DOCSLIB.ORG

National Archives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Archives National Archives MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY PROF S JAYAKUMAR, MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS AND SECOND MINISTER FOR LAW ON THURSDAY, 26 MARCH 1987 Introduction Mr Speaker, Members will recall that at our sitting on Mar 4, the Member for Potong Pasir asked the Prime Minister "whether he will call for a public inquiry to get to the bottom“ of what he termed "the Teh Cheang Wan affair" and " to make recommendations to prevent further corruption at high places". The Prime Minister said that "the Government is ready to have a public inquiry into any matter of public interest so that there can be no question of any cover- up". The Prime Minister repeatedly asked the Member to spell out the Terms of Reference. It was only after the lunch adjournment that the Member read out his proposed Terms, although he said he had it "all the time" since that morning. The Prime Minister pointed out these Terms were ambiguous and suggested that the Member refine them. Nevertheless the PM said he was prepared to accept the draft as it was and to gazette it because he would not stop any inquiry. In reply the Member insisted that "as far as the substance of this reference [of the Inquiry he wanted] goes, it stays". The Member also requested that there should be three Commissioners. In response to PM's question whether he would lead evidence on the Terms requested by him he said ... "not only I will lead in evidence but I have certainly people who are willing to assist me in that area". 2 This was noted by PM "... as he said he will lead evidence and he will bring people to bring. evidence ... so be it." The Member's final words on the Terms were " I wish to have these Terms of Reference written out in a form that is accepted under the Inquiry Commissions Act". Appointment of Commission In deference to the Member's stated desire to recast his Terms in an acceptable form, the Government waited for his redraft. On the morning of 23 Mar 87 I asked the Member whether he had a redraft or if his Terms read on the 4th March was final. He asked for time, and at about 6 pm he handed me his revised Terms of Reference. I now wish to inform the House that the President has appointed a Commission of Inquiry consisting of 3 members as proposed by the Member. The Chairman of the Commission will be Judicial Commissioner Mr Chan Sek Keong and the two other members will be Mr Robert Iau Kuo Kwong and Mr Thai Chee Ken. The full text of the Instrument of Appointment signed by the President will be gazetted and is circulated for information of Members. This Instrument reproduces the revised Terms of Reference of the Member for Potong Pasir in their entirety as Terms of Reference (2) and (3). The Instrument also records the fact that the Member had undertaken to "lead in evidence" relating to those said Terms. An additional term At our sitting of 4 Mar, the Member made several references which implied that the CPIB had been less than thorough in its investigation of the case. For example: (a) He asked whether, now that the Minister has died "everything will be closed and covered up?" 3 (b) He said there was "evidence of strange -goings-on have taken place ... This is indeed very, very strange. So I think there is a need for an inquiry into that area." (c) Referring to a core contractor willing to give a bribe, he said "It is no small sum. There must be certainly something behind that.... if we dig deep enough, we will find the evidence." In other words, he cast doubt over the thoroughness and effectiveness Of CPIB's investigations, that they "didn't dig deep enough!" The Government had expected the Member for Potong Pasir to refine his Terms to inquire into the adequacy and efficacy of CPIB's investigations. He has not done this. The Government cannot allow these doubts on the effectiveness of the investigations of the CPIB to stand unchallenged. Accordingly, before proceeding to investigate the Terms of Reference which the Member spelt out, the Commission will first address itself to this 1st Term of Reference. It reads as follows: (1) To enquire whether - (a) the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau did all that was necessary to uncover all the acts of corruption or criminal wrongdoing of the late Mr Teh Cheang Wan in investigating complaints of or leads to acts of corruption by the late Mr Teh Cheang Wan as Minister for National Development; (b) the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau was thorough in their investigations before concluding that there was no involvement by any other Minister, Parliamentary Secretary, or Government officer in these acts of corruption or other criminal wrongdoing: (c) there has been any attempt to overlook, to conceal or to cover-up any information concerning corruption or criminal wrongdoing. 4 Mr Speaker, Sir, it is in the public interest that there can be no suggestion of any concealment or cover-up of any corruption or criminal wrongdoing by the late Mr Teh Cheang Wan or any other Minister or Parliamentary Secretary or Government officer. Therefore the thoroughness and effectiveness of the investigations by the CPIB into the late Mr Teh Cheang Wan should be inquired into by the Commission of Inquiry. With regard to this Term the Deputy Public Prosecutor will lead evidence to show that CPIB carried out its duties effectively and properly. The Director-of CPIB will give evidence under this Term. 0 'After this Term of Reference has been addressed, the Commission will then address the Terms requested by the Member for Potong Pasir. With regard to those Terms he will, as he had undertaken, bring forth his witnesses and "lead in evidence". I ISTANA SINGAPORE THE INQUIRY COMMISSIONS ACT (CHAPTER 48). COMMISSION. BY WEE'KIM WEE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE WHEREAS it is provided by the Inquiry Commissions Act that it shall be lawful for the President, whenever he shall deem it advisable, to issue a Commission appointing one or more Commissioners to inquire, inter alia , into:- (a) the conduct or management of any department of the public service: or (b) any matter in which an inquiry would in the opinion of the President be for the public welfare; AND WHEREAS the late Mr Teh Cheang Wan died on 14th December 1986 in circumstances which had necessitated the holding of a Coroner's Inquiry into the cause of death; AND WHEREAS such a Coroner's Inquiry held on the 20th day of January 1987 had established that he - (i) had committed suicide: and ISTANA - 2 - SINGAPORE (ii) had done so as a result of investigations conducted by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau against him into two alleged acts of bribery and corruption in the course of which Inquiry evidence had been led relating to these allegations pointing to the receipt of $800,OOO by the late Mr Teh. AND WHEREAS subsequent to the Coroner's Inquiry questions were raised in Parliament on 26th January 1987 regarding the allegations of bribery and corruption which had led to the a investigations and subsequent suicide of the late Mr Teh; AND WHEREAS again on the 4th day of March 1987 in the course of the debate in the House, the Member of Parliament for Potong Pasir, Mr Chiam See Tong, had asked- for a public inquiry to investigate what he termed as the "Teh Cheang Wan Affair": AND WHEREAS the Prime Minister requested Mr Chiam See Tong to spell out what he meant by the "Teh Cheang Wan Affair" and subsequently accepted the terms of reference for such a Commission as tabled by him; AND WHEREAS Mr Chiam on the 23rd day of March 1987 delivered to the Minister for Home Affairs and the Second Minister for Law his revised Terms of Reference: AND WHEREAS Mr Chiam has undertaken in Parliament "to lead in evidence" relating to the said terms: AND WHEREAS it is in the public interest that there can be no suggestion of any concealment or cover-up of any corruption or criminal wrongdoing by the late Mr Teh Cheang Wan or any other Minister or Parliamentary Secretary or Government officer; AND WHEREAS the Government has accepted Mr Chiam See Tong's terms of reference, as revised, for a Commission of Inquiry, HEREBY ADOPTED AND INCLUDED in their entirety as the second and third terms of reference for the Commission of Inquiry; - 3 - ISTANA SINGAPORE ACCORDINGLY, the terms of reference of the Commission of Inquiry are HERESY AS FOLLOWS:- (1) To enquire whether - ( a ) the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau did all that was necessary to uncover all the acts of corruption or criminal wrongdoing of the late Mr Teh Cheang wan in investigating complaints of or leads to acts of corruption by the late Mr Teh Cheang Wan as Minister for National Development: (b) the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau was thorough in their investigations before concluding that there was no involvement by any other Minister, Parliamentary Secretary, or Government officer in these acts of corruption or other criminal wrongdoing; (c) there has been any attempt to overlook, to conceal or to cover-up any information concerning corruption or criminal wrongdoing. (2) TO investigate - ( a ) into the circumstances which made it possible for the former Minister for l National Development to accept the two $400,000 bribes: (b) whether other persons were involved or implicated in relation to the said two bribes or other bribes, if any; (c) the system used by the Ministry of National Development in - (i) acquisition/alienation of land; (ii) receiving and accepting of tenders: and (iii) the operations of its and related companies.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 331KB***Administrative and Constitutional
    (2016) 17 SAL Ann Rev Administrative and Constitutional Law 1 1. ADMINISTRATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW THIO Li-ann BA (Oxon) (Hons), LLM (Harvard), PhD (Cantab); Barrister (Gray’s Inn, UK); Provost Chair Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. Introduction 1.1 In terms of administrative law, the decided cases showed some insight into the role of courts in relation to: handing over town council management to another political party after a general election, the susceptibility of professional bodies which are vested with statutory powers like the Law Society review committee to judicial review; as well as important observations on substantive legitimate expectations and developments in exceptions to the rule against bias on the basis of necessity, and how this may apply to private as opposed to statutory bodies. Many of the other cases affirmed existing principles of administrative legality and the need for an evidential basis to sustain an argument. For example, a bare allegation of bias without evidence cannot be sustained; allegations of bias cannot arise when a litigant is simply made to follow well-established court procedures.1 1.2 Most constitutional law cases revolved around Art 9 issues. Judicial observations on the nature or scope of specific constitutional powers were made in cases not dealing directly with constitutional arguments. See Kee Oon JC in Karthigeyan M Kailasam v Public Prosecutor2 noted the operation of a presumption of legality and good faith in relation to acts of public officials; the Prosecution, in particular, is presumed “to act in the public interest at all times”, in relation to all prosecuted cases from the first instance to appellate level.
    [Show full text]
  • Jaclyn L. Neo
    Jaclyn L. Neo NAVIGATING MINORITY INCLUSION AND PERMANENT DIVISION: MINORITIES AND THE DEPOLITICIZATION OF ETHNIC DIFFERENCE* INTRODUCTION dapting the majority principle in electoral systems for the ac- commodation of political minorities is a crucial endeavour if A one desires to prevent the permanent disenfranchisement of those minorities. Such permanent exclusion undermines the maintenance and consolidation of democracy as there is a risk that this could lead to po- litical upheaval should the political minorities start to see the system as op- pressive and eventually revolt against it. These risks are particularly elevat- ed in the case of majoritarian systems, e.g. those relying on simple plurality where the winner is the candidate supported by only a relative majority, i.e. having the highest number of votes compared to other candidates1. Further- more, such a system, while formally equal, could however be considered substantively unequal since formal equality often fails to recognize the es- pecial vulnerabilities of minority groups and therefore can obscure the need to find solutions to address those vulnerabilities. Intervention in strict majoritarian systems is thus sometimes deemed necessary to preserve effective participation of minorities in political life to ensure a more robust democracy. Such intervention has been considered es- pecially important in societies characterized by cleavages such as race/ethnicity, religion, language, and culture, where there is a need to en- sure that minority groups are not permanently excluded from the political process. This could occur when their voting choices almost never produce the outcomes they desire or when, as candidates, they almost never receive the sufficient threshold of support to win elections.
    [Show full text]
  • BTI 2014 | Singapore Country Report
    BTI 2014 | Singapore Country Report Status Index 1-10 7.22 # 24 of 129 Political Transformation 1-10 5.55 # 68 of 129 Economic Transformation 1-10 8.89 # 6 of 129 Management Index 1-10 5.98 # 35 of 129 scale score rank trend This report is part of the Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index (BTI) 2014. It covers the period from 31 January 2011 to 31 January 2013. The BTI assesses the transformation toward democracy and a market economy as well as the quality of political management in 129 countries. More on the BTI at http://www.bti-project.org. Please cite as follows: Bertelsmann Stiftung, BTI 2014 — Singapore Country Report. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2014. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. BTI 2014 | Singapore 2 Key Indicators Population M 5.3 HDI 0.895 GDP p.c. $ 61803.2 Pop. growth1 % p.a. 2.5 HDI rank of 187 18 Gini Index - Life expectancy years 81.9 UN Education Index 0.804 Poverty3 % - Urban population % 100.0 Gender inequality2 0.101 Aid per capita $ - Sources: The World Bank, World Development Indicators 2013 | UNDP, Human Development Report 2013. Footnotes: (1) Average annual growth rate. (2) Gender Inequality Index (GII). (3) Percentage of population living on less than $2 a day. Executive Summary Despite having weathered the financial crisis, the People’s Action Party (PAP) suffered its worst election results ever in the 2011 parliamentary election, receiving a comparatively low share of the popular vote (60%). The opposition, which had been emboldened and was more unified than ever, was also able to garner its highest ever share of seats.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Newspaper Reports to Glean Insight Into Current Affairs. a Case Study : the Singapore Parliamentary and Presidential Elections
    Using newspaper reports to glean insight into current affairs. A Case study : The Singapore Parliamentary and Presidential Elections. NewspaperSG • Online archives of Singapore newspapers • 1831 – 2009 • URL: newspapers.nl.sg Elections in 2011 • Parliamentary Elections : 7 May 2011 • Presidential Elections : 27 August 2011 Singapore’s politics • 10 Parliamentary Elections between 1968 – 2006 • People’s Action Party (PAP) won all seats in 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980. • Opposition won 2 seats in 1984; 1 in 1988; 4 in 1991; 2 in 1997; 2 in 2001; and 2 in 2006. • 2011 : PAP lost 6 seats and garnered only 60.14% (lowest ever) of total votes casted. Presidential Elections • 1993 : Ong Teng Cheong elected • 1999 & 2005 : S R Nathan (uncontested) • 2011 candidates: – Tan Cheng Bock, Tan Jee Say, Tan Kheng Yam & Tan Kin Lian • Singaporeans politically apathetic? • Only concern about economic well-being and material wealth? • “stifling environment” • traditional media bias towards ruling party • Internet (political sites) & new media NewspaperSG usage stats in 2011 Month Unique visitors Number of visits Pages Jan 2011 35285 65453 395319 Feb 2011 36412 64109 376205 Mar 2011 49841 90780 473786 Apr 2011 42936 76677 412861 May 2011 66527 116862 611861 Jun 2011 47421 85069 522151 Jul 2011 48929 90345 517565 Aug 2011 51222 94665 523321 Sep 2011 49802 93781 509233 Oct 2011 48486 94649 506465 Nov 2011 46601 105525 495306 Dec 2011 43821 107918 490345 Total 567283 1085833 5836418 Most viewed articles in May 2011 Most viewed articles in August 2011 Top keyword
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Elections Act (Chapter 218) (Section 51) Statement of the Poll After Counting the Ballots
    FRIDAY, MAY 13, 2011 1 First published in the Government Gazette, Electronic Edition, on 12th May 2011 at 2.00 pm. No. 1268 — PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS ACT (CHAPTER 218) (SECTION 51) STATEMENT OF THE POLL AFTER COUNTING THE BALLOTS ELECTORAL DIVISION OF BISHAN-TOA PAYOH ‡Number of Ballot Papers Issued 141,760 Number of Ballot Papers cast for Name of Candidate Party ‡Number of Ballot Papers Chiam See Tong SPP 47,205 Lee Yeong Wee Wilfred Leung Mohamad Hamim Aliyas Benjamin Pwee Hri Kumar Nair PAP 62,385 Ng Eng Hen Josephine Teo Wong Kan Seng Zainudin Nordin ‡Total Number of Ballot Papers cast for the above Candidates 109,590 Number of *Rejected Ballot Papers 2,087 Total Number of Ballot Papers found in the ballot boxes 111,677 Number of Unused Ballot Papers undetached from the books 30,061 Number of †Spoilt Ballot Papers 22 ‡TOTAL 141,760 *A Rejected Ballot Paper means a ballot paper which has been handed by the presiding officer to an elector to cast his vote but which, at the close of the poll, has been found in the ballot box unmarked or so improperly marked it cannot be counted. †A Spoilt Ballot Paper means a ballot paper which, on polling day, has not been deposited in the ballot box, but has been found by the presiding officer to be spoilt or improperly printed or which has been handed by the presiding officer to an elector to cast his vote, and (a) has been spoilt in marking by the elector, and (b) has been handed back to the presiding officer and exchanged for another.
    [Show full text]
  • Votes and Proceedings of the Twelfth Parliament of Singapore
    VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWELFTH PARLIAMENT OF SINGAPORE ______________ First Session ______________ FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 No. 14 1.30 pm 89 PRESENT: Mr SPEAKER (Mr MICHAEL PALMER (Punggol East)). Mr ANG HIN KEE (Ang Mo Kio). Mr ANG WEI NENG (Jurong). Mr BAEY YAM KENG (Tampines). Mr CHAN CHUN SING (Tanjong Pagar), Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports and Minister of State, Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. Mr CHEN SHOW MAO (Aljunied). Dr CHIA SHI-LU (Tanjong Pagar). Mrs LINA CHIAM (Non-Constituency Member). Mr CHARLES CHONG (Joo Chiat), Deputy Speaker. Mr CHRISTOPHER DE SOUZA (Holland-Bukit Timah). Ms FAIZAH JAMAL (Nominated Member). Mr NICHOLAS FANG (Nominated Member). Assoc. Prof. FATIMAH LATEEF (Marine Parade). Mr ARTHUR FONG (West Coast). Mr CEDRIC FOO CHEE KENG (Pioneer). Mdm FOO MEE HAR (West Coast). Ms GRACE FU HAI YIEN (Yuhua), Senior Minister of State, Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts and Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources. Mr GAN KIM YONG (Chua Chu Kang), Minister for Health and Government Whip. Mr GAN THIAM POH (Pasir Ris-Punggol). Mr GERALD GIAM YEAN SONG (Non-Constituency Member). Mr GOH CHOK TONG (Marine Parade). No. 14 17 FEBRUARY 2012 90 Mdm HALIMAH YACOB (Jurong), Minister of State, Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports. Mr HAWAZI DAIPI (Sembawang), Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education and Minister for Manpower. Mr HENG CHEE HOW (Whampoa), Senior Minister of State, Prime Minister’s Office and Deputy Leader of the House. Mr HENG SWEE KEAT (Tampines), Minister for Education. Mr HRI KUMAR NAIR (Bishan-Toa Payoh).
    [Show full text]
  • Competing Narratives and Discourses of the Rule of Law in Singapore
    Singapore Journal of Legal Studies [2012] 298–330 SHALL THE TWAIN NEVER MEET? COMPETING NARRATIVES AND DISCOURSES OF THE RULE OF LAW IN SINGAPORE Jack Tsen-Ta Lee∗ This article aims to assess the role played by the rule of law in discourse by critics of the Singapore Government’s policies and in the Government’s responses to such criticisms. It argues that in the past the two narratives clashed over conceptions of the rule of law, but there is now evidence of convergence of thinking as regards the need to protect human rights, though not necessarily as to how the balance between rights and other public interests should be struck. The article also examines why the rule of law must be regarded as a constitutional doctrine in Singapore, the legal implications of this fact, and how useful the doctrine is in fostering greater solicitude for human rights. Singapore is lauded for having a legal system that is, on the whole, regarded as one of the best in the world,1 and yet the Government is often vilified for breaching human rights and the rule of law. This is not a paradox—the nation ranks highly in surveys examining the effectiveness of its legal system in the context of economic compet- itiveness, but tends to score less well when it comes to protection of fundamental ∗ Assistant Professor of Law, School of Law, Singapore Management University. I wish to thank Sui Yi Siong for his able research assistance. 1 See e.g., Lydia Lim, “S’pore Submits Human Rights Report to UN” The Straits Times (26 February 2011): On economic, social and cultural rights, the report [by the Government for Singapore’s Universal Periodic Review] lays out Singapore’s approach and achievements, and cites glowing reviews by leading global bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Loss of The'world-Soul'? Education, Culture and the Making
    The Loss of the ‘World-Soul’? Education, Culture and the Making of the Singapore Developmental State, 1955 – 2004 by Yeow Tong Chia A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Theory and Policy Studies in Education Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto © Copyright by Yeow Tong Chia 2011 The Loss of the ‘World-Soul’? Education, Culture and the Making of the Singapore Developmental State, 1955 – 2004 Yeow Tong Chia Doctor of Philosophy Department of Theory and Policy Studies in Education Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto 2011 Abstract This dissertation examines the role of education in the formation of the Singapore developmental state, through a historical study of education for citizenship in Singapore (1955-2004), in which I explore the interconnections between changes in history, civics and social studies curricula, and the politics of nation-building. Building on existing scholarship on education and state formation, the dissertation goes beyond the conventional notion of seeing education as providing the skilled workforce for the economy, to mapping out cultural and ideological dimensions of the role of education in the developmental state. The story of state formation through citizenship education in Singapore is essentially the history of how Singapore’s developmental state managed crises (imagined, real or engineered), and how changes in history, civics and social studies curricula, served to legitimize the state, through educating and moulding the desired “good citizen” in the interest of nation building. Underpinning these changes has been the state’s use of cultural constructs such as ii Confucianism and Asian values to shore up its legitimacy.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Systems in Asean – Singapore Chapter 3 – Government and the State
    Government and the State LEGAL SYSTEMS IN ASEAN – SINGAPORE CHAPTER 3 – GOVERNMENT AND THE STATE THIO Li-ann* A. INTRODUCTION: THE ADOPTION OF A MODIFIED VARIANT OF THE WESTMINSTER PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM Upon attaining independence on 9 August 1965 after peacefully seceding from the Federation of Malaysia, Singapore retained a legal system that is essentially based on the British legal system, a colonial legacy, importing the common law and the Westminster model of parliamentary government, with some notable modifications, including a written constitution. Article 4 declares that the Constitution “is the supreme law of the Republic of Singapore”; hence any legislation which is inconsistent with the Constitution is void, to the extent of that inconsistency. The Westminster model of representative democracy is predicated on a bipartisan or multi-party system, where the ultimate political check resides in the ability of an opposition party to defeat the incumbent government at general elections and form an alternative government. This check of political turnover is absent in Singapore as the ruling party has a dominant majority in Parliament. B. PRINCIPLES OF CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT Separation of Powers Singapore has a unicameral Parliament which currently has 84 elected seats. 82 of these seats are held by the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) while the other 2 are held by Chiam See Tong (Singapore People’s Party) and Low Thia Khiang (Worker’s Party). Government is based on a variant of the separation of powers principle, organised around the familiar trichotomy of powers: the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Unlike the UK Parliament, the Singapore Parliament is a body constituted under, and deriving powers from, the Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks by Esm Goh Chok Tong Parliamentary Debate on Pm’S Statement on Allegation of Abuse of Power – 4 July 2017
    REMARKS BY ESM GOH CHOK TONG PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE ON PM’S STATEMENT ON ALLEGATION OF ABUSE OF POWER – 4 JULY 2017 Mdm Speaker, 1. This sad public squabble between the Lee siblings is blown out of proportion. But it has embroiled all of us. It has tarnished the reputation of Singapore and distracted the Government from far more important work. 2. Because the allegations against PM have been made by members of the Lee family, they are given weight. The public is confused and concerned, even as Singaporeans continue to trust the PM and the Government. There is thus urgency to explain, restore trust and get back on track. It is our duty and responsibility to do this, to account to our voters. 3. My main concern is neither the fate of 38 Oxley Road nor the family feud. They are far removed from the daily concerns of Singaporeans. It is the wilful attack on the integrity of our leaders and the insidious corrosion of public faith in our institutions that I want to address. The nub of the issue for us in Parliament is integrity and trust – in the Prime Minister and our system of government. Absent these, Singapore will descend to a Third World country. 4. Incorruptibility of our Government is what distinguishes Singapore. The Prime Minister is central in upholding that incorruptibility. He holds the key levers of state power, entrusted by the people. When trust in the Prime Minister disappears, his moral authority and political capital shrivel. 1 Therefore, the constant self-policing, restraint and care of the Prime Minister in wielding the immense power at his disposal, is paramount.
    [Show full text]
  • Speech by DPM Wong Kan Seng on Population at the Committee of Supply
    Speech by DPM Wong Kan Seng on population at the Committee of Supply PREAMBLE Mr Chairman, many Members have spoken passionately about the issues of immigration and population. They no doubt reflect concerns raised by segments of our public over the increased inflow of immigrants and its impact on our society. This is a very important subject, and it is also a highly complex subject. I want to thank the Members for giving me this opportunity to address it. Let me first assure the Members that the Government recognises and acknowledges Singaporeans’ concerns and sentiments. Indeed, in the last few years, we have seen a dramatic increase in the number of foreigners in Singapore. It is understandable that Singaporeans may feel uncomfortable over the sheer number of foreigners in our midst. The Government has taken note of this, and we have reviewed our current processes of granting permanent residence (PR) and citizenship to foreigners in Singapore. CALIBRATING THE INFLOW OF FOREIGNERS Dr Teo Ho Pin asked about the Government’s strategy in attracting foreigners to come here for work, and to become PRs and citizens. Broadly speaking, there are two types of foreigners living in Singapore – the transient group which mainly comprises those who come here to work, and the resident group which sinks roots and becomes our PRs and citizens eventually. Although this distinction is not obvious on the ground, it is an important one to bear in mind. In June 2009, the transient group accounted for about 1.25 million out of our total population of about 5 million.
    [Show full text]
  • Dpm's Speech on Population at the Committee of Supply
    DPM’S SPEECH ON POPULATION AT THE COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY 2010 PREAMBLE Mr Chairman, many Members have spoken passionately about the issues of immigration and population. They no doubt reflect concerns raised by segments of our public over the increased inflow of immigrants and its impact on our society. This is a very important subject. It is also a highly complex subject. I thank the Members for giving me this opportunity to address it. 2. Let me first assure the Members that the Government recognises and acknowledges Singaporeans’ concerns and sentiments. Indeed, in the last few years, we have seen a dramatic increase in the number of foreigners in Singapore. It is understandable that Singaporeans may feel uncomfortable over the sheer number of foreigners in our midst. The Government has taken note of this, and we have reviewed our current processes of granting permanent residence (PR) and citizenship (SC) to foreigners in Singapore. CALIBRATING THE INFLOW OF FOREIGNERS 3. Dr Teo Ho Pin asked about the Government’s strategy in attracting foreigners to come here for work, and to become our PRs and citizens. Broadly speaking, there are two types of foreigners living in Singapore – the transient group which mainly comprises those who come here to work, and the resident group which sinks roots and becomes our PRs and citizens eventually. Although this distinction is not always obvious on the ground, it is an important one to bear in mind. 4. In June 2009, the transient group accounted for about 1.25 million out of a total population in Singapore of about 5 million.
    [Show full text]