editors
2,420
edits
Josephine Teo: Difference between revisions
m
→Controversies
m (→Personal Life) |
m (→Controversies) |
||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
* Josephine Teo's answer, "I have not come across one single migrant worker himself that has demanded an apology." | * Josephine Teo's answer, "I have not come across one single migrant worker himself that has demanded an apology." | ||
<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20250319115328/https://sg.news.yahoo.com/covid-19-migrant-workers-were-on-mo-ms-radar-since-january-josephine-teo-083406682.html</ref> | <ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20250319115328/https://sg.news.yahoo.com/covid-19-migrant-workers-were-on-mo-ms-radar-since-january-josephine-teo-083406682.html</ref> | ||
* she was widely labelled as aggressive and defensive for her responses | |||
===Allegations of conflict of interest and profiteering=== | ===Allegations of conflict of interest and profiteering=== | ||
| Line 64: | Line 65: | ||
* A separate joint statement by MOH and MND said the Government had asked Singapore investment company Temasek to help set up a CCF for those with mild or no symptoms of Covid-19 and recovering patients as they believed Temasek had the necessary resources to do so at short notice through its subsidiaries, which includes PSA International, Singapore Technologies Engineering and Sheares Healthcare. | * A separate joint statement by MOH and MND said the Government had asked Singapore investment company Temasek to help set up a CCF for those with mild or no symptoms of Covid-19 and recovering patients as they believed Temasek had the necessary resources to do so at short notice through its subsidiaries, which includes PSA International, Singapore Technologies Engineering and Sheares Healthcare. | ||
* statement added that the Ministry of Manpower and Mrs Teo were not involved in the selection of Surbana Jurong, nor were they involved in the process of managing the project costs. | * statement added that the Ministry of Manpower and Mrs Teo were not involved in the selection of Surbana Jurong, nor were they involved in the process of managing the project costs. | ||
===NRIC unmasking incident=== | |||
* 19 Dec 2024 - at press conference, as Minister for Digital Development and Information, Josephine Teo, Second Minister for Finance [[Indranee Rajah]] and {{g |ACRA}} chief executive Chia-Tern Huey Min apologised multiple times for the anxiety caused. <ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20250319131821/https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/govt-apologises-for-acra-lapse-will-accelerate-efforts-to-educate-public-on-proper-nric-use</ref> | |||
* this followed massive public backlash when on 13 December, statements from ACRA and the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) justified the unmasking as part of a broader policy shift to phase out masked NRICs, which were described as creating a “false sense of security.” | |||
* Acra had made available full NRIC numbers in its free People Search function on its new Bizfile portal launched on Dec 9, sparking public backlash. The function was eventually disabled on Dec 13. | |||
* over 500,000 queries were made on the Bizfile portal during 9-13 December 2024, before the People Search function was disabled. This surpassed the usual traffic of 2,000-3,000 queries daily | |||
* However, the issue only came to public attention on 12 December, after former Straits Times editor [[Bertha Henson]] highlighted it in a Facebook post. Public outcry ensued as the full NRIC could be misused to access various services and personal data, in contravention of PDPC guidelines released in 2019<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20250319135344/https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/DPO-Connect/July-19/Gearing-Up-For-Sept-1-When-NRIC-Guidelines-Kick-In</ref> | |||
* Subsequently, MDDI and the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA) have blamed a misunderstanding of a July 2024 circular<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20250319133300/https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2024/12/20/governments-backtracking-on-nric-unmasking-and-the-miscommunication-excuse/</ref> | |||
* Repeated calls to make this circular public have gone unheeded | |||
* A review of how the disclosure by ACRA came about and Government’s policy on the responsible use of NRIC number was led by Head of Civil Service Leo Yip, to be completed in Feb 2025<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20250319134109/https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/review-of-nric-unmasking-incident-likely-completed-in-feb-2025-findings-to-be-made-public</ref> | |||
* The report was submitted to Senior Minister [[Teo Chee Hean]] on 25 February 2025 and only approved for public release by Prime Minister [[Lawrence Wong]] on 27 February. | |||
* review's conclusion was the unmasking of full NRIC numbers on the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority’s (ACRA) Bizfile portal was the result of miscommunication and coordination lapses, rather than deliberate wrongdoing, but also highlighted several shortcomings on MDDI and ACRA's part<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20250319134252/https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2025/03/03/review-panel-finds-no-deliberate-wrongdoing-in-acras-bizfile-nric-disclosure-incident/</ref> | |||
* when questioned in detail by MPs in parliament, [[Teo Chee Hean]] acknowledged that miscommunication between ACRA and MDDI was a key factor in the incident, and that officers and senior management involved will face a range of measures, including counselling, retraining, and reductions in their performance grade and performance-based payments. | |||
==Personal Life== | ==Personal Life== | ||