|
 |
|
Source: www.mha.gov.sg |
|
Second Reading Speech for the
Secondhand Goods Dealers Bill 2007, Ministry of Home Affairs |
|
|
Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the Bill
be now read a second time. |
|
Introduction |
|
Sir, although the intent of this Secondhand
Goods Dealers Bill to provide for the licensing and control of
secondhand goods dealers remains the same as the current Secondhand
Dealers Act (SHDA), MHA is proposing to enact a new Bill because most of
the sections in the current Act have been amended. |
|
The Secondhand Dealers Act was enacted in
1918 to regulate businesses that deal in the trading of secondhand
goods. That¡¯s almost 100 years ago. |
|
This is because businesses that deal with
secondhand goods trading have the potential to be a channel for
criminals to dispose of stolen goods¡ªor what is known as fencing. Hence,
the need to regulate the secondhand goods trading industry. |
|
The Act has been useful in solving some
crimes. Members will know that, in recent years, handphone theft nearly
tripled from 1,700 cases in 2001 to more than 4,800 cases in 2005 before
falling to about 4,600 cases last year. |
|
Police's regulatory control of secondhand
dealers, as well as other enforcement measures, has contributed to this
improving trend. |
|
Apart from intensifying checks on dealers of
secondhand handphones, Police compared the leads from cases of handphone
theft against the transaction records of dealers. These efforts have
improved our success rate in crime solving and this in turn has had a
deterrent effect on thieves and errant secondhand handphone dealers. |
|
Clearly, the Act has been useful in
helping Police deal with errant dealers who are responsible for
the quick and easy disposition of stolen handphones. |
|
While the intent of the Act remains
the same, the crime situation has changed considerably over the
years. |
|
This Bill before the House reflects a
refinement of the existing Act to better serve today¡¯s regulatory
and investigative requirements. It also seeks to bring it
up-to-date with Police¡¯s current enforcement needs. |
|
Sharper regulatory focus |
|
Mr Speaker Sir, the new Act will
sharpen the focus of the regulatory regime for secondhand goods
dealers. We assess that there is no need to subject all secondhand
goods dealers to regulatory requirements, such as yearly
registration and payment of fees, especially if the items they
deal in are of little crime control value. |
|
Hence, whereas the Schedule of the
current Act contains a list of goods that are excluded from
regulation under the SHDA, that is, a ¡°negative list¡± approach,
the new Act will take a ¡°positive list¡± approach, that is to say,
the new definition of secondhand ¡°goods¡± in Clause 2 of the Bill
will cover only items that have considerable value and which have
been identified to be common items of theft and easily disposed
off to secondhand goods dealers by property offenders. |
|
To ensure that we can adjust quickly
to changing crime trends, the Minister will have powers to amend
this ¡°positive list¡± by order in the Gazette. |
|
This ¡°positive list¡± approach in
regulation will benefit dealers in secondhand goods that are not
in the Schedule. Such an approach is also more pro-business. |
|
But, let me assure the House that,
with this loosening of control over the industry, Police will
still exercise regulatory control over dealers in secondhand goods
which are of interest to the Police. Enforcement checks will
continue to ensure that errant dealers are dealt with accordingly
under the SHDA. |
|
Expansion of scope |
|
Sir, the second major enhancement to
the current regime involves extending the definition of ¡°shop¡±
beyond physical shop premises, to include any place of business,
whether a physical place or a virtual one like the Internet. |
|
The current Act does not cover dealers
operating without a shop. We recognise that many secondhand goods
dealers today actually carry on their business via other means,
such as on the Internet, or in an open-air setting like Sungei
Road. This is unacceptable, as thieves and robbers will simply get
rid of their loot through these other dealers who do not have a
shop-front. |
|
MHA is hence widening the coverage of
the law to include those dealers who do not operate within a shop.
However, in keeping with the emphasis on a sharper regulatory
focus, only dealers who trade in secondhand goods that are listed
in the Schedule will come under the ambit of the Act. |
|
Record-Keeping |
|
Another important aspect of this Bill
lies in Clause 10, which requires selected dealers to keep
transaction records and to submit these to Police. Such records
are valuable in facilitating Police¡¯s work in crime control and
investigation. |
|
Secondhand goods dealers are also
required by law to retain the records for a period of not less
than 5 years and to produce such records for examination by any
Magistrate, Justice of the Peace, Licensing Officer or police
officer. |
|
Consolidate and update penalties |
|
As the Act has not been amended for
some time, the penalties in the SHDA are generally light in
today¡¯s context. |
|
Apart from the penalty of an
imprisonment term of up to 3 years for dealers in used bicycles or
bicycle parts, motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts, for failing
to keep proper books of account, all other offences carry only a
penalty of a fine of up to $1,000, and an imprisonment term of up
to 6 months. |
|
These penalties are insufficient in
today¡¯s context as revenues of dealers¡¯ trade are considerably
higher. The law will then lose its impact, if it poses little
deterrence. |
|
Using the Pawnbrokers Act as a
benchmark as the two Acts are similar in intent and purpose, MHA
is consolidating all the penalties in Clause 18 of the Bill, which
imposes a stiffer general penalty of a fine not exceeding $20,000
or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or both, to
any person convicted of an offence under the proposed Act or its
Rules. As this is only the maximum amount of the fine, the court
will have greater leeway to impose the appropriate punishment in
any particular case. |
|
Composition of offences |
|
Clauses 18 and 19 give Police more
powers in bringing errant dealers to task. But, as not every case
is serious enough to be prosecuted in court, the new Act will
empower the Licensing Officer to compound any such offence
prescribed as compoundable by the Minister, with a composition
fine not exceeding $2,000. This is in line with the process MinLaw
started two years ago to make some offences, where appropriate,
compoundable. |
|
Conclusion |
|
Mr Speaker Sir, enacting this Bill
will mean that, for a start, more than 900 existing dealers would
no longer be licensed under the Act, as they are not currently
dealing in goods in the Schedule or the ¡°positive list¡±. This is
in line with the policy to reduce regulatory controls on
businesses. |
|
Police will focus their control over
secondhand goods dealers who trade in high-end or profitable
secondhand goods, using the new ¡°positive list¡±. |
|
Sir, in conclusion, the Government is
taking another important step to help ensure that our legislation
keeps pace with evolving trends so that we can keep crime under
control whilst allowing businesses as much room to operate as
possible. |
|
Mr Speaker Sir, I beg to move |
|
Source: www.mha.gov.sg
News Release 22 Jan 2007 |
|
 |
|
Important
Notice |
|
Our FrontPage
Editions are a historical record of our Web site and reflect
the changing of the times, and also of our Web site through
time. We do not and will not update the links and stories on
these FrontPages even if they have become obsolete. |
|
FrontPage Edition: Sat 27 January 2007
All rights reserved
