Commemorating 200 Years of the Singapore Police Force

1.20 pm

Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Madam, I beg to move*, "That this House commemorates and honours the important contributions of the Singapore Police Force and its officers to nation building and to keeping Singapore as one of the safest countries in the world".

*The Motion also stood in the names of Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Patrick Tay.

I would like to express my thanks to Mr Murali Pillai for his partnership in putting up this Motion and to Mr Patrick Tay for so willingly supporting it.

I also thank all Members who have expressed their desire to voice supporting speeches. In particular, I would like to express my gratitude to the Minister for Home Affairs who was very supportive of the idea of this Motion when Mr Murali Pillai and I broached the idea of it and also for agreeing to speak on it.

The Singapore Police Force (SPF) has come a long way since its beginnings in 1820. Mr Francis James Bernard led Singapore's first Police force with just 12 officers. Just 12 officers. SPF has grown to a force of 45,000 regular officers, full-time National Servicemen, civilian officers, volunteers and operationally-ready National Servicemen.

SPF has done a lot for Singapore over the last 200 years. In the early colonial times, Singapore faced many challenges in law and order, such as gambling, prostitution, opium abuse and secret society activities.

There were conflicts and unrest between the different communities. Faction fighting, robberies, murders and the use of firearms were so rampant in the 1920s that some nicknamed Singapore the "Chicago of the East".

After World War Two, there was social disorder and conflict between people of different backgrounds and ideologies. Unions and schools were infiltrated by communists and their supporters who instigated riots and public unrest in the Chinese middle schools. Discontent and distrust brewed between different races, resulting in racially-charged riots.

The capabilities of the Police grew to meet these new challenges. For example, in 1952, after the Maria Hertogh riots, the Riot Squad in SPF – now known as the Special Operations Command – was formed so that it can respond more effectively to public order incidents.

Post-Independence, SPF achieved a few major milestones. Part-time National Service was operationalised in SPF in 1967 to augment manpower resources. Two years later, the Government expanded the recruitment of Police officers and reorganised the Police Academy in 1969 to equip recruits with the skills for effective policing.

In the 1980s, SPF explored new ways to directly engage residents in fighting crime. Besides the Neighbourhood Watch Scheme, we also formed the National Crime Prevention Council. Neighbourhood Police Posts and Neighbourhood Police Centres were set up to bring policing to the heartlands. This transformed the image of the Police officer, not just as a person enforcing the law, but to also being a trusted member of the community.

Over the last two decades, SPF has enhanced its capabilities to meet new and complex challenges beyond neighbourhood crime, such as terrorism, cybercrime, commercial crime and scams.

For example, SPF established the Anti-Scam Centre in 2019 to work with stakeholders, such as banks, telephone companies and online marketplaces to disrupt scammers' operations and mitigate victims' monetary losses.

All these efforts brought about the low crime rates that we enjoy today. This safety and security underpinned Singapore's remarkable growth and progress.

Over the years, SPF has successfully upheld safety and security at several major events hosted by Singapore. These are complex security operations that require close coordination across different SPF teams covering various aspects of security, including patrols, monitoring the ground and being prepared to stop any threats that may arise. At the same time, SPF has to ensure that daily operational needs were not compromised even as it dedicated resources to the smooth running of these events.

For example, the security operations for our National Day Parades require extensive planning and seamless execution by many SPF ground units.

Members would also recall the Trump-Kim Summit which Singapore hosted in June 2018. The short lead time and volatility of plans made planning for the security operations extremely challenging. SPF made meticulous and detailed plans for the security operations in coordination with Home Team agencies and other public agencies, with many – I should emphasise "many" – different security contingency plans worked out. More than 6,900 SPF officers were deployed over a span of three days to ensure that the historic Summit proceeded smoothly without incident.

SPF has also effectively managed complex security operations at many other events that bring together international guests to Singapore, such as the Shangri-La Dialogues, Formula One races and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation or APEC meetings. For each of these events, SPF assesses the security risks, crafts detailed security plans and executes these plans effectively in close coordination with other agencies, if required.

SPF's tireless efforts have contributed to the successful hosting of these events, boosting the Republic of Singapore's reputation globally.

SPF has also contributed significantly to combatting transnational crime through international policing work in cooperation with its foreign counterparts. SPF has mounted many successful operations in collaboration with its foreign counterparts over the years.

For example, in 2020, officers from the Commercial Affairs Department collaborated with the Hong Kong Police Force to arrest five core members of a transnational online credit card fraud syndicate operating in Hong Kong. In 2020, the Commercial Affairs Department also worked with the Royal Malaysia Police to conduct a joint police operation against a transnational Internet scam syndicated in Kuala Lumpur. I am also told that our SPF has strong ties with Indonesia and its police force.

Internationally, SPF has earned respect for Singapore. It is a key member of INTERPOL. In 2008, then-Commissioner of Police Khoo Boon Hui was elected as President of INTERPOL by an overwhelming majority vote. In 2015, Singapore earned the honour of hosting the INTERPOL Global Complex for Innovation, through which SPF collaborates with foreign law enforcement counterparts on cross-border crimes and the sharing of knowledge, intelligence and best practices.

In SPF's early history, it would have been unthinkable for Singapore's Police force to be able to contribute anything substantial to international policing. Two centuries on, SPF is one of the leading police forces in the world, playing a significant role in international crime-fighting efforts.

We are proud of SPF and its many achievements over the last 200 years. Thanks to SPF, our people are able to live, work and play in, arguably, the safest city in the world.

I would like to thank all SPF officers – SPF regular officers, civilian staff, National Servicemen and Volunteer Special Constabulary officers, past and present – for their contributions to and sacrifices in safeguarding Singapore.

Today, we are privileged to have in the House, 69 visitors representing the SPF family. They include Singapore's Commissioner of Police, in-service officers, full-time National Servicemen, Operationally Ready National Servicemen, Volunteer Special Constabulary officers, civilian officers, retired Police officers and two family members of a Police officer who was killed in the line of duty.

Your presence here today, allows us to honour, in a special way, the whole of the Singapore Police Force and the families of our officers, past and present.

To commemorate SPF's 200th anniversary and to accord recognition to SPF officers, I would like to suggest that MHA and SPF consider introducing a commemorative award for Police officers.

On a more personal note, I would like to share that I have seen the dedication and courage of our Police officers at close range. In the course of my membership in the Government Parliamentary Committee or GPC for Home Affairs and Law, I have visited the Police on the ground, spoken with many officers and witnessed operational exercises, including anti-terror exercises. What always strikes me are the officers' commitment to their mission and their unwavering loyalty to Singapore. Their loyalty is truly commendable.

Therefore, in conclusion, Madam, may I invite this House to show our sincere appreciation to and strong support for our men and women in the Singapore Police Force. I beg to move. [Applause.]

Question proposed.

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Murali Pillai.

1.33 pm

Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mdm Deputy Speaker, it is my honour and privilege to support this Motion filed by hon Member Mr Christopher de Souza.

The Singapore Police Force (SPF) has, over two centuries since the founding of modern Singapore, made Singapore one of the safest countries in the world. This security which allows us all to walk safe at night, to work without fear in the day, this peace of mind, is a public good without price.

We honour SPF officers, past and present, for their courage and unwavering sense of duty; we remember those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in the past and those who walk the streets each day, know that this sacrifice may be demanded of them in the future.

In my speech, I would like to focus on the contributions of our retired SPF officers as well as the sacrifice of officers who gave up their lives in the course of their duties.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, today in this House we have 30 retired officers. Between them, they served, and I calculated this, 1,040 years cumulatively. That is almost 35 years per person. A good number of them joined service in the 1960s and the 1970s. In those days, we had serious issues in enforcing law and order. In particular, we had to contend with the menace of secret societies, a point that hon Member Mr Christopher de Souza made. SPF needed stout-hearted people to deal with these problems. Thankfully, it had a good number of such officers.

Let me tell you the stories of these brave SPF retirees who are present here.

Detective Station Inspector Anthony Low joined SPF in 1962. He is now 78 years young. In 1974, Mr Low, then a detective sergeant, was called to attend to a case of an armed robbery in progress at a finance company. The robber had a revolver. He forced the manager of the company to draw money from a bank and bring it back to her office. The manager tipped off her colleague before leaving for the bank. That was how the Police were alerted. Mr Low laid an ambush in the office. The robber entered the office, but somehow sensed danger and rushed out. Mr Low gave chase.

It is useful for me to pause here and explain the significance of this to hon Members. What I am relating is not a movie scene. This is a case of an officer chasing a robber known to be armed with a gun. Need to have guts to do this! Whilst climbing up the staircase of a building looking for the robber, the robber in turn ambushed Mr Low. He struck Mr Low on his head with the butt of his revolver repeatedly. The robber then relieved Mr Low of his service gun and tucked it into his waist. He then said the chilling words, "Why do you want to risk your life looking for me? Today is my day or yours."

He then asked Mr Low to walk down the stairs. Mr Low seized an opportunity to grab his service gun from the robber's waist. The robber then took a step backward to fire at him. Mr Low thankfully fired first. He survived. The robber died. For his bravery, President Sheares conferred on Mr Low the Police Gallantry Medal. DSI Low went on to have an illustrious career in SPF and retired after 40 years of service.

Mr Lim Siong, who is also in this House, served in Security Branch, now known as the Police Security Command, before retiring as a Station Inspector in 1993. For a good number of years, he was one of the Security Officers in the team assigned to protect Mr Lee Kuan Yew, our founding Prime Minister. These security officers, past and present, are a special breed of people. Their training, their muscle memory is to put themselves in harm's way to protect our nation's leaders, if necessary, with their lives.

Mr Lim Siong joined SPF in 1968 when Police officers still wore khaki shorts. Apparently, the idea was to keep them cool in the day. In 1969, when the then Constable Lim Siong was on duty, he received information that there was a suspicious person lurking around the railway tracks beside the old Chartered Bank along Upper Bukit Timah Road. What was happening was that a communist sympathiser was planting a homemade bomb at the railway tracks.

Mr Lim Siong acted quickly. With his baton, he managed to disarm and handcuff the person by himself. He then recovered the bomb, which was in a Milo tin, and the communist flag from the scene. Today, these items can be seen at ISD's Heritage Centre. Mr Lim Siong's quick thinking and fearlessness saved lives. Just two weeks later, however, sadly, a bomb did explode at Upper Changi Road, Seven Mile, killing a lady. Those were dangerous times.

Hon Members would agree that there has been a sea change in the crime and security situation in Singapore since the 1960s and 1970s. It is our good fortune that SPF could count on its brave and dedicated officers who turned the tide against crime and disorder. There is no doubt in my mind that SPF today stands on the shoulders of these giants. To them, I would like, on behalf of a grateful nation, to express a debt of enduring thanks. [Applause.]

I now wish to pay tribute to our Police officers killed in the line of duty and their families.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, SPF kept records of fallen officers only from 1901. Based on these records, 125 officers have been killed in the line of duty to date. But I would imagine more officers would have perished in SPF's 200-year history. I am indebted to the Commissioner of Police for providing me with a list of the officers who have been killed in the line of duty and I seek your permission to annex this list to my speech, please.

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Yes, please. [Please refer to Annex 1.]

Mr Murali Pillai: Obliged, Madam. One of the officers in the list was the late Inspector Allan Lim Kim Sai. He was a second generation Police officer, following the footsteps of his father who joined the Police force when we were still part of the Straits Settlement.

On 5 August 1965, Inspector Lim co-led a pre-dawn operation to capture a notorious gangster and his men who were responsible for several kidnappings in Siang Lim Park at Geylang. A fierce gun battle ensued. The gangster even lobbed hand grenades which exploded, causing injuries. Inspector Lim perished from the wounds he suffered in the gun fight at the age of only 28.

At the time when Inspector Lim died, his only son, David Lim, was just nine months old. The responsibility to take care of David fell fully on his mother. Raised by his mother, he too, like his grandfather and his father before him, joined the Singapore Police Force in 1992. When he reported for duty, after nine months of Police training, in 1993 at Tanglin Police Division, he asked Mr Peter Lim, his head of department who was a colleague of the late Inspector Allan Lim and present in this House today, "Tell me, how did my father die?"

Mdm Deputy Speaker, Mr David Lim is in this House today. He retired as a Superintendent of Police two years ago. I extended an invitation to his mother, who is now 84, to attend Parliament. Unfortunately, she is not fit enough to travel.

One other person's name that appears in the list of 125 officers is the late SI Boo Tiang Huat. In November last year, I spoke in this House about his case. I related how, at the age of 47 in 1994, he was killed in the line of duty by an axe-wielding person at Newton Road. I was his colleague then and I was at the scene several minutes after he perished. I spoke about the anguish his widow and three young children felt when I accompanied them to the location he passed away to pray for his soul later that day.

SI Boo Tiang Huat's widow, Mdm Chew Tuan Jong, is present in this House. So is her son, Mr Boo Jia Liang. I remembered Jia Liang as a seven-year-old boy with spiky hair. He is now 34 years old. Mdm Chew, a clerk, single-handedly raised her three children – Jia Liang and his two elder sisters. All three graduated from University; two of them, including Jia Liang, became teachers. The other is an engineer. Jia Liang shared with me that, knowing how hard his mother worked to raise him and his siblings, all three siblings decided that she should retire 10 years ago and just enjoy life whilst they take full care of her.

For the officers who died in the line of duty, their spouses, parents, children and siblings bore the brunt of the loss. Widows of fallen officers like Mrs Lim and Mdm Chew would have to dig deep to raise their children. Children of the fallen officers like David and Jia Liang would forever wonder how life would have been for them if only their fathers had come home.

As a nation, we should never forget the ultimate sacrifices made by our fallen SPF officers in the line of duty. The Commemorative Gallery at the Police Heritage Centre was created as a permanent tribute to them. But we should also not forget the extraordinary courage of the families of the these fallen officers too. The sacrifice is theirs too.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, on the occasion of SPF 200, I would like to urge the hon Minister for Home Affairs to consider honouring both our retired officers as well as the families of our fallen officers by providing them each with a meaningful token of some form that will forever symbolise our nation's indebtedness to them. They deserve not just our appreciation, but to be remembered and honoured too. [Applause.]

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.

1.46 pm

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. In the past five decades, since as a little boy, I have had the honour of seeing, witnessing, working in, serving in and partnering many in the Singapore Police Force.

During the first 10 years of my life, my late cousin, who lived with me, served in SPF in Team Policing and in Criminal Investigations. I saw for myself, as a young boy, the dedication and service to the nation of our Police officers. Oftentimes, the work involves long shifts, sudden recalls and chasing criminals until they are apprehended. He rose through the ranks as a Constable to a senior Police officer before he retired from SPF. Through him, I saw how every Police officer, regardless of rank, unit or type of work, plays an important role in ensuring the safety and security of our country.

During the second 10 years of my life, my encounter with SPF came in the form of my extra-curricular activity in school in the National Police Cadet Corp (NPCC) for four years from Secondary 1 to Secondary 4. Little known, the NPCC under the auspices of SPF, commemorating their 62nd anniversary this year, has impacted many youths and young people like me. Besides having the opportunity to fire a 0.22 Smith & Wesson Revolver, the NPCC imparted many useful experiences, knowledge and life skills to many young people and youths. I was at their 62nd virtual anniversary celebrations on 7 May this year and want to congratulate the NPCC movement and everyone who has been and is part of this movement for leaving an indelible mark on many who have been through the NPCC journey in Singapore.

During the third 10 years of my life, in my 20s, I spent six years of it with the SPF as a full-time Police officer. As someone fresh from school, these six years have left a lasting impression on my life, my values and impacted me in more ways than one. I spent four of these six years with the Special Tactics and Rescue or STAR unit, a little known and highly secretive and clandestine unit within the SPF's Special Operations Command. During my service with the STAR unit, I had the honour to work and train with officers in the STAR unit, and almost all the specialist units within SPF. I cannot divulge more of the highly secretive, dangerous and risky training and operations which these units have been involved in, but you can watch subtle snippets of it in archived episodes of Crimewatch.

I know many of my fellow officers put our lives at risk undergoing very intense, gruelling training in the operations. In fact, not just putting their lives at risk but also affecting lots of family life and time with family. Two very impressionable ones were when I had to stand my wife up in the midst of a midnight movie, because I had a pager call for an activation. Another time, over a dinner date, I had to walk out in the middle of the dinner; both for important criminal operations.

I think the efforts and contributions of our SPF cannot be understated. In fact, in the course of my career in SPF, there were a few officers who left a very lasting impression on me; both whom I reported to and worked with: Mr Lim Soo Gee, then Commander, Special Operations Command, and Director Operations SPF then, Mr Leo Yip, as well as current Commissioner of Police, Hoong Wee Teck, whom we used to, in colloquial terms, "chiong sua" together, when he was then AD Major Crime of the Criminal Investigation Department. I recall those memorable days when he hunted down the criminals, and my team and I had to storm and arrest the criminals. Those were really memorable days.

This draws me to then appreciate and thank all the past and present officers who have served in our specialist units within SPF, from officers of the Special Operations Command, such as those in the well-known red-coloured vehicles colloquially known as the "ang chia", including the STAR unit which handles high-risk and highly armed criminals and criminal hostage situations, and the little known but important SPF K-9 unit to provide specialised capabilities for a whole host of tracking, detection and support to prevent and detect crime. Other specialist units to make special mention are the Police Security Command, Police Coast Guard, Protective Security Command, Operations Command Centre, Public Transport Security Command, Airport Police, Traffic Police, Training Command, School of Criminal Investigation and the Gurkha contingent.

Oftentimes, their work may go unnoticed but I can assure you these units are highly trained and provide SPF with specialised tactical support and the highest armed response, a plethora of operational capabilities, and operational readiness to stand ready for the unexpected and overcome any unplanned contingencies.

During my 30s, after leaving SPF, I was in active service as a NSman in the Police Training Command. I met and interacted with many SPF NSmen during my annual recall for about a decade. I want to, therefore, use this opportunity to thank and appreciate them and their families and employers, as they complement and support SPF especially during major national events, critical operations and deployments.

An often-forgotten group will be the VSC officers who are civilian volunteers, who also dedicate their personal time to serve and patrol alongside our SPF officers on the ground.

In the last 10 years as a Member of Parliament, I have had the chance to also partner and work with the SPF line units to see to the safety and security of the constituency and our residents. With strong community engagement and partnership, the Police has responded to various incidents from crime cases to handling major accidents and incidents to keep the peace in our towns and estates. They also partner with the grassroots and community to effectively prevent and detect crime.

These days, with a more digitalised and virtual operating environment, SPF has also reinvented and innovated to keep pace with new forms of online crimes and scams.

To conclude, I wish to express my heartfelt thanks, appreciation, respect and honour to the many members of SPF, past and present, young and not so young, enlisting, entering or have retired or left us, NS or regular or VSC, Uniformed or Non-Uniformed, including the many families, wives, children, parents and loved ones of each of them for their dedicated service, working tirelessly, upholding the law, often putting their lives at risk and at stake to nation building and to keeping Singapore one of the safest countries in the world.

The work of SPF will continue, and if I may use my favourite quotation from George Orwell: "People sleep peaceably at night because rough men" – well, and women – "stand ready to do battle on their behalf." Happy SPF 200. [Applause.]

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.

1.54 pm

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Motion today calls for Parliament to commend the Singapore Police Force on its 200th anniversary for keeping Singapore safe. The three Members of the House who have filed the Motion and supported it, understand what Police work entails; being a former prosecutor and two former Police officers respectively.

Madam, there is no doubt that crime and security threats have become more complex and unconventional. The Force and its officers have had to continually adapt and raise their game to be equal to these challenges. It is also not easy to manage the ever-increasing expectations of the public who, in this digital age, expect quick turnaround times and instant answers from investigators through WhatsApp.

My Party colleague, Mr Dennis Tan, will speak more about the work of SPF in the community. That said, we should also be mindful that there are other police forces working in, arguably, even tougher conditions, perhaps, because the police are unarmed as in the UK or because the public has the right to carry firearms, as in the US.

In my speech today, I shall resist the temptation to reminisce about my late father's involvement in the Operation in 1965, just described by Member of Parliament, Mr Murali, where Inspector Allan Lim was fatally shot, nor shall I dwell on my experiences as a law enforcement officer in the 1990s. Indeed, several Members of this House are former officers with longer and deeper insights.

Instead, I will make two points. First, that we should not forget the co-equal contributions made by other agencies and, second, that effective policing is not just about safety and security alone.

First, the co-equal contributions of other agencies. At the outset, I acknowledge that it is quite natural to focus on the Police as the pre-eminent law enforcement agency. However, keeping Singapore safe is also done every day by many other agencies as well as private sector organisations, whom I feel are often not acknowledged enough.

Take, for instance, the Central Narcotics Bureau. CNB is often engaged in very high stakes and dangerous operations, where the offences involve the death penalty and having to battle crime syndicates with significant resources. Another example is the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority, whose officers are tasked with preventing the entry of undesirable foreigners.

Yet another is the Prison Service, which is charged with the safe custody of offenders, their rehabilitation and their re-integration into society. These agencies should also occupy the public mind share as co-equal contributors to the state of Singapore security.

Madam, Singapore's relatively safe living environment is an asset. It gives comfort to citizens and makes it attractive to foreigners to come here to live and work. Despite this strength, I wish to emphasise that effective policing should not be measured only by this metric of law and order. I now turn to the second point of my speech.

Imagine, hypothetically, if one were to be confronted with the statistic, that every arrest by law enforcement officers resulted in a conviction in Court. On the one hand, a 100% success rate may seem truly impressive, but on further reflection, a reasonable person would want to drill further down into the reasons for this. Questions such as the following would be asked: how did the law enforcement officers get it right every single time? Were they so careful to only arrest suspects when the evidence was overwhelming? Did every suspect plead guilty? Did nobody claim trial? And if trials were conducted, how did the judges assess the evidence? And so on.

Madam, I use this hypothetical example to illustrate that safety is not the only metric that counts. If a society were to be absolutely safe, one could go overboard and lock up as many people as possible. This is not as ridiculous as it sounds, as it is an accepted dilemma faced by governments and law enforcement all over the world.

Students of Criminal Justice learn very early about Herbert Packer's two models of criminal justice developed in the 1960s: the crime control model and the due process model.

A crime control model focuses on efficiency and crime suppression, seeing crime control as more important than individual freedom. On the other hand, a due process model focuses on having a just and fair criminal justice system for all and upholding constitutional rights. Every criminal justice system worth its salt will have to find its balance between the two models.

While it seems to me that many Singaporeans would prioritise crime control, fair-minded Singaporeans would also want a system where law enforcement agencies must produce evidence of a high standard before anyone is convicted and punished.

To that end, I would urge the Government to look into finding the resources to enable law enforcement to perform their roles more effectively. For today, I will take just two aspects: recording of statements and supporting crime victims.

During the debate on the Justice Motion last November, my party colleagues and I pointed to certain aspects of the justice system where more could be done to ensure its fairness, accessibility and independence. In the main, the Government did not disagree with us, stating that we were "pushing an open door."

To that end, it seems to me that some review of priorities should be considered. For instance, on the way statements are recorded from suspects, we know that video-recording is a good safeguard to ensure that statements are not coerced. It also protects officers from false accusations.

We heard from the Minister then that video-recording was the gold standard but resources were a constraint. When I suggested recording statements in other languages for suspects not fluent in English, I was told that it was not possible. But these are being done in other countries. So, is it a case of priorities?

As for our response towards crime victims, my assessment is that we lag behind other countries in our measures. To be fair, there have been some steps in this direction to recognise crime victims as stakeholders. For instance, the Police Service Pledge requires officers to give victims an interim update within seven days of reporting a case.

Where offenders are charged in Court, victims may be heard in certain cases through the use of Victim Impact Statements, and there are higher chances of them receiving compensation from offenders at the time of sentencing. However, I believe these measures are not used in the vast majority of Court cases.

Madam, we can do a thorough review of how to involve the victim at critical stages of the case such as during pre-trial hearings on bail and explaining to them the reasons for prosecutorial decisions, such as what charges are being preferred or when there is a decision not to prosecute. I had spoken about this last November and will not repeat further here.

More recently, the murder that took place at River Valley High School makes me wonder if every frontline officer has been adequately trained in the people-to-people skills necessary to handle traumatised victims and, in particular, minors.

Suffice to say, victims are stakeholders and their cooperation can make or break a case. To this end, we must not neglect the training of law enforcement officers in critical soft skills that will make them more effective.

Madam, let me summarise. I have highlighted today that even as the Police has indeed been at the forefront of keeping Singapore safe, other agencies have as well. In addition and, more importantly, we must never think that safety is the only metric by which to judge the quality of law enforcement agencies. The need to do justice and to act fairly is equally critical. Having more inclusive case processes would also be in order.

Madam, I wish SPF and all law enforcement agencies success. While I support the Motion, we should not think that we have arrived but strive for even higher standards. [Applause.]

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.

2.03 pm

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, it is often easy to overlook the fact that SPF and its officers are responsible for an incredibly wide range of responsibilities beyond its most stereotyped role of solving crime cases and bringing offenders to justice.

In recent years, much efforts have also been expanded in the area of public security and anti-terrorism. Cyber crimes and online scamming have also taken up much attention of our SPF officers.

We are also living at a time when the public's expectation of Police standard is increasing. For example, the video-recorded interview of suspects has been introduced a few years ago and many hope that it will be extensively used.

Today, I wish to spend a little time on the Police work in our neighbourhoods and community. Since I became the Member of Parliament for Hougang, I have had many opportunities to see our SPF officers doing their work in my constituency. I also heard much from my residents of their own experience with our Police officers when they have had the need to contact them.

Recently, one of my elderly residents passed away suddenly. Officers from the Hougang Neighbourhood Police Centre (NPC) and Ang Mo Kio Police Division had to attend onsite to do the necessary investigation before helping staff of a casket company to remove the body.

I had a great view of their professional efforts on display that evening as I witnessed the Police officers going about the grim but necessary work competently, meticulously and coolly even as it was not the most pleasant vocation. The officers, including a young NSF officer, handled the grieving relatives onsite professionally and calmly and yet, empathetically, patiently making sure that the next-of-kin knew what was going on and what the relatives had to do next.

Police officers in our NPC attend to many calls every day. I am sure they deal with all types of crime reporting. But they also deal with noisy or unruly behaviour at void decks, fights, families' or neighbours' disputes, suicides or unnatural deaths, fires in HDB flats or common spaces and many others. In recent times, they also had to handle many scamming cases.

I am often amazed by the range of cases for which people make Police reports. Many reports probably involve issues which do not come under Police jurisdiction. But one can just imagine the amount of time taken by our Police officers in NPCs, Police stations and Police posts, helping members of the public to patiently record their Police reports.

During the COVID-19 period, with circuit breaker and work-from-home, Police officers probably have to contend with more cases of neighbours' disputes and complaints on the breach of safe distancing or other prevailing restrictions by groups of people hanging out in our common spaces such as void decks, ball courts, sitting areas or neighbourhood parks.

A lot of such work can be mundane, dreary and thankless. It may not be as exciting or headline grabbing as cyber crimes, fraud or other white-collar crimes, drugs and vice-related offences or even checking on KTVs or gambling dens but a large number of our Police officers have to do such unglamorous but necessary bread and butter community policing work.

The work they do in a community is necessary and help to keep things in the right equilibrium and will help to make our homes, neighbourhoods and towns feel safer, more secure and peaceful.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, SPF and its officers have over the years helped to keep our homes and neighbourhoods safer and more secure but I would also agree with the point made by the hon Member for Aljunied, Ms Sylvia Lim, that effective policing is not just about safety alone but justice too.

Save for a few isolated incidents, by and large, we do not usually feel unsafe when we walk around any part of Singapore at any time of the day. Many people, both locally and abroad, have pointed to Singapore having fewer violent crimes on our streets. This is, of course, not something which we can ever take for granted and SPF must continue to work on this.

We are also one of the few countries where many of our Police officers are NSF officers freshly enlisted from school at the cusp of adulthood. The different challenges that our young NSF Police officers may have to face every day cannot be underestimated and can be daunting. I hope that our young NSF Police officers are given sufficient psychological support as they go about their work.

In Committee of Supply debates for MHA in recent years, Members of Parliament have brought up the issue of manpower constraints in SPF. The use of different technologies is one way of making up for such constraints in an era of declining birth rates and population.

More use of technology, while necessary, can never make up for the human touch, the need for a good relationship with the community as well as for more empathy when handling members of the public. Good relationships between Police officers and residents in the community will promote mutual trust, which is essential for effective policing.

We should also be mindful that – and I quote from an article from a US Department of Justice community relations services toolkit for policing entitled "The Importance of Police-Community Relationships and Resources for Further Reading" – "the community members' willingness to trust the police depends on whether they believe that police actions reflect community values and incorporate the principles of procedural justice and legitimacy".

Good relationships and trust will enhance officers' efforts on the ground when they engage residents and will also encourage provision of information important for solving of crimes or non-crime matters handled by the Police.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, in closing, I wish to thank our SPF officers for their service and contributions. In particular, I commend SPF for the good work which its officers do in its community policing efforts on an everyday basis. I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.

2.10 pm

Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mdm Deputy Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak on this Motion to honour the important contributions of the Singapore Police Force and its many officers.

Madam, I first joined SPF in 1995 and served 20 wonderful years before retiring in 2015. Police work is challenging, not simply because the job of keeping Singapore safe and secure never ends, but also because most of the work that our Police officers do daily goes unseen, often unknown and, hence, unrecognised.

Today, I would like to join my Parliamentary colleagues in honouring the tireless efforts made by our Police officers, particularly, the invisible work that is done to keep Singapore and Singaporeans safe every day and every night.

Let me start by thanking our Police intelligence officers, a role which is never meant to be thrust into the spotlight.

As the name suggests, the primary role of an intelligence officer is to provide intelligence: critical information that can help solve a case or prevent a harm from happening. But this is not as simple as it sounds. Intelligence work can mean poring through large amounts of data, analysing heaps of spreadsheets and documents, and reviewing long hours of CCTV footages or it could mean going undercover for weeks or laying in ambush for days, sometimes to no avail.

As a former Police commander, I valued very much the hard work and contributions of our Police intelligence officers. For obvious reasons, I cannot say more on what they do but their efforts are tremendous and often unknown to the public. So, today, in this House, I would like to extend my appreciation to all the dedicated men and women in our Police intelligence service who work quietly behind the scenes all these years.

Next, I would like to highlight another vital but often unseen policing unit, the Police Coast Guard (PCG). They patrol and protect Singapore's territorial waters, a job that is often confused with our more famous Navy counterparts.

As an island state, threats from our territorial waters are plentiful and our PCG officers deal with a variety of challenges every day, and especially so in the darkness of night, ranging from piracy attacks to detecting and deterring illegal persons from swimming across the sea to enter or leave Singapore. No matter how choppy the waters are, we can always count on the Singapore Police Coast Guard to keep our waters safe.

Moving inland, I would like to commend the work of another important Police unit which has kept a low-profile presence since it was established in 1949, the Gurkha Contingent.

The first batch of Gurkha officers arrived in Singapore in March 1949. Known for their courage, loyalty and paramilitary prowess, they guard our vital installations and provide security coverage for major events held in Singapore.

The Gurkhas were first called to the frontlines in the 1950s to deal with several major civil unrest such as the Maria Hertogh riots and the Hock Lee Bus riots. They were also deployed during Konfrontasi in the 1960s. More recently, the Gurkhas were featured widely for helping to secure the historic meeting in Singapore between US President Trump and North Korean Leader Kim in 2018.

Our Gurkha officers continue to be an important part of the SPF family and I would like to pay a special tribute here for their contributions in keeping Singapore safe for more than 70 years.

Madam, that same year in 1949, then-Commissioner of Police RE Foulger recruited the first batch of women Police officers. Before this, it was recorded in books that the untrained wives of Police constables were employed to help check women accused and were paid a dollar for conducting each search. It was a dollar per search.

In the initial years, the women officers were trained to handle female offenders, record statements from victims of sexual offences and help counsel female juvenile delinquents. Since their entry into the Force, our women Police officers have constantly pushed against boundaries to reach greater heights in what used to be a male-dominated profession.

Today, we have close to 2,000 women officers in SPF, with many serving in leadership positions, taking command of specialist units and leading crucial staff and operational departments.

Madam, our policewomen hold multifaceted roles at home too. They are mothers, wives and daughters. In addition to coping with the heavy workload that comes as a Police officer, many of our policewomen must cope with a second shift when they go home. Despite these challenges, they continue to serve and lead with distinction, and keep Singapore safe and secure.

Incidentally, there is a Motion after this on Empowering Women. Our women Police officers have been excellent role model of breaking barriers and I ask the House to join me in thanking and honouring all our passionate women Police officers, both past and present. [Applause.]

Madam, the contributions of our volunteer Police officers cannot be neglected too. The Volunteer Special Constabulary (VSC) scheme was formed in 1946 to augment the ranks of regular Police officers after the end of World War II. It started with only 150 volunteers and the VSC has since grown to over 1,000 volunteer Police officers, supporting SPF in various operational roles.

It is virtually impossible today to tell a VSC officer apart from a regular Police officer from the uniform he wears or the equipment he carries because they are dressed and equipped the same as their regular counterparts.

Unknown to many, most of our VSC officers have regular day jobs and volunteer for Police duties at night and during the weekends. They juggle their full-time job and family commitments, on top of patrolling our streets and our territorial waters. The sacrifices of our volunteer Police officers have helped to keep Singapore’s crime rate low over the decades.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I have spoken at length about the various roles within the Police Force that might be invisible to members of the public. Let me now highlight the need to safeguard the invisible trust that Singaporeans have in SPF.

According to the Gallup 2020 Global Law and Order Report, Singapore has topped an index of public perceptions of law and order for the sixth year in a row. An extraordinary 97% of us feel safe walking alone at night, an activity that cannot be taken for granted in many countries.

Minister Shanmugam once noted in 2017 that many law enforcement agencies around the world envy the level of faith and trust that Singaporeans have in our Police Force. I agree fully.

And the high levels of trust have stood the test of time. A 2020 survey conducted by the Institute of Policy Studies also found that 87% of respondents were confident or very confident with SPF, the highest level of confidence in police globally.

But we must not take this for granted. Malicious actors have and will continue to engage in efforts to damage the image and credibility of SPF. Policing work is no longer just about fighting crimes. The Police must do all it can to always safeguard the trust that Singaporeans have placed on our men and women in blue.

Madam, I have spent more than half my working life serving as a Police officer. I know how tough, difficult and exhausting the work can be. But I have also benefited immensely from the training, the experiences and the many great friendships that I have made throughout my time in the Force, and I can see so many of them here with us today in the Gallery.

The values that SPF has ingrained in me – Courage, Loyalty, Integrity and Fairness – continue to guide me as I serve the community in a different role today. As the saying goes, once a Police officer, always a Police officer. It has truly been an honour to have worked alongside so many dedicated Policemen and Policewomen.

Madam, the Singapore Police Force has come a long way since its humble beginnings as a 12-man team more than 200 years ago. As one of Singapore’s oldest institutions, it has met and overcome many great difficulties throughout its long history. No matter what challenges the future may bring, I know that SPF will continue to keep Singapore and all of us safe and secure for many more years to come. To SPF, thank you very much. [Applause.]

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat.

2.21 pm

The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Heng Swee Keat): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank Member Mr Christopher de Souza for tabling this Motion to commemorate and honour the important contributions of the Singapore Police Force and its officers.

Mr Christopher de Souza has given an excellent overview of how policing has evolved in Singapore since 1820. It is a story of growth and transformation that has enabled the Police to contribute to nation building and keep Singapore one of the safest cities in the world.

Mr Murali recounted acts of bravery of our officers – DSI Low, DSI Lim Siong – and paid tribute to the 125 officers who were killed in the line of duty as well as their families, and Mr Melvin Yong just highlighted the important role that many different officers played.

I rise to speak in support of this Motion and to add a personal perspective as someone who has served in the Singapore Police Force for 17 years, including five when I was on course or seconded to MOE.

Listening to Mr Patrick Tay recount how his pager sounded when he was in the cinema with his then-girlfriend reminded me of how my own dates with my girlfriend were also interrupted very often that way. [Laughter.]

But I am sure that many of our officers today will be interrupted by more than just a pager. I was telling my children about this pager story and they said, "Dad, what is a pager?"

I joined SPF 15 years after our Independence. The old problems of street crimes, rioting and secret society activities had been brought under control, thanks to the excellent work of many of our veteran officers, including many of them with us here today. They were really in the rough and tumble in those early years when things were very difficult.

But back in 1980, the problem of street crimes and secret society activities were still there. But new problems like commercial crimes were on the rise as our economy took off. Our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew had tasked Dr Goh Keng Swee to review our policing approach to keep up with the times.

The result was one of the most significant changes in policing strategy, where we adopted the Neighbourhood Police Post system, modelled after the Japanese Koban system. I was very excited to be part of this effort to implement this new way in my second year of service. I will share why.

As a fresh officer, our first assignment was to do investigation and I was posted to the Central Police Division at that time. On duty one day, I was deeply disturbed to attend to a case of a badly decomposing body. The old lady had been dead for several days in a rental cubicle in Chinatown, but no one knew until the stench was unbearable, as she was living all alone.

As part of investigations, I uncovered a sum of cash and gold jewellery that she had saved up. I tried to trace her next-of-kin to return these valuables. What was very sad was that several "relatives" turned up to make the claim but in order to verify this, I had to take statements from them. None could say what they had done with her or for her.

It taught me that when members of the society are isolated and relationships were not built over time, we will run into long-term problems, and when people do not care for the people around them, the Police would have a hard time trying to maintain law and order.

And just the year before this, I spent some time in Tokyo with Mr Heng Chee How, a fellow Police officer, to study the Koban system as Dr Goh Keng Swee had decided to adopt this community policing system. When we were in our second year of service, after we finished our investigation stint, we are part of this effort to set up Neighbourhood Police Posts or NPPs all over the island, one in each constituency. NPP officers conducted house visits, checked on the well-being of citizens, gave crime prevention advice and encouraged neighbours to form Neighbourhood Watch Group, to look out for strangers and report suspicious activities.

Special efforts were made to nurture the community spirit. In the kampungs, people knew each other well. But when relocated to HDB flats, they needed time to get to know one another and to adjust to a new way of life. It was critical to build that community spirit among neighbours, to look out for one another, to look out for criminals on the prowl. Besides their own efforts, the NPP officers also worked closely with grassroots advisors and volunteers, joining them to give crime prevention advice and helping to build the community spirit.

For many officers, especially detectives, it was a huge cultural change. Police officers were traditionally seen as macho gun-toting officers. The friendly Policeman, out to make friends with the public, was seen as a step backward and, in fact, the NPP system was derided by some as "No Power Police". "NPP" equals to "No Power Police". I see many of the seniors here smiling because that was the term that we used all the time at that time. But the Police Commissioner then, Goh Yong Hong, persisted.

At the same time, the Government was also enhancing punishment for some crimes. We had strict minimum sentences and death penalty for offences like trafficking of drugs above a certain quantity, robbery with firearms and kidnapping. The message was simple: in Singapore, crime does not pay.

I was later interviewed by an American professor when applying for my postgraduate studies. His question was simple: you had low crime rates in Singapore because of harsh punishment? I took some time to explain to him that the Singapore Police had a holistic approach in dealing with law and order.

First, everyone is a potential victim of crime, so Police officers spent a great deal of effort encouraging everyone to take prevention seriously. Prevention is better than cure. And the Police worked with agencies to optimise the design of public spaces, especially with the HDB, to provide protection for the most vulnerable.

Second, it is not punishment alone, but the probability of being caught. So, it depends critically on whether you can solve a crime. Again, after several years of the NPP system, the Police have built up enough trust and confidence for the public to come forward to do their part. Each of us is a potential witness.

Third, it is how our criminal justice system is organised to ensure fairness and justice. We have due processes and a public who supports taking action. And later on, as the system evolved, the different agencies, first within MHA, the Home Team, was one that worked closely together, Central Narcotics Bureau, the Prisons and SCDF. In fact, Mr Tee Tua Ba, the Commissioner whom I served under, was the Director of Prisons. He was a Policeman seconded to become Director of Prisons and when he came back, he came back with a new perspective about how we can help to reform those criminals who can be reformed.

So, I was glad that the professor agreed with me and told me years later when we met again that he learnt a lot about our policing approach, and not to take just a broad brush approach and come to conclusions.

In fact, the main insight of our NPP system, which is part of the broader community policing approach is this: 99% or more of the public are law-abiding. In many communities, unfortunately, the Police treated most members of the public or segments of them as potential criminals. This sets up an antagonistic relationship, the very exact opposite of what the Police needs to rally the 99% against the 1% or less.

We made the right choices in adopting the soft policing approach of building the community to partner one another and taking action to protect one another, so as to deal with potential criminals. And this soft approach is complemented by investing in cutting edge capabilities, whether it is in intelligence or in dealing with extreme stresses and hardened criminals.

So, while we can speak of policing approaches, the heart of it is in the trust and confidence of the public in the Police. This trust and confidence rest critically on the values and attributes of our officers.

Over the years, we have selected and developed officers with integrity and to keep out corruption. The Commissioner I first served under, Mr Goh Yong Hong, had stories of him arresting those who tried to bribe him. Implementing community policing was a big change in culture for a policeman who grew up in the 1960s, and he gave full support to this very major change.

When I was serving as Commander of a Police Division, the then Commissioner Tee Tua Ba initiated an empowerment movement. He saw that as the situation that officers had to handle were becoming more complex, and that was over 20 years ago, they could not just rely on PGO, the Police General Order.

The PGO sets out what you could or could not do. But Mr Tee felt that every situation is different and you cannot just rely on instructions. Rather, you have to know the ambit of the law, assess each situation on the ground that you encounter, exercise discretion and take the right course of action. This was another huge cultural change, built on the earlier changes to community policing.

Personally, I have learnt much over the years and particularly enjoyed my final stint in the Police as Commander of the Jurong Police Division. The camaraderie among officers was strong and the level of dedication was outstanding. And the public, and Members of Parliament and grassroots leaders in the Jurong area were most supportive. Every few weeks, I had the pleasure of presenting a pewter plaque to members of the public for their acts of bravery in helping us arrest criminals, including snatch thieves and molesters. In fact, about 30% of our crime then was solved with the help of the public. Today, I am glad that this ratio remains high, between 20% and 30%, even as our policing capabilities have risen.

Mr Christopher de Souza's recount of the journey of the Police over the 200 years has one key element: that we must constantly adapt and innovate. So, I am glad that Minister Shanmugam has set up the HTX – the Home Team Science and Technology Agency – to invest in building new capabilities, especially in the digital area, while Commissioner Hoong Wee Teck is building the frontline capabilities of officers to tackle new and complex crimes, including those in cyberspace.

Above all, it is critical that we continue to invest in our officers the values that underpin their work: integrity, fairness, discipline, dedication. As crimes become more cross-border and sophisticated, our officers would need to become even more skilled.

Let me take this opportunity to thank the officers who have served over the years, including many in this House, officers who were Regulars, men and women, NSmen, volunteers as well as civilians supporting our officers. I especially thank those who served together with me during my years in the Police.

I am confident that the Singapore Police Force will continue to scale new heights and keep Singapore safe and secure.

So, let us, as members of the public, support our frontline officers, and as Members of this House, support legislation to strengthen the capabilities of the Police and our law enforcement agencies. [Applause.]

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Leader.

Debate resumed.

2.35 pm

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr K Shanmugam): Mdm Deputy Speaker, last year, the SPF marked its 200th anniversary, a significant milestone.

We had Sir Stamford Raffles landing in 1819 and the Police force was set up in 1820; essentially set up from the very first beginnings of modern Singapore.

I thank Mr Christopher de Souza for moving this Motion for this House to recognise the essential contributions of SPF over 200 years and for creating this occasion. Mr de Souza outlined SPF's journey over the years and its contributions to Singapore's development.

SPF started as a 12-men team in 1820. It is today a 45,000-strong force with regular Police officers, full-time National Servicemen (NSmen) and supported by civilian officers who are NSmen and volunteers.

SPF is now a respected force with a high standard of operational excellence. Its success has to be tested by looking at the lived experiences of Singaporeans. And what are the lived experiences? I have, over the years, shared with Members, probably every year, what Singaporeans feel about their surroundings, safety and security.

Mr Melvin Yong referred to the latest Gallup Report 2020 which shows that 97% of residents in Singapore feel safe when they are walking alone in their neighbourhoods at night. The global average is 69%.

I will come back to this point later, but I think on no account will Singaporeans want to give that up.

That is a fundamental human right: to be able to walk where you wish and where you feel, man or woman, at any time of the day or night, without fear, and to allow your child to take public transport without fear.

Singaporeans' confidence in SPF is also extremely high. Mr Yong also made this point. This has been so for many years. The latest 2020 Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) study shows that 87% of respondents were confident or very confident in SPF. It is the highest level of confidence amongst all state institutions surveyed in Singapore and also the highest globally across other police forces in the study.

What we have, this level of safety and security, and confidence in the force, did not just happen as the natural course of events. It is a result of paths taken; and also paths avoided, not taken. I will, in the speech: first, highlight some of the factors that have made SPF successful and have helped it keep law and order in Singapore; second, pay tribute to the contributions of SPF officers; and third, outline some of SPF's plans for the future.

Let me start with some of the factors that have led to SPF's success and its remarkable progress over the years since Independence.

There are many factors which can help or impede the performance of our Police force. For example, the levels of governance in society, the levels of equity and inequity, inequality, many factors like that. For the purposes of this Motion, I will not speak about these larger factors. Instead, I will take a slightly narrower focus and deal with the factors that are more closely connected with Police work and the Police as an institution.

The three factors I will touch on are: first, our criminal justice system; second, the quality of leadership in SPF; and third, maintaining trust with the community. Let me deal with each one.

First, our criminal justice system. No police force operates in a vacuum. Its operations are fundamentally influenced by the criminal justice system within the framework of which the force operates. If the criminal justice system does not work, if there is no proper due process and crimes go unpunished, then it is difficult for a police force to be effective.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, with your permission, may I display some slides on the screen as I make my points?

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Please proceed. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]

Mr K Shanmugam: In this context, I have often referred to a speech by the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew who said this in 1962: "In a settled and established society, law appears to be a precursor of order. Good laws lead to good order, that is the form that you will learn. But the hard realities of keeping the peace between man and man, and between authority and the individual, can be more accurately described, if the phrase were inverted to 'order and law', for without order the operation of law is impossible."

Members will notice that he said, "order and law", not "law and order". He reversed, or inverted, the phrase. You have to establish order first, then laws can work. Otherwise, laws will not work.

I think it is fair to say Mr Lee sometimes took a view similar to that which Hobbes had put out, about man in society. That philosophy underpins the changes we made to the criminal justice system which we had inherited from the British.

A lot of it, I would say, is primarily due to what Mr Lee himself believed, thought through and brought about, with a deep understanding of how people actually behave, how societies work and how laws actually work. The criminal justice system we inherited has a long history, evolving over many centuries in England; we adapted, changed and, in some respects, we changed quite fundamentally. That helped create a framework for the Police to be effective.

Let me give three examples as to what I mean.

We changed our laws, for example, to allow the Courts to draw an adverse inference if an accused person puts up a defence that he did not mention when he was first interviewed by the Police.

This position was based on the UK Criminal Law Revision Committee's recommendation which had then not been put into practice in the United Kingdom (UK). The committee had said that hardened criminals could greatly hamper investigations by refusing to answer any questions; so, put the onus on them to answer the questions.

It runs against a basic principle, some might say, the golden thread, as it were, of the right to remain silent. But we made the major change in 1976. It encouraged suspects to be forthcoming during investigations. Accused persons have to tell the Police the truth when interviewed, or adverse inferences can be drawn.

Members would have seen, perhaps in TV dramas, the police will tell the suspect that he or she has a right to remain silent and if the police officers did not do so, that could become, a procedural problem and the suspect may walk free on a technicality.

Our position: it is in the public interest that persons under investigations by the Police tell the truth when interviewed. The change has had a big impact on how suspects behave and the entire criminal process.

In this context, maybe I can take the opportunity of dealing with or responding to some points that Ms Lim made. I think she made the following points about video-recording of interviews (VRI), translation to other languages, resource allocation, as well as helping victims and victim impact statements. Steps have been taken and further the steps will be taken.

I responded on these previously. Since today's Motion is on SPF and 200 years, and celebrating SPF, I will not go into detail on those points. We can discuss those on another occasion.

There is another point that, coincidentally, forms a big part of my speech too. Ms Lim made reference to Prof Herbert Packer's work on due process and crime control. While it is not so clear, I think Ms Lim would probably fall on the side of the due process model.

The approach we have taken is not ideological. It is to see what is suitable, what works in Singapore. As I said, in 1976, the steps we took would probably be described as more akin to the crime control model.

And as Ms Lim was speaking, I remembered a speech by our former Chief Justice Mr Chan Sek Keong. This was a lecture in 2008 – I think Justice Chan was Chief Justice at that point – at the centenary of Mr David Marshall's birth.

This is what he had to say and I can do no better than what perhaps the greatest jurist Singapore has seen, said about this process. He said, from paragraph 13 onwards:

"Before I discuss some of these amendments, let me now sketch out for you the features of the criminal justice process that was in place in Singapore before 1976. We then had an investigative and trial process regulated by the Criminal Procedure Code and the Evidence Act which basically provided the framework for a common law trial process which was highly admired, if not revered, in England at that time."

I make a point to take Members through this in some detail because if you want a safe and secure Singapore, with due process for all of us, it is important to get this fundamental principle right. Because there is and there will always be a tendency to move towards much more of putting hurdles and processes in the way of the Police. The point is to strike the right balance and I would emphasise that all Members and all Ministers for Home Affairs and Law remember these fundamental principles.

That is why I said in my speech paths taken and paths avoided. If we had not taken this path in 1976, neither the Police nor Singapore would have today's crime control system.

Let me read a little bit more about what Chief Justice Chan, as he then was, said:

"The fundamental principle was the presumption of innocence. This meant that (a) the prosecution must prove every ingredient of the offence against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt; (b) the accused had the right to remain silent at any stage of the criminal justice process, from investigation to trial; (c) the accused had the right not to incriminate himself, except in restricted circumstances; (d) the accused's statements to the police were not admissible except in restricted circumstances; (e) he had the right to give an unsworn statement from the dock; (f) all evidence, even if true, was not admissible if it might have a prejudicial effect on the jury; and (g) the practice of the courts was to require strict compliance with the rules of evidence and procedure and (h) to have strict oversight of jury directions on accomplice evidence and corroboration.”

“In a paper published in 1964 on the criminal justice process in the USA, Professor Herbert Packer of Stanford University described two models of criminal justice process, namely, due process and crime control. This paper has since been regarded as one of the most important contributions to systematic thought about criminal justice.”

“The basic features are those I have just described of our criminal justice process before 1976."

That means, very much, due process.

"Because of the presumption of innocence, priority must be given to the protection of the accused's rights in a fair manner. Police powers of arrest and investigation should be limited to prevent potential official oppression of the individual. Procedural rights are not mere technicalities. Law enforcement officers and the prosecution should be held accountable to rules, procedures and guidelines to ensure fairness and consistency."

And he goes on; I will skip a little bit. At paragraph 15, he said:

"Marshall achieved great success under this system. Many other lesser lights also shone. But it was inevitable that the prosecution would sooner or later take note of the defects (from its point of view) of the existing process which had been so ably and amply demonstrated by Marshall. It must have led the Government to rethink seriously about the objectives of the criminal justice process and how to achieve those objectives.”

“Let me now introduce the other model of criminal justice process that Professor Packer had identified in his paper, viz, the crime control model."

And he sets out the features.

"The repression of crime should be the most important function of criminal justice because order is a necessary condition for a free society. Criminal justice should concentrate on vindicating victims' rights rather than on protecting defendants' rights. Police powers should be expanded to make it easier to investigate, arrest, search, seize and convict. Legal technicalities that handcuff the police should be eliminated. If the police make an arrest and a prosecutor files criminal charges, the accused should be presumed guilty because the fact-finding of police and prosecutors is highly reliable."

I am setting these out, I am not saying that I agree with them. This is what Prof Packer had identified.

"The main objective of the criminal justice process should be to discover the truth or to establish the factual guilt of the accused."

And he has a few other factors too.

"The 1976 amendments introduced many features of the crime control model. Ironically, these amendments were based on the recommendations of the 1972 Eleventh Report of the UK Criminal Law Revision Committee which the UK government had rejected."

For Members' reference, those who are not lawyers, the UK Criminal Law Revision Committee comprised eminent jurists and lawyers. They looked at the system in the UK and they came up with a set of recommendations but it was not doable in the UK. In Singapore, many of the recommendations were passed into law.

Chief Justice Chan, as he was, set out the two major changes.

“All statements made by an accused to a police officer in the course of investigation would be admissible in evidence… And second, the trial process. If the accused is called upon to enter his defence, he has no right to make an unsworn statement from the dock."

“These two broad changes led to an increase in the conviction of the factually guilty through pleas of guilt or at trials. Crime control was strengthened with the use of rebuttable and irrebuttable resumptions in substantive offences. These developments, together with better and more dedicated and efficient law enforcement have reduced the crime rate over the years and have made Singapore a safer place to live in. You might think that this statement is somewhat simplistic, but many people would agree that law enforcement in Singapore, although not perfect, is among the best in the world."

That is the view of the Chief Justice, as he was, in 2008. That is not to say that therefore crime control becomes the be-all and end-all. Of course, you must have fairness in the system. So, it is a question of finding the right balance. I would ask Members to carefully consider what is suitable for our society when seeking to strike the right balance. The right balance should not be guided by pure ideology. It should be guided by what works, what is fair, what is right.

We have a system today: trained judges, a defence bar, rules of process, procedure, presumption of innocence except in the context of, say, drug trials where presumption of innocence is there but the accused has got to go and prove specific factors because those are within his knowledge. And in corruption trials, also a reversal of onus of proof.

We do not say we have arrived. That will be not only inaccurate, it will be hubris. But we are constantly refining, constantly trying to find the right balance. And the right balance also changes when society changes.

Our philosophy is that the Police investigations should not be made into a series of technical hurdles which have to be cleared. But it must be a clear and fair process that helps to arrive at the truth.

I think all Members will agree that it is a question of balance and it is really a question of how you strike that balance.

We have, for example, talked about, implemented, in some cases, initiatives like VRI, the Appropriate Adult Scheme, other initiatives. All of these will help in the fairness in the process.

Another example that I would put forward in going back to my point about the law enforcement framework within which the Police operate, is that tough penalties that have been introduced to deal with serious crimes.

I spoke about drugs, corruption and many other offences. The penalties were changed and, where necessary, onus of proof was reversed. If you have wealth, you are a public servant, you have wealth which is not explained, the onus is on you to prove.

We also have preventive detention, the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act adapted from British laws.

Jury trials were abolished. Instead, we have trials presided over by professional judges, who are better able to handle the complex issues for a more reliable fact-finding process. It lessens the theatrics, reduces the risk of injustice.

And we have the institutions required for an effective judicial justice system: the judiciary, the public prosecution service, the bar associations. They have all been built up.

As a result, we have a criminal justice system which has worked well for us. But it is constant work, constant refining, constant tending and it will continue to have to be so.

If the system does not work well and criminals walk away because the system is corrupt or weak, then Police morale and discipline will go down. Police will not be effective. We have avoided that.

I have only given a few examples of this framework but Members can assume that there have been many changes that have been very substantive that has led to the system we have today. But let me now move to this context of SPF 200.

The second key factor behind SPF's success is the quality of officers in SPF and the quality of its leadership.

The focus by Mr Lee and his team was on building not just the size of the Police force upon Independence but also the quality of officers and leadership in SPF.

High quality does not only mean educational qualifications. You need qualities of character, a sense of purpose and you must be able to handle the pressure and perform on the job.

In 1972, seven years after Independence, and again I quote Mr Lee addressing Police officers at the Police Dining-in, I quote, "There are certain virtues in the force which never changes. It must have high morals, it must be proud of itself and it cannot be proud of itself if it has not got the right leadership. It must have that sense of purpose that comes out of men trained on a common doctrine. And it must have a sense of continuity."

Almost 40 years later, in 2011, that his final Police Dining-in, Mr Lee said, "We cannot have a situation where the criminals are smarter and better resourced than you. If we do not recruit strong officers with the moral fibre and a sense of purpose, you will go downhill very fast."

In the 40 years in between and before, these lessons were taken to heart and applied. Today, there is rigour in who gets to become a Police officer. Less than one out of every 10 applicants to SPF is accepted as direct Sergeants or Inspectors. The emphasis is on quality.

SPF also tries to ensure that good officers move up, regardless of their entry rank. It implemented the unified rank structure in 2016, went beyond academic qualifications.

It provides faster progression through the ranks for officers who perform well. Once you are in service, how you perform should matter more than your qualifications when you first came in.

SPF also has a scholarship scheme – prestigious, competitive, highly sought after. Some who spoke earlier on this Motion – Members of Parliament Murali Pillai, Melvin Yong, Patrick Tay – were all scholars, and of course, the Deputy Prime Minister. SPF sent him on his first trip overseas to Cambridge.

As a side note, if I may say so, one of the problems that SPF is finding is that other services are increasingly looking at SPF. Because apart from the Deputy Prime Minister, the Head of Civil Service and various other officers, Permanent Secretaries and those in other Ministries have come from SPF. I suppose the approach we have to take is that we spot, we groom, we invest, we train and then, we should be glad that they are taken by others.

SPF is also becoming more gender diverse. Today, we have 1,800 women in SPF making up 20%, one-fifth of the force. They serve in every division, including Specialist Divisions.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, Senior Staff Sergeant Siti Aisyah is from the Emergency Response Team (ERT), which is, Members would know, our dedicated fast-response Police unit; and in the event of a terrorist incident, she and her colleagues will be on the ground immediately. The other photo is that of Sergeant Anna Anthony from the Community Policing Unit.

Going back to Siti Aisyah, she is 30 years old. Her childhood dream was to be a Police officer. She volunteered for the ERT Conversion Course which is tough and she is the first ERT Officer in Woodlands Division.

ERT officers like her are trained in tactical and counter-assault skills. She patrols in public places with her gear which is up to 17 kilogrammes and she maintains her IPPT Gold and Marksman qualifications. She is also a Physical Training Instructor, a Police Defence Tactics Instructor and a Range Safety Officer and highly regarded among her peers.

Gender is no barrier in the Police force even for the physically and mentally demanding roles like the ERT. SPF actively grooms its officers for leadership positions in the SPF. They will undergo postings in ground units, Patrols and Operations, Investigations and Intelligence. They may spend some time in MHA getting policy experience and the wider Public Service; sharpen their policy understanding; make them think whole-of-Government. Some of the younger officers may spend some time with me, assisting me directly. And if they perform well, prove they can do the job, they will be appointed to Command positions in SPF.

SPF today is led by Police Commissioner Hoong Wee Teck. Rose from the ground, highly respected by the rank-and-file, because he is both operationally very good and at the same time, understands his men and women, so they respect him.

Below him, the Deputy Commissioners: Jerry See, Florence Chua, Tan Hung Hooi. All in their early to mid-50s. They and the next echelons, you will get an example of SPF's approach to grooming leaders and I would illustrate by referring to three officers who are a little bit younger.

How Kwang Hwee, age 42, Oxford, Stanford. Started as Investigation Officer (IO) in Operations, moved on to various positions, then Commander, G Division, spent some time in policy work in MHA, then Director of Operations and now Director in Criminal Investigation Division (CID), which is one of the most senior positions in SPF, at the age of 42.

Lian Ghim Hua, 41, started again as an Investigation Officer; before that, on scholarship to Cornell and then, Stanford, moved up eventually to become Commander, F Division, which is a stressful position because in terms of crime, it is not the highest, but it covers Prime Minister's ward and coincidentally my ward as well. So, it is a high stress job. He is now Director of Operations and a high performing officer.

Alvin Moh, age 40, again started as an Investigation officer, Commanding Officer (CO) of Neighbourhood Police Centre (NPC), of which Deputy Prime Minister said something, Commander, G Division, spent time at MHA, now Director of Police Intel Department (PID).

All three and others, and the Deputy Commissioners, the Commissioner and people below them, exemplify the SPF leadership today. As I said, we also voluntarily gave up various other officers to the wider public sector. If we go down the ranks, I will mention three officers with whom I worked directly, again more to illustrate how SPF grooms its leadership.

One of them is 37, two others are 33 each, spent about 18 months working with me closely: Teo Zi-Ming, 37; Sergius, 33; Lee Huan Ting, 33. They went through various ground postings – IOs, CO NPCs and so on – came up to MHA and worked with me. Zi-Ming is now Assistant Commissioner Commander, F Division at 37. Sergius is now a Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Deputy Commander, J Division. Huan Ting is now a Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Deputy Commander, A Division.

I have mentioned the senior leadership because leadership is vital. Leadership also needs our committed ground officers. During this Motion, we recognise all of them: the officer on Coast Patrol, off our waters; the officer in the NPC on ground patrol; officers doing their Emergency Response (ER) patrol, Transport command, Traffic Police, Police Operations Command Centre (POCC) command, Investigation Officers, Gurkha Contingent and many others. Our Volunteer Constabulary, they are our heroes, unsung, doing their work, day in, day out. They are all together, integral to the Singapore that we have today. And SPF knows that it must take care of every officer appropriately.

The SPF today is an institution that is confident and forward-looking. Officers have a strong sense of purpose, integrity and professionalism. Morale is high, there is high public trust and confidence in SPF. This is the remarkable state of affairs, even more remarkable when you look at the situation of police forces in other cities.

In the US, police officers nationwide have faced years of protests, there have been calls to defund the police. Gun violence against police officers have also increased. According to data collected by one of the non-profits, number of officers killed or injured by firearms in the USA, 346 last year, in 2020. About one every day.

Against this backdrop, morale of officers is affected. Retirements are up by 45%. Resignations are up 18% from a year ago. Many police departments have trouble finding new recruits.

The difference between Singapore and these places are not the officers. Our officers are neither superior or worse. We make it a point to choose very good officers but people for people, Singaporeans, I have said, quality wise, it is difficult to say, draw conclusions.

The US police force in some states, we learn much from them. They are very good. But the difference is the wider criminal justice system, the laws that can have an impact on the police force and the entire approach of society to the police. For example, if you have lax gun control laws, you will get more homicides and more police officers killed. And if you are a police officer in the US, as one officer described quite graphically, every time you get a call, whether it is a cat on a tree that is stuck or a baby that has been abandoned, or a neighbourhood call, any call, you go there thinking that someone might shoot you, you go prepared for all eventualities. You can see why.

If we move to another example, London. I will illustrate my point by referencing a report by an independent panel called the Report of Daniel Morgan Independent Panel which was released in June this year and received substantial coverage, including in the Financial Times.

It relates to a person by the name of Daniel Morgan who was a private investigator. He was murdered in southeast London in 1987. Five criminal investigations and, I think, five unsuccessful prosecutions. In 2013, finally an independent panel was set up to consider what happened and the independent panel found that the family of Daniel Morgan was failed by police corruption. This is about London Metropolitan Police. For example, the police officer who had searched Morgan's office was a business associate and later, a colleague of the chief suspect. In 2011, the London Metropolitan Police acknowledged, and I quote, "police corruption in our original investigation was a significant factor in this failure".

London now has more than 100 murders reported every year since 2015. A June 2021 survey shows that only 36% of the population in London have confidence in the police, vis-a-vis 48% nationwide in the UK.

Morale is also low. In a survey of police officers in England and Wales, 85% reported that police service morale was low, 90% cited public treatment of the police had the highest negative impact on morale, amongst other factors including pay and workload.

Why this state of affairs? It is not because the London police officers are, man-for-man, worse. It is all these other factors.

So, I would say to Members, have a care when we look at parts which we have avoided and which we now may feel tempted to go back to.

The London Met is a highly professional outfit and we learn much from them as well. But it is the criminal justice system, the pay of police officers, many other factors. It is political will to make sure that the criminal justice system works, that the police officers are protected as long as they have not done wrong and that the system allows for proper investigation and prosecution, while making sure that innocent people can go free. Therefore, the entire system works properly with the right balance.

Every police force, including ours, will have errant officers and we have to be most strict, the strictest with our own officers. That is a way to make sure that morale is up, integrity is up, public trust and confidence is up. So, our officers know, any officer caught wanting will be treated more severely than any member of the public. That has been our approach. When an allegation is made against any officer, the Internal Affairs Office conducts the investigation. If wrongdoing is uncovered, SPF, or in appropriate cases, the Public Service Commission will take disciplinary action against the officer.

Where crimes are perceived to have been committed, there will be charging in Court and the Courts often take into account the fact that this is a Police officer who is charged with upholding the laws, and therefore, the punishment is usually stricter.

If a further review is necessary, there is an Independent Review Panel, comprising persons of standing, who can review the findings of SPF's own internal investigations. As a result, we have been able to maintain public trust, keep up morale and a strong sense of mission within our Police force.

Consistently over the years, a large majority of our officers say that the work they do is meaningful and these are anonymised surveys. The work they do is meaningful, they feel engaged with SPF, they identify with SPF's mission, vision and core values.

Internally, Employee Engagement Survey results show very high morale over the last few years. Average scores for engagement across SPF has increased from 76% in 2018, to 78% last year. Half-yearly, surveys conducted over the last three years consistently showed that more than four out of five SPF officers found their work to be meaningful.

But workload remains an issue. Members will know, SPF's manpower strength is very lean compared to police forces in other major cities such as London, New York and Hong Kong. There is a limit to how much our officers can do with the resources that they have. We are studying this closely and we will come back on this.

The third factor that I want to touch on in explaining SPF's success is the strong trust between the community and the Police. Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Dennis Tan spoke about this. Sir Robert Peel, known as the father of Modern Policing said: "The Police are the Public, and the Public are the Police".

We recognised early on the importance of building trust between the community and the Police.

Over the years, many different community initiatives – the Neighbourhood Police Post (NPP) system, the Neighbourhood Police Centre (NPC) and Community Policing System (COPs) system, the Community Watch groups, Citizens on Patrol, to name a few – have contributed to the high level of trust between community and the Police. The public trust in the Police sets the tone for the everyday interactions between the Police and the community.

When a Police officer arrives on a scene, people cooperate with his directions, they accept that the officer has a right to investigate and manage the incident in the interests of the public. And members of the public largely trust SPF. Many help SPF by sharing crime-prevention messages, providing information on crimes. Yet others have risked their own safety assisting Police during arrests and live incidents and we make it a point to recognise, honour, praise them and give them an award.

This level of public trust cannot be taken for granted. SPF has to continue to maintain a high level of trust with the community.

Let me now move on to paying tribute to our officers.

As we reflect on SPF’s progress, we want to pay tribute to SPF officers, past and present, for their contributions and sacrifices.

I thank Mr Murali Pillai for inviting to the House today some of our retired SPF officers and SPF officer representatives and leadership group led by our Commissioner of Police Hoong Wee Teck. They are up there in the Gallery.

Our SPF officers across the generations – regular officers, civilian staff, National Servicemen, Volunteer Special Constabulary officers, retired officers – they have served Singapore faithfully and with utmost commitment.

Mr Murali Pillai spoke of 125 SPF officers who have given their lives, and definitely, more than the 125 that you see, in the line of duty. He has listed their names in the annex to his speech, to be recorded in the Hansard.

I will mention six.

Detective Corporal Yuen Yen Pang and VSC officer Andrew Teo Bock Lan, who were attacked and killed by rioting mobs during the 1955 Hock Lee Bus Riots.

Inspector Allan Lim Kim Sai, who died in a shoot-out with a notorious kidnapper in 1965 – Mr Murali Pillai spoke about him – and his son is here.

Sergeant Mohd Saad bin Omar, who died after being shot by a drug suspect in 1979.

Station Inspector Boo Tiang Huat, who died while on anti-housebreaking rounds in 1994.

And Staff Sergeant Nadzrie who was involved in a traffic accident while on patrol duties in 2017, four years ago, and I went to his wake.

These officers and others gave up their lives while trying to keep us safe and secure. We remember what they have done for SPF and for Singapore.

We are privileged to have the families of two of our fallen officers with us in the House today. Mr David Lim, as you have heard, is a retired Police Superintendent, son of the late-Inspector Allan Lim; and his grandfather was also a Police officer.

We also have Mdm Chew Tuan Jong and Mr Boo Jia Liang, widow and son of the late Station Inspector Boo Tiang Huat.

They are sitting in the Gallery. Can I invite them to stand? [Applause.] Thank you.

As we commemorate SPF’s bicentennial, we want to recognise the important contributions of SPF and accord recognition to its officers. Members asked for it, so, I will set out how we will recognise them.

A commemorative Singapore Police Bicentennial 2020 Medal will be awarded to SPF officers who were in service for any period between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2020. This includes regular Police officers, volunteer Police officers, full-time National Servicemen and Operationally Ready National Servicemen. The medal will be worn on their uniform.

We will also award a Medallion to former Police officers who had retired or completed their National Service liabilities before 1 January 2020, to recognise their contributions. This Medallion will also be given to civilian officers who were in service with SPF in 2020. The families of SPF officers who had given their lives in the line of duty will also receive the Medallion in honour of their contributions and sacrifice.

The Singapore Police Bicentennial 2020 Medal and Medallion are a reminder of SPF’s proud history and of the country’s appreciation of their steadfast commitment in safeguarding our everyday lives.

From the past to the present and, now, to the future.

The third part of my speech is that as SPF commemorates its bicentennial, we are looking ahead. How can the SPF strengthen itself for the future? Better equipment, training and more technology.

Let me explain by giving Members the perspective of a Police officer responding to a hypothetical incident four years from now, in 2025.

First, before the Police officer reports for duty, information on his work assignments for the day will be available through his Police smartphone. He will be notified of his patrol sector and partner.

Once in the station, he collects his equipment from the automated systems. The systems use RFID technology. Seamless. At the touch of a button, he will instantly draw his communication sets, firearms and taser, his other patrol equipment, such as his riot shield, ballistic-resistant vest. His body-worn camera comes equipped with live-streaming capabilities for enhanced sense-making during incidents. And his Glock 19 Gen 5 pistol provides higher firepower and ammunition capacity.

The officer and his partner then get to their Next-Gen Fast Response Car (FRC) equipped with RFID technology as well, which enables them to keep track of the equipment within the FRC. They perform a visual check, drive off in the FRC for duties. So, no more stock-taking, checking everything. Each FRC is equipped with improved safety features and cameras with live-streaming capabilities, feeding back to Police Operations Command Centre (POCC).

Assume a homicide is reported. The victim’s body is found burnt and disposed in a car parked in a secluded location. No witnesses.

POCC will push the case information to the officers in real time. And as officers rush to the scene, SPF investigators will make enquiries.

At POCC, the extensive network of Police Cameras will allow investigators to quickly narrow down a prime suspect, based on movements caught on camera and also help trace his current movements and whereabouts. This sounds hypothetical, but I have based it on a real incident that a body was burnt in a remote location and Police did find the culprit based on cameras and other information.

Investigators access a digitised and automated screening platform. The system combs through multiple Police databases, provides case information on the culprit, taking maybe 75% less time to do so than before. Very powerful. Brings all the databases together, information at fingertips.

Crime scene specialists process the murder scene with advanced technology. And through forensics, the victim is identified. DNA evidence places the culprit at the scene of the murder. The officers then locate the suspect and arrest him.

This is an SPF that will use technology quite extensively to enhance its operational capabilities and streamline its processes. In particular, we will continue to enhance our sensor networks.

We have installed more than 90,000 Police Cameras since 2012, as I have told this House a number of times. Surveillance cameras deployed by governments, whether in Singapore or other countries, are sometimes criticised as being an invasion of privacy. These claims overlook a couple of basic point that most people want to live in an environment which is safe and secure. And, conceptually, having cameras in public spaces is no different from police interviewing eye witnesses to establish what happened. The camera is a constant, ever-present eye witness whose memory would not be suspect. It is, literally, black and white evidence.

Surveys also show that people feel safer with the prominent placement of Police Cameras in their own neighbourhoods. They want them. People want these cameras in their neighbourhoods. And they have been very effective in helping Police deter, detect and solve crimes.

For example, in April this year, there was an armed robbery. It was solved within five hours. The suspect was an AETOS Auxiliary Police Officer. He had drawn his firearm, changed his uniform, left headquarters without authorisation. Visited a moneylender in Jurong, told staff to hand over the cash as he had a firearm, made away with more than $24,000. With the help of cameras and other tech and investigative techniques, he was identified, traced, tracked and arrested in a safe manner within five hours. The potential harm he could have caused was great.

So, we will install more cameras across the island. As I have told Members, we aim to have 200,000 Police Cameras, at least, by 2030. They help our Police officers to deter, detect and solve crimes, as I have said earlier.

SPF will also continue to prioritise community policing and step up partnerships with individuals, grassroots organisations, businesses and other public agencies in keeping our Singapore safe.

Some key initiatives include the Safety and Security Watch Group and the upcoming Community Watch Scheme, which will go beyond geographical-based approaches to interest-based engagements with the community.

Mdm Deputy Speaker and Members, the SPF story has been an inspiring one. Let me conclude with a quote from Mr Lee Kuan Yew again in 1972, when addressing Police officers at the Dining-in. The various quotes from Minister Mentor Lee will give a sense to Members. He was a key architect, if not the key architect, of modern SPF; and a lot of the philosophy, the approach and the legal system of SPF work came from him. So, let me quote:

“You need integrity, you need a sense of purpose, you have got to have that mark which others recognise to be special. You are upholding the state. Without you, without the quiet civil servant who gets the things done, all the young executives who can wine and dine in Shangri-La, they will be down the drain.”

As SPF writes its next chapter, I am confident that SPF will continue to uphold its tradition of excellence and stay anchored on its core values: courage, loyalty, integrity, fairness, even as it charts its way through a more complex operating environment. In doing so, SPF must continue to hold its officers to the highest standards of integrity and professionalism, in order to maintain the trust of Singaporeans whom it serves.

I ask all Members to join me in congratulating and thanking SPF for its 200 years of exemplary service in keeping Singapore safe and secure. And long may this continue for many generations to come. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Christopher de Souza.

3.28 pm

Mr Christopher de Souza: Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank the Members, including the Minister for Home Affairs as well as the Deputy Prime Minister, for speaking on this Motion and for their support.

I fully support the introduction of the Singapore Police Bicentennial 2020 Medal and Medallion for Police officers and other officers serving with SPF to honour SPF's contributions on the occasion of its bicentennial. It is a meaningful way to honour SPF's contributions and strengthen the sense of pride and identity amongst Police officers on this significant occasion. It expresses the collective appreciation of the House for all that our Police officers have done.

Before I move on with my planned speech, I would like to just make reference to Ms Sylvia Lim's comments that the CNB and the ICA were not mentioned.

The reason for that, really, is when Mr Murali and I proposed this Motion, it was to commemorate SPF's 200th anniversary, its bicentennial. I did a check: CNB was formed in 1971 and ICA was consolidated into the ICA in 2003.

So, nothing in this Motion dilutes our appreciation to CNB and ICA. In fact, in 2017, the House debated a Motion, which I moved, on strengthening Singapore's fight against drugs. And I quote from a speech that I gave that, "the CNB and the Singapore Prisons Services are sterling institutions, staffed with dedicated and committed officers. Their effort in the fight against drugs is courageous. But the fight is not only theirs to bear. All Singaporeans have a role to play."

So, nothing in this debate should be misinterpreted as being diluted appreciation to CNB and ICA. In fact, we hold them also in high esteem.

Looking to the future, over the last 200 years, SPF has displayed an unwavering commitment to keep Singapore and Singaporeans safe and secure. Our SPF officers have served with integrity, professionalism and courage. We are proud of SPF's reputation as a world-class Police Force, trusted by Singaporeans.

As we look to the next 200 years, I am glad to hear from the Minister for Home Affairs that SPF is already enhancing its capabilities to meet the emerging challenges. However, even as SPF continues its transformation and capabilities, it is crucial that SPF and its officers continue to be anchored by the core values of courage, loyalty, integrity and fairness. If this is achieved, I am sure that SPF will continue to grow from strength to strength and Singaporeans will get to enjoy many more years of safety and security.

Therefore, in conclusion, Madam, I invite this House to resolve to commemorate and honour the important contributions of the Singapore Police Force and its officers to nation building and to keeping Singapore as one of the safest countries in the world. [Applause.]

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

"That this House commemorates and honours the important contributions of the Singapore Police Force and its officers to nation building and to keeping Singapore as one of the safest countries in the world."

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Order. I propose that we take a break now and I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.53 pm. [Laughter.] Okay, 4.00 pm!

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.33 pm until 4.00 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.00 pm.

[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]