MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1986 TO 31ST MARCH, 1987

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head Q (cont.) -

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I was astonished to hear just now from the Member for Potong Pasir that he represents the Chinese Communist Party. He should realize that even up to now ---

Mr Chiam See Tong: Mr Speaker, I think that is a wild allegation. I do not represent the Chinese Communist Party, please. I wish that the Member for Serangoon Gardens withdraws that statement.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Mr Speaker, Sir, did we not hear him say that the Chinese Communist Party does not have any more ties with any communist movement in Southeast Asia? Up to now the Chinese Communist Party has not eschewed any such connection of ties with any communist party in Southeast Asia. Now if the Member for Potong Pasir says that the Chinese Government, ie, the Chinese Communist Party, has no longer any such ties with the communist movement in Southeast Asia, then obviously he knows more than we do.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Mr Speaker, the Member for Serangoon Gardens is purportedly to be a - is he a professor or an associate professor in political science? I was quoting the Prime Minister who said in America that Communist China does not export revolution. That is what I said.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Well, the implication of what he has said seems to me that he knows more about the policy of the Chinese Communist Party than most experts do.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I am quoting the Prime Minister.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Well, coming to the amendment, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to refer to an incident ---

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, does the Member for Serangoon Gardens withdraw his statement in regard to the fact that he said that I was a member of the Chinese Communist Party?

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Sir, I said that from what he spoke, it would seem that he represents the Chinese Communist Party. If he withdraws what he has said, then of course I will withdraw what I have said. Can I continue, Sir?

I would like to refer the Minister to the incident concerning the People's Association's East Coast Parkway Campsite which occurred on 9th January this year. According to the various reports in the newspapers, especially the Straits Times, it would seem that a band of pirates, supposedly pirates, landed on our shore, attacked the campsite and escaped with a loot of about $6,000. According to that report, the PA campsite was defended by a 64-year old guard who was armed only with a whistle. Sir, I would like to hear the Minister's version of this incident. According to various reports, this is not the first time that a raid has occurred on a site along the East Coast. Apparently, as far back as 1983, there were two such incidents which occurred at the East Coast Recreation Centre. And even before that, there were attempts at the Changi Sailing Club. These are stories which are reported in the papers. We are not quite sure whether they are true or not. That is why I would like to hear the Minister's version.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Why didn't you check them?

Dr Lau Teik Soon: I would like to hear the Minister's version. I am checking them now. The Member for Anson, if he will be patient, will hear the truth from the Minister.

If this story is true, then I think certain serious questions arise. If there had been past incidents of such a nature, why is it that the Marine Police did not take adequate measures to prevent such a recurrence?

I understand that the stretch of water between Pulau Tekong and Kusu Island is covered by only about eight Marine Police patrol boats. I do not know how far this is true. And that stretch of water covers about a quarter of our coastline. So the question I would like to raise now is, has the Marine Police sufficient manpower and equipment to safeguard the coastline?

Mr Tan Soo Khoon (Alexandra): Sir, I would like to speak on both my amendments. In fact, the first amendment on the Marine Police is exactly what the Member for Serangoon Gardens has just raised. It amazes me how pirates could have the audacity to come to our shores to raid the People's Association's Holiday Camp along the East Coast Parkway. Sir, I have met some people living around that area and they have expressed their concern over their own safety. Singapore is not a mere coastal village for pirates to come aboard and plunder. This is a modern city state. And it amazes me again how the pirates could have escaped the attention of our Marine Police who are supposed to patrol the coastal areas.

Sir, the next point I want to raise concerns the problem of road safety. For the last few years, we have seen with horror the statistics that showed that road deaths were increasing year after year. In 1985, fortunately, the number of road accidents involving injuries fell to 7,061. We have been told by the Minister for Home Affairs that this is the lowest figure in 25 years. Again, in 1985, there were only 265 deaths on our roads. Unfortunate, but heartening again to note that this figure is the lowest in five years.

Sir, there are two categories of road users who are most vulnerable to accidents and deaths on the roads. These are our pedestrians and our motorcyclists. I would like to find out from the Minister what plans there are to continue in our efforts to improve the situation.

Sir, another cause of accidents on our roads must involve that category of heavy vehicles. I have had the experience of seeing heavy vehicles, like containers, tearing down our roads as if they were racing tracks. I have seen bus drivers changing lanes, coming out of bus bays, oblivious to other road users.

Last year, when I brought up this subject of heavy vehicles, the Minister informed the House that he felt that existing penalties were inadequate and that he was looking into the possibility of amending the laws to have heavier penalties for accidents involving heavy vehicles. May I know what progress has been made in that direction?

As we all know, there are many causes of road accidents and many of the PAP Backbenchers have raised these over the last many years. For today, I would just like to point out three causes which I feel should be looked into to see whether the situation can be improved. First of all, the problem of people crossing roads. I am talking more about people crossing our expressways. Sir, again it is very amazing to see that there are many pedestrians crossing from one side of the Pan-Island Expressway (PIE) to the other side. Quite a few stretches of the PIE have got no barriers of any kind in the middle. Naturally, people are tempted to cross the PIE. Where there are barriers dividing the PIE in the middle, there will still be people who find it convenient to climb over the barriers in order to get to the other side.

Sir, another cause of road accidents, I feel, is the failure of motorists to give early signals as to their intentions on the roads. For instance, we see a lot of motorists changing lanes without indicating the signals of their vehicles. We see a lot of vehicles turning right or turning left without indicating their signals beforehand. There are many motorists who presume that just because they happen to be on the lane that allows them to turn right or on the left that allows them to turn left, they need not give early warning signals. I think this is very wrong and I would urge that the Traffic Police mount a campaign to educate motorists to give early warning signals as to their intentions.

The third cause of accidents which I want to highlight today is the fact that many vehicles stop indiscriminately on our roads, particularly on the right hand side of the roads, which is the side for fast moving traffic. Vehicles stop on the right hand side for a variety of reasons, chiefly to let passengers off or to pick up passengers. It is quite common to see a lot of vehicles including taxis doing such a thing.

Motorists also stop their vehicles suddenly on the right hand side because they want to post a letter and because the postbox happens to be located on the right hand side of the road. Or because there is a newspaper seller on the right hand side of the road. There are many examples of such poor location of postboxes, of newspaper sellers and even of telephone booths. I think part of this may be due to the fact that in the old days many of our roads were two-way streets. When these roads were converted into one-way streets, what used to be the left hand side became the right hand side. The mailboxes and the telephone booths were not removed. And motorists continue to stop indiscriminately and when they do so, vehicles from behind - some people have the habit of driving very close to the vehicle in front - just knock into them.

Sir, I hope the Minister will be able to look into these points.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two amendments. I suppose, before I begin, you would rather that I declare whether I have any pecuniary personal interest in these matters. The answer is no, Mr Speaker, Sir. Although, of course, I have acted for victims of police violence and for people who have been denied stay in this country as a result of the Immigration laws. I had in the past acted, yes.

The question that I propose to ask for the first half of my speech is: is Singapore a police state? I ask this notwithstanding what the Member for Clementi said about the police organizing disco nights for the youths and the setting up of neighbourhood police posts. The definition of a "police state", if I may attempt one, is a state where the police would appear to be exercising powers regardless of the question whether the powers are within the law, and exercising them with impunity to oppress the citizens, and the citizens feel helpless against the exercise of such powers.

Sir, the Member for Potong Pasir mentioned the case of Chia Thye Poh whose detention I had raised several times last year. Let me say categorically that if you detain persons on police allegations without bringing them to trial, then you have a police state. It is not just Mr Chia Thye Poh who is nearing 20 years of detention. We have more than a thousand of our people detained without trial on police allegations. So if you take that as a criterion, then you have a police state in Singapore.

But it is not just that. Let me give the Members of the House three cases, one of which I mentioned a few days ago. This is the case of a worker returning home at midnight after he had finished his work. Unfortunately, he did not have on him his identity card. He was stopped by the police and was hauled off to the police station. For what offence? Because he did not have his identity card. I have looked through the National Registration Act - I stand corrected by the Minister if he can tell me where it is - I cannot find that it is an offence for a person not to have on him his identity card when he is stopped by the police. There is an obligation on him to produce it to the police sometime or other. But this man was taken off to the police station and, as I said then, he was put into a cell and was there for 15 hours or so, till 3.00 pm. Then he was released without any charge preferred against him. During that time he was not allowed to telephone members of his family, because a telephone call to his family would have brought his identity card to the station. No charges were preferred and he was released. That is one instance.

The second instance concerns a shopkeeper in my own constituency, and I see that he wrote a letter to the Public Relations Department of the Police on the 16th February this year. His shop had been raided several times by the police on suspicion that he was carrying on bookmaking activities. No evidence was found and they went off. He says the latest incident was when they turned up at 4 o'clock in the afternoon when he had customers in his shop. Without so much as by or with your leave, they went in, ransacked the whole place, and when they could not find any evidence they then went away, without even a word of apology to the man. He says this is going on far too long and too often. So he has written to the Director of Public Relations Department. I do not know whether he had an answer to this.

Then I hear increasing stories of police violence. We have seen reports, even in the papers, of police resorting to violence upon arrest of persons in the streets. These are all manifestations of police violence; an excessive, zealous use of powers by the police. I hear time and time again of people who are taken into police stations and then assaulted violently. The police are getting very good at this. They are able to commit acts of battery without leaving any evidence of it.

I cannot emphasise too strongly, Sir, that in a democracy the police must be kept within the bounds of law. The question is, who will protect the people from the guardians if the guardians themselves do not uphold the law? The police are intended in their role to be the guardians of the people and of the law. May I know what steps the Ministry proposes to take to see that the police uphold the law first and foremost, and that the police will not resort to violence against our citizens on the simplest pretext. I have a definite case which I shall bring up on the Adjournment Motion. I will leave the details till then. But it clearly illustrates more than anything else what I say when I asked the question whether Singapore is a police state. The Minister glibly answered three days ago, "Oh, we don't do this. We inform the parents as soon as possible." Time and time again I get complaints that they are not given permission to telephone. I make a plea that the Ministry should direct all police officers that they should not treat all our citizens as criminals. Law-abiding citizens should not be made to feel that they are criminals. They should be made to feel that the police are on their side and that they do not have to battle with the police for their rights.

It may be necessary, Mr Speaker, Sir, for us to consider whether we should not introduce the practice in the United Kingdom of having Watch Committees in the various constituencies, or constituencies grouped together with the MPs on the Watch Committee amongst others, to guard against police abuse of powers and police violence. I just throw that suggestion to the Minister and ask whether we should not consider setting up Police Watch Committees.

The second half of my amendment concerns the immigration policies. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to deal with this in two parts, one concerning spouses, of which something has been said by the Member for Changkat. But, first of all, may I deal with the second part of the question, ie, of people in Singapore working on employment passes. Now we have a recession and I have been talking about workers not having enough employment. But there is also the very serious question of our graduates, our professional people, who are being disadvantaged by people from other countries. I want to know whether the Immigration Department is still very liberal in the granting of employment passes. Or will the Immigration Department take steps now to review all employment passes granted and to restrict the liberal grant of employment passes.

Only last night, Sir, somebody came to see me in my meet-the-people session. He is an ex-Republic of Singapore Air Force pilot trainee. He was in the 19th batch, he told me. He failed the advanced phase. He said, "Unfortunately I was not able to get through the advanced phase." So he left the Republic of Singapore Air Force. But he went on to get his commercial licence from the Singapore General Aviation Service. So he has a commercial licence for a pilot, but he said it was not one with an instrument rating. He said one could get that quite easily. He said he applied six times to our own airlines, Singapore Airlines, for the post of pilot. He has not been successful for several years. He said he was called up once and was told that there would be a series of interviews. But after having been seen once, he got a reply to his letter, "Thank you for your interest in SIA. We regret your application is not successful." He is a Singaporean, and he said he can pilot the planes that the Singapore Airlines flies; perhaps with some training even the Boeing 747. He said Singapore Airlines is employing too many expatriates when there are Singaporeans who could be doing the job. And he mentioned two or three of his colleagues who are also ex-Air Force pilots. He said they were all unable to get into the Singapore Airlines to fly the planes.

There was a letter in the Straits Times sometime ago complaining about the ease with which foreigners could get jobs in Singapore while Singaporeans were without jobs. So may I ask the Minister whether there will be any change in the policy of the Immigration Department as regards employment passes.

May I turn to the other question about the right of families to stay together, the right of a husband and wife to stay together, the right of children to stay with their parents. The Member for Changkat, I am glad, has raised this. But I see that she puts it on the level of economic productivity for Singapore, or on balance of convenience. I put it on a much higher footing, and I say that to send out the wife or the husband is to interfere with a fundamental basic right of the human being. Mr Speaker, Sir, I have with me six cases, I have got several but I only picked up six cases. The Member for Changkat is wrong if she thinks that Singapore men will be given permanent stay for their foreign wives whereas Singaore women will not be given permanent stay for their foreign husbands. I have had several Singapore men come to me ---

Dr Aline K. Wong: May I seek a clarification?

Mr Jeyaretnam: You may speak after this, please. I have had several Singapore men who have come to me to complain about their wives being asked to leave the country. There is a man who is married to a Thai citizen and then there is another one who is married to a Filipino, and of course I have a Singapore woman who is married to a Malaysian man. The important thing is they are not work permit holders, these spouses who have been asked to leave. They are genuine marriages contracted at the Singapore Registry of Marriages. I hope the Minister will not ask me, as the Minister of State did in a letter to the Straits Times, to point out the Article in the Constitution which says that the husband and wife could stay together. I am sorry the Minister of State thought that my reply was very violent. But I was, if I may say so, appalled that the Minister of State should be posing that question to me.

I say that this interference of the right of families to live together is a gross violation of the natural order of things. It interferes with a basic fundamental right, and it of course conflicts with all the international covenants on civil liberties and rights of individuals. The Minister three days ago said that most countries do not allow entry of foreign spouses into their country, and I asked him if he would list all the countries which do not allow the wives of citizens permanent residence in their country. I hope he has got the list for me this afternoon. Except for countries which do not accept the civilized code of behaviour, all countries recognize this basic family right. It has been even declared in a Court of Appeal decision in England that there is this fundamental right which the law must recognize. So I am not putting it on the level of whether they will be economically productive to Singapore or not. The thing that I find most distressing is that the persons who are not allowed to keep their wives or their husbands are the lower-paid. I have yet to know of a professional man or woman who is not being allowed to bring his wife or her husband into Singapore. But these people who have a little business, who are workers, they are told, "You cannot support your wife" or "Your husband is unable to support you." That, as I have said again and again, is thoroughly discriminatory against the less well-off people in our community, and I am thoroughly ashamed of all the discriminatory practices that go on in this country.

Dr Aline K. Wong: Just one point of clarification. The Member for Anson heard me wrong. My complaint to the Minister was that the foreign husbands of Singapore women have a more difficult time in getting PR than the foreign wives of Singapore men. What gives the Member for Anson the right to think that he alone is thinking about the problem on a so-called higher plane? Did I not speak on grounds of equality? Did I not speak on grounds of emotional difficulties and stresses?

The Chairman: Prof. Jayakumar, would you like to answer now because the guillotine time is 5.15 pm?

The Minister for Home Affairs (Prof. S. Jayakumar): Yes, Sir. Mr Speaker, Sir, I will deal with some of the points raised by hon. Members relating particularly to immigration, citizenship, fire service, civil defence, internal security, and my colleague, the Minister of State for Home Affairs, will deal with the other points which were raised.

Sir, may I take the points raised under Immigration first. Let me preface my remarks by making some general observations on our immigration policy and the considerations that inevitably must go into shaping our immigration policy. I understand perfectly well what the Member for Changkat said in the beginning of her statement. She said that she had many cases at the meet-the-people sessions. This has been told to me by other Members and I myself know it because, don't forget, I am also an MP. Perhaps it is even more difficult for the Minister of State for Home Affairs and the Minister for Home Affairs in dealing with immigration problems with their constituents. Other Members can say they will write to the Minister for Home Affairs, but it is not an answer which the Minister for Home Affairs can easily give!

Sir, our immigration policy must be shaped by the constraints, the problems and circumstances of our own country. Certain key statistics already indicate the dimensions of our problem. All of us know the size of our country, the available resources, the density of population, the scarcity of land which has been outlined by the Minister for National Development before. As a backdrop, last year more than 198,000 people applied for extension of the various passes. They are potentially long-term social visit pass holders and potential de facto permanent residents. More than 11,000 persons applied for permanent residence. Even though the Member for Anson paints Singapore as a terrible police state, there are 11,000 persons who want to be permanent residents, who are not fleeing away from the so-called police state.

As it is, we have about 130,000 permanent residents, each one of them a potential citizen. Last year there were more than 46,000 persons who overstayed illegally and they tried desperately to stay on in Singapore, even if it meant illegal presence. The ideal perhaps is to take a humanitarian approach to our problems: open the floodgates, let everyone who wants to become a permanent resident and citizen become a permanent resident and citizen. But every decision that we take on permanent residence or citizenship has implications for the rest of society. It has implications for the rest of Singaporeans, the vast majority of our citizens, because permanent residence and citizenship bring along with it not only rights but it also brings privileges to education, housing, medical and other facilities. When it comes to citizenship, it also brings along with it political rights of voting, standing for elections, and so on.

I would like Members to bear in mind these parameters, the realistic dimensions of our problems. I therefore do not hide the fact that we have a strict immigration policy but I make no apology for it because this is necessary by the very nature of our circumstances, our constraints and our problems. It would be disastrous to take a purely humanitarian approach to our immigration policy and to let in all who apply. We must and we will be cautious. Permanent residence and citizenship is not a right. It is a privilege. Persons will be assessed on the merits of each case. There is a balance between considerations of whether they will be an asset, useful to Singapore, together with considerations of compassion, connections with Singapore, family roots and so on. This is the backdrop which we must never lose sight of, for it is very easy and tempting to talk about a very liberal policy on immigration.

Let me now answer some of the specific points raised. The Member for Toa Payoh and the Member for Eunos asked me to shed some light on the problem of illegal immigrants and illegal overstayers. Perhaps that is a good point for me to start for it shows not only the dimension of the problems that we are having but it will also explain to all why is it that the Government, the Immigration Department and the Police have to take a very strict view on immigration matters and on illegal immigrants.

As of 16th March, 1986, there were 715 persons in our jail for overstaying, for being illegal immigrants. The number would have been more had we not repatriated others. There is an average of about 60 persons arrested weekly for illegal overstaying or illegal entry, and about an average of 32 are prosecuted weekly. Those then are the stark figures. Here again, bear in mind, the Member for Anson says we are a police state, but all these people want to come to Singapore even at the risk of arrest and prosecution. 715 persons in our jails. Last year over 46,000 persons were detected for overstaying. Of them, more than 4,500 were arrested as they had overstayed a long time.

As to what action is being taken on illegal workers, Sir, I am glad to say that the Immigration, Police, Ministry of Labour are very efficient. They have combined operations and it is very difficult for an illegal overstayer to escape detection and apprehension for too long. In December 1984, Members will recall that we amended the relevant laws to provide for enhanced penalties not only for illegal overstaying and illegal entry but also to penalize persons who harbour and employ illegal overstayers and illegal entrants. Action by Police, Immigration and Ministry of Labour will continue. Both overstayers and harbourers, including employers of illegal overstayers, must know, as they already know it, that it does not pay to engage in this activity for they cannot escape apprehension and prosecution.

If I may turn to the points raised by the Member for Changkat. She has raised several issues. First, she has advocated that the Ministry should devise a special scheme for artists and talented persons and that our approach should not be too narrow. Indeed, we have considered this and I would say that our approach is not narrow because there is a special scheme for those who are artistically inclined and outstanding in their own fields. It is not just MTI or PIPS or CATS which are the vetting authorities. There are other vetting authorities, for example, Ministry of Community Development, SBC, Ministry of Education, who are consulted in these cases, and I would like to say in response to her comment that even religious workers are considered for permanent residence.

As regards aged parents, while each case is considered on its own merits, I would like to inform her that we are sympathetic as far as possible, especially if the applicant has no other children to rely upon except the sponsor in that case. As for brothers and sisters, our policy is that if the person concerned is the only non- citizen in the family and is under 21, we are quite liberal and sympathetic. If the person is already of age, then we would want the person to qualify on his own merits, and here again we do not take an unsympathetic view if the person is the only non-citizen in the family.

As far as allowing persons, whether married or otherwise, to be here on long-term social visit pass, we do allow them extensions. Often these extensions are given up to three months in one year. Our concern will be really whether or not the grant of long-term social visit pass or repeated extensions will lead to a de facto permanent residence situation. That is one consequence we want to avoid, and for cases which she mentioned where extensions are necessary to allow persons to make arrangements we do give special consideration to such cases and we will continue to do so.

I understand her poignant call for equality between male and female spouses. Maybe she is right that this distinction between applicants for citizenship or permanent residence, male spouses and female spouses, has its origin in some peculiar aspect of Asian culture which decrees that the woman must follow the man. I would not like to completely extinguish her hopes for eventual change in this alleged discrimination! She should continue the fight and perhaps with more Members of the fairer sex in our Chamber they can win the hearts and minds of the policy-makers. But let me caution here that our understanding of the position in countries where they have taken a very liberal view on this is that it has led to an increase in the number of marriages of convenience. So we would want to watch out for that. She gave an example of a situation where the husband has been here working and providing for the family for 13 to 18 years. We will be prepared to look at this case, not necessarily on the grounds of marriage, but on the merits of the case and the fact that he has been here for such a long period of time.

She made references, I believe, to HDB and so on. This underlines the point that I made, ie, we must bear in mind that permanent residence and citizenship has privileges including that of housing and so on. But I would think that it is a wrong approach in shaping immigration policies to grant permanent residence because that person wants a particular privilege. That would be a wrong approach. In that case, then lots of people will be knocking at the doors of the Government wanting privileges and concessions which they would get only if they become permanent residents or citizens. I believe I have touched on most of the salient points.

While we are on immigration, the other day the Member for Anson raised the same points which were dealt with when he asked supplementary questions with regard to the question the Member for Clementi asked on spouses. Mr Speaker, Sir, what I said the other day was that the practice in most countries of the world is to make a distinction between grant of citizenship or permanent residence on the one hand and grant of entry and immigration on the other. That was what I said, and he can check the Hansard. My Ministry has consulted the embassies of as many countries as it could - Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, Brunei, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Japan, Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Germany, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Pakistan. My Ministry asked whether there is any automatic right of entry on the basis of marriage, and the answer is no. The only country where the answer was yes, was Switzerland.

The Member for Anson talked about violation of fundamental human rights. The point I would like to make is that both the Registry of Marriages as well as the Office of the Work Permit, Commissioner for Employment, make it very clear to the parties before they marry that marriage does not confer automatic rights of entry or permanent residence. If I may quote from the letter which is issued at the Registry of Marriages. I will not read the entire text:

'This is to inform you that your marriage to a Singapore citizen/permanent resident will not automatically confer on you the right to reside in Singapore permanently. Similarly, it will not automatically entitle you to the issue or renewal of any immigration pass to remain or work in Singapore.

The purpose of this notice is to inform you the position concerning the issue of entry permit for permanent residence or any other immigration passes to work or stay in Singapore.' And the party acknowledges receipt of this letter. Similarly, in work permit cases, where approval is given for marriage by the Commissioner for Employment, a similar letter is sent before marriage. It states, inter alia:

'Please note that the approval of marriage does not confer on the applicant the right to permanent residence in Singapore. Your continued stay in Singapore will normally be allowed if you are in employment.'

So, Sir, in view of this fact that parties prior to a marriage are placed on notice, I do not see how there can be a so-called "violation of fundamental human right".

Sir, may I now turn to the question of fire services which was raised by both the Member for Toa Payoh and the Member for Jalan Kayu. The number of fires in 1985 was 5,384. It was higher than in 1984 but lower than in 1981, 1982 or 1983. But the number of deaths in 1985 was high - 23. Many of the fires involved old buildings in which there were many people living in a rather congested situation.

The Members asked what would be the strategy and approach of the Fire Service. Basically, Sir, the approach of the Fire Department is not very different from the approach of the Police in preventing crime, and tackling crime. The key really is to try to prevent fires because once a fire occurs it is really a question of trying to limit the damage and put out the fire as soon as possible. If prevention is the key, then our strategy is to mobilize and harness the cooperation of the people as widely as possible. This means to increase public knowledge on the do's and don'ts, and to increase public understanding of what is necessary to prevent fires.

In this regard let me say that several steps have been taken. First, a National Fire Prevention Council has been formed and the members will be announced shortly. The purpose of the Council is to promote public awareness of fire safety and concern about outbreaks of fire and to secure public cooperation in establishing proper safeguards against loss of lives and properties in cases of fire. We hope that membership of the Council will be such that it will harness the support of the private sector, insurance sector, construction sector, and so on. Furthermore, in areas which are particularly vulnerable to fires, we are assisting the grassroots organizations there in establishing volunteer fire squads which will have the function of early alert and putting out incipient fires before the fire engines arrive. One has been formed in Chinatown and, if successful, we hope to form squads in other areas. We will also mount and step up publicity over television, press and other media to spread the message on the do's and dont's. Fire safety exhibitions will also be held. Finally, together with Civil Defence, we will encourage as many people to purchase a BCF fire extinguisher.

On the operational side, plans are in the pipeline to build five new fire stations and to relocate three others which will bring about a 15-fire station configuration which will help to reduce response time.

As far as the query about arson is concerned, arson has been suspected in some but not most of the cases, and investigations are going on. The Member for Jalan Kayu will be pleased to know that the Police and Fire Officers have been undergoing specialized fire and arson investigations.

Turning now to Civil Defence. I thank the Member for Jalan Kayu for his words of appreciation. I would really not want to single out any one particular group or unit for the effort in rescue operations when the hotel in Serangoon Road collapsed, because I think it was truly teamwork which we can all be proud of. It was indeed a very moving scene to see so many people - Singaporeans, foreigners, public sector, private sector, service personnel, non-service personnel, individuals, organizations working as a team, tirelessly and fearlessly, over so many days and nights, and many of them, in fact, risked their lives. I think it is a team effort in which the Civil Defence forces and volunteers also played their role. The Member also asked whether recognition will be given and the answer is yes. The Government has decided that recognition will be given to individuals and organizations who were directly involved in the rescue operations. A ceremony will be organized on a suitable date by Government to give commendations. Details as to the date, the function and the nature of the awards will be announced later.

As regards his comments on sustaining the interest of Civil Defence, I have taken note of his proposal for telematch. We will give it consideration. But he is right that Civil Defence is a long-term effort and we must find ways and means of sustaining the interest over a long period of time as more and more volunteers will be coming on to the scene. Training them in basic Civil Defence skills alone may not harness their continuing interest. Perhaps they will have to develop into a separate grassroots organization of their own, with their own camaraderie and special ethos. But he is right that Civil Defence is an integral part of Total Defence. I think we all would have wished that the hotel collapse could have been avoided but he may be right that that unfortunate event might have brought to the minds of all of us how important it is to take Civil Defence seriously, which means not only the SCDF but all of us have to play a part in understanding the importance of Civil Defence, and taking part seriously in exercises and drills which are being held from time to time.

Now I come to the point made by the Member for Potong Pasir. All of a sudden he has become an expert on communist insurrection! I do not know whether he listened to the comprehensive statement which I made on 31st August 1985 on the question of Chia Thye Poh and where I distributed fairly detailed papers to Members of the House. If he was here, obviously he did not listen, because if he had listened, he would not have made the point that he mentioned just now. His point is that there is no communist danger in Singapore, no possibility of communist insurrection or communist insurgency. I would prefer to rely on a political scientist such as the Member for Serangoon Gardens. Has not the Member for Potong Pasir heard of the Voice of Malayan Democracy, which is the CPM radio station which broadcasts even now?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Potong Pasir said that the Internal Security Act should be abolished. I dread really the day if he became the Minister for Home Affairs and abolished the Internal Security Act.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Can I just rise on a point of clarification?

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, I have only 10 minutes left. Please allow me to finish.

He claims that people are in a state of fear. It is really surprising that people, who are in a state of fear, could have elected two Members of the Opposition. I will not belabour the point about Chia Thye Poh. I have given a detailed statement in August 1985. I only need to stress what I said on that occasion - that Chia Thye Poh knows that he will be released if he gives an undertaking renouncing the use of force or, alternatively, he can be released to go to any country which is prepared to accept him.

The Member for Anson, and this is the last point I will deal with, joined the bandwagon and says that Singapore is a Police state; Police are acting in rampant and reckless disregard of the law. Surely, as the Member, a legal practitioner, he must know that if this is true, there must be many successful prosecutions brought against the Police for assault and violence. I think it is very irresponsible and very unfair to the Police for him to come here and make allegations that the Police are resorting to violence. Where are his facts? If Members had heard him, this is what he said, "I hear of increasing stories. I hear people telling me this." In other words, Sir, the easiest allegation one can make against the Police, and it is a reckless way of ridiculing the Police in any country, is to spread a rumour alleging that the Police engage in violence. Within the Police, there are strict checks and safeguards to investigate any allegation of assault. As the Minister for Home Affairs, let me say that not only the Police but the Ministry also takes a very serious view of any allegation of assault and investigates it. Why? Because the Police will not and do not condone or tolerate any black sheep in their midst who perpetrate acts of violence, and we will want to weed them out of the Police Force. Having said that, I think the Member for Anson has done disservice by coming here and, solely on hearsay evidence, mind you, and together with the Member for Potong Pasir, criticized the Internal Security Act on allegations of hearsay evidence. He comes here on hearsay evidence and tarnishes the entire Police Force, saying that violence is rampant. I think it is totally uncalled for and a totally irresponsible act.

I make no apologies for the criminal law preventive detention which he alluded to. Mr Speaker, Sir, as far as the Government is concerned, we would like to bring to book any criminal element in the courts of law. But we know that there are criminal elements, secret society gangsters, who we cannot bring to court under the normal processes because witnesses are terrified to testify in a court of law. The option therefore is: do we take into account the interests of the safety and security of our people, their ability to walk in the streets, live and work, with peace of mind? Or do we let loose all these criminals to harass, victimize and terrify our people? This Government has decided that if the normal processes of the law do not work, we cannot let loose these criminals on to our society. This is our responsibility and we intend to carry out the responsibility. If the Opposition Members come to power and they want to abolish the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act and let loose all these criminals, that is their option, of course.

Mr Speaker, Sir, my colleague, the Minister of State, will deal with the other points.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Sir, may I ask the Minister whether he is going to deal with the question of this boy who was kept for 15 hours? What is his answer to that?

Prof. Jayakumar: Be patient, Member for Anson. The Minister of State will reply.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Oh, I see. All right.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Can I check on a point of clarification? The PAP was in the Opposition right up to 1959. Did your Party not fight against the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance which later became the Internal Security Act?

Mr Jeyaretnam: Yes, they did.

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Member for Potong Pasir has the quotations which he claimed to recite earlier on, let us have the quotations and we can have a debate on another day.

The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Dr Lee Boon Yang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to begin on a subject which has a great importance and bearing on the future of our law enforcement and crime prevention policy.

Sir, the Member for Jalan Kayu spoke about the measures that the Police are taking with regard to community oriented policing and whether these efforts have achieved results. In the past, crime was seen primarily as a Police problem. The notion has changed in recent years due to efforts and successes by the Police to actively involve the community in crime prevention. The Neighbourhood Police Post system was introduced in 1983. It has played a pivotal role in the Police effort to win over the community's trust and cooperation. The close interaction between the Police and community made possible by locating these Neighbourhood Police Posts (NPP) in the housing estates and by the wide range of services that are provided greatly facilitate Police efforts to build up better rapport with the people.

The Police have also initiated the formation of 14 boys' clubs in various constituencies. These clubs foster a wide range of interesting and healthy activities for youths so that there is less likelihood of these youths being led astray by undesirable elements.

Community based organizations such as the Residents' Committees, Citizens' Consultative Committees, Community Centre Management Committees and the Neighbourhood Watch Scheme are also cooperating with the Police in moving towards crime prevention. They provide a valuable framework within which the public can help to keep crime rates low and to detect and apprehend offenders. The Neighbourhood Watch Scheme (NWS) has been widely promoted in public and private housing estates with the help of volunteers and over 200 Residents' Committees. This scheme helps to enhance the Police effort to prevent crime such as housebreaking and other petty offences in our housing estates.

Sir, in the commercial and industrial sector, the Police have been assisting tenants, shopkeepers, to form crime prevention committees. A total of 85 crime prevention committees have been formed during the past five years in various factories, shopping centres and other business premises. These crime prevention committees receive Police support. Police officers attend their meetings and regularly give advice on preventing crime in these premises.

Special efforts have also been made to harness the support of school children in crime prevention. Crime prevention talks are given in schools and through various incentive schemes such as awarding of crime prevention badges and Neighbourhood Watch Scheme badges help to generate interest in crime prevention among the children. Students from various schools are invited to crime prevention exhibitions to give them a better knowledge of what measures to take to protect themselves and their properties.

The National Crime Prevention Council is also actively supplementing the efforts of the Police in further promoting community oriented policing and to raise the general level of crime awareness among our people. All these measures taken by the Police have yielded positive results. For example, in Divisions where Neighbourhood Police Posts have been introduced, the number of reports lodged by the public increased substantially compared to those constituencies where Neighbourhood Police Posts have yet to be established. This would indicate that the public have accepted the Police as a person to turn to when they need advice on crime prevention and when they need assistance in reporting the occurrence of crime within their neighbourhood or any presence of suspicious characters that they have seen.

Sir, the statistics on serious offences in a constituency with a Neighbourhood Police Post compare very favourably with those in which the NPP has yet to be established. In the Toa Payoh Division, the number of police reports increased by 45% during the first year of the NPP operation. In the second year of NPP, there was a further increase of another 6%. Due to the growing willingness of the public to report crime occurrences and the presence of suspicious characters in their neighbourhoods, the number of criminals apprehended increased by 466 cases in the second year of the Toa Payoh NPP. Sir, likewise in Paya Lebar and Jurong Divisions, the number of police reports which were received showed a significant increase during the period after establishment of the NPP.

To further sustain this cooperation between the community and the Police, the Police have recently introduced a hot-line to provide members of the public with an additional channel to offer information to the Police. The Police hot-line was implemented on 31st January 1986. It is located at the Radio Division and is manned by experienced officers from Radio Division. Members of the public who are witnesses to crime or have information which can help in crime investigations are requested to call this hot-line. There will be Police officers available to take down the details and to act on the information supplied.

Regarding the Member for Leng Kee's point on the Neighbourhood Police Posts and the development programme of the NPPs, the overall plan is to implement a total of 91 NPPs by 1989, which is already a well-known fact. To date, 34 NPPs have been established in various constituencies. The eight NPPs in Toa Payoh Division have been in operation for over two years now. There are 12 NPPs in Jurong and Paya Lebar Divisions which have been in operation for a little over a year. Another 14 NPPs were introduced in December 1985 and January 1986, out of which 10 are located in Queenstown, three in Paya Lebar and one in Jurong. Over the next four years, the remaining 57 NPPs will be established at the rate of 14-15 per year. The reduction in established posts in the Police Department will not affect the schedule to provide all constituencies with NPPs by 1989.

The Member for Jalan Kayu would like to know when will he get his NPP. The two NPPs projected for Jalan Kayu Constituency will be set up in 1989. It is not possible, Sir, to bring forward the date of implementation of these two NPPs because there are many constraints. Ideally, we should implement it immediately and build NPPs in all the Constituencies straightaway. Unfortunately, we face constraints in manpower. We have to recruit the officers. We have to train them. And they have to be specially trained in community relations. They have to be trained to have a higher level of interpersonal skills because, as community oriented Police officers, they will be in very close contact with the residents. They will be expected to be not just crime fighters but also friends in need to all the residents in the neighbourhood. Sir, it is difficult to train sufficient numbers of officers for all the NPPs within a short period without affecting the quality of the service eventually.

However, the Member for Jalan Kayu should not be too worried. All is not lost. Pending the implementation of the NPPs in Jalan Kayu Constituency, the Police Division at Paya Lebar Station will continue to see to the needs of the residents. Whatever problems that may arise, they will receive the best service from the officers at Paya Lebar Police Station. The Member's constituents can also seek the services and assistance of nearby NPPs in Cheng San and Chong Boon. Officers from Paya Lebar Police Station are also performing vertical policing in the Jalan Kayu Constituency's highrise blocks.

Sir, I next turn to the Member for Clementi. He questioned the Police attempts to organize discos and other activities for the youths. Sir, this is not an instance of Government entering into private enterprise. Police are not organizing discos in competition with the many discos which have already established themselves. Sir, many of our youths have access to various recreational pursuits. However, there are always some who find it difficult to fit into any organized or structured activity. They have difficulty in adjusting to social environments. Instead they like to gather aimlessly in shopping centres, shopping malls, fast food outlets and even the void decks in our housing estates. These youths are not attracted to the usual type of activities which are more healthy and which would lead to a better character formation. Being young, exuberant and highly impressionable, they are often attracted by thrills and excitement. They are also vulnerable to a variety of influences, some of which are not at all that wholesome. If they are left alone and neglected by society, these undesirable influences may eventually prevail. Some of them would be led astray and could wander into crime.

Merely taking enforcement action against such youths is not the answer to their problem. The Police have therefore decided to embark on a persuasive approach. The Police will organize social activities which are more attractive to them. These activities provide opportunities for building up friendly relations between the Police and our youth. The objective is to win over their trust, respect and support.

Sir, in September 1985, during Police Week, the Police took the initiative to organize a Pop concert. It met with overwhelming support. Subsequently a series of youth oriented activities was launched in December 1985 and January 1986 to coincide with the long school vacation and the festive season. Disco was not the only activity included during this period. Other activities, such as visit to old folks' home, visit to homes for handicapped children, games, soccer matches, sepak takraw matches, cycling and picnicks were all part of this programme of activities for the youths. All the activities were organized with grassroots and community organizations support. The programme was carefully planned to cater to the diverse interest of youths. Besides providing entertainment and recreation, these activities also help to inculcate in these youths a commitment to the community and to people who are less well-off than them.

Has the Police gone too far in organizing these activities? Is there not a possibility that discos can also lead to some adverse influence? Sir, the discos were the Police way of introducing themselves to the youths. Through them, the Police were able to forge the initial bond of trust and respect. Through their informal contact with the Police, the youths will also have a better understanding of crime prevention and law enforcement. And hopefully learn to appreciate the Police and the work that they are doing.

Sir, the Member for Clementi who professed to indulge now and again the age-old game of mahjong ---

Mr Bernard Chen: Mr Speaker, Sir, I did not say that. I did not say I was a mahjong player.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: Point taken. The Member for Clementi did not indicate that he indulged in such activities. However, both the Member for Clementi and the Member for Leng Kee made the point that there is much concern among the public, particularly among the older generation who frequently and innocently indulge in games of mahjong in their homes. They are worried whether the harsh penalties that have recently been enacted will be brought down on their heads. Sir, the Betting (Amendment) Act and the Common Gaming Houses (Amendment) Act and the Road Vehicles (Special Powers)(Amendment) Act which came into operation on 25th February 1986, cover a wide variety of gambling offences. However, the thrust of the police action has been against operators of mini-turf clubs and betting information centres. These mini-turf clubs are operating in Housing Board estates. They have given rise to numerous complaints from residents concerning the tranquility and the security in their neighbourhood. It is a result of these complaints that the Police had to take action. In 1985 the police conducted a total of 7,125 raids on these mini-turf clubs. However, the raids were ineffective in stopping these illegal activities. It is only by enhancing the penalties which these illegal operators have to face that we hope to be able to control this menace from spreading and further despoiling the peaceful environment within our housing estates. In respect of other types of gambling, the Police enforcement action is directed mainly against the syndicated and organized gambling, such as those who conduct illegal bookmaking in their premises, illegal 4-D operations, chap ji kee and gambling dens or common gaming houses.

Let me assure Members of the House that the Police will not normally act against ordinary citizens playing mahjong or other games in their homes with their friends and relatives, unless there is evidence to show that their premises are, in fact, being used as a common gaming house. On the other hand, if the Police received complaints about noise pollution and nuisance generated by such gambling activities, then the Police will have to respond and they will have to act to stop such nuisance. In general, the Police will deal with such cases by advising the people concerned to have more consideration for their neighbours, not to make too much noise, not to disturb their neighbours. It is not the intention of the Police to arrest old ladies or housewives who play a game of mahjong or other games in the privacy of their home for amusement. If they do not cause a nuisance to others, police will not intervene. Sir, I too have heard such complaints from my constituents. They tell me that there is a rumour going around that Police will be arresting all and sundry who indulge in games of mahjong. I would like to dispel this notion of indiscriminate action, and to point out that there are many operators of illegal gambling premises, gambling dens, mini-turf clubs, who wanting to continue with their illegal operations are very keen to discredit the Police. So there is no need to be alarmed by such rumours so long as one is law-abiding and participate in wholesome activities.

Sir, I would like now to come to the point raised by the Member for Anson about this so-called innocent worker returning home past midnight, and was suddenly arrested and brought to a police station for not having an identity card. The Member for Anson said that he was not allowed to contact anybody in his family. If the Member for Anson is so certain of his details, should he not perhaps provide us in this House with the details, with the facts of the case so that a proper investigation can be carried out, rather than making accusations and repeating hearsays in this chamber.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I made a report in the Joo Chiat Police Station on the lst of March. You could ask them.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: Did you then take up this case, write to the Officer-in-Charge of the Joo Chiat Police Station to obtain details and to ask for his assistance to investigate?

Mr Jeyaretnam: I am bringing it up here. You investigate. Tell me.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: Besides just saying that he made a report in Joo Chiat Police Station, if the Member could give us the details, such as who was involved, will we conduct a proper investigation and we will be able to answer his allegations. If he is not able to bring up details other than hearsay or whisper, then there is no point in carrying on with this discussion.

Mr Jeyaretnam: You go and ask Joo Chiat Police Station. You check up their records, 1st March.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: Would you be prepared to let us have the details?

Mr Jeyaretnam: If you would like me to send it to you, yes.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: I look forward to receiving your details.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Order a full investigation into it.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: A full investigation is always undertaken whenever there is an allegation of wrongdoing against the Police. Let me assure Members of this House, whether this allegation comes from the Member for Anson or from any member of the public, the Police takes its duty seriously and do not exercise powers beyond what is allowed by the law.

Mr Jeyaretnam: You will hear more of this when I move the Adjournment Motion.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: Sir, in the next few minutes left to me, I think I would just take up the point made by the Member for Jalan Kayu on traffic.

Sir, the Member for Jalan Kayu asked for more details on the recent improvement in the rates of road accident. Compared to 1984 there was a signficant drop in the number of accidents and casualties on our roads. Fatal accidents dropped by 22.3%, and those with injuries by 19.3%. Sir, the most significant drop was accidents casualties involving pedestrians and motorcyclists. The number of pedestrians killed in road accidents decreased from 114 in 1984 to 75 in 1985, a decrease of about 34%. The number of motorcyclists killed also showed a decrease of about 28%.

Sir, the Traffic Police anticipate that the accident rate will further decrease following the introduction of a series of measures recently. These include the banning of learner-drivers on public roads, compulsory circuit driving, training and testing for learner-drivers and riders, and the introduction of the breathalyser for suspected drunken motorists. In addition the Traffic Police will tackle the problem from two other angles, namely, by further improving and intensifying their efforts in enforcement and education.

The Member for Alexandra pointed out that heavy vehicles are often involved in fatal accidents and that because of the nature of these vehicles they cause serious injuries. 5.15 pm

The Chairman: It is guillotine time.

Dr Aline K. Wong: In view of the replies given by the Minister of State and the Minister, I beg to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $384,284,680 for Head Q ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $55,000,000 for Head Q ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: I shall now deal with the remaining heads of expenditure in respect of which no amendment stands on the Order Paper Supplement. In respect of the Main Estimates, they are Heads B, C, D, F, G, H, S, W and Y.

I propose to take those heads of expenditure en bloc.

Question, "That the sums stated for those heads of expenditure which appear in the last column of the Schedule of Estimated Expenditure under the Main Estimates on page 25 of Paper Cmd. 6 of 1986 stand part of the Main Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987," put and agreed to.

The Chairman: In respect of the Development Estimates, the remaining Head is Head S.

The sum of $27,736,000 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Question, "That the sum of $11,867,713,120 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Main Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987, contained in Paper Cmd. 6 of 1986," put, and agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $13,520,370,300 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987, contained in Paper Cmd. 6 of 1986," put, and agreed to.

Resolutions to be reported.

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

The Minister for Finance (Dr Hu Tsu Tau): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions.

First Resolution reported -

"That the sum of $11,867,713,120 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Main Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987, contained in Paper Cmd. 6 of 1986."

Second Resolution reported -

"That the sum of $13,520,370,300 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987, contained in Paper Cmd. 6 of 1986."

Dr Hu Tsu Tau: Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions."

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolutions accordingly agreed to.