DEFERMENT/EXEMPTION FROM NATIONAL SERVICE (Particulars)

Mr Lim Boon Heng asked the Minister of Defence how many applications for deferment of and exemption from national service were received in 1981 and how many of these applications were granted and on what grounds.

The Minister of State of Defence (Dr Yeo Ning Hong) (for the Minister of Defence): Mr Speaker, Sir, persons liable for national service, but assessed by Mindef to be medically unfit, are given exemption from all forms of national service. In 1981, 1,425 registrants (meaning those who have registered for national service but have not been enlisted) were exempted. In the same year, of those who have been enlisted, 3,358 servicemen (including reservists) were exempted from further national service on medical grounds.

Applications for exemption on medical grounds are granted only if the person is certified by a Mindef Medical Board, consisting of three doctors, to be permanently unfit for national service. However, for those who possess GCE 'A' level qualifications, even if they are medically unfit, they will still be enlisted and will be posted to sedentary jobs instead of undergoing military training. This is to ensure that those who are medically unfit do not have an advantage over those who are fit in respect of entering the university. Many such cases help out in Government Ministries. They work under the supervision of experienced staff.

Each application for exemption on grounds other than medical grounds is examined by an Advisory Board consisting of prominent citizens and senior SAF officers. Most applications are made on grounds of financial hardship and every case is thoroughly investigated before the full facts are submitted to the Advisory Board. When the Board finds that a case merits special consideration, it will decide either (i) that financial assistance be provided during the full-time national service period, or (ii) that deferment of enlistment for full-time national service be granted, or (iii) that the applicant be permitted enlistment into the Vigilante Corps instead of the SAF, Police, or Fire Brigade.

In 1981, a total of 699 applications on grounds of financial hardship were received. Of these, 537 cases were rejected, 116 were offered financial assistance of up to $300 per month during their full-time national service; 21 had their enlistment deferred, and the remaining 24 were enlisted into the Vigilante Corps.

In addition to the deferment of enlistment for full-time national service granted to a few hardship cases, there are various deferment schemes for the following groups of registrants:

(a) Full-time students in Government or Government-aided schools, and other recognized educational institutions.

(b) Personnel in the essential uniformed services.

(c) Trainees in approved technical and vocational apprenticeship training schemes, and

(d) those who are temporarily medically unfit for national service.

For those who have performed their national service full-time, there is still the question of deferment from in-camp training. Reservists are now being informed six to 12 months in advance of the date of their next in-camp training. They can thus make the appropriate arrangements well ahead of time. Therefore, deferment from in-camp training is allowed only after Mindef is convinced that the circumstances are clearly beyond the control of the reservist and/or his employer. In 1981, only 5% of those called up for in-camp training were given deferment on their application. As the message gets through that reservists are given six to 12 months' prior notice for their in-camp training, there will be little ground to seek deferment. Mindef will therefore be tightening and will be stricter in granting further deferments for in-camp training.

By far the greatest proportion of applications for deferment of in-camp training comes from reservists who are officers and NCOs. This is because, generally, they hold more responsible positions in their civilian employment. Unfortunately, granting deferment to such reservists will also cause the greatest upset to the military units in which they serve. For example, if a Company Commander is deferred from in-camp training, all the soldiers who train under him in the Company will suffer as he and his men who have been used to his command will not be able to train together for that one year. This represents obviously a great loss. Reservists and their employers are, therefore, urged to assist the SAF, and to appreciate the situation in which we operate, and to extend to us their fullest cooperation and support in our arrangements for in-camp training.

Mr Eric Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Hon. Minister of State aware that there are occasions where in-camp training was requested twice during the year, a stretch of six weeks at a time, and this has interfered with a reservist's employment. A request was made for a deferment but this was turned down by Mindef.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Member can provide me with the details, I will provide him with a very detailed answer on the specific case. But if I may be permitted just to generalize, I suspect that in cases where very short notice has been given, the reservist had in the past another in-camp training deferred and therefore he had to do a make-up in-camp training. Secondly, it is possible that because of very special circumstances another officer had to be deferred at a very late notice and the second officer was then asked to assist, instead of allowing the whole company of national servicemen to operate without their Commanding Officer.

Encik Saidi Haji Shariff (Kaki Bukit): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek a clarification from the Minister of State? He has mentioned that hardship is accepted as one of the grounds for an exemption or deferment of national service. May I know the criteria how hardship is defined?

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Mr Speaker, Sir, hardship is not one of the grounds for exemption.