IMMIGRATION (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

10.36 a.m.

The Minister for Labour and Welfare (Tun Lim Yew Hock): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Sir, in the light of constitutional changes and of experience gained over the past few years in the administration of the Immigration Ordinance, 1953, it is imperative that certain amendments should be made in the law to meet changed conditions and to close the loopholes that have been discovered over a period. To this end there have been several consultations with the Federation Government at ministerial as well as official levels.

Hon. Members are aware that since 1953 the policy on immigration has been Pan-Malayan, and I am happy to report that as a result of these consultations it will continue to be so.

The Federation is an independent territory now and Singapore will soon have internal self-government, but despite the difference in status, the Federation Government has agreed to maintain a Pan-Malayan approach to this very important legislation. There will be no change in the freedom of movement between the two territories along the Causeway other than in the case of those citizens who are specifically prohibited by order of either Government.

The provisions incorporated in this Bill are the result of consultations referred to by me. A new Bill incorporating these amendments was passed by the Federal Legislative Council about a fortnight ago. The Federation Government is now awaiting the passing of our Bill so that the new law can be brought into operation simultaneously.

Reference to the Explanatory Statement to the Bill will disclose the reasons for the proposed amendments.

Clause 4, the most important clause, seeks to amend the provisions of section 7 of the Immigration Ordinance in that the right of entry is now confined to citizens of Singapore and of the Federation, and I am sure hon. Members will welcome this move. Persons other than citizens of Singapore and of the Federation will have to apply for a permit or pass in order to enter Singapore from outside Malaya. I wish to stress that this will refer to those who will be seeking entry into Malaya after the coming into force of this amendment. This amendment will not affect persons already resident in Singapore on entry permits or passes.

Sir, in regard to those categories of persons who at present are entitled to enter by virtue of section 7 (1) (b) of the Ordinance, namely, persons in the specific employment of the Government or of the City Council, consular representatives or members of the Diplomatic Corps, and members of Her Majesty's Forces serving in Singapore, they will be covered by an Immigration (Exemption) Order which it is proposed to make if this Bill is passed. This Exemption Order will be authorised under section 55 of the Ordinance as amended. Clause 27 of the Bill seeks such an amendment to section 55 so as to empower the Minister, when he makes an Order exempting any person or class of persons from the provisions of the Immigration Ordinance, to impose conditions on such exemption. It is intended that such an Order, when made, will make it obligatory on the part of persons qualified for exemption to apply for an entry permit or pass, if the specific reason for the exemption ceases to hold good. Such persons could then be treated as if they were applying for first entry into Singapore if they wish to remain here after their diplomatic or consular status ceases, or their service with the Armed Forces or the Government or the City Council is terminated, as the case may be. The Government feels that this amendment is vitally necessary in order that when the new Exemption Order is introduced, there will be a system of control, which will enable it, in consultation with the Federation Government if need be, to have the power to refuse or to allow such persons to remain in Malaya when the reasons for exemption have ceased to be valid in their cases. The present law gives no such power once they have entered Singapore under the entitlement conferred under section 7 (1) (b) of the Ordinance. It will therefore be in the interests of Singapore to have this control in order that permission to stay here either on an entry permit or pass would be regulated by considerations of contributions which such persons would make for the economic betterment or otherwise of Singapore or of Malaya as a whole.

Sir, Singapore now has overwhelming problems of a fast expanding population and of a totally inadequate number of employment opportunities created from time to time to absorb the large numbers of young persons coming into the employment market every year. At the same time, the Government is only too conscious of the need to attract capital and technological know-how for industrial development, and to expand and improve the productivity of existing industries, while maintaining to the full the enviable position which we have gained through our entrepot trade. It is, therefore, necessary that there should be a balance struck somewhere between the need to curtail the entry of persons seeking employment in Singapore and the necessity to have recourse to steps to invite foreign capital or experts, whether it is in the scientific, technological or professional spheres, who could contribute to Singapore's economic, social or industrial development.

With the introduction of this control, Sir, emphasis will be placed more and more on the economic benefit of Singapore. Positive steps will have to be taken to encourage people to invest in Singapore and to protect that investment with their presence here. As an important corollary to this better system of immigration control, it is proposed that the present Immigration (Prohibition of Entry) Order, which includes the category of persons under paragraph (b) of the Schedule to the Order enabling a contract employee to be granted an entry permit if he has a contract of employment guaranteeing a salary of $500 per month for two years, should be replaced. Accordingly a new order will be issued, deleting paragraph (b) of the Schedule, as well as another category in paragraph (c) which refers to skilled artisans being allowed entry for employment in the trade or occupation if there are not sufficient skilled artisans already resident in Malaya, and if such entry is in the economic interests of Singapore, and to cover these two categories of persons by the issue of Employment Passes. Such Employment Passes will be authorised under new Immigration regulations which it is also proposed to make. Such an Employment Pass may be issued by the Controller to any person other than a prohibited immigrant who satisfies the Controller that he wishes to enter Singapore in order to take up employment in Singapore under a contract for a minimum period of two years and up to a maximum of five years (with extensions to be granted at the discretion of the Controller) with a company or firm, such contract guaranteeing an emolument of $1,200 per month. It is further proposed that there should be a proviso that where the Controller is satisfied that no person resident in Singapore is available to undertake employment of the kind referred to in such contract and that it will be unreasonable to expect an employer to pay such a salary in the particular circumstances of the job or post, he may waive the requirements of this stipulation that the employee should be paid a salary of $1,200 per month.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I must ask hon. Members to bear with me if I appear to dwell too long on this part of the proposed provision. There has been some considerable disquiet on the part of the commercial and trading community as to the Government's intentions, and I hope this statement will allay the fears that the Government is seeking to exclude contract employees altogether.

Quite apart from the necessity to provide and preserve employment opportunities for local people, there is of course the recognized need to maintain confidence in the ability of Singapore to cope with the demands of what we hope will be an expanding economy. Contract employees will therefore be allowed entry and even welcomed if they are personnel of a high calibre of attainments that are not to be found amongst local qualified persons, and if they will bring special talents, whether it be in the business, industrial, scientific or technological fields. In the process of raising the figure from $500 a month to $1,200 a month, it is the Government's hope that indirect inducement will thus be offered to firms and companies to encourage or promote local persons to take the places of the junior executive grades whom they, up to the present, find it expedient to recruit from overseas. We believe that many firms of repute and standing in Singapore have already embarked on programmes of training local people to take over posts of responsibility even without any such inducement. Therefore, I wish to give an assurance to such firms and to others which recognize sympathetically the need of Singapore to preserve employment opportunities as far as possible to its citizens, that there is no present intention to influence them to Malayanise the senior executive posts.

I need hardly stress that if this proposed immigration control is exercised over the coming years with the broad imaginative objectives which we have in mind, there will be much greater appreciation of the benefits of Singapore citizenship, and communities will become close-knit and integrated. The building up of a Malayan consciousness and loyalty will be greatly accelerated thereby. With the Federation, this Government agrees that at this juncture we will not be unduly restrictive over the issue of Employment Passes provided that employers can show that they are making genuine attempts to cooperate with the Government to see that as far as possible local people are being employed or being trained for higher posts, so that the need for overseas recruitment is reduced to the minimum. As the proposed orders to be made will not be retrospective but will come into force on the dates they are made, persons already resident on entry permits, whether they be contract employees or specialists or professional consultants under paragraph (a) of the Schedule to the Prohibition of Entry order, will not be affected.

Sir, clause 3 of the Bill proposes an amendment to subsection (2) of section 6 of the Immigration Ordinance in order to prohibit the entry into Singapore from the Federation of any person other than a citizen of Singapore who has been prohibited entry by order made under section 9 of the Ordinance, or who has entered the Federation of Malaya on a pass issued under the provisions of any written law for the time being in force in the Federation, and endorsed as not valid for entry into Singapore. Hon. Members will appreciate that this amendment will enable the Government to have the right, which it is hoped will be rarely exercised, to exclude visitors to Singapore from the Federation, whether for security or other reasons, because their presence is objected to in Singapore, but not in the Federation. The Federation Bill has such a parallel provision to exclude visitors from Singapore to the Federation.

Clause 7 of the Bill seeks to amend section 10 of the Immigration Ordinance to make the issue of an Entry Permit discretionary instead of mandatory. I have already explained that this will now prove absolutely necessary if immigration control in the interests of Singapore which we seek is to be implemented.

Clause 8 similarly seeks to amend section 11 (2) of the Ordinance to make the issue of Re-entry Permits discretionary instead of mandatory.

Clause 12 seeks to repeal and re-enact section 15 of the Ordinance to give power to the Controller to declare the presence of a person who has entered Singapore on a permit or certificate to be unlawful after his arrival, if it is proved subsequently that he obtained either document by misrepresentation or that he is a prohibited immigrant. The certificate in question is the Certificate of Citizenship status issued to someone outside Singapore who claims to be a citizen of Singapore by birth or otherwise. This power to cancel will be exercisable within two years of the person's arrival.

Clause 13 proposes an amendment to section 16 of the Ordinance to make it quite clear that once a person's presence in Singapore is declared unlawful, it would be unlawful for him to remain here.

Clause 23 seeks to amend section 48 of the Ordinance to make the master, owner, charterer or agent of a vessel or aircraft liable for expenses of removal from Malaya of persons illegally entering Singapore from such vessel or aircraft.

Clause 24 reinforces this provision by seeking to amend section 49 by increasing the period of liability to return a person illegally entering to his port of embarkation from three months to one year from the date of entry. This latter provision is to ensure that the necessary lengthy enquiries that may be required in some cases do not result in the owner of the vessel or aircraft repudiating liability.

Clause 25 introduces a new section to facilitate interrogation and investigation in cases where persons are liable to be removed from Singapore under any of the provisions of the Ordinance.

Sir, I wish, in conclusion, to acknowledge with gratitude the part played by Tunku Abdul Rahman, Prime Minister of the Federation, in all this. I must also thank Dato Abdul Razak and Dr Ismail for the friendly understanding and close co-operation in many problems which we have had to discuss and solve over these matters. It is an example of close consultations which we hope will be achieved in many other fields where the two territories inevitably have to examine the plans in the light of interdependence of one on the other, and to give effect to the over-riding considerations of maintaining a Malayan outlook, so that to the greatest extent possible we will be marching in step with each other, and to our mutual benefit.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

10.51 a.m.

Mr R. Jumabhoy (Telok Ayer): Mr Speaker, Sir, every Singaporean will no doubt support the protection of the interests of Singapore citizens in getting employment in his own country. I have no objection to that.

Sir, the Hon. the Chief Minister mentioned in his speech that he wants foreign capital. I think all Parties need it, and have already spoken about it. But how is foreign capital going to come? Unless you allow the managers or partners to run the business. They are not going to send capital here and hand it over to somebody and say, "Look here, you take this capital of $100,000, and run the business for us." That is not possible, because those who invest their capital in this country want to see their capital under their control and invested in lines of their own interests. This being the case, the managers and partners should be allowed to stay here to manage the affairs of their businesses. Of course, they will have to employ local men in the big businesses, especially the industrial side, and they must also train the local people in order to form the majority of the employees.

Sir, I have one more question. Many firms have been established here for years. Their businesses are vast and they have branches in many parts of the world, with their managers or their partners running these businesses. The Singapore Government, whichever Party is in power - of course, the present Government will soon be out of office - must know that, in order to keep investments in this country and to attract investments into this country from outside, they must allow the partners or managers of these businesses, whoever they choose, to stay in this country. Of late, many people have approached me saying that they want to send their own partners here to manage their own well-established businesses. If these partners or managers are not allowed to stay here, the only thing that will result is that the businesses, and with the businesses the capital too, will move out. This difficulty, of course, after persuading the Immigration Department, is generally solved; sometimes it goes to a higher level, but it is solved. But I must at this stage draw special attention to this fact - that most businesses here have been established before these rules, or this Ordinance, came into force. Therefore, my first point is that these partners or managers - when I say managers and partners, I mean those who manage the businesses - must be allowed to stay in this country. My second point is that those who want to establish new businesses for the benefit of Singapore must also come within the same category.

Sir, I welcome the Bill.

10.55 am.

Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill, as presented to us by the Hon. the Chief Minister, makes it quite clear that this is a measure which should receive the support of this House and of everyone in Singapore. Although we are politically separated from the Federation, we are physically and economically one, and it would be unthinkable to have two sets of immigration laws - one of the Federation, and the other of Singapore. This would give rise to difficulties in going from Singapore to the Federation and from the Federation to Singapore.

On the point of raising the minimum salary of $500 to $1,200, there has been considerable disturbance in firms whose managements are outside Singapore. But on the whole, they realise that times have changed. When the minimum of $500 was fixed many years ago, wages and the cost of living then were very much lower, and it is only right that the minimum should be raised to $1,200 today, because anyone fit to be a manager, assistant manager or partner, should be worth over a thousand dollars, if he should be allowed to come to Singapore. He should have the experience, the knowledge and the know-how to justify that salary before he could be allowed to come and take away a job from one of our local men. One of the greatest difficulties and causes of dissatisfaction in business management, and even in the public services, has been the importation of very junior men. People who have just passed out from college or have received superficial training - young men of just over 20 years - come to Singapore and become assistant managers and are placed well over the head of those who have been working here for years and years; clerks who have worked 20 years or more and who are now in the position of chief clerks.

Up to a few years ago, there was not much attempt to train the local senior staff to bring them to the stage where they could take over the manager's or the assistant manager's job. One can well see the dissatisfaction that is caused in an office where you have a junior man suddenly thrown over you and you have got to take his directions when you know that his directions are not correct as he does not know the local conditions, but you still have to serve him. That surely lowers the morale of the whole office. I think it is only right that posts which carry up to $1,200 in pay should be given to local men to encourage them to take over all these positions so that they can become managers in later years and take part in the running of our Government.

11.01 a.m.

Sir Ewen Fergusson (Nominated): Mr Speaker, Sir, one accepts this Bill as inevitable as one welcomes the fact that the Federation and Singapore continue in line on these measures. The emoluments - I think that is the word and I would like the Hon. the Chief Minister to confirm that it is the word "emoluments - $l,200" that was used - on the whole may .not be unreasonable in the circumstances which are likely to exist in the future. I may not have heard the Hon. the Chief Minister correctly, Sir, but there is the point that was made in the Federation, and stated by the Acting Prime Minister there. He gave an assurance that entry was allowed on an employment pass - that the holder, once he got in, could look forward to a continuing career in this country. I think that is quite an important point, because if it is necessary to bring someone in, they are brought in for a very good reason. To seek for a person, and when you find him, and all that you can say to him is, "You may come in for two years", may be damaging to the economy of the country, possibly not in the long term, but certainly in the short term.

11.02 am.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the point raised by the last speaker, I stated in my speech on the Second Reading that, in regard to Employment Passes, these will be given and that extensions will be granted if the employers could produce a contract guaranteeing that such persons will continue in their employment. Perhaps the language used is not very clear, and thus it has caused some doubts in the mind of the hon. Member.

In regard to the point raised by the Member for Telok Ayer, I would like to explain something which I am afraid has not been properly grasped. Under the present law, any person who could produce a contract guaranteeing his employment for two years on an all-in emolument of $500 cannot be denied permanent entry into Singapore. That definitely is wrong. And the amendment proposed is to see that persons who seek employment in Singapore should only be given Employment Passes and not permanent residence, and his stay in Singapore will therefore be tied to the length of his employment with his employer.

The amount of $1,200 that has now been fixed is to ensure that only persons of senior status will be allowed Employment Passes. But I did say even in my speech just now that if the employers can make a satisfactory case to the Controller that it is not possible to find local men to do a particular job, which job does not require the payment of $1,200 a month, the Controller will give sympathetic consideration to the granting of an Employment Pass.

The hon. Member for Telok Ayer then mentioned the encouragement of foreign capital, and that foreign capital will never be interested in coming in unless they are allowed to bring in their own people. Sir, under the proposal here, anyone whose entry is in the economic interest of Singapore will be granted permanent stay, and along with him will be his family, that is, his wife and children up to the age of 18 years. That is a great encouragement to them.

In regard to the senior jobs as managers and accountants, they will be allowed Employment Passes if they can produce a contract showing that these people are being employed for a certain period at a certain figure.

It is a bit more difficult, Sir, in regard to partners. Now, partners can be sleeping partners. They need not be interested in the management of the business. But just by reason of the fact that they are partners and that they should be allowed entry into Singapore is, I submit, not in the best interest of the economy of Singapore. If before a new venture is started they are partners, they will, of course, be allowed in, but not for already established business which desires to bring in their friends or their relatives, by just transferring some shares to someone outside Singapore, and then claiming that that person should have a right of entry by reason of the fact that he owns some shares in that business. I think in such cases it should not be made possible for such people to be allowed entry.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[Tun Lim Yew Hock].

Bill considered in Committee.

11.09 a.m.

Clauses 1 to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 5-

Mr A. R. Lazarous (Farrer Park): Sir, I think the Chief Minister will agree with me that the established Government-

The Chairman: Order. Is the hon. Member intending to move an amendment?

Mr Lazarous: I wish to move an amendment. But before I move it, I want certain clarification from the Chief Minister.

The Chairman: Of course, the hon. Member knows that two clear days' notice of an amendment must be given. If no notice is given, then the hon. Member must seek the assent of the Assembly. Is the hon. Member seeking the assent of the Assembly?

Mr Lazarous: Yes, Sir.

The Chairman: Will the hon. Member indicate what the amendment is?

Mr Lazarous: May I have your permission to seek clarification from the Chief Minister? If I am satisfied, then I will not move an amendment.

The Chairman: Order. The procedure is a bit complicated but I think, if the hon. Member is not satisfied with any part of clause 5, he should first seek permission to move an amendment. After permission has been given, he can move his amendment. After that, if he is satisfied, he can ask for leave to withdraw his amendment. Perhaps if he will indicate the nature of his amendment, I can assist.

Mr Lazarous: Sir, the nature of the amendment is this. In place of the words "any established government", I wish to substitute "any established friendly government".

The Chairman: Order. I take it the hon. Member is now seeking the assent of the Members of the Assembly?

Mr Lazarous: Yes. Sir.

The Chairman: The question is that the honourable Member for Farrer Park be given leave to move an amendment. The amendment is, in page 3, line 24, after "established" to insert "friendly". Do hon. Members give their assent?

Hon. Members: No.

The Chairman: Then the hon. Member cannot move his amendment.

Question proposed, "That clause 5 stand part of the Bill."

The Chairman: Perhaps now the hon. Member would like to comment.

Mr Lazarous: I think the Hon. Chief Minister will agree with me that Communist China is an established Government. If it is so, and if this amendment goes through, it would mean, if the principal Ordinance is amended according to the Bill, that a person who believes in or advocates the overthrow by force or violence of any established government in Malaya is therefore a prohibited person. So, if Communist China is an established Government, then the Americans or the Formosans who are trying to overthrow the Government of Communist China are prohibited persons. So, is it the intention of this Government to exclude Americans or Formosans from entering Singapore? If it is so, the Chief Minister should inform this House. Or is it the intention of this Government that those people who are already established here - the Americans and Formosans who are already here - will be repatriated? If it is so, the Chief Minister should inform this House.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Sir, the proposed amendment to bring in "established government" is to state categorically that Singapore does not wish to encourage any kind of politics which is foreign to Singapore. It does not play favourites with one side or the other. If anyone indulges in the overthrow of any established government by violence or, according to the words here, Sir, "by force or violence", such a one should not be allowed entry into Singapore.

Mr Lazarous: I am sorry, Sir, but I do not understand what the Chief Minister says. I see he does not understand what I have said. If it is proved that any foreign government or a member of a foreign government goes against any established government, that person will not have any right of entry into Singapore. If it is also proved that Communist China is an established Government, then Formosa is against Communist China. Then Formosans should not be allowed entry into Singapore. America is against Communist China. Therefore the Americans should not be allowed entry into Singapore. You must delete "established government". You say: "Ah, we must not interfere with political intentions." If America went against Communist China, we must declare that Singapore should have nothing to do with them. But when you say: "When any government goes against an established government", then it is admitted that Formosa is against Communist China, and America is against Communist China because Communist China is an established Government, and you treat those persons as prohibited persons. There must be some proper explanation. Sir, either you delete the words "established government" or you admit that Communist China is not an established government.

The Chairman: Order. I do not think the Chairman is responsible for drafting the Ordinance.

Mr Lazarous: I am sorry, Sir.

The Chairman: Perhaps the hon. Member will address the Chair.

Mr Lazarous: Yes, Sir. Mr Chairman, I am sorry I do not understand this point. I want an explanation from the Chief Minister. If any foreign government goes against an established government, that government, or the citizens of that government, will not have a right of entry into Singapore. Perhaps the Chief Minister will make me understand. Then, if it is established that Communist China is an established government, then America is against Communist China, and Formosa is against Communist China, and naturally the Americans should not be allowed here and the Formosans should not be allowed here. Or, Mr Chairman, Government must admit that Communist China is not an established government, which this Government is not prepared to admit. Some vital amendment is necessary on this.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mr Chairman, Sir, I too had great difficulty in understanding what the hon. Member was trying to say! But, anyway, I will try to reply to what he said. This is an Immigration Ordinance to regulate the entry of persons, but not of governments at all. Any person who, in the view of the Government, believes in or advocates the overthrow by force or violence of any established government shall not be allowed entry into Singapore. That is in plain language! If he wants to start overthrowing any established Government, then let him go and do it elsewhere!

The Chairman: Before I put the Question, will the Chief Minister direct his attention to page 3, line 31? Should not the word "between" read "within"? The words quoted are from the Ordinance itself, and in the Ordinance the word "within" occurs-unless I have misread the Ordinance!

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Thank you, Sir.

The Chairman: The word "between" is a typographical error and in place thereof will be inserted the word "within".

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 6 to 31 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

The Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment; read the Third time and passed.