PASSPORTS BILL

PASSPORTS BILL: Order for Second Reading read.

5.25 pm

The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Sir, the Singapore passport is well regarded internationally because of its strong reputation as a highly secure document with several anti-tampering features. The visa-free entry that Singaporeans currently enjoy in many countries and the fact that Singapore remains a member of the US Visa-Waiver Programme attests to the confidence that foreign governments have in the integrity of our passport. However, as the

Column: 1090

Singapore passport provides easy visa-free access to many countries, it is also an attractive document for abuse.

Criminal and terrorist elements are known to assume different identities using photo-substituted or fake passports to facilitate their movement between countries. As recent as late March 2007, ICA had detected foreigners who attempted to use photo-substituted foreign passports to gain illegal entry into third countries. We should also not forget the case of Hambali, the suspected planner of many terrorist attacks in Indonesia, including the October 2002 Bali bombings, who was caught in 2003. He was reported to have used a fake Spanish passport for his travels.

We have been taking and will continue to take the necessary steps to prevent terrorists and other criminals from misusing and abusing the Singapore passport. On 15th August 2006, we introduced the Singapore Biometric Passport, or BioPass, for short. The BioPass, with its enhanced security features, will help ensure that the Singapore passport continues to be regarded as a highly-secure travel document.

To ensure that we have the necessary tools to safeguard the security and integrity of the Singapore passport, we need to update the Passports Act, which has not been amended since 1971, so that it reflects the realities of the current operating environment and remains relevant in today's context.

Thus, this Bill repeals the existing Act, and re-enacts a new Passports Act which introduces measures against the abuse and misuse of Singapore passports and travel documents, as well as foreign travel documents. It also sets out a comprehensive regime for the issuance and handling of our passports and travel documents. Finally, the Bill provides a

Column: 1091

framework to allow the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) to adopt new technologies to enhance the security of Singapore passports and travel documents.

Regularising the issuance and handling of Singapore travel documents

Lost and stolen passports

Sir, while we have been reminding our citizens to take good care of their passports, a small number of Singaporeans still lose or have their passports stolen each year. In the current security climate, should a passport fall into the wrong hands, the consequences could be very severe. ICA will continue to highlight the importance of safekeeping our passports. Charging a replacement fee for lost passports is one way of doing so.

ICA currently registers the reported loss or theft of Singapore passports in its database, to ensure that they can no longer be used for travel. However, such passports are not effectively cancelled as the present Act does not provide for cancellation under such circumstances. Clause 21 of the Bill rectifies this by vesting the Controller of Immigration with powers to cancel a Singapore passport immediately once it is reported lost or stolen.

It is important for Singaporeans to promptly report the loss

or theft of their passports as this allows the ICA to alert the foreign immigration authorities. Through the sharing of information on lost and stolen passports, we can contribute to curb the abuse of passports worldwide. Clause 45 of the Bill therefore makes it compulsory for Singaporeans or a person who has a parental responsibility for a Singaporean aged 16 and below to report the loss or theft of a passport within 14 days when he first knows of the fact.

Column: 1092

Cancellation/refusal of passports

Sir, having the use of a Singapore passport is a privilege and not an entitlement. Clause 57 of the Bill makes it clear that every Singapore passport issued before, on or after the commencement of this Act shall be the property of the Government. In fact, this notice already appears in today's passport and in earlier versions of our passports.

The Bill provides discretionary powers to the Controller to cancel Singapore passports. Besides cancelling passports that are reported lost or stolen, the Controller may also cancel or refuse to issue a passport for administrative or law enforcement reasons as well as for reasons relating to harmful misconduct which would include conduct that could prejudice the security of Singapore, endanger the health or physical safety of other persons, or constitute an offence under the Act. Let me elaborate on this.

Administrative reasons

While a lost or stolen passport can be cancelled, there would be some Singaporeans who will continue to be careless and fail to safeguard their passports. To help curb such behaviour, the Bill allows the Controller to refuse to issue a Singapore passport to a person who has had two or more passports lost or stolen when the Controller deems it undesirable to issue that person with another passport.

Let me reassure the House that the ICA will look into the merits of each case very carefully and will exercise such powers judiciously. A citizen who has taken reasonable steps to safeguard his passport need not be too worried about being denied a passport. Nevertheless, it is important to emphasise that we expect Singaporeans to exercise due care in safeguarding their passports and to minimise the likelihood of their passports being lost or stolen.

Column: 1093

Law enforcement reasons

Clause 23 of the Bill allows the Controller to refuse passports to persons for law enforcement reasons, such as to persons who have been placed under supervision of the Misuse of Drugs Act. This will ensure that they do not indulge in drug-related activities overseas. Others who may be refused passports include those who are the subject of warrants of arrest issued for seizable offences.

Reasons relating to harmful misconduct

ICA has cancelled the passports of Singapore citizens for national security reasons. In recent years, such actions have been taken against the Jemaah Islamiyah members who are on the run or hiding in other countries. Under clause 24 of the Bill, the Controller can refuse to issue a passport to such a person to prevent him from doing harm overseas.

Since 1st September 2005, we have put in place a passport cancellation policy against the leaders of unlicensed moneylending syndicates who are convicted under the Moneylenders Act. The Bill continues to allow the Controller to deny passports to these persons so as to prevent them from re-establishing and perpetuating their unlicensed moneylending business while they are overseas.

All Singapore passports and travel documents that have been cancelled should be surrendered to ICA quickly. This is to avoid such passports being subsequently abused. Hence, clause 30 of the Bill allows the ICA to demand that a person surrenders a cancelled Singapore passport. Similarly, a person who ceases to be a Singapore citizen will also be required to surrender his Singapore passport.

Column: 1094

Measures against the misuse of Singapore and foreign travel documents

Sir, the Bill seeks to enhance measures against the misuse and abuse of Singapore passports and foreign travel documents. Currently, for Singapore passports, we rely on administrative measures, such as the denial of passport facilities, to curb abuse. We can also prosecute a person under the relevant sections of the Penal Code if a Singapore passport or a foreign travel document is misused within our jurisdiction.

Our efforts against passport abuse have kept the number of abuse cases low. In 2006, there were only 74 passport abuse cases, compared to 116 in 2003. Abuse of the Singapore passport, if left unchecked, can cause inconvenience to Singaporeans who travel overseas. Foreign immigration authorities may start to doubt the authenticity of Singapore passports presented to them, causing them to scrutinise our passports and their Singaporean holders more closely and, perhaps, even imposing additional restrictions. Our international reputation could be adversely affected.

Furthermore, in today's heightened security environment, we must do our part as a responsible member of the international community to minimise the abuse of our passports so as not to provide terrorist elements with the opportunity to slip in and out of the country easily using forged or stolen passports. It is therefore necessary for the Government to take a tougher stance by criminalising such acts.

Thus, the Bill introduces four main clauses of passport offences. These offences will carry heavy penalties to send a clear message to potential perpetrators.

Column: 1095

Offences related to the improper use or possession of passports

First, we will introduce offences relating to improper use or possession of a Singapore passport. Sir, we have cases where persons were found to have attempted to pass through our checkpoints using another person's Singapore passport. We cannot condone such activities, nor should we allow a small number of Singaporeans to misuse their passports for selfish gains.

In 2006, ICA arrested a citizen who was engaged in selling lost or stolen Singapore as well as foreign passports to a syndicate. He was found to have multiple Singapore and foreign passports in his possession when he was arrested. As the law currently does not provide for the offence of selling passports, he was instead charged and only sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment for the fraudulent possession of property under the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act. The charge of fraudulent possession of property carries with it a maximum fine not exceeding $5,000 and an imprisonment term not exceeding two years, or both.

Clearly, Sir, such penalties are grossly inadequate. Classifying the sale of passports as "miscellaneous offences" is not commensurate with the seriousness of the offence, especially if the passports were to fall into the wrong hands, in particular, the terrorists. With this Bill, any person who is guilty of selling or attempting to sell the Singapore passport can be fined up to $10,000, imprisoned up to 10 years, or both. Further, should such an act be found to be syndicated, ie, if a person is found to have engaged in the business of selling Singapore passports, the penalty will be stiffer - a mandatory jail term of not less than two years and not more than 15 years, and a fine of up to $20,000.

Column: 1096

Besides the offence of selling Singapore passports and travel documents, we will also criminalise the improper possession of passports or travel documents, with a maximum penalty of imprisonment of not more than 10 years, a fine of up to $10,000, or both. A person who is found guilty of giving away his Singapore passport or travel document and is reckless as to whether it would be misused by another person for travel or for identification purposes will face a fine of up to $5,000, a jail term of up to three years, or both.

Singaporeans should not hand over their passports to other persons or hold on to other persons' passports for no legitimate reasons. While we can allow travel agents to temporarily hold on to our passport to facilitate our travel documents, eg, for visa applications, we should not hand over our passports to persons who demand them as a form of security or surety for any form of goods or services rendered.

Offences related to false Singapore passports

Sir, the second group of offences covers the falsifying of Singapore passports. Clause 36 of the Bill makes it an offence for anyone to make or use a false Singapore passport. It will also be an offence for a person to make or have in his possession any equipment or material that is specially designed for the making of a false Singapore passport with the intent that it would be used for such purposes. Such acts would be punished with a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment of up to 10 years, or both. In addition, clause 37 criminalises the possession of a false Singapore passport. Such an act will carry the same penalties.

Offences related to foreign travel documents

Sir, besides the Singapore passport and travel documents, foreign travel

Column: 1097

documents are also susceptible to tampering, forgery and misuse. We view any form of passport abuse seriously. Clause 47 of the Bill, therefore, seeks to punish such acts, if they are carried out in Singapore, with penalties equivalent to that imposed on the tampering, forgery and misuse of Singapore passports and travel documents.

Offences related to the giving of false statements or information

Sir, in 2005, ICA detected a case where some parents had applied for Singapore passports for other children using their own children's original birth certificates in exchange for money to be gained. Their Singapore passports would bear the names of their own children but affixed with photographs of other children.

Had ICA failed to detect such an act, the imposter would have used a genuine Singapore passport to travel overseas. While ICA's passport issuance process has the necessary checks and balances to detect and prevent fraudulent passport applications, we need to send a strong deterrent signal. We will, therefore, introduce a third group of offences to deal with the giving of false statements or information to obtain a Singapore passport or for any other purposes related to the Singapore passport. Clause 39 criminalises the act of providing false statement or information with a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment of up to 10 years, or both.

Unauthorised issuance of Singapore passport

Fourthly, Sir, we will introduce offences on the unauthorised issuance of Singapore passports and travel documents. Clause 48 of the Bill penalises Government officials who issue or make

Column: 1098

endorsements on Singapore passports contrary to the requirements set out in the Bill. This ensures that the integrity of our passport issuance system is duly upheld. Government officers who are found to have issued or endorsed passports in contravention of the requirements would be liable for a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment of up to 10 years, or both.

Extra-territorial application for passport abuse offences

Sir, we recognise that passport abuse need not be restricted to Singapore, but may be committed by people of all nationalities in any part of the world. Indeed, as the Singapore passport is a travel document, its value is in facilitating entry into other countries. Therefore, the abuse of a passport is likely to occur overseas, as in Singapore. Thus, the Bill extends the application for offences relating to the Singapore passport under this Act beyond our shores to all persons, irrespective of their nationality or citizenship.

We are aware of the operational difficulties involved in enforcing our laws overseas. The foreigner concerned would need to be physically present in Singapore in order for us to prosecute him. There are also practical problems involved in information gathering and investigation for an offence committed outside Singapore. Nonetheless, having the extra-territorial clause in this Bill emphasises the Government's stance against passport abuse offences and sends a strong deterrent message.

Framework to adopt new methods and technologies for the Singapore travel documents

Sir, the BioPass Project is an example of how, by incorporating new and advanced technology, such as the use of biometric identifiers, we can stay ahead

Column: 1099

of the potential abusers who are increasingly using modern technology for criminal purposes. Indeed, since 2003, Singapore has been actively taking part in discussions in this arena held by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Council. This has helped us to successfully launch the BioPass in August 2006. As of May this year, the ICA has issued more than 300,000 BioPasses. Features of our BioPasses are now being considered as a model for many other countries planning to introduce biometric passports.

It is important for us to stay abreast of technological advancements and continue to deploy new technologies aggressively to enhance the security features of our passports. Clause 54 of the Bill therefore gives us the necessary flexibility to adopt new technologies for our travel documents.

Safeguarding of personal identifying information

Sir, incorporating more personal information into our travel documents, such as biometric identifiers, also means that we need to safeguard such confidential information. Clause 55 therefore restricts the sharing of such information to the purposes of identification, law enforcement and national security.

For example, when a Singapore citizen faces difficulties in establishing his identity overseas, such information could be shared with our embassy officers to assist the authentication process so that necessary assistance may be rendered to him. Unauthorised access or disclosure of such information attracts a maximum penalty of fine not exceeding $5,000, imprisonment of not more than three years, or both.

Temporary Travel Document (TTD)

Sir, with the growing affluence amongst

Column: 1100

Singaporeans and a globalising economy, we are seeing strong growth in overseas travel. In 1998, Singaporeans make some 12 million trips overseas. This has since increased to more than 18 million trips in 2006. From time to time, Singaporeans may face difficulties when they need to travel urgently but their passports are with a foreign embassy for visa application. For this group of people, ICA currently issues them with what is known as the Document of Identify, or DOI.

However, the DOI, as a travel document, lacks sufficient security features. Furthermore, not all countries recognise the DOI. There is therefore the need to introduce a new travel document, known as the Singapore Temporary Travel Document, or TTD. The TTD carries the same security features as our BioPass, but has fewer pages and a shorter validity. The TTD will be better equipped to serve Singaporeans' travel needs, compared to the DOI. Clauses 11 to 15 of the Bill therefore provide for the issuance of the TTD.

Consequential amendments to the Immigration Act

Sir, the Immigration Act regulates the entry, stay and exit of foreigners into and out of Singapore, and allows us to take biometric information from foreigners under certain circumstances. As such, the Passports Bill makes consequential amendments to the Immigration Act in order to put in place similar safeguards for the access and disclosure of such personal information.

Separately, Regulation 22 of the Passports Regulations requires a person to present his passport upon entry into and exit from Singapore only if required to do so by an immigration officer. In line with our move to tighten border security due to security situation, and as the presentation of passports upon entry and exit is essentially an immigration issue, we will

Column: 1101

transfer this provision to the Immigration Act, and amend the provision to make it compulsory for all persons who enter and exit Singapore via our checkpoints to present his passport or travel document to an immigration officer.

Validity of Singapore passports

Sir, following the First Reading of the Bill, members of the public have asked whether we would reduce the validity period of the Singapore passport with the passing of the Bill. Sir, I would like to clarify that the Bill does not shorten the validity period of the Singapore passports, including those that have already been issued.

Since 1st April 2005, all new Singapore passports are issued with a validity period of five years. This allows ICA to incorporate new technologies and features into our passport to ensure that it remains secure and less susceptible to forgery and tampering. While clause 8 of the Bill states that a Singapore passport issued after 1st April 2005 would have a validity period not exceeding six years, the additional year of validity allows ICA the operational flexibility to transfer unused validity from an old passport to a new one, when Singaporeans renew their passports. For example, when a person who has a passport with remaining validity of six months applies for a new passport, ICA will transfer the remaining six months' validity to his new passport. His new passport would thus be valid for five years and six months.

This is no different from the previous Passports Regulations which provided for a validity of 11 years although the passports issued then were valid for 10 years.

Column: 1102

Conclusion

As part of Singapore's contribution towards the fight against international terrorism and transnational crimes, we must proactively enhance our security measures to stay ahead of terrorists and criminals. This Bill aims to restrict the space for terrorists' and criminals' movement by tightening passport controls and to deter the abuse of our passports and travel documents.

We will not hesitate to take action against those who abuse their Singapore passports and travel documents. For the vast majority of Singaporeans who travel for legitimate purposes, they will benefit from a highly secure Singapore passport that continues to enjoy stronger reputation and confidence among immigration authorities around the world. This Bill will help us to maintain that reputation and confidence, so that Singaporeans can continue to enjoy hassle-free access wherever and whenever they travel overseas.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

5.51 pm

Dr Teo Ho Pin (Bukit Panjang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill.

As Singaporeans become more affluent and the cost of travelling reduces, many Singaporeans will need a passport to travel the world. But the rising security threats and abuses of passports have made it necessary for Singapore to set up a comprehensive framework to protect the interests of Singapore and Singaporeans. Sir, I fully support the introduction of technologies and measures to combat identity fraud and possible misuse of Singapore passports and other Singapore travel documents.

Column: 1103

Sir, as we introduce more stringent measures to curb abuses, we must also not over restrict the rights of Singaporeans to travel overseas. With globalisation, more Singaporeans will need to travel overseas for business and work. In addition, many Singaporeans have relatives and friends living in many countries and may need to travel for social purposes. Thus, we need to have proper control in the issue of Singapore passports and travel documents and, at the same time, set up an integrated system among different Government agencies to prevent forgeries and abuses.

Sir, I wish to seek the following clarifications from the Minister:

One, lifespan of passport. Sir, I understand the continuing need to introduce new technologies to deter criminal elements in forging our passports. But a six-year lifespan for Singapore passports is rather short and does incur extra costs to both the Government and Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans do not travel frequently and thus their passports are used only a few times per year. Having to replace a passport every six years will entail wastage and pose unnecessary cost burden on Singaporeans.

Sir, currency notes are also vulnerable to forgery or counterfeiting but, yet, the average lifespan for currency notes is about 10 years. I do not think the pace of new security technology advancements in passports warrants a shorter lifespan. Very often, new technologies will take many years to be tested before it can be introduced and integrated into our existing passport control system.

Furthermore, it is always possible to introduce new security technologies in passport on an incremental basis without the need for a total revamp. Such practices are common in the printing of currency notes. As such, I would propose

Column: 1104

that we continue to issue passports with a 10-year validity period.

Two, issue of passport. Sir, I support Part III of the Bill which sets out various situations or circumstances which the Controller may refuse to issue or cancel a Singapore passport or travel document. This empowerment is necessary especially if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the holder of the passport will engage in harmful activities, such as drug trafficking or criminal offences. But I do not agree with clause 25 which allows the Controller to refuse the issue of Singapore passport to a person where two or more passports issued to the person have been lost or stolen.

Sir, I support personal accountability whereby Singaporeans must exercise caution to safeguard their passports. However, when in foreign countries, the chances of having passports stolen or lost can be high. Sometimes, passports were lost or stolen under circumstances beyond the control of passport holders.

Sir, unless there is evidence to believe that such persons will be engaged in harmful activities if issued with another passport, we should not refuse the issue of Singapore passports to Singaporeans. The right to travel for Singaporeans must be respected and safeguarded. Instead, we can impose a penalty system for the replacement of passport to deter careless behaviour, and tag persons who have replaced their passports for more than two times in our immigration computer system so that our immigration checkpoints will be alerted when such persons travel in and out of the country. This will serve as a better deterrent to the abuse of Singapore passports.

In 2005, Australia amended its Passports Act to increase the replacement cost for passports ($50 for the first passport lost or stolen; $153 for the

Column: 1105

second; and $306 for the third or more). We may consider using this additional fee to encourage Singaporeans to protect their passports at all times, both at home and overseas.

Three, offences relating to Singapore passports and travel documents. Sir, I support Part V of the Bill to increase the fine and imprisonment term for offences relating to Singapore passports and travel documents. The tougher penalties will serve as a strong deterrent to potential offenders who have intention to misuse the Singapore passports for unlawful gains. Clause 38 states a new offence, which is the "bringing, taking or sending across international borders a false Singapore passport or a false Singapore travel document to someone else".

Sir, I have two queries on this new offence. First, how can this clause be effectively enforced especially for senders of false Singapore passports? Very often, the mastermind behind such unlawful acts will engage runners or con innocent people into sending the false passports. As such, this clause may not be effective in preventing the abuse of Singapore passports. Second, why the offence is only for false Singapore passports? A person with ill intention can also send genuine passports of other Singaporeans to other persons overseas for unlawful gains.

I propose we amend the Bill by deleting the word "false" in clause 38. This will make it an offence for anyone who brings, takes or sends Singapore passports to someone else across international borders. This will complement clause 42 which sets out the offence for selling Singapore passports or travel documents. Thus, the new offence will be able to cover all trafficking of Singapore passports or travel documents irrespective of whether they are genuine or false documents.

Column: 1106

Sir, the tougher penalties and increased powers of the Controller will provide more impetus to combat identity fraud, terrorism and other crimes relating to Singapore passports or travel documents.

Sir, I support the Bill.

5.59 pm

Mr Alvin Yeo: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the new Act aims to combat identity fraud and the possible misuse of Singapore passports as well as the misuse of foreign travel documents in Singapore and elsewhere by creating new offences and widening the scope of and increasing the penalties of all offences.

These changes and the heavy penalties the offences will carry all serve as a deterrent to the commission of identity fraud involving the Singapore passport as well as the misuse of foreign travel documents in Singapore. The signal being sent is that Singapore will not tolerate such activities and will come down hard on the perpetrators. These measures are especially relevant in the light of the dangers posed by terrorism today. This is vital not just for our own security, but also that of our neighbours. We should thus close every loophole and strengthen any weak link in our vigilance against international terrorism.

Having said that, there are two points I wish to raise in relation to the changes. The first relates to the extra-territorial jurisdiction conferred under the proposed Bill. Clause 4 provides generally that the Bill will apply to acts done outside Singapore and to all persons irrespective of citizenship. Clause 34 provides that the offences under Part V will apply whether or not the illegal conduct or its result occurred in Singapore.

This means that under the new Act, a person may be prosecuted for an offence even if the offence was committed overseas.

Column: 1107

The misuse of passports or travel documents for illegal purposes is, by its very nature, a crime that cuts across borders, eg, a radicalised UK national might well use a forged Singapore passport to commit a terrorist act in Australia, thousands of kilometres away. The Deputy Prime Minister himself gave the example of Hambali using a forged Spanish passport.

In a globalised world of today, acts of misuse could occur anywhere in the world. However, the question does arise - how could we effectively investigate and later charge someone whose actions were taken totally outside this country? We probably have no choice but to retain the power to prosecute such persons for such action, but we must take care that these provisions do not become merely symbolic.

The second comment or point I would like to raise relates to the right to refuse or cancel Singapore passports. Under clauses 19 and 21, the Controller of Immigration may refuse or cancel a Singapore passport. The grounds upon which he can do so include whether either a competent authority has made a request or the Controller himself believes on reasonable grounds that (1) it might prejudice the security of Singapore or any other country; or (2) endanger the health or physical safety of other persons in Singapore or overseas. This power is highly relevant in this day and age where the threat of terrorism and also of epidemics like avian flu is increased by the facility of modern travel.

However, the concern I have is this. This right could be seen as a restriction on civil liberties. It thus becomes vital that the process, including that of appeals to the Minister, is handled in a fair and transparent manner. This may well pose difficulties as the person appealing is required to specify the

Column: 1108

grounds upon which the appeal is being made. But if the decision to refuse a passport was made on grounds, for instance, of national security, the sources and items of information for that decision are likely to be confidential. How then is the party appealing against the refusal to bring forward his case? The situation is probably unavoidable as with all matters of national security, but it remains an issue to be grappled with nonetheless.

These two points notwithstanding, the move to tighten the regime against identity fraud is welcome. And, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.

6.05 pm

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, I thank the Members - Dr Teo Ho Pin and Mr Alvin Yeo - for their support and comments. Allow me to explain further how the Bill will tighten the security of our passport regime.

Dr Teo has proposed that we continue to issue passports with a 10-year validity period. I would like to reiterate that the current lifespan of five years for our biometric passport is to allow the ICA to quickly incorporate new technologies and features into our passports. A passport which is valid for 10 years will slow down our process of replacing passports with new technologies. It will mean that the pool of passports already issued will not become due for renewal or replacement until the person comes forward for a replacement or renewal for a long time. In fact, the ICAO itself recommended that the validity period of passports should be a maximum of five years, and that is the standard which we have followed. As a result of this, we can then make changes to the passports when they are due for renewal. In fact, a shorter period of validity also enables the pool of passports to be refreshed more quickly.

Column: 1109

Different countries have different standards in setting the validity period. Some countries have 10 years and some have five years, and we have chosen five years, like several of those countries which have chosen five years. But, despite that, clause 8(4) allows the Minister to extend the validity of the Singapore passport by Gazette , and we will consider doing this when our passport technology system becomes more stable. We do not know when but, in time to come, who knows. We know that technology will always bring forth surprises that will require us to continue to make changes to the passport.

As I said, Sir, each country sets its own standard in issuing passports. Let me give an example. Malaysia, Thailand and Japan issue passports with five years' validity. The UK, US and Australian passports are valid for 10 years. But there is a difference. Their fees are much higher - two or three times that of Singapore. We charge $80 for a biometric passport. And if a person applies for a biometric passport via electronic means through the ICA website, then he gets a rebate of $10, which means he pays $70. Whereas for the other countries, which I have mentioned with 10-year validity passports, they charge two to three times that amount. But that is not the only point. Their passports are with only 24 or 32 pages - half the number of pages of our passports. We can have a 10-year validity, but a traveller can be assured that if he is a frequent traveller, his passport will be renewed more frequently, and he will probably end up paying more.

Dr Teo also shared his concern about refusal of passports to Singaporeans who have lost or their passports stolen two or more times. Sir, we have always emphasised the need for Singaporeans to take good care of their passports. That is because the passport is a valuable travel

Column: 1110

document, well recognised by many countries and, as a result of our reputation, we cannot run the risk of suffering a loss in our reputation if significant numbers of Singapore passports are abused, either by Singaporeans or by foreigners. Therefore, we take a very severe view of those who abuse their Singapore passports. It may be just a false Singapore passport, but we will still take that view that if a Singaporean is in cahoots with other groups or individuals to misuse a genuine or false Singapore passport. And when that passport falls into the wrong hands, I think the Member knows that the consequences will be quite severe, particularly if it falls into the hands of a criminal or a terrorist. And we never know when that criminal or terrorist may sneak into Singapore using that genuine Singapore passport as his identity.

The practice of refusing passports to certain categories of people - including those who lost their passports twice or more - is not new. In fact, we started this practice some years ago, but we did it administratively. And those who were denied their passports know why they were denied their passports. As Mr Alvin Yeo said, they ought to know the reasons. We will tell them the reasons and they have a right of appeal. When the appeal comes to me, I will consider all the factors and give them a fair hearing, and I will then make a decision.

But that is not to say that those who lost their passports twice or more will automatically have their passports denied forever. In fact, if there are good reasons why the passport was lost and it is a credible story, then ICA will be quite generous and will give them the passports. But even in the case of those Singaporeans who are denied their passports, because they have lost their passports twice or more, ICA also takes a compassionate view that if they have a good reason to travel, ICA will give them

Column: 1111

a temporary travel document that would facilitate entry into a country for one time and come back, or for a short period.

As a result of this policy of denying Singaporeans who lost their passports twice or more, Singaporeans have become much more careful in making sure that they safeguard their passports and keep them well, so that they will not be lost or stolen. In fact, since we implemented this policy, despite the number of passports issued and in circulation has gone up, the number of persons who lost their passports more than twice has not gone up. The number is still very small. We have now put this into the Bill to make the process more transparent. Up till now, it is only done by administrative means.

Dr Teo also mentioned that the right to travel for Singaporeans must be respected and safeguarded. But let me reiterate here that the passport issued is a privilege. It is not a matter of right, and Singapore is not the only country that has made it a privilege to give a citizen a passport. Other countries do the same. In fact, when crafting this legislation, we have taken the view that we probably do not need to reinvent the wheel. We can follow what others do, take on the very good features that others have adopted, and adapt them for our purposes and which suit our social context. This is what we have done. So many provisions in the Passports Bill have been adopted from other countries.

Dr Teo mentioned about charging a penalty fee. We already have that. In fact, if a person loses his passport, the replacement fee for the first time is $50; the second time is $100; the third time is $100. And if we really have to do it, we will deny a person a passport, and he will not be able to travel. So it is very clear that we need to take very strong measures against people who abuse their passports.

Column: 1112

On the idea of tagging those who have lost their passports twice so that Immigration Officers can be alerted, I do not see much purpose in this. Because once a person is issued with a passport, he should be free to leave and return. The tagging does not serve a purpose, because we are not going to stop him from travelling.

Dr Teo's third point is regarding the offence of bringing, taking or sending of false Singapore travel documents across international borders, and he asked how such an offence can be enforced. In fact, I recognise the difficulty of tracking people who do this overseas. But if the person happens to be in Singapore and he is detected to have a false Singapore passport, then we will take action, and that is the purpose of the provision. But even if a person were to misuse a genuine Singapore passport, not just a false passport, action can also be taken by the ICA. Therefore, we see the need to put in place a system to check abuse in order to safeguard the integrity of our passports. I think this is for the general good. It is better because it will mean that the interest of the majority will be protected and they can get into or leave the country more easily than others whose passports may be suspect.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a committee on the Bill. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.