Ministry of Home Affairs: Committee of Supply 2018 – Cuts by WP MPs

(Delivered in Parliament on 2 March 2018)

Unlicensed Moneylending Harassment – Daniel Goh

Chairman Sir, loan sharks have been turning to online harassment of debtors. The aim of online harassment is the same as the offline mode, to shame the debtor in his community and harass the debtor’s associates until he pays up. There is one difference, loan sharks are innovating to avoid detection and identification, for example by stealing the debtor’s identity and posing as him to utterly destroy his reputation.

The widespread use of police CCTV surveillance in public housing estates and tough enforcement have led to the steady decline of loan shark harassment cases since 2010. But there is a spike in cases last year for the first time, with electronic harassment contributing to the spike. Can the Minister clarify whether this spike also represents a spike in Singaporeans borrowing from loan sharks? Can the Minister also elaborate how the police is combating online forms of loan shark harassment so as to assure the public?

 

Immigration Policy – Pritam Singh

Mr Chairman, as a country that extends Singapore citizenship to an average 20,000 foreigners each year and partly relies extensively on immigration to replace and increase the overall population, it remains an anomaly that there are no official statistics detailing the country of origin of new citizens who live among us and who have to integrate together with us as one people. The Government’s long-standing position has been that it does not officially reveal the countries from where these new citizens originate on the grounds of sensitivity of the country of origin of our new citizens and the implications and sensitivities for specific groups of persons. Previously it was revealed that about 50% of new citizens originate from Southeast Asian countries with another 40% from other Asian countries. However, in reply to a similar question in 2016, the Government did not give any percentages but to say that the majority came from Southeast Asian countries. Can the Ministry please elaborate on what sensitivities the Government is concerned about particularly since Singapore’s need for immigration is publicly well-known along with the Government’s stated position of keeping the racial percentages as close to their current levels as far as possible.

Secondly, the Government has stated that it would a plus factor when it assesses whether the spouses of foreigners married to Singaporean citizens who apply for Permanent Residence have children. However, in my discussion with some residents in my Meet-the-People sessions, there is some residual concern amongst such residents that their monthly household income explains why they are having trouble securing Permanent Resident status. I understand from previous parliamentary questions that for foreign spouses who were granted PR from 2009 to 2015, around 45% had a monthly income of less than $4000. Can the Ministry provide specific details of the number of successful applications for the same period for applicants who had a monthly income of less than $3500, $3000 and $2500 and confirm if there has been any change to the ICA’s evaluation criteria from 2016? These details would provide some degree of certainty for foreign spouses married to Singaporeans when they apply for PR.

Thirdly, can the Government share how many foreigners are married to Singapore citizens who do not meet the LTVP or LTVP+ criteria but are granted short-term visit passes instead. What are the main reasons for the rejection of their LTVP or LTVP+ applications and what criteria does the Government use to reassess or review such applications.