ROAD TRAFFIC (AMENDMENT NO. 2) BILL

Order for Second Reading reed. 4.24 pm

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Chua Sian Chin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

With the growing affluence of the Singapore population, the number of vehicles on our roads has been increasing at a rate of 6-7% each year. Despite fiscal disincentives in the form of higher Additional Registration Fees (ARF) and increased road taxes, car ownership has continued to grow. The motorcycle population grew even faster, at a rate of 8-10% each year, as there is no disincentive imposed on its ownership. In 1983, of the total number of 476,288 vehicles, 46% were motor cars and 30% motorcycles. The number of vehicles to population in the same year was 18,900 per 100,000 population compared to 13,100 per 100,000 population in 1978, an increase of 44%. On the other hand, there was only a small increase in our road mileage, from 2,263 km in 1978 to 2,568 km in 1983, an increase of 13%. This higher volume of vehicular traffic has resulted in greater congestion on our roads. It has also contributed to the rise in our accident rates.

In 1983, 49,777 traffic accidents were reported compared to 32,752 in 1978, which is an increase of 17,025 cases or 52%. Of the 216 who died in road accidents in 1983, 45 or 21% were due to speeding. In the course of pursuing the hell-riders, some of our Traffic Police officers also suffered injuries. From 1979 to 1983, and for the first seven months of this year, there were at least nine such cases.

The Traffic Police have responded to the situation by adopting both preventive as well as other remedial measures. It has embarked upon a plan to upgrade the training standards of drivers. At the same time, it has continued to educate the general public on the various aspects of road safety through campaigns, the mass media and schools. The Police have also stepped up enforcement by increasing patrols along roads and expressways where accidents used to occur, and are taking steps to enhance penalties for traffic offences.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, "hell-riding" or "hell-driving" activities by motorcyclists and motorists on our expressways and other roads have been a growing problem in the last few years. In 1981, there were 1,509 instances of hell-riding/driving reported; in 1982, 2,986 and last year 3,728. Such activities, often committed late at night and in the early hours of the morning, are not only a menace but also a nuisance to the public. Hell-riders race their vehicles beyond the maximum speed limits with total disregard for traffic rules. They not only endanger their own lives but also the lives of other road users.

In 1979, there were only nine known venues where hell-riding activities took place regularly. In 1983, 20 such venues were identified. From only a few youth groups connected with hell-riding, the Traffic Police have now identified some 57 organized groups. In 1979, 42 hell-riders were arrested, compared to 800 in 1983. There is also a link between hell-riders and the rising incidents of motorcycle thefts. In 1983, the Traffic Police arrested nine hell-riders on stolen motorcycles. Thirteen stolen motorcycles were also recovered when their riders abandoned them. Gambling and fights with an undertone of secret society involvement have also taken place in connection with hell-riding.

Over the years, the Traffic Police have stepped up their operations against hell-riding. In 1983, 61 operations were mounted and 4,620 vehicles were impounded for inspection of illegal modifications, compared to 729 vehicles in 1979. Although the operations resulted in many arrests, the punishments meted out to those convicted did not have a deterrent effect on such activities.

Hell-riders are charged under the Road Traffic Act for speeding, reckless or dangerous driving, and driving without care or reasonable consideration. Out of 179 convictions from 1981 to 1983, prison sentences were meted out only in eight cases. In five of the cases, imprisonment was for one day and, consequently, the culprits went home when the court rose for the day. For the first seven months of this year, out of a total of 26 convictions, only one offender was sentenced to imprisonment for two months. In all the remaining cases, the culprits were only fined or fined plus disqualification. The fine imposed is normally less than $1,000. The continuous deployment of Traffic Police officers to pursue hell-riders/drivers and apprehend them is not only an unproductive use of manpower but is also dangerous to the enforcement officers as well as to the culprits and other road users. The Traffic Police have also been counselling all such offenders apprehended on the dangers of such activities, but to no avail. Heavier penalties are thus being sought virtually as a last resort.

In the first seven months of this year there were 1,252 reported cases of hell-riding. It is therefore timely to enhance the punishment to deter such menace on our roads. This Bill therefore seeks to provide mandatory imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months in addition to a fine of not less than $1,000 and not more than $2,000 for a first offence. For the second and subsequent offences, the penalty will be mandatory imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months in addition to a fine of not less than $2,000 and not more than $3,000. A person convicted of the offence of hell-riding will also be liable to be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence for a period of not less than 12 months from the date of conviction.

In addition to these penalties, the new laws also provide for the confiscation of vehicles used in the commission of the offence of hell-riding, even though no person may have been convicted of such offence. Hell-riding activities are rampant right now because a hell-rider can easily acquire a motorcycle on instalment payments under hire-purchase. Hell-riders are charged for speeding or dangerous/ reckless driving under the Road Traffic Act, but there is no provision in the Act to empower the Police to confiscate a vehicle used for such activities.

The forfeiture of vehicles used for hell-riding, irrespective of whether they were bought on hire-purchase or otherwise, would be an important deterrent to such activities as the hell-riders would lose their vehicles on conviction. When motorcycle traders are made to recover the cost of forfeited motorcycles from hell-riders through civil litigation, they would also exercise greater care in selling motorcycles to persons on hire-purchase.

I would like to point out to the House that there is a clear difference between speeding and hell-riding. A person will be charged for speeding if he drives a motor vehicle on a road at a speed greater than the speed which is prescribed as the maximum speed in relation to a vehicle of that class or description. On the other hand, a driver or rider who takes part in any competition or trial of speed shall be guilty of the offence of hell-riding. All enforcement officers on motorcycles are required to follow a speeding vehicle and clock its speed after 400 metres or so. A motorist who is merely speeding would therefore not be charged under the new provisions unless he had actually participated in a competition or trial of speed. Further, our Traffic Police officers have enough experience to know the difference between mere speeding and hell-riding. To constitute an offence under the proposed new section 68(3), there must at least be two vehicles travelling at fast speeds in competition. Other factors to constitute an offence would include deliberate overtaking of competing vehicles at high speed, taking corners at high speed in competition with another vehicle, disregarding traffic lights, and so on. Whether a motorist was racing or otherwise would have to be proven to the satisfaction of the court. There are, therefore, sufficient safeguards to protect them from prosecution for hell-driving/riding if they have not been involved in racing.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Chua Sian Chin].

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

Mr Deputy Speaker: I propose that we take a break here. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 5.10 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.40 pm until 5.70 pm. Sitting resumed at 5.10 pm