Strong support from MPs on tougher traffic laws; some call for even harsher penalties

AI generated

SINGAPORE - Although tougher traffic laws were passed in Parliament on Aug 4, some MPs wanted even harsher penalties given the dire road safety situation.

The newly passed traffic laws will see heavier penalties on errant motorists, targeting drink drivers, those who deliberately endanger others on the roads and those who hold their mobile devices while driving.

A total of 27 MPs spoke during the debate on the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill, which lasted over six hours.

While all supported the Bill, some MPs wanted more.

Traffic deaths hit a 10-year high of 149 in 2025 compared with 141 in 2016.

The number of people injured have also been rising, from 9,342 in 2024 to 9,955 in 2025.

Xie Yao Quan (Jurong Central) called for the penalties for dangerous driving to be raised.

He cited the case of Jeremiah Ng, who killed a Gojek driver and injured six others in 2021 after treating the road like a racetrack, travelling at between 157kmh and 169kmh. He was jailed for seven years for dangerous driving causing death, and will also be disqualified from driving for 12 years after his release.

Xie said while Ng was reckless, his actions would not meet the threshold for the new purposeful endangerment offence, which carries a maximum of 15 years’ jail.

He said in such cases, the drivers responsible would still be prosecuted under dangerous driving, with a maximum of eight years’ jail.

He said: “For such an egregious case of recklessness and wanton disregard for other road users, eight years jail feels way too light... while offenders like him may have a lifetime of guilt and remorse, we cannot count on that.”

Xie said he wished the Bill raised the maximum penalty for dangerous driving causing death to upwards of 11 years.

Second Minister for Home Affairs Sim Ann said the penalties will continue to be reviewed, as with other traffic offences.

Kenneth Tiong (Aljunied GRC) called for harsher penalties for those who drive without a licence, saying there should be a minimum sentence imposed.

He noted that first time offenders can be jailed for up to three years, but that a recent High Court judgment set the starting point for the offence at three weeks’ jail.

Nominated MP Neo Kok Beng recalled how he had personally encountered “brake checking”, which is when a driver suddenly slams on their brakes to scare the vehicle behind them.

Such actions are expected to fall under the new offence of purposeful endangerment.

Neo said such behaviour is dangerous and unacceptable. But he questioned if this was reflected in the penalties. He also asked if such errant motorists could be immediately suspended.

Sim said this depended on the facts of the case.

Hazlina Abdul Halim (East Coast GRC) suggested traffic fines be scaled according to income.

Sim said this was a complex issue involving questions of equity and fairness, and the authorities will study the experience of jurisdictions that have done this.

MPs welcomed the clampdown on those who hold their phones while driving, but some noted that drivers could also be distracted by wearable devices, large infotainment systems and digital dashboards.

Dennis Tan (Hougang) asked if the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) would consider studying the effects of screen-based distractions, a driver’s cognitive load, situational awareness and emergency response braking times.

Sim said that under current laws, it was not an offence for drivers to drive with wearable devices worn in the manner intended by the manufacturer of the device.

She added it was already an offence to install any visual display unit in a manner that posed a safety hazard or caused distraction, and that MHA may make changes to its approach should the need arise.

Demerit point system

Sim also spoke about the recently announced changes to the demerit points system, saying the authorities have been mindful of sentiments from vocational drivers.

She said the transport unions were consulted and MHA considered a differentiated regime for vocational drivers, but concluded it was not justified as it would create a lower standard of accountability for one group of road users versus the rest.

She added that introducing an additional buffer for drivers with good driving history was considered, but it was at odds with the intention of resetting driving behaviour against the backdrop of the worsening road situation.

Sim said: “We will continue to monitor the road safety trends and make adjustments where necessary.”