HEAD P - MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 2008 TO 31ST MARCH, 2009:

(Paper Cmd. 2 of 2008): Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [2nd Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]: Head P - Ministry of Home Affairs

The Chairman: Head P - Ministry of Home Affairs. Dr Teo Ho Pin.

Terrorism and Security

Dr Teo Ho Pin (Bukit Panjang): Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head P of the Estimates be reduced by $100.

Sir, I am indeed very surprised to learn that JI leader Mas Selamat, a limping detainee, can escape from our detention centre yesterday. This has indeed raised concerns about our Police Force vigilance and security operating procedures.

Sir, may I ask the Minister what level of security was imposed on Mas Selamat while in detention? How did he manage to escape from the detention centre? What is the status in the manhunt for Mas

Selamat? Will the Police be conducting a Board of Inquiry into the incident and report to this House the findings of the inquiry?

As Mas Selamat is still at large, it has raised public concerns on their safety. What is the Police's advice to the general public at this point of time?

Sir, Mas Selamat escaped at 4.05 pm yesterday. I received news of his escape through Channel NewsAsia and SMS alert at 8.42 pm. May I know why the Ministry took so long, four hours, to

Column: 1126

inform the public? Mas Selamat is unarmed, unlike Dave Teo's case. So why can we not involve the public to help to arrest him?

Sir, the recent arrest of three self-radicalised potential terrorists had shown that terrorism threats are real in Singapore. Despite much efforts by the authorities and various stakeholders, three young educated Singaporeans can be influenced to wage militant jihad . The easy access to radical teaching, religious teachings through the Internet over 6,000 radical websites and a large proportion of Singapore's Muslim youth, about 40%, who do not have formal religious instructions pose major concerns to the security of Singapore.

Sir, we should not take comfort that self-radicalised individuals are inevitable, and let our guards down in strengthening our vigilance in particular our efforts to engage the community. We should set up more vigilance, self-radicalised terrorism watch groups among family members, religious organisations and the community. I propose that the Ministry develop a simple checklist for community stakeholders to detect individuals who have radical religious beliefs and are potential terrorists. We need to equip the community stakeholders to take on a proactive and vigilant role to strengthen our security safety net.

Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions: (1) What are the Ministries multi-pronged approaches to curb self-radicalised terrorists; (2) What measures are taken to increase community vigilance to prevent self-radicalised terrorism; (3) How can the Ministry encourage more young people to learn religious teachings from mainstream religious institutions; and (4) How can the Ministry monitor over 6,000 radical religious websites or reduce their influence on young Singaporeans?

Column: 1127

Emergency Preparedness

Mdm Ho Geok Choo (West Coast): Sir, what more can we do to prepare Singaporeans for major and small emergencies that may arise at home or at public amenities.

I would like to suggest teaching basic first-aid and CPR to as many residents as possible. Are there plans to train female home and caregivers and the elderly; extend the teaching and practice of first-aid to all student groups in schools and consider implementing a short stint of national training for females, where they will learn nursing care?

On the episode of Mas Selamat Kastari, MHA has been very swift to comb him down. But how else is MHA preparing Singaporeans and other residents on this alert and on emergencies that may arise, especially when there is a possibility that there may be a network operating in the background in Singapore for Mas Selamat to be able to slip away so easily? How can Singaporeans be prepared for possible pervasive forces?

Public Safety and Security

Mr Arthur Fong (West Coast): Sir, on the subject of public safety and security, MHA has recently announced its plan to extend a network of public security cameras, more than double of what it was previously and in more areas across the island. Indeed, this is one measure which the MHA has undertaken to promote greater public safety and security.

Sir, I am pleased to note that the Police has announced a marked drop in crime where CCTVs have been installed, for example, at Boat Quay, Orchard area, Little India, Shenton Way. According to press reports, footage used from the CCTV has been instrumental in identifying criminals, resulting in breakthrough when solving crimes. Still, some concerns

Column: 1128

remain. Adaptable criminals may be able to work around these measures. Similarly, CCTVs are known to be vandalised. I hope that the above have been taken into account when expanding the footprint of CCTVs further.

Sir, the use of technology such as CCTVs has broader applications. Much of the July synchronised bombing in London was recorded by the cameras and this assisted the forensics in unfolding the tactics and unveiling the culprits.

Counter-terrorism at home should be a concern for all Singaporeans and in light of the recent information of Mas Selamat's escape. This is a concern for all of us. Terrorists are a different category of fish when compared to the criminals at home. They are organised, trained and hence a greater threat to our security. This is the reality that we are faced with. Given this reality, I hope the Minister could oblige us with his view on the role of technology and how it can play to counter terrorism in our front yard.

Drug Abuse

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, may I ask the Minister what measures are taken to curb the rise of Subutex and heroin abuse? Are the barriers to prevent drug trafficking effective at our customs and coastal areas? What additional measures can be taken to prevent drug trafficking? Why are sniffer dogs not extensively used to detect drug trafficking at our customs entry points? How many drug abuse cases were arrested due to ground intelligence or through informants?

Sir, the recent rise in the abuse of Subutex and heroin is a disturbing trend. We should not accept the reason that the increase is attributed to the implementation of Subutex as a controlled drug. In fact, it shows weaknesses in our drug enforcement regime. Our barriers to drug trafficking are not watertight, despite

Column: 1129

Singapore being a small island. Ground intelligence is also insufficient to arrest drug traffickers, pushers and abusers and the surveillance system to track repeat offenders has failed.

Sir, if big land mass countries like Australia and New Zealand can set up stringent customs and immigration control to prohibit food products being brought into their countries, I do not understand why Singapore cannot set up a more robust customs and immigration control system to curb drug trafficking. The Australians and New Zealanders use sniffer dogs extensively to deter food and drug trafficking irrespective of religious or racial sensitivities. We must do likewise and adopt more measures such as deployment of sniffer dogs, scanners and extensive visual checks to strengthen our barriers to drug trafficking.

Dr Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Sir, Singapore is known for her strict law pertaining to drug trafficking, distribution and use. Over the years, there have been effective measures to control the problem, using a multi-pronged as well as community-based approach. It has attracted much interest from other countries as well. In fact, in our DRCs now, there are days when we have more visitors than inmates.

In managing the drug abuse problem, besides the individual, physical and psychological consequences related to the addiction, there are also social implications such as family disputes and disruption, non-performance and drop-out from schools, loss of jobs and source of employment. Over time, the nature and type of drug abuse has also evolved to Subutex, Dormicum, designer as well as lifestyle drugs. In fact, despite the fact that Subutex has been made a controlled drug, I am still seeing cases coming to the hospital with complications of recent

Column: 1130

abuse. What are the average numbers of drug related arrests currently? What are the numbers being entered into our DRCs and what are their ethnic breakdowns?

Ms Sylvia Lim (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, last January, Parliament was told that there was no evidence of a Subutex black market and that the majority of Subutex abusers seem to have kicked the habit. How far has the situation deteriorated last year? How many Subutex abusers have been arrested for Subutex abuse or abuse of heroin or other drugs?

The recent news of the spike in heroin linked arrests is a cause for concern. Last year, heroin linked arrests went up by 600% to 670 cases, the highest figure since 2002. Out of those arrested, 90% were repeat abusers. The Central Narcotics Bureau said that one of the reasons was the release of 4,000 hardcore addicts from prison over the years. What does this suggest about the effectiveness of our drug rehabilitation programme and long-term imprisonment as a strategy to fight drug abuse?

Public Expression

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen (Nominated Member): Sir, Singapore has come a long way from the time when we were known only for caning vandals and banning chewing gum. Yes, we are being featured more positively as a city that swings and winning the bid for the Youth Olympic Games will be good for us. If Singapore wants to be a global city, it must behave like a global city and strive to make it more conducive for a spontaneous and expressive society, not because we want to read more positive stories in the foreign media about Singapore's image, so that Singaporeans can meaningfully identify beyond monetary terms with the notion of belonging to a First World nation. We can do this by actively nurturing our arts and culture. We should do this by expanding

Column: 1131

the space for public expression and activity.

Sir, this House heard last year about how the Workers' Party's cycling event was banned and the debate that ensued on political events. As Nominated MP, I do not propose to join that fray. I want to take this issue beyond party politics because there is such a wide scope for public expression. Last year, for example, a group of Singaporeans turned up with anime figurines at a public park to protest against the clamp down on online downloading by Singapore animation distributor, Odex. The Police sent four anti-riot vans to the scene, took down the anime fans' particulars and filmed them. It is not an issue of whether we should disapprove of copyright infringement or not. If the Government wants to rebuke criticisms that Singapore is not a police state, actions like these do not help. We can all appreciate concerns about law and order. Race and religion are still sensitive subjects.

But I wonder if the Home Affairs Ministry can appreciate that there is a wide scope of issues for which more space to public expression can be given. It is not space for space sake. We strive to make Singapore a magnet for talent, a top economy, as we should. But let us not forget what the State does can leave an indelible intangible mark on an educated citizenry. We are losing about 800 to 1,000 Singaporeans a year. Would a better balance between law and order and a demonstrable regard for the importance of social expression have made a difference for them, not for all definitely, but for some? I am sure if every Singaporean counts, it should be enough to warrant relooking how we approach public expression. We need to learn how to cultivate the value of social expression, in particular by Singaporeans on Singaporean issues, to the benefit of the country.

Column: 1132

I would like to quote from Media Academic Georgian George who wrote on his blog. He was referring to how Singaporeans have resorted to socially irresponsible expressions on the Internet, and he said, "By failing to enshrine free speech as a fundamental social good, young Singaporeans are growing up seizing that freedom on their own terms impervious to being lectured about their social obligations." I would like to ask the Minister if he would consider reviewing the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act in Singapore's best interest.

Loansharks

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, in Singapore, you can gamble every day. Mondays and Thursdays are for Toto betting. Wednesdays, Saturdays and Sundays are for 4-D betting. Horse racing is on every Saturday and Sunday. Big Sweep, you can bet once a month. And soccer betting is available almost everyday, depending on the matches. If you miss all of the above, you can still take a cruise to nowhere and gamble at a casino any day. So the high accessibility has created a new industry in Singapore, that is, illegal moneylending or loanshark services.

In recent years, we have seen a first in loanshark harassment cases. On average, about 4,000 to 5,000 households were harassed by loansharks yearly. This rampant loanshark activity has affected the safety of our residents and their quality of life.

Sir, Singaporeans are aware of the moneylending and debt collection tactics of loansharks and yet many have resorted to borrowing money from loansharks. Why is it so? It is due to gambling. I foresee this problem will be further aggravated when the two Integrated Resorts are operational. The Police must take immediate concrete action to curb loanshark activities. May I ask the Minister why is there a sudden increase in

Column: 1133

loanshark activities? How many reported loanshark cases were resolved by the Police? What are the strategies or measures to prevent loanshark activities in Singapore? What are the education efforts by Police on loansharks? Are these efforts effective in educating Singaporeans not to borrow from loansharks?

12.15 pm

Mr Arthur Fong: Sir, the issue of loansharks or illegal moneylending is not only a menace to society but it is also posing a present and direct challenge to the authorities. Reports of harassments have been widely covered in the media. Of concern are the innocent victims of such harassments. Most of us, if not all of us, in this House would have encountered at some time or other during our meet-the-people sessions of residents telling us the problem they face from harassment from loansharks. Woe befalls anyone who had bought a resale flat whose previous owner had borrowed money from these loansharks. If the previous owner had outstanding debts, the loansharks' runners are indifferent to whether the new owners have anything to do with the previous occupant. Spray painting on the walls is a form of vandalism, and some even had the gall to cut off the electricity supply of "lenders". Some have even resorted to harassing neighbours or occupants of those flats to embarrass them into paying.

I spoke with a Singapore PR who came from Hong Kong. I asked him, "Do you have this problem in Hong Kong?" He said, "Oh, maybe the Hong Kong loansharks are more kiasu than the Singapore ones." I asked him, "Why do you say that?" He said that when the loansharks lend them the money, they actually do due diligence. I asked him what he meant. He said they went to

Column: 1134

verify where they live so that they would not have these innocent parties suffering. I do not know. It is quite laughable. But to these residents who come to see us at our MPS, it is not funny at all.

While I am glad that the Government has gone out in the media to show the plight, pain and suffering of gambling addicts' families in the effort to bring awareness to our people, the other end of the gambling problem, ie, that of the loansharks, is still very much in our midst. As long as there are borrowers, loansharks and their illegal moneylending activities will exist. However, their debt recovery methods have caused much stress, fear and tension not only to the occupants of the targeted flats but to the neighbours as well. I ask for a stronger enforcement and whether the current law is adequate enough to deal with this menace.

Borrowing Money from Unlicensed Moneylenders

Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): "Owe money, pay money" - these threatening words mar the walls of several common corridors of our HDB homes.

In January last year, Senior Minister of State, Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee, informed that there were 10,221 reported cases of unlicensed moneylending in 2006. That was a 19% increase over 2005 when there were 8,568 reported cases. Similarly, the 2005 figure represented an increase of 47%, to be exact, over 2004, which had 5,809 reported cases. Multiple initiatives were introduced by MHA to try to solve the problem. These included:

(a) Enhancing the penalties under the Moneylenders' Act; and

(b) The formation of the Anti-UML Task Force to increase, among others, the number of ambush operations.

Column: 1135

However, recent figures show that these measures have not deterred UML syndicates. A look at the statistics for 2007 support this point. In 2007, there were 277 arrests over the first three quarters, ie, from January to September, which were just 17 short of the total number of arrests for the whole of 2006. All else being equal, working from an average of 30 cases per month, the total figure for 2007 would be in the region of about 360. In the same nine months in 2007, there were 7,438 reported cases of illegal moneylending and related activities. All else being equal, working from an average of 826 cases per month, the total figure for 2007 would be in the region of 9,917 cases. This is a mere drop of about 300 reported cases from 2006-07. Having previously worked with enforcement agencies to tackle similar types of crime, I put on record my appreciation for their dedicated effort in their attempt to deter UML activities in Singapore.

However, in the light of the unattractive figures quoted above, I urge MHA to take a different strategy in tackling the very real problem of unlicensed moneylending. This involves simultaneously tackling the supply of and the demand for illegal loans. Currently, the law, called the Moneylenders Act, curbs UML only by deterring the supply of illegal loans into the market. It does nothing to penalise or deter the borrowing, ie, the demand side. This is clear from sections 8(1)(b) and (c) of the Moneylenders Act. These offences in these sections do not deter the demand for illegal loans. I therefore propose that MHA consider introducing a new section which makes it an offence if a person secures a loan for himself or on behalf of any other person from an unlicensed moneylender. The punitive measures which come along with the offence can be calculated based on the harm that the State deems such borrowing creates and based on the level that will best deter such activities. Naturally, the Public

Column: 1136

Prosecutor will have the ultimate discretion whether to prosecute a borrower, and unique circumstances prompting a compassionate approach would likely merit non-prosecution.

Having said this, the merit of making borrowing illegal and having it in the books, as it were, is that it deters people from taking loans which cause both them and their neighbours a great deal of distress. Taking a page out of the speeches of Dr Teo Ho Pin and Mr Arthur Fong, to my mind, a good example, though not the only example, of a borrower who deserves to be prosecuted is one who gives a false address to the loansharks such that innocent residents get harassed. If the borrower abets such harassment, why not make his very act of borrowing an offence?

There are two prominent pieces of legislation which combat both the supply and demand elements of an offence.

The first is the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA). Sections 5, 6 and 7 of the MDA penalise the trafficking, import and export and manufacture of controlled drugs, ie, the supply of them. But, significantly, section 8 of the MDA also penalises the possession and consumption of controlled drugs, ie, the demand for them. By penalising both the demand and supply, Singapore's drug problem has been contained.

The second prominent piece of legislation is the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA). Section 5(a) of the PCA penalises the supply of corruption, ie, it

Column: 1137

penalises, subject to other elements being satisfied, the corrupt soliciting or receiving or agreeing to receive for himself or for any other person any gratification as an inducement to or reward for. In order to effectively deter acts of corruption in Singapore, section 5(b) of the PCA penalises the demand for corruption, ie, it penalises, subject to other elements being satisfied, the corrupt giving, promising or offering to any person, whether for the benefit of that person or of any other person any gratification as an inducement or reward for.

Thus, both the demand and supply of elements of corruption are tackled in tandem, resulting in Singapore's extremely low incidence of corruption. Why not use the same strategy to combat the rapid growth of unlicensed moneylending in Singapore, given that:

(a) The anecdotal evidence that a significant number of those borrowing from loansharks are using the loan to pay off gambling debts?

(b) As a result, innocent residents have to bear the brunt of harassment if a false residential address is given?

(c) The whole corridor suffers the stigma of graffitied walls even if a false address is not given?

(d) The continuing Government philosophy that if we continue to work, we will be given an incentive, such as WIS, why not make borrowing from illegal moneylenders, which causes much harm to the neighbourliness of communities, an offence?

The Public Prosecutor is always in a position to exercise his discretion whether or not to prosecute the borrower based on the unique mitigating factors, if any. The number of reported cases and arrests in relation to unlicensed moneylending and related activities over the last three years is very worrying. I urge MHA to consider a shift in policy away from supply-centric enforcement to one which also combats the demand. This would be similar to the two-pronged enforcement action taken against drugs and corruption. Such a

Column: 1138

two-pronged strategy focusing on the supply and demand forces giving rise to the crime would pressure the offence from all sides and help lead it closer to extinction.

I propose that MHA use a portion of its budget to analyse how a new provision can be introduced into the Moneylenders Act to make the borrowing of money from unlicensed moneylenders an offence.

Turning, Sir, to my second cut.

To Clamp Down on Prostitution and Associated Vices

The number of foreign prostitutes arrested in 2006 was 4,310. This was a 34% increase over 2005. In 2007, the number of foreign prostitutes arrested was 5,400. This signified a 25% increase over 2006. Bids to contain the trade in Geylang has not been successful. An evening drive down Duxton Road and Duxton Hill - which I did with my wife by the way - will prove that prostitutes operate well beyond the artificial borders of Geylang. Prostitution is working itself into our heartlands. Many of these sex workers come on two-week social visit passes. Just before the two weeks come to an end, the sex workers leave the country, usually by making their way to JB, only to return to Singapore the same day. This trip, which earns them an extended stay in Singapore, is known as the "U-turn". Many of them continue to ply the trade until caught for overstaying. I am told that they even get a free ticket home when repatriated after serving their jail sentences.

We have all seen several reports in the press of prostitutes openly soliciting in coffeeshops. I have also received feedback that sexual services are offered at shops claiming to offer massages, especially, for some reason, massage parlours with curtains. The numbers speak for themselves: 34% rise in number of foreign prostitutes arrested from 2005 to

Column: 1139

2006, 25% rise from 2006 to 2007. What concrete steps will MHA take to curb the worrying figures? In particular, would MHA allocate a healthy budget to bolster the anti-vice squad with additional manpower and intelligence officers to:

(a) Suss out new locations where sex syndicates operate?

(b) Clamp down on such operations?

Road Safety

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, may I ask the Minister:

(1) What measures are in place to ensure that road safety is properly taught in driving schools?

(2) Are the existing road safety and courtesy programmes effective in improving drivers' driving behaviour and reducing accidents?

(3) How many police officers are deployed to conduct enforcement of road safety?

(4) How frequent do police patrol the roads, especially after midnight hours?

Sir, in Singapore, we have good roads and fast cars, but we do not have many good drivers. Each year, about 200 drivers and pedestrians are killed on our roads. Another 12,000 people were injured due to road accidents. This situation raises questions on our road safety rules and culture in Singapore.

Sir, some road accidents are unavoidable, but the majority of them can be prevented if we have a comprehensive road safety system in Singapore. There are many limitations in our road safety system.

First, new drivers do not undergo very stringent road safety training or learning

Column: 1140

how to drive. Every driving school has its own standard and syllabus for its driving lessons. There is hardly any quality control to ensure that all new drivers adopt good road safety practices upon passing.

Second, new drivers on probation can have access to high capacity engine cars or motorbikes. These new drivers do not have enough experience and thus do not know how to handle such powerful high-powered driving machines. Thus, we have recently witnessed a few fatal accidents along Dunearn Road and Upper Thomson Road, resulting in the deaths of five young Singaporeans.

Third, more drivers are driving recklessly, such as speeding, tailgating and drink-driving.

Fourth, there is a lack of police enforcement on reckless and dangerous driving after midnight hours.

Sir, this is indeed a sad situation. Driving on our roads is no longer a pleasant experience.

Mr Ang Mong Seng (Hong Kah): Mr Chairman, Sir, in Mandarin.

( In Mandarin ): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A.] Sir, I would like to ask the Minister how many cases of road traffic accidents were there in 2006 and 2007, and how many precious lives were lost in such accidents.

Recently, I notice that many motorists are driving without following the traffic rules. Some overtake from the left lane and some hog the fast lane on the right. Some young drivers drive recklessly and change lanes indiscriminately, resulting in many unnecessary traffic accidents and causing heavy traffic jams.

Come September, we will be hosting the Formula One (F1) event. I am worried

Column: 1141

that more motorists will be imitating the F1 drivers and race along our highways as though they are race tracks, resulting in many more serious traffic accidents.

I would like to ask the Minister whether the Traffic Police has any plan to prevent such unnecessary accidents from happening.

I would like to suggest to the Minister that a month-long safe-driving campaign be held. During this campaign, the Traffic Police can educate our motorists on the proper use of the roads and how to drive safely to ensure that we have congestion-free traffic while ensuring the safety of the other road users.

*Cols. 1343-1344.

12.30 pm

Mr Hri Kumar Nair (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, we have had and will continue to have long debates on road congestion. But it is not just the number of vehicles on the roads which contribute to it. Driving habits cannot be ignored.

We have all seen it. It just takes a minor accident to cause a massive jam, not along just the same road, on the opposite as well as drivers slow down to take a look. With our car population now surpassing 800,000, we have seen a steady rise in the number of accidents with fatalities and injuries over the past three years. Some accidents are unavoidable but most can be prevented with diligence and better driving habits.

The Traffic Police cannot be everywhere every time. Most of us would rather they would not. So much depends on individual drivers. And many drivers leave much to be desired, they switch lanes indiscriminately, they do not signal their intentions, they wait in yellow boxes, do not allow others to get in front

Column: 1142

of them, and so on. This is, of course, not unique to Singapore but those who have driven in other developed countries will know that while we are far behind in road manners, better discipline on the roads is not a pipe dream.

Recently, we have read about tragic deaths involving backseat passengers. These tragedies could have been avoided had they worn seat belts. We have seat belt laws but rear passengers regularly flout them. The driver and front passengers invariably belt up, but rear passengers do not. I have also seen children jumping up and down in cars unrestrained while their minders have their seat belts on. These double standards are inexplicable. And it is not just about moving vehicles. Drive down Battery Road or Serangoon Road during peak hours and you will discover that congestion is partly due to the indiscriminate parking and pedestrian crossing. All these cause frustrations to the drivers, encouraging impatience and aggressive driving.

Sir, clearly more needs to be done to educate drivers and passengers and drive home the safety message. I am loath to suggest another campaign, but if they work, why not? In the meantime, there is no substitute for enforcement. The message should be driven home that inconsiderate and dangerous behaviour will not be tolerated. For example, many park indiscriminately because they are willing to risk the fine. It is time to come down harder, particularly on multiple offenders. It is also time to give the Traffic Police greater flexibility in the punishments it can dish out. For example, if fines do not work, why not allow for short suspensions?

We should also review the competency framework, like Dr Teo Ho Pin suggested, for example, how realistic are our driving test? Now you learn on a 1.3-litre Toyota and on passing, you are allowed to drive a Ferrari. We make

Column: 1143

distinctions for engine capacities of motorcycles. Why not the same for cars? I am not advocating more tests or more costs but we can have a simple mechanism of only allowing those who have, say, three years of driving experience before they can handle high-capacity cars.

Finally, the rise of drink driving is a concern. The Police has implemented new measures to monitor hot spots but prevention should not left to the Police alone. Owners of drinking establishments should be given some responsibility to check that their patrons are capable of driving and to make arrangements to send them home if they are not. I would be grateful if the Minister could comment on this.

Crime Statistics

Ms Sylvia Lim: Sir, each year, the Police release statistics on the crime situation in Singapore. However, the picture is not complete.

Firstly, reported crime. Last month, the Police reviewed a new approach when releasing statistics on crimes in 2007. This was a crime class approach where offences are grouped into six broad rubrics, for example, theft and related crimes, offences against the person and even miscellaneous crimes as a class. Could the Ministry clarify why this approach was adopted?

One weakness I find is that the public does not know exactly which crimes make up each crime class. For example, under offences against the person, it is stated that this class includes murder, rioting, rape and outrage of modesty, amongst others, which were not explained. The public will be interested to know if specific offences are on the rise but the information is only given ad hoc. Could the Police publish all the sub-

Column: 1144

categories and numbers in each crime class on its website?

Secondly, unreported crime. It is not accurate to rely on Police crime statistics to reflect the actual crime situation. What if a crime is not reported or it was reported but somehow went unrecorded by the Police? In order to uncover this dark figure of crime, victimisation surveys have been used in other jurisdictions. For instance, the Home Office in Great Britain has been running the British crime surveys since 1982 and in the United States, the national survey began even earlier. In such surveys, a representative cross-section of the population was asked whether they have been crime victims, whether they have reported the crime and the reasons for reporting or not reporting. Such surveys were very useful to uncover the actual crime situation, public perception of whether reporting crimes will be worthwhile, what stops people from reporting, and so on.

I believe that with the above improvements, we will get a clearer and more accurate picture of the crime situation which will help in crime prevention and Police service delivery.

Funding of Prisons

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Sir, I want to talk about funding for prisons.

I recognise that the physical security features of Whitley Road detention centre from which Mas Selamat Kastari escaped from is not in the same league as our other prison complexes. And this may be one reason for the unfortunate incident yesterday.

Sir, last year, the operating budget of the Prison Service was about $235 million. Our former prison chief pointed out that this still makes it, and I quote, "the cheapest prison system to work in the developed world."

Column: 1145

There are certainly reasons to smile at this efficient use of resources, but I would like to ask three hard questions.

First, can we have more figures about how we compare with the rest of the world? Second, are we funding our prisons adequately, in the light of our ageing population and the forecast of higher crime numbers in the light of the IRs and increased immigration? And third, can we explore creative options in our Prison Service such as best sourcing it to a private contractor?

Sir, the first question is relatively simple. I want to know if, man-for-man, we are spending less than other countries, as it seems to be implied by what our former Director of Prisons said. And if so, I would like to ask how we are managing to do so. Are we doing it at the expense of denying comforts to older prisoners, schools for younger prisoners, psychiatric care for the mentally ill and rehabilitation programmes for drug addicts? Do we have a good vocational and rehabilitation programme? Are there international benchmarks that we meet?

Sir, I know that prisoners also provide services to private companies to defray the cost of running the prisons. For example, some female inmates work as call centre operators. Sir, this is well and good, and I am sure that there are equally worthwhile projects going on inside. I wonder though, if there is merit in taking a more private sector approach to the management of the billion-dollar Changi Prison complex.

This brings me to my third question. Can we privatise Changi Prison? It is not a new idea. America has done it since 1985. Today, there are more than 150 for-profit prisons in 30 American states. In fact, one of them, the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) - for those

Column: 1146

who are interested in - is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. It is a listed company with a unique business proposition, but it is a business all the same.

If after 40 years of public housing, we can privatise part of HDB to help other countries with their homes, who is to say that we cannot help other Asian countries run their prisons? Viewed in this light, it is a clear candidate for private sector input. And it is a business that is expanding all the time. In the five years to 2000, the number of prisoners soared more than 50%, from 8,500 to 13,000. The number of arrests made by Police increased by 9.5% from 19,284 in 2004 to a record 21,108 in 2005. And, according to the World Prison Population List of King's College London International Centre for Prison Studies, the prison population rate, per 100,000 of national population, for Singapore, at 350, was the fifth highest in the world.

All this points to a growing population in our prisons; and surely an increase in the spending needed. We ought to look at the manner, as well as the quantum, of spending.

Foreign Beggars

Er Lee Bee Wah (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, in October 2007, 59% of the 68 beggars caught in Singapore during the year till that time were foreigners and they were subsequently referred to ICA or the Police for repatriation.

I would like to ask the Minister: do we ban these repatriated beggars from entering Singapore? It seems that this problem has not been diffused and has, in fact, gotten worse. Our local media reported on a foreign syndicate of beggars who operate in Waterloo Street Temple. This is indeed worrisome if these beggars and illegal immigrants are able to operate so openly in our country. Does it not

Column: 1147

show the gaps in our security network and the lapses in the work of enforcement agencies? In acting openly, these illegal operators clearly show their blatant disregard for the law enforcement agencies.

The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng): Sir, I thank the Members who have spoken on the Ministry Head for their questions, observations, suggestions and also their criticisms.

Members have spoken on the escape of the Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) detainee Mas Selamat yesterday. Let me give an update.

There has been a security lapse at the Whitley Road Detention Centre, which allowed Mas Selamat to escape. Mas Selamat, at that time, was taken out of his cell where he was confined to go to the family visitation room to wait for the arrival of his family. He asked to go to the toilet from where he escaped. This should never have happened. I am sorry that it has. An independent investigation is underway. We should not speculate now as to what and how it happened. Security at the centre has been stepped up.

Mas Selamat is a security threat which is why he was placed under preventive detention. However, there is no information that he has any plans that threaten public security at this time. Nevertheless, we are not taking any chances.

Dr Teo asked why the public was only informed about four hours after the escape. Our security agencies assessed that there was no imminent danger to the public. The focus then was to lock down the Whitley Road Detention Centre and start a systematic operation to find and arrest him.

Column: 1148

The priority is to find and arrest Mas Selamat. No efforts will be spared to track him down. Security at all our land, sea and air checkpoints have been tightened, including areas where there may be a possibility that he may leave our shores and from areas which are not the normal immigration checkpoints.

In the meantime, I urge the public to stay calm and to report any suspicious sighting to the Police immediately. Anyone who renders assistance to him is committing a grave offence.

I will now address the Members' comments on terrorism, drugs and public expression. SMS Ho Peng Kee will speak about crime and drugs and other issues in greater detail.

Until the threat of the Al Qaeda and its proxy, the Jemaah Islamiyah, surfaced against us in 2001, Singapore was essentially not a direct target of international terrorist groups. Today, we are so targeted. We are living today in a different security climate.

Our security agencies have successfully disrupted local plots and terrorist networks so far. However, we have remained a "trophy" target in the eyes of the terrorists. Hence, apart from hardening security in key installations, including iconic buildings, we also need to step up security for international events held in Singapore.

That is also why we must treat certain crimes differently. For instance, any intrusion which breaches our borders must be treated as a security incident. Our officers must, in the first instance, deal with it as such even if the intruder eventually may turn out to be just a cigarette smuggler.

While the threat of terrorism is by no means over, there have been fewer attacks in the major cities last year. The

Column: 1149

counter-terrorism efforts of countries have led to many arrests and timely disruptions of terrorist plots.

Terrorism researcher, Dr Rohan Gunaratna, has observed that the threat posed by Al Qaeda has expanded into a "Global Jihad Movement" with its ideology penetrating conflict zones in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. While the operational threat of Al Qaeda itself has weakened, the affiliated jihadist groups and the home-grown cells, including self-radicalised elements, have spawned.

12.45 pm

Dr Teo asked about the phenomenon of self-radicalisation. This is indeed a troubling development although not unique to Singapore. Many countries have reported cases of nationals who, on their own, had planned terrorist attacks. In Singapore, in February and December last year, ISD arrested and detained several self-radicalised individuals. There would be some who have yet to be discovered.

A common denominator in such self-radicalisation cases is an individual's exposure to radical and extremist ideology via various sources, such as the Internet and publications. The importance of their ideological campaign is clear. In 2007, the Al Qaeda reportedly released a video every three days, and with broadcasts now also accompanied by subtitles, including English and other European languages to reach out to a wider audience.

Terrorist organisations and their supporters exploit the unregulated, anonymous and pervasive nature of the Internet to propagate their extremist ideology. Dr Teo asked how my Ministry would monitor the thousands of radical websites or reduce their influence on young people. There is no way that we can monitor all the radical websites. Even if we were to

Column: 1150

block some of these websites, new ones will be created very quickly.

To address such a threat, we need, firstly, to strengthen the efforts of our Muslim leaders in countering extremist ideology. Secondly, we need to raise Singaporeans' vigilance and resilience to detect those in our midst who have been infected by such extremist ideas and show signs of radicalisation.

I am truly appreciative of our Muslim leaders' efforts, as they have not shied away from the problem. They are confronting the terrorism threat directly, even taking the fight online to counter the extremist ideology. MUIS, the RRG and other groups like Taman Bacaan and 4PM have established programmes to raise the awareness of the community, especially the young, against terrorist ideology.

In addition to these efforts, we need to recognise that the threat of the self-radicalised terrorist must also be defeated by the vigilance of the others around him. Early warning signs in the individual's conduct can be discerned. Those who see it must recognise the significance and not be reluctant to report on him. Early intervention will help us nip the problem in the bud, and also help the individual in his recovery before he plunges deeper into terrorist and extremist violence.

There seems to be a creeping danger of polarisation between Muslim and non-Muslim communities in many countries. We see a greater intolerance and hardening of attitudes at the extreme ends of both communities. This is both compounded when provocative acts, like films which offend Muslims, are pursued in the name of freedom of speech or expression. Such ethnic polarisation only serves the cause of the jihadist extremists and terrorists. We must not allow this to happen in Singapore.

While we address the ideological dimension of the threat, we must

Column: 1151

continue to make Singapore a hard target. I therefore agree with Mr Arthur Fong that in this regard, we must fully exploit technology. Our border security technology infrastructure, for instance, is a formidable resource. It has enhanced our operational capabilities. In 2007, ICA officers detected 37,800 cases of smuggling at our borders, a rise of 83% over 2006. This is a good proxy indicator because if we can catch people smuggling cigarettes or other items, we can catch people smuggling terrorist materials.

Mr Fong is right that technology alone does not defeat determined criminals and terrorists. Technology is only a tool; the operator is the brain that makes it work. Hence, we invest heavily in the training and development of our officers.

Mdm Ho Geok Choo has raised concerns with emergency readiness. Our agencies have a high level of preparedness, having built up significant capabilities. Singaporeans, however, must get more involved in preparing themselves and their families for emergencies. The SCDF conducts community emergency preparedness programme for the constituencies, and they impart life saving and emergency preparedness skills to the community. Since its implementation in 2003, participation has grown over the years. We have trained about 310,000 participants to date, and we encourage more participation, regardless of local or foreign. Everyone should know the basics of CPR, first aid and fire fighting. The four SCDF centres are open every day for training.

Mdm Ho will be pleased to note that the participants include many housewives, the elderly and students. We welcome ideas from Members on ways to broaden and deepen our outreach, as there can be no age or gender bias in dealing with terrorism. All must play a role.

But no government can provide total protection to all. Resources are not

Column: 1152

unlimited. Increasingly, the Home Team's resources are being stretched to meet the security and safety needs that come with higher tourist arrivals, a growing foreign worker population and an increasing number of mega international events like Formula One, APEC 2009 and the Youth Olympics in 2010.

Order, security and safety are critical pre-conditions to any successful event or business. If we are unable to ensure the security and safety of everyone, be they Singaporeans, foreign VIPs, delegates and visitors, Singapore will decline as a premium event centre or investment destination. Security must be regarded as part and parcel of the cost and reality of doing business. Going forward, we must continue to engage business, industry and citizens to become stakeholders in their own security, as they ought to be.

Let me now turn to the issue of drug abuse raised by Dr Teo, Dr Fatimah and Ms Sylvia Lim. The last two years saw an increase in the number of drug addicts returning to heroin abuse. This was partly due to the displacement from Subutex abuse. A more important reason is the increase in the regional production and supply of both opium based and synthetic drugs. We anticipate increased attempts by syndicates to smuggle drugs into Singapore. In my mind, however, the most significant challenge is about maintaining the support of our community against drugs. I am concerned by the increasing acceptance of the use of so-called social drugs or party drugs amongst some of our young. Some foreigners also expect to continue their drug taking habit in Singapore.

Some argue that Singapore should follow the approach of liberal societies which have given up trying to stop drug abuse, and seek instead to minimise its dangers to the addicts by providing, for instance, clean needles for the addicts to "shoot up" safely. Those advocating this

Column: 1153

approach want us to dismantle our tough laws and permit drug abuse among our people. If we go down this road, we will unravel the relatively crime-free and drug-free society that we have today. We will continue to help addicts who are willing to take responsibility for their lives to overcome their addiction. However, our approach is and will remain one of harm prevention and zero tolerance. We must keep drugs out of our society and not go soft on drugs.

Singaporeans are plugged into a global environment and are open to a universe of ideas and their influence. Many ideas and values can benefit us. But others, like going soft on drugs, are harmful to us should we adopt them.

Ms Eunice Olsen called for the Government to have a lighter touch when it comes to Singaporeans expressing their views on important public issues. I thank her for raising this important subject. Over the years, I believe we have seen real changes. We see more divergent views expressed through various avenues. This includes the press, Internet, various forums as well as letters and emails from individuals and groups directly to the Government and political leaders, like Ministers. I have received many such letters and emails of grievances or strong views about what we do or what we should do. Some are polite, some are very rude. But all are read and looked into.

Accessibility to avenues to express one's views, therefore, is not wanting. In terms of Government reaction to such views, I believe that while the occasional robust response is given when felt necessary, there has been generally a more accommodative dialogue with the man-in-the-street.

We have also evolved our policies in relation to different forms of expression.

Column: 1154

To recapitulate, in the year 2000, we created the Speakers' Corner as an outdoor venue for political speeches. In 2004, we liberalised its use to include performances and exhibitions. In addition, we exempted all indoor public talks from the licensing requirement under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act, so long as the organisers and speakers are Singapore citizens. The only content restriction to all these is that the speeches must not touch on race or religion, and Members know why.

We have stopped short of allowing outdoor and street demonstrations. However, we allow demonstrations if they take place indoors or within the confines of stadiums, as the Police assess that any disorder will be better contained in such venues. We are presently reviewing how we can further liberalise the use of Speaker's Corner as an outdoor venue for more political activities including demonstrations.

Our experiences in the past have taught us to be very circumspect about outdoor and street protests. The 1950 Maria Hertogh riots and the 1964 race riots, both started as peaceful assemblies, but eventually ended up with 54 dead, 736 injured, and significant damages to property. I think many Members in this House are either too young to remember these incidents or not even born yet. Some members of the public may say that this is all old history and should not apply to us today. Is it really so sanguine? I do not think so.

Indeed, we constantly review our assumptions by monitoring the developments in other countries. And what we learn tells us that our concerns remain valid. In many supposedly mature societies, we see cases where peaceful protests do degenerate into riots and violence. Protest organisers do not typically declare that they want to hold a

Column: 1155

violent protest. And although most people involved in a demonstration may have no intention of using violence, a handful of agitators can spark off mob violence quite easily. So, for young people in their exuberance, they may think that it is fun to demonstrate for whatever the cause. They have no control of the situation should agitators choose to exploit it.

The question for Singaporeans is whether we should accept the risk and permit a culture of street protests. That is the key question. In my view, one riot is one riot too many. The scars of violence in a community take a long time to heal. Once lost, public confidence in our stability and security will take a long time to re-build.

Let me now share with Members the views from a young Singaporean, Ms Khartini Khalid, who wrote to the Prime Minister after she attended the Prime Minister's Chinese New Year reception about 10 days ago. Ms Khartini is a grassroots leader and polytechnic lecturer. She said and I quote:

'I was in the United States last summer on a State Department-sponsored programme on citizen participation in America. I attended an anti-war rally near Capitol Hill and saw how vibrant the spirit of the people was, due to America's freedom of speech provision in the constitution. I came back with a tinge of envy for societies with more "freedom" of expression. However, I got a reality check soon after when the Burmese uprising happened, and a few months later, the Hindraf protests.

It hit me then that the most important thing to a citizen is good governance, because without capable leaders, all the demonstrations and protests in the world would be meaningless. While persuasive arguments by Singapore's critics sometimes manage to seduce me, and while I continue to harbour hopes that the authorities will be less strict over certain matters, I realise that ultimately, I

Column: 1156

do not want Singapore to be like Burma, or Malaysia, or even the US.'

Sir, that is her view to the Prime Minister. I further quote:

'It is by no choice of mine that I was born in Singapore. But it is a choice of mine now to stay and contribute to my country and to make a difference in whatever small way I can. I may not always agree with the Government but I am proud to be a Singaporean. I am happy that as a Malay Singaporean, I claim credit for whatever I do because of my efforts and not because of my race. I am happy that I am not part of a system which discriminates, even if it were to bring benefits to my race.'

1.00 pm

That is young Khartini

who has seen the world. I think most Singaporeans will share Ms Khartini’s views too. Like her, they may not always agree with the Government. But like her, they value good governance that Singapore enjoys. I believe that Singaporeans understand and support the fundamentals that have made Singapore what it is today. What are these fundamentals?

The first fundamental is the rule of law. In a multi-religious society, the primacy of the secular law is especially vital. If we are to have maximum space to pursue our interests with equal basic protection, we must also observe equal basic liability and obligations. Not everyone likes this or that law. But everyone must abide by the law and respect its authority. Civil disobedience cannot be acceptable. In fact, more than even the political interest groups, the religious individual may lay greater claim to a moral basis to choose to disobey laws which are not in accord with his beliefs. If we allow this, our society will be torn apart.

Second, we must continue to uphold a regime which requires that we respect the

Column: 1157

sensitivities of each ethnic community and not denigrate another’s religion or ethnicity. The third fundamental is that we will not allow foreigners to interfere in our domestic politics. They are free to share their ideas, views and criticisms, including on the Internet where Singaporeans can freely access them. But foreigners do not have the right of citizens to take part directly in the politics of Singapore. We will not allow, for example, foreign funding of political parties or sponsorship of candidates for election. Singaporeans alone have the sovereign right to determine what kind of society they want Singapore to be. Finally, with more de-regulation and autonomy, there must also be greater individual ownership, responsibility and accountability over the exercise of one’s actions in these realms.

Sir, we will continue to review our policies and steer by these fundamentals. Singaporeans are neither a society of people with no views nor lacking the means to express them. We will hear and consider their views carefully. However, as we contemplate change, we are also mindful of the silent majority and their interests. Ultimately, the Singapore we create must be a Singapore for all.

The Senior Minister of State for Law and Home Affairs (Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee): Sir, let me first address the cuts on drug abuse, loansharking, and vice, and then the others later.

Unlike isolated crimes of violence or theft, these offences (ie, drug abuse, loansharking and vice) are linked to larger issues. Hence, we must go beyond the offender, look at the underlying forces and issues which relate to these activities, and devise holistic strategies to tackle them, as we have done with drugs.

On drug abuse, Dr Teo asks what the trends are. Last year, we arrested 2,166

Column: 1158

drug abusers, up from 1,218 the year before. 77% were repeat abusers. Abusers of Subutex went up by 416 and heroin went up by 554. These two accounted for most of the increase. Abuse of other drugs has abated somewhat with fewer arrests for Ketamine, Cannabis and Erimin-5.

Sir, as we know, Subutex was permitted for use in drug replacement therapies in 2002. When we discovered its wide abuse and consequent addiction, we declared buprenorphine, Subutex’s key ingredient, a controlled drug in August 2006. Mop-up operations then began. While the Subutex situation has improved, there has been some displacement effect - 285 of the heroin abusers arrested last year were former Subutex users. However, I think we should not over-state the connection. Indeed, as our drug enforcement measures against Subutex begin to take effect, I expect the number of Subutex abusers to fall over time. The monthly arrest figures bear this out. Compared to when the mop-up operations first began, the monthly arrest figures for Subutex users have come down.

Despite the increase in drug abusers arrested, according to the UN World Drug Report for 2007, Singapore has one of the lowest drug abuse prevalence rates in the world. This affirms that our comprehensive and holistic approach is effective.

Whilst the Subutex phenomenon should pass, the emerging regional supply of drugs poses a serious, possibly drawn-out threat. We are monitoring this closely. Regional opium poppy cultivation has increased. As opium is the raw material for heroin production, more heroin will flood the market. Methamphetamine is now the main drug of abuse in much of East and Southeast Asia with signs of industrial-scale production. The proximity of drug production activities near our borders will lead to more attempts by drug syndicates to traffick drugs here.

Column: 1159

CNB has therefore stepped up enforcement. Last year, CNB conducted 53 major operations and busted 27 syndicated trafficking activities. CNB smashed a syndicate that tried to bring in 3.5 kg of heroin on New Year’s day. Another operation in February led to the largest haul of heroin in five years. CNB also works closely with its foreign counterparts to conduct training, intelligence exchanges, joint investigations and operations against illicit drug activities.

In response to Dr Teo, our checkpoints indeed form an important first line of defence. CNB works with other Home Team agencies to conduct intensive checks on persons, goods and vehicles, including deploying Narcotics Detector Dogs from the Police K-9 Unit daily at the land, sea and air checkpoints. Over the last three years, more than 250 traffickers were stopped at the checkpoints. In 2007, 105 traffickers were arrested, up from 90, the year before. CNB also has a wide intelligence network but for operational reasons, I cannot disclose details of its inputs to our arrests.

Dr Fatimah Lateef and Ms Sylvia Lim ask about the state and effectiveness of our Drug Rehabilitation Centres or DRCs, and Long Term or LT regime.

The number of first time and second time drug abusers admitted to our DRCs has fallen from a high of 4,800 in 1994 to 510 last year. Last year, synthetic, heroin and Subutex abusers made up 40%, 30% and 27% of the admissions respectively. About half were Chinese, while Malays and Indians formed 38% and 13% of the DRC population, respectively. Nearly two-thirds of the admissions were first-timers.

In response to Ms Sylvia Lim’s question, let me say that the LT regime is a big plus, not a minus in our overall strategy. New drug abusers do not take up the habit by themselves. They are

Column: 1160

invariably introduced to it by a habitual drug abuser. The LT regime therefore serves a critical role of putting hardcore addicts out of circulation for some time, thereby reducing their contamination effect on others. Since its introduction in 1998, more than 5,000 persons have undergone it, with 4,000 now released. Only 15% or 609 of them who have completed the LT regime have relapsed to drugs. The LT regime has helped reduce the overall relapse rate from a high of 50% in 1997 to 10% now.

Let me assure Members, therefore, as I wind up on this segment on drugs, that the situation is firmly under control, notwithstanding the higher arrests last year. But we must press on, bringing all stakeholders like family members, businesses and the community on board.

Next, let me touch on unlicensed moneylending or loansharking. In 2005 and 2006, we strengthened measures to deal with the deteriorating situation by enhancing the penalties, invoking our preventive detention laws, introducing powers to confiscate assets and cancelling the passports of leaders to prevent them from controlling operations from overseas. More recently, we amended the Penal Code to enable us to prosecute persons who abet loansharking activities from overseas. We also worked with MAS, IRAS, HDB, town councils, banks, and SingPost to tighten their procedures and limit opportunities for exploitation by the loansharks. On its part, Police targeted syndicates and centralised their key operations at CID-level.

Police has stepped up enforcement. Dr Teo asked how many loanshark cases have been resolved. Last year, six syndicates were smashed through intelligence-based operations, resulting in the arrest of 37 syndicate members. These syndicates were believed to have had a pool of 2,000 debtors, and had

Column: 1161

given out loans amounting to a total of more than $1 million. In total, 392 persons were arrested last year as compared to 294 the year before. In a landmark case, a loanshark’s assets were confiscated. For the first time since 2001, the number of harassment and unlicensed moneylending cases fell from 10,221 in 2006 to 9,762 last year. So it is down about 4.5%. But I agree with Members who have spoken that the number remains unacceptably high.

Loanshark syndicates have adjusted to changed circumstances. They now manipulate borrowers and use them to front illegal transactions. They leverage on borrowers to gain access to their bank accounts for electronic transactions. Desperate borrowers end up helping loansharks to apply for phone lines and to register pre-paid SIM cards under their own names. Some borrowers who are not able to repay the debts become runners to harass other borrowers. Some leaders of loanshark syndicates are also operating from overseas and this impedes Police investigations.

Sir, the problems created by loansharking are increasingly not confined to those who borrow. Some borrowers furnish outdated or false home addresses to avoid harassment, leading to innocent households being harassed. Last year, about half of the harassment cases reported were perpetrated against innocent victims. We will do more to stop this, by requiring persons who apply to update their home address in their NRICs to furnish some proof such as bills to show that they are indeed staying there. Also, ICA and HDB will work together to get persons who buy or sell HDB flats to update their NRIC addresses.

Sir, with the Integrated Resorts being built, I agree with Members that we must

Column: 1162

do more to root out loanshark syndicates. So far, we have experienced some success in taking out syndicates through enforcement. But as Mr Fong suggests, more needs to be done to hit particularly at the core of syndicates. Loansharking is really a form of organised crime. This explains its persistent and insidious nature, making it difficult for Police to root out. When we prosecute and imprison their runners, the organisation simply recruits new members to replenish their ranks. The new recruits are either too naive or simply not deterred by the existing laws and penalties. We are therefore exploring ways to address the organised nature of loansharking squarely.

Mr de Souza suggests punishing those who borrow from loansharks. We will study his suggestion seriously. I agree that those who borrow to feed their vices or subsequently abet loansharks in their operations should not be also treated as victims. They are part of the problem. But I am sure he agrees that not every borrower is in this category and we should also recognise that the social circumstances behind these borrowers are wide-ranging. So, what do we do? We have to differentiate. I think he suggests an approach where the Public Prosecutor is given the discretion and, indeed, he has the discretion, but he will exercise it consciously and carefully. We will study this issue and include in our study the profiles of borrowers and their habits, so as to strike a balance.

On Dr Teo's point on public education, Police will soon be launching a public awareness campaign to highlight the pitfalls of borrowing from loansharks. As loansharking affects the entire community, we need to encourage community action to help stem this problem. It is good to see local communities rising to the challenge to mount CSSP projects to combat loanshark harassment. Such efforts make the neighbourhood a more difficult area for loansharks to harass

Column: 1163

without being detected. I think we can do more on this.

On HDB's Neighbourhood Renewal Programme, residents can also choose to install safety and security features such as CCTVs as part of precinct enhancement. Recently, members of the public stepped forward and helped Police identify suspected loansharks captured by CCTVs in our housing estates. Police arrested the subjects the following day. I commend these efforts and urge our communities to do more.

Sir, now I will turn to the issue of vice. First, I am sure Mr de Souza will agree with me that it is impossible to eliminate vice completely. After all, no country has been able to do this. I suppose that is why they call it the oldest profession in the world.

Last year, over 10 million visitors came to Singapore. While ICA has implemented measures at the Checkpoints to sieve out persons who have suspicious entry-exit patterns, undesirable elements still get through, including a very small percentage who engage in vice. Indeed, the vast majority of those arrested by Police for vice were social visit pass holders. They were repatriated and banned from entering Singapore again. As far as I know, they paid for their own plane tickets and were not part of any vice syndicates.

1.15 pm

Our enforcement strategy, therefore, is a pragmatic one, focusing on confining activities within the traditional red light areas and keeping vice off our streets. Last year, Police conducted some 950 vice-related operations island-wide, up from 890 the year before. Tough enforcement action is also taken in the heartlands, a point Mr de Souza makes, and also in other places, like the Duxton cluster, and so forth. In the heartlands, the number of foreigners arrested for vice activities remains low, accounting for less than 1% of all vice-related arrests but I

Column: 1164

agree that it is a continuous thing that we must do to keep vice off our streets.

Mr de Souza suggests beefing up the Anti-Vice Branch (AVB). I assure him that we would not let manpower constraints, if any, hamper our efforts. That said, while AVB, as a CID specialist unit, focuses on vice issues and enforcement, it does not work in isolation. It works closely with all six Police Divisions across the country. In fact, community partnership to deal with the vice is also undertaken by the division Police officers.

So Police will continue to enforce and explore ways in consultation with various stakeholders, including Members like Dr Lateef who is very active heading a multi-agency taskforce trying to improve the situation in Geylang for the sake of her residents. And we will do that to prevent the local vice situation from getting out of control.

Mr de Souza said he has received feedback concerning vice. If he knows of massage establishments in other places, he should let me have the feedback. If serious enough, Police will look at it and, if need be, enforce, as they have done, checks on these establishments.

Let me now turn to other issues raised by Members, ie, road safety, crime statistics and funding of prisons and foreign beggars.

First, on road safety. Let me say that Singapore’s roads are among the safest worldwide. The Road Accident Fatality rate per 100,000 persons dropped from 5.63 in 1998 to 4.2 in 2006, increasing slightly to 4.68 last year. The fatal accident rate per 100,000 vehicle population increased from 2.34 in 2006 to 2.60 last year.

Motorcyclists and pillion riders remain the most vulnerable group of road users, contributing to 47% of total road fatalities

Column: 1165

in 2007. Young and new drivers and riders are also very vulnerable.

Traffic Police, therefore, stepped up enforcement efforts last year, a point mentioned by Dr Teo and Mr Hri Kumar. Its officers are deployed round the clock to patrol Singapore's roads. Compared to 2006, 19% more summonses were issued for moving, parking and pedestrian offences; 7% more drivers and riders were arrested for drink driving; 86% more summonses were issued for red-running violations.

Drink driving is another area of focus. Mr Kumar points out this issue. The pubs and entertainment outlets are key stakeholders to counter drink-driving. Whilst operators play their part by providing services such as arranging for taxis to send patrons who have consumed alcohol home, more can and will be done. Members must have read about a new 'ring-fencing' strategy in the media, so I will not repeat it here.

If necessary, we will implement other measures such as mandating drinking outlets to provide breathalysers for self-testing. I commend the polytechnic students who stepped up to set up a "Students Against Drink Driving" website, leveraging on new media to alert their peers to the dangers of drink driving. My point is that we want to get more stakeholders on board. It is not a problem that it is only for the Police to handle. But, here, everyone can play a part. And I applaud these students for doing their part to reach out to their peers.

I share Mr Kumar's concerns about habitual offenders of our traffic rules. Under the Driver Improvement Points System, recalcitrant offenders are suspended for one year or longer and have to re-take a driving test before they can drive again. If a motorist commits

Column: 1166

very serious traffic offences such as causing death by dangerous driving, or by rash, or negligent act, his licence will be suspended on the day he is charged in court. Repeat drink driving offenders will also face mandatory imprisonment. We constantly review our laws. I will ask Traffic Police to consider Mr Kumar's suggestions for harsher penalties and to expand Traffic Police's powers to suspend licences.

Sir, enforcement is only one aspect of the solution. A more enduring approach is to get our road users to develop better driving habits, through effective public education.

Here, regular talks, exhibitions and large-scale campaigns such as the Road Courtesy Campaign, Annual Shell Traffic Games and the Anti-Drink-Driving Campaign reinforce these messages, including the importance of using seatbelts and child restraints, a point that has been made here. I do not think there is a need separately to have a month long campaign just to coincide with F1. But certainly the message that the F1 should not lead to more accidents or more errant behaviour on our road should be constantly emphasised, a point Mr Ang Mong Seng makes. As for education, Traffic Police is currently producing a new pamphlet, which will highlight the consequences of not wearing seatbelts.

These large scale public campaigns are complemented by targeted initiatives to achieve maximum impact. A good example is a Motor Cycle Task Force which has launched a focused "Ride Safe Campaign”, another focus campaign, with young people coming on board, and they are tapping the expertise of another group of stakeholders like motorcycle clubs to promote safe riding in young riders in ITEs and polytechnics.

Mr Kumar suggests that for new drivers, we should only confine them to

Column: 1167

smaller capacity cars. I think he takes a leaf from motorcycles. There is a distinction. For motorcycles, you handle the machine. You are riding on it. So the control situation is different. For new cars, they can also go fast and indeed can pick up fast as well. I do not think any country makes a distinction. This is something that we can look at, but for now, I think we will leave it be.

The bottom-line, therefore, on road safety is that everyone should take personal responsibility to keep our roads safe. How? I would suggest first starting with our own road behaviour by internalising safe driving behaviour. And that is where families and friends can come in, reminding each other that when they leave the home everyday, the message that pops up is, "I will drive safely on the road today." Parents can also act responsibly by using proper child restraints. Whilst enforcement and public education have their roles, ultimately my point is that it boils down to the individuals like you and me and certainly, for road safety, we can all make a difference.

On crime statistics, Ms Sylvia Lim proposes that Police further breaks down the statistics released and to include non-seizable offences.

First, let me clarify upfront that Police can release further breakdown of crime statistics, where it keeps track of the figures. However, in relation to the Overall Crime statistics which Police publishes twice a year, the intent is to let the public have a good sense of the general safety and security situation in Singapore. Specific crimes are included not because they are seizable or not, but because they are relevant to public concerns.

Let me explain how. With the annual release of the Overall Crime statistics, Police also publishes the statistics of six crime classes. These classes have been

Column: 1168

chosen to take into account the seriousness of the offences, measured in terms of harm or potential harm suffered by the victim - to the person, to property and to the public at large. They offer a better description of the crime concerns and trends compared to individual offences which tend to fluctuate over short terms.

As for Ms Lim's suggestion to gather data on unreported crime, I know that this is done in some countries like the UK. But, these surveys tend to be inaccurate as they depend on respondents' subjective recollection. They are however useful in societies where the public may be apprehensive in coming forward to report crime due to the lack of reporting channels or lack of trust in the Police. This is certainly not the case in Singapore. In fact, Singaporeans are quick to report a crime even when it is not a seizable offence because they want to put on record the incident and also get the Police to look into it.

Moreover, the SPF is highly accessible to the public. Island-wide, there are some 358 contact points for members of the public to report crimes and provide feedback. Police can be contacted through telephone, letters, emails and online reporting through the Electronic Police Centre. '999' lines and NPC counters are open 24 hours a day and 365 days a year.

There is also strong Police-Community partnership. For the past five years, public-assisted arrests have accounted for about four in 10 arrests for selected major offences. In fact, Singapore ranked first for Reliability of Police Services in the 2005-2006 Global Competitiveness Report. So I think there is no need to conduct such a survey in Singapore.

Mr Seah Kian Peng asks about the funding of Prisons. On average, our Prison spends about one to two-thirds of

Column: 1169

what other developed countries, such as UK and Hong Kong, spend on an inmate per day. Yet, we have achieved one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world. Indeed, these rates have improved over the years. For the cohort of prisoners released in 2004, 23.7% was incarcerated again for a new offence within two years of release. This is a significant improvement from 1998, when the recidivism rate peaked at 44.4%. This shows that our Prison is cost effective.

I assure Mr Seah that all inmates are given basic amenities and have access to medical care. They undergo a comprehensive rehabilitative programme that addresses their criminogenic needs, whilst enhancing their educational level, employability and promoting family bonding, and eventual reintegration into society.

Work-therapy is part of the rehabilitation process to help inmates acquire life skills and the discipline to work. They may be employed to provide services to private companies under a Private Sector Participation Scheme. The main aim of work-therapy, however, is to rehabilitate inmates, not to defray the cost of running the Prison.

Sir, as the proportion of elderly inmates above 60 years is low at 1.2%, Prison does not have a specialist facility for aged offenders. But it will monitor the Prison's population trend and review if there is a need for one.

Next, Mr Seah suggests privatising Changi Prison Complex (CPC) to save costs. Sir, Prison is always studying new ways to operate more efficiently. The consolidation of several stand-alone institutions into the CPC is intended to enhance our Prison capacity and reap economies of scale. The CPC leverages on technology to make operational processes efficient and provide a safe and secure

Column: 1170

environment which is conducive for conducting comprehensive programmes for prisoners. We have built-in flexibility to expand the CPC depending on future demand for prison space.

Outsourcing is another strategy Prison considers, including the possibility of outsourcing its operations. Since 1999, Prison has outsourced two of its non-core functions, namely, the provision of medical services for prisoners and escort duties of prisoners with low security risks, to the private sector. This has allowed Prison to concentrate its resources on the core functions of the safe custody and rehabilitation of prisoners while reaping cost and manpower savings.

However, any proposal to privatise or fully outsource the management of a Prison institution requires careful analysis. I am sure Mr Seah agrees. There are safety and security concerns. While privatised prisons are enjoying a growth in western countries, the impetus for privatisation varies with countries and is not always due to fiscal reasons. For instance, in the United Kingdom and Australia, concerns over the stifling influence that prison officer unions had on prison operations prompted privatisation. Thus far, reports on the performance of private prisons have been inconclusive. Whether private prisons adequately serve the interests of inmates and society remain to be seen.

Finally, Sir, on foreign beggars, which is Ms Lee Bee Wah’s concern. Sir, foreign beggars, when detected by MCYS and police officers, are repatriated and barred from entering Singapore permanently. Last year, 83 persons were picked up, out of whom 68 were foreigners. These foreign beggars were repatriated and banned from entering Singapore permanently.

Police enquiries to date have not found such persons to be involved in any organised crime syndicates. But, still, we are monitoring

Column: 1171

the situation. I know action has been taken. There have been media reports on this, but when they are detected, working with MCYS, Police and ICA will do the necessary. I, therefore, assure Mdm Lee that the entry of these foreign beggars does not constitute a breach of our security and when they try to come back, they will be detected at our checkpoints.

1.30 pm

Sir, let me conclude. The wide range of issues DPM Wong and I have touched on shows the complexity of the Home Team's work. The challenges will grow with globalisation and as our society develops. The Home Team cannot deal with these challenges on its own. Singaporeans understand this and have responded by taking ownership of these issues. Sir, the point is working together, especially stakeholders who have expertise to offer, please come on board. Whether it is counter-terrorism, promoting road safety, fighting drug abuse, keeping the vice situation under control or, in particular, tackling loansharks, which is really a ground phenomenon, Police cannot be eyes and ears all the time. But I am happy to see, for example, the formation of CSSPs on the ground by some constituencies where they keep alert for harassers who come. So as we end this part on MHA's cuts, I will call more Singaporeans to come on board. I thank and commend the efforts of those who have done so and I am confident that with the continued support of Singaporeans, we can navigate successfully through all these challenges and ensure that Singapore remains a peaceful, safe and secure home for all.

The Chairman: We still have some time left for clarifications. Yes, Dr Teo.

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, I have two clarifications. One is on the Mas Selamat escape. I just want to check with the Minister when the independent investi

Column: 1172

gation panel will finish the investigations and whether the panel will report its findings or recommendations to this House.

The second clarification is on drug abuse. I think we should not take comfort that the increase in drug abuse cases in Singapore is due to the increase in production in the region. What it shows is that our barriers are not watertight. As a result, drugs are being available and trafficked into Singapore for abusers. So we should instead focus our effort on measures to strengthen our barriers and to monitor drug abusers in Singapore. I hope the Minister can elaborate on measures taken to strengthen the barriers and whether we are deploying more sniffer dogs to prevent trafficking.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, I will ask the investigators to do a thorough job. Let us not rush them. When it is completed, yes, the House will be kept informed as to what took place.

As for the comment on our border and the reason why we still have drugs coming in and cigarettes being smuggled, no country can guarantee a watertight security around its shores, particularly when we have a shoreline which is also quite long and we have only a few checkpoints around Singapore. It is not difficult for anyone who is determined to plan to leave Singapore or to come into Singapore if he wants to do so. All he needs is just a very high speed boat, and within minutes he can come in. Despite what we do, and we have radars all round our coast, there could still be people who would slip into Singapore. But at the checkpoints where we have security and immigration, you can be assured that 100% checks are being conducted, and that is why you see that we have over 30,000 cases of smuggling being detected at our checkpoints, a very significant increase in the number of detection.

Column: 1173

We can strengthen barriers as much as possible and, indeed, this is done. I think if Members were to visit the ICA checkpoints, they will know there is a whole host of security measures as well as people manning the right places to ensure that those who want to come in illegally will be detected. Dogs are used from time to time. We do not have dogs all over the place like in some countries, as the dogs may not do the job well if they are too tired. So dogs are deployed at the appropriate time and when we have significant numbers of people coming in and that we need to deploy dogs for specific purposes, we will do so. At the Woodlands train checkpoint, for example, we do have dogs. Dogs are not just for drugs but also for explosives and so on. So, we will do as much as we can, but no country can guarantee that we will have a watertight security such as no fly can get into Singapore.

Mr Christopher de Souza: One clarification coming out of MHA's description on the UML activities in Singapore.

Given that there has just been a 4% drop in reported cases from 2006 to 2007, despite the many enforcement actions taken up by MHA and in light of what SMS Ho had said that the syndicates in fact used borrowers like manipulating them as runners and so on, does this not signify an urgency to make borrowing an offence so that the borrowers themselves do not get involved in this industry? I know MHA will consider studying it but when will the review be done?

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: As Mr de Souza has said and I have also said in my speech, the range of borrowers is wide-ranging. Some of the backgrounds of borrowers can be genuine; but some are not. Many borrow because of gambling activities, and some may have genuine

Column: 1174

need for funding. So this will affect a lot of people if we go ahead with it. But the fact that we are prepared to consider it is already a step forward because we have been thinking about it. We have thought about the suggestion before but we said no. So we have tried all the other measures. It is, in fact, a significant step that now at least we are prepared to study it and we are open to doing it. But we want to study it further, partly in terms of the impact on the ground.

In the meantime, of course, we also draw a distinction between what may start off as innocent borrowers and then they slip down the slippery slope and become abettors. Therefore, you start from being a borrower who has a legitimate cause to borrow and later on then abet the UMLs in the operations and become a harasser, or you lend them your bank account number. Then you are part of the problem by becoming an abettor.

Let us take some time to study this issue because it will be impactful. We want to do it in a way which will be acceptable to Singaporeans because not only those who are the borrowers will be affected but the family members as well.

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen: I thank the Minister for his reply and I seek one clarification.

I would like to ask if the Minister would consider amending the Schedule under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act to change the definition of "public entertainment" so as to narrow the application of the Act.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, there are all kinds of public entertainment. We can try to narrow down as much as possible the scope of the meaning of "public entertainment". There will always be groups and activities and matters which we have not contemplated and, therefore, I would rather leave the Schedule as it is

Column: 1175

and the Police would look at every case and apply the most practical way of granting a permit where one is needed.

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Sir, on the Mas Selamat incident, I appreciate it is always easy to finger-point or critique from hindsight after something happens. But before the investigation is completed, I wonder if there are some specific steps that we can take as a nation to at least attach some resources to high-risk criminals at this point so that the incident will not happen again.

Secondly, how do we engage the rest of the population, including grassroots organisations like the CEP, CDEC, IRCC, and so forth, to ensure that the goals of trust, vigilance and harmony are still maintained?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: The Ministry of Home Affairs has always been in contact with the grassroot organisations and talk to them about ways of enhancing our security and preparedness in dealing with emergencies and even dealing with sensitive issues like race, religion, and so on. So, that is an ongoing effort and, of course, we keep them informed of what we do with regard to security.

I can assure the Member that the moment the incident happened yesterday, the Internal Security Department has taken steps to ensure that this will not happen again in the Whitley Road Centre.

Ms Sylvia Lim: Sir, some clarifications for the Senior Minister of State.

Sir, first regarding the statistics released by the Police for crimes in 2007. I was not sure whether I heard the SMS correctly to say that the Police would actually release the statistics which they collate regularly. In other words, even though they are adopting a crime class approach now, they will actually give the

Column: 1176

breakdown of all the different offences and the occurrences of those offences that make up that total for that crime class. Is the SMOS saying that they would actually publish the sub-categories and the numbers on the website since they are gathering it anyway? The concern is that the crime class is very broad and it may mask certain trends within individual offences in the class.

Secondly, Sir, with regard to the crime surveys, the Senior Minister of State mentioned that our system is accessible to all Singaporeans, there is high confidence and so on, but I think it is a little bit unscientific at the moment to claim that because we do not have data showing that. And the crime surveys in other countries have actually managed to flag out certain groups which find the criminal justice system inaccessible. So, in Singapore's context, I am just thinking aloud, we may find, for example, that foreign workers, even though they are victims of crime, may not come forward to report. There may be other groups with less education, and so on. So, are we not interested to find out how accessible our criminal justice system is actually to all groups of Singaporeans? Secondly, Sir, the crime surveys -

The Chairman: Ms Lim, you are taking too much time for your clarification.

Ms Sylvia Lim: The second clarification is that crime surveys in other countries have enabled Police to better their procedures because they found dissatisfaction in the public about the police procedures they were asked to go through. So, is it not in our interest also to try to flag out some of these improvements that we could make?

Lastly, Sir, international data shows that there will always be certain crimes which are under reported, even in countries with high confidence in the Police, eg, sexual crimes, crimes against

Column: 1177

persons. So, if we are really interested to know the actual crime situation, should we not do the crime survey to flag out some of these statistics?

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, the context of different countries for doing different things is important. I think we had this debate yesterday. So certain countries which are vast, like the UK, do unreported crime surveys to really find out what is happening on the ground. But, in Singapore, I think we are compact - we have 4.6 million people - and Police is there on the ground all the time, including the NPCs and also other officers who are in touch with the grassroots leaders and the residents. So, I do not think there is a need to formalise this with surveys because feedback comes back all the time. I am sure Ms Lim and Members of the House will agree. We get an earful from residents should there be dissatisfaction with Police services on the ground, whether it is molest cases or foreign workers who drink in the neighbourhood. So I do not think there is a need like in some countries to do formal crime surveys.

My point is, therefore, not that Police is not interested to know the perceptions of Singaporeans as to the state of the service or whether or not some Singaporeans indeed do not report crimes. On the second point, like I have said, the context is important. In some countries, people do not report crime because they are not sure of what follow-up action there will be and it is difficult to report crime. But, in Singapore, there is access to the Police in terms of the ease with which Singaporeans can report crime. That is one point. Secondly, it is the confidence Singaporeans have that when they do report a crime, it is taken seriously, there is follow-up action, and it is not just there for the record. So, I think we can say with some certitude that the

Column: 1178

percentage of unreported crimes in Singapore is low.

On the first point, she has heard me wrongly. I am not saying that the Police will change the current practice; in fact, it was just implemented last year where they now take an Overall Crime approach. I have explained in my speech why we do that. Because, really, the message is that Singaporeans will be interested to find out what is the general trend for crimes that impact them - the person, the property and the public at large. So the six categories already reflect that. The assurance is that, in terms of selecting the offences to be put in each of these categories, ie, the basket of offences, Police has looked at what these offences are and has chosen offences which will impact public safety.

For example, in this review, offences such as simple cheating or transmitting hoax messages have been put into the basket of offences that would then be reflected in the six categories, while offences such as breach of hire purchase agreement or pyramid selling have been taken out. So when Singaporeans read that, they will get a good sense as to whether Singapore is becoming safer or not. But this is not the be-all and end-all of everything because, as Ms Sylvia Lim has said, when there is a need to put out advisories, when there is a need to have media stories about particular crime trends, this will also take place. Indeed, even in the last annual release of statistics, Police took the opportunity to highlight certain areas of concern. Youth crime was one. Crime against elderly was the other. I think Ms Ellen Lee spoke on it the other day. And also scams by telephone or other means was another. So I think Singaporeans do have a sense as to what to look out for.

1.45 pm

The Chairman: I would like to remind Members to keep their clarifications short

Column: 1179

and no speeches, please, so that we can get more questions in.

Dr Teo Ho Pin: One clarification. I just want to check whether using high-powered boats is a common method of trafficking drugs into Singapore. If yes, what measures are in place to prevent it?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Yes, indeed, the smugglers have tried using high speed boats to come into Singapore. For us, we have also upgraded our PCG craft to be equally high speed, in fact, even faster in some cases. Therefore, it is quite a risky venture for smugglers to try to come into Singapore on a high speed boat. They will run the risk of a collision and they will be the worst for it, and lives may be lost.

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Sir, there are quite a number of cases where HDB dwellers, who are Singaporeans, actually collect multiple deposits from foreign students or foreign talents working here. Is the Police trying to stop this kind of crime? I would like to have the Minister's comments on this, Sir.

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: I think Ms Phua has a case where some PRC students have complained to her. I have asked Police to look at it. I think this is something we need not discuss in this House. But certainly, should there be cheating, it will be dealt with accordingly.

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Sir, I would like to ask the DPM, in view of the escape, what is the advisory to be given to the residents? On the way back, I met some residents and they are very concerned about their safety and the safety of their children as well. Would DPM give some advisory on this?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I can understand the concerns of the public. When I heard from some of the Members here who sent their children to the schools this morning around the area where the search was conducted, they were also alarmed by the

Column: 1180

large presence of the Police force and security people, including the SAF in that area.

Let me advise the public to stay calm about this. The Police will do its job. The photograph of Mas Selamat is flashed all over the country. Look out for him. If there is any information of anyone that looks like him, report the case to the Police and they can be sure that the Police will look into it thoroughly. For example, I read in the papers that there was a case of an old lady at the Goldhill area where she reported that someone was up at the roof of her house or nearby. So Police actually went in and secured the area, checked it up but they could not find the person. So, we spare no efforts in ensuring that this man will be captured but, at the same time, we ask the public to stay calm and help the Police in its job. If they have information as to the whereabouts of this person, report to the Police.

But let me also warn those who are helping Mas Selamat. If they are helping Mas Selamat to hide, they are committing a grave offence and they will have to face the law.

Ms Indranee Rajah (Tanjong Pagar): May I seek a clarification from the Senior Minister of State with respect to our enforcement against drugs? I would like to ask whether the CNB gives equal priority to enforcement on the ground as it does to enforcement against busting the activities of syndicates. I ask for specific reasons because, in my constituency, there is an area, Blocks 91 to 96 of Henderson Road, where there is drug activity since I took over from the last Election 2006. To CNB's credit, the activity has been reduced because we have asked them to assist. But recently, the reports are that the activity is on-going. It is less than satisfactory. Two youths were apprehended for glue sniffing but released. The impression I am getting,

Column: 1181

and I hope to be corrected on this, is that the big level activity is paid attention but enforcement on the ground may not be given as much priority.

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: For drug takers, it is also important to enforce on the ground to prevent hotspots from appearing. In the past, in Singapore, there were hotspots. It also affects Singaporeans' sense of safety and security should they find people either sniffing glue or taking drugs. Let me assure Ms Rajah that CNB, whilst it does delegate resources to hitting at the syndicates, is also concerned about ensuring that, on the ground, Singaporeans do not take drugs. So if she gives me the details, I will ask CNB to look into it.

The Chairman: Any more clarifications. If none, Dr Teo, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, I wish to thank the DPM and the SMOS for their comprehensive answers to all our cuts. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn .

The sum of $2,526,027,400 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $387,819,200 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.