Transcript of Minister Josephine Teo's Interview with Singapore Media during the High-Level Week of the 80th Session of the United Nations Assembly

Minister: In the past few days, I have been in New York and Washington. I arrived in San Francisco yesterday. I would like to share with you some of the takeaways from the visit. Thus far, we have been to New York during the High-Level Week of the 80th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, and the digital cooperation agenda has become more prominent over the years at the UN level.

As you know, Singapore is the convener and the chair of the Forum of Small States. Some years ago, we started a digital pillar, and arising out of this cooperation with the small states, there have been a number of initiatives. For example, we organised two capacity-building programmes - one at the executive level and another at the fellowship level for the members of the Forum. We have also cooperated with countries that are members of the Forum to put out materials and resource guides that could be useful for other countries. For example, together with Rwanda last year, we created an AI Playbook for Small States.

Two observations to share with you as background to why we introduced the Singapore Digital Gateway. The first is that when it comes to digital cooperation, one theme that is quite consistent is the need for digital inclusion. Or another way of looking at it is the concerns about digital divide within countries.

In Singapore, during the debate on the President's Address, several Members of Parliament have expressed concerns about how we can ensure that digital development remains inclusive for particular groups, like seniors, persons with disabilities, and by extension, countries as well. The concern is not only about uneven benefits of digital development within groups of citizens, but also the digital divide across countries, where some countries are better able to keep up with digital developments than others. That's the first observation: a common concern about the digital divide both within and across countries.

The second observation is that Singapore's experience in the digital domain is well-regarded and often serves as a source of inspiration for our colleagues. We are frequently asked about how we build up digital infrastructure and utilities, how we enable skills development, how we look out for those who have more difficulty keeping up, how we operate digital government, how we strengthen digital security, as well as how we promote the digital economy. We would like to be able to share these developmental experiences with our international colleagues, but we must find a sustainable way of doing so.

For many of our colleagues around the world, finding a resource or a central platform to easily discover these experiences has not been the easiest or most convenient. That was the impetus for putting together the Singapore Digital Gateway, as a platform to help our international colleagues discover for themselves the areas of Singapore's digital development that they may find useful and relevant, so that it can enable them to think about their own priorities too.

I just wanted to share that the reception to this has been very positive. Some members of the Forum of Small States were already aware that Singapore was working towards this, and they had given us useful inputs as to what to include. Within the time that we had, we have already put in over 30 resources. We will build this up over time, depending on the areas of interest of our colleagues around the world.

Members of the media are also aware that we have talked about introducing new legislation that will protect victims of online harms and give them an opportunity to seek more timely relief and to hold the perpetrators accountable. The Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Bill has been some time in the making. As we said previously, the plan is to table it for first reading in Parliament by the end of this year. We are on track to doing so, and in the process of preparing for the first reading, we have been in close consultation with our partners, particularly those in industry.

It is important to consult the industry because many of the directions will have to be implemented by them, and so we want to understand their ability to respond to these requirements. These consultations have been very helpful in fine-tuning the design of the legislation, and it has also been a very useful exercise in thinking through how we will operationalise the Online Safety Commission. The passage of the Bill will enable the Online Safety Commission to be established and empower it with the tools to help victims seek timely relief from online harms.

In New York, I also met the global headquarters of the tech companies that will be working with the Singapore Government to enhance these protections for victims of online harms. I should say that the meetings went well, and these companies have been very much involved in thinking through and shaping the legislation. We adopt a collaborative approach and want to get the companies to strengthen their commitment to protect victims of online harms because this is a topic of concern.

The companies' response to the Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Bill has been very encouraging. They expressed understanding of why we would want to introduce such legislation. They also understand the way in which we are seeking to implement the legislation in support of the victims.

Jointly, we will ensure that online harms be reduced, and victims are able to seek timely relief.

Straits Times: Two questions: one on AI governance and one on online safety. Minister, at the UN discussions on AI governance this week, the US pushed back on calls for global oversight on artificial intelligence. Against such geopolitical backdrop, how confident are you of more collaborative international frameworks around AI governance. On online safety, how are the companies taking the fact that Singapore is rolling out the Online Safety Commission? Are they concerned about the practicalities of rolling up these requirements?

Minister: Maybe I'll take the second question first. Naturally, when countries introduce new legislation or regulation, the companies that are affected by it will be very interested in how they are impacted. But the way we have done it is not to spring surprises on companies. We have involved them right from the start and explained our objectives, so that they know how we are thinking about the design of the legislation.

We put out the draft legislation for public consultation. These companies then formally write in to point out specific areas that they wanted more clarity on, and it has been a very useful exercise. We take their feedback seriously and see where we can refine the language of the legislation to better address their concerns. For example, how long before they have to respond and what constitutes the adequate notification or follow-up. These are details that have to be worked out when you operationalise the law.

I think Singapore has a track record in terms of how we implement legislation in the digital domain. The companies that we are working with already have some sense of how we approach things. They know that we firstly are collaborative. They also know that we are targeted and specific about the risks that we are trying to manage. They know which are the harms that we are trying to guard against, so they appreciate that we are not vague and overly expansive. It is reassuring that they tell us they have this understanding of our approach. In fact, some of the meetings we had, they said that they found us reasonable to work with. But this doesn't mean that the requirements are light or they do not obligate the companies to organise themselves better to respond to the legal obligations and needs. Rather, we do so in a manner that is measured and calibrated. Most of all, it has to be effective and produce the right outcomes for the victims that we are trying to protect. It builds an online domain that is safer for everyone.

Your question on AI governance is an important one, in any new area where governance has not been cast in stone and is still being developed, we mustn't expect things to happen overnight. It is completely understandable that these things go through cycles back and forth. One day, you think these are the most prominent concerns, and then the technology moves the way it is implemented, perhaps not exactly how you initially imagined. As a result, either the concerns are sharpened or have dissipated. Therefore, the governance priorities will have to shift accordingly.

We are in this phase, and it will be many years before we land on a set of norms that we all agree are the right things to do. Singapore's approach to this is to remain plugged into these conversations. We are consistent, steadfast, and engaged with our counterparts, including policymakers and the scientific and research community, because the situation is dynamic and changes all the time.

Not so long ago, we held the Singapore Conference on AI, bringing together an international scientific exchange on research priorities and the safe and responsible use of AI. That is one way of advancing the conversation, adding to the understanding of what it takes to govern AI appropriately. For Singapore, where there is clarity and when we believe it is the right thing to do, we can move quite fast.

Apart from the governance frameworks that we developed, we also have guidelines and legislation on data. If legislation is necessary, we have also been able to move at a fast clip. You would remember that last year we introduced the Elections (Integrity of Online Advertising) (Amendment) Bill for election integrity. This is to guard against the use of AI-generated content and synthetic materials that misrepresent candidates during an election. Once it is very clear that this is the guardrail that you need to put in place, our response can be a swift one.

As for issues that will take longer time to bear fruit, we must stay connected to how these issues are evolving. We remain plugged in and stay involved in conversations even for more issues where breakthroughs are more difficult to achieve.

CNA: On the theme of staying connected and addressing these concerns about digital divide. what's the value-add of this platform and how will Singapore benefit from all of this?

Minister: Just as we ask corporates to be good corporate citizens, we also must be good global citizens and contribute to the global commons. And if we can be helpful to other countries, we should try. Will there be a benefit to Singapore – perhaps in an indirect way? As other countries get to know Singapore's philosophy and its approaches and capabilities, and when they have the opportunity to work with Singapore companies - all these will give them additional confidence to work with us. The fact that we have described Singapore's approach may help them understand the capabilities that we have, and if it enables them to make a choice in favour of the companies that originate from Singapore, that would be good. But even if it doesn't, I think it doesn't prevent us from being helpful to others.

Business Times: From a local business point of view, will they stand to benefit from the Singapore Digital Gateway? Another question more on technicalities, will Singapore businesses have access to the Singapore Digital Gateway as well?

Minister: Well, I can put it to you this way, for example, if someone visits the Singapore Digital Gateway and takes an interest in how we have thought about cybersecurity, the implementation of our legislation, and how we have built up the cyber ecosystem inSingapore, they can decide if they want to do so similarly. And as they seek further suggestions, we might link them up with businesses operating in Singapore that are familiar with meeting our legislative requirements. And then it will be very much up to the countries as well as to businesses to engage with each other and see whether there's a good fit. It's not a marketing platform, per se. That's not what we set up the Singapore Digital Gateway to do, but if our colleagues around the world express an interest to be connected to Singapore businesses that are active in the various fields that we described, we are happy to be a bridge.

Straits Times: Back to the Singapore Digital Gateway, what are the institutions or nations that you think would benefit most from this? Is it those who are a bit further behind on their digital journey, or do you think also those who are on a more advanced journey may also benefit from the resources and insights that Singapore has?

Minister: The countries benefit in different ways. Sometimes they need to get inspiration and ideas; sometimes they know what they want to achieve, but getting to it is not so easy. Where do we find the people and build up the skills? I give an example of our colleagues in Cambodia – they are very enthusiastic and have put together good teams. They find our tech products and tools very good to use as they do not have to reinvent the code. We have open-sourced it and are very happy to share with them. For some countries, theymay take a closer look at the strategies and adapt them, or refer to them to get a second opinion. Singapore's approach can provide them with further ideas, or to contrast with the advice that they have been given by other partners. There are different ways in which the companies and the countries can benefit. There are more than 100 countries in the Forum of Small States. Based on their feedback, we will then consider how to meaningfully add to the existing suite of resources.

Straits Times: One minor clarification – this is open for countries across the world and not just those in the Forum of Small States?

Minister: Yes, it is entirely open. But that's the group that we interact most when it comes to digital development. Size is not the sole determinant of digital advancement, but it tends to be the case that smaller countries have found it more difficult.