Hansard Explorer

Debate resumed.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.

6.29 pm

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Deputy Speaker, AMLA does not deal with substantive Muslim law itself, but the administration of Muslim law in our secular and multi-racial nation. I am generally supportive of the proposed amendments to govern SCIS, which will open in 2028, and to further refine divorce processes in the Syariah Court. However, I do have some clarifications for the Minister on certain aspects of the Bill.

The establishment of SCIS is a significant milestone for our Muslim community. Our aspiring religious teachers and scholars will no longer have to travel overseas to North Africa or the Middle East just to pursue higher religious education. A homegrown tertiary institution will also allow us to ground classical Islamic scholarship within Singapore's unique multi-religious and multicultural context.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Clause 4 of the Bill will expressly provide that MUIS will have the additional function of overseeing the provision of tertiary religious education at SCIS. In the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's (MCCY's) responses to the public consultation earlier this year, it was clarified that the SCIS Board will take care of academic and operational matters, MUIS will "oversee the development of religious graduates through SCIS" and the Minister's oversight will focus on ensuring the appropriate governance structures and strategic direction at SCIS.

Can the Minister confirm my understanding that MUIS' oversight will centre on the religious aspects, while the day-to-day operations as well as the secular part of SCIS will be under the direct supervision of the Ministry? And how does this interact with the existing leadership structure of an Advisory Panel, a Board of Governors and a Steering Committee which have been appointed? Given the mix of individuals which comprise these bodies, how will we practically divide the decision-making between operational, religious and secular matters at SCIS?

I do note in Acting Minister’s opening speech, he elaborated a bit on this but it would be good if the Acting Minister can answer my specific questions on this.

This is not merely a theoretical question. MCCY has expressly recognised the importance of maintaining SCIS’ academic independence and scholarly rigour. How does MUIS and MCCY plan to maintain this delicate balance between the oversight and leaving SCIS with its academic space?

In terms of funding, I understand that the plan is for the Government to provide funding support for the non-religious components of the programme, including social sciences modules, whereas the Muslim community primarily funds the religious education components. Have we modelled whether and how the community funds under MUIS’ administration, such as zakat, wakaf and the MBMF, can sustain SCIS’ long-term work?

What measures will be in place to ensure transparent accounting and equitable fund allocation across MUIS’ various obligations, so that other vital community needs funded by zakat or MBMF are not inadvertently squeezed? This is important. Furthermore, would SCIS be establishing financial assistance schemes to ensure that no qualified student is turned away from SCIS due to financial hardship and how will these be funded? Hopefully, the Acting Minister can share a bit more about the financial elements of SCIS going forward.

The Bill also explicitly clarifies that SCIS will not be treated as a typical "Muslim religious school" under section 86A of AMLA. What is the practical significance of this distinction that is drawn in the Act?

And as SCIS represents a significant long-term investment in Islamic scholarship and religious leadership, could the Acting Minister elaborate on the extent of the Government’s funding support for SCIS, and how MUIS will ensure that funding SCIS does not come at the expense of other community needs, such as mosques, madrasahs and zakat beneficiaries?

Next, SCIS curriculum. A college is ultimately measured by the success of its graduates. The curriculum of SCIS – combining Islamic scholarship with social sciences, like psychology, counselling and organisational studies – is designed to produce versatile, future-ready graduates.

Our tertiary education system has long been reputed for ensuring that practical roles can be filled and performed in society, where we need them and when we need them. Beyond traditional roles in mosques and madrasahs, how will the Government and community partners facilitate career placement for SCIS graduates across the public sector, social services and education sectors?

From the partnership with SUSS, as well as the automatic qualification of SCIS graduates as Tier 1 Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS), it appears that the SCIS is focused on supplying leaders and professionals in the religious and social sectors only for now.

So, what are the plans to diversify the offerings of the SCIS into other Islamic areas or specialisations? Fast-growing areas, such as Islamic finance and Shariah-compliant medical treatments and biomedicine, will complement our offerings as a financial hub and a medical hub. I had mentioned these two areas in the 2025 Committee of Supply for MCCY.

Besides the announced four-year undergraduate degree programme in Islamic Studies, does the SCIS intend to offer other degree programmes, and if so, what are the status and timelines of these plans, and possibly also, hopefully the Acting Minister can elicit a little bit more information on financial funding of these programmes if there are plans, going forward. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, strong families are the foundation of our society. Marriage is not merely a bond between two individuals, but also an important institution for building stable and resilient families. Therefore, efforts to help couples preserve and strengthen their marriages must remain a priority, while taking into account the safety and welfare of every family member.

At the same time, when a marriage truly cannot be saved, unnecessary procedural hurdles can prolong the hardship faced by couples and their children. For lower-income families in particular, every additional session can incur costs, including loss of income from taking time off work and childcare expenses.

Therefore, in my view, we need to strike a balance. We do not want to make divorce easier without due consideration. But neither should we retain procedures that add to the burden on families when the requirements for divorce under Muslim law have been met.

On this basis, I support the move to simplify the procedures for talak tafwidh and to provide discretion regarding the requirement for witnesses in fasakh applications. Importantly, the Court must still be satisfied that the grounds for divorce have been proven and are valid under Muslim law. How will this discretion regarding witnesses be exercised consistently? Applicants need clear guidance on the types of alternative evidence they may submit. This is particularly important for women who lack family support, including converts to Islam.

At the same time, we must continue to focus on preventing marital breakdowns before couples reach the point of divorce. Regarding the Marriage Counselling Programme, apart from knowing the number of couples who reconcile, could the Minister share how many couples undergo the programme but ultimately proceed with their divorce applications?

More importantly, how do we assess the effectiveness of this programme, not only in preventing divorce, but also in identifying safety risks and reducing conflicts that affect children? And how can we strengthen support for Muslim marriages beyond the Bersamamu programme, including ongoing support at different stages of family life?

Protecting children and access to justice. I support the affirmation that the welfare of the child is the Court's paramount consideration. This principle is already rooted in Muslim law and the practice of the Syariah Court, and is consistent with the spirit of Maqasid Al-Shariah in safeguarding the well-being of future generations.

How are children's views heard according to their age and maturity, and how is support continued in collaboration with community agencies after proceedings have concluded? Children should also not feel that they are being forced to choose between their mother and father when their views are sought. Are there plans to further strengthen coordination between the Court's support services and community agencies, so that families receive comprehensive and continuous support after divorce?

The clearer powers concerning the removal of children from Singapore are also welcome. However, if there is a risk of a child being taken out of Singapore within hours, swift action is crucial.

MCCY has clarified that enforcement will remain through the civil courts. How can urgent applications be heard promptly, including on the same day if necessary? How can orders be communicated quickly to the relevant authorities, including ICA where appropriate? More broadly, when the Syariah Court is already familiar with the facts of a case and the parties have undergone proceedings before it, could we explore ways to streamline the enforcement process so that families do not have to go through another complicated and burdensome process?

What emergency protection channels are available to couples who are still undergoing counselling before divorce proceedings are filed? A distressed parent needs clear directions on which court to approach, with coordination to avoid delays. Simple guidance in languages that families understand, including for those without legal representation, would help them obtain timely protection.

I also support the power to make financial and child-related orders following a Muslim divorce overseas. This could reduce the burden on families who would otherwise have to go through separate proceedings. However, obtaining foreign documents, translations and expert evidence can be costly. Could clear guidance and appropriate assistance be provided for lower-income applicants, and could remote testimony be allowed where appropriate? How will divorces that are legally recognised in the foreign country but obtained outside court proceedings be handled?

Where enforcement must go through the Civil Courts, the process should also minimise duplication of documents and additional costs. The ultimate goal must be a system that is not only legally fair, but also one that families can navigate from beginning to end.

Finally, certainty in estate planning. In future reviews of AMLA, could the Ministry, together with MUIS and legal practitioners, examine how to provide greater legal certainty for instruments, such as hibah and nuzriah? Families need to understand whether their estate planning arrangements will achieve their intended legal outcomes. Clearer guidance can help reduce disputes following the death of a family member.

( In English ): Mr Speaker, if I may conclude in English. The amendments in this Bill reflect a forward-looking vision for the Singapore Muslim community. The SCIS is an investment in a future where our religious leaders are deeply grounded in faith, intellectually agile and equipped to guide our community through complex modern challenges within Singapore’s context. The continuing refinements to our family justice system is a reflection of how our religious values and grounding can adapt to suit our modern Singapore context.

Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding the clarifications sought, I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker: Mr Fadli Fawzi.

6.42 pm

Mr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I welcome this Bill. I will speak about the Syariah Court before I turn to the SCIS. I am also declaring my interest as a practising Syariah Court lawyer.

Sir, let me begin with the Bill's intention to strengthen the child-centricity of the Syariah Court. Here, I will speak about the roles and functions of the Court therapeutic specialist in the Syariah Court, and their possible synergies with the counselling and psychological services counterparts at the Family Justice Court.

At the outset, let me state that I wholeheartedly agree with the proposed inclusion of sub-section 3A into section 52 of AMLA, which states that in matters relating to custody, care and control, the paramount consideration is to be the welfare of the minor child. This enshrines in statute what is already reflected in the practice of the Syariah Court.

I also understand that in recent years, the Syariah Court has introduced a series of innovative practices to help the Court and its officials better ascertain and protect the welfare of the child. This includes employing Court therapeutic specialists through the Court counselling framework in 2022, the implementation of the Child Representative Scheme in 2023 and the co-mediation pilot in 2025.

Court therapeutic specialists, according to a Syariah Court brochure are social science professionals with specialist training in supporting families going through divorce. They are meant to enhance the child-centricity of the Syariah Court processes. For instance, the Syariah Court has a long-standing practice of having its Presidents interview children who are the subject of custody disputes. Since September 2022, the Court Presidents now jointly conduct the interview together with the Court therapeutic specialist.

As the then-Senior President of the Syariah Court, Mdm Guy Ghazali told Berita Harian on 17 September 2023: "It is imperative that we have a court counsellor with social science training to conduct the interview jointly with the Court President, as court counsellors have the expertise to ask appropriate questions to children, ascertain the relationship between children and their parents, their daily activities and others to help Syariah Court Presidents conduct interviews with children."

The court therapeutic specialist are also involved in the Syariah Court's co mediation pilot launched in April 2025. They now accompany mediators to help families attend to their emotional, psychological and legal needs holistically, including directing families to the necessary help in the event of family violence, child welfare risk, or parental conflict.

I am glad that the Syariah Court and the Muslim children of divorcing parents are now receiving the help of trained family court specialists and I applaud their introduction to the workflow of the court. I notice that these moves parallel some of the forensic and therapeutic interventions provided by the counselling and psychological services of the Family Justice Courts.

The Counselling and Psychological Services (CAPS) is staffed by experienced counsellors, psychologists and social workers, and they can similarly assist with counselling, mediation and judicial child interviews in the Family Justice Courts. CAPS also helps the Family Justice Courts with child custody evaluation reports. It is my understanding that currently the Syariah Court will commission an external psychologist if a custody evaluation report is needed.

If CAPS is indeed the model, is the Syariah Court planning for the possibility that its inhouse therapeutic specialist will be able to prepare a child custody evaluation report in the near future? And more generally, I would like to ask the Minister what further plans the Syariah Court has for the development of its therapeutic specialist services, and specifically how it intends to develop and sustain its best practices and its institutional knowledge over the long term.

The Syariah Court has also implemented the Child Representative Scheme in 2023. Here, the Syariah Court's Child Representative Scheme is significantly different from the Child representative Scheme in the Family Justice Courts. In the Family Justice Courts, the child representative is a lawyer. He or she will have at least seven years of experience in family law, be an accredited mediator and be vouched with two references. The child representative is an independent third party expected to represent and advance the child's welfare and interest during the custody proceedings.

In the Syariah Court, the child representative is a social science professional instead of a lawyer. In a speech on 13 September 2023, Mdm Guy Ghazali explained that this decision was taken because social science professionals are well placed to perform this role as they are trained to speak to children. They are able to identify and assess relevant issues and they function within a community or network of social science professionals that facilitate information sharing between agencies if the children are known to them.

I appreciate the Syariah Court's efforts to develop a multidisciplinary approach to child custody issues. However, can the Minister explain the considerations that the Syariah Court had in mind in departing from the conventional model of appointing a lawyer as a child representative, as practised in the Family Justice Courts and many other jurisdictions?

I also have three specific questions about how the Syariah Court is implementing its child Child Representative Scheme. First, what is the criteria to count as a social science professional for the purposes of being empanelled as a child representative of the Syariah Court? Second, what are the minimum qualifications required to be a child representative of the Syariah Court? And third, what is the relationship, if any, between the child representative panels and the therapeutic specialist services of the Syariah Court?

I want to be clear that I am not against social science professionals being appointed as child representatives in the Syariah Court. This is an innovation that should be given due time and consideration. I hope that the Government will take the opportunity to commission a study looking into the relative effectiveness of the different child representative models in the Syariah Court and the Family Justice Courts to find out what works best for children in custody disputes.

Mr Speaker, I also hope that the Minister can give an update about the feasibility study to relocate the Syariah Court closer to the Family Justice Courts and the State Court. I hope that this relocation is being seriously considered to support the long-term institutional and professional development of the Syariah Court. The Syariah Court's relative isolation at Lengkok Bahru is perhaps reflective of its organisational and institutional isolation from the Family Justice Courts. The Family Justice Courts is part of the Judiciary, which is an independent third branch of the state after the Executive and the Legislature.

The Syariah Court, however, is administratively parked under MCCY. Thus, the Syariah Court is not part of the Singapore court system. This is even though the High Court and the Syariah Court do share concurrent jurisdiction in three ancillary matters pertaining to divorce: the maintenance of the wife and child, the division of matrimonial property, and the custody of the child.

In other words, parties to a Muslim divorce can already have their custody disputes be heard in the civil courts. Hence, can I ask the Minister the reason for maintaining the Syariah Court under MCCY, instead of being under the Judiciary, and whether the Government views this as an ideal arrangement for the future?

My concern is that the physical and institutional separation of the Syariah Court from the Family Justice Courts system may prevent the Syariah Court from harnessing the expertise, knowledge, skills and resources of the Family Justice Courts, and also vice versa.

To be clear, both courts are committed to the principle of therapeutic justice, and in matters concerning custody of the child, both courts courts elevate the welfare of the child as a paramount consideration. It seems that the work of both courts can benefit from a closer working relationship, if not closer integration.

Mr Speaker, that concludes my discussion of the Syariah Court. I will now turn to the Bill's focus on the SCIS and talk about its budget and financing, its cohort size and its curriculum.

Before that, Sir, please allow me to start with two minor technical queries about the statute. First, on the section 73E directions that may be given by the majilis. One of the grounds for a section 73E direction is if the majilis considers it is necessary or expedient in the public interest. How is the public interest defined here, and can the majilis' determination on this ground be challenged?

Second, section 73 H1A, that requires the written consent of the Minister for the admission or removal of any person as a member of the college company. I understand that an entity named Singapore College of Islamic Studies Limited has already been registered with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority in November 2025. Can the Minister verify who are the members of the college company and how were they selected? Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): Next, on the budget and financing of the SCIS. This Bill allows MUIS to fund the religious component of the SCIS curriculum from community sources it administers: the Baitulmal, the Mosque Building and MENDAKI Fund, zakat and wakaf.

Meanwhile, the Government will fund the non-religious components, such as the social sciences modules and general facilities. This is a sensible principle. However, can the Minister offer a projected breakdown of the budget, including stipulating what proportion of SCIS' running and capital costs is expected to come from the community, and what proportion is to come from Government grants?

Additionally, I appreciate the Minister’s assurance that zakat funding for SCIS will not crowd out other recipients who may have more pressing needs or urgently depend on zakat monies. However, could the Minister explain how MUIS plans to distribute zakat funds without compromising the needs of other eligible beneficiaries?

The Bill also allows SCIS to raise funds from other sources. Along these lines, will SCIS seek sponsorships, endowments and naming opportunities, such as endowed chairs, scholarships or named lecture halls? Is the Government also planning to start an endowment fund for the SCIS, similar to what our Autonomous Universities have, and will it receive seed funding from the community and the Government?

A healthy endowment will reduce the pressure on community and Government funds over time.

I would like to move on to SCIS' expected cohort. I understand that the first intake will be a batch of around 50 to 60 students. Is this number expected to grow gradually over the next five years, and is it expected to cut into the 120 madrasah graduates that go overseas to study every year?

I would also like to ask about admission beyond the madrasah pathway. Will students from the A-Level and polytechnic cohorts be able to apply? If so, would they need to attend some form of foundation or bridging course, for example, in Arabic language?

I am concerned that a small cohort size may not be sufficient to support a diverse range of modules. With a cohort size of 50 to 60, can the faculty sustain the variety of courses for an interdisciplinary tertiary religious education?

Here, I am hoping for more clarity in terms of SCIS' planned partnership with SUSS: is the plan for students to be able to take electives at SUSS, especially in the social sciences track? Or are students expected to only attend modules that are offered in-house at SCIS? Furthermore, would SCIS consider establishing a legal education track so that we can develop asatizah that are trained both in civil and religious law? This would help to sustain the future work of the Syariah Court.

( In English ): Lastly, I return to the aim of SCIS, which is to develop local asatizahs who are able to adapt and context contextualise Islamic teachings and values to diverse cultural and societal settings, fostering inclusivity and relevance. This is a laudable goal.

To achieve this, however, SCIS students should have opportunities to interact with people from all walks of life, including peers from outside the madrasah pathway. Can the Minister share whether the SCIS has any plans to ensure that our SCIS graduates have the opportunities to interact with different segments of our diverse multiracial and multi-religious society? Notwithstanding these clarifications, I support the Bill.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Mariam Jaafar.

6.57 pm

Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. In my work as a Member of Parliament, I have met a couple whose marriage lasted 31 days. I have also met a woman whose divorce has taken close to two years. A system serving both of them must be able to tell the difference between the two.

Divorce is not only a legal event. It determines where children live, who provides for them, how a family divides what it has built and whether people can rebuild their lives with dignity. Mr Speaker, I will continue Malay.

(In Malay): Sir, there is a word we grew up with called ihsan. To do what is right, and to do it with care. When a marriage must end, our tradition asks that it end with ihsan.

So, the test I will apply to this Bill is a simple one: does it help marriages end that way?

I will consider this through three lenses: the child, the spouse who cannot afford to wait, and the capacity of our institutions to deliver justice.

First, the child. I welcome the Bill’s express provision that the welfare of the child must be the paramount consideration of the Syariah Court, and the expanded powers on relocation outside Singapore. I also recognise the Court's efforts to make its processes more child-centred, including its Therapeutic Specialist Services and initiatives to hear children's perspectives.

But a principle in legislation must translate into the lived reality of the child. Allow me to share a couple of cases from my Meet-the-People sessions. I do not raise them as exceptions. I raise them because each point to a gap that could affect many families.

The first is a mother trying to maintain breastfeeding and continuity of care for her infant after her marriage broke down. The judgment provided for shared care and control. On paper, this was a question of care arrangements. For that infant, it was whether the most basic rhythms of life would be disrupted. So, I hope the Court will look beyond formal labels to who actually provides day-to-day care, the continuity of the child's environment and the child's own views where appropriate.

The second is a woman whose former husband had assured her that, with shared care and control, both parents could use their child’s name in their respective HDB applications. He later included the child in his BTO application. This has affected her ability to secure a home for herself and her 10-month-old child, who in practice lives with her full-time. This is not one family's difficulty. Agreements agreed in one forum can carry consequences in another, and parents are not always told.

Could the Ministry work with the relevant agencies to ensure that parents understand the implications for future housing applications before arrangements are finalised? More broadly, how can we ensure that decisions made in one part of the system do not inadvertently disadvantage the child or the parent who actually provides day-to-day care?

Sir, a child's welfare also depends on whether the child receives adequate and timely maintenance. There are established channels. Maintenance is ordered in the Syariah Court or the Family Justice Courts, but enforcement sits with the Family Justice Courts. The Maintenance Enforcement Process, which now covers all such applications, is a welcome step, and I understand the application itself can be made online.

But a process existing does not mean a child's needs are met in time. My concern is not the form. It is whether parents with Syariah Court orders know where to go, and how long it takes before the money actually reaches the child.

Could the Ministry share how many Syariah Court maintenance orders have needed enforcement, and how long it takes from default to first payment? Specifically, how long does it take before a child actually receives the maintenance ordered by the Court? Are there recurring causes of delay that can be addressed?

Second, the spouse who cannot afford to wait. I welcome empowering the Court to dispense with a hakam where both parties agree to talak tafwidh and the Court considers one unnecessary. Where there is agreement, unnecessary steps should go. I also welcome greater flexibility in fasakh procedures.

But I want to speak about time. Time is not experienced equally in a divorce. For a financially-independent spouse with legal representation, a prolonged process may be an inconvenience. For a spouse who is financially dependent, has young children, or is trying to leave an abusive home, every additional month carries a cost she may not be able to bear.

When that happens, delay itself can become bargaining power.

No one writes that into the law. But it can be how the process works in practice. Some NGOs have highlighted women who, wanting only for the process to end, waived claims to nafkah iddah, mutaah and matrimonial assets. Some did not fully understand what they were entitled to. Others understood, but decided they could not endure months more of strain.

An agreement reached in these circumstances may be formally voluntary. We should ask whether it is substantively fair. Consent is meaningful only when a person knows what she is giving up and is genuinely free to refuse.

So, I urge the Ministry to consider proportionate safeguards: where a party is giving up significant financial claims, she should receive a plain-language statement of what she is entitled to, and a route to independent legal advice, before the agreement is recorded. This should be targeted at cases with signs of dependence or pressure.

I would not advocate additional steps for every amicable divorce. That would add cost and delay for families who need neither. Instead, safeguards should target situations where there is a genuine risk of injustice.

On fasakh and evidence, I welcome the proposed amendment allowing the Court to waive the requirement for two sworn witnesses where the grounds can be established through other means, or where obtaining witnesses would be impractical or cause further hardship.

Cruelty and intimidation rarely happen before witnesses. They often happen behind closed doors.

But how will this discretion be exercised in practice? Will the Court have guidance on assessing documentary evidence, medical records and messages, while ensuring both parties receive a fair hearing? And will the Ministry monitor how often it is used, and whether applicants still face difficulty establishing their cases?

Genuine cases of abuse must not be made harder to establish simply because the abuse happened in private.

One more point. Where there is violence, intimidation or coercive control, safety must come before reconciliation. I note that the Ministry has acknowledged feedback on the need for more flexible referral pathways in cases involving allegations of family violence or coercive control, and has committed to reviewing the marriage counselling requirements.

I urge particular attention here. Mediation and counselling have real value, but not in every case. Where there is an imbalance of power or a genuine risk to safety, requiring reconciliation without first assessing that risk may expose the more vulnerable party to further pressure. The system should identify such cases early, prioritise safety, and ensure that efforts to reconcile couples do not compromise the necessary safeguards.

Third, the capacity of our institutions. I support allowing the Syariah Court to deal with matrimonial property and child-related matters following a foreign Muslim divorce. It is a sensible step towards a more integrated system.

But new jurisdiction means little without the capacity to exercise it. We have heard of mediation sessions and hearings postponed by months. A Law Society submission has also highlighted differences in hearing timelines between the Family Justice Courts and the Syariah Court.

The two courts handle different cases, and direct comparisons are not straightforward. But the question remains: are families waiting longer than necessary? And when the Courts has decided, can its decision be carried out?

A resident came to me with a Syariah Court order requiring the sale of her matrimonial flat by a specified date. She told me that her former husband kept changing the locks and turning away prospective buyers and property agents.

The order existed. The relief did not. For her, that deadline was not a technicality. It was the point at which she could access her share of the matrimonial home and move on with her life.

A Court order is only as meaningful as the ability to enforce it. As the Bill expands the Court’s powers, including after foreign divorces, the demands on the institution will likely grow. Can the Minister clarify what recourse a party has when the other refuses to comply with an order, and how quickly it can be activated, particularly in time-sensitive matters such as the sale of a matrimonial home?

(In English) : Sir, I could suggest four areas for the Ministry's consideration. One, make sure no parent is left to find the route alone. A parent should be told at the point a maintenance order is made how to enforce if payment stops.

Two, publish three numbers each year, the time from filing to final order; the time from a maintenance order to first payment; and the share of orders that need enforcement. Do not stop measuring when an order is issued, measure whether families actually receive what the Court has ordered. What gets measured can be held to account.

Three, let the systems tell cases apart. It should be able to tell apart the couple whose marriage lasted 31 days and the woman whose divorce has taken close to two years. Where both parties agree and issues are few, there should be a streamline path. Where there are children, substantial assets, violence or significant power imbalances, cases should receive more active management and priority. Fairness does not always mean putting every case through the same process, it means giving each case the attention and urgency if circumstances require.

Four, match capacity to responsibility. As the Court takes on more, judicial mediation and administrative resources must grow with it. This is not simply about manpower. It is about having the right capabilities, processes and support to resolve increasingly complex cases without compromising the quality of justice. Access to justice is not simply the ability to file an application, it is the ability to obtain a fair outcome within a reasonable time and to have that outcome become reality.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, let me conclude. Earlier, I spoke of ihsan and I want to return to it.

A marriage that has broken down should be allowed to end. But ending it with ihsan means a child receiving maintenance before the next school term. It means a woman leaving an unsafe marriage without waiting out months of fear. It means a spouse being able to say yes or no to a settlement knowing their rights, and not simply because they have run out of strength. It means a Court order that does not just exist on paper, but delivers the relief that a family needs.

(In English) : A Court order that does not just exist on paper, but delivers the relief that a family needs. Sir, I would put it this way: make it easier for broken marriages to end, make it harder for the ending itself to become another hardship. The marriage may end, our responsibilities to the children do not, nor does our duty to ensure that the process is fair to both parties. I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker: Mr Muhaimin Abdul Malik.

7.14 pm

Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will confine my remarks to Part 2 of the Bill, which provides for SCIS. I support the purpose of Part 2, the new section 3(2)(da) gives MUIS the function of overseeing tertiary religious education at the college for the purpose of developing Islamic teachers who are suitably qualified and trained to guide the Muslim community in Singapore. That is a worthy aim and a college that trains such teachers here deserves a sound legal framework.

But Part 2 does more than recognise the college. It allows community funds to be paid to it. It gives MUIS power to direct its religious teachings and it gives the Minister control of its Board and its spending. Because those powers are wide, this House should be clear about how they will be used.

I will make six points, each with a request to the Minister. Mr Speaker, in Malay.

(In Malay): The new Section 73D(1) allows MUIS to fund the college from four sources: the General Endowment Fund, zakat and fitrah, moneys collected for charitable purposes, and the Mosque Building and Mendaki Fund (MBMF).

The Bill does not prescribe any limit on the amounts involved. Nor does it specify whether MUIS must seek religious advice before making these payments.

The provision allowing these payments to be made notwithstanding "any other provision of this Act" is significant. The existing Act, before these amendments, imposes conditions on each of these four funding sources. Three are particularly noteworthy.

First, zakat. Section 68(4) of the Act requires zakat and fitrah to be administered "in accordance with the Muslim law". Section 73D(1) would allow zakat to be paid to the college notwithstanding that requirement. I am not suggesting that the training of religious teachers falls outside the permissible uses of zakat. However, zakat contributors would certainly want to know whether the requirement under Section 68(4) would continue to apply.

Second, MBMF. Section 77(1)(c) already permits the Fund to be used to finance religious education, subject to the Minister's directions. However, Sections 78(9) and (10) provide that additional voluntary contributions, as well as contributions that cannot be attributed to any particular individual, are deemed to be funds for mosque building. By overriding this requirement, Section 73D could allow such money to be paid to the college, even though it was specifically contributed for mosques.

Third, charitable collections. Under Section 71, money may be collected under a licence for a specific purpose, subject to conditions imposed by MUIS. Section 73D(1) could allow such money to be paid to the college, regardless of the original purpose for which it was contributed. I acknowledge that controls are already in place. Under Section 73D(3), the college may only spend these funds on purposes permitted by the Minister. Under Section 73I(3), the college is required to publish a summary of its financial statements.

Under the First Schedule to the Act, the audited accounts of the General Endowment Fund and MBMF will be presented to this House. However, nothing in the Bill or the Act requires these accounts to disclose, as separate line items, the amounts paid to the college from each fund. Indeed, the zakat and fitrah accounts are not included in the First Schedule at all, unless the Minister chooses to specify them.

I have four requests.

First, will the Minister confirm that zakat and fitrah paid under Section 73D will still be applied in accordance with Muslim law? Second, will the Minister confirm that contributions deemed to be for mosque building under Sections 78(9) and (10), as well as charitable funds collected for specified purposes, will not be paid to the college? Third, will MUIS publish the amounts paid to the college under Section 73D(1) each year, with a separate breakdown for each funding source? Fourth, will there be an upper limit, or a trigger for review, for payments from zakat and fitrah and from the Mosque Building and Mendaki Fund?

On a related point, I note that Section 73C(2) allows the college to undertake functions beyond tertiary religious education, and Section 73D(2)(b) allows it to receive funding from sources other than MUIS and the Government. For the college's long-term sustainability, will it be permitted to generate its own revenue through activities, such as continuing education programmes, conferences, publications and investment of its own funds?

( In English ): Sir, my second point is about who governs the college? Under new section 73G, the SCIS Board consists of any number of Directors the Minister appoints. The Minister may remove or replace any Director at any time. The only procedural step is that he consults the Chief Executive of MUIS, before appointing, removing or replacing anyone, other than the Chief Executive.

The Bill sets no criteria for appointment, no fixed terms and no requirement that any Director has qualifications in Islamic scholarship. This power sits alongside others. Under section 73D(3), the college may spend MUIS' and Government's monies only on objects the Minister allows. Under section 73H, his prior written consent is needed to admit or remove members of the company, or to change its constitution. And anything done without that consent has no effect.

Under section 73K, the Act prevails over the constitution. Taken together, the Minister controls the Board, the money and the constitution. The Bill says nothing about academic freedom or the independence of the college's teaching. The explanatory statement says MUIS directions are not meant to affect the college's day to day operations, but it is silent on whether the same restraint applies to the Minister's own powers under sections 73D, 73F, 73G and 73H.

In reply to Parliamentary Questions in February this year, the Ministry stated that non-Muslim members make up less than half of the Board of Governors and the steering committee. And that matters of faith and religious scholarship are led by the Mufti, supported by the SCIS Advisory Panel of Islamic scholars.

I welcome those arrangements, but none of them is in the Bill. Section 73G will allow a future Board to be constituted quite differently. I asked the Minister for three assurances.

First, that the college will have academic freedom in its teaching and research.

Second, the Board appointed under section 73G will keep the safeguards the Ministry has described: non-Muslim members in the minority and religious scholarship led by the Mufti and the Advisory Panel. I will also welcome clarity on what criteria will guide appointments and whether directors will serve fixed terms.

Third, that section 73G will not be used to direct the curriculum.

Sir, my third point concerns MUIS' power to direct the college. New section 73E(1) lets MUIS give directions concerning the college's tertiary religious education on four grounds – two are specific, ensuring that Islamic teachers are fit and proper with satisfactory training and experience, and developing Islamic teachers. The other two are broad. MUIS may act against teaching. That is contrary to the Muslim law or the conduct of Muslim religious affairs in Singapore and it may act in the public interest. Under section 73E(3), the college must comply.

I welcome section 73E(2), which keeps directions on staffing away from non-Islamic teachers and staff. But the grounds in section 73E(1)(b) and 73E(1)(d) are not defined and the Bill gives no examples. The explanatory statement offers two: a direction to engage teachers recognised by MUIS and safeguards against deviant teaching. Those are sensible, but they are not the limits of the power.

On appeals, clause 7 amends section 88G to allow the college to appeal to the Minister against a direction. I ask the Minister two things: first, can he give the House examples of what directions under section 73E(1)(b) and (d) will cover and what they will not? Second, will there be a published procedure for these appeals with written reasons?

Sir, my fourth point is brief. The explanatory statement gives, as an example of a direction, a requirement that the college engage local teachers recognised under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme, but the Bill does not require this. It only allows MUIS to direct it.

The Bill also defines an Islamic teacher broadly: anyone who provides Islamic instruction in any subject to one or more students. That would seem to include visiting or short-term lecturers. The Ministry has said the college will partner Dar al-Ifta al-Misriyyah in Egypt, Al-Qarawiyyin in Morocco and the University of Jordan for its Islamic studies pathway. Scholars from those institutions may well teach at the college.

I ask the Minister to confirm whether every Islamic teacher at the college will be required to be recognised by MUIS and how that will be secured if it rests on a direction?

I also ask him to clarify whether visiting lecturers from the college's partner institutions who fall within the direction of Islamic teacher, will they be required to hold recognition under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme, or whether MUIS will apply a separate vetting process for them?

Sir, my fifth point is about the students. Clause 33 exempts the college, its managers and its teachers from the Private Education Act. Clause 6 provides that the college is not a Muslim religious school, under section 86A. The Bill does not say what legislative authority for students take place of those regimes. In October last year, the Ministry said that the course fees and the student financial support were still being determined. That makes it all the more important to know what protections students will have once fees are set.

Under section 73F, the college must follow a quality assurance framework decided by the Minister, and take part in reviews by external panels he commissions. That is welcome, but the Bill does not say whether the framework or the panels' findings will be published. Section 73J applies the Societies' Act to student bodies, which the explanatory statement says is to provide accountability for students' union funds. Students are therefore held to account for their funds.

I will ask for clarity on how student themselves are protected, once they have enrolled and paid their fees. I ask the Minister what safeguards will apply to students in place of the Private Education Act, and will the quality framework and external review reports be made public?

Sir, my last request ties the others together. Many of the powers in Part 2 are broad on their face. The explanatory statement tells us how some of them are expected to be used, but the text does not limit them in the same way. I ask the Minister to commit on the record today to report to Parliament within two years of the college admitting its first batch of students. The report should cover the amount paid to the college under section 73D(1) from each source appointments and removals under section 73G, the number and grounds of directions issued under section 73E and the outcome of any appeals under section 88G.

Mr Speaker, Part 2 gives the college a legal framework and a clear purpose to develop Islamic teachers qualified to guide our community. It also allows zakat, fitrah and the Mosque Fund to be spent on it, and places MUIS and the Minister in-charge of its teachings, its board and its money.

This House should therefore be clear on three things: how community funds are used and reported, who decides what is taught and how these decisions can be reviewed. I believe that none of my clarifications and requests would delay the establishment of the college. Instead, these are debates this House should have at this juncture to strengthen the public confidence in it. Sir, I support the Bill and I look forward to the Minister's response.

Mr Speaker: Mr Sharael Taha.

7.28 pm

Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Changi): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I rise in support of the Bill. In my speech, I will focus on the SCIS and seek clarification on three matters: firstly, the scope of its education; secondly, ensuring employability of its graduates; and thirdly, the safeguarding of the community funds entrusted to it.

Mr Speaker, I recently had the privilege of joining the parliamentary delegation led by you to Europe, including Italy and Vatican City, to strengthen our ties with the region. It was a meaningful visit, but also a sobering one. In our consultations, concerns about war, polarisation of societies, discrimination and online falsehoods were never far away. Across societies, the question is increasingly not just how we advance, but how we hold together.

One experience stayed with me. As someone working on artificial intelligence (AI) in industry, and as a Chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Digital Development and Information, during our parliamentary visit to Vatican City, I was particularly struck by the reflections of Pope Leo XIV in his encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, on how faith and theology can provide a moral compass as humanity navigates the challenges of AI; on safeguarding the human person in the age of artificial intelligence.

In our conversations with Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican Secretary of State, it showed how religious thought engaged seriously with a profoundly modern challenge. The encyclical considers human dignity, the future of work, responsibility for AI decisions and the danger that falsehoods pose to truth and life. It does not ask society to retreat from technology. It places human judgement, conscience and the common good at its centre.

I found that perspective to be deeply valuable. We can learn from one another across faiths without diminishing our own beliefs. Religion is not confined to explaining what we believe in. At its best, it also helps us understand how we should live together. That, to me, is a promise of SCIS.

We need asatizahs who are typically grounded in Islamic scholarship, yet equally capable of engaging with that dilemma confronting Singaporeans today – from AI and misinformation to ageing, mental well-being, family pressures and relations across faiths. As Mufti Dr Nazirudin Mohd Nasir has described: the aspiration. SCIS, should be a source of intellectual rigour and spiritual resilience. That ambition must shape not only what we teach but what our graduates are equipped to do. And with that I have three clarifications.

First, the scope of SCIS. Clause 5 through proposed section 73C recognises the College's ability to award degrees, diplomas and certificates in tertiary religious education. The initial four-year undergraduate programme with Islamic studies and social science pathways is an important foundation.

My first clarification concerns breadth. The partnership with SUSS opens an opportunity to bring Islamic scholarship into conversations with applied disciplines. Will students be able, subject to academic prerequisites and programme requirements, to take modules beyond the social science faculty, for example, in gerontology, special education, data analytics, business finance, AI or AI governance?

I am not suggesting that SCIS should dilute its Islamic education core. Quite the opposite, a strong foundation in theology becomes more valuable when graduates can apply confidently to the current challenges people face.

My second clarification concerns depth and progression. Section 73C is drafted broadly enough to encompass qualifications beyond the first degree. What is the roadmap for postgraduate programmes, specialist diplomas and continuing education for practising asatizahs?

Consider two possibilities: an experienced religious teacher pursuing advanced studies in counselling or family dynamics to better support vulnerable households; and an asatizah developing special expertise in digital ethics to guide institutions grappling with AI-generated content and online harms or thinking through the future of work and preserving the dignity of workers. These are examples of how deeper religious learning and applied expertise can reinforce each other.

I appreciate that the new college must build its foundations carefully, but it should begin with clear, long-term academic ambition. Mr Speaker, allow me to continue my second and third clarifications in Malay.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, my second point is about job opportunities for SCIS graduates. I agree with what the Minister said earlier. SCIS' success should not be measured only by the number of students it admits.

In my view, success is not just about the knowledge and degrees they obtain, but how that knowledge can be applied to serve and advance our community, and open up meaningful career opportunities. No less important is how our asatizah can build a better future and support their families.

I welcome the collaboration between SCIS and SUSS. However, job opportunities must be planned from the outset, not just after students graduate.

I would like to ask how SCIS will ensure that its graduates have clear career pathways? Will they have opportunities for industry internships, career guidance and connections with prospective employers? How do we ensure that they find meaningful jobs with salaries that match their qualifications?

We should also look beyond the religious sector. With suitable qualifications and additional training, SCIS graduates can contribute to social work, education, public policy, counselling and technology governance. However, some of these fields require specific professional qualifications.

So, what efforts is SCIS making with employers, professional bodies and educational institutions to open up these pathways?

I also hope that the SCIS curriculum will be regularly reviewed with a long-term view, not just to meet the needs of our community today, but also to anticipate future challenges. This will ensure that the asatizah we produce remain relevant, ready to face change and able to guide our community with wisdom.

We want to produce asatizah who not only have knowledge, but also have a future. We want them to serve with confidence. We want them to be respected for their expertise. And we want them to have opportunities to build better lives for themselves and their families.

Religious knowledge should open more doors of opportunity, not limit their future.

Mr Speaker, my third point is about the trust placed in us in managing community funds. Through Clause 5, particularly Sections 73D, 73F and 73I, the Bill provides for the funding, oversight and financial transparency of SCIS. I greatly appreciate and welcome these measures.

At the same time, I would like to raise something that is very close to the hearts of our Muslim community. Zakat, wakaf and MBMF represent a major trust placed in us. Behind every contribution is a sincere intention. There is a desire to help those in need and to strengthen our religious and educational institutions.

Most importantly, there is public trust that every contribution will be managed responsibly, transparently and prudently. Each of these funds has its own purpose and responsibilities. I am confident that MUIS will do its utmost to uphold this trust.

In the spirit of strengthening public trust and ensuring the long-term sustainability of SCIS for future generations, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister on three points.

First, on transparency in the use of funds. The Government has explained that the non-religious components will be funded by the Government, while community funds will be used mainly for religious education. However, facilities, such as libraries, buildings, computer systems and administration, may serve both purposes.

How will SCIS ensure that these expenses are allocated fairly and accurately? Will there be separate accounts so that the use of each fund can be identified and independently reviewed?

Secondly, on safeguarding community funds. How will MUIS ensure that zakat funds are used according to the prescribed conditions and for eligible recipients? And how do we ensure that funding SCIS through MBMF does not affect existing commitments to mosques, madrasahs and other community needs?

Thirdly, on the financial sustainability of SCIS. Section 73I allows the Minister to obtain financial records and requires SCIS to publish a summary of its financial statements. This is important.

However, will the use of each funding source also be independently audited and reported to the community? Has MUIS made financial plans for the coming years? What if fund collections decline? What if operating costs increase? And how do we ensure that students who have been admitted can complete their studies despite financial challenges? Can students apply for financial assistance through the Financial Assistance Scheme, or FAS, or education loans from MENDAKI?

Mr Speaker, I raise these questions because I firmly believe in the importance of SCIS. SCIS must succeed. And to succeed in the long term, SCIS must have the trust of the community. Because when that trust is properly upheld, it builds confidence. And that confidence will ensure that SCIS remains strong for future generations.

Mr Speaker, SCIS is not just a new college. It is not just a building. And it is not just a place to obtain a degree. SCIS is our investment in the future of Singapore's Muslim community. It is our hope to produce a generation of asatizah who are knowledgeable, credible and broad-minded.

Much effort, time and energy have gone into realising this dream for the benefit of our community. I would like to express my highest appreciation to the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs and the MCCY team. To MUIS and its officers. To the Mufti of Singapore, Dr Nazirudin Mohd Nasir, and the leadership and team behind the development of SCIS. To SUSS, our academic partners, mosques, madrasahs and the entire asatizah community. And not forgetting the Muslim community in Singapore, who have always given their support and trust.

SCIS is a joint effort, and its success is our shared responsibility.

Mr Speaker, if we plan its educational scope well, we will produce asatizah who can face the challenges of the world. If we provide good job opportunities, we can give them a brighter future. And if we manage community funds responsibly, SCIS will remain strong and sustainable.

The future will bring more advanced technology. But more advanced technology does not necessarily make people more compassionate. The world may become more interconnected. But that does not mean our communities will become more united.

This is where our asatizah play an important role. To impart knowledge. To share wisdom. To foster compassion. And to guide our community with wisdom and conscience.

Let us build SCIS not just for its first batch of students in 2028, but for our children and future generations. May SCIS become an institution strong in knowledge, broad in its contributions, financially sustainable and steadfast in upholding the trust placed in it. Because ultimately, we are not just building a college. We are building the future of religious leadership and Singapore's Muslim community.

Mr Speaker: Mr Azhar Othman.

7.42 pm

Mr Azhar Othman (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise in support of the Bill for SCIS. A homegrown institution can nurture religious leaders with a sound understanding of religious texts and the contexts in which they are applied. Realising this vision requires a credible plan not only to establish the institution, but more importantly, to sustain academic excellence over the long term.

Sir, I wish to address three priorities: attracting students; securing the resources and upholding the standards needed to develop accomplished scholars and competent counsellors; and enabling students to acquire complementary skills while pursuing their strengths and interests. I will elaborate on these priorities in seven parts, focusing on the success of SCIS and the wider Singapore Muslim community. With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will now continue in Malay.

(In Malay): First, competing for students – making SCIS the institution of choice.

Madrasah students who are high achievers have a range of educational options. Al-Azhar and Madinah (universities) have well-established reputations. Beyond academic learning, studying overseas offers opportunities to develop independence, experience different traditions and build international networks.

Scholarships covering tuition fees and living expenses also make these options financially attractive. To become the institution of choice, SCIS must offer compelling advantages beyond simply being close to home. How will the Ministry ensure that SCIS offers distinctive academic programmes, affordable tuition fees and meaningful international exposure?

Student exchange programmes, visits by overseas Islamic scholars and research collaborations could combine a strong educational foundation in Singapore with international opportunities for SCIS students.

Second, strengthening the student pipeline – expanding access to madrasah education.

Mr Speaker, a strong college also requires a broad pool of prospective students. I call for a gradual expansion of enrolment in full-time madrasahs to provide more children with the interest and aptitude with opportunities to pursue madrasah education. This would also help meet future demand for religious leaders and counsellors, while supporting students who wish to switch to other fields such as engineering or business while maintaining a strong foundation in religious knowledge.

Broader enrolment should open opportunities without determining a child's career path too early. Madrasah students must continue to have pathways to further education and careers beyond religious service. A sufficient pool of students, supported by appropriate academic preparation and religious guidance, will provide a strong foundation for those who choose to pursue their studies at SCIS.

Third, supporting madrasah teachers – fair salaries and professional development.

Additional Government financial support is essential for madrasahs and SCIS. In particular, this support should enable madrasahs to offer fair and competitive salaries that reflect teachers' qualifications, responsibilities and contributions, helping to attract and retain dedicated educators.

I also call for dedicated funding and time set aside for the professional development of madrasah teachers, so that they can strengthen their subject expertise, teaching methods and skills in supporting students. These efforts should also include training in AI, so that teachers can provide comprehensive teaching and guidance to madrasah students.

Fourth, investing in madrasah and SCIS facilities.

To nurture knowledgeable and capable students, I urge that investments are made for larger premises where necessary; better-equipped classrooms, libraries, laboratories and digital facilities; and suitable spaces for sports, the arts, clubs and other co-curricular activities. These facilities support academic learning while also developing teamwork, confidence and leadership as part of a holistic education.

I call on the Government to present a phased implementation plan that includes teachers' salaries, funded professional development and improvements to facilities. This plan should be developed in consultation with madrasahs and SCIS, based on an assessment of needs, with clear funding commitments and timelines.

Fifth, local relevance must be accompanied by deep understanding.

SCIS can combine rigorous Islamic studies with an understanding of life in Singapore's secular, multiracial and multi-religious society. Graduates must understand religious texts as well as the circumstances and needs of those seeking guidance, including family challenges, youth concerns, mental well-being and the ethics of technology.

Sixth, sustaining excellence – developing credible religious guides and counsellors.

Mr Speaker, establishing a college is an important achievement. However, sustaining excellence requires long-term commitment. Pathways into community service and advanced studies have different requirements, and both require sustained support and investment. Aspiring religious leaders need rigorous academic training, strong language proficiency, guidance from credible mentors, and time to conduct research, critically examine ideas and publish scholarly work.

Counsellors, meanwhile, require specialised training and continuing professional development. SCIS must recruit and retain the academic staff needed to support these pathways and ensure secure long-term funding without placing an excessive financial burden on students or the community.

Success should be measured not only by student enrolment and graduate numbers, but also by research quality, progression to postgraduate studies, graduates' career pathways and their professional readiness. Student admissions should consider intellectual curiosity and academic potential, supported by scholarships and mentorship. Partnerships for advanced studies overseas should be seen as opportunities to strengthen SCIS, rather than merely as competition.

Seventh, diverse skills, meaningful choices.

Mr Speaker, equipping students with a broad range of skills does not mean that they must become experts in every discipline. Expecting students to master scholarship, counselling, social work, research and community leadership within a single programme risks prioritising breadth of knowledge at the expense of depth of understanding.

Elective subjects, practical placements, early career guidance and mentorship can help students identify their strengths and adjust their educational pathways as their interests develop. These choices should reflect students' abilities and aspirations, rather than just the immediate needs of the workforce.

( In English ): In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, SCIS should combine local relevance with global excellence. It must offer an education grounded in depth, alongside the flexibility for students to develop their talents and pursue their aspirations.

I urge the Ministry and the Governing Board to translate these aspirations into a clear, sustainable plan to attract students, retain academic staff in all levels – primary, secondary and higher institutions – and secure long-term funding and uphold rigorous standards across the different pathways. This plan should include the phased expansion of madrasah student intake and adequate teaching resources.

Additional Government funding should support fair and competitive salaries for madrasah teachers at all levels, as well as larger and better-equipped premises, where needed, for academic and co-curricular activities. These investments should be accompanied by transparent accountability.

We talk about SCIS, at the same time, we must address the current problem so that we have students prepared and more secured in assuring their seat in SCIS. I support SCIS because our ambition must extend beyond producing graduates to nurturing credible religious teachers, competent counsellors and trusted community leaders committed to serving Singapore.

7.52 pm

Mr Speaker: Acting Minister Zaqy Mohamad.