MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1979 TO 31ST MARCH, 1980

Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [4th Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

2.48 p.m.

Head Q -

The following amendment stood in the name of Dr Ong Leong Boon -

(1) That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1100 of Subhead Code QA-01 of the Main Estimates.

The Chairman: Amendment (1), Dr Ong.

Dr Ong Leong Boon (Kim Seng): Sir, I am not moving.

The Chairman: Amendment (2), Dr Lau Teik Soon.

Dr Lau Teik Soon (Serangoon Gardens): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code QA-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I would like to bring the Minister's attention to the administration of one department in his Ministry, namely, the Department of Immigration which I feel is still deficient. At the last Budget debate I mentioned the poor working conditions of the Immigration Officers and stated that such a state of affairs, if continued, would undermine the effectiveness of the Immigration Department.

The major issue is the poor salary scale of the Immigration Officers in Division IV. At one time, their salary scale was superior to those of the prison warders and the police constables, but over the years, while the salary scales of the prison warders and the police constables have been revised upwards, that of the Immigration Officers has remained stagnant. This is a factor which has resulted in the low morale of the Immigration Officers and led to a number of resignations in the department.

Sir, according to the Amalgamated Union of Public Employees, from 1971 to 1978 there were 560 new recruits into the service but during the same period, there were 130 resignations, that is, 23.2% of the new appointments. The breakdown of appointment and resignation for the various years is as follows: Year Appointment Resignation 1971 4 7 1972 33 4 1973 20 17 1974 56 21 1975 45 14 1976 122 15 1977 280 45 1978 - 7 ___ ___ 560 130 From the table, it is noted that the highest number of resignation occurred in 1977 when the Exit Control Scheme was introduced. This undoubtedly must have affected the effectiveness of the control over foreign visitors who have overstayed in Singapore.

Sir, at the last Budget debate, the Minister stated that he would look into the grievances of the Immigration Officers, particularly the problem of those who are responsible for checking incoming vessels, detention of illegal immigrants and manning the immigration outpost at Sultan Shoal. I would like to hear from the Minister whether anything has been done to improve the working conditions of the Immigration Officers.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Chua Sian Chin): Sir, the short answer to the Member for Serangoon Gardens is yes. May I just elaborate on what I promised to do in the last Budget debate and what has been done.

During the last Budget debate I remember that the Member for Serangoon Gardens brought up three grievances of Immigration Officers. The first grievance was that some officers had to travel great distances to checkpoints, and my reply was that the officers in many other services were in a similar situation. The second grievance was that officers working at headquarters were favoured for assignment to the Task Force. I reassured the Member that selection for the Task Force was based on the merits of individual officers and not where they had been working at. The third grievance was on low pay for Immigration Officers. I said at that time that I did not think the problem was as serious as the Member had made it to be, but I promised to look into the matter.

Sir, my Ministry undertook a review of the Immigration Scheme of Service. In October last year, a set of proposals to adjust the salary scales in the service was submitted to the Ministry of Finance. One of the proposals is to upgrade Immigration Officers from Division IV to Division III and place them on the same salary scale as Customs Officers. I believe that was one of the grievance brought up. The starting salary on the proposed scale will remain the same but the maximum will be $120 more than the existing scale.

Another proposal put up is that Immigration Officers will be eligible for promotion to Division II if they pass a qualifying examination. These proposals take into account the trend that new recruits to the Immigration Service have better educational qualifications and unless career prospects am improved they may not remain in the service for long. My Ministry is now awaiting a reply from the Ministry of Finance. I believe that the matter can be amicably concluded.

As for working environment of Immigration Officers, improvements have been made wherever possible, such as the provision of more spacious rest rooms and canteens. The Department has also provided life-jackets, rain-jackets, gloves and oil-resistant footwear for those officers who have to board vessels in the course of their work. I therefore disagree with the Member that the morale of the Immigration Officers now is low.

The figures he quoted, which he said came from the AUPE, indicate that there were only seven resignations in 1978 as compared to 45 in 1977. May I correct him that the Exit Control Scheme was introduced on the 3rd January 1978 and not in 1977 as stated by him. Therefore, it follows that his conclusion that the highest number of resignations in 1977 must have affected the effectiveness of the control over foreign visitors cannot be correct.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Sir, I am glad to hear from the Hon. Minister of the various measures to improve the salary scale of the Immigration Officers as well as to improve the working conditions. I am confident that the Minister for Finance will see the justice of the case and will approve the proposed revision.

With that, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code QB-O1 of the Main Estimates.

In reply to criticisms by some Members of Parliament on 22nd March, 1976, in this House, the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs said [Hansard, Vol. 35, cols. 765-6]:

"When members of the public give information to the Police on suspicious persons or activities of suspected criminals, etc., the source and identity of the persons giving such information are always treated with the strictest confidence. Such information is treated as intelligence and classified as secret and will not be revealed to any member of the public, much less the accused ... and if the information given is revealed to members of the public, then it is a very serious offence and the officer responsible has committed an offence."

It is precisely in this context that the amendment is moved. Lest the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs becomes impatient, I would like to ask him whether the information passed on to his Ministry on drug-taking is also classified as secret. (Sir, this is not to forget the provisions in the Misuse of Drugs Act.) I would think it is, and I shall therefore develop my comments on two aspects: -

(1) breach of confidentiality by some police officers, and

(2) the possibility to cover up such misdeed. 3.00 p.m.

May I say, "There's no smoke without fire." As I have stated, this House debated at great length on these two matters over the years. This was more so detailed as can be seen in the deliberations on 22nd March, 1976, in which the Member for Aljunied who is now Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs, gave several illustrations to substantiate these allegations (Cols, 757-759 and col. 770 of the same Volume). Therefore, my question is: what is being done? Can the Hon. Minister, apart from reassuring the House that he does not condone such acts, say that he will act firmly, but impartially, to deal with those culprits so that the public will continue to have confidence in the Police?

Sir, if this is not forthcoming, then I fear that despite all the exhortations to the public spirited to come forward with such information and in turn the public's fear of retaliation on the part of those brought to book, nobody will want to come forward to give such information. Their attitude will then be, "Let the Police do the work and we stay out of trouble." This is no good, Sir. Should this happen, then I think the work of the Police in crime detection, prevention and the eradication of crime and drug abuse, more so in the maintenance of our internal security, can be reckoned to fighting an uphill task.

Towards this end, the good work of the Police in the last 20 years is well known, but I must add that its good name should not be marred by a few black sheep in the flock.

Sir, Singapore's crime rate as compared to many other cities may not be high. But it is still not enough for the Police to feel relieved that the situation is manageable. The Police should redouble their efforts so that this problem will be further reduced to a minimum. I would certainly be of the opinion that public cooperation is vital and, in turn, the Police can manifest to them that in the enforcement of the laws not only are they firm but they are also fair to all.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I cannot but entirely agree with the Member for Punggol that the Police and the CNB officers should never disclose the source of all information. Such disclosures in breach of confidentiality will undermine the trust of the public in both the Police and the CNB.

Sir, I am indeed grateful to the Member for having read the relevant excerpts of my speech which I made in the 1976 Budget debate on this matter. I do not think I need to restate the lengthy explanation which I made in that debate as a result of the answer to the amendment moved by the Member for Aljunied who was then a Backbencher and who now happens to be my Parliamentary Secretary. Mr Speaker, Sir, whatever information is given to the Police is confidential information and the same goes for information given to the Narcotics officers. In fact, upon their appointment, Police officers and the CNB officers sign an undertaking to safeguard official information under the Official Secrets Act (Cap. 223). They are liable to face prosecution if they breach this undertaking. Any Police officer or CNB officer who is found to have divulged confidential information to unauthorised persons will be dealt with severely, including prosecution in court. However, to be fair we must also bear in mind that there is always a possibility that such allegations may not be true. To do justice to both sides, every case will, therefore, have to be thoroughly and impartially investigated.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that the Member for Punggol has chosen to move this amendment because he had written to my Parliamentary Secretary lodging a complaint in respect of two cases. May I say that the two cases are now under investigation. They are under investigation under the direction of my Parliamentary Secretary, the Member for Aljunied, who raised such a matter in 1976. I am quite sure that the Member for Punggol will be quite confident that there will be a thorough and impartial investigation into his complaint. May I also add that I have full confidence in my Parliamentary Secretary's ability and determination to do just that.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, may I also add that I am surprised that almost three years (short of two days) have elapsed since the Member for Aljunied went over to the other side of the House as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs. In order to save the time of hon. Members of the House, I have decided not to quote at length the number of cases he brought up and in which the Hon. Minister in reply sought details from the Member. But just now when the Hon. Minister mentioned the two cases, I brought them to the attention of his Parliamentary Secretary. This goes to show that. as far as I can believe, no follow-up action seems to have been taken. I would, therefore, hope that all allegations, both substantiated or, after an impartial investigation, proved to be unsubstantiated, are thoroughly investigated. It is no use coming to this Chamber just to make allegations if in the end they are not followed up by a thorough investigation. That is the observation I wish to make. I hope the Hon. Minister would consider in his reply as to the number of cases that have been brought to his attention and the two cases that I have raised.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know exactly the import of the Member's remarks. I thought I have already stated quite clearly that the two cases which he brought to the attention of my Parliamentary Secretary are under investigation. As soon as it has been concluded, a decision will be taken on whether or not they have been substantiated. If they have been substantiated, then action will be taken to punish the offenders.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I believe the Hon. Minister has not answered my question, i.e. how many cases have been brought to his attention, apart from the two he has mentioned just now?

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, with regard to breach of confidentiality, I cannot say off-hand how many cases have been brought to the notice of my Ministry. As far as I know, recently only two cases have been brought up by the Member for Punggol.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I believe that there are more than two cases. I make no bones about it. I think the hon. Member for Brickworks has also come across such a case. That makes more than two. But in view of the Minister's assurance that all complaints received will be thoroughly investigated impartially, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I said, "two cases recently." The case brought up by the Acting Minister for Social Affairs was brought up last year.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi (Kampong Kembangan): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code QD-02 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, during the debate on the Estimates for the Prime Minister's Office, I raised the question on statistics on crime, including drug offences, which could be usefully supplied to community leaders so that they could understand the crime profile of their respective constituencies. The Senior Minister of State (Prime Minister's Office) assured us that he would consult the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs on this matter. I would like to seek clarification from the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs on this point.

It will indeed be helpful to Members of Parliament if they know what crimes are being committed in their respective constituencies, where they are being committed, why are they committed, at what time, the age group of the crime offenders, and so on. With such information, I think it will be easier for Members of Parliament, members of the Citizens' Consultative Committees, youth groups, sports and civic organisations in the constituencies to work together in helping the Police to reduce the crime rates in the constituencies. 3.15 p.m.

The roles of the Member of Parliament and community leaders are especially critical on these matters. This is so because of a number of reasons. Firstly, the Member of Parliament fortunately is usually well received by his constituents. As a result, his personal involvement in studying problems of crime and in seeking ways and means to reduce them would ensure greater impact.

Secondly, in all constituencies, we have already established community organisational networks and structures, like the CCC and its subsections, residents' committees, youth groups, sports organisations and, usually, the Members of Parliament have very close rapport with these organisations in the constituency. In other words, they constitute the ready-made machinery for transmitting crime control programmes and for their implementation at grass-roots level with close support of community leaders.

Thirdly, these community leaders and members of civic organisations in the constituency are leaders and members of the very society where crimes occur. With them and through them, it will be very much easier for the Police to seek closer rapport with and strong support from the community in removing the sources of or factors for crime.

If the Police really desire to get the strong cooperation and support of these community organisations and their leaders and members, and if they want the support to be meaningful and effective, then I should think the best way to achieve this is by helping leaders in these organisations to understand the true picture of the crime situation. Therefore, for this purpose, the preparation and use of comprehensive crime statistics of the constituency will be extremely useful to community leaders and will indeed make preventive and rehabilitative programmes against crime more effective.

I am aware, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the Police statistics are often confidential in nature. But then surely the Police and Members of Parliament can work out some agreed schemes or procedures to ensure confidentiality. Moreover, it would also be in the interest of the Police to ensure that Members of Parliament understand the true situation of crime in their constituency. Of course, if there is anything which is especially confidential, surely the Police can request the Members of Parliament to be discreet in the use of such statistics and to limit the circulation and distribution of such statistics.

Sir, may I know whether the Minister has plans to design a comprehensive crime statistics and reporting system and to make it available to Members of Parliament on a regular basis so as to help Members of Parliament understand and be aware of the crime profile of their constituency and gear the community service function of the constituency towards effective prevention and control of crime.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I entirely agree with the sentiments expressed by the Member for Kampong Kembangan. I also agree that the MP and the community leaders who are interested in the crime situation or drug addiction situation in the constituency be given information on these matters. But the crux of the matter or disagreement is how much information and what sort of information can be given that is sufficient for such cooperation and rapport.

Sir, since the matter was brought up by the Member for Kampong Kembangan earlier in the Budget debate, and he referred to the correspondence which he had with the Commissioner of Police on this matter, I have with me here copies of the relevant correspondence between the Member and the Commissioner of Police.

Sir, the Commissioner of Police did not agree to provide to the Member details, such as the names, addresses of offenders and the results of court proceedings, for good reasons which he stated in his letter to the hon. Member. The reasons are:

'Firstly, the disclosure might bring about civil suits for damages against the Police by offenders, if they were subsequently acquitted or discharged by the court.

Secondly, it would be a breach of the law under the Children and Young Persons Act and the Probation of Offenders Act to disclose the findings of guilt of young offenders.'

Finally, there was the question of the social stigma the offenders would have to bear if the Police were to divulge information of their arrest, particularly if the offences were minor, and these laws, Mr Speaker, Sir, cover not only disclosure to ordinary members of the public but also Members of Parliament and community leaders. I am saying this not in any disparaging context.

The Commissioner also did not agree to provide information on the location of the offence, age of the offender, and date and time of the offence, because it would involve a lot of unnecessary work. The Commissioner then suggested a revised format for supplying the monthly statistics. This revised format will indicate for each type of offence whether the offenders are from within the constituency or outside and the age range of offenders. That was a letter sent to the Member for Kampong Kembangan by the Commissioner of Police.

The hon. Member in his reply to the Commissioner agreed to the modified format. May I refer to his reply, Sir, because I think it will be clear if I just read a few excerpts from the reply. It says:

'I am grateful for the advice you have given me and I appreciate the legal implications for requesting the addresses of arrested persons. I am also grateful for your comments that offenders residing within the constituency might have been committing crimes outside the constituency. And as such the statistics which I requested for previously may not reflect the complete and true picture. I appreciate the consequent workload that would involve if the original statistics I have requested for are to be supplied on a monthly basis. I am therefore agreeable to your proposed format.'

Sir, I am quite surprised that the Member raised this matter again because I thought this matter has been closed. May I just refer to the proposed format* which was agreed?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think this is sufficient crime statistics (Cols. 901 - 902) to indicate the crime and drug situation in the constituency concerned. Besides, this format has already been agreed upon. crime statistics (Cols. 901 - 902)

Dr Augustine H.H. Tan (Whampoa): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I just inject a comment into the debate on the question of cooperation between the Police and community leaders? But before the Hon. Minister gets too concerned, I am here to offer a compliment. For several years now, the divisional headquarters of the Police in Toa Payoh have been sending a representative to the monthly meeting of the Whampoa Citizens' Consultative Committee and we have found this to be a very useful means of cooperation between community leaders and the Police. The community leaders are invited to bring up complaints and cases before the Police and this has led to a number of cases/action taken by the Police in respect of drug enforcement and other crime prevention, gambling and traffic offences. In fact, Sir, because of this rapport built up and the cooperation shown, the Police have shown great understanding and tact in terms of the work which they are undertaking. For example, in clearing Whampoa Drive of illegally parked vehicles, the Police first of all announced to the CCC meeting that they were going to take this measure and then they proceeded to issue warning notices before finally issuing the necessary summons. I think this has been a great step towards better cooperation.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Mr Speaker, Sir, I must thank the Hon. Minister for agreeing on the usefulness to supply MPs with statistics so that the MPs could know the crime profile in their constituency. It is also true that I have had correspondence with the Commissioner of Police as I have stated during the debate on the Prime Minister's Office, and the proposals from the Commissioner of Police were indeed agreed to by me. I think the excerpts which the Minister read just now are correct. In fact, I did believe that the suggestion by the Commissioner of Police was good and accordingly I accepted the revised format. However, after a time I found that:

(1) The revised series of statistics did not seem to be as informative as those provided for by the 'G' Division of the Police Department and they did it promptly and with ease. I understand they did not have too much workload difficulties.

(2) Especially in recent months, the details of statistics were more generalised to the extent that they are of little use to me now. 3.30 p.m.

For the information of the Minister, I do not make use of the statistics supplied by the Police Department any more because they are of little value. In this debate, Sir, I am not trying to take issue with the Commissioner of Police. I am just suggesting that since Members of Parliament, together with the community workers, are very involved in trying to solve the problems of the community, including problems of crime, then surely this must require the close cooperation between the MPs, community leaders and the Police. I think that if the Police could help the Member of Parliament and the community leaders understand the crime profile in the constituency, then they would be in a better position to help the Police. On the other hand, if the Minister feels that the revised series of statistics, which have been supplied by the Police and which I find of little value, are sufficient for our purpose, then I do not have any more questions to raise on this matter. However, I will try and see whether there are any other ways of getting information so that the community workers in my constituency really understand where crime is committed, what is the pattern, and how best we can solve the problem.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I think statistics alone - maybe the Member for Whampoa will agree - will not convey very much unless it is accompanied with explanations, and so on. If the Member for Kampong Kembangan has been receiving these statistics on a revised format which he himself has agreed to, and if he requires further explanation, then I am sure there will be further explanation by the Officer-in-Charge of the Joo Chiat Police Division, which covers his constituency. It is not that the Police do not want to reveal more information than what is required by the Member of Parliament or the community leaders. It is only that the Police must act responsibly and not divulge unnecessary information. These are very personal information, pertaining maybe to very young offenders who may thereby be stigmatised. Surely there is rapport between the Officer-in-Charge of the Division and the Member of Parliament of the constituency within that Division, as in the case of Toa Payoh mentioned by the Member for Whampoa, and moreover the Member for Kampong Kembangan and the community leaders in Kampong Kembangan are also engaged with Project Libra where there is close cooperation. I fail to see why these statistics cannot be more meaningful if the request is made for clarification of the crime or drug situation in his constituency. As I say, mere supply of statistics is a very impersonal thing. It will not help very much unless it is accompanied with clarification and explanation.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I would like to join in this discussion on the Police cooperation with the local Member of Parliament. I would like to associate myself with the Member for Whampoa in congratulating the Police for being generally a very helpful branch of Government, in the sense that in my work too, similar to that done in Whampoa, in attending to problems like crime, delinquency and drugs within my constituency, we have found that the Police have given us very good cooperation all-round. Besides sending an officer to attend the meetings of the Citizens' Consultative Committee, we also have a very active woman police sergeant to sit in a special committee for crime and drug prevention. In fact, the Police have helped us to spearhead certain campaigns directed at certain problem areas within the constituency. For all that, I feel that the information and the cooperation that have been provided are adequate for the purpose of attending to these problems within the constituency.

I must also add here that I think it is vitally important that the Police should not disclose too much information because confidentiality is important and it is right that we should protect the rights of our citizens who may be rightly or wrongly detained, whichever the case may be. With the information that is provided, I think it is sufficient for the Member of Parliament and the local community leaders to direct their attention to these problems. I really have no quarrel here.

The Member for Kampong Kembangan's problems have arisen probably because his attention is directed at attempting to personally help these criminals or delinquents. Maybe that is what gave him problems because with insufficient data he felt a bit obstructed in going about his work. But for my part, the cooperation that we have received so far has been adequate and we look forward to continuing cooperation from the Police to help alleviate or solve these problems.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I share the views of the Member for Kim Seng because statistics alone will not solve crime. It also requires the goodwill and cooperation of the community leaders and the Police. In fact, under my amendment no. (8) Subhead Code QF-08 I have a list of expressions of gratitude to the Police for being extremely helpful in implementing many community projects in Kampong Kembangan and also in Kampong Ubi, a constituency which I am looking after on behalf of Tuan Haji Ya'acob bin Mohamed. In fact, officers from the "G" Division had embarked on massive projects such as repairing the soccer field and drainage, organising recreational activities for the youths or even DRC releasees, and-organising soccer and sepak takraw competitions. All these have worked well in consolidating the goodwill and the rapport between the Police and the community leaders.

Insofar as statistics is concerned, maybe I would not have been too involved in this area of crime and drug abuse if I had not known, from the survey conducted by the Ministry of Social Affairs' Probation Aftercare Service Research published in 1974, that of the 28 postal districts, postal district 14 had the highest rate of young drug offenders. My constituency and Kampong Ubi are within this postal district. I have got statistics for Kampong Kembangan. The statistics covering the period 1977 showed that there were 266 arrests, of which 102, that is 38.3%, were drug cases; and 136 cases of theft. Assuming that the majority of these theft cases were committed by drug offenders, then the total drug problem in my constituency is definitely above 60%. We managed to prepare this figure sometime in mid-1977, if I am not wrong. On the basis of these figures and through discussion with my community leaders, we managed to locate, on a constituency basis, the drug-prone areas and the crime-prone areas. With this information we mobilised the religious leaders, community leaders, youth groups and the sports recreation group to tackle the problems and we seemed to have reduced the problems. During April to September 1977, the number of arrests ranged from 11 to 34, with the maximum in May 1977, with 34 cases. Since the PWD pulled down the empty houses, sometime in October and November, crime and drug cases dropped drastically. In fact, for the last three months, from the very summarised statistics I got from the Police, them were no drug cases in my constituency. Therefore, I thought that statistics of this kind would be extremely useful for Members of Parliament and the community leaders.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, as I said, statistics alone is not good enough. It is the rapport and the cooperation between the Member of Parliament and the community leaders and the police that is more important. Therefore, I do not think we should go further into the debate on the supply of statistics because it will be a futile one and it will not end up with better cooperation and rapport.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, if that is how the Hon. Minister feels, then there is no point in debating further, and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Eric Cheong Yuen Chee.

(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code QE-01 of the Main Estimates.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Sir, I am not moving.

Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon (Tiong Bahru): ( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code QE-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, in recent years the Traffic Police Division has done its best in campaigning for safety on the roads. They have organised national road safety week and road safety exhibitions at community centres in the various constituencies. Recently they have also introduced a special weekly column on road safety in the local newspapers. Not long ago they announced the organisation of a nation wide road safety campaign in all secondary schools. As a complement, in conjunction with the Ministry of Education and the National Safety Council, the Traffic Police yesterday launched a nation wide secondary school road safety exhibition and seminar. All these measures have been taken with the idea of helping and advising road users to comply with traffic regulations and road signs so as to reduce the number of accidents to avoid causing unnecessary loss of lives. This can be achieved only with the concerted effort and cooperation of all concerned.

Obviously from the statistics on road accidents we can see that some measure of success has been achieved. The number of accidents has dropped in the past six months. Compared with the same period last year, the number of fatal accidents has been reduced from 152 last year to 122 this year. The number of cases of serious injury has also dropped from 1,486 last year to 965 this year. This is commendable. 3.45 p.m.

However, the fact is that there are still some unreasonable and obstinate road users who totally disregard road safety or traffic regulations. We can often see some pedestrians who would not pay heed to or make use of any pedestrian overhead bridge or traffic lights which are meant for their safety. They would rather risk their lives by cutting across fast moving traffic. Some drivers, particularly young drivers who think highly of their own technique of driving, would speed recklessly along crowded streets. If others give way a little to them, they will only be ridiculed by these reckless drivers as "kayu". If onlookers persuade these reckless drivers to be more courteous, they would only get threats in return. If their car numbers are taken down by the Traffic Police, they will try to argue heatedly with the Traffic Police. At times, they may submit and plead for leniency. It is only when they meet with an accident that they become scared. For such reckless drivers the best penalty is to fine them and award demerit points. But some people are of the view that a fine is to help increase Government revenue. This is nonsense. It is the most unreasonable argument that can be advanced for reckless road users.

Some reckless drivers, after having been suspended for some months would plead with their MPs about the hardship caused to their family. To the professional drivers, suspension may affect the livelihood of their families. But if they are so reckless and dangerous in their driving, the suspension of their driving licence should be the price they have to pay. They have themselves to blame. Their suffering is only temporary. They could get other jobs during their suspension. When the period of their suspension is over, they can still resume their old trade. Just imagine the long suffering that members of the family of the victims have to bear as a result of their reckless and dangerous driving. And if their victims should die or suffer permanent injury, would it not be a great pity? I feel that for all those black sheep who do not abide by the traffic regulations, the Government should mete out the most severe penalties under the law. Other than this, it is all the more necessary to have the cooperation of the public in order to keep our roads really safe.

Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi): Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak. Under this subhead, I would like to touch on a few small points regarding traffic enforcement.

Sir, we have heard so much about measures taken by the Traffic Police to track down inconsiderate drivers on the road. However, it is unfortunate to say that the situation today has not improved. The roads are still reigned by motorists with their reckless and terrorising manner of driving.

The lack of discipline on our roads is not due to the lack of human and vehicular traffic rules and regulations but the ineffective enforcement of these rules and regulations by the Traffic Enforcement Department. The demerit points scheme, for example, is an effective weapon against hell-drivers and riders as well as other road-user offenders if it is properly administered. Unfortunately, most of the motorists get away with infringement of the traffic regulations. Those who are penalised under the demerit points scheme and subsequently suspended from driving for a certain period of time, are the unfortunate few who happened to violate the traffic regulations in the presence of the traffic policeman.

The yellow-box junctions are introduced to ease traffic congestion at road junctions. These serve a good purpose if motorists follow the rules of the yellow-box junction. However, it is observed that motorists do not seem to strictly observe the rules. Time and again, in some of the yellow-box junctions away from the main city, motorists are seen caught with their vehicles in the middle of these junctions, thus causing obstruction to other vehicles moving off when the traffic light turns green. In most cases, they manage to escape from the arm of the Law because there is no Traffic Enforcement Officer around to book them. Where are the Enforcement Officers?

Sir, the next problem I would like to touch on briefly is indiscriminate parking by motorists. Indiscriminate parking by motorists is yet another example where no stern Police action is taken against the culprits. Although double yellow lines are drawn along Upper Changi Road in front of Changi Village, vehicles are seen parked beside the double yellow lines every day. Even the parking lots reserved solely for the parking of tourist buses along this road are also taken up by inconsiderate motorists. As a result, the tourist buses have to be parked at other undesignated parking lots. I believe that such indiscriminate parking by motorists is seen not only in the Upper Changi Road area. If one drives around, he will be able to see indiscriminate parking of vehicles everywhere.

I hope the Traffic Police will intensify enforcement action so that more erring motorists who flout the law can be booked. This will not only make our roads safer for all motorists and pedestrians but also reduce the number of traffic accidents which at present are still on the increase. In these circumstances, I would like to find out from the Hon. Minister what further measures he proposes to take to improve the situation.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Sir, thank you for this opportunity to join in the debate. I have no intention to compliment the Police Force. They have obviously carried out their public relations so well that we have so many Back-benchers complimenting the Police. One could say that the image of the Police may have improved a little but I do not think it has got to a stage where we should be so profuse with our compliments.

Now, to speak on the Traffic Police. Over the years our Traffic Police has been up to all sorts of tricks to trap motorists. They hide behind trees, bushes and side-lanes, and one Hon. Minister's predecessor went so far as to say that if they could catch erring motorists he would not care whether they hide behind trees or up in the trees or around trees. Adding to their bag of tricks, I notice that lately the Traffic Police is also using unmarked cars to trap motorists. I have two questions to pose to the Minister here. Firstly, is it legal to use unmarked cars? Secondly, would he not agree that this could be a rather dangerous practice because if a motorist is being chased by an unmarked car he might mistake the Police car to be a robber or kidnapper going after him. So, instead of slowing down, he might step on the accelerator. To that extent, it could be dangerous. Perhaps he would care to answer these two points.

The other aspect of enforcement which has often been complained by the public is the attitude of our Traffic policemen. I do not think they are really that polite. They seem to take great delight in catching motorists, and when they do their attitude is invariably arrogant and sarcastic. I experienced it myself on one occasion. I was travelling a little faster and I was caught. The Traffic policeman got down from his motor-cycle full of smiles, but passed a sarcastic remark, "How is the car? Is it running well?" I think that is uncalled for. Having taken down the particulars, we find that they themselves then move away at great speed. Surely that is not the right thing to do. I do not see what is the great hurry.

Over the years, the Minister has always denied the fact that there is such a thing as the "quota system". I believe it still exists today. Every morning before a Traffic policeman goes out he is probably given a certain quota to book. Only recently, I was told by a young man that he was caught riding a motor-cycle without a licence and he pleaded with the traffic cop. After pleading, I suppose the traffic cop felt a bit sorry and said, "Never mind. I will think about it. If I could catch a few other chaps at the end of the day, I will forget about your case." I can go on and on, but I do not think it is necessary.

I think it is right to say that we must make sure that our roads are safe. But I think it is a sheer waste of public funds when our Traffic policemen are unable to behave and to conduct themselves in a reasonable manner, because it is counter-productive. I simply do not understand why they lay their traps at some of these places. They go to some relatively remote area where the traffic is very light, and this is the point which the Member for Changi did make earlier on. When we do need them during the rush hour when the traffic is so congested, we do not see any Traffic policeman around to help ease the congestion. Where are they? They are probably somewhere out in the rural areas of Chua Chu Kang, Lim Chu Kang or Jalan Kayu laying traps to nab offenders.

An hon. Member: Something wrong somewhere.

Mr Ho See Bong (Khe Bong): Sir, I have also a complaint to make against the Traffic Police. When a traffic offence has been committed by an offending motorist, the Traffic Police takes as long as one month to notify the offender who, on receipt of the notice, often cannot recall where and when he has committed the offence. In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister for Home Affairs why the Traffic Police takes so long a time to inform the driver of the offence.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, as is expected, as far as the performance of the Police is concerned, we get compliments as well as brickbats. That is life, Sir.

First of all, I would like to thank the Member for Tiong Bahru for complimenting the Traffic Police road education programme. It is rare, as can be seen from the beginning of this debate, particularly in a Budget debate, for the Traffic Police to be complimented. But, Sir, I have no apologies for this. I think they deserve it for they are tackling a difficult task with determination and imagination.

Sir, may I elaborate on the method of tackling this problem. To reduce road accidents, the Traffic Police has to adopt a two-pronged strategy of selective enforcement and education of road users. They concentrate their enforcement on motorists who commit dangerous acts and serious traffic offences. The education programme, on the other hand, serves to remind all road users about the hazards of road traffic and to teach them the correct behaviour on the roads. This is the policy and the measure which they have been taking. 4.00 p.m.

The oft-repeated question about traffic policemen having to bring in a quota of offenders is all nonsense. I think it is a figment of the imagination. Maybe the Member for Jalan Kayu has heard it from someone who, in turn, has heard it from yet another person. It is not true at all. If it is true, I would like more information on the matter and I will certainly investigate on it.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, I did not hear the Minister quite clearly. Would the Minister repeat what is not true?

Mr Chua Sian Chin: That Traffic police officers have to bring in a certain quota of offenders. May I have clarification on that?

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, as I have pointed out earlier on, the Hon. Minister has been denying this year after year, but somehow members of the public are not convinced that there is no such system.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, if some members of the public are not convinced, I cannot help it. I have stated quite clearly the two-pronged strategy of selective enforcement and education.

Sir, a Traffic Accident Study Unit was formed in September 1978 to carry out research into the causes of accidents and to make recommendations to reduce the number of serious accidents. Profiles of dangerous and accident-prone road users were drawn up. Accident prone locations were also identified. Recommendations on engineering improvement, optimal deployment of patrol officers and road safety education were made. As a result of these studies, an educational programme was devised. The studies revealed that the main cause of accidents is the careless and negligent behaviour of road users whether they be drivers or pedestrians. I think the Member for Tiong Bahru has referred to the various publicity media that are used. One is the press when every Monday a message is put across to the public in all the language newspapers. We even advertised these messages during football matches in the National Stadium

Sir, for the young we have road safety campaigns, such as safe cycling and rallies. Traffic games are also conducted. During festive and rainy seasons motorists are reminded to be more careful, by way of advice, about the dangers of alcohol and the hazards of wet weather. Every means available is used to put across the road safety messages. So it is not just enforcement. Education must also follow hand-in-hand, Besides all the publicity, it is felt that there is a real need for information on road safety to be made readily available to road users, particularly drivers, in a handy and durable form.

The traffic police has, therefore, embarked on the important project of producing a road safety manual. This manual will be comprehensive and authoritative, highlighting the various aspects of road safety, such as the Highway Code, traffic offences, signs, accidents, their causes and how to prevent them. Though the manual has been prepared with the drivers in mind, there are also sections for other road users. Care has been taken to see that the manual is simple yet comprehensive. It has also been attractively designed in its layout, with 150 full colour photographs and 200 illustrations. This is not a public relations job, but for information and education. The manual will be available in the English and Chinese editions, and should the need arise editions in the other languages will also be produced. It will be sold at a nominal price. I hope that the manual will be read by all road users, especially motorists, and it can be kept in the glove compartment of the vehicle for ready reference.

I would like to mention here that some credit should be given to the Member for Kim Seng who, Members will recall, brought to our attention in last year's Budget debate the need for such information to be made available to our road users. He rightly pointed out that a large number of road users were not fully conversant with the Highway Code. In order to convincingly prove his point, he even considered himself as one of those not fully conversant with the Highway Code. I was thus fully convinced and, as a result, we are going to have a road safety manual.

In addition, the Traffic Police, in conjunction with the Ministry of Education, the Public Works Department and a sponsor in the private sector, is planning a traffic games garden. A three hectare site at the East Coast Park has been allocated for that purpose. The aim of the traffic games is to teach the young the importance of road safety in their different roles as road users.

Now, may I turn specifically to the Member for Changi. He said that in spite of all that had been done to enforce the law and also the points demerit system which, he said, was good, yet the situation had not improved. I cannot agree with him because the situation has improved. A test of whether or not the situation has improved cannot be based on the number of convictions we get or the number of summonses we issue but on the accident rate. I have told the Traffic Department, particularly the officers in charge, that that is the test of whether their strategy of an educational programme and of selective enforcement has been a success or not. Nobody can doubt the validity of that test, that is, whether the number of traffic accidents, particularly deaths and serious accidents, have declined. I do not think the officer in charge can be foolish enough to tell his officers, "Bring in more summonses and you will get a promotion", because that will not help him. The only thing that will help him is to show quality enforcement. In other words, he must catch the dangerous and reckless drivers who are the cause of accidents rather than those who park illegally unless they cause obstruction.

Let me give some statistics to prove my point that the accident figures indicate that the current traffic police policy of selective enforcement and education is producing favourable results. From September 1978 to January 1979, a total of 122 people were killed and 965 seriously injured in traffic accidents. On the other hand, for the same period last year, the figures were 155 persons killed and 1,486 seriously injured. If the trend towards fewer serious accidents continues and our road users are constantly being educated and motivated to behave correctly, the number of persons killed and seriously injured on our roads in 1979 may become, I hope, the lowest in the past 15 years.

Turning to the next point on enforcement, the Member for Changi said that many motorists got away scot-free because there were no policemen around. On the other hand, the Member for Jalan Kayu said that some of them had been summoned because the traffic policemen stood behind trees, or even up the trees, as suggested by my predecessor, to catch them. May I say that the reason for the selective enforcement policy is that we cannot have policemen everywhere at all road junctions. It is not possible. So we must be selective, and concentrate on those offences which are likely to result in accidents. That is why the Traffic Accident Study Unit undertook an in-depth study of accidents, and they have now come to the conclusion that certain types of drivers are more prone to accidents. That is why a study of the profiles of the various types of drivers will aid them in their selective enforcement.

The Member for Changi complained that many motorists have got away with indiscriminate parking. It may well be that in certain circumstances they could have got away but, as I have said, in our enforcement policy we concentrate on major and serious offences. It ought to be so. But if illegal parking results in obstruction to traffic, then I think it is no longer a minor offence but a serious offence. If the Member for Changi knows of cases of illegal parking which result in obstruction and traffic jams, of course, I would be happy if he could inform me of the place and enforcement will be effected.

With regard to the Member for Jalan Kayu, he asked whether it is legal for Traffic Policemen to use unmarked cars. I say, it is legal for them to use unmarked cars. But more interesting is his question about unmarked cars; that in chasing after an offending motorist who is reckless or a hell-driver, whether that might not cause a danger. For the information of the Member, although the car is unmarked they always have a police light or blinker. As soon as they go on a chase, they will put the blinker on the roof of the car and switch it on. It will then be no longer unmarked. We cannot say, therefore, that an unmarked police car cannot be identified when they are chasing an offender.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, I would like a specific assurance that the Minister's instruction will go down the line. From my own experience, I was chased by one of the unmarked cars without any blinkers at all. 4.15 p.m.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Perhaps the car in question did not have the flashing light which they ought to have. If that was the case, I agree with the Member that it would cause a danger to other road users.

The Member for Khe Bong has also got a case. He said there was a delay of about one month in the issue of a summons. If he gives me the details, I am sure I can answer him why it has taken so long. In fact, it should not take that long. The normal time taken is about two weeks.

The Member for Khe Bong also said that after having been issued with a summons one month later, he has forgotten about the offence. I do not think that anyone can easily forget a traffic offence after a lapse of one month.

Mr C.V. Devan Nair (Anson): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not want to sound pedantic but my question is on the use of language. The Hon. Minister referred to accident-prone drivers. There are people who are accident prone. Human beings are prone to various things. The Member for Jalan Kayu, for example, is prone to attracting the attention of the traffic policemen. But every day as I drive up Napier Road, I am intrigued not by an accident-prone driver but by "an accident-prone bend". The poor "bend" is always meeting with accidents! That is an improper use of language.

I remember reading the New Nation some weeks ago about an explanation given by a driver of how he met with an accident in his report to an insurance company. He said that "as he was driving along, he found a lamp-post rushing very fast at him and he tried his best to avoid the la mp-post but the lamp-post hit his car." So could we have some more apt words for that poor "accident-prone bend" in Napier Road? Have a sign there saying "Caution - Accident Area" or something. I think it does make a poor impression on English-speaking visitors to Singapore who find not only accident-prone drivers but accident-prone bends and nooks.

Encik Sidek bin Saniff (Kolam Ayer): Mr Speaker, Sir, I just cannot help wondering whether the Hon. Minister would consider a campaign or advertisement on the lines used in the West. For example, for people who want to keep healthy, the general advice is that they should eat less than 3,000 calories a day and should not smoke more than 20 sticks of cigarettes per day. But they did the reverse in a magazine. It says, "If you want to die young, smoke more than 20 sticks of cigarettes; eat more than 3,000 calories" and so on and so forth.

Would the Minister consider adopting this line of campaigning or make a study of it? Instead of asking motorists to drive carefully within the speed limit, or "if you drink, don't drive; if you drive, don't drink", make it the reverse and say, "If you want to die young, drink when you drive." and so on and so forth.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir. may I answer the Member for Kolam Ayer first? He has brought up an interesting point. As I said, we use all ways and means to put across the road safety message. So if we use one slogan which cannot put across the message to some people but it does to some other people, then if there is a suggestion to reverse the message and it can be put across effectively, we will use it. Perhaps we may use both.

As regards the Member for Anson, I agree that the language of the road sign he mentioned is not very appropriate. In fact, what we have been doing for such dangerous junctions is to put up a sign of a skull meaning, "If you do not drive carefully, you may end up like this."

Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon: ( In Mandarin): Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin (Bedok): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code QF-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, in the programme description of the full-time Police National Service, amongst the duties of the PNS are the policing of housing estates and the apprehension of drug addicts. I would appreciate, Sir, if the Hon. Minister could elaborate on how these police officers conduct the policing of housing estates. I would like to know from the Hon. Minister whether he would consider the suggestion I made in the last debate on the President's Address. I strongly feel that the policing of the housing estates, in order to make it really effective, has to be carried out in an earnest way. From my observation, Sir, I do not see the rapport being established between the residents and the officers. The Police national servicemen move in groups of four or five, or they just walk about showing no interest in what is going on around them. Sir, I see no reason why the officers should not stop for a while and talk to the residents to find out if they have any problems, like security in the blocks of flats, etc. In this way, the residents will have a high respect for the officers.

The other thing is that there seems to be overlapping of functions or duties as I notice, besides the full-time Police National Servicemen, there are also the Vigilante Corps, the Special Constabulary, all of whom seem to be performing similar duties, i.e. policing the HDB estates. Also, Sir, may I know what are the plans for the setting up of a police post in Bedok constituency, as announced by the Hon. Minister in the Addendum to the President's Address. If so, where will the post be sited?

Although the crime rate in Bedok is comparatively low, some residents feel that there is a lack of security. Several of the block residents' committees in my constituency have set up their own security arrangements by engaging security officers to keep an eye on the blocks of flats. Is it possible to have an area security arrangement on a neighbourhood basis whereby full-time national servicemen or police officers can operate from a point in the neighbourhood and using the walkie-talkie to check on the movement of people in the area? By this I mean, Sir, that duty officers who are doing vertical as well as horizontal policing of the HDB estate will equip themselves with the walkie-talkie and give a situation report to the officer at the police post, so that within seconds of receiving any information of any possible housebreaking, theft or any crime, those on ground duty can be alerted to go to the scene of the crime immediately. In other words, a lot of precious time can be saved. At present, those officers go about without carrying any such equipment at all. How could they be more effective should they face a situation as I have just mentioned?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Chin Harn Tong): Mr Speaker, Sir, during the debate on the President's Address in January, the Member for Bedok welcomed the scheme for reservists to perform patrol duties during the day, but suggested that they should also be deployed between 10.30 p.m. and 12 midnight. He also made some suggestions concerning discipline, deployment, training of reservists and police and public relations.

Sir, the Enlistment Act stipulates that part-time national servicemen and reservists should perform duties for 12 hours per month and seven days of in-camp training annually, or a maximum of 40 days annually. In practice, part-time national servicemen in land divisions are required to perform duty between the hours of 7 p.m. and 11 p.m., i.e. four hours, once in ten days. Reservists were performing duty on the same basis during October 1977 to 14th January 1979. From 16th January, 1979, reservists are deployed to patrol public housing estates between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. because:

(1) there is a high incidence of house-breaking, theft, outraging of modesty and vandalism in public housing estates between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m.;

(2) Most of the residents in public housing estates are away at work during these hours.

Sir, it is not feasible for reservists to be deployed just for the hours from 10.30 p.m. to midnight. If this period is to be covered by part-time national servicemen, it will mean a thinning of coverage in the early hours of the night, bearing in mind the availability of men as I explained earlier. There will also be transport problems f6r the men if they sign off as late as midnight. Perhaps what is most important is that most of the part-time national servicemen have regular employment and signing off at midnight will adversely affect their work the following day.

Sir, the point to remember is that reservists and part-time national servicemen only supplement regulars and full-time national servicemen who are deployed round the clock.

The other suggestions by the Member were, in fact, considered when the patrol scheme was first drawn up in September 1978. They have been put in practice, wherever possible. Immediately before commencing patrol duty, the reservists have to attend a one-day refresher course or in-camp training during which they are briefed on the essential points on police work and good police and public relations. Each reservist is paired with a full-time national serviceman to form a patrol team to cover a sector of approximately 15 blocks of flats. The team is issued with a walkie-talkie to maintain communication with the police division. They perform vertical policing by visiting each floor of the flats and check on suspicious persons found in the lifts, common passageways and staircases. They also check on flats with unsecured doors and windows and advise the occupants to take appropriate measures. They have to arrive at designated points at prescribed times to be checked by their supervisors.

Part-time Special Constabulary national servicemen patrol in groups of three and part-time Vigilante Corps national servicemen patrol in groups of four. Action has been taken to minimise these part-time national servicemen moving in bigger groups.

The duty hours of part-time national servicemen are between 7 p.m. and 11 p.m., whereas those of reservists are between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. There is, therefore, no overlapping of work. 4.30 p.m.

My Ministry has worked out a plan to construct 41 police posts in the various public housing estates, starting from July this year to 1983. More posts will be constructed between 1984 and 1987, according to the actual development of public housing building programme. The plan was forwarded to the Ministry of Finance last December for consideration. Under the plan a post will be constructed in July 1979 at Block 37, Avenue 11, of Bedok South. Reservists are now being transported from Joo Chiat Police Station to Bedok constituency. When the police post is set up in Bedok constituency, reservists will be deployed from the post. The scheme was launched only two months ago. As more national servicemen go into reservist service, more reservists will be deployed under the scheme.

Sir, although the scheme was launched only recently, the results so far have been encouraging. From the commencement of the scheme on 16th January 1979 to 28th February 1979, a total of 44 suspects have been arrested, whereas only 15 suspects were arrested in the whole of 1978 when they performed patrol duties in the evenings. The presence of the reservists helps in the prevention of crimes. A study of the crime figures in the sectors patrolled under the scheme shows that, on average, each sector has a 97.9% probability of being free of crime between 10.00 a.m. and 6.00 p.m. during 16th January 1979 to 28th February 1979. The corresponding percentages of probability for October, November and December 1978 are 90.8%, 88% and 92.4% respectively.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, can I have your permission to speak on my amendment no. (9) now, which touches on Neighbourhood Policing, so that I need not have to move it later?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Thank you, Sir. If I heard the Parliamentary Secretary correctly, he talked about policing in the Housing Board estates by reservists. Looking at the various Subhead Codes under the National Service Programme, we have Police National Service (full-time) for policing, Security Guard Services, Drug Enforcement, Emergency Security Services, including the Special Constabulary. One of the functions of the Special Constabulary includes Neighbourhood Policing. In this respect I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs how effective is Neighbourhood Policing. I know that several Housing Board estates are covered by this scheme and, hopefully, when more national servicemen are released into the Special Constabulary service, they will also be deployed to police more Housing Board estates. In this light would the Parliamentary Secretary concerned enlighten this House as to how effective Neighbourhood Policing is in relation to crime prevention, detection since implementation of the scheme. I would also like to know whether he has got figures to show that this scheme has proved to be effective so that he can embark on the next stage of ensuring that there will be real peace and harmony in the housing estates, relatively crime free.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, since we are now discussing issues on Neighbourhood Policing, team policing and also the functions of Special Constabulary on the question of drug abuse, may I have your permission to speak on the subject now?

The Chairman: I think the Parliamentary Secretary wants to make his reply now.

Mr Chin Harn Tong: Sir, the Member for Punggol has raised the question of Special Constabulary (part-time national servicemen), the CSF of the Vigilante Corps, and the reservists (full-time) patrolling the Neighbourhood. So there are actually three groups policing the neighbourhood. Part-time national servicemen are attached to the police stations to receive on-the-job training on Neighbourhood Policing during their basic training. After basic training, lectures on Neighbourhood Policing are given to them from time to time.

Neighbourhood Policing is not so complicated a task. It is therefore not necessary to give the national servicemen elaborate training on it. But for it to succeed, our national servicemen must be imbued with the right spirit and sense of responsibility. Most of them now have it after having been suitably motivated. In the last two to three years, quite a number of national servicemen have been encouraged and are showing greater interest in their work after being promoted and given command responsibility. Ultimately, however, malingering on the part of our national servicemen can only be brought down to the minimum if both regular and national service officers properly supervise their men on the ground.

Sir, Neighbourhood Policing Scheme started on 1st April 1976, as a pilot project with only four Neighbourhoods. Each Neighbourhood on average consisted of 46 blocks of flats divided into three sectors. Each sector was patrolled by a national serviceman holding the rank of corporal and two national servicemen holding the rank of police constable. The pilot project showed that the scheme was effective and should be expanded. On 1st January 1977, another 24 Neighbourhoods were added to the scheme. On 1st February 1979, there were 29 Neighbourhoods. About 3,500 national servicemen, or 35% of the total strength in the Special Constabulary, were attached to the Neighbourhood Policing units in the eight police land divisions. On 1st February 1979, there were about 3,400 blocks of HDB and JTC flats. Of these, 1,342 blocks or 39% were covered by the Neighbourhood Policing units. With smaller intakes of national servicemen and demobilisation of those who have completed 12 years of national service, the number of part-time Special Constabulary national servicemen will decrease gradually from the end of this year, It is therefore unlikely that the coverage of the NPS can be expanded further.

Under the NPS, the national servicemen patrol in their own neighbourhoods between 7.00 p.m. and 11.00 p.m. Statistics show that only 116 crimes were reported in 1978. These took place between 7 p.m. and 11 p.m. in the Neighbourhood covered by NPS. This works out to less than one crime in three days for all the Neighbourhoods. In the first two months of this year, a total of seven cases of crime were reported as compared with 14 cases reported in the first two months of last year. The preventive value of NPS is therefore quite obvious.

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin: Sir, in view of the very detailed and satisfactory reply given by the Parliamentary Secretary, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave. withdrawn.

The Chairman: I propose to take the Suspension now.

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.15 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.41 p.m. until 5.15 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.15 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head Q (cont) - The following amendment stood on the Order Paper Supplement -

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: (8) That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code QF-08 of the Main Estimates.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (8), Encik Mansor Sukaimi.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I find that this subject matter concerns drug enforcement and, if I may, I would like to withdraw this particular amendment and join in the discussion on Subhead Code QG-01.

The Chairman: Yes. Amendment (9), Mr Ng has spoken. Amendment (10), Dr Ong.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code QG-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, the problem of drug addiction and abuse in Singapore has become a big one. It has been attracting the attention of the Government over the past few years, and I think the enormity of this problem is really demonstrated by the fact that something like 1% of national servicemen are known to be drug abusers. If we take this figure and reflect it on the population at large, one would appreciate the problem. It would mean that there are something like 15,000 people who are known to abuse drugs.

Last year when the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs gave figures on drug addicts and abusers generally, he mentioned that, excluding those already under detention at the drug rehabilitation centres, as of January 1978, there were 5,164. This figure was larger than the previous year. It was 11,600. As a consequence of very active measures having been taken, particularly Operation Ferret I and II, where we were given a total figure of 26,000 arrests made, the drug situation, in the words of the Government, is contained. This is a happy note for all of us, but the situation in actual fact is not at all rosy and I would urge the Government to further continue with this enforcement and rehabilitation programme to rid our country of the menace of drug abuse.

Going back to the question of drug abusers themselves, I think we are not particularly happy to note that the rate of recidivism is, in fact, quite high. The rates that have been given by the various centres varied from something like 90% - in some places the rate is lower - to 50% of drug addicts going back to drugs. In our Singapore experience, one gets the feeling that the rate of recidivism appears to increase with a longer follow-up. I think this is to be expected because, if we conduct a trial over a shod period of time, we will get the impression that a good percentage are, in fact, rehabilitated. But over a longer period of time, we will find that the percentage of those who returned to taking drugs will increase. This is obviously a tremendous problem.

The Minister for Home Affairs has also enlightened this House with regard to the regime of treatment of drug addicts. Last year the Hon. Minister went to great lengths to explain the five stages in the cold turkey treatment involving detoxification, recuperation, indoctrination and subsequently physical and mental rehabilitation, and phase V consists of work schemes to restore drug addicts to employment.

Sir, in this particular aspect, I think it is important for us at this point of time to take stock of the situation. I refer here, in particular, to the rehabilitation programme because it is not possible for the Government to continue to apprehend drug addicts who have returned to drugs after a stint in the DRCs and to continue to put them in these centres. I think a more effective programme of rehabilitation is called for. However, I would like, first of all, to invite the Minister to give us some facts and figures regarding the dimension of the problem that we are talking about.

Two points here about rehabilitation. Do we have experience from other countries where similar drug problems exist, and whether they have been able to succeed where we have failed? The other point is in regard to the return to employment of these drug addicts. Recently in Singapore we had some public information and a debate and discussion on this issue. This was highlighted in a case where someone was employed by a statutory board but subsequently dismissed because they discovered that he was formerly a drug addict. This really is the crux of the matter. If statutory boards and Government organisations or ministries do not adopt a more enlightened attitude towards drug addicts returning to employment, then one naturally cannot expect the private sector to do the same. I am taking this opportunity to call upon the Government to take the lead in situations like this, so that we can actually and properly add another measure to help in the rehabilitation of former drug addicts.

Sir, I think this is important. Of course, I do not have any illusions as to the problem of trying to rehabilitate a drug addict. The problems are many. They can be social, educational or can well be emotional or psychological, and from my experience with them a good number of drug addicts do have many of these factors operating. So giving them their jobs back is just one of the possible means to help them. I repeat, this is important, because if we do not ensure that we help these drug addicts as far as possible (I think the Government is in a position to do so) then very soon we will find that we are not as successful in our programme of rehabilitation as we possibly want it to be. I would, therefore, once again say that this is important, and I hope the Minister for Home Affairs could enlighten this House on this matter.

I do not know whether the recent discussion in this Chamber on this issue has any bearing on the attitude of the Government. I can recall the reply from the former Senior Minister of State for Finance to the Member for Khe Bong regarding the Government's attitude towards drug addicts who have reformed. I thought the reply was not very satisfactory because the attitude was that if a reformed drug addict applied for a job and there was another person, not a drug addict, who also applied for the job, then chances were that they would employ the other person and dump the reformed drug addict.

I think this is an important issue and it is necessary for us at this juncture to take stock of the situation. We have with us enormous problems. To me, it is a national problem. Thousands of youths are involved and, therefore, thousands of families in Singapore are involved. I think it should therefore attract the attention of the Government for an understanding attitude towards them. We should try to help them, and in this direction I think we can. Let us take the lead through the Government ministries and statutory boards and in so doing set an example for the private employers to follow.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, may I have your permission to speak on this amendment so that I need not have to move the next amendment?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Thank you, Sir. I am entirely in agreement with the sentiments expressed by the hon. Member for Kim Seng. I am just as concerned about the fight against drug abuse. Under the programme, it is divided into two parts, drug enforcement and rehabilitation. For this year's estimates, there is an increase of $2.9 million, or 30%, for this two-pronged approach against drug abuse. I am gratified to note that this fight has entered a new phase by placing greater emphasis on rehabilitating drug addicts through work therapy and supervising ex-addicts to prevent relapse. 5.28 p.m.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

Mr Ng Kah Ting: This brings to my mind several questions which I would like to pose to the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs. One, Sir, is in regard to rehabilitating the drug addicts. In moving the Second Reading of the Misuse of Drugs Bill a couple of years back, the Hon. Minister stated that the situation was critical. He said that there was a need to repeal the previous Act and to introduce a new Act. He mentioned that more than 11,000 persons were hooked on drugs. I remember puffing up some observation on this particular point, and that was, on the one hand, rehabilitation, and on the other hand, enforcement by way of catching the drug traffickers and pushers. In this respect, one of the provisions in the Act is capital punishment. I did raise the question of the number of drug traffickers and drug pushers so far sentenced to death and the number executed. I remember the Hon. Minister said in his reply that there were still a few cases pending because of their appeal to the Privy Council. Sir, in enforcing the provisions in the Act, how many persons have so far been found guilty of drug trafficking and drug pushing, resulting in the death penalty being imposed, the number sent to the gallows, and the number still outstanding. 5.30 p.m.

The other matter, as pointed out by the Member for Kim Seng, is the question of rehabilitating the addicts. There are a few drug rehabilitation centres. Some MPs had the opportunity to visit these drug rehabilitation centres. With the provision of another 67 posts for the setting up of a Supervision Division within the Central Narcotics Bureau, I wonder whether this number is sufficient to supervise such a large number of addicts who are being rehabilitated in the centres concerned. Will there be an extension of service to those who have already been reformed, and whether they could be given opportunities for employment, as mentioned by the Member for Kim Seng? Those who have been rehabilitated and want to get a job should be given an opportunity to earn an honest living. The fact that they were drug addicts before should not be held against them. In this respect, I would like to know how many drug addicts have been rehabilitated, whether the number of relapses is great, and whether studies have been made to ascertain the reasons for these relapses. Is it because there is an easily available supply of drugs that they can go back on drugs? If this is one of the reasons then, I am afraid, there must be greater enforcement, that is to say, enforcement officers must be more than vigilant.

This brings me to my next point. Information passed on to the Ministry concerned should be classified as secret and should not be divulged to any unauthorised persons, because we need the confidence of the public and those who are public spirited to come forward and give such information. We should give them a greater sense of confidence by ensuring that any information supplied will not be disclosed, otherwise no one will come forward to give such information.

These are the points which I intended to raise when I filed my notice of amendment, and I thank you, Sir, for allowing me to speak.

Encik Sidek bin Saniff: Sir, if I am not mistaken, the Misuse of Drugs Act was first passed in 1973. Because of the seriousness of the drug situation, it was amended in 1975 and again in 1977. It looks as if amendments to the Act are being made at every two-year interval. Now, we have another nine months to go before the end of 1979, and judging from the sentiments expressed as well as the comments made by my colleague, does the Minister not consider that it is time that another review was made especially on rehabilitation centres and employment opportunities for them?

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, may I be permitted to speak on this subject now so that it will not be necessary for me to move amendments (12) and (13) because the subjects are related to the topic of drug abuse, control and rehabilitation?

The Chairman: Yes, carry on.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I am sure that when we debate and discuss about the problems of drug abuse, our objective is to see that these problems are effectively controlled. We can say that so far we have succeeded in containing the problems of drug abuse.

I agree with the views of my colleague that there are still problems, for example, the need for Government to take the lead in getting job placements for DRC releasees because without jobs the releasees will not have the opportunity to strengthen their self-esteem and confidence and, therefore, have a real purpose in keeping themselves away from drug abuse. I share the sentiments of the Member for Kim Seng that the Government should take a lead in this respect.

On this particular point, my view is that this job placement is not so simple. From my constituency's experience we offered 120 jobs to the DRC releasees but only 40 accepted the offers. Out of the 40, less than half assumed the jobs and after that less than half continued in their jobs. The problem of job emplacement exists not necessarily because of the reluctance of companies or departments to get jobs for them but arises because of the attitudes of the DRC releasees themselves. While I do not want to suggest that we should ignore them because of their disinclination to take their jobs seriously, we must bend ourselves as far as possible to help the drug releasees to stick to their jobs and encourage them to take their jobs seriously.

While we have succeeded in implementing enforcement measures, there is still scope for us to improve the scheme. In this respect I would like to humbly submit the following views. First, there is the important role of the family. While there are custodial reasons to treat the addicts firmly and in isolation, we should not divorce a drug addict completely from his family. I consider this important for the following reasons. A drug addict has become one because of a severe breakdown in his ties with, and loyalty to, his family. To my mind, this is a fundamental cause for drug abuse. Therefore, the best solution is to ensure that there are sound programmes on education, and community service to strengthen the family ties so that a family can play a role in protecting its members from drug abuse. Secondly, a drug addict is usually repentant during or after the first week of detention in the Drug Rehabilitation Centre. He normally needs emotional reassurance and, in this regard, his family is the most ready source for this reassurance. Therefore, the rehabilitation programme must take into account the active participation of the family.

To this extent I wish to mention that in Kampong Kembangan constituency we have during the past year received over 20 requests for assistance from families on the problems of drug addicts detained in the DRCs. We have tried a number of ways to seek the assurance of the DRC authorities that they will give the families all possible facilities to help the addicts. I am happy to say that we have received active support and understanding from the DRC authorities. Perhaps we could further increase the opportunities for early contacts between the family, the community leaders and the DRC during the detention. I say this because recently we received a list of 40 DRC releasees. Unfortunately, we did not make any early contacts with the DRC releasees and because of the lack of these early contacts we found it difficult to get them to join us in our recreational activities or in other projects which could keep them away from drug addiction. In one instance, one of my colleagues in Kampong Kembangan made an approach to a family but the family was not friendly. If we had had earlier contacts with the drug addicts while they were still under detention, it would have been easier for us to involve them in many recreational activities. We can involve the former drug addicts in more positive activities in the constituency.

Another point which deserves mention is the question of enforcement officers. On the whole we must say that the drug-enforcement officers have done a wonderful job. But I am concerned about the way in which enforcement officers approach suspects along the public road. It is common to see youths on bicycles or motor cycles being stopped along the road and questioned and checked by the enforcement officers. Maybe this is one way to check on suspects. But it is important for us to ensure that the enforcement officers make a very strong effort to be more friendly to the suspects, and not to make it appear that they are being harassed. 5.45 p.m.

Normally when a person is stopped and checked, and if there is reason to suspect him of drug taking, he is sent to the police station for a urine test. I understand that about 50% of cases sent to the police station are either confirmed drug addicts or cases confirmed by urine tests to have symptoms of drug taking. But then there are the other 50% who are not confirmed, and therefore they are released. This means that for every thousand young people who are detained and sent to the DRCs, 500 are sent home because the tests are not confirmed. If these 500 are being made to feel that they are being harassed, then we are releasing 500 angry young people. I wonder if the Minister could report whether it is true that about 50% of cases are released and whether he is satisfied that those released are not subjected to any harassment.

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin: Sir, may I be permitted to speak on this subject of drug rehabilitation? My amendment is Amendment No. (13).

The Chairman: Yes.

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin: Sir, some of the issues that have been raised by my colleagues are similar. However, I would like to speak on the question of rehabilitation of drug addicts.

Sir, since the successful launching of Operation Ferret, we have not heard from the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs the latest situation on drug abuse in the Republic. We know there has been occasional reference made with regard to problems of shortage of volunteer probationary officers to undertake the supervision of those ex-drug addicts who have undergone treatment at the drug rehabilitation centres. Very little is publicised on the actual position of drug abuse. I would like to know if the Minister could enlighten the House as to the number of addicts who are now undergoing treatment at the DRCs. What is the recidivism rate known? Is the figure for the relapse rate higher than before? If so, why? What kind of supervision is given for those who have been released from the DRCs, and whether the existing supervision is adequate or not? Have those drug addicts been given employment? Or, in the case of those who were employed before undergoing treatment, how many of them rejoined their former employers, in either the private or public sector? I do not want to go deeper into this because I think my colleagues have already touched on this subject.

Sir, I would like to know whether any study or studies have been made to find out what happens to those who have undergone treatment. My colleague, the Member for Punggol, has also raised this question. I raise this question because I feel that our society is not really trying to help these ex-addicts to readjust themselves. I even hear of some families rejecting these addicts after they have undergone rehabilitation. The problem is that our society is so prejudiced against drug addicts that they are so labelled or stigmatized to the extent that they cannot face society anymore. This is the problem that we are facing right now, as regards ex-drug addicts. Unless this label or stigma is removed, Sir, it is very difficult for these ex-addicts to start a new life. Society wants the addict to stop taking drugs the moment he leaves the DRCs and to be gainfully employed to stabilise his personal life and generally improve his character and become a useful and productive citizen. Of course, in practice, this seldom happens.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I start with answering the Member for Kim Seng. The Member has stated quite correctly that although we have contained the problem of drug addiction, we are still a long way off. The picture is not so rosy because it is an enormous problem.

May I say that drug enforcement and rehabilitation is a continuing battle. In the event of our succeeding in combating one aspect of it, something else crops up and we have to follow up. It is a battle which we have to wage without any let-up whatsoever. When enforcement against traffickers and pushers results in drying up supplies of heroin and cannabis in Singapore, addicts would cross the Causeway to purchase and smuggle small quantities into Singapore on their return. We therefore deny drug supervisees travel documents. This reduced but could not eliminate the ant trafficker going through the Woodlands checkpoint. So what we have done is to use narcotic detector dogs at the Woodlands checkpoint to help us to intercept. Numerous small amounts of heroin and cannabis are secreted under the seats of passenger buses. We have managed to make it difficult for even small quantities of drugs to come in through the Causeway. But as soon as we have done that, we find that some of the addicts have now switched over to barbiturates, I think the Member for Kim Seng being a medical doctor will understand this. So my Ministry has been in consultation with the Ministry of Health which, in turn, is seeking the cooperation of private medical practitioners to monitor the situation and to prevent drug supervisees from getting hold of barbiturates. From heroin, they have now gone to barbiturates.

With regard to drug trafficking and drug pushing, I can definitely say that there has been a decrease of drug pushing and trafficking in Singapore. In 1977, 348 drug traffickers and pushers were arrested. Although there was no let-up in enforcement, only 289 traffickers and pushers were arrested in 1978. The decrease in drug trafficking and pushing is clearly illustrated when one compares the 1978 first half-year figure of arrests to the second half-year figure. In the first half of 1978, 196 traffickers and pushers were arrested whereas in the second half, only 83 such persons were arrested.

Sir, since Operation Ferret started in April 1977 up to 15th March this year, a total of 11,411 addicts were sent to drug rehabilitation centres. In addition, 2,557 persons were prosecuted in court and 1,882 were referred to the SAF for further action. The drug pushing network has been disrupted and drug addicts no longer carry out their activities blatantly in public places. However, as I said, some of them have now turned to barbiturates as a substitute which they usually take with alcohol.

The abuse of barbiturates became noticeable in August last year when there was an increase in the number of persons admitted to hospitals in a state of coma due to barbiturate poisoning, because barbiturates when taken in large quantities is a poison and can kill. At the peak, in the month of September 1978, there were 45 barbiturate-coma cases a month in hospitals. However, our enforcement action against the abuse of barbiturates by addicts has kept the problem in check and the number of comatose cases, I am glad to say, has now come down to 19 in February this year.

Sir, I am also glad to say that we have contained the drug addiction problem in the sense that there are now fewer new addicts joining the drug addict population. I think this is an achievement because unless we are able to prevent new addicts from addiction, we will never solve the problem. May I just give Members some figures with regard to this. During the last Budget debate in March last year, I informed the House that the drug problem had been contained and I gave the figures as follows - the ratio of new addicts, meaning those not on CNB record, to old addicts, meaning those on CNB records. Those figures were:

Persons arrested in January 1978, last year, the ratio of old to new addicts was 0.85:1. However, in January this year this ratio has fallen sharply to 0.21:1. In summary, this indicates that the number of persons who become addicts has been drastically reduced and our problem now is primarily confined to dealing with hard-core addicts. That is why I say that we are now emphasising on tackling the problem of rehabilitation.

I agree with the various Members, including the Member for Kampong Kembangan, that one of the problems which we have to solve is the employment of ex-drug addicts, in other words, when they are released they should be found jobs. With regard to the question on the policy of Government departments and statutory boards towards taking ex-drug addicts into the service, the new Minister for Trade and Industry, speaking as the Senior Minister of State for Finance in charge of the Establishment, had explained to the House the policy of the Government. This was in answer to the question raised by the Member for Khe Bong. I do not want to elaborate further what he has said. But as the Minister for Home Affairs, I would like to say this: on principle, if a person has been on drugs but he has been rehabilitated, he should be employed. But the question is, where do you employ him? So it is a question of job placement in the various Government departments and statutory boards. You must not put him in sensitive jobs. 6.00 p.m.

May I explain what I mean by sensitive jobs? It is just like putting him in a place where we inadvertently put him to some temptation. For example, we employ him and put him in charge of a Government outpatient clinic, or even in the Accident and Emergency Unit. I do not think we should put him there because, as we know, they can have access to things like barbiturates, morphines, and so on. On principle, there is no reason why Government departments and statutory boards should not take them in, but it is a question of the right department and the fight type of job.

As far as job placement is concerned, besides the Government departments and statutory boards, the private firms and organisations should also do their bit for the ex-drug addict, because it is a national problem and by helping them with jobs they are helping to solve a national problem. For this, the Singapore Anti-Narcotics Association (SANA) has started a job placement scheme for ex-addicts. By the end of February 1979, SANA was able to get 140 private organisations and firms to pledge employment for ex-addicts. A total of 649 ex-addicts applied for jobs in these organisations. Of the 649 applicants, 158 or 24.3% were successfully placed in jobs, whereas 217 or 33.4% rejected jobs offered to them. That illustrates the point brought up by the Member for Kampong Kembangan. He knows what he is talking about because he himself is involved in helping these people in his constituency. 216 or 33.3% were found unsuitable for reasons other than the fact that they were ex-addicts. They were not found suitable not because they were ex-addicts but for other reasons. The remaining 58 or 9% are still awaiting the results of their applications. As I said, it must not be assumed that all ex-addicts are eager to work. Among the 217 ex-addicts who rejected job offers, some said that the salary was inadequate. There were also some who considered the workplace too far from home. Nevertheless SANA will continue to persuade more employers to take in ex-addicts as part of their contribution to rehabilitation. I would also like to appeal personally to all employers to do their bit by employing ex-addicts. I also know that the Labour Ministry has also joined in this effort and the Employment Service of the Labour Ministry is now working closely with SANA. They are also trying their best to get employment for ex-drug addicts.

May I answer some of the points brought up by the Member for Punggol. He has again raised the matter of confidentiality of information given by members of the public to the narcotics officers. I have stated that the officers have a duty to keep the information confidential and they cannot breach it. If they breach it they are com mining an offence.

The Member for Punggol asked me about drug enforcement against drug traffickers, how many have been sentenced to death and how many have been hanged. Since 12th December when the provision for the death penalty was introduced for trafficking of drugs exceeding a certain amount, 16 traffickers have been sentenced to death by the High Court. Of these, two were executed last year. Why only two? As Members know, this is because our legal system allows for appeal right up to the Privy Council, and if the Privy Council turns down the appeal, then the person is executed. Of course, before execution, he can appeal to the President for clemency. That takes time. That is why only two were executed last year. One of them was detained at the President's pleasure because of age. The remaining 13 are awaiting appeal. Another three traffickers have been charged and are awaiting trial in the High Court, and they will suffer the death penalty, if convicted.

Let me answer the question on supervision and the number of drug addicts in our rehabilitation centres at the moment. First, the number of addicts who are now in our rehabilitation centres. On 15th March, 1979, there were 3,263 addicts in the DRCs; 3,011 are males and 252 are females. Between 1st August 1976 and the end of January 1979 a total of 9,657 ex-addicts were placed under our supervision scheme.

May I explain our supervision scheme? Our supervision scheme for drug addicts is over a period of two years immediately after the ex-drug addict is released from the DRCs. Out of these 9,657 ex-addicts under supervision, a number of these supervisees were subsequently taken out of the scheme. They include those who were enlisted for national service and those who were sentenced to imprisonment for non-drug offences. So there remains after the deduction 8,732 supervisees. Out of this figure, 3,210 have since relapsed. In other words, the recidivism rate is 36.8%, which is arrived at by computing the 3,210 supervisees, who relapsed, as a percentage of 8,732 supervisees. If that is the rate of recidivism, then I say we have done well. In fact, this is only an apparent rate. Let me explain. The 3,210 supervisees relapsed at various points of time during the two-year supervision.

Another way of measuring recidivism is to calculate the percentage of supervisees who successfully completed the two-year supervision. That is the point made by the Member for Kampong Kembangan. The longer the period, the more relapses he gets. However, since the supervision scheme has been functioning for only 2 1/2 years, at the moment the number who have completed the two-year supervision period is only 358. Out of the 358, 238 have relapsed, giving the recidivism rate as high as 66.5%. However, it is too early to say that this is the correct recidivism rate, since only a small number has completed the two years. Whatever it is, progress has been made because before this we have recidivism rates of 80% to 90%. As I say, these figures of recidivism are still tentative and I am sure we will get the correct recidivism rate in another six to nine months. I am confident that with all that we are doing, concentrating on rehabilitation, we will get a low rate of recidivism, as far as is humanly possible. The Member for Kim Seng asked whether we have any figures to compare with the experience of other countries. I am afraid we have not got the recidivism rate figures from any other country. But I am told that the recidivism rate in other countries, particularly the developed countries, is very high, 80-90%. So we are now on a frontier subject. We have to pursue it from our own experience. I am quite confident that, now that we have contained the problem, we will put emphasis on rehabilitation. I think we can bring down the rate of recidivism as low as possible.

I come to the point made by the Member for Punggol. He asked whether we have got sufficient staff to supervise them well. We use whatever manpower available for supervision. We have been using part-time national servicemen in the Special Constabulary and Vigilante Corps for urine tests when the supervisees come for the test every five days. Of course, we cannot just depend only on part-time personnel to do the work. So we employ 67 full-time supervisee officers to do the work. There again, we found them to be not sufficient. We are requesting the Establishment Division for more posts of supervisee officers.

Apart from supervision that is done by the Central Narcotics Bureau, we also have supervisees who are being counselled by SANA volunteer counsellors. In other words, it is again a two-pronged approach. One is strict supervision by supervision officers working under the Central Narcotics Bureau. At the same time we have volunteer counsellors who counsel the supervisees and they are trained and organised by SANA. 6.15 p.m.

The Member for Bedok asked me whether a study has been undertaken to find out what happens to ex-drug addicts after rehabilitation and release from the DRCs. No such study has been made. However, it would have been clear from what I have said about recidivism and supervision that my Ministry is monitoring closely the behaviour of ex-drug addicts during their two-year period of supervision after release from the DRCs.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Is there a study on relapses?

Mr Chua Sian Chin: As far as relapses are concerned, there are many reasons why drug addicts go back to drugs. The two common reasons are frustration with life and problems with parents and girl friends. But underlying these reasons is the fact that addicts are basically weak in character, and this is the basic problem which we are up against. Because they are weak in character they try to escape from the realities of life instead of facing them. If only they would face the realities, then we would have won. But, nevertheless, it is important that every help is given to the ex-addicts and addicts to overcome this problem.

I come to the point brought up by the Member for Kampong Kembangan about the families of these drug addicts, that is, the emphasis on family ties. He has brought up a very important point. Some of them became drug addicts because the families did not care for them. If only the families had cared for them and had time for them, then I think this problem would not have arisen in the first place. But, nevertheless, this has happened and they have taken drugs. If the families now realise the abdication of their responsibility and they want to make up for it, every encouragement is given to the families to come forward and help the drug addict on the long and arduous journey back to normal life. Not only families are encouraged to help him but also members of the public to volunteer as counsellors. This is the point which has been brought up by the Member for Kampong Kembangan. Every facility will be given for these volunteer counsellors to get to know the addicts early while they are still in the DRCs so that their counselling can be facilitated after their release. The counsellors must get to know them. In fact, some volunteer groups are already visiting the DRCs for this purpose. As far as the Member for Kampong Kembangan is concerned, he has gathered a group of volunteer counsellors from his constituency. In fact, there is no objection to his volunteer counsellors doing the same thing. However, owing to the large number of SANA and constituency volunteer counsellors, a system will have to be worked out so that the visits of counsellors will not disrupt the functioning of the DRCs. For this purpose, SANA will be asked to coordinate.

In fact, on the Member for Kampong Kembangan's suggestion, counselling courses geared to the needs of each constituency will be conducted if an MP so requests and volunteer counsellors are available. I would like to say that SANA will be conducting the first of such courses on 26th March this year for Kampong Kembangan constituency, and more courses will be conducted if there are at least 50 counsellors for each course.

The Member for Kampong Kembangan has brought up the point that in making arrest of drug addicts the enforcement officers should behave correctly and not allow their actions to be interpreted as a harassment and high-handed. I agree with him entirely. But I would like to assure the Member that the officers do not make indiscriminate arrests. To make an arrest, an enforcement officer must first of all have reasonable suspicion that an offence has been committed. Reasonable suspicion is drawn from:

1. Information which has been verified by investigation, or

2. Observation of suspicious behaviour or circumstances. And people are likely to be arrested on suspicion of having consumed drugs illegally if:

(i) They appear to be in a daze or stupor in public places;

(ii) They are found in places where drug abuse is known to have occurred;

(iii) They make contact with drug pushers;

(iv) They are seen in the company of known drug addicts; and

(v) They are caught in possession of drugs or in the company of others who have drugs.

Of course, some spot checks will be made now and then but they will not be arrested unless they fall under any of these conditions which I have just enumerated. In other words, innocent people are therefore unlikely to be arrested.

The Member has brought up the point that among those arrested and who had their urine tested, from quite a number of them it was found that their urine samples did not contain narcotics. That is true. But may I say that, if the urine sample does not show traces of narcotics, it does not mean that the person is not a drug addict. On the other hand, if the urine sample is positive, then of course that person is proved to be a drug addict; not necessarily the other way round. Perhaps the Member for Kim Seng who is a medical man, or the Member for Mountbatten who is a chemist, or the Member for Buona Vista could attest to this. In cases of heroin or morphine, one can see traces of it, but in the case of cannabis, if a person is addicted to cannabis or MX pills, one cannot see traces of it but that does not mean he is not a drug addict. Nevertheless, if a person appears to be in a state of stupor, under the law he can be sent for observation and the doctors can see whether he suffers from withdrawal symptoms. If he does, then he will be certified a drug addict and he will be sent to the drug rehabilitation centre for his own good.

Under this category, in January and February this year, 190 persons with negative urine test result were committed for medical examination and observation, and the medical officers reported that 140 persons or 73.6% exhibited distinct clinical symptoms of drug withdrawal syndrome consistent with narcotic addiction. They were put in the drug rehabilitation centre for treatment.

I think I have answered all the points. If I have left out any, I would like Members to raise it and I would answer it.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Sir, at the beginning of his reply the Minister stated that the drug traffic problem prevailing across the Causeway is a very serious one. I assume that the drug traffic operates both ways. Since this is an international problem, I wonder whether there has been any move to seek the cooperation of the Malaysian Government to curb the drug traffic. If such cooperation has been initiated, may I know what measures have been agreed upon and how effective they have been in reducing the drug traffic.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, my reply is that we have been cooperating very closely. The Central Narcotics Bureau and their counterpart in Malaysia have been cooperating very closely with a view to solving a mutual problem, and as a result of cooperation some drug traffickers have been arrested. But I do not think I should disclose more, otherwise we will be revealing our strategy.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I am very happy with the reply by the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs, particularly with the figures that he has given at this Session. I think it is particularly heartening to note the figures regarding the ratio of new drug addicts as against the old addicts that were arrested each time. I think this figure shows a dramatic improvement. If we look at the figure for April 1977, it was 2.17%. It came down to 0.85% in 1978 and in January this year it was 0.21% This indicates that the measures that we have been taking are probably meeting with more and more success, and this really brings us to the problem of rehabilitation of drug addicts. Here then is the uphill battle that we are talking about, and when several MPs and I asked the Government to take a more positive and enlightened attitude towards employing reformed drug addicts, we were really thinking along this direction.

As I said earlier on, we have no illusions as to the battle to totally convert drug addicts to normal behaviour and normal life. We should certainly try to place these reformed addicts to employment and for those who were previously employed we should try to restore their previous jobs. These are tangible means that the Government can do and must do. True, this is an uphill battle. This requires the cooperation of all concerned - parents, employers and the Government. I think this is the message that should be driven home. 6.30 p.m.

I must congratulate the Member for Kampong Kembangan for taking the initiative in tackling the problem in Kampong Kembangan. He deserves a big applause for the fine work he has done. However, as he has said, and later on supplemented by the Minister, regarding the number of drug addicts refusing jobs, I am not so sure about the figures. Does this really mean that these drug addicts refused to work? I can give another reason for that, namely, there is a normal bias towards certain jobs. Drug addicts come from different backgrounds. Some are from well-to-do families, some are tom middle income families, and some are from very poor families. They have different educational qualifications and also different character traits. True, they have a common pattern. Generally, they have a weak personality. To say that because so many per cent of them have turned down jobs means that all reformed drug addicts are lazy or refuse to work, I think, is not necessarily a logical or reasonable conclusion.

The Hon. Minister has mentioned the problem of where to put drug addicts in employment. I am very happy that he has accepted the principle, and I hope he can persuade his colleagues in the Government that the same principle of wanting to put them back in normal productive work holds true for all Ministries, statutory boards, Government-owned companies or partly Government-owned companies. I think that is a tremendous idea. Then he raised another point of where to put them. Of course, the problem is one of job placement. He said, "We should not put the reformed drug addicts in a clinic." I think that is commonsense. It is like asking a person with a suicidal tendency to go to the roof top of an HDB flat. Surely you are encouraging him to jump down. It is commonsense that we should place them in places where they can be reasonably safe. Given that there is job emplacement and that he is accepted by society, there is a good chance that he will lead a normal life subsequently.

Besides, Sir, I really think that the other figure which he gave regarding relapses proves my point. That is, if you carry out a survey over a longer period of time, the rate of return to drug abuse will increase tom a figure of, say, 36.8% over a short survey to 66.5%. I think that is what is worrying us. That alone should draw our constant attention and vigilance to try and properly rehabilitate all these addicts. I think the Hon. Minister has a lot to say and he is very excited over the whole thing.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I have not much to say after the eloquent speech of the Member for Kim Seng. I only wish to clarify one point. I did not say that drug addicts are lazy and that they do not want to work. I did not say that. What I said was that we should not assume that every one of them wants to work. That was what I said, and I gave figures. I think that is a fair and correct statement. The Member should please not twist my remarks with his eloquence.

Besides clarifying that point, may I say that I share the views of the Member with regard to job placement. The point is that everyone must try his very best. The Government and the private employers must do their bit for the ex-drug addicts. The crux of the matter is, where do we place them? I think they should be placed in jobs which will not lead them back to drugs.

The last point made by the Member concerns the relapse rate, when he says, the longer the period the higher the percentage of relapse. I am sorry I attributed that remark to the Member for Kampong Kembangan. I withdraw that. I should not attribute that wise remark to the Member for Kim Seng.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, the Minister has not, in fact, replied to the question of relapses posed by my friend, the Member for Kim Seng. From the figure of 8,732 ex-addicts, 3,200 of them, or 36.8% had relapses. He then gave a figure of 358 ex-addicts against 238 relapses, that is, 66.7%. He has not clarified that point.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I agree that it is quite complicated. May I explain again? The first figure I gave was 36.6%. This is the relapse rate out of over 8,000 ex-addicts, of over 3,000. As I have said, the figure was calculated from a figure of over 3,000 as a percentage of the base of over 8,000. That is why we get 36%. We have not specified the period. But once we start specifying the period of two years, then we will get a higher relapse rate. That proves the point made by the Member for Kim Seng. That is why it went up to over 66%. That is the position. But as I have said, as far as the 66% rate of recidivism is concerned, it is too early to say anything because we have only over 300 supervisees who have undergone the two-year period of supervision. I think we must wait for another six or nine months when more drug supervisees would have undergone the two-year period of supervision before we can come to a definite figure of relapse. I hope the rate of recidivism will be as low as it is reasonably possible to achieve.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, in that case, it would appear that these would be the hard-core addicts. Apart from the reasons advanced by the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs of the 67 posts of supervisors that are being provided foL I have mentioned that that number of posts is hardly sufficient, to which he has replied. My question now is whether the relapse is also partly due to the availability of drugs. No doubt, some of the addicts have gone on to some other forms of drugs, like barbiturates, MX pills etc., but he has not actually replied to this point raised.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, the relapse is due to a number of factors, and not just an inadequate number of supervision officers One of the main factors is the weak character of the addict and his family support. If someone can bring him back to his family, always reminding him not to mix with bad company, and he has a steady job, there may not be a relapse. But if he goes back to his former surroundings or former so-called friends who had taken to drug addiction, there may be a relapse. Of course, enforcement is also important. If a reformed drug addict has ready access to drugs, then he may be tempted to go back to drugs. But there are a number of factors. I cannot say if any one factor is responsible for the relapse. This is something which we will have to study further in depth, and perhaps come up with some solution and innovation.

I think I have forgotten to answer the Member for Kolam Ayer's question. He said that the Misuse of Drugs Act has been amended once every two years. We amended it because, as I have said, this is a frontier subject. We do not know the total solution. But we are now in a position to know fairly well what the problem is and how to tackle it. I can assure the Member that we do not propose to amend the Misuse of Drugs Act at the moment. Our object is to improve upon our measures on rehabilitation. This is our main emphasis at the moment and it is being directed on the hard-core addicts.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I think we are all very pleased with the reply and the assurances given. We should all congratulate his Ministry for having done good work so far. I think more good work can be done. I hope the Minister will continue along this virtuous path and let us hope he is the last frontier man.

With the explanation that has been given, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code QH-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I would like to ask the Hon. Minister what are the present criteria in assessing applications for Singapore citizenship? For instance, at the time of application a person may be a labourer. After some years he becomes a successful hawker, but this reduces his chances of being granted Singapore citizenship. At present Singapore citizenship may be granted to a non-citizen worker, if he has been employed in a recognised skill trade for five years or more with the same employer. Can consideration be given to other categories of applicants? For instance, (a) persons who have less than five years' service with the same employer but have obtained an acceptable higher skill; (b) elderly persons who are unemployed but in continuous residence for more than 10 years and are well supported by their families; (c) applicants without documentary evidence but were born in Singapore and can substantiate their length of residence through school records or employment records.

Another point I would like to raise is this. Whenever Members of Parliament ask for details about application for citizenship, they usually receive the standard reply on cyclostyled forms. Two standard replies are usually given: (1) states that the application is still under consideration and the result will be made known in due course. This can go on for years. (2) rejection of application without any reasons. 6.45 p.m.

Why can the Registrar not inform applicants of the reasons why consideration cannot be given for the time being, or why the application was rejected? For instance, if a person takes an educational examination or even a driving test, if he fails he is informed of his inadequacy of the subject so that he can improve upon it when he next goes for his test.

As you are aware, Sir, the personal status of applications for citizenship may improve over a period of time. Such changes may enhance his prospects. In other words, the changes may meet the criteria for the granting of citizenship. Take, for instance, applications for Housing Board flats. If the HDB discovers that the total family income of an applicant has exceeded the maximum ceiling, the applicant is told that his application would be cancelled. I suggest that the Registrar should inform applicants that if their applications are rejected, they could reapply again stating fresh grounds. And, secondly, if an application has been under consideration for a length of time, the applicant should be advised to submit further information on his status, so as to enhance his prospects of getting Singapore citizenship.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, this subject has been the object of so much debate year in year out.

The Chairman: Dr Ong, are you speaking on amendment (15)?

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the same subject. I somewhat feel tired having to raise this subject again. But as MPs, we have our work to do. We have our constituents to attend to, and they keep on coming back. When I first started in 1972, I had people who applied for citizenship coming to see me. In 1973 I met the same faces. In 1974 I went away for a short while. I came back, and I still find the same people. They keep coming back. It does not bother the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs. It certainly bothers us!

Mr Chua Sian Chin: I am also an MP you know!

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Perhaps the Hon. Minister has developed a certain immunity towards this problem. We still have not. We are not as hardened as he is.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I really hate to go on. But this subject has been raised and I -

The Acting Minister for Social Affairs (Dr Ahmad Mattar): You sound reluctant!

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Yes, I sound reluctant, not because I am reluctant to speak but because I am reluctant to hear the same replies!

Sir, on 31st July last year, the Hon. Minister in reply to a question by the Member for Kolam Ayer elaborated in fair detail the criteria for citizenship, and he gave about four qualities that are desirable for an applicant to become a Singapore citizen, and he gave seven qualities that are undesirable. The desirable qualities are: must possess a recognised professional, university or technical qualification; must be skilled or semi-skilled, entrepreneur or investor providing jobs; and must complete national service. Fair enough. I think these people are an asset to the country.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Do you agree?

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Yes, I do agree with the Minister. But, on the other hand, I am not so sure if I fully endorse the grounds that a candidate is a liability to the country. I have my reservation on the first one. He says:

'Persons who are likely to bring into Singapore wives, children or aged parents who are not citizens or permanent residents of Singapore;'

The Chairman: Dr Ong, would you like to identify the quotation?

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am glad that you are also impatient with this subject. When we go on and on, there are certain characteristics that can be identified.

The Chairman: Dr Ong, you still have not identified the quotation.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I am coming to it very, very quickly. In essence, what I am trying to say -

The Chairman: Dr Ong, I am asking you to quote the source for identification purposes.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, it is in Hansard, Vol. 37, No. 19, col. 1600. Sir, I think there are many applicants for Singapore citizenship but who may not necessarily fall into distinct lots as the Minister has defined them. As the Member for Toa Payoh has mentioned, some of the applicants might have just gone past their productive years. Nevertheless, they have contributed to the country's progress, brought up good citizens and that the problem of giving them citizenship should, I think, be duly considered. I am glad that last year the Minister said that applicants with family roots would be given special consideration. I just wonder how many people in this category were given citizenship and, if possible, the number of applicants who were successful. I was really quite disturbed that we have, in fact, a figure of 23,700 at the end of 1977, and that so many of these people have, in fact, satisfied the basic qualification of residence in Singapore. Unless this issue is resolved, year in year out, we are going to reiterate the same problems.

I am sure, as the Hon. Minister has stated on several occasions, that, depending on the social and economic situation in Singapore, these laws governing citizenship may be reviewed. In many ways some of the social and economic conditions in Singapore have changed over the years and perhaps, in the light of new circumstances, he may wish to consider making the award of citizenship a more possible, a more accessible or closer goal for many of these people who have, in fact, lived here and have families here, have contributed towards the prosperity and the overall good of our society.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I reply to the Member for Kim Seng first? He is a bit impatient. So I will reply to him first.

The Member quoted the backlog of cases for 1977 which was over 23,000. He quoted from Hansard It is true. May I say that this year the position has improved.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Very good.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, may I give him some figures to make him a little happy? During 1978 and the first two months of 1979, the Registry of Citizenship received 14,388 applications for citizenship. During the same period, 10,156 applications were approved.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: That is very good.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: But 8,162 applications were rejected. On 28th February 1979, 18,948 applications were pending, which is an improvement over the 23,000 pending at the end of 1977. So it is not that bad.

May I explain why there is a backlog of cases? It is mainly due to the fact that those who were rejected again file their applications almost immediately, although their income and family circumstances, etc., have not changed in any way to improve their chances of citizenship.

Then the Member asked me about those applicants who have strong family roots and who are the only non-citizen member in the family. May I say that we have been granting citizenship very liberally to this category of applicants. In fact, the number of applications approved has been increased by this category of cases. Sir, I cannot tell the Member offhand how many of these cases were approved. But I can assure him that there were quite a number of such cases.

The Member quoted my answer to a previous Question from the Member for Kolam Ayer regarding the criteria for the grant of citizenship. He agreed with some of the criteria but he had reservations on the criteria of liability to the country. May I say that the grant of citizenship is not a right. It is important that when a person is granted citizenship, he should not be a burden to the country. That is the most important thing. There are also other criteria, one of which, of course, is character. If a person is of bad character, I do not think he deserves citizenship.

Sir, turning to the Member for Toa Payoh, he wanted to know whether if a person who started off as a worker with a low income -

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: As a labourer.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: A labourer with low income and then became a hawker earning a high income, whether he would be granted citizenship. Of course, there are other factors to be considered. As I said, if he can satisfy the criterion in respect of income, it means that he will not be a liability to the country, and therefore his chances are better.

Then the Member asked me what if the applicant became a skilled worker. There again, if he is a skilled worker, his chances of getting citizenship are that much better.

The Member for Toa Payoh asked me whether elderly people with strong family roots in Singapore and are supported by their children could be granted Singapore citizenship. May I repeat again that, as far as the policy is concerned, those who have strong family roots in Singapore and are unlikely to become a burden to Singapore will be given favourable consideration. However, in granting citizenship to elderly applicants, may I add that we must be certain that there is little likelihood of the children, who are now supporting them, later on abandoning their support. We must also consider the factor, whether the desire for citizenship is not just to get places for the parents in the Home for the Aged, because that will increase our problems. 7.00 p.m.

He also asked whether or not special consideration for citizenship would be given to applicants who claimed to be born in Singapore but were unable to produce documentary evidence to support their claim. I say it is not possible to concede that. May I explain why? If we do so, many people who were not born in Singapore will claim birth in Singapore just to obtain that special consideration. May I add that, by and large, people who cannot produce a birth certificate to prove birth in Singapore are able to produce other documentary evidence. On the other hand, I agree that there may be a number of persons who were genuinely born in Singapore but unfortunately were not able to produce proof of it. As I said before, in answer to the Member for Kim Seng, the Government has and will continue to give special consideration to applicants who are blue identity card holders and who are the only non-citizen members in the family. If they were genuinely born in Singapore, by and large, they would come under this category. So they would be given special consideration.

As regards giving reasons for rejection, may I say that it is not as simple as all that. A number of factors have to be considered before citizenship applications are approved. One of them is character of the applicant, and so on. It is not possible to state all that in the reply to the applicant. It could lead to interminable argument, particularly when grant of citizenship is not a right. It is quite different from applying for a Housing and Development Board flat where there is a clear income limit placed on the applicant.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, in his reply the Minister has stated that quite a high proportion of those who have been rejected have reapplied immediately. That is the reason why some kind of reason has to be given to avoid such a situation where an applicant who has been rejected immediately applies again the following day. This has created a lot of problems not only for me, but I believe for many other Members in this House. A simple reply stating for instance, "Your application is unsuccessful unless you can furnish fresh grounds", will I think help a lot.

But as far as the employment of skilled workers is concerned, at the moment why is this prerogative given to employers only - that of certifying that an employee has been in employment for five years or more and has attained a certain level of skill? Can an applicant on his own not obtain such certification from an institution of higher learning, certifying that he has attained a certain level of skill, rather than depending on the employer alone? Because if he is totally dependent on his employer, we are just leaving him to the mercy of the employer. Even if the employee has shown ability in a skilled trade, if for one reason or other the employer does not like him, then the employer would not support his application for a Singapore citizenship.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, on his first supplementary question as to why he cannot state in the refusal notification that, "If you have further grounds, you may then reapply", the reason is that it begets another question which is, "What are the further grounds?" And so it goes on. It will set off a chain of interminable correspondence. The point is, as I said, the person will know the various criteria in the granting of citizenship. When an application has been rejected, the applicant should more or less know that if he applies again almost immediately, he certainly will not get it. But later on if there is a change in, say, his income, then maybe his chances of getting citizenship would increase, and therefore there is hope for him when he reapplies.

Haji Rahmat bin Kenap (Geylang Serai): ( In Malay): Sir, in my constituency there is one family in which three of the children have got a pink identity card, but unfortunately the last child has got a blue identity card. Can the Minister inform us of the reasons?

Mr Chua Sian Chin: I believe the Member for Geylang Serai has a case where the applicant is the only non-citizen in the family. If he can let me know the details of the application, I will look into the matter. But the point is this. There are other factors as well to consider in granting citizenship; as I said, character, background, and so on. If the applicant is the only non-citizen in the family, his chances are very good. So I invite him to let me have the details, and I will look into the matter.

The other point which I have to answer the Member for Toa Payoh is about skilled workmen. There again skill is one of the factors. There may be other factors. Whether or not the employer supports his application is something which I do not think the Citizenship Registry should get itself involved. So long as the Citizenship Registry is satisfied that the applicant has got skills and that he will be an asset to Sin a ore and not be a burden, then his application will be favourably considered.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister. How does he define "strong family roots". This is one aspect of policy which can solve many problems. If he can clarify, we Members of Parliament will be in a better position to help our constituents in regard to applications for citizenship.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Of course, there is a range. A clear example would be if the person is the only non-citizen in the family, that means, his father, mother and brothers are Singapore citizens, then he definitely has got strong family roots in Singapore.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, I am afraid I have to bring up again this question of giving reasons for rejection. It is easy to say, "Your application is rejected" without giving any reasons. The applicant will therefore reapply. This gives a lot of inconvenience not only to Members of Parliament but also to the Registrar himself. Could the Minister consider giving an appropriate reply? For instance, an applicant should submit his application in duplicate. So in the first instance, he will have a record of the grounds for application. Then if he should apply again, but this time he cannot provide further grounds, Members of Parliament can advise him that since he is unable to provide further grounds, there is no possibility of his getting the application considered. In this way, a lot of unnecessary confrontation with applicants can be avoided.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: I have said in public the set of criteria for the grant of citizenship, and that criteria can be used by persons who apply, and for Members of Parliament to explain. We cannot and we should not give the reasons in our notice of rejection. There may be a number of reasons why an application has been rejected. If we state the reasons, it can lead to interminable arguments. In fact, the arguments in this debate appear to be interminable. What more if we have it stated in the reply. Because then the applicant will say, "Why must I come under this and that criteria?"

I would agree if this is a matter of right. But this is not a matter of right. The grant of citizenship is a privilege and the Authority reserves the right to consider the application on its own merit and make a decision, because the Authority concerned must bear in mind its authority. As the Member for Kim Seng says, "I also have my work and responsibility as a Member of Parliament", so also do I have my work and responsibility as a Minister in looking after the interests of the citizens of Singapore. Our first responsibility is to the citizens of Singapore and the grant of citizenship is a privilege given to non-citizens to become our citizens.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): Sir, I stand to be corrected. I do not know whether applications for citizenship are still processed by an advisory committee. If they are, I would suggest to the Minister that perhaps some of the Backbenchers could be invited to sit in the committee so that they will appreciate the difficulties of the Registrar in not granting citizenship to some of the applicants.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, there is such an advisory committee. But membership is limited in number. If we were to invite Backbenchers to sit in the committee, we have to discontinue membership of some of them. But I will think about the point brought up by the Member for Jurong. Whatever it is, I am quite prepared to discuss the question of citizenship, the criteria and so on, in this House or outside the House. If Members have any more questions, I am prepared to answer them.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, in order not to prolong the argument in the hope that the Minister will seriously look into some of the points raised in this House, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment (15), Dr Ong is not speaking. 7.15 p.m.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code QH-04 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I just want to raise a few points with the Hon. Minister with regard to Immigration. At present, Employment Passes are given to people from Thailand, India and other countries for them to work in Singapore. I would like to ask the Minister whether consideration could be given to allow dependants of Singapore citizens and permanent residents living outside Singapore to work here. At present, such people are only granted Social Visit Passes and are not allowed to seek employment in Singapore. Surely these people find it easier to fit into our social system.

The second point I would like to raise concerns work permit holders who have breached the regulation on marriages under the Employment Act, whereby one party is barred from entering Singapore for a period of up to two years. This penalty has created a lot of social problems for those who have married against the regulations and have offsprings. I have come across instances where one party who is residing in Kuala Lumpur and another in Ipoh have to travel all the way down to Johore Bahru to meet their spouses for the sake of a family reunion. This is causing undue hardship. I am not suggesting that we should waive all penalties, but would the Minister consider granting Social Visit Passes to such people on compassionate grounds to visit their families in Singapore?

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, may I answer the first point about spouses and children of citizens or permanent residents who are in Singapore on Social Visit Passes and are precluded from seeking employment. May I clarify that there is no such rule? They are not precluded from seeking employment, but before taking on any job they must apply for a work permit if the job does not pay more than $750 per month. In other words, they are treated in the same way as the other job-seekers who apply for work permits. I think they should not be treated more favourably or unfavourably. So long as they satisfy the criteria laid down by the Ministry of Labour for the grant of work permits, they will be granted work permits. But before they work they must apply for a work permit. That is our policy and it is a straightforward matter. For those who earn a salary of more than $750 per month they must apply for Employment Passes, and if they satisfy the criteria then they will be given Employment Passes.

The second question is on work permit holders who have defied the Commissioner for Employment in respect of marriage. Their predicament has been brought about by their own selves. Although this is a Ministry of Labour matter, I think it is a policy which has been made known. They have defied the regulations of the Commissioner for Employment and they should know the consequences before embarking on such a marriage. In the work permit policy I think there is a way in which the couple may be able to be together and, that is, to sign a sterilisation bond. That being so, there is no case for a relaxation of the present work permit policy. Therefore, before a couple marry they should first apply to the Commissioner for Employment for permission.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, I am not suggesting that we should relax the regulations on the issue of work permits. If they have breached the regulations of the Commissioner for Employment and they cannot get a work permit, it is fair enough. But the question is that they are debarred from entering Singapore for a period of time. Let us not forget that many of these people are young and they have been misled into getting married in Malaysia and not in Singapore. So there is no way for the Commissioner for Employment to allow them to get married, even on the condition that they sign a sterilisation bond. This is a different category altogether.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, it is not a different category altogether. It is because they know that if they apply for permission to get married they will not be granted. That is why they have gone across the Causeway to get married. It is the same. If we relax on this regulation, we are just allowing them to circumvent the work permit policy. Although I am not in charge of work permit policy, I would like to point this out. It is not a different category. It is the same. If the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is in charge of the Immigration Department, issues Social Visit Passes to them, we would be undermining the work permit policy of the Ministry of Labour, which I think is not the right thing to do.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, in view of the Minister's reply, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $176,614,600 for Head Q ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $14,673,220 for Head Q ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.