動議 · 2024-01-10 · 屆國會 14
構建包容安全數字社會
議員質詢數字化程序中信任危機與網路安全挑戰，強調詐騙等網路危害日益嚴重。政府回應強調新加坡數字經濟發展成就及前瞻性基礎設施建設，承諾採取全社會協作應對數字風險。核心爭議在於如何平衡數字化發展與保障公眾安全及信任。
關鍵要點
- • 數字經濟快速增長
- • 網路詐騙威脅加劇
- • 需全社會協作應對
支援數字化並強化網路安全
推動數字信任與安全建設
“Scams often operate in the dark corners of the digital realm, exploiting vulnerabilities and thriving in unsuspecting spaces.”
參與人員 (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
完整譯文（中文）
Hansard 原始記錄 · 2026-05-02
下午1時31分
陳佩玲女士（麥波申選區）：先生，我請求動議，“本院重申我們致力採取全民參與的方法，通過建設包容且安全的數字社會來維持信任。”
【程式文本】*該動議亦由沙拉爾·塔哈先生、蘇翰妮女士、陳潔瑩女士及任國強先生聯署提出。【程式文本】
議長先生，通訊及資訊政府議會委員會（GPC）由人民行動黨議員陳潔瑩女士、德索薩先生、任國強先生、沙拉爾·塔哈先生、蘇翰妮女士及我本人擔任主席組成，現提出此動議。新加坡正處於國家數字化程序的關鍵階段，我們必須面對可能侵蝕對關鍵機構及個人信任的挑戰，而這些信任對國家的成功與凝聚力至關重要。
新加坡歷來不懼變革。獨立後短短數年內，我們從傳統的內需型經濟轉型為由跨國公司推動的出口導向型工業化。隨後，新加坡戰略性地轉向發展現代服務業，並在生物醫藥等新興領域進行了大量投資。新加坡還提前大量投資基礎設施建設，以便在浪潮來臨時能夠乘勢而上。
這種前瞻性思維，加上勇於探索未知領域的勇氣，取得了成功，並由團結且高度信任的民眾所支援。我們的國內生產總值（GDP）人均從1965年的500美元增長到1990年的13,000美元，2022年更達到83,000美元。數字化已成為全球現實，對新加坡尤為重要。2022年，我們的數字經濟佔GDP的17.3%，高於2017年的13%。
隨著我們繼續轉型，擁抱數字化帶來的機遇，並在日常生活中深度融入數字領域，我們面臨的挑戰也日益增多。數字環境日益危險，網路詐騙、勒索軟體、深度偽造、虛假資訊及其他惡意網路活動激增。加之手法迅速演變，形勢持續嚴峻。
詐騙如同蟑螂，常在數字世界的陰暗角落活動，利用漏洞，在不知情的空間中滋生。它們靈活、迅速進化，善於偽裝，難以徹底根除。正如我們以為已識破最新詐騙手法時，更復雜的新威脅又會出現。
詐騙案件的激增即是明證。2022年舉報案件達31,728宗，比2021年增長32.6%。2023年1月至8月，因惡意軟體詐騙造成的損失超過2060萬美元。
值得注意的是，一項全球研究顯示，新加坡不幸承受重大損失，詐騙受害者平均每人損失4031美元。對部分新加坡人來說，這可能是沉重的積蓄損失。
在麥波申選區，我遇到多位詐騙受害居民。2021年底，一位年輕居民陳女士分享她及他人如何在未收到或提供一次性密碼（OTP）的情況下，信用卡遭遇欺詐交易而蒙受損失。
她引用說：“即使沒有證據顯示消費者收到銀行傳送的OTP（例如電信公司的簡訊記錄），銀行仍要求客戶支付這些欺詐交易款項，而未調查OTP是否可能被轉移。消費者因在與銀行的爭議中處於劣勢，常常承擔高達五位數的支付責任。”
作為普通公民和消費者，通常難以從電信公司獲取簡訊資訊或歷史，受害者往往在銀行、電信公司、新加坡金融管理局（MAS）及警方之間反覆奔波。
另一個例子是，我遇到一位年長居民餘先生，他在網上投資騙局中受騙，該騙局聲稱得到時任資政尚南古拉達南的背書。他不懂網上信用卡交易，結果被詐騙數千元信用卡賬單，經濟拮据的他儲蓄賬戶僅剩數百元，身心俱疲，擔心失去一切。
鑑於其困境，我們成功說服銀行免除其債務，但有多少此類善意豁免是可能的呢？
這些只是我在麥波申遇到的部分顯著案例，我相信我的議會同事們也有許多類似例子。這些案例促使我們提出此動議。
此外，全球人工智慧（AI）軍備競賽加劇，引發對倫理考量可能被忽視的擔憂，強大的科技公司為贏得競爭不惜一切代價。這種激烈競爭可能忽略社會不平等問題，包括數字技能差距擴大，加劇人口分裂。
此外，如果機構僅專注於利用AI或其他新興技術提升生產力，而不同時投資於勞動力培訓和再培訓，普通民眾可能會對技術進步帶來的損失感到恐懼，而非期待其帶來的益處。這種恐懼反過來會阻礙新加坡的發展。
關鍵基礎設施和基本服務的可信度也影響公眾對個人資料安全的信心。新加坡99%的居民家庭接入網際網路，網際網路普及率居世界前列。這證明了新加坡的進步，但也意味著我們更易受到網路威脅。
2023年星展銀行多次數字服務中斷、公積金因安卓惡意軟體詐騙損失及公共醫療個人資料洩露等事件，影響了大量民眾，進而影響公眾對數字世界的信任。這些問題若任其發展，將破壞信任。
無法信任所接收的每條資訊、每筆交易、每個聲音及每張影像令人癱瘓。信任是社會的基石，因為在困難時期，個人需願意暫時犧牲個人利益以換取集體利益。信任對價值創造交易的發生、創意的分享及不被壓制至關重要。
因此，若我們不明確立場並積極管理這些問題，風險是公眾對數字世界失去信任，從而失去便利帶給公民的好處及生產力和創新對國家經濟的益處。
基於此背景，我們決定提出此動議，重申本院致力採取全民參與的方法，通過建設包容且安全的數字社會來維持信任。
在演講開頭，我已說明提出此動議的背景，並強調信任的重要性及加強數字社會信任應為動議的最終目標。請允許我詳細闡述動議中的“安全”與“包容”原則。
關於“安全”，安全的網路環境對建立數字社會信任至關重要，因為它直接影響人們參與數字交易和互動的信心與意願。
安全網路環境的基礎包括：第一，數字交易的信任
首先，我們需要可靠的數字基礎設施，為安全、可靠及可訪問的數字服務提供基礎。
系統不可靠、頻繁中斷或基礎設施存在漏洞，會使使用者對交易安全產生懷疑，阻礙數字信任的增長。因此，各行業組織必須有意識且系統地納入優先提升信任的措施和做法，貫穿整個數字交易過程。
第二，我們需迅速有效打擊詐騙和欺詐行為。詐騙通過利用毫無戒心的使用者侵蝕信任，導致財務損失，破壞對數字交易的信心。
第二，解決網路威脅。網路安全威脅，如惡意軟體導致的資料洩露和身份盜竊，增加使用者的恐懼和懷疑。隱私洩露及未經授權訪問個人資訊也會使個人猶豫參與數字活動。因此，我們必須確保相關政策和能力不斷演進，以應對猖獗且快速變化的網路威脅。
第三，抵制網路傷害。網路傷害包括網路欺凌和騷擾，對個人心理健康和福祉有現實影響，阻礙其潛能發揮。此外，兒童和老人等弱勢群體尤易受網路傷害影響。因此，我們必須促進尊重和負責任的行為，實施保護弱勢群體免受剝削的措施，從而在所有使用者群體中培養信任。
第四，有意義的人際連線。線上與現實世界的互聯常影響現實人際關係。我們應致力創造更積極的線上體驗，使人際連線在數字化程序中依然有意義。
第五，數字包容。最終，人們若感到安全，參與意願更強。因此，我們必須創造安全的網路空間，允許廣泛參與，方能實現真正包容的數字社會。
簡言之，安全的網路環境是建立數字社會信任的基石。這種信任反過來促進數字生態系統的成長與成功，積極影響個人線上線下生活。
關於“包容”，包容性通過確保數字化利益惠及所有人，促進公平、公正及共同進步，從而建立數字社會信任。
關鍵包括：第一，基本服務的可及性。隨著政府、醫療、金融及電信等基本服務日益轉向數字平臺，必須確保所有人均可訪問。
第二，數字技能賦能及縮小社會差距。我們必須賦予公民數字接入權及正確技能，積極參與數字社會。須注意避免在數字熟練者與非熟練者間製造新差距。如此，個人包括弱勢群體能獲得信心，駕馭數字平臺，減少數字鴻溝，增強其參與數字技術的信任。
第三，適應各年齡層的職場演變。我們必須使工作崗位和職場適應快速變化的數字環境，同時確保勞動力具備正確技能，使所有人無論年齡或背景均能有意義地貢獻。
第四，增強公民參與。我們必須確保數字平臺和環境安全、友善且尊重，如我先前所述，使公民不因持不同意見而害怕被“取消”，不被剝奪發聲權或有意義的線上參與。
第五，擁抱多樣性。我們必須確保數字介面設計包容，使所有年齡、語言及身體狀況的公民均能舒適自信地參與數字空間。
為實現安全且包容的數字社會，每個人都需發揮作用。因此，我們通訊及資訊政府議會委員會與多位人民行動黨議員提出13項行動呼籲，敦促全民參與，使網路空間對所有新加坡人更安全、更包容。
我將先介紹五項行動呼籲，其餘由我的GPC同事及人民行動黨議員深入闡述。
第一，政府牽頭建立與業界的資訊共享機制，借鑑“英國反詐騙”模式。
鑑於競爭性質，企業通常不願合作共享資訊和最佳實踐，而這些本可助力及時干預或執法打擊詐騙及數字威脅。諷刺的是，這種合作本可促進學習和業務改進。
然而，企業更願意與政府共享資料和經驗，政府可對資訊進行匿名和彙總。因此，我們需要更強有力的框架，促使公私部門共享詐騙資訊，實現更快的偵測和干預。
借鑑“英國反詐騙”允許業界共享情報併合作開展反詐騙行動的做法，我們政府應牽頭建立類似的資訊共享機制。我的同事維克拉姆·奈爾稍後也將對此發表演講。
第二，政府進一步整合專業知識，優先資源以監管和執法保障網路安全。新加坡政府在打擊詐騙和網路傷害方面已做大量工作，包括立法更新、引入守則及新工具供企業和公眾使用。
2022年成立反詐騙指揮部，主要銀行人員與警方同址辦公，促進詐騙偵測和舉報，令人鼓舞。但打擊詐騙和網路傷害的更廣泛工作仍需政府各部門及私營機構如銀行、電信公司等協調合作，這些機構職責和資源優先順序各異。
因此，監管和執法網路安全方面仍有進一步整合專業知識和資源優先順序的空間。我的同事葉漢榮稍後將在演講中具體談及利益相關者協調。
第三，裝置製造商和數字服務提供商應加強防範惡意軟體的保障，確保其產品設計和預設狀態即安全。
我們見證了因惡意軟體導致的手機詐騙案件增多。這些惡意軟體威脅普通使用者難以察覺。即使有公眾教育，個人也難以判斷手機或裝置是否被攻破。即便是科技行業人士也難以判斷。
因此，裝置製造商和數字服務提供商應主動告知消費者檢測到的漏洞，強化防範惡意軟體的措施，確保產品設計和預設狀態安全。從另一個角度看，增強透明度和安全使用的明顯努力將提升客戶信心，促進銷售，雙贏局面。
第四，銀行和電商平臺應採用更強的認證方案，如快速身份線上（FIDO）通行金鑰，保障賬戶安全。
許多數字服務提供商仍使用傳統密碼等易受釣魚攻擊的認證方式。隨著不法分子手法演進，銀行和電商平臺憑藉強大技術能力，有責任保障客戶賬戶安全，應採用抗釣魚認證，如FIDO通行金鑰。
第五，每個人都能為建設安全、友善且包容的新加坡數字社會貢獻力量。隨著我們線上時間增加，數字與現實世界融合，我們在任一領域的行為都可能對另一領域產生深遠影響。
最終，我們應自問希望數字世界呈現何種環境？若我們期望現實世界安全、包容、友善和尊重，數字世界為何應不同？我的同事維克拉姆·奈爾稍後也將對此發表看法。
在同事們稍後深入討論網路傷害時，我想強調確保網路空間思想和言論自由安全的重要性。網際網路有放大少數聲音的力量，若被誤用，可能淹沒或取消持不同意見或僅僅不同的人。因此，我們呼籲每個人繼續秉持線上線下的友善和尊重價值，超越自我，伸出援手幫助有需要者。
在我開場演講後，人民行動黨議員們將聚焦其餘八項行動呼籲。請允許我簡要列出。
追究社交媒體服務對有害內容和惡意廣告傳播的責任。我的同事納迪亞·桑丁、萬瑞扎爾和瑪麗亞姆·賈法爾將對此進行闡述。
接下來，審視針對未經授權交易詐騙受害者的處理方式，要求較大的參與者在防止損失和分擔後果方面做出更多努力。我的尊敬同事蘇翰儀和葉漢榮也將對此進行討論。
要求社交媒體服務和應用分發服務加強年齡驗證措施，更好地保護年輕使用者免受有害內容的影響。我的尊敬同事納迪亞·薩姆丁將就此發表講話。
要求社交媒體服務和應用分發服務提高對使用者舉報平臺有害內容的響應時效。我的尊敬同事納迪亞·薩姆丁也將對此進行討論。
要求基本服務提供者確保無障礙服務，惠及所有人。我的同事陳潔儀、納迪亞·薩姆丁和葉漢榮將就此發表講話。
推動企業和社群組織提升對基本數字技能的認知，並與公共部門合作，幫助縮小數字技能差距。我的尊敬同事陳潔儀、蘇翰儀、莎拉爾·塔哈和瑪麗亞姆·賈法爾將就此發表講話。
推動公共、私營部門及個人之間建立更緊密的合作伙伴關係，深化對青少年和老年人數字素養、詐騙及網路危害教育的關注。我的尊敬同事達里爾·大衛、萬日扎爾、莎拉爾·塔哈和葉漢榮將就此發表講話。
最後，加強努力，打造面向未來的職場，培養更具數字化能力的勞動力。我的尊敬同事莎拉爾·塔哈也將對此發表講話。議長先生，請允許我用中文說幾句話。
（中文）：【請參閱方言發言。】自獨立以來，新加坡一直無畏地突破現狀，勇於在相對較短的幾十年內進行轉型和改革。
我們的國家已從主要專注於國內部門的傳統經濟，發展為由跨國公司驅動的出口導向型工業化，再到現代服務業和新興投資領域的發展，以保持競爭力。
新加坡還進行了前瞻性的基礎設施投資，使其能夠抓住機遇。
加上人民的團結、高度信任與合作，新加坡才能達到今天的成就。
然而，數字化轉型帶來的機遇增加的同時，我們也面臨日益嚴峻的挑戰。
網路威脅，如詐騙、勒索軟體、深度偽造和虛假資訊迅速增加，顯著提升了數字環境中的風險。
俗話說，層次越高，魔鬼越大。
這些網路威脅就像永不言敗的蟑螂。
此外，全球在人工智慧（AI）領域日益激烈的競爭引發了潛在倫理妥協的擔憂。
強大的科技公司可能不惜一切代價爭奪勝利，這可能導致忽視社會不平等。
此外，關鍵基礎設施和基本服務的可信度也會影響公眾對個人資料安全的信心。
如果不加以控制，這些問題將侵蝕信任。人們將無法信任他們接收到的每一條資訊、進行的每一筆交易、聽到的每一個聲音和看到的每一幅影像。
這是一個令人擔憂的局面。我們如何繼續生活？我們如何前進？
當然，世界上沒有絕對的事物，現實世界中沒有完美。
現實生活中，我們不會因為害怕遇到意外而不出門。
然而，信任是構建社會基礎的關鍵因素，因為生活中困難是不可避免的。
在這些時刻，我們可能需要暫時犧牲個人利益，以換取社會的集體利益。
信任在創造價值的交易和分享思想中也至關重要。
因此，如果我們不明確立場並積極應對這些問題，可能會失去公眾對數字技術領域的信任，導致民眾便利性的喪失，以及經濟生產力和創新利益的流失。
在此背景下，我和人民行動黨議員決定提出本動議，提出13項行動呼籲，以重申議會通過政府、企業和人民的共同努力，建設包容且安全的數字社會，維持信任的承諾。
（英文）：隨著技術不斷發展，新的詐騙和網路威脅手段也將出現。我們可能無法完全根除這些風險或威脅，因為它們如同蟑螂般難以消滅。但如果我們能做得更多，如果每個人都願意承擔更大份額的責任，我們就能保護更多人，減少對普通市民的傷害或損害。
總之，要維持信任並建設包容、安全的數字社會，不能僅靠單一政府、實體或個人的責任。隨著新加坡繼續邁向數字社會，公共和私營利益相關者必須作為一個整體國家協作，管理風險，應對挑戰，互助共贏數字未來。議長先生，我懇請動議通過。[掌聲。]
【程式文本】提案已提出。【程式文本】
議長：林秀玉女士。
下午1時58分
林秀玉（阿裕尼） ：議長先生，我今天的主題是恢復數字領域的信任，以應對信心危機。關於恢復信任，我將談及詐騙和人工智慧。
首先是詐騙。我對通訊及資訊部部長張燕玉去年12月接受《聯合早報》採訪時談及該部今年重點工作深感興趣。她強調了恢復數字空間和電信領域信心的緊迫需求。
關於詐騙，尤其是電話詐騙，資訊通訊媒體發展局（IMDA）披露，新加坡每年接收約16億國際電話，其中約四分之一即3億通被懷疑為詐騙電話，並在去年頭九個月被電信公司攔截。
攔截3億通電話是驚人的數字。但我推測還有許多詐騙電話未被攔截。我們的父母、居民和我們自己都可能成為潛在受害者。
自我在九月中旬就詐騙損失及銀行客戶權益發表講話以來，形勢進一步發展。
積極方面，我注意到銀行似乎採取了更多措施防止詐騙並阻止詐騙進行。我無法過分強調為何銀行尤其需要這樣做。銀行盈利豐厚，擁有資源和專業知識，可以做更多保護和偵測詐騙的工作。
同時，詐騙者的作案手法不斷演變，利用受害者心理。從冒充刑事調查局（CID）和銀行職員，到現在冒充新加坡金融管理局（MAS）官員。涉及Paylah!的釣魚詐騙有效偽造了通常由星展銀行傳送的簡訊。
今年元旦，我也收到一條關於從我的Paylah!賬戶提取289元的簡訊，並附有連結，提示若非本人授權可點選停止交易。因當時正忙於工作，我未仔細審查簡訊便點選了連結。連結引導我輸入銀行憑證時，我頓悟並立即停止操作。
不幸的是，一些收到同樣簡訊的居民後來絕望地來到民眾見面會（MPS）。總的來說，我不得不承認這些有組織的犯罪分子一定有非常優秀的顧問。
即使是我們認為非常安全的儲蓄方式，如中央公積金（CPF）和定期存款，也無法完全防範詐騙和惡意軟體。這正在改變人們對數字交易的看法。
對此，我注意到三家本地銀行現提供的“資金鎖定”選項，是一項實用功能，可將資金鎖定，只有親自到銀行才能提取。我自己也選擇了此項服務。但從宏觀角度看，“資金鎖定”實際上承認數字空間並非完全安全。
我不想誇大其詞，但我認為如果政府監管機構不加強幹預，我們正走向數字銀行信心危機。
當然，客戶也需盡責。客戶需保持警惕，防止被騙。但我們應時刻牢記，不應對公眾期望過高。正如《海峽時報》9月22日論壇頁一封信所述，人們不可能時刻保持高度警惕，因為警覺程度可能受多工處理、壓力、疲勞或藥物影響。
根據IMDA去年11月釋出的新加坡數字社會報告，78%的60歲以上長者使用電子支付進行線上交易，但僅44%對此群體對識別詐騙持中度信心。99%的人擔心成為詐騙受害者。這些資料表明詐騙威脅非常真實，且需要做更多工作。
議長先生，我承認政府正致力於恢復數字空間信心。MAS一直在加強對銀行的監管，且在預防和損失分擔方面需做更多。我之前已談及此事，今天不再贅述。我也向MAS提交了關於詐騙損失風險分擔框架的意見。
議長先生，鑑於銀行與消費者之間的議價能力不對等，MAS應意識到公眾期待其作為銀行監管機構，確保銀行負責任且合乎道德地行事。
過去幾個月，我收到一些公眾懷疑的反饋，認為銀行利益總是優先於客戶。我希望MAS能證明這種看法不正確。
關於數字通訊和服務的更廣泛問題，我認可《線上刑事危害法案》（OCHA）在防止詐騙方面的潛力。該法案賦予執法部門主動發出訪問阻斷令和應用移除令等權力，要求網際網路服務提供商保護公眾免受詐騙及其他惡意網路活動侵害。關於OCHA，期待了解所有條款何時生效。
此外，我注意到通訊及資訊部長宣佈成立多機構小組，名為數字基礎設施與服務韌性安全工作組（簡稱RSD工作組）。該工作組負責監督國家數字服務的公眾信心事務。
雖然RSD工作組的成立是重要進展，但其成員構成中未見MAS代表。鑑於銀行是數字基礎設施和服務的重要組成部分，MAS是否應加入該工作組？
議長先生，我的同事林正杰和嚴傑輝稍後將詳細闡述詐騙及責任分擔問題。接下來談談人工智慧。
2023年普遍被認為是ChatGPT進入全球視野的一年，人人開始探索其潛力。隨著AI技術日益成熟，焦點轉向如何大規模部署AI工具。從讓AI執行特定任務，AI工具已從分類AI發展到生成式AI，能創造內容，如模仿親人聲音。進一步發展為互動式AI，能與人類互動推理，做出影響工作和生活的重大決策。
去年，政府釋出了《新加坡國家人工智慧戰略2.0》。報告承認AI既有巨大潛力，也存在風險。風險包括AI可能助長詐騙，如利用深度偽造技術傳播虛假資訊等。
據CNA報道，2023年新加坡深度偽造影片的出現率較前一年激增500%。我們應高度警惕AI的陷阱及AI監管的必要性，確保新加坡人網路安全。
議長先生，我相信政府正密切關注AI潛在風險。政府成立了AI驗證基金會，去年釋出了題為《生成式AI：信任與治理的影響》的討論檔案。該檔案面向政府和企業高階領導，倡導更多討論與合作，構建可信且負責任的生成式AI生態系統。檔案列舉的生成式AI新興風險包括錯誤產生、版權侵權、傳播有害內容和網路威脅。除這些風險外，AI導致的失業和虛假資訊也將侵蝕公眾對數字領域的信任。
全球範圍內，人們開始質疑是否真的希望AI進一步發展。越來越多的人擔憂創造更強大的AI工具可能取代人類功能，甚至控制人類互動。這種擔憂也來自AI行業內部。
例如，美國有一個名為生命未來研究所的非營利組織，其多學科國際團隊致力於改善AI治理的政策工作。今年3月，該研究所發起請願，呼籲暫停GPT-4之後的AI開發。請願獲得超過33,000個簽名，包括多家AI公司CEO。
一些重要反思問題包括：（a）是否應允許機器用可能的宣傳和虛假資訊淹沒我們的資訊渠道；（b）是否應自動化取代所有工作，包括有意義的工作；（c）是否應開發非人類智慧，最終可能數量超過、智商超越並取代我們。
其他知名思想家警告，依賴AI工具處理資訊和思考可能導致人類推理和分析能力的喪失。就我個人而言，世界重大決策外包給AI工具的想法是不可接受的。
展望未來，如何利用AI同時確保人類掌控將是重大挑戰。技術應為我們服務，而非成為我們的主人。我們應花時間反思正在發生的事，不應讓技術失控。為此，政府需持續投入能力建設，確保AI有效監管。
議長先生，容我總結。今天的發言主題是恢復數字領域的信任。我強調了網路詐騙和AI風險對信任的嚴峻考驗。今天的動議提出應採取全社會方法，通過建設包容且安全的數字社會來維持信任。我支援該動議，因為我認同每個人都有責任。
然而，基於上述理由，我認為政府和企業有責任領導這項工作。
議長：陳武銘博士。
下午2時10分
陳武銘（裕廊） ：議長先生，我原本無意在本次辯論中發言，但多位金文泰居民談及本動議的及時性，我覺得應分享幾點看法。
我今天將談詐騙的消費者保護角度，其次更廣泛地談AI時代的形勢及新加坡的生存能力。
首先談詐騙問題。議會各方普遍認同這是嚴重問題，尤其在數字銀行時代，長者們成長於面對面櫃檯交易的時代，如今卻可能因遠在新加坡之外的詐騙者輕點裝置而損失銀行賬戶和畢生積蓄。
這是嚴峻問題，尤其在新加坡這樣快速從第三世界躍升為第一世界的社會，長者們成長於數字化之前的時代，如今卻生活在數字接入和數字技術的世界。這是關於消費者保護的第一點。
儘管議會兩邊議員呼籲採取更多措施審查銀行對客戶的待遇，我想再次呼籲MAS及相關部門，重申我此前多次在議會提出的觀點，即對涉及銀行客戶線上被騙儲蓄的詐騙，應採取消費者保護的視角。
近期，MAS已有相關努力——最初稱為風險分擔框架或風險分配框架，視評論者角度而定。但關鍵點是：我們對銀行消費者安全的處理方式，不應與市場上其他更有形產品的消費者安全相差太遠。
正如我不久前向MAS國務部長所述，若一家公司有消費產品，若有人被陌生人誘騙錯誤配置該產品，導致人身傷害或財產損失，甚至損失畢生積蓄，我們知道消費者保護的做法會是怎樣。
我們看到車輛方面，如果車輛設計存在缺陷，容易導致人為錯誤或人為錯誤造成災難性後果，該車輛必須召回，製造商將受到非常嚴肅的處理。
昨天，在向通訊及資訊部長提交的關於作業系統的書面質詢中，值得注意的是，某一作業系統幾乎佔據了警方知悉的所有網路銀行詐騙案件，而另一種不同的作業系統在該議會書面答覆中報告的數字中幾乎沒有出現。因此，我們再次看到這些消費產品之間的情況截然不同。
我再次呼籲政府關注消費者保護，確保製造商以及包括金融機構在內的服務提供者承擔責任，這種責任方式不應與社會其他領域有太大差別。
如果你的家庭擁有一輛汽車，而該車設計存在問題導致人身傷害或你失去全部積蓄，你知道製造商必須做什麼。如果你家廚房有一臺家用電器，有人能騙你按錯按鈕，導致有人受傷並失去積蓄，你也知道對該家電的處理方式會是怎樣。
我呼籲政府、金融管理局及其他機構認真審視金融機構和銀行，問問自己：銀行、電信公司和科技公司在數字世界中是否承擔了與實體商品提供者在物理世界中相當的責任？這是我發言的第一部分，議長先生。
我發言的第二部分將談論人工智慧時代以及新加坡需要如何適應。我去年在總統致辭辯論時談過這個話題。去年初，我談及人工智慧時代，那是一個令人謙卑的時刻，因為演講發表後在網上稍有傳播，我估計全球大約有十多萬人觀看——並不算多。但我們開始收到來自世界各地的郵件和資訊，有美國的，有非洲的，觸動了人們的心絃。但這不是關於那次演講，而是關於新加坡對世界的意義。當人們看到我們的議員，無論是部長、官員，還是不同派別的後座議員，關注未來世界的樣貌時，人們會關注新加坡的思考，並希望我們能找到前進的道路。
因此，關於人工智慧和深度偽造問題，我也有一些建議供政府考慮。其中一些我曾在議會質詢和演講中提出過，但讓我再次重申。
深度偽造問題將成為全球民主國家的嚴重問題——因為如果我們無法輕易辨別真假，就無法擁有正常運作的民主。無論哪個政黨執政，沒有這種審議性民主討論的基本基礎，都無法治理任何國家。
這意味著，作為社會，我們需要預先應對這一問題。不久前，首相在Facebook帖子中提到，有一個深度偽造影片顯示他試圖推銷某些投資產品，那是個假影片。但那只是深度偽造1.0。往前推三年、五年、十年，隨著計算能力提升，你可以想象那些深度偽造將多麼逼真。因此，作為社會和政府，我們不能迴避，必須預先採取行動應對深度偽造問題。
我呼籲政府研究電子水印內容的方法，即所謂的“人類證明”，無論是證明與AI機器人交易時是人類，還是與可能由AI提供答案的科技公司線上互動，關鍵是我們需要確認內容是真實且由人類產生的方式。
我們還需要繼續從源頭做起，正如我昨天在質詢時間對教育部長所說的。從小培養和教育我們的年輕新加坡人、我們的子孫後代，讓他們更加意識到深度偽造的存在及其微妙之處。
簡而言之，前不久一位來自金文泰的年輕朋友分享了他對深度偽造的擔憂，說“你知道，有些看起來有點可疑”。但關鍵是，第一步是培養健康的懷疑精神，感知某些東西可能有點“可疑”，同時不失去對社會前進能力的信心。
這當然是全政府的努力，需要多方面著手，包括教育、監管、社會規範，確保科技公司也承擔責任。但我們必須迅速行動，因為一旦魔鬼完全脫瓶，馬已逃走，重建這些規範和重塑我們社會的民主程序將更加困難。
總之，議長先生，我有兩個關鍵點，但根本上是從人民的視角看問題。
第一，從消費者的視角看，確保數字領域和金融領域的公司，包括零售銀行服務，在線上對消費者保護的態度與我們對家庭中線下有形產品的消費者保護態度一致。
第二，同樣從人民的視角看，在我們必須應對深度偽造的世界中，培訓和教育人民更好地識別，以保護新加坡這一寶貴理念，在一個不斷被人工智慧顛覆的世界中。
我還想強調一點，我們需要加倍投資於政府和產業的人工智慧能力。雖然提到了人工智慧路線圖2.0，但有時我們也應問自己，是否可以有更高的雄心。
根據公開資訊，如果我沒記錯，不久前不到十年前，微軟向OpenAI投資了10億美元。當時看似很大一筆投資，但回頭看，這筆投資相當划算，考慮到OpenAI的發展。這也呼應我幾年前在預算辯論中提出的觀點：有時我們提前投資市場，投資某些今天看似脆弱但未來可能高回報的技術能力，意味著我們能在未來獲得紅利。
如今許多大型科技公司，無論是蘋果、谷歌、Meta（前Facebook），在早期都不被看好為穩妥投資。但那些願意下注的人獲得了豐厚回報，成為今天的科技巨頭。
因此，隨著我們進入人工智慧和數字世界技術的下一個階段，讓我們思考哪些投資今天看似脆弱，但未來能讓新加坡成為世界級能力強國。
議長先生，感謝您允許我發言。我支援田佩玲女士的動議。[掌聲]
議長：陳潔儀女士。
下午2時22分
陳潔儀（東海岸）：議長先生，我們通訊及資訊全職議員倡導所有利益相關者承諾建設包容且安全的數字社會，因為技術進步改變了我們的生活、工作和娛樂方式。這些變化帶來了便捷和快速的訪問能力、連線和互動能力，帶來了好處，也帶來了新的能力和機會。
正如我們在新冠疫情期間所見，數字連線使人們能夠持續獲取及時資訊、服務和溝通。企業和工作得以繼續——雖然是虛擬的。
越來越多的生活服務通過數字方式提供。從日常任務如叫出租車或私家車、點餐或預訂餐廳、支付、獲取資訊或導航，到訪問和辦理政府服務及銀行交易。甚至獲取折扣也需要掃描二維碼或上網。某些機構的求職申請和麵試也線上進行。最新新聞一發生就能數字化獲取，甚至即時更新。
如果個人被數字排斥，他或她將無法及時獲得資訊、服務及其好處。因此，確保沒有人被落下，在我們日益數字化的過程中尤為重要。
雖然《新加坡數字社會報告2023》令人鼓舞地顯示，新加坡99%的家庭擁有網際網路接入，且即使是老年人中數字技術和技能的採用率也更高，但信息通信媒體發展局的研究顯示，雖然新加坡人更願意嘗試新技術，但只有55%的18歲及以上人士和24%的老年人知道如何使用帶有語音識別、虛擬或增強現實等新興技術的裝置和應用。
新加坡採取數字優先但非數字唯一的策略，作為核心組織原則，既利用創新潛力和生產力，又確保不熟悉數字技術的人不會被排除在基本服務之外。
但在繼續提供非數字選項的同時，我們必須努力鼓勵和使盡可能多的人參與數字化。如果不這樣做，在數字優先但非數字唯一的社會中，不使用數字的人將錯過數字帶來的便利、及時性和好處。
舉個簡單例子，社群發展理事會（CDC）代金券的領取方式說明了這一點。你可以去社群俱樂部（CC）領取實體CDC代金券。這樣做需要你在開放時間內抽時間去CC。如果幸運的話，沒有排隊，你也不用等就能領取代金券再使用。相反，如果你用Singpass線上“領取”CDC代金券，只需一分鐘甚至更短時間，就能繼續使用代金券。
這一點適用於我們進行的許多其他交易，如銀行業務。你可以去銀行辦理交易，但需要出行和時間，還必須在銀行營業時間內進行。通過網上銀行，你可以隨時隨地辦理。
這引出了數字安全和韌性這一關鍵點，影響信任和採用。你聽過前面所有發言者談到的擔憂、風險和危險。但我想補充幾點。
數字包容不僅僅是接入。它必須伴隨有效且安全使用數字技術的能力，以及對數字環境和平臺安全性與韌性的信任，才能真正受益。這包括保持網路安全的重要技能，如如何安全互動、如何保護個人隱私、如何有效搜尋和辨別資訊。
新技術的日益使用確實帶來風險，防範網路風險、詐騙和虛假資訊的保障措施對於增強信心和信任至關重要。
隨著詐騙者使用更復雜的技術和工具，受害人數和損失金額顯著增加。特別令人關注的是未經授權的交易。
雖然已有包括立法在內的措施保護網路空間免受有害內容侵害，政府機構也持續與關鍵服務和數字平臺提供者合作，防止、檢測和追回詐騙資金，但仍需更多努力保障數字交易和線上交易安全，保護弱勢使用者。
談到弱勢使用者，我們往往想到老年人和數字技能較弱者。遺憾的是，我曾接觸過既有老年人也有年輕人被騙失去積蓄，向我求助。
最近，一位20多歲的年輕居民來找我幫忙，她努力攢錢，花了幾年時間積累儲蓄，但因一次線上交易不幸失去所有積蓄。更糟的是，她的銀行賬戶資訊和信用卡資料被盜，導致未經授權的信用卡付款。
基本上，這意味著隨著新技術和複雜工具的出現，使用者的數字素養不足以防範數字風險。我們必須對政府、平臺運營商、電信公司和裝置製造商提出更高要求，提升安全標準，加強使用者在其平臺和服務上的線上安全。
但在談論危險和風險的同時，也存在機遇。隨著我們對所有大型參與者和關鍵利益相關者提出更多要求，我認為這也是新加坡平臺和服務提供者的機會。新加坡是一個先進市場，連線水平高，如我之前所述，居民擁有智慧手機的比例也高。根據我引用的報告，老年人擁有智慧手機的比例已升至89%。這為平臺和服務提供者利用新加坡作為創新基地，應用並展示更高安全標準提供了機會。我敦促所有參與者這樣做，因為隨著政府推動措施，如果所有參與者齊心協力，將是嘗試新事物的絕佳機會，正如陳武明博士所說，真正讓新加坡成為數字空間中重建信任和信心的展示視窗。
正如我所提，建立數字採用的信任和信心至關重要。我還想補充一點，《新加坡數字社會報告2023》顯示，55%的15歲及以上新加坡人願意接受使用技術帶來的風險，而60歲及以上人群中僅有33%。所以，人們意識到風險，但我們現在需要管理這些風險。
現在讓我談談使用者角色和公眾教育。產業參與者和政府在加強數字安全、保障和提升使用這些應用和線上系統人員的數字素養方面發揮重要作用。公眾教育和為特定群體如老年人和弱勢群體提供數字素養培訓已見成效，促進了採用。但仍需更多持續努力，因為數字空間不斷變化。
但我想強調的是我們每個人的角色。我們必須提醒自己，保護自己在現實生活中的做法也應應用於數字世界。例如，在現實生活中，我們讓某人進入家門前會核實身份，不會讓可疑或不認識的人進門。我們不會將身份證、銀行賬戶資訊或ATM卡交給不認識或不信任的人。同樣的原則和做法必須應用於線上和數字裝置及應用的使用。否則，無論採取何種措施和立法提升數字安全，都無法保護我們在數字交易中的安全。因此，我們每個人都必須盡責。
讓我談幾個其他點。
雖然數字素養使我們能進行數字交易，但人們在交易遇到問題時，獲得幫助解決問題的能力有時相當具有挑戰性，因為目前支援渠道的結構。除非你是詐騙受害者，否則大多數提供的服務熱線需要較多導航。優先支援詐騙受害者是必要的，但數字服務使用者在交易遇到問題時也需要支援解決交易問題。
我同意鑑於人力、成本和能力限制，提供支援具有挑戰性。但隨著商業和政府服務越來越數字優先，我們需要重新思考支援模式，尋找更有效方式，為使用者在數字交易遇到問題時提供及時支援。這將增強數字信任和信心。尤其是涉及資金交易時，可能引發使用者焦慮，無論年輕或年長。
我還想談談數字包容的另一個方面，即參與機會的能力。新技術領域，包括人工智慧，具有賦能新能力、引發變革、創造新方式和新機會的潛力。
新加坡繼續制定雄心勃勃的計劃，利用新技術促進增長，為我們的人民和企業帶來利益。一個例子是新加坡第二個國家人工智慧戰略（NAIS 2.0），該戰略於去年12月由副總理黃循財釋出。它概述了人工智慧的機遇與風險，同時也闡明瞭我們建設一個值得信賴且負責任的人工智慧生態系統的雄心和承諾，通過人工智慧推動創新和增長，並賦能我們的人民和企業理解並參與人工智慧。但這也需要新的治理模式。
所以，我的觀點是，要實現這些雄心勃勃的計劃，我們需要具備新技術和網路安全領域技能的人才。為什麼？這是為了構建深思熟慮的設計和解決方案，真正從這些新技術中受益。這也意味著為新加坡人創造優質就業崗位。但要抓住這些機會，需要新的技能。組織必須投資支援員工構建新技能，教育機構必須為學生和在職人員準備這些機會，所有年齡和職業階段的個人必須開放學習並抓住新機會。政府和私營部門必須投資培養深厚技能。
新技術將帶來新的工作方式，這不僅僅是技術問題。我們需要新的思維和理念。這讓我想到了多元化勞動力的問題。多元化勞動力能夠讓組織利用不同的視角、技能和經驗，因為發展新理念、在數字社會中成長和繁榮需要這些。這是可能的。在此，我想對僱主和組織強調，我們必須利用資深員工豐富的財富和經驗，將其納入多元化勞動力中，使我們能夠找到新方法，年輕人和年長者共同利用技術創造新的工作方式。
現在讓我總結一下。雖然我們討論建設包容和安全的數字社會，但本議案的核心是我們的人民。這不僅僅是成為數字先進社會，擁有最佳基礎設施、政策、技能或卓越水平和技術採納。所有這些都是必要的，但包容和安全的數字社會的目的是確保每個人都能積極參與並受益，使生活更美好，沒有人被落下。但要實現這一目標，需要我們所有人盡力促成包容、可信賴和安全的數字社會。
議長先生：副教授林志明。
下午2時37分
副教授林志明（盛港）：議長先生，議會中的其他成員，特別是我尊敬的朋友林秀燕女士，之前已經闡述了為何金融管理局（MAS）的共享責任框架（SRF）不充分且不公正的理由。
雖然我支援現有議案，但我將在今天的發言中詳細說明為何該框架在目前構想下，仍然根本不公平，與其宣稱的公平分擔目標形成鮮明對比。
官方新聞稿描述該框架時指出，我引用：“所有各方都有責任保持警惕並採取防範詐騙的措施。”金融機構需要實施強有力的控制措施，保護客戶賬戶，檢測並打擊可疑交易。客戶需要採取預防措施，不輕易洩露銀行憑證，並保持網路衛生。損失將根據各方未履行責任的程度進行分配。
表面上看，這一切似乎合理。但實際上，詐騙幾乎總是針對鏈條中較弱的一環，在本案中即是脆弱的消費者，而非相對裝備更好、技術更先進的銀行或電信公司。因此，所謂公平分擔框架實際上更多是責任分配，而非公平分配損失。損失發生時，消費者往往承擔絕大部分。換句話說，只有當責任分配公平時，我們才應期待該框架產生公平結果。
任何在市場上討價還價買魚或蔬菜，或與僱主談判薪資，或參與家務分配討論的人都深知權力差異的重要性，以及最終“蛋糕”如何被分割。
這不僅是猜測。大量關於談判理論的文獻表明，擁有權力的一方在談判中往往佔優勢。在明確對抗的談判中，經典模型顯示更有耐心且能先發制人的一方擁有優勢。
即使考慮到各方看到合作利益並將其納入談判，結果仍然嚴重受制於各方相對談判力。此外，更能輕鬆放棄談判的一方往往表現更好。
仔細觀察涉及詐騙索賠和解的雙方，很明顯誰擁有更大權力、耐心和堅持立場的能力，那就是銀行。
金融機構不僅規模更大。如果他們能證明在執行詐騙轉賬時沒有失誤，目前可以合理拒絕承擔任何損失。即使發生核銷，通常也只是機構資產負債表中的一小部分。
相比之下，詐騙往往對存款人造成毀滅性打擊。極端情況下，可能是個人全部積蓄，甚至可能讓無辜的“洗錢人”揹負沉重債務。那麼，什麼樣的分配最能體現分配正義？
雖然存在差異，許多人認為50/50分配或接近此比例，是大多數談判情形下唯一公正的解決方案。重要的是，50/50分配不應被視為雙方承擔相等的名義份額，而是指各方承擔與其承受能力相稱的負擔。
這就是為何政府需要介入，為存款人提供更強有力的法律保護。最簡單的法律可能是限制詐騙交易責任的最高金額。
我曾在去年關於《金融服務與市場法案》的發言中提出此點。這裡我將詳細說明為何這樣做不僅有助於糾正客戶與銀行之間的權力不平衡，也為何這是根本公平的。
議長先生，政府於2022年初首次向議會透露正在制定損失分擔框架。年底時解釋進展比預期慢，釋出被推遲至去年中。金融管理局最終於10月釋出聯合諮詢檔案，但範圍極為有限，僅涉及網路釣魚詐騙。
更重要的是，該框架提議採用“瀑布式方法”，即金融機構和電信運營商僅在“未履行各自規定職責”時承擔全部損失，若被認定已履責，則無需向消費者賠付。
遺憾的是，這種方法將免除金融機構和通訊公司業務成本，只要他們履行了職責。雖然這不排除其他解決機制，如金融行業爭議解決中心（FIDReC），但在初步責任分配上仍顯輕率。SRF基於努力分配，而非結果。換言之，只要金融機構或電信運營商能證明已滿足某些義務——坦率說，這些義務甚至不全面——其損失份額不會是半數，甚至不會是三分之一或四分之一，可能是零。這顯然不公平。
打個比方，想象兩輛車並排行駛。兩位司機都有責任不超速並保持車道。如果前車突然剎車，後車應保持安全距離。但如果兩車並排行駛，有孩子突然跑到其中一輛車前方，若一車為避讓而轉向，另一車未讓路，很難說只有一方應承擔事故責任。
金融詐騙雖然通過良好系統設計和盡職調查可在一定程度上預防，但幾乎不可避免，無論雙方多麼努力。正如上述比喻，責任很少能明確歸咎於一方。因此，雙方共同承擔部分損失是公平的。
當然，這樣的立法可能被視為魯莽。批評者常用的論調是，保護客戶免受詐騙後果會降低他們採取必要防範措施的意願，即所謂的道德風險——一方受保護，另一方則更少謹慎。
雖然我原則上理解此論點，但粗暴應用此理論存在問題。首先，這種論調對新加坡人的能動性信心不足。畢竟，誰願意成為詐騙受害者？
即使後果有限，大多數人仍會積極採取措施防範犯罪，即使沒有明顯回報。此外，就像大多數保險計劃中的共付額，只要儲戶需承擔一定合理損失——比如最高100元或500元——就難以說消費者激勵與打擊詐騙不一致。
我們不應認為只有災難性損失才會促使個人保持必要的網路衛生。沒人願意輸給騙子100元，如果能避免的話。
當然，這也可能被不法分子利用所謂的受害者保護來直接詐騙銀行。但這對任何保險欺詐都適用，已有成熟機制識別並打擊此類濫用，尤其當損失更公平分擔時。
這自然引出長期間接好處：讓雙方承擔部分損失的制度可能帶來金融生態系統一系列有利發展，使其更具韌性。
金融機構將更加重視防範網路釣魚和詐騙。由於不能將大部分損失成本轉嫁給消費者，他們將更積極追查可疑交易，不再容忍用非法資金進行的未授權購買。
詐騙檢測和防範工具已存在多年，但生成式人工智慧的廣泛應用使最新演算法的快速部署成本更低且更先進。商戶和銀行將更加謹慎實施自身防護措施，以免失去電子支付或轉賬資格。詐騙保險計劃可能出現，且因法律要求所有金融機構參與，市場將迅速擴大，保持保險成本合理。
這些發展可能是使系統實現真正公平損失分配的意外但受歡迎的副產品。
政府似乎意識到此類保險機制的潛在好處。在最初討論公積金相關詐騙時，陳振聲部長表示對此類機制持開放態度。但次日，相關部委宣告“無意”考慮保險計劃。
雖然我理解定價可能最終過高，但令人疑惑的是為何保險概念至少不值得更深入研究。畢竟，即使是有限責任保險——限制詐騙賠付最高金額——也優於完全缺乏此類保護的體系。
議長先生，我的發言大部分聚焦於供應方措施。最後，我將談談為何需求方措施雖有邊際效用，但終究不足。
銀行已與金融管理局及新加坡銀行協會合作，獨立實施某些功能，為線上交易增加摩擦。例如，在達到每日最大轉賬限額或其他關鍵賬戶功能後實施冷靜期；移除電子郵件或簡訊中的可點選連結。
但值得注意的是，這些措施自2022年1月推出以來，若以過去兩年詐騙持續增長為鑑，單靠這些措施仍不足以遏制金融詐騙潮。
銀行還可考慮採取其他障礙措施。例如，要求某些賬戶持有人群，如老年人或技術不熟練者，加入一項計劃，指定一名可信賴的個人（如親屬）作為第二把鑰匙，需批准異常交易。但這幾乎肯定會帶來衝突和控制問題，比如即使是善意的家庭成員也可能限制他人使用自己的資金。
同樣，冷靜期僅在受害者意識到或接受自己被騙時有效。詐騙者常利用受害者的信任、天真或不安全感，巧妙規避此類保護措施。
除非我們認為自己絕不會成為受害者，否則請記住許多詐騙者是極其高明的騙子，甚至專業人士也可能上當，正如警方心理服務部門2018年研究所示。
議長先生，政府提出的損失分擔框架是確立金融詐騙責任的進步。但基於我所述理由，我認為其未能實現公平的根本承諾。這導致數字交易信任逐漸流失，若不迅速解決，可能引發線上支付和數字金融的信心危機。
為重建信任，監管機構應要求金融機構和通訊公司實際承擔損失，消費者責任上限設為100元或500元，以應對不可避免且不幸的損失。這不僅公平，也有助於長期推動系統向更穩健方向發展。
議長先生：納迪婭·薩姆丁女士。
下午2時53分
納迪婭·艾哈邁德·薩姆丁女士（宏茂橋）：議長先生，我支援本議案，並宣告本人是SG Her Empowerment董事會成員，該非營利平臺致力於推動性別平等，賦能新加坡各階層個人。我的發言將引用性犯罪事件。
議長先生，我代表受害者和倖存者發言。
大約五年前，SG Nasi Lemak電報群組成立。成千上萬張未經同意的女性和女學生的色情照片和影片被分發給超過44,000名成員。
大約半年前，一位TikTok內容創作者製作的約會節目因對特殊需求人士的敏感度不足及似乎利用他們而遭批評。
大約一個月前，一位65歲的新加坡退休老人15天內失去了全部積蓄。我的一位居民的祖母在六天內通過115筆交易被騙走積蓄。這都是網路詐騙的結果。
上週，有報道稱英國警方正在調查一起涉嫌在元宇宙中對一名青少年虛擬化身進行團伙強姦的案件。
這些僅是部分例子。對許多人來說，數字世界提供了認同感、聯絡和便利。不幸的是，它也可能導致網路虐待、網路噴子和痛苦的詐騙，尤其對脆弱群體造成嚴重傷害。
社會變化比以往任何時候都快，新技術影響生活方方面面，從下班後的電子郵件，到班級的WhatsApp群聊，再到輕點螢幕共享位置。新冠疫情也推動了我們的世界大部分轉向線上，從買菜到Zoom會議。
但僅有技術接入和使用能力不足以應對危險。我們必須超越此點，邁向數字福祉和數字公民意識，讓每個人都感到被包容並有能力安全參與網路空間。
政府為此已採取了重大舉措，特別是在數字接入方面，並堅決反對利用技術實施的性暴力。例如，信息通信媒體發展局（MCI）的“數字生活基金”資助包容性專案，賦能所有新加坡人擁抱數字化。
2023年7月，信息通信媒體發展局（IMDA）實施了《網路安全行為準則》，要求指定的社交媒體服務提升新加坡的網路安全，遏制其平臺上傳播的色情內容、暴力內容、自殺及自殘內容。
然而，營造更安全的網路空間需要全社會共同努力；今天我將圍繞內容、溝通和網路習慣這三個“C”展開發言。
每天，大約有3400萬個影片上傳到抖音（TikTok），1500萬個數字版電報（Telegram）訊息被髮送。我們的現代社會渴望內容，也熱衷於創造內容。我想強調三個後果——除了越來越多的朋友可能會捱餓，而手機鏡頭先“吃”了飯，為了發Instagram故事，因為如果你不發，事情真的發生了嗎？
首先，演算法為創作者提供了接觸大量觀眾的機會。但對完美內容的策劃可能損害自尊。研究顯示，社交媒體的使用似乎在延續負面身體觀念和加劇飲食失調方面起作用。年輕女孩和男孩被推送關於不切實際的身體期望和激進節食的影片和建議。
這種濾鏡生活的觀念也製造不滿，加劇社會比較。為了快速獲得點贊而製作影片的壓力，也可能導致未經核實或聳人聽聞的內容，真相為流行度讓步。
其次，一些使用者，包括易受影響的未成年人，為了獲得認可而製作暗示性內容，有時受到同齡人或惡意行為者的慫恿。這與成年人內容創作者不同，後者對自己的行為有控制並意識到後果。
我呼籲平臺和應用加強年齡驗證措施，更好地保護年輕使用者免受有害內容侵害，並實施更完善的驗證和限制措施。
當然，在數字賦權的社會中，僅僅禁止青少年使用裝置或沒收裝置是不夠的。我們還必須為他們創造一個安全的環境，讓他們在好奇時有依靠，並在不幸情況下獲得可信且有效的支援。
第三，我談到了許多社交媒體渠道銷售、鼓勵和傳播未經同意及非法獲取的色情材料。幾個月前，我們被一則令人震驚的新聞震撼：七名男子早在2010年就在一個網路論壇相識，討論共享妻子的幻想並付諸行動，甚至直播這些行為。
我們能採取哪些措施防止施害者實施如此惡劣的行為，保護作為母親、姐妹和朋友的女性和女孩？如何追究網路論壇和社交媒體服務的責任？他們允許有害內容流傳的時間越長，且伺服器位於海外時響應使用者舉報的時效性越差，我們如何防止此類事件再次發生？
最重要的是，良好的網路習慣始於建立在尊重基礎上的富有同情心和安全的線下世界。網路性傷害事件往往涉及權力和羞辱元素。為了控制受害者，性暴力施害者往往採用操控和脅迫等手段。
施害者不一定從行為本身獲得滿足感，而是賦予男性權力的意義，這可能凌駕於行為目標之上。
因此，我們創造、規範和傳播關於女性的內容至關重要。我們如何推廣基於能力的性別平等資訊，超越刻板印象、物化和過度性化？
除了內容，網路空間也是我們相互交流的場所。但在一個陌生人多於溝通、觀點分歧且迥異的世界裡，我們如何營造一個尊重的空間？
遺憾的是，我們經常看到帶有種族主義或粗魯言論的評論。有時這些偽裝成“友好評論”，或由匿名噴子賬號釋出，其創作者在現實生活中可能不會當面發表此類言論，但在網路背後卻感到有恃無恐。
雖然他們的怨氣可能真實存在，但我們必須在數字教育方面做得更好，使人們不失去基本的同情心和包容心，並理解憤怒發言的後果。
我們如何突破演算法和過濾氣泡，這些機制似乎無一例外地確認我們已有的信念和偏見，同時隱藏挑戰我們思維的內容？這種氣泡導致社會極化和分裂，甚至現實生活中的朋友也無法接納不同的觀點或頻率。
關於網路習慣及我們如何將社交媒體融入日常生活，存在兩個極端。一方面是對技術的恐懼，阻礙參與，例如老年人會刻意避開只接受電子支付的攤位；另一方面是個別人可能沉迷社交媒體，過度消費內容或參與網路賭博。
我們如何更好地裝備各年齡層和不同素養水平的個體，培養積極的網路習慣？先生，社群發揮著作用。基於社群的數字干預和創新是我們作為人民能夠承擔責任並解決這些問題的關鍵途徑。例如，NUGU是一款基於群組的應用，已被用來改善自我調節的智慧手機使用，且效果顯著。在我的選區正山-實裡達，一群名為正山查帕朗俱樂部的青年以多種語言和方言為長者舉辦一對一數字工作坊，提升他們的數字素養。非營利組織如新加坡網路青年也發揮重要作用。2022年啟動的“安全上網倡議”旨在培養中學生更安全的網路習慣，迄今已覆蓋33,944名學生。
除了專案，歸根結底是培養積極且值得信賴的網際網路文化。這對確保每個人都能充分參與尤為重要，包括有特殊需要的朋友。研究顯示，網路生活可能為自閉症等個體提供安全感。在數字空間，他們對溝通和參與方式擁有更大控制權，促進了互動中的平靜感。政府還能做些什麼來裝備和賦能特殊需要人士，實現數字參與和獨立生活？
技術可以成為偉大的平衡器，讓你在網上社群找到患有相同罕見疾病的支持者，或線上約會，或在虛擬現實中游覽現實中可能永遠無法見到的地方，或成為團隊遊戲中的英雄。但這隻有在特殊需要人士能夠利用輔助技術並以符合其世界理解方式學習數字技能時才能實現。
數字賦能計劃自啟動以來已服務多少人？是否有計劃進一步搭建數字結構，例如建立專門網站，培育無障礙和包容性的線上平臺？
當然，社會努力必須輔以嚴格的政策和執法。隨著技術進步速度加快，監管者難以跟上步伐，在灰色地帶，事實上的規則有時由不一定以公眾利益為重的主導者制定。
從資料隱私、內容監管、網路傷害到人工智慧，歐盟（EU）、美國和澳大利亞等司法管轄區也在制定新規。然而，這帶來了自身的複雜性。數字空間並不總是止於物理邊界，數字治理和法規的碎片化可能導致法律拼湊，惡意分子利用漏洞遊走，例如隱藏在複雜IP地址背後的詐騙者。
最終，受害的往往是無辜者。除了有效調查，我們如何更好地為網路詐騙受害者提供情感和心理支援，幫助他們應對深刻的失落感和不公？
執法同樣關鍵，社交媒體平臺發揮重要作用。2023年7月，谷歌推出了YouTube優先舉報者計劃，授權社群合作伙伴接受培訓，評估違反YouTube社群準則的內容。這些優先舉報者包括Touch和SG Her Empowerment等組織，能夠直接向谷歌舉報內容，使問題內容優先審查。
通過讓社群在內容審查和建立信任安全方面發揮更大作用，有助於打造更具韌性的網際網路文化。先生，請允許我簡短地用馬來語發言。
（馬來語）：[請參閱方言發言。] 在當今世界，我們不斷被技術包圍。技術幫助我們，但也可能傷害我們。我們的數字社群必須建立彼此信任，無論年齡和背景如何，方法包括：
理解演算法如何運作，謹慎避免沉迷於演算法，以致不再考慮其他觀點。我們也可能因所展示內容而陷入狹隘觀點，這類內容可能在社會中製造緊張。因此，培養健康的網路習慣非常重要，以便我們能在日常生活中受益於技術。
其次，即使在屏幕後也要謹慎溝通。技術讓許多人有機會表達他們關心的問題，但也成為網路傷害的平臺。根據本地獨立非營利組織SG Her Empowerment（SHE）的一項研究，五分之三的新加坡人經歷過網路傷害或認識經歷過的人。隱藏身份的能力讓許多“鍵盤俠”有了信心，敢於線上發表評論，而現實中不敢直接對人說或做。許多此類案件被舉報，其中一起涉及2021年對本地女性阿薩提扎（宗教教師）的猥褻調查。謹慎溝通，以及提高對網路傷害受害者的意識和支援，必將對我們努力為社會各階層創造安全網路空間產生重大影響。
（英語）：先生，每一次技術進步都伴隨著風險。問題不在於如何阻止潮流，而在於我們如何迅速改變作為數字社群的相互尊重和保護方式，作為線上世界的平等參與者。為此，我希望國家繼續推進靈活、協作、包容、賦能且以人為本的國家數字戰略。
議長先生：副教授拉茲瓦娜·貝古姆。
下午3點08分
副教授拉茲瓦娜·貝古姆·阿卜杜勒·拉希姆（提名議員）：議長先生，感謝尊敬的議員陳佩玲女士與沙拉爾·塔哈先生、蘇涵妮女士、陳潔茵女士和任亞歷克斯先生共同提出這項重要動議。
陳佩玲女士在發言中提出了若干策略，強調需要採取全面的全民方法，與私營和公共部門合作，建設包容且安全的數字社會。
我支援這項動議。我的發言來自教育視角，聚焦共同責任、意識和問責。
2014年，新加坡啟動了智慧國計劃，願景是打造“一個人們能夠更有能力過上有意義且充實生活的國家，技術無縫支援，提供激動人心的機會給所有人”。
多年來，我們取得了良好進展，在醫療、交通、金融和教育等關鍵領域實現顯著轉型。新加坡因其成功而聞名。根據瑞士商學院管理發展研究所釋出的2023年智慧城市指數，新加坡是亞洲最智慧的城市，全球排名第七。
議長先生，這是了不起的成就，我們的持續成功依賴於包容性以及確保所有新加坡人都能從定義智慧國格局的技術進步中受益的承諾。然而，我們必須做得更多，確保無論年齡、種族或社會背景，每個人都能充分受益於數字服務，並能有意義地參與數字世界。
在分享我對建設包容且安全數字社會的更多看法之前，我想指出一些擔憂。
先生，隨著我們邁向數字互聯的未來，網路安全威脅增加。數字詐騙攻擊上升，去年新加坡遭遇了3200萬次此類攻擊。根據新加坡警察部隊資料，2023年上半年，詐騙和網路犯罪案件接近2.5萬起，比2022年同期增長近70%。值得關注的是，這些犯罪受害者中超過50%是20至39歲的年輕成年人。
詐騙手法也在變化。就在上週，媒體報道了美國發生的一起網路綁架詐騙案，受害者是一名17歲的外國學生。
數字空間並不免疫於現實世界存在的社會問題。網路騷擾、歧視和仇恨言論普遍存在，影響各年齡段和不同背景的人士。
根據本地獨立非營利組織SG Her Empowerment最近的一項調查，報告個人經歷過網路騷擾或歧視的受訪者中，52%年齡在15至24歲之間。同一調查顯示，五分之二的受害者報告因騷擾或歧視經歷至少遭受一次嚴重後果，包括身心健康問題和自殺念頭。
議長先生，資料表明年輕人風險更大。這一點由尊敬的議員陳潔茵女士和納迪婭·桑丁女士強調。資料也顯示我們意識到問題的嚴重性，並正逐步通過強有力的立法和監管來緩解局勢。
此時，我要讚揚政府的積極主動，持續關注這些問題。同時感謝眾多社群機構持續支援犯罪受害者並提供預防教育專案。他們的參與強化了與社群部門合作的重要性。採取全民方法時，必須認識到社群機構在與受害者及潛在施害者合作中的作用。
既然我已指出當前挑戰，接下來分享我的潛在策略。
首先，數字信任。議長先生，數字進步時代帶來創新、連線和經濟擴充套件的諸多可能。但要釋放這些潛力，需要信任和共同責任。與大多數由私營部門驅動技術創新的國家不同，新加坡政府在此領域扮演核心角色。這種做法取得顯著成果，使新加坡處於全球前沿。
例如，憑藉超過50萬個警察監控攝像頭和基於網路的警察門戶，新加坡被視為世界上最安全的國家之一。眾所周知，安全是馬斯洛需求層次中的基礎需求。在新加坡，我們很好地滿足了這一需求。
隨著我們繼續擁抱數字化，也在積極推動公民參與，注重共創。但我們還需努力培養共同責任感，培育積極公民意識。議長先生，請允許我舉例說明。
作為新加坡社會科學大學公共安全與安保專案負責人，我與多組學生合作，解決網路犯罪、詐騙，特別是技術促成的性暴力問題。我自豪地分享，自2020年以來，我專案的學生在社群機構支援下，開發了多個社群參與專案，提高公眾對技術促成性暴力的認識。
該專案的關鍵經驗之一是需要讓年輕人積極參與，利用他們的社交網路提高意識。
通過讓可能使用數字服務並可能受到其傷害的人參與，提出並實施有效機制防止非法行為，年輕人還能通過教育潛在施害者幫助解決行為根源。這類舉措也為可能經歷心理健康問題的年輕人提供了尋求幫助的機會。
其次，數字素養。議長先生，要建設安全的數字社會，政府和企業必須在國內外合作，優先保障網路安全。然而，儘管政府和包括企業在內的私營部門有責任，網路安全攻擊往往針對消費者。因此，提升消費者的網路安全意識至關重要。
賦予個人在數字世界中導航的知識和技能是根本的。隨著我們推進智慧國計劃，重點放在創新和提高生產力的同時，我們應同步加強全民的數字素養。通過這樣做，我們可以確保每個人，無論年齡或背景，都能利用技術的優勢，同時瞭解相關風險。
同樣重要的是認識到，賦權不僅僅是擁有做某些事情的能力。它還涉及培養負責任的行為和問責制。這不僅僅是向個人分享和告知“該做與不該做”的事情。需要做更多工作，真正賦予個人在數字世界中保護自己和他人隱私的能力和責任感。
前進的一種方式是考慮引入對負責任的網路行為的激勵，無論是通過表彰計劃還是其他實質性獎勵。積極的強化可以激勵公民積極為社群福祉做出貢獻。
第三，數字公民身份。議長先生，所有使用電子裝置上網並與他人互動的人都是數字世界的數字公民。數字公民身份要求個人在網上負責任地行事，遵守法律，保護隱私，管理聲譽，並考慮自己的網路行為如何影響自己、熟人及更廣泛的數字社群。議長先生，請簡短用馬來語表達。
（馬來語）：[請參閱本地語言發言。]數字公民身份指的是個人在使用技術和虛擬世界時負責任且審慎行事的概念。
父母在塑造一代在數字世界中明智且負責任行事的人方面發揮重要作用，通過提供良好的指導和支援。
在此背景下需要教給孩子的價值觀包括法律意識、保護隱私、管理聲譽，以及考慮其網路行為對自己和全球數字社群的影響。
（英語）：在新冠疫情期間，數字工具的使用成為必需。數字工具使世界得以繼續運轉，通過遠端工作保持經濟活力。成年人並非唯一受益者，兒童和年輕人廣泛依賴數字工具進行教育和娛樂。
當時我們處於危機模式，必須迅速反應和即興應對。現在環境穩定，父母和教師應支援並指導孩子如何在網路環境中安全且負責任地溝通與協作。
正如所有孩子都需要父母和教師的幫助成為好公民，今天被稱為數字原住民的年輕人也需要指導，學習如何在數字世界中應用公民原則。推廣數字公民價值觀，強調同理心、寬容和包容，將促進積極的網路文化，確保安全且更和諧的數字社會。
議長先生，總結來說，構建一個安全且包容的數字社會是一項複雜挑戰，需要全民參與，包括個人、社群、政府和企業的合作。通過提升數字信任、推進數字素養和培養數字公民文化，我們可以為未來奠定基礎，使每個人都能參與並在數字世界中茁壯成長。
讓我們共同塑造一個新加坡，一個智慧國，同時也是一個安全國，數字社會體現人類最美好的品質——一個有韌性、包容且基於平等與尊重原則的社會。基於此，我支援該動議。
議長先生：何麗瑩女士。
下午3時20分
何麗瑩（馬西嶺-裕地） ：議長先生，為了建設一個包容且安全的數字社會，三方主體必須各盡其責。正如拉茲瓦娜副教授剛才與我們分享的，基於相互信任和共同責任，企業和社群夥伴持續為使用者提供在快速變化的數字社會中所需的技能，或為無法使用數字技術的人提供無障礙選項，同時幫助遏制網路威脅，如詐騙，並教育公眾。
我很高興注意到近年來，我們伍德格羅夫的多個社群夥伴已努力使數字社會對社群所有人更具可及性。一個很好的例子是位於伍德格羅夫福春鄰里中心的POSB伍德蘭西分行。翻新後，該分行現僅提供全天候24小時自助銀行服務，分行員工仍在正常營業時間內為客戶，尤其是長者，指導如何使用新型櫃員機訪問所需服務。該分行還設有社群空間，專門舉辦多語言講座和研討會，旨在進一步教育居民有關數字銀行和電子支付服務。
我還要感謝新加坡數字辦公室（SDO）的數字大使們，他們在2023年支援了伍德格羅夫共12場以長者為中心的社群活動，如長者嘉年華和數字技能提升工作坊。
儘管福春社群中心的SG數字社群中心因正在進行重大升級工程而關閉，SDO仍與基層組織緊密合作，在伍德格羅夫多個地點設立流動櫃檯，提高居民對數字技術的認識並激勵他們採用數字技術，提升數字技能。
然而，許多伍德格羅夫的長者告訴我，儘管他們現在配備了智慧手機，能夠使用Facebook和WhatsApp等應用與家人朋友保持聯絡，但他們仍對獨自探索和使用數字世界感到擔憂。這不足為奇，因為他們不斷聽聞新加坡同胞因網路詐騙遭受巨大經濟損失的令人心碎的故事。
一個令人警醒的例子是我一位60多歲的伍德格羅夫居民，他因冒充詐騙損失了近80萬新元的夫妻積蓄。這筆錢原本是他們朝覲朝聖和退休後生活的保障。
面對幾乎每天都有類似詐騙新聞和軼事報道，我們如何確保新加坡人，尤其是長者，對各種數字平臺的安全性建立足夠信任，開始自信使用，同時保持對不斷演變風險的警惕？
我認為大型機構，如銀行和電商平臺，需要做更多工作防止網路詐騙造成損失並承擔相應責任。正如陳武明博士早前所述，方法應以消費者保護為中心。
就在兩天前，我在每週的“與民會面”時接待了伍德格羅夫居民餘先生，他分享了自去年6月以來與銀行的不愉快經歷。當時，餘先生在網上預訂酒店時，因在假冒網站輸入一次性密碼（OTP）而中招惡意軟體。他發現信用卡被未經授權扣款超過6000新元后，立即聯絡銀行客服要求終止交易。但客服告知，由於款項尚未被詐騙者接收，他必須等到下一個月賬單作為證據後才能對欺詐交易提出異議。
餘先生採納了客服建議。近六個月後，銀行調查完成後回覆，要求他承擔50%的未經授權交易金額。更令人氣憤的是，銀行在書面回覆中提醒他“務必妥善保管憑證，並參考銀行網站了解防詐騙資訊”。
因此，餘先生對銀行拒絕及時終止欺詐交易感到不滿和困惑。他還能做什麼或做得更好？遇到類似情況的人應如何應對？
與此同時，另一家銀行在一篇新聞報道中被採訪時表示，其客戶因惡意軟體詐騙損失全部積蓄，銀行同樣認為客戶“仍是最有效的防線，強烈敦促客戶在不斷變化的威脅環境中保持警惕和謹慎”。
我不同意兩家銀行的立場，即他們方便地期望個人客戶自我防範。採取這種做法可能阻礙更多人成為數字社會的積極參與者，並導致更多人對銀行的信譽失去信心。
所有利益相關者都有共同責任承諾採取全民方法，通過建立包容且安全的數字社會來維持信任。因此，銀行可以且應該做更多貢獻，如採用更好的反網路釣魚解決方案、改進身份驗證、對異常交易保持高度警惕，以保障賬戶安全並防止詐騙發生。
我之前提到的那對因冒充詐騙失去全部積蓄的長者夫婦的子女告訴我，銀行本可以做更多防止未經授權交易發生。銀行應關注客戶的常規銀行行為。該夫婦的賬戶多年無取款活動，直到詐騙者通過兩筆大額交易取走超過50萬新元。銀行應在放款前致電確認異常請求。
還有其他方案可幫助保護資金免受詐騙。去年11月，華僑銀行推出名為“OCBC Money Lock”的反詐騙安全功能，允許客戶鎖定賬戶資金，只有在銀行驗證客戶身份後才能解鎖。這是個好舉措，我希望金融管理局（MAS）能強制所有新加坡銀行推廣此功能，並鼓勵長者註冊。
此外，MAS還可考慮與銀行和保險公司合作，推出類似存款保險計劃的保險方案，任何銀行賬戶持有人均可購買，以在遭遇網路詐騙時保護資金。
同時，我們應加強金融機構與社群的合作。華僑銀行的“數字銀髮族”計劃，以及星展基金會與資訊通訊媒體發展局（IMDA）合作的數字素養專案，都是此類舉措的典範。如果與前述措施結合，銀行還可利用這些工作坊推廣“資金鎖定”功能和反詐騙保險，鼓勵長者註冊。我希望這些工作坊能像SDO舉辦的那樣便捷易得，我也將探索如何幫助伍德格羅夫居民受益。最後，請議長允許我用普通話總結。
（普通話）：[請參閱本地語言發言。]近年來，詐騙不斷演變，尤其是網路詐騙。不斷變化的詐騙手法讓許多新加坡人，尤其是長者，感到焦慮和無助。
新加坡並非唯一的詐騙目標國。隨著技術進步，全球各國都面臨如何打擊詐騙的棘手問題。
去年10月，《海峽時報》報道，全球因詐騙造成的年損失高達1.4萬億美元。澳大利亞2022年損失約26億新元。鄰國馬來西亞去年12月報告，1月至11月損失高達13億令吉。
我們如何防止自己成為下一個詐騙目標？一些長者採取“視而不見，聽而不聞”的方式以求安全，即根本不嘗試。
我認為這絕非理想，會讓他們在快速變化的數字社會中更加落後。如今，在中國等國，網購和移動支付已成為社會不可或缺的一部分，現金支付迅速成為過去。
總之，打擊詐騙需要全社會共同努力，公眾需保持警惕，及時瞭解各種詐騙型別，政府資助的資訊渠道提供支援。同時，企業如銀行應協同提升數字安全防護。我們共同努力，提升公眾信心，培育包容且安全的數字社會。
議長先生：寶拉女士。
下午3時32分
寶拉女士（非選區議員）：議長先生，我發言支援該動議。
進步新加坡黨（PSP）認同建設包容且安全的數字社會需要全民參與。隨著社會數字化，網路詐騙種類增多，降低了許多新加坡人對數字工具的信任。關於人們瞬間失去畢生積蓄的恐怖故事屢見不鮮。
去年，我父母將半生積蓄交給我存入我的銀行賬戶，而非他們自己的，因為他們不相信自己的賬戶資金安全。他們對銀行賬戶資金安全的信任是有生以來最低的。我相信許多先驅和獨立世代的新加坡人有同感。
多年來，政府一直推動新加坡人實現財務自立。對大多數人來說，自己的儲蓄是維持生活尊嚴的依靠。儲蓄安全受到威脅對我們來說是大事。鑑於問題嚴重，我認為政府可以做更多工作保障公民儲蓄安全，培養強烈的消費者保護文化。
擬議的共享責任框架（SRF）要求金融機構和電信公司承擔相關職責以減輕網路釣魚詐騙，並在職責被違反時向受害者賠付，是朝正確方向邁出的一步，但只是初步。SRF存在兩個主要問題。
首先，SRF範圍有限，僅涵蓋網路釣魚詐騙，不包括惡意軟體詐騙、冒充警察詐騙、投資和戀愛詐騙等其他詐騙型別，保護範圍較窄。例如，最近一戶家庭因下載惡意軟體購買有機雞蛋而失去積蓄，SRF對此無幫助。
其次，金融機構和電信公司需履行的職責極為有限。SRF要求金融機構執行四項職責：
一、數字令牌啟用後至少設12小時冷卻期，期間禁止高風險活動。
二、傳送數字令牌啟用和高風險活動通知警報。
三、通過簡訊、電子郵件或應用內通知向消費者提供出賬交易通知。
四、提供24/7舉報渠道和自助功能，供消費者及時阻止賬戶的線上支付轉賬。
這四項職責不足以激勵金融機構主動保護客戶，消除系統中的潛在欺詐風險。雖然消費者的警惕和個人責任是防詐騙的重要防線，但普通消費者的資源遠不及金融機構。
金融機構有能力通過監控交易和檢測可疑支付流動來更好地保護消費者。個人罕見或從未進行的大額海外交易應立即觸發金融機構系統的警報。這不會影響經常進行此類交易的企業，鑑於金融機構IT基礎設施的規模和能力，實施難度不大。
與新加坡框架相比，英國等司法管轄區已趨向於要求銀行對詐騙受害者進行全額賠償，除非消費者存在欺詐或重大過失。澳大利亞和歐盟也考慮採用此模式。
我承認全額賠償存在道德風險問題，因此建議銀行與消費者共同分擔責任。
在評估網路詐騙問題時，存在金融安全與便利性和生產力之間的權衡。一方面，如果銀行對任何損失完全不承擔責任，那麼由於節省人力成本，銀行將僅憑金融激勵越來越多地轉向數字金融交易和服務。數字金融交易的成本表現為更容易損失大量資金，而這部分成本由銀行客戶承擔，尤其是最脆弱的群體。此外，銀行掌控其銀行應用程式和支付流程中的安全功能，但客戶無法控制這些功能，卻為任何不足之處買單。這顯然是不平衡的，因此不可持續。
在考慮金融安全與便利性和生產力之間的權衡時，監管機構可能難以為所有人劃定統一的界限。例如，當華僑銀行在其銀行應用中引入禁止下載可疑應用的安全功能時，一些客戶提出了投訴。可以預見，不同客戶會有不同需求，但不必一刀切。
我敦促政府考慮建立一個多層次系統，提供不同安全性與便利性的選擇。銀行可以提供不同版本的銀行應用和流程；例如，一個版本具有最高安全功能但便利性較低，且在不受共享責任框架（SRF）覆蓋的網路詐騙案件中，銀行承擔75%的財務損失賠償。另一個版本安全功能較低，便利性較高，銀行承擔50%的賠償，滿足需要更大便利性的客戶。
銀行可以根據不同的責任水平調整其應用和流程中的安全功能。例如，銀行可能需要重新評估要求使用獨立實體令牌的利弊。尊敬的議員林秀玉女士此前提到過從銀行獲取令牌的困難。雖然令牌對銀行來說是額外成本，但它提供了額外的安全保障，需要第二個裝置來授權交易，而不僅僅是可能被惡意軟體劫持的手機。以最近涉及的“蛋”詐騙案中的家庭為例，如果當時要求使用實體令牌，該家庭可能不會失去他們的全部積蓄。
銀行是私人商業實體，預期會在投資額外安全措施時進行成本效益分析。但政府可以通過施加損失分擔安排來改變其成本效益分析，從而影響其決策。
賠償金額可設定上限，最高賠償金額相當於基本退休金額。
在此模式下，銀行和客戶共同承擔因詐騙造成的損失責任，雙方都有激勵保持警惕。客戶可以選擇自己舒適的安全級別。銀行將有動力根據其安全能力推動線上交易，從而確保數字金融交易的發展更加平衡和全面。賠償上限有助於限制銀行的風險敞口，同時確保對最脆弱群體給予最大保護。
另一個應承擔職責以減輕詐騙風險的機構是中央公積金局（CPF），許多新加坡人的畢生積蓄存放於此。令人擔憂的是，最近出現了詐騙者控制使用者的Singpass和銀行賬戶後清空CPF賬戶的趨勢。直到2023年6月，CPF局和GovTech才為某些CPF電子服務引入了Singpass面部驗證作為升級認證挑戰。
2023年10月，我的同事梁文偉先生曾就為何CPF網站未實施銀行常用的安全措施（如交易限額和終止開關）提出議會質詢。令人欣慰的是，自2023年11月30日起，所有55歲及以上CPF會員將預設設定每日線上CPF提款限額為2,000新元。
然而，該預設每日限額仍可隨時線上調整至最高200,000新元。這包括已啟用CPF提款鎖的會員，該鎖會立即將每日提款限額設為0。
更改提款限額需通過Singpass面部驗證。我想請政府確認，面部驗證是否可以通過使用詐騙受害者的照片來通過？是否會加強保護措施，要求已啟用CPF提款鎖的會員必須親自到CPF服務中心更改提款限額，類似銀行資金鎖賬戶的安排？
我們對銀行施加的保護儲戶儲蓄的同樣職責，也應同樣施加於CPF局，以保護CPF會員的退休儲蓄。
最後，我想談談Singpass。我們已見到詐騙者如何控制受害者的Singpass。我擔心Singpass中儲存的大量資訊，如家庭成員、教育背景、收入和CPF資訊等。如果詐騙者控制了受害者的Singpass，是否會獲得關於個人及其家庭成員的非常全面的資訊，從而設計更多詐騙手段？這些廣泛的資訊是否必要？政府是否考慮重新引入Singpass的實體令牌？議長先生，請用中文發言。
（中文）：[請參閱本地語言發言。]議長先生，進步新加坡黨支援今天的動議。建立包容且安全的數字社會對我國至關重要。近年來，詐騙案件激增，令許多市民深感憂慮。
去年，我的父母將一半積蓄分存到我的銀行賬戶以保管，擔心他們可能成為詐騙受害者，失去辛苦賺來的錢。我相信許多老年市民有同樣的感受。
多年來，政府倡導市民自力更生。因此，對許多市民來說，儲蓄是確保他們有尊嚴生活的唯一手段。網路詐騙嚴重影響了市民對儲蓄安全的信心。政府可以做更多工作來保障市民儲蓄和保護消費者。
根據新加坡金融管理局（MAS）和信息通信媒體發展局（IMDA）釋出的共享責任框架，金融機構仍缺乏積極保護消費者和消除系統內潛在詐騙的足夠激勵。
進步新加坡黨敦促政府考慮實施多層次共享責任框架。在該框架下，消費者可以在安全性和便利性之間做出權衡。
例如，消費者可以選擇使用具有高安全功能的銀行應用，雖然可能帶來不便，但在發生詐騙損失時，銀行必須承擔75%的損失。如果消費者選擇安全功能較低的應用，銀行承擔的損失比例將較低。這將為消費者提供更多選擇，同時激勵銀行提供更安全的線上交易，在我國數字化與安全之間取得更好平衡。
（英文）：議長先生，作為一個國家，我們需要採取積極和全面的方法打擊詐騙，創造一個包容且安全的數字社會。
詐騙對受害者造成嚴重後果。除了經濟損失，受害者還會遭受心理和情感創傷，如因被騙而感到羞愧。其家庭成員也會受到經濟影響，例如法律上可能需贍養因詐騙失去畢生積蓄的父母的子女。
當人們失去畢生積蓄，無法獨立生活，必須依賴救濟和慈善生存時，社會最終將承擔這筆賬單。
全球反詐騙聯盟最近的一項研究顯示，新加坡在每位受害者因詐騙損失金額方面居世界首位。這使新加坡人成為詐騙者最具吸引力的目標。
作為一個國家，我們還有很多工作要做，以創造更安全的數字社會。讓我們共同努力實現這一目標。
議長先生：瑪麗亞姆·賈法爾女士。
下午3時48分
瑪麗亞姆·賈法爾女士（森巴旺選區）：議長先生，閣下，我首先宣告本人是管理諮詢公司的董事總經理兼高階合夥人，業務涉及數字和人工智慧領域。
感謝尊敬的議員陳佩玲女士及通訊及資訊政府議會委員會其他成員促成本次辯論，議題對我們所有人都極為重要。我想幾乎每個人都經歷過聽聞居民因網路詐騙而失去畢生積蓄的令人心碎的故事。
我剛當議員時，一群女孩的臉被合成到在新加坡及鄰國社交媒體上傳播的色情照片上，她們的呼籲讓我震驚至深。我將永遠感激尚穆根部長和拉哈尤國務部長協助加快司法程序。
最近，在我與兀蘭區長者交流，鼓勵他們註冊“更健康的新加坡”計劃時，發現不少長者因害怕詐騙而忽視衛生部的簡訊。我還發現他們大多依賴Singpass應用中較不安全的密碼認證，部分原因是不懂使用，部分原因是不信任生物識別認證。
我支援之前同事們關於維持信任、建設包容且安全數字社會的許多觀點。我參與本次辯論，是因為我認為人工智慧，尤其是生成式人工智慧（GenAI）的迅速發展，對包容且安全數字社會的影響值得特別關注。
議長先生，在我四月的答謝動議演講中，我談到了人工智慧和生成式人工智慧的機遇與風險。我當時說：“人工智慧的進步既令人興奮又令人擔憂……我們需要讓我們的人工智慧戰略、政策和人才跟上飛速發展的步伐。所以，讓我們繫好安全帶。”
在網路空間，人工智慧和生成式人工智慧的快速發展帶來了許多風險：錯誤資訊和虛假資訊、缺乏透明度、隱私問題、倫理問題、資料洩露、偏見、經濟不平等、版權侵犯、安全風險、權力集中等。
生成式人工智慧的可訪問性使任何網際網路使用者都能操縱工具及其生成的內容，可能帶來災難性後果。例如，雖然像ChatGPT這樣的聊天機器人現在專門訓練以拒絕諸如“如何製造髒彈”等有害提示，但仍可能被冒充研究論文或電影劇本寫作的惡意行為者欺騙。
假新聞、假圖片在網路信任與安全中並不新鮮。但隨著我們從有趣的換臉應用和相機濾鏡，轉向深度偽造技術被用於有害用途（如涉及我們總理的投資詐騙）的快速擴散，顯然人工智慧為網路信任與安全開闢了新領域。
如今，我們被敦促對網路上的資訊保持謹慎和懷疑，質疑所見一切。但問題在於，有人問，我們是否應預設不信任？這是一個非常嚴肅的問題，我希望議會所有成員都能深思。
想想那位沒有開啟衛生部“更健康的新加坡”報名簡訊的阿嬤。在商業領域，有公司已禁止生成式人工智慧工具進入其系統。當“預設不信任”變成“不信任和退出”時，會發生什麼？
議長先生，信任是任何數字社會的基礎。它賦予我們線上互動和交易的信心。它是推動創新和採用的必要條件，以實現數字和人工智慧的巨大益處。如果我們希望人工智慧提升新加坡的經濟和社會潛力，如果我們希望新加坡及新加坡人在開發、部署、採用和創新技術方面處於前沿，我們需要人民確信他們使用的產品和服務是安全的。如果我們要乘坐賽車，就必須信任剎車。
幾乎所有主要平臺都設有某種剎車或安全保障。安全保障可以採取政策、實踐和工具的形式，如健全的社群準則、內容稽核政策以及確保資料具有代表性並剔除偏見。
機器學習和人工智慧本身將在建立新型安全保障和建立信任方面發揮強大作用。機器學習工具可用於設計隱私和信任機制，檢測並阻止欺詐交易。它們還可以根據風險比例調整權衡。
人工智慧工具還能減少偏見——包括人為偏見和滲入機器學習模型的偏見。通過識別和測量偏見，它們使平臺能夠採取措施減少歧視和偏見，或去偏演算法。一個著名例子是Airbnb，利用資料和機器學習減少對黑人客人和房東的歧視，促進平臺包容性。
議長先生，人工智慧時代已經來臨。我在四月的演講中表達的立場未變。應對相關風險不能是恐懼和癱瘓，而應是裝備自己以知識、策略和工具來應對這些風險，包括利用人工智慧本身推動我們前進。
為此，我提出五點建議，基於同事們的部分建議，以在人工智慧時代通過建設包容且安全的數字社會來維持信任。
第一，加強安全保障，追究社交媒體服務對有害內容、詐騙和惡意廣告（包括人工智慧生成內容）傳播的責任，保護消費者，尤其是兒童。
網路安全和詐騙是全球性問題。雖然對受害者來說永遠感覺不到及時，但政府正積極採取措施保障安全和包容。
2023年2月通過的《網路安全法》及2023年7月IMDA釋出的《網路安全守則》加強了監管框架，要求社交媒體服務採取預防措施防止網路傷害。政府還推出了一系列防範網路詐騙的措施，包括備受關注的共享責任框架，計劃今年實施。
政府採取的做法是通過參與和利用多種手段，不僅是立法，還有自願採用行為準則和工具，確保措施有效且可持續，然後再強制執行。這種做法有助於建立信任和支援，減少常見的阻力。
事實上，新加坡是全球最早引入法規，確保指定社交媒體服務採取預防措施保障網路安全的國家之一。相比之下，英國《網路安全法》因政治危機延遲了五六年，難以推進。
一些打擊詐騙的措施，如強制所有字母數字簡訊發件人ID在新加坡簡訊發件人ID註冊處（SSIR）註冊，在許多其他司法管轄區難以實施。
尊敬的議員林秀玉女士曾表示，如果政府監管機構不加強幹預，我們正走向數字交易和銀行業務信心危機。我相信政府已採取重要措施，也相信他們會繼續採取更多措施。我希望部長能更新最近宣佈措施的實施情況，並分享政府可能探索的額外措施，包括可能擴大對其他平臺如線上技術平臺的限制範圍。
然而，這是一個快速發展的領域。與人工智慧生成內容相關的網路傷害，如深度偽造，可能未被現行法律充分涵蓋。
新加坡對人工智慧監管採取務實態度——我會這樣表述：我們不應急於監管尚未充分理解且解決方案尚不明確的領域。相反，採取參與、測試不同方案和建設能力的方式，同時認識到立法終將到來。這是一種明智的做法。
儘管如此，政府應繼續審查《網路安全法》中針對人工智慧生成內容的安全保障和條款是否充分。目前，我想請問部長是否計劃近期引入任何針對人工智慧的保護措施，特別是我呼應許多人對深度偽造的擔憂。
放眼全球，英國《網路安全法》已將傳播深度偽造色情內容定為非法，平臺需迅速採取行動將其移除。美國行政命令旨在建立檢測人工智慧生成內容和認證官方內容的標準和最佳實踐，商務部負責制定內容認證和水印指導。
似乎有一種勢頭推動著審查防範有害深度偽造的保障措施，並釐清責任歸屬。正如尊敬的議員陳武明所指出的，這也對民主本身構成風險。
確實，有呼聲要求在任何與人工智慧的互動中，無論是文本、影像還是語音，人工智慧都必須宣告其身份。此外，我們還必須考慮如何支援那些因深度偽造而被利用形象並受到傷害的個人受害者——這是一種極具創傷性的經歷。
第二，推動全國範圍內的合作伙伴關係，涵蓋線上生態系統中的所有利益相關者，教育並賦能我們的人民，尤其是年輕人和老年人，提升他們對詐騙、網路危害和數字素養（包括人工智慧素養）的認識。
雖然科技平臺可以且必須做得更多，但建設一個包容且安全的數字社會需要更多利益相關者的共同努力。這些利益相關者包括政府、公共部門、私營部門、科技平臺，還有電信公司、銀行、人工智慧公司及其他提供線上產品和服務的公司、執法機構、家長和照顧者、學校、社會服務及社群組織，而最核心的則是個人自身。
人工智慧素養指的是一套能力，使人們能夠批判性地評估、有效溝通並與人工智慧協作。昨日，陳振聲部長分享了教育部如何通過培養學生的人工智慧基礎知識、促進安全和負責任地使用人工智慧、採取防範人工智慧風險的措施以及教授網路健康技能（如評估資訊和識別假新聞）來為學校和高等教育機構的學生做準備。
早期兒童教育中對人工智慧素養的興趣正在萌芽，並取得了一些積極效果。一些研究強調，早期人工智慧素養可以改善兒童發展的多個方面，如創造性探究、情感探究和協作探究。有觀點認為，通過設計良好的人工智慧玩具和服務，如PopBots、Zhoria、Quickdraw，幼兒可以探索與人工智慧相關的概念，發展他們的數字和人工智慧素養，即使他們可能不瞭解背後的知識。另一些觀點認為，鑑於幼兒已經在使用裝置和平板電腦，重要的是他們即使在年幼時也應掌握某些資料素養元素，如理解個人資料和資料隱私的概念。
然而，也存在疑問，比如是否能為早期兒童教育開發適齡課程、早期兒童教育者自身的準備情況以及對不平等和包容性的擔憂。部長是否認為早期兒童人工智慧素養值得深入研究？
第三，政府應率先通過公共服務中的高價值應用大規模部署人工智慧，並推動線上信任與安全的研究。
最近釋出的《國家人工智慧戰略2.0》，我希望屆時能在議會得到充分討論，闡述了“為新加坡及世界公共利益服務的人工智慧”的願景。重點將放在引導人工智慧解決重大挑戰，不僅是本地的，還有全球性的，如氣候變化和人口健康，同時賦能個人、企業和社群以自信、明辨和信任的態度使用人工智慧。
政府計劃在公共服務和產業中推動有意義的應用案例，以對我們的生活產生巨大影響。我敦促政府大力推動在公共服務中大規模部署高價值應用案例。人工智慧本身不僅能創造價值，還能提升政府內部能力，因為多學科產品團隊將學會調整和部署解決方案以應對出現的弱點，政策團隊也將通過實踐學習如何防止有害活動的傳播並制定有效法規。
我們處於一個令人羨慕的位置，政府贏得了經過數十年努力建立的強大信任。如果政府在部署這些高價值應用案例時，能夠透明地披露其價值和風險，推動線上信任與安全的研究，構建和測試諸如“設計即信任”技術（如水印和內容認證）等工具，並在公共部門的應用案例中使用這些工具，新加坡可以為私營部門和全球政府樹立榜樣。
第四，引領數字經濟中負責任人工智慧的採用。負責任人工智慧是一種全面的方法，涵蓋人工智慧系統的開發、評估和部署全過程，確保其安全、可信和符合倫理。它要求透明說明產品何時及如何利用人工智慧，演算法如何影響決策，以及採取了哪些措施來減輕偏見、隱私侵犯和其他風險。負責任人工智慧的價值不僅在於風險緩解，還能增強組織與客戶之間的信任，確保客戶所使用的產品和服務是安全的。
公共部門和數字經濟各行業部署人工智慧解決方案的公司，無論是在開發產品和服務還是供應鏈人工智慧，都應在構建和部署人工智慧解決方案的同時，落實負責任人工智慧。由於負責任人工智慧需要具備不同專業、經驗和背景的團隊成員，並且需要組織各級的合作，首相和執行長本人必須從高層領導，推動並持續投資和關注。
最後，加強國際合作，涵蓋線上安全、人工智慧治理和安全。鑑於網路空間的全球性，推動對話、分享知識和合作解決方案至關重要。提升包容性人工智慧治理和互操作性，實現我們共同的可信人工智慧目標，是新加坡必須承諾並可發揮關鍵作用的領域。
早前林瑞華議員提到的AI Verify開源，實際上是一種促進國際合作的方式，也是在該領域爭取知識領導權和合法性的體現。在相關各方存在一定緊張關係時，這一點尤為不易。
類似氣候變化等全球性問題，新加坡在某些方面已走在前列。傅瑾芳部長在歷屆聯合國氣候變化大會上領導第六條和減緩談判令人印象深刻。部長能否提供我們在人工智慧治理和安全領域參與的最新情況？
議長先生，我想以感謝今天參與維護我們網路空間安全、包容和可信的多個部門和跨部工作組結束髮言。我知道這有時感覺像是在玩打地鼠遊戲，有時感覺是無償的工作。我希望全國人民能響應號召，各盡其責，繼續縮小網路空間與現實空間之間的信任差距。議長先生，我支援該動議。
議長先生：部長陳志凌博士。
下午4時07分
人力部部長兼貿易及工業部第二部長（陳志凌博士）：謝謝議長先生。我想借此機會回應議員潘慧珠女士的指控。她早前提到公積金賬戶被清空的說法不屬實，是不準確的。我們的公積金結構是，在55歲時，退休賬戶內有基本退休金額度，只有超過基本退休金額度的部分才能從公積金普通賬戶或特別賬戶提取。
我們的公積金保障措施不亞於銀行所採取的措施。話雖如此，任何屬於公積金成員的金額都是寶貴的、辛苦賺來的，對我們來說至關重要。因此，公積金局不斷審視和改進安全措施，同時保持成員的靈活性。
公積金局還與整個政府緊密合作，確保安全措施嚴密。議員也可放心，自2023年6月實施Singpass面部驗證後，未發現任何未經授權的損失。
至於其他倡議的細節，我將留待張燕芬部長在總結時說明。
議長先生：秩序。我建議現在休息，暫停會議，下午4時30分繼續主持會議。
會議於下午4時09分暫停，至下午4時30分恢復。
會議於下午4時30分恢復。
[副議長（陳淑瑩女士）主持]
建設包容且安全的數字社會
[辯論繼續]
副議長女士：嘉邁爾先生。
下午4時30分
阿裕尼區議員嚴彥松先生：副議長女士，複雜的網路詐騙日益猖獗，給受害者帶來嚴重的經濟損失，這一問題影響著各行各業的新加坡人。全國各地，無論年輕或年長、技術熟練或不熟悉技術的居民，都成為這些詐騙的受害者。我曾見過選民因詐騙失去全部積蓄，甚至定期存款賬戶也被清空。有些人和子女或父母共用賬戶，給家庭帶來雙重打擊。這些事件顯示出我們共同面臨的脆弱性。雖然我自認為技術較為熟悉，但我也不得不承認，成為受害者的威脅時刻存在。
許多受害者向我描述銀行的回應令人沮喪。舉報詐騙後，他們常收到含糊或不明確的回覆，銀行以保密為由提供的資訊有限，有時僅給予部分賠償。警方有時告知資金已被轉移至海外，無法追回。
這些詐騙的技術性質令人擔憂。驅動下載攻擊和更先進的零日漏洞利用，使惡意軟體能在使用者幾乎無操作的情況下安裝到手機上，利用作業系統和應用程式的漏洞。
鑑於這些複雜攻擊，相關部門對每起舉報的詐騙調查程度如何，尤其是涉及螢幕讀取和鍵盤記錄惡意軟體的案件？若調查不徹底，難以確定責任，確保無辜受害者不承擔非其過失的損失。預設責任是否落在受害者身上，由他們承擔大部分經濟損失？
詐騙已成為推動全民數字接入的重大障礙，尤其影響老年群體。我遇到許多老年居民，他們害怕使用網上銀行或線上支付，擔心被騙。因此，儘管數字銀行方便，我也不敢鼓勵他們使用，因擔心他們一旦成為詐騙目標，可能失去全部積蓄。
這種情況導致了阿裕尼區議員林瑞華所稱的數字銀行系統信心危機。除非當局更有效地解決詐騙問題並建立更強的消費者保護，否則我們推動全民數字賦能的努力將付諸東流。
政府應對詐騙的有力工具之一是《網路刑事危害法》。該法允許政府指示線上平臺停用涉嫌詐騙的賬戶。議會去年7月通過該法，但今年才開始逐步實施。
《網路刑事危害法何時能全面生效？鑑於新加坡每天平均發生87起詐騙，每延遲一天，都會讓許多受害者錯失救濟時機。
銀行必須承擔更大責任保護客戶。我呼應林瑞華女士早前呼籲，銀行應恢復為所有客戶預設提供實體令牌作為多因素認證措施。多因素認證依賴“你知道的東西”和“你擁有的東西”的組合。但當手機被惡意軟體感染，允許詐騙者檢視螢幕和鍵盤輸入時，這種系統就退化為單因素認證，使得擁有密碼的詐騙者能繞過額外安全層。因此，恢復實體令牌將重建關鍵的第二道安全防線。
金融管理局（MAS）必須更積極果斷地解決銀行系統中的詐騙問題，保護消費者。在我與MAS溝通為受害選民爭取權益時，發現MAS傾向將關鍵案件轉交銀行跟進，而非直接代表受害者處理和解決問題。這種委託過程使銀行承擔確定責任歸屬的重任，即機構還是受害者應對詐騙負責。這種做法令人質疑調查的公正性和有效性。
我還觀察到MAS對金融機構違規行為的執法態度存在差異。一方面，MAS對銀行線上銀行和ATM服務短暫中斷施加嚴格限制和額外資本要求等懲罰措施；另一方面，在處理詐騙案件時，缺乏同等的決斷力和嚴謹性。
MAS應要求銀行以同等強度和嚴謹性應對詐騙，保護消費者利益，正如他們對系統中斷所做的那樣。
詐騙受害者需要來自MAS等知識豐富且公正機構的全面解釋，說明詐騙如何發生，銀行、電信公司、客戶及其他實體在詐騙發生和防範中的角色。這將決定責任歸屬及損失承擔方。
此外，責任不應僅限於金融機構、電信公司和消費者。社交媒體公司和手機制造商也應對其平臺的安全負責。所有在新加坡銷售的手機應預設停用側載應用，並使終端使用者難以繞過關鍵安全功能。社交媒體平臺應建立流程，在接到通知後迅速刪除欺詐性帖子。
信息通信媒體發展局（MCI）披露，約37%的居民不定期更新裝置，許多可能是技術不熟練的使用者。期望所有人都具備技術能力保持裝置更新是不合理的。因此，消費者保護策略必須基於大量使用者不會更新裝置的前提，設計額外安全層以保護這些使用者。
應設立中央機構監督所有詐騙調查和應對工作。我瞭解反詐騙指揮部（ASCom）及其官員的重要工作，但鑑於ASCom隸屬於新加坡警察部隊商業事務部，我認為其無法對政府整體反詐騙工作負責。那麼，誰最終對政府的反詐騙工作負責？
總結我的建議如下：第一，銀行必須大幅提升消費者保護責任，包括為客戶提供實體令牌。第二，MAS應更積極介入，明確銀行、數字平臺的詐騙責任，並支援受害者。第三，《網路刑事危害法》需儘快全面實施。第四，政府應加強對科技公司平臺和裝置安全的問責。最後，應設立中央反詐騙機構，監督並最終負責政府的反詐騙工作。
副議長女士，我們正處於反詐騙鬥爭的關鍵時刻。我們對這一禍害的應對，將體現我們保護公民數字時代權益的決心。讓我們迅速果斷行動，保護人民，也保護我們自己。我支援該動議。
副議長女士：施珍麗女士。
下午4時39分
提名議員施珍麗：謝謝副議長女士。感謝我的議會同僚提出這項動議。
1970年，經濟學家米爾頓·弗裡德曼提出了一個根本性問題：“企業在社會中的角色是什麼？”他在《紐約時報》發表觀點稱，“企業的社會責任就是增加利潤。”
此後，這一敘述塑造了企業的發展。幸運的是，社會責任投資者的崛起打斷了這一敘述。社會責任投資者要求企業承擔更高的社會責任標準。這反過來推動了企業社會責任和環境、社會及治理（ESG）目標作為新優先事項的出現。
針對該動議，我想將弗裡德曼的問題更新至當今背景：在數字驅動的經濟和社會中，什麼是具有社會責任感的企業及其在社會中的角色？作為勞工權益倡導者，我想強調三個令人擔憂的趨勢，並提出三點我們作為社會可以如何應對的建議。
首先，技術將變得更加複雜和強大。我們許多人都欣賞諸如預訂或購物應用程式等技術帶來的便利。為了換取便利，我們可能同意這些應用背後的公司重新營銷我們的資料。
鑑於資料的流動性，使用者可能會發現自己成為未經請求的營銷資訊的接收者，因為公司試圖從新的消費者群體中獲利。許多人因缺乏知識或能力而難以擺脫無休止的營銷資訊網路。這種掙扎給不斷被廣告淹沒、常常被誘導在應用上花費更多時間和金錢的個人帶來了心理壓力。我們如何在數字時代培養一種尊重商業倫理的準則？
其次，技術將變得更簡單但更復雜。一方面，移動技術結合人工智慧工具將開啟服務前線人員生產力的新紀元；我們確實看到資源被定製並觸手可及，服務前線人員在與客戶互動時能夠使用。另一方面，工人也可能被技術挾持。許多工人既是使用者又是操作員，對技術的工作機制瞭解不足或幾乎不瞭解。如果公司只培訓工人以便部署而非員工發展，公司更換技術供應商的決定可能導致現有工人在短時間內難以掌握新技術。這個故事的結局往往是工人被裁員，而公司則以工人技能與業務需求不匹配為由免責。
我們如何減少因資訊不對稱而導致的工人不穩定性，並取而代之地培養公司與工人之間的共同責任感，以增強工人在數字經濟中的職業壽命？
第三，技術和網路傷害的關注使我們更加意識到自己的權利。然而，許多人不確定如何行使這些權利。雖然企業意識到需要徵求使用者對資料隱私的同意，但預設隱私設定往往難以操作。嘗試完全退出預設設定更具挑戰性。此外，同意預設設定的使用者可能不瞭解這些設定允許或意味著什麼。
在這方面，不難理解這些公司的預設心態，正如記者澤伊內普·圖菲克奇所言：“期望使用者接受他們所提供的內容，不知道自己的選擇，或沒有持續的警惕來跟蹤可用選項，無論這些選項多麼有限。”
科技公司的工人，無論是自由職業者還是員工，也未能倖免。事實上，工人可能被要求或感到有義務下載僱主或公司的應用程式，並始終同意更新應用程式的請求，卻不知道每次更新都可能重置他們的資料隱私設定，取消之前的退出選擇。
隨著越來越多公司轉型為數字化企業，我們如何引入監督機制，確保公司在獲取資料隱私許可的過程中負起責任並保持透明？這三個趨勢的核心是我們對具有社會責任感的企業及其在數字經濟和社會中的角色的期望。
我想為該動議關於建設包容和安全數字社會的敘述貢獻三點建議。
為應對未經請求的營銷的有害影響以及使用者對所交出資料的無力感，我建議監管機構採取積極措施，教育企業尊重使用者權利。例如，具有社會責任感的公司應確保預設設定優先保護使用者隱私和自主權。這意味著使用者必須能夠無限制地訪問自己的資料隱私設定。
必須為陷入不良資料隱私設定的使用者提供幫助渠道，使其能夠擺脫掠奪性公司的陷阱。這種幫助可以採取由公私部門合作管理的幫助臺形式。
監管機構應考慮對頑固不化的公司施加懲罰性措施，並建立防護欄，遏制表現出掠奪性行為的公司。
為應對技術創新和變革帶來的工人不穩定性，我敦促公司採取前瞻性方法。例如，他們可以與工會和行業機構密切合作，提高工人的數字和技術流暢度。
在這方面，具有社會責任感的公司應與工會和機構合作，持續為員工提供培訓和在職學習，以提升員工在不同技術間的流動性。這將積累工人的數字資本，是工人在數字時代延長職業壽命的關鍵。
正如弗裡德曼的敘述因社會意識的興起而被重塑，作為工人和使用者，我們有責任做出改變。
我鼓勵工人和使用者通過工會和協會等代表機構團結起來，提出我們對數字時代企業社會責任的更新期望。
通過與政府及志同道合的企業和組織密切合作，利用三方框架，我們可以建立更新的標準，合法化規範，成為安全包容數字社會的基石。副議長女士，我支援該動議。
副議長女士：萬瑞扎爾博士。
下午4時48分
萬瑞扎爾博士（惹蘭勿剎選區）：副議長女士，我支援該動議。在數字技術滲透我們生活各方面的時代，今天的動議比以往任何時候都更具相關性。
作為一名教育者和有青少年及兒童的父親，我深刻意識到數字世界的影響。我們的責任不僅僅是技術進步，還包括保護年輕一代的心理健康和福祉。
數字世界改變了教育和交流，提供了無與倫比的學習和連線機會。人工智慧是這一變革的關鍵推動者。人工智慧通過個性化學習和即時反饋，徹底改變了教育體驗。
在網路安全方面，人工智慧可以檢測潛在危險。它能識別網路欺凌模式，標記不當內容，甚至提供主動且迅速的干預，保護我們的年輕使用者。
正確利用時，人工智慧是強大的盟友。然而，人工智慧的部署也面臨挑戰。通過深度偽造或其他操縱內容傳播網路欺凌的濫用令人擔憂。
此外，如果人工智慧系統未按倫理開發，可能繼承偏見，導致歧視性做法或對某些群體保護不足。
隱私是另一個關鍵問題。利用人工智慧保障安全與尊重個人隱私權之間的平衡微妙，需要謹慎處理。
數字世界的另一個重大挑戰是網路欺凌的驚人普遍性。2020年一份全球報告揭示了影響全球兒童的“網路大流行”。
在新加坡，這一問題尤為令人擔憂，研究顯示，40%的8至12歲兒童面臨網路欺凌風險，青少年的風險更高。促成因素包括智慧手機普及、過度使用社交媒體和高頻率遊戲活動。
陽光行動聯盟（AfA）的一項線上調查證實了類似比例的青少年經歷網路欺凌，導致深刻的情感創傷。社交媒體與年輕使用者焦慮和抑鬱等心理健康問題的關聯日益明顯。我們的責任是確保數字接入不損害兒童的心理健康和福祉。
女士，請允許我分享一個軼事，關於一名中一學生艾莎，她的數字世界經歷反映了網路傷害的多面性，她的年齡與我女兒相仿。
像許多同齡人一樣，艾莎活躍於多個社交媒體平臺。儘管年齡尚小，她輕易通過偽造出生日期繞過了年齡驗證流程，這在許多平臺的註冊程式中是常見的疏漏。
在這些平臺上，艾莎遭遇了諸多挑戰。儘管這些服務聲稱有嚴格的內容過濾，她仍接觸到不當內容。這種暴露擾亂了她，扭曲了她對社會規範的理解。此外，她遭受網路欺凌。起因是一張無害的人工智慧換臉照片被髮布線上。匿名賬戶的騷擾資訊、公開嘲笑和羞辱成為日常折磨，深刻影響了她。
轉折點是學校介入，注意到她突然退縮和學業成績下降。學校與她的父母密切合作，解決她在線上遇到的問題。但問題是：是否為時已晚？
顯然，雖然學校的數字素養教育和家庭的家長參與至關重要，但需要更負責任和嚴格的政策來補充這些努力。
在這方面，我想強調涵蓋學校、家庭和網際網路的三管齊下方法，我們正在實踐。
首先，在學校，我們必須繼續鞏固數字素養和網路健康教育的成功，這被全球專家譽為“黃金標準”。我們必須繼續培養倫理和有意識的數字參與文化。我們的孩子必須理解網路世界的複雜性，辨別真偽，建立健康的數字關係。
諸如網路隱私、識別錯誤資訊以及理解數字媒體的倫理和心理影響等主題至關重要。我們必須繼續創造性地將這些數字素養專案融入各級教育體系的核心課程中。這種整合不應僅限於資訊科技課程，而應適當融入所有學科，確保孩子們將數字技能和倫理作為教育的基本組成部分。
其次，在家庭，必須加強家長在數字安全方面的參與和教育。家庭環境同樣關鍵，塑造兒童的數字體驗。家長和監護人必須充分了解情況，更重要的是積極參與。可通過定期研討會和資源實現，賦能他們在家中營造安全的數字環境。
這些舉措應側重於教育家長了解網路風險、適當的內容監控（許多人對此羞於啟齒）以及與孩子開放溝通其網路活動和體驗的策略（這項技能不易掌握，但對孩子成長至關重要）。目標是促進學校與家庭的協作，確保數字安全和使用的訊息與實踐一致。
最後，副議長女士，是網際網路本身。數字體驗的門戶必須加強。必須採取嚴格措施保護兒童免受網路傷害，實施適齡內容過濾，並對數字平臺加強監管，營造更安全的數字環境。政策和法規必須強有力，要求社交媒體服務和應用開發者承擔責任。
因此，我讚賞信息通信媒體發展局（MCI）推出的《網路安全行為準則》，該準則對數字內容和互動進行管理，旨在創造更安全的網路環境。該準則要求在新加坡具有廣泛影響力的社交媒體服務如Meta和谷歌建立系統和流程，保護使用者，尤其是兒童免受網路傷害。
然而，儘管社交媒體服務和應用開發者針對年輕使用者制定了政策，但仍存在關鍵缺口，即準確確定使用者年齡的挑戰。除了自我申報外，這些平臺需要可靠的年齡驗證措施，因為現有系統易被繞過。
因此，我敦促社交媒體服務和應用開發者加強年齡驗證措施。他們必須更加警惕，保護年輕使用者免受有害內容影響。
此外，社交媒體服務應改善對使用者舉報的響應速度，確保對標記的有害內容迅速採取行動。值得考慮這些服務移除有害內容所需的時間，我們是否應設定具體時限，並對不合規者實施更嚴格的懲罰？
艾莎的故事強調了建立強有力年齡驗證系統、有效內容過濾和平臺對網路欺凌採取積極措施的重要性，以保護我們的孩子。
作為立法者，我們必須支援並執行這些舉措。我們必須確保社交媒體服務和應用開發者遵守這些做法，並不斷調整策略，應對新興的網路安全挑戰。女士，請用馬來語發言。
（馬來語）：[請參閱本地語演講。]先生們，我們生活在一個快速發展的數字時代，數字技術觸及我們生活的方方面面。
然而，我們必須確保這個數字世界是一個安全且包容的空間，尤其是為我們的年輕一代。
在建設包容和安全數字社會的努力中，我提出三大戰略步驟，
第一，在學校，重要的是將數字素養納入課程。這不僅是教會如何使用技術，更是關於數字倫理、網路安全以及負責任地導航數字世界的技能。
第二，在家庭，家長的角色至關重要。他們需要具備知識和資源，營造安全的數字環境，併成為孩子數字教育的合作伙伴。
第三，在網際網路，我們應加強進入數字世界的門戶。這意味著應加強立法和政策，確保社交媒體服務和應用開發者承擔更多責任，保護我們的孩子免受有害網路內容影響。
信息通信媒體發展局最新推出的《網路安全行為準則》是改善網路安全，尤其是兒童安全的重要一步。
通過這種方法，我希望我們能作為社會共同努力，建設一個不僅技術先進，而且充滿和平、理解和包容的數字領域，特別是為我們的年輕一代。
（英語）：女士，最後，我呼籲服務提供者、立法者、教育者、家長和科技行業採取行動。我們必須共同制定政策、教育課程和技術解決方案，保護我們的數字空間。
確保兒童在數字世界的安全是共同責任。我的願景很簡單——看到我們的孩子能夠安全探索、學習和成長，無懼恐懼和傷害。基於此，我支援該動議。
副議長女士：王華漢先生。
下午4時59分
王華漢先生（提名議員）：女士，鑑於近期新聞報道突出深度偽造的危險及詐騙案件的上升，今天的動議時機確實恰當。
今天提出的動議有兩個關鍵重點——我們的數字社會既包容又安全。
2018年至2022年間，詐騙案件報告增加了五倍。預計2023年詐騙損失可能再次超過五億新元。電子商務、求職和網路釣魚詐騙迅速成為通過流行渠道如通訊應用、社交媒體和線上購物平臺最常見的詐騙型別。
顯然，隨著社會數字化程度加深，營造安全的網路環境至關重要。近期出現了大量網路釣魚網站和移動應用。詐騙者建立幾乎無法區分真偽的假網站。假網站誘騙使用者輸入憑證，目標是使用通訊、電子郵件和銀行服務的使用者。詐騙者常用連結縮短器使連結看似合法。
識別假網站的一種方法是仔細檢查域名。合法域名的例子是“.gov.sg”，詐騙者無法複製。"Go.gov.sg"是政府機構使用的官方連結縮短器，使用者首次點選縮短的政府連結時會被提示暫停並檢查瀏覽器位址列。政府還發布並更新可信網站列表，明確提醒公眾注意政府網站URL中的“.gov.sg”。
為了更全面的方法，政府是否可要求消費者銀行和通訊服務釋出類似明確的警示，並實施類似“暫停並檢查”功能的措施？2022年1月，新加坡金融管理局（MAS）和新加坡銀行協會（ABS）宣佈了加強數字銀行安全的額外措施。其中，新加坡銀行已取消向客戶傳送的電子郵件或簡訊中的可點選連結。
現在問題來了——在仍然存在涉及可點選連結的網路釣魚詐騙的環境下，我們如何確保所有零售銀行使用者，尤其是老年人，瞭解這一舉措？此外，這些措施並不適用於非銀行金融機構，如數字投資平臺。政府是否可以考慮擴大這些措施的範圍，確保為零售客戶服務的非銀行金融機構也遵守相同的標準？畢竟，當詐騙者的企圖失敗時，這符合終端使用者和服務提供者的利益。
在考慮了網路安全之後，我想現在將注意力轉向本動議同樣重要的另一原則。在接下來的發言中，我將提出一些問題，以確保我們的數字社會也對弱勢群體具有包容性。隨著日常生活逐漸數字化，這一點尤為重要。如今，網際網路已成為一個重要且無可比擬的資料來源。我們議會中的所有人都會毫不猶豫地在網上搜索資訊或通過社交媒體新增內容。在日常生活中，通過智慧手機進行即時支付已成為習以為常的事情。但對社會上的一些人來說，情況並非如此。
根據信息通信媒體發展局（MCI）的資料，新加坡的老年人在使用技術進行無接觸支付等用途時仍然感到困難。對於60歲以上的老年人，這種困難更為普遍。由信息通信媒體發展局（IMDA）於2020年6月設立的新加坡數字辦公室（SG Digital Office，簡稱SDO）開展了“老年人數字化”計劃，旨在幫助我們的老年人輕鬆自信地駕馭數字環境。鑑於一些老年人仍對使用技術表示猶豫，政府能否澄清這些計劃是否成功實現了其目標，以及還能做些什麼？
接下來談談我們有感官障礙的朋友們，需要更多關注以確保他們在我們發展所謂的數字社會契約時不會被落下。我將先談及聾人社群的關切，然後討論與視障人士相關的問題。
去年九月，我曾提出議會質詢，詢問政府是否會考慮在重要的政府現場直播電視廣播中提供新加坡手語（SgSL）翻譯服務。回覆中指出，自2020年4月起，信息通信媒體發展局已要求具有重大國家和公共利益的電視廣播必須配備新加坡手語翻譯。這一舉措標誌著包容性邁出了關鍵一步，諸如國慶集會和預算演講等活動確實變得對聾人社群更為可及。然而，也有一些重要的現場直播活動缺少新加坡手語翻譯，或者僅在延遲播出中提供。
例如，在最近的2023年總統論壇中，據我瞭解，新加坡手語翻譯未能即時提供，僅在延遲播出中出現。儘管2023年總統選舉是新加坡十多年來首次有競爭的總統選舉。
疫情爆發初期的關鍵現場直播，如最初的新冠肺炎簡報，也缺乏手語翻譯。雖然後來簡報中提供了手語翻譯，但我們必須認識到聾人社群在那些早期極度不確定的時刻所面臨的挑戰和不安環境。
除了電視廣播外，還有反饋指出聾人社群面臨的劣勢。如今，在我們的數字優先但非數字唯一的服務模式中，仍有政府服務涉及面對面或電話互動。這包括向建屋發展局（HDB）報告公寓損壞、諮詢衛生部（MOH）或醫療集團，或處理中央公積金局（CPF）、移民與關卡局（ICA）、陸路交通管理局（LTA）等問題。這些服務對聾人來說並非完全可及。聾人往往不得不自費聘請手語翻譯，以便通過這些渠道與政府機構溝通。
鑑於這些持續存在的挑戰，我們很容易對聾人社群產生同情。他們自然會感到，在日常生活的社會參與、獲取基本服務或時效性資訊方面，落後於聽力正常的同齡人。我知道並感謝服務新加坡（ServiceSG）與新加坡聾人協會（SADeaf）之間正在進行的合作，以解決這些可及性挑戰。儘管如此，我們仍需繼續推動包容且及時的解決方案。我們必須確保隨著世界數字化，聾人社群中沒有人感到被落下。
我將在發言的最後部分代表視障（VI）社群提出問題。根據《賦能藍圖2030》報告，大約61%的高流量政府網站是可訪問的。這些高流量網站定義為每年訪問量至少一百萬次的網站。《賦能藍圖2030》正確地承認了數字可及性存在的差距，承諾設計政府服務的可訪問網站和應用程式。此外，還旨在提高非政府部門對電子可及性的採用。
儘管如此，許多視障人士仍反饋數字不可及性是一個大問題。視障人士以不同方式消費數字內容。對於視力低下或完全失明的人，他們使用一種稱為螢幕閱讀器的軟體。螢幕閱讀器是一種文本轉語音軟體，將使用者的手機或電腦變成會說話的機器。它掃描所有可用文本並大聲朗讀內容。對於圖片和按鈕，螢幕閱讀器需要清晰、使用者友好的標籤或替代文本，以實現有意義的音訊播放。
與視障社群交談時，他們反映通過螢幕閱讀器訪問新加坡數字內容的體驗充滿不一致。例如，最新更新的HealthHub應用程式，據說盲人使用者不再像以前那樣能夠訪問該應用。之前，該應用程式按鈕標註清晰，使盲人使用者能夠輕鬆預約醫院或無縫支付賬單。更新後，按鈕變得無標籤，螢幕閱讀器只能宣佈“按鈕”或“無標籤圖形”，沒有任何有用的上下文。目前，盲人使用者只能通過試錯方式導航應用，導致效率低下且常常令人沮喪。
幸運的是，情況也有積極的一面。視障使用者報告稱，其他政府網站如稅務局（IRAS）和中央公積金局（CPF）的體驗良好，顯示只要關注和考慮得當，我們的數字服務確實可以實現可訪問性。
除了政府服務，許多本地公司的網站和應用程式對螢幕閱讀器不友好。對大多數人來說，使用政府服務並不是我們線上活動的主要部分。視障人士同樣參與多樣的線上互動。
《網路內容可訪問性指南》（WCAG）是確保線上內容對殘障人士可訪問的國際標準。在新加坡，我們的數字服務標準（DSS）與WCAG 2.1的AA級別保持一致。WCAG標準有三個符合級別：“A”為最低，“AA”為中級，“AAA”為最高。
新加坡的DSS框架僅適用於政府機構。新加坡沒有立法要求公司使其產品和服務對殘障人士可訪問。也沒有直接激勵措施促使公司為所有使用者或消費者實現可訪問性。
缺乏這些措施，公司在其線上產品中往往不會充分考慮弱勢群體。例如，一些電子商務網站使用拼圖或滑塊來驗證使用者是否為真人。這些方法通常不符合WCAG標準的基本“A”級別，該級別要求提供替代的挑戰-響應認證，以適應不同型別的感官感知。類似例子導致殘障人士在使用最簡單的線上服務時經常依賴他人。他們也渴望像你我一樣擁有獨立管理日常活動的自主權。
在我們的實體建築環境中，有建築與建設局（BCA）無障礙規範，為新開發專案設定最低無障礙要求。BCA管理的無障礙基金為改善建築無障礙提供資本激勵。這些措施惠及所有人，包括身體殘障者。
隨著商品和服務日益數字化，在數字領域實施類似標準和激勵措施以確保所有人的可訪問性變得同樣重要，甚至更為重要。我完全同意尊敬的議員陳佩玲女士在開場發言中的觀點：為什麼數字世界要與現實世界不同？
放眼海外，新加坡可以借鑑國際上已建立的線上可訪問性框架。例如，2019年歐盟指令為消費者銀行和電子商務服務等設定了可訪問性標準。該指令確保服務設計易於殘障人士使用。關鍵措施包括以所有人都能感知的方式提供資訊。這意味著為非文本內容提供替代方案，使用易讀字型，確保高對比度，並允許文本間距可調。
從線上可訪問性框架轉向，我們還必須確保未來的設計師接受有關可訪問使用者體驗設計和數字包容性的教育。為了邁向數字可訪問性成為常態的未來，必須從任何新數字專案的起始階段就融入這些原則。周到的，或者說通用設計，必須考慮到具有多樣使用需求的人群。
在討論了各種挑戰和包容性數字設計的必要性後，我想提出三項關鍵建議。
第一，是否可以考慮要求非政府的關鍵服務，首先是高流量線上平臺，遵守類似DSS的可訪問性框架？
第二，為鼓勵小型企業，政府是否可以考慮擴大生產力解決方案補助金（PSG）的範圍，支援網站、移動應用、數字產品和服務的開發與改進，使其對所有人可訪問？
第三，政府是否可以與高等院校合作，確保未來的網頁設計師和程式設計師接受充分的數字可訪問性培訓？
通過實施這些建議，我們將邁出重要步伐，確保視障社群有一天能在數字社會的各個方面實現全面包容。
副議長女士，我們今天討論的問題——確保安全、支援老年人、照顧聾人和包容視障人士——都強調了全社會共同努力的必要性。政府雖居領導地位、樹立榜樣並推動議程，但我們也需要企業、程式設計師、使用者體驗設計師和終端使用者在實踐中落實，保障網路活動安全，自信地參與數字環境。
我與社群中的人們一樣，希望通過共同努力，這個數字烏托邦不再是夢想，而很快成為現實。我支援本動議。
副議長女士：葉漢榮先生。
下午5時16分
葉漢榮先生（義順-蔡厝港選區）：副議長女士，人工智慧驅動的數字領域為連線、成長和進步提供了前所未有的機遇。它推動我們的經濟，賦能我們的社群，並以無數方式豐富我們的生活。但像任何前沿領域一樣，數字世界也隱藏著危險和挑戰。
我今天站在這裡，為一個我深切關心且亟需關注的事業發聲：確保我們的老年人擁有一個安全且包容的數字世界。
副議長女士，我們的銀髮一代建設了我們所知所愛的獅城。他們辛勤工作，付出巨大犧牲，為國家的成功奠定了基礎。如今，當他們步入人生暮年，我們有責任確保他們能在一個日益由科技塑造的世界中享受勞動成果。然而，對許多老年人來說，數字革命帶來了挑戰。複雜的介面、繁瑣的線上流程以及無處不在的網路詐騙威脅，可能讓他們感到不知所措和被排斥。
鑑於社會快速發展和數字化推動，許多人可能別無選擇，只能通過數字方式進行交易、溝通和保持聯絡。雖然許多老年人擁有智慧手機，但並非所有人都知道如何有效使用。他們可能難以理解資料與Wi-Fi的區別、數字令牌和密碼管理等基本概念。
我從親身經歷中理解這一點，幫助我的父母在手機上設定新賬戶。下載應用和建立賬戶只是第一步。真正的挑戰在於駕馭複雜的功能、登入和驗證流程。即使有耐心和反覆練習，記住步驟也不容易。故障排除、擔心被鎖定——他們有太多問題，這不僅是一次性解決。幸運的是，我的父母有我。但還有無數其他人，在數字鴻溝中沒有熟悉的聲音引導他們。
我在義順-蔡厝港的見選民活動中目睹這些掙扎。想象一下譚女士，她一生養育家庭，卻因缺乏實體渠道或清晰資訊，難以訪問線上政府服務支付賬單。
想象林先生，我們國家獨立的老兵，靠微薄資源誠實謀生，如今面對釣魚郵件感到無助。
想象阿末先生和他的妻子，他們是社群的支柱，靠勤勞和友善微笑經營椰漿飯店，供養五個孩子上學，退休夢想卻因詐騙者的狡猾應用一夜間吞噬了他們的積蓄，令他們無助且心碎。這些不是假設，而是義順-蔡厝港乃至新加坡無數老年人的真實經歷。
數字鴻溝不僅是便利問題，更是獲取基本服務、財務獨立和社會聯絡的障礙。缺乏適當的數字素養和支援，我們的老年人面臨被落下、孤立和被剝削的風險。多年來，新加坡數字辦公室（SDO）已做了大量工作，裝備老年人必要的數字技能。我想了解目前已覆蓋多少老年人，還需覆蓋多少？我們如何衡量成功？進展是否足夠快？
衡量老年人的數字素養不應僅僅是統計參加的工作坊或下載的應用數量。就像學習烹飪作為生活技能需要持續練習一樣，使用數字工具也需要持續的實踐、進步和探索。然而，數字領域的風險更高。一次錯誤點選可能導致多年辛苦積蓄化為烏有，難怪老年人會感到恐懼和懷疑。這造成了一個殘酷的矛盾：一方面鼓勵老年人依賴數字，另一方面卻責備甚至嘲笑他們因錯誤而付出的代價。想象一下，當承諾的便利突然變成潛在危險時，他們的困惑心情。難怪一些老年人儘管取得初步進展，最終選擇完全退縮。
遺憾的是，副議長女士，數字世界也存在惡意行為者，他們利用老年人的脆弱性。從虛假投資計劃到冒充詐騙，這些掠奪者利用信任，造成財務和情感傷害。深度偽造技術的興起更凸顯了保護老年人免受網路掠奪者侵害的必要性。
我們最近看到針對總理和副總理等高層人物的深度偽造影片，推廣可疑投資計劃。這些惡意行為不僅製造混亂，破壞對網路資訊的信任，還利用老年人易受騙的弱點。我們不能讓老年人成為容易的目標。我們必須為他們提供知識和工具，使他們能夠安全自信地駕馭數字環境。
本動議正確指出，彌合數字鴻溝和打擊網路詐騙需要多管齊下、全社會共同努力。我有以下建議。
首先，副議長女士，我們必須繼續賦能老年人。我們已經開始這段旅程，必須堅持下去。為老年人建立數字素養是一項持續工作。我們需要可持續、有趣的專案，融入他們的生活。專案應根據他們的需求和興趣量身定製，由可信賴的導師一步步指導，幫助他們回憶並培養信心。
這些持續的旅程將使老年人逐步釋放技術的全部潛力，一次點選或一次輕觸。關鍵是賦予他們批判性思維能力，鼓勵核實資訊來源，在網路空間更具辨別力。不僅僅是轉發資訊；要檢查電子郵件地址，絕不分享密碼。更重要的是，我們的老年人必須培養持續學習的心態，並對技術和新威脅保持警惕。
第二，副議長女士，我們必須為我們的長者建立支援系統。專門的熱線和支援網路對於長者尋求數字問題幫助和無畏舉報詐騙至關重要。為應對網路詐騙的普遍現象，政府能否考慮設立一個集中管理這些支援網路和熱線的機構？我們能否考慮類似市政服務辦公室（MSO）或OneService應用程式的模式？
第三，副議長女士，我們必須加強執法力度。執法機構必須積極打擊針對長者的網路犯罪，將犯罪分子繩之以法，並遏制未來的詐騙行為。我們知道長者常常向他們的國會議員求助，以加快警方調查追回損失資金。然而，一旦犯罪分子獲得資金，追回資金顯然非常困難。我曾在本院呼籲執法機構設定時間表，向居民，尤其是受網路詐騙影響的長者，更新相關事項的進展。
我的一位長者居民R女士曾寫信給我，表達她在向我的國會選區服務處舉報詐騙後等待結果的沮喪。她的話反映了這些情況帶來的情緒負擔，我引用她的話：“目前有什麼進展？我感到不安、壓力大且擔憂。這是我辛苦賺來的錢。我需要更新資訊。我需要拿回我的錢。”我們的長者應當得到及時的更新，並有信心我們的流程能夠帶來結果。
第四，副議長女士，我們必須改善基礎設施和網路韌性。我們需要重新審視對未經授權交易詐騙受害者的處理方式。將此類交易的全部責任歸咎於詐騙受害者是不公平的。雖然教育至關重要，但在當今複雜的數字環境中，損失可能源於系統本身的漏洞。大型企業，從電信公司到銀行及應用開發者，都必須共同承擔責任，投資於強有力的安全措施。
近期政府的干預和努力值得歡迎。然而，升級我們的基礎設施和生態系統仍需更多時間和資源。部長能否分享一些進一步加強網路韌性和基礎設施的計劃？
在此，我想問，我們對抗金融詐騙的努力與香港、紐約和倫敦等其他城市相比如何？中國的情況又如何，那裡甚至老年公民也能輕鬆使用線上支付？借鑑國外的最佳實踐可以幫助我們建設一個更安全、更包容的數字生態系統，讓便利不以犧牲安全為代價。
副議長女士，雖然我們努力彌合數字鴻溝並保護長者的網路安全，但建立和維護他們對我們工作的信任至關重要。這需要我們在處理他們關切時保持透明，也需要迅速果斷地採取行動打擊這些威脅，表明我們真正致力於他們的福祉。
及時回應他們的焦慮和挫折，比如向R女士提供調查更新，能夠重申他們對我們機構和流程的信心。通過優先保障他們的安全和賦權，我們可以建設一個數字未來，讓長者不僅感到被包容，更感到被保護和被尊重，成為社群中有價值的一員。
與此同時，長者和弱勢群體不應承擔數字進步的代價。雖然建設網路韌性需要時間，但基本服務必須保持可及，即使這意味著提供實體選項。我們不能在慶祝數字便利的同時，讓我們的長者被落下，感到不便和沮喪。
最後，副議長女士，請想象一下。譚女士自信地使用線上表格，面帶微笑地支付賬單，無需他人幫助。林先生與遠方的孫輩們歡笑相聚，科技將他們連線在一起。艾哈邁德先生享受線上購物的便利，無需擔心會因此失去畢生積蓄。
這不僅是一個願景；這是我們可以向長者許下的承諾，一個數字世界，在這裡他們不會被落下，而是被賦權和擁抱。這一旅程需要行動，而非空談。我們必須加快數字素養計劃，為每位長者配備所需工具。我們必須建立一個集中支援網路，成為他們數字焦慮和恐懼的單一聯絡點。我們必須對那些針對長者的犯罪分子採取迅速果斷的行動，追究其責任。
讓這成為我們今天的承諾：我們將攜手銀髮一代彌合數字鴻溝。我們將編織一幅數字畫卷，讓他們的聲音被聽見，關切被回應，安全被保障。這不僅關乎技術，更關乎尊重、包容和尊崇他們所建立的遺產。
讓我們共同建設一個數字新加坡，讓每位長者，從譚女士到林先生再到艾哈邁德先生，都能自信地邁向未來，獲得賦權，成為社群中受尊重的一員。副議長女士，讓我們支援這項動議，讓我們將這一承諾變為現實。
副議長女士：烏莎·昌德拉達斯。
下午5時28分
烏莎·昌德拉達斯女士（提名議員）：副議長女士，我支援這項動議，我也特別想談談我們社會在構建安全包容的數字社會時如何考慮我們的長者。今天許多尊敬的議員都提出了這一點，我也想補充我的看法。
根據年度《人口簡報》報告，新加坡65歲及以上公民約佔人口的19%。預計這一數字將增加，到2030年，約24%的公民將達到65歲及以上。這是一個龐大的數字，我相信本院的每個人對此都相當熟悉。
我們的方針是讓新加坡成為“數字優先”社會，而非“僅數字”社會。因此，我們需要確保非數字選項——在我們選擇提供的情況下——是有效且周到的。這一點並不新鮮，過去本院多次提及和認可。
我想補充兩點。首先，在構建包容性的背景下，我想再次強調需要整體考慮數字體驗，而不僅僅是具體服務和應用的功能。讓我們退一步，思考一下——對於一位試圖安享退休生活的長者來說，當前更大的數字環境是什麼樣的？
儘管銀行創下了利潤紀錄，但它們仍以成本因素為由，決定取消實體支票或對其使用收費——而這是一種幾代新加坡人習慣的支付方式。
許多銀行分行關閉，自助影片櫃員機取代了人工櫃員。醫療預約、處方續配、健康記錄——這些都可以通過HealthHub和Health Buddy等應用訪問。商店、超市和咖啡館開始無現金支付，智慧手機應用也用於積分收集和折扣分配。去餐廳時，很可能需要掃描二維碼檢視選單，有時甚至點餐和付款。雖然你的整個生活濃縮在小小的智慧手機中，但你還會擔心被詐騙者盯上。
所有這些數字舉措雖然提高了效率，但不一定改善了長者的整體體驗。或許有人會說，不熟悉銀行、醫療等領域技術發展的老年人應當接受教育提升數字技能，或依賴可信賴的家人幫助。但這種做法忽視了幾個事實。
首先，它忽視了並非每個人都有可以依賴的照顧者。對一些長者來說，親自辦理銀行業務或購物可能是他們一天中唯一的社交活動。
其次，尊嚴和自主權對健康老齡化至關重要。沒有人願意覺得自己是負擔，或需要重新學習才能繼續獨立完成多年來一直能做的事情。
雖然報告數字顯示越來越多長者參與數字交易，但其中有多少實際上是由照顧者、朋友或家人代為完成的？
我認為，應允許希望繼續使用非數字選項的長者按他們習慣的方式生活。他們可以選擇學習數字解決方案，但應是漸進的，按自己的節奏進行。
我承認有許多良好的學習途徑，如“長者數字行動”計劃，政府在這方面做得很好。但我們必須記住不要進展過快。
這一理念呼應了歐盟基本權利機構《確保數字社會中公共服務的可及性》報告中的原則。報告指出，雖然“成員國應積極支援所有為各年齡段老年人開放終身學習機會的舉措……但個人不應被強制要求掌握訪問數字服務所需的數字技能。”報告還指出，公共管理部門應始終為無法或不願掌握這些技能的公民提供其他訪問渠道。
議長先生，真正的包容性關乎選擇和自主權。即使在變化的世界中需要適應，個人也需要做出積極選擇去學習新技能。其社群則需提供適宜的環境支援這一學習。
這當然不是說我們都應成為拒絕技術進步的“盧德分子”。事實上，技術有許多方式可以用來創造包容性和保障長者安全。
新加坡的數字準備藍圖強調以使用者為中心的設計，這非常正確，但我們需要以更廣泛的視角應用這一思維，而非零散地實施。我們需要設身處地為不同群體的長者考慮，認真思考他們各自的生活體驗，並思考技術如何幫助他們。
這引出我的第二點，即藝術相關舉措如何助力提升長者的數字素養、包容性和安全性。我想分享三個例子。
2021年，新加坡國家美術館啟動了一個名為“人民畫廊”的精彩專案。通過增強現實（AR）技術，美術館將心臟地帶社群的25多個組屋空地牆面轉變為虛擬藝術畫廊。
你只需用手機攝像頭對準空地牆上的二維碼，國家收藏的藝術作品便會如同掛在牆上一樣呈現眼前。觀眾可以暫時超越現實，享受美麗藝術品的體驗，且無需支付一分錢。只需開啟手機攝像頭即可。
這是一種易於使用的技術，我認為我們可以在不同場景中同樣輕鬆應用，例如老年診所的醫院候診區，長者需長時間等待。漫長的等待可能給長者帶來巨大壓力，無論他們是獨自一人還是有照顧者陪伴。接觸數字藝術可能緩解部分緊張情緒，同時幫助長者熟悉數字工具。這是技術包容性、易用性和合理應用的絕佳示例，真正服務於長者的實際需求。
下一個例子是技術在痴呆症護理中的應用。藝術家兼程式設計師Eugene Soh就是這一領域的從業者。他利用虛擬現實（VR）技術幫助患者應對痴呆症。在他的社會企業Mind Palace中，Eugene和團隊能夠虛擬帶領養老院居民前往熟悉的地方，如他們的舊居、社群，甚至是虎豹別墅和牛車水等興趣點。團隊還可將家人融入VR場景，幫助老年患者觸發記憶，緩解社交孤立，拓展身體界限。
不僅如此，考慮到佩戴VR頭盔可能不受長者歡迎且存在傳播病毒風險，Mind Palace決定將整個房間改造成沉浸式互動環境，通過動作感測器實現健身和冥想體驗。總之，整個體驗完全無接觸，符合使用者需求和偏好。
迄今為止，Mind Palace已進行數百次試驗，並在多個養老設施建立了五個永久沉浸式房間。這又是一個基於解決方案和以使用者為中心設計思維的優秀範例。
正如Eugene對我所說，他的創造力是一種衝動，是利用技術促進講故事和表達的方式，旨在觸及有需要的社群，帶來積極影響。
最後一個例子是香港滙豐銀行去年11月舉辦的藝術展，旨在提升公眾對防範詐騙和網路詐騙的意識。展覽中有一件藝術品利用換臉技術，向參觀者展示他們的形象如何被轉換成著名本地名人。該展品旨在教育參觀者識別深度偽造視訊通話詐騙。
在新加坡，政府與YouTube上的知名創作者合作，提高詐騙意識，並通過音樂影片等創新媒介傳播資訊。這確實是提高數字原住民意識的良好舉措。但我本週早些時候也注意到，星展基金會和POSB已與歌臺表演者合作，娛樂並教育長者數字素養。
我讚賞這些舉措，並希望政府關注新加坡龐大的藝術社群及其人才。富有創意、娛樂性和富有同理心的講故事方式，能夠更好地向社會不同群體，包括難以觸及的長者群體，推廣數字素養。
在我們朝著智慧國目標邁進，追求包容性和安全的同時，別忘了兩點：第一，設計思維應始終以整體和同理心方式應用，尊重長者的完整生活體驗；第二，在全國家政府策略中，尤其是在資金和資源分配時，別忘了藝術家和創意人才在打造數字社會包容性和安全性方面的重要作用。
議長先生：沙拉爾·塔哈先生。
下午5時39分
沙拉爾·塔哈先生（巴西立-榜鵝）：議長先生，我感恩我們生活在一個高度信任的社會，這種信任超越了種族、語言、宗教和差異的障礙。值得注意的是，這種信任也延伸至我們的機構。根據2023年埃德爾曼信任度研究，我們的政府仍是新加坡最受信任的機構。
只有建立信任，我們才能保持團結。根據2022年皮尤研究，75%的新加坡受訪者表示他們在新冠疫情後感到更加團結，位列13個國家之首。這在一個日益分裂、對國家和政府機構信任難以獲得的世界中尤為顯著。
多年來，我們通過共同工作和麵對挑戰，維持了人民、政府、組織和企業之間的高度信任。
然而，這種信任脆弱，若我們的分歧被操縱，信任可能迅速瓦解。種族或宗教緊張、日益擴大的收入差距、假新聞、深度偽造影片（正如同僚譚博士所述）、感知的不公和未解決的焦慮，都可能輕易破壞我們多年來精心建立的信任。因此，我們的政府議員團在本動議中呼籲本院重申承諾，採取全國家方法，通過建設包容和安全的數字社會來維持信任。
我們如何確保在全球數字化加速的背景下，每個人都感到安全並融入社會？我們如何應對威脅社會凝聚力的虛假資訊？我們如何打擊基於技術的詐騙？我們如何提供平等且公平的機會，確保機會不僅惠及少數頂層人士？
我想重點談三個關鍵點，以幫助通過建設安全包容的數字社會來維持信任。
首先，重新定義就業。重新定義就業至關重要，因為就業格局正在演變。這個格局多面且動態，新加坡的任何企業主都會告訴你，由於人口有限和人口老齡化，我們在獲得合適人力方面面臨挑戰。
反覆提到，到2030年，新加坡每四人中就有一人年齡超過60歲。目前，老年人的工作通常是體力性質的，比如清潔工和泵站工作人員，可能是因為現有老年人缺乏數字技能。然而，與我們現在所經歷的不同的是，我們的年輕老年人現在具備數字素養，可以以不同的方式繼續為經濟做出貢獻。
在一次家訪中，我遇到一位50出頭的居民，她為公司做賬。她分享說，自新冠疫情以來，她就沒有去過辦公室。她希望自己能夠一直這樣工作，直到退休後很久。她希望繼續工作，因為她喜歡與人互動，但也想花時間陪伴孫輩。
新冠疫情加速了新加坡靈活工作安排的概念。三方公平與進步就業實踐聯盟（TAFEP）已分享了靈活工作安排的指導方針。現在，某種程度的遠端辦公已被職場普遍接受。然而，工作分享、錯峰上下班、兼職工作尚未被真正廣泛採納。
那麼，我們如何將所有這些不同元素結合起來，利用數字化滿足未來老年人退休後擁有有意義就業和舒適工作生活平衡的需求，滿足未來退休人員繼續積累退休資金的需求，以及滿足我們經濟的人力需求？
為此，我們必須採取結構化的、全國性的整體方法，重新思考就業的定義，鼓勵靈活的工作安排，如工作分享、錯峰上下班、兼職工作（在可能的情況下），以真正釋放具備數字能力的年輕老年人的潛力。此外，殘疾人士和重返職場的媽媽們也能從這些安排中受益，有助於促進包容性，同時確保經濟活動持續進行。
其次，雖然我們的數字連線性值得稱讚，但我們必須確保每個上學的孩子都擁有數字訪問權和未來經濟所需的數字技能。
最新的新加坡數字社會報告顯示，通過DigitalAccess@Home和NEU PC等計劃，新加坡所有家庭的網際網路連線率達到99%，有上學孩子的家庭中有98%擁有電腦。在基層層面，我們與社群合作伙伴合作，為低收入家庭提供數字訪問。例如，在巴西立東，我們與施耐德電氣合作，向低收入家庭的孩子分發了100檯筆記本電腦。
然而，我感到驚訝的是，儘管有這些專案，只有98%的有上學孩子的家庭擁有電腦。這意味著每100個有孩子上學的家庭中仍有兩個家庭因各種原因沒有電腦。
這令人擔憂，尤其是考慮到這些家庭很可能來自低收入家庭。我們如何確保所有有上學孩子的家庭都能擁有電腦？
確保連線性和數字裝置的可訪問性無疑是優先事項，我們還必須確保教育系統在小學和中學階段就提供必要的數字技能。畢竟，當新加坡推行義務十年教育時，目的是確保我們的上學孩子具備未來所需的基本知識和技能。
通常，較富裕的家庭會送孩子參加編碼、人工智慧、增強現實和機器人等額外課程。尤其是在年幼時，接觸這些昂貴的課外活動可能對低收入家庭來說難以負擔，他們在獲取資源、瞭解和學習這些關鍵數字技能方面面臨障礙。這加大了有與無之間的技能差距。我們如何確保所有青少年都有平等機會接觸並發展這些數字能力？
我們能否確定基本數字技能，如基礎編碼、機器人技術、應用人工智慧、網路安全和數字健康，將其納入小學和中學的核心課程，使所有學生都能在早期接觸這些必備數字技能？我擔心如果不這樣做，來自低收入家庭的孩子將在未來經濟中處於不利地位。
因此，聽到陳振聲部長昨天表示教育部正在準備學生髮展人工智慧基礎知識，我感到欣慰。我希望我們能在學校正式教授更多數字技能。為減輕學生的學業負擔，我建議將這些主題作為核心課程中的非考試內容，同時替換掉未來經濟中可能不那麼關鍵的內容。
提供一個平臺，提高對數字經濟所需技能的認識和知識，正是M 3 @巴西立-榜鵝（PRPG）希望實現的目標之一。通過我們的專案，如M 3 數字化、3D製造工作坊、輔導計劃、學習之旅和HashTech，M 3 @PRPG希望裝備孩子們，尤其是來自低收入家庭的孩子，瞭解這些技能及未來經濟中的可能機會。
沒有這樣的平臺，低收入家庭的孩子如何瞭解數字經濟所需的技能，更不用說受到啟發去從事這些不斷發展的行業的職業？議長先生，請用馬來語。
（馬來語）：[請參閱方言發言。] M 3 @巴西立-榜鵝的優先事項之一是為我們的學生，尤其是低收入家庭的學生，提供學習、嘗試和提升數字領域技能的機會。只有通過嘗試，學生們才能培養興趣，並立志將其作為職業繼續發展。
專案如M 3 數字化和3D製造空間，學生們學習3D列印；M 3學習之旅，學生參觀工程和技術公司；以及#Hashtech專案，學生學習儀表盤製作、網路安全和人工智慧；所有這些都為學生提供了獲取數字技能的平臺。
一個例子是3D製造挑戰賽的冠軍隊伍。獲勝團隊由馬來西亞阿拉伯伊斯蘭學校的學生組成，他們利用3D打印製作了一個玩具直升機。
另一個例子是#HashTech比賽的亞軍隊伍，由三兄妹Nurul Musfirah、Nurul Shahzanie和Nurul Zahirah組成，他們展示了一個人工智慧平臺，幫助人們更好地瞭解新加坡目前可用的各種支援計劃。
祝賀所有學生，我也感謝M 3 @巴西立-榜鵝、MENDAKI、MUIS、MAEC、MMiT和MM工程的所有志願者，為我們的學生提供提升數字技能的機會。
幾個月前，作為ITE學院4PM Bestari獎和韌性獎的評審團成員，我被這些學生克服挑戰的決心和毅力深深感動。他們中的許多人還在攻讀應用人工智慧和網路安全等各類專業領域的深造。
對我們的學生說，請繼續追求數字知識。我們的社群必須繼續鼓勵學生探索和提升在新經濟中必不可少的數字技能。
（英語）：從數字包容轉向保護新加坡人免受網路詐騙的需要。我感謝跨部委官員在打擊詐騙方面的持續努力。雖然許多議員談到了防止詐騙，我將簡要談及兩項詐騙後的恢復工作。
首先，我們能否審視處理未經授權交易詐騙的方式？許多詐騙源於受害者被誤導授權的交易。然而，有些詐騙是在未授權交易的情況下執行的。我們能否審視這種方式，使金融機構對未經授權交易的詐騙承擔部分責任？
其次，鑑於詐騙案件數量龐大，僅2023年1月至6月就有超過24,000起詐騙案件，且詐騙複雜，僅有10,000名常規警員，調查需要時間是可以理解的。然而，在調查期間，受害者的銀行賬戶可能被凍結。如果這是受害者的唯一賬戶，這對受害者來說非常困難。我們能否審視凍結銀行賬戶整個調查期間的流程？
總之，議長先生，新加坡在一個日益分裂的世界中，始終是團結的燈塔。然而，信任是脆弱的，如果不加以培育，將會動搖。負責任地利用數字進步對於維持社群內的信任至關重要。讓我們共同努力，建設一個安全、包容和值得信賴的數字社會，確保無人被落下。議長先生，我支援該動議。
議長：李馬克先生。
下午5時53分
李馬克先生（提名議員）：議長先生，今天我們聚集一堂，討論國家的未來和數字時代，必須認識到數字化在塑造繁榮、高效和互聯的新加坡中的重要性和相關性。雖然我們關注其帶來的挑戰，但擁抱數字轉型的好處不可否認，是國家進步的關鍵。
數字化是經濟增長和創新的關鍵驅動力，開啟了新市場和新機遇的大門。它提升了運營效率和生產力，徹底改變了企業的運營和全球競爭方式。它使企業能夠提供更好的客戶體驗，利用資料分析制定更有效的策略和服務。
雖然數字化可能導致部分工作崗位自動化，但它也創造了新的崗位。歐盟委員會報告稱，每消失一個因數字化而失去的工作崗位，數字領域會創造2.6個新崗位。
數字化在環境可持續性方面也發揮重要作用，通過創新解決方案減少碳足跡。企業在新冠疫情期間展現的韌性，很大程度上得益於其數字能力，這凸顯了數字準備的重要性。這種準備不僅確保危機中的業務連續性，還增強了我們適應和在變化環境中繁榮的集體能力。
隨著新加坡堅定邁向智慧國願景，我們的數字轉型之旅不僅要以技術進步為標誌，更要以包容性和安全性為特徵。這種整體方法對於確保數字化的好處對社會所有成員都可及且安全至關重要。
企業是新加坡數字社會的重要支柱。許多企業正在採用或開發數字產品和服務，更好地滿足消費者需求，在人力緊缺的情況下，通過自動化實施數字解決方案以簡化運營，提高效率。
在數字交易和互動成為我們日常生活不可或缺的一部分的時代，數字資訊的安全性已成為全球使用者，包括新加坡使用者的首要關注點。新加坡人越來越關注企業如何處理他們的數字資訊。2018年SingHealth資料洩露事件在公眾意識中留下了深刻印象。
另一個個人事件——我一位擁有工程和建築公司的密友經歷了一次突顯數字時代嚴峻現實的事件。他的公司遭遇了勒索軟體攻擊，駭客竊取了公司伺服器和所有工程藍圖，並加密鎖定。這次攻擊使他的運營陷入停頓，損失不斷增加。
為了奪回控制權，他被迫支付了16萬新元的贖金。然而，財務損失不僅限於贖金，停工和運營中斷造成的損失也極為嚴重。遺憾的是，他的經歷並非孤例，許多人默默承受著類似的痛苦。
這是一種日益增長的複雜網路攻擊趨勢，令商業界深感憂慮。這些事件提醒我們數字基礎設施的脆弱性和對強大網路安全措施的需求。然而，在快速變化的數字環境中，實現數字包容和安全需要大量的資金、時間和人力投入。這對資源有限的公司尤其具有挑戰性。
根據新加坡工商聯合會（SBF）2022/2023年度最新全國商業調查，64%的企業對採用新技術的高成本表示擔憂。此外，無論規模大小，企業都面臨著員工技能提升以跟上技術進步的需求以及缺乏管理專業知識以有效推動技術變革的挑戰。
儘管企業在應對網路安全挑戰方面的信心有所增長，今年有80%的企業表示有信心，而去年為74%，但中小企業（SMEs）仍落後於大型企業。最新資料顯示，78%的中小企業對其安全措施保護免受網路威脅表示有信心或較有信心，低於大型企業91%的信心水平。
此外，新加坡中華總商會（SCCCI）2023年調查顯示，32%的中小企業優先加強對網路威脅的韌性，較2022年的11%顯著增加，表明中小企業部門對網路安全的意識和承諾在不斷增強。
今天，我旨在解決企業，尤其是小型企業中普遍存在的觀念和擔憂，即實施數字安全和網路防禦成本過高。我將介紹和討論各種量身定製、易於獲取的自助工具和協作資源，旨在以經濟有效的方式提升企業的網路安全水平。
由新加坡網路安全域性（CSA）打造的網際網路衛生門戶（IHP）是一個綜合平臺，供企業使用自我評估工具。這些工具旨在評估公司網站、電子郵件服務和域名配置的安全性。評估後，IHP提供量身定製的可操作建議，使企業能夠有效提升整體網際網路安全態勢。
此外，IHP通過釋出網際網路衛生評級表增強透明度。該功能簡化展示了各種數字平臺的網路衛生狀況。通過提供這些關鍵資訊，它賦能企業和消費者做出明智的數字平臺使用決策，從而增強數字交易的安全性，防範網路威脅。
對於準備深化網路安全承諾的中小企業，CSA提供網路安全健康計劃。在該計劃下，網路安全顧問充當中小企業的虛擬首席資訊安全官，進行網路健康審計並制定定製的網路安全健康計劃。為鼓勵參與並減輕財務負擔，符合條件的中小企業可獲得高達70%的共同資助，使先進的網路安全更易獲得且負擔得起。
適當的網路風險管理對於中小企業自信地推進數字化之旅至關重要。由信息通信媒體發展局（IMDA）開發、新加坡工商聯合會管理的“技術長即服務”（CTOaaS）計劃是“中小企業數字化計劃”的一部分，旨在增強這種信心。通過CTOaaS，中小企業可訪問經驗豐富的數字顧問共享池，提供全面諮詢和專案管理服務，幫助中小企業識別和彌補數字化差距，抓住機遇，確保更安全高效的數字轉型。
缺乏內部IT專業知識或專門資源的中小企業從該服務中獲益良多，獲得了針對其需求量身定製的數字解決方案和培訓路線圖。該計劃確保中小企業能夠獲得市場驗證的、具有成本效益的解決方案，確保它們不會在我們共同邁向包容且安全的數字社會的程序中被邊緣化。這是數字進步民主化的一大步，使所有企業，無論規模或資源如何，都能參與並貢獻於我們的數字未來。
鑑於現有舉措，我想向政府提出一些建議，以進一步支援我們的中小企業：開發針對數字化新興且關鍵領域（如網路安全和人工智慧）的行業特定資源。
通過與行業協會和企業密切合作，這種方法可以顯著加速中小企業向包容且安全的數字社會的轉型。這些資源應涵蓋行業特定的培訓和評估計劃、基線工具及相關解決方案。
此外，正如近期新加坡工商聯合會（SBF）與畢馬威（KPMG）2024年預算建議中強調的，政府可以考慮調整現有的資助計劃，以支援中小企業採用這些工具和解決方案。例如，採用分層支援方式，對採用先進的人工智慧和區塊鏈技術給予更高額度的資助，可能有助於企業在數字化路線圖上超越基礎的流程和運營自動化。此外，鑑於本地IT人力資源緊缺，也可以考慮擴大現有計劃，支援那些為提高運營和成本效率而在新加坡境外進行開發工作的數字專案。
另外，建立一個專門的援助渠道，供中小企業在應對潛在的網路安全或人工智慧治理違規時尋求幫助，將提供安全保障，確保中小企業在需要時獲得支援。這一全面戰略不僅能保護我們的企業，還能賦能它們自信地擁抱數字未來。
隨著技術在我們日常生活中變得更加不可或缺，對技能型人才的需求也相應演變。培養員工的學習和創新文化至關重要。作為領導者和利益相關者，我們必須認識並解決員工的擔憂，為那些可能因快速數字變革而感到不知所措的人提供安慰和支援。
我們必須繼續大力投資於員工培訓，確保每個人，無論起點如何，都有機會成長和適應。這不僅是為了跟上數字社會的步伐，更是為了賦能他們在其中引領和創新。通過促進持續學習、提供支援和指導、鼓勵創新，我們不僅能提升個人職業發展，還能推動整個行業乃至國家的集體進步。
因此，企業必須認識到，培訓員工不僅僅是跟上技術進步的步伐，更是戰略性地提升他們的技能，以充分釋放技術應用的潛力。當員工熟練且靈活時，整個公司將獲得顯著收益。
例如，Utracon Corporation通過參與CTO即服務（CTOaaS）計劃，利用專家建議實施針對性解決方案，顯著提升了專案即時監控能力並促進了團隊協作。這一案例凸顯了投資員工成長的更廣泛價值，帶來了公司運營效率和創新能力的提升。
為了幫助企業繼續致力於提升員工技能，正如SBF-KPMG預算建議所提，政府也可以考慮通過引入資助計劃，支援與員工技能提升及採用新技術（如人工智慧和機器學習）相關的費用，並提供一個安全便捷的集中平臺，供中小企業訪問這些技能提升服務。
最後，在當今數字時代，我想強調，客戶資訊的倫理處理已超越了單純的法律義務。這是建立信任和維護企業誠信的根本要素。作為客戶資料的守護者，我們必須遵守最高的倫理標準，確保每一條資訊的收集、儲存和使用都充分尊重隱私和同意。
這意味著要透明公開我們的資料處理方式，為客戶提供明確的選擇，並採取積極措施保護其資訊免受洩露和濫用。通過承諾這些倫理實踐，我們不僅符合法規要求，還能強化聲譽，培養客戶忠誠度，並促進更可信賴的數字生態系統。議長先生，我想用中文結束髮言。
（中文）：[請參閱本地語言發言。] 總之，在我們應對建設包容且安全的數字社會的複雜性和機遇時，讓我們採取全面的方法。這不僅包括投資穩健的技術和基礎設施，還包括培養持續學習、創新和倫理實踐的文化。
通過這樣做，我們確保邁向智慧國的旅程充滿信任、安全和包容，惠及社會中的每個人和每個企業。讓我們共同承諾，創造一個數字進步等同於更安全、更繁榮且倫理紮實的新加坡的未來。
（英文）：議長先生，我支援該動議。
議長：維克拉姆·奈爾先生。
下午6時11分
維克拉姆·奈爾先生（森巴旺）：議長先生，新加坡向數字化社會的轉變令人矚目。過去幾年，政府和社會關鍵角色緊跟並利用技術，使我們的生活更美好、更簡便。
曾幾何時，我們每個人都必須保留所有重要檔案的紙質副本，包括出生證明、身份證、駕駛執照、健康記錄、結婚證、銀行賬戶對賬單和公積金對賬單。如今，所有這些資訊都可以通過手機上的應用程式輕鬆獲取。
Singpass應用程式方便地將我們連線到大多數官方記錄，而所有主要銀行也通過手機應用提供大部分服務。對許多人來說，可能不再需要攜帶現金或錢包，也無需排隊到郵局、銀行、自動取款機或AXS機，因為幾乎所有支付都可以通過手機隨時隨地完成。
甚至營銷和購物體驗也發生了徹底變化，線上商店將購物體驗帶到指尖。我們現在可以在家中或乘坐公共交通時購物。事實上，當我與一家線上零售商的主管交談時，她提到相當大比例的購物者是在早晨上廁所時完成購買的。
這些變化也顯著改變了我們的商業格局，亞馬遜和阿里巴巴等線上巨頭取代了Borders和Robinsons等實體零售商。對於小企業來說，在Shopee和Lazada等平臺展示商品使他們無需實體店面即可銷售，而對於擁有實體店面的商家，線上銷售成為補充銷售的重要方式。
該動議強調了數字化過程中需要解決的兩個重要問題：包容性和安全性。讓我先談談包容性。
對於那些線上並通過網路獲取服務的人來說，生活從未如此輕鬆。對年輕人而言，上網似乎是天性。我女兒大約四五歲時就學會了在我妻子的手機上下載遊戲，不久後她又學會了線上購物，所有這些都沒有我們教她。
另一方面，我確實認識許多未完全上網且感到困難的年長居民。銀行開始關閉分行並引導客戶使用自動取款機和AXS機時，我曾收到更多分行開放的請求。現在，銀行也在減少自動取款機，習慣現金交易的居民發現操作更困難。許多小商戶也是如此，儘管許多熟食中心和組屋商場的店鋪已實現數字化，但仍有少數未採用線上支付或記錄系統。這其中包括一些受過良好教育的人士，甚至有些資深醫生仍偏好多年沿用的傳統做法。
政府各機構已推出多項舉措以縮小數字鴻溝，吸引更多人進入數字世界。例如，信息通信媒體發展局（IMDA）推出的“攤販數字化”計劃，補貼攤販將業務搬到線上並接受數字支付，成功將許多社群攤販帶入數字世界。“長者數字化”計劃則針對長者，在社群各地提供課程，培訓他們使用手機訪問各種功能和服務。
我相信這些舉措正在發揮作用，但為了更好地發揮效果，我認為需要全社會共同參與，鼓勵身邊的人參加課程、上網並提升數字能力。每當居民請求增設自動取款機時，我會解釋我們面臨的挑戰，同時溫和地引導他們使用網上銀行應用，邁向數字化。
動議的另一個備受關注的方面是數字安全。這涉及多個層面。
一方面是系統安全，包括保持系統執行和防範網路威脅。例如，我們的部分銀行系統曾多次宕機，導致交易無法進行。對於主要依賴數字支付的人來說，這可能帶來問題。比如銀行支付系統宕機時，只有該銀行數字支付方式的人該怎麼辦？
我曾在系統首次宕機時遇到小麻煩，當時我在商店，只得退貨回家。雖不算大問題，但如果我們繼續數字化，這類問題必須重視。
更重要的是惡意網路威脅，包括駭客攻擊和勒索軟體，組織可能遭受系統入侵、資訊被盜，隨後被勒索付款。許多公司和機構存有大量個人資訊，如果儲存系統不安全，個人可能面臨攻擊風險。對此，我認為必須確保收集個人資料的機構能夠保護這些資料。
第三個方面，也是本院許多發言者最關注的，是網路詐騙。我在本院多次談及此問題。
詐騙問題複雜多面。首先，詐騙者大多位於新加坡境外，這使得本地執法機構難以採取行動。新加坡警方與國際刑警組織及其他機構緊密合作，但追蹤眾多詐騙的具體來源仍有難度。
其次，受害者通常被利用信任。詐騙型別包括求職詐騙、戀愛詐騙和投資詐騙。本院部分議員認為詐騙氾濫正在引發數字化信心危機，我對此持不同意見。
我認為數字化是一列高速列車，大多數新加坡人都已上車。詐騙受害者往往過於信任，輕信來電和資訊，從而陷入騙局。
在工作中，我曾接觸一名戀愛詐騙受害者。她通過網路交流和一次見面愛上了一人。最終，該人據稱去世，留給她一筆鉅額遺產。然而，為了領取遺產，她不得不且確實為各種所謂官方用途定期付款。她向我求助時，已損失超過一百萬新元。她仍難以相信自己被騙，仍希望有遺產等著她。
詐騙者本質上是試圖盜竊的罪犯，數字化只是讓他們更容易實施詐騙。我不認為數字化信心存在危機，而是消費者必須學會更加謹慎和警惕。正如現實生活中我們會注意不隨意放錢包和手機、不外出時鎖門，數字世界中也應如此小心。
第三個挑戰是詐騙損失應由誰承擔。我們普遍同情受害者，他們被利用，失去畢生積蓄或重要資金。我在“面對面會議”中遇到的受害者故事令人心碎。有人呼籲更多損失應由電信運營商、銀行或其他相關大公司承擔。
這種做法有幾個吸引點。我們都認為大公司比個人更能承受損失，也希望施加更大壓力促使大公司採取必要防範措施。但我想指出，如果過度傾向此方向，存在一些風險。
首先，每家大公司，包括銀行和電信，都需從客戶獲利。如果詐騙損失大部分由它們承擔，必然會從客戶身上回收成本，可能導致價格普遍上漲。
其次，這可能意味著服務提供商對客戶採取更具侵入性的監控措施。例如，如果電信公司對通過電話或WhatsApp的詐騙負有責任，可能不得不加強對私人通話和資訊的監控，以識別詐騙。我們希望銀行在多大程度上對指令和交易進行二次審查？
第三是道德風險問題。如果人們認為損失會由他人承擔，他們可能會減少防範措施。
綜合考慮，新加坡採取了三管齊下的反詐騙策略。
首先，採取上游措施，包括ScamShield過濾和阻止詐騙資訊，簡訊發件人身份註冊制度標記未註冊的可能詐騙者。我想我們許多人已採用這些措施。
其次，新加坡警察部隊（SPF）採取下游措施，追查詐騙團伙。據《海峽時報》報道，至少有一次詐騙被成功破獲，避免了超過1260萬新元的損失——雖是九牛一毛，但方向正確。
新加坡警察部隊還開始與銀行合作應對詐騙。例如，2023年3月與華僑銀行合作，利用機器人流程自動化識別潛在詐騙者。金融管理局（MAS）也參與此舉，與銀行緊密合作，加強反惡意軟體控制、故障監控和檢測能力。主要零售銀行已提升安全措施。顯然，大型機構和政府正積極打擊詐騙。
當然，最重要的是第三方面——公眾教育。我認為新加坡警察部隊、網路安全域性、MoneySENSE和銀行利用多平臺向居民宣傳，許多議員也在選區舉辦講座和對話，鼓勵下載ScamShield並警示詐騙風險。
新加坡還參與全球合作打擊詐騙。若想獲得他國協助，我們必須發揮作用。
近期新加坡展開大規模打擊行動，逮捕大量人員，我相信這筆資金大部分來自境外犯罪。雖然具體細節尚未公佈，但這顯然是國際合作的一部分。
這是全球性問題，英國、澳大利亞和美國等國也採取類似措施打擊詐騙。令我關注的是英國的“Stop Scams UK”，這是由企業主導的合作專案，涵蓋主要銀行、信用卡運營商及亞馬遜、谷歌等大型線上企業。
在英國，詐騙是最常見的犯罪，受害機率是其他犯罪的兩倍。值得注意的是，這是一個私營部門主導的倡議，部分原因是英國法律要求銀行賠償授權推送支付（APP）詐騙受害者。APP詐騙指受害者被冒充者欺騙付款。通過將潛在責任置於私營企業，激勵它們合作遏制APP詐騙。現在的關鍵是該措施是否有效，或是否會增加道德風險和詐騙發生率，我們應持續關注。
儘管方法看似激進，英國目標是減少詐騙10%。他們並不雄心勃勃，也不聲稱能完全根除，只是希望降低發生率。這是我們必須面對的問題，且需採取必要防範措施。
在新加坡，政府可能需要主導這些舉措和相關立法，為行業參與者設定合理風險分擔。金融管理局的風險分擔框架是一個起點，若有需要，可審視和調整，以平衡各方風險分配。我相信，財務上利益一致的行業合作總體上是明智的做法。
議長先生，數字化對我們所有人的生活都很重要，通常來說，它使我們的生活變得更好、更便捷。我們必須擁抱並乘風破浪。我認為迴避數字化不是一個選項。然而，在乘風破浪的過程中，我們需要儘可能讓每個人都參與進來，也就是包容性，同時要意識到這帶來的新危險，即安全問題。因此，我支援這項動議。
議長先生：議會領袖。
英文原文
SPRS Hansard · Fetched: 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.