As parliament convenes on Tuesday ( Jan 7 ), the unmasking of National Registration Identity Cards ( NRIC ) numbers will be in focus.
There were also issues filed on healthcare practices in the midst of provider , MaNaDr Clinic getting its licence revoked, vaping as well the prospect of further , safeguards , around social media usage for children and teenagers.
Members of Parliament were questioned about the justification for the partial masking of NRIC numbers, when it was decided to stop it, and whether the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA ) would face sanctions for exposing the numbers in question in the order paper released on Monday.
Private concerns were raised over ACRA’s fresh Bizfile site, which , was launched on Dec 9, and showed , titles and full NRIC figures for free via its search function.
Recently, research results displayed masked NRIC numbers, and people had to pay for complete information, including NRIC figures and names.
The government announced on December 14 that it wanted to change the process of masking NRIC numbers, but before the public was made public, the new Bizfile portal was launched.  ,
The authorities on Dec 19 , apologised to the government for the stress caused , over the NRIC unmasking story, while ACRA main professional Chia-Tern Huey Min said the event was due to a fall in cooperation.
She continued, noting that the Ministry of Digital Development and Information ( MDDI) had issued a circular to government agencies in July “interrupting any planned use of masked NRIC numbers in new business processes and services.”
However, due to a lack of coordination between the team regarding how this was going to be implemented, ACRA proceeded with the misinterpretation that NRIC numbers should be removed from the new Bizfile website, according to Mrs. Chia-Tern.
Lawmakers posed more than 30 queries on the subject.
MPs Liang Eng Hwa ( PAP-Holland-Bukit Timah ), Dr Tan Wu Meng ( PAP-Jurong ) and Sharael Taha , ( PAP-Pasir Ris-Punggol ) asked for the rationale behind the government’s intention to phase out the use of masked NRIC numbers.  ,
Mr. Liang even wanted to know whether the government’s most recent plan place aligns with the private sector’s current status and whether the total supply of NRIC numbers for the consumer will result in security concerns or individual privacy concerns.  ,
Pritam Singh, the leader of the opposition, questioned when the MDDI circle that intended to change how government companies were told to conceal NRIC numbers, and when the government made the decision and began making plans for it.
He also inquired whether there had been any whole-of-government discussions prior to and following the publication of the round, and whether any other state agencies, besides ACRA, had misinterpreted or misunderstood it.  ,
MP Sylvia Lim ( WP-Aljunied ) was interested in knowing if the Personal Data Protection Act ( PDPA ) will still be obstructing government agencies and whether sanctions will be imposed on ACRA or its officers as a result of the exposure of NRIC numbers through its Bizfile portal.
Next Minister for Finance Indranee Rajah responded to CNA’s request to know whether something will occur to the specific employees in question when asked at a media conference on December 19 about the issue.
A number of additional inquiries were made about the safety threats and repercussions of NRIC number leaks.
MP Yip Won Heng ( PAP-Yio Chu Kang ) asked whether the move to unmask NRIC numbers could heighten the risk of NRIC-related scams, particularly among the elderly, while MP Christopher de Souza ( PAP-Holland-Bukit Timah ) asked how the government will ensure that Singaporeans are not exposed to the risks of scams and , identity thefts as a result.
He Ting Ru ( WP-Sengkang ) from the PDPA sought information on the number of organizations that were investigated and fined for making public disclosures of NRIC numbers. Also requested was information on the projected cost of the public education campaign on the appropriate use of NRIC information.