Penalised for going Too Early for Appointments at ICA

I was alerted to this letter published in Today papers on 6th January 2009.

sigh........

11 year-old poses security problem

I have two Filipino brothers who came to study in Singapore. The older boy arrived a month earlier. I placed him in a language school to prepare him for the year end school entry test. He received his student pass without a hitch.

The younger brother was also admitted to the same language school but his application for student pass was rejected. The school has no answer as to why it was rejected so I have to go down to ICA personally to see an officer.

I took a queue number and waited. A counter officer called my number and seeing the letter of rejection, just said there was nothing he could do as the decision is final. I asked for the reason for this rejection. He said he cannot tell. So I asked for an interview to see another officer.

I was back to the queue again and was seen by an elderly officer. She too said the decision was final. And she refused to tell me the reason for the rejection.

I took out the Manager's number and called. He attended to me at another counter. I showed him the letter of rejection. He too tried to dismiss me. When I pressed him for a reason, he said it was 'security reason'.

I saw red.

"Look at the boy's birth certificate! He's only 11 years old! What security problem can he pose? Besides, his older brother who is 12, is already given a student pass? Same family! Why isn't the older brother a security problem? Why the double standard?"

The Manager looked through the documents again and sheepishly apologised. I obtained the boy's student pass within 5 minutes.

These ICA staff are unbelievable!! And this is Singapore!? "...first class public service which is the envy of many other countries."

Do you envy ordinary Singaporeans? *slaps forehead*

Low IQ, Low EQ?

I used to go to Immigration (ICA) quite often. To wait a whole day just to submit or collect a pass is very common. At any one time, you can see crowds. Until today, it has never changed much even though ICA is boasting about its online services now.

This incident happens a few years ago. But even now, the attitude of ICA staff has not changed much.

On 21st January 2003, I went to ICA again to submit a ward's Banker's Guarantee and show the officer the original documents of the applicant. I showed the receptionist the letter from ICA and the applicant's documents and was given a queue number at counters 4 to 11. I waited one hour for my number to be called, only to be informed that I was in the wrong queue. I had to take another queue number for counters 18 to 23.

When my number was called at counter 19, (I was served by Irene) I was told I need a letter from the school (which is SIM) confirming the student is studying there and the course commencement date.

I informed her that the original letter from the school had been submitted and it was in the file she was holding. She refused to accept it as "it is a letter of acceptance from the school, not a confirmation letter." She asked for the receipt for the payment of the course, but I did not bring it. I was told to go back to SIM to get the letter and come back the next day.

I called SIM's Programme Officer Rohana Neti and she confirmed that the letter which was submitted to ICA was valid as the description of the course and duration was written. Besides the same letter format was submitted for the Indonesian students of SIM before and they were accepted without questions. But Rohana agreed to write another letter to make sure the student could commence his course as soon as possible. I was to collect the letter from SIM in Clementi Road (west of Singapore) the next morning. I lived in East Coast Road (east of Singapore).

The next morning after collecting the confirmation letter from SIM, I went to ICA, show the receptionist the letter from ICA and the applicant's documents again so as to get a queue number. I was surprised that I was given a queue number for counters 4 to 11 again. I pointed out the error to the girl and she changed it for me.

When my number was called, I gave the documents (minus the confirmation letter to test if the letter was really required) to a Malay counter staff. She told me to go back at 2.15 pm to collect the Student Pass.

At 2.15 pm, my number was called by a young Chinese lady at counter 18. I paid for the SP and there was no mention of any confirmation letter. It was not required!

I was confused and puzzled. I was made to run around like a mad dog to get the 'right' document.

Are the counter staff's standard of English language so poor?
How qualified are these staff?
Who decides the rules in ICA?
Can counter staff make their own rules? (They seem to do it all the time.)

There are several counter staff who have served in ICA for many years. Some act as if they are the decision makers in ICA. What qualifications do they have?

I heard from many of the runners who are regulars at ICA, "In the past (I think even up till now) the duration of the waiting period of your various passes depend on the moods of the staff that day or the applicant's face." There seems to be some truth in it.

Time and again, I was forced to waste precious time and money because of these people's inefficiency and poor knowledge of Immigration rules and procedures. It does not please me to know that I pay taxes for these civil servants' salaries.

ICA pushes its online services at the expense of security

This letter (names of boy and school edited) was sent to Minister of Home Affairs Wong Kan Seng on 4th December 2008.

An ICA officer sneered,"You think the Minister so free, read your email?"

Ministers and MPs have to read feedback from Singapore citizens. No matter how badly written the letters are. The ordinary people are not trained to write to Government Departments. If I can write well, the Ministers and many civil servants would be out of their jobs. :P

The civil servants know their bosses don't have time to read feedback from ordinary citizens. Letters sent to the leaders will be hijacked. The leaders will never know what actually happened at the ground level.

My letter was redirected to ICA on 11th December 2008. I'm still waiting for a reply. Let's see how long they need to 'look into the matter'.

************* ooOoo ************

Around 4pm on 5th November 2008, I went to 4th Floor of ICA, Student Pass Unit to get a queue number to apply for a student pass for my Filipino ward. The letter (attached) given by the private school showed the boy was going to take a 2-month Bread and Cake-making course.

The counter staff said ICA does not give 2-month student pass, minimum 6 months. I was referred to an officer. She is in her 40s, has long hair tied up in a pony tail. I can recognise her if I see her again.

She read the letter and said that it cannot be used to apply for student pass. I asked her for advice. She said this course is illegal, the boy cannot take the course without a student pass. I went back to the school. The Principal assured me that her courses are recognised and that she has had students who managed to extend their visit pass with her school's letter. I let the boy attend her course.

On 4th December 2008, I went to ICA around 9am to extend the boy's visit pass. I waited more than an hour to see officer Norizan Sa'ad at counter 45. The boy plans to apply for courses in another private school. I didn't have proof to show that my ward was going to sit for an entrance test, I told her I'll get a letter from the present school where he is learning now. I had left the above letter at home.

So I went to the school to get another letter to prove that he is taking a course there. I asked them to put the word 'training' since ICA staff said their courses are illegal.

I returned at 10.47 am and was given another queue number 7682. I went back to Norizan. When she saw the letter with the word 'training' on it, she told me she cannot extend my ward's visit pass based on that. They have never approved any extension on visit pass for training courses. At my request, she went to ask her senior officer.

The application was rejected. Training is not accepted for visit pass extension. My request to see the senior officer was also turned down. But I could see an officer in the Interview Room.

Norizan told me : visit pass can be extended online, 'there is no need for sponsor, no need to come down to ICA and no physical endorsement in passport needed'.

I was left waiting, not knowing when is my turn. The boy and I didn't have our breakfast, we were hungry but could not go off to have food in case our number was called. I approached Norizan again and asked if I need to exchange for another queue number as many of those entering the Interview Room have queue number starting 9. I didn't have to. And she has no idea how long I have to wait but there were a few people before me. We just sat down to wait.

From 11 am I waited until almost 1pm before I got to see Jane Yew. After listening to my appeal, she rejected it because 'the senior officer has already rejected it'.

Then why let me wait so long to get this same reply?

Jane accused me that I got the school to issue me the letter that day so as to extend the boy's visit pass. We have a letter from the school prior to his starting the first lesson, but one ICA staff said it was illegal. Fees were paid to attend the 2-month course in a Singapore registered, tax-paying company.

She chided me for not extending his visit pass online. ICA is encouraging applicants to do that. ICA approves short term courses. 3 days before the 30 day visa expires, I just need to log online and extend. No questions asked. I wasn't aware of this new online application.

I argued that it is strange that online application can be approved without seeing the applicant or documentary proof but coming down to ICA with documentary proof is rejected.

Jane Yew insisted that the boy has to leave Singapore. By hook or by crook, he must leave the country by 12 midnight on 5th December 2008. As long as he leaves the country, she doesn't care where he goes. Even if he goes on a day trip to Johor or Batam.

I knew it was fruitless to argue with such rigid civil servant, so I went to book his air ticket. It is very difficult to get a seat on a flight at this time of the year. Since leaving ICA at 1 plus, I have been trying to call all the airlines. At 1816h, I just got a seat on SQ for 5th December, after many calls and paying a premium for it.

Thanks very much to ICA's rigid, cold, unfeeling, ill-informed staff.

Please clarify : Can we extend visit pass when taking short term courses like baking and cooking in a registered Singaporean school or company?

In view of the terrorists attack in Mumbai, is it safe to have foreigners extend their visit pass online without having the need to have a sponsor; no need to go down to ICA and no physical endorsement in passport needed? Notice the increasing number of hookers, fake students, fake study mamas around us.

ICA counter staff is pushing their online services too hard, at the expense of security.

My ward is only 18 years old, he has yet to complete his secondary education and he is looking to continue his education here. If it is due to safety reason the extension is rejected, he was not banned from Singapore. He came back after a few days.

ICA staff at the frontline are ill-informed and have varying mentality. Different officers have different ways of understanding or interpreting letters / documents. I have examples to show.

It is necessary to be strict with immigration procedures due to terror threats but to be unreasonable, not understanding and not be in the shoes of applicants, that is very frustrating and unfair for ordinary folks.

************************ ooOoo *************************

Updated 13/1/2009

Foreign visitors who are on Social Visit passes may now take up a short course (30 days or less) during their stay here in Singapore. With effect from 1 June 2004, there is no longer a need to separately apply for a Student's Pass!

http://www.ica.gov.sg/news_details.aspx?nid=7288&secid=192

No questions asked for wealthy emigrants

A word of advice to Lee Khoon Choy, MPs and Ministers who wish to help the foreign emigrants .... check their backgrounds. Doesn't mean they have obtained their PR or citizenship, they have been thoroughly checked and are clean.

Andrew Goh, the Assistant Head of Talent Group (EDB) took bribes totalling $380,000 from seven Chinese nationals between February 1999 and June 2001. In return, he helped the 7 Chinese nationals by processing their application for permanent residency in Singapore. Andrew was sentenced to 26 months' imprisonment and the money he took from the seven Chinese nationals was forfeited.

Yang An was one of the 7 Chinese nationals. They were next-door neighbours prior to Andrew's arrest. He even gave money to Andrew Goh after he was released from prison. For the past 5 years, Yang An hasn't dared to return to China because he is asked to assist in some corruption cases.

An intricate and well-organised outfit where the foreigners get a one-stop service. They get a company registered, buy house, buy cars, buy investment funds, get introduced to ex-principals or principals who would get their children into our government schools. I was told the tuition teachers recommended are tutors to Ministers' or MPs' children.

Wealthy emigrants are supposed to be good for the economy of Singapore, so ordinary citizens should give up our places in top schools and universities to them.

Wealthy mainland Chinese and some of our Asean neighbours are no strangers to paying for what they want. They can get their degrees, identities and passports faked too. ICA wants proof. If the government agencies don't have enough resources to check every foreign emigrant who comes to Singapore, why do they expect me to prove it. They look me so up.

So what if I give the government proof, they might decide not to prosecute due to embarrassment. Waste my time.

I wonder why CPIB didn't probe further in this Andrew Goh case. Foreigners who give bribes not subjected to prosecution? EDB didn't review these 7 Chinese nationals' applications?

Food for thought to the common man.