Vikram Nair
Singapore
“I thank the Minister of State for the answer, as well as forming a workgroup to look into this issue. I think it is worrying that platform workers have a much higher rate of workplace injuries than many other groups and I think compensation is one component, but does the Minister of State think any interim measures are needed while the wo…”
“I thank the Minister of State for the answer. I think it is an improvement from the last time this question was asked two years ago, which was 17 minutes and 164 minutes. So, there is improvement. But a one-and-a half-hour waiting time is still quite long.”
“Thank you, and I thank the Minister of State for flagging the answer to me as well. So, I have a supplementary question. The answer was that the Ministry is engaging the digital service providers as well as preparing advisories for parents.”
“I thank the Minister of State for the response and to explain that the OCHA Directions are being issued to Telegram as well. The only reason I mentioned Telegram specifically is it seems to emerge in a whole range of crimes, including selling of drugs, etomidate, sexual crimes, scams.”
“It seeks to enable efficient cross-border travel while retaining Singapore's legal framework and ensuring that foreign officers cooperate within defined limits. It also provides for reciprocity, so that Singapore officers can exercise similar functions in Malaysia.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I note that amongst the different sources of energy, diesel prices have risen much higher than electricity prices. And diesel fuels many commercial operators, including buses and lorries, which feeds into many other sectors.”
The complete record
Every one of 760 lines we hold for Vikram Nair, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 16 of 16.
“The second question I will deal with is immigration and whether we need it, because that seems to be the fundamental difference between what the White Paper proposes and what the Workers' Party is putting forward. And I think both of these are very important issues. Let me deal with the first point in terms of opportunities. By and large, as Singaporeans age, there will be the risk of a diminishing workforce. But even in that, there will be industries that have opportunities, there will be industries that can grow around helping the old. One area, in particular, for example, is medicine. There will definitely be a need for doctors. I am also hoping that as we expand the opportunities, we also try to preserve more of these opportunities for Singaporeans, specifically. I know many young doctors, for example, one who studied with me in the university who could not get a place in medicine at NUS. His parents were able to afford an education abroad, he was one of the top in Cambridge but he could not get a place in NUS. There were many others who may not have had a chance to study medicine in Singapore, even though they may have had very good grades. What I am hoping is that as we expand the economy, we still do look out for opportunities Page: 137 that Singaporeans will want and expand places there because I know that there are some jobs Singaporeans may not want, but medicine is not one of them. Let me go a bit broader on opportunities. The second point is this. I also think there is scope for us to make sure that opportunities come to Singaporeans first.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, like many Singaporeans, when I first saw the headline about the White Paper that we were going to have a Page: 136 population target of 6.9 million, I had a very heavy heart. As it is, most of the residents who stay in my area are feeling the constraints of a crowded city. The trains are crowded. There is a shortage of housing and, for some of the older citizens, they were also saying that even getting places in hospitals are difficult. It was certainly with a heavy heart that I read the headlines. Now, when I actually read the White Paper itself and followed by the subsequent clarifications by Ministers, I had a little bit more reassurance. It is pretty clear that the number of 6.9 million is really a number for planning purposes which actually means that the bigger the number, the more infrastructure we will have, the more houses we will have, the more transport we will have. In that sense, the bigger the number you plan for, the more room you will have and the more ease you will have. If we do not hit that number, for example, that means there will be more space on trains, more space on buses and so on. In that sense, with regard to my initial knee-jerk reaction – that we are going to have too many people and our island cannot deal with it – I am a little bit reassured. Of course, the real proof of the pudding will be if these effects are actually felt by Singaporeans over the next couple of years. So, hopefully this is something that will play out. Now there are two particular things I want to deal with in my speech. The first is how we can make sure that even as we expand infrastructure capacity and a large number of foreigners come into Singapore, we can continue to preserve opportunities and employment for Singaporeans.”
“The second question – and this is just to understand how the Workers' Party runs the shop when it is in charge – does the Workers' Party's Town Council either directly or indirectly hire foreign workers? "Indirectly" meaning through the managing agent.”
“Two questions for the hon Member. The first is I understand the Workers' Party's aim is to reach the population of 5.9 million in 2030 and the focus of this would be growing the domestic workforce participation. But how much immigration does the Workers' Party envision within this 5.9 million number? Is it zero or is it some growth and, if so, how Page: 74 much, because we do not have the breakdown? That is the first question.”
“Again, this is something which only time will tell and I think we should give this legislation a chance to work out and see what exactly happens. Going forward, I think this is definitely an important step we are taking and whether it works or does not work is something that we should be alert to see whether or not we move in the right direction. In particular, I think it would be useful to keep track of our rates of drug offences. By drug offences, I do not just mean arrests, because high numbers of arrests may indicate enforcement, but also other figures, such as drug addiction rates and so on, and also to keep an eye on how this compares to other countries. I mean, if other countries are able to reduce their drug addiction rates without using the measures we are using, then perhaps we can learn from them too. But if we compare ourselves to our immediate vicinity and we realise that ours is really the most effective means possible, then we need to be firm and stand by our grounds as well. So, Mr Speaker, I do support this amendment Bill. I have some reservations like many of our speakers, but I think it is a step in the right direction. Page: 1108 5.43 pm”
“In terms of how the mechanics of the Bill will work, in relation to certificate of cooperation, I understand the intention of the Bill is to make sure that this does not end up being another football just tossed around in court, so, therefore, it is not really subject to review except in very limited cases. But, in practice, if there is a hope and that certificate is not provided, I think there will be a very strong temptation for any defendant to bring it into challenge. So, the reality is that the certificate might end up in court despite our best efforts with allegations of malice and bad faith being used. So this will be something that the enforcement authorities would need to take into account as well. On the language used for the defence, I would use the language of diminished responsibility but this is really the unsoundness of mind defence. The language used of the Act is very similar to diminished responsibility defence used for murder. But, of course, a drug offence is very different from murder. So I think it will probably take some time for the courts to develop the jurisprudence on how the diminished responsibility defence that was used in murder would apply in the case of drug offences. I am confident the courts will be able to develop that, but it would probably mean that it would not be exact same types of cases that would fulfil the requirements in both cases. For example, in relation to murder, diabetics who have not taken their medicine could qualify for the defence but that may not be the case where the person is a drug mule. The last concern, of course, is one of whether or not this might create perverse incentives to exploit the groups that have been described as vulnerable or might fulfil the requirement of vulnerability to become drug mules.”
“And one of the things that I learned from that conference was that many of our neighbours actually respect the regime we have, or at least the parliamentarians mentioned that to me aside. But they may not be able to do the exact same things in their countries. Our rates of drug addiction and offences are much lower than in many of the other countries. One of the main reasons I support the legislative changes that we have here is that I think it takes a more nuanced approach in dealing with drug pushers. It tries to distinguish between those who might be less culpable drug mules and those who are, in fact, behind the business. It also tries to reward those who cooperate. So, theoretically, it means that the Police are able to arrest people higher up the drug chain. I think arresting the people at the very top will be very ambitious but at least they are able to arrest people slightly higher up, and that would disable the business somewhat. Page: 1107 Like many of the Members who have come before me, I have several concerns about the Bill as well and how it would actually play out. I would just list four of them. The first, and I think one which many others have mentioned earlier, is the signalling. Are we sending a signal that Singapore is getting softer on drugs? From the language the Deputy Prime Minister used to introduce the Bill, I think it is very clear that this is really not the signal we are intending to send. And I hope that is the message that everyone will get, including those who are intending to bring drugs to our shores.”
“Page: 1106 When I joined the GPC for Home Affairs, one area which I was very interested in was the rehabilitation of ex-offenders, and I asked about the recidivism rates for different offences in Singapore. I was very surprised to learn that the recidivism rate for non-drug related offences was actually quite low. However, when it came to drug-related offences, not only was recidivism high, but a good number had convictions for other offences too. It appeared that once they became addicted, the addicts needed to engage in other crimes in order to get the money to feed the habit. So, if drug abuse is not the root of all evil, it certainly is the root of many evils. If we step back a little further, as a matter of principle, the drug trade exploits some of the most vulnerable people in our society and, at least in the case that I have come across − those with lower income, less education − and hooks them onto a habit that can be cynically exploited for income. I was particularly angry when I heard reports about drug pushers being spotted near the rental blocks in my area, essentially targeting people who already have a whole lot of problems and trying to add more to it. And not only that, many of the people whom they seem to be targeting − and there are a lot of young people who live in these blocks – are the young people. So, it seems that the young people are the ones they are going after. And I think the utter destruction of individuals and families by drugs is what warrants the very tough stance we have taken so far. When I attended a recent ASEAN Inter-parliamentary meeting dealing with the menace of drugs, I learned a few more things. I learned that the menace of drugs is not unique to Singapore and it is something that all our neighbours are struggling with.”
“Mr Speaker, like many of those before me, my focus is on clause 14 of the Misuse of Drugs Act dealing with the amendments to the mandatory death penalty in certain cases. As a young university student, I remember that the mandatory death penalty, especially for drug offences, was one law that I was deeply uncomfortable with. In relation to drugs in particular, I believe that the Government should play a minimal role in the lives of individuals, perhaps this was from a liberal-minded individual. I believe that if individuals want to take drugs, it was their problem, and it might be a silly decision but it was not something the Government should get involved in. Following from this, it seemed quite anomalous to have a death penalty for people who trafficked in drugs. My view on this matter changed quite dramatically, after I started attending Meet-the-People sessions. It was at that point that I met drug addicts, former drug addicts and their families and experienced first-hand the actual trauma that drug addiction brought to people. Almost all the cases I met at my MPS sessions were people from the lower income groups, often less educated, and quite often the drug they were addicted to was heroin. When I asked them how they started, they usually mentioned it was because of peer influence, friends introduced them to it. The social pressure forced them to get into it and once they started, they were hooked. The drug addiction often haunts them for life. They never really escaped. One sad case I dealt with involved an addict who had been out of prison for about four years, remained reasonably clean, but recently re-offended because his old friends caught up with him again.”
“I agree with the Minister's endorsement of the strong dollar policy − that is probably the best way to keep consumer price inflation down. My only concern is whether a strong dollar policy also attracts a lot of capital which may, in turn, create asset price inflation. I think getting capital in for cheaper borrowing costs and higher equity values is probably a good thing, but if this capital flows to the property market, it may actually create higher property prices. So, I am wondering if there are any other controls to keep this in check.”