REQUISITION OF RESOURCES (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

The Second Minister for Defence (Services) (BG Lee Hsien Loong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Civil resources are as important a component of the SAF's operational preparedness as reservists. We must be able to requisition resources as quickly as we can mobilize reservists. The systems for mobilizing both of them must fit together. The amendments to the Requisition of Resources Act do this. They provide for the same means of requisition and the same presumptions of knowledge as in the Enlistment Act. This will also help us react more quickly to civil disasters, such as the Hotel New World incident.

However, two differences arise because civil resource owners are not only individual persons but also companies, corporations or firms. Firstly, the persons responsible for these entities are the partners of the firm or the directors, managers or secretaries of the companies or corporations, or their authorized agents. Already under the Companies Act, such persons have locus standi to act in all matters relating to the affairs of these entities. Section 41(2)(a) therefore specifies that these persons can receive requisition orders over the telephone. Knowledge of the requisition order by these persons is knowledge by their respective entities.

Sections 41(3)(c), (d) and (f) provide for requisition orders also to be served by telephone, facsimile, telex and other means of telecommunication at the last known place of business or registered office of the entity.

Secondly, most civil resource owners do not conduct their businesses from home. Therefore, section 41(4)(d) specifies that when a requisition order is received at home by a member of the civil resource owner's family, there is only a rebuttable presumption of knowledge of the order. The civil resource owner is only deemed to have knowledge of the order six hours afterwards. This is unlike the position under the amended Enlistment Act, where the reservist is immediately deemed to have been informed of a mobilization order which was communicated to a family member.

The Bill requires the text of the announcement over the radio or television for mobilization and requisition to be prescribed in regulations. These regulations will be duly promulgated when these amendments become law. They will provide only for a symbol or codeword to be flashed over television or announced over the radio, rather than the full text of the order for mobilization or requisition.

Mindef will carry out exercises to familiarize civil resource owners with this new system of requisition and to break in the system. Civil resource owners have responded well in previous exercises. Mindef is confident that they will continue to be responsive in future.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Dr Ong Chit Chung (Bukit Batok): Sir, I rise to support this Bill.

Sir, it is heartening to note that many of our corporations and companies give full cooperation and support to this mobilization of civil resources. In fact, I know that many of them have declined payment or compensation for the work they have done for the nation. We can conclude from this that many of our businessmen have taken to heart Machiaevelli's statement that there will be no prosperity without adequate defence. I think they are fully aware of the fate of city states of Florence and Milan during Machiaevelli's time which fell under foreign domination because of their neglect of defence while pursuing prosperity. This, I know, will not be the fate of our nation with the support of these businessmen.

It seems, therefore, that the message of total defence where you could not divide civil and military resources has permeated throughout society. The question here I would like to raise is whether these cooperative and supportive companies and corporations are given their due recognition by the Ministry of Defence and by society in general. I am aware that there is a parallel scheme of recognition to reservist employers for their full cooperation in the call-up of reservists. I wonder whether the Ministry of Defence will consider such similar scheme or recognition, though it may be a token recognition, to endorse and to encourage all these civilian businessmen and companies who give full support to this mobilization of resources.

I support the Bill.

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I will ask Mindef to look into the matter. We are grateful for the support we have received from civil resource owners and from reservists and from employers. Contrary to what some people believe, we have a very strong national consensus on total defence. And the SAF's efforts have received considerable understanding from members of the public who from time to time, we acknowledge, have been inconvenienced, although we try to keep the inconvenience to the barest minimum.

I will ask Mindef to look into a scheme to recognize formally civil resource owners who have been exceptionally cooperative with Mindef in the same way as we do with employers of reservists.

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.-[BG Lee Hsien Loong].

Bill considered in Committee.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 3 ---

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Chairman, Sir, I seek your consent and the general assent of Members to move an amendment.

The Chairman: I give my consent. Does the Minister have the general assent of Members to move the amendment?

Hon. Members indicated assent.

The Chairman: BG Lee, please move your amendment.

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move the following amendment to the Bill:

In page 5, line 22, after "section", to insert "16 or".

This is a typographical omission. It is not a substantive amendment. The proposed section 41(3) of the Bill refers to notice of requisition issued pursuant to section 12 or an order or direction issued pursuant to section 16 or 17. The proposed section 41(4) follows from section 41(3) of the Bill but has inadvertently omitted any reference to section 16.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported with an amendment, read a Third time and passed.