However, this trust is fragile and can erode if our differences are manipulated. Racial or religious tensions, increasing income gaps, fake news, deepfakes, as shared by fellow Parliamentarian Dr Tan, perceived unfairness and unaddressed anxieties can very easily unravel the trust we have meticulously built over the years. In this Motion, our GPC thus calls for the House to reaffirm our commitment to adopt a whole-of-nation approach to sustain trust by building an inclusive and safe digital society.
How do we ensure that amidst increased global digitalisation, everyone feels secure and feels part of our society? How do we tackle falsehoods that threaten social cohesion? How do we combat technology-based scams? How can we provide equal and equitable opportunities such that the opportunities do not only benefit the few at the top?
I would like to focus on just three critical points to help sustain trust by building a safe and inclusive digital society.
Firstly, redefining employment. Redefining employment is essential as the employment landscape is evolving. The landscape is multifaceted and dynamic and any business owner in Singapore will tell you that we face challenges in securing the right manpower due to our limited population and an ageing demographic.
It has been mentioned repeatedly that by 2030, one in four Singaporeans will be above the age of 60. Currently, jobs for seniors are typically manual in nature, such as cleaners and pump attendants, possibly because of the lack of digital skillset of the current seniors. However, what is different compared to what we are experiencing now is our young seniors now are digitally literate and can continue to contribute to the economy in a different way.
At one of my house visits, I met a resident in her early 50s doing accounts for companies. She shared that since COVID-19, she has not been to her office. She hopes that she can continue to do so, well into post-retirement. She wishes to continue working as she enjoys the interaction but wants to spend time with her grandchildren too.
COVID-19 has expedited the concept of flexible work arrangements in Singapore. Guidelines on flexible work arrangements have been shared by Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP). Some degree of telecommuting is accepted as the norm at the workplace now. However, job sharing, staggered time, part-time work have yet to be embraced in earnest.
So, how do we bring all of these different elements together and leverage digitalisation to meet the needs of our future seniors to have meaningful employment with a comfortable work-life balance when they retire, to meet the needs of future retirees to continue to build their retirement nest egg and to meet the manpower needs of our economy?
To do so, we must take a structured, whole-of-nation approach to rethink the definition of employment to encourage flexible work arrangements like job sharing, staggered time, part-time work, where possible, to truly unlock the potential of digitally abled young seniors. Moreover, individuals with disabilities and back-to-work moms can stand to benefit too from such arrangements, helping to foster inclusivity while ensuring economic activity continues.
Secondly, while our digital connectivity is commendable, we must ensure every school-going child has digital access and digital skillsets required in the future economy.
The latest Singapore Digital Society Report indicates that through schemes such as DigitalAccess@Home and NEU PC, Singapore has a 99% internet connectivity rate for all households and 98% of households with school-going children have access to computers. At the grassroots level, we work with community partners to provide lower-income families with digital access. An example is in Pasir Ris East, where we worked with Schneider Electric to distribute 100 laptops to children from lower-income families.
However, what I find surprising is that, despite all these programmes only 98% of household with school-going kids have access to computers. This represents two out of every 100 households with kids in school still not having access to computers for whatsoever reason.
This is worrying, especially when we consider that these households may likely be from the lower-income families. How do we ensure that all households with school-going children have access to computers?
While ensuring connectivity and accessibility to digital devices is an undoubted priority, we must also ensure that our education system provides essential digital skills as early as at primary and secondary school levels. After all, when Singapore pursued compulsory 10 years education, the intent is to ensure that our school-going children has the necessary basic knowledge and skills for their future.
Typically, more affluent families send their kids to extra classes on coding, AI, AR and robotics. The access to such expensive extra-curricular activities, especially at a young age, may not be available to the lower-income families who face hurdles in accessing resources as well as being aware of and learning these crucial digital skills. This widens the skill gap between the haves and the have-nots. How do we ensure all our youths have equal opportunities to be exposed to and to develop these digital competencies?
Can we identify essential digitals skills such as basic coding, robotics, applied AI, cybersecurity and digital wellness to be included as core curriculum in primary and secondary schools, so that all our students have access and are exposed to these essential digital skills at an early age? I fear if we do not do so, kids from lower-income families are unduly disadvantaged in the future economy.
Hence, it was reassuring to hear from Minister Chan Chun Sing yesterday, that MOE is preparing our students to develop the foundational knowledge of AI. And I hope we can have more digital skills taught formally in schools. To ease the academic load on our students, I propose that these topics are included into the core curriculum as non-examinable, while we replace topics that may not be as critical in the future economy.
Providing a platform to create awareness and knowledge of the skills required in the digital economy, is precisely one of the things M 3 @PRPG (Pasir Ris-Punggol) hopes to achieve. Through our programs such as M 3 goes digital, 3D Makers Workshop, Mentoring Program, Learning Journey and HashTech, M 3 @PRPG hopes to equip kids, especially those from the lower-income families with the awareness and basic knowledge of these skills and the possible opportunities in the future economy.
Without such platforms, how will kids from lower-income families be aware of the skillsets required in the digital economy, let alone be inspired to have a career in these growing industries? Mr Speaker, Sir, in Malay please.
( In Malay ) : [ Please refer to Vernacular Speech .] One of M 3 @Pasir Ris-Punggol’s priorities is to provide opportunities to our students, especially those from low-income families, to learn, try and upgrade their skills in the digital field. It is only through trying that our students can cultivate their interest and aspire to continue doing it as a career.
Programmes such as M 3 Does Digital and 3D Makers Space, where students learn about 3D printing; the M 3 Learning Journey where students visit engineering and technology companies; and the #Hashtech programme where students pick up skills in dashboarding, cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence; all these provide a platform for our students to acquire digital skills.
One example is the champion of the 3D Makers Challenge. The winning team comprises pupils from Madrasah Al-Arabiah Al-Islamiah who created a toy helicopter using 3D printing.
Another example is the runner-up in the #HashTech competition; a team of three siblings, Nurul Musfirah, Nurul Shahzanie and Nurul Zahirah, who presented an Artificial Intelligence (AI) platform that helps people to better understand the various support schemes currently available in Singapore.
Congratulations to all the students and I would like to thank all volunteers from M 3 @Pasir Ris-Punggol, MENDAKI, MUIS, MAEC, MMiT dan MM in Engineering for giving our students the opportunity to improve their digital skills.
A few months ago, in my capacity as a panel member of the 4PM Bestari Award and Resilience Award for our youths studying at the ITE colleges, I was very moved when I saw the determination and resolve of these students in overcoming their challenges. Many of them are also pursuing further studies in various specialised fields, such as Applied AI and cybersecurity.
To our students, please carry on pursuing digital knowledge. Our community must continue to encourage our students to explore and enhance their digital skills that are essential in the new economy.
( In English ): Moving on from digital inclusion to the need to protect Singaporeans against online scams. I would like to thank the officers from the inter-Ministries for their continuous hard work in combatting scams. While many of our fellow Parliamentarians have talked about preventing scams, I will briefly touch on two post-scam recovery efforts.
Firstly, can we review the approach of dealing with scams by unauthorised transactions? Many scams originate from transactions which the victims have been misled to authorise. However, some scams are executed without the transactions being authorised. Can we review the approach such that financial institutions bear some consequences for scams by unauthorised transactions?
Secondly, given the volume of scam cases, more than 24,000 scam cases from just January to June 2023 alone and the complexity of scams with only 10,000 regular officers, it is understandable that investigations take some time. However, during the investigation, the victims' bank accounts or account, can be frozen. This can be highly challenging for the victims especially if it is the victim's sole account. Can we review the process of freezing bank accounts for the entire duration of the investigation period?
In conclusion Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore has stood as a beacon of unity amidst a world experiencing growing division. However, trust remains delicate and will falter if left unnurtured. Leveraging digital advancements responsibly is pivotal in sustaining trust within our communities. Let us collectively strive to build a safe, inclusive and trustworthy digital society where no one gets left behind. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion.
Mr Speaker : Mr Mark Lee.
5.53 pm
Mr Mark Lee (Nominated Member) : Mr Speaker, Sir, as we gather today to discuss the future of our nation and the digital era, it is crucial to recognise the importance and relevance of digitisation in shaping a prosperous, efficient and connected Singapore. While we are mindful of the challenges it presents, the benefits of embracing digital transformations are undeniable and pivotal for our nation's progress.
Digitalisation is a key driver of economic growth and innovation, opening doors to new markets and opportunities. It enhances operational efficiencies and productivity revolutionising how businesses operate and compete globally. It empowers businesses to offer improved customer experiences, leveraging data analytics for more effective strategies and services.
While digitalisation can lead to the automation of some jobs, it also creates new ones. The European Commission reported that for every job that is destroyed by digitalisation, 2.6 new jobs are created in that digital sector.
Digitalisation also play a significant role in the environmental sustainability, reducing our carbon footprint through innovative solutions. The resilience demonstrated by businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic largely due to their digital capabilities, underscores the importance of being digitally prepared. This readiness not only ensures business continuity in crises, but also strengthens our collective ability to adapt and thrive in changing circumstances.
As Singapore steadfastly progress towards our vision of a Smart Nation, it is imperative that our digital transformation journey is not only marked by technological advancement but is characterised by its inclusivity and safety. This holistic approach is essential in ensuring that the benefits of digitalisation are accessible and secure for all members of our society.
Businesses are an important pillar of Singapore's digital society. Many businesses are either adopting or developing digital products and services to better engage and serve the needs of consumers, and in a manpower tight situation, implementing digital solutions with automation to streamline operations to improve efficiencies.
In an age where digital transactions and interactions are integral to our daily lives, the safety and security of digital information have become paramount concerns for users worldwide, including here in Singapore. Singaporeans are increasingly vigilant about how businesses handle their digital information. Incidents like the SingHealth data breach in 2018, have left an indelible mark on the public consciousness.
Another personal incident – a close friend of mine, who owns an engineering and construction company, experienced an ordeal that brings to light the stark realities of our digital age. His company was a victim of a ransomware attack, a malicious intrusion that stole his company servers and all of his engineering blueprints locked and encrypted by hackers. This attack brought his operations to a standstill with losses escalating every minute.
In a desperate bit to regain control, he was compelled to pay a ransom of $160,000. Yet, the financial toll extended beyond the ransom, with significant downtime and disruption losses adding to his burden. Regrettably, his experience is not an isolated one that I know. Many have suffered silently.
It is a part of a growing trend of sophisticated cyber attacks that are deeply concerning the business community. These incidents are stark reminders of the vulnerabilities in our digital infrastructure, the need for robust cybersecurity measures. Yet, in the face of a swiftly changing digital landscape, achieving digital inclusivity and safety necessitates significant investments in terms of finances, time and personnel. This requirement may present considerable challenges to some companies, especially those with limited resources.
According to the most recent National Business Survey 2022/2023 by the Singapore Business Federation (SBF), 64% of businesses expressed concern over the high costs associated with adopting new technologies. Additionally, businesses, regardless of their size, are grappling with challenges such as the need for upskilling staff to keep pace with technological advancements and a shortage of management expertise to effectively spearhead technological change.
While there is a growing confidence among businesses in managing cybersecurity challenges, with 80% feeling confident this year compared to 74% the previous year, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) still find themselves trailing behind their larger counterparts. According to recent data, 78% of SMEs feel confident or somewhat confident in their security measures to protect against cyber threats, which is lower compared to the 91% confidence level of larger companies.
Furthermore, a 2023 survey conducted by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SCCCI) revealed that 32% of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are prioritising the strengthening of their resilience against cyber threats, marking a significant increase from 11% in 2022, indicating a growing awareness and commitment to cybersecurity in the SME sector.
Today, I aim to tackle the prevailing notion and apprehension among businesses, particularly small enterprises, that are implementing digital safety and cyber defences and feel that it is prohibitively expensive. I intend to introduce and discuss various tailored, accessible self-help tools and collaborative resources designed to enhance the cybersecurity stance of companies affordably and effectively.
The Internet Hygiene Portal (IHP), crafted by the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA), serves as a comprehensive platform for businesses to utilise self-assessment tools. These tools are designed to evaluate the security of a company's websites, email services and domain configurations. Following the assessment, IHP provides tailored, actionable recommendations, enabling companies to enhance their overall internet security posture effectively.
Additionally, the IHP enhances transparency by publishing an Internet Hygiene Rating table. This feature offers a simplified overview of the cyber hygiene status of various digital platforms. By providing such critical information, it empowers businesses and consumers alike to make informed decisions regarding their digital platform usage, therefore enhancing the security of their digital transactions and protecting against cyber threats.
For SMEs who are ready to deepen their commitment to cybersecurity, CSA offers the Cybersecurity Health Plan. Under this initiative, cybersecurity consultants act as the SMEs' virtual Chief Information Security Officers, conducting cyber health audits and crafting bespoke cybersecurity health plans. To encourage participation and alleviate financial burdens, eligible SMEs can avail themselves of up to 70% co-funding under this scheme, making advanced cybersecurity more accessible and affordable.
Proper cyber risk management is pivotal for SMEs to confidently navigate their digitalisation journey. The CTO-as-a-Service (CTOaaS) initiative, a part of the SMEs Go Digital Programme developed by IMDA and managed by SBF, is designed to bolster this confidence. Through CTOaaS, SMEs gain access to a shared pool of seasoned digital consultants who provide comprehensive advisories and project management services. This support helps SMEs identify and address digitalisation gaps and seize opportunities, ensuring a more secure and efficient digital transformation.
SMEs lacking in-house IT expertise or dedicated resources have found significant benefits in this service, receiving tailored digital solutions and training roadmaps specifically to their needs. This initiative guarantees that SMEs have access to market-proven, cost-effective solutions, ensuring they are not marginalised in our collective stride towards an inclusive and safe digital society. It is a step forward in democratising digital advancement, allowing all businesses, regardless of size or resource, to partake in and contribute to our digital future.
Considering these existing initiatives, I would like to propose some recommendations to the Government to further support our SMEs: the development of resources tailored to the emerging and critical areas of digitalisation, such as cybersecurity and artificial intelligence on a sector-specific basis.
By working closely with trade associations and companies, this approach can significantly accelerate SMEs' transition into an inclusive and safe digital society. These resources should encompass sector-specific training and assessment plans, baseline tools, and solutions that are pertinent to each industry.
Also, as highlighted in the recent Singapore Business Federation (SBF)-KPMG Budget recommendations for 2024, the Government can consider adjusting existing grant schemes to support SMEs in adopting these tools and solutions. For instance, a tiered support approach with a higher grant support quantum for the adoption of advanced AI and blockchain technology may be necessary to help companies to progress along their digitalisation roadmap beyond basic process and operational automation. There is also scope to consider expanding existing schemes to support digital projects where development work is conducted outside of Singapore for operational and cost efficiency, given the tight IT manpower pool here.
Additionally, establishing a dedicated assistance channel for SMEs to reach out when addressing potential cybersecurity or AI governance breaches would provide a safety net, ensuring that SMEs have the support they need when they need it. This comprehensive strategy will not only safeguard our businesses but also empower them to confidently embrace the digital future.
As technology becomes even more integral in our daily lives, the demand for skilled workers correspondingly evolves. It is essential to cultivate a culture of learning and innovation within our workforce. As leaders and stakeholders, we must recognise and address the apprehensions of our workers, providing reassurance and support to those who may feel overwhelmed by the rapid digital changes.
We must continue to invest significantly in training our workers, ensuring that every individual, regardless of their starting point, is given the opportunity to grow and adapt. This is not just about keeping pace with the digital society; it is about empowering them to lead and innovate within it. By fostering continuous learning, providing comfort and guidance, and encouraging innovation, we would not only enhance individual careers but also drive the collective progress of our industries and the nation as a whole.
It is therefore crucial for companies to recognise that training our workforce transcends merely keeping pace with technological advancements; it is also about strategically upskilling them to unlock the full potential of technology adoption. When our workers are adept and agile, the company as a whole reaps substantial benefits.
For instance, Utracon Corporation, through its participation in the CTOaaS initiative, leveraged expert advice to implement targeted solutions, significantly enhancing real-time project monitoring and fostering improved team collaboration. This example underscores the broader value of investing in our employees' growth, leading to enhanced operational efficiency and innovative capabilities within the company.
To assist companies to continue their commitment to upskilling their workers, as proposed in the SBF-KPMG budget recommendations, the Government can also consider complementing the efforts of businesses by introducing a grant scheme to support costs related to employee upskilling and adoption of new technologies such as AI and machine learning, as well as by providing a secure and convenient centralised platform for SMEs to access these upskilling services.
Finally, in today's digital age, I would like to stress that the ethical handling of customer information has transcended beyond just a mere legal obligation. It is a fundamental aspect of building trust and maintaining the integrity of our businesses. As custodians of customer data, we must adhere to the highest standards of ethics, ensuring that every piece of information is collected, stored, and used with the utmost respect for privacy and consent.
This means being transparent about our data practices, providing customers with clear choices, and taking proactive steps to protect their information from breaches and misuse. By committing to these ethical practices, we not only comply with regulations but also fortify our reputation, foster customer loyalty, and contribute to a more trustworthy digital ecosystem. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to conclude in Mandarin.
( In Mandarin ) : [ Please refer to Vernacular Speech .] In conclusion, as we navigate the complexities and opportunities of building an inclusive and safe digital society, let us embrace a holistic approach. This involves not only investing in robust technology and infrastructure, but also fostering a culture of continuous learning, innovation and ethical practice.
By doing so, we ensure that our journey towards a Smart Nation is one marked by trust, security and inclusivity, benefiting every individual and business within our society. Together, let us commit to a future where digital advancement equates to a safer, more prosperous and ethically grounded Singapore for all.
( In English ): Mr Speaker Sir, I support the Motion.
Mr Speaker : Mr Vikram Nair.
6.11 pm
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang) : Mr Speaker, Singapore's move to a digitised society has been remarkable. Over the last few years, the Government and key players in society have kept up with and utilised technology to make our lives better and simpler.
Once upon a time, each of us had to keep physical copies of all our important documents, including birth certificates, identity cards, driver's licences, health records, marriage certificates, bank account statements and CPF statements. Now, all this information is readily available on or through apps on our mobile phones.
The Singpass app readily links us to most of our official records, while all major banks provide most of their services through mobile phone apps. For many of us, there is probably no need to carry cash or wallets anymore, or to queue up at post offices, banks, ATM or AXS machines, as almost all payments can be done on our phones, from wherever we are.
Even the marketing and shopping experience has changed completely, with online stores now bringing this experience to our fingertips. We can now shop from the comfort of home or while on public transport. Indeed, when I spoke to an executive in an online retailer, she mentioned that very significant percentage of shoppers made purchases while they were in the toilet in the morning.
These changes have also changed our business landscape significantly, with online giants such as Amazon and Alibaba replacing physical retailers such as Borders and Robinsons. For small businesses, getting goods displayed on platforms like Shopee and Lazada allows them to sell without retail shopfronts, while for those who have retail shopfronts, getting online has been an important way to supplement sales.
This Motion highlights two important issues that need to be addressed in this move to digitisation: inclusion and safety. Let me start with inclusion.
For those of us who are online and get our services online, life has never been easier. For young people too, getting online seems to be second nature. My daughter had learnt to download games on my wife's mobile phone from around the age of four or five, and shortly after that, she had learnt to make online purchases. All this, without any of us teaching her.
On the other hand, I do have many older residents who are not fully online and struggle. I used to get requests for more bank branches to remain open when banks started closing branches and transitioning people to ATMs and AXS machines. Now, banks are also pulling back on ATMs and residents who have spent a lifetime transacting with cash are now finding it more difficult to do so. The same applies to many small business owners, and while many shops in wet markets and HDB malls have gone digital, there are still a few who have not signed on to online payments or record keeping. This includes some very educated people, including, in some cases, senior doctors who prefer to practice the way they have done for many years.
There have been wide ranging initiatives by different Government agencies to bridge this divide and bring more people into the digital fold. For example, Hawkers go Digital, an initiative by the IMDA to subsidise hawkers to move their business online and accept digital platforms, was rolled out, bringing many heartland hawkers into the digital world. Seniors Go Digital, likewise, is targeted at seniors with courses available at locations throughout the heartlands and trains them in the range of functions and services they are able to access through their phones.
I believe these initiatives are working, but in order for them to work better, I think it will take the whole of society to be involved, for us to encourage people around us to go for courses, go online and become more enabled. Whenever I get requests by residents for more ATMs, I explain the challenges we face in getting more ATMs, but also gently nudge them to getting online banking apps and to move digital.
The next aspect of the Motion which has received a lot of attention is digital security. This has several facets.
One aspect is security of the systems. This includes keeping systems operating and protecting from cyber threats. There have been several instances, for example, of some of our banking systems going down, preventing transactions taking place. Where people operate largely digitally, this can create issues. For example, if a bank's payment systems are down, what happens to people who only have digital means of payment from that bank?
I suffered a minor inconvenience in this because I was at a shop the first time the system went down. I had to return the items and went back home. Not a major issue but definitely something that needs to be looked at if we are going more digital.
But more important are malicious cyber threats, including hacking and ransomware, where organisations may have systems hacked, information stolen and then demands are made for payment. Many companies and organisations have extensive personal information from individuals and if the systems on which these are stored are not secured, individuals could be exposed to attacks. On these matters, I think it is necessary to ensure that those who collect personal data are able to protect it.
The third aspect which I think has received the most attention from many speakers in this House is online scams. I have spoken on this issue several times in this House.
The challenge with scams is multi-faceted. First, the perpetrators are mostly located out of Singapore. This makes it difficult for local law enforcement agencies to take action against them. The Singapore Police is closely plugged in with Interpol and counterparts in other agencies, but it is sometimes difficult to trace exactly where each of the numerous scams originate from.
Second, victims normally have their trust taken advantage of. The types of scams include job scams, love scams and investment scams. Some in this House have spoken about how the prevalence of scams is creating a crisis of confidence in our digitisation process. I beg to differ on this.
I think digitisation is a fast moving train and most Singaporeans are on board. The victims of scams are often too trusting and take at face value the calls and messages they get, which hook them into the process.
In the course of my work, I was approached by a victim of a love scam. She had fallen in love with an individual through online exchanges and one meeting in-person. Eventually, this individual allegedly died, leaving her a massive inheritance. However, to get this inheritance, she had to and did make regular payments for various purportedly official purposes. By the time she approached me, she had spent more than $1 million dollars. It is still difficult for her to believe she has been scammed. She still wants to believe there is an inheritance waiting for her.
Scammers are essentially criminals who are trying to steal. Digitisation has simply created an easier way for them to do so. I do not think there is a crisis of confidence in digitisation, but rather this is a matter on which each consumer must learn to be more careful and vigilant. Just as in the real world, we take precautions, such as not leaving our wallets and phones lying around, or leaving our houses unlocked when we are out, we must exercise the same care digitally.
The third challenge is where the losses for these scams should fall. Generally, we are all sympathetic to the victim, who have been taken advantage of. Some have lost life savings or monies they needed for important purposes. Some of the victims I have met at the Meet-the-People Sessions have had heart wrenching stories. There are calls for more of these losses to fall on telco operators and/or banks, or generally, any other big companies that may be involved in this process.
There are several attractions to this approach. We all believe that big companies should be better able to bear losses than individuals. We also want to put more pressure on big companies to take the necessary precautions to protect individuals. I would, however, like to highlight some risks I see if we swing too far in this direction.
First, every large company, including banks and telcos, have to make money from their customers and if taking a large proportion of losses from online scams falls on them, they will have to recoup these losses from one of their customers. So, we may see prices rising across the board.
Second, this may mean that more invasive approaches by service providers to their customers. For example, if telcos are held liable for scams through phone calls or WhatsApp messages, they probably going to have to take more efforts to monitor and scan private calls and messages in order to ferret out scams. To what extent do we want banks to second guess instructions and transactions?
The third point, that of moral hazard, has been recognised. If people believe that losses may fail elsewhere, they are more likely to take less precaution.
Balancing these considerations, Singapore has taken a three-pronged approach to fight scams.
Firstly, they adopt upstream measures, including things like ScamShield, which filters and blocks scammed messages, an SMS sender identity registry regime to label non-registered scanners who are likely scammer. I think many of us already have this adopted.
Second, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) adopts downstream measures, including trying to chase down scams syndicates. I think there was a report in The Straits Times that at least one scam had been successfully cracked with this, adverting over $12.6 million in losses – a drop in the ocean but a step in the right direction.
The Singapore Police Force (SPF) have also begun working with banks to tackle this issue. One example of this the work with OCBC Bank in March 2023 to use robotic processes automation to allow them to identify potential scammers. MAS has also been involved in this approach to combat scams, working closely with banks to strengthen anti-malware controls, faults surveillance and detection capabilities. Major retail banks have enhanced their security measures. So, certainly, bigger organisations and the Government are taking steps to fight scams.
Of course, the most important approach is the third aspect, which is public education. I think SPF, Cyber Security Agency, MoneySENSE and banks have used multiple platforms, reach out to residents and many of us, Members of Parliament, have also been conducting talks and dialogues in our constituencies to encourage people to download ScamShield and to warn them about the risks of scams.
Singapore is also involved and plugged into global cooperation to fight scams. We have to play our part if we want others to assist us.
There was a recent crackdown in Singapore where large numbers of people were arrested and I believe a large part of this money is from crimes committed abroad. Of course, the full details of this are large scale arrests and seizure methods have not been released, but I think it is part of our cooperation with international work.
This is a matter that affects all countries and other countries like the UK, Australia and the United States and also similarly taking these approaches to fight scams. One initiative that caught my attention was actually "Stop Scams UK", which is an industry led collaboration of businesses, including major banks, credit card operators and big online players, such as Amazon and Google.
In the UK, just like in Singapore, fraud is the most commonly experienced crime. In the UK, one is twice as likely to be the victim of a fraud than any other crime. What is interesting here is this is a private-sector-led initiative. This may have been partly motivated by UK's legal measures to require banks to reimburse victims of authorised push payment or APP scams. This is where a payee poses as someone else and defrauds victims to make payment. By placing potential lability on private sector players, they have been financially incentivised to get together to work to stop APP scams. The jury is now whether this will work or whether it may increase moral hazard and increase the incidence of frauds, but we should keep a watch on it.
It should be noted that despite the seemingly radical approach, the UK's aim is to reduce fraud by 10%. Even they are not ambitious or claiming that it can be completely eradicated but they just want to reduce the incidence. So, this is something that is going to be with us, but with which we all have to take the necessary precautions.
In Singapore, it may be necessary for the Government to take the lead in these initiatives and/or in the passed legislation, to put adequate risk for industry players. MAS' risk-sharing framework is a start and it is one thing that can be reviewed and modified, if needed, to balance the allocation of risks amongst the different players. I believe that financially aligned industry collaboration is, in general, a sensible approach.
Mr Speaker, digitisation is important to all our lives and generally, it has made our lives better and easier. We have to embrace and ride this wave. I do not think avoiding digitisation is an option. However, in riding this wave, we need to bring in everyone we can, that is, inclusion and be aware of the new dangers that this poses, that is, security. I therefore support this Motion.
Mr Speaker : Leader of the House.