AMUSEMENT RIDES SAFETY BILL

AMUSEMENT RIDES SAFETY BILL: Order for Second Reading read.

3.04 pm

The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to first set the context for the Bill and explain the rationale for the new regulatory framework for amusement rides.

Column: 2554

The amusement ride industry in Singapore is fairly small, with about 20 companies operating about 60 permanent rides and 40 relocatable rides. In recent years, the industry has witnessed significant changes with the development of large scale theme parks like Universal Studios Singapore and the use of larger and more complex relocatable rides like those found at events such as the Annual River Hongbao Carnival.

Today, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) regulates amusement rides through its Public Entertainment Licensing Unit (PELU) under the ambit of the Public Entertainment and Meetings Act (PEMA). Under PEMA, a Public Entertainment Licence is required to operate amusement centres, amusement parks or funfairs. SPF seeks the input of other agencies such as the Building and Construction Authority (BCA), the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) and SPRING Singapore before issuing the licence.

Sir, historically, this licensing approach stems from law and order concerns over the operation of these amusement parks or centres. The situation is different today and calls for a review of the licensing approach. While law and order concerns are still valid, there should be greater emphasis on our regulatory approach to enhance public safety in amusement rides, especially when there are increasingly more complex and sophisticated rides. The safety of amusement rides covers several dimensions. These include: the design of the supporting structures; electrical, mechanical systems and safety harnesses; the construction and erection; compliance with safe operating procedures; regular checks and maintenance; and emergency procedures.

Under SPF's licensing regime, different agencies are responsible for different dimensions of amusement rides safety, using different pieces of legislation

*Cols. 2599-2602

Column: 2555

pertaining to safety. For example, there is the Building Control Act on building safety; the Workplace Safety and Health Act on worker safety; and the Fire Safety Act on fire safety in buildings. These laws do not provide an appropriate framework to tackle the multiple dimensions of amusement rides safety.

With these considerations in mind, my Ministry has jointly reviewed the existing licensing approach with the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Manpower, and the Ministry of Trade and Industry. The new regulatory framework will focus primarily on safety as the primary motive for regulating amusement rides. We need a more structured and comprehensive regulatory framework to ensure that rides are designed, installed, operated and maintained according to recognised international safety codes and standards. For the new regulatory approach, the BCA will be the lead agency and is supported by the SCDF to regulate amusement rides safety.

Key features of new regulatory approach

Let me now briefly touch on the key features of the new regulatory approach and how it differs from the current licensing regime under PEMA. Currently, SPF issues a Public Entertainment Licence and imposes several licensing conditions on the ride operators to be fulfilled in operating the rides. Some of these conditions relate to the safety of the ride while others relate to law and order issues. In terms of safety, the operators must fulfil the licensing conditions which include ensuring that the ride is certified safe for use by a conformity assessment body; that employees are trained and familiar with safety procedures; and that safety and rescue support measures are in place.

In addition, SPF differentiates amusement rides on the basis of whether they

Column: 2556

are permanent or temporary. For permanent rides, such as "Enchanted Airways" and "Revenge of the Mummy" found at Universal Studios Singapore, SPF requires the operator to ensure that the ride is certified safe for use by a Conformity Assessor (CA). CAs are third party inspection bodies with technical expertise to provide a comprehensive assessment on amusement ride compliance to safety standards and codes.

For temporary rides on the other hand, such as those found at pasar malams and carnivals, SPF does not require operators to apply for a licence, provided that they meet certain conditions. For instance, the carnival ride equipment has to be certified safe for use by a registered professional engineer. Other conditions include those relating to operating hours; the rides must be operated within a barricaded area; and that there should not be an element of gambling or betting.

We have observed that some of the temporary rides at our pasar malams or carnivals have a rather high risk profile as they move patrons as high as 30 metres above the ground. I am told this, I have not tried it myself but my staff tells me that it is happening now. Some even rotate the patrons through 360 degrees. Other high-risk profile rides involve controlled free falls and travel at high speeds.

Under the new regulatory framework, we will be adopting a risk-based approach. We will cease to use the basis of whether rides are temporary or permanent. Instead, rides will be defined on the basis of their risk and safety profile. Rides which have a high-risk and safety profile will be classified as "Major Amusement Rides", to distinguish them from ordinary amusement rides. It is imperative to ensure that rides which are assessed to have a risk profile are

Column: 2557

regulated based on a higher level of safety standards. Given the larger scale and higher risk level of some rides today, we will incorporate the use of technical codes comparable with international standards to guide the safety assessment of the design and installation of these rides.

We are also introducing statutory duties and liabilities of stakeholders to ensure proper accountability for safety of rides, and introducing provisions for enforcement, offences and prosecution. I will elaborate on these later.

Let me now describe the key elements of the Bill which contains a total of 11 parts.

Proposed scope and administration of Act

First, on the scope of the Act: Part I of the Bill defines an amusement ride as any mechanised or power-driven device that is designed to carry patrons on a fixed or restricted course, or within a defined area, for the primary purpose of giving patrons amusement, pleasure, thrills or excitement, and is made available for use by the public. Examples of rides that will be regulated under the Act include roller coasters, flume rides, ferries wheels such as the Singapore Flyer, swing devices, carousels and go-karts.

This definition is not intended to cover devices or systems that are designed primarily for transportation purposes such as trams, buses, trains or monorails, whether these are operated within amusement parks or not.

The Bill also provides for the inclusion of amusement rides that do not strictly meet the definition, for example, bungee devices, high water slides and the Jewel Cable Car ride. We decided to include cable car as we recognise that it is also operated for amusement although it is primarily a transport device. We also took

Column: 2558

into consideration the risk profile of the ride. The Bill also allows us to exclude rides like low power, battery-operated rides for children and coin-operated devices.

The administration of the new Act will come under the charge of the BCA's Commissioner of Amusement Rides Safety to be appointed by the Minister for National Development. The Bill will confer specific powers to the Commissioner to discharge his duties.

Risk and safety profile

Clause 2 in Part 1 of the Bill defines rides on the basis of their risk and safety profile. Rides which have a high-risk and safety profile will be classified as "Major Amusement Rides" to distinguish them from ordinary amusement rides. The risk and safety profile will be determined by factors such as the maximum height and acceleration that a patron experiences during the ride.

Clause 2 also defines a Qualified Person (QP) as a person who is registered as a specialist professional engineer in the discipline of amusement ride engineering under the Professional Engineers Act. Conformity Assessors (CAs) are defined as third party inspection bodies with technical expertise to assess rides. As I mentioned earlier, they provide a comprehensive assessment on amusement rides' compliance to safety standards and codes. CAs may comprise a firm or a team of professionals with the relevant technical expertise. For major rides with higher risk profile, the Bill requires a QP to appoint and consider the opinion and advice of a CA when discharging his duties under the Act. Rides that are not classified as major rides would just require certification from a QP.

Statutory duties and liabilities

To ensure proper accountability for the safety of an amusement ride, the Bill also

Column: 2559

places certain duties and liabilities on the "Person Responsible" for the ride. Clause 2 defines the "Person Responsible" for an amusement ride as the person who holds the Operating Permit in respect of the amusement ride or, if there is no one holding such a permit for the time being, the person who owns or otherwise has the charge, management or control of the ride.

Another important stakeholder that we have introduced under the Act is the "Ride Manager". This is the person who is appointed by the operator to oversee, manage and supervise the daily operation and routine maintenance of the ride.

Permits

Sir, I shall now touch on the permits for rides. There will be three permits to be issued during various stages of a ride's life cycle to regulate the installation, modification and operation.

Parts II and IV of the Bill cover the installation of new amusement rides and the major modification of amusement rides. Clauses 5 and 23 prohibit the installation or major modification of a ride without a valid Installation or Modification Permit respectively. Clauses 6 and 24 require the appointment of a QP to review and certify the installation and modification design plans and calculations; safety assessments and tests based on prescribed requirements in the technical codes; and the approval of the Commissioner of Civil Defence for the design and plans of the fire and rescue management system of the ride. These clauses also give the Commissioner of Amusement Rides Safety powers to take enforcement measures to cease installation or modification works that are not authorised by the relevant permits. Clauses 7 and 25 require the holders of the permits to ensure that no installation or modification works are carried out

Column: 2560

except under the supervision of the QP. Finally, clauses 12 and 30 set out the duties of the QP relating to the inspection and certification of rides after installation or modification.

Part III of the Bill covers the operation of amusement rides. This part introduces provisions to ensure that rides have been inspected and are certified safe for operation by a QP and, for major rides with the advice of the CA, upon completion of installation or modification. Clause 13 prohibits the operation of an amusement ride without a valid Operating Permit. It also places the fundamental duty on the "Person Responsible" to ensure that rides are in a state of good repair and safe working condition and requires that a "Ride Manager" be appointed to oversee, manage and supervise the daily routine operation and maintenance when rides are in operation. It also requires that the SCDF issue a certificate of compliance relating to the approval and certification of the fire and rescue management for rides before the Operating Permit is granted. The Commissioner of Amusement Rides Safety is also given powers to take enforcement measures to cease the operation of amusement rides if operators do not comply with the terms of the Operating Permit.

Role of the SCDF

The SCDF will continue to oversee the fire safety and emergency rescue requirements for rides. Part VI of the Bill and clause 36 contain provisions on the procedures for operators to obtain SCDF's certificate of compliance.

Relocation of rides

Part V of the Bill contains provisions regulating the relocation of rides. For rides that can be relocated, the installation requirements would be the same as

Column: 2561

permanent rides for the first installation. However, when the rides are relocated, we have decided to exercise some flexibility and require inspections and certifications during relocation works by a QP for major rides and a "Ride Manager" for other rides.

Sir, I wish to reassure Members that the safety of the rides will still be of key concern, and the holder of the Operating Permit will have to give the Commissioner of Amusement Rides Safety notice in writing of the intention to relocate the amusement ride. The Commissioner may impose conditions or give directions relating to the relocation, and if he thinks that the relocated premises are unsafe or unsuitable, he may prohibit the relocation of the ride. The relocation works must also be carried out in accordance with the design and specifications and the proposed installation method, as set out in the original Installation Permit issued for the ride.

Sir, we have adopted this pro-business approach, which balances safety and practicality, because we are mindful of the costs involved for some operators to engage a CA or QP, as the case may be, each time their rides are dismantled and reassembled for relocation within Singapore.

Other provisions – enforcement, offences and prosecution

Parts VIII and IX of the Bill contain provisions relating to enforcement, offences and prosecution. Clause 50 provides the Commissioner with powers to enter and inspect premises to ascertain whether there has been any breach of the Act. It also gives him powers to carry out investigations into adverse incident that has occurred. Clause 53 provides the Commissioner with powers to order the cessation of operation and all works, and

Column: 2562

close or require dismantling of rides that are deemed to be in dangerous condition.

The Bill also provides for penalties for breaches of the Act. For example, under clauses 5, 13 and 23, it will be an offence for any person to install, modify or operate any ride without a valid permit.

Transitional provisions

Sir, let me now elaborate on the transitional arrangements as outlined in Part XI of the Bill. For existing rides that currently do not have a valid public entertainment licence, the operators will be given a six-month grace period, while continuing operation, to obtain an Operating Permit.

For existing rides with a valid public entertainment licence, we will recognise the validity of their licences and allow them to continue to operate without an Operating Permit until the expiry date of their licences. However, all existing rides, whether licensed by SPF or not, will have to comply with some key requirements after the six-month grace period beginning on the commencement of the Bill. These include obtaining SCDF's certificate of compliance, public liability insurance and appointing a suitably qualified Ride Manager.

While these existing rides may continue to operate without an Operating Permit under the Act during the grace period, the other statutory requirements cited in the Bill such as the reporting of adverse incidents and minor modifications in respect of the ride; the duty to continue to maintain the ride in a safe condition; the application for Modification Permits, penalties for offences, etc, will apply to these rides from the implementation date.

Sir, BCA has studied the regulatory practices in overseas jurisdictions in Hong Kong and the three US states of California, Florida and New Jersey. BCA

Column: 2563

has also held several consultation sessions with stakeholders like ride operators and has conducted training sessions for the Professional Engineers who will certify the safety of the rides.

With a more comprehensive regulatory framework for amusement rides safety in place, there will be a structured regime to ensure proper certification of rides to prescribed codes and standards, allocate responsibilities and impose penalties to govern the safety of amusement rides. This will further enhance public safety in the daily operations and throughout the life cycle of amusement rides.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.23 pm

Er Lee Bee Wah: Mr Speaker, Sir, amusement parks are tourism magnets and a social platform for families, friends and holidaymakers. The successes of local amusement parks like Universal Studios Singapore and even the rides like Singapore Flyer and Sentosa Cable Car are inspiring. At the same time, we also see springing up in our heartlands many miniature forms of parks and amusement rides from time to time. This is especially so during festive periods and even during National Day celebrations.

Amusement parks are family-friendly forms of entertainment, yet they are also probable breeding grounds for serious accidents, given the potentially dangerous nature of certain rides and the involvement of young children. As amusement park rides become more commonplace in Singapore, the likelihood of related accidents will increase.

It is timely that standardised regulation measures be implemented to protect the safety of our loved ones, park employees and tourists. I fully support the

Column: 2564

implementation of the Amusement Rides Safety Bill.

I am heartened to note that the Bill will call for more accountability from the stakeholders. No doubt this will encourage stakeholders to take on a proactive role in ensuring the safety of their amusement parks. However, to do so, they must in the first place be equipped with the understanding of what makes an amusement park safe. More often than not, due to ignorance or an overwhelming need to spice up their rides at the expense of safety.

Amusement park patrons expect the most exhilarating and wildest rides where they can let their hair down and leave all their troubles behind on a ride. A certain amount of risk or fear factor is what makes a ride appealing and memorable.

To pander to consumers' needs and to compete with rivals, stakeholders and designers may challenge the norms and strive to invent out-of-the-world attractions that offer more thrill and appeal in terms of physical appearance and user experience.

As an engineer, I am well aware that despite all our efforts to overcome limitations, there are safety limits that must be complied with. There are boundaries that we must not cross if we do not wish to compromise practicality and safety. Considering that stakeholders have the final say in the attractions and facilities built for the park, they must be held responsible ultimately. They must be well versed on amusement park safety so that they may be aware of what they can or cannot implement in an amusement park. He may employ professionals to help him but he should be ultimately responsible for the safety.

The rest of the partners like specialist Professional Engineers and the Conformity Assessors no doubt have their respective roles to play. All these partners taking on

Column: 2565

the jobs must be well trained, well versed and carry out their duty diligently. Hopefully, these people will join our pool of local expertise on park safety which we can tap on as more amusement parks come our way or we may even be able to export our expertise overseas.

I believe that the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) is already playing a big part in assessing the safety of park attractions. However, besides regulating the rides, BCA can do more by nurturing the expertise of the people involved in building and running the amusement park, from stakeholders to specialist Professional Engineers to Ride Managers. Can the Minister share with the House what has been done so far to increase expertise knowledge and professionalism on park management?

Amusement parks are money-spinning ventures and can generate huge amounts of revenue and boost tourism with each day of opening. Hence, we also need to implement a smooth, red tape-free procedure that allows for efficient inspection of rides and release of operation permits without compromising the safety of amusement park goers, without unnecessarily delaying the business operation. I hereby put forth a request for an explanation on the standard procedure taken to assess an amusement park and its rides before it receives an operation permit and the time taken for approval upon submission.

To regulate safety standards in all amusement park rides in Singapore, I strongly believe that a committee should be established and designated to standardise park management protocols in Singapore. Issues that they will tackle include ride designs, operations and maintenance, reviewing of park performances as well as conducting quality control assessments and rides testing. A

Column: 2566

similar committee in America had previously been created by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) to regulate safety standards for amusements parks. Considering that there are many amusement parks in America, each with their own management and different protocols, it was certainly a necessity. As we foresee the construction of more parks and rides in the near future, it is time to implement a similar concept to reduce future conflicts.

I would like to ask if the Bill also makes it compulsory for all amusement parks and ride operators to report accidents and ride malfunctions to the authorities. This will increase the accountability of amusement parks, pressuring them to be more vigilant with their inspections and employment of safety measures.

By monitoring the frequency of ride malfunctions and operating errors, the relevant authorities may also be able to better anticipate the problems and formulate long-term solutions quickly. From derailing roller coasters to ride collisions, amusement parks may be paradise in one second and hell in the next. It is absolutely essential that we adopt more preventive measures before tragedies happen. After all, exemplary park management could well be the future of our tourism industry.

3.31 pm

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Sir, first and foremost, I applaud the Ministry for carrying out this timely review on the regulatory regime. Over the years, amusement rides have now become more adventurous, more complex and much bigger in scale. As the past Chairman of the River Hongbao organising committee, I saw for myself how thrilling the rides can be and how such fun rides can add to the carnival atmosphere as well as act as a crowd puller. It seems

Column: 2567

the sky is the limit for these amusement rides as they just get higher and faster. Just watching these rides in itself is a thrill, not to mention to ride on them.

Sir, I support the new regulatory approach which is more structured and comprehensive, involving the right expertise to tackle the increasing sophistication of the amusement rides. The new framework adds a lot more clarity on the regulatory requirements as well as the responsibilities of the related parties. I am heartened to note that public safety is the key motivation for the Bill and would always be the overriding consideration.

Central to this new approach is the appointment of BCA as the lead agency taking over the role from Singapore Police Force. As the amusement rides are more of an engineering safety issue than a law and order issue, we should rightly not burden the Singapore Police Force (SPF) with such technical regulatory functions so that they can better focus on enhancing security. However, I would like to find out from Senior Minister of State how may the Building Construction Authority (BCA) intends to gear up for this new role. We know that BCA is a competent regulator for buildings and construction. Would the authority have the required technical expertise and know-how to effectively regulate rides and stay abreast of the industry developments? We are seeing more world-renowned amusement rides in Singapore at our theme parks. Some of the rides may even be the first-ever to be introduced worldwide. Obviously, the vendors and the manufacturers would spare no efforts to increase the thrill factor to attract more patrons.

For the temporary rides, many of the ride equipment are imported or leased from overseas locations as far as Europe. Some of these complex relocatable rides come on short notices and stay on short

Column: 2568

tenures during the festive seasons, for example, Lunar New Year. There could be major modifications done on the rides to customise to local conditions. While BCA would be in a much better position than the SPF to do the job, would they have the domain knowledge and resources to effectively regulate the industry – which is getting more sophisticated – and to enhance public safety?

Still on expertise, I would also like to ask the Senior Minister of State if there are currently enough trained Conformity Assessors (CAs) and Qualified Persons (QPs) in the industry so as not to cause bottlenecks in the industry. Are the QPs trained enough to look into rides that may be water-borne or air-borne like hot air balloons? I was told in some countries, some rides would even involve some pyrotechnics and fire. Also, I would like to know whether the new framework is likely to significantly increase costs, especially to the major rides.

In December 2008, the breakdown of Singapore Flyer, one of our iconic tourist attractions, left passengers stranded for six hours. In March 2010, the famous Battlestar Galactica roller coaster at Universal Studio Singapore was halted one week after opening when a seat fell off during the routine testing after a metal bar holding it to the chassis of the roller coaster gave way. These incidents have rung the alarm bells as they could impact Singapore's reputation as a tourist destination and, more importantly, risk the lives of the patrons and public. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State to share whether if the certification and the maintenance regime on the permanent major rides is rigorous enough. Also, what are the frequencies of audits or inspections by BCA or the CAs?

Sir, the ultimate responsibility and accountability of the public safety must fall on the management of the amusement ride operators or person responsible as

Column: 2569

defined in clause 2 of the Act. I also support the creation of the ride manager role under the Act for further accountability. It would further strengthen safety consciousness among the employees of the operators. Clause 19 imposes duty on the holder of an operating permit and ride manager to notify the Commissioner of Amusement Rides Safety of any contraventions of the regulation where they know or ought to reasonably know even if it does not lead to an incident. I think this is a requirement for self escalation of any violation is good and would instil a more safety conscious culture among the permit holders. The operator and the ride manager need to be constantly reminded of this duty.

The Act also mentioned in clause 16 that the ride manger to be suitably qualified and to be a trained person. It would be better if the qualifications required can be more specific, for example, requiring a certain level of technical proficiency. I would also like to ask if the person responsible or the ride manager is a foreign national, would there be a need for a local guarantor or some form of reference just to ascertain the suitability of the responsible person or the ride manager, and also if they are responsible individuals.

Sir, as in all regulations, we can have the best rules and regulations but if they are not strictly enforced and complied with, there would be no significant difference in enhancing safety. I would like to ask Senior Minister of State what are the enforcement measures that the authorities have taken in the past on the operators and what are the common violations? Under the new framework, how would BCA and the other agencies intend to strengthen enforcement and compliance of the new regulations?

Sir, with that I support the Bill.

Column: 2570

3.37 pm

Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Sir, on 23rd December, I went on one of these permanent rides in Singapore, which I have to confess as a medical specialist who deals with trauma, I have always been sceptical about. I got into the seat and suddenly, someone said "hands up" and a metal bar came across my thighs. That was the only device to strap me down and off we went forward into a dark tunnel. Before I knew it, we were moving backwards at a very rapid speed, and I feared for my neck. Feeling some strain already, and from the contraction and extension movement that was going on, I feared even further. My mind wondered, thinking of the consequences of a whiplash injury. Then, before my eyes could accommodate, bright lights were shining and eerie noises and voices came on. For the rest of the ride, I kept myself crouched as I felt this was the best position to protect my neck. I came off the ride with cold sweat, giddiness and an unsteady gait for at least a minute before gaining full composure.

I checked with my friends whom I was there with and at least 30% of them felt the same symptoms. From my very brief experience, I certainly feel it is important for thrill rides to meet safety standards and requirements. It is also appropriate for the authorities to assume oversight over these rides and ensure all aspects of the rides are optimised. Sir, we are debating this new Bill after two recent high profile incidents mentioned by my colleagues earlier.

Injuries and accidents which happen can be caused by, first, mechanical causes, secondly, electrical causes and thirdly, human errors. Besides these, there are also issues such as lightning strikes as we are dealing with a relatively tall structure here, ejections and, of course, suicides, occasionally.

Column: 2571

I would like to suggest that the operators place a strict emphasis on preparedness and have an algorithm in place so that all staff know exactly what to do in the event of an untoward incident or other emergencies. These need to be regularly practised through drills and exercises.

With the new Bill, Sir, operators will have to get relevant permits and approval. Public entertainment licence is also to be obtained in between installing and operating the rides. This is stipulated to be done yearly. Will there be yearly inspections then, done on this renewal? I hope that it can be effected. This will help us put our practice in alignment with the United States as stipulated in their National Amusement Park Rides Safety Act which appoints a task force to inspect rides regularly and present educational campaigns to promote safety as well. This Bill also requires the appointment of at least one qualified ride manager to supervise operations. What will be the training to prepare him/her for the job? Will skills required of a first responder, first aid and CPR as well as Automated External defibrillator operations be included? Will BCA also be reviewing the insurance policies for ride managers and will there be an incident reporting register that will be set up?

Will BCA have special criteria for children and children rides, as young children are indeed at highest risk for ride-related injuries? This is besides the coin-operated rides mentioned by the Senior Minister of State earlier. I did not see the specifics pertaining to this in the Bill and we do know that there are indeed separate rides and thrill rides for children and kids such as the ones at Resorts World Sentosa.

In line with the classification of the rides according to risks and safety criteria, determined by speed, height displacement

Column: 2572

and acceleration when BCA issues the technical expertise criteria, I would like to suggest customisation for specific rides, as the different rides have the potential for different types of injuries.

Sir, pertaining to the issue of re-installation, it is mentioned that "when the rides are relocated, they would be subject to less stringent regime of inspection during re-installation by a QP and a ride manager for major and other rides respectively". My question is why "less stringent"? In the process of relocation and re-installation, many things can happen indeed. Parts can be moved, dislodged, broken, become dysfunctional or even faulty. Thus, the public should be given the appropriate assurance on this matter of re-inspection.

The pro-business approach mentioned is fine but we must indeed be mindful of the cost involved in engaging a QP versus the cost of a human life lost or affected by lifelong disability.

In conclusion, Sir, these rides must be taken seriously. We must respect the forces and follow all the recommended safety rules and ensure extra precautions are taken especially when dealing with children and vulnerable rides.

Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 4.00 pm.

_Sitting accordingly suspended at
3.42 pm until 4.00 pm _

.

Sitting resumed at 4.00 pm

Column: 2572

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]:

AMUSEMENT RIDES SAFETY BILL: Debate resumed.

Assoc. Prof. Paulin Tay Straughan: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise in support

Column: 2573

of this important Bill, which seeks to enhance public safety in the amusement ride industry.

This Bill is also timely given the recent publicity on disruptions on the Singapore Flyer, Sentosa Cable Cars, and the Battlestar Galactica at Universal Studios. One key aspect of the proposed Bill addresses the need to involve specialist technical expertise in the new regulatory framework. This is an essential specification as we position Singapore as a top leisure destination and amusement rides become more sophisticated and challenging.

In particular, I note the significant role of the Qualified Person, who is a registered specialist professional engineer, in the review and certification process. This Bill also encourages self-regulation and self-policing of operators.

Sir, my only query on the Bill is on the role of the Building and Construction Authority (BCA). Given the focus on self-regulation, will the BCA conduct on-site inspections of amusement rides? In other words, under this Bill, will the BCA police operators directly or through the involvement of the Qualified Person (QP)? To ensure integrity in the regulatory process, the QP must be an independent party. But if the QP is engaged by the operators directly, how can we ensure that the QP will be truly neutral in its assessment?

4.04 pm

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, let me thank all Members who have spoken in support of the Bill.

Let me first clarify that the Bill focuses on the technical safety of amusement rides within carnivals or amusement parks. There are existing legislation to regulate the amusement parks. For

Column: 2574

instance, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) will continue to oversee law and order in the parks as per any other public area. SPF will also continue to regulate public entertainment activities within the parks, which fall under the ambit of the Public Entertainment and Meetings Act (PEMA). The Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) will regulate the contingency and rescue requirements for the whole park.

Er Lee asked for an explanation of the procedures to assess rides before they receive an Operating Permit and the time taken for approval upon submission. BCA will put in place a mechanism whereby the ride operator and Qualified Person (QP) may consult BCA on the regulatory and submission requirements before applying for permits. This will help speed up processing as the proper documentation requirements are already met. BCA will take between two weeks and one month to approve the application, depending on the complexity of the ride.

The ride operator must concurrently apply to the Singapore Civil Defence Force for a Certificate of Compliance for the Fire and Rescue Management System for the ride. BCA will endeavour to process the applications as expeditiously as possible, but not at the expense of the safety of the ride. Obviously, if the ride is a very complex one, the earlier the discussion is started with BCA, the faster it would be towards the end.

Mr Liang asked whether the new framework would lead to a significant increase in cost, especially for major rides.

Sir, the fees for the various permits will depend on the category of ride. BCA will release details on the fees at a later date when the Regulations are finalised. However, BCA will endeavour to keep the fees reasonable and affordable.

Some Members enquired about BCA's on-site inspection of amusement rides.

Column: 2575

Under the new regulatory regime, BCA will conduct onsite inspections before the issurance of Operating Permits for rides, and the subsequent annual renewals. During the operation of the amusement rides, BCA will also conduct ad hoc audit checks on-site as well as checks on the maintenance and operating records.

Mr Liang asked about the certification and the maintenance regime for major rides. Sir, the requirements for the maintenance regime are the same for all rides, be they major or otherwise. The appointed Ride Manager must ensure that proper maintenance is carried out according to the stipulated requirements. For major rides due to the higher risk profile, we will require the QP to consider the opinion and advice of the CA when reviewing the ride design, and when he inspects and certifies the ride.

Several Members have also spoken about building up expertise in amusement ride safety. This is indeed an important area, as we set up the new regulatory regime.

We will ensure that the various stakeholders, like the QP, CA, Ride Manager have the required qualifications and expertise to do their jobs properly.

First, the QP. The QP is a specialist Professional Engineer who will be registered by the Professional Engineers Board (PEB), in the discipline of Amusement Rides Engineering. He will have to pass an oral examination and an interview with the PEB. He must be a Professional Engineer (Mechanical) with stipulated years of practical experience in amusement rides engineering or related fields.

To prepare our PEs for registration as a specialist PEs, BCA has arranged for experts from the US and Europe to provide technical training in amusement ride engineering. More than 20 PEs

Column: 2576

participated in the technical training session held in October 2010.

The requirement for the QP to appoint and to consider the advice of the CA for major rides will also nurture and build up local specialist expertise in amusement rides. The intent is to enable our local PEs to gain sufficient experience and expertise as they work closely with the established CAs. Over time, there will be sufficient specialist PEs who can lead a team to take on the multi-disciplinary roles of a CA.

Assoc. Prof. Paulin Tay Straughan has asked how we could ensure that the QP would be neutral in his assessment, given that he is engaged directly by the ride operator.

Sir, under the Bill, the QP assumes statutory responsibility. This means that the QP is accountable to carry out duties to review, inspect and certify rides, as well as to ensure that rides meet prescribed standards. In addition, clause 39 of the Bill requires the independence of the QP from any professional and financial interests in the amusement ride.

This approach is similar to the construction industry, which has established procedures relying on the professionalism and integrity of the QP. For example, the developer has to appoint a QP who is a registered professional engineer in the branch of civil or structural engineering to carry out the structural design and to prepare and submit structural plans for approval. The Professional Engineers Act also regulates the qualifications and conduct of Professional Engineers. As with the QPs in the construction industry, the QPs whom we will rely on to certify the safety of amusement rides, will also be expected to upload the same standards of professionalism, ethics and discipline.

Next, the Ride Managers will be appointed by the Person Responsible to

Column: 2577

oversee and manage the operation and maintenance aspects of the rides. While these Rides Managers need not necessarily be directly performing their duties, they should maintain management oversight on the daily operation and maintenance of the ride.

We will stipulate a set of requirements for individuals to qualify as Ride Managers in our Regulations. For a start, the Ride Manager should possess a qualification in the technical field plus some years of relevant experience or, equivalent combinations of qualifications and experience, to be assessed by the Commissioner for Amusement Rides Safety under this Bill. This will ensure that the Ride Manager is equipped with sufficient technical background and expertise to manage the ride.

Mr Liang asked if the guarantor is required when the Person Responsible or Ride Manager are foreign nationals. Under the Bill, the Person Responsible and the Ride Manager, be they locals or foreign nationals, are required to discharge various statutory duties. Failure to do so properly will be an offence, and there is hence no need for a guarantor.

As for BCA, it has set up a new department to take on this regulatory function, re-deploying existing staff with suitable experience and recruiting a new team of engineers with relevant expertise and qualifications. I would just like to remind the Members that we are not starting from scratch. We have been involved in the regulations and in giving inputs to Police over the past many years. So I think we do have some expertise within BCA. But right now, we are concentrating where to re-deploy them, and we are building up their technical expertise as they proceed with their statutory functions. To bring the team up

Column: 2578

to speed and to build up expertise in amusement rides engineering, BCA has been attending various overseas training courses, seminars and expositions in the US as well as local technical training courses conducted by academics and experienced technical instructors.

Mr Liang asked whether there are enough trained QPs and CAs so that there will be no bottleneck in regulatory process.

There are currently about seven Professional Engineers in Singapore who certify rides to meet Public Entertainment Licensing Unit (PELU)'s licensing requirements. In comparison, there are 18 Registered Professionals for the 64 permanent rides in Hong Kong. Of these 18, nine of them are active. So I think this gives Members sort of a sense of the scale of the kind of people and expertise that we require here. BCA is working closely with PEB to register a larger pool of Specialised PEs with the necessary expertise. This group includes PEs with experience in related fields, such as lifting equipment, pressure vessels, railway transport and marine engineering. BCA and PEB have estimated that there are at least 20 PEBs who may qualify for selection.

As for the CAs, they possess years of practical experience in assessing various aspects of amusement rides. Currently, the industry taps on two CAs to inspect rides under the SPF licensing regime. Over time, more sophisticated rides will develop. The industry is building up its expertise and we encourage the industry to procure the right expertise and source for more CAs to assume this role. We are actually asking the industry to go out and source for the right CAs, and BCA will assess them on their individual expertise and experience. So we are open to accepting more CAs to operate in the local industry.

Column: 2579

Er Lee suggested that a Committee be established to standardise parks management protocols in Singapore, similar to the US' American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Under the Bill, our Regulations will generally prescribe that the rides in Singapore have to meet the standards under the ASTM F-24 Committee, as well as the European/UK equivalent, BS EN-13814.

These international standards are a result of years of collective experience and expertise of established global industry experts in amusement rides in the various fields ranging from design, operation, maintenance and testing. BCA will also review these standards periodically. Sir, given the relatively small size of our amusement rides industry, I do not think that we need to set up a similar standard-setting committee in Singapore.

Er Lee has suggested that the Bill should make compulsory the reporting of accidents and ride malfunctions to the authorities. Sir, I can confirm that this will, indeed, be the requirement.

Mr Liang asked about the enforcement measures taken in the past against operators and how the new framework intends to strengthen enforcement and compliance. Under the exisiting licensing regime, the Police uses a Demerit Points System to penalise breaches in licensing conditions. The Demerit Points System has graduated penalties as the licensing chalks up more demerit points, ranging from imposition of bank guarantee to cancellation of licence. Where the ride is found to be unsafe, the licensing officer can suspend or cancel a licence immediately. The new regulatory framework will prescribe a more detailed and structured system of fines and statutory penalties, covering a wide range of contraventions throughout the life cycle of the ride, from installation, operation, modification, to maintenance, repair and relocation. There will also be a tiered level of penalties, depending on the severity of

Column: 2580

the breach of duties for the various statutory parties. The Commissioner of Amusement Rides Safety has powers to revoke the Operating Permit when the ride is deemed to be unsafe.

Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef asked about emergency management, the handling of personal injury and insurance. The SCDF will be responsible for the fire safety and rescue management system for rides. It will approve the evacuation and incident management procedures for rides. They will also go through fire safety and evacuation exercises with the ride operators. Before the Operating Permit is issued by BCA, the ride operator has to fulfil SCDF's requirements and obtain the Certificate of Compliance issued by SCDF.

There will be requirements in the Regulations for a properly-trained first aider to respond to any emergencies that could arise in the operation of the ride. On insurance, all existing operators have public liability insurance coverage of varying amounts. The Regulations will prescribe a mandatory minimum amount of insurance coverage to safeguard public safety.

Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef also asked if there will be special criteria for children's rides. She raised concerns on the less stringent regime for relocation of rides.

Sir, we have adopted a risk-based approach to regulate all amusement rides. Under the Bill, the risk assessment will be carried out based on, among other things, the age profile of the target patrons. In other words, if the ride is designed for a certain height and certain weight, then we have to assess what are the kinds of mechanical parts, and structural design that have been put in place. So, it is actually an age-appropriate assessment. All rides will be required to be designed, operated and maintained according to prescribed international safety codes and standards.

Column: 2581

On the less stringent regime for relocation of rides, I wish to reiterate that there is no compromise on the safety of ride, as I mentioned in my earlier speech. The relocation work must be carried out in accordance with the design and specifications and the proposed installation method as set out in the original Installation Permit issued for the ride. The Commissioner of Amusement Rides Safety will also have powers to cease the operation of any relocated ride that is deemed unsafe.

Sir, I believe I have addressed the Members' concerns and queries. Let me conclude by thanking Members for their support for the Bill. With the more comprehensive regulatory framework for amusement rides safety in place, we can further enhance public safety in the daily operations and throughout the life cycle of amusement rides.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.