S Jayakumar
Singapore
“It is well and good for countries to announce various targets and emissions. But one vexing issue ultimately is: what will be the method for verifying compliance with each country's announced measures? Another vexing issue, of course, is the issue of financing.”
“I would appreciate it if she were to give me some specifics of the negative feedback. But the general feedback I have had about our judiciary, both of the Supreme Court and the Subordinate Courts, has been nothing but positive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the information that I have is that there is always medical advice present when caning is administered and that if the medical opinion is that caning cannot proceed beyond a certain point, that medical opinion will be observed and the caning will not proceed.”
“Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Transport in view of the recent announcement to make immediate improvements to the public transport system (a) whether the Ministry has set a timeline for the increase in frequency of feeder bus services; and (b) whether the Ministry can immediately target such services that are currently running at…”
“SCDF will continue to work with HDB and other relevant agencies to ensure that such older buildings with one exit staircase meet the prevailing fire safety requirements when they undergo major renovation or upgrading works. CIVIL SERVICE PENSIONERS 3.”
“The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Mr Teo Ser Luck) (for the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to take Mrs Jessie Phua's and Dr Lim Wee Kiak's questions together as they both relate to the same issues.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,291 lines we hold for S Jayakumar, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 58 of 66.
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank the Members who have spoken. Let me deal with the points raised by the Member for Whampoa first. His first question was whether long-term prisoners would be allowed to be released for periods longer than the last 12 months. We do not exclude this. But our approach is to first try this limited scheme and see how it works. Based on the experience after some time, l am prepared to consider expanding and improving the scheme. The second point on which the Member wanted clarification was whether, in the process of determining who can be selected for the day release scheme, there will be some method of giving persons who are not selected a method of lodging an appeal. This is a good point and I will ask my officials to look into providing such an avenue. Thirdly, the Member wanted to know whether there are any efforts or steps taken to look into the welfare of prisoners after their release. I wish to assure him that this is being done, not only by the Singapore Aftercare Association but also through the Department in the Ministry of Community Development which is involved with the rehabilitation and counselling of prisoners. With regard to the first point raised by the Member for Anson concerning the terms and conditions which would be the subject of regulations to be done subse- quently, he wanted to know whether it will be the individual prisoner who negotiates with the employers or whether it will be done by the relevant administering authority or the Prisons. The answer is that it will be done by the relevant authority which, in this case, will be SCORE.”
“Besides work therapy, the rehabilitation programme also includes education, recreation and religious activities. A comprehensive in-prison educational programme is manned by a Principal Education Officer and 14 officers from the Ministry of Education. Academic classes for the qualifying test of 'O' and 'A' levels are conducted to help those with potential. From 1981 to 1984, a total of 239 prisoners sat for the GCE 'O' level examinations in the three language streams. 122 of them passed the examination. For the same period, 19 prisoners sat for the GCE 'A' level examinations, of which one obtained a full certificate whilst the rest had one to three passes in subjects at principal level. Finally, Sir, the introduction of Day Release Scheme for prisoners will, as with the other Day Release Schemes, bridge the gap between institutional life and their release into free society. It will facilitate their reintegration into society to function as socially responsible and law-abiding citizens. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“They were engaged either in construction work or in the manufacturing and service sectors. The records show that the recidivism rate of drug addicts who had gone through a stint on the Day Release Scheme is much -lower at 48.7%, as compared to 58.5% for those who did not. Similarly, for the categories of Criminal Law detainees and Reformative trainees, there is a lower recidivisim rate. As at 31st March 1985, 403 Criminal Law detainees and 77 Reformative trainees had successfully completed the Day Release Scheme. The relapse rates of Criminal Law detainees and the Reformative trainees are 8.8% and 23.3% respectively. Comparing these rates with those of convicted prisoners, which is 32.3%, we can conclude that such Day Release Schemes do help to facilitate the prisoners' reintegration into society. This Scheme will be implemented by the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises (SCORE), whose experience in providing jobs for prisoners, its existing administrative set-up, and its contacts with employers in the private sector will ensure the smooth and efficient implementation of this Scheme. Sir, our penal system in Singapore is aimed at striking a balance between the deterrent factor and the rehabilitation factor. The mainstay of our rehabilitation strategy is the work programme. A statutory board, as I have said, has successfully been running vocational workshops within our penal institutions since 1976. The prisoners are paid market wages for the work done in the Day Release Scheme. Within the prison workshops, they are paid wages based on the level of skill pegged on graded performance. They can remit their savings home. Work as an ethos, discipline, self-image and responsibility towards the family are built up.”
“The opportunity for fine defaulters to work and earn market wages will also provide them with financial relief upon their release from prisons. Participation in the Day Release Scheme for those eligible will be voluntary. They will be paid wages at market rates and also paid CPF allowances. They will also be covered by the Workmen's Compensation Act. They will be allowed to retain only sufficient money for fares and lunches and the balance of their wages will become compulsory savings, and with the prisoner's consent, their family members can draw from it. Eligible prisoners will be considered for the Day Release Scheme by a Selection Committee chaired by a Justice of Peace. Prisoners with serious and violent criminal antecedents will not be considered for emplacement on the Scheme. Only those who are assessed to be capable of staying out of trouble and who do not pose a criminal or security threat will be selected. Prison officers furthermore will carry out spot checks on prisoners' conduct and behaviour at the worksites. Those who breach the conditions of the Work Order or involve themselves in crime will be immediately taken off the Scheme and sent back to the prison to serve out their term. In introducing this Scheme, we are relying on our experience gained from the existing Day Release Schemes which were introduced for drug addicts in 1979, Criminal Law detainees in 1981 and Reformative trainees in 1982. The releasees under those Schemes commute daily to work in participating employers' factories outside the prisons and return to the prisons at the end of the day. They are paid wages at market rate as well as CPF allowances. More than 4,000 persons have successfully completed the Scheme since its inception.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the purpose of the Bill is to enable a Day Release Scheme to be introduced for convicted prisoners. Under this Scheme, elected long-term prisoners can opt to serve the last 12 months prior to release in a pre-release camp. They will be released in the day to work for an outside employer and return to the camp in the evening. Where possible, they will be given training to equip them with necessary skills. Plans are therefore under way to provide prisoners with VITB-type of training courses, such as tiling, paving, plastering, to prepare them for jobs outside the prison. The Bill therefore will empower the Minister for Home Affairs to introduce such a Scheme for prisoners who are considered suitable to take up gainful employment while serving their sentences. The Bill provides for prisoners under the Scheme to be released daily to work outside the limits of any prison. The Minister is also empowered to make regulations for the purposes of the Scheme. During this period when the convicted prisoners will work alongside ordinary workers, they will have the opportunity to prepare for normal life after release. It is hoped that it will also inculcate in them a sense of self-worthiness and social responsibility. Sir, the Day Release Scheme for convicted prisoners will also be made available to short-term prisoners serving a sentence of less than six months, such as fine defaulters. Owing to their short imprisonment, they are not able to fully participate in educational and training programmes in the prison. Neither can they be employed in SCORE's workshops in the prison because of the high turnover which disrupts production.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, a total of 1,620 robberies were reported to the Police in 1984 - 797 in the first half of 1984 and 823 in the second half of 1984. In the first half of 1985, 770 robberies were reported, a decrease of 27 cases as compared to the first half of 1984 and a decrease of 53 cases as compared to the second half of 1984. As for homicide cases, Sir, a total of 64 murders were reported in 1984 - 31 in the first half of 1984 and 33 in the second half of 1984. In the first half of this year, Sir, there were 31 murder cases. SINGAPORE POOLS (PTE) LTD (Agency licences for 4-digit puntings) 16. Mr S. Vasoo asked the Minister for Finance and Minister for Health (a) what are the pressing reasons for the move by Singapore Pools (Pte) Ltd to offer licences for agents to operate 4-digit puntings; (b) whether the social ramifications of such a decision had been considered; and (c) whether such a move contradicts the overall Government policy of promoting better moral values of our citizens.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. This matter was discussed yesterday. The discussion on this was interrupted at 12 noon, which was the End of Question Time. Is he allowed under the guise of this motion to continue in this House a matter which was interrupted at 12 noon, End of Question Time, yesterday? Mr Deputy Speaker: Please carry on, Mr Jeyaretnam.”
“Will the Member give way for an explanation?”
“The PAP put forward alternatives, criticized the government which was in power, explained why its policies were not in the long-term interest of Singapore. We came out with a Manifesto on the economy, political future and other directions in which Singapore should go. The people elected us in 1959, elected us again and again. And, Sir, we will continue to do our best to win the hearts and minds of the people. We must. This is our sacred trust and responsibility. We know that the electors are changing. We know that we must continue to persuade them and this we will do. But to come to this House and to allege that we have violated some constitutional role of the Opposition is totally untrue, is unsupportable in any constitutional textbook. If they can cite provisions of the Constitution or Erskine May on Parliamentary Practice, then they should come and persuade us. [Applause.] 12.35 pm”
“If anyone wants to come to this House to allege a grave violation of the Constitution, that person must also explain why is it that, in one breath, he alleges violation of the Constitution, and in another breath says, "Well, I do not want to go to the Court. I want to make a political issue out of it." Sir, the test is very simple. We can have two tests. One, the legal test, and the other, I would say political test. Both of them are lawyers, Sir. They have alleged and built up this notion that the role of the loyal Opposition has been denied by the Government and they have adduced the so-called exhibits and evidence, such as Schools Council, planting trees, community centres and so on. If indeed there has been a violation of the Constitution, then being lawyers, they can bring an action, mandamus certiorari, and let the legal issues be vindicated and decided upon. I would say there is another test, Sir, on which I will close. The Member for Anson began his speech yesterday by referring to certain speeches made by the Prime Minister during the days when the PAP was in the Opposition. I have studied the Hansards, of the era when the PAP was in the Opposition. I would like to ask a very simple question. When the PAP was in the Opposition, did it ask for the sharing of governmental functions? Did it beg to be involved in the rights and duties of the Government which was in power? If it did, I would like to ask him to cite me chapter and verse of when and how the PAP, which was then in Opposition, sought or begged for rights which were, properly speaking, governmental functions. What the PAP did, Sir, then, was to perform the role of a loyal Opposition.”
“And they surely, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as lawyers, must recognize that if they come to this House to allege that there has been a violation of constitutional freedoms and rights, then they must also know that the remedy for this is to vindicate their allegations in a Court of law. Planting trees on public property. This has been dealt with by the Member for Chong Boon and others. Even PAP MPs cannot plant trees in public property without complying with the laws and regulations. So what is the Member for Potong Pasir alleging? We will, if he wants, invite him to our annual Tree Planting Day. But if he feels that this notion of constitutional rights have been violated, then make out a case. Schools Council and visiting schools. Is there a violation of a law, of the Constitution, by not allowing the Member for Potong Pasir to visit schools when classes are in session? Is there a violation of our laws and Constitution? Is there a violation, Sir, of the role of a loyal Opposition in denying them the right? Because this right is also denied to PAP MPs. I would like to know which PAP MP has visited schools during the school teaching hours other than to officiate at official functions. Which PAP MP has been asked to sit in on the Schools Council which is dealing with professional matters? Is there a denial of the role of the constitutional Opposition? If so, the two Members of Parliament for Anson and Potong Pasir ought to know that the remedy for violations of Constitutions are clear. They can take a mandamus in a court. Yes.”
“And presumably he will reply further. The Constitution makes it clear, Sir, as in other countries, similar to our system, the people elect a Government which has the mandate and the duty of governing the country. So, what really are the respective roles of Government and a loyal Opposition? What is the role of a loyal Opposition? The task of a loyal Opposition, Sir, is to provide an alternative, an alternative to the people. Its tasks are to criticize the Government, yes, and we have said @hat we welcome criticisms. We are not afraid of criticisms. And constructive criticisms, useful ideas, we must be honest and open enough to incorporate them. The task of an Opposition is to provide an alternative - alternative policies, alternative programmes, alternative ideas, alternative ways of doing things which we are doing now - so that the people will be able to have a choice, will be able to choose, will be able to evaluate the present Government, its policies, its way of doing things, as to the alternative proposed. Let us look at the points raised, Sir, by the Member for Anson and the Member for Potong Pasir, points brought forth in support of the general notion that there has been a breach of some "constitutional rights, liberties and freedoms." Community centres. Sir, the use and access to community centres is spelt out in the People's Association Act. The Members for Anson and Potong Pasir, if they seriously believe that a constitutional right has been infringed, they can take it to court, they can vindicate their legal rights.”
“I have mentioned these myths because this displays a profound ignorance of the concept of constitutional Opposition. It is totally untrue, Sir, the propositions which have been propagated in this House. With some humility, may I say that I have studied the Constitution. For most of my life at the University, I have taught constitutional law. I have read constitutions of other countries. But nowhere in our Constitution, Sir, is there any reference which supports the propositions which the two Members of the Opposition, who are themselves lawyers, have sought to make us believe. In fact, Sir, the concept of Opposition is not even mentioned in the Constitution. Who is responsible for governing the country? Who is responsible for discharging the basic duties of Government? Is it Members of the Opposition? This is provided for in our Constitution, Sir. Article 24 says: 'There shall be in and for Singapore a Cabinet which shall consist of the Prime Minister and such other Ministers. . Subject to provisions of this Constitution, the Cabinet shall have the general direction and control of the Government and shall be collectively responsible to Parliament.' Sir, it does not say anything other than that the task - Mr Jeyaretnam rose -”
“But if you read the whole of his article, it has conjured up a courtroom scenario where two lawyers have built up a case producing Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and so on, ending up by saying both men have tried to build up a case against the Government for discrimina- tion. In other words, some constitutional right of equality has been seriously violated. I would have wished that in this article, Mr Philip Lee could have enlightened the Press and the audience on what are accepted notions of the role of constitutional Opposition. Sir, in Singapore, we have not had a long history of constitutional Opposition. The notion that has been pervaded in this House yesterday must be rebutted. Otherwise, we, Members of the Parliament, the voters, the rest of the population who observe our proceedings, listening to the two lawyers, may believe that the notions that they have propounded indeed represent the correct notions of a loyal Opposition. And this is why, Sir, I have been prompted to take the floor to rebut and destroy some of the myths that have been floated in the House. What are the myths? Look at what they have said. Myth No. 1 - the notion that Opposition MPs have some constitutional right to be involved in the rights and duties of governing Singapore. Myth No. 2 -that Opposition MPs have the right to be involved in governmental functions and the sharing of governmental functions. Myth No. 3 - both Opposition MPs have developed this notion that there is a constitutional right of equality and to be exactly equal on terms, rights and privileges of Members of the governing Party, that is to say, PAP MPs who have a collective responsibility with the Cabinet to ensure that the place is run and there is a proper discharge of the responsibility of governing the country.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it had not been my intention to speak on the motion, but I decided that it was necessary after listening to the two speeches by the Member for Anson and the Member for Potong Pasir yesterday. Sir, in the two speeches, the Opposition Members gave the impression, and developed the notion, that some fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution were being violated, that some grave contravention of an essential right of the Opposition was being contravened. I noted, Sir, that when the Member for Anson began his speech introducing his motion, he said that the motion concerned, I quote from my memory, "constitutional rights, liberties and freedoms". This is the essential pillar on which his motion stands. Constitutional rights have been violated! The Member for Potong Pasir echoed the same line when he talked about the rights of the Opposition MPs to be treated equally. That was how it was quoted in the Straits Times. So this notion has been created that there has been a grave injustice and violation of some provision of the Constitution, though neither of them, being lawyers, took the pains to explain to this House which provision, in what Constitution, and on what legal authority, do they rest their case. This was not told to us. So the impression has been created that a grave legal wrong-doing has been perpetuated by the Government. This needs to be rebutted, Sir. And this has been compounded by Press articles. I read Mr Philip Lee's article in the Straits Times, "From the Gallery". I have met Mr Philip Lee. He is a nice young man.”
“00 noon) GOVERNMENT AND STATUTORY BOARD INVESTMENT IN COMPANIES (Particulars) 1. Dr Toh Chin Chye asked the Minister for Finance and Minister for Health (a) what is the amount of Government investment in companies and their subsidiaries; (b) what is the amount of investment in companies by statutory boards; (c) what are the profits and losses incurred by these off budget companies for 1984; and (d) whether he will give a complete list of companies, their subsidiaries and associate companies in which the Government and statutory boards have an interest.”
“Internal Security Act As of 1st May 1985, only one person was detained under Section 8 of the Internal Security Act. He is Chia Thye Poh, a member of the illegal Communist Party of Malaya (CPM). Chia was specifically instructed by the CPM to penetrate the Barisan Sosialis and engage in Communist United Front agitation to destabilize the Government. This he did by mounting a series of illegal demonstrations and industrial strikes. Chia was therefore placed under preventive detention in November 1966. He will be released as soon as he is prepared to give a public undertaking disowning the CPM's use of force and terror to overthrow the Government. There were others who were arrested for purposes of investigation in connection with a case of illegal transhipment of arms through Singapore. These investigations led to the detention, on 8 May, of Shankar Gopal and William Tan Cheng Siew. All the others have since been released. Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act The number of persons detained under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act is as follows: (a) Secret Society and Criminal Activities 0-5 years - 617 6-10 years - 113 11-15 years - 4 (b) Drug Traffickers 0-5 years - 617 6-10 years - 85 11-15 years - 2 Misuse of Drugs Act 3,980 persons were detained for rehabilitation and treatment in Drug Rehabilitation Centres under the Misuse of Drugs Act. All were detained for less than five years. 2,215 or 56% were detained for less than one year. Immigration Act As on 1st May l985, 189 persons were detained under the Immigration Act for less than five years. 170 of them or 90% were detained for less than a month. They were mainly persons arrested for overstaying and awaiting repatriation. QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER (Not reached by 12.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, there is no misleading and there is no inconsistency. We debated this on 18th March as well as on 29th March. I clearly said then that there were no figures. I did refer, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, to examples of many instances at the check-points when such foreigners came. But the Member for Anson must not be so naive or ridiculous to believe that all those who would want to circumvent our immigration regulations, whether for adoption purposes, whether for arms smuggling, whether for drug trafficking, would openly come to the check-point to declare their intent to do so. 12 noon”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my Ministry does not compile such statistics.”
“In that case, it would be covered by the Act. But if it is a genuine case of adoption and not an adoption of convenience, then the Immigration authorities would give a Dependant's Pass. Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported without amendment, read a Third time and passed. COMMITTEE OF SELECTION 4.25 pm”
“If the child is already a child of a Singapore citizen or permanent resident, is he going to be adopted by another parent? Dr Augustine Tan indicated assent.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, no doubt there can be a host of alternative approaches and solutions to the problem. The solution that my Ministry has proposed is the simplest and the least complicated. It leaves intact the jurisdiction and power of the court in adoption cases which is, quite properly, to look at the case from the viewpoint of the welfare of the child. But before the child comes to Singapore, some authority must be satisfied that the Immigration rules are not circumvented, and surely the proper authority for that must be the authorities which are entrusted with the implementation of Immigration laws and policies. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Prof. S. Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 2 -”
“In the United King- dom, they also have laws on adoption. I would like to read a typical letter sent out by the Secretary of State, Home Office, to any prospective applicant on adoption proceedings, and I quote: 'Immigration requirements. There is no provision in the Immigration rules for a child to come to the United Kingdom for adoption. However, the Home Secretary may exceptionally exercise discretion to allow a child to come here for this purpose if he is satisfied that this is appropriate in all the circumstances of this case. He [the Secretary of State) will first need to consider whether the intending adopters and the child they wish to adopt fulfil the requirements of the Immigration rules relating to admission of children for settlement in so far as these are applicable as if the child had already been adopted and these rules apply. In particular, the Home Secretary will wish to be satisfied that the proposed adoption involves a genuine transfer of parental responsibility on the grounds of the original parents' inability to look after the child and that it is not one of convenience arranged simply to enable the child to gain entry in the United Kingdom. Sir, if an advanced country with vast resources deems it necessary to have a safeguard such as this before invocation of the legislative procedure for adoption within the country, surely it makes sense for us to do the same.”
“I do not have the figures but I can inform the House that the Immigration authorities were so concerned because people were arriving at the checkpoint with infants in arms requesting Social Visit Pass and long-term Social Visit Pass, and when they were asked why, they said, "Well, we want to have this child adopted by this relative in Singapore." The numbers are sufficiently large to cause concern and to introduce administrative measures requiring these persons to undertake that they will not proceed with adoption proceedings. This is why, Sir, the case which was mentioned a week ago showed that some of the administrative measures are not foolproof because of the large numbers of persons coming here on Social Visit Pass or long-term Social Visit Pass. As to the second question, as I explained a week ago, under the legal regime on adoption contained in the law as it stands at present, the court's function is guided primarily by the welfare of the child. The Immigration policy or the Immigration status is not a dominant or primary consideration. It is true, as the Member for Anson has said, that the procedure under the law for adoption is such that references are made to the Department of Social Welfare for investigation. But under the law, the Department of Social Welfare's investigation must be circumscribed by the duties imposed by the law, and the law requires the Social Welfare officers to look at the case and put up a report with regard to the interest and the welfare of the child. Whether the child is an illegal immigrant, or what his immigration status is, and so on, are not primary considerations. Sir, in case anyone should think that we have embarked on a very unusual and novel method, let me mention the practice in the United Kingdom.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if I may respond to the two points. The first question is: have there been such a number of cases as to warrant concern to justify this legislation? The answer is yes. If it was not a problem which needed a solution by way of legislation, then we would not have recourse to this option.”
“And I am sure that if the court is informed that the proposed adoption is not a genuine case of adoption but a case of convenience, as the Minister puts it, the court will not make the adoption order. The court must have regard to the welfare of the child, must have regard to the standing and to the genuineness of the application to adopt the child. So I do not know why this amendment is really necessary. You have, as I said, the power and the wherewithal now to make the representation to the court and the court is left to determine in every single case whether it should make the order or not.”
“With this amendment, a foreign child on any Immigration Pass other than a Dependant's Pass will not be considered resident in Singapore. A Dependant's Pass will be granted to facilitate adoption proceedings unless the adoption proceedings are adoptions of convenience or intended to circumvent our Immigration policies. Thus, Sir, the proposed amendment will not prohibit the adoption of foreign children in genuine cases. I should add, Sir, that the Government will be sympathetic in cases where childless couples, who are unable to have their own children, wish to adopt a foreign child. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. Mr Jeyaretnam. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I see in the Explanatory Statement accompanying the Bill that the Bill "seeks to amend the Adoption of Children Act so as to prevent the indiscriminate adoption of foreign children by Singapore citizens and permanent residents." The Minister in his speech seemed to imply that there were a large number of these cases. May I ask whether he has the number of these cases, whether there is a large number of people sending their children in to be adopted by families in Singapore. Secondly, the Minister says this amendment will not prevent adoption of foreign children in genuine cases. As I pointed out to the Minister when I raised the question last week that when an adoption petition is presented to the court, it is served on the Attorney-General. The Attorney-General refers it to the Department of Social Welfare, and the Department of Social Welfare then makes all the investigations necessary to help the court decide whether an adoption order should be made or not. So even without this amendment, the Government has the wherewithal and the power to make the investigations and to bring the matter up before the court.”
“Once it is determined that a foreign child is suitable for adoption, the Immigration Department will grant him a Dependant's Pass to enable his adoptive parents to obtain an adoption order. Thus the proposed amendment will not prohibit the adoption of foreign children in genuine cases and deserving cases. The proposed amendment, Sir, is necessary so as to prevent adoptions of convenience. We have many examples where adoptions were used to circumvent Immigration policies. In a case already recounted to this House earlier, a 59-year-old Singaporean with seven children of his own adopted his own grand-daughter who had overstayed her Visit Pass and was illegally in Singapore. The child's natural parents, we will recall, were Malaysian citizens with four other children. Her natural father was working as a construction worker on a Work Permit. Although he was not eligible to bring in his wife and children for long-term stay, he sought to circumvent this restriction in regard to his daughter by making her the adopted child of a Singapore citizen. Sir, there have been many other such cases where Singaporeans have been approached, or attempted, to adopt their foreign nephews and nieces even though they already have children of their own, and there was no reason for them to adopt another child. To deter such adoptions of convenience, administrative measures have been taken by the Immigration Department hitherto to restrict the stay of unaccompanied foreign infants. However, Sir, past experience has shown that administrative measures alone are not completely adequate to prevent adoptions of convenience. It is therefore advisable to amend the law now before we get more cases of adoptions of convenience.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, section 3(6) of the Adoption of Children Act provides that a child must be resident in Singapore before an adoption order can be made. However, the term "resident" is not defined in the Act. In practice, the court would normally consider a child to be resident if he has been staying continuously in Singapore for about six months. If the court is satisfied that the child is so resident, it would decide whether to grant the adoption order, after taking the child's welfare into consideration. The child's immigration status and immigration policy are not relevant for this purpose. Consequently, Sir, some Singaporeans have made use of adoption to bring in their relatives from other countries to enjoy our social benefits, including subsidized education and medical services. There have been cases of Singaporeans who already have many children of their own adopting their foreign relatives, thus imposing an additional burden on the State. The Bill seeks to amend section 3 of the Adoption of Children Act so as to prevent the indiscriminate adoption of foreign children by Singapore citizens and permanent residents. The Bill provides that an infant who has entered and remained in Singapore on a Social Visit Pass, a Student's Pass or a Special Pass, or whose presence in Singapore is unlawful under the Immigration Act, is to be deemed not resident in Singapore for the purposes of the adoption under the Act. Sir, with this amendment, a foreign child on any Immigration Pass other than a Dependant's Pass will not be considered resident in Singapore and cannot be adopted under the Act.”
“Sir, since after I spoke, the Member for Anson has raised the question of the legality of the condition. Let me inform Members of the House that work permits are given on certain conditions. There are many conditions: health conditions, immigration conditions, types of work they have to perform, prohibition of certain activities. And it is fully within the legal powers of the Ministry of Labour to impose the condition that a work permit holder shall not marry without permission.”
“There you are! Sir, every letter that is addressed to me as a Minister, and there are many of them, I make it a point to lead it, as Members will know. Although it takes up a lot of time, I do this in order to have a flavour of the kinds of problems which Members of Parliament come across. In this case, the Member has written to the Immigration Department. The Immigration Department receives about, I think, 500, maybe hun- dreds of letters every month. Naturally, all of them are not referred to me. I cannot comment on the specifics of the case. The Member for Anson, if he feels a serious breach of laws has taken place, can write to me about this case.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, did he address it to the Minister? He has addressed certain representation to the Minister, and I have received it. Did he address this case to me?”
“Well, I have not received it. If he can send it to me?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is impossible for me to comment on the specifics of the case. Has the Member for Anson written to the Ministry on this particular case?”
“As I said, Sir, he can keep on making insinuations that he wants, but the facts are clear. It cuts across all categories of persons in Singapore. So it is a fair balance between promoting the advancement of Singapore, its national interest, and ,compassionate grounds. It strikes a fair balance. Sir, the Minister of State will answer the other questions.”
“- press statement was issued on the permanent ban of work permit holders who contravene the marriage restriction policy. This press statement was issued and publicized while the Member was a Member of the House. It was given full publicity. I do not know why he is asking this question here because the answer is given there - a person who contravenes the work permit marriage restriction policy is expelled from Singapore and barred from entering Singapore. The answer was given, was publicized, and this is why I made the point that these conditions are made known well ahead of time. Mr Speaker, Sir, as I say, we make no bones about the fact that we have strict immigration policies and strict citizenship policies. The question for Singaporeans to ask is that if we did not do so, then are we prepared to let hundreds of thousands of foreigners come to Singapore and overburden our facilities and resources? Our policies strike good balance between two criteria. One, the person who comes to Singapore must be able to contribute to our skills, talent, economic advancement, Under that scheme persons are granted permanent residence. But at the same time, wives, children, dependants of Singapore citizens are also admitted and, contrary to what the Member for Anson says, it is not for the rich. It cuts across all categories - wives, children and dependants. The only criterion is, we want to ascertain that they will be maintained and looked after by somebody in Singapore so that they would not become a burden to the State. Mr Jeyaretnam: And the rich can do that.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Anson surely must know that a -”
“Now, why do we do this? I do not like as Minister for Home Affairs to expel anyone. Why should I? It is because we do not want Singapore to suffer the same consequences as some of the Western European countries do. They are saddled with an enormous problem of migrant workers who came, who were supposed to be temporary workers but have settled down permanently, with wives and children. We cannot afford to have that. We have learnt from the experiences of other countries and we have introduced these measures and controls precisely to avoid the problems faced by Western European countries. Now, then, what happens when a work permit holder, and there are about 150,000 to 160,000 of them, wants to sink roots here and marries without permission? The answer is that he or she is asked to leave Singapore. Is our policy strict? It is strict. There is no denying about it. But the question is: we have strict immigration policies, we have strict citizenship policies. But for whom is a strict immigration policy designed? Is it designed for me? No. Is it designed for the Cabinet Ministers? No. It is designed to promote the well-being of Singapore citizens, because if you have liberal policies based on liberal criteria, then we will be swamped with hundreds of thousands of people who want to come to Singapore. This would put a strain on our housing, social, medical, educational and other facilities. Our first duty as a government, Sir, is to ensure that the interest of Singapore and the interest of Singapore citizens is safeguarded in the context of our limited resources. So he has -”
“May I answer in the way that I choose, just as he has been able to frame the questions in the way that he has chosen? Sir, we must see this problem in the context and only then we will appreciate the magnitude of our problems. 274,000 persons tried to extend their stay here. There are 150,000 to 160,000 work permit holders. In addition, we have about 130,000 permanent residents who are potential applicants for citizenship. This is the magnitude of the problem. The Member for Anson, on other occasions, has said that Singapore is a place where there is oppression, lack of rights, lack of freedoms. Nevertheless, there are hundreds of thousands of people who want to come to Singapore. Now, can we allow every one who wants to come? The answer is no. We are a small country with limited resources. The Minister for National Development, the other day, told us that there is almost no more land to build HDB flats. In these circumstances, as Minister for Home Affairs, it will be foolhardy for me to adopt a policy which is liberal and lets in everyone. This is the first point that I want to make. The second point, Sir, which deals with a specific question mentioned by the Member for Anson, is that we have not wilfully separated families whom we have allowed to form in our country. Work permit holders are put on notice well ahead of time that when they get a work permit there are certain conditions attached to the possession of a work permit. A work permit is intended to allow them to come to Singapore to work temporarily and they intend to go back. That is very clear. They are also told in advance that if they want to marry and sink roots here, they would have to get the permission of the relevant authority which is the Commissioner for Employment of the Ministry of Labour.”
“May I now, Sir, touch on the points raised by the Member for Anson, and I will deal with both his points on citizenship and permanent residence together. The points on fire safety raised by the Member for Ang Mo Kio and the Member for Serangoon Gardens will be dealt with by the Minister of State. The Member for Anson's thesis boils down to this: that our citizenship laws and policies and our permanent residence laws and policies are such that we have separated families, that this demonstrates a lack of humanitarian and compassionate feelings, and that we have wilfully and deliberately brought about the separation. Sir, the point I would like to make is that our laws and policies are known and have been made known. As to the cases that he mentioned, individual cases, it will be difficult for me to reply to them here without detailed information. But from the recitation of the facts that he made, it appears that most of them are work permit cases. 3.45 pm Sir, let me put the context of our permanent residence policy. If we could, it will be the easiest and the ideal policy to let in whosoever wants to come to Singapore, to adopt as liberal, as compassionate, a policy as possible. If we could, if our resources permit it and if our land and other facilities could cope. But what is the situation? Let me give the problem its proper picture. There are hundreds of thousands of persons who want to come to Singapore. Let me give some figures. Last year, about 13,000 persons applied for permanent residence. There were 274,000 persons last year who tried every means possible to extend their stay here, These are, what I would call, the potential applicants for permanent residence.”
“The answer to that is that the existing law, ie, the Misuse of Drugs Act which is designed for drugs such as heroin and so on, is not really adequate for the purpose of glue-sniffing. The Coordinating Committee which has been established has, as one of its tasks, the examination of laws and enforcement measures in other countries. The difficulty, Sir, is this. The substances in which glue-sniffing takes place are to be found in a wide variety of commercial and household products. We will have to devise legal measures which will not impede the bona fide users of these commercial and household products. Secondly, laws which will lend themselves to effective enforcement. We are told that in a few other countries they have such laws but we must ascertain that in those countries they have effective implementation before we adopt their practices. This is a measure which the Coordinating Committee will address itself to and make recommendations. On the question of rehabilitation of hard-core addicts, I would like to inform the Member for Pasir Panjang that he is right in saying that, as we are more effective in controlling the addict population and supply of drugs and as the number of first-time addicts is reduced, the residual problem will be that of relapse cases. We have a problem of a growing number of hard-core addicts who have undergone treatment and rehabilitation a number of times. My Ministry officials together with SANA and the Central Narcotics Bureau are now considering whether the treatment and rehabilitation of hard-core addicts should be intensified and a special regime be devised for both treatment and rehabilitation as well as intensive counselling. I hope to be able to give the results of this review at a later date.”
“So evidence sufficient to bring about a prosecution in court is not easy. This is another problem that we will have to tackle. Sir, the Police will be upgrading both the intelligence and operation strategies, and I have directed the Police and the Ministry officials to approach this problem in a comprehensive manner, It will not do just to make raids on housing estates and particular selected sites on weekends. Last year, there were 9,103 such raids and 803 persons were prosecuted. It is far more complicated because there is a communication network which passes on race results. There are indication centres which operate secretly, and illegally tap telephone lines. We are working in close cooperation with the Telecommunications Authority in ascertaining the places which have such telephones and appropriate action will be taken. I would like to give assurance to the Member therefore that this is a problem which we are fully cognizant of and that we are embarking on a full-scale comprehensive review. Results may not come about overnight but it is certainly an area where we intend to spend special attention in the forthcoming period. I would not like at this stage to pre-judge the measures which will be taken and I hope the Member for Clementi will be satisfied with the assurance that this matter is being given utmost priority. Next, Sir, may I turn to the points made by the Member for Pasir Panjang on glue-sniffing and the rehabilitation of drug addicts. First, on glue-sniffing. A few days ago, the Minister of State gave an Oral Answer to a Question asked by the Member for Punggol and information was then given on the measures that are being taken. Specifically, the Member for Pasir Panjang asked whether the laws are adequate.”
“Thank you, Sir. First, let me respond to the points made by the Member for Clementi on what is known as the mini-turf clubs. I completely share the view of the Member for Clementi which is a view that other Members have expressed to me. Some have told me that gambling is part of our way of life, so why bother? There are different types of gambling and different types of illegal gambling. But I agree with the Member and other Members that action has to be taken on the so-called mini-turf clubs which are operating in our housing estates because they defile the social environment of our housing estates. Families, children, wives are afraid to go to hawker centres, afraid to go to coffee shops and they time their visits either before the first race or after the last race. This is an undesirable situation. I have had discussions with my Ministry officials and the officials in the Police and special priority will be given to tackling this problem. The Member wanted to know the kind of problems that we have in this area. There are quite a number of problems which will have to be tackled. One concerns the law. The penalties will have to be reviewed. There is a lot of money involved in this operation, and if the penalties are not a deterrent, people would not mind paying fines which may be inadequate. So the law will have to be reviewed. Second, there is also a problem in bringing about a successful prosecution because prosecutions, to succeed, must depend on evidence. For those who are familiar with the way in which these miniturf clubs operate, there is a mind-boggling array of methods by which the operators keep check on their bets. Watermelon seeds, buttons, chips, match-sticks, and the latest is soluble paper which can be either swallowed or put in a pail of water.”
“But we will have to enforce our traffic regulations if we want to bring down the accident figures as soon as possible. I believe the points raised by the Member for Toa Payoh are very similar and I have covered them in this reply. The other points, Sir, will be replied by the Minister of State. 3.00 pm”
“I have never heard anyone complain when it comes to apprehending criminals and thieves. No one ever complains that the Police are wrong to lay an ambush to apprehend a criminal. No one complains about it. Why then should someone complain if an ambush is laid for a habitual or reckless driver or rider on the road who is going to be a menace to all others? Now, I am not saying that I am going to revoke the directive which has been given. But I want to say that although I agree that the policeman should not hide behind the bushes, I would not go so far as to say that the delinquent driver ought not to be surprised, because you will never catch the habitual delinquent rider if he is always given an early warning by the presence of the policeman down the road. These are the persons we want to catch. So with that observation, I hope the Member for Alexandra will agree with me that we must allow the Police a variety of ways provided, of course, we know what are the targets t,hat we are aiming at. For the less serious offences, I would like to inform the Member for Alexandra that the Police, in fact, have been issuing warnings and it is not a case of every motorist being stopped and given a summons. But I am afraid that this problem of image may not be completely eradicated because the very nature of enforcing traffic regulations is different and unique because it is very public. A person is stopped on the road, his ego is affected; his boss or his girlfriend or his relatives may be driving past and, here, he is in the middle of the road under the glare of publicity. And I guess it is natural for him to react with a certain amount of resentment and indignation.”
“I should also add that the testing standards of all drivers are being upgraded and this includes the Class 4 drivers. Finally, since December 1984, Class 4 drivers who were suspended under the Dips (Driver Improvement Point System) will have to undergo retraining courses conducted by the Traffic Police. Sir, the Member for Alexandra referred to the image of the Traffic Police. He complained of traffic policemen being sneaky, hiding behind bushes. It is a point raised on many other occasions. The general point being made is taken, namely, that the Traffic Police are a part of the whole police set-up and whatever I said just now about the importance of public relations, enlisting the support and cooperation of the public, applies also equally truly to the Traffic Police. But the Traffic Police and I have discussed this with Traffic officials from other countries. Traffic enforcement officials in all countries have this problem, so much so that in other countries the Police force tries to transfer the Traffic Police to some other Ministry, the Ministry of Transport and Communications, so that this image problem can be eradicated. But, I think, in Singapore we will have to make sure that the public understand the reasons why we have to be strict in our enforcement. The Member for Alexandra has pointed out the figures. Education, preventive measures, campaigns, work to a point but where drivers are reckless, are errant, they need to be apprehended and charged for the offences. I would like to inform him that the directive given to the Traffic Police is not to hide behind bushes. As the Member for Anson says, "There may not be enough bushes!" Mr Speaker, Sir, although the directive was given to the Police, I am not too sure that I accept the logic of the argument.”
“We are now in the process of obtaining tenders and we hope that this pilot project will be implemented early next year. After the pilot project, there will be an evaluation. If the evaluation, according to performance indicators, shows that it has been effective, then we will seek approval for the full complement of fast expressway patrols. As to the high-speed cameras, these have been evaluated. There are two types of cameras. One is a camera to detect the beating of traffic lights. The other is cameras to detect speedsters. The first type of camera to detect drivers who beat traffic lights has been tested and evaluated, and I am glad to say that the tests have shown that they are effective. Approval has been given for purchase of these cameras, and they will be implemented at a later date. As to cameras to detect speedsters, this is still under evaluation. As to heavy vehicles, the Member for Alexandra is correct in saying that there is a special problem with heavy vehicle drivers because the nature of the vehicle, as well as the speed at which they sometimes travel, pose a danger. How will we tackle this? First, Sir, we believe that the existing penalties are inadequate and we are studying the Road Traffic Act to see whether we should amend the law to provide for heavier penalty, which is the case in many other countries with regard to errant drivers of heavy vehicles. Secondly, even before any amendment of the law is considered, we are, as of now, enforcing more strictly the law on drivers of heavy-moving vehicles who are involved in "moving" offences. Thirdly, in our plan to build driving and riding circuits, we specifically plan to designate one of the circuits for the training of drivers who will be driving heavy vehicles.”
“But some of the reasons, of course, stare at us in the face -the number of vehicles on our roads has soared dramatically while the increase in road space is limited. Apart from that, Sir, the Member for Alexandra is quite correct in pointing out that there are two special areas of concern. One is motor-cyclists and the other is pedestrians. Measures are being taken by the Traffic Police to arrest the trend, apart from the preventive and educational measures which are taken. The problem of motor-cyclists is being tackled by a special riding circuit and the prohibition of learner drivers going on the roads immediately upon obtaining their vehicles. Of course, they have been given three years' notice of this impending measure which will come into operation on 1st October. With that, and the intensive training which will be given to the riding circuits, we believe a major breakthrough will be made in our efforts to arrest the high fatality and casualty figures for motor-cyclists. With regard to pedestrians, it is not so much a question of the Pedestrian Crossing Rules. Our analysis of the figures showed that vast majority of the fatalities involving pedestrians were in situations where there were no pedestrian crossings. So it is not a question of enforcing the Pedestrian Crossing Rules more strictly. What we are doing now is to liaise with our other relevant counterpart agencies to bring about an accelerated programme of building more pedestrian crossings. With regard to his question on expressway patrol cars, I am glad to say that the Ministry has received approval from the Ministry of Finance to commence a pilot project involving the use of eight fast patrol cars.”
“Yes. This is less favourable compared to NS officers. Sir, the position is that the junior officers with HSC qualifications can rise to Inspectors depending on their own merits. NS officers with HSC qualifications apply to join the Police Force as an Inspector only if they are commissioned officers during NS. So there is a distinction. I should also add that these appointments are made by the Public Service Commission which is an independent body. The final point that he made was that he understands some of the vehicles in the Police Force are not roadworthy. Well, this is news to me because I have sought information from the Police and I have been assured that all police vehicles on the road are roadworthy. They go for regular inspections. I have had a look at the age profile of the vehicles and I do not think any of them are so old as to be a danger on the roads. They are properly maintained and serviced by the Force Transport Branch of the Police. The Member said that he understood that he believed some vehicles are not roadworthy. But, here again, it is difficult for me to comment on that unless I have some information which he seems to have. But let me assure the House that all the Police vehicles are properly maintained and serviced by a special unit of the Police Force. If I may now turn, Sir, to the points raised by the Member for Alexandra on traffic. Some of his points were also mentioned by the Member for Toa Payoh. He made several points. First was with regard to expressways. Now, this is indeed a cause for concern because the number of accidents on expressways is twice that of other roads, and the number of fatalities on expressways is as high as four times the fatality on other roads.”
“I think there is a factual point to be established here. As far as my information is concerned, Sir, there is no such situation where a sergeant in Division III is paid Division II salary. So perhaps the Member for Anson could let me know of any specific instance, because my information is that the Sergeant's post is a Division III post and his salary is a Division III salary. So perhaps if he has information, he can take it up with my Ministry separately. His third point dealt with junior officers with HSC qualifications who were dissatisfied because they were promoted automatically to Inspectors, I believe.”