Hri Kumar Nair
Singapore
“This has a direct bearing on how liberally orders for OCPOs and FROs will be made. To conclude, the Bill gives us more tools to attack and dismantle OCG and ensure that they and their sympathisers do not benefit from the proceeds of crime.”
“I thank the Minister for the answer. I have two supplementary questions. Could the Minister let us know what is the number of pending cases with MOM on unpaid salaries?”
“According to section 11, such a landlord is entitled to terminate the tenancy and can re-possess the property a minimum of 14 days after giving notice. Could the Minister give an estimate of how much the bond is likely to be?”
“LTA has announced that beginning February 2015, the contribution rate of deregistered cars to the Open Category will be reduced from the current 15% to 10%. But why not just scrap the Open Category entirely and transfer its quota entirely to Category A?”
“Second, I renew the call I have made since 2010 to lift or remove the income ceiling. The income ceiling is too blunt a tool. It does not take into consideration the circumstances faced by each family, such as the number of dependants.”
“This will enable students to make informed decisions before and during their university. Second, by better matching demand with supply. I understand that the Law Society currently maintains a page of training contract listings.”
The complete record
Every one of 461 lines we hold for Hri Kumar Nair, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 10.
“" The new section 3A(3) refers to persons who are required by the Suspicious Transaction Reporting Officer (STRO) to disclose documents or information, while section 39(1) refers to persons under a duty to disclose their knowledge or suspicion where such information or matter on which the knowledge or suspicion is based came to his attention in the course of his trade, profession, business or employment. The question is whether the law affords protection to a voluntary "informer", someone who reports his knowledge or suspicion of money laundering even if he is not required under a law to do so is not under the duty to do so. The wording of the provision indicates otherwise. Should we not encourage more people to come forward and afford them protection from civil claims? How would this tie in with protections for whistle-blowers? Could the Minister clarify, therefore, the intended scope of the provision? Second, section 39(1) of the CDSA. I accept this is not part of the amendment of the Bill but important for its understanding. Section 39(1) of the CDSA places an obligation on a person to disclose knowledge or suspicion of any act which may constitute drug dealing or criminal conduct should the pertinent information come to his attention in the course of his trade, profession, business or employment. "Criminal conduct" in this provision refers to "any act constituting a serious offence or a foreign serious offence", and "serious offence" encompasses a whole host of offences as specified in the Second Schedule of the CDSA. Mr Deputy Speaker, it can be argued that this provision casts too wide a net – it deals with an array of offences that are not likely to have anything to do with money laundering, terrorism or drug dealing.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. The Bill aims to strengthen our fight against money laundering and terrorism financing. It is good for two main reasons. First, its importance to Singapore's continued growth as a major offshore financial centre cannot be overstated. As an international financial and investment centre, we are vulnerable to cross-border money laundering and terrorist financing risks. The Singapore National Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment Report issued in January this year revealed that while we do have tough laws and regulations in place, more can be done in certain sectors which lack the relevant legislative and supervisory framework. The Bill, therefore, represents our continuous efforts to keep our laws relevant and effective. Second, this Bill tightens the regulation of money flows in accordance with the international standards set by the Financial Action Task Force, an inter-governmental body that Singapore has been a member of since 1992. It complements the recent changes made to the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (TSOFA) in relation to terrorism financing in 2013 and it is, therefore, another step in a series of regulatory reforms taken to honour our international commitments. That said, I wish to raise two points of clarification. First, section 40A of the current CDSA serves to protect "informers". And this, in the Bill, clause 9 amends section 40A(4) of the Act such that it will read: "In this section, 'informer' means a person who makes a disclosure pursuant to a requirement under section 3A(3) or Page: 97 pursuant to section 39(1).”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I have three questions for the Deputy Prime Minister. First, the Deputy Prime Minister mentioned that the SOC force will be increased by 300. The Police Commissioner justified during the hearing that he needed an additional 1,000 officers in the force and the COI spoke of recruiting quality than of quantity. As the Minister has accepted all the recommendations, could the Deputy Prime Minister clarify how he intends to recruit such numbers given the tight labour situation, and particularly, how long he anticipates the Ministry will need to bring the numbers up to an acceptable level? Second, in the meantime, does the Ministry have any interim or temporary measures to address the manpower deficit? Finally, Mdm Speaker, on a separate note, I have read and heard a number of commentaries about what the Government should do in order that similar incidents like these will not happen again. That sentiment concerns me because I do not think the Minister or anyone can give that assurance to this House. Perhaps, the Deputy Prime Minister could clarify, even with the successful implementation of all recommendations, what he sees is an acceptable or reasonable response to similar incidents in the future.”
“I just would like the hon Member to know that there is a difference between a detail and a motherhood statement.”
“Mdm Speaker, it can be resolved very easily. All the Workers' Party needs to do is to produce all their proposals and all their details and let Singaporeans scrutinise as to whether they have been constructive and whether they have offered serious, realistic proposals. It is very simple. I have written about this many times and I have spoken about it many times, and we are still waiting to hear from them.”
“Mdm Speaker, the Prime Minister is a far more polite person than I am. I will try and address all of the learned Member's points. I am not a member of the Opposition. I know I am dressed in blue today. But the Member will know if he has read my speeches and followed my writings, I have dealt with many policies of the Government. I have offered constructive suggestions, not just in MHA but in other Ministries as well. If he wants a list, I will be happy to send him a list tomorrow morning. For example, for MND, I have suggested raising the income ceiling for Singaporeans to buy HDB flats before the income ceiling was raised. I had gone further to say that all Singaporeans should be entitled to buy HDB flats. I can go down Ministry by Ministry – Education, Home Affairs and others – where I have made constructive suggestions with details. I think that is the difference between me and him. Page: 103 Whether President Obama is a statesman or not, I am not getting into that debate, I did not say that all politicians in mature democracies were not statesmen. I said they were few and far between. And I am not going to discuss individual politicians. And insofar as electorates in mature democracies are concerned, I have given him the numbers. Your right to vote is the most important sacred right of any citizen, but look at the numbers. People are tuning out. Half the voting population are not exercising their right to vote. Why would they not do that? They do not do that because it has become to them a pointless exercise. It does not matter who they vote because they do not expect the outcomes to be any different. If we go down that path and if we come to that situation, it will be a sad, sorry day for Singapore.”
“I think he should be clear to support Singaporeans. Page: 102 Mdm Speaker, the President urged us to debate our challenges, be prepared to take necessary and bold decisions and take a long-term perspective for the common good. Every government and every political party in the world claims to do this, but we have actually been doing it. We have been showing the rest of the world in the last 50 years what can be achieved with honest and realistic policies, and constructive politics. And the world has sat up and taken notice of the magic of this tiny Red Dot. We hope that they will continue to do so for the next 50 years. I support the Motion.”
“Singaporeans are getting wise to such tactics. No plan or policy is ever perfect or benefits everyone in the same way – and, so, it does not take a particular genius to think of criticisms. Proposing alternatives means giving proper details. Issuing Meaningless Motherhood Milestones is not an alternative 3M framework. So, let us deal with the real issues which confront us and let us give details of what we propose to do. For example, in Education, the Minister is under constant pressure to reduce stress and workload for our children. But he has to ensure that there remains rigour in the system, because the education experts will tell you that rigour is an important component in any good education system. And he also has to ensure that while opportunities remain open to all, the system must continue to recognise, encourage and push a little bit harder those who can do better. For CPF, we can debate lowering the CPF Minimum Sum, and the call for Singaporeans to withdraw more monies sooner, but you also have to say what the Government should do if people run out of money. We can debate the GRC system, but you also have to say how you will otherwise ensure minority representation in this House. Or, if that is not important to you, say so. We can talk about increasing social spending, but we also have to address revenue. Mr Gerald Giam says that before the Government raises GST or income taxes, it should, I quote, "look first to increasing the net investment return contributions or taxes on profits derived from economically non-productive activities". If you understand that, please let me know. So, what? The Government should take more monies to set aside for future generations? What are "economically non-productive activities"? And how much money will that raise?”
“Is this new social compact sensible? Will it serve us as well? That is the debate we must have today. What is the role of this House and, indeed, all politicians in this debate? I believe the simple answer is to be honest with the electorate. Do not sugar-coat and do not over-reach. Explain clearly why we are doing what we are doing and why we are not doing what we are not doing. In 2007, soon after I entered politics, I made a speech where I said I was glad that our political leaders were serious and a bit boring. I remain of that view. They are still serious and very boring. But I think Singaporeans are fine with that. We do not need soaring rhetoric and we do not need grand promises. We need practical and workable solutions to improve the lot of all Singaporeans, and give them confidence and hope for a brighter future. What of the Opposition? I quote Mr Giam again. During the debate, he said this, I quote, "Robust debates which focus on the issues and the problems at hand and where alternative solutions are proposed and properly considered can help shape better policies which will benefit Singaporeans." I absolutely agree with him. It is only by debating alternatives that Page: 101 the real strengths or flaws of a policy or proposal will be appreciated and revealed. But that is not what we have been getting from the Opposition. The famous English author, PG Wodehouse, who was imprisoned by the Germans during the war, wrote that the Camp Kommandant would issue the same instructions to the prison guards every morning. He says, "Go and find out what the prisoners are doing, and tell them to stop it." The Opposition in Singapore is a bit like that. One gets the impression that their role is to find out what the Government is doing and then to find what is wrong with it.”
“So, every mass shooting in the US – and we had one recently – is followed by a mass hand- Page: 100 wringing exercise and people wonder why nothing gets done. Is that the kind of "mature democracy" we want? The real question posed by the President is whether politics in Singapore can remain different. Can we continue to march to the beat of a different drum? I believe that the cynicism and hopelessness that characterise politics in many "mature democracies" have still not infected our politics. The vast majority of Singaporeans still believe that politics remains a noble cause; that politicians and political parties must have integrity and that Government is, and must always be, a force for good. The Straits Times recently commissioned a survey on the half-time performance of the Government since the last General Elections, particularly on hot-button issues – education, transport, housing, immigration, so on. Singaporeans have expressed their concerns on these issues. But most recognise and accept that some of these issues will take time to resolve. What was most revealing about the result of the survey was that the majority of the respondents were confident that almost all these issues would improve in the future. The people expect the Government to deliver and most are confident that it will. That expression of optimism is not present in most "mature democracies". But there are larger issues and more difficult questions looming. As the President noted, Singapore is at the cross-roads. We are reviewing the social compact between the state and the people. We are changing the formula which allowed our nation state not just to grow, but to thrive in the last 50 years – despite all our obvious limitations and in the face of one global crisis after another.”
“In "mature democracies", there is a thriving, multi-billion-dollar entertainment industry dedicated to making fun of, and running down, politicians and governments. Politicians are the subject of ridicule and they even run themselves down lest they be accused of not having a sense of humour or being out of touch. And there is contempt for what really should be the most important and serious office in the land. So, what has happened and what is happening in "mature democracies" is that people are increasingly tuning out of the political system. They no longer bother to vote because as far as they are concerned, the political parties are just the different cheeks of the same bum. Voter turnout in the US fell below 50% for the 1996 Presidential Election and has been in the mid-50% for the last few elections. Voter turnout in the UK was 80-plus percent in the 1950s, but has fallen now to about 65%. In Germany, which we associate with having a disciplined and engaged population, the voting-age turnout was 66% in 2013; in Japan, it is 60% in 2012; in Switzerland, it was 40% in 2011. People are tuning out. There are serious consequences to this disengagement because well organised and funded pressure groups end up shaping the government's agenda. Although they are in the minority, they seize the agenda from the majority. There is clear evidence of this. We see it all round the world. In the US, for example, over 70% of people want stricter gun rules, but they cannot pass laws to get it done. Why? Because if you take a position against guns, that 30% minority organises itself and votes against you to the last person, and you are done for.”
“In the US, opponents of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, were rallying people to oppose it on the argument that America has the best healthcare system in the world, and many people bought into that argument. Never mind that a 2013 Bloomberg Survey ranked the US health system 46th in the world, with a score of 30.8 out of 100. Singapore, by the way, came in second with a score of 81.9. Page: 99 And what politicians say in a closed room is quite different from what they say outside. We saw a great example of this when US Presidential candidate Mitt Romney was recorded in a private meeting as essentially describing 47% of Americans as deadbeats and recalcitrants, and he was not really concerned about them. It has been said that "statesmen tell you what is true even though it may be unpopular; politicians will tell you what is popular even though it may be untrue." There are very few statesmen in "mature democracies", because it is not politically profitable to be one. So, in "mature democracies", after politicians get elected, they set about doing what they were going to do anyway, not necessarily what they said they would do. People get disillusioned, and so, every so often, they vote the opposition into power, because they say they will do things differently. But it almost never happens. And so, people change the government again. That is the very definition of madness, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Is it any surprise that people get disillusioned with politics and politicians? Underlying it all is a deep sense of cynicism and hopelessness; an overwhelming belief that people run for political office, not to help the country or their fellow citizens, but to satisfy their egos, or their thirst for power.”
“They want less stressful education but a better educated and more competitive workforce. They want higher wages but lower costs. They want a free market which promotes investment and creates better jobs but with protection from competition. It is when we come to the details that things get a bit more complicated. But the details are everything. It is what distinguishes a successful country from one that is not. We are fond in this House of saying, "You know, the policy sounds good, but the devil is in the details." But very few critics of the Government are prepared to get into the details because it is not always pleasant to see the sausage being made. Mr Low Thia Khiang said something on Monday I found quite interesting. He said, "To achieve the outcome of constructive politics in a diverse and open society like those in mature democracies and to nurture an environment conducive for it require much effort, and everyone across the society has their part to play." "Mature democracies". What has politics become in "mature democracies" around the world? It is about the art of winning elections. In "mature democracies", millions of dollars are spent at every election, not on improving the lives of the people, but on public relations, messaging, image makeovers and, more and more so today, negative campaigning. Politicians make grand speeches, and even grander promises – all crafted by professional speechwriters, vetted by focus groups who press buttons when they hear something they like or something they do not like. The whole objective is to make sure that politicians say what people want to hear, and, therefore, make them believe that their lives will improve if they elect them. Never mind that what they say is not true or they do not actually believe in what they say.”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I support the Motion standing in the name of Mr Zaqy Mohamad. Mdm Speaker, I had prepared a speech on constructive politics, but so much has been said about it this week that I have had to rewrite most of it. Despite all the heat, I am not sure how much light has been provided to Singaporeans outside this House on this issue. Hopefully, the Prime Minister's speech today will be seen and read by all Singaporeans, for it provides, I think, an important framework for good politics and good government. I think that the real question is: what do Singaporeans want from the Government? The French economist, Frederic Bastiat, once described government as that "great fiction, through which everybody endeavours to live at the expense of everyone else." That is true of Singapore, as it is of every other country. So, when Mr Gerald Giam accuses the Government of being very good at managing its own risks but not the risks of Singaporeans, he completely misunderstands what government is. Governments do not have risks. It is only people who have risks. The allocation of risks is always between one group of people and another group of people, so, between old and young, between current generations and future generations, between employers and employees and so on. Page: 98 It is the Government's role to allocate risks between these different groups in an equitable, sensible and sustainable way. So, when you say you want one group to bear less risk, you are, in effect, saying that another should bear a higher risk. Except Opposition politicians find it inconvenient to mention this second group of people – so, they call it Government. I think that it is easy to answer what people want at a general level.”
“Is there a way the Government can assist in such technical matters at no or low cost if the applicant is able to demonstrate a good case? My third point has to do with the remedies set out in the Bill for false statements. Currently, we have defamation laws to address false statements but, then, only in cases where a person's reputation and standing have been damaged. Those laws also require legal proceedings to be brought, and the only remedies the Court may grant are damages and an injunction against further publication. Contrary to popular belief, the Court cannot compel the defendant to apologise or to publish a correction. But, sometimes, all that may be required is a simple clarification, correction or response. This Bill, therefore, provides a wider range of solutions, such as publishing corrections. It is, however, doubtful how effective these will be in the online space. In the time it will take for the Court to determine if the statement of facts complained of is false and for the remedy to be effected, the false statement would have travelled around the world many times over. Mdm Speaker, in conclusion, let us be clear about what this Bill is about. It is to protect vulnerable people from those who seek to harm them mentally and emotionally. There is no good reason to deny such victims protection of the law; neither should we ignore what is already going on in the real world and online world as well. This is not a problem for parents or educators to solve, at least Page: 104 not on their own. It requires intervention by this House and we would be derelict in our duty if we stood by and did nothing. I support the Bill. 4.35 pm”
“First, the Bill creates both criminal offences and provides civil remedies for the same conduct. That is useful. But I am concerned that victims who turn to the Police may be asked to take civil proceedings instead. That may not be a viable avenue for many Singaporeans who do not have the resources or stamina to conduct litigation or even may be intimidated by the process. Even with the simplified approach which the Minister spoke about, many people may Page: 103 not wish to take that step. In that event, the assurance intended by the Bill may prove illusory. Will the Minister clarify or provide some guidance as to when the Police will take action and when they will advise complainants to turn to civil remedies? Second, there are two practical difficulties when the provisions are applied to cases of cyber harassment. The Bill does not address the difficulties associated with identifying the perpetrators of cyber abuse. Even though the provisions have been worded to take into account harassment made via online communications, and also to account for offenders in foreign jurisdictions, the cloak of anonymity that cyber-bullies hide behind may prevent the Bill from being effectively enforced. Therefore, we must beef up the resources of the Technology Crime Division of CID so that they can conduct investigations into technology-related offences beyond the Computer Misuse Act. Will we be putting more resources in these departments or other departments? Similar difficulties arise when victims of cyber-harassment pursue civil claims. If the perpetrator is anonymous, civil remedies may prove ineffective. Again, the victim may have to expend much time and resources to discover who is behind the attacks, and that may be beyond the means of many.”
“Before I deal with some points about the specific provision of the Bill, I would like to respond to some criticisms that have been made about it. First, some have alleged that this law is targeted at curtailing speech, especially online of the anonymous variety, and is, therefore, politically motivated. That would be a misrepresentation of the law. The law makes no distinction between conduct online or in the physical world, nor should there be any distinction. Indeed, other countries, such as the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, have enacted legislation against harassment, including online harassment. Why should accountability and the rules of human decency be different online? If we agree that a person should be made accountable for causing harm to another by making hurtful statements and uttering falsehoods in the physical world, why should he obtain a free pass simply because he does it online and anonymously? There are no provisions in this Bill which stifle legitimate criticisms and free speech. Second, if not this law, then what is the alternative? Status quo? That is clearly not a desirable remedy and many in this House have said so. And I have not heard any sensible alternatives. I do, however, accept that this law may give rise to some difficulties and uncertainties because harassment is not easy to define. However, that is not a reason for us not to find ways to protect victims and provide meaningful remedies. This Bill does as good a job as any I have seen doing that. But it is not a silver bullet and we have to be prepared that there may be practical difficulties in its enforcement. I now wish to make the following specific points about the Bill, which I hope the Minister will respond to.”
“The learned High Court judge hearing the case said, "In Singapore we live in one of the most densely populated countries in the world… It will make for an intensely uncomfortable living environment if there is no recourse against a person who intentionally makes use of modern communication devices in a manner that causes offence, fear, distress and annoyance to another." And this is the case of Malcomson Nicholas Hugh Bertram v Mehta Naresh Kumar [2001] 3 SLR(R) 379. The learned judge held that, in common law, a person is said to have committed the tort of harassment if he: (a) intentionally embarks on a course of conduct; (b) that was sufficiently repetitive in nature; (c) as would cause worry, emotional distress or annoyance to the victim; and (d) the harasser ought reasonably to have known that his conduct would have that effect. Last year – and that is 12 years later – another High Court judge considered the case where an accident victim had claimed on his accident policy. When he did not receive payment, he began to persistently send emails and make phone calls to his insurance company's employees and external lawyers. Some of these emails were abusive. And this was a case of AXA Insurance mentioned by the Minister and other speakers, as in AXA Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd v Chandran s/o Natesan [2013] 4 SLR 545 (H.C.). Now, the learned Judge in AXA said that Parliament was better positioned to define the law on harassment than the Courts. He was also of the opinion that to award a civil remedy for morally and socially indefensible conduct Page: 102 should go through the legislative process of deliberation and debate. There is a need for proper laws and remedies, and the Courts have declared that this House is the proper forum to discuss and debate these issues.”
“Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. The old adage "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never harm me" could not be more wrong. Words can wound deeply, and, in some cases, irreparably. Just as we are entitled to live our lives free of crime against our person and property, we should also have the right to live our lives free of harassment and bullying. Does harassment and bullying occur? Of course, they do. And as the Minister and a number of Members have pointed out, in a 2012 Microsoft Study, Singapore is found to have the second highest rate of cyberbullying in the world. Should we help and protect the victims? Of course, we should. Harassment can take place in the physical and online space, and take many forms, such as sexual harassment, stalking and bullying in schools. But no matter what form it takes, harassment has severe repercussions on the victim's physical and emotional well-being. Technology – and the immediate, direct, multiple and extensive Page: 101 communications it enables – has exacerbated the problem. Do our existing laws provide an adequate response? Currently, we have in place piecemeal laws, such as the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act, to deal with limited instances of harassment. It is not nearly enough. Our Courts have tried their best to fill in the gaps left by legislation. In 2001, the High Court dealt with a case where an ex-employee was accused of harassing his former boss by telephoning and going to his home. The harassment took many forms. For example, his former boss' baby son had died. And close to the anniversary of the death, the ex-employee sent his former boss a greeting card used to congratulate people on the birth of a newborn, as well as a baby rattle.”
“Could the Minister please explain the rationale for having the system? Second, I ask the Minister to offer different pathways to Secondary schools. The PSLE and DSA may be important to decide who goes to more popular Secondary schools, but do we need to put everyone through that system? Much time is now spent preparing the child for the PSLE from Primary 4 to Primary 6. I ask whether that time could be better time used giving them real teaching, real learning. I accept that academic rigour is important and I am not suggesting doing away with testing or giving anyone an easy ride. But if we have a through-train or affiliated school programme which is prepared to take students based on their regular work and assessments, that will be a more accurate reflection of their abilities and would do away with the need for an all or nothing high-stakes examination. Time will be freed to do more meaningful work. For those who want to compete for places in more popular schools, they can sit for the PSLE but that would be their choice. PSLE Review”
“Mdm Chair, I accept that MOE has a difficult task in Secondary school admissions. So long as some schools have more applicants than places, some would be disappointed and may question the fairness and logic of the system. The only solution is to have a fair, logical and transparent system which you can defend and also fulfil the objectives of a good education. On that, I have two points. First, I wish to ask whether students should be admitted under DSA on their academic achievements. Because if a student is strong academically, should he Page: 123 not just rely on his PSLE results like everyone else? I would like to also ask how DSA is, in fact, assessed. While the Minister has previously stated that the students accepted into the Gifted Education Programme (GEP) is not in itself sufficient criteria for admission by a DSA, statistics show that GEP students make up 15% of the students admitted to Secondary schools via DSA. This gives rise to two issues. First, GEP students enjoy an advantage because they have two bites of the cherry, when it comes to admission to a Secondary school; and second, because of that advantage, it increases the impetus and, therefore, pressure on students to get into GEP at Primary 4. This gives rise to a more fundamental question on the relevance of the GEP. It is founded on the assumption that some children are naturally more clever or talented and that we can through testing identify who they are when they are nine years old. But there are growing numbers of studies which challenge this talent meet and show success is more a function of good instruction, purposeful practice and hard work. Indeed, there are also studies that telling children that they are naturally intelligent may harm them rather than help their development.”
“Thank you. The time has come for anti-discrimination legislation. The usual argument against such legislation is that it will be ineffective as employers who discriminate will not admit to doing so. Yes, it will be difficult to enforce but that is not a reason for not having it. More importantly, such a law will carry a strong moral force and it sends the message about what we believe in and that there must be accountability in employment practices. Page: 30 In line with this, I also urge the Minister to set up a labour tribunal to hear all employment disputes and grievances quickly and at low cost, much like how FIDReC does for financial disputes. Having a job makes a world of difference in the lives of many people, and those who lose their jobs or are treated badly at work rarely have the ability or appetite to take on their ex-employers in court. Where Singaporeans have a legitimate grievance, we should help them resolve them in a fair, transparent and expeditious manner. Professionals, Managers and Executives (PMEs)”
“Mdm Chair, thank you. The principle of meritocracy should apply not just in school but at the workplace. A recent IPS study on racial and religious harmony reported that of the more than 3,000 people polled, 20% of Malays and 18% of Indians said they often, very often or always feel discriminated against when it came to applying for a job and there was a similar response for promotions. Significantly, this perception was not limited to members of the minority races. While this survey was about perception and not actual discrimination, in such matters, perception is also important. Age discrimination made the news last year when it was reported that several agencies in schools had imposed an age limit when hiring security guards, thereby flouting anti-discrimination guidelines. These examples are not exhaustive. Other forms of discrimination exist, including against gender, nationality and the disabled. We have guidelines against discrimination issued by TAFEP but they do not have the force of law and there are no penalties for non-compliance. The time has come for anti-discrimination legislation. The usual argument against such legislation is that it will be ineffective —”
“Madam, I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister, Second Minister Iswaran and Senior Minister of State Masagos for their answers. Despite all our questions and comments, I should acknowledge that we remain still one of the safest countries to live in. For that, I would like to thank Deputy Prime Minister and his team for their leadership on these issues. With that, Madam, may I have leave to withdraw my amendment? [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $3,769,663,700 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $439,215,500 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Madam, I would like to thank Deputy Prime Minister for his response to my question about keeping experienced officers within the Force and extending the retirement age. Could I ask for comment on retaining experience within departments? What I mean is that within each department, be it Prisons, border security, SOC, CAD, SCDF, they all call for different skillsets and different experiences and, if there is a regular transfer of officers at the mid or senior levels between these departments, then that sufficient amount of experience would not be built up as well. Will there be any thought towards trying to keep officers within the same department for longer periods so that experience can be built up?”
“From 2006 to 2011, the rate of reported incidents in each of the three communities fell far more than the overall city average. The overall city average fell 15% and the three communities fell between 20% and 27%. Page: 46 What was critical to each community's success was the diverse and holistic range of initiatives launched. Police conducted outreach sessions, resident-led walkabouts were organised to identify and report safety issues, such as signs of drug peddling and prostitution, and community forums were organised to bring residents together to discuss security and crime-prevention strategies. What is clear from the study is that crime prevention is not about enforcement or enforcement-type activities alone. Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister what strategies MHA will adopt to continue engaging and building strong relationships with its community partners, and to continue supporting the Home Team's work in keeping Singapore safe. Terrorism”
“Madam, the community plays a critical role in our efforts to keep Singapore safe and secure. Recognising this, the Ministry has made structural changes to promote community engagement. In 2012, following the launch of the Community Policing System, our Neighbourhood Police Centres were revamped to enhance their crime fighting and community liaison capabilities. More foot and bicycle patrols were introduced to allow Policemen to become more familiar with residents and neighbourhoods, thereby enhancing Police engagement with the community. These structural developments were complemented by a range of schemes. The Singapore Police Force (SPF) runs several volunteer schemes, including the Neighbourhood Watch Zone, which cultivates mutual assistance among residents in the community to help to prevent and detect crime. We have the Crime Prevention Ambassador project and the Volunteer Special Constabulary, which recruits, trains and supervises volunteers to work with the SPF in helping to enforce law and order in Singapore. We also have programmes like the Community Safety and Security Programme which provide an additional platform for residents and grassroots to work with the Home Team. Madam, there is no doubt that these schemes are important, but there is scope for further engagement. A study published in 2012 from Ottawa, Canada, confirms that crime prevention and law enforcement are more effective where the community takes collective responsibility for them. According to the study, the reported incidents of crimes against persons or properties in three communities that adopted community-based crime prevention techniques were tracked and the results were significant.”
“15 pm I understand that the Ministry has stepped up recruitment efforts over the past few years, but is this going to be enough, particularly in our tight labour market? A comparison with other cities shows how lean our forces already are. We have 239 Police Officers per 100,000 people; Hong Kong has 393 police officers per 100,000 people; New York has 430. Even if we are able to recruit sufficient numbers, how does the Ministry intend to keep them in the force to ensure that there is sufficient experience both at the management level and, more importantly, on the ground? A cool, experienced head on the ground may prove more effective than an entire troop of raw officers. In this regard, I have one suggestion. The Ministry should find an enhanced role for retired Police Officers. I had the pleasure of recently lunching with the Management Committee of the Singapore Police Retirees' Association. They may have thinning, greying hair and may be less fit than they once were. But what struck me most was their passion for law enforcement and their sense of duty, and most of all, a powerful call deep within them to help Singapore remain a special place. With their experience and instincts, their older and wiser heads can be a tremendous resource. They can be tapped on to train younger officers, Page: 45 reviewing investigation reports and other work which can accommodate their physical abilities. They told me they are ready, willing and able to serve again, if called. What a shining example they would be in our efforts to get more older Singaporeans and retirees active and involved. Madam, do I continue with my second cut, please?”
“The SPF relies on the Auxiliary Police in several capacities, such as to conduct patrols and to beef up enforcement on the roads. In fact, Auxiliary Police were involved in patrolling Little India before the riot and were also present at the incident. Is this high degree of dependence on Auxiliary Police desirable? Auxiliary Police are not substitutes for Police Officers. They have limited enforcement powers. The quality of training received by them may also be different. Therefore, I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister to what extent do we depend on the Auxiliary Police force to supplement our Police force and Page: 44 what does he see as a desirable balance? Thirdly, much more is expected today of our Police and law enforcement officers. Singaporeans hope to see a stronger Police presence, not just in areas where foreign migrants congregate, but everywhere, particularly where we live. I have lost count of the number of times my residents have requested more Police patrols, even in areas where statistics show low crime rates. We all want to feel safe in and around our homes. And in a way, the Ministry is promising that – with its Community Policing initiatives – more boots on the ground and more bottoms on bicycle seats. We have also recently amended the Prisons Act to introduce the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme where ex-offenders will be provided with counselling, case management and supervision to support their reintegration into society. This is an excellent approach, but will require the involvement of more resources, more counsellors and more officers. Can the Ministry realistically deliver or continue to deliver on these programmes? Or do we need to temper our expectations? If the Home Team is not adequately staffed, they will be hard-pressed to deliver. 1.”
“And underpinning those issues, whether the Deputy Prime Minister believes he has, or is able to recruit and train, sufficient personnel with the sufficient experience and ability to meet those challenges. I would like to make three points on this. First, are we prepared to deal with future riots and public order disturbances? The Little India incident involved a crowd of about 400 migrant workers, but not all were actively involved. It was eventually quelled by two Police Tactical Troops from the Special Operations Command (SOC). We know from the Deputy Prime Minister's statement in Parliament that the first SOC troop arrived about an hour after the incident occurred. As Ms Denise Phua so eloquently explained during the debate on the Public Order Bill, things could have turned far, far worse in that time. Over and above the questions the COI will answer, there are a number of other questions we need to ask. Do we have enough trained Police to handle a riot on a larger scale? I understand that we presently have eight SOC troops, each comprising 20-30 men – therefore, at most, we have 240 SOC officers. Larger foreign dormitories may house thousands of men. Would the SOC be able to quell a riot breaking out in such a dormitory? And if we have two incidents at two different dormitories at the same time, what will happen? Coordinated riots are not unheard of. It has been revealed that the SOC has grown smaller over the years – from a peak of 12 troops to the present eight. In addition, they now perform other duties, such as counter-terrorism operations. Will we therefore be able to deal with such threats? My second point has to do with the deployment of Auxiliary Police Officers.”
“Mdm Chairperson, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head P of the Estimates be reduced by $100". MHA does not usually get into the spotlight unless something unpleasant happens. We are surprised and shocked by serious crimes and high profile incidents because they are and remain the exception in Singapore, and we continue to enjoy living in one of the safest countries in the world. That is in no small measure due to the efforts of the staff, officers and leaders in MHA. But it is clear that the challenges to maintain safety and security are growing. Last year, we witnessed a number of incidents which have challenged assumptions on how secure and ready we really are when a crisis hits us. Just recently, the Little India riot and the border-security breach at Woodlands have led us to review our readiness and protocols and, indeed, much soul searching. No one expects, or should expect, a perfect system. The best equipment, systems and protocols in the world cannot anticipate all challenges our officers will face on the ground. Often times, these gaps must be bridged through good judgement and exercise of discretion, and these usually come with training, time and experience. I will not comment on the ongoing Committee of Inquiry (COI) in relation to the riot, but Deputy Prime Minister's answers to this House on the riots and the breach of border security do raise uncomfortable questions on whether our officers will respond adequately to emergencies and unexpected situations. Page: 43 I would, therefore, like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister on his perspective on what the Ministry's key challenges are in the current climate and how his Ministry intends to tackle those challenges.”
“Madam, despite the fact that the Minister has pushed my questions to some other Ministries, I would like to thank the Minister and Senior Minister of State for answering the questions and with substantial interests. With that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $253,196,400 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $572,831,100 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Thank you, Madam, just two clarifications; in fact, two requests. First, I would be grateful if the Minister or the Senior Minister of State could give an update on the third law school and where we are on that. And second, on the issue of moneylending regulations, I welcome the review that is going to come up. One of the reasons why moneylenders are prepared to lend to those with lower credit is, of course, the higher interest rates and returns, and also the fact that they are able to employ more robust enforcement method to recover the debt which banks normally do not. As part of the review, would the Ministry also consider looking at regulations in relation to how moneylenders seek to recover their debt?”
“However, law is inherently a parochial industry, and almost all other countries have adopted far less liberal stances towards foreign firms entering their markets. As such, SLPs face challenges in developing their legal practice abroad, hampering their ability to meet their international counterparts head-on. Could the Minister tell us if the Ministry intends to level the playing field for local law firms venturing abroad, and if so, what measures they intend to roll out? Page: 98 Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC)”
“Just last month, it was reported that the number of people robbed by online fraudsters faking romantic interest before tricking their victims out of money jumped 62% between 2012 and 2013. I therefore ask the Minister what plans his Ministry has to tackle these admittedly very difficult issues. Supporting Singapore Law Practices (SLPs) Madam, on to my second cut on Singapore Law Practices. Let me begin by declaring my interest as a practising lawyer. Singapore's legal industry has been progressively opening up to international law firms, with a view towards cementing Singapore's rising prominence as Asia's legal hub. This liberalisation process began with the amendments to the Legal Profession Act in 2000. These amendments allowed foreign firms to enter into Joint Law Ventures (JLVs) and Formal Law Alliances (FLAs) with Singapore Law Practices (SLPs). This was followed by the awarding of Qualifying Foreign Law Practice (QFLP) licences to selected international law firms in 2008. This was aimed at encouraging foreign law firms to establish themselves in Singapore, giving more options to Singaporean and foreign clients and making Singapore a more attractive destination for investment, arbitration and other opportunities. Since then, a second batch of QFLP licenses was awarded in 2012. Madam, an inevitable consequence of these liberalisation measures is a more crowded market – since the inception of these liberalisation measures, foreign lawyers in Singapore have doubled to more than 1,200, while foreign law firms have doubled in number as well. With the influx of foreign law firms in our market, arguably the best strategy for SLPs to remain competitive and relevant is to expand overseas.”
“Thirdly, the Penal Code should be revised to reflect the reality that the Internet is increasingly being used as a conduit to commit both traditional and novel criminal activities. We have already taken several steps in the right direction. In 2007, sections 267C and 298 of our Penal Code were amended to accommodate the use of electronic media in the commission of crimes. Also, a new offence of "sexual grooming of minors under 16" was introduced in 2007 to target Internet sexual predators. More can and should be done. As criminals are constantly creating new ways of exploiting the Internet and its users, we too must constantly update our laws to safeguard our rights and interests. We should in particular review whether the offences have sufficient extra-territorial reach, and whether we have sufficient legal tools to deal with criminals who stay out of Singapore. Finally, whether the prescribed punishments take into account or properly reflect the enormous and repeated harm that can be done online. Related to this change is whether there is sufficient help and protection for those who fall victims. The anonymity of the net often allows the real perpetrators to remain hidden or out of reach. The number of online victims is also on the rise. Last year, it was reported that there was a sharp spike in mixed delivery scams, where victims fail to receive goods purchased online and are also cheated into making further payments. While only 26 such scams were reported for the whole of 2012, at least 173 cases were reported between July Page: 97 and October of 2013. There has also been an increase in online dating scams.”
“The "Hacktivist" organisation Anonymous, for example, attacks government, religious and corporate websites as a form of publicity. In view of such developments, it is timely for us to review our laws to ensure that they are adequate to deal with such threats. In particular, precise terms describing various hacking methods can be drafted into legislation to ensure there are no gaps. For example, Dutch legislation has included the definition of "intrusion" within their criminal legislation, with "intrusion" being defined as access by means of "break through a security; by technical means; by false signals or a false key; by disguising, which is using a stolen username Page: 96 and password." A second area is online news sites. Currently, these sites are regulated by conventional legislation such as the Defamation Act. The difficulty with such legislation is that it works on the assumption that the media is licensed and responsible. This assumption does not always hold true in cyberspace. This disparity between how Internet and non-Internet news providers are regulated prompted the MDA to introduce an individual licensing scheme for popular news sites last year. This may be a convenient and expedient mode of regulation, but frankly not very satisfactory. I would submit that such issues throw up fundamental questions not just of freedom of speech, but safeguarding the rights and interests of our society. It should properly be the subject of specific legislation, where we will have the opportunity in this House to debate what is in the best interests of Singapore and Singaporeans, and how we should define boundaries and out-of-bound markers.”
“However, it is a recognition that many of our laws were drafted well before the Internet was even conceived, and our institutions and procedural rules may not be equipped to deal with this new paradigm. Opportunities are abundant for those who have the means and know-how to exploit the convenience and anonymity of the Internet to commit illegal acts. These include serious crimes such as identity theft, hacking and defamation. The ramifications of cybercrime are very real. Last year, The Straits Times reported that cybercrime victims in Singapore suffered the highest losses per capita in the world. It is therefore imperative that we take decisive measures against Internet crime before it becomes a permanent fixture in our society; an accepted risk. On that note, I would like to raise two points today. First, I would like to ask the Minister whether, outside harassment, the Ministry intends to enact more laws to deal with online conduct, in particular criminal conduct. Three areas deserve mention here. First, many of us will recall the spate of hackings last year by "The Messiah". Hacking is primarily dealt with by the Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act. Sections 3 and 4 cover unauthorised access to computer material, while section 5 covers unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer. What is telling is that despite increasingly sophisticated and varied methods employed by hackers, these provisions have remained largely unchanged since their introduction in 1998. Furthermore, hacking is increasingly employed for reasons other than to commit fraud or to obtain private data – some employ hacking as a means of advancing activist agendas.”
“Thank you, Madam, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Estimates be reduced by $100". The past year or so has seen significant work done by MinLaw. It has led the way in reform in important areas, such as improving access to justice, opening our legal market and helping make Singapore a more attractive place for investment and creating high skilled, well-paying jobs to Singaporeans. We are creating a third Law School, and enabling Singaporeans who were unable to enter law school in their younger years to realise their dreams of practicing law. We have also seen movement and reform in controversial and difficult areas such as the death penalty. All these are consistent with our move towards forming a more inclusive and compassionate society for all Singaporeans. But the circumstances we find ourselves in today are vastly different from those of 20, or even 10 years ago. In particular, the Internet has revolutionised the way we live, work and play. This is particularly relevant to us as we boast the highest Internet penetration rate in Southeast Asia and one of the highest in the world. This has posed obvious challenges to those charged with maintaining law and order, and prescribing laws which govern interactions and relationships. Many say they prefer Government to stay away from the Internet and to allow self-regulation, but those who need help navigating this new environment, or Page: 95 are harmed by it, often turn immediately to the Government for intervention. Next week, we will have the Second Reading on a Bill to deal with harassment, which will deal in large measure with online conduct. I shall not comment on that Bill here.”
“It has been argued outside this House that this Bill is discriminatory towards the communities living in the gazetted zone. I find that surprising but, on that issue, I look forward to hearing from my colleague, Ms Denise Phua, on the concerns of her residents, and she, no doubt, could have spoken to them. And those views are certainly important and should be given some weight. With that, Mdm Speaker, I support the Bill. Page: 52 3.27 pm”
“They will, in the main, be dealing with persons from different countries of different cultures, who may have limited understanding of English and, more importantly, with different perceptions of law enforcement, based on experiences in their home countries. A cool, experienced officer, who is able to communicate effectively, will be more effective in defusing a situation than well crafted pieces of legislation. I would like to ask the Minister what assurances we have that experienced and properly trained officers will be deployed in the designated zones. Furthermore, as auxiliary police officers are given the same powers under the Bill, I would like to ask the Minister if there are adequate steps to ensure that these officers from external sources are properly qualified and trained to wield these additional powers. I have two further specific queries. First, clause 3(2)(b) provides that the Minister may "declare as part of a special zone, any additional area in Singapore that is adjacent to any area described in the Schedule". An incremental approach in widening the boundaries of the special zone has merits. However, should incidents arise in areas separate from, and not adjacent to, the proposed special zone, what recourse would the Minister have to deal with those situations? And is there a need to pass further legislation? Second, clause 1(2) provides that this Bill, if passed, would continue in force until the end of 12 months after its commencement. It does not expressly provide for any renewal mechanism. Could the Minister clarify whether this Bill, if passed, will require the approval of the House at the end of 12 months for renewal? Finally, just one other argument I have read.”
“They have to be given discretion so that they can properly carry out their duties to preserve public order. And if they abuse those powers, they should be taken to task. Nonetheless, the Bill can and should ensure that with such wide discretionary powers, there must be a commensurate level of oversight and supervision. In this regard, the Bill does state that the discretion conferred is not unfettered – standards, such as a reasonable level of suspicion, have to be met before measures like search and seizure can be carried out. Moreover, it is important to note that judicial review is available. And even though clauses 5(6) and 13(8) express finality against appeal, the option of judicial review is not precluded. Likewise, clause 19(3) grants the authorities immunity, but only when acting with good faith and reasonable care when exercising their powers under the Bill. Again, some may argue this is being overly generous to the Police, but again, what is the alternative? That the Police can be sued even if they acted in Page: 51 good faith and reasonably? How are they expected to do their jobs? But there are important things we can and I think we should do outside this Bill. And as part of its oversight, I urge the Ministry to look carefully at implementation issues. Giving officers discretion is clearly necessary. However, in matters like these, a good outcome will depend on a sensible exercise of that discretion. For that, there is no substitute for experience, good judgment and temperament. It is vital that we deploy experienced Police officers in the subject area.”
“And this would ensure that the measures that this House ultimately enacts will be effective and deal with Page: 50 the real, as opposed to perceived, risks. But having said that, I wish to make a few points about the Bill. First, it is important that we avoid speculating on the causes of the riot, as it risks us training our scopes on the wrong issues. The COI has been convened to look into the incident, including what caused it and provide recommendations. Hence, may I ask the Minister for the rationale behind the significant emphasis of this Bill on alcohol consumption in the subject area? Clauses making expressed reference to alcohol consumption include clause 3, and this appears to pre-determine that alcohol consumption was the main cause of the riot. Mdm Speaker, while it is indeed possible that alcohol consumption had a role to play in the rapid escalation of events, as well as the behaviour of the crowd, we should wait for the findings of the COI before passing judgement. I accept the necessity for decisive steps to be taken now to safeguard the peace, but I think the language of the Bill could have been more neutral. Second, some will express discomfort with the significant discretionary powers this Bill gives our Police officers. But as the Minister has explained, these powers are not unprecedented. And I think it is an easy criticism to make of the Bill. It is telling that no one, at least to my knowledge, has been able to offer a viable and practical alternative. And the reason is simple. Police officers on the ground will encounter a variety of circumstances and situations, and it is impossible to legislate what they should or should not do in any given situation.”
“Mdm Speaker, the 8 December riot was a rude shock for all Singaporeans. We never imagined witnessing acts of violence and destruction we usually watch or read about happening in other countries. It was a timely reminder that we are not immune from, and cannot be complacent about, such matters. But, as Deputy Prime Minister Teo said in his Ministerial Statement last month, the incident is also noteworthy for what did not happen. No shots were fired, no one was killed or even seriously injured on account of the riot itself. And while a small minority of the foreign workers involved clearly broke the law, we have seen videos, pictures and heard accounts of some who helped people to safety and tried to restore calm. But all that was not by design. It could so easily have been far, far worse. And if there had been large numbers of casualties, if Singaporeans had been killed, if properties and homes were damaged, I wonder if those objecting to this Bill would be so enthusiastic. The real question is where do we go from here. This Bill gives the Police a wider array of powers so that they can calibrate their responses to different situations. Some charged that this Bill is an over-reaction and premature, and that we should first wait for the findings of the COI. However, that process may take some months. And more importantly, if the incident has identified gaps in our legislative framework to prevent and more effectively deal with such risks, then it would be wrong and irresponsible of us not to act now. Nonetheless, I hope the Minister will confirm that the legislation will be reviewed when the COI releases its findings and, if necessary, amend it.”
“Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister for the update. I have three supplementary questions. First, why did both the officers allow the car to go through without raising an alarm? Secondly, whether any attempts were made to locate the car while it was in Singapore for the three days and why those attempts were not successful? Finally, I understand that disciplinary proceedings are in motion; I would like to ask how many officers will be subject to disciplinary proceedings for this incident.”
“With more than 10,000 persons going through the prison system each year, the Prison Service have to go beyond managing custodial sentences and be given the material and non-material resources to succeed on the rehabilitation front. Madam, once again I reiterate my support for the Bill. 5.59 pm”
“In short, the MAS should not be one where the ex-offender is seen as a mere beneficiary or someone deserving of our assistance. This requires, of course, interventions in community settings co-produced with the community. This can also increase inclusion and develop social capital. What it all amounts to is for the ex-offender to fully realise that he does not walk alone in his journey to be a useful citizen. Would the Senior Minister of State elaborate on how the MAS can build resilience in ex-offenders? Madam, I see the MAS as a new and concerted strategy to break the cycle of re-offending. The MAS, like the CRS, will apply to those who commit offences after these amendments before us today come into effect. May I ask the Senior Page: 107 Minister of State whether the Prison Service will be open to accepting ex-offenders who commit offences before these amendments take effect and who would voluntarily like to be on the MAS? There will be questions on the legal consequences for such an ex-offender if he were to commit a serious breach while on the scheme although the MAS does not technically apply to him. My larger point is whether the MAS framework can be offered to ex-offenders seeking to rebuild their lives even though the MAS does not apply to them. Madam, the annual average number of penal releases for 2010 to 2012 was 14,137 while the annual average number of penal admissions was 13,612. Generally, the figures show slightly more releases than admissions between 2010 and 2012. The convicted penal inmate population stood at an annual average of 10,361 between 2010 and 2012.”
“Here, the literature demonstrates that the ex-offenders' thinking, as well as their circumstances, would influence whether they re-offend in future or not. In this regard, I would appreciate it if the Senior Minister of State could elaborate on the modalities of the MAS, in particular, the personalised case management. Furthermore, the MAS cannot be just about surveillance, control and discipline – one imposed, post-release from custody, by an external party on an ex-offender. The MAS regime must address the criminogenic needs of the ex-offender. These are the dynamic risk factors that predict re-offending and include anti-social attitudes and problematic peer associations, the lack of self-control and self-confidence, often flowing from low self-esteem, the lack of self-management skills and a variety of addictions. The MAS must have cognitive-behavioural therapies and programmes that are designed to deal with the different aspects of an ex-offender's behaviour. The endeavour to help an ex-offender change cannot be simply about eliminating or modifying the various risk factors. Too often, these risk factors are external and systemic and beyond the control of the aftercare services. As such, the MAS must also develop resilience among ex-offenders. Otherwise, the MAS can result in dependency by an ex-offender, in particular, on the aftercare services. The ex-offender's lack of resilience also results in his susceptibility to re-offending. In this regard, a personalised MAS regime can re-set and shift the narrative from an ex-offender's criminogenic needs and other deficits to a community dimension in which the key consideration is what the offender can do to contribute to his family, community and society.”
“The rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-offenders may well be a life-long journey. Hence, a multi-stakeholder approach is necessary. Even after an ex-offender completes the MAS uneventfully, there is still the re-integration challenge. Co-production in aftercare requires that we recognise that the effort to reduce recidivism will be successful through the ex-offenders' relationships with stakeholders, such as their families, employers, friends and the community. The ex-offender's relationship with the aftercare services, while important, is grossly inadequate. Other stakeholders can provide the conducive structure and setting to promote healthy relationships for an ex-offender. These are the ties that bind, and the MAS must seek to embrace the network of relationships for each and every offender. The Yellow Ribbon campaign has gained traction among Singaporeans and more can be done to ensure that the community truly gives ex-offenders a second chance at life, and to inspire concerted community action to support ex-offenders and their families. Madam, ex-offenders often have multiple and complex needs, and re-offending often occurs in the first few months of an ex-offender's release from a custodial sentence. I hope that the MAS will not be seen as another sentence, albeit a less demanding one than incarceration. Page: 106 The MAS cannot be a one-size-fits-all approach as this risks fitting no one. Research has shown the growing importance of "desistance". This is the change process involved in the rehabilitation of offenders that results in their desistance from re-offending. Desistance is a lengthy process, not an event, and where reversals and relapses are common.”
“In turn, this requires aftercare staff to be more involved and proactive in their work with offenders even while they are under imprisonment. At the same time, prison officers will also have to recognise the vital role they play in changing behaviours and attitudes of the offenders under their custody even as they need to maintain security and discipline in prison. For the MAS to succeed, behavioural and attitudinal change cannot be regarded as the function of the aftercare regime. It has to be integral even during the period of imprisonment. Page: 105 There must be the alignment of goals and processes of the custodial and the aftercare regimes if the MAS is to succeed. As such, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether the system is able to allow aftercare officers to work closely with prison officers while the offender is still serving his custodial sentence. Can the Senior Minister of State elaborate on how the Prison Service is gearing up for the MAS? The Bill before us provides a legislative framework but I also like to hear about the "software" that would be the operating system of the MAS. Furthermore, if we are to reduce re-offending, great care has to be given to working with the offender to change his behaviour, attitude and lifestyle. In this regard, how does the Ministry ensure that privately-run aftercare establishments, while having the best of intentions in seeking to rehabilitate and reintegrate ex-offenders, are really up to the important task? Can the Ministry and the Prison Service do more to build up and enhance the capacity and competency of these important institutions in our community involved in the external placement scheme? We should continue to embed "co-production" of aftercare as the proposed amendments recognise.”