ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR - 1ST APRIL, 1994 TO 31ST MARCH, 1995 - <div align="center"> <h4>[Mr Speaker in the Chair]</h4> </div>
Sir, I thank the Members for raising the various issues. I will try to answer all of them, except for Mr Koo's question on tests for citizenship, Dr Soin's question on spousal domestic violence and Mr Lau Ping Sum's question on training of police officers. I will leave these questions to my Parliamentary Secretary to deal with later. Sir, let me assure Members that the drug enforcement and control problem will always remain the priority area in my Ministry's agenda. As Dr Arthur Beng rightly pointed out, the problem cannot be completely eradicated. We must relentlessly ensure that the situation is kept in check as much as possible. The drug situation in Singapore, as in any country, depends on several factors, for example, the supply of drugs from external sources, the changing patterns of drug consumption, and our enforcement and rehabilitation programmes which must continue with vigour. Over the last six years or so, relentless efforts have been put into enforcement against drug traffickers and addicts. Much emphasis was also put on rehabilitating the addicts. There were many innovative programmes being tried out such as the exit counselling programme, the use of electronic monitoring system and drug rehabilitation programme tailored to suit the various categories of drug abuses. Recently, our drug rehabilitation centres (DRCs) have seen an increase in the number of drug addicts. In 1993, for example, 4,740 addicts were admitted into the DRC as compared with, say, 3,823 in 1991. That shows an increase of 24%. The number of hardcore addicts, and by "hardcore" I mean those who are third timers and above, amongst them has also increased due to relapse. The number of hardcore addicts has increased from 48% in 1991 to 51% in 1993. The relapse rate now stands at 70%, which means that 70% of these drug addicts go back to taking drugs within two years after their release from the DRC. And we also keep the repeater drug addicts longer in the DRC. This has therefore contributed to the increase in the DRC population which is now about 8,130 as at the end of 1993. This increase indicates that we need to fine-tune and make adjustments to the current two-pronged strategy of curbing supply and demand. On the supply side, I have asked the CNB to step up its enforcement action against all drug traffickers, whether they are big, small or ant traffickers. For those who cannot be prosecuted in court because their witnesses or their accomplices are not willing to go to court and give evidence, then we will detain them under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act. As at the end of December last year, we have 427 persons detained under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act for drug trafficking. We also need to consider the regime in the DRC. This will help to curb the demand, hopefully. CNB and Police will step up their efforts to round up addicts and send them to the DRC for treatment and rehabilitation. But in the end, it is really up to the addicts whether they want to be reformed or rehabilitated. We can only do so much for them. For those who are amenable to change and responsive to rehabilitation, generally we think these are the first and second timers, we can and we will adopt a compassionate and helpful approach. But for the hardcore addicts and recalcitrant addicts, that means, the third timers and above, I think we cannot keep treating them as patients who need assistance and help to kick off the drug habit. We need to draw a line somewhere, given our limited resources and not let these addicts return to the DRC time and again. We now even have eight timers and above in the DRC. The number of such real recalcitrant and hardcore addicts will only continue to grow if they keep on relapsing. So we must adopt a tougher approach towards such drug addicts. We will continue to detain them in the DRC for progressively longer periods and to add to the deterrent effect, my Ministry is also considering incorporating some of the features of prison life in the DRC regime. For example, we will lock them up for a longer period initially and we will introduce tougher physical drills and exercises. We will also cut down drastically on the privileges and the opportunities for recreational activities for these addicts. I am also considering whether for the truly hardcore addicts (fifth timers and above) that Dr Arthur Beng talked about, they should not be prosecuted in court and let the court decide to send them to jail, instead of the CNB sending them to the DRC. Compared with the prison, of course, the DRCs are more like camps and addicts sleep in dormitories, and drug addicts feel a sense of community because they are meeting their own kind when they are together. Like Dr Beng said, there is a sense of home-coming whenever they get back to the DRC. I think this situation is not on, whereas in jail, and "jail" literally means behind bars, I think these real hardcore addicts should have a taste of it. The option of charging these addicts in court with a view of having them sent to jail is not new. In fact, under the Misuse of Drugs Act, anyone who is found guilty of drug-taking or smoking, self-administering, consuming controlled drugs is liable to be punished by up to 10 years of imprisonment or a fine of up to $20,000, or both. The minimum sentence for a second or subsequent offence where a person is sentenced by the court is three years' imprisonment. In the past, very few addicts were prosecuted because we have always treated them as patients and we try not to leave them with a conviction record. But if they choose to relapse repeatedly, then I do not see why they should not be sent to court and let the court send them to jail. If that is still insufficient deterrence, then we can consider introducing caning for such hardcore addicts, in addition to imprisonment. Some may probably argue that adopting such a tough approach or this option of sending the addicts to jail will mean that they will have a criminal record and therefore this will mar them for life and that will ruin the chances for full rehabilitation. Our records show that most of these hardcore addicts already have criminal records. Therefore, the argument of helping them to keep a clean record is not really valid. Our data show that for the more hardcore addicts, the more hardcore an addict becomes, the more likely he is to have a criminal record. For example, while 55% of the first and second timers had past criminal convictions, this figure rose to 64% for the third and fourth timers, and 75% for the fifth timers and above. In other words, three out of four fifth timers and above have a criminal record. In fact, for the 10th timers and above, I can guarantee that all of them have a criminal record. Most of the offences committed were for property offences, which means robbery, theft, housebreaking and also for drug trafficking. 4.30 pm The Prisons Department recently did a random survey of 60 drug addicts - 20 first timers, 20 third timers and 20 fifth timers and above. These drug addicts are with criminal records and the results show that 65% of them had started with drugs first before they committed their first criminal offence. Another study of about 50 criminal law detainees who were ant traffickers also showed that 90% of them admitted to being drug addicts before becoming drug traffickers. All this evidence suggests that drug addiction leads to crime and if we do not control this situation, then definitely our crime rates cannot go down. So there is a strong correlation between hardcore drug addiction and crime. It also highlights the potential danger of drug abuse to our society, and I do not intend to let this happen. Besides the above enforcement measures, we will also be placing emphasis on preventive drug education programmes to reach out to the youths to make sure that before they start taking drugs, we try to get to them and educate them on the evils of taking drugs. But the Ministry alone cannot achieve this objective on its own. The community and the schools must also play their part in spreading the anti-drug message to our youths, especially those who are identified to be potential school drop-outs as well as those who have already dropped out of schools. Based on our studies, we know the drug addicts generally come from these two groups of youth. They are most likely to abuse drugs. We must find ways to prevent them from doing so. In addition, the Ministry will also try to strengthen the after-care support for drug addicts released from the DRC so that they can have a better chance of rehabilitation. However, this task should not be undertaken by the Government alone. The participation of the family and the community is essential and critical if an addict is to be fully reintegrated into society. We will, therefore, explore various ways to enlist the help of the drug addicts' families and the community organisations, such as, SANA, the half-way houses, and so on, to help to provide after-care services to these ex-addicts. But let me also say that, ultimately, it is the addict himself who must want to change. If he does not want to change, then no amount of treatment, rehabilitation by the Government, community help, or family support, is going to help him change for the better. To ensure that our efforts against drug traffickers and addicts are well coordinated and executed, the Ministry recently appointed a committee chaired by the Parliamentary Secretary, Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee, to look into the drug problem. The committee has submitted its report and the Ministry is now looking at the various recommendations with a view of implementing them. I have already mentioned some of these recommendations earlier, such as better preventive drug education and after-care as well as a tougher DRC regime to deter hardcore addicts. I want to emphasise that the problem of drug abuse will always remain with us so long as we are close by to one of the major centres of drug production and so long as there are people who want to take drugs and there are people who want to sell them. We must, therefore, be constantly on our guard and adopt new and innovative methods to counter this problem effectively. But let me also emphasise that we must look at these things in perspective. Indeed, compared with many other countries, the drug situation in Singapore is under control and we are determined to keep it that way. Regarding the questions on crime, Dr Arthur Beng brought up a few questions. They concern the crime situation and juvenile crimes, outraging of modesty, and construction work site crimes, and he wants to know our strategy. As I said about a couple of weeks ago, the crime situation in Singapore is satisfactory. For five years in a row, we have recorded a decline in the overall crime rate and significant declines were recorded for crimes such as snatch theft, motorcycle theft, robbery and housebreaking. But we see an increase in the outraging of modesty. Here, I refer to simple outraging of modesty. There is also aggravated outraging of modesty, but the number of aggravated outraging of modesty has been quite consistent. I will let my Parliamentary Secretary deal with this because there is a question to be raised by Dr Soin later on, and a fuller reply will be given. Regarding crimes and murders in the construction work sites, we take a very serious view of this. Last year, we noted that quite a number of murders were committed in the construction sites and many of these were foreign criminals who came here to steal quite expensive survey equipment in the construction work sites. The Police has mounted an operation recently. Last year, they also had a success, but recently, about a couple of weeks ago, they managed to get a group of Thai illegal immigrants, or overstayers, in a particular work site. The matter is now being investigated to see whether they are implicated in the thefts of some of these equipment as well as in the murders. The Police has also worked with the Contractors Association and the insurance industry to see how these equipment can be better covered and protected, and ensure that contractors do not leave equipment lying around and tempt any would-be criminal to steal them. We are also considering whether, for instance, when we know or suspect that some insider information has been provided by the foreign workers in the work sites to the foreign criminals and they refuse to come forward, tougher measures should also not be taken against these foreign workers, for example, by packing them off, if they refuse to cooperate. I can assure the Member that we are taking a very serious view of this and we will do something about keeping this crime down. Regarding the disturbing trend mentioned by Dr Beng on the increasing number of juvenile offenders, yes, indeed, the number of juvenile delinquents has recorded an increase last year to 1,878 which is an increase of about 27% over the figure for 1992. The number of arrests has also increased from 1,205 in 1990 to 1,300 in 1991. And Dr Beng just recounted the incidents of a case where a 12-year old boy was arrested for molesting an 11-year old girl and a student who threatened his teacher with a pen-knife. There was also an incident where a boy set fire to his former school when he became bored. We continue to see such groups of youth hanging aimlessly around shopping centres and in public areas, some of them will, no doubt, succumb to the adage that an idle mind is a devil's workshop. The Police is aware of this problem and has adopted several measures to help keep these youths out of trouble and from associating with secret societies. For example, the Police has conducted talks in schools and to youth groups, advising them not to get involved in crime, counselling them before their parents and arranging for some of them to visit the prison to see what kind of life is waiting for them if they happen to be in prison. At the end of the tour, many of the boys said that it is a really scary experience and we hope that this will scare them from getting involved in crime. Despite these measures, juvenile offenders are still on the rise and it clearly shows that more needs to be done. I agree with Dr Beng that if we do not adequately address this issue, then it will add on to our burden of crime enforcement when these wayward youths become adults. But the problem of wayward youths is more than just law enforcement, or a law and order problem. It is part of a larger social problem that could not be solved by law enforcement alone. While my Ministry will continue to take tough enforcement measures, it is important to understand the root causes of this larger social problem. And in this respect, the Police will work closely with MCD and MOE. The first step has been undertaken to understand this problem. The Police is now conducting two studies on the question of problem youth. The first study is in collaboration with the National University of Singapore and it looks at the causative factors behind the youth crime and juvenile delinquents. The second study is a study to determine the profile of these youthful offenders. So the Police will be working with the MCD and MOE to see what roles they can play to help tackle this problem. But I believe that the long term solution to keep such crimes down among youthful offenders is to ensure that Singaporeans develop strong family values and preserve the moral fibre of our society. In our pursuit of economic goals, we should not neglect the development of the family unit as an important cornerstone of our society, one which is critical in maintaining the society's moral fibre. I understand that in February this year, the Chief Justice has also independently decided that a committee be established to review the Children and Young Persons Act. The committee chaired by a District Judge and with representatives from the Police will, among other things, review the measures that can be taken to reduce the incidence of delinquency in Singapore. With these efforts, we hope that a clearer picture of the problem of youthful offenders and its causes should emerge in the coming months. The various Ministries involved will then develop appropriate measures to address this problem. On the other issue of TV violence raised by Dr Beng, I share his concern regarding the powerful influence of TV on our children. We must remain vigilant and not allow TV programmes that portray violence to harden or imbue viewers with acts of violence. TV programmes come straight into our living rooms. We must ensure that SBC enforces strict censorship guidelines. During last year's debate in the Committee of Supply, we announced the setting up of a Standing Committee on TV violence, chaired by MITA, with representation from SBC and Police to address this concern. I will leave it to MITA to update you later on on the work of this committee. On the part of the Police, it is fully aware of its role in ensuring that the level of violence on TV is not excessive, especially for locally-produced contemporary programmes. It monitors all TV programmes and feeds back to the committee the SBC scenes which it considers to be violent. Here, I would like to reassure Members that scenes which encourage tolerance or disrespect for the female gender are also considered. Since last year, it has made five reports to the committee. The Police has also worked closely with MITA to ban video games which contain violent and gruesome scenes, such as Mortal Kombat. Finally, we must recognise that parental control is important and I would urge parents to exercise some form of control over their children, eg, the kind of programmes they see. This will ensure that the values of our society are enriched and not eroded by what the children see on television over time. Mr Robert Chua raised questions about encouraging the professionals to come to work in Singapore, granting them permanent residence (PR) status and tapping into the region to ensure that we have a wider pool of talents available in Singapore. The short answer is yes. The Immigration Department certainly makes it a policy to make it easy for the professionals and foreign talents, ie, people with skill, knowledge, expertise, and so on, to settle down in Singapore. We, therefore, welcome these graduates and professionals who can make a contribution to Singapore's economic development because it can help to add to the quality of our limited workforce. Currently, I would say that the professionals are eligible for permanent residence after they have worked in Singapore for some time. The Immigration Department, as I said earlier, has been very liberal in granting PR to them if they apply. In fact, the Immigration Department also takes the initiative to encourage them to apply for permanent residence. If we know that they are here on employment pass and they are of value to us, and if they can add value to our human resource pool, the Immigration Department will write to them and ask them whether they would like to be considered for PR. The Immigration Department also helps other Government agencies, for example, the EDB and the National Arts Council, to devise schemes to attract suitable professionals who want to come and work in Singapore. 4.45 pm In short, I would say that our current policy pertaining to foreign professionals who want to become PR is quite liberal. And the Immigration Department will continue to work with others to attract these professionals to make Singapore their home. As regards the questions raised by Dr Soin of making clear the minimum economic and educational criteria for people to become PR and giving husbands, I presume she was referring to husbands of Singapore women, an amnesty so that they could become PR and she quoted the case of an Indian girl, let me deal with it generally first. We have made known our criteria for the grant of PR not too long ago. I believe it was in 1989. We announced that PR would be granted to foreigners who, firstly, have a secondary education, earn at least $1,500 a month and have five years of working experience; or have at least 5 'O' levels or equivalent qualification; or have acceptable trade certificates or equivalent qualification. The criteria apply to immigrants from all sources so long as they can integrate into our society without upsetting the present multi-racial character. So the wife of a Singapore citizen will be granted PR so long as the Singapore husband is gainfully employed and is able to support the family. If the applicant is the husband of a Singaporean woman, then he must also be gainfully employed here. If he cannot work here, then he will be a burden to us and somebody will have to look after him. Apart from foreign husbands who are not eligible for PR because they are not even in Singapore, the foreign husband will also not be successful in the PR application if he is not employed. In other words, the husband is not in a position to support his family since he does not have a job. To put it simply, the criterion for foreign spouses, whether male or female, and children of Singapore citizens, is this: as long as they and their families will not become a burden to the State, PR will be granted liberally. Dr Soin quoted the case of an Indian girl. I do not have the details. I do not know the circumstances other than the brief facts given by Dr Soin. The Indian girl wants to be a filial daughter and therefore obeyed the father to marry an Indian national and now she expects the State to take on the burden of giving the husband PR. I am not sure the State should play that kind of role. What the State should do, and it is in the national interest of Singapore, is to ensure that whoever wants to come and live in Singapore and be a PR, he must be able to look after himself. So if Dr Soin can give me the facts of this case, I will look into it. On the question of traffic safety raised by Dr Beng, let me say that we also place great emphasis on traffic safety in Singapore. This is because every traffic accident fatality on the road is one unnecessary death too many. As pointed out by Dr Beng, the Traffic Police has over the years introduced a number of measures to reduce road casualties and these include legislation such as those relating to drunken driving and compulsory seat belt wearing. We also mounted educational campaigns regularly to inculcate good driving habits among our drivers, including one which encourages the motorcyclists to ride bright. Dr Beng mentioned that there are some people who are cynical about the value of rear seat belts and the effectiveness of riding bright. The Traffic Police has informed me that from their experience, rear seat belts have saved lives and the data are as follows. Between October 1992, ie, when the law first came into force, and December last year, there was no fatality in all the 63 injury accidents where rear seat belts were used. This compares and contrasts indeed to the 18 fatalities out of the 479 accidents over the same period where rear seat belts were not used. So the fact proves quite conclusively that if you put on your seat belt, and you are a rear seat passenger and there is an accident that involves injury, the chances are that you would not die from it. But if you do not, then you have quite a good chance of being killed. As for riding bright or the Ride Bright Campaign, we do not have the data now. But I believe it has contributed to reducing motorcycle accidents if people practise "ride bright" in the day time. "Ride bright" means riding bright in the day time. For example, in a number of European countries such as Sweden and Finland, this was found to be so. And Malaysia recently also legislated the requirement to ride bright. They also found that there has been a decreasing trend in multiple and day-time motorcycle accidents since the ride bright law came into effect. And I would not rule out the possibility of legislating this requirement in future. In fact, it is through all these measures that our traffic accident and fatality rate per hundred thousand population is comparable to, and in some cases better than, that of many other countries. Nevertheless, I believe that we could do more. I would like to highlight a few areas where improvements can be made. Firstly, as pointed out by Dr Beng, studies by the Traffic Police show that newly qualified drivers, ie, those with less than one year's experience, are generally more prone to accidents. The accident rate for the probationary Class 2B motorcyclists is about four times higher than that of all Class 2B riders, while the accident rate for the probationary Class 3 licence holders (motorcar drivers) is about 1.8 times that of all Class 3 drivers. Secondly, among all road-users, motorcyclists and pillion riders as a group are the most vulnerable. They accounted for over 50% of the casualties and close to 48% in respect of fatalities. Since we have identified new riders and new drivers as a group that are more prone to accidents, then we must do something about this. For example, we plan to introduce special probation plates to be displayed by these newly qualified drivers and riders sometime this year. The details of this scheme will be announced by the Traffic Police in April. The purpose of the scheme is to remind such new drivers and riders to be more careful on the road and also to signal to other road-users to be more tolerant towards them. The idea of introducing this special plate to probationary riders and drivers is not original. It is not invented in Singapore. Countries such as New Zealand, Japan and several states in Australia have already instituted such a scheme. Although these countries did not directly attribute any reduction of accidents to the scheme, their informal assessment was that it has contributed to a reduction in road accidents. For instance, in South Australia, there was a significant reduction in road accidents involving young drivers after the introduction of the P plate. We believe that such a scheme is beneficial and should help to reduce road accidents and fatalities involving new drivers and riders. This new measure will be in addition to the current policy of suspending the licence of a new driver or rider if he chalks up more than 12 demerit points. Coming to Dr Beng's other question on the particular vulnerability of motorcyclists to accidents, we are considering several other measures to address this situation. First, the Police is reviewing with a view to tightening the motorcycle testing and licensing criterion. Presently, motorcyclists are trained and tested only in the riding circuit or driving circuit. This is not adequate as it does not prepare the motorcyclists for actual road conditions which are quite different from those in the circuit. It will introduce testing on the roads for motorcyclists as is the requirement for the car drivers or learners. We will also be reviewing the minimum age which is now 16 for obtaining a licence. We are going to increase it - we are still studying it - to maybe 17, 18 or 20. The Traffic Police is not just concentrating on changing the rules and practices to improve riding standards. It will also be running a major education programme aimed at motorcyclists in the middle of the year. This campaign will cover aspects such as the need to wear the proper riding attire, to switch on their headlights during the day as well as safe driving. And other measures such as requiring motorcyclists by law to ride bright will also be considered if these efforts in educating them fail. My Ministry will periodically review the effectiveness of these measures to improve motorcyclists' safety and implement further measures if there is a need to do it. And it is hoped that with all these measures, we could further reduce unnecessary deaths on our roads. Overall, I would say that we have a comprehensive system in place to keep our roads safe. Our testing and licensing schemes ensure that drivers and riders are competent before they are allowed to operate motor vehicles on the road on their own. We have an effective driver improvement points system which encourages motorists to continue to drive and ride safely after they got their licence. The Traffic Police also takes enforcement action to deter motorists from committing unsafe or inconsiderate acts on the roads and will continually improve the road infrastructure to enhance road safety. And finally, we go to great lengths to educate road-users on road safety, particularly the vulnerable groups, such as motorcyclists, pedestrians, the aged and the very young. What we need to do, of course, is to continue to fine-tune the system from time to time. But in the final analysis, let me stress that road safety must be a joint responsibility, both the authorities and individual road-users have a part to play. Road-users must do their part by conforming to traffic rules designed for the safety of all and by developing and practising safe driving or riding attitudes and habits and exhibiting these when they are driving on our roads.