AI Influence Profile
Edwin Tong Chun Fai
Positioning
Member of Parliament. Spoke in 3 AI-related parliamentary debates (2019–2026), most often on AI Economy & Industry and AI Governance & Regulation.
Parliamentary AI record (3)
Impact of AI Adoption on Junior Lawyer Training Pipelines and Addressing Developmental Gaps Through One-year Practice Training Framework
2026-05-05 · Parliament 15
Workers' Party NCMP Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Minister for Law in writing whether the Government has assessed the risk that widespread AI adoption in law firms will shrink the routine work — research and drafting — through which junior lawyers have traditionally developed professional judgment, and whether the new one-year practice training framework under the revised admission process is designed specifically to address this risk. Minister for Law Edwin Tong gave no substantive reply, stating that the Ministry of Law would answer this question orally together with other parliamentary questions filed on the same topic at the next available opportunity, and pointed to the consolidated reply "Workload Reduction at Law Firms from AI Use and Guidelines for Such Use" in the Official Report of 6 May 2026. The underlying tension: AI automation is eroding the legal profession's traditional apprenticeship pathway, while the Government's systematic assessment of the training-pipeline gap has yet to be made public.
Use of Copyright Law to Strengthen Protection Against Deepfakes
2025-09-24 · Parliament 15
An MP asked whether Singapore is studying Denmark's use of copyright law to fight deepfakes. The government said it takes the online harms of deepfakes seriously and will introduce new legislation to strengthen victims' redress. It stressed that copyright law primarily supports innovation and creativity, is not the right tool to regulate technology abuse, and related infringements can be handled via other IP laws. The core debate: whether copyright law is appropriate for deepfake governance.
Role of Personal Data Protection Commission in Investigating Blood Donors' Data Leak
2019-04-01 · Parliament 13
MPs asked about the PDPC's investigation role in the blood-donor data leak and whether public agencies should be subject to the PDPA. The government replied that PDPC is investigating the private IT vendor involved, and public agencies are governed by other regulations with data-protection standards no lower than the PDPA. The core debate: whether public agencies should be exempt from PDPA oversight and the accountability mechanisms.