Christopher de Souza
Singapore
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. My supplementary question arises out of our deployment of our Multi-Role Tankers Transport. I think our airmen and soldiers, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and MINDEF should be commended. It was a complex high-altitude mission, and it was successful.”
“Much obliged, Sir. My supplementary questions draw from the fact that the situation displays: one, how Singapore has agency; and two, how Singapore can use the situation as a catalyst.”
“It cannot be allowed to be the master. It does not moralise. Thus, as we embrace AI, we must do so with discernment. We should use it to the extent that it facilitates decision-making, but it cannot be allowed to usurp our decision-making. Innovation cannot come at the expense of trespassing on some existing IP rights.”
“In relation to the study on the drug trafficking and the death penalty. In fact, in response to that, I think there is a very good statistic that we should elaborate on in this House and also out there in education that 15 grams of diamorphine feeds 180 drug abuses for one week.”
“The Singapore Land Authority plays an important role in unlocking the value of state land for community use. As a sportsman, I have personally seen with immense joy how underutilised spaces, such as areas under flyovers, can be transformed into safe and vibrant places for sport and recreation, whether for pickleball, futsal, badminton, te…”
“To propel our status as a hub, Singapore will need infrastructure, such as exhibition facilities, to showcase mediation capabilities, breakout rooms, bilateral mediation hearing rooms as well as printers, laptops and screens for settlement agreements to be typed out.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,264 lines we hold for Christopher de Souza, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 26.
“For the interests of justice, the Act should still only be resorted to, not only in the most serious of those activities, but when an open Court trial is impracticable. A trial by the Court must still remain and continue to be the primary mechanism of law enforcement and judicial adjudication. This Bill also makes some changes to the Police supervisory regime. One of them is regarding restrictions able to be imposed on a person under Police investigation or supervision. Currently, section 33(1) allows for the possibility to impose "all or any" of the restrictions, and subsection (2) provides for the Minister being able to vary, cancel or add restrictions specified under section 33(1). Clause 4 purports to make the regime more flexible by moving the restrictions placed on those on Police supervision from the main Act to subsidiary legislation. This seems to remove boundaries and categories on the kind of restrictions being imposed. As the previous structure also allows for some form of flexibility, would the Minister of Home Affairs kindly elaborate on the rationale behind this change? Besides detention without trial and supervision orders, this Bill criminalises strikes for employees of essential services, something which drew public attention in 2012. Although the repercussions of that strike then may not have been as deeply felt, a protracted strike on essential services can be quite severe. Therefore, notwithstanding this Bill, it is important that channels of dialogue for amicable settlements of disputes between providers of essential services and their employees remain open and effective.”
“Of course, we need safeguards within CLTPA itself and, since the last time CLTPA was renewed, there has been a successful appeal on detention under CLTPA. This case impacts our debate on the Bill for two reasons: (a) it sheds light on the implications of clause 3 that says the Minister's decision is final, and (b) its observations birthed the new Fourth Schedule specifying the serious criminal activities as legitimate grounds for a detention under the Bill. Newspapers have reported some concern raised over clause 3 of the Bill. However, in my view, those concerns can be ameliorated as the clause does not change the law. The Bill Supplement clearly says it is to "clarify" the law. What was reviewable in the past continues to be reviewable. Clause 8 puts in the new Fourth Schedule which specifies the scope of criminal activities, the powers of detention and supervision orders may be exercised for. This promotes the rule of law as it delineates the parameters of the power clearly. It is necessarily wide so as to not remove the efficaciousness of the Act but allows for a more concrete understanding of the scope of power and what is sufficiently serious – an issue examined by the Court of Appeal in the Tan Seet Eng case. One thing worth noting about the Fourth Schedule is the reference to section 48(1) of the Organised Crimes Act. It recognises the problems with syndicates and also provides the possibility for international activities with local links to be tackled, such as that of match-fixing in the situation of Tan Seet Eng. Nevertheless, it is important that this Act not be invoked merely because a criminal activity is specified in the list.”
“When I started off in the Legal Service at the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC), when you know the suspect is very likely to have done it and the only witness to corroborate fears for his life or his family's life, then he does not come to Court. Drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act is a good example. The trafficker or the suspected trafficker may have drugs but who is he trying to traffic to? And, if the witness who is meant to have received the drugs so as to prove the trafficking case or the charge says "No, I don't want to come, I fear for my life and my safety", then it does prejudice the procedures. Similarly, for the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act. A person could have trafficked the woman, abused her and she is very likely to have been someone from overseas and, therefore, fears for the life of her family overseas. What do we do with someone who, with all intelligence, shows very likely committed the crime but there is no witness to corroborate that? Do we just let him go without the facility of the CLTPA detention? Also, when I sat as a junior judge and there was not a witness to corroborate the charge, then the burden of proof is not met, notwithstanding a lot of evidence against the person who has been charged. And, even in private practice now, having a good witness is a real advantage to the case. So, from my perspective, I agree with the Minister that when you have situations where all the other facts and all the other evidence point to the conclusion that the person very likely did it and you do not have somebody who is willing to come forward because of fear of his life or the legitimate fear of his family's life, we need something like the CLTPA to plug that gap.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, today we are debating the necessity and proposed refinements to CLTPA. The CLTPA is a necessary tool for Singapore to dismantle criminal syndicates. Secret societies continue to make up the majority of the detainee population. In 2016, 91 of 109 detainees were detained because of secret society gang activity. This is not surprising as strong loyalties and the pervasive network easily intimidate witnesses, making it impossible for an open Court trial. Projecting into the next five years, the CLTPA still remains a necessary tool for law enforcers. This is because there is still a need to be able to carry out actions even though witnesses are afraid to step forward and even when it is impossible to procure evidence without undermining the territorial integrity of another jurisdiction. While international collaboration and technology, such as forensics and video recording evidence, may allow us to do what was previously not possible in terms of evidence gathering, technology has a flip side. It also enables intimidation of witnesses and made it easier for crimes to take on a syndicated nature, multiplying the propensity of harm and intimidation like a sinister phalanx formation. This not a figment of imagination out of a comic strip. This is real. So, we need an arsenal of laws to deploy to deter and overcome the morphing nature of criminal syndicates. I listened to what the Minister said quite carefully and I agree with the Minister's views that the fear of witnesses coming to Court does prejudice justice, does prejudice law enforcement and the rule of law. I agree with this because of my own experience.”
“Hence, the regulatory framework, in my view, needs to remain flexible for future refinement of regulatory controls. This flexibility is especially crucial because technology is an ever-evolving landscape. Cybersecurity depends on innovation to keep up, keep ahead and remain effective. Recently, MINDEF invited white hat hackers to hack into MINDEF’s Internet-facing domains. This method of exposing vulnerabilities maximised the talent pool available locally and overseas. The non-prohibitive cost estimated at $100,000, compared to up to a million dollars for hiring a dedicated vulnerability assessment team. This is attractive fiscally. Would the Minister clarify how this Bill would affect non-mainstream methods of strengthening cybersecurity, such as white hats? In this fast-changing technology-connected world, this Bill provides the preventive complement to the deterrent CMCA. It is a complement to that Act. It places our country to better respond to, prevent and secure the integrity of our computer systems through a strong, yet flexible, regulatory framework. For these reasons, Mr Speaker, I strongly support the Bill.”
“As we seek to increase leveraging the conveniences and prowess of modern technology, it is critical that we protect and prevent attacks and crises from threatening our cyber infrastructure. The important place they have in the running of our country is reflected in this Bill’s designation of CII. This designation spans 11 broad areas of essential services set out in its First Schedule. Cybersecurity in a computer network would only be as strong as the weakest link. A single vulnerability may be exploited to infect other areas and other computers in the network. Since computer networks extend beyond territorial boundaries and cyberattacks know no physical boundaries, clause 3 of this Bill extends regulation to computer networks that are wholly or partly in Singapore. This Bill has been carefully calibrated for a consistent framework over the different sectors yet providing space for flexibility for purpose-oriented, sector-suited rules and practices. For example, the Commissioner’s written directions may be issued to a class of CII owners under clause 12(1); the Commissioner to direct more frequent audit above the two years "in any particular case" under clause 15(1)(a). The Bill also provides for flexible codes of practice under clause 11 to be promulgated to promote best practices in cybersecurity. It is important that this regulatory skeleton provides sufficient flexibility to accommodate for changes in the realm of cyberspace and allow for careful calibration of regulation in the future. If there are too many regulations, the higher threshold to entry may perhaps shrink our well of cybersecurity expertise to draw from, harming our cybersecurity resilience, for example, through an over-reliance on a single provider which may multiply knock-on effects of a breach.”
“Additionally, the National University of Singapore (NUS) and the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) reported an attack by "advanced persistent threat" (APT) actors that sought to "steal research and Government-related information." These and many other instances are like red, flashing lights warning us to be vigilant. So, I concur with Minister Yaacob Ibrahim's point that we need to act and we need to act now. Cybersecurity threats are nearer than we think. They could hit us faster than we can react and they could hit us harder than we can imagine. Therefore, this forward-looking Bill goes upstream to secure our information infrastructure through preventive and reactive compliance, so as to give us the upper hand and arsenal we can deploy against those who seek to do us harm. Some key features of this Bill’s regulatory framework include: (a) reporting and investigating of breaches to facilitate damage control and prevent future occurrences under clauses 14, 19 and 20; (b) licensing of cybersecurity service providers in Part 5; and (c) regular auditing under clause 15 to ensure compliance and accountability. To facilitate accountability and promote compliance, clause 45 protects informers’ identities. In today's age of technology, more infrastructure is being built, not from concrete and steel but, rather, in the realm of intangible cyberspace. This trajectory is bound to continue as Singapore moves toward being a "Smart Nation". Some of the future initiatives announced recently include digitalising of healthcare records even at the level of a private general practitioner (GP) through the National Electronic Health Record (NEHR) and the promoting of cashless payments.”
“Wannacry was a ransomeware worm and, by "worm", we are talking about a malware programme that is able to self-replicate to infect other computers and infiltrate through the connections in a computer network. The NotPetya in Ukraine, which utilised a hacked version of a major accounting programme widely used in Ukraine, affected companies in many different sectors, from shipping to pharmaceuticals and to outside Ukraine through multinational companies. Worse still, NotPetya encrypts files with no chance of recovery, that is, it was not a ransomeware. Stuxnet, a different computer worm, caused a proportion of machinery in Iran’s nuclear facility to spin out of control in 2010. This cyberattack was executed through infected Universal Serial Buses (USBs), overcoming the "air gap". Since then, new methods to jump over an air gap has emerged. No sector has been spared cyberattacks, with commercial and healthcare sectors targeted the most. This threat is not something remote to Singapore. The threat is real and palpable. Although Singapore’s critical infrastructure was not hit by Wannacry, Singapore malls were among the victims of that ransomware. Within the past five years, there were notable occasions of security breaches. In 2014, Singapore’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs' IT system was breached. One thousand and five hundred SingPass users' IDs and passwords were reported to be potentially compromised and illegally accessed. In 2017, 850 Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) personnel’s National Registration Identity Card (NRIC) numbers, birth dates and telephone numbers were stolen following a cyberattack.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Cybersecurity Bill is a forward-looking piece of legislation that ensures that our laws keep pace with the threats that we face as a nation. The year 2017 has been called the Year of the Data Breach. Even within the first six months of 2017, the number of records stolen in breaches numbered almost two billion – even more than the whole of 2016, which was 1.4 billion. New malware samples reached an all-time high of 57.6 million in the third quarter of 2017, according to McAfee Labs Threat Report December 2017. This is not just a matter of privacy or lost personal data – there are financial, security, proprietary interests at stake. A class action suit was initiated in the US last year against Equifax for data breach. They alleged that criminals used the stolen data to "apply for mortgages, credit cards, student loans, tap into bank debit accounts, file insurance claims and rack up substantial debts." Stolen identity also poses an international problem, a terrorist problem. Last month, Thai police arrested a man who allegedly forged passports, including Singapore passports, for groups, including a terrorist group. Furthermore, breaches in cybersecurity can have debilitating effects on essential services. WannaCry, the first ransomware worm, crippled the healthcare system in England. It "shut down computers in more than 80 NHS organisations in England alone", cancelling almost 20,000 appointments in an appointment-based healthcare system, five hospitals resorted to diverting ambulances, unable to handle any more emergency cases. So, what we are debating today is serious.”
“Another example is how, during the recent elections in the US and UK, supporters of a particular candidate or party had been encouraged to vote via invalid methods or on an invalid day. If voters acted on this, the electoral process by which democracy is effected would not function as it was meant to be. Today, Sir, the motion is to refer the question of which principles should apply to the regulation of deliberate online falsehoods. Such a reference is needed. If falsehoods continue to influence the minds of people across sensitive issues, such as our multi-racial identity and our national security, then our unity will be at stake. So, we need to act − and we need to act now. 3.35 pm”
“There needs to be space to clarify misconceptions, address prejudices and reduce misinformation. Truth is the antidote to lies, and lies need to be addressed in order to dispel suspicions based on falsehoods. This brings me to my third point. People who tell the truth do not need to and should not be afraid of the actions to be taken. I repeat: people who tell the truth do not need to and should not be afraid of the actions that will be taken. There is a difference, of course, between falsehoods and truths that we do not like to hear. The Green Paper is entitled "Deliberate Online Falsehoods". It is not entitled "prohibiting hard truths". It is important for a democracy to work that ideas be exchanged. However, concocting a collage out of unrelated data, then squeezing an untenable conclusion out of it and then attempting to pass off that conclusion as truth − now, that is dangerous and should be avoided. Why? Because it misleads people. Simply put, there is no interest in being misinformed. This is especially so when important decisions have to be made. Therefore, while we should not hamper constructive discussion and the expression of viewpoints, we need to make sure that decisions are based on the foundation of truth and not the shifting sands of falsehood. An example of how falsehoods may hamper democracy can be seen in the Brexit situation where there was a misleading poll with shaky extrapolation that caused people to think that millions of Turkish people would move to the UK if it voted to remain in the European Union. What would happen if such important decisions were made based on these false premises?”
“When that happens, the corroboration of articles seems to enhance the perceived credibility of the article rather than expose its falsehood. Other ways to increase the audience reach and strengthen perceived veracity by enhancing popularity are through automated bots and phantom accounts. Social media has also become a platform for individuals and larger entities to transcend traditional territorial boundaries to irresponsibly wield the sword of the keyboard to manipulate politics, destabilise a country, increase polarisation or to simply get rich. The Internet has enabled a cloak of anonymity to increase the lack of accountability and enable an easy masquerade of a credible news site through subtle changes to a website domain. While it is not easy, tackling deliberate online falsehoods is important for our future as a nation, for our future as a democracy, for our future as "one united people". Allow me, Sir, to move on to my second point: falsehoods can divide us but we need to stand united − united as one multiracial Singapore. We need to safeguard our social cohesion. Unity is important, and unity can be threatened by false allegations. A Straits Times article on India’s fight against fake news reported that false images had been circulated on Twitter purporting to show Rohingyas persecuting Hindus in the Rakhine province, where the Muslim Rohingyas have been fleeing alleged persecution. In that instance, the purported victims were repainted as the oppressors, exploiting the tension in Myanmar towards the Rohingyas. These examples show how false allegations can target and wrongfully exacerbate society’s fault lines and threaten unity. Falsehoods should not be perpetuated.”
“An article entitled "US kids suss out the truth about fake news" by Washington Post and later picked up by The Straits Times had this to say, I quote, "While they once feared teenagers would fall for everything they read online, now teachers are increasingly concerned that their students will grow up not believing anything they read – or worse, believing the difference between what is real and what is fake is a matter of choice." That would be dangerous. What is important is discernment and not just disbelief. Therefore, empowering people to discern between truth and lies is of paramount importance. Only then can we increase our resistance to the insidiousness of falsehood. This is not an easy task. Though the phenomenon of "fake news" is not a new 21st century phenomenon but more like an upgraded or multiplied upgraded version of rumours, the rise of technology has exacerbated the issue. In an age of increasing technology sophistication, artificial intelligence can fabricate a scenery that had not existed. It is possible to make a video showing Barack Obama saying things he did not actually say – all without compromising the perceived authenticity of the video, a point alluded to by Minister Yaacob in his speech. Even without sophisticated technology, a simple deliberate miscaptioning and hence, repurposing of an old picture or video, can paint a very misleading picture. For example, in Italy, a government Minister's appearance at a funeral was falsely captioned to make it appear as if she was mourning a mafia boss. Using an apparently trustworthy news article but adding unverified and misleading facts can turn groups of people against each other.”
“Sir, thank you for letting me join in on this debate. I have three points – all three points support the intention to refer the issue of deliberate online falsehoods to a Select Committee. First, even as we try to tackle the problem of deliberate online falsehoods upstream, to be truly inoculated to the adverse impacts of falsehoods, people need discernment to differentiate between truth and falsehoods. This is because of the ubiquitous nature of online falsehoods. I refer to paragraph 14(b) of the Green Paper to put things into perspective: 36,746 Twitter accounts generated approximately 1.4 million automated, election-related tweets. Additionally, the repudiation of an article as false is often announced hours after the viral impact and seldom reaches all the audiences. False news may also continue to circulate making the article that repudiated it seem outdated. According to a study done by the Communications and New Media Department at NUS and the Institute of Policy Studies, younger Singaporeans have an optimism bias. That survey showed that Singaporeans who are more optimistically biased tend to "evaluate the news they receive on social media as less credible" and that they "tend to search for more information". This scepticism that leads people to dig deeper is encouraging. Nevertheless, the value of repetition and perceived corroboration may pose difficulty with automated accounts and multiple websites putting up the same unreliable information. Furthermore, even as people need to disbelieve falsehood, they need to be able to discern what is true, what is reliable.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for her reply. There was a recent case of the Public Prosecutor vs BDB, where the Court dealt with grievous hurt and said that for vulnerable victims, an equivalent of section 73, which deals with foreign domestic workers, would be useful to it to enhance its sentencing ability. So, would the Ministry consider something like that?”
“I thank the Minister for his reply. I would like to ask the Minister, in light of the highly heinous nature of this crime of child pornography, would the Ministry prioritise the deterrence against the crimes in its review of any relevant penal laws? And if the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) can form any feedback mechanism or support the Ministry in its work, we would be very happy to work with the Ministry in this review.”
“Rather, through stringent and high-quality implementation, our position as a travel elite hub and Singapore airports' reputation will grow stronger by being more secure and lowering the possibility for identity fraud and a safer transit area. We need to ensure that our security measures are tight and kept up to date or even ahead of the technologies used by criminals to manoeuvre their way around the proper safeguards. Another feature of the Bill is the increased maximum penalty for breach of regulations. Originally set at imprisonment of six months or a fine of $1,000, clause 5(C) of this present Bill increases it to imprisonment of two years or a fine of $3,000. This update of the maximum penalty ensures that inflation does not rob the penalty of its punitive effect. In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, this immigration amendment Bill is a welcome addition to the tools in the weaponry that our ICA officers need to secure effectively in these changing times. By empowering Home Team officers to respond promptly and by enhancing security measures, this Bill is a further step forward towards a synergistic and comprehensive move against terror threats in Singapore. I, therefore, strongly support the Bill.”
“According to the January issue of S Rajaratnam's School of International Studies and titled "Counter terrorist trends and analyses", a small percentage of combat-hardened fighters use forged, adapted and fraudulently-obtained genuine documents to travel home to conduct attacks. So, this is real. The collection of personal identifiers adds to the Advance Passenger Information and Passenger Name Record programmes which Singapore had committed in the 2016 Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) counter-terrorism action plan in October last year to secure and facilitate legitimate travel within the region. The collection of personal identifiers of transit passengers is now more common in today's increasingly globalised world. Such countries include New Zealand and the United Arab Emirates. Currently, travellers who remain in the transit area do not need a visa. Clause 55B, which provides for collection of personal identifiers, covers both those who remain in transit and those who apply for or hold a Singapore visa. This is needed. Such a provision is necessary and timely to ensure security in our airports and it should be implemented with the utmost care to stringently secure the information collected. If such personalised data gets into the wrong hands, the cure may be worse than the ill. As the number of travellers at our airports has been increasing, hitting the record 60 million mark last year, it is important that those who travel through Singapore for legitimate reasons not be afraid of the collection of important personal identifiers, such as fingerprints and even irises.”
“ICA officers will be equipped, through training, and they will not be hamstrung if they witness or have reason to believe that an offence is being committed before their very eyes. This supportive role will enhance the ICA's powers to protect Singapore and strengthen security at our borders. The second main feature of this Bill is the collection of personal identifiers from passengers transiting through our airport. What has happened in some countries previously is that illegal immigrants travel using forged documents, staying in the airport lounge to connect to their next destination. Alternatively, illegal immigrants cleared immigration using genuine documents but switch to forged documents or even took other persons' boarding passes inside the travel lounge. By collecting personal identifiers from those transiting through Singapore airport, it will be harder to commit identity fraud. Furthermore, there has been a proliferation of fraudulent documents that facilitate travel. It is not just boarding passes that can be faked. Lost passports and faked IDs have increased in number. As of July 2013, Interpol had nearly 38 million lost or stolen travel documents. According to a Political article, EU passport fraud epidemic, which refers to EU passport fraud epidemic in January this year, the number of lost and stolen documents in the EU has doubled in five years. There are 250,000 stolen or lost Syrian and Iraqi passports, including blank documents, very easily utilised. A report by the University of East London entitled "Mining the dark web, drugs and fake IDs" showed that whilst counterfeit documents make up a smaller percentage of the market compared to drugs, they are readily available.”
“Coupled with pass to intervene to prevent a crime and to cordon off an area to preserve a crime scene under subsections (13) and (14), these powers allow for a prompt response and would aid with the investigation process of crimes committed near the border. Through prompter collection and preservation of evidence of an act at or near the crime scene, there may be more evidence and more cogent, reliable and accurate evidence collected. It is hoped that this will greatly enhance the administration of justice in Singapore. Further, through the powers of arrest under clause 4 of section 51AA(8) to (10), ICA officers' presence at the borders will strengthen deterrence of the Home Team officers there. The procedural safeguards are in subsections (11) and (12), with subsection (12) playing an important signal that the Police are still primarily in charge of these policing duties. Subsection (12) requires the ICA officer to inform the Police immediately of the arrest and await the Police's arrival for handover, detaining the person in a suitable place for not more than 24 hours. As the ICA officers' powers are restricted to offences committed in the authorised area and its vicinity, an arrested person has to be ultimately handed over to the Police, the relationship between the ICA officers is clearly delineated for effective collaboration. Rather than abrogating from the Police's primary duty, these expanded powers further promote prompt and effective responses to a situation at our borders. Even with a strong uniformed presence near the borders, there are some who still dare to commit offences in the area.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of this Bill as it is an important piece of legislation that strengthens our border security. There are three main facets of this Bill. The first is the expanded role of ICA officers. The second is the provision for the collecting of personal identifiers of transit passengers. And the third is the increased penalty for breach of regulations. The expanded role of ICA officers promotes synergy and collaboration of the ICC. Started in 2015, the ICC organises Singapore's borders into three domains: air, land and sea. One domain head oversees operations of all Home Team officers in that domain, whether they be Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB), Police or ICA officers. This was a further step to optimise the organisation of our Home Team resources. Back in 2003, the ICA was born with the merging of Singapore Immigration and Registration and the Checkpoints Operations of Customs and Excise Department. Today, this Bill seeks to confer certain Police's powers on ICA officers so that we are able to respond to situations promptly and effectively. This move in this Bill keeps our Home Team agencies nimble, flexible and able to address the changing needs in these changing times. The new section 51AA (1) and (2) under clause 4 of the Bill seeks to allow ICA officers to stop and search any vehicle, train, vessel or person or any aircraft for evidence of criminal offences being committed in or around the protected area. This includes security screening under subsection (4) of the new proposed section 51AA under clause 4.”
“Every 500 hours without injury is a milestone. Every 10,000 kilometres without a breakdown is a milestone. Recognise it within the corporation. Third, SMRT must be proactive rather than reactive. What does the amnesty tell us or tell me about SMRT? Is it that the top or middle management does not know what is going on in the tunnels or on the tracks? So, my third question is: how is SMRT going to be proactive rather than reactive in troubleshooting?”
“I thank the Minister for his Statement and the leadership with which the Minister delivered it. I have three clarifications focused on SMRT. The first point is this. SMRT is a line monopolist. It has no competition on the lines it operates, like the North-South or the East-West Lines. No competitors mean a lot more money. Corporate energy should be focused on operational reliability. Yet, we are seeing these maintenance lapses. The second point is this: SMRT is able to apply to LTA for asset replacement grants for eligible operating assets like trains. So, that gives SMRT even more incentive to use its own revenue for maintenance. Yet, we see maintenance and serious maintenance lapses. The third point is this: SMRT has a secure customer base. It provides an essential service − public transport. It does not have to advertise "Please take my train instead of my competitors'" because SMRT has operational monopoly over the lines it operates. So, SMRT has line monopoly, taxpayer subsidies and a secure customer base. Yet, we see maintenance lapses. Where a corporate institution provides an essential service, we cannot tolerate corporate complacency. So, going forward, I have three suggestions for SMRT and I hope MOT will consider these. First, revamp the fine model for regulating rail transport operators. The highest fine imposed to-date was $5.4 million on SMRT for the 7 July 2015 breakdown disrupting 413,000 commuters. Yet, that money was less than 0.5% of SMRT's total revenue. So, we should move away, in my humble view, from a mere fine model. Second, we should peg the remuneration of SMRT's management to the overall reliability of SMRT and, where milestones are met by workers slogging it out, working their guts out in the tunnels, reward them with financial recognition.”
“Therefore, I stand in strong support of this Massage Establishment Bill.”
“Or even if it were just a fine meted out by the Court, the upper range has been extended from $1,000 to $10,000, or a tenfold increase. If a person re-offends in the same manner, he or she can face a heavier punishment. Second, the Police Commissioner may issue a premises closure order. Under this order, it is no longer up to the person being charged to decide whether or not unlicensed activities are going on at the massage establishment. The premises can be locked up, secured and disused. Thirdly, this Bill adds a duty on owners or occupiers to ensure that a person deliver up the premises within one month after conviction of certain offences. Through enhanced punishment, a premises closure order and the determination of a lease, this Bill ensures that massage establishments are robustly regulated. Allow me, Mr Speaker, a clarification. I note that there has been a change of rule-making power conferred by this Bill. Under section 13(2b) of the current Massage Establishment Act, the Minister could make rules concerning "the standards of hygiene to be observed in establishments for massage". This does not appear under clause 35 of this current Bill before the House. The general clause for rule-making, which is clause 35(1), would probably not extend to hygiene since the only other health-related provision is that of clause 35(2c), a prohibition against employing a person who has not "undergone and passed a medical health screening if required to do so by a licensing officer". As such, would the Minister kindly clarify how the hygiene of massage services is regulated? In conclusion, Mr Speaker, we cannot allow massage establishments to be a vehicle to proliferate vice, and certainly not in our residential areas.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is a welcome addition to the laws we have against vice in Singapore and is timely, needed. While massage establishments can provide valuable health-enhancing services, we cannot shy away from the fact that many have been used as a facade for carrying out vice-related enterprise. The media have covered this: 19 June 2016, the New Paper reported, "Dhoby Ghaut Spa Almost like a Brothel"; 8 June 2017, Asiaone reported, "Police Raid Five Massage Parlours for Illicit Activities"; 29 August 2017, The Straits Times reported, "79 People Arrested for Offering Sexual Services at Massage Parlours, Gambling and Working without Permits". The higher regulation embedded in this Bill is needed to target the recalcitrant massage establishments. By taking a less regulated approach to businesses offering manicures, pedicures and the like, the Police are now able to productively deploy and focus resources to clamp down on parlours which are mere shopfronts for vice activities. I hope this law will encourage the Police to prioritise their anti-vice raids on suspicious parlours within residential areas. I have had a complaint of a suspicious parlour along Bukit Timah Road within the constituency I serve, close to schools and homes. As the Police prioritises their anti-vice raids, I would hope officers will first focus on rooting out vice activities near residential areas. Allow me, Mr Speaker, Sir, to speak of certain aspects of this Bill. This Bill gives the extra teeth necessary to ensure that vice activities can be clamped down swiftly and effectively. How? Firstly, the punishment for operating an unlicensed massage establishment has been increased. It is not just a fine, but there is also a possibility of imprisonment of up to two years.”
“She is pictured here with Mr Choo's widow, Mr Choo's son Roland, and Mr Choo's grandchildren. Also seen are Waseemah's parents. Mr Choo is not in this photograph. But his values of a united multiracial society within an independent Singapore live on in Waseemah, who is part of the Youth Executive Committee in Ulu Pandan serving a multiracial Singapore. When terror strikes, what instincts will come to my mind? The care of Nenek Zainap, the complete dedication of Mr Choo, the effort of Waseemah and the selfless work of the many volunteers and Singaporeans who aspire to multiracialism. We will resist pointing a finger. Instead, we trust that Singaporeans will lock hands with fellow Singaporeans of all races, face terrorism squarely, and show in unity that "we will not be defeated, not on these shores, not in our homes, not on our soil", and that Singapore will prevail. [Applause.] [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Resolved, (proc text)] [(proc text) "That this House fortifies Singapore's resolve to stay united against the threat of terrorism by reaffirming the core values of multiracialism and social cohesion and calls on the Government to continue (a) promoting vigilance and resilience among Singaporeans to deter and overcome terrorist attacks; (b) preventing the spread of radicalised teachings which promote violent extremism; and (c) investing in multiracialism as the best socio-weapon to defeat the ills that terrorism seeks to sow". (proc text)]”
“My father and mother had asked a young Malay lady, Cik Zainap, whether she would like to help my mother in taking care of the children. My father was flying fighters then in the 1970s. It was dangerous. Pilots' wives went through quite a lot then, not knowing if something would happen in the air to their husbands. So, any extra help at home was very welcomed by my mother. Zainap became part of our family. She worked well with my mother and she saw my sister and I grow up. Even after we settled down and started our own families, our family kept in touch with Zainap. She is now known as Nenek Zainap to our children and she considers them each her cucu. We keep in close touch. This photograph was taken when my parents, my wife and I and our children visited Zainap last year in her Tampines home for Hari Raya. Since then, we had our No 3 − so one more cucu for her! So, it is wonderful that in Singapore, we can consider one another as part of the same keluarga, the same family. My parents and I are a part of her family, and she is a part of ours. Sir, one more example. In 2012, the Prime Minister came to Ulu Pandan to launch the Choo Siu Heng Scholarship, named after a long-standing and selfless community leader who dedicated over 50 years of service to the community. Mr Choo believed in a Singaporean Singapore, with multiracialism as a bedrock. Mr Choo was a source of great wisdom and encouragement, especially in how to reach out and serve residents. Sadly, in 2011, he passed away. We decided to honour his legacy by setting up a scholarship in his name to sponsor the university fees of a young Singaporean who is involved in community work in Ulu Pandan. Every year since then, we have given out a scholarship to a new and deserving student. The second recipient was Waseemah.”
“There is multiracial bonding on all levels − the teacher with the infant, the infants with one another, the teacher with her colleagues, the infant's family and the teacher, and the families with other families. But this also shows the big reservoir of trust we have among the races − to augment Dr Tan Wu Meng's point − to be able to entrust the baby with someone else from a different race. It is reflective of these day-after banners, which Ulu Pandan residents helped to organise, reflective of the values Singapore aspires to achieve. Many of us here celebrate Multiracial Day in our constituencies where the children dress up in traditional costumes. Recently, in Ulu Pandan, we had a Multiracial Dessert Day. We feasted on many different kinds of desserts, from ang ku kueh, roti, samosa, pineapple tarts. We experienced the wonder of multiracialism through our appetites and stomachs. In a very real way, we tasted how each culture had something unique to offer, how each culture was unique and valuable. And we experienced it in one of the most Singaporean ways possible − food − a language that transcends the different communities. Many of us would have attended moon cake festivals over the weekend and seen residents of many races carry lanterns together, lighting up the evening with the warm glow of the lanterns. Allow me to conclude, Sir. I took this photograph when visiting the PCF infant care centre in my ward earlier this year. It is a photograph of Makcik Minaseh carrying young Xander, holding him, caring for him. It is a meaningful photograph for me. Why? It reminded me of what happened 40 years ago. Back then, I was just born and my parents lived on Changi Air Base.”
“This tabletop exercise was organised by Ulu Pandan constituency's Community Emergency and Engagement Committee. I am sure many other constituencies have conducted similar exercises. Our grassroots leaders and key community resource persons, such as religious group leaders, gathered to simulate responding to a terror attack. Different people from different races are playing a part now to prepare for the consequences of a terror attack. Committee members were assigned to different groups, such as operations, media, logistics, community resources deployment, all everyday issues needed to overcome terror attacks. It is nothing like being prepared. Essentially, multiracialism is a constant work-in-progress. As Minister K Shanmugam stated clearly, we have never believed that a laissez-faire approach to creating a national identity would work. We are wanting to secure a multiracial society that will work and that we are activist in this respect. As Minister Yaacob Ibrahim said passionately, we all sing the same National Anthem and hold our right fist to our hearts when reciting the pledge. These and many more experiences of being a Singaporean must mean something to every one of us, especially when the going gets tough for a member of our Singaporean family. Dr Mercy Jesuvadian of the National Institute of Education highlighted that it is important to start building racial harmony at an early age. At the PAP Community Foundation (PCF) Sparkle Tots Preschool in my constituency, we have babies of all the different races taken care of by infant care teachers of different races. There is a photograph there. Members can see multiracial babies and multiracial infant caregivers.”
“As Ms Thanaletchimi stated, as our Singapore workforce constituents comprise a combination of local and migrant workers, it is not only important to inculcate the value of multiracialism and multiculturalism among Singaporeans but also to the migrant workers from various countries. Singapore's multiracial tapestry is important. And in preserving it, Mr Pritam Singh shared with us that conflicts of another country, although emotive, should not be transported here to destroy the social fabric we have in Singapore − our common humanity. I agree. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked why the word "weapon" was used in the Motion's title. Let me share. When I was crafting the Motion, it was to view terrorism as an enemy in a real sense. After all, terrorism is an affront to Singapore and all her values. I thought "weapon" was a good analogy for what we are up against, and the hybrid word "socio-weapon" was chosen because terrorism is a common enemy we have to battle against as a citizenry. In peacetime, we do not use multiracialism as a weapon. But when under attack, we can deploy that multiracialism as a strength, as a weapon, against the common enemy. It is distinct from the hardware the SAF and Home Team will use, but it is as important a tool, as important a weapon when we are facing a terrorist attack on our shores. Hence, the reason for the word "socio-weapon" in the Motion's title. The Community Emergency and Engagement Committee is another significant platform to ensure that our multiracialism can endure the test of a terror attack. With your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, may I display a few slides on the LED screen?”
“Mr Leon Perera suggested to have more common spaces for people of different races to interact and integrate. I agree. Mr Leon Perera also expressed the desire that we must be aware of minorities who seek to sow discord amongst numerical majorities through influence and interference, sow discord along the lines of what the terrorism regime seeks. I agree. And I agree that that is a good desire to have. But I would also say that the laws in Singapore already deter such behaviour. The Government has already put in the legal levers to deal with this. I had mentioned the Public Order Act, Sedition Act and the Penal Code in the opening speech. All these seek, in one way or another, to deter the proliferation of violent extremism, radical teachings. So, we have systems in place already. Mr Muhamad Faisal Manap suggested working upstream to intervene to strengthen our social cohesion to fight terrorism. He suggested the use of religious knowledge in schools to achieve that. But I think Mr Muhamad Faisal Manap would agree that much would depend on the curriculum and teaching materials of the subject, and that one requirement would be that the subject not include teachings that would incite violent extremism. That should be avoided so as not to manipulate the students. Many of the Members here shared how multiracialism was furthered in their communities. Dr Tan Wu Meng, speaking in all three languages, shared with us that the Clementi CC organised a demonstration of ketupat making for the new citizens to share with them Singapore's multiracialism. Ms Thanaletchimi highlighted the workplace as an important venue to foster multiracialism in Singapore.”
“Through collaboration with the US, we have developed puffer portals to detect all forms of Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive (CBRNE) threats. We have utilised the Automated Biometric and Behavioural Screening Suite to identify many blacklisted travellers. These are all important and critical initiatives. Importantly, we also need to guard against the deadly concoction of terrorism and drugs. In Marawi, it was reported that 11 kilogrammes of high-grade methamphetamine hydrochloride or "Shabu" worth about US$5 million was found in a den belonging to militants. Some militants were even found high on drugs. This is not just a problem isolated to Marawi. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation stated at a Security Conference in December last year, "Terrorism is closely linked with the drug problem. Illicit drug trafficking provides the bulk of terrorism's funding." Therefore, to prevent funding to terrorists, we need to make sure we do our part to stop drugs from travelling into and through Singapore. The third point is investing in multiracialism as the best socio-weapon to defeat the ills terrorism seeks to sow. As Ms Sun Xueling shared, her aspiration is that Singapore will grow "closer to realising the ideals our nation aspires to". Ms Rahayu Mahzam still retains the faith that the non-Muslim community in Singapore will know that Singapore Muslims strongly reject terrorism and the misguided ISIS actions. To that end, Mr Liang Eng Hwa stated that, "Government policies and laws alone will not be enough to bring us to that enduring level of trust and harmonious relations at the people-to-people level". So, for Mr Liang, people-to-people relations are important. It is a good point.”
“" Yes, we have a range of laws to prevent the spread of radicalised teachings which promote violent extremism. And as Mr Murali Pillai stated, it is important to have these laws in place now, before an attack occurs. But, as Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar also pointed out in her speech, more can be done upstream, well before muscular laws are applied. This is a good point. One major battleground upstream is the Internet. While it may propagate violent extremism, it can also be used to deter it. What are we facing? It was reported by Channel NewsAsia that in 2015, there were 46,000 Twitter accounts and 10,000 accounts on Facebook held by those openly supporting terrorists. There were another 9,800 websites belonging to terrorist groups. We need to work on the counter-narrative. How? Dr Intan Mokhtar shared that she hoped that there will be more "social media savvy" asatizahs as they have a potential to be a positive influence to shape and influence the perception of the youths. Google's subsidiary, Jigsaw, does it by providing links to credible counter-narrative videos. These links are provided to those who had searched online for what Google's algorithms construed as potential terrorists. The counter-narrative links are not openly counter-terrorist in name and title. So, as a result, that potential reader is not deterred. Counter-narratives are key. In fact, what we are debating today in Parliament is also a counter-narrative to terrorism. What we need to do more of is to put that counter-narrative into social media. But we have not remained stagnant in that endeavour. Our Home Team has worked hard to keep us ahead of the game. We have invested in technology and thought out of the box to keep ahead.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the 17 Members of Parliament, including Minister K Shanmugam and Minister Yaacob Ibrahim, who have contributed much to the robust debate on this Motion. That multiracialism can be discussed so openly by Members of many different races here in Singapore's Parliament is itself a strength not many parliaments around the world possess. Furthermore, that we could achieve broad consensus in the debate that we have to stay united, regardless of race, in the face of a terror attack is itself important and positive. We have agreed broadly not to point fingers at a certain race or religion, but to condemn in a single voice the abhorrent nature of terror attacks. That agreement is not something to be belittled, especially when we see how so many countries around the world choose the fractious route of finger-pointing and ostracising. So, this bipartisan support for this Motion is good for Singapore and good for a united stand against terrorism. Mr Alex Yam supported the idea that all Singaporeans have a role in being vigilant. He said that all of us need to be aware of the concerns, as well as the preparatory measures required. Vigilance is only part of the equation. Resilience after an attack is just as important. Mr Desmond Choo shared the importance of having "first responders" online to initiate and shape discussions in a productive manner, as well as to dispel falsehoods and rumours. Both vigilance and resilience require a collective effort. In the same way, a collective counter-offence is required to diffuse the spread of violent extremist radical teachings. As Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar has said, "[it is] a shared responsibility, [one] which requires ... common effort and resolve.”
“When an attack vests on our shores, will Singapore shut down in fear? No, Singapore will not. We will respond as one united people. And that way, Singapore will win. [Applause] [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“There is some familiarity, a platform for social integration through interaction, transcending ethnic boundaries. There is a kampung family. Another important pillar is the Inter-Racial and Religious Confidence Circles (IRCCs). They bring leaders of the different religious, ethnic and community groups together to build friendship and trust. Their good work had brought all of us of different races and religions together and has greatly contributed to furthering our ideal of multiracialism. This picture was taken at the reappointment ceremony of our constituency's IRCC this year. All of us, the races, Chinese, Malay, Indian and Eurasian, and many religions were present and represented at that table, cutting a cake together, symbolising the re-appointment of the IRCC. That was a very meaningful ceremony, possibly only in Singapore. I think all of us do ceremonies in each of our constituencies. What I mean by "only in Singapore" is that this type of ceremony happens only in Singapore. In conclusion, Sir, terrorism is an affront to the Chinese community, it is an affront to the Malay community, it is an affront to the Indian community, it is an affront to the Eurasian community. It is an affront to Singapore and her values. This photo is significant. These are our anti-terror frontline task force patrol officers. Armed, ready. Look closely. They are a multiracial group of men. Multiracialism is what terrorism seeks to destroy. But in Singapore, it is that same strong multiracialism that will be used to defeat the ills terrorism seeks to sow. That way, we secure for ourselves a happy irony. In the very face of the threat, we deploy a united multiracial force. So, I ask this House, do we let terrorism divide us? Or do we say no, not on our soil.”
“Singapore has been recognised as a multicultural society and that has also been independently recognised as a strength. According to the Gallup World Poll 2016, Singapore ranked top out of over 140 countries for tolerance of ethnic minorities. According to the 2015 Legatum Prosperity Index, Singapore ranked the highest among 142 countries where people feel that their country is tolerant of ethnic minorities. In an article in September 2017 in the Asian Tribune, the author cited the Singapore Government as having recognised "the importance of maintaining and fostering racial harmony" and that it had implemented policies and safeguards to that end. Multiracialism does not come naturally. Left to itself, people tend to gravitate along racial lines. In France, after the Charlie Hebdo attacks on 7 January 2015, it was reported that the then Prime Minister Manuel Valls identified 64 ghettos in major cities where significant portions of the population were being left behind economically, marginalised into ethnic enclaves. When there is an unfamiliarity among ethnic groups, lack of social cohesion exists. The unfortunate consequence is a sense of distrust among the races. So, multiracialism does not come naturally. We have had to work hard at it and we need to continue to work hard at it. It is an aspiration, an ideal that we strive and need to continue to strive towards. It is a long work in progress. So, what have we done to move towards our aspirations? When it comes to housing, the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's), Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) programme ensures that there will be racial diversity in each block of HDB flats. People of a different race, of a different religion, live next to one another.”
“So, being part of the Eurasian race, I can understand what it means to be culturally aware of ethnic heritage and all the richness it offers but, at the same time, being completely focused on being Singaporeans first and foremost. This is my experience of multiracialism. I hope we will all aspire towards retaining cultural identities coupled with a strong duty to Singapore. Terrorism seeks to destroy unity. It seeks to disunite communities, make us point fingers at one another, become factious. But with a cohesive spirit and multiracialism, we can defeat the ills terrorism seeks to sow. That multiracialism is a strength can be illustrated in tangible ways. Look at sports. In the 2007 Southeast Asian (SEA) Games, women's 4x100-metre relay, Wendy Enn, Shanti Pereira, Dipna Lim-Prasad and Nur Izyln Zaini became the first local women's team to go under 45 seconds, cutting the national record from 45.51 to 44.96 seconds. Each runner's race did not matter. Rather, what mattered to them was the RACE Singapore had to win. What mattered was the mission − advancing Singapore's flag on the track. Working together, they broke the national record. Growing up, when I was playing lots of hockey, I had Chinese, Indian, Malay, Punjabi, Eurasian teammates. When we played against teams from other countries, our teams used to communicate on the pitch in different languages − Malay, English, Mandarin, Punjabi, Tamil, Hokkien. Sometimes, using very colourful verbs and nouns, best not repeated, especially here. The other teams were confused at hearing this collage of languages. We used our multiracialism and multilingual ability as assets. Diversity was a strength for our team. What mattered most to us was whether Singapore was up against the opponent on the scoreboard.”
“In fact, multiracialism makes Singapore a multiskilled, multitalented and multifaceted country. Within Singapore, our population can lean on the different skills, thought processes, talents and languages of the people from the different races who live in Singapore. When foreign governments visit Singapore, explore trading opportunities and collaboration, our multiracialism becomes an immediate asset. Foreign governments, trading partners and tourists can relate to the cultures within Singapore which may be present in their own home countries. That is an asset. Internationally, when Singapore Government leaders and businessmen visit China, Indonesia, Malaysia, India and many other countries, we are able to connect with them. Why? Because cultures are understood well and sometimes shared. We offer those whom we visit and with whom we trade a multiracial Singapore − multicultured, multiskilled, multitalented. It is a previous asset. For me, multiracialism is not an academic issue. Singaporean Eurasians are multiracial in our very genetic makeup and believe in Singapore's multiracialism to the core. We do not want to discard the English, Portuguese, Dutch, Burmese and the Indian influence in us but, at the same time, we have a duty to Singapore. We are multiracial in the very core of our identity but, at the same time, profess fierce loyalty to Singapore. Over the centuries, in terms of ethnicity, we have become an amalgamation of many races, including Dutch, English, Portuguese, Ceylonese and Burmese. One cannot divide us and put a bit of us back into the different countries our ancestors came from. We have no homeland but Singapore. This is it. Our duty is to Singapore and her future.”
“To see children suffer like that grates against humanity. In the case of terror attacks around the world, people of different races and religions have shown through their actions and courage that they will not condone violence and the killing of the innocent. In July this year, Channel 4 News ran a documentary on a group of Christians in Mosul who were rescuing Muslims from the fire of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) snipers there. They risked their lives to save innocent Muslim people. Let me give another example. It was reported by Channel NewsAsia on 5 August that during the fighting in Marawi, a Muslim villager chose to stay put in his house and put his own life in danger, even when his friends and relatives begged him to vacate it. Why did he choose to stay? Because he had people he was protecting there. Who? Christians. They had run out of food and he helped them escape from the militants' rampage. Terrorism is an affront to all of us, regardless of race or religion. And so, we can and need to have a collective counter-offence to it. How? By continuing to strengthen multiracialism and social cohesion in Singapore. We need to view our multiracialism as an asset, a muscular asset. Sir, allow me to share what my view of multiracialism is. Different ethnic communities define their identity in different ways which may change over time. Multiracialism does not mean we give up our ethnic identity which is informed by race, our culture and upbringing and, to an extent, by our religious beliefs. It is not about everybody becoming the same. Multiracialism is about appreciating diversity − diversity in race, language, religious beliefs and, at the same time, being loyal to our duty we have as Singaporeans, that is, the duty to advance Singapore and Singaporeans.”
“" It was reported that the restriction order of one of the former members of Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) was allowed to lapse; he is no longer required for further supervision under the restriction order regime. This is not the only example. ISA detainees can be released from preventive detention and put on restraining orders after they are shown to have made progress in rehabilitation and no longer pose a security threat that requires preventive detention. Therefore, we have an arsenal of laws to empower pre-emptive action, preventive detention, leading to rehabilitation and, hopefully, reintegration. The laws are effective and noble. But laws alone cannot offer Singapore's complete counter-offence to terrorism. Multiracialism is the best socio-weapon to defeat the ills terrorism seeks to sow. What does terrorism seek to sow? Terrorism seeks to sow division, disunity, discord. Terrorism is not the problem of a single race. It is not the problem of a single religion. Terrorists come in all forms. Look at Anders Behring Breivik. In 2011, he committed Norway's worst attack and was convicted of mass murder and terrorism offences. At that time, it was the world's deadliest terror attack by a lone gunman. Many of his victims were teenagers on a recent summer retreat. Besides the shooting rampage on the island of Utoya, he planted a bomb in a van in Oslo's city centre. In total, 77 people were killed. He was a self-declared fascist, who held strong anti-Muslim sentiments. What he did was detestable, horrid and inhuman. There can be no room for violent extremism in Singapore. Violent extremism is an affront to humanity. Therefore, acts of violence, such as those acts towards all vulnerable communities in the Rakhine state, should stop.”
“Allow me, Mr Speaker, to go through the Acts and, by so doing, hopefully get across to those who wish to do us harm that we have the requisite laws to act pre-emptively and swiftly. For example, under section 7 of the Public Order Act, the Commissioner of Police may refuse to grant a permit if he is of the view that the proposed assembly or procession may glorify the commission or preparation of acts of terrorism, whether in the past or future. A different raft of laws targets the action of spreading violent extremism. These can be found in the Penal Code and the Sedition Act. Section 267C of the Penal Code makes it an offence to distribute or possess documents or communicate electronic records that incite violence. The Sedition Act makes it an offence to commit an act which has a seditious tendency. Seditious tendency is defined to include "promot[ing] hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore." When the need arises, there is the Internal Security Act (ISA). For instance, section 20 empowers the Minister to prohibit or set conditions regarding the possession of documents that contain any incitement to violence. But, to add real value, the laws should also aim to assist the detained and help rehabilitate them. Rehabilitation and reintegration are important strategies to stem the spread of such violent extremism. This makes crucial the work of organisations, such as the Religious Rehabilitation Group (RRG). Its mission statement expands on the importance of rehabilitation to the detainee: "Rehabilitation seeks to counter detainees' ideological misunderstanding of religion and help them come to terms with the fact that they have been misled.”
“The Independent reported that Scotland Yard acknowledged that the ringleader of the terrorist who carried out the London Bridge attack was known to the police and MI5 for extremism before he went on his rampage of murder and maiming. The British Broadcasting Corporation reported that the ringleader had previously appeared in a Channel 4 documentary about the presence of violent extremists in British cities. In the end, that ringleader led a rampage which killed eight people and injured 48 others in an attack at London Bridge in Borough Market on 3 June this year. In Singapore, the laws must not work to hinder investigation. When pre-emptive detention is necessary, we must act and administer it. We cannot have our hands tied behind our backs. More so, in light of what the Minister for Home Affairs shared just three weeks ago. Minister K Shanmugam said that before the Islamic State militant group came on the scene, authorities assessed it will take about two years for individuals to become radicalised. But now, some individuals may be radicalised in as little as one or two months. The rate of being influenced has decreased from 22 months, not to 20 months, not to 12 months, but to two months. Our laws in Singapore must facilitate early action, pre-emptive action, to reduce the possibility of terror threats. Laws are important. They are important tools. Our laws do help deter the spread of radicalised teachings, which promote violent extremism. And with the changing nature of terrorist attacks in the world, the shorter period for radicalisation, we may need to review our laws to ensure that they are flexible enough, that they are robust enough, to mitigate against and ameliorate the morphing nature of terror attacks.”
“A first step now could be to prepare posters and other paraphernalia to send such messages quickly and visibly. These are some of what the residents in the constituency I serve, Ulu Pandan, organised in terms of banners. These are day-after banners. They have been printed, they are in the Community Centre, ready to be put up at locations throughout the constituency should there be an attack. "We are one people, one nation, one Singapore", "Deny terrorism a victory, let's stay united". The four hands of our races ─ Singaporean Chinese, Malay, Indian and Eurasians ─ protecting our precious Singapore, holding it together. Red and white chosen ─ the colours of our flag. "No to disunity", "Terrorism will not win". These messages displayed the day-after are what Singaporeans can see and will stir them to say, "Yes, we are in this together", "Yes, it will be okay." So, first, we need to promote vigilance and resilience amongst Singaporeans to deter and overcome terrorist attacks. And that was the first part of the Motion. Allow me, Sir, to move on to the second point, that we need to prevent the spread of radicalised teachings which promote violent extremism. There were 18 radicalised Singaporeans arrested in the past two years, compared to 11 in the preceding years. Let us study that statistics: 18 in the past two years, compared to 11 in the preceding seven years. To take the appropriate action, we have a range of laws that may be applied. We only need to look to the recent terror attack on London Bridge in Borough Market to see why muscular laws which gives police proactive and pre-emptive powers are important.”
“Another key strategy to secure resilience against the psychology of fear that terrorists seek to sow is to promote unity in the aftermath of a terror attack. How we respond to a terror attack is important. A response using Home Team and SAF military hardware is key but let us also realise that Singapore and Singaporeans must win the psychological battle. Our unity will ensure we are victorious over any ill the attacks seek to incite. That is why communication is very important. According to SAFE-COMMS which was commissioned by the European Union, a key message should be, "We will not allow terrorists to spread fear and horror and gain the upper hand." The next message is, "We know what we are doing", then the next message is, "All those affected will receive all the support that they need." The basic principles are rapid restoration of confidence and security, transparent trust-building information policy, calmly competent yet sensitive treatment of all those that are directly and indirectly involved, leadership with integrity and credibility, and decisive action. The message of social connectedness and hope is important, especially in the aftermath of an attack. In December 2014, a lone gunman held 17 hostages at a cafe in Sydney for more than 16 hours. Two hostages eventually died. Within a few hours of the attack, a hashtag campaign entitled "I'll Ride With You" went viral on the Internet. Australians stood together with their Muslim brothers and sisters. The point is, we need to win the psychological value. It is not just the day itself, but the day after the attack. How will we act? How will we move ahead? We do not point our fingers but hold hands and stand united together against terror. But to do so, we need to prepare now. How?”
“If the threat is so well-disguised and an attack does occur, then we should provide as accurate information as we can through the SGSecure app. To be truly secure, all of us − very Singaporean − has a part to play to be vigilant. It is also important that Singaporeans work synergistically with the uniformed forces in the face of a terror attack. Equally, the uniformed services − Home Team and SAF − will need to work synergistically with each other. Very interestingly, Australia amended their laws this year to allow military deployment alongside police personnel after a terror incident has been declared. A synergistic response is needed. Singapore is increasing exercises and trainings between the Home Team and SAF as well as between the Home Team and the citizenry, through local Emergency Preparedness days. But a look at how other countries are planning their responses to terror attacks may be useful for Singapore's policymakers. For example, in Hong Kong, the Standing Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Planning Group meets regularly to formulate contingency plans and procedures for threatened or possible attacks, including terror attacks. It is made up of specialists from various departments and agencies, such as the hospitals, laboratories, police force, civil aid service and fire service. It is a multidisciplinary team on call, 24 hours a day, to assess threats and give advice on the spot. In Australia, the Prime Minister Malcom Turnbull wanted personnel from the defence force to be placed within law enforcement agencies to assist in coordination efforts. We could study the Hong Kong and Australia models to assess what best practices we could import into Singapore's anti-terror regime.”
“Therefore, it is not just for the specialist forces or the Police to be alert to such threats. The possibility of a terror attack needs to be ingrained in the consciousness of everyone. It should not cripple us in Singapore with fear. Rather, that consciousness should help us to know how to spot suspicious activities and how to react to them in a calm and systematic fashion. Firstly, there is a need to identify the threat. The signs of suspicious persons, articles and vehicles have been disseminated through the SGSecure App and other means. But knowing the signs is not enough; we need to instil the culture of vigilance that will cause people to look up, observe their surroundings and know how to make a judgement call. That judgement call includes following instructions in the SGSecure App, which are "Run, Hide, Tell". But what to tell is also important. How well we are able to respond to the terror attack would very much depend on how we, the first responders, cooperate with the Police by giving information through the SGSecure app. Information communicated is crucial. Hence, according to the SGsecure guide, we should TELL. T-E-L-L. T for the total number of attackers, E for equipment or weapons being carried, L for look of attackers, and L for location of attackers ─ where they are now and moving towards. Our response as citizens will be crucial in order for the response from our uniformed staff to be even more effective. It could be a vehicle marauding through the crowd on a footway, or a knife-wielding group of men in a crowded restaurant. The attackers could be a moving target. It is our duty as citizens of Singapore to help report suspicious activity before the threat materialises.”
“The Straits Times reported that there was an Arabic publication circulated last October that identified two entities here, the Singapore Exchange and a port, as targets as part of a wider bid to damage American and Western interests. In a separate report by the Jakarta-based Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict, those heading the Marawi network had urged militants on Telegram to attack targets in Singapore, Thailand and Japan. For these three reasons − one, our region is facing a heightened threat; two, the threat is global; and three, our country has been explicitly targeted − we need to promote vigilance and resilience. According to a report on "Risk and Resilience" for the Department of Homeland Security in United States (US), pre-event activity is key to resilience. It places importance on the capacity to anticipate, plan and prepare to cope with threats. An important aspect of this pre-event activity is being vigilant. Why is this so? In London, recent attacks involved vans being driven on pedestrian walkways and knife attacks. It happened in very public areas, accessible to pedestrians and vehicles. Low cost, highly visible, possibility for lone-wolf operations, vulnerable targets, are dangerous concoctions. These attacks are very difficult to prevent. Without concrete bollards on every crowded street, checks on every bag carried on the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT), restriction on the sales of all kinds of knives ─ even kitchen knives ─ this would be near impossible. As Minister K Shanmugam has said, "You can't turn the entire city into a garrison." No matter what interventions the state puts in to try to prevent a terrorist attack, it is very likely that the first responders will be the citizens on the ground.”
“Thank you. Terrorists are returning from Syria and Iraq to Southeast Asia. Misguided, they form terror cells which seek to influence others. It is estimated that in the next two years, about 200 terrorists would be released from prisons in the region. They could return to terrorist leanings after their release. Reports have shown that the Marawi conflict has generated potential terrorists, adding to the regional threat we face. But this threat is not just regional. The threat confronts the globe. In fact, every single inhabitable continent in our world has suffered a terror attack since the beginning of this year alone, 2017. In Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a man shot and killed five people at the airport. That was January 2017. Just last night, we heard news of a possible terror attack in Las Vegas, 59 people tragically killed. In Manchester, an explosion killed 22 children, youths and adults at an Ariana Grande concert. That was May 2017. Again, just over the weekend, in Marseille, France, two women were stabbed to death. In Jakarta, two explosions at a busy bus station killed three police officers and injured 10 people. That was May 2017. In Melbourne, a woman was taken hostage, two men were shot, and three police officers injured in the line of duty in June of this year. In Colombia, South America, an explosion at a shopping centre killed three women and injured 11 others. And in Mali, West Africa, five people were shot at a tourist resort in June. So, should we move on the assumption that an attack will never happen to us? I do not think so. Rather, we must prepare now. In 2016, plans to attack Singapore were avoided and foiled. Terrorists from Batam planned to launch a rocket attack on Marina Bay Sands in August 2016.”