Response Speech by Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Social and Family Development and Law Eric Chua at the Committee of Supply Debate 2026
2 Mar 2026 Posted in Parliamentary speeches and responses
Introduction
1. Chairman, the Rule of Law underpins our society’s broader objectives and continued development.
2. In my speech, I will focus on two key areas:
a) First, optimising land and creating good spaces for economic and social needs.
b) Second, upholding the Rule of Law and expanding access to justice to strengthen our social fabric. We do so by ensuring that no one is denied legal access and by supporting vulnerable groups.
Optimising State assets to meet economic and social needs, and exploring new ways to facilitate innovative use of state assets
3. Let me start with land.
4. Sir, we are committed to optimising State properties to better meet community and business needs. This safeguards land resources for our current and future generations.
Creative Use of State Land and Properties for Sports and Arts
5. To this end, The Singapore Land Authority (“SLA”) engages public agencies and industry to better understand market needs and identify opportunities to put State land and properties to good use, in a pro-enterprise manner.
6. Mr Christopher de Souza and Mr Kenneth Goh asked about the use of State land and properties. I will share some examples:
a) Responding to arts practitioners’ call for a dedicated space, SLA collaborated with the National Arts Council (“NAC”) to transform State properties at Kampong Java Road, into Flock – an artist-led innovation and creation hub.
b) SLA has also been activating suitable spaces in response to requests for “weather-proofed” sports spaces.
i. One creative example is the placement of sport facilities under viaducts. These were previously under-utilised due to noise and lack of essential utilities.
ii. But we saw potential in the natural shelter and worked with Sport Singapore to transform the Gali Batu Flyover area into ARK Sports Village @ Segar.
iii. What was previously unused space is now a thriving sports facility.
Making State Properties Available on Longer Tenure
7. Mr Kenneth Goh also asked about a longer tenure for more State properties.
a) Currently, State properties are let out for a range of interim uses, typically with tenures of under 10 years, to retain planning flexibility.
b) In response to feedback that such tenures may not facilitate capital expenditure recovery, and may limit investment in property rejuvenation, SLA has leased out selected State properties on longer tenures, subject to planning considerations.
i. For instance, SLA recently launched the sale of Adam Park heritage bungalow cluster on 30-year leases.
c) Such extended tenure allows time for investment recoupment and greater business certainty.
Enhancements to Land Betterment Charge Regime
8. Ms Goh Han Yan asked about improvements to the Land Betterment Charge (“LBC”) regime.
a) We have enhanced various aspects of the LBC framework, since it came into force in 2022.
b) Minister Edwin spoke about the enhancements just last week at the REDAS Spring Festival Lunch. More details may be found in his speech on the MinLaw website.
Upholding Justice and Fairness Through a Fair, Accessible and Effective Legal System
9. It is also vital that our legal processes and frameworks remain accessible, fair, and effective.
10. We continue to review our legal frameworks to adapt to trends and societal needs, so that Singaporeans can seek recourse and resolve frictions whenever they arise.
Community Disputes and Community Justice
11. First, in community justice. Legislation was passed in 2024 to enhance the Community Disputes Management Framework (“CDMF”).
a) We have made mediation mandatory in appropriate cases.
b) Second, a new Community Relations Unit has been created to investigate neighbour disputes and to act. This is being piloted in Tampines.
c) Third, we have enhanced the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal (“CDRT”) to improve the service journey for victims and enable them to obtain relief more quickly.
12. Mr Gerald Giam made several points on the CDRT’s processes.
a) Sir, the CDRT is but one component of our broader community disputes framework, which also includes mediation and also the Community Relations Unit.
b) Many disputes arise from misunderstandings or lifestyle differences.
c) Calm, neighbourly exchanges can usually go a long way.
d) But if informal communication fails, parties should attempt formal mediation.
e) Mediation at the CMC is quick, effective, and free: Around 80% of cases reach an amicable settlement and that is why we made it mandatory.
f) The CDRT is an avenue of last resort, after all other measures have failed. As it is a Court of Law, some proper processes are necessary to ensure the proper administration of justice.
g) The pre-filing assessment is not designed to redirect or deter residents. Instead, it is meant to help residents assess whether their dispute is suitable for the CDRT. For example:
i. Residents should attempt mediation before filing a CDRT claim. So, the form asks whether mediation has been attempted before.
ii. Residents also cannot file a CDRT claim against persons who are not their neighbours. Again, the form highlights this point. This ensures that residents do not spend time and money and energy filing a claim, that cannot be heard in the CDRT.
h) Those who need help navigating the e-filing system – including those with specific language needs – can contact the State Courts Service Hub.
i) And on the $150 filing fee, those with financial need can apply for a waiver. But again, parties should always attempt mediation first – it is entirely free, and mostly, effective.
Review of Civil Enforcement Regime
13. Second, we have been studying ways to streamline the enforcement of civil judgments – as mentioned by Mr Vikram Nair, Mr Gabriel Lam and Mr Alex Yeo.
a) We received feedback that the time, the effort and the costs of enforcing judgments can be disproportionate to the judgment sum, leaving some judgments unenforced. This is undesirable.
b) We aim to simplify the enforcement process, therefore, to be more effective, efficient and affordable.
c) We intend to do this by:
i. One, giving the Court greater powers to identify a judgment debtor’s assets and means.
ii. Two, by introducing new enforcement modes to deter and punish non-compliance with Court orders; and
iii. Three, creating new Civil Judgment Enforcement Officers to assist parties with enforcing their civil judgments.
14. We have been consulting with relevant stakeholders, including the Bar and the Judiciary; and aim to introduce a Bill later this year.
Implementation of the Maintenance Enforcement Process
15. Third, in family justice – we have made changes to help families move forward with minimal acrimony, including addressing non-compliance with maintenance orders – as noted by Mr Nair and Mr Yeo.
a) Since establishing the new Maintenance Enforcement Division in January last year, the Family Justice Courts have referred around 1,000 cases to the new Division.
b) So far, around two-thirds of concluded cases settled during or after conciliation. This is a good start and we plan to expand coverage in future phases.
Accessibility of Will-Making
16. Another area is ensuring Will-making remains accessible to Singaporeans.
17. Singaporeans have a range of options. Depending on complexity, budget, and personal preference, they can write their own wills, engage will making services, or even ask a friend for help.
18. Ms Hany Soh asked if Wills can be registered for free in SAL’s Wills Registry, and suggested regulation or mandatory insurance for non-lawyers.
a) On the former, the fee defrays the costs of the service, which includes maintaining records for up to 120 years of the testator’s life.
b) Those with genuine financial needs can apply for a fee waiver. And I will add that the validity of the Will does not depend on registration with the Registry.
c) On the latter, we do not plan to impose insurance requirements, to encourage options for legacy planning.
d) If the public is unsure whether their service-provider is a licensed lawyer, they may check the MinLaw webpage. It has a search function that lists lawyers that have valid practising licences at the date of search.
Expanding Access to Justice and Supporting Vulnerable Groups
19. Lastly, I turn to access to justice.
20. It is a key pillar that ensures our laws and justice system are not just for those with means – thereby preserving our social fabric – as mentioned by Mr Nair.
Civil Legal Aid and Criminal Defence Aid
21. We have been helping those in need through:
a) The Legal Aid Bureau (“LAB”); and
b) The Public Defender’s Office (“PDO”).
22. Since 1958, LAB has provided the vulnerable with civil legal aid, including matrimonial, monetary claims, and probate matters.
a) The impact of LAB’s work is significant – receiving an average of around 7,000 applications annually.
23. In 2022, MinLaw established the PDO, which institutionalised criminal defence aid.
a) PDO received about 2,400 applications in 2025.
b) A portion of applications is referred to Pro Bono SG’s Criminal Legal Aid Scheme under a co-delivery model.
24. And additionally, LAB and PDO partner with social service agencies (“SSAs”), Family Service Centres and social services offices to provide holistic assistance and referrals for applicants with social needs such as family violence, addiction, mental health, and housing problems.
25. Dr Wan Rizal, Mr Alex Yeo, Mr Gabriel Lam and Mr Jackson Lam asked about ensuring access to legal aid for lower-income and lower-middle-income Singaporeans.
26. We continue to review the means test thresholds regularly.
a) In 2022, we expanded the income coverage for criminal defence aid from the bottom 25th to the bottom 35th percentile by per capita resident household income (“PCHI”).
b) In 2024, we adjusted the PCHI and Annual Value threshold for civil legal aid and criminal defence aid, accounting for the increase in household income and property value over the years.
c) As Minister announced earlier, we will expand civil legal aid coverage by the LAB. We will raise the PCHI threshold for civil legal aid from $1,050 to $1,650. This could potentially benefit up to 1,000 more Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents annually.
d) To account for rising household income, the bank savings and non-CPF investments threshold for both civil legal aid and criminal defence aid will be raised from $10,000 to $12,000 to ensure that the truly needy remain eligible.
e) And we target to implement this later this year.
27. Applicants with extenuating circumstances will continue to be reviewed by an independent means test panel comprising legal and social service professionals.
28. Beyond Government schemes, we continue to partner with the legal fraternity and key stakeholders, such as Pro Bono SG (“PBSG”), to strengthen the legal-help ecosystem for all Singaporeans.
29. Mr Alex Yeo asked about those facing legal issues arising from loss of mental capacity of family members.
a) In 2025, we amended the Legal Aid and Advice Act 1995 to allow means testing based on the mentally incapacitated person, and not the volunteers applying to be their deputy.
b) This has reduced financial barriers and encouraged more volunteer deputies for vulnerable persons without family support.
Inclusive Justice Taskforce
30. Finally, we are also examining how our justice system may better serve those with disabilities, or mental health conditions, as needs for these individuals often go beyond legal support – this was mentioned by Mr Vikram Nair.
31. In better serving these individuals, we have in the past made some efforts.
a) In 2010, we introduced community-based sentences, including the Mandatory Treatment Order (“MTO”).
i. The MTO allows certain offenders with treatable psychiatric conditions to be treated in the community rather than be incarcerated, in appropriate cases.
ii. In 2018, we expanded the MTO scheme to benefit more suitable offenders.
b) Other measures include the Appropriate Adult Scheme for Persons with Mental Disabilities administered by MINDS to support such persons during interviews with investigating officers.
32. But, we fully recognised that more can be done. We want to finetune how our system caters to these vulnerable individuals’ unique needs, while delivering just outcomes.
a) For instance, effective rehabilitation may differ for offenders with different underlying conditions.
b) While some may benefit from psychiatric treatment, others such as those living with autism or intellectual disability may benefit from other interventions.
33. These questions intersect multiple areas such as law, social services, and healthcare, and involve stakeholders from the private and public sector. Thus, MinLaw formally announced the launch of the Inclusive Justice Taskforce (“IJT”) in January this year.
34. The IJT will examine how society can better support individuals with such conditions and disabilities who risk offending, or who interact with the criminal justice system.
35. Our objective is simple and it is to raise public awareness of what works and recommend tangible improvements.
36. The IJT has begun its work, and we will provide updates in due course. I am privileged to co-lead this IJT alongside Ms Peggy Yee, founding director of PY Legal LLC and longtime advocate in this space. I am also grateful for the IJT members across the private and public sectors – lawyers, policymakers, law enforcement officers, social service professionals, healthcare experts, community partners, caregiver representatives.
Conclusion
37. Sir, to be sure, we face both challenges, disruptions, but also tremendous opportunities.
38. Our Ministry’s priorities are crystal clear. We will enhance legal services and intellectual property to support the economy, upload the rule of law, and expand access to justice, and at the same time, optimise land to meet our community needs. Together with our partners, we will press on.
39. As we commemorate the bicentennial anniversary of the Second Charter of Justice this year, we look not only to our own history but to the future – one where the law continues to serve Singapore and Singaporeans well.
40. Thank you.
Last updated on 2 March 2026