Wong Kan Seng
Singapore
“We all want a better future for our children and the future generations. Amid the debates, let us not lose sight of what we are working for – we are working for the benefit and future of Singaporeans. Not for growth targets, not for foreigners, but for Singaporeans.”
“Mrs Mildred Tan also suggested doing a longitudinal study on the impact of new citizens on Singapore. I am told that there is a periodic study on the perception of integration and rootedness of Singaporeans and PRs. A study is now ongoing too.”
“All they need to do is simply declare that they meet the residential criteria. EASING IN US ECONOMY (Impact on Singapore) 9. Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Senior Minister what will be the expected impact on the Singapore economy arising from the US Federal Reserve's announcement on 3rd November 2010 of a "quantitative easing" of the US economy…”
“Well, from the data I have here, 553 registered to vote before the 2006 GE and this is the data I have but Ms Lim may be right. There may be 1,000-odd that Ms Lim had mentioned. From what I am told now, we have 1,325 Singaporean overseas who are eligible to register to vote have registered.”
“But, as I said, there are so many other possibilities that they could come in and there could also be many possibilities that we could have missed and they have entered or left Singapore. LAND SWAP AGREEMENT FOR KTM STATION AND RAILWAY LANDS 2.”
“They are also recruiting people by offering them scholarships. So, we hope more of our companies can do that. Hopefully they come here to work for a while and, if they like our place, they may want to settle down. This is a place which they can think about. POPULATION AND TALENT DIVISION 5. Assoc. Prof.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,192 lines we hold for Wong Kan Seng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 64.
“The overall aim of the punishment framework is to reduce crime, protect society and maintain law and order. Several factors are taken into account in proposals to increase the maximum imprisonment terms of offences in the Penal Code. The number and trend of convictions for each offence are only one of these factors. Indeed, this number may fluctuate from year to year in line with the overall crime rates for any particular year. Also, it is not meaningful to base our decision whether to increase the maximum imprisonment terms on the number of sentences in the past which have hit 80% or more of the maximum sentences. Taking such an approach would disregard the facts and circumstances of the case which the Judge would have taken into account in considering what is the appropriate sentence to be meted out. Apart from the number and trend of convictions for each offence, the other considerations taken into account in deciding on the maximum sentences are: a. Punishment should reflect the severity of the offence and serve as a deterrent; b. The need to maintain proportionality between the offence and the punishment; c. The type and quantum of punishment should provide sufficient flexibility to our Courts to mete out an appropriate sentence in a particular case, rather than to amend the law to adjust the punishment every now and then; d. The need to maintain relativity in the punishment for related offences within the Penal Code; e. The need to maintain relativity in the punishment for similar offences covered under different statutes; f. The need to retain mandatory minimum punishment and to abolish it where it is no longer necessary to retain them; and g. The need to reduce the gap between 10 years or life imprisonment for double-limb penalty provisions.”
“The number of persons convicted, imprisoned and those who were sentenced to five months' imprisonment or more under section 143 (Punishment for unlawful assembly) of the Penal Code, for the last 10 years (1997 to 2006), is provided in the table below. No. of persons convicted, imprisoned and sentenced to 5 months imprisonment or more under section 143 of the Penal Code 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 No. of persons convicted 571 453 486 254 217 242 347 295 234 272 Imprisoned 121 123 128 113 86 128 146 97 72 92 5 months imprisonment or more 24 8 3 15 18 24 30 21 11 3 PROPOSED PENAL CODE (AMENDMENT) BILL (Increase in maximum sentences) 4. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs, in view of the proposed Penal Code (Amendment) Bill issued for public consultation in November 2006 which proposes to increase the maximum sentences for certain offences as set out in the Schedule to the Bill, for each of the last ten years, (a) how many convictions have there been for each of those offences; (b) how many involved sentences of imprisonment; and (d) how many sentences were at 80% or more of the maximum duration of imprisonment permitted.”
“Rape cases where deception was used in the course of committing the offence under section 376 of the Penal Code are not separately noted and recorded. Nevertheless, based on anecdotal accounts, cases where accused persons had intentionally deceived the victims into sexual intercourse or intentionally induced the victims to consent to sexual intercourse by impersonating a person known to the victims, are not common. This is backed by what can be culled from the compilation of facts in the preliminary reports submitted by the Investigation Officers when rape cases are reported. PROSECUTION UNDER PENAL CODE (Punishment for unlawful assembly) 3. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs for each of the last ten years (a) how many convictions were there for offences under section 143 of the Penal Code; and (b) of these, how many were sentenced to imprisonment and how many were sentenced to five or more months of imprisonment.”
“Under section 140(5) of the Women's Charter, the presence of reasonable cause to believe that the girl was above the age of 16 years shall be a valid defence on the first occasion on which he is charged with an offence of carnal connection under section 140 (1)(i). We do not actively track the breakdown of the number of cases where the defence of mistaking the age of the victim was invoked. From anecdotal accounts, it is not common for accused persons to use mistaking the age of victims as a defence for their sexual offences. POLICE INVESTIGATIONS ON RAPE CASES (Section 376 of Penal Code) 2. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs for each of the last ten years, how many cases were investigated by the police involving allegations of an offence under section 376 of the Penal Code where the person alleged to have committed an offence (i) intentionally deceived the victim as to the nature of the acts in question; and (ii) intentionally induced the victim to consent to those acts by impersonating a person known to the victim.”
“The statistics on the number of persons convicted under section 377A (Outrages on decency) of the Penal Code between 1997 and 2006 are shown below. Prosecution statistics are not available. Police does not proactively enforce the provision. Number of persons convicted under section 377A 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 25 16 31 30 23 25 11 13 4 7 STRAY CATS (Figures on complaints) 4. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Minister for National Development, of the approximately 10,000 complaints about stray cats received by the Agri-Food Veterinary Authority (AVA), HDB and the Town Councils (a) how many were repeat complaints; (b) how many persons were these repeat complaints attributable to; and (c) how many of these repeat complaints were directed to AVA, HDB and the Town Councils respectively.”
“Over the last 10 years, ie, from 1997 to 2006, an average of about 36,000 persons were granted permanent residence (PR) in Singapore annually. They came predominantly from South-East, South and East Asia and some were from diverse places, such as the Americas, Oceania and Europe (see Table 1 below). Table 1: Average number of PR granted annually for 1997-2006 Nationality Average number of PR granted annually for 1997-2006 Percentage South East Asian Countries 17,522 48.4% Other Asian countries 16,183 44.7% Others 2,487 6.9% Total 36,192 100% The total PR granted has generally been on an upward trend. Since 2001, the number of PR granted was consistently more than 30,000. For the years 2005 and 2006, the number of PR granted was above 50,000. Over the last 10 years, an average of about 8,500 Singapore Permanent Residents became Singapore Citizens annually. PROSECUTIONS UNDER PENAL CODE (Outrages on decency) 3. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs, in each of the last 10 years, (a) how many prosecutions and convictions have there been under section 377A of the Penal Code; (b) how many of these prosecutions were police prosecutions; and (c) how many of these police prosecutions were the result of proactive police enforcement.”
“Thirteen persons were detained in relation to the Jemaah Islamiyah arrests in 2001. Three of them have been released from detention. They had cooperated in investigations and had responded positively to rehabilitation. The remaining 10 persons are still in detention. They had taken part in terrorist training, armed jihad and terrorist planning for attacks in Singapore. They had been deeply indoctrinated with the JI’s violent and radical ideology for many years. This cannot be easily undone. For example, several of them continue to hold on to the core JI belief that Muslims and non-Muslims cannot live in harmony. They also believe in the establishment of an Islamic state through violent means. Rehabilitation, including religious counselling, for these detainees is on-going. Their cases are regularly reviewed. COMPLAINTS AGAINST SECURITY GUARD AGENCIES (Breach of Employment Act) 3. Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many complaints were received in the last 24 months concerning security agencies making guards work excessive hours or denying them benefits under the Employment Act; (b) whether such cases indicate industry-wide problems or are merely aberrations involving the individual agencies; (c) of the proven breaches, whether the affected guards received compensation or other relief; and (d) whether the Commissioner of Labour has exempted any employers in this industry from compliance with the Employment Act under section 41A and, if so, which requirements were exempted and what were the factors taken into account to grant such exemptions.”
“Since 1999, a total of 54 persons had been detained under the Internal Security Act. Currently, 39 persons are still under detention. They were detained for involvement in terrorism and espionage. All the cases were approved by the Cabinet, assented to by the President, and reviewed by the ISA Advisory Board chaired by a Supreme Court Judge. A few of the cases have not been publicised. This is because publicity can compromise on-going operations, or seriously harm national interests. JEMAAH ISLAMIYAH DETAINEES (Update) 2. Prof. Thio Li-ann asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs if he will provide an update on the current status of the persons detained in relation to the Jemaah Islamiyah arrests in December 2001.”
“He has been Government Whip since 13th September 1988. He will be succeeded by Mr Lim Swee Say. Dr Amy Khor - I think Members know her very well - has now been given a new task as the Deputy Whip. This is in addition to - many Members may not know - Mr Inderjit Singh who is our current Deputy Whip. All these changes will take effect from 1st April 2007. Once again, Sir, may I thank you and your Deputies for your patience for sitting through long hours of speeches. Thank you. *Cols. 3655-3656.”
“Perhaps MPs should re-examine this and see how to spread out their limited time to also focus on other issues of concern to Singaporeans, and Singapore's future and survival. Sir, we have changed the Standing Orders to allow MPs to speak in two languages and that indeed has livened the debate and also enabled our MPs to reach out to their constituents who may not understand English. So I shall also try this by speaking in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A *. ] Mr Speaker, Sir, during the Budget debate, many Members have used two languages to express the people’s aspirations. Some of them required a lot of time to prepare these multi-lingual speeches. At the same time, they have also taken the opportunity to speak in their mother tongue. This has raised the understanding and knowledge of the mother tongue and Members too have a deeper understanding of the language. This is really putting into practice what they have learned. Their multi-lingual speeches were very interesting and lively and they deserve our compliments. The debating standard is high and, at the same time, to those constituents who do not know English, they will have a better appreciation and understanding of the issues raised in Parliament. (In English): Having been Leader for 20 years, I think it is time to change. There must be renewal too but it has taken a long time to come. So I discussed it with the Prime Minister just a few days ago. Hence, the Prime Minister has decided that Mr Mah Bow Tan, who has been Deputy Leader since 2002, will be appointed as Leader, and Dr Ng Eng Hen will be the Deputy Leader. Similarly, Sir, I know my colleague, Dr Lee Boon Yang also thinks that he has been in the same job for a long time.”
“They have distilled the key messages in their speeches to keep within the time they asked for and were allocated. Very few had to suffer a cut by the guillotine. I will not be wrong if I say that my Cabinet colleagues and I will agree with me that the speeches certainly had our attention. I also believe that even if the Ministers did not fully deal with all the points or the suggestions Members have made, they would study the suggestions carefully and see what can be done and adopted. Mr Speaker, Sir, when I was appointed Leader of the House on 25th February 1987, there were only three women MPs. Today, we have 23 women MPs - 17 elected, 1 NCMP and 5 NMPs. This is a refreshing change from the 1980s and a significant improvement. In 1987, 45 MPs filed 367 cuts and it took almost as many days as this one. The Ministries which had the most cuts between the late 1980s and up to the recent years were National Development and Education - about five to six hours each. Today, the focus seems to have changed to the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports, with 36 individual cuts, and 29 MPs moving just one cut on each item. The COS debate on MCYS lasted 5 hours and 35 minutes, compared to just 2 hours and 25 minutes when I was the Minister in the same Ministry. Maybe the issues under MCYS are closest to the hearts and minds of our MPs and to their constituents. But Members should not forget that we have other equally important issues to also debate, but these took up much less time compared to MCYS'. Foreign policy took up just 50 minutes, while issues concerning health, economy, education, security and national development took between three and four-and-a-half hours each.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of all Members, may I thank you and your Deputies for chairing the proceedings at the debates on the Budget Statement and the Committee of Supply, and ensuring that these are conducted so smoothly. Twenty-four new elected MPs, one NCMP and 7 NMPs joined in the debates at this Committee of Supply and Budget Statement for the first time. This injection of new Members into the House also brings a new phase in our Parliamentary debates. Fifty-eight MPs filed 372 amendments in this Committee of Supply. Practically all the MPs used up the time allocated to them - 18 minutes for MPs and 20 minutes for GPC Chairmen. We changed the system in 2005. This new system has kept the number of amendments manageable, and averaging 366 cuts over the last three years. This is certainly much better than the inflationary number of cuts starting in 2001. We had 484 amendments in 2001, 518 in 2002, 707 in 2003 and 769 in 2004. The new system has also enabled Members to focus on the key points in their speeches, some even with just a 30-second sound bite. Well done. I know our MPs spent long hours researching the issues and preparing their speeches, particularly for those who have to speak in two languages. It was a great sweat. Some, of course, spoke more than two languages. Many spoke passionately about the issues of concern to them and their constituents. Their speeches were certainly impactful. Indeed, some Members held no punches, while others even put the points across in a very colourful way, and yet not missing the seriousness of the message. The quality of debate is very high. Mr Speaker, Sir, Members have certainly "honed" their skills as you had wished after we changed the system. They indeed spent the time allocated to them very wisely.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2007/2008, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.”
“Sir, I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow.”
“In fact, one of the strategies that the Police adopts is proactive policing. This means that they go out, meet the public, talk to them, engage them and help those who need help. That is how they go about their work. Of course, I am not saying that all the 10,000 of them do the same thing. They are human beings like all of us. Some have their own weaknesses. Some, for whatever reason, may not have the right mood for the day. But we always demand high standards of them and we hope that they will carry the flag high for the Force, and set a good example and model for the rest of those who are lagging behind. There is also counselling within the Force. The senior officers will keep watch and counsel those who are not keeping up with the task. There is a system of checks as well on the kind of cases that they deal with, whether they are behind time and so on. The systems are in place. But, ultimately, no matter what system we have, no matter what kind of training we have, it is the officer's own interest, his own motivation, his own values and his own enthusiasm in carrying out his task. That is why recruiting people is not so easy, and we have to find the right people to join us.”
“Yes, indeed, when the Police look at the deployment of officers, they have to look at the person and see where they think the strength of the person lies. Not everyone can make a good police investigator. I think that is a fact. So they have to choose the ones who make good police investigators. But from the limited pool of people that they have, particularly from the sources, it is 10% for junior officers and 15% for senior officers, not 16%. Ultimately, there is a limit to the number of people who will be made available to the Police Force. And from that number, we will then train them, assess them as they go through the deployment, to determine who has the ability, the quality and the mentality to be able to make a good police investigator. Investigators are a specialty track and they are therefore given suitable recognition.”
“Sir, I do not know the reason why that particular resident had to be at that particular place at that hour. I also cannot give an answer as to why the Police charged him. But since Ms Lee has written to the Ministry, I suppose she will get a reply and she may know the answer. We always encounter in our MPS cases, people who come and tell us one story. But it is like a coin, it has the other side of the story. Please remember that. For these two specific cases, I will leave them to the officials to look at them. If it comes to our attention, we will take a closer look and see whether there is any case to do something about it or not. Ultimately, prosecution depends on the Attorney-General, who is the Public Prosecutor. But, at the same time, the police officers just want to do a good job. I think we should not run them down on one or two incidents or for whatever reason there is, but if indeed they have neglected their duties and abused their powers, then that is something that we will not condone. But, like in every organisation, there will be some black sheep. We will identify them and we will take them out. Or if they can be changed, we will retain them.”
“In fact, I just joked to somebody in the House not long ago that, if the public wants to change road behaviour, then they should be careful because there is no other effective way of changing road behaviour other than through DIPS and to take the driver off the road if he is a recalcitrant traffic offender. That is the most effective way of changing driver behaviour because he would no longer be able to drive. On fire safety, if Members look at the chart carefully, I think we have done very well. If we just look at the number of fire incidents, from 5,008 to 4,007 between 1994 and 2006, then, yes, the drop may not seem to be very large. But do not forget, in the last 12 years, from 1994 to now, how many more new buildings have come up? How many more new flats have come up during this 12-year period? Well, definitely a lot more than it was in 1994. But if we look at the fire incidents per 100,000 population, I think that is a better measure of how effective our fire safety education has been. It has dropped from 170 per 100,000 in 1994 to 105 in 2006, and that is a very significant drop. And, mind you, we are also a very compact place. All we need is one naughty boy or girl, like a brother and his sister who burn something over the window, and it happens to fall onto some clothes, we will find that all the clothes that are hung out there will be burnt. People who live in flats, in fact, anyone, whether he smokes or throws a burning charcoal or whatever over the rubbish chute, please be careful. He may not just burn other people's house down, he may burn his.”
“Sir, Dr Teo asked about the readiness of the SWG. There are 72 of them. They comprise security managers and senior people of the buildings where we have propagated this particular scheme. They take their job very seriously. Police also has a network of communication with them - in different forms - through emails or SMSes. If anything happens in a particular place, through an SMS broadcast, they will know what is happening in that area and be able to take steps to protect themselves. From time to time, there will also be exercises, checks, workshops and seminars, and so on. The Police is in close touch with them and we are going to expand such security watch groups because we find them very useful. As Members know, we have divided Singapore into several sectors, so that the Home Team agencies can work with the stakeholders in their different areas. They are mapping out the key partners in their respective areas and domains so that they know that, at every place, every building, who are the key people in charge. In that way, they will be able to reach out to those people. On traffic rules and why is it there are two different Ministries, the answer is quite simple: because the expertise required is quite different. Road building and road engineering obviously is not an expertise that MHA has. We are good at security. When it comes to road building and road engineering, we should depend on the Transport Ministry. When they design a road, in the way they have structured the road, and the way they have built the road, it can only take certain kinds of speed. So Police will have to take that into account as well. Does DIPS change driver behaviour?”
“With the support of fellow Singaporeans, I have no doubt that the Home Team will continue to succeed in its mission to keep Singapore safe and secure. 6.15 pm”
“The Ministry of Home Affairs has to make judgements over the optimal deployment of finite resources, balancing competing imperatives without compromising its mission for a safe and secure Singapore for all. Singaporeans, too, need to make choices. Today, Singaporeans enjoy a low crime rate, low drug problem and good security. In the course of change, Singaporeans will have to ask themselves how much they value this quality of life and how much of it they want to put at risk. If we think we can afford to go soft on drugs, for example, because they connote a fashionable, desirable lifestyle, then we will have to live with the consequences of drug abuse to our families and the next generation. Should we emulate societies which have gone soft on drugs because they have failed to deal with it or should we staunchly defend our success and our zero tolerance policy? That question Singaporeans would have to decide. Similarly, if we choose to lower the threshold of security at our borders and inside the country to avoid inconvenience, then we must face the enhanced risk of a terrorist incident. I am not exaggerating this. We have had specific intelligence of how our strict security measures have deterred terrorists like the JI’s Azahari Husin from targeting us. Azahari Husin, of course, had been shot dead by the Indonesians. Sir, I am confident that just as we have done in our fight against crime and drugs, we will cultivate an equally mature and effective partnership with our people to fight against terrorism. Together, we will make the right choices to navigate a future where the security landscape is more complex and uncertain than in the past.”
“Otherwise, the Ministry will face difficulties attracting and retaining capable officers, leading to a degradation of our capacities and capabilities. We are undertaking a salary review for the different schemes of service in the Home Team and will be completing the review shortly. Sir, the strength of the Home Team is in its officers. Attracting and retaining capable officers is the key to maintaining Singapore's low crime rate and good security. Many foreign visitors appreciate this when they come. Singaporeans have more or less taken our safety for granted. They would not feel it because it has always been safe. But when they come from a place that is less safe, they notice it straightaway. So, many of these visitors, after the visit, wrote to the Prime Minister, the Senior Minister and the Minister Mentor, expressing their appreciation for the safety they felt in Singapore and how much they had enjoyed Singapore and being able to walk in the streets, jog in the parks, and so on, without the fear of being mugged. Compared with their own country, they think it is a remarkable change. These fundamentals of safety and security are the foundation upon which Singapore's progress and development are built. Sir, let me now make some concluding remarks regarding this afternoon's replies that both my Senior Minister of State and I have given to Members who have raised many questions in the last few days. Firstly, a recurrent theme in our responses is that Singaporeans, whether as individuals, organisations or communities, are the ultimate stakeholders of Singapore's safety and security. Secondly, we have highlighted the constant need for balanced judgements and trade-offs.”
“I will now ask the Clerk of Parliament to distribute a set of charts showing the general trends in crime, drug arrests, fire incidents, recidivism rates of prison inmates and the population at drug rehabilitation centres, to show that the general safety and security situation in Singapore is positive, and has improved over the past decade. Take your time, flip through it and understand what these figures mean for all of us. We must continue to emphasise that we have to optimise all available resources to ensure that our public interests are efficiently and effectively served. So far, if Members look at the numbers carefully, the Home Team has been able to do so and has done it well. Sir, we recognise that, today, security work is very demanding on the officer and his family. Each year, many of our officers have to forgo portions of their annual leave due to exigencies of service. Many of our ICA officers at the checkpoints routinely have to work overtime. Finding the right officers to do these jobs is critical. They have to be security-cleared and be able to meet the demanding physical, intellectual and psychological requirements. Despite stepping up recruitment efforts in 2006, only 10% of applicants actually met the recruitment criteria for junior officers in the Home Team while 15% of applicants met the criteria for the senior service. So the pool is not very large to start with. This situation is further compounded by the higher resignation rate in 2006. Retention, therefore, is also critical. Experience and specialist training are valuable and not immediately replaceable. So the Ministry must keep pace with the tightening labour market and offer a competitive remuneration package commensurate with the demands of the job.”
“One of the strategies in this effort is to outsource non-core functions, and this is done carefully to ensure that we do not compromise the public interest. This includes the outsourcing of enforcement of illegal parking. Ms Lim mentioned that some of the outsourced traffic wardens appear over-zealous. Ms Lim should note that the performance of these wardens is not assessed according to the number of summonses they issued, which is a misperception by the public. If the aggrieved party feels that a summons was unfairly issued, he or she can appeal through the normal channels. Ms Lim also mentioned yesterday's Forum letter which wrote about the delay in responding to a case of a body found. Police has informed me that that delay was due to poor command and control by the Police Division which resulted in a delay of about 25 minutes before the resource was sent. Upon arrival, the resource took another 20 minutes to find the location, as they were not familiar with the location. The Police is looking into the handling of this incident with a view to improving our Police service. But, please, do not shoot at the Police every time there is an incident. Give them a chance to tell you why and what happened. Of course, we do not condone mistakes which are made because of the officer's own neglect of his duty. But if an officer genuinely makes a mistake, I think we have to accept that and to help him improve. Ms Lim should be able to see a reply to the letter soon in the newspaper. Sir, safety and security remain the Home Team's top priority. The overall crime rate for the past 20 years shows a general downward trend, with a clear decline in 2006.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Christopher de Souza raised the concern that resource constraints may lead to compromises of public interest and about the challenges in attracting and retaining good police officers and other members of the Home Team. Indeed, Sir, we are constantly optimising the use of resources through various innovations. One good example is the Police's move from the Neighbourhood Police Post (NPP) system to the Neighbourhood Police Centre system. It was a strategic move made by the Police to evolve and keep pace with the changes in the operating environment, and to improve the system of community policing. Right now, we have, across the nation, 32 NPCs supported by 65 NPPs, totalling 97 police contact points. This is not much different from the good old days that we had which Ms Lim lamented when we had 90-plus NPPs. This new system means that police presence is more visible in the neighbourhood, and not just confined to the NPPs. Also, under the current NPC system, all patrol resources in the precinct are managed directly by the NPCs. This will enable the NPCs to respond more quickly and flexibly to the needs of the community. The real measure of our safety is not just on how many contact points you have with the Police but on our sense of safety and security. Mr de Souza mentioned the Forbes report which reported well on Singaporeans' sense of safety. But other research institutions, such as the WEF, in its World Competitiveness Report, as well as PERC, also reported well on our Singapore Police Force and our sense of safety. We are constantly reviewing our roles to focus on security and other core functions.”
“However, our people responded rationally and positively. In particular, our Muslim community leaders have boldly moved to address the dangers of radicalisation. Singaporeans know very well that the real damage in extremist terrorism can pose is not just material destruction but the more permanent damage against our social cohesion and community harmony. We must not let this happen. All Singaporeans are the stakeholders of Singapore’s safety and security. When we all take ownership of our own security and safety, we will not only make Singapore a hard target – we will also make Singaporeans a resilient people who will not be cowed or intimidated by terrorism. I will now ask my Senior Minister of State to deal with other parts of the questions before I come back to answer Mr de Souza's subsequent question on police and Ms Sylvia Lim's question on the resources for the Home Team.”
“Another recent example is Al Khair Mosque and the Grassroot Organisations from Choa Chu Kang, Keat Hong and Yew Tee organising in January an Inter-Faith Forum for community leaders. It was also especially heartening to observe the interest among our young. A group of youths pursued a project on inter-religious understanding called 'Project Connect'. Under this project, they attended a three-day camp, made study trips to different religious sites and agencies and held a Singapore Inter-Faith Youth Forum to promote inter-religious understanding, in January this year. The business community too, which Dr Teo referred to, is also playing its part. The Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SCCCI) together with the Singapore Federation of Chinese Clan Associations (SFCCA) formed a CEP taskforce to engage the other ethnic groups. They organised a job fair in September last year to increase the number of Malay workers in Chinese firms. Sir, a Tripartite Panel on Community Engagement at Workplaces was formed in October 2006. The Panel is working to expand its outreach to cover the various subgroups in the business community. Sir, the Home Team will do as much as we can to keep Singapore safe and secure. However, we cannot take extreme measures to protect everything, as doing so will lead to a society paralysed by fear and an economy mired in a security gridlock. We need to make critical judgements about risks and trade-offs, balancing security and other needs all the time. Ultimately, it is the people and not the Government who will defeat terrorism. This has been our approach since 2001. I know that it must have been difficult and awkward for all, especially our Muslim community, to grapple with sensitive issues linked to the nature of this terrorism today.”
“In January 2007, Taman Bacaan held a convention to raise awareness among youths on the threat of terrorism and terrorist ideology. About 300 youths, both Muslims and non-Muslims too, from secondary schools, junior colleges, ITEs and madrasahs took part. Some individuals in our Muslim community have also stepped up to address the threat of terrorist propaganda. Ustaz Muhammad Haniff Hassan, a research analyst at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, recently published a book called "Unlicensed to Kill; Countering Imam Samudra's Justification for the Bali Bombing". Imam Samudra was the leader of the JI cell which staged the Bali bombings. In October 2006, Ustaz Haniff also created a blog (counterideology.freeonlineblogs.com) - take a look at that - to refute extremist ideology. Taking the counter-ideology effort on-line is a significant direction, since it is impractical to try to shut down all terrorist websites. Religious and community groups must actively work through education and engagement to prevent extremist ideas from gaining a foothold in our mainstream community. Mr Arthur Fong asked how we can do more to encourage community involvement against terrorism. One of the ways we are doing so is through the Community Engagement Programme (CEP). Since the launch of the Community Engagement Programme, we have established a national-level working framework and have actively engaged a broad range of community partners. We have also seen many encouraging ground-up initiatives in support of the CEP. I strongly support such ground-up efforts. I had mentioned some initiatives earlier.”
“In recent times, our Internal Security Department (ISD) has investigated into a few Singaporeans who had become attracted to terrorist and radical ideas purveyed in the mass media, particularly over the Internet. There are about 6,000 websites today carrying pro-terrorist ideas. They distort Islamic concepts in furtherance of a terrorist agenda and prey on those who lack sound religious knowledge to unwittingly buy into such terrorist propaganda. For example, a young Singaporean, after exposure to such propaganda on the Net, believed that it was permissible to take part in armed jihad regardless of the origin of the fatwa and grew to admire Osama bin Laden. Youths can also be radicalised while pursuing studies overseas. In one case, the young man developed an intense interest in radical ideology while studying overseas. He continued after returning to Singapore and engaged like-minded individuals over the Internet and eventually even communicating with foreign individuals involved in terrorist recruitment and financing. Sir, our Muslim community has initiated many programmes to address such radicalism. For example, MUIS' Asatizah Recognition Scheme serves as a reference for the Muslim community when selecting their religious teachers, so that they do not unwittingly engage radical teachers. The Religious Rehabilitation Group, which comprises 30 volunteer asatizah, has done a commendable job in counselling their spouses. Other Malay/Muslim organisations have also come forward. In February 2007, the National Junior College's Malay Language, Drama and Debate Society (MLDDS), with the support of Mendaki Club, organised a dialogue session on the threat of terrorism for Junior College students.”
“The SCDF ambulance has responded to 96,000 calls in 2006. The demand for ambulance services has consistently increased but we cannot continually expand the SCDF pool of ambulances and paramedics. These are costly and highly geared resources, well-trained and designed to handle extreme crises including biological and chemical terrorist incidents. These resources should be prioritised for security-related emergencies or for crises. However, the general need for ambulance services for medical emergencies is likely to grow with an ageing population. Those above 65 years old account for nearly 30% of all our Emergency Ambulance Service calls though they only represent 8% of our population today. Can you imagine that when our population, those aged 65 and above, grow further in the years to come, what would be the expected number of calls from the 65 and above? The projection is that about 55% of the calls will be made for such cases by the year 2030. MHA is therefore seriously considering how to solve this problem. One option is for the SCDF to encourage competent private ambulance providers to meet this need. By increasing the emergency ambulance supply in this way, we can judiciously meet the trend of rising demand and also augment the SCDF resource pool in times of crisis. Of course, those who undertake this task in the private sector must also be well-trained and well-equipped and this is what the SCDF hopes to do in the coming years, to prepare the private sector for that task. Sir, the terrorism threat remains. And we see a troubling new phenomenon today of individuals who are self-radicalised, independent of direct recruitment by established terrorist groups. Singapore is not immune to the threat of self-radicalised individuals.”
“We detected more than 20,000 cases of smuggling in 2006, including 900 travellers who tried to bring in security related items like stun-guns and air-guns. However, we must also be realistic. Singapore is an island. Our borders are not air-tight and some will try their luck to evade our checks and some may succeed. But we believe that most will be caught, if not at the borders, then eventually within the country. Our officers will do their level best to keep Singapore safe. There is ultimately no such thing as absolute security. No government anywhere in the world can ever completely insulate its population against threats. Instead, we must act sensibly and balance the trade-offs of security against our other needs, whether it is economic, social or political. For instance, we cannot seal off our borders and yet remain an open society and economy. During peak periods, more than 21,000 travellers go through our land checkpoints every hour. Even this number is exceeded during the festive holidays and can you imagine with 21,000 travellers in one hour, how much resources we need in order to screen everyone and make sure that they leave or they come in and do not cause harm to Singapore? Hence, although ICA has leveraged extensively on technology to expedite speed of clearance, there are limits. Congestion and delays are inevitable. Lowering our security levels at the Checkpoints, for the sake of convenience, is something that we must not be tempted to do. I think Singaporeans will sleep better and more safely if they exercise a little patience and allow our security agencies to do their job properly. Managing trade-offs and optimising resources is also something we are addressing in the area of Emergency Ambulance Service. This is an issue raised by Dr Fatimah Lateef.”
“For those people grouped under the different heads cited by Mr Arthur Fong, whether it is head in the clouds, head in the sand, or whatever, I just wish that they pay attention to what Mr Fong said this afternoon and take heed and get involved with emergency preparedness before they find it is too late when an incident happened to them. Apart from large-scale exercises, we reach out to the people on the ground through publications and initiatives like the Ready Bag. In 2006, the SCDF conducted 72 Emergency Preparedness Days with MPs and grassroots leaders where participants learn basic first-aid and how to protect their homes from a chemical attack using In-Place Protection. 5.30 pm Mr Christopher de Souza suggested implementing further measures to control the entry of firearms into Singapore. Our controls over firearms are already very stringent. In order to carry firearms, one needs a police permit. Without one, then it is an offence to carry firearms. So, as a result, Singapore has one of the lowest number of firearm-related offences or incidents in the world. Over the last six years from year 2000 to 2006, we had seven cases involving the use of firearms. Six had been solved and two of these seven involved CISCO officers who were authorised to carry firearms. Obviously, as Mr De Souza has said, I cannot discuss the case of Tan Chor Jin, as to how he got his weapon. The case is still before the Court. But the most important measure here to prevent the smuggling of firearms or arms and explosives and intrusion of terrorist element is a strong border security system. Our border is our first line of defence. The level of security checks and screening at our checkpoints has been enhanced.”
“The recent terrorist bomb attacks in Iraq using chlorine underscore the timeliness of our efforts in this area. Many measures we have embarked upon are not so visible. Our agencies have significantly expanded their foreign liaison networks since 2001. When the July 2005 subway bombings occurred in London, we were able to send a Police team to London to learn directly from the Scotland Yard investigators on what to do with the incident and such learning is invaluable in order to improve ourselves and stay ahead of the terrorists. Dr Teo also asked about the lessons we learnt in Exercise Northstar V. What was new in this exercise was that about 10,000 commuters were exposed to what a terrorist attack on our MRT system would entail. Many were supportive of the public involvement in such exercises. A small number of commuters were of course unhappy because of the inconvenience they have suffered. We agree with Mr Arthur Fong that more Singaporeans need to take ownership of safety, security and emergency preparedness. They need to understand that the inconvenience created by such exercises is but a small and necessary price to pay to ensure our preparedness. They also need to know that security has a personal value to themselves and their families because being prepared can make a difference between life and death in a crisis. We agree also with Dr Teo's observation that it is unrealistic to expect Singaporeans to become better prepared for a terrorist attack after just one or two emergency exercises. That is why we must persevere while developing a multi-pronged approach in our outreach.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I thank the Members for raising their concerns as well as some of the comments on the Ministry, its performance and its law officers. Dr Teo Ho Pin asked for an update on the counter-terrorism measures. As Dr Teo has pointed out, our approach has been to prioritise our counter-terrorism efforts intelligently using a risk-based assessment of threats and vulnerabilities. We cannot protect everything but we can make Singapore a hard target. For instance, we have raised the protective measures at key installations and iconic sites like this Parliament House itself. In Aug 2005, we formed a Police MRT Unit to enhance our public transport security. We have also started to engage the business sector to enhance security. For example, to harden "soft" targets like shopping malls, we have engaged business or building operators and owners through the Security Watch Group Scheme to take ownership of their own security. Now, we have 72 Security Watch Group clusters taking care of 520 buildings in the business districts. We have also established the CCTV standards to support the ground deployment of CCTV systems. These are on-going programmes and will cover more buildings and areas over time. In January this year, Parliament approved amendments to the Arms and Explosives Act to tighten controls over hazardous materials and establish a new licensing regime for explosive precursors. Since 2005, the SCDF implemented the Hazmat Vehicle Tracking System, which closely monitors the movement of all hazmat vehicles in Singapore on a real-time basis. From April 2007, we will install immobilisers on all such vehicles, which means that the moment the vehicle goes off the scheduled route, they will be immobilised by a remote control.”
“Sir, there is a difference between what we treat as official languages and what languages we want to promote and allow the individuals to learn while in school or within their own community. Right now, in our schools, we already allow children, eg, if they come from a Sikh family, to learn Punjabi, or any other language, if they can find a significant number of students to form a class. But as far as the national language policy is concerned, we have four official languages in this Chamber. If one day, we have somebody who comes from somewhere else and he does not fit into these four-language policy, then we wonder whether the person should be in this Chamber.”
“Sir, we also have to decide whether these PRs who have remained here for a long time and, for various reasons, do not want to be a citizen, and say, "Now, please pack up and go home." If they do, then are we going to lose anything or not? And if we do not, then why force them to go away? If they can continue to contribute, why not? They can be PR for whatever the reason. But of course, in our policy, we will try to make a distinction in giving whatever surplus sharing schemes, and so on, to favour citizens. Members can see that already in our healthcare and, in fact, also in our education policy. But at the same time, also bear in mind that the wider the gap it is between the citizen and foreigners and PRs, the less attractive we make Singapore as a destination for them. So do not make it difficult for us to attract people to come here while, at the same time, recognise the contribution of Singaporeans. As I said earlier, the value of citizenship is not in how much money they will get from the Government. It is really how they feel for the place where they are born.”
“I think there is only one key issue that we consider before we will decide whether to allow a former citizen or PR to come back to settle and work in Singapore, and that is the National Service account. If they have done National Service, I think that is not an issue. We will look at what the person can bring to Singapore, having decided earlier to leave Singapore for better or greener pastures, or for whatever reasons. But if the person has not done National Service, that would be a different matter altogether. All citizens and PRs who are here have to do National Service. If they chose not to, then they cannot regain their PR, and that is a price that they have to pay much earlier.”
“Thanks for bringing this up. If we have only that size of the cloth, we will have to decide how we want to cut the cloth. It is not a limitless amount of money that we can put in resolving the population problem. We can put all our money in this, but we have no money to spend in other programmes. So the Government will decide on how much money is sensible to put into the programmes for marriage and procreation. Then we will decide on how to divide this sum of money, whether it is in the form of more maternity leave, more childcare centre subsidies, more Baby Bonuses, or more work life balances for companies, and so on. These are the issues that we are now looking at, whether to have maternity leave, for example, as some have asked, or whether they have just maternity leave only and leave it to the mother to look after the child. These are hard decisions that we have to make. In life, we know that we have to make hard decisions and, ultimately, something has got to give.”
“Sir, we target foreign talent from wherever they are if they would like to come. Of course, our big markets, so to speak, are China, India and the region. But now, we also have people coming from Europe, America, Japan and the Middle East. There are a few also from Africa. We want people who can contribute to Singapore, who can fit into our Singapore society, and who can integrate with us. In that way, it would add diversity to our economy and it also makes Singapore a more cosmopolitan society. In big cities around the world, we find that that is the case. We cannot be a homogeneous single race society. We never can be. We are already multi-racial. But whoever comes here must learn how to adapt to the local norms and to adjust and also integrate with Singaporeans.”
“So, the Government will study how the criteria can be eased and made more flexible so that more of them will qualify to vote while maintaining the spirit of the law that only those Singaporeans who maintain their links back home should be entitled to vote overseas. 1.15 pm Whatever we do to improve the processes for overseas polling or counting, we must still safeguard the integrity of the electoral process. The problem cited by Ms Lim regarding the counting of votes in Singapore, being four days after the close of poll, is limited to a small number of constituencies, particularly the single constituencies but, otherwise, there should not be any problem. We hope that in time to come, we can find a way to resolve this. Whether we will extend the number of days for campaigning or have people overseas to vote early or not, I think there are other implications to do this as well. So we have to be very careful in changing the present system. The present election system is very simple. It is fair. It is transparent. It is well-tested. And the overseas voting system will follow the same system. The polling and counting of votes will follow the same system, as I said. Overseas voters will, therefore, continue to vote at the polling centres. Can we expand more? Well, we have to see where we have a critical mass. Not every city in all the 38 places where we have a consulate or a mission have enough Singaporeans to making voting practical. Also, for practical reasons, our overseas polling stations will have to be in a mission where we have a large concentration of eligible overseas voters, and in the premises where we have a mission which will enjoy diplomatic immunity and, at the same time, security. These are the key considerations on how we set up our foreign polling stations.”
“Sir, I thank Ms Sylvia Lim for raising the issue of overseas voting by Singaporeans overseas. In fact, following the 2006 General Election, I formed a Committee to review the various processes concerning overseas voting, as well as local voting. And one of the issues we looked at, of course, is how to make it easier for people to register to vote and how to make it possible for more Singaporeans to also be eligible to vote overseas. On the registration process for overseas voters, we will try to make it more user-friendly. The time window for registration, publicity for registration using not just the media, but also as many channels as possible - we will study all these issues. On the registration procedures, the Elections Department will also simplify them without sacrificing the integrity of voter identification and information authentication. The important issue is about the qualifying criteria to be eligible as an overseas voter. Right now, the law says it is two years out of the five years of residency before a person can qualify. When we set this, we studied the examples in other countries and we found that since it is the first time we are doing it, we have taken this approach of two years out of five years of residency as a requirement. Having first experienced our overseas voting in the last Elections and having learnt how to operate it better, we are now reviewing how to ease the criteria for overseas voting. We know that more Singaporeans are now going overseas to work and study or even to accompany their spouses, and many will not be able to meet the present criteria of having to spend two years out of the last five years in Singapore. But we know that they also return regularly to Singapore during their annual leave.”
“What we know is that we have to do more to encourage more and earlier marriages and births. We will monitor the implementation of the current package. We will also study how we can be more targeted in some of our incentives. I think we can do this through a more targeted approach in three areas - better support for Singaporeans to achieve work-life balance, creating opportunities for more socialisation, and providing more targeted incentives for earlier marriages and earlier first births. I would like to thank Dr Ahmad Magad for his specific suggestions on how to increase our baby population. We are also open to other ideas and would welcome suggestions from the public as well. This has to be a collective effort, not just the Government putting on its thinking cap. Sir, we have an enormous strategic challenge ahead of us. Our population challenge is not to be taken lightly. It is easy to be lulled into complacency; our economy is doing well, many Singaporeans are better off today than they were 10 years ago. We need to look forward, but only if we are able to keep going as a vibrant and productive community and economy. We know what needs to be done. Three things. One, get married and have more babies. Two, welcome suitable immigrants and help them integrate into our society. And three, keep our overseas Singaporeans connected. I hope all our people will work together with the Government to achieve these objectives. Overseas Voting”
“Second, Singaporeans are marrying later: the median age of citizen males getting married was about 30 in 2005, up from 28 in 1990; that for females was close to 27, up from 25 in 1990. Singaporeans are having their first child later. The median age of a Singaporean mother at first birth had also increased from 27.5 years in 1990 to 29 in 2005. Singaporeans are also having fewer babies. On average, a married Singaporean woman had 2.2 children in 2005, down from 2.8 in 1990. While it is still above the replacement level of 2.1, it is clearly on a downward trend. Among ever-married female Singaporeans aged 40-49 years, 6.6% of them were childless in 2005, and that is up from 4.4% in 1990. So having to juggle work and family life, and the cost of raising a child, remain the key considerations for many in deciding whether to have children. From the data, it seems that a typical Singaporean has a high probability of staying single, and if he or she does get married, is getting married later, and will have his/her first child at a later age and have fewer children. Mr Charles Chong asked what we could learn from other countries to raise local fertility. Indeed, every country has its own policies and plans. We will study all these policies that they have and see what works for Singapore. What the French did may not necessarily work for Singapore. In fact, some of the social practices there may not be what Singaporeans want to have. I would not go into details on what they do, but I can tell Mr Chong and Members that we are studying our population package. We review them all the time. For now, we will keep the present package but we are looking at every item and see where we should put more money in.”
“For the year of assessment 2006, 46,000 parents have claimed $70 million under the Parenthood Tax Rebate; 131,000 mothers have claimed Working Mothers' Child Relief amounting to $111 million in forgone revenue; and 26,000 parents have claimed Grandparent Caregiver Relief amounting to $4 million in forgone revenue. Started in August 2004, the Work-life Works! or the WoW! Fund of $10 million is expected to be fully committed by the middle of this year. The Government will study how to encourage the companies to create more work-life balance in the workplace. The Manpower Minister will give Members more details on this. Overall, there have been some positive indications in birth figures. Although we have not increased our total fertility rate (TFR) from 1.25 to something higher, at least, we have arrested the decline that we have seen just before 2004. In 2005, 35,500 babies were born - 400 more than in 2004. In 2006, 36,200 babies were registered - 570 more than in 2005. A survey by MCYS also showed some encouraging signs: 56% of married persons indicated that they would consider having more children earlier and 83% indicated that the package has helped to make Singapore a more family-friendly place. But, we still have very worrying trends. What are these? First, more Singaporeans are now remaining single: 37.4% of male citizens in the key age group of 30-34 were single in 2005, and that was an increase of 33.9% in 1990. The same figure for females was 26.3%, up from 20.9%. 22.2% of male citizens in the age group of 35-39 were single in 2005, up from 17.8% in 1990; that for females was 17.2%, up from 14.7%. In other words, more males than females remain single, and the worrying trend is that more are remaining single in the age group band of 30-39.”
“Those who are active indeed found many ways of making sure that the Singaporeans who are there found ways to engage with one another. And that is a good sign. Some even do social service. I know, for example, one of them raised money to provide bursary and so on to children in that country. And in a way, they become our ambassadors. While we want our embassies to do more, we must also bear in mind that every embassy has very few officials and Singaporeans themselves have to work hard and engage themselves and publicise what they do. 1.00 pm Mdm Halimah Yacob asked for an update on the measures to promote marriage and parenthood in Singapore and Dr Ahmad Magad also urged the Government to do more to boost the birth of more Singaporean children. Let me now touch on this other key strategy on our population challenge. I would ask the Clerk to give out some data on what the Government has done so far with regard to the population package. [Copies of handouts* distributed to hon. Members.] *Cols. 2433-2436. The parenthood package was first introduced in 2001 and enhanced in 2004. In FY2005, the Government spent $575 million to support the various incentives and benefits in the package. The take-up for the various schemes has been encouraging. The table that I just circulated contains all the details. Since the Baby Bonus scheme was introduced in April 2001, the Government has disbursed $420 million to the parents of 133,000 newborns, and co-funded 89,000 co-savings accounts that were opened, which amounted to another $270 million. And that is a lot of money. Since Government-paid maternity leave was extended from eight to 12 weeks in August 2004, 28,000 mothers have benefited from it.”
“In fact, in all our policies, they are targeted at improving the lives of our citizens. We have recently reduced healthcare and education subsidies granted to foreigners and PRs to ensure that citizens enjoy the fullest support from the Government. We have many Government surplus sharing schemes, eg, CPF top-ups, New Singapore Shares, Economic Restructuring Shares, and now even Workfare. They favour only citizens. But let us also remember that the value of citizenship cannot be measured in dollars and cents. Singapore is our home; it is what we have to call our own. We cannot put a price on the feeling of being in a place that belongs to us, where we belong. Home, as it is often said, is where the heart is. We care for Singaporeans who are overseas too. Some of our best and brightest Singaporeans are similarly attracted to study and work abroad. Some even migrated. It is not necessarily a bad thing that Singaporeans go overseas to work and study. One day, they will come back. And when they come back, they will add value to Singapore. Miss Penny Low asked how the Government intends to strengthen its ties with these overseas Singaporeans. She mentioned the Overseas Singaporean portal. We have an Overseas Singaporean Unit too, specifically just targeted at engaging Singaporeans who are overseas. Mr Michael Palmer yesterday raised problems faced by Singaporeans overseas. But let me put it this way. The Government will do its best to engage Singaporeans while they are overseas. While they are there too, they should do something for themselves and take the initiative to organise things for themselves, to reach out to others. They cannot wait for the Government to do everything. I have been to many cities and met many Singaporeans.”
“We must support and encourage them. In that way, we will accelerate their integration into our community and, soon, the differences that seemed so stark before, would diminish. This is especially so for the children and grandchildren of immigrants here, as they would have grown up in the Singaporean milieu. The Government, therefore, takes the issue of integration seriously and recognises that more efforts are needed to focus in this area. And there are many ongoing efforts already. The People's Association, for example, has, through its grassroots network and leaders, organised many activities at the community level to facilitate integration between locals and new citizens. Marine Parade GRC, for example, has a sub-committee to reach out to new citizens by organising gatherings for them and sharing information. There are also expatriate clubs and communities that will cater to the expatriate community, eg, the Kowloon Club, Hua Yuan, India Club and many other associations formed by the Indian immigrant community. The MOE also plans to enhance the integration of foreign students with Singaporeans. To encourage all Singaporeans, whether they are newly-minted citizens or indigenous citizens, to embrace our common identity as one community, we are studying the possibility of having a "Citizenship Day", like what the Australians have. Miss Penny Low raised the issue of citizenship and national pride. A "Citizenship Day" will mark and celebrate our coming together as citizens of Singapore. MCYS will drive this effort as part of its mandate to build a cohesive and resilient society. Citizens, of course, will be valued more than foreigners. Miss Penny Low also asked about the value of being a citizen. Singaporeans can rest assured that they would always come first.”
“Yet, as a former immigrant and now a multi-racial society, we should be able to adapt, accommodate and handle such relationship issues and have a higher level of understanding and tolerance for this. If we look back into history, when our parents, grandparents, great grandparents first came here from wherever, eg, India, China, Indonesia, the Philippines or anywhere around the region, they were all here to make a living, and seek economic opportunities, and they wished one day they would go home, retire and die there. Members must have heard of your mother, grandmother, etc, who would tell you the same stories. But in the end, many chose to remain in Singapore and make this their home. That is why we are here. If they had been dissuaded from sinking roots in Singapore because of some remarks or unwelcoming gestures by the locals at that time, I think Singapore would not be what it is today. So acceptance, tolerance and integration take time and effort, and we must all make the effort. But we also do not have to pretend that there are no differences between new immigrants and the native Singaporeans. It happens everywhere too. Such differences existed even during the times of our forefathers when they were immigrants. They, too, found it hard to integrate into the local community. So what did they do? They formed clan associations and mutual help associations, etc. But, over time, they and their children integrated. We should acknowledge that there are differences between Singaporeans and the new immigrants. We may speak different languages. But one thing will hold us together, ie, our common destiny as Singaporeans, new or native. It is not an easy decision for someone to come here, sink roots here and choose to make this his permanent home.”
“But some continue to harbour certain prejudices against them, while some foreigners have also not adapted to our local conditions and norms. I have heard and read of accounts of how some Singaporean landlords refused to lease their properties to some foreigners. Ms Sandhya Reddy related her unhappy experience in the Today newspaper on 31st January 2007 that a landlord refused to rent her the flat because she was an Indian immigrant. There was also a case of a new immigrant who moved into a private estate and held a housewarming party with loud music late into the night, not a weekend. Of course, the neighbours were disturbed and understandably upset. There were also instances of stereotyping and social prejudices of foreigners against Singaporeans. It happens the other way round too. I was told of a road rage incident where a Caucasian, who drove into a yellow box junction and blocked the path of other motorists, started swearing in an exaggerated Singlish accent, only to be retorted by an equally vocal Singaporean who spoke in an equally exaggerated foreign accent. Of course, we can all laugh at such stories and frown at all these behaviours, but we should not condone them, whether it is about prejudices against renting properties to somebody not of your race or of somebody else's behaviour that you do not like, such as the Straits Times' survey talking about Chinese being too loud, noisy and dirty. I think they forgot what our own forefathers were like. It just goes to show that both sides need to make the right effort to build a shared community that we can call our very own. Sir, the issue of integration, ie, of welcoming new immigrants and of them adapting to our local environment, is not something unique to Singapore.”
“They can also assess what are the chances of being accepted as a PR and as a citizen. ICA has also been sending personal invitation letters to suitable working adults to apply for PR and citizenship since 1994. We also have grassroots leaders who actively encourage those who are interested to take up PR and citizenship by welcoming them to the neighbourhood and sharing relevant experiences with them. Here, I want to thank Mr Banerjee for his suggestion of formal channels for potential citizens and PRs to provide feedback and inputs to the Government. Indeed, this is important, because we value feedback from all Singaporeans, and there are many channels now, eg, REACH, chaired by Dr Amy Khor, and there are many other avenues for anyone, including our new citizens and PRs, to provide feedback or seek information. And if there are other better ideas to do this, I will consider them. Let me now talk about the need for Singaporeans to welcome immigrants and for immigrants to integrate into our society. This is an important subject. It has received extensive publicity in the press, particularly after the Straits Times' survey that led to all kinds of remarks being made about foreigners and surfaced all kinds of prejudices and stereotyping among Singapore citizens and foreigners. I want to talk a bit about this. Singapore is a multi-racial country. To maintain this harmony, all of us must learn how to accommodate and adapt. So the concerns shared by Ms Indranee Rajah, Mr Inderjit Singh, Dr Teo Ho Pin and several other Members are taken in. The Sunday Times' survey published on 14th January 2007 on Singaporeans' attitudes towards foreigners revealed that Singaporeans do not mind foreigners coming here to work.”