Architects (Amendment) Bill 2017 2nd Reading Speech by Minister Lawrence Wong

Feb 28, 2017

Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, “That the Bill be now read a Second time”.

The Architects Act was enacted:

a. to provide a framework for the registration of architects,

b. to regulate the qualifications and practice of architects, and

c. to enable the Board of Architects, or BOA in short, to licence corporations, partnerships and limited liability partnerships.

The last set of amendments to the Architects Act took effect on 1 Dec 2005, which included enlarging the composition of the BOA and enhancing its disciplinary process.

Today, with globalisation,

a. More architects are likely to provide architectural services in foreign countries and territories in addition to their own country or territory of registration.

b. In particular, many of our locally registered architects are well recognized for their skills and professionalism, and many of them are already expanding their businesses overseas.

Hence, we need to amend the Architects Act to facilitate our locally registered architects to provide architectural services overseas. At the same time, we must regulate foreign architects that provide architectural services in Singapore.

The proposed changes in the Bill will seek to:

a. Give effect to arrangements made between the BOA and the appropriate foreign registration authority of any country or territory outside Singapore, for the mutual recognition of the qualifications and standards adopted by each of the parties to the arrangement regarding the practice of architecture;

b. Enhance disciplinary proceedings and penalties; and

c. Allow limited partnerships to provide architectural services in Singapore.

Let me go through this in turn.

Mutual Recognition Arrangements

Firstly, for locally registered architects seeking to practice overseas, they must first be recognized in Singapore before they engage in the practice of architecture in a participating overseas jurisdiction. By that, we mean any country or territory outside Singapore in relation to which a mutual recognition arrangement is in force.

The need for such domestic recognition is a standard feature of the mutual recognition arrangements we have currently with various jurisdictions.

a. For example, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand have a Trilateral Agreement under the APEC Architect Framework.

b. Singapore has also signed the ASEAN Mutual Recognition Arrangement on Architectural Services with other ASEAN member countries.

c. Such a domestic recognition allows for the qualifications and experience obtained by an architect in the country or territory where he or she is already registered to be recognised by the participating overseas jurisdictions.

d. This will make it easier for Singapore-registered architects to practice abroad in a participating jurisdiction and will open up opportunities for them overseas.

Likewise, a foreign architect from a participating jurisdiction can be registered in Singapore in order to engage in the practice of architecture in Singapore subject to the following conditions:

a. First, the foreign architect must meet the registration requirements as agreed to by BOA and the registration authority of the participating overseas jurisdiction, pass the necessary examinations as approved by the BOA, and also pay a prescribed fee.

The amended Act will allow the BOA to impose any prohibitions, restrictions or conditions as to the practice of architecture in Singapore when registering a foreign architect.

a. For example, the BOA may impose a restriction on a foreign architect to only provide architectural services in Singapore in collaboration with a local registered architect with a valid practicing certificate on a project basis, rather than doing so independently.

I will also like to take this opportunity to clarify that an architect providing architectural services independently in Singapore as a Qualified Person is required to be a registered architect with BOA and must have a valid practising certificate. This does not change even with the amendments in the Bill.

Enhancing Disciplinary Proceedings and Penalties

Next, I will speak on disciplinary proceedings and penalties. The proposed changes in this Bill also seek to enhance the disciplinary proceedings and penalties currently provided, which include the following:

a. BOA will be allowed to appoint independent investigators where necessary, to enable BOA to more effectively deal with disciplinary proceedings.

b. The maximum penalties for certain offences in the Architects Act will be raised to ensure sufficient deterrence.

c. A new offence is created under the new section 12(1A), which makes it an offence for a person to engage the architectural services of another person in relation to any building works unless the other person is authorised under the Act to supply architectural services.

d. A person will also not be allowed to use the word “architect” or any of its derivatives as part of the name of an architectural practice if this person is not authorised under the Act to supply architectural services independently. This is to avoid misleading the public that the person is authorised to provide architectural services.

Licensing Limited Partnerships

Thirdly, I will speak on licensing of limited partnerships. In view of the fact that the Limited Partnership Act was enacted in 2008 to provide for the establishment and registration of limited partnerships, the Architects Act is now also being updated to allow for the licensing of limited partnerships that provide architectural services in Singapore.

Finally, Madam, the amendments proposed in this Bill are timely –they will enable our Architects to operate more effectively in a globalized world, and also ensure that the BOA continues to play an effective role in supporting the growth of the profession.