WORKPLACE SAFETY AND HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL: Order for Second Reading read.

4.45 pm

The Minister for Manpower (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Sir, in 2005, my Ministry undertook a comprehensive review of our workplace safety and health (WSH) legislation to improve safety outcomes. The review resulted in the enactment of the Workplace Safety and Health Act which came into force in 2006, replacing the Factories Act. The Act was crafted based on three key principles – reducing risks at source, engendering industry ownership of WSH outcomes, and preventing accidents through higher penalties for poor safety management.

Our WSH statistics indicate that these improvements to our WSH framework have borne fruit. Our workplace fatality rate had declined from 4.9 fatalities per 100,000 workers in 2004 to its lowest level in six years of 2.2 last year, a decrease of more than 55%. We have also seen a similar decrease in the workplace injury rate.

Extension of the WSH Act

When the WSH Bill was first introduced in 2005, we said then that our intention was to extend the legislation to eventually cover all workplaces, rather than only factories as defined by the Factories Act. All workers would then receive the protection they deserve against safety and health risks at the workplace. To give industry time to adjust, we had been extending the coverage of the WSH Act in stages. In 2008, following consultations with the industry, we extended the Act to six additional sectors, including healthcare, hotels and restaurants, and transportation of goods. We are now ready to do more.

Clause 2 of this Bill seeks to extend the coverage of the Act to all remaining workplaces. With this amendment, workplaces in another 14 sectors, ranging from wholesale and retail trade, public administration to administrative and support services, will now be brought under the ambit of the Act. These sectors account for more than 100,000 organisations employing more than 1.6 million workers, or almost 60% of the workforce in Singapore.

We intend to exempt occupiers of domestic premises from the Act, unless the occupier himself is using the premises for a business undertaking.

With the extension, stakeholders in these newly-included workplaces will have a general duty of care to take "reasonably practicable" measures to ensure the safety and health of workers and others who may be affected by their work. The term "reasonably practicable" means that stakeholders need only take preventive measures which are proportionate to the potential impact of the hazards at the workplace. In addition, stakeholders will also need to comply with Regulations under the WSHA that are relevant to their work activities. These include requirements for risk management and incident reporting, which apply to all workplaces covered by the Act. There are also regulations that deal with specific hazards such as excessive noise, confined spaces, the use of hazardous chemicals, and so on, that stakeholders must comply with if their work involves such hazards.

Efforts to reach out to stakeholders

To prepare for the extension of the coverage of the Act, since March 2010, my Ministry and the Workplace Safety and Health Council have stepped up our efforts to educate stakeholders in the new sectors on their roles and responsibilities under the Act, and the measures they can take to raise WSH standards at the workplace. To educate workers and members of the public on protecting themselves from common WSH hazards in the new sectors, we launched an outreach campaign in July 2010. Members may have seen some of the advertisements at our MRT stations or bus stops featuring everyday risks at work such as slips, trips and falls. In November 2010, we also published a guidebook on managing these common hazards and sent this to all the employers in these sectors. To provide more targeted advice and assistance to employers, we had also held several sessions of WSH Clinics over the last eight months, where employers receive free advice from WSH professionals on managing WSH risks at their workplaces. More than 800 employers have sought advice at these clinics. We will continue with these educational efforts, for example, through the National WSH Campaign 2011 to be launched later this month.

Scoping the definition of a factory

When the coverage of the WSH Act, and its predecessor the Factories Act, was limited to workplaces deemed to be "factories", the definition of the term "factory" was deliberately crafted broadly to cover a wider range of workplaces. This broad definition meant that hawker stalls and tailor shops could be considered factories.

With the extension of the coverage of the Act to all workplaces, this broad definition of "factories" is no longer necessary. We will instead redefine "factories" to refer to higher-risk workplaces whose activities present a higher potential for serious accidents so that these workplaces will be subject to more stringent regulation – such as notifying or registering with MOM before commencing operations; and forming a WSH committee. Clause 4 of the Bill defines a "factory" to include five broad categories of work activities that we have identified to be of higher risk, such as building operations and the manufacturing of hazardous substances. The Fourth Schedule lists 19 classes of workplaces falling under these five categories that we deem to be "factories". This revised definition will enable us to focus our efforts on higher risk workplaces such as shipyards, construction sites, manufacturing plants, etc, to achieve greater effectiveness.

We have also taken this opportunity to clarify the roles and responsibilities of principals and persons at work under the Act.

Duties of principals in relation to their contractors

Section 14 of the existing Act covers principals who engage contractors for specialised tasks or engage the services of workers from third-party labour suppliers. Some principals are involved in directing the work of the contractors they hire as well as their workers, and they effectively take on the role similar to that of an employer in terms of supervision. For these principals, the Act places a duty on them to ensure the safety and health of these workers. These duties are similar to those of an employer.

However, even if the principal is not involved in directing the work of his contractors, he should still be required to exercise reasonable care to ensure the safety of the workers. Clause 5 of the Bill will require all principals to ensure that any contractor they engage is able to carry out the work safely, whether these contractors work under their direction or not. This duty on principals is not an onerous one. The new section 14A requires principals to take only such measures that are "reasonably practicable", which takes into account the level of knowledge and expertise that the principal could reasonably be expected to possess. To provide stakeholders with some clarity on what such measures would entail, sections 14A(2) and 14A(3) state that such measures would include ascertaining that the contractor and his employees have sufficient experience and training to carry out the work, and that the contractor has conducted a risk assessment on the safety and health risks posed by the work.

For example, a principal who engages a contractor to repair his roof should minimally verify that the contractor and his employees have been trained to work safely at heights, including the proper use of the necessary fall prevention equipment. The principal should also be satisfied that the contractor has conducted a risk assessment to identify the risks involved and the measures to mitigate such risks. A principal who himself can be expected to possess expertise for the work that he has contracted out will be held to a higher standard. For instance, if the principal is also a contractor himself, he would be expected to assess whether the risk assessment conducted by the contractor is adequate, and, if need be, let the contractor know what risks have not been adequately addressed. As with other stakeholders under the Act, such as employers and occupiers, principals who fail to discharge these duties with due diligence can be subject to the maximum penalties allowed under WSHA, that is, a maximum fine of $200,000 for individuals and $500,000 for businesses.

Duties of persons at work for negligence

For persons at work, clause 6 of this Bill will allow the Ministry to take to task those workers who acted negligently in the workplace and in doing so, endangered the safety and health of themselves or of others. I would like to stress that this is not a new offence per se . The Government can and has taken individuals to task for endangering the safety of themselves or of others at the workplace through a negligent act under the Penal Code. For example, in 2008, a chief engineer of a tanker was convicted and fined $7,000 for a negligent act resulting in two divers being injured. The engineer had neglected to confirm that the diving operations under the propeller had been completed before starting the tanker's engines.

We can already take other stakeholders – such as the employer or occupier – to task for negligence under the WSHA. The proposed amendment merely seeks to make the WSHA more consistent internally, to allow us to take all responsible stakeholders to task for negligence under the same piece of legislation, rather than to rely on the Penal Code for persons at work. The penalties for the new section 15(3A) are aligned to those under section 304A of the Penal Code for causing death by a negligent act and are capped at a fine of $30,000, a jail term of two years or both.

Enhance MOM's powers of investigation

This Bill also seeks to enhance MOM's powers of investigation for diseases contracted as a result of occupational exposures to chemical or biological hazards. Currently, MOM only has the power to investigate incidences of diseases that are specified in the Third Schedule of the Act. The Schedule lists only diseases that have a well-established link to work, such as hydrogen sulphide poisoning and occupational skin diseases. However, we need to ensure that MOM can investigate and take action against any lapses at the workplace that could expose workers to a chemical or biological hazard and could adversely impact their health, but which may not have a direct link to the diseases specified in the Schedule. Clause 3(b) therefore expands the definition of an "occupational disease" (OD) under the Act, to include not only diseases listed under the Schedule of ODs, but also diseases resulting from occupational exposures to any chemical or biological agents.

Finally, the Bill also makes some technical amendments, by removing obsolete references to "factory permit(s)", which are no longer used following the Ministry's review in 2008 of the factory registration system. Clauses 3(b), 8 and 11 effect the changes in this regard.

In conclusion, Sir, I would like to thank our tripartite partners, including the industry and professional associations, and the members of the public for their support in our WSH journey to date, and for their valuable feedback and suggestions on these Act amendments. The progress we have made over the past six years would not have been possible without their strong commitment and support. I look forward to working with them on the next leg of our WSH journey, in our efforts to realise our national target of bringing our workplace fatality rate to below 1.8 per 100,000 workers by 2018.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

4.56 pm

Mdm Halimah Yacob: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this amendment Bill.

I think not many Members in this House know of the Spyros industrial accident. It was one of the worst industrial accidents in Singapore's history. But the message that came across very strongly to me was when as a rookie officer in NTUC, I had to handle a number of cases involving the injured workers. It was one month after the accident occurred and I was asked to give advice to a number of the workers who were injured because we wanted to know what options they should pursue – whether they should go under the Workmen's Compensation Act or it would have been better for them to file a claim under common law. And the image that I saw at that point of time was something that will stay with me throughout my life because it was one month after the accident, but you see these workers were still traumatised and in agony because their injuries were so extensive and they were really very confused. They did not know what was going to happen to them, how they were going to proceed with their lives.

Sir, I think this Bill is truly important because we should never in any way compromise the safety of our workers. There should never be any way in which we cut the processes or try to save cost in order to make it cheaper for us to produce but at the same time that will compromise the safety of the workers. Since the Spyros incident, I am really very happy that the Government has put in place many new legislations, processes and policies to make sure that our workplace is a much safer place for workers. Workers go to work to earn a decent living and we owe it to them that they should go back alive and, most importantly, they should go back in one piece.

However, Sir, I have a few clarifications to seek from the Minister. First, this Bill will extend coverage of the Workplace Safety and Health Act to all workplaces. This is a logical move and is consistent with the legislation in many other countries. Although not all workplaces expose employees to the same level of risk, as some are by the nature of their work, such as construction and shipyard, more hazardous. Nevertheless, it is wrong to assume that other workplaces carry no risk at all to workers. This coverage will now make it an obligation for all employers to assess the risks in their organisations and put in place safety measures to protect their workers.

However, as this provision will come into effect soon, I would like to ask the Minister what measures are in place to educate the new employers who are now covered under the Act of their obligations. The Minister has outlined some of the measures undertaken but my own sense is that not many employers are aware that they are now covered by the Act and, in my view, if they are ignorant, how would they be able to comply with the law? Would there, therefore, be a more concerted campaign, for instance, to raise the awareness of the new workplaces that are now covered under this Act on their obligations?

Sir, I would also like to ask the Minister whether he could indicate how many more companies and workers will now come under the Act with this new amendment. Although I support completely this idea of extending the Workplace Safety and Health Act to all workplaces, I still must stress that concerted effort, and targeted and focused action must continue to be placed on those workplaces that are a lot more hazardous, particularly the construction sites and shipyards, because they pose a much greater hazard to workers' lives and limbs.

Second, the new section 14A imposes two new obligations on principals. Principals will now have to make sure that the contractors they engage have the necessary expertise to carry out the work, and have taken adequate safety and health measures in the use of machineries, equipments, plants, articles or processes. What is unclear however is how this provision would apply to sub-contractors. Would the principals also be responsible for ensuring that sub-contractors employed by their contractors comply with the two new duties imposed on them? If the obligation does not extend to the sub-contractors, then we are back to square one because it basically means that the principals could outsource their responsibilities to the contractors and the objective of this amendment would be undermined. So, I would like to ask Minister for his views on that.

Third, which is somewhat related to my second point, the construction sector continues to have the highest number of fatalities. Sixty percent of all work fatalities in 2010 occurred in the construction sector. Fatalities at construction sites made up 44% or about two in five of all deaths across all industries. Two challenges were identified for the poorer performance of the sector – poorly managed sub-contracting work and smaller companies with resource constraints. A third possible cause, which was suggested by the President of the Singapore Institution of Safety Officers, is the more transient nature of the workforce deployed in the construction sector, not so familiar with the safety drills. Could the Minister update this House on the measures taken to address these issues and to improve safety at the construction sector? Also, as SMEs employ a large number of workers, what more could be done to enhance safety standards in these companies?

My next point, Sir, is to ask for Section 15(3A), which Minister just explained, makes workers liable if they are negligent and their negligence results in accidents or injuries at work. However, I wish to emphasise that before workers are penalised for acts of negligence, it must be ascertained that they had already been given proper training and equipped with the proper tools and equipment to do their work. Otherwise, it would be unfair to penalise workers for negligence if they were not properly trained or equipped or advised on the safe processes at work that they have to comply with.

Finally, this Bill will not involve the Government in any extra financial expenditure. I am somewhat concerned with this because the MOM's Safety and Health Department's scope of work would certainly increase as the Act now covers all the workplaces, yet Ministry feels that it is not necessary to have additional resources or staff, in order to monitor and ensure compliance with this Act. I would like to ask the Minister for his comment whether existing resources are sufficient to ensure the effective implementation of these new amendments. Even as the Ministry continues to ensure the more hazardous workplaces like shipyards and construction sites continue to improve their standards of safety to protect workers, they are now expanding their scope into covering other areas. They obviously need a lot more employees and staff to do the monitoring and enforcement work.

In conclusion, Sir, I also support the wider coverage of occupational diseases under this amendment. Safety and health measures will now apply not only to those specific diseases listed in the schedule but also to any other disease that a worker contracts because of his exposure to any chemical or biological agents. The kinds of chemicals that are used in workplaces now have expanded considerably and some of them are really toxic. We need to ensure that the Act effectively covers workers when they are exposed to such hazardous chemicals. Having a list of occupational diseases alone is not sufficient. It is important that we have a "catch-all" provision to make sure that as new chemicals develop, workers continue to be protected under the Act.

On this note, Sir, I support the Bill.

5.05 pm

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang (Aljunied): Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am pleased today to see the full expansion of the Workplace Health and Safety (WHS) Act coverage finally coming into reality. It is indeed a watershed move in our WHS legislative regime and a realisation of our tripartite partners' aim to better protect our workers from accidents at all workplaces.

However, there is much work to be done. While the Act will be comprehensive in coverage, what is important is preparedness of the stakeholders to embrace WSH in carrying on their businesses at the ground. Employers and supervisors have to take the lead in creating a safe work environment for their workers and themselves by putting in place safety management systems at work. Every worker must take responsibility for identifying with WHS risks at their workplaces and look out for the safety of their colleagues. After all, workers come to the workplace to work and make profit for the business, so the least employers can do is to ensure that these workers can go back home safe and sound to their families at the end of every workday. We urge all employers to inculcate safety as a value in all their considerations. The sad reality is that when an accident happens, it is the worker who is usually the victim, bearing the full brunt of the accident. I would like to remind all employers that ensuring safety at the workplaces is about showing respect to human lives – a basic obligation and value that all employers must fulfill.

In 2006, when the WSH Act first came into operation, the NTUC formed the Town Council Cleaning and Custodial Services Sectoral Workgroup and working in close collaboration with the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Council, to look into workplace safety and health issues of workers in that sector. This was in early anticipation of the eventual coverage of the Act. The Sectoral Workgroup, which included representatives from managing agents in Town Councils and their contractors, worked hard to develop safe work procedures on the core work processes pertaining to Town Council cleaning and custodial services. As the core procedures on general cleaning, horticulture and pest control works were progressively developed by the workgroup, they were shared with industry players and feedback for improvement were gathered at various platforms. I am happy to say that the WSH Council, through the efforts of this workgroup, was eventually able to publish the WSH Guidelines for Cleaning and Custodial Services in mid-2009. I understand that to-date, 70% of contractors in this sector have attained Third level Biz-Safe with MOM.

By September 2011, the WSH Act will cover all other workplaces, including the retail, education, entertainment and services sectors, as suggested by these amendments. These diverse sectors employ about 46% of our workforce. I am concerned that a majority of these businesses and workforce are ill-prepared. I would like to urge the respective business associations and parties of these sectors: the retail, the education, the entertainment, the services industry; to take up the ownership of preparing your industry well, perhaps taking up the challenge like what the cleaning and custodial services sector did. And of course, MOM should facilitate these industries to do so. NTUC will do its part to reach out to the various sectors through its union channels to encourage all employers to come onboard. The Government must seriously look into providing more resources and incentives or any other avenues to these companies, particularly the SMEs, to help them in a group to improve WSH. We know that a safer working environment will not happen overnight. Changing the law is only the beginning. I look forward to seeing the various stakeholders, particularly the employers, taking up this mission of making our workplaces safer, and achieve the vision of our labour movement that every worker goes home safe and sound at the end of every workday.

( In Mandarin ): For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A . Mr Deputy Speaker, for the past 10 years, our tripartite partners have worked very hard and introduced many successful models to ensure workplace safety. As a labour MP, I am pleased to see that the tripartite cooperation has also led to this amendment which will take effect from 1st September this year. The Act will cover all the workplaces and our workers will be given comprehensive safety protection.

However, I must remind employers that this is only a good beginning. I hope that all the employers will make all the necessary preparation even before 1st September to provide a safer and better working environment for their workers. I also urge the Ministry of Manpower to provide more assistance to companies, especially SMEs. I understand that many employers, especially those in the services sector, do not even fully understand this Bill, let alone fulfil their duties and responsibilities under this Bill to protect the interests of the workers. I think, in this respect, we need to do more.

The Ministry of Manpower should give more support to the employers in this area. As we all know, when accidents happen, the true grave consequences are not the regret of the employer or his economic loss; what really matters is the permanent physical and emotional damage to the victim. I would, therefore, like to remind all the employers of their responsibilities to step up workplace safety measures so that our workers can go back to their loved ones safely after a day's work.

Sir, I support this Bill.

---

*Cols. 4859-4860.

5.11 pm

Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Deputy Speaker, adults spend a considerable portion of their daily waking hours at work. Thus it is important to ensure the environment is as safe and conducive as possible. Staff well-being is important to organisations. Loss of manpower hours, medical leave and inability to function optimally due to illnesses and injuries, can have a negative impact on companies as well as their productivity.

The workplace has been established as one of the priority settings for health promotion in the 21st century, according to World Health Organization. The workplace directly influences physical, psychological, economic and social well being of workers which in turn affect the health of their families, communities and eventually, society. A health promoting workplace now becomes a pre-requisite for sustainable social and economic development.

Sir, in the last 20 years as a medical practitioner, I have encountered and handled many cases related to work and industry injuries. Some lives – young lives – have been lost. Indeed, it has devastating effects on the family.

It is timely for us to debate this Bill. I support the regulations and stipulations in this Bill which has been expanded to cover all workplaces by September 2011. It helps to emphasise the greater responsibilities of all stakeholders involved. We must ensure we reduce all reckless behaviour and negligence to the lowest possible level attainable.

Singapore's workplace fatality rate has dropped significantly from 4.9 per 100,000 in 2004, to 2.8 per 100,000 in 2008. MOM has set a target for this to be reduced to 1.8 per 100,000 by 2018. I am highly supportive of this but it requires a lot of mindset change by both employers and employees to achieve this. Workplace safety can never be taken for granted. With Singapore’s effort to keep employees at work till a ripe old age and the passing of the Re-employment Act recently, it thus becomes crucial to ensure our workplaces are safe, even for the seniors and elderly employees.

Besides this, the Workplace Safety and Health Fund of $70 million has also been set up. This is supposed to be used to assist companies to develop their safety culture and safe practices. Can I ask the Minister what types of projects and activities can this fund be utilised for? Will this fund be available only for Singapore companies based here or can it be tapped by Singapore companies that are also based overseas?

Can I also clarify the following:

(a) Are there regular assessments done by MOM or related officers at work premises to ensure compliance with guidelines? Are some higher risk work places monitored more closely and, if so, how frequently?

(b) Are all workplaces required to have at least minimal first-aid equipment and trained staff onboard all the time?

(c) If in the course of starting a new job, after several weeks or months, an employee is found to have developed an acute occupation disease – one of those listed in the list or a related one – understandably, he would have to be terminated from that job. How much of the acute and subsequent care cost will be taken care of, by the employer or MOM? Does MOM have any specific mechanism to assist these people scout for a new job?

Leading up to the September 2011 deadline, MOM is planning some roadshows, in particular, targeting the newly affected sectors. I support this publicity and creation of greater awareness. Can I ask if these programmes will be done in several languages to target the specific industries that we want to?

Finally, can I ask if MOM will be working closely with MOH? MOH is also actively involved in the promotion of workplace health. MOH has started the Workplace Health Promotion Grant and programmes and all these are indeed in alignment with MOM's objectives as well.

Sir, with that, I support this amendment Bill.

Mr Gan Kim Yong: Sir, let me first thank Members who have spoken in support of the Bill. As Mdm Halimah Yacob, Mr Yeo Guat Kwang and Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef have pointed out, the extension of the WSH Act to cover all workplaces is a significant and timely move to ensure the safety and health of our workers. Let me now address some of the specific queries raised by Members.

Mdm Halimah asked about outreach efforts to educate stakeholders in the new sectors. I agree it is very important for us to ensure that employers and workers are aware of their obligations before the amendments take effect. I had earlier outlined the efforts of my Ministry and the WSH Council in this regard.

As the new sectors account for more than half of the workforce, we started our outreach and education efforts early – slightly more than a year ago – including dialogue sessions with industry associations and the WSH Clinics. We also used the 2010 National WSH Campaign as a platform to reach out to employers and workers.

I would also like to assure Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef that our WSH educational efforts and resources can be readily understood by those who come from a variety of backgrounds. For instance, our Workers' Safety Handbook for Work at Heights adopts a pictorial format and is available in English, Mandarin, Tamil and Bengali. The roadshows for the new sectors on the extension of the Act will include sessions targeting our heartland retailers. These sessions will be conducted in both English and Mandarin. In addition to the roadshows, we will be rolling out a series of WSH radio talkshows in the four national languages later this month. MOM and the WSH Council also work closely with the Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) on workplace health promotion. For example, we are working with HPB to draft a Code of Practice providing workplaces with practical guidance on implementing inhouse promotional programmes on safety and health.

Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef also asked about the use of the WSH 2018 Fund, which MOM launched last year. The Fund provides support on four fronts: helping companies build a strong WSH culture; helping SMEs build their WSH capabilities; tackling WSH challenges specific to the construction and marine sectors; and building new national capabilities such as the WSH Institute. The $70 million Fund supports a mix of direct funding initiatives and national programmes. For example, the Risk Management Assistance Fund (RMAF) assists SMEs through defraying the costs of building in-house risk management capabilities.

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang asked for more help for SMEs. We recently topped up the RMAF with another $11 million to help more SMEs, including those in the new sectors. We have also allocated some $8 million to help companies build a strong and progressive WSH culture.

Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef further asked whether Singapore companies with branches overseas can also tap on these funding. Direct funding initiatives are meant for workplaces and workers in Singapore. However, I am sure the WSH capabilities that companies develop here will also benefit their operations overseas.

To respond to Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef's query, the WSH (First Aid) Regulations will apply to all workplaces from September 2011. Currently, the Regulations only apply to factories and other specific workplaces such as laboratories. We are reviewing the requirements under the Regulations for different types of workplaces. Under the proposed amendments to the Regulations, all workplaces will minimally need to provide some first-aid equipment, such as first-aid boxes. Workplaces with more than 25 workers will need to have trained first-aiders.

To ensure that stakeholders comply with their duties under the WSHA, MOM conducts regular inspections of workplaces. We have adopted a risk-based enforcement approach where higher risk workplaces are inspected more frequently. These include workplaces such as construction sites, which, as Mdm Halimah has noted, accounted for close to 60% of fatalities in 2010. Last year, MOM carried out close to 6,000 inspections. Approximately 60% of the inspections were for the construction sector, focusing on issues such as work at height and crane safety. The WSH Council has also formed industry-led taskforces to look into hazardous work activities that are common in the construction sector.

We recognise that riskier sectors, such as marine and construction, employ large numbers of transient foreign workers. To ensure that these workers are equipped to work safely, we require workers in the construction, marine and metal-working industries to attend and pass a safety orientation course before starting work. Workers who perform certain tasks such as scaffolding work and lifting operations must also be trained and certified before performing such tasks. Contractors have also leveraged on their daily toolbox briefings to regularly remind their workers of the WSH risks and measures that they need to keep in mind when working.

To help SMEs in the construction sector, apart from tapping on the RMAF to help build their risk management capabilities, they can also tap on the Safety Compliance Assistance Visits initiated by the Work at Height Taskforce. Under this programme, WSH professionals visit small construction worksites to provide them with specific advice on WSH management.

The proposed amendments to section 14 of the Act, to clarify the duties of principals, will also help improve ownership of safety outcomes in the construction sector, where sub-contracting arrangements are common. By requiring all principals – whether or not they direct the work of their contractors – to ensure that the contractors they hire have the necessary expertise and have taken adequate safety and health measures, only the right contractors with the proper safety management processes in place will be given the job.

To answer Mdm Halimah's query, the principal's duty under the new section 14A will apply only to the contractors he hires directly, and not to sub-contractors hired by his contractors. It may not be reasonable or practical to hold the principal responsible for all the sub-contractors. Instead, each contractor will be held responsible for the sub-contractors he engages. We believe that the proposed amendment is sufficient and yet practical for achieving our objective of improving ownership of safety outcomes in the sub-contracting process. It will effectively cover all sub-contractors in the entire construction chain, as the persons who hire them will be held responsible for ensuring their ability to carry out the work safely.

Mdm Halimah asked about the Ministry's resources to cater to the extended coverage of the Act. As I mentioned earlier, our efforts to prepare stakeholders for the extension of the Act started more than a year ago, with various outreach and capability building initiatives. These will continue in the months ahead. When the Act is extended to cover all workplaces in September 2011, my Ministry will allocate additional resources to conduct inspections of workplaces in the new sectors. We have set aside adequate resources within our existing budget for these activities.

Mdm Halimah also asked about penalties under section 15(3)A. This is not a new power. But I can assure Mdm Halimah that we will take into account all relevant circumstances of the negligent act if we do take action against the workers.

Sir, as Mr Yeo Guat Kwang has pointed out, to ensure that the extension of the WSH Act achieves our objective of providing all workers with a safe and healthy workplace, all stakeholders – including employers, business associations, workers, unions – must play their part. Putting in place a regulatory framework that is relevant and responsive to the needs of stakeholders is only the first step. I am heartened by NTUC's strong support and commitment to help reach out to the various sectors to raise their WSH standards. On MOM's part, we will continue to work closely with the WSH Council, unions and employers to enhance the effectiveness of our initiatives and programmes, so that every worker can go home safe and sound at the end of every workday.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Gan Kim Yong].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.