|
Continued from
FrontPage of Article
There will also be
regulations governing the conduct of security officers and
security agencies. The net result is that better training and
conduct will raise the standards and will give the security
officers a greater sense of pride and professionalism.
Should a private
investigator or security officer be charged with or convicted of a
prescribed offence which makes his continued employment as a
private investigator or security officer undesirable, his licence
can be suspended with immediate effect. This power is provided in
Clause 24(5) of the Bill.
With the introduction
of the licensing schemes for security officers and private
investigators, more than 500 private investigators and 30,000
security officers will need to apply for a licence.
We are aware that some
security officers and private investigators are unable to attain a
licence, despite their best efforts. If they work in places where
the security threat is lower, we will consider exempting them from
the licensing requirement under the Act. This will ease the level
of displacement from the industry when the Act comes into force.
Clause 5(2) of the
Bill currently provides that certain persons are not to be
regarded as private investigators, such as in-house investigators
employed by insurance companies, and those working as
investigators in other business sectors, for example, those who
obtain or give information on the financial standing of another
person, or public accountants, which pose little threat to
national security, and are of no concern to the Police. The Act
also allows Minister to further exempt other categories of private
investigators from licensing under the Act, should their work be
of little security concern.
Approval for
private investigators to take on certain security assignments
However, for those
private investigators who need to be licensed, Police will tighten
up the regulatory regime to ensure that they do not conduct
private investigation activities which may be prejudicial to the
public interest or our national security.
Clause 11 of the Bill
therefore states that a private investigator has to seek the
licensing officer’s approval before accepting any assignment from
a foreign government or its proxy agency.
Similarly, a private
investigator has to seek the licensing officer’s approval before
he carries out any surveillance, or activities which involve the
gathering of information on, certain persons or places of security
concern. The licensing officer may subsequently revoke this
approval if it is not in the public interest or if it poses a
threat to national security.
Sir, key government
leaders and sensitive places are known to be targets of
terrorists. Having such provisions in our laws will mark out
clearly to the industry the boundaries they have to work
within. At the same time, such a law serves to alert the licensing
authority to any activities of security concern, giving the
licensing authority advance information, as well as the
opportunity to investigate further if necessary.
Record-keeping
of identities of private investigator’s clients
Other measures to
strengthen the regulatory framework over the private investigation
industry include Clause 10, which requires a private investigation
agency to obtain and verify the identity and address of the person
engaging its services, before it can accept any assignment from
such a person.
To complement this
requirement, Clause 12 of the Bill specifies the various records,
including the identity of the clients, which a private
investigation agency or employer of a private investigator has to
keep and submit to the licensing authority.
Expansion
of regulatory scope to include other activities in the private
security industry
The Bill will also
cover security service providers, other than private investigators
and security officers. As defined in Clause 18, those providing
security surveillance services, and those installing security
equipment like audio devices used for overhearing and recording a
conversation in any premises, will be regulated under the new
Act. This will allow controls to be imposed on other security
service providers, to ensure that they meet certain standards of
professionalism.
For example, Clause 20
allows the licensing officer to levy a charge on a prescribed
security service provider, being a Central Alarm Monitoring
Station or CAMS provider, if it indiscriminately alerts the police
whenever an alarm is activated at premises it is monitoring,
without first taking reasonable measures to verify whether it is a
false alarm.
The Schedule of the
Bill contains a list of security equipment that will fall under
the ambit of the new Act.
Sir, the current Act
was enacted in 1973, more than 30 years ago. The highest penalty
provided for in the Act is a $10,000 fine or a 2-year imprisonment
term, or both. In the current context, where revenues of industry
players are considerably higher, such penalties are no longer
adequate, particularly the fines. If the fines are not increased,
the Act will pose no deterrence and this will have adverse
consequences for our security. Hence, to keep pace with changes in
the business environment and to ensure that there is sufficient
deterrence in today’s context, the Bill will provide for a
five-fold increase in the maximum quantum of fines.
Past
Initiatives to Upgrade Industry
Mr Speaker, Sir, let
me put into context the current amendments in terms of what we are
doing to upgrade the private security industry. At the end of
2004, Police set up the Security Industry Regulatory Department,
or SIRD, to look into the regulation of the private security
industry. A set of skills standard under the National Skills
Recognition System, or NSRS, was introduced in 2005 for all
private security officers employed by the security agencies.
At the beginning of
last year, a buyer awareness exhibition and seminar was held to
allow major buyers in the business community to be more discerning
in their engagement of security service providers. Last month, I
launched the Security Workforce Skills Qualifications or Security
WSQ.
In line with the
effort to upgrade the quality of the security services, a pilot
exercise was also conducted last year, to grade all licensed
security agencies according to prescribed professional
standards. Part of the objective of the exercise was also to
provide an objective and authoritative assessment of existing
security agencies and motivate them to raise their service
standards and improve their operational processes. Police has
recently completed the formal grading exercise for this year,
after refining the criteria following last year’s pilot exercise,
and will be publishing the results on the internet very soon.
Sir, much work has
been done over the last few years to develop the private security
industry into the effective partner of our security
forces. Today’s amendment to the law is part of this greater
transformation of the industry which MHA is helping to
facilitate. In the current security environment, this Act will be
a key component in our efforts to enhance the capabilities of the
private security industry, so that the Government and private
sector partnership can work together to keep Singapore safe and
secure.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg
to move.
Source:
www.mha.gov.sg News 27 Aug
2007

|