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 32 of 64.
“There will be three basic conditions: (a) The speaker must be a Singapore citizen; (b) The speaker must register his intention to speak before he makes his speech; (c) The speech should not be religious in nature, and should not have the potential to cause feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different racial or religious groups. Let me elaborate on each of these conditions. The speaker must be a Singapore citizen. The Speakers' Corner is meant to provide Singapore citizens with an avenue to express their views on issues that concern them. The Corner should not become an avenue for foreigners to pursue their own agenda whether in respect of their own domestic issues, or those of other countries, including Singapore's. Speakers must give notice of their intention to speak, and present themselves in person to show that they are Singapore citizens, before they start speaking. This is a very simple requirement. All they need to do is to turn up in person at the Kreta Ayer Neighbourhood Police Post, which is right next to the Speakers' Corner, produce their identity cards or passports to prove their citizenship, and register their intent to speak. They need not inform the NPP what they intend to speak on. Approvals will be granted on the spot, and they can then proceed to the Corner to speak. The Police will allow advance registration by individuals who wish to speak, but not advance booking of whole or part of the venue for an organised public event. This is to ensure that the Speakers' Corner remains available at all times to all Singaporeans who wish to speak, and no person or group can take over whole or part of the venue for themselves. No speeches that would cause racial or religious enmity. Singapore is a multi-racial, multi-religious society.”
“I will also ask the Clerk to distribute a map (Cols. 81-82) which shows the exact extent or location of the Speakers' Corner. [Copies of document distributed to hon. Members]. Hong Lim Park is easily accessible and close to the business district and Chinatown, which are areas of high concentration of people and activities. It is also historically the venue for political rallies and speeches. The Kreta Ayer Neighbourhood Police Post nearby will make it convenient for speakers to register to use the Corner. map - SPEAKERS' CORNER AT HONG LIM PARK (Cols. 81-82) My Ministry considered other possible locations, such as the Padang, the Civic Plaza at Ngee Ann City, Bras Basah Park, and the Botanic Gardens. However, they were less suitable for various reasons, such as interference with frequent commercial or sporting activities, relatively poor accessibility and redevelopment in the near future. There will only be one Speakers' Corner. Given Singapore's population and geographical size, there is no need for more than one such venue, nor to have venues of different sizes to cater to different levels of formality. Even London, with a population of over seven million people and about three times the size of Singapore, has only one Speakers' Corner at Hyde Park. There have been suggestions to set up more such venues in the UK, but these are for other cities across the country, rather than for London itself. Some ground rules will ensure that speakers and audience use the Speakers' Corner without creating a fracas, or law and order problems.”
“Sir, the Speakers' Corner will give Singaporeans a designated venue where they can speak outdoors in public on any issue, without having to apply for a Public Entertainment licence. The idea of having a Speakers' Corner, modelled on the Hyde Park Corner in London, was mooted about a year ago. The Government initially did not support the proposal, as it was concerned over the potential for public disorder in our multi-racial, multi-religious society. Irresponsible speakers might use the Corner to make speeches to create social strife and division for whatever reason. However, after studying the matter further, the Government has decided that while there is some risk, the risk can be managed, and the idea is worth trying out, especially in view of the support it has attracted from civil society groups. The rules for using the Speakers' Corner will be kept to the minimum. The Police has carefully studied how the Royal Parks Agency and the Royal Parks Constabulary in the United Kingdom manage Hyde Park Speakers' Corner in London. We will adopt many features of the Hyde Park example in our own Speakers' Corner. I will ask the Clerk to distribute the comparison (Cols. 77-80) of the conditions of our Speakers' Corner and the Hyde Park Speakers' Corner. [Copies of document distributed to hon. Members]. Members can study that afterwards. comparison - COMPARISON OF HYDE PARK'S SPEAKERS' CORNER AND SINGAPORE'S SPEAKERS' CORNER AT HONG LIM PARK (Cols. 77-80) Let me now outline my Ministry's plans for the Speakers' Corner and the basic rules that would govern its operation. First, let me address the choice of venue. The Speakers' Corner will be set up at Hong Lim Park. It will be open during the daylight hours of 7 am to 7 pm, 7 days a week, throughout the year.”
“Sir, may I have your permission to answer Questions 6, 7 and 8 together as they are all related?”
“Sir, I am sure all of us have been waiting for this moment. After a long 10 days of exhaustive debate, we have all heard enough. It now just leaves me to thank you, Mr Speaker, on behalf of all Members, for your patience and thank them also for their contributions. Sir, I beg to move, That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed.”
“If one loses an IC and if enough Singaporeans lose their ICs, it will impact on Singaporean's sense of safety and security because you may have people who get hold of these ICs and, in fact, there are syndicates who do that, and they will fall into wrong hands. That is why I think we must be very careful with them.”
“The number has since dropped to 2,600 monthly for the whole of 1999, which means that with the deterrent regime people have been reminded that it is important to take good care of their ICs. This figure, although lower, is still a serious problem. Sir, let me assure Mr Chiam that SIR, like I have said just now, does not take a blunderbuss approach because it does exercise discretion in waiving the deterrent component of the replacement fee carefully on the merits of each case. For example, SIR waives the penalty where the IC holder is not at fault, such as in the case of break-ins, robberies, or losses due to fire. Indeed, between July 1998 and February 2000, SIR waived the penalty for about 7,000 cases. Hence, these IC holders only have to pay the recurrent replacement fee of $60 which incidentally is just above the cost of a new IC which is about $50. So the Government is not levying the fee to make money. The onus is on the IC holders to explain the circumstances in which the loss occurred. In cases where the circumstances of the loss were dubious, for example, persons are unable to recollect how the IC was lost, the request for waiver of the penalty fees will not be acceded to. Mr Chiam referred to a writer in the Straits Times' Forum last year and I believe there were also one or two other writers. Let me tell him that, following further interviews and clarifications given by the IC holders in those cases, SIR gave them the benefit of the doubt and waived the penalty fees for them. Sir, the other point is that Mr Chiam compares the approach taken by banks to SIR. Banks do not charge very high administration fee for an ATM card. Is he serious in comparing an ATM card with an IC? If one loses an ATM card, perhaps at most, he loses his money in the bank.”
“Sir, our laws and enforcement approach are tough but fair. Our enforcement agencies will continue to exercise compassion where justified. In line with this approach, as Mr Peh would know, my Ministry is working with the relevant Government agencies to put in place a range of new sentencing options such as community service orders, front-end home detention, boot camps, and probation for adult offenders. These sentencing options carry a greater rehabilitative element and would be suitable for persons who have committed relatively minor offences and first time offenders. They will complement existing forms of punishment and broaden the court's sentencing options. 5.45 pm Let me now take Mr Chiam's cut. Mr Chiam has commented that persons who are victims of crime are also penalised by the deterrent replacement fee through no fault of theirs. He feels that our civil servants are bureaucratic and Government is unfair in levying the replacement fee of $100. First, let me say that the deterrent replacement fee complements Singapore Immigration and Registration's (SIR) public education effort to get Singaporeans to take good care of their ICs. So it is not a blunderbuss approach. Indeed, before its implementation in July 1998, there was a public campaign advising Singaporeans of the situation which was bad at that time and in fact giving prior warning to Singaporeans that if the situation did not improve, tougher penalties would be imposed. Before the fees were implemented in July 1998, the number of lost ICs was not only high, but was on an uptrend. The monthly average of about 3,300 cards lost in 1997 rose to about 4,000 in the first half of 1998.”
“We have to maximise the land use. It is a luxury to have a stand-alone community club occupying 0.4 or 0.5 hectares of space. I think in land scarce Singapore, we should maximise the land use, put as much of our communal facilities together as possible, so that they can share in the use of land as well as become convenient points of contact for Singaporeans. Quite a number of other organisations are co-located with the community clubs, such as the library, NTUC child care, Council of Social Services and some corporate members of the People's Association. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, first, let me take Mr Peh Chin Hua's cut. I would now respond to his concern that there should be greater compassion when the Police and law enforcement departments enforce our laws, particularly against first-time offenders. Sir, both the Police and the Attorney-General's Chambers already exercise compassion whenever appropriate, before a decision is made to prosecute offenders. If the offence is a minor one and the offender has a good record, indeed he may be let off with a warning, instead of being charged in court. For example, in 1998, over 1,800, constituting about 40% of shoplifters, were let off with a warning. However, being forced by circumstances as an excuse is not acceptable and is not a justification for committing an offence. Sir, neither should a person be exonerated nor spared punishment merely because he is a first-time offender. Sir, cases of the sort that Mr Peh mentioned must have been serious enough for the offenders to be charged in court in the first place. The court then takes into account all the relevant facts and mitigating circumstances before deciding on the appropriate punishment in accordance with the law.”
“As regards Mr Chng's question about the DNA technology, let me say that my Minister of State has already mentioned something like that the last time he spoke on this. The Police is already beginning to study this to find out how it can make better use of DNA technology for its investigations. And it is looking at the practices in other countries, such as UK and US which have successfully set up such databases. The setting up of the database for DNA is indeed a strategic thrust of the Police. For forensic and intelligence-led investigations, DNA should become an important tool for criminal investigation as the criminals are now becoming more sophisticated, and conventional investigation methods will become inadequate. But the setting up of a DNA database is not a straightforward task because it will take time, as operational, technical and legal issues need to be looked at. We are now working with the Health Ministry and AG's Chambers on this. Dr Teo Ho Pin asked about the NPCs and the criteria we use for selecting the sites for the NPCs. We want to site the NPC where the community is. Where else can it be? It cannot be tucked in a corner somewhere in Singapore. It ought to be convenient, central and easily accessible. As far as possible, we will also try to site the NPC together with the community clubs, community centres. We already have done so in a couple of the community clubs and centres where the NPCs are co-located. Over the years, we are going to have another 10 or 12 more such NPCs co-located with the community clubs. It is a policy of the Government, and here I am wearing my two hats as People Association's Deputy Chairman as well as the Minister in charge of Police, that we would have the NPC co-located with the community club as far as possible.”
“Information technology classes have also been introduced to the drug inmates last year. And these measures have contributed in some way to the reintegration of the addicts into our society. As a result, we saw a decline of the relapse rate from 81% in 1994 to about 52% last year. For first-time abusers, Mr Chen has asked whether there are better or more effective ways of dealing with them. Let me assure Mr Chen that we do try to help the first-time abusers who are earnest in wanting to kick their drug habit. The Prisons Department actually runs a treatment programme called the Voluntary Treatment Programme which is basically intended for first-time abusers. Under this programme, first-time abusers who confess and volunteer to go for treatment in Changi Hospital will be given the opportunity to undergo detoxification and follow-up counselling sessions, without being committed to the DRC and therefore have no record, so to speak. But the number of first-time abusers who actually successfully complete this programme is dismally low. Many of them just do not have the stamina, determination and discipline to go through with it. Out of the 137 abusers who signed up for this programme since 1996, only 44 of them eventually completed the programme. We are prepared to help the first-time abusers to help themselves. But, ultimately, they must help themselves. Because if they do not, nobody can help them. If Mr Chen or anybody else can think of better ways of rehabilitating them, I would be very happy to look into them. But let me tell him and everybody here, that nobody enjoys sending a drug abuser to a court or to the DRC, because ultimately we would like to have our society rid of this problem. But if he does not heed the law, then, of course, the law has to take its course.”
“The Council works very closely with the CNB, with the schools, voluntary welfare organisations as well as the private sector corporations to run programmes to specifically target at-risk youths and there was a mass awareness programme highlighting the dangers of drug abuse. For example, the Council works closely with SANA (Singapore Anti-Narcotics Association) to put together an outreach programme targeting out-of-school youth called the Peer Alliance Liaison or PAL programme. Many voluntary welfare organisations have since joined this programme to turn at-risk youths away from abusing drugs. The Council also works very closely with advertising agencies under the banner of Partnership for a Drug-free Singapore. This Partnership devised innovative ways to spread the anti-drug message. Last year, the Partnership organised an anti-drug song writing contest, published a parents' guide to drug prevention and developed innovative advertisements showing the dangers of heroin, Ecstasy and Ice abuse, and these agencies actually put in a lot of their own time and resources and expertise in helping in this effort. In 1998, I briefed Members on the rehabilitation and aftercare measures undertaken by my Ministry. And I highlighted the community-based programme which releases addicts into the community to continue their rehabilitation in supportive environment, such as half-way houses and the offer of employment opportunities for addicts through the SCORE's job placement service. Besides continuing with these measures, we also offer more educational and vocational training for drug addicts in the past years. The commencement of the Prisons school this year also gives better facilities and more opportunities for drug addicts to study.”
“Sir, Mr Kenneth Chen and Prof. Chin asked about the drug situation in Singapore. Since the peak of the drug problem in 1994, MHA has taken a multi-pronged approach in dealing with this problem. This was done through preventive drug education, very rigorous enforcement, rehabilitation and aftercare of those abusers arrested or detained in the DRCs. This strategy has worked well and I am pleased to report to the House that the drug problem continues to be well under control. The number of drug abusers arrested fell by a marked 15% from 4,500 in 1998 to about 3,800 in 1999. The continued high price and the low purity level of heroin in the local market also confirm that the drug situation here has improved. The purity level of the heroin, the main drug of abuse, has fallen to an all time low of less than 3% compared to 7% in 1996. Over the same period, the price of heroin has actually increased from $10 a straw to $20 a straw. For the second consecutive year since 1998, the number of new drug addicts arrested has also remained below 800. The last time it fell below 800 was in 1986. CNB's enforcement, as you read from time to time in newspapers, continued to remain rigorous. It conducted 48 major operations last year, crippling 30 drug trafficking syndicates in the process. Approximately 50 kg of heroin and about 7 kg of cannabis were seized last year. About 100 kg of opium and over 17,000 Ecstasy tablets were also seized. The National Council Against Drug Abuse has continued to play a crucial role in preventive drug education.”
“The syndicate leader has since been charged in court and the case will come up for trial. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] 5.15 pm Last year, the Police also busted two illegal moneylending syndicates that were active in Circuit Road, Geylang and Changi areas. The two masterminds of the syndicates who are responsible for providing money to the runners to operate the illegal money-lending business were also arrested. Both masterminds have been brought to justice. But breaking up syndicate operations and arresting and prosecuting the leader of the masterminds is not a simple and straightforward issue because it will take time. It involves careful planning, careful intelligence collection and elaborate investigations. You do not just rush in there and catch somebody and say he is the mastermind, otherwise you might catch the wrong guy and the real fellow may run away. So let me assure Mr Peh that police does pay a great deal of attention on the mastermind, just as we also do on those who traffic illegal immigrants or who traffic in drugs. I think the most important thing, of course, is to go after the mastermind. As far as possible that will be done. But let me also say that it is more than one person who will be involved and if we chop one head, new heads will pop up. Some of them may not even be here to be found. I will tell you that in many instances the masterminds of the illegal immigrants are actually not in Singapore. They are not based in Singapore. They might be Singaporeans but they are not based in Singapore. So it is not that easy to catch them.”
“I think that kind of perception is no longer so visible any more. I want to take CSSP one step closer to the schools but, at the same time, I will move it at a pace that the schools are comfortable with. The CSSP is really a project to complement the community with all the Home Team departments, including the Civil Defence. This system of working together with police posts, working together with the police centre, is certainly an improvement over the normal community policing concept that we have implemented for quite some time. We have now moved from NPP to NPC in two of our Police Divisions. The NPC will, since Mr Iswaran asked, let me say to him and all of us here, actually provide more time for the Police officers to do patrols on the ground, because the NPCs can deploy their resources better. The results in the two NPCs have shown that the crime rate is actually lower, and Police time for patrols has actually increased, and the residents are generally happy with the system. And in time, by next year or a year after that, we shall have all our Police Divisions converted to the NPC system. Let me now come to Mr Peh Chin Hua's question whether we are only catching the Tua Pek Kongs and not the masterminds. The Police must be also interested in syndicate leaders, not just only the runners of the syndicates. Wherever possible, they will go after them. The Police has indeed been successful in a number of such cases. One recent example was in December last year when the Police smashed a syndicate which supplied immigration offenders as labourers. The syndicate leader and his associates were all arrested. They were all responsible for managing the illegal workers. They were deploying them to the various companies and worksites and they were also collecting the payments.”
“We talk about Singapore 21 and active citizenship, and I think this is a concrete example of what active citizens can do for themselves, for self-interest. As regards the suggestion to extend this programme to schools, we are already thinking about that, but I want to tread a bit cautiously here. Because some may feel, like Mr Iswaran said, that the schools may attract the odium that they have a problem. Let me assure them that this is not the case to highlight a problem in the school, but really to encourage the school community to also care for their own safety and security, within their own neighbourhood. And the students will also, in a way, be involved with the community, not just within the school itself, but also the neighbourhood around them. But we can work with the school, with the parents, teachers and the students, whether it is on juvenile delinquency, street gangs or bullies and so on. I think it is good that they themselves play a role in identifying and finding solutions to solve these problems. And the Home Team will give them the necessary support. I want to tread cautiously here because some teachers may not fully understand this now. Some principals may wonder whether we are giving them more work. So we have taken the first step to brief the cluster supervisors. Let them understand it. Then we are going to have a meeting with some principals so that they can understand what it is all about, and those who are willing can experiment on this, just as we did on the anti-drug campaign. We have got all the schools involved in preventive drug education now, and no school is saying that just because it has got an anti-drug campaign or it has a group of people coming to talk to its students on drugs or drug prevention, the school has got a drug problem.”
“But if the residents themselves do not play a role, because they are the ones on the ground who know exactly what goes on, and if they do not play a role in helping to ensure that the place is safe and secure, then it is very difficult for the Police to be there all the time. It is impossible for the Police to be everywhere. This Community Safety and Security Programme, which Mr Goh Choon Kang also said that we should promote and encourage, is indeed something that we ought to do. Since the programme was launched in October 1997, we have, to date, 450 Community Safety and Security Programmes already drawn up by the various committees - RCs, neighbourhood committees, and they are doing it even in private estates. I think this is quite encouraging. The fact that individuals and parents are coming forward, eg, to make sure that the zone around the school is safe for the children, is a good sign. But I think more should be done, not just keeping this programme only within the grassroots committees or only within certain concerned citizens, but all residents who want to make sure that their place is safe and secure should play a role. I think that is the only way for us to drive out the would-be criminals. At the national level, in fact, I take a deep interest in this because wearing both hats in the People's Association and the Police, I think there is a lot of synergy to be derived between the community organisations and what the Police, the Civil Defence and the CNB want to do. It is not just using the vehicle of the grassroots organisations, but because the People's Association is also an organisation that helps to promote community bonding, cohesiveness and self-help among the community. We thought that this is really a practical example of active citizenship.”
“I think that is the way we should manage all these cases. I suppose if you have read about cases in Taiwan, I think the press got to know more than the police, and I do not think that helps the victim at all in solving his or her problem. That is the kind of approach that we want to take. But, of course, I would say also that we can be a bit more proactive and we can find new ways of marketing ourselves. And I have always told my officers that while they may have a good story, a good product, if they have not told people about how and why they do it, then I think they have not won the public over. It is not that we want to brag about what we do and gain credos and applause, but really if we have done something good, I think the public ought to know it, so that they know that the Police is actually working hard for them. Let me assure Mr Iswaran that we take safety and security very seriously. But I also want to stress that safety and security is not just the job of the Police Force, or the job of the Home Team only. In fact, the idea that we are trying to propagate is that every one of us living in our community, living in our HDB flats and private estates, actually has a role to play in ensuring that the place remains a safe and secure one for us. So this programme called the Community Safety and Security Programme is one such programme that we put out to engage the community. It is not a programme to pass responsibility to the community, as some would like to believe. The Police will carry on doing its job, so will CNB, Immigration, Civil Defence and all the other departments.”
“But the question he also raises is: do we have a good PR strategy to deal with these problems that crop up from time to time? The Police meets the press very regularly. It briefs them on the major cases. It briefs them on how it handles its cases. And I think the public know from these cases and the handling of the cases and the speed in which the Police solves some of the problems and the cases show the Police has been quite proactive in engaging the media and in sharing with them as much information as possible. But sometimes the Police cannot tell the press everything because some of these are operational trade secrets. We also do not want the people on the wrong side of the law to learn about them and find new ways of beating us. So, sometimes we have to reserve a bit of our position and not tell everything. But as far as possible, the Police tries to manage it and get to the public and tell them as much as they can. By informing the public about what is going on, even by reporting the crimes that are committed, it also serves a purpose to remind the public that although we have a low crime rate in Singapore, it does not mean that there is no crime. So please take the necessary precautions. So, highlighting all these cases is not at all bad, but sometimes we have to hold back some of the information, or even have to ask the press to cooperate not to release the information, as it may jeopardise a case. Last year's kidnapping case is a good example. I know that some journalists got wind of that and, fortunately, they cooperated and did not put out the story. Otherwise, I think the Police operation to catch the culprits would have been in jeopardy. It is only after the culprits were arrested that the story came out.”
“And the Police is serious in weeding out all these errant officers whenever they are found, and although the Police knew that it would attract adverse publicity, it does not hesitate to take these officers to court, even though it may attract adverse publicity against the Police. As regards Mr Sin Boon Ann's suggestion to raise the penalty for Police officers who commit criminal offences such as corruption, yes, I will take note of his suggestion. For now, I believe the courts have enough discretion to impose the maximum penalty. Mr Chng asked how does the Police make sure that it keeps up its image and the performance of its officers. Training is the key, as Mr Chng himself has said, and supervision and management. There are various measures that the Police has put in place to ensure that its officers continue to remain on top of the job. Basic training is definitely a must, and they take a multi-pronged approach in training, inculcating the right values, competencies in discharging their duties, and they also do psychological tests. In other words, before people are recruited, our Police Psychological Unit actually interviews them and, as far as possible, try to sieve out those who are not suitable for the Police Force. There is also continuous training on the job, and the training for the supervisors who, I believe, are the most important people in making sure that the officers under their charge do the job properly. Because without good managers, without good supervision, then I think something will give. So it is important that we also train our Police managers well. On Mr Iswaran's concern about the public sense of safety, let me assure him that generally the public still feel very safe. Otherwise, the results of the survey will not hear this out.”
“76% felt that the Police provides high quality service, and this is also an improvement of 7% over the previous survey. When the respondents were asked to select five out of the 13 statements, whether they are positive statements or negative statements of the Police, the five top attributes or descriptive terms of the Police were that they are respectable, approachable, well-trained, disciplined and capable. So, the public perception of the Police is still generally positive. The fact that the public is willing to come forward and help the Police in solving a number of crimes is testimony to the public's confidence in the Police Force, that Police will act when they make a report. In the instance of snatch theft, motor vehicle theft, robbery, housebreaking, outraging of modesty, murder and rape, 45% of the arrests of people who committed these offences were the result of public cooperation. 5.00 pm The drop referred to in the headlines in Zaobao was in response to respectability, and reliability and trustworthiness, both registering falls to 77%, down by 6% for respectability; and for reliability and trustworthiness, down 4%, at 57% compared to the previous survey. But these reductions, I believe, were due to the recent spate of reports of Police corruption in one major case - the Ah Long San case. But one must not let this one case mar the whole perception and whole performance of the Police Force. Put in context, more than 99.9% of our Police Force officers conduct themselves well. Less than 0.1% of the Police Force officers are charged in court every year. I think we must look at the numbers in perspective.”
“Let me say that I am the first person to be concerned about the public perception of the Police Force because, if the public has a poor impression of the police force, I think it will make it very difficult for the Police to operate in this environment. They cannot recruit people to join them because it is a lousy outfit or people think it is a lousy outfit and they cannot do their job well because the public would not cooperate with it. But we must look at the problem that is currently highlighted or reported in the press in perspective, in the total context of the Police Force. From what you read in the papers and what you read about other countries like in the United States, whether it is in New York or Los Angeles, or whether it is in Japan or in Britain, I think the problems we face pale in significance. But still, I am concerned because any black sheep that we have will cast a black mark on the whole force and will make it difficult for us. Let us look at the survey mentioned by Mr Goh Choon Kang first. Generally, the survey has been positive and many of the positive points have been highlighted. This survey was done by a private survey agency, Forbes Research, and it was commissioned by the Police Force. That survey was also reinforced by the results of the Straits Times survey. The significant attributes of the survey were that 90% of the people surveyed felt that the Police is effective in maintaining law and order, and this is an increase of 6% over the previous survey. 78% of the people surveyed found the Police is rational in discharging their duties, and this is also an increase of 5% over the previous survey. 82% found that the Police has done well in solving crimes, and this is also an increase of 3% compared to the previous survey.”
“On the case brought up by Mr Chng of the 120 persons found living in a boarding house in Serangoon Road, I had followed up and checked it out, and I was told that all of them are here with work passes. So they have work permits. But the owner of the property has misused his property. He did not have the permission of the proper authority and I believe URA or BCA has taken action, and so has the Civil Defence Force. Now let me also talk about the Immigration Act which deals with immigration offenders. We have reviewed the Immigration Act quite a few times already to make sure that it is effective in dealing with this problem and now the Ministry is reviewing the Immigration Act based on operational experience to ensure that this piece of legislation continues to remain effective. For example, we are considering introducing new provisions to ensure that the housing agents also play their part in curbing the immigration offender problem. To deter the harbouring of immigration offenders, the current Immigration Act imposes due diligence on the person letting out the accommodation to check and make sure that the prospective tenants are not immigration offenders. But my Ministry will now consider extending this legal requirement for due diligence by the landlords to those who act as facilitators or middlemen in a transaction to rent out the premises as well. But this new provision will not absolve or reduce the home-owners and landlords to conduct due diligence checks as well. Several of my colleagues spoke on the public perception of the police force and Mr Goh Choon Kang specifically referred to the headline in the press report in Lianhe Zaobao and he also explained that the second headline better explains the public perception of the Police Force.”
“So there is no reason why foreign worker would not be able to produce the original copy of their work permits on demand. Landlords should be suspicious if their prospective tenants say that their employer kept the original and that they have only a photocopy, or that their passports are with the employer and they have only a photocopy. When they receive such papers, they should question and insist on seeing the original copies. A home-owner may lose his HDB flat, if he or his spouse or any authorised occupier of the flat has been convicted of harbouring immigration offenders. 14 such errant owners had their flats re-possessed between 1st January 1995 and 31st October 1999. So be careful. A fundamental point I wish to make here is that, like our Members who have suggested, Singaporeans should take an interest in their own safety and security and the public should report any suspected immigration offender as well as harbourers and employers of such immigration offenders. I am told by the Director of Singapore Immigration that there was a recent instance where a member of the public came forward to report a suspected immigration offender who had produced a forged blue identity card. The member of the public saw the forged blue identity card and he suspected that something was not quite right. He called the SIR to look at that identity card and SIR confirmed that that foreigner was, in fact, an immigration offender. Such public spiritedness is to be encouraged. This will further deter anyone who wants to employ or harbour such immigration offenders and in the end, these immigration offenders will find that they have no place to live, work or hide.”
“Singaporeans should not create the demand for immigration offenders by employing them. That is very important. And neither should Singaporeans harbour them by renting out their premises, flats, private apartments or houses to them. In 1999, 388 employers were arrested, compared to 270 arrested in 1998 for hiring these immigration offenders. 306 harbourers were also arrested last year compared to 166 in 1998. All these were because of stepped-up enforcement by Police and immigration. Home-owners with premises to let out should be more careful when selecting their prospective tenants, because many of these home-owners claimed that they did not check this or that, or they simply checked the copy without looking at the original copy. What they should do is to check the prospective tenants' original copy of the immigration and work passes and then cross-check to make sure that the particulars on the passports tally with those of the work passes. In addition, where the names of the employers appear on the work passes, then the home-owners should also check with the employers to verify that the prospective tenants are indeed employed by these employers. If not, they will find themselves in great difficulty explaining to the court. If the home-owners are in doubt of the genuineness of the pass or about the status of the person, or even about his work status, then, they should contact the immigration authorities during office hours or check with the information and services counters of the Work Permit Department of the Manpower Ministry to verify the genuineness or the authenticity of these passes. After we amended the law, all work permit holders or foreign workers must carry their work permits with them all the time.”
“In a widely reported case last year, SIR arrested 35 illegal immigrants who tried to sneak into Singapore on the 30th of July, which was the very last day when our old checkpoint was in operation. They were all in a lorry under the canvas sheet and mattresses. This tragic case resulted in four of the illegal immigrants dying of suffocation. This case clearly shows the ruthless nature of the traffickers of these immigration offenders. They will go to no end just to earn a quick dollar without caring for the safety of the people in the vehicle. Police and immigration are also now focusing on crippling the syndicates that are responsible for trafficking these immigration offenders and giving these offenders forged documents. With the stringent checks in place, the syndicates have been finding new ways to send these illegal immigrants through the land checkpoints. From using lorries and buses or hiding in car boots, the syndicates are now resorting to using special compartments in the vehicles or ferrying these illegal immigrants by car or lorry to somewhere near the checkpoint and then ask these illegal immigrants to find their own way into Singapore, or out of Singapore. Such action by the syndicates is a sign of their desperation, in view of the stringent checks and enforcement by the authorities. The evolving nature of the problem means that the Home Team has to be alert and stay on top of the problem and be responsive to the new methods of operation of these syndicates. We will seek deterrent sentences against these syndicate members who are arrested. But the responsibility for tackling the immigration offender problem does not just lie with the Home Team alone. The public, too, has a role to play.”
“To stay on top in its fight against immigration offenders and the smugglers, the Police Coast Guard recently added 20 high speed patrol boats equipped with the latest surveillance and digital communication equipment and six highly manouverable speedboats or interceptor speedboats to its fleet. Illegal immigrants and traffickers who try to sneak in by sea will therefore be up against these high performance boats. The Police Coast Guard will continue to upgrade its fleet to ensure that it is sufficiently equipped to handle the threats and the challenges it faces. In July last year, the new Woodlands Checkpoint or land checkpoint came into operation. To address Mr Chng's question, the facilities at this new Woodlands Checkpoint have enabled the immigration to conduct more stringent checks on the people who come in, to prevent illegal entry and departure through the land checkpoints, without adversely affecting traffic flow, because if it starts to check everybody, then I am sure people will complain that there are long queues of vehicles and long lines of people queuing at our immigration counters. Police and the immigration also intensified the intelligence gathering to curb the trafficking of immigration offenders through the land checkpoints and these efforts have yielded positive results. For example, 60 illegal immigrant traffickers were arrested and 52 vehicles seized in 1999, compared to only 42 illegal immigrant traffickers arrested and 23 vehicles seized in the year 1998. Many of these illegal immigrants who were arrested were trying to enter Singapore or leave Singapore by concealing themselves in the car boots or in special compartments of travel coaches, lorries or bus kilangs. The media have highlighted some enforcement successes.”
“Police and Immigration have also conducted raids in areas where immigration offenders are likely to gather to work or live. Let me elaborate on this. In the past year, the Police and the Singapore Immigration and Registration raided various immigration offender haunts, including construction sites, workplaces, forested areas and known congregation areas. The Police conducted 15 major island-wide operations throughout 1999, resulting in the arrest of 1,400 illegal immigrants and 185 overstayers. In addition, 17 operations were conducted in the forested areas, with 195 illegal immigrants and 27 overstayers arrested. 4.45 pm The Police also targeted the employers of immigration offenders and the harbourers at their residential premises, such as our HDB flats and also in private estates. Since we stepped up enforcement in early 1998, it is now more difficult to find congregations of immigration offenders at any particular location. The Police has therefore widened its net to include entertainment outlets in the crackdown on immigration offenders. For example, in October last year, 100 immigration offenders were arrested in a discotheque in Orchard Road. Sir, the Police Coast Guard has stepped up both sea and shore patrols to detect those who attempt to enter Singapore illegally by sea. The Police Coast Guard also deploys monitoring posts equipped with surveillance equipment and systems at strategic locations to detect these illegal landings. The Police Coast Guard's enhanced presence has thwarted many illegal immigration attempts. In 1999, the Police Coast Guard foiled 52 attempts and arrested close to 240 illegal immigrants.”
“I thank the Members for raising their points. Let me deal with a few of the cuts and then I will ask my Minister of State to answer the others. On the question of the illegal immigrant situation, raised by Mr Chng Hng Kok and Prof. Chin, let me report to this House that in 1999, the Home Team arrested about 17,000 immigration offenders. By "immigration offenders" we mean illegal immigrants and overstayers, people who have overstayed in Singapore, overstayed beyond the period stated in their visit passes. This figure of 17,000 is actually a decrease of about 26% of the 1998's figure of 23,000. But this figure is still much higher, about 21% higher than the 14,000 immigration offenders arrested in 1997. The immigration offenders arrested in 1999 came from all over the region - Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Myanmar and Thailand. The number of illegal immigrants arrested in 1999, ie, those who sneak into Singapore either by car, boat, or whatever means, was about 11,500. This is a 22% decrease from the 14,800 compared to 1998. But it is still 51% more than the 7,600 arrested in 1997 and I consider this a very unacceptably high figure. As for the overstayers, 5,400 of them were arrested in 1999 and this is also a decrease of 35% from the 8,300 overstayers arrested in 1998 and a further decrease of 14% from the 1997's figure of 6,300. Sir, to ensure that the immigration offender problem remains in check, the Home Team has taken a multi-pronged approach to deal with this problem comprehensively. For example, we have enhanced our border control. We have continued with intensive enforcement efforts against the traffickers, the employers as well as the harbourers.”
“On the Committee of Supply dividing into two different Committees, I think all of us want to be in the same committee. I think it is very difficult to say that my interest is only in this and not in the others because some of our interests may cross. If you look at one classification, "Economic and Infrastructural Development", Ministry of Trade and Industry and Ministry of Manpower, are very different from public housing under Ministry of National Development. So they are totally unrelated. The Ministers have a responsibility for their own portfolios and we should leave it to them to decide how to answer those questions instead of putting them into different Committees. As for the title, I think the Clerk will not appreciate changing the title. I do not know his sentiments. This title has been in existence for more than 600 years. The first recorded term of "Clerk" was in 1363, 637 years ago. Fortunately, other Members said that the Speaker does not need to change his name. If we changed, I am sure you, Mr Speaker, will take great offence because in the whole of Singapore, no official title is called the Speaker, except yours. If we call you "President" or "Chairman", there are plenty around.”
“I thank the Member for making this amendment. Since the Speaker cannot speak, I will speak on his behalf and I hope he will not cut me off at 4.05 pm. I think we follow what some people do and we also do new things on our own. I always have a dictum. We always look at what we do all the time, review them and, if it is necessary to change, we will change. But I also believe sometimes that when it ain't broke, do not fix it. There are a few points that the Member raised. For example, the extension of Question Time by more than half an hour. I have looked up the other Parliaments and I found that practically all of them have one hour or less. In fact, in some cases, even just 30 minutes. In the case of Canada, a question cannot even be asked in more than 35 seconds and an answer cannot be given in more than 35 seconds. I do not know whether you want to get to that stage. For Question Time, I have some sympathy but for now, until we relook at the Standing Orders again, we leave it well and good. On the point about reducing the notice period from seven days to two days, I think two days would not be fair enough for a proper answer to be given, unless he just wants an answer that says "The Ministry will look into it." That we can give it to him perhaps with one day's notice or on the spot. Exempting the Standing Orders every time we need to go beyond 4.30 pm is not a problem at all. It is a very simple thing. I will stick to that because, if need be, we will move a motion. By his suggestion, I still have got to come up and adjourn earlier. So it makes no difference to me. Time limit of speeches of Members to 20 minutes is a good point to consider. At the right time, we may consider that. But some may not totally agree with him because some may prefer a longer time.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders: (i) the proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for FY 2000/2001 on 8th, 9th, 10th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 17th March 2000, be continued beyond 4.30 pm, and be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 until 7.00 pm on each day; and (ii) the proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for FY 2000/2001 on 11th March 2000 be continued beyond 4.30 pm, and be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 until 5 pm. This is because almost 530 amendments will be moved in the Committee of Supply this year. In fairness to the MPs, and in order for them to get the replies, we need the extra time to deal with these amendments. Resolved, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders: (i) the proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for FY 2000/2001 on 8th, 9th, 10th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 17th March 2000, be continued beyond 4.30 pm, and be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 until 7.00 pm on each day; and (ii) the proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for FY 2000/2001 on 11th March 2000 be continued beyond 4.30 pm, and be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 until 5 pm. SECOND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR FY 1999/2000 (Paper Cmd No. 3 of 2000) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 12.45 pm”
“Singapore is a young nation. We have not reached the stage of nationhood where a Singaporean with a second citizenship would still retain his identity and loyalty to Singapore as his homeland wherever he goes, his second citizenship being only of secondary importance. Hence, the Government does not allow Singaporeans to have dual citizenship. Foreigners are granted Singapore Citizenship only if they are committed to making Singapore their home, and see their long-term future with Singapore, in which case they should readily be prepared to give up their foreign nationality. EARLY DETECTION AND TREATMENT OF HEARING LOSS 3. Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh asked the Minister for Health (a) if there is a hearing impairment detection programme for the newly borns in all hospitals; and (b) whether a policy will be formalised in relation to early detection and intervention programmes in order to arrest hearing impairment of the very young.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That Parliament do now adjourn. Question proposed. LIBERALISATION OF THE SINGAPORE STOCK EXCHANGE 5.34 pm”
“Sir, the prison authorities will look at whatever condition that is necessary to be included in the enforcement of this home detention scheme. It is easier to detect drug consumption than, say, alcohol. When you take alcohol, whatever drink it is, and overnight, it can be washed away. But as for drugs, you can actually do a urine test, and you can determine whether the person has drugs. But we will still look at the Member's suggestion and see if it is necessary to have the condition. On pre-trial cases, I think right now it is definitely beyond the scope of this particular review, and it is a totally different thing altogether. I am not ruling it out completely, but right now we have other considerations that we have to take into account in implementing this particular scheme. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. ADJOURNMENT MOTION”
“I have not looked at the particular provision in the Penal Code, but from my recollection, I believe that it applies to people who are not civil servants who help us and we consider them to be public servants in the performance of their duties as members of the committee. Therefore, we assume that they do their job in good faith and whatever decisions, recommendations or actions that they take would not be subject to any suit.”
“Of course, some employers are wary of employing ex-prisoners. What SCORE and ISCOS, which are MHA statutory board and company, have done is that they have been helping these people to find jobs. If employers are prepared to employ them, we will be happy to match the prisoners or those under home detention for jobs. In certain places, like airport and seaport, security is very important. Therefore, the standards that the authorities expect of people with criminal records are much higher. We should not be too lax about that, otherwise we will bring ourselves more trouble by being too lax over security standards in the airport and the seaport. Finally, Mr Gerald Ee asked about the use of firearms, and whether firearms would only be used when absolutely necessary. That must be the case. I do not think our people are trigger-happy to shoot whenever somebody attempts to escape. They will employ all measures to restrain the person and to stop the escape from happening and if that is impossible, then orders to shoot will be given by a superior officer. If firearm is actually used, and it is necessary to have a Committee of Inquiry, we will inquire into it. In any case, the right authority to investigate into any discharge of firearm is the police. If there is a discharge of firearm, even innocently or accidentally, by an officer on duty, the matter will also be investigated by the police. Members can be rest assured that we do not just shoot unnecessarily. Sir, I believe I have dealt with all the questions.”
“Mr Noris Ong asked what is the potential number of prisoners who will qualify for home detention. I do not have the numbers but I believe it will be a significant number. Of course, not the majority of them, because many of them are in the medium and high security prisons. So we will have to consider all those eligible cases and then take a look at them. Offhand, I would say that prisons will start off with 30 to 40 a month. It will try this out and see the pace of it. If it can cope with it, and if our Advisory Committee can deal with it, then more can be released. We have to take it one step at a time. The person who is on home detention is not likely to be wasting his time. If he wants to do that, I do not know what else we could do. We could recall him. One of the conditions for home detention would be that the inmate be gainfully employed or studying. We will try our best to find him a job. But that may not be easy. There could be a time when a person may not be able to find a job. That does not mean we will recall the inmate back from home detention immediately. We ought to have some flexibility on that. As to whether we can help them to reduce the stigma and their friends knowing them as prisoners or not, I think the moment he goes to prison, the neighbours will already know. The prison authorities have been quite discreet in designing the tag. The tag is a little item that is put on the leg and if he wears long pants, it can be covered. Unless he wants to go for a swim, that is a different matter. I think the person has to take a chance. Mr Chew Heng Ching asked whether we should be more compassionate to ex-prisoners. That is a view which we will try to encourage people to have, particularly employers, to employ these people.”
“It is very difficult to enforce a condition which requires a person to be a teetotaler at home unless, of course, if a person is out on a drink driving charge, and an offence is committed, that person will be in deep trouble. Among the other suggestions Mr Ravindran talked about in extending the scheme to the different categories of offenders, indeed those he mentioned would be covered except those who are on pre-trial or pre-sentencing. Because, if the case has not been heard yet, how could we put a person on home detention? What power do the prison authorities have? If he cannot post bail, then he goes on remand. That is it. I cannot imagine a person who cannot post bail but at the same time commits a serious offence and there is no way of assessing the bahaviour of the person, the prison authority is called upon to decide whether that person should be on home detention. I think that is an impossible task. Mdm Claire Chiang asked about different home detention periods for different types of prisoners like, for example, a person who is handicapped. The prison authorities will look at all eligible inmates and release them for up to six months on home detention if they are suitable. That is the kind of flexibility that we should have. We should not put too many conditions and criteria into the assessment process, otherwise it will complicate the whole running of the scheme. Even for intensive interviews, that will be done. As I have said, counsellors will be used. We will talk to the right people, including the family members, to make sure that the person is indeed amenable to home detention. But the more money we invest in this, the less we will have for other purposes, including rehabilitation in the prison.”
“Without family support, there is no purpose in releasing that inmate back to society because we need the family to also play its role in rehabilitating the inmate. Getting the half-way house to do the job is not good enough because we should not just pass the responsibility to the half-way house. But we can get the half-way house to help. For example, in counselling, we can get SANA, VWOs, the Singapore Aftercare Association to help in the counselling. Counselling would indeed be one of the conditions that the prison would impose on anybody who is on home detention. Of course, by not incarcerating the prisoner, it will be cheaper in the process to put a person under home detention. So indeed the answer is yes, it is cheaper to put a person under home detention. Mr Ravindran also asked whether the Ministry or the prison authorities or the Government will be liable for any offence committed by an inmate who is on home detention. The prison authorities will be liable if it is shown that there is criminal negligence on its part. If there is criminal negligence in releasing the person, yes, certainly they could be sued. But in the end the whole process has to be examined and see whether prison has indeed been criminally negligent in releasing the prisoner. The final decision on that will be, of course, the courts which will take that case into consideration and decide whether there is any criminal negligence based on evidence and facts. One condition which Mr Ravindran asked the prison authorities to consider is whether we can prohibit such home detainees from consuming alcohol. I think we should only have conditions which can be enforced or seemingly possible to enforce.”
“In the process of making its recommendations, the Committee can call up the inmates and ask questions and review their records. That power is given to the Advisory Committee. In the end, a decision has to be made and that will be made by the Director of Prisons. Mr Ravindran asked specifically whether the overcrowding in our prison is the result of the strict sentencing guidelines that have been imposed for offences. There are a number of reasons which I have explained earlier. We always look at the sentencing regime to see whether they are adequate or not. Of course, if they are not, we will review them. On whether we could release prisoners in the process earlier instead of just having the standard remission period, I think the remission of one-third of the prisoner's sentence is already quite generous. Now we are providing the balance of up to six months for the person to serve his sentence at home and I think for a start we should just go for that and not do anything more. The prisoners need not pay for the cost of the electronic tagging and the cost of monitoring because this will be borne by the prison authorities. Home detention with electronic tagging is not a new thing that the prison has implemented. As I have said, it has been implemented for criminal law detainees, reformative trainees as well as those detained under the Misuse of Drugs Act. So Prisons Department already has enough experience in dealing with such people, including the process of examining, assessing and investigating whether a person is suitable for home detention or not. That process will be quite exhaustive, including talking to professionals and counsellors if necessary, and, in particular, for home detention, family support is very important.”
“Mr Ee and Mr Noris Ong also asked whether we should not consider that as an alternative instead of having the person served a prison sentence and then put him on home detention. The Committee that my Minister of State chaired did indeed consider such an option, but I think we should take things one at a time and we should not rush into implementing every recommendation that has been put up by the Committee. Prof. Chin also asked why some offences which we consider to be serious such as armed robbery or extortion are not included in the disqualification list. We can have an exhaustive list which can run into many pages or we can consider some of those offences which we think are very serious and which we should exclude them. For the others, they could be included provided they satisfy the criteria that I have made out. The criteria being that the inmates are amenable to re-integration and rehabilitation and the family members are prepared to support them in the re-integration effort, and the good behaviour of the person and so on. So it is not an exhaustive list and we will review the list from time to time and, if necessary, update or include or exclude other offences which are currently not in the list. Prof. Chin also asked about the Advisory Committee for Home Detention, how such a Committee will work and who will appoint the Committee and whether the Committee will be appointed by the Minister and whether it will have its own internal procedures. Of course, the internal working will be such that the internal Prisons Committee will review all eligible inmates for home detention and those who are considered suitable or even not suitable, but if they are eligible, they will be put up periodically to the Advisory Committee who will then make its recommendations.”
“Yes, to be fair to him. If the person is likely to be implicated, he may engage counsel to represent him. Eventually, if the committee's report adversely affects him and his career, eg, it involves a prison officer, as Prof. Chin says, then, of course, we will look at the grounds for a request for the committee's report. There were three suggestions on the term of "home detention", eg, why do we not try something else like community-based detention and home supervision and so on. Of course, there are various alternatives that we can consider, but the term "home detention" is not an original term that we have coined. Rather, it is a term used by other countries as well including the United Kingdom. So I see no particular reason why we should favour one term over another when that particular term is easily understood by the rehabilitative or prison authorities in other countries. Both Mr Ravindran and Prof. Chin asked whether this home detention scheme is more rehabilitative or perhaps merely a measure to reduce over-crowding in prisons. We know, of course, that there is an over-crowding situation in the prisons, but that is because many of our prisons' capacities are designed based on the old norms and we do not have many new prisons lately. So there is some aspect of over-crowding, but that is not the reason why we are providing for home detention. The reason, as I have said earlier, is that it arose from a study that I have asked my Minister of State to make together with other interested parties on what are the other alternative sentencing options that could be made available in our criminal justice system. We found that this tail-end home detention is one of them.”
“Sir, I thank the Members for speaking in support of the Bill, and I shall try to answer as many of the questions as possible and as detailed as possible. First, Prof. Chin Tet Yung's question about whether it would be better to have more than one member in the committee. Certainly, it is, and it is not my intention to have only a one-member committee. Otherwise, it does not make much sense, except that the law, as it is drafted, is not inconsistent with the provisions in other laws. Who would be appointed to such committees for the committee of inquiry? As I have said in my speech, prominent citizens, non-prison officers, senior officers in Ministries and the Government, and people who can help us to inquire into a particular matter. All expertise would be sought where necessary. This is not the first time that we have committees of inquiry for matters that happen in the prison. We have appointed a few of them and, invariably, the committees have members who are not from the civil service, like Justice of the Peace, for example, or someone who has been involved as a Visiting Justice. Since the proceedings are not open to the public, and if the chairman decides not to open it to the public, would the Minister decide? Certainly, I will so decide if there is a public interest to do so. If there is not, then I think we should leave it to the committee to do its work. Otherwise, the committee will feel encumbered and its job is to get to the root of the problem. It is not a prosecutorial agency, neither is it an agency to decide what sort of charges to make out against people who commit any particular offence. That should be left to the proper prosecutorial authorities. Whether a person who may be implicated adversely arising from a committee of inquiry may employ counsel?”
“Sir, in general, the Prisons (Amendment) Bill contains useful institutions and measures that, if implemented wisely, would undoubtedly improve our system of criminal justice. As the Bill stands, I would certainly support it, but hope that the Minister would address the issues that I have raised.”
“Coming to the eligibility of prisoners for the Home Detention Scheme, the Bill proposes that he has to have more than six months' imprisonment left, and not be disqualified from being considered. The disqualifications are contained in the Second Schedule. The disqualified category includes offences against the person, especially sexual offences. Curiously, however, the offences of extortion, robbery and armed robbery are not within the disqualified category. These are serious offences - robbery, for example, attracts a minimum of two years imprisonment and a maximum of ten and with caning. Gang-robbery, an aggravated form of robbery, is included in the disqualification list. May I therefore ask the Minister to let this House know why prisoners who are sentenced for armed robbery, robbery or extortion are not disqualified and therefore technically eligible for consideration for home detention? It must be remembered that even in the case of extortion, the crime involves instilling fear of injury or even death to the victims. Finally, the Bill proposes the establishment of an advisory committee to advise the Director on the suitability of the prisoner for release under the scheme. Could the Minister clarify how such a committee would work? Who would be appointed to this committee? Will it interview potential supervisees to assess their suitability for release, or will it simply rely on the recommendations of the Director? Since it is called an advisory committee, I assume that there is no substantive power of review, but can it insist that it would like to interview prisoners applying for the Home Detention Scheme?”
“In such a situation, where the status and livelihood of a person is at stake, and where he feels that there was, for instance, bias, should he not be entitled to a copy of the proceedings that may assist him in his case? Will the Minister let him have the report, even though the report came from a committee appointed by him? I hope that there could be some procedure to ensure that the committees of inquiry and their records are available to interested and affected parties. I now move to the provisions for Home Detention. Sir, I am not one to engage in semantics, but I do feel in this case that the use of the phrase, "Home Detention" is not quite appropriate, given the spirit and intent of the scheme. I understand that this scheme was a recommendation of the Inter-Ministry Committee on Community-Based Sentences, and that its purpose is to allow prisoners to re-integrate back into society, and to his home environment. Unless we want to preserve an idea that Home is Prison or detention centre, using another term, such as "supervision" might have been more appropriate. From the point of view of the family members, it may also be more palatable than to regard their home as a place of detention. In any case "supervision" more correctly describes this process. The supervisee is allowed to go out and seek gainful employment within the period that he is allowed to be absent from home. The electronic tagging is really more like a supervisory or surveillance process - triggered only if he absents himself from home during the restricted hours. I hope that the Minister will take the first opportunity to assure Members that the intention of this scheme is rehabilitative, and not just a measure to reduce prison population.”
“And I hope the Minister can let the House know who are likely to be appointed to such committees. Third, the proceedings of the inquiry are not open to the public unless the chairman permits or the Minister directs. I take this provision to mean that where a chairman permits, such a hearing can be open to the public, but that where a chairman does not give his permission, the Minister may direct him to do so. Can the Minister confirm that this is the position? Fourth, it is apparent that this committee of inquiry is intended to be a quasi-judicial institution, that is, it takes evidence on oath, has power to summon witnesses and the duty to keep records of the inquiry. Prison officers, prisoners and others may be affected by such proceedings. May they employ counsel? If not, why not? I refer in particular to the proposed section 7J where a prison officer who may be adversely affected by the findings of the committee has to be notified, and given a hearing during which he can give evidence as well as examine any witnesses. In such a case, counsel may be desirable. Fifth, the record of the committee is confidential and not to be released without the permission of the Minister. I am uneasy with this, not that I think the Minister will act improperly. There may be situations where he may be left in a difficult position. For example, a committee finds that a prison officer has used excessive force on a prisoner. Disciplinary action is taken and he is dismissed from the service. He seeks redress for unfair dismissal and of course the claim will be made against the Ministry.”
“Clauses 25 and 26 of the Bill seek to make amendments to the Intoxicating Substances Act and the Misuse of Drugs Act to empower prison officers to use weapons against inmates and other persons facilitating an escape; to appoint auxiliary police officers to serve as escorts or guards for inmates; and to convene Committees of Inquiry to look into and report on matters connected with the administration, functions, inmates of these centres and institutions. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung: Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak in support of this Bill. This Bill is an important one relating to the running of prisons and the treatment of prisoners. It deals with several matters, but I wish to focus on two. One refers to the new Committee of Inquiry to investigate or inquire into "any matter connected with the discipline, administration or functions of any prison or affecting any prisoner ." The other seeks to provide a system and procedure for home detention. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] 4.35 pm I welcome the establishment of the "Committee of Inquiry" and even though a committee is usually understood as a group of persons, it is not unheard of to have a committee of one. My only query here is: would it not be more sensible to have more than one committee member? I say this because such a committee is likely to be appointed only when there is some serious allegation made concerning the running of a prison, or the treatment of a prisoner. A group of members, even of two, will add to the transparency, the credibility and the general quality of the inquiry. This brings me to my second point: who would be appointed to such committees? Or more precisely, what qualifications must they have? The Bill is silent on this.”
“In addition to voicing their concerns to the Visiting Justices, they can also forward any complaints or requests to the Superintendent of their institution or write directly to the Director of Prisons. They are also free to let their family members know of their grievances during prison visits. Their family members may then take the matter up with the Prison authorities, who will investigate into every complaint received. Other Amendments In addition, the Bill also proposes various amendments that are essential to facilitate the management of the penal population and to allow the Prisons Department to operate more effectively. For example, clause 18(c) of the Bill regularises the existing practice that, before the offender is punished for any major breach of prison discipline, the Director of Prisons is required to confirm or vary the punishments imposed by the Superintendents. My Ministry is also taking this opportunity to update the provisions which have become obsolete and outdated since its last major review in 1985. For example, clause 14 of the Bill seeks to delete the provisions pertaining to the terms of engagement and discipline of prison officers which have become irrelevant as all terms and conditions are now in accordance with those laid down by the Public Service Division. Related Amendments to the Intoxicating Substances Act and the Misuse of Drugs Act Sir, as the Drug Rehabilitation Centres and the Inhalant Abuse Centres are also under the jurisdiction of the Prison authority, some of the amendments made to the Prisons Act will also be made to the Intoxicating Substances Act and the Misuse of Drugs Act.”