Teo Chee Hean
Singapore
“The second point first, Mr Speaker. Certainly, it could have been a factor. But to the Panel which reviewed the thing, it was not an acceptable excuse or reason. The agencies still have to be responsible for what they are doing, whatever season of the year it is.”
“On the balance in ACRA, I would not say it is a conflict, but you have to strike the right balance between the functions that ACRA is meant to provide, which is to have a registry which promotes corporate transparency, and you have to balance that against how you protect personal data.”
“That means, if you do find a bug or you do find a way in which you can penetrate a Government system, you let us know, and there is a bounty for it. And this is evergreen. But we also do, from time to time, have a hunting season. So, for certain of our systems, we invite white hatters to attack those systems.”
“Then, he asked when the political office holders got involved in the public communications on the Bizfile portal issue. They got involved, I think, almost as soon as it became apparent that there was public anxiety. Next question about paragraph 40 and the email to senior officers, yes, the July 2024 CM was emailed to officers.”
“In fact, we monitor the dark web for a variety of things, including this, and we have not seen any sale of NRIC numbers as such. On the question of collection and use of NRIC numbers, actually, in the communication with the Government agencies, I think it is important to know who you are communicating with.”
“So, you actually make your email address available to others. But for authentication purposes, it is quite different. You do not tell your password to others. That is something which you keep for yourself and your email service provider knows. So, there is a difference between an identifier and an authentication.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,689 lines we hold for Teo Chee Hean, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 21 of 34.
“MHA is also working with IDA to put in place additional risk mitigation measures to prevent our infocomm infrastructure from being compromised by foreign governments or other groups or individuals acting against Singapore's interests. Periodic audits on the designated Providers will be conducted and IDA will impose penalties if they fail to comply with the security requirements. We will continue to work with stakeholders to strengthen our security regime to ensure the integrity and resilience of our infocomm services, taking into account new technologies and risks. Page: 1302”
“In early October 2012, the US House of Representatives' Intelligence Committee published a report on the potential security risk to US corporate and government interests posed by two particular non-US telecommunications companies. The report made a number of recommendations for US government agencies, Congressional Committees, and the two non-US companies to consider. We are monitoring the developments. Singapore takes the issue of cybersecurity seriously. A trusted, secure and resilient information and communications (or infocomm) infrastructure is critical to Singapore's national security and economic interests. MHA works closely with the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) and the Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) to put in place robust measures to secure our Government and national infocomm infrastructure. This is done by identifying the security threats, assessing the attendant risks, and implementing controls to mitigate the risks. Our approach does not differentiate between products or suppliers by brand or country of origin. Page: 1302 Within the Government sector, infocomm infrastructure is evaluated for compliance with security requirements before deployment. Additional security safeguards are put in place where needed. The infrastructure is also regularly monitored, tested and reviewed to ensure that it continues to meet stringent security standards. For the telecommunications sector, IDA has also taken steps to strengthen the security of our Internet Infrastructure. In February 2011, IDA issued a mandatory Code of Practice to designated Internet Access Service Providers (IASPs). The Code requires information on threats and vulnerabilities to be shared with IDA to enable effective mitigation measures to be taken.”
“They are not couriers, so they are not covered by the exception that is provided, unless Mrs Chiam thinks that they are couriers.”
“The measures we have taken have kept the drug problem in Singapore in check in spite of the serious global and regional situation. But the war is still on. We must continue to have the determination and resolve to take the measures needed, tough but unfortunately necessary ones, to keep our streets free from drugs, and ensure that Singapore remains a safe and secure home for ourselves and our children. Let me once again thank the Members for their support of the Bill. [Applause.] 3.06 pm”
“Surely, one would be concerned if a train driver or an airline pilot were to take drugs, even outside of his working hours. So, one should similarly have concerns, if his lawyer or accountant or financial advisor, the type of students that Asst Prof Tan's university trains, is on drugs recreationally. Page: 1245 Sir, several Members, including Dr Intan, Ms Ellen Lee, Ms Faizah Jamal, Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap and Mr Zainal Sapari, have called on the Government to put more resources into public education and public outreach. We will do so. But we need the public to help us magnify the voice and send the right signal. All of us have the responsibility of spreading the message about the harmful effects of drug abuse – whether as parents, teachers, university lecturers, workmates, schoolmates or friends. This is not just the role of the Government. We should all be prepared to help shape societal attitudes in positive directions, and away from negative ones – for the benefit of our society and our children. Sir, this was what our parliamentarians did in 1975 in moving to stem the tide of drug abuse that was sweeping across the Western world and threatening to overwhelm us. Parliament set the tone and sent a strong signal that galvanised our nation to work together and reverse the tide in Singapore against the tide in the world. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singaporeans should have no illusions about the challenge we are facing. We are in this for the long haul. The war against drugs will not be won today, or next year, or even in the next 10 years. But it can be lost very quickly, as we have seen in many other countries. We have gradually and steadily managed to bring the situation under control in Singapore compared to the 1970s.”
“We are maintaining the mandatory death penalty for the drug offences where it currently applies, but are making measured and carefully defined exceptions to allow for the Courts to impose life imprisonment instead for couriers in cases of abnormality of mind or where substantive cooperation has been provided. Let me state categorically that we are maintaining our "zero tolerance" stance against drugs. Taken in totality, these amendments will make our regime tougher against repeat offenders, introduce new offences, especially against those who target the young and vulnerable, and enhance the effectiveness of the death penalty regime. We will also give CNB officers more power to deal with emerging threats and improve their monitoring capabilities. Beyond what Government does, in partnership with the community, what we do as individuals, and as a society, matter too. I listened carefully to what Asst Prof Eugene Tan said on Monday. He said that he sensed from questions he had posed to his students that "societal attitudes towards drugs are perhaps softening, especially among the young". And he gave some examples. Sir, I do hope that Asst Prof Tan not only posed questions to his students, but also helped his students come to their own conclusion that experimenting with drugs is dangerous and has no socially redeeming qualities. Experimenting with drugs is not like trying bungee jumping or sky-diving – drug taking is illegal, and it can only lead down the path of addiction, and damage to one's health, one's mind, as well as one's future and family. Beyond the impact on the individual, taking drugs outside of company time can have a serious impact on work and society.”
“If couriers are unable to provide us with substantive information, we would at the very least have increased the risks and complications for the syndicates. Sir, the drug challenge remains a serious one. As at the end of September this year, as pointed out several times during this debate, drug offenders made up more than two-thirds of locals in our prisons. About four out of five of the local prison population had drug antecedents. Mr Vikram Nair spoke about the higher recidivism rates for those with drug antecedents. And this is so. For prisoners who were released in 2009, the recidivism rate over two years for those with drug antecedents was 36% – more than one in three. This is almost double the 20% recidivism rate for those without drug antecedents. This is how the long tail of drug addiction destroys lives and families. Page: 1244 We must, therefore, continue our comprehensive approach to tackling the drug challenge, dealing with both demand and supply. This Bill, which has taken in the recommendations of the inter-ministry Taskforce on Drugs chaired by Senior Minister of State Masagos, strengthens our ability to do so, at all parts of the drug eco-system. It starts with public education, but we have also put in place strict laws with severe penalties, coupled with strong enforcement. The new measures proposed in this Bill will enable us to help drug abusers who themselves have shown commitment to get off drugs and stay away from drugs. And we are introducing new offences and increasing penalties for those who target the young and vulnerable, so that we do not create another generation who are enslaved to drugs. Offenders have a high certainty of being caught, and of facing severe punishment, including death.”
“Every such convicted courier has thus already crossed the threshold of culpability under our laws and is subject to the death penalty. What we are proposing is that where the Public Prosecutor has certified that substantive cooperation has been provided, judges will have the discretion to sentence them to life imprisonment with caning, rather than death. We cannot be sure how exactly couriers or the syndicates will respond to this new provision. But we have weighed the matter carefully and are prepared to make this limited exception if it provides an additional avenue for our enforcement agencies to reach further into the networks, and save lives from being destroyed by drugs and, hence, make our society safer. Syndicates may now be forced to re-organise their operations to more tightly compartmentalise the information. Or they may have to stop using experienced couriers who may have, through several trips, gleaned more information about the networks. They may have to look for new couriers, which will make their supply chain less reliable. All in all, it will create an atmosphere of risk and uncertainty in the organisation, because they do not know if one of them gets caught, whether he will reveal secrets that will then cause problems for all of them. Our intent is to make things as difficult as possible for the syndicates and to keep them and drugs out of Singapore. We expect that after these changes, the syndicates will continue to evolve their operations, and we, too, will have to watch and assess and adapt our strategies. If we are able to get substantive information that enables us to disrupt the networks, we will have gained in our war on drugs.”
“Some Members, including Mr Edwin Tong, Ms Sylvia Lim, Asst Prof Eugene Tan, Mr Laurence Lien and Mr Desmond Lee have asked whether couriers who are low in the hierarchy within drug syndicates will be able to provide useful information to substantively assist the CNB in disrupting drug trafficking activities. The CNB feels that there is potential for useful information to assist them. They also asked whether it is fair that those couriers who know little about the drug network may not be able to benefit from this, while couriers who are more knowledgeable about the drug network may be able to cooperate and thus avoid the death penalty. Page: 1243 As Mr Shanmugam said, we must be clear about what the policy intent is. The policy intent of this substantive cooperation amendment to our mandatory death penalty regime is to maintain a tight regime – while giving ourselves an additional avenue to help us in our fight against drugs, and not to undermine it. Couriers do play a key role in the drug network. In fact, they are often our key point of contact with the drug network. Let me explain why. Illicit drugs are not manufactured or grown in Singapore because of our tough laws and enforcement. All our drugs, therefore, have to be couriered into Singapore. Thus, couriers are a key part of the network which has to be vigorously targeted and suppressed in order to choke off the supply to Singapore. And they are the main link to the suppliers and kingpins outside Singapore. Earlier in my speech, I made the point that the mandatory death penalty is applied only to those who traffic in large quantities of drugs, enough to bring misery in that one act, to hundreds, if not thousands, of lives.”
“Minister for Law has already addressed the issues related to how this will operate legally, Public Prosecutor and so on. Let me talk about the policy considerations. But before I do so, let me speak about the sentencing discretion for the death penalty for drug couriers with an abnormality of mind which satisfies the diminished responsibility test. While there is strong support for the mandatory death penalty, there is also a legitimate concern that it may be applied without sufficient regard for those accused persons who might be suffering from an abnormality of mind. The policy intent is for this exception to operate in a measured and narrowly defined way. We want to take this into account, where an accused can show that he has such an abnormality of mind that it substantially impairs his mental responsibility for his acts in relation to his offences. Such cases are worthy of special consideration. However, in Mr de Souza's words, we do not want to inadvertently "open the backdoor for the offender to escape harsh punishment notwithstanding his or her understanding of the consequence of the crime". We do not want the application of the mandatory death penalty in such cases to call into question the appropriateness of applying the mandatory death penalty regime on traffickers in general. But we do not want to open the doors wide. Otherwise, we would have undermined our strict penalty regime and its deterrence value. And as Mr Shanmugam has pointed out, we might even encourage drug syndicates to recruit more couriers who think they can easily escape the gallows by claiming any condition without medical evidence. The exception for drug couriers who provide substantive cooperation serves a different purpose.”
“These are real risks we face if we weaken our deterrence and the message that we are sending. And this is a responsibility that the Government has to bear, and which I, as Minister for Home Affairs, have to bear. I can understand Mr Lien's point of view and the nobility of his motives and his cause. We need people like Mr Lien in our society to try to save every wrong-doer and to give him more chances. But we must also, as a Parliament, carry the responsibility of putting in place an overall system that minimises the number of those who will take the chance and end up becoming wrong-doers in the first place, by sending an unequivocal deterrent signal that this is a serious crime and the consequences are severe, and do not even think about going down that line. As Members of Parliament, we have to reconcile the two – attend to the concerns of those of our constituents caught on the wrong side of the law and do our best to help them within the constraints of the law. But we also bear the responsibility of putting in place a legal and policy framework that minimises the temptations for people to commit crime and cause damage to others, thinking they can get away with it lightly. Members like Asst Prof Eugene Tan, Mr Vikram Nair, Mr Desmond Lee, Mr Christopher de Souza and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap understand this as they have seen the despair and destruction that drugs cause. And I did not hear them call for the abolition of the mandatory death penalty. Page: 1242 As Parliament, we must establish a system that not only provides fairness, justice and protection to wrong-doers; we must provide fairness, justice and protection to victims and society as well. The fourth issue I would like to address is: can the "substantive assistance" provision really be effective?”
“This ultimately helps to restrict drug supply in Singapore and helps keep our drug situation under control. Several Members of Parliament, including Mr Edwin Tong, Mr Alvin Yeo, Asst Prof Eugene Tan, Dr Intan Azura, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Vikram Nair, Mr Zainal Sapari and Mr Christopher de Souza have cautioned that we do not send out the wrong signals with the changes that we are making. And I agree wholeheartedly with them. Page: 1241 Sir, this is not the signal that we want to send at this point of time, when, as I had said in my speech on Monday, we are facing serious and new challenges on the drug front. If we went the way that some Members are advocating, by doing away with the mandatory death penalty, as Mr Pritam Singh suggested, or doing away with the death penalty altogether, as Mr Laurence Lien mentioned, we would be sending the wrong signal that the risks of drug trafficking into Singapore have now been lowered, that the society is now more accepting of drugs. They have looked at this from the point of view of the drug trafficker who has been apprehended. We also have to look at abolition from the point of view of society and the victims of drugs. Would Singapore and Singaporeans be better off as a result? I do not think so. Not if our deterrence is weakened and more people might be tempted to try to smuggle in significant quantities of drugs. Not if more of them try, get caught, and spend the rest of their lives in prison. Not if more victims fall into the downward spiral of drug abuse because more drugs enter into Singapore. Not if our enforcement officers are overwhelmed by a greater number of traffickers and drug abusers and are not able to get on top of the situation.”
“The regime is a multi-pronged one – it involves education, strong enforcement, severe penalties for trafficking, strict rehabilitation for drug abusers, and long-term imprisonment for repeat abusers. The deterrence message is strong and clear. We send the signal that drugs are bad – bad for abusers, their families and society. People who take drugs do so at their own peril. They should expect to be caught eventually. Drug traffickers should also beware; there is high certainty of being caught and punished. Punishment is severe, including capital punishment. The mandatory death penalty strengthens this deterrent message. The incidence of kidnapping and firearms offences fell sharply after the mandatory death penalty (MDP) was introduced for these crimes. From 38 kidnapping offences in 1959, the number of offences fell significantly after the death penalty was introduced for kidnapping in 1961 to just one case and has remained low since then. For firearms offences, the number fell from 174 in 1973 to 97 in 1975 after the introduction of the death penalty in 1973. This has since dropped steadily and there have been no firearms offences since 2007. For drugs, the war is on-going. We want to give our drug enforcement officers the tools they need to do their jobs, to keep us safe. We know that the mandatory death penalty has a deterrent effect because drug traffickers deliberately try to keep the amounts they carry to below the capital punishment threshold. So, you can say, they are clever, they can get away with it. But there is an operational effect on the drug syndicates, and a benefit to Singapore. This complicates their supply chain, raises their costs and their risks.”
“In such countries, we have all heard of, or seen for ourselves, the easy availability of drugs, for example, in legalised so-called "coffee shops", or being passed around at parties, or caught a whiff of drugs being smoked while walking down the corridors of college dorms. We might also have encountered drugged-out persons "shooting themselves up" in side streets in the night, or seen the detritus of discarded hypodermic syringes in public parks and underpasses during a morning jog. It strikes me, Sir, that families from these countries with more liberal drug regimes and drug laws find that one of the key attractions of living in Singapore with their families is that their children are much safer from drugs and crime. And I think there is a lesson, an important one, to learn from there. Page: 1240 So, Sir, we have to ask ourselves what type of society we want. There may be no death penalty or mandatory death penalty, but the human toll is great. Drug wars take the lives of thousands – innocents, law enforcement officers and members of drug cartels. Daily, people die of overdoses or adverse drug reactions, including young people, and sadly, people whom young people idolise – pop stars, movie stars and even sports personalities. Lives and futures are destroyed, families are left destitute and in despair. The fabric of society is weakened, safety and security for its citizens compromised, and children put at risk. Sir, the mandatory death penalty is an important part of our comprehensive anti-drug regime. The regime does not just depend on one element, but it depends on all of them.”
“When Members of the House pass this amendment into law, this would be another example where Parliament has taken a policy decision and is prepared to send a strong signal, which requires the courts to subject persons convicted of such offences involving young persons or vulnerable persons in drug offences, to mandatory minimum sentences. Let me now deal with the second and third themes: has the mandatory death penalty been effective in helping to curb the drug menace? Do the amendments to the mandatory death penalty send the wrong signal that we are softening our stance against drugs? A number of Members, including Ms Sylvia Lim, Asst Prof Eugene Tan, Mrs Lina Chiam and Ms Faizah Jamal, has asked whether the mandatory death sentence has been effective. As several Members have already pointed out, it is not easy to prove a counter-factual conclusively. But it is instructive to take a look at the approaches that other jurisdictions have used to combat drugs and the corresponding outcomes. In some jurisdictions, the legal regime is not operating properly and the enforcement is not effective. The drug situation is completely out of control and drug cartels rule the roost. We read about them in the newspapers and thank our lucky stars that we are not there or in one of those countries. Then, there are jurisdictions where laws are strict, at least theoretically, but enforcement is not effective. They also face problems, which demonstrate that strict laws and severe penalties are not sufficient by themselves; good enforcement and effective Courts are needed too. And there are also jurisdictions where law enforcement agencies are effective, but drug laws are liberal, allowing drugs to become commonplace.”
“Severe penalties are not something which the Government chooses to impose lightly, but only after careful consideration of the nature of the act and the consequences of doing so. And this is especially so in the case of the mandatory death penalty. Parliament bears the heavy responsibility of deciding whether an offence is serious enough and the damage to society severe enough to make the death penalty the only available sentence for that offence. In his tribute to former Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong on Monday, the Minister for Law stated that Chief Justice Chan believed that the function of Judges was to interpret and apply the law, and not to legislate or make policy in the guise of adjudication. Which offences carry the mandatory death penalty and which do not is, therefore, clearly a matter of policy which Parliament, and not the Courts, has to decide, in the interest of our society. Page: 1239 Parliament took that responsibility for making this policy decision and sending this strong signal in 1975 after careful and serious consideration. This, together with the other measures that Parliament decided on then and over the years, has provided the basis for our success in tackling the drug problem that has overwhelmed so many other countries. On Monday, Members of this House unanimously welcomed the setting or raising of penalties for those who target youths or vulnerable persons in drug offences and this included mandatory minimum sentences.”
“They weighed the damage that drugs and those who traffic in drugs were doing to our society. They decided to institute tougher laws and penalties, coupled with strong enforcement. Severe penalties were introduced, including the mandatory death penalty for those trafficking significant amounts of drugs. Even though the penalties were severe, they were instituted in a measured and calibrated way, with only those convicted of trafficking substantial amounts of drugs subject to the mandatory death penalty. In the case of heroin, for example, the threshold amount for capital punishment is set at 15 grams of pure diamorphine. This may not sound like very much, but it is, in fact, equivalent to the pure diamorphine content of some 2,200 straws of heroin, with a current street value of $66,000. This is enough to supply one straw per day to more than 300 addicts for a week. Trafficking in amounts below the threshold amounts where capital punishment applies, is also subject to mandatory minimum penalties and, in this case, long prison terms and caning. Sir, as Mr Shanmugam has pointed out, it is the responsibility of Parliament to decide what acts should be criminalised, and the importance and emphasis to be placed on each crime. Based on the seriousness of the crime, and the damage it does to society and to the victims, Parliament then provides an appropriate penalty framework. For some serious crimes, due to the potential harm that they cause and to register society's disapprobation, it is necessary to send a deterrent signal by providing for minimum or mandatory sentences. This, by their nature, limits the degree of discretion that the courts have in deciding on sentences.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank all 16 Members who have spoken on the Bill. I am heartened by their strong support for the Bill and, more importantly, for their support for the tough stance that we take against drugs. Minister for Law, Mr Shanmugam, has earlier addressed the legal issues that Members have brought up and also the consequences of the decisions that we make in this House. Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs, Mr Masagos Zulkifli, has also addressed issues related to implementing the recommendations of the Taskforce on Drugs. Having listened carefully to Members' speeches on Monday, there was a number of recurring themes which I would like to now address in broad terms. First, should Parliament change the law to do away with the mandatory death penalty and leave the discretion to the Courts? Second, has the mandatory death penalty been effective in helping to curb the drug menace? Third, do the amendments to the mandatory death penalty send a wrong signal that we are softening our stance against drugs? And finally, can the "substantive assistance" provision really be effective? But let me take a step back and re-focus ourselves on the challenges that we are facing, and the policy objectives that we are aiming for in tabling these amendments to the Misuse of Drugs Act. It is with this overall perspective in mind that I will take us through each of these points before wrapping up by taking a look at our holistic approach to combating the drug scourge. Page: 1238 First, should Parliament do away with the mandatory death penalty for drug offences and leave the discretion with the Courts? Sir, when Parliament sat in 1975 to consider the drug problem, they were faced with a serious drug situation which was threatening to overwhelm Singapore.”
“The Traffic Police (TP) takes a firm and active enforcement stand against motorists who beat the red lights. In the first nine months of this year, TP detected 13,881 red-light violations, an increase of 3% from the 13,490 violations detected over the same period in 2011. TP deploys red light cameras at road junctions that are identified to be problematic based on accident data and public feedback. Traffic junctions that do not have red light cameras installed are supported by TP's mobile enforcement operations. TP periodically reviews the deployment of red light cameras based on ground assessment, and will consider installing additional cameras at problematic junctions if needed. TP will also be upgrading its current fleet of cameras to digital technology in the near future to allow for more effective enforcement and deterrence against red-running offences. While enforcement and penalties are needed, TP will also continue with its efforts to educate motorists about road safety. We need a community of road users who use the roads in a manner that is safe for themselves and others, to ensure safe roads for all. Page: 1153”
“Page: 1153 NCPG's 2011 Gambling Participation Survey indicated that the overall gambling participation rate and the probable pathological and problem gambling rate have remained stable among Singapore residents after the opening of the casinos. CRA, MSF and NCPG will continue to closely monitor the social impact of casino gambling, and fine-tune our policies and measures to ensure that the vulnerable within our society are protected against the harms of gambling. Page: 1153”
“The National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) was established in 2005 with the objective of reducing the impact of problem gambling on individuals, families and society. The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and NCPG undertake public education initiatives to raise awareness of the potential harms of gambling and avenues for help. NCPG also works closely with Family Service Centres to provide counselling, treatment, and integrated credit, legal and financial advisory services for problem gamblers. The Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA), MSF and NCPG work in partnership to limit the social impact of casino gambling. There are established platforms for these agencies to meet and discuss issues relating to problem gambling. Senior representatives from CRA, including its Chief Executive, are regularly invited to join NCPG's meetings as resource persons. Since the casinos began operations in Singapore, CRA, MSF and NCPG have worked together to monitor the social impact, review our regulatory framework and identify enhancements to our social safeguard regime. The agencies have collectively proposed new measures, such as the Visit Limit regime, an enhanced Responsible Gambling regime for casinos, and stronger deterrence and penalties against deliberate breaches of social safeguards. The proposed amendments to the Casino Control Act will bring these enhanced measures into effect. At the operational level, CRA and NCPG work in close partnership to implement the social safeguards. While the NCPG issues casino exclusion orders, CRA enforces such orders on the casino floor. CRA and NCPG will work together to operationalise the proposed Visit Limit regime under the amendment Bill.”
“A total of 10,900 Singapore citizens renounced their citizenship between 2001 and 2011, which was on average about 1,000 per year. About half of the renunciations were by ethnic Chinese citizens, with Malay, Indian and Others making up the other half. Page: 1152”
“In the last five years, from 2007 to 2011, an average of 42 permanent residents had their PR status revoked each year. The key reasons for revocation include having been convicted and jailed for criminal offences, and providing false declarations in their PR applications. The revocation of PR status is a serious matter. ICA makes a careful evaluation of the facts and circumstances of each case before action is taken to revoke the PR. The factors that are considered include the nature and severity of the offence, the sentence received for the offence, whether the conduct breached public peace or was prejudicial to public order, and the person's family ties in Singapore. Page: 1143”
“Strict record keeping requirements are also imposed on the Casino Operators, and they are required to file a report for any cash transaction involving an amount of $10,000 or more. Casino Operators who fail to comply with our anti-money laundering laws are liable to fines and disciplinary actions, which may include suspension or cancellation of the casino licences. Since the casinos began operations, our enforcement agencies have not detected any major infringement of the anti-money laundering provisions of the Casino Control Act by the Casino Operators. There has been one conviction of a person for money laundering in a casino under the CDSA thus far. That case involved a person who had misappropriated jewellery from her employer and converted her criminal proceeds, from pawning that jewellery, into gambling chips at a casino. Page: 1133 The Government will continue to benchmark our casino regulatory regime against international standards and best practices to keep our casinos free from criminal influence and exploitation.”
“We recognise that casinos are vulnerable to criminal activities, such as money laundering and terrorism financing, and have put in place a robust framework to mitigate the risks. This strict regime is underpinned by two key pieces of legislation – the Casino Control Act (CCA) and the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act (CDSA). Our anti-money laundering regime for casinos is aligned to the recommendations of the inter-governmental Financial Action Task Force (FATF). These recommendations prescribe international standards on how jurisdictions should combat money laundering and terrorism financing, and apply to financial institutions, such as banks, and non-bank entities, including casinos. Let me highlight the key safeguards that we have put in place. The CDSA, as the primary piece of legislation against money laundering, criminalises the laundering of benefits derived from serious crimes. It requires persons, including Casino Operators and their employees, to report any suspicious transactions if they know or suspect that the funds may represent criminal proceeds. Specifically for casinos, the CCA prescribes measures that Casino Operators are required to put in place to prevent and detect money laundering and terrorist financing. The Casino Operators are prohibited from entering into any transaction involving the conversion of money from one form to another when the funds are not used for gaming. As part of the mandatory "Customer Due Diligence" measures, the Casino Operators are required to verify patrons' identities when they open gaming accounts, and monitor these accounts to ensure consistency with their knowledge of the patrons' income profiles or source of funds.”
“Our firm stand against drugs has helped us to keep drug abuse under control, at a time when other Southeast Asian countries have seen their drug problems worsen significantly. The measures in this Bill will send a strong deterrent message and enhance operational effectiveness of our enforcement agencies. They strengthen our ability to curb the demand for and the supply of drugs, in particular our ability to act against and deter those who target the young. At the same time, the Bill will introduce an element of discretion in the sentencing of drug couriers. The mandatory death penalty will continue to apply for drug traffickers in most circumstances. The changes to the mandatory death penalty will only apply if tightly defined and specific conditions are met. We believe that the measures strike the right balance given the current operating environment. However, we will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the Misuse of Drugs Act and make other changes or tighten the provisions, if necessary. Mr Speaker, Sir, today, Singaporeans enjoy a safe and secure environment because of our firm stance against drugs and crime. We have long taken a "zero-tolerance" approach against the drug menace. The amendments proposed in this Bill will strengthen our ability to do so in our new operating environment, and allow us to continue doing all we can to keep our streets safe and to protect our children from the scourge of drugs. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Page: 1076 [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 3.45 pm”
“Page: 1075 Finally, the Bill also includes a number of miscellaneous and consequential amendments which are technical and administrative in nature. Mr Speaker, Sir, the threat posed by organised drug syndicates is a very serious one. The global drug situation is worsening, with the number of drug users across the world increasing from 180 million to some 210 million over the last decade. Within our own region, the drug problem has become worse. Illicit drugs draw thousands of people every year into a web of addiction and despair. Their family members and the rest of society also pay a heavy price. Those who trade in illegal drugs are still attracted by the huge financial gains to be made, and deterring them requires the strictest enforcement coupled with the severest of penalties. We deal with the drug problem comprehensively by tackling both the demand and supply factors. On the demand side, we educate the young about the harmful effects of drugs, and impose severe penalties, including long-term sentences, on those who abuse drugs. This helps repeat drug abusers to break the cycle of addiction, and also prevents them from influencing others in the community, especially the young, to take drugs. For those who have a genuine desire to rid themselves of their addiction to drugs, we will provide the support and close supervision to help them to do so. On the supply side, our enforcement efforts against drug syndicates have inhibited drug supply and pushed up the street price of illicit drugs in Singapore. This is significant, especially given our close proximity to major source countries, and the fact that some 500,000 travellers enter or pass through Singapore every day.”
“"Substantive assistance" in disrupting drug trafficking activities may include, for example, the provision of information leading to the arrest or detention or prosecution of any person involved in any drug trafficking activity. Assistance which does not enhance the enforcement effectiveness of the CNB will not be sufficient. In order to ensure that this significant power is used judiciously and in a fair manner, the Public Prosecutor will determine whether there is in fact "substantive assistance" in any particular case. The new section 33B of the MDA provides that where the Public Prosecutor certifies that the defendant substantively cooperated with the CNB, the court will have the discretion to sentence the convicted person to life imprisonment with caning of at least 15 strokes, or death. Clause 27 relates to saving and transitional provisions. A person who has already been convicted of a relevant offence, that is, an offence under section 5(1) or 7 or an attempt to commit an offence under section 5(1) or 7, can elect to be considered for re-sentencing under the new regime in new section 33B. Clause 28 makes a related amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). Section 258 of the CPC provides that a statement recorded from an accused person may not be admissible if it is caused by a threat, inducement or promise by a person in authority. Operationally, the CNB will inform the accused person upon his arrest of the conditions under which the death penalty may not be applied. Section 258 of the CPC will be amended to provide that any statement subsequently taken from him will not be rendered inadmissible merely because he was so informed.”
“Clause 14 introduces changes to the death penalty regime for drug trafficking and drug importation or exportation under sections 5(1) and 7 of the MDA. Under the new section 33B, the court will have the discretion to decide whether to impose a sentence of life imprisonment and caning, or the death sentence, if the following two specific conditions are both met [Please refer to Annex 6 on Pg 1175]. First, the offender must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that his role in the offence is restricted only to that of a courier which, in essence, is a person whose role is confined to transporting, sending or delivering a controlled drug, and who does not play any other role within the drug syndicate. Page: 1074 Second, if having satisfied this first requirement, in order for the mandatory death penalty not to apply, either the Public Prosecutor must have certified that the person has substantively assisted the CNB in disrupting drug trafficking activities within or outside Singapore, or the person must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he is suffering from such abnormality of mind that it substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts and omissions in relation to the offences he has committed. The Bill uses the same formulation as that for the defence of diminished responsibility which applies to the offence of murder under the Penal Code. Those who are only drug couriers and are determined to have been acting under such an abnormality of mind will be sentenced to life imprisonment. The aim of the "substantive assistance" condition is to enhance the operational effectiveness of the CNB, by allowing investigators to reach higher into the hierarchy of drug syndicates.”
“Clause 13 amends section 33 by providing enhanced punishments for a person who commits a subsequent offence under section 5(1), that is, trafficking or section 7, that is, importation or exportation. The Taskforce on Drugs recommended stiff punishments for those who target the young or vulnerable. This is necessary, given the rise in young abusers arrested in recent years. Clause 13 provides for enhanced punishments for those who, being above the age of 21, supply drugs to young or vulnerable persons. In addition, clause 5 introduces a new section 12A which makes it an offence for any person above the age of 21 to recruit young or vulnerable persons to traffic, import or export controlled drugs. Fourth, the MDA will be amended to enhance upstream intervention for young abusers. Currently, young abusers arrested who are assessed to be of low risk are placed on a Direct Supervision Order, while those assessed to be of higher risk are placed in Drug Rehabilitation Centres (DRCs). The Taskforce on Drugs recommended the setting up of a Community Rehabilitation Centre (CRC) as a step-down arrangement for young abusers after they had served a short period of detention in the DRC. The CRC regime will comprise a structured residential component with counselling programmes in the evenings, while allowing the youths to continue with their education or employment during the day. This will minimise disruption to their daily lives and mitigate the risk of contamination from repeat abusers at the DRC. Clause 19 repeals and re-enacts section 38 to allow abusers to be transferred from the DRC to a CRC after the initial detention period. Finally, I will speak about the changes to the death penalty regime.”
“Clause 15 amends section 34 by empowering the Director of the Central Narcotics Bureau to make a supervision order requiring a person, whose hair specimens have tested positive for drugs, to be subject to the supervision of a CNB officer for a period not exceeding two years. Those who fail to provide hair specimens without a reasonable excuse will be subject to up to two years' imprisonment or a fine of $5,000 or both. Third, the MDA will be amended to strengthen our enforcement framework. It is currently an offence if the owner of any premises permits drug activities on his premises. However, it is not currently an offence to arrange or plan a gathering for the purpose of taking drugs. The Taskforce on Drugs found that new abusers are often introduced to drugs by friends at drug gatherings. Clause 4 introduces a new section 11A. Where there is a gathering of two or more persons, any person who arranges or plans the gathering with the knowledge that any controlled drug is, or is to be, consumed or trafficked at the gathering will be guilty of an offence. The punishment for this offence is an imprisonment term of not less than three years and not more than 20 years and caning at the court's discretion. Clause 13 provides for enhanced punishments if young or vulnerable persons are involved at the drug gathering. Young persons are defined in the MDA as persons under the age of 21. Vulnerable persons are defined as those who are suffering from a mental impairment. Page: 1073 We will enhance punishments for repeat drug traffickers. Currently, there are enhanced punishment provisions for repeat drug consumption in the MDA. However, there is no enhanced punishment for repeat trafficking offences.”
“However, the trafficking, manufacture, import, export, possession or consumption of any substance which is temporarily listed in the Fifth Schedule will not constitute an offence under the MDA, until that substance is removed from the Fifth Schedule and is subsequently listed as a controlled drug in the First Schedule whereupon all these offences will apply. Second, we will introduce the option of hair analysis to enhance our detection and deterrence capabilities. Currently, drug abuse is mainly detected and confirmed by urine tests. Urine tests are effective in detecting drug consumption for a few days from the time of abuse, after which the urine is less likely to contain sufficient traces of the drug. In contrast, hair analysis can detect drugs months after consumption. However, some time has to elapse after a drug is consumed before the drug and its metabolites which are incorporated into the hair become more clearly detectable through hair analysis. Hair analysis can therefore be a very useful complement to urine testing to detect drug consumption. Hair analysis is a relatively new technology in Singapore. As such, hair analysis will be used initially as an additional detection tool only for the purpose of making supervision orders. This will allow the Health Sciences Authority and the law enforcement and legal fraternities to build up further experience with the protocols in this area before a decision is taken on extending the use that hair analysis is put to. Clause 11 therefore introduces a new section 31A empowering law enforcement officers to obtain hair specimens for analysis.”
“The proposed amendments will provide our enforcement agencies more tools to target those higher up in the drug syndicates and to disrupt trafficking networks. While there is broad acceptance that we should be tough on drugs and crime, there is also increased expectation that, where appropriate, more sentencing discretion should be vested in the courts. Sir, allow me to now take this House through the key provisions of the Bill. First, listing new psychoactive substances temporarily. As I have mentioned, new psychoactive substances are today being developed very rapidly across the globe. Currently, before a substance is made illegal by being listed as a controlled drug under the MDA, careful study is needed. Research is undertaken to better understand its harmful effects. Industry consultation is also necessary to identify possible legitimate uses. This takes time and, in some cases, the drug may be in circulation, causing harm, long before these processes are completed. Page: 1072 Clause 23 of the Bill provides for a new Fifth Schedule to the MDA, within which new psychoactive substances can be temporarily listed for up to 12 months, with a possibility of extension for another 12 months. Other jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom and New Zealand also use a temporary listing regime to bring new psychoactive substances under legal control. Clauses 7 and 8 amend sections 24 and 26 to allow the Central Narcotics Bureau to seize the psychoactive substances listed in the Fifth Schedule, so that circulation of such substances can be restricted.”
“Page: 1071 On the demand side, the number of drug abusers arrested per year has increased by about 50% from 2,211 to 3,326 in the five-year period between 2007 and 2011 [Please refer to Annex 4 on Pg 1173]. Of particular concern is the increase in young abusers [Please refer to Annex 5 on Pg 1174], with the number of youths below 21 years of age arrested for drug abuse tripling from 103 in 2007 to 326 in 2011. In addition, about 2,000 repeat drug abusers will be released from the Long-Term Imprisonment regime between 2013 and 2014. Despite measures to help them stay off drugs upon their release, some may return to drug abuse and also influence others to take drugs. Rigorous and effective enforcement has helped us to stay on top of the drug situation. However, the operating landscape has become much more complex. Drug trafficking syndicates have responded to the increased risks of apprehension by moving offshore, with their leaders controlling their operations remotely. We have to adapt our enforcement measures. For example, we are now working more closely with Malaysia through an MOU signed in June 2012. Mr Speaker, Sir, I informed the House in July that we would be making changes to our legislation to strengthen our ability to deal more effectively with these new challenges. This Bill proposes important amendments to the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), bringing into effect the recommendations of the inter-Ministry Taskforce on Drugs, led by my colleague, Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs Mr Masagos Zulkifli. In addition, we are making a significant change to the way that the death penalty is applied to the offence of drug trafficking in order to keep pace with the evolving operating landscape and more effectively tackle drug trafficking.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, I addressed this House on 9 July 2012 on the challenges facing Singapore in the trafficking and use of illicit drugs. Let me now recap the key points [Slides were shown to hon Members]. Our firm stand against drugs has led to an improvement in Singapore's drug situation since the height of the problem in the mid-1990s [Please refer to Annex 1 on Pg 1170], with a decrease in the number of drug abusers arrested from 208 per 100,000 of our resident population in 1994 to 88 per 100,000 in 2011. However, we are concerned with recent trends and developments. On the supply side, we are seeing greater quantities of methamphetamine and heroin being trafficked through Southeast Asia [Please refer to Annex 2 on Pg 1171]. This has worsened the regional drug situation, with a significant number of clandestine laboratories operating in East and Southeast Asia. Just in 2009 and 2010, just two years, 61 laboratories were seized in Indonesia and 27 in Malaysia [Please refer to Annex 3 on Pg 1172]. As recently as June this year, a fire in a factory located at Pekan Nenas, Johor, just half an hour away from the Second Link, led Malaysian authorities to discover a clandestine laboratory producing methamphetamine. About RM$10 million worth of methamphetamine and "Ecstasy" tablets were seized. The drug problem in our immediate vicinity is very real. Globally, new psychoactive substances are also being developed so rapidly that law enforcement agencies are having difficulties dealing with them effectively. These new psychoactive substances mimic effects of controlled drugs such as amphetamines, cocaine and cannabis and have the potential to cause as much, if not more harm.”
“The expenditure incurred by the Elections Department for the Hougang By-election in May 2012 was $853,300. This included the cost of printing ballot papers and election materials, rental of equipment, transportation costs, and allowances paid to election officials. Page: 1022”
“There are approximately 33,000 pensioners drawing a pension from the Government as at 30 June 2012. The following table shows the amount paid out to Government pensioners for the 10 years, extracted from the Government Financial Statement from FY2002 to FY2011, rounded up to the nearest million: Since 1974, there have been nine revisions to the gross pension ceiling with the latest revision made on 1 April 2011. In the latest revision, the gross monthly pension ceiling, was revised to $1,190. The Government will continue to carry out regular reviews of the gross pension ceiling and revise it when necessary. Page: 1022”
“The number of heavy vehicle speeding violations detected increased from 584 in 2010 to 1,182 in 2011. However, this data must be seen against an increase in traffic enforcement operations against heavy vehicles in 2011. In terms of accident statistics, in 2010, there were 246 accidents involving heavy vehicles, of which 163, or 66%, were at least partly attributable to heavy vehicle drivers. In 2011, there were 237 accidents involving heavy vehicles, of which 131, or 55%, were at least partly attributable to heavy vehicle drivers. The accident situation has improved further this year with 49 such accidents recorded from January to June, as compared to 77 accidents over the same period in 2011. The Traffic Police takes a tough enforcement stance against errant heavy vehicle drivers, given the potential of serious accidents involving such vehicles. At the same time, TP also engages relevant stakeholders, such as the heavy vehicle associations and the Singapore Road Safety Council, to raise road safety awareness amongst heavy vehicle drivers and improve their skills. Page: 1009”
“For the six-month period of January to June 2012, there were 5,228 reported cases of unlicensed moneylending and related harassment. This represents a drop of 21% when compared to the 6,642 cases reported in the same period in 2011. In contrast, the number of persons arrested rose by 22% to 1,033 persons between the same two six-month periods. This overall improvement in the situation continues the trend which commenced two years ago. Police released this information in its regular report on the crime situation in Singapore on 14 August 2012. The number of persons arrested for unlicensed moneylending and harassment offences from 2009 to June 2012, who are of the age of 19 years old and below, is provided in the table below. Page: 921 We are not able to provide statistics on the number of debtors arrested. This is because borrowing from loansharks is not an offence, and Police do not routinely verify if the persons arrested for loanshark activities were also debtors. Page: 921”
“An average of 3,400 Singapore Permanent Residents (PRs) renounced their permanent residence status each year from 2006 to 2011. This works out to an annual renunciation rate of about 0.7% out of the average stock of 500,000 PRs during this period. PRs are not required to give reasons for their renunciations. Page: 920”
“The pension paid to a pensioner is based on the officer's length of service and his pensionable salary at the eve of retirement. The pension is a fixed quantum and is tax-exempt. To help pensioners in the lower pensions group cope with inflation, the Government in 1974 introduced an ex-gratia allowance called the Singapore Allowance (SA) over and above the pensions paid to pensioners residing in Singapore, subject to a gross monthly pension ceiling. The current SA quantum and gross monthly pension ceiling is $260 per month and $1,190 respectively. Since 1974, there have been 11 revisions to the SA with the last four revisions made between 2007 and 2011. In the latest revision made on 1 April 2011, the SA quantum was revised by $20 to $260 and the gross monthly pension ceiling (that is, SA and basic pension) revised by $20 to $1,190. The Government will continue to carry out regular reviews of the gross pension ceiling and revise it when necessary. Page: 920”
“From 2004 to 2012, a total of 1,080 investors were granted permanent residence (PR) status under the Financial Investor Scheme (FIS). Asian investors came mainly from China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and ASEAN countries, while non-Asian investors came from countries, such as Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. In the same period, 194 applications were rejected. The FIS has ceased with effect from 15 April 2012. Page: 919”
“Singapore's resident6 Total Fertility Rate (TFR) has been below replacement level for more than 30 years, and has been on a general downward trend. This is a common challenge faced by other East Asian urbanised societies, such as Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan. Singapore's low TFR has resulted in an ageing citizen population as life expectancies increase. Without immigration, and if our current low TFR continues, the citizen population will age and shrink rapidly. The size of the citizen population will decline from 2025 onwards, and the citizen population will age from a median age of 39.6 in 2012 to 46.9 in 2030. Immigration delays the ageing and decline of our citizen population. The effects of immigration on the share of the citizen population aged 65 and above were examined in NPTD Occasional Paper on Citizen Population Scenarios published in April 2012 and widely reported in the media. The data provided in the Occasional Paper is summarised below. Page: 919 While a calibrated pace of immigration can help to delay the decline and ageing of our citizen population, supporting Singaporeans in getting married and having children is our key priority, and it will continue to be so.”
“Our demographic changes will result in a smaller pool of working-age citizens and lower citizen old-age support ratio within the next decade. A multi-pronged approach is needed to overcome the challenges of a shrinking and ageing citizen workforce. First, we are working towards raising our productivity through business restructuring and the retraining of our workforce through initiatives like the Productivity and Innovation Credit and Capability Development Scheme. Second, we are also encouraging more residents, including older workers and women, to enter and stay in the workforce through job-redesign and flexi-work schemes. Third, we need calibrated levels of foreign manpower to complement our resident workforce. With current birth rates and no immigration, there will only be 2.1 working-age citizens (aged 20-64) to each citizen aged 65 and above in 2030. If our citizen population is supplemented by immigrants and a foreign workforce, the old-age support ratio in the total population will improve. However, there are no international targets or recommended standards for the old-age support ratio. A declining ratio will mean a greater fiscal burden borne by working-age citizens. There will also be fewer citizens looking after their parents and elderly relatives. Issues regarding the sustainability of our citizen workforce will also arise. A comparison of old-age support ratios of many developed countries today is in the table below. Page: 918 The Government is engaging the public on these issues and is preparing to release a White Paper on Population in January 2013. We have invited Singaporeans, including all Members of Parliament, to provide their views. Page: 918”
“There have been no incidents leading to violence among foreign nationals in Singapore thus far arising from the latest South China Sea maritime dispute. However, we are monitoring the situation closely, and will take firm action against acts calculated to inflame sentiments among different nationalities or groups in Singapore. We advise members of the public not to participate in activities which could lead to public disorder or negatively affect our relations with other countries. Any such activities should be reported to the Police.”
“I would like to thank Members for their interest in the medical benefits for civil servants. In July this year, Mr Zainal Sapari had also asked whether the Civil Service would consider increasing the quantum of medical benefits under the Medisave-cum-Subsidised Outpatient (MSO) Scheme. I would like to assure this House that the Public Service Division (PSD) is currently in the midst of reviewing the medical benefits for civil servants. Page: 900 As part of the review, PSD will benchmark the Civil Service medical benefits with the market and assess if the current provisions are sufficient to meet the needs of officers. The review is expected to be completed by the end of this year and we will make adjustments to the medical benefits if necessary. Page: 900”
“I should say from the outset that this issue has nothing to do with foreigners in Singapore. Even Singaporeans can be intolerant and Singaporeans have also shown intolerance for foreigners in quite unpleasant ways. Mr Speaker, Sir, what is important is that, as the Prime Minister says, we all understand, we are all human beings. There needs to be a certain generosity of spirit. We need to make greater efforts to understand each other. Singapore has always been a multi-racial and multi-religious society. People come here, they appreciate us because we are a multi-racial and multi-religious society and because of these important values that we hold. Through education, the individuals' practice and good modelling of behaviour, we hope that everyone in Singapore will subscribe to and conform with accepted patterns of behaviour both in the real world as well as on the Internet. Page: 808”
“Sir, I appreciate what Prof Tan is trying to say. Prof Tan will probably agree with me that it cannot be that everything goes on the Internet. It also cannot be that the Government clamps down on everything on the Internet. So, the issue is how to draw a line and how to come to a conclusion. In fact, this is one of the dilemmas and issues which the Government has to face. MHA assesses both the content and the possible impact of the Internet content in determining whether to request the blocking of the Internet content, in this particular case, this video. The issue at hand is not censorship of Internet content but taking the necessary pre-emptive measures to prevent Internet content from inciting or being used to incite social unrest in Singapore. In this particular instance, the violent protests and religious tensions in several countries around the world, including in our neighbourhood, had been escalating and, of greatest concern, in countries which are not so dissimilar from ours. Page: 807 Given the inflammatory and offensive nature of the film and the violence spreading through several countries, the Government decided that it was necessary to take a firm stand. This was also a matter of principle, because it is not the kind of thing which we want to see. Certainly, if it was produced in Singapore, we would have taken action against it according to the law. So, even though this video was produced somewhere else and available in Singapore, we felt that it was necessary for us to do something about it, as a matter of principle, if we can. As I said earlier, the consequences of a single incident in Singapore could have a long-lasting impact on the inter-racial and inter-religious bonds we have built over the years.”
“Such decisive actions assure the public that the Government will act whenever the line is crossed, and there is no need for affected groups to respond in inappropriate ways. This episode is a tragic reminder that freedom of expression does not mean that one has unfettered rights to insult and denigrate another's religion or race, things which are held very deeply and very dear by others. Rather, we safeguard this freedom only through mutual respect of the views and beliefs of others. By observing these principles, we maintain the social peace and stability we enjoy today. This is the basis upon which our strong communal relations have been built, and we must never let this be undermined by the highly irresponsible acts of a few individuals. Asst Prof Tan Kheng Boon Eugene (Nominated Member): I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his reply. Sir, there are many similar provocations that we will see in the online world. So, the question is: is the ban on the trailer to "Innocence of Muslims" an exception rather than the rule? I must hasten to add that such hate speech should not be tolerated at all. But my larger concern is whether we will weaken our ability to deal with hate speech, particularly in this case where the hate speech did not originate from Singapore. The local population dealt with it in a very mature and admirable manner. I am not so clear from the Minister's reply when is the line exactly crossed. In short, the question is whether the pre-emptive measure by the Government with regard to this trailer is an exception rather than the rule. The concern is how do we fortify ourselves, because there will constantly be hate speeches like these.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am heartened that the public reacted calmly and rationally to this inflammatory and offensive film. It shows that within our society, people, by and large, understand the need for self-restraint and tolerance, and reject views which denigrate the faiths and beliefs of others. The film sparked a wave of riots and attacks in various parts of the world that resulted, sadly, in injuries and deaths, to protesters, to law enforcement officials, and probably to innocent bystanders as well. The protests came very close to home, with incidents reported in Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines and Thailand. To prevent violence from escalating further, the video was subsequently blocked in several countries, including Malaysia and Indonesia, following requests from those countries to Google to do so. Given the inflammatory and offensive nature of the film, and the violence spreading through several countries, the Government decided that it was necessary to take a firm stand as a matter of principle. The consequences of a single incident in Singapore could have a long-lasting impact on the inter-racial and inter-religious bonds we have built over the years. In addition to the request made to Google, the Ministry of Home Affairs at the same time also engaged community and religious leaders to reiterate our stand against religious intolerance, and re-affirm our commitment to social peace and stability. Page: 806 In multi-racial, multi-religious Singapore, we have laws against the incitement of hatred and disharmony between religious and racial groups, and we have used them when warranted. Beyond drawing the boundaries of acceptable behaviour, these laws allow the Government to act decisively against threats to the social peace and stability we enjoy.”