LITTERING, SPITTING AND ILLEGAL DUMPING (Prosecutions)

Dr Aline K. Wong asked the Minister for the Environment how many cases were prosecuted in each of the past five years for (i) littering; (ii) spitting; and (iii) illegal dumping in public places.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment (Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng) (for the Minister for the Environment): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am replying on behalf of my Minister.

The answer to this question is rather lengthy. It consists of a set of numbers. I have therefore arranged for the answer (Cols. 105 - 106) to be circulated to Members. It should be with the Member by now. answer - LITTERING, SPITTING AND ILLEGAL DUMPING (Cols. 105 - 106)

Mr Chew Heng Ching (Kaki Bukit): Sir, what is the average fine imposed for each of these offences in the last one year?

Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: This is, of course, off the top of my head. For littering, I would say it is about $140-$150; for spitting it is about $70; and for illegal dumping it is about $200.

Dr Koh Lam Son (Telok Blangah): Sir, may I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary the explanation for some of these figures here? In the case of littering, for the total number of cases, there appears to be a sharp rise from 1983 to 1984, ie, from 11,560 cases to 28,026 cases, followed by a sharp fall from that figure to 10,536 cases in 1985. In the case of spitting, from 1985 to 1986, there was a drop from 139 to 81 cases.

Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: Mr Speaker, Sir, in the case of littering, the Member would probably remember that in the year 1984 there was a blitz against killer litter and littering. If the Member looks at the column under "Littering Cases in HDB Estates", he would straightaway find the answer to the 28,000 cases. Most of the offenders caught were actually in the HDB estates. For spitting, in the year 1984, there was actually an educational programme, publicity and so on against spitting. Later there was a blitz against spitters, and that is why the figure went up.

Dr Koh Lam Son: Sir, does that mean that these cases reflect more on the Ministry's campaigns and the effectiveness of its enforcement rather than on the control of the problems?

Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: No, it does not mean that at all. We do not, as a matter of fact, keep looking for spitters every day. They appear as we do our other work. But when there is a campaign, after publicity and so on and so forth, yes, we get a bit more enthusiastic. We go around looking for them.

Dr Koh Lam Son: Mr Speaker, Sir, it is just that I cannot believe that there were only 81 cases of spitting in the whole year of 1986. I think I personally can count more than 81 for myself.

Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: I think we can go around with the Member to count these spitting cases. Maybe he probably does not know that these figures do not include spitting cases, say, in Botanic Garden, in the PSA area and so on where the other agencies enforce their own spitting regulations.