MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1990 TO 31ST MARCH, 1991

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [5th Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head I (cont.) -

Resumption of Debate on Question [19th March, 1990],

"That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Code IJ 3100 of the Main Estimates." - [Mr S. Chandra Das].

Question again proposed.

Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi): ( In Mandarin): Sir, yesterday afternoon when Parliament had its moment of interruption, I was talking about the TV programmes produced by SBC. I will continue with my speech today.

Sir, I am suggesting that when the SBC scriptwriters write their scripts they blend in the characteristics of the different lifestyles of our multi-racial society into the dramas. Let me elaborate - in our daily lives we are in contact with people of different races almost every day - in public places or in our offices when we meet our Indian or Malay friends, we would spontaneously greet each other in English or Malay, for example with words such as, how are you, selamat pagi, or apa khabar. And when we patronise the shops of our Indian or Malay friends, we would also use some simple practical words to communicate with them.

Sir, I am not suggesting that we should make a mess of the dialogues in our Chinese TV serials and lower the standard of the Chinese language. I am just thinking that if we could selectively blend some of these simple conversational expressions used by our people in real life into the dialogues of our Chinese TV serials, then I am sure it would not have any adverse effect on the standard of these serials. On the contrary, it would enhance their local flavour and make these TV serials more convincing and interesting so as to strike a sympathetic chord with our people. At the same time, it would help to promote better mutual understanding and unity among compatriots of our various races and lend to a more harmonious and cohesive society.

Sir, there is one other point I wish to raise. Since we have promoted various mass education campaigns, such as the Keep Singapore Clean campaign, Courtesy campaign and so on. I hope that SBC could also include the concepts of these mass education campaigns in the plots of these TV serials so that these education campaigns would perpetually exert an imperceptible influence on our people. I hope that the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation will consider and study my suggestions.

Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar GRC): ( In Mandarin): Sir, we can be proud of the development and achievements of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation over the years. This is attributable to the able management of SBC and the efforts by the artistes as well as the cooperation of all the staff and workers in SBC.

However, recently, we have seen many resignations of SBC artistes and staff. This has caused us to worry about the future of the now lively TV performance of SBC, and has incited a lot of comments by the fans. From what I gather about the cause of resignations, I would like to suggest the following points to the Minister and SBC in order to strengthen the relationship between the artistes and SBC.

1. SBC could replace the Artistes Liaison Unit with an Artistes Personnel Section. (I know SBC has a personnel section but it does not deal with the artistes' affairs). This section can deal with all matters relating to the artistes, for example, their performance, behaviour, welfare and safety as well as their discipline, awards and punishments. At the same time, this section can also collect feedback or complaints from the artistes so as to strengthen the industrial relationship between the artistes and the management of SBC.

2. To renew the artiste's contract six months before the expiry date. SBC should avoid renewing the contract at the last minute. In this way, the artiste will feel confident and secure. This can eliminate the wrong impression that SBC does not care for the artistes' employment.

3. To allow the artistes to have an equal opportunity to perform. Systematic planning and careful coordination of allocation of performance schedule would avoid misunderstanding between the artistes and SBC and also avoid the dignity of the artistes being hurt.

4. To allow the artistes to perform outside SBC's assignments, like in commercial advertisements, stage shows, opening ceremonies, etc. to make extra money to supplement their income and enhance their popularity, on condition that such activities would not affect SBC and their reputation and performance with SBC. SBC should not require them to work overtime without giving them extra payment.

5. To set up a code of conduct for part-time artistes. In case any part-time artiste makes a mistake, he or she should be admonished and warned. To quietly stop the part-time artistes from appearing on TV shows as a punishment will not achieve any desired effect as they would not know what wrong they have done. As a result, they would feel bitter and complain that SBC is not being fair to them.

I hope that the above five points will be adopted to improve the development of our TV industry as well as to attract and retain more artistes for SBC.

Sir, I would also express my concern over what Mr Teo Chong Tee had suggested in Parliament yesterday and today about SBC actors blending the use of the English word "Sir" for Mandarin Jan-Guan and "MC King" instead of bin jia da wan, as such use does not quite reflect the reality of our daily life. We should not use all sorts of dialects and slang that are available to pollute the proper Mandarin that is used in the programme. A few years ago, when I led a delegation to China I asked one of the team members how was his brother getting on. When he replied, he used a mixture of dialect, colloquial Malay, English and Mandarin. It sounded simple enough to us, but it was incomprehensible to the Chinese around. This is a very serious pollution of the proper Mandarin language. Should this kind of polluted language appear in the TV shows, then I fear it will lead to more serious consequences. I hope SBC should ponder carefully such use as suggested by the Member and avoid polluting and distorting our language in their shows.

Mr Goh Choon Kang (Braddell Heights): ( In Mandarin): Sir, I agree very much with the Member for Changi about the shows produced by SBC. The shows should reflect more of our local situation and realities. In the past few years SBC has achieved quite good results in these serial programmes they have broadcast. But in respect of contents, it seems to give people the impression that there is some sort of compartmentation of programmes in that Chinese programmes mainly concentrate on the Chinese background and Chinese viewers, the Malay with only Malay background viewers and Tamil with purely Tamil in mind. They seem to have no relationship to one another in the multi-racial context of Singapore.

Last Sunday, I happened to see a Malay TV drama. It was about young people taking to drugs. This would give people the wrong impression that the problem of drug taking is a Malay social problem and not a problem or concern of the whole of Singapore. So I hope that SBC would pay more attention in future to see that there could be more TV serial programmes reflecting our multi-racial backgrounds as a whole, not in separate compartments, according to ethnic backgrounds separately. Now, I would like to touch on the topic of popular songs.

Last year, in order to meet with the competition from Batam, SBC set up one new radio channel producing only English programmes. This year SBC has produced another one called the 93.3 channel purely on Chinese programmes. So, there are plenty of pop songs on the air. Some people say that now our air is filled with all the pop songs with decadent or bewitching music. In the past, a student of Confucius, by the name of Yen Yan, asked Confucius how to rule a country. Confucius replied that it should be "fang jeng sen, yuen ling ren; jeng sen yin, ling ren dai." "Ling ren" means a mean person and "jen sen" represents decadent music. It means banishing decadent music and keeping away from mean persons. So one who rules a country should have an upright mind and should do away with the influence of mean people. So from here we can see that certain mean characters with decadent thought and music would endanger the country by polluting and contaminating the cultural atmosphere of the country. This shows how great the influence of art and culture is over the people. Most of the pop song programmes produced by SBC are not lacking in enticing and bewitching sound and a great part of which are of the decadent type which will easily give a bad influence to our young people by numbing their senses and drowning their feelings. Other than radio, TV is just the same. Earlier, I was talking about the radio broadcast but now I want to talk about TV broadcast.

In recent years, SBC has been striving to improve its TV programmes, with quite good results. Almost every night, there is a variety musical entertainment programme, the contents of which are mainly concentrated on pop culture and popular singers. Of course, this has something to do with the taste of our people. It has also something to do with SBC's abetment in organising such programmes. However, I would like to ask the SBC whether they should be influenced by the taste of audience and try to meet their requirements all the time which will only help to promote pop culture and popularising particularly Hong Kong and Taiwan popular foreign culture. The higher and deeper culture because of the neglect by the very important mass media, has not been promoted or has not been able to grow and develop well. For example, the artistic songs, cultural and folk songs which were regarded with equal importance in the past, have now declined and disappeared. On the other hand, popular songs have emerged and acquired the mainstream status.

I remember in the past when the TV broadcasting section organised singing competitions, there was the classification of art songs and popular songs; whereas now, there is only one category of popular songs. This has deprived singers of cultural songs the opportunity to perform and the form of art songs has declined. As far as I could remember, singers of cultural songs have never appeared in the variety concerts of the TV section ever since. If this trend were to go on, then young people of Singapore will not ever know what is the form of cultural songs, not to talk of fostering their taste in cultural songs or ability in their appreciation. I hope SBC will pay attention to this aspect and check this trend of unbalanced development.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education and Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Tang Guan Seng): Sir, there are two points I wish to raise regarding the improvement of the television services: the need to re-introduce late night news and the guidelines for sponsorship and funding of programmes.

The late night news was terminated in January last year because, according to SBC, there was only a limited number of viewers. I would like to point out that SBC should not consider all programmes just in terms of viewership. Instead, it should also consider about actual needs. News broadcasting is one of the main objectives of SBC. It provides the public a daily window to the world around and beyond us. It not only informs but it also educates. One bulletin a day, for example, at 9.00 o'clock for English and 8.00 o'clock for Chinese, is hardly adequate. There needs to be at least another bulletin later in the night, both to provide an update as well as to cater to viewers who missed the earlier broadcast. Because of the scrapping of the late night news, there were viewers who missed the almost hourly dramatic development in China and Eastern Europe on SBC. As a result, some had no choice but to tune in to the BBC radio broadcast and use their own imagination to fill in the visuals. Others had to switch to Malaysian TV channels for an update of these events. But, most important of all, the viewers do not have the update of local news. Certainly we do not expect foreign stations to provide this vital service to our own viewers. Can SBC reconsider bringing back the late night news?

On the sponsorship and funding of programmes, it is only right that SBC should be a viable corporation providing quality broadcast while maintaining sound finances. But SBC is not purely a commercial organisation. It is a statutory board with important missions to accomplish. In the words of its own Annual Report last year, "SBC will continue to inform, educate, and entertain Singaporeans, and in the process help forge and strengthen nationhood."

Sir, there is no doubt that SBC has been trying very hard to improve the quality of its programmes. However, it sometimes also gives the impression that SBC is very commercial-oriented, paying little or no attention to the nature of events to be covered.

We must realise that there are many nation-wide activities and events which can benefit the entire society and which are strictly non-profit-making. Organisers are often hard-pressed looking for funds to get the event off the ground, and expecting them to pay SBC to cover the event is almost impossible. One example I can give is this year's Chingay procession. As a result of non-coverage of the event, fewer people were able to enjoy the festive colours and mood.

The question that I want to ask is: Between getting more revenue and sacrificing a meaningful programme, which is in line with its stated objectives? What are the guidelines to decide whether to cover a certain event or not? In my opinion, activities which attract mass interest and participation, as well as issues concerning all Singaporeans, are national issues and events. As such, they deserve adequate coverage by SBC. If newspapers, running on commercial basis, are prepared to give colourful and full coverage of the events, there is no good reason for SBC to give just a few seconds of coverage during the news bulletin.

Sir, I think what we need here is sound professional judgment, striking a balance between commercial considerations and SBC's missions.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang: ( In Mandarin): Sir, first of all, I would like to comment on Mr Chiam See Tong's criticism of SBC in a letter to the Forum Page of the Straits Times this morning with the caption "SBC is not fair". I agree that SBC has not been fair because, for a simple reason, if we listen to the radio or watch the Parliamentary Report over TV, we could see Mr Chiam See Tong being featured there almost every night. Yet, some of our Backbenchers, despite having spoken a lot, were not shown over TV, not reported at all. SBC is indeed unfair! SBC should give us, PAP Backbenchers, more opportunities to be heard over TV, so that the audience could see us and hear our arguments.

Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Choo Wee Khiang: ( In Mandarin): I agree with Mr Goh Choon Kang that SBC should promote the performance of orthodox art songs. However, we cannot totally eliminate pop songs or refuse to telecast pop songs, because pop songs are very popular in all the countries in the world. It does not necessarily mean that by promoting pop songs we will be inviting bad influence from the western countries. I also agree with what Mr Peh Chin Hua said about the so-called "MC King". I feel that if we want to improve our standard of Mandarin, we must certainly discard such expressions. I fully agree with Mr Peh Chin Hua with regard to what he said about the resignation of SBC artistes.

Over the past months, it was reported in the newspapers that many SBC artistes had resigned. There are many discussions among the people within and outside the circle. Basically, the problem lies in the remuneration, welfare, prospects and many restrictions that hamper their career development. I believe what Mr Peh said, a moment ago, was correct. SBC should have a special unit of specialists to deal with problems concerning the contract artistes' remuneration, to arrange and coordinate for their opportunities to appear on TV, to listen to their complaints and views, and to look after their welfare.

Similarly, I can imagine the frustrations of the performing artistes in the other units in SBC, for example, the broadcasting and other programme units. I believe there is great mobility among the SBC performing artistes. I think the management should pay more attention to this problem. I heard that SBC has a training centre for the artistes. However, I received some complaints about the mismanagement of the centre because it has not fully achieved its target. Why? The reason is that the instructors who are conducting the training courses are using English as the medium of instruction. For those who speak Tamil, Malay, or Mandarin, it is extremely unfair, and most of the time it is a case of "getting half the result with twice the effort".

In fact, SBC should send people who are directly involved in the production of the programme, such as the broadcasters, artistes and actors, and not just technical and backstage personnel, for training overseas. By so doing, we will be able to raise the standard of production of SBC's programme. We must not lock ourselves in the ivory tower. If we look around at the TV stations in our neighbouring countries, their standards are getting higher and higher each year. This is a fact! As a matter of fact, some people have told me that the standard of SBC's TV programme has lowered as compared to the programmes of the TV stations in other countries, and that the schedule of TV programmes in SBC is found wanting. I hope that the SBC management would seriously look into these two points.

The Minister of State, Mr Mah Bow Tan said in Parliament yesterday that there was a need to increase the competitiveness of our TV stations, to expand, to train our talents, to introduce advanced technology, and at the same time to have the flexibility and innovative spirit of a commercial environment. I agree that all these are correct. However, I hope that Mr Mah would not only look after the backstage people, and the technology, but also take care of the welfare of all the people working in the front stage.

I have also heard that SBC is planning to have a late-night English News Bulletin over Channel 5, ie, late night news in English at 10.30 pm. I think this is very good news. If it is possible, SBC should also consider having a late-night Chinese News Bulletin over Channel 8. I think this will be very exciting news for our Chinese audience in Singapore. This would indeed be a "Double Happiness".

Some local artistes complained to me that they have been "frozen" by SBC for no rhyme or reason, and were deprived of opportunities to appear over TV. On occasions when they tried to go through the proper channel to find out why they had been frozen, they were either brushed aside by the officer-in-charge or simply refused to be given an interview for some very unreasonable reasons. I personally feel that when an offence is committed there must be a reason behind it, and the punishment for such an offence must be definitive. If these artistes have made any mistakes resulting in their being "frozen", I think the authority should at least, as a matter of courtesy, let them know what they have done wrong.

(In English): Sir, may I carry on with my next cut on "Licence Fees"? Sir, from my understanding, collection of SBC licence fees can be very tedious and troublesome.

The Chairman: Mr Choo, you have to finish your speech only in one language.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang: I have finished mine in Mandarin, Sir.

Mr Chairman: It is still the same speech.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang: Same speech. Okay.

(In Mandarin): Sir, with regard to the licence issued by SBC and the requirement for motorists to pay the licence fees, I have some views on this.

Very often, there is some trouble with the collection of the fees. Some motorists who had already paid their licence fees were subsequently wrongly accused by SBC for non-payment of fees and were charged in court. This is indeed very regrettable! I hope that the relevant authority would accept my humble suggestion on this matter.

I hope that the authority would consider merging the collection of road tax and the licence fees. Then it can be shown clearly on the road tax disc whether or not the car-owner has installed a radio set in his car.

Dr Lee Siew-Choh (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, Sir, first let me say that I fully endorse what Mr Lau Ping Sum so eloquently said yesterday on the subject of Malaysia's TV3 and Cantonese serials. I have no wish to repeat much of what he has said. I therefore quickly come to the subject of radio and TV reporting proper.

Sir, at one time before 1980, Radio-TV Singapore was under the direct control of a Government Minister. Civil servants were put in charge and Radio-TV Singapore used to churn out PAP propaganda day in and day out. Radio-TV Singapore was widely known as Radio-TV PAP. This naturally gave the Radio-TV a very bad image.

In 1980, SBC was formed with a well-respected non-civil servant as Chairman to run our Radio-TV as a body supposedly independent of the Government. This is intended to create a new image of our Radio Singapore.

Since then, Sir, SBC has improved radio and TV services tremendously in many respects, especially in the presentation of drama. But what of the presentation of news and current affairs? Many people find that in the matter of presentation of news and current affairs, changing the name "Radio-TV Singapore" to SBC has not changed anything at all. SBC has continued to churn out PAP propaganda day in and day out. In fact, SBC is a misnomer. It should be called PAP Broadcasting Corporation (PAPBC), not SBC.

For example, news presentation, insignificant events and activities of PAP branches are given considerable prime air time in the news presentation.

Encik Yatiman Yusof: Such as?

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: For example, PAP conventions, CCC, RC activities. Even the Second Deputy Prime Minister frying rice was given all the news coverage on TV. But the whole trouble, Sir, is that he was frying what the Chinese call "cold rice", chao leng fan.

Sir, on the question of Today in Parliament, contrary to what Mr Choo Wee Khiang has said, it is a PAP show by PAP Ministers and MPs, of PAP Ministers and MPs. Opposition MPs feature mostly in commentaries, if at all. Important Opposition arguments relevant to issues under debate are left out. Inconsequential lines spoken by Opposition MPs are broadcast instead. The whole focus is on PAP MPs.

Another example, Diary of a Nation gives a very one-sided presentation of events of the past. It is lopsided history written with a big bias. It is meant to glorify the PAP and denigrate the Opposition, especially the then Barisan Sosialis.

Another example, Contact-Y creates the impression that questions and answers are all spontaneous. But on discussion of current issues, much of what is said by critics of Government has been edited and, of course, "edited" means censored. It is a bogus form of consultation since decisions have already been made by Government. I ask the Minister:

(1) What guidelines does Government give to SBC as regards news and political reports?

(2) Will Government stop treating SBC as a monopoly and direct it to give fair, objective, reports including views of Opposition political parties?

(3) Will SBC consider broadcasts of forums with Opposition parties on important political issues of daily life with no editing whatsoever? This would certainly be of great interest to the people of Singapore.

(4) If SBC is to be privatised, will Government stop interfering with the running of the corporation and allow it to operate on lines similar to those of the BBC in Britain?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Encik Yatiman Yusof): ( In Malay): Mr Speaker, we know that the functions of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation are to inform, to entertain, to educate and to be a national medium of public education. Thus, while it needs to concern itself with business and economic considerations, SBC cannot avoid, I stress, cannot avoid shouldering its socio-political responsibilities.

Sir, as far as the Malay section is concerned, the role of SBC is even more crucial because competition from RTM, TV3, 101.6 and even, to some extent, TVRI is so keen, so stiff. And if we do not seek to maintain the audience among the Malays in Singapore by upgrading the standard of presentation, there is a big possibility that the Malay audience in Singapore will switch to other channels. The signs in this direction have already appeared. I fully agree with Mr Choo that beside commercial considerations, SBC's function as a national TV medium must be brought back onto the right track. And in this respect, we can see in the Malay section of SBC, which comprises three units, News, Programming and Current Affairs, that there has been some achievement in the News section. We see the use of graphics, maps, more effective presentation. But in the other two aspects, ie, programming and Current Affairs, the shortcomings are very obvious. I can give the example of one programme broadcast in September or October, which carried a report on the national anti-drug campaign (NADAC) in September or October 1989, which was repeat-broadcast in 1990 when the national anti-drug campaign has long passed. It might have been by mistake, but there is a possibility that it is due to a lack of funds, lack of manpower, lack of proper planning that these shortcomings come about.

The problem of funds, the problem of time slot and the problem of manpower are major problems. But these are problems that cannot be allowed to continue. Therefore, I would like to strongly urge, if SBC wants to be more effective in attracting the Malay and Tamil audiences in Singapore, it must do more than what it is doing now. It must allocate the expertise, and if such expertise is not available in Singapore, it must be brought in from outside. If we can bring in specialists from Hong Kong and Taiwan and elsewhere, why can't similar expertise, which would strengthen our abilities, be brought in for the Malay section?

I would also like to propose, that a committee be set up to re-evaluate all productions of SBC Malay section, ie, its News, programmes and current affairs productions, with a view to enhancing their standards and thereby maintaining the Malay audience in Singapore.

The Minister of State for Communications and Information (Mr Mah Bow Tan): Sir, first of all, allow me to address Mr Chandra Das's concern about the quality of the Indian programmes of SBC. He asked why the Tamil executive producer who retired last year was not replaced. He also asked whether MCI would consider additional inputs to the advisory committee on Indian programmes. Before I address the specific points, let me make a general point that SBC recognises that it has a responsibility to all its viewers, to all Singaporeans. In a multi-racial and multi-lingual society, this means that SBC must try to improve the quality of the programmes in all the various languages, even though the viewership of the minority language programmes may not be as high.

On the specific point about the Tamil producer who retired last year, he was not replaced because SBC restructured the TV programme division. And instead of allocating producers along the language programme lines, it has restructured it according to different types of programmes. Under this new structure, the Tamil producers now report to the respective controllers who are in charge of variety, drama, children's programmes, culture and so on.

SBC tells me that audience response to the SBC's Tamil TV programmes, particularly the variety series, has been favourable. They gave me some figures. For 1988, average viewership for the variety series, for example, was 54,000. For 1989, it went up to 59,000. This is quite commendable considering that it is quite a high percentage of the total viewership.

Let me assure the Member that SBC continues to look for ways to improve its Tamil programmes. In this connection, he may be pleased to know that SBC recently recruited a Tamil producer to strengthen its capacity to produce the cultural and current affairs programmes.

As for the Member's suggestion to have a separate advisory committee for Indian programmes, let me state that SBC already has a mechanism to receive suggestions and views on its programming. And this mechanism is the Programme Advisory Committee (PAC) which has representation from all the communities. So matters that are related to SBC's Tamil programmes can be brought up for discussion by this Programme Advisory Committee and if the Member has any specific suggestions, I would be glad to pass them on to the PAC. So I do not think it is necessary to set up a separate advisory committee specially for Tamil programmes.

Sir, I now turn to the comments by Encik Wan Hussin on the possibility of SBC producing English local dramas and plays. SBC is very aware of the growing interest in locally produced English TV dramas. And because of this, it has taken the first step of dubbing some of SBC's Mandarin programmes into English. Later this year, SBC and the Ministry of Community Development will be organising a TV playwriting competition. The best entries from this competition can be used to produce a pilot series of English language TV dramas for telecast, hopefully sometime next year.

With regard to the screening of local English plays, I must inform the Member that it is not simply a matter of telecasting the stage play. In order to do justice to the play, extensive modifications and adaptation would have to be made for television. But even after doing this, experience has shown that viewership of such programmes is not high. For example, in 1988 and 1989, SBC actually telecast at prime time a series of local English plays. The viewership ranged from as low as 1,000 viewers to a high of 38,000. Obviously, with the limited air time that is available, SBC will have to weigh very carefully the telecast of local stage plays against other programmes which enjoy a much higher viewership. However, I take note of the Member's suggestion and I would be passing on to SBC his comments and to urge SBC to continue to play its part to promote the arts, and especially the promotion of local English plays in Singapore.

Sir, I turn now to the comments by Encik Wan Hussin again and Encik Yatiman Yusof on Malay programmes. Encik Wan Hussin and Encik Yatiman have asked what measures SBC has taken to improve the quality of its Malay programmes. These measures are similar to the measures that SBC has taken to upgrade all its various language programmes. It includes the development of its human resources, the improvement of the production and presentation facilities, and the on-going review of drama or scripts by research writers and scriptwriters.

Specifically on some of the Malay current affairs programme, like Tinjauan, the staff involved in Tinjauan have been sent for training, sometimes overseas, sometimes local in-house SBC training, to upgrade their production as well as their presentation skills. Where it is necessary, Tinjauan production teams have also been sent overseas to cover stories of interest. I am pleased to inform the Members that SBC will increase the frequency of telecast of Tinjauan, which is currently a monthly programme, to a fortnightly programme from October of this year. Let me now touch on the upgrading of quality of SBC's Malay dramas. In addition to improving drama production facilities as well as training of drama performers, scriptwriters, Malay drama production crews also go on location shooting outside Singapore and every effort is being made to reflect the current trends and developments in Singapore society in the themes of SBC's Malay dramas.

On the question of increasing frequency of local Malay dramas, SBC has been looking into this possibility and since March this year they have further increased the telecast frequency of acquired Malay dramas or movies from once a fortnight to once a week. Increase of local dramas will require, of course, the building of more production facilities and training of additional creative talents. This will take time.

Sir, I now turn to the question of late night news which Mr Tang Guan Seng raised just now. Sir, late night news in English on Channel 12 when it was telecast attracted a viewership of 4,000 viewers. As a comparison the regular news at 9.00 o'clock attracted a viewership of 123,000, a factor of about 30. Similarly, the late night news in Chinese on Channel 8 drew about a tenth of the nightly news in Chinese at 8.00 o'clock. Given these figures and given the fact that SBC's resources are finite and limited, I think SBC took the decision to discontinue the late night news programme and it was a correct decision.

However, since Mr Tang has raised this matter, I will ask SBC to keep monitoring the situation and if and when the situation changes, when viewer interest picks up, obviously SBC can consider resuming the late night news. In the meantime, I am pleased to announce that, as part of the on-going efforts to improve the quality of news programmes, SBC will be piloting in June a special 45-minute news programme on the main English news on Sunday nights. This will be piloted to test the audience reaction. It will include more news features, a more interactive style of reporting and it will include more wire agency news. If the new format is well received, SBC intends to adopt it on a daily basis thereafter, and possibly also for the news items in the other language streams as well.

Sir, I next move to Mr Tang's comments about Chinggay particularly, but probably on a more general point about the complaint that SBC tends to be too money-oriented in its approach. Sir, I must stress here that staff and management of SBC are very, very conscious of their role in nation building. They pay a lot of attention to the news and the current affairs programmes, probably, more attention to these programmes than to the entertainment programmes because it realises that it has this very important role to play. It helps to keep the public well informed. And a well-informed public is essential because it will be better able to provide the considered well-informed opinion, feedback, suggestions and views to help Government achieve national consensus, which is so crucial to nation building.

Sir, while SBC management and staff recognise this point, they also realise that this is not an easy job because there are from time to time requests or views put forth by various Members of this House as to what constitutes good information and good education programmes. Some want late news, others want morning news, some want Chingay, others want post-midnight movies to relax themselves and so on. Sir, the resources of SBC are limited and I think this is a point that we keep stressing. And because they are so, SBC has to make conscious decisions as to how to allocate these resources. When decisions are made they are made with the full realisation that the audience interest must be kept in mind.

Specifically on the point of Chingay, it is not correct to say that there were only a few seconds of Chingay featured on the news because the night Chingay procession was also featured in the magazine segments of two very popular programmes, Sunday Morning Singapore as well as Studio One Presents. A full live coverage was considered but given the resources and the manpower that were required, a decision was taken not to telecast it live.

Sir, I now touch briefly on Mr Choo's point about collecting SBC licence fee with ROV road taxes. I think it is a suggestion worth considering and I will pass it on to SBC.

Allow me to respond to Dr Lee Siew-Choh's points. I am a little bit puzzled by Dr Lee's complaints, although we have heard it before in this House, that PAP Ministers and Backbenchers are given too much publicity on TV. He may be pleased to know that we get equally vociferous, equally urgent and, equally loud complaints from PAP Backbenchers and even Frontbenchers. Sir, Mr Choo Wee Khiang has also made the point that he is not satisfied with the coverage by SBC of PAP Backbenchers on programmes like Today in Parliament.

Sir, Dr Lee asked, what guidelines does SBC use? I think the answer is very simple. SBC will take whatever is news worthy to determine whether an event or a speech by whoever is covered. This is understand- able because if it does not do so, then SBC will lose its audience. So I think we should leave it to the professionals in SBC to decide on such editorial matters. Similarly, for current affairs programmes on radio and TV. These are not political forums where different political parties engage in debate. These are forums and discussions for different people to air their views. The producers of these programmes should be left to decide who they wish to approach to take part in those programmes. If I remember correctly, Mr Chiam See Tong was featured in two of these programmes last year and one of the programmes was telecast as recently as two weeks ago when he was featured on the Feedback programme on consultative Government although I understand that he is not too happy with the coverage that he was given. Nevertheless, he was featured, although it is not possible for programmes like this to be left unedited. I think it answers the point that Dr Lee has mentioned that no television coverage has been given to Opposition MPs or that not enough television coverage has been given to Opposition MPs.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications and Information (Mr Ho Kah Leong): ( In Mandarin): Sir, just now Mr Teo Chong Tee, Mr Peh Chin Hua, Mr Goh Choon Kang and Mr Choo Wee Khiang made some very good suggestions on the improvement of SBC. First of all, I would like to thank them for their praises for SBC and concern for the welfare of SBC staff. There is one thing in common in all their speeches, ie, they are all speaking out of loving concern for SBC with the hope that SBC would make further improvements to make their performance even better. Sir, of course, on the side of SBC, they know that their responsibilities are heavy and the road ahead is long. All these years, they have been working very hard to make better and more interesting programmes to cater for the audio-visual demand of our people of various races and echelons.

Sir, Mr Teo Chong Tee asked just now, and also yesterday, whether it was possible to blend in the characteristics of our multi-racial society in our Mandarin TV serials, and whether these TV serials would help to convey the messages of some of our nation-wide campaigns. Sir, I fully agree with these two suggestions by Mr Teo. As a matter of fact, in the Mandarin TV serials produced by SBC, we have from time to time introduced some scenes depicting our multi-racial characteristics. However, as Mr Teo has said, ours is a multi-racial society. In order to achieve racial harmony in Singapore, we have to be very careful in dealing with the sensitivities of the languages, religions and customs of the various races. I would urge SBC to include more scenes depicting the co-existence among our various races in Singapore in their future Mandarin TV serials.

Sir, as for the second suggestion by Mr Teo, SBC has already done so. In the TV serials produced by SBC, the story-lines are generally consistent with the spirit of our nation-wide campaigns and our traditional values. We appreciate that some useful traditional values and the messages of some of our nation-wide campaigns cannot be forcibly made to appear on our TV serials in a "sermon-like" fashion, but should rather be featured subtlely in the plot, creating an imperceptible influence, as described by Mr Teo. To put it simply, what we seek to do is to educate through entertainment.

Sir, now let me answer Mr Goh Choon Kang's question. I am also a lover of art songs. I am 100% in agreement with Mr Goh. However, we must understand that SBC has to cater for the demand of its audiences of various echelons and tastes and different ages. If a particular programme does not suit the taste of a particular section of the audience, they could easily switch to another channel immediately, or even resort to watching video-tapes. So SBC could only feature a limited number of art song and folk song items in its combined entertainment programmes. However, Channel 12 does feature a comprehensive range of artistic programmes which should satisfy the demand of those who prefer such artistic programmes. In addition, Radio 3 has been broadcasting some traditional folk songs and art songs.

The Chairman: Order. It is guillotine time. Mr Das.

Mr Chandra Das: Mr Chairman, Sir, I thank the Minister of State for his very detailed and painstaking reply. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $77,053,030 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $625,713,500 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head E -

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head E be reduced by $10 in respect of Code EA 1500 of the Main Estimates.

There are two amendments. They are both linked together. I will speak on both of them since they are actually on the same theme.

Sir, presently there are 11 Judges and Judicial Commissioners sitting on the High Court Bench. Of these 11, only six hold office under the protection of the Constitution, that is, the tenure of the office of the Judges will continue until they reach the age of 65. Five others, including the Chief Justice, hold office on fixed terms determined by the Prime Minister.

Early last year, Government amended the Constitution, and that amendment was backdated to November 1971 in order to allow Government to regularise its mistakes made in earlier years, although the Minister for Home Affairs had vigorously defended the appointment of the Chief Justice made before the amendment.

In this appointment, Sir, it is clear that too much power lies in the office of the Prime Minister. I feel that this should be corrected. As is also clearly stated in the Elected President's White Paper (Cmd. 10 of 1988), and I quote:

'The existing Constitution is inadequate. The Prime Minister and his Cabinet have untrammelled power. Presently, our Constitution does not contain any checks on the Government.'

And of course, Sir, this includes the fact that there are no checks on the powers of the Prime Minister to appoint High Court Judges for fixed terms. There should be checks and balances in this.

In the United States, Sir, the President's power to nominate High Court Judges has to be approved by the Senate. Similarly, there should be some checks on the powers of the Prime Minister in this respect. Presently, such appointment of High Court Judges by the Prime Minister has come under criticism both at home and abroad, and such criticism has rather unfavourable connotations on our judicial system. We should therefore avoid giving occasions for criticism which would create a bad image for our judicial system and could embarrass our High Court Judges.

Sir, I want to ask the Minister: does Government intend to continue the present system of appointment of Judges for fixed terms by the Prime Minister?

The Minister for Law (Prof. S. Jayakumar): Sir, can I take it that Dr Lee has spoken on both his amendments.

The Chairman: Yes, he did say that.

Prof. Jayakumar: Thank you. Sir, I can be brief because this is nothing new. It is a repetition of points which have been made in this House by Mr Jeyaretnam and more recently by Dr Lee Siew-Choh.

First, appointment of Judges for fixed terms. This is not a provision which is unique or special to Singapore. The appointment of Judges or Judicial Commissioners for fixed terms to the Bench is to be found in the Constitutions of many countries, particularly Commonwealth countries. Malaysia and other Commonwealth countries have similar arrangements. It is common even in England where Commissioners of Excise, now called Deputy Judges, hold short-term appointments. And not only that, Sir, in England, Judges there as well as in other Commonwealth countries hold office as Judges beyond their normal retirement age for fixed periods and, even in some cases, just for specific cases. For example, I understand in England, Lord Justices of Appeal who have retired are appointed ad hoc to hear cases.

This is nothing new and I had explained on previous occasions why in Singapore we have difficulty in getting some of the most talented, the ablest, the best of our legal practitioners to take up judgeships. I have explained in this House that even when they are persuaded, some of them are not prepared to do it indefinitely. They themselves request that they do it for one or two years. Some of them may stay on, but others might want to go back to their practice.

Secondly, he says that there is too much power given to the Prime Minister because under the Constitution, the Prime Minister is involved in that the Judges are appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Prime Minister. The Constitution, I should add, Sir, has requirements for the Prime Minister to consult the Chief Justice in respect of Judges.

Here again, Dr Lee Siew-Choh is wrong in making out that this is some provision or practice that is unique to Singapore and therefore it should comes in for criticism. That is not so. This provision is to be found in Malaysia and many other Commonwealth countries. In fact, I would like to invite Dr Lee Siew-Choh to let me know how many former Commonwealth countries in fact do not have a system where the Prime Minister recommends to the Head of State on the appointment of Judges.

He has said that this system has brought about criticisms from abroad and locally. As far as I know, the only criticisms, innuendoes and insinuations about the process of appointment of Judges or about the Judiciary have come from the Workers' Party and Mr Jeyaretnam.

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: The criticism, Sir, has come from America and from Britain. I have not queried the uniqueness of the Prime Minister recommending the appointment of Judges. I am asking why the Prime Minister should be given such great powers to appoint Judges especially for fixed terms, when there should be some checks on such powers.

Prof. Jayakumar: The answer is simple, Sir. This practice and procedure for appointment of Judges is something that we have had in our Constitution from time immemorial. It is a practice rooted in good precedents from other Commonwealth countries, and there is no reason to change it just because the Workers' Party has criticised it.

I forgot to mention, Sir, that the Member has repeated the point about the Chief Justice and the constitutional amendment we made last year. I must state for the record that there was no mistake which was regularised. It was the Workers' Party's Secretary-General who raised it as an issue in the Privy Council. It was not adjudged, but because he raised the issue and raised it out, that was to put it beyond any doubt.

The Chairman: Dr Lee, are you withdrawing your amendment?

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: I beg to withdraw, Sir, although I am not quite satisfied with the explanation given.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Loh Meng See (Kampong Glam): Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head E be reduced by $10 in respect of Code EA 9854029 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, there seems to be a disparity in the provision in the development expenditure between the Supreme Court and the Subordinate Courts. The provision for the Subordinate Courts is meagre compared to that of the Supreme Court. We all know that the bulk of the Court cases affecting Singaporeans are in the Subordinate Courts. I believe that there is still a serious backlog in the number of cases yet to be settled in the lower Courts.

Sir, justice necessitates that all cases before the Courts are resolved as quickly as possible. With better use of manpower, technology and support systems, I am sure that further improvements could be made in expediting the settlement of cases in the Subordinate Courts. With quicker turnaround time, much resources could be saved for productive pursuits by the public who are involved in the cases before the Courts.

May I ask the Minister whether the Subordinate Courts services are adequate and that there is no need for additional development expenditure to be incurred. Are we satisfied with the current state of affairs in the lower Courts?

Sir, the needs of the Judiciary deserve high priority in our budget allocation. The improvements and developments required to make our Courts perform better should not be that funds are not provided.

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, I understand the concern expressed by the Member. The figures in the Budget book do not mean a lack of plans for the Subordinate Courts. I understand from the Judiciary that the number of Subordinate Courts until recently was 26. In 1988 six more were added. So there are now 32 Subordinate Courts. I understand that the Judiciary has plans to increase the number of Courts by an additional 22, and they will be putting forward proposals to the Ministry of Finance and PWD. If I may elaborate. The plans which the Judiciary has to improve the Subordinate Courts include the following.

First, sometime this year, hopefully in June, the Ministry of Labour's present Headquarters will be taken over by the Subordinate Courts so that there can be space for additional facilities.

Secondly, it is hoped to construct a new annexe building at the site adjacent to the existing Subordinate Courts Complex, in which can be housed the Courts' Civil Division.

Thirdly, there will also be renovation and relocation works to be done internally in the existing Subordinate Courts Complex.

The costings for all these works are being undertaken by the PWD and will take some months to finalise, after which the necessary project paper for funding will be submitted to the Development Planning Committee. When the funds are approved in time, these will then be reflected in the Development Estimates for the ensuing financial year.

Mr Loh Meng See: Sir, I am very happy with the Minister's reply. I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Loh Meng See: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head E be reduced by $10 in respect of Code EA 9874071 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, it appears from the Development Estimates that the pilot project for mechanical recording and running transcript which started in 1988 will be completed in the financial year 1990/91. May I know from the Minister what were the objectives for the pilot project? What has been the progress made and what further action would be undertaken on the completion of this pilot project? Also, what would be the cost impact in terms of charges to users of such facilities in the courts?

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, Members may be interested to know that the existing system for the making of transcripts for civil cases is from handwritten notes of the Judges which are transcribed, I believe, by the Private Secretary of the Judge. For non-civil cases, there are teams of verbatim reporters. Of course, under this sytem, the preparation of the transcripts can take several weeks.

The pilot project was a pilot project to evaluate the feasibility of a mechanical system of recording the proceedings and obtaining a transcript faster than the existing system. It was introduced in 1988 in three courts. The results of the pilot project, I understand, will be evaluated this year. I have spoken to the Registrar of the Supreme Court who has informed me, not surprisingly, that there are definitely advantages with the mechanical recording. The advantage is that the transcript can be obtained much faster.

The extent to which it will be applied to all the courts and how soon this will be done are, of course, decisions which the Judiciary will take. But I understand that it will depend on the evaluation of the pilot project. Also, the implementation of this system does require a highly trained staff. So not only will it depend on evaluation of the pilot project, it will also depend on the availability of trained manpower and funds.

I am afraid I am not able at this stage to give more information than that. But on his final point, if and when it is introduced in all the courts, I am quite sure that the consumers will be pleased because they are able to obtain the transcripts faster. I must envisage that they will have to pay for part of this increased efficiency and I am confident that they will not begrudge the extra payment.

Mr Loh Meng See: I beg to withdraw, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $18,022,750 for Head E ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $13,458,200 for Head E ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head B -

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head B be reduced by $10 in respect of Code BA 1500 of the Main Estimates.

I have two points to make here, Sir. Under Article 35(4) of the Constitution, the Attorney-General can hold office until the age of 55. His fixed period of office has been extended twice and his term of office was supposed to have come to an end sometime in January 1989. We have not officially heard of any further extension of his office. What is the present position of the Attorney-General? If there has been another extension, when was it made and for how long? Would the Minister please enlighten the House?

Another point that needs clarification from the Minister is this. The Attorney-General has been advising the Government on numerous issues. In the case of the judgment of the Privy Council on J.B. Jeyaretnam's appeal, the Attorney-General has also given advice to the Cabinet on the legal effect of the Privy Council judgment. Many people feel that the AG should not have done that. As AG, he had prosecuted J.B. Jeyaretnam in the now famous case. The Privy Council judg- ment was in fact a judgment on the AG's case. Sir, the complaint is that allowing himself to pronounce on the correctness or otherwise of the judgment on the case of Jeyaretnam and the conviction that followed is wrong because the AG would then be a judge in his own cause, as the lawyers put it. Would the Minister care to comment on all that?

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, I will be brief because both points are essentially old points. In July 1986, Mr Jeyaretnam brought up in this House the same point, that the Attorney-General had reached the age of 55 on January 1984 and since there was no gazette notification in announcing his extension, therefore there was a doubt about the legal position of the Attorney-General. Presumably, the fact that there was no gazette notification in January 1989 has led to this question being asked again. And I have to give the same answer that the Attorney-General, Mr Tan Boon Teik, is still Attorney-General. Because after the expiry of his term of office under the first extension in January 1989, his term was extended by another three years. But there is no need to gazette this appointment because there is no requirement in the Constitution to require such gazetting.

The second point is that he says the Attorney-General ought not to have advised the Cabinet or the President on the implications of the judgment of the Privy Council. Sir, if the Attorney-General, is not to advise, the Government on a matter which the Government seeks or the President seeks legal advice, then who is to advise the Government? Dr Lee Siew-Choh should have a look at Article 34(7) of the Constitution, which I will read:

'It shall be the duty of the Attorney-General to advise the Government upon such legal matters and to perform such other duties of a legal character as may from time to time be referred or assigned to him by the President or the Cabinet and to discharge the functions conferred on him under this Constitution.'

It is a duty of the Attorney-General. That is what he did when he was asked by the President or the Government to advise on the implications of the Privy Council judgment. Because when Mr Jeyaretnam applied for a pardon, his application for a pardon was based on the Privy Council judgment. So the President needed advice on the implications of the Privy Council judgment and the Attorney-General in giving his advice not only did not act improperly, he was carrying out a duty which the Constitution places on him.

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: In this particular case, the Attorney-General was personally involved and directly involved in this case of the prosecution. Would it not have been better if another officer was to give the advice to the Government?

Prof. Jayakumar: When Dr Lee Siew-Choh says the Attorney-General was personally involved, do I take it that he does not impute any improper motive but that the office of the Attorney-General was involved in the prosecution? Am I right?

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: Yes.

Prof. Jayakumar: If that is so, then there is no difference between this case and many other cases where applications are made to the President for pardon. Drug traffickers who are sentenced to death appeal to the President for clemency. Many other criminals do so. And all criminal prosecutions in Singapore are under the charge of the Public Prosecutor who is the Attorney-General. Therefore, should the Attorney-General refrain from giving his advice to the President in all these other cases?

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: But there are many other officers in the Attorney-General's office.

Prof. Jayakumar: I just asked him what he meant by the Attorney-General being "personally involved". Did he mean that there was no improper motive but that the office of the Attorney-General was involved in giving advice and he confirmed that that was the interpretation. If that is so, will it make him feel happier if a lesser official than the Attorney-General were to sign the opinion?

The Chairman: Dr Lee, are you withdrawing the amendment?

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: I withdraw, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $9,589,400 for Head B ordered stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $1,001,400 for Head B ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head S -

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam (Fengshan): Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100.

Sir, the fiscal year 1989 saw several developments in our legal system; the establishment of the Academy of Law, the development of a legal database for on-line legal research, Legalnet, the computerised land lot registration system, the setting up of a Law Reform Committee, the decision to set up a Centre for Advanced Legal Studies in NUS, and the decision to establish an Arbitration Centre.

1989 was a watershed year for the legal profession. The continuing legal education programmes conducted under the auspices of the Academy and the Law Society are also notable developments. These measures can only spark the independent development of our laws. I am sure that with these measures, our legal profession which is capable and competent can only improve and provide a better and efficient system of administration of justice.

We now have in place (since 1989) legislation allowing the appointment by the Senate of the Academy of Law of Senior Counsel by reason of a lawyer's ability, standing at the bar or special knowledge or experience in the law. As yet, there have been no appointments of Senior Counsel save for the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General by virtue of their office. It would be convenient at this stage to ask the Minister what will be the role of Senior Counsel? Would the appointments of Senior Counsel aid the general and overall improvement in skills and competence of our legal profession?

The institutionalisation of Senior Counsel appointments raises the larger question of the general direction our legal profession could and should take. Should we move towards specialisation? As we move into a developed nation status, and as the globalisation of services assumes increased importance, our legal services will be pushed into this direction.

Sir, the appointment of Senior Counsel would have little meaning unless we give tangible and due recognition to such appointees. The persons appointed by the Senate of the Academy should naturally be leaders in their own fields - whether as advocates or solicitors. They should be professionals to whom junior lawyers can look to for inspiration and advice. A system of referrals, and "conjoint management", if I may use the medical term, must develop.

Sir, in Singapore the legal profession is a fused profession, ie, our lawyers are both advocates who argue cases in court, and solicitors who do legal work, but who may not plead cases in court.

It has been impressed upon me that there is an increasing tendency to use Queen's Counsel to argue cases in court as advocates. The admission of QCs is governed by section 20 of the Legal Profession Act. As the section stands, quite apart from few requirements, the Queen's Counsel must have special qualifications or experience. Over the past 10 year, there is an increase in the number of admissions of QCs to argue cases and appeals in our Courts. This is largely due to:

(1) Singapore is entering a vigorous phase of commercial sophistication and development and there is an increase in litigation (including arbitration).

(2) The gargantuan nature of claims, and

(3) The complexity of some of these cases.

The admission of QCs to plead complex cases is complementary to our legal system. The problem is the handling of cases by QCs, which our local lawyers are competent to deal with. The question to be addressed is whether the increasing tendency to use QCs for cases which are not complex will impede the development of our legal system. Will our lawyers have the opportunity to mature and improve their stature? Does the present practice conform with the original intent of Parliament when the Legal Profession Act was enacted? Should not Queen's Counsel be restricted to complex cases so as to give our own local lawyers the chance to develop their expertise in advocacy?

The whole argument takes on a "chicken and egg" situation. If local lawyers are not give a chance to take on complex cases, how can they then specialise? The engagement of a Queen's Counsel by one party makes it almost binding for the opposing party also to engage a Queen's Counsel. If Queen's Counsels are admitted for cases which the local lawyers feel competent to handle, can specialisation be feasible?

This, Sir, is the dilemma that the legal profession is in. However, because of the traditional high ethical standards of the profession and the "hangovers" of the colonial era, not many lawyers would want to address this problem publicly. For this I indeed respect the profession. Nonetheless, I feel that it is incumbent upon us as Parliamentarians to address this crucial problem, if we are to move away from the "crutch" mentality of always having to look to foreigners for a "legal opinion". Admittedly, in the very complex case, expert advice is desirable. We must attempt to strike the correct balance and this will be no easy task. This is a problem that the legal community itself will have to work out together to reach a consensus as to what is best for the profession and the public, ie, their clients.

Sir, on the question of competence of local law firms in complex cases, our local lawyers have made a very reasonable case for themselves. The argument centres along the line of transfer of legal expertise. If a local law firm is given a chance, they would even be willing, I am told, to give an undertaking to the client to engage foreign expertise as consultants. In this way, the local lawyers would gain "hands-on" experience while at the same time building up the local and regional professional reputation, image and credentials of the local profession. If an assignment is given to a foreign lawyer, be it a foreign law firm or a Queen's Counsel, the "transfer of knowledge" element will not be so complete. It has been emphasised to me that the "experience" and "image" factors are important - it will add to the credentials of our local lawyers as they move towards marketing their expertise regionally and globally. Their plea is very simple: "Give us a chance to prove ourselves". They have no objection to the use of QCs or foreign expertise for very complex cases.

I hope the Minister will comment on the further upgrading of the legal profession, and the future role of QCs and Senior Counsel. If clear directions are available, the profession can then plan and adjust its human resources management. The undergraduates and the younger lawyers can also then plan their own career development into new fields and specialisation.

Dr Ho Tat Kin (Toa Payoh GRC): Sir, I move this amendment so as to share with the House some concern among the information technology industry and computer users of the lack of legislation to deter computer-related crime and hope to persuade the Minister to correct this deficiency.

Sir, although at present the Trade Marks Act and Copyright Act are in use in information technology matters involving copyright issues, both the Trade Marks and Copyright offences are generally not considered computer-related crimes although they relate to computer hardware and software. The term "computer crime" generally involves illegal, unethical or unauthorised behaviour involving automatic data processing and/or transmission of data, cases such as computer fraud, computer espionage and computer sabotage offences.

In the 80s, with the strong Government push, many organisations automated their operations with computers. Banks were one of the first to do so and bank customers could draw money through automated teller machines or ATMs. In 1982 we had the first of the computer-related crimes. A 21 year old woman, an ex-computer operator of POSB, was by virtue of her position entrusted with custody of keys to the cabinets where the keys to various ATMs and the safe combination numbers were kept. Using this information, she stole $83,600 from a POSB ATM. She was subsequently caught and charged with an offence of Theft in Dwelling, an offence under section 380 (Chapter 103). She was found guilty and sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment.

In 1985, another bank lost $35,900 through fraudulent transactions using bank computer terminals. Yet in 1986 another bank employee stole $376,000 from the bank's ATMs within five days. In 1987, there was yet another case where a bank teller left a terminal unattended. An enterprising office boy sat himself in front of the terminal. Within one hour he withdrew $1.2 million from the bank. Sir, these are just examples. Cases of theft and cheating involving ATMs rose from 69 cases in 1986 to 90 cases in 1987 and to 125 cases in 1988.

Today if a person robs a bank with a gun, he faces the death penalty. Without a gun he may get 10 years jail sentence, but robbing a bank using a computer he may get two to three years' imprisonment. On top of that, detection is more difficult.

Currently there is no legal requirement for any computer crime to be reported to the police and it is generally suspected that many computer crimes are not reported so as not to harm the reputation of the organizations. According to the Electronic Data Processing Fraud Review Task Force of the USA, only about 5% of all computer crimes in their country are detected.

Sir, money is not always the motive in computer-related crime. Industrial espionage, industrial sabotage, theft of important business information or the destruction of information are other motives. There were also cases of unscrupulous employees who placed a time-bomb in the programmes they created. For example, when the payroll is run, and his name is not found, ie, he has been sacked, the entire payroll system can be sabotaged. There are also hackers, people who think they are very smart, breaking into computer systems for various reasons - sometimes for fun, sometimes to show off their skills, sometimes to sabotage, and sometimes for blackmail. Some even plant virus that destroys data. Many computers are now linked by telecommunication net- works, and many network links are across international boundaries. This means computer virus can spread very fast and cause greater damage.

The recent and devastating virus attacks on computer systems all over the world, which caused great financial loss to many organizations, have received widespread publicity in the international media. One can imagine what could have happened to Singapore had the "Friday, the 13th" virus infected our Government networks, the banks and the financial institutions, corrupting all the information.

Since any computer security system designed by computer professionals can be broken by other unscrupulous professionals, and as the number of computer fraud cases grows, with more high value funds illegally transferred, some legal measures to deter or stop computer crimes are necessary. The interim measure taken by more and more financial institutions is to obtain insurance coverage to protect against substantial losses from computer crime. But there is no legal deterrent. In fact, other than provisions dealing with the evidentiary aspects of computer-generated information, the written laws of Singapore do not at all deal with many issues which the widespread usage of computer technology has brought about.

Currently in Singapore, theft of processing, storage and transmission services by data processing employees for their own purpose does not constitute an offence. Unauthorised access to computer systems or hacking does not constitute an offence. Our existing laws could only be used for traditional business offences assisted by computer, which include the misuse of computers by management of fraudulently operating companies to defraud customers, investors, Government agencies, etc.

We have no laws relating to the protection of privacy of computer stored information. Use of inaccurate computer data arising from manipulation and erasure of personal data by unauthorised persons do not constitute an offence, unless it affects the economic interests of the holder of that information. But this will only attract civil remedies. We have no law at present against eavesdropping into computer system by acoustic tapping or tapping of electromagnetic waves emitted by transmission lines. We have no statutory provision which deals with computer virus.

Sir, we should have laws to deter people from spreading computer virus. We should have laws to compensate those who suffer loss due to computer crime and we should have laws to punish those who exploit computer systems for criminal purposes.

Today, computer crimes in various forms are already a serious problem in the West, and they have taken steps to introduce legal deterrents. In California, Switzerland, West Germany, Denmark, France and Sweden, there are examples of legislation to deal with some aspects of criminal law. In October 1989, the Law Commission for England and Wales recommended a hierarchy of offences. The first level, a summary offence, is for mere unauthorised access, and is seen as indicating the new legal environment. Higher level offences, including fraud and damages would carry substantial prison sentences. This is difficult to frame, and there are international implications with the world-wide use of networks and cross-boundary network systems.

Sir, although different countries differ in their approach as to how the issue of computer crime can best be dealt with, and some are at best rudimentary, yet these are models which we should study with a view to determine the best approach for our legal system to deal with computer crime.

Mr Lau Ping Sum (Yio Chu Kang): Sir, I would like to endorse the views expressed by Dr Ho and point out that the advent of Information Technology (IT) has transformed the way we work and live. Many of the repetitive, tedious and time-consuming operations in the office have been taken over by the computer. Increasingly, the new information systems are being used not just to replace manual work but to provide new and better pro- ducts and services to increase market share and revenue.

At the same time, the extensive use of IT has brought with it problems relating to unauthorised access to and damage of computer systems. Since the introduction of computer network and on-line transaction processing, data can be exchanged all over the world in a matter of seconds. Prevention of computer crimes requires greater awareness of system security and control and specific provisions to deal with them. In many countries, the legislative process has not kept up with the rapid technological developments in IT. Singapore is no exception.

Sir, computer fraud is the practice of abusing a computer system to obtain money or goods by deception. Human intervention is sometimes reduced after computerisation and where segregation of duties is not carefully enforced and monitored, opportunities could be created for fraud. Of course, fraud can take place in all systems, even in manual systems. But with an increasingly computer-literate workforce, the extensive use of the PC and terminals, such crimes have emerged even in Singapore, as reported by Dr Ho and the newspapers from time to time. In fact, the amount that has been lost in Singapore has been negligible compared to what has been reported overseas. For example, there was a case of an electronic fund transfer in UK involving a software programmer. This programmer was part of the team developing the front-end processing programme for the cheque banking system. This programme would verify that the manual transactions were collected and validated before being passed to the mainframe for processing. After testing was completed, the programmer amended the programme to arrange that the first 10 transactions were diverted to a bank account which he had in Switzerland. On the first day that the system was to run live, the programmer did not turn up for work. He was on his way to Switzerland. After 15 minutes, the bank discovered that there was something wrong and stopped the processing. But it was too late. Six million pounds had been fraudulently transferred electronically. It is said that the programmer has made a deal with the bank to return some of the cash in exchange for no prosecution.

Sir, in the past, in Singapore perpetrators of computer fraud were charged under section 380 "Theft in Dwelling", section 381 "Theft as a Servant" or section 420 "Abetment of Conspiracy to Cheat." I would like to know if the Ministry is satisfied that these provisions are specific enough to deal with computer frauds.

Sir, another form of computer crime is hacking. Hacking refers to the unauthorised access to computer systems by finding out illegally user identification and passwords. It is usually carried out by youngsters for the intellectual challenge or adventure it entails. Monetary gain is not usually the motivating factor. But damage may be caused if the system fails to function normally. I would like to ask the Minister to what extent can section 425 of the Penal Code which defines the offence of mischief be applied to hacking?

In recent years, the emergence of computer viruses has caused great concern to many system operators. Computer virus is a programme which can replicate and spread quickly through a network of computers causing nuisance and damage. Some viruses are benign and relatively innocuous, for example, displaying Christmas greetings on 25th December. There is one that specialises in giving colourful descriptions to the political leaders of the world. And I am afraid our leaders have not been spared. Considerable expenses and effort would be required to get rid of these viruses. Other more malicious ones seek to destroy all the data and corrupt the programmmes they come into contact with.

I would like to know the progress of updating our legislation to deal with the persons who create and spread the viruses. What are the liabilities of the culprits to the persons affected by the virus? What are the rights of a person who suffers damages caused by the virus?

Specific provisions with suitable punishment would deter potential hackers and those who create and spread the viruses. In addition, it will bring home the point that it is vitally important that all systems should pay greater attention to system control and security procedures.

Dr Low Seow Chay (Chua Chu Kang): Sir, it is not surprising to read reports in the press about an office boy illegally drawing or transferring millions of dollars into his account through an access to a computer terminal, persons who are caught for attempting to erase important information stored in a computer, and virus infections costing millions of dollars to companies.

Sir, Singapore has succeeded in popularising the implementation of information technology. Today, almost all organisations in the public sector, banks and large organisations do use computers to store, process, transfer and retrieve their information. For organisations having such a huge amount of information stored in the computer, there is a potential risk that confidential information may be leaked out to unauthorised persons. People may hack into the computers and try to delete or change important information which could lead to a public chaotic situation, causing embarrassment to the organisation and the people whose information are affected could incur a high degree of hardship. It would be worse when viruses are planted into a computer and this could cause the affected computer to a standstill and a tremendous loss in computer information. It will cost the organisations millions of dollars to put in the data and update the data to what it was before. The risk will be even greater if computers are linked together under the concept of networking.

Sir, this risk could be lessened if we do have sufficient deterrent measures to prevent people from committing such unethical action. At present, there is little or no legislation that could cater specifically for irresponsible action of this kind. There is a necessity to classify such action as illegal and punishable. We should keep our law up-to-date with the advances in information technology.

Sir, breaking into a computer system is equivalent to forging a set of keys, and attempting to unlock and enter a house without permission. It is trespassing or housebreaking. Peeping into a computer file is just as serious as invading into the privacy of others by tampering with the mail. It is time for us to tell people that planting virus into a computer system is not simply a personal ego trip. It is a serious criminal offence.

Sir, implementing legislation to curb computer crime is not new in the world. In the United States, they have already implemented a law since 1984. Certainly their experiences will be valuable to us. It is reported that the Ministry has set up a Committee to study the implementation of new legislation in this particular area. Could the Minister enlighten us about the progress of work of the Committee?

Mr Davinder Singh (Toa Payoh GRC): Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to declare my interest as a solicitor.

Sir, last year I had raised the question whether our insolvency laws would be revised to bring them in line with the Insolvency Act in England and the Minister said that he would look into this. I wonder whether he could be good enough to give this House a progress report on that.

Sir, while I am on my feet, may I have your permission to touch on a topic which Dr Beng raised, that is, Queen's Counsel?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Davinder Singh: Thank you, Sir.

Sir, in Singapore there are two types of lawyers who can appear in the Courts - first, it is the Singapore lawyer who has been admitted to practise in Singapore; and secondly, it is the Queen's Counsel who is admitted on a case by case basis. The Queen's Counsel is only admitted if he satisfies certain pre-requisites, one of which is that he must be a specialist in his field.

The rationale behind allowing admission of Queen's Counsel is this. Queen's Counsels are experienced English Barristers who specialise in one area of the law. You may have commercial law, but they specialise in a sub-area within that wider field, for example, either in banking or company law within a commercial field, and similarly for constitutional law and public law.

There are two advantages to this. First is that the client gets better representation. It must follow that if you have a barrister who spends the better part of his life dealing with one area of the law, chances are he will be more up-to-date and that he will be better in that area than other lawyers. He will also be able to see more issues and different angles to any one problem within that area of law.

The second advantage is that the law in Singapore develops. This is because Judges rely heavily on Counsels. And if Counsels are good, they will be able to assist the Court in relation to the applicable law and how the law should move, whether in line with the law in England or whether specially in a particular direction in Singapore.

Why is it that they specialise and Singapore lawyers do not specialise to the same degree? It is because in England the system is a split profession, unlike Singapore which is fused. Here, after you graduate from the Law Faculty, you can practise both as a solicitor and as an advocate. You can go and appear in Court, at the same time do office work, whereas in England you decide on graduation what you want to do. You either do a solicitor's job or you become a barrister, and you spend the rest of your life doing that. You join a particular set of chamber. It may be commercial, it may be criminal, and you do nothing but the type of work which that set of chamber attracts, and therefore you specialise.

The question is: should we in Singapore follow that system? Should we also have a split profession? Personally, I think not, for the reason that we will not, in the foreseeable future, attract good people to do a barrister job. There is not the status of a barrister's in England that is present in Singapore or will be present in the foreseeable future. It is also not an easy job. It is not as lucrative as a solicitor's job. If we are not going to get good people to join the Law Faculty in the first instance and then to persuade these good students to specialise in barrister's work, then it is going to be very difficult to build up a core of specialists who can appear in Court to the exclusion of Queen's Counsel.

What then is the solution? The solution is not to carry on the present practice, which is to have ad hoc admissions of Queen's Counsels, whether the case is complex or not. I firmly believe that Queen's Counsels continue to play a very useful role in Singapore. There are many cases which they should continue to appear in which perhaps local counsels are not as experienced or not so specialised in. For example, constitutional law and some aspects of commercial law. But then again, there must be stricter guidelines in the sense that we must limit admissions to highly complex matters.

The way to address this, I believe, is perhaps the formation of a committee comprising representatives from the Ministry of Law, a judge perhaps and definitely lawyers. We must have lawyers on this committee to decide or to give their views on what nature of applications should we exclude Queen's Counsel from. It is not a difficult task because you can identify a whole series of applications which you do not require specialist assistance. If we can prepare an exhaustive list, then in so far as they are matters which fall outside that list, we shall then leave them to the courts to decide whether in each particular case the matter is of such a complex nature that it requires assistance from England. That way we assist the courts in their task and I think we also develop talent in Singapore. But until that is done, the paramount interest must be the protection of the client. And if the client is better represented by a Queen's Counsel, then he must have that right.

Mr K. Shanmugam (Sembawang GRC): Sir, I would like to say a few words on what the hon. Member for Fengshan has said. I should declare my interest as a lawyer.

Sir, we must be one of the few countries in the world which allows specialist barristers from other jurisdictions to appear in our courts with comparative ease. This infusion has had its benefits. Where expertise is not available locally, everyone benefits by importing such expertise, in particular by the use of English silks. However, we recognise that unlimited use of English silks may in fact tamper the growth of specialist advocates in Singapore. It becomes all too easy for the local bar to rely on what is termed the "Queen's Counsel crutch". These sentiments were expressed by Mr David Marshall 12 years ago in a Braddell Memorial Lecture. He said:

'We should be conscious of the dangers of the excessive use of the Queen's Counsel crutch. An occasional Queen's counsel pre-eminent in his esoteric field could be a stimulant to the Bench and the Bar. But today they are here in substantial numbers and are a routine sight in our courts. The present liberality may well inhibit the emergence and development of local specialist bar.'

Since that warning was given, the position, if anything, has moved towards even greater use of Queen's Counsel. Thanks to the greater ease of travel and the increased economic activity. This must affect the growth, in my view, of the local specialist bar. A vigorous and strong bar is essential if Singapore is to continue to develop as a regional, financial and service centre. But a balance has to be struck. We should not shut the door altogether to English QCs. They provide a very useful service and we have much to benefit and learn from them. Rather, we should review the present system and see what we can do to tighten the rules so as to ensure that only in really necessary cases are English QCs admitted to practise in Singapore. If we are too restrictive, then we deny to Singaporeans the access to expertise which is otherwise not available in Singapore.

On this point, I would like to touch on what my colleague, the hon. Member for Toa Payoh GRC has said. He says that he takes the view that he does not favour the split profession in Singapore, mainly because he does not see that young lawyers would become barristers. It is an uncertain future and financially it may not be lucrative at this stage. So the experiment may not succeed.

Personally, I tend to take a slightly different view. England is an example of a split profession in the extreme. You are either a barrister or a solicitor. There is no middle ground. But there are examples in other jurisdictions. For example, New Zealand with a population similar to that of Singapore, slightly bigger, and economic development not very different, has specialist barristers, solicitors and a third category of lawyers who are both barristers and solicitors. So a young graduate who graduates from the Law School can choose. He can either decide to specialise as a barrister or as a solicitor or he can decide to do both. And what happens is that most people take the best of all options. They decide to do everything first and then after a few years, 10 years, 15 years, they go and become specialist barristers with the idea of becoming judges. So a small specialist bar is developed.

Similar examples occur in the various Australian jurisdictions. And the legal system of Australia, New Zealand and England is the same common law tradition. I think we should look at that because ultimately the question is one of providing specialist barristers to be able to deal with complex cases. As long as we have the present system of lawyers having to do both solicitor's work and go and argue cases in court, it may be difficult to develop that specialisation and we may be rushing into cutting off QCs and then not providing Singaporeans with an alternative. So I suggest, yes, we must restrict and ensure that QCs are only used in absolutely essential cases. But that is only a short-term solution. In the long term, ultimately we must provide an alternative in Singapore so that there will come a time when we do not need the Queen's Counsel crutch altogether.

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, first can I respond to Dr Arthur Beng, Mr Davinder Singh and Mr Shanmugam's comments on Queen's Counsel? I think the best way I can respond to it is by answering Dr Arthur Beng as to what was or could have been the legislative intent when our Legal Profession Act provided for admission of QCs. It is worthwhile recalling that QCs are allowed to come in because we the Government and Parliament specifically have so provided for in the Legal Profession Act. The reason why we allow QCs to come in is really public interest and national interest, ie, it is a recognition of the fact that there are cases or there can be cases of such complexity or difficulty that there may not be the local expertise here or there may not be enough of the local expertise here to provide that kind of skills to handle cases of such complexity and difficulty.

If that is the reason why QCs were allowed in and why the Legal Profession Act provided for it, I would say that reason continues to exist. With Singapore trying to be a leading financial and commercial centre, we will have this need for expertise to handle difficult and complex cases. So I too share the views expressed by the three of them that the practice of allowing QCs should not be stopped and it should continue.

The specific provision in the Legal Profession Act says that QCs can be admitted on an ad hoc basis where "he has special qualifications or experience for the purpose of the case". So the legislative policy is very clear. They are obviously to be admitted for cases of complexity or difficulty where the needed skills or experience or the specialist knowledge is not readily available here. To put it in a different way, Parliament never envisaged or contemplated that they should be admitted for the routine or the ordinary or the simple case which can easily be handled by Singapore lawyers. It is for this reason, I believe that the scheme for the provisions of QCs also allows for the Law Society, in addition to the Attorney-General, to specifically put their views on each application of a QC to the court. So if they have objections, they can and should register the objections with the court, because then the court taking note of all views expressed before it can make a decision.

I too have had feedback from lawyers expressing the same concern of the three colleagues that the system of admission of QCs has gone in a direction which might have not been intended by the legislature and that they are being admitted for the simple, routine and ordinary cases. Such a trend not only was never contemplated or envisaged by Parliament, but I agree with the Members that one unhealthy consequence of this would be that it will stultify the growth of a specialist bar in Singapore. It will impede the growth of a core of good litigation lawyers in Singapore. As to what needs to be done - whether we need to amend the law or whether we need to have a committee, like Mr Davinder Singh suggested, to provide stricter guidelines or do we need more radical surgery, as Mr Shanmugam suggests, possibly with a view to splitting the profession - I will have to discuss and I will discuss these matters with members of the Law Society, the Attorney-General and also seek the views of the Judiciary. I should mention parenthetically that the provision in Malaysia is narrower. It says:

'QCs can be admitted who in the opinion of the court have special qualifications or experience of a nature not available amongst advocates and solicitors in Malaysia.'

So there are various possible solutions to remedy this problem. I repent that I will have to discuss this matter with the Judiciary, the Attorney-General and the Law Society. Obviously something has to be done.

Secondly, on computer crimes, the Government has been concerned with this area which was touched on by Dr Ho Tat Kin, Mr Lau Ping Sum and Dr Low Seow Chay. Therefore, we have had an inter-Ministerial committee formed by representatives of the CID, Commercial Crime Division, Auditor-General's Office, Attorney-General's Office, National Computer Board and Monetary Authority of Singapore. They have studied the problem and have in fact come out with a report with recommendations to have legislation meet the areas where there may be gaps at the present time. This includes the areas touched upon by the Members - hacking, wilful destruction, alteration of data or programmes, theft of computer time and services and so on. They have recommended that there should be a separate omnibus legislation to deal with the problem of computer crime. I would like to assure the Members who have expressed concern that the report of this committee will be sent to the various interested bodies, both in the public and private sectors, for their views, after which the Ministries of Law and Home Affairs will jointly make proposals to Cabinet for the enactment of legislation on computer crime. In short, the matter is being considered by the Ministries and we hope to see some legislation during the course of the next year.

Mr Davinder Singh asked for a progress report on the points he raised last year about the Insolvency Bill. I am glad to say that the Attorney-General's Chambers has now prepared a first draft of the Insolvency Bill which touches on some of the points he spoke about and the first draft of this Bill has been sent to the Law Society as well as to the Institute of Certified Public Accountants for their comments. Thereafter, we will improve the Bill and here again I hope that the Bill will be in a shape that we can present it to Parliament.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, before I withdraw, I would like to clarify one point. When I was speaking about specialisation I was not referring to either a "fused" or a "non-fused" profession. That is best left to the profession. I was thinking in terms of giving lawyers an opportunity to specialise in fields like, say, shipping, building contracts, etc.

I would like to ask the Minister two questions. (1) When will our first Senior Counsel be appointed? (2) He mentioned that he would discuss this matter with the Judiciary, Law Society and the Attorney-General. I hope he will not forget the GPC.

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, the appointment of Senior Counsel is a matter that has been vested in the hands of the Senate of the Academy. I cannot give directions to them, and they in their wisdom will decide on who will be appointed and when they will be appointed.

As to consultation, I take it that it is axiomatic that the Minister for Law will never do anything without consulting the GPC!

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I thank the Minister and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Chay Wai Chuen (Brickworks GRC): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Code SI 1500 of the Main Estimates.

The budget allocated for this item is barely 6.3% higher than in 1989, at $2.16 million. All the increase of this $127,000-odd dollars is accounted for by the increase in salary of the staff. There is no increase in the manpower strength. Very often I hear of the poor constituents who come to complain regarding the unpleasant experience with the Legal Aid Bureau. They can be the poor widow or the single woman separated from the husband. At the same time, I can understand the tight condition that the legal aid Bureau is operating. Why cannot the Minister consider raising the minimum income level for legal aid eligibility and increase the number of legal officers? This would allow more cases to be handled within the Bureau instead of being farmed out to outside lawyers. This can possibly give a more committed and controlled environment for the Bureau's staff in handling the cases of the poor.

I believe this action, if taken by the Minister, can be well regarded by the people of limited means and it will reinforce the perception by the people that justice is for all, and that the Government takes this seriously. I am sorry to inform the Minister that presently when people approach the Legal Aid Bureau they approach them in despair rather than in hope. I know of a case in the constituency where the ---

The Chairman: Mr Chay, we have one minute left. Would you like to have a short reply from the Minister?

Mr Chay Wai Chuen: All right, I will stop here.

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, I will be very brief. First, the Management Services Department did a study of the manpower requirements of the Legal Aid Bureau and they recommended after the study, that there was no need to increase the manpower of the Legal Aid Bureau except for certain clerical staff, ie, support staff for the legal officers. I am glad to say that after discussion with the Director of the Legal Aid Bureau he does not think there is an urgent need to increase the number of legal officers because he is concentrating on matters such as productivity improvement and computerisation of case files, management of cases, which will really improve the tracking of cases and files in the Legal Aid Bureau.

As to raising the minimum income ceiling, I realise that it has not been increased for some time, but what the Member should note is that of the many thousands of cases, about 9,000 each year, the Legal Aid Bureau is able to accept as much as 80% of all those who apply.

The Chairman: Order. It is guillotine time. Mr Chay, would you withdraw your amendment, please?

Mr Chay Wai Chuen: Sir, I withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $103,041,600 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $85,188,300 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: I think it is time for a tea break.

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

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.35 pm

Sitting accordingly suspended at 3.07 pm until 3.35 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.35 pm.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head Q -

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head Q of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100.

Sir, I would like to speak on the upgrading of the Police Force.

Sir, last year the GPC, the Ministry and indeed this House were extremely concerned with the manpower shortfalls in the various uniformed law enforcement agencies. Despite this, our officers have not failed us and they have carried out their duties diligently. In spite of their shortage, they also perform the duties of the international police officers by serving as part of the United Nations contingent in Namibia.

Sir, the GPC welcomes the range of incentives announced by the Minister on 24th February 1990, to provide for not only better salaries but overall, a more satisfying and rewarding career for all law enforcement officers. The morale of the force today is at its peak. This is testimony to the good work of the Ministry of Home Affairs. In particular, Sir, we welcome the setting up of the General Police Scheme of Service to include officers in the Central Narcotics Bureau and the Prisons Service. Sir, the officers in the Prisons Service deserves special tribute as their task is a most unenviable one.

However, Sir, this multi-disciplinary approach to law enforcement now means that the training and career path of the officers has to be carefully thought through. For example, the new recruits will now have to be exposed to a broad base curriculum which should not only include the principles of law enforcement but also the rehabilitation of the offender. It would mean that much more is expected of every single police officer, and the officers must be given the basic training to help them carry out their duties effectively whilst at the same time providing an opportunity for specialising in different spheres and at different times of their career.

In short, Sir, the training offered by the Police Academy should now encompass all these disciplines. I would like to ask the Minister how his Ministry intends to deal with this new challenge. In addition, I would like the Minister to give us an idea conceptually of the career path of a police officer. What are the areas of postgraduate specialisation and what are the opportunities for postgraduate specialisation for the senior officers?

Dr Ho Tat Kin: Sir, in mid-February this year the Minister announced a very good revised salary scheme for the Singapore Police Force and officers of the uniformed service of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Sir, I support this salary revision scheme. This scheme is necessary and timely. It is necessary because the Singapore Police Force is suffering a shortage of about 23% in senior manpower and not only must their salary scale and career path be attractive enough to encourage young people to join but, most important of all, encourage good people to join the Police as crime prevention and crime detection are difficult jobs.

Sir, the salary revision is timely because there is a lot of competition at present for the 'O' level and the 'A' level students. If the salary revision was announced just before the 'O' and 'A' levels results, I believe the Police Force will be able to attract many good school leavers. In order to attract more people to try out the service of the Police Force, the Minister also announced the 6-year contract scheme. While I support this scheme, I believe a 6-year contract may not attract too many young people. As I understand, young people today do not want to tie themselves down to one organisation for too long. I understand some brilliant young people today do not want to apply for scholarships or bursaries because they do not want to sign the bonds. I would therefore like to suggest to the Minister to consider contracts of 3 years to attract more people to join the Force. A 3-year contract scheme will allow both sides to evaluate each other and if both sides are happy at the end of three years, they can always extend the contract for another three years.

Having got the better applicants to join now, obviously the training programme must do justice to them. Last year, at the Committee of Supply, the Minister informed this House of plans to have a new Police Academy with new training curriculum by 1994. I would like to ask the Minister for an update of the progress made since then. I would also like to ask the Minister in particular what aspects of special training to solve murder crimes will be included as murder cases have risen sharply in 1989 to 71 cases compared to 54 cases in 1988 and 50 cases in 1987.

Dr Ong Chit Chung (Bukit Batok): Sir, in the past year, the Ministry of Home Affairs has done much to improve the terms and conditions of service in the Police Force. Morale is high and I wish to congratulate the Ministry on a job well done.

Of course, there is always room for improvement, and more can be done, eg, in the area of training. I believe that good training is the key to high professionalism and motivation.

Sir, the Police Academy plays a pivotal role in the training of our officers, and I would like to ask the Minister, like my colleague, to give an update on the development of the Police Academy. Are sufficient funds, may I ask, being invested in the physical upgrading of the Academy? Will new technology be incorporated in the overall plan of development? Will experienced and bright officers be identified to staff this Academy?

Sir, I also wish to ask if courses are designed for senior officers of the rank of Superintendent and above, which could include studies on national issues and changes in the international environment. This I believe would help to prepare these officers for senior commands in the Police Force.

Sir, we should do all we can to make the Police Academy the pride of place for the police profession, and the centre of excellence in training for this region, attracting trainees from our neighbouring countries, and thereby enhance bilateral relations with them.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I next turn to the upgrading of the Joint Civil Defence Force.

Sir, last year the Singapore Fire Service and the Civil Defence Force were merged to form the Singapore Joint Civil Defence Force. I would like to ask the Minister for an update of the exercise. Is the Joint Civil Defence Force able to carry out the mammoth task of providing an efficient Fire and Emergency Ambulance Service, whilst at the same time preparing itself for major disasters? What are the new programmes that have been initiated by the Singapore Joint Civil Defence Force?

Sir, in this matter of upgrading, I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister the problem of nurses manning the Emergency Ambulance Service. Sir, with the restructuring of Government hospitals, the nurses in the Singapore Joint Civil Defence Force will be left out in terms of career advancement. Will the Ministry of Home Affairs work out with the Ministry of Health a rotation scheme to allow these nurses an opportunity to attend post-basic courses? At a time when we are facing such an acute shortage of nurses, should the Civil Defence Force not now start seriously to study the possibility of training paramedics? Special training could be given to a group of Civil Defence officers to upgrade them to the role of paramedics. The deployment of paramedics in emergency ambulance services is now a well established norm in many countries. It would also provide another career advancement route for our Civil Defence officers whilst, at the same time, providing the long-term solution for the manpower needs of our Emergency Ambulance Service.

Sir, next I would like to refer to the Fire Safety Bureau. Under this reorganisation, the FSB now comes under the Civil Defence Force. Our architects, engineers and the Fire Safety Bureau are working closely to allow for the speedy approval of building plans. I would like to ask the Minister what are the plans that are present to allow for the speedy disposal of building plans whilst at the same time not compromising safety standards.

Dr Ho Tat Kin: Sir, I would also like to ask the Minister for an update of the Singapore Joint Civil Defence Force. Since last year, have there been any operational difficulties encountered? And if so, what are they? Have the operational difficulties been resolved since? And if not, what measures will be taken to ensure that the Singapore Joint Civil Defence Force will operate smoothly?

Sir, in all uniformed services, there is always some elite group to set the pace and eventually the performance of such an elite unit will trickle down to the rest of the Force, for example, the Guards and the Commandos in the SAF and the Tactical Task Force in the Police.

I understand the SJCDF is now in the process of forming such an elite group called DART which will undertake special rescue work. I would like to ask the Minister for the progress made in the formation of DART and the difficulties encountered.

Sir, in late February this year, the Minister opened the new Police HQ at Pearl's Hill. This new Police HQ brings together for the first time many key departments of the Police which previously were dispersed in several places. Obviously, command and coordination will be improved. It will make sense to have the SJCDF located in one operational HQ in a similar manner. I would like to ask the Minister what progress has been made in this direction.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I would like now to turn to the issue of laws on seizure of assets for drug-related offences.

Sir, Singapore has always been in the forefront in the fight against drug abuse. This is due to the realisation that manpower is our only asset. Compulsory rehabilitation is not practised in many countries. But we are one of the few who are very committed to this. We deal with drug offences severely in using even the death sentence. But there are special problems involved in the issue of seizure of assets for drug-related offences as Singapore is trying to develop itself into a financial and services centre.

I would like the Minister to elaborate and to update us as to what is our stand now and what are the problems involved in the drafting of our laws on seizure of assets for drug-related offences.

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, if I may first take up the questions on the Police raised by Dr Arthur Beng, Dr Ho Tat Kin and Dr Ong Chit Chung.

With the salary revision, we hope and are confident that the Police can get a share of good and talented recruits. But as Dr Ho Tat Kin said, everyone, private sector and public sector, is competing for the limited talent pool. So I do not want to mislead Members that although we may be more successful this round, I think Police will always face a manpower problem. It is important that the Police takes conscious attempts to maximise whatever resources they have and this is what the Commissioner of Police plans to do - to concentrate available resources on priority functions of crime prevention, crime detection, law enforcement, order and security.

Apart from the salary revisions, one of the two other important recent developments touched on by the Member was the Police General Scheme of Service under which there will be three components - the Singapore Police Force, the Prisons Department and the Narcotics Service. The advantage of this new General Police Scheme of Service is that although you have three different branches, it will enable the sharing and infusion of talents vis-a-vis the three branches. And it will mean that there can be cross-postings of the more outstanding selected officers which will be beneficial for them as it will expose them to wider aspects of law enforcement problems, including rehabilitation problems. It will be good for their career development.

But in answer to Dr Arthur Beng's question on training, we do not envisage that every recruit into the three branches of the Police General Scheme of Service will have to be trained in everything. In other words, each branch - Police, Narcotics, and Prisons - will continue to be responsible for recruitment of the staff to the three branches. Most of those recruited will serve their careers in the three branches, but the better officers, more outstanding officers, those who have the potential, will be selected for cross-posting. Therefore, it will be these officers who will have to be trained for different roles as and when the occasion arises.

Related to this is the other development of the establishment of a Police and Civil Defence Services Commission. This is a proposal contained in a Bill, the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment No. 2) Bill, which will be taken through its final stages (Second Reading and Third Reading) sometime next week. The Police and Civil Defence Services Commission, like the proposed Education Service Commission, is one of two sub-Commissions of the PSC which will be established. There are advantages. It is hoped that this sub-Commission over a period of time will gain sufficient familiarity and in-depth knowledge of the requirements of the Services, that means, the Police General Scheme of Service and the Civil Defence Scheme of Service, as well as have an in-depth knowledge of the various officers. It will enable the sub-Commission to make decisions not only on career development, postings, promotions, but also it will be able to take decisions on transfers as between the Services, that means, from the Police General Scheme of Service to the Civil Defence Scheme of Service. So here too there will be healthy beneficial sharing of talent, which is very important, because if you look at it in one way, the Police is the agency which has the greatest share of talent whereas the Prisons and Narcotics Services are smaller groups but yet are expected to perform very important law, order, security functions.

Once we have the Police and Civil Defence Services Commission with the Police General Scheme of Service, it enables a flexibility which will not only be good for law enforcement but it is also good for the better officers in these Services.

I now turn to the specific questions asked by the Members. Career profile - we can only answer it in general terms. We expect that for a junior officer, he would spend, say, the first two years of his career as patrolman where he learns the basic policing skills. During this period, his performance and aptitude will be closely monitored by his superiors. After the two years, he will be streamed into one of the specialised areas of policing such as inves- tigations, community policing, traffic, CID, and so on. If the officer is found suitable in the specialised area, he will be given advanced training. Similarly for senior officers, they will spend the first two years as investigators, after which they will be streamed to respective specialised areas according to their aptitudes.

Next question that Dr Arthur Beng asked was about training of recruits. Under the proposed General Scheme of Service, the officers will be recruited into their respective branches - Prisons, Police and Narcotics - as the case may be, according to their attributes. The majority will serve their career there, and it is only the better selected officers who will be cross-posted.

As for post-graduate specialisation, what we envisage is that the outstanding police officers will be given post-graduate scholarships to pursue courses in not only police-oriented subjects in specialised colleges abroad but also in subjects such as public administration, security management in prestigious institutions overseas. Officers with good potential will also be sent to foreign police colleges either in the United States or United Kingdom.

If I may turn to the points raised by Dr Ong Chit Chung and Dr Ho Tat Kin. First, let me deal with the point raised by Dr Ho Tat Kin on murder cases. I think we should view figures carefully. If the murder rates have gone up, it may be of interest to Members to know that if we take the figures for the past 10 years on murder rates, about 50% of all murders each year are crimes of passion, ie, murders committed in that kind of situation. Although any murder should cause concern, we should particularly interested to examine the figures for murders which were committed in the course of commission of a crime, such as murders committed during the course of a robbery. That is a good indicator of lawlessness and state of crime. Crimes of passion, while we wish we can reduce them, are not easily preventable. I am glad to say that if you look at the figures for the past 10 years, murders committed during the course of robbery, that category has never exceeded 20%. We will watch the figures carefully. But it is good to know that the figures are under control and they have not gone to the heights which exist in some other urban cities.

As for the Police Academy, there are plans to relocate the existing Police Academy in Thomson Road to a different site because the existing site at Thomson Road has to be freed for other public development purposes. The Ministry is now considering an alternative site, I believe in Yishun, and to develop a new Police Academy there. The proposed new Academy of course will be the main training institution not only for the Police but I also hope that it can be a training institution for other related law enforcement organisations, especially now that we have the Police General Scheme of Service like CNB, Prisons, and so on. But it is premature for me to go into more details when the plans are still in a fluid state.

Questions were asked about what we have in store for training of police officers. First, Police intends to develop specialist officers in different areas of policing such as CID, commercial crime, and this was mentioned by Dr Ong Chit Chung, white collar crimes, and what was mentioned earlier in the debate on the Ministry of Law, computer crimes. There are new areas where we will have to train officers, particularly when the legislation of computer crimes comes into force.

Secondly, Police intends to upgrade the contents of the course which are now conducted in the Police Academy by setting up subject-based units. In other words, these units will be staffed by specialist officers who will develop curriculum in their respective fields such as community policing, police tactics, operations and so on.

Dr Ho Tat Kin asked about the recently introduced concept of contracts, why not three years instead of six years? We have not decided on the option of three years, for the reason that the amount of time and energy involved in training a new police recruit does not warrant giving a three-year contract. So much energy is put into it and so much time is spent in the training of a new police recruit, I think that for optimum results we need a longer period of contract and we think six years strikes a good balance.

Let me now go on to the Members' comments on civil defence. I think Dr Arthur Beng and Dr Ho Tat Kin touched on this. First, may I say that part of his comments on the Fire Safety Bureau will be dealt with by my colleague, the Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs, when he answers Mr Lau Ping Sum's questions later on, because these two are related.

As for the update on the Civil Defence and Fire Service integration, I would like to say that we are pleased with the way things are going and there are some good indicators to show that the integration has yielded positive results. First of all, the integration which involves the headquarters and the divisional HQs of both forces has resulted in more effective and speedier responses to the public in the provision of fire fighting, ambulance and rescue services. For example, the percentage of fire calls responded to within 8 minutes has increased from 70.8% one year before integration to 79.1%, 10 months after integration. That is a significant improvement. False alarms for fire and ambulance services have reduced by 31% when we compare one year before integration to 10 months after integration. It is reduced by 31% from 4,953 to 3,410.

Next, with integration, Civil Defence has been able to look at overall improvement of important matters such as rescue services. And here I am glad to inform the Member, Dr Ho Tat Kin, when he asked about specialised rescue units which he referred to as DART. Let me explain. There are now three specialised squads in Civil Defence. In other words, search and rescue squad which is involved in rescuing people from high-rise situations; secondly, an MRT strike force which was an outfit trained to operate in MRT tunnels; thirdly, the blitz squad which was raised for ground rescues.

With the integration of the Fire Service and Civil Defence, the Singapore Joint Civil Defence Force is converting the three squads into one single smaller and effec- tive rescue force which will have diverse expert rescue capabilities. The acronym for this new specialised rescue squad is DART (Disaster Assistance and Rescue Team). The intention is that this new rescue group, DART, will be fully operational by 1991 and will have a strength of three platoons comprising 109 specially selected men, specially selected because of their fitness, their experience, their courage and their leadership qualities. I expect that DART will probably be the most experienced and quick response team in Singapore. In fact, the first platoon has already been formed. Under DART, a platoon will be always on call 24 hours to be able to respond immediately to any disaster rescue situation.

He asked about coordination of different commands and stations. With the integration of the Singapore Fire and Civil Defence into the Joint Civil Defence Force, the HQ staff of the new organisation are now housed in two separate locations - Bendemeer Camp and the former IE building at Paterson Road. To enable greater coordination amongst the various HQ staff and to meet the projected space requirements of the SJCDF, we now have plans to redevelop the Bendemeer Camp into a headquarters complex. This new complex is scheduled for completion in 1995. Meanwhile, during the interim period, the Bendemeer Camp will be renovated and the working conditions there made more efficient and suitable for these new functions.

Dr Arthur Beng then spoke about assets seizure. I believe he raised this because the question was asked of me last year and I said that this was a matter to which we would give careful consideration. I am glad to inform Members that the Government has decided to proceed with the enactment of assets seizure law for drug traffickers.

We already have some of the toughest laws on drug trafficking - death penalty, preventive detention for those whom it is impossible to prosecute in court, caning and so on. And for the addicts, we have DRCs. Why enact an assets seizure law? In our view, an assets seizure law will be useful as a further weapon in our package of legislative instruments to deal with the problem of drug trafficking. The proposed assets seizure law will provide powers in the following areas: tracing, freezing of assets and confiscation of assets of drug traffickers.

To prevent a suspected trafficker from liquidating or transferring his assets, the prosecutor will have to have the power to apply to the courts to freeze the assets identified. Also, we will have to make provisions for the custody of these assets and there can be various kinds of assets, not just cash. This is where some of the complication arises. In some other countries, they have had the problem of taking custody of boats, aeroplanes and so on. There will also be provisions for the seizure of assets to be carried out upon court conviction for offences related to trafficking, manufacturing, importing, exporting of drugs.

The drafting of this law will not be an easy task, because I do not envisage our draftsmen simply adapting or copying the laws of other countries, because the laws of other countries are framed in legal contexts which are different from ours. To give you one problem. What do we do with the ill-gotten gains of those big-time traffickers who are under preventive detention, under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act? They have not been convicted by a court. They are drug traffickers and they may have assets. Should they be exempt? That is one of the questions which none of the assets seizure laws of other Western countries deals with. Because if they cannot convict a drug trafficker, he goes off scot-free. There is no such thing as preventive detention.

Next, we must also ensure that there are safeguards to take care of the point which Dr Arthur Beng mentioned, ie, to ensure that there will be no abuse of this law, such as unwarranted or unjustified requests for information on bank accounts. We must make sure that when information is sought, it is for valid and bona fide purposes and not on the pretext of some other excuse.

As for individuals, this law will have to make provisions to safeguard the interest of innocent third parties, because illegal drug proceeds may be intermingled, either intentionally or otherwise, with assets of legitimate businesses. How do we take care of these problems?

Provisions will also have to be included to protect financial institutions or other agencies which extend their cooperation to the authorities to disclose information without consent of the client. So we will have to make a careful study not only of the laws of other countries but the experience of other countries in overcoming some of these problems. Our draftsmen will have to come out with the law which best suits our purposes to meet our problems and which is best for our legal framework. So it may take some time before the law will be ready. But I am glad to say that we have decided that we will proceed with the enactment of such a law.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek some clarification. Firstly, the drug assets seizure law. 90% of our population live in HDB estates. If a drug trafficker has his home confiscated, what happens to the family? This is one situation that is quite peculiar to Singapore, as the Minister has mentioned earlier. There are situations that are peculiar to Singapore and the public housing programme is something which I hope the Minister will take into account.

Specific questions on the police. First, for 'A' level officers, is there any scheme for good officers to study in the NUS either on a scholarship or on a grant? This is important if we want to keep many of our good younger officers.

Secondly, how may post-graduate scholarships will be offered per annum? One anxiety is that there will be too few scholarships and these may be restricted only to those who are scholarship holders already, eg, President scholars or Colombo Plan scholars.

Thirdly, will the Minister please remind the sub-commission of the PSC to ensure regular, if not, annual promotion exercises? This is an area of discontent often mentioned by officers. Would the Minister please care to comment?

Prof. Jayakumar: First, on the question of promotion, whether it will be done annually or twice a year. I am aware of the concern which the Member has expressed. But when I announced the salary revision and the General Police Scheme of Service, I also announced that promotions will be held annually from now onwards. So this takes care of that problem.

As for the assets seizure law, perhaps the details would be best left to discussion as and when the first draft of the Bill has emerged. I am sure the problems raised by the Member will not only be tackled then but there will be a host of other similar concepts which will have to be attended to by the draftsman and by the Government.

May I suggest that the specific questions he raised as to how many post-graduate officers will be sent for training abroad and the availability of how many scholarships for 'A' level officers, perhaps these are details that can be taken up when the GPC has its regular consultations, because I do not have the information with me.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for his detailed answers and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Dr Ho Tat Kin: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Code QC 1500 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, illegal parking has been a constant problem on Singapore roads and in some housing estates. In January this year, the Traffic Police did a very good job in clearing many illegal parking. I want to find out from the Minister what progress has been made to solve illegal parking problems since then?

Illegal parking poses a hazard to other road users. Drivers who park illegally or double park or some even triple park, block off the free access to roads. Currently, the police issues summons and tow away vehicles. From 392 cars towed away in 1986, there is a nearly three-fold increase to 1,555 cars in 1988. But towing away illegally parked cars is very labour-intensive and is very unproductive work. Towing charges at present are also no deterrent. For example, towing charge for motorcycle is $40, while towing charge for cars which exceed 3,000 cc is only $110. People who can afford to drive a 3,000 cc car will consider a towing fee of $110 as tips. If you look at the storage charges for tow-away vehicles, it is $10 for motorcycle but for a 3,000 cc car it is only $20. These charges are definitely out of proportion. What I would like to suggest is that towing fees and storage charges be made proportional to the size of vehicles and the offenders be charged the two costs involved.

Can the Ministry also seriously consider using the lock-wheel system to immobilise illegally parked cars? I think this has been used at some multi-storey car parks with some success.

Dr Wong Kwei Cheong (Cairnhill): Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for a progress report of actions taken against touting activities, ever since the new touting law under section 36(1) of the Minor Offences Act came into force on 9th June 1989. In particular, I would like to know the number of police raids conducted against touts in the Orchard Road area, the counterfeit goods, especially watches seized, the number of touts arrested and the number of touts imprisoned. Under the new law, have touting activities been finally brought under control? If not, what other measures will be introduced to solve the problem?

Mr Loh Meng See (Kampong Glam): Sir, I would like to speak on the police procedures.

Sir, we are upgrading our Police Force with better qualified and competent officers. With the community policing programmes, our law enforcement operation has been delegated more and more to the officers in our Neighbourhood Police Post. I wish to ask the Minister whether the procedures specified in the Criminal Procedure Codes are rendered obsolete and needed updating? I ask this in view of the improvements and developments taking place in our Police Force. I believe our police officers are capable and competent and they could be entrusted with greater responsibilities in upholding the law.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, I have got two amendments. With your leave, may I take them together?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, it is reported in the budget that the number of people deployed as security screening personnel has risen from 200 to 359, a substantial increase of 60% for FY 1990. The Opposition is naturally curious: why this sudden increase in security manpower? Is this greater number of security men employed to check on Singaporeans or on foreigners? I certainly hope that they are not used against Singaporeans. I would like to ask the Minister certain clarifications. Why this increase in number? What is the nature of their work? Who do they screen? Do they also screen Singaporeans who are outside Singapore?

Sir, as regards the second amendment, it is also noted in the budget that the number of seizable offences is expected to increase from 1,820 to 2,340 per 100,000 population. The crime rate of serious offences is on the rise. Sir, I think the question is not to quickly increase the size of the Police Force but, more importantly whether or not the police personnel in the Force could be better trained and be more effective in curbing crimes. And also, Sir, I would ask the Minister, since serious crime rate is on the rise, will he consider diverting police officers from the security services programme to the crime control programme?

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: Sir, I have two amendments. I will take one after the other.

The Chairman: Yes.

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: I am perturbed, Sir, by the many reports of police violence against arrested persons and those detained for investigations. Police investigations of such reports of violence leave much to be desired. It is difficult to convince people outside the Police Force that there is no cover-up in such police investigations. Would the Minister consider setting up some form of a watch committee comprising of people outside the Police Force to play a real watchdog role to investigate into the complaints of police violence against those arrested and detained?

Another matter that needs the Minister's attention is this. The whole world is relaxed. Is it not also time to relax our internal security activities of the police? Our secret police is in the habit of putting political opponents under surveillance. How many political opponents are currently put under police surveillance? What is the extent of phone-tapping? Is our mail regularly intercepted and detained? What is the total amount spent on internal security?

Finally, when other countries have relaxed internal security activities and released political detainees, when is Government going to release our own political detainees in Singapore? Now that Mr Nelson Mandela has been released, when is Chia Thye Poh, who should now gain a prominent place in the Guinness Book of Records as the longest term political detainee in the world, to be released? I hope the Minister will give a satisfactory answer.

The next amendment is about traffic congestion. There are many reasons why there is traffic congestion in Singapore. Mr Chin Harn Tong has eloquently touched on one of them. Another reason is the total failure or mis-timing of traffic lights and a non-synchronisation of traffic lights along short stretches of busy roads. We are supposed to have computerisation to help ease our traffic flow in the city, yet many must have been irked and annoyed by the traffic chaos in busy traffic junctions where traffic lights have failed or are mis-timed. There is usually a big pile-up of traffic. There is even danger of motor accidents as motorists try to quickly get through. Similarly, many motorists are justifiably annoyed when they start their cars only to be stopped after going 100 metres or so, and again after another 50 metres at another traffic junction and so on.

I believe every motorist has now and again found this type of traffic congestion along the stretch of road from Orchard Road/Bras Basah Road junction, right through Bras Basah Road to Raffles Boulevard. It is most annoying and an unnecessary waste of time. What has the Traffic Police done about such traffic congestion? Sometimes when he is most needed, the traffic policeman is just not present. Is there any traffic policeman permanently stationed in certain busy road junctions? If not, why cannot a traffic policeman or two be stationed permanently in certain busy road junctions to ensure smooth, unobstructed traffic flow? The Traffic Police should also correctly use manpower to deal with the more important and urgent problems of traffic control and not to go along to serve traffic summonses to motorists who infringe parking regulations for a few minutes but who do not obstruct traffic flow in any way. Will the Minister please comment on what I have just said?

Encik Yatiman Yusof: Sir, in supporting this amendment, I would like to draw the attention of the House to the redevelopment of Woodlands Checkpoint.

Sir, the Checkpoint plays an important aspect in our effort to facilitate the smooth flow of thousands of persons and vehicles passing through the Checkpoint. When I passed through the Checkpoint recently, I realised an that a major transformation is taking place. I would like to ask the Minister whether the redevelopment has eased the flow of people and vehicles through the Checkpoint. Secondly, I would also like to ask what is the Ministry's future plan to increase the capacity and effectiveness of the Woodlands Checkpoint? Thirdly, since the Checkpoint is also a place where foreigners and overland travellers enter Singapore for the first time and it would create the first impression on them, I would like to find out whether the Minister has plans to improve the quality of the human aspect of this Checkpoint?

Finally, Sir, we are aware that Lorong Fatimah has been recently acquired for redevelopment. I would like to find out whether the acquisition of the place is in line with the future plans to expand Woodlands Checkpoint further?

The Chairman: Order. Moment of Interruption.

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

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1990/91, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Speaker: So be it.