ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 2002 TO 31ST MARCH, 2003 (Paper Cmd. 3 of 2002)

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply (7th Allotted Day).

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head L (cont.) -

Resumption of Debate on Question [21st May, 2002],

"That the total sum to be allocated for Head L for the Main Estimates be reduced by $100." - [Dr Teo Ho Pin].

Question again proposed.

12.38 pm

Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay (Chua Chu Kang): Sir, it is not uncommon to see refuse vehicles carrying wastes leak sullage water on the roads. They cause nuisance to road users and residents. It also pollutes the environment. Some popular spots I notice of the leak of sullage water from garbage trucks are the uphill road in Hillview Estate, the junction where vehicles turn from Chua Chu Kang Drive into Chua Chu Kang Avenue 3, and the junction, turning from Toh Tuck Road into Commonwealth Avenue West. Under the sun, the sullage water emits a strong and unbearable pungent smell that affects the people living near the contaminated roads, and also the roadusers. Such dirty and smelly sullage water from the garbage trucks is unhygienic and could be a health hazard. Sullage water must not leak from garbage trucks. I would like to ask the Minister whether his Ministry has any rules to prevent leakage of sullage water from garbage trucks.

Last month, large amounts of construction debris dropped from an overloaded lorry, causing two out of three lanes of the PIE unusable. Luckily, it happened during an off-peak period; otherwise, it would have caused serious traffic jams. For trucks carrying sand, marine clay and incineration ash, due to the nature of these materials, the fine and soft materials leak continuously from the gap between the tailgate and the body of the trucks carrying them. As a result, it contaminates the roads, dirties the cars, generates dust and pollutes the air.

Sir, all the above problems are partly due to the inadequate design of the waste transportation vehicles, and partly due to the negligence of the drivers. What are the measures taken by the Ministry to ensure that all waste carrying vehicles have adequate designs? Is there any action to deter people from committing such irresponsible acts?

The Minister for the Environment (Mr Lim Swee Say): Sir, I thank the Members for sharing their views relating to the management of solid waste and water resources. This afternoon, I would like to respond to the solid waste issues first, followed by water issues.

Yesterday, Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay, Mr Ang Mong Seng and Mr Low Thia Khiang asked about the reasons for the recent increase in incineration fees and refuse collection fees. Sir, there is no more landfill sites on the main island of Singapore. Today, 7,000 tonnes of solid waste are generated and burnt at our incineration plants every day. These 7,000 tonnes are burnt because we need to reduce the volume of our solid waste to preserve our landfill capacity. These 7,000 tonnes of solid waste are turned into 1,600 tonnes of bottom ash. We then landfill them at Pulau Semakau.

The present approach poses two problems. Firstly, every 5-7 years, we have to build a new incineration plant. These plants are not cheap. For example, the latest plant we built at Tuas South costs $890 million. It is not cheap. The second problem is that every 25-30 years, we have to find a new landfill site, the size of Sentosa Island. I think Members here will agree with me that the present approach is not sustainable. It is not possible for us to build a new incineration plant at a cost of $890 million once every 5-7 years. It is not possible for us to find a new landfill site, the size of Sentosa Island, once every 25-30 years.

We, therefore, have to adopt a new approach to the management of solid waste. Basically, we have embarked on three strategies. Firstly, we do whatever we can to encourage the reduction of waste, so that we can reduce the amount of waste that goes into incineration. Secondly, even for those waste that has to be incinerated, we try to find ways to re-use the bottom ash, so that they do not have to go to the landfill site. And, lastly, for those solid wastes which go directly to the landfill site without going through an incineration process, we also find ways to re-use them, so that we can move towards what we call zero landfill. Hopefully, the day will come when there is no need for landfill requirements at all. In fact, zero landfill is the only sustainable way for Singapore in the management of solid waste. This is the reason why we have no choice, but to continue to increase the charges for the incineration fees, not to make profits, but only to recover costs. Even with the latest round of increase to $77 per tonne, the amount collected is still below the full cost of processing the solid waste. 12.45 pm

Incineration fee accounts for about 60-70% of the total operation cost of the public waste collectors. Companies that collect waste from the households have to pay for the incineration cost. The fees they pay for incineration accounts for about 60-70% of their business cost. This is the reason why when there is an increase in the incineration fees, they will have to recover this increase in the fees from the increase in refuse collection fees.

The ENV is mindful that this adjustment will have some impact on our households and, in particular, on the SMEs. We have therefore spread out the increase over a period of few years. The last increase from $67 to $77 came up to about 15% increase. But, of course, incineration fee does not account for 100% of the business cost - only 60% of business cost. So, 60% of 15% gives you 9%. In other words, the refuse collection fees for households and SMEs would have to go up by about 9%, and not 15%, as mentioned by Prof. Low Seow Chay yesterday. This works out to about less than $1 per month per household. For HDB flat, it is about 88-95 cents per month. In the case of landed property, it is about $1.50 per month. In the case of the hawker centres and market stalls, it is about $5 a month.

Sir, I know that nobody likes any increase in the refuse collection fees. But, as I have mentioned, the present way of managing our solid waste is not sustainable. So, the only way for us is to work together to enhance the level of recycling, as that is the only sustainable solution.

Mr Ang Mong Seng asked at what point in time that the refuse fee can be lowered if the residents continue to support waste recycling efforts. Sir, this is a very good question. The refuse fee comprises two components. The first component is the service fee that we pay to the public waste collector for collecting the waste from our doorsteps. The second component is the disposal fee - for them to send the waste to the incineration plant for incineration. For every tonne of solid waste that the household is able to recycle, the public waste company will be able to avoid the payment of $77 for that tonne of waste, because he no longer has to incinerate that tonne of waste. But the problem is, on the whole, the level of participation in recycling, as well as the amount of waste being taken out from our waste stream, at this moment, has not reached a critical mass. As a result, the public waste companies are still not able to derive enough savings from recycling to compensate for the cost of recycling infrastructure.

Sir, what it means is that, over time, if we can continue to encourage our residents and households to participate in recycling, then hopefully the day will come when certain precincts could reach the critical mass to the extent that the public waste collection companies will be able either to contain the rise in the refuse fees, or maybe even to reduce the refuse fees, because they will be able to derive additional value from the avoidance of having to pay for the incineration, as well as to be able to derive values from the recyclables.

Sir, in this regard, the Members of the House here can actually do a lot to help us encourage the residents to take part in recycling. Hopefully, their precinct will be among the first to benefit from having achieved the critical mass in recycling.

Sir, some Members may ask, is it possible for us to achieve a critical mass in recycling? For me, the answer is "Yes". In April last year, 2001, we initiated the National Recycling Programme. At that point in time, only 15% of the residents took part in recycling, meaning 1 in 7. By the end of last year, it has gone up to 22%, 1 in 5. By the end of this year, our target is to achieve 1 in 3, and by the end of next year, 1 in 2. In other words, if we continue our momentum in recycling, we can indeed achieve a critical mass in recycling. We have made a good start, but I would admit that there is still room for improvement. Take, for example, some households, even today, are still not issued with green bags, because the recycling company, for whatever reasons, decided that it is not worth their while to issue the green bags to certain categories of households.

In some cases, the companies, even though they were supposed to collect the green bags once every two weeks, did not do so regularly. It has not been consistent and thereby created a problem for the households. At the same time, many of the private apartments and condominiums in Singapore are not part of the National Recycling Programme yet because the collection of waste for private apartments does not come under the ENV.

Sir, in the coming months and years, we intend to take three actions to further improve the National Recycling Programme.

The first action we are taking is to expand the coverage of the National Recycling Programme. In the case of the condominiums, the participation rate today is only 4%. Our aim is to increase it to at least 30% over the next two years. ENV has started working with 14 major managing agents in the private sector to introduce recycling to the condominiums managed by them. Some of them have indicated to us that they do intend to introduce recycling within the next 3-6 months.

The second action that we are taking is to improve the quality of service of collection. ENV is now looking into the introduction of what we call "Minimum Quality of Service" (QOS). These QOS standards will be imposed on all the public waste collection companies, and all companies that want to take part in the collection of recyclables. For example, we are looking into the possibility of requiring them to provide 100% coverage to every household within their area of responsibility. It means that they cannot pick and choose. Secondly, door-to-door collection must be done at least once every 2 weeks, and on a fixed day of the week, so as to make it easier and less confusing for the households. Last, but not least, they must be committed to collect a minimum list of recyclables, so that the scope of recycling can be broadened over time. At the same time, we will also encourage them, for example, to place recycling bins in void decks, to supplement the door-to-door collection.

Last, but not least, we will continue to strengthen public education, and to improve community awareness. Sir, in this regard, we will be working very closely with the grassroots advisors, Town Councils and so on. For example, we will put up posters on notice boards, in the Town Council Newsletters, and we intend to conduct roving exhibitions at the various community centres.

Sir, we believe that these three actions, when taken, will be able to ensure that the operation of the National Recycling Programme will become smoother and, at the same time, lead to a greater level of participation by the households. Hopefully, this will lead to a reduction in incineration, and thereby help to contain any potential rising cost in refuse collection in the future.

But, of course, to reduce incineration, household recycling alone is not enough. We will continue to promote recycling in the industries. In fact, we are very happy to see that the level in recycling in the industries has improved last year in the areas of construction and demolition waste, used copper slab, paper, cardboard, and so on. We are also beginning to see the recycling of food waste from the food industry. All these are very encouraging signs.

Sir, in the coming years, in order to reach a 60% target by 2012 under the SGP 2012, we have set ourselves much higher targets for a whole host of waste stream.

Sir, having addressed our strategy to reduce incineration, I would like to go on to talk about what we can do with the incineration bottom ash, when it comes out from the incinerators. As I mentioned earlier, everyday 1,600 tonnes of incineration bottom ash are being produced from the burning of the solid waste in Singapore. At this moment, they account for two-thirds of the waste that end up in the landfill site in Pulau Semakau. Sir, we believe that if we can find ways to reuse this bottom ash, then over time, we will be able to reduce the demand for landfill. We started doing this with the LTA. A pilot project is now on-going. We were using the Incineration Bottom Ash (IBA) for road construction. If this project is successful, we do intend to broaden the use of IBA.

Sir, let me move on to the third strategy, which is to reduce the solid wastes that are not being incinerated, but end up in the landfill site directly. We call it the direct landfill, eg, construction and demolition waste and used copper slab. Today, these are the two top solid wastes that end up in the landfill site directly, and they account for 50% of our direct landfill waste. So, we have decided to set a higher target for recycling these two waste streams. Sir, take for example the case of construction and demolition waste. We are now working with the construction industry to see how we can increase the recycling rate from 85% today to 90% by the year 2012. At the same time, in the case of the copper slab, from 90% to 95%.

Sir, yesterday, Mr Ang Mong Seng asked whether something can be done to recycle tree branches, trimmings and so on, and turn them into useful products. Horticultural waste, as mentioned by Mr Ang yesterday, is not small. Every year, we produce about 280,000 tonnes. These are basically generated by the landscape contractors of NParks and the various Town Councils.

Sir, our intention, basically, is to create more facilities in the private sector, through the private sector, so that some of this horticultural waste can be turned into compost and charcoal. Two new facilities will come into operation by the end of the year. Our target is to increase the recycling rate for the horticultural waste from 32% today to 70% over the next 10 years.

Sir, the overall outcome of these three strategies that I have mentioned - reduce incineration, reuse bottom ash, as well as reuse and reduce the direct landfill, will hopefully help us to reduce, not just the amount of waste, but also the amount of waste for landfill. Today, we dispose about 2,400 tonnes of solid waste in the landfill site, and this quantity is expected to increase to 3,300 tonnes by the year 2012, an increase of almost 50%. We believe that the three strategies outlined earlier will enable us to reduce the waste disposed at the landfill site by 50%. Sir, instead of going up from 2,400 tonnes to 3,300 tonnes over the next 10 years, we should be able to reduce it, from 2,400 tonnes to 1,600 tonnes. And if we can succeed in doing so, we will be able to reduce the need for new incineration plants from 1 in every 5-7 years to 1 in every 10-15 years. But, more importantly, we will be able to extend the life-span of Pulau Semakau from 25-30 years today, to at least 50 years in time to come.

Sir, I will now go on to address some of the specific cuts brought up by the Members. Prof. Low Seow Chay asked why do we allow some recycling companies to collect more waste than they could, and as a result pose a fire risk.

Sir, ENV is aware that some of the recycling companies do accumulate a large amount of waste at their premises. What they really have to do is to upgrade their recycling operations, so that they can recycle these wastes faster and more efficiently. Under our Innovation for Environment Sustainability Fund, we are working with some of these recycling companies to see how we can help them to come out with new and better methods to recycle their wastes. For example, we are now working with the industry to see how we can process the horticultural wastes to produce compost in a shorter time so that the quality will be more consistent and better. At the same time, we will continue to enforce strict actions against those who deliberately flout the regulations. Over the past five years, we only had two cases of fire in the waste recycling facilities. One case was the wood waste recycling company at Lim Chu Kang. The wood waste caught fire in March 1998. The SCDF conducted an investigation and came to the conclusion that the fire was not set deliberately. So no legal action was taken against the company, but that company did clear the debris very promptly.

The second case was the fire in November last year. I think this was the case cited by Prof. Low Seow Chay. As the case is now in court, I will not comment further on the case. 1.00 pm

Prof. Low also asked whether there are any rules on enforcement to prevent the refuse trucks from leaking sullage water. Yes, indeed, there are rules and regulations on refuse removal operations. The waste collectors are required to use compaction vehicles for the collection of domestic waste, as well as various organic wastes. They have to minimise the smell and they have to prevent the spillage of waste. Before they embark on the road, they have to drain off the sullage water from the compaction of refuse into sewers in the bin centre. We are aware that there are some trucks that are still not conforming to the rules and regulations. The ENV will continue to take enforcement action, and will pay particular attention to the locations cited by Prof. Low.

Prof. Low also asked whether we have any rules to prevent vehicles carrying construction debris and sand from polluting the environment. The lorries are required to cover up the construction materials. The ENV carries out enforcement rounds regularly. Last year, there were 54 offenders. When they are caught, for the first offence, they are fined $150; second offence, $200; third offence, $250. Beyond that, for subsequent offences, these are not compoundable. They will have to go to court and the fines will be determined by the court.

Sir, I believe I have addressed the issues relating to the management of solid wastes. I will now move on to address the issue relating to the management of water resources.

On 5th April, the Prime Minister said in this House that Singapore will move away from our reliance on Malaysia for water. Yesterday, several Members - Dr Teo Ho Pin, Prof. Low Seow Chay and so on - have also called for the Government to increase our self-sufficiency in water supply. Sir, in 10 years' time, on the demand side, we can expect our demand to go up by about one-third, meaning that we will be consuming one-third more than what we are consuming today. This is on the demand side. On the supply side, the expiry of the 1961 agreement in 2011 will reduce water supply from Malaysia. Basically, the Members are asking, when that happens in 2011, with higher demand and lower supply, will we be faced with water shortage by then?

Broadly speaking, Members of the House, as well as members of the public, are concerned with three issues. First, will we have enough water by the year 2011, if the 1961 agreement is not renewed and extended? Second, will we have enough water from 2011 to 2061? Lastly, what happens after 2061?

Sir, I am glad to assure this House that even though the 1961 agreement will only expire in 10 years' time, the Government has already embarked on several key projects to increase our own water supply. I will now give the House an update on this. First, we are going ahead with three major projects to increase the supply of the local catchment water. We are going to convert the Marina Basin into a fresh water reservoir. Second, we want to create a new reservoir, down stream of the Lower Seletar Reservoir. Third, we are going to link up all the reservoirs in Singapore, so that we will be able to maximise the yield of the various catchment areas in Singapore. These three projects will be completed by the year 2009. They will significantly increase the supply of our local catchment water from where we are today.

Secondly, we are going to proceed with desalination as a new source of water supply. The cost of desalination has come down steadily and rapidly by 50% over the last 10 years. PUB has therefore called a tender for 30 mgd of desalination water. The tender will close on 31st May. The plant will come into production by 2005.

Besides desalination, what are the other options? Yesterday, Prof. Low asked whether we can ferry water from Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia and so on. Let me explain to the House that we are talking about securing water supply to meet the long-term requirements of Singapore. We are not talking about having additional supply to solve our problem for one day, one week, next five years or next 10 years. We are securing water supply, hopefully, that will strengthen our supply system for the next 50 years, 100 years and beyond. In this regard, I do not feel comfortable relying on this idea of ferrying water, no matter what is the amount, no matter how cost effective it may be, from places like Australia, New Zealand and so on. As pointed out by Prof. Low, in times of emergency, maybe those options are viable. But, for today, I want to talk about long-term water supply, meaning sources which will be able to provide good quality and substantial quantity of water over a long duration - 50 years, 100 years and beyond - and at a competitive price. Otherwise, over time, we will not be able to contain the cost of water if these water sources are not cost competitive.

With that in mind, I would say that the two strategies, which I outlined earlier to expand the local catchment area and to increase water supply through desalination, are what I call the strategies of addition. For example, let us say that in our zoo today, we have only one lion. If we decide that one lion is not enough, and we would like to have four lions, what do we do? One way is very simple. 1 plus 3 equals to 4. So we go out to look for another three lions. We bring them to the zoo. Then, 1 plus 3 equals to 4 lions. So this is the strategy of addition.

Sir, there is another approach. Assuming that we have a lion, and why do we not find a lioness? With a male lion and a lioness, they can together produce baby lions. 1 plus 1, multiply by 2 also equals to 4. In other words, as we look for a long-term supply solution, we should not confine our mindset to just looking for new water sources to add to our supply. But, more importantly, we should think about how we can multiply the capacity of our water supply.

Sir, this leads me to our third strategy which is to develop water reclamation into a major source of supply in the long-term supply system of Singapore. Some may ask what is the difference between water reclamation from desalination. Why do we say that desalination is addition? Why do we say that water reclamation is multiplication? There is a big difference.

Today, we consume 300 million gallons of water per day. Every single drop of the 300 million gallons of water, after being used, is treated by PUB to internationally accepted standard before it is discharged into the open seas. And to make sure that this water is treated to the standard required of the international community, we continuously invest in our infrastructure to ensure that sewage water will be treated properly. This is precisely why we embarked on the DTSS (Deep Tunnel Sewerage System), as mentioned by Mr Zainul yesterday. The DTSS is our long-term solution to ensure that every single drop of used water will be treated properly and in the most cost-effective manner. In other words, the implementation of DTSS is to help us save money in the treatment of used water. It does not incur additional cost. In fact, it saves us cost. Therefore, the concern that the DTSS may lead to higher water prices in the future is unfounded.

Secondly, Mr Zainul also asked whether we can find ways to use the DTSS for other utilities. It is a good idea, except that the DTSS is very deep. That is why it is called deep tunnel. It is about 30-50 metres underground. It is too deep for us to use it for electricity, cable and so on.

Having said that, let me come back to the point about water reclamation. As I said, every drop of water is now being treated before we discharge it into the open seas. At this moment, only 5% of the water after treatment is reclaimed as industrial water. The other 95%, or more than 280 million gallons per day, is being discharged into the open seas, and is really wasted.

Today, with the advancement in membrane technology, it is now possible for us to recover a good percentage of this 95% of treated used water and turn it into clean water again. In other words, we can really give every drop of water a new lease of life. Instead of releasing this water into the open sea, let this treated used water be mixed with sea water, and then take it back to go through desalination, which will be very expensive. Basically, we are saying, why do we not capture this water before it is being discharged into the open sea? So, we turn the treated used water into new water, and we give it a new lease of life, and that is why the PUB has called it the NEWater.

Dr Teo Ho Pin yesterday asked whether this strategy is a costly option. Will it be very expensive? In fact, water reclamation has two major advantages. Firstly, it is much cheaper than desalination. In terms of capital cost of the facility for reclaimed water, it is about half that of desalination. Secondly, in terms of energy consumption - energy cost - water reclamation costs only one-quarter to one-fifth that of desalination. Putting the two together, the saving in capital cost and the reduction in energy cost, in fact, NEWater will cost about half to one-third that of the cost of desalination.

The second advantage of NEWater is that it is clean. It is even cleaner than PUB water. If we are to look at the total organic carbon of NEWater, it is less than one-tenth of PUB water. Precisely because of that, the industry users find NEWater to be very attractive. Take, for example, the wafer fabrication plants. Today, they take our PUB water and process it to reduce the total organic carbon to a level that is acceptable for their operation. This will cost them money. But starting from next year, all the wafer fab plants in Singapore will be using NEWater instead of PUB water. Why? Because NEWater is cleaner than PUB water, and is more suitable for their operation.

Yesterday, Prof. Low Seow Chay asked what are we going to do to market NEWater beyond wafer fabrication plants. Sir, this is a very good question. Our intention is to set up a reticulation system to reach out to various industrial estates and commercial hubs in Singapore, so that over the next 10 years, we will be able to expand the use of NEWater beyond wafer fabrication plants, to various other sectors such as semi-conductors, chemicals, electronics, utilities, engineering and so on. Starting with 15 million gallons per day next year for the wafer fabrication plants, our target is to expand the use to more than 55 million gallons per day by the year 2012. By the year 2012, NEWater or water reclamation will account for at least 15% of total water demand in Singapore.

Sir, this increase in our water supply, namely, local catchment expansion by the year 2009, desalination by 2005, and NEWater by 2003 will be more than enough to make up for the drop in Johor water, by the time the 1961 water agreement expires in 2011. In other words, to the question whether we have enough water by the year 2011, the answer is yes. We will have more than enough to make up for the reduction in Johor water. At the same time, this increase in our own supply will enhance our self-sufficiency in water supply.

Sir, the next question is: during the period between 2011 and 2061, will we have enough water? During this period, beyond 2011, we expect our total demand for water to continue to increase, as our population continues to grow and the economy continues to expand. On the demand side, we need to conserve as much as we can, a very important point mentioned by Dr Teo Ho Pin yesterday. The PUB has an on-going educational and publicity programme. Over the years, the education programme and the restructuring of our water tariffs have been effective. Take, for example, in 1996 and 1997, the increase in water consumption was about 4-5% a year. By 1998 to 2000, it dropped to 1.2%. Last year, the growth in water consumption continues to decline to 0.5%. Therefore, I share Dr Teo's point that it is very important for all of us to continue to do whatever we can to create this awareness towards water conservation. 1.15 pm

At the same time, on the supply side, we will continue to increase our own supply. With the three projects which I have outlined earlier, there is still further scope for us to further expand the catchment areas. At the same time, with the cost of desalinated water coming down, there is still scope for us to continue to increase the amount of desalinated water. But, more importantly, there is still tremendous scope for us to produce a lot more NEWater from 2011 to 2061, and beyond.

Sir, let me just share with the House here that the multiplying effect of NEWater is tremendous. For example, if we were to reclaim 50% of the used water, we will be able to double the water supply capacity in Singapore. Today, membrane technology for water reclamation can achieve a recovery rate of up to 75%. At 75%, it means that every drop of water can be turned into four drops of water. This is the power of multiplication. So, the adding to and the multiplying of our water supply system - expansion in local catchment areas, desalination and water reclamation - is a very effective and very powerful combination.

Furthermore, the challenge of water shortage is not a problem faced by Singapore alone. It is a global challenge. We can be sure that there is research going on today looking for cheaper and better ways of producing water. We can expect a breakthrough in technology in the coming years and decades. We intend to take full advantage of any technological breakthrough.

Sir, on the whole, this diversified platform of water supply will enable us to increase our water supply in a sustainable manner for the next 50-60 years and beyond. Therefore, the answer to the second question, whether we are confident of having enough water from 2011 to 2061, again, is yes.

Yesterday, Mr Othman and Mr Ahmad Magad asked whether NEWater is safe to drink and, if so, when do we plan to use it for potable use. The use of reclaimed water for potable use is not new, as pointed out by Mr Othman. This has been done in several parts of USA for more than 20 years. Take, for example, just outside of Los Angeles, a place called Orange County, they have been using water reclamation since 1976 under a project known as Water Factory 21. This Water Factory 21 produces 13 mgd, and is supplied to a population of about 2.5 million. They have plans to increase the capacity of Water Factory 21 to 110 mgd over time.

Another example is North Virginia, a place called Fairfax County, just outside Washington D.C. Since 1978, they have been implementing water reclamation for a population of about 1.2 million. Today, this water reclamation plant produces about 44 mgd. Again, they have plans to expand it to 70 mgd. At these various locations, they discharge the reclaimed water into the reservoirs, either aboveground or underground reservoirs. The reclaimed water is then further processed together with the water in the reservoirs, both underground and aboveground. The whole process is what we call the indirect potable use of reclaimed water. This means they do not consume the reclaimed water directly, but go through the process of mixing it with reservoir water and process it for the second time.

Members may ask, if we say that the quality of reclaimed water is so good, why then is there a need to process the water one more time, by mixing it with reservoir water? I asked the technical experts and the answer given to me is very interesting. The technical experts told us that the reason they do this - indirect potable use - is not because the reclaimed water is not clean enough, but rather it is because the water is too clean. After going through dual membranes and ultra-violet, it is so clean that the process takes away the minerals and nutrients in the water. As a result, in all these places, what they have to do is to mix the reclaimed water with reservoir water because this is the easiest way to put back the minerals and nutrients into the water. After processing, it is consumed.

Sir, another point to note is that while this process of water reclamation started in the 1970s in USA, it is becoming a growing trend in USA and other countries today. Why? Because the technology is improving all the time. The quality of the reclaimed water is improving and, at the same time, the cost of water reclamation is coming down. We were told that in Atlanta, Georgia, they are now building a water reclamation plant. Starting with 15 mgd, which will come into operation by 2005, it will eventually be expanded to 50 mgd. Again, North Virginia, having been very successful with the project that I mentioned earlier, is now building another plant. Starting with 10 mgd, it will come into operation by 2008. Basically, what is happening overseas has given us a lot of confidence regarding the potential indirect potable use of reclaimed water.

Sir, in the case of Singapore, the NUS laboratory has been conducting very comprehensive analyses of NEWater to ensure that the water quality is indeed as good as what the technical literature has put it up to be. These analyses are supervised by a panel of experts, both internationally and locally, because we want to make sure that we tap on the best brains in the world. The process started more than two years ago and tests are now on-going. So far, the NUS laboratory has conducted 20,000 analyses over the last two years, and they have established that NEWater is cleaner than PUB water. Normally, we look at water quality from three angles; first, in terms of chemical quality such as the total organic carbon, minerals, nutrients. They have established, after 20,000 analyses, that NEWater is even cleaner than PUB water. Next, in terms of physical quality such as clarity and colour, again NEWater outperforms PUB water. In other words, NEWater is WHO+, because it is able to meet and exceed the World Health Organisation's standards. This explains why it is attractive to the industry for use as high-grade water.

The third aspect is the bacteriological quality of the water. This is a very important factor because for potable use, we are concerned about bacteria count, viruses, and so on. Sir, here, I am happy to inform the House that based on the 20,000 analyses so far, they have established that the bacteriological quality of NEWater is as good as PUB water, because the presence of bacteria and virus is not detectable - it is so low. It is just not present in the water, thereby meeting the World Health Organisation's standards again.

In other words, if we look at NEWater, it is not only WHO+, it is also PUB+. It satisfies all the WHO's standards and it is even cleaner than PUB water. Notwithstanding that, there is no need for us to rush the process. We intend to take it one step at a time. The next step is for us to await the recommendations from these international experts. We give them enough time to conclude their studies. We expect the recommendations to come to the PUB and the ENV sometime in July.

Sir, Mr Ahmad Magad asked when will the Visitors' Centre for NEWater be ready. I am aware that the interest in NEWater is now getting higher and higher. This is a good sign. The PUB is now building the Visitors' Centre at the Bedok NEWater Plant, which will be ready by early next year. At the same time, to make it more convenient for our school students to get to know more about NEWater, we are exploring the setting up of a Visitors' Centre in the Singapore Science Centre.

Sir, let me sum up the issue of water supply. As Members of the House have mentioned, it is very important for Singapore to secure our water supply, and to be more self-sufficient. With the increased supply of our local catchment areas, together with desalination and NEWater, we are now diversifying and increasing our water sources from two today - Johor water and local catchment water - to four by the year 2005. In other words, if we look at Singapore as a country, we will have four big national taps. What is even more important to note is that the water coming out from each and every one of these four taps is of equally good quality. Should the supply be disrupted in any of these four taps, the other three taps can provide the mutual back-up to the fourth tap. We do not know what will happen to the supply of these four taps. Maybe drought will reduce the supply of local catchment water. Maybe pollution in catchment areas may reduce the supply of water from Johor. We do not know what will happen. But what is important is that we now have four taps. Whenever the supply in one tap is being reduced because of whatever reasons, at least we have three other taps to provide the mutual back-up. Sir, in this way, our supply system will not only become more cost-effective but, at the same time, more resilient as we become more self-sufficient in our water supply.

Dr Teo Ho Pin yesterday asked: can we be completely self-sufficient in the long term? Sir, the 1962 Water Agreement will continue to run until 2061. Therefore, the issue of whether Singapore can be completely self-sufficient does not arise until 2061. After 2061, of course, we do not know whether there will be an extension of water supply from Malaysia. This is an on-going issue being negotiated today. But what is important is for us to recognise that Singapore is an island surrounded by sea water. Today, with the advancement in membrane technology, with the cost of desalination coming down, with the ability to multiply water sources through water reclamation, the answer is: Yes, Singapore certainly can become completely self-sufficient, after 2061, if need be.

Sir, let me conclude by saying that I want to assure this House and our people out there that they can count on this Government to do whatever necessary to ensure that we will have enough supply to meet the needs of our industry, of our people, today, in the future, for a long time to come.

Mr S. Iswaran (West Coast): Sir, in the Singapore Green Plan, the target for air quality is 85% of good days - "good days" being defined as days when the PSI reading is below 50. I understand that the key pollutants that matter in this regard are sulphur dioxide and also particulate matters. One of the main contributing factors, if we take away the haze, is diesel vehicles. And we know that public transportation in Singapore is the main user of diesel vehicles.

Sir, we are now in an era where there is a range of more environment-friendly options. The range includes electric vehicles, hybrid vehicles, right through to natural gas, and so on. So the question is: how actively are we pursuing these options as part of our longer term effort to improve air quality in Singapore? I welcome the initiative of the compressed natural gas pilot project that the Ministry of the Environment has initiated with SBS and also with the taxi companies, ie, Comfort and City Cab. I think 30 buses and 50 taxis are involved.

Sir, the questions I have are, first of all, what is the time-frame for this pilot project, and what criteria will be used to assess its success and viability for extension to the broader fleet within the public transportation system? The second question is that the feedback, in general, suggests that the upfront cost of many of these green vehicles is not adequately compensated for by the vehicle rebates that are given by LTA. I believe that there has been some discussion on this in the debate on the budget of the Ministry of Transport. My question for the Ministry of the Environment is, assuming the Ministry of Transport's policy remains unchanged on the matter of green vehicle rebates, whether it is capital or operating cost rebates, what more can the Ministry of the Environment do to encourage public transport operators to adopt the use of more environment-friendly vehicles? 1.30 pm

The Chairman: Dr Teo, you can take your two cuts together.

Dr Teo Ho Pin (Holland-Bukit Panjang): Sir, my topic is heat island. The Concept Plan 2001 has increased the density and height of future developments in Singapore. High-rise and high-density development will have an impact on the quality of our living environment, such as ventilation, warming, pollution and noise. One area of concern is the build-up of heat in our built environment due to the compact development and lack of cross natural ventilation - this is what we call the wind tunnel effect. This problem is further compounded by the extensive use of airconditioning, which emits hot air to the surrounding areas.

Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions: (1) What is the long-term plan to prevent the heating up of our living environment? (2) What are the measures taken to ensure that the air ambient temperature is within tolerable limit? (3) How does the Green Plan 2012 integrate or coordinate with the Concept Plan 2001?

My next cut is on green consumers. Human activity has left a permanent mark, potentially increasing the earth's temperature, destroying massive areas of tree cover, and obliterating thousands of living species. When we go shopping, we use public or private transport, and we choose a place to live. Our choices have an effect on the quality of the air we breathe, or the water we drink, and the environment we live in. Everything we do will affect the ecological balance.

Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions: (1) What is the long-term plan to encourage "green consumerism"? (2) What are the measures or incentives undertaken by the Ministry to support "green products"? (3) How do we educate Singaporeans to be green consumers?

Mdm Ho Geok Choo (West Coast): Sir, I was pleased to learn from MOS Vivian Balakrishnan on Monday that the use of HDB flats for home-based food business is allowed within certain guidelines. Nonetheless, I noted with a tinge of amusement when MOS Vivian added that, eventually, whether these home-based food operators would take off would depend on the Ministry of the Environment.

Sir, it would appear that the common complaint we often hear is how the public is referred from one department to another is also making its manifestation in this august Chamber. It seems that, although HDB has given its blessing, it is no guarantee that such home-based food business can take off. Now, I would have to refer the matter to the Minister for the Environment.

Coming back to what is foremost in my mind and being an optimist, I am hopeful that the Minister for the Environment and his MOS had followed through the arguments I had put forward to the Minister for National Development in my petition on Monday. As such, I will not labour over the same arguments for advocating an informal sector in Singapore to help the unemployed, and to nurture mum and papa entrepreneurs among the heartlanders by allowing them to use their flat dwellings for operating home-based food business. If this group of people were to be granted licences to distribute and sell their home-based cooked food, it is important that we ensure that the hygiene standards of the food that they prepare are up to the standards prescribed by the Ministry for hawkers preparing and serving food in the hawker centres.

Sir, over the last six months, I have seen no less than 10 residents who had been fined for selling food without a proper licence. I raise this matter to the Minister as a matter of public concern, because of the need to meet two seemingly opposing imperatives. On the one hand, I am concerned that we help these unemployed people find temporary sources of income, while they search and wait for job offers elsewhere. On the other hand, we need to ensure that standards of public hygiene, with regard to the handling of food, need to be strictly adhered to.

I fully empathise with the Ministry's concerns in respect of granting licences to people who want to operate their food business from their homes and to sell the food. It is not easy to ensure that hygiene standards are adhered to, because of the diffusion of multiple food businesses in the homes of these people. Nonetheless, as advanced in my arguments on Monday, administrative difficulties in doing something should not be used as reasons for not exploring solutions to facilitate the outcomes that we are seeking.

In this instance, we can stipulate a number of measures to address these concerns of hygiene standards and quality. For example, we could do the following: organise short educational, food preparation and hygiene courses by the CDCs, and aspiring small scale home-based food operators are required to go through this programme before being issued a licence to sell food. Limit the type of food that can be prepared from home, eg, cakes, biscuits, desserts, satay and other dried food. I urge the Minister to consider these measures in order that his Ministry can justify the issue of such licences. In this way, we can ensure conformance to standards and practices, and this is where the CDCs can come in to ensure this. After all, CDCs were established to provide decentralised service to the constituents to serve them better.

I firmly believe policies must be responsive to changing needs and times. Where we have constraints in making change at the Ministry level, the CDCs, at their level, must provide the flexibility to address the needs of these people. Those who do not comply to specifications can have their licences revoked. Another way in which the Ministry, or CDCs, can also maintain a better control of those who have been issued with a licence would be to maintain a registry of these operators. CDCs could consider setting up a central kitchen for these small-scale operators to prepare food and organise for distribution of such prepared food to hawker centres, restaurants and other food outlets. This will spin off a totally new food cottage industry in Singapore.

To reiterate what I said on Monday, in fact, the successful Bengawan Solo started its cake business from its HDB kitchen flat many years back. I also understand that in Taiwan, ---

The Chairman: Mdm Ho, you are taking too long again.

Mdm Ho Geok Choo: --- many of their successful businesses started from home. Our leaders have been hailing Singaporeans to change their mindset. On this premise, I am calling on the Ministry of the Environment to embrace a new mindset. I would like to urge the Ministry to consider granting licences to enable these people to sell their food.

The Minister of State for the Environment (Dr Balaji Sadasivan): Sir, I would like to thank the Members of Parliament - Mr Iswaran, Dr Teo Ho Pin and Mdm Ho - for the very important issues they have brought up.

I will first begin with the issue that Mr Iswaran brought up on air quality. If we look at air quality and look at domestic factors that affect the air quality, certainly, vehicle emissions are the most important. Of the three fuels that can power vehicles - petrol, diesel and compressed natural gas (CNG) - CNG is the cleanest, and diesel the least clean. If we compare CNG to diesel, if we use CNG, we will reduce particulate material emissions by more than 95%, and it will also reduce emissions, things like nitrate oxide, hydrocarbons and sulphur dioxide. So, ENV is taking a pro-active approach to encourage public transport companies to try out CNG buses and taxis. This is because the vehicular emissions from these vehicles are a major source of air pollution.

One major initiative we have taken is to work with our industry partners in the establishment of supporting infrastructure for CNG vehicles. The cost of the first CNG vehicle refuelling station in Jurong Island was jointly funded by the gas company and ENV, under the Innovation for Environmental Sustainability (IES) Fund. ENV has also been providing funding support to help defray the higher cost of CNG buses compared to diesel buses, so that the bus companies can experiment with CNG buses and gain a better understanding of the long-term cost effectiveness of operating CNG buses versus diesel buses.

ENV is focusing on public buses and taxis as the first step. If the outcome is positive from operation and environmental point of view, ENV intends to facilitate other fleet owners to try out various types of green vehicles to protect our air quality.

Sir, these schemes have just started. We need to wait and see how they work out. From this experience, we also need to see what will be the long-term economic feasibility of going completely into CNG.

With regard to the issue of higher temperatures in cities, that Dr Teo brought up, this urban heat island concept was attributed to an American meteorologist who pointed out that the temperature of cities is a few degrees higher than that of the surrounding areas. There are two factors that give rise to this. This urban heat island effect is, firstly, caused by the absorption and radiation of heat by man-made surfaces during the day, and the lack of vegetation to provide shade and absorb the heat in an urban environment. The second factor is the heat released into the urban atmosphere by combustion processes from vehicles and from airconditioning and other sources of energy used within the city.

ENV, together with other Ministries, is working to reduce the heat island effect by tackling both causes. First, MND, BCA, URA and NParks have already implemented measures that could help to counter, or mitigate, this heat island effect. And these measures include, first, the use of lighter and cooler roofing and pavement materials that do not absorb or radiate as much heat as dark surfaces or materials; secondly, by setting up guidelines, standards and building design codes to reduce the heat trapped within buildings and to incorporate green spaces as far as practicable; thirdly, by planting roadside trees and shrubs to increase the vegetation within the city; fourthly, by provision of parks and gardens around buildings; finally, by promoting roof-top gardens and high-rise greenery under the concept of Singapore as a City in a Garden.

The second way of trying to reduce the temperature within the city is to reduce the heat produced by the energy that we use, and we do this by promoting energy efficiency. This is being done under the auspices of the National Energy Efficiency Committee (NEEC). The NEEC recently introduced the energy label scheme for home appliances, such as refrigerators and airconditioners, to promote the use of more energy efficient home appliances. The scheme will extend to other appliances, such as washing machines and TVs. The NEEC is also looking at other initiatives to improve energy efficiency in the industry, building and transport sectors. 1.45 pm

With regard to Concept Plan 2001 and the Singapore Green Plan 2012, the Concept Plan 2001 allows more land to be used as green spaces and for further greening of our urbanised landscape. With this increased vegetation, the heat island effect will be reduced. The Singapore Green Plan 2012 complements the Concept Plan by encouraging building designs that make use of better natural ventilation, and hence reduce the need for air-conditioning and, therefore, more efficient use of energy and less use of energy within the city. The Singapore Green Plan 2012 and the Concept Plan 2001 complement each other in our efforts to reduce the temperature within the city.

Dr Teo also brought up a very important point, that of green consumerism, that each and every one of us, as a consumer, has an impact on the environment by our choice of lifestyle and the consumer products we use. While some amount of official incentives may be necessary to start off some green product programmes, they are not sustainable and cannot be a permanent solution. ENV has, therefore, been emphasising awareness-building and public education to develop a more environmentally-conscious population. Changing mindsets and behaviour, however, takes time, and requires a comprehensive outreach programme that is sustained over the years.

ENV has embarked on an aggressive programme to build a more environmentally-conscious population. This includes making environmental education a life-long process, organising public campaigns such as the annual Clean and Green Week in November, and sustaining the awareness through commemorating international events, such as Earth Day and World Environment Day. We are also promoting community involvement through activities organised by CDCs and grassroots organisations.

In addition to these on-going programmes on education, public campaigns and community and grassroots activities, ENV has also launched the Singapore Green Labelling Scheme (SGLS) in 1992. The scheme is administered by the Singapore Environmental Council (SEC). The initial scheme, however, met with limited success. There were several reasons for this. One reason is that many consumers were not aware why a product, as labelled, is considered green. Another reason is that not many consumers were interested in green products, as they were not environmentally-conscious. Consequently, in the past, there was a low demand for green products. Hence, manufacturers were not keen to apply for the label. But ENV and SEC have since worked together to improve the scheme. One way is to provide useful information on the label that would assist consumers in making a choice. For example, the energy label for airconditioners and refrigerators was launched in April 2002. The label provides energy-efficiency information to consumers. This enhancement has met with more interest from the distributors of airconditioners and refrigerators than the old SGL scheme. ENV and the SEC will be extending the energy label to other appliances, such as washing machines and dishwashers.

Ultimately, whether the revamped Green Labelling Scheme will succeed will depend on each and every one of us. Manufacturers will respond only if there is a demand for green products. If all of us, as consumers, can make a deliberate choice to support green products, manufacturers will take the cue. This is a concrete way for all of us to demonstrate our support and do our bit for the environment.

Sir, I now come to the issue which Mdm Ho brought up, about home-based small food businesses. My Ministry does not allow food intended for sale to the general public to be prepared and cooked at home for public health reasons. The concerns are that food prepared and cooked at home may not be done under strict hygiene conditions at all times, and that the persons handling food in the home may not meet our public health requirements. All persons who handle food intended for sale to the general public have to be medically screened. They also have to pass a course on food handling before they can be registered.

Unlike licensed food establishments where their premises are readily open for inspection by our Environment health officers, food preparation and cooking in a residential premise are done within closed doors. This makes inspection and enforcement of public health requirements very difficult. In comparison, a licensed food shop can be inspected at any time the food shop is open for business. No licence, however, is required if a person cooks for his or her friend or neighbours. Such private arrangements are not prohibited.

Sir, like Mdm Ho, I am sympathetic with those facing difficulty in finding employment. ENV will not be intrusive and regulate private cooking arrangements among friends, family members or neighbours. However, everyday, many Singaporeans, foreigners and tourists eat out at public establishments with little fear of food poisoning. This is due to the vigilance of our public health inspectors and the high standards of hygiene that they ensure. From a public health point of view, ENV does not intend to allow food prepared for sale to the general public to be done in the closed environment of the home. This is to ensure public health safety.

The Chairman: Let me remind Members that if they make long rambling speeches, we will not be able to finish this Head within the stipulated time. That goes for all other Heads too. Mr Ang Mong Seng.

Mr Ang Mong Seng (Hong Kah): (In Mandarin): Mr Chairman, we have altogether 124 hawker centres in Singapore, 32 come under the purview of ENV and the remainder under the control of HDB. However, the administration of each hawker centre involves three authorities - the Housing and Development Board for rentals, ENV for licensing and the town council for the collection of maintenance fees and other charges. So, even for a small hawker stall, we have to involve three departments and the administrative costs become unnecessarily high.

This could lead to much confusion for the hawkers. When something goes wrong, they do not know where to go for remedy. A stallholder told me that when the hawker inspector came to check on his stall, he found that there was something wrong with the water pipes. The inspector told him that this matter was under the HDB, and he was referred to the HDB. When he went to the HDB, he was told that this was a maintenance and repair matter and it should come under the charge of the town council. He went to the town council only to be told that the piping problem was within the stall, and that it was the stallholder's own responsibility to rectify it. I had to step in to get the town council to look into it. The problem was resolved within four hours.

I feel that this kind of problem would not have happened if the hawker centres come under one centralised Ministry, ie, ENV. ENV should be the main coordinator, and handle all matters relating to the hawker centres, such as issuing of licence, collection of licence fees, rentals, maintenance charges and looking after other related problems. In this way, we can have a one-stop service centre under the Ministry of the Environment to administer all hawker centres.

Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay: Sir, on upgrading of hawker centres. The hawker centre is one of the places that provides affordable food for Singaporeans, in particular for the low-income people. Watching the trend of prices charged by hawkers, prices are rising. This is partly due to the relatively high prices charged by the stallholders in HDB eating houses, and partly due to the increase in rentals due to tendered hawker stalls.

Upgrading, no doubt, will improve the ambience and comfort level of hawker centres. With millions of dollars spent, it is also natural to expect the Government to recover part of the costs through an increase in rental. The amount of rental increase depends very much on the cost of upgrading. I have seen some of the upgraded hawker centres - expensive wall tiles with graphic pattern designs being used. I have also seen some of the conceptual designs. I have seen fanciful roofs and 3-dimensional roof structures have been adopted. All these will lead to an increase in the cost of construction, and may also lead to difficulty maintaining these high 3-D structures. Ultimately, these factors contribute to an increase in rentals and maintenance costs.

I would like to ask the Minister what action has been taken at the design stage to keep the cost of construction and upgrading of hawker centres and their subsequent maintenance costs low. Does the Ministry plan to increase rentals after the upgrading and, if so, what plans does the Ministry have to keep food prices as low as possible in the upgraded hawker centres?

The Chairman: Dr Amy Khor is not here. Mr Ang Mong Seng.

Mr Ang Mong Seng: (In Mandarin): Sir, during my overseas trips, I had occasions to visit their public toilets. I found that the public toilets in Korea and Japan were very clean and the standard of hygiene there was exemplary. I would say they are the best in the world. However, in China, it is an entirely different story. I was told that the ladies had to carry an umbrella whenever they went to the toilet, because there were no doors at the toilets. However, in preparation for the Olympic Games 2008, they are sprucing up all the amenities, public toilets included. I suppose by 2008, their public toilets will be as exemplary as those in Korea and Japan now.

In Singapore, much has to be done to our public toilets too. Years back, when I was in charge of the Island-wide Cleanest Estates Contest, I found that some public toilets were quite clean, but overall the standard of cleanliness and hygiene left much to be desired. If we aspire to become a gracious society, we should improve the overall image of our public toilets.

May I ask the Minister what is the progress in the upgrading of our public toilets. As for the toilets in the coffeeshops, some may say that it is the responsibility of the coffeeshop owners to keep their toilets clean. However, the fact is that the use of these toilets is not confined to the customers and staff of the coffeeshops. Members of the public also make use of these toilets, as coffeeshops are public areas and are accessible to members of the public. They are de facto, public toilets, and should be included in the upgrading programme.

May I suggest that we have a Public Toilet Cleanliness Contest, so as to encourage the managers of these public toilets to keep the toilets under their charge clean and hygienic, and to contribute to our strive to become a gracious society.

Mr Lim Swee Say: Sir, Prof. Low Seow Chay touched on the issue of upgrading of hawker centres. I want to assure Prof. Low that we are fully aware that upgrading of our hawker centres is a very expensive exercise. It will cost the Government about $420 million over 10 years. In batch one of the programme, the total cost came up to about $120 million. For the second batch, the budget is in the region of $50-$70 million. Therefore, we are equally mindful, as Prof. Low is, on the need to keep the cost of upgrading to as low as possible.

Sir, I want to assure Prof. Low and this House that the ENV places emphasis of design basically on a few areas. Firstly, it is to improve ventilation; secondly, to improve the layout for better circulation; and, thirdly, where possible, to put in some handicap-friendly features. At the same time, we try to make the seating arrangements as innovative as possible, so that groups of different sizes can sit together.

On the whole, we have been able to contain the costs of upgrading. So far, based on all the tender returns that we are getting, I would say that we are able to derive some savings from our budgetted sum. Notwithstanding what I have said, I can assure Prof. Low that we will continue to be mindful of the need to contain the costs of upgrading. 2.00 pm

Prof. Low also made the point that upgrading may lead to higher rentals, and that higher rentals may lead to higher cost of hawker food. I want to clarify that this is indeed not the case. Yes, we spend a lot of money on upgrading the centres, but it is not our intention to recover the costs of upgrading through rental adjustments. Just a few weeks ago, I was at the Adam Road Hawker Centre. It costs us $1.7 million to upgrade the centre. But at the end of the day, the rental adjustment for the stallholders there was only $1 per day. In other words, if we were to try to recover the cost of upgrading through rental adjustment, I work out that we will need something like more than 100 years before we can recover the cost of upgrading. This is not our intention. The whole purpose of upgrading is to ensure that Singaporeans will continue to have a place where they can have good food at affordable prices in a conducive setting.

Prof. Low asked whether there is anything we are going to do to ensure that prices at the hawker centres will not go up. Sir, this is an open market. What I can assure the House is that, under the ENV and HDB hawker centres, there are altogether 20,000 hawker stalls. In other words, we should let market forces work to the fullest. If there is any stall that charges higher prices, I would encourage the consumers to stay away from such stalls. On the whole, I would say that the upgrading programme has progressed quite smoothly. By the year 2004-2005, we aim to upgrade one in three of the hawker centres.

Mr Ang Mong Seng asked whether ENV would consider taking over the function of HDB in managing all the hawker centres in Singapore. HDB and ENV do work very closely together. But I do see the point brought up by Mr Ang Mong Seng. What I intend to do is to discuss with my colleague at the Ministry of National Development to see whether we can work together, as suggested by Mr Ang, to provide a one-stop service to the hawker centres.

Let me go on to the cut on public toilets. Mr Ang asked what is the progress on the upgrading of public toilets. Today, the National Parks, SMRT, bus interchanges, hawker centres and HDB together manage about 1,100 public toilets. Out of these 1,100 public toilets, 800 of them are found in the coffeeshops. Over the years, these agencies I mentioned earlier have implemented a systematic programme to upgrade these public toilets. For example, for ENV and HDB, we have upgraded 52 public toilets at hawker centres at a cost of $5.5 million. Over time, all the public toilets in all the hawker centres will be upgraded under the Hawker Centre Upgrading Programme. Likewise, for the National Parks and SMRT, they also have a formal programme to upgrade their public toilets.

However, there is one area where we do not have a formal programme. These are the public toilets at the coffeeshops. As I mentioned, there are about 800 of them. These coffeeshops, as pointed out by Mr Ang, are used not just by the customers, but also by the members of the public. I therefore fully agree with him that it is useful for the Government to see how we can speed up the upgrading of these public toilets at the coffeeshops. I am happy to say that we have decided to launch a new upgrading scheme known as the Toilet Upgrading Scheme (TUP). Under TUP, the Government will co-pay 50% of the cost of upgrading of these coffeeshop toilets up to a maximum of $5,000 for each toilet. This would be made available to all the 800 toilets in the coffeeshops, both rental as well as those that have been purchased. This will cost the Government a total budget of $4 million. We think it is a worthwhile investment. This scheme will start in September.

Let me conclude by saying that it is insufficient to just upgrade the toilets, because at the end of the day, it is very important that we take good care of these toilets as well. We intend to mount a 3P partnership programme. We are going to work with the Restaurants Association of Singapore, the Coffeeshop Association, the Singapore Tourism Board, the National Parks Board, grassroots organisations and so on, to heighten public awareness on the need for clean public toilets. At the same time, we are going to improve the standard and quality of public toilet cleaning. We are now working with the Centre for Cleaning Technology, as well as SPRING Singapore. We are going to train all the cleaners of public toilets to make sure that they will have the proper technique and equipment when they clean these public toilets.

Last but not least, Mr Ang suggested that we should have an island-wide competition on the "Cleanest Public Toilet". Again, I think it is a very good idea. Since Mr Ang is the man behind the island-wide "Cleanest HDB Estate Competition", I encourage him to organise this competition for the "Cleanest Public Toilet". I assure him that ENV will give him our fullest support.

Let me conclude by referring to what Mr Ang said about China. I was in China briefly in December on a holiday in Beijing. I asked a taxi-driver, "Why is your public toilet so clean now?" He mentioned the same reason - they are gearing up for the Olympic 2008. He said, "Look, our leaders told us that a country with dirty toilets has no future." Sir, in the context of Singapore, I would say that a country with dirty toilets has no pride. I hope all Singaporeans would take pride in having clean public toilets in Singapore. Our aim is to turn these dirty public toilets a thing of the past. Therefore, your aim will help!

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed (Aljunied): Sir, I am often reminded that as an MP and Mayor, one must keep close to the ground. I agree. But that is not the only reason why I have this cut on cemeteries.

Sir, it is a serious matter of life and death. It is laden with emotions and thus needs sensitive handling. Nevertheless, to moderate emotions with realities, allow me to quote what Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew said sometime back when asked about the reuse of the Kampong Java cemetery land. SM Lee said, "We have done enough for the dead. Let's worry for the living". Today, we have the KK Women and Children Hospital on the same site, delivering more lives and healthcare for the children.

Sir, I would like the Minister to explain ENV's thinking, programmes and efforts at assuring sufficient burial grounds, what plans ENV has to meet that need in land-scarce Singapore. I gather that ENV and MUIS officers have made study trips to a few countries outside Singapore. What are the findings? Will there be any new innovations introduced to make burial better, cleaner and more suitable for Singapore's need to recycle burial grounds? I do not know whether the Minister wants to call it Cemetery Upgrading Programme (CUP).

Meanwhile, I hope the Environment Minister would also take a look at the present cemetery ground in Pusara Aman, maybe on a rainy day, to see how messy it can be and see what can be done to give it a decent look there.

Finally, right now, ENV is undertaking a major cemetery exhumation exercise at Bidadari. I believe that the contract was offered on a tender basis. Has the Ministry taken sufficient measures to ensure that the sensitivities involved are factored? What are they? I would like to urge ENV to take all measures and steps necessary to make sure that sensitivities are taken care of during the exhumation exercise. I also learn that the contract for providing of columbariums is also done on a tender basis. Is ENV confident that such a method would not lead to escalating prices so much so people might then say, "even to die, not cheap".

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang): Sir, it was reported in the press that the latest attempt of ENV to solve the problem of dengue fever is to breed one new breed of mosquitoes to kill or neutralise the dangerous breed that will cause dengue fever. My concern is: how confident is ENV in ensuring that this initiative is 100% error-free? Is the Minister sure that the bio-science laboratory responsible for the project will not mistakenly unleash another type of mosquito that is more deadly than what we already have here?

I would also like to know whether the new breed of mosquito bites and sucks blood like other types of mosquitoes. If so, when the new breed of mosquitoes is released and residents complain of mosquito bites, what should we tell them? Are we to tell them that they are healthy and friendly love bites, so never mind?

Sir, despite my concern, it is a quite a bold idea. If the initiative is proven successful and safe here, perhaps, we can export the new breed of mosquitoes to make some money and maybe develop ourselves into a regional mosquito hub.

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed: Sir, I hate to be a pest. My cut is still on mosquitoes. I would like to compliment the Ministry of the Environment for being very proactive. In fact, even before I raise the cut, my question has been answered. You can see from the Straits Times, they did a very good job, about the $100 million war on infectious diseases and bio-terrorism. More than that, they even have a very good expose about what has been done to battle this problem about the mosquitoes and other pests.

I would like to just briefly talk about more bites with a hotter weather. I think that is still a problem with El Nino and we can expect a lot more mosquitoes. In fact, some residents are exasperated with this problem to the point that each time when I go on house visits, I always get feedback that the children have been bitten by mosquitoes. In fact, one resident has even sent me a collection of about 200 mosquitoes. It looks like a piece of artwork. But this is just to show how desperate they were. I have given this feedback to my colleague, Mayor Othman, and the ENV apparently has acted on it. They do act fast. But what can ENV do to help alleviate this problem, especially when the weather gets hotter and the El Nino strikes?

Dr Balaji Sadasivan: Sir, I thank Mr Zainul and Mr Low for their questions. I will begin first with the issue dealing with the dead.

Sir, in land-scarce Singapore, both the living and the dead compete for available scarce land. We estimate that the cemetery at Chua Chu Kang can last up to 2064. However, as this is the only cemetery that we have, we are concerned that we need to find ways to extend the lifespan of the cemetery. I am pleased to say that we have found a solution, that we call the Modular Burial System (MBS).

The MBS is a system where pre-fabricated rectangular concrete crypts are constructed, forming a grid. Each rectangular crypt is fitted with a concrete lid. When the time comes for burial, the lid for the crypt is lifted to reveal the empty chamber below. The coffin or body is then lowered into the crypt and the crypt is filled with earth. After that, the lid is put back in place before it is covered with a final layer of earth and turf.

We have consulted MUIS and a few other religious organisations and they have found the MBS to be an acceptable system. The MBS makes better use of the land for burial. With the MBS, the cemetery land can last up to 2130, an extension of more than 60 years. We agree with Mr Zainul that exhumation must be done properly. We will consult MUIS and other religious and ethnic groups to ensure that cultural and religious sensitivities are taken into consideration in carrying out exhumation. Exhumation would be carried out individually, with dignity and respect.

Currently, for the exhumation of Muslim graves, the agency requiring the exhumation, for example, HDB, will appoint MUIS to take charge of the exhumation. ENV will also do the same when exhumation at Chua Chu Kang cemetery commences.

With regard to the problem of mosquitoes, because we are situated in the tropics where the weather is warm and humid, we will always have mosquitoes around us. We cannot get rid of them, but we can keep their population size down so that the impact, both as a nuisance and as a vector, will be minimised.

In dealing with mosquitoes, we must realise that we are dealing with an ecological situation out there. When we reduce the population of one type of mosquito, it is possible that another species of mosquito, which previously would not be able to thrive, would now increase in numbers. There are two species of mosquitoes that bother us in Singapore, the Aedes and the Culex mosquitoes. The Aedes breeds in clean water inside and outside homes, for example, in vases, roof gutters, pots, plates and litter thrown into bushes. The Culex breeds in dirtier waters, like choked drains. 2.15 pm

The only way to keep mosquito population down is to make sure they have little opportunity to breed. Using chemicals to kill the mosquitoes will not help if the sources of breeding remain present.

ENV's Vector Control Team, together with pest control companies engaged by ENV, carries out daily surveillance in areas where the vector population is known to be high. We have good ground surveillance system that is linked to our geographical information system (GIS), which will tell us, on a real-time basis, where the build-up of vectors are taking place. However, ENV will need the help of everyone, from the residents, especially those who live in landed properties, to management agents, including Town Councils and, contractors doing construction work, to prevent mosquitoes from breeding within their premises.

Sir, regarding the concern about new types of mosquitoes, our scientists are doing research on the various types of mosquitoes and their genetic labelling so that we can better understand how the mosquitoes spread from one region to another, and what factors allow one population to increase, while another decreases. I can assure Members of Parliament that we have no intention of creating new species of mosquitoes in our laboratories that we are going to release into the environment. That is something that we are not doing.

The Chairman: Yes, Mr Zainul. We are running out of time, Mr Zainul.

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed: Mr Chairman, if Mr Ang Mong Seng is not going to crow on the other cut, I would like to inform the Minister that he did not answer my question about the tender system.

Dr Balaji Sadasivan: In general, Sir, the tender system is the best and most efficient way of deciding how a project is to be done. If the contractor meets the tender specifications, then we would have no problem with it. If there is any specific problem with the contractor, Mr Zainul can bring it up with our Ministry, and we will look into it.

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, I wish to thank the Minister and the Minister of State for their comprehensive replies. I am very impressed by the performance target set by the Ministry, and I am very confident that the Minister will bring in more lionesses to safeguard the interest of Singapore. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Ang Mong Seng: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head L of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code LC 1500.

(In Mandarin): Sir, my cut is only for $10, so I am only going to ask five very simple questions, $2 per question. First, does the Minister know how many crows we have in Singapore? Second, the Ministry of the Environment has engaged professional shooters to cull crows. How many have they culled so far? Third, many residents complained that some elderly people were attacked by the crows. Is there any plan to prevent that from happening? Fourth, is there any plan to stop the propagation of crows? And fifth, I was told that some crows flew from Johore Bahru to Singapore in the day and then fly back to Johore Bahru at night. Is there any plan to stop them from flying in?

Dr Balaji Sadasivan: Sir, I shall be brief. First, the crow population in Singapore today is about 120,000. Second, we have a culling rate of about 60,000 crows a year. In the last three months we have culled the same number of crows as the whole of last year, and so our culling programme is extremely successful. We hope to bring down the crow population eventually to about 10,000 in Singapore. Crows do not normally attack people. They may do so only if provoked, or they perceive a threat to their nestlings. So we do not think that crow attacks are really a big problem.

The Chairman: Mr Ang, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Mr Ang Mong Seng: I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $456,276,240 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $674,608,900 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head Q -

The Chairman: Head Q, Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. Amendment No. (1), Mr Seng Han Thong.

Mr Seng Han Thong (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head Q of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100.

Sir, investing in cultural capital is MITA's new vision. Arts is now viewed as investment capital as opposed to consumption. In short, arts is not just for arts sake, but also for business sake. Any concept which promises job creation and economic growth is, of course, welcome in these difficult times.

I must congratulate MITA for its creativity in extending and repackaging the Renaissance City Report by adding a business element, so that expenditure in the arts is increasingly seen as an investment, something that will reap economic rewards. However, I must say that a close scrutiny will show that both the cultural capital and the Renaissance proposal bear similarities.

The three tenets of the cultural capital are:

(1) Creative cluster;

(2) Creative people and workforce; and

(3) A connected nation.

The fact that a creative cluster engaged in traditional and the fine arts can become a potential growth engine for our economy has already been recognisd in the Renaissance City Report. "Creative people and workforce" was "Renaissance Singaporeans", and "Connected nation" was "Renaissance Nation and Society". What is new is perhaps the new emphasis on the sector of applied arts, ie, design, media and advertising. When fused with artistic innovation, it is hoped that we can come out with new products and services.

Sir, to devise such a thorough and far-reaching proposal must have required a fair bit of time and energy. I am sure the ideas behind them are sound, but why two reports when one will do?

In the same vein, we can allocate resources to push through the reforms envisioned under the Renaissance City Report rather than putting our entire arts community through another round of brainstorming and vision seeking. On this note, I would like to add a few ideas.

First, the Green Paper should argue for the increase of funding for arts. I know that in these difficult times it is hard to argue for more money to spend on arts, something which many see as a luxury. However, as the Ministry has already acknowledged that spending is now a form of investment in the economy, we have no reason not to spend more to stimulate growth through arts spending.

Second, Sir, in order to introduce arts at all levels, we have to start at our education system, to build an arts loving society. I am happy to note that we will have an arts school soon. Let us dare to dream of an arts university in the future.

Funds for the Arts Education Programme (AEP) have now increased to reach 50% of the student population. But, from what I know, AEP, in most schools, amounts to merely sponsoring tickets for students.

Of course, parents also have to change their mindset. Parents want their children to be a doctor over a violinist, a lawyer over a writer, a teacher over an actor. Our children are told that this is a pragmatic world, one cannot live on the arts, keep it only as a hobby - as the Chinese say, er bu si, chi bu bao.

Sir, arts education must have a bigger role to play in the life of our young, otherwise we can forget about the creative cluster of a cultural capital vision. It will never create 5% of our GDP.

Finally, Sir, there must be a sizable arts industry in order to provide sufficient job opportunities. Some, like the film industry, involve high overhead costs. This is where funding comes in. Hence, we come a full circle. If arts is to be seen as an investment, we must have not more visions and reports but a sound and solid business plan. We need to have a clear direction of where we are heading, where are the returns we expect on our investments, and how we can exhibit.

Sir, I am not saying that everything must reduce itself to dollars and cents. Instead, what I want to see are implementation plans, and the enhancements to what is already a very good blueprint.

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, I support MITA's vision to develop Singapore into a creative and connected place. Arts and culture can definitely play a significant role in the economic and social development of Singapore. We must aim to develop Singapore into a culture hub. It should also, at the same time, attract more tourists to Singapore. Cities like Paris and Edinburgh are good examples of places which have developed the arts and cultural capital to boost economic activities and community bonding.

Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions:

(1) What are the plans to develop cultural capital in Singapore; and

(2) What are the key performance indicators to measure cultural capital?

Miss Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, I was a little disappointed to note that the budget allocation to MITA stood still at 1.5% for Financial Year 2002. It is a moderate increase of $20.94 million to $425.53 million, in absolute terms, but nevertheless, I was hoping to see more.

Many may ask, in such time when many face unemployment and economic hardship, is there room for arts and culture? The answer is a resounding "Yes." Perhaps, more so now, because it is in critical times like this that we need to delve deeper into ourselves and bring out the intrinsic value of our rich cultural capital from within, so as to achieve a breakthrough. Let me illustrate my point with an example.

Sir, how much is a watch worth? It can be $10, $100 or tens of thousands, depending on who created it, which artist has his hands on it, and which musician puts a tune in it. In the 1980s, when the famous Swiss watch-making industry was facing laggard sales and serious threats from high-tech, lower-cost Japanese products, a man called Mr Nicholas G Hyak took an ordinary mass-produced watch and got a few artists to exhibit their works on it. He said, "We have to give Swatch a warm heart and soul so that people would love it." As such, within a short span of five years, Swatch, a plastic watch company, became the largest watch making company in the world.

Capitalising on cultural diversity of a nation brings a breath of fresh air into the watch economy, and put a piece of Switzerland onto many people's wrist. In fact, it has got a back-end added value of promoting tourism in Switzerland as well.

Singapore can do the same too. In fact, Singapore has a very rich cultural capital. With the diversity of race, language, religion and a highly cosmopolitan city, we are in a good position to tap on our cultural capital to give us an edge in the competitive world. A few examples are the Banyan Tree, and Creative Technology who has recently created the ProdiKey. These are all very good examples of combining arts with music and culture into traditional and technological platforms. As such, my questions are:

(1) What are some of the programmes that we have put in place to tap on our cultural capital so as to bring this diversity into our technology, and into our products?

(2) Is this funding sufficient as proportionate to the value that it can bring to our economy?

(3) Is this funding sufficient as proportionate to the role that it plays in making Singapore a vibrant cosmopolitan, as well as it being a social glue? If I could coin the 5Cs in cultural capital, the 5Cs would stand for:

(a) Creativity - which is the power to invent and innovate;

(b) Connectivity - which is the power to connect people on a heart and soul level;

(c) Capability - which is helping all our artists, our other talents to come in and contribute to our economy;

(d) Competitiveness - because it makes an ordinary product extraordinary, it makes it unique and gives us the competitive edge; and

(e) Community - because it brings together groups of people with different talents to communicate with each other to create new things from this collaboration.

Last, but not least, I would also ask, as some of my colleagues have asked, what are some of the yardsticks that would be used to measure the success of germinating this cultural capital, both from the economic and social perspectives. I would like to add that we should bear in mind that arts and culture, or the germination of a cultural capital itself takes time to come to fruition. And, as such, the measurement used to determine the ROI from such investments should be different from that of mere statistics alone. 2.30 pm

Mr Zainudin Nordin (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, as we grow and mature as a nation, we have to look at our development in a wider perspective than just in the economic sense. There is an increasing need for us to grow and develop our cultural capital. The strategy to grow our cultural capital is laudable and long overdue. We must understand that many used to consider the arts and culture as a luxury. This view is passe, and there is a need for a major mindset change. We must take the opportunity in our process of remaking Singapore to make this shift. We must view the arts and culture as an integral part of our development and growth.

Our cultural heritage is rich and multi-faceted. We should harness this vast potential and exploit it to our advantage. The investment and resources that we allocate to the arts and culture should not be seen as wastage. We have to look at the long-term rewards, and the intangible returns, ie, a more culturally rich and vibrant Singapore. We need, over the long term, to portray Singapore not only as a place of economic excellence but also as a centre for artistic excellence.

To recapitulate what was said by Dr Ng Eng Hen yesterday, the congregation of brains and minds would attract investments. I would further add that congregation of brains and minds in a vibrant and artistically and culturally rich environment will be ever sweeter for investors.

In conclusion, in view of the growing importance of this aspect of our country's development, I would encourage the Minister for Finance to allocate more resources to MITA. Over time, we should accord more funds to the Ministry than the 0.3% of GDP as it is today.

Dr Tan Boon Wan (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, we are now in the process of remaking Singapore. I would therefore like to join my fellow colleagues to ask the Minister if he would share his vision on the role of arts and culture in the strategy to remake Singapore. In particular, we are searching for competitive advantages for a changed world, and here we must exploit all our strengths. Our arts and cultural heritage does not need to be "nice to have". Art and cultural centres of the world have exploited arts and culture as a source of growth. For example, London and Paris have used arts and culture to lure both tourists and talents. We can do the same. I would therefore like the Minister, in his reply, to address, if possible, the role of arts and culture as a strategic tool for our economic development and competitiveness.

Mr Loh Meng See (Jalan Besar): Sir, the other day, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong spoke about attempts by the Government to try and uplift the morale of Singaporeans. So far, in Parliament, the only thing that we hear are about the downturn of the economy, the doom and the gloom. Really, arts and culture should be for all seasons. When times are good, there are reasons for us to celebrate. When times are not so good, arts and culture can indeed uplift the mood of Singaporeans. Therefore, I would suggest that the Ministry take a contrarian view as far as the budget provision is concerned. If we think that the economy is not likely to be good, in fact, we should give more money to the Ministry, so that there would be the enhanced outreach programmes to the people. In fact, in the budget provision, the outreach programmes have plateaued. I do not see efforts being made to enhance these outreach programmes.

We remain ambitious to achieve the middle class society. I think, as we attempt to more forward in our economic ladder and with a better educated population, two-thirds of Singaporeans are receiving tertiary education. The intangibles become important. Singaporeans are no longer materialistic. They are very interested in the things of the spirit and the soul, and arts and culture become very important. Singaporeans are well travelled. They are exposed to top displays and performances. We are also talking about attracting top talent to Singapore. So it is very, very important for a society like ours that we have this wholesome living, this quality of life that we are looking at.

The Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts is really a very young Ministry. It is only about 10 years old. It is a very long journey. I think we have made very good progress, and we should encourage the Ministry to press on.

Sir, I just want to ask the Minister about the balance of the three sectors, of Government, private and people sectors. I believe too much is imposed on the private sector to provide the funds. I think the Government can do more, because we have not developed the patronage system as yet. So it is not easy to get the private sector or even the people sector to cough up the money. Maybe the Government should put as much seed money as possible.

The other thing is the question of job creation opportunities. In times where jobs are difficult to come by, this is an area where jobs could be created.

Finally, Sir, I have a query about Capitol Cinema. It is in my constituency. When Capitol Cinema was closed, it was intended to become a theatre. It has been mothballed for a long while. One of the problems with eviction is that when the place becomes empty, the whole place gets hollowed out. And that is always the problem when there is lack of synchronisation between the party that acquires Government buildings and filling up the place. I am waiting to see when Capitol Cinema will come back to life again.

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, arts and heritage play an important role in helping to build a cohesive and gracious society. It strengthens the sense of belonging of our people and enhances their quality of life. As a young country, Singapore must chart clear directions to promote arts and heritage. Sir, I would like to urge the Government to provide more resources for MITA to work closely with community-based organisations to organise more arts and heritage programmes for our people.

Sir, I also like to ask the Minister the following questions:

(1) What is the masterplan for the arts and heritage programme in Singapore?

(2) What is the strategy to promote arts and heritage to our people?

(3) How much resources are allocated for arts and heritage programmes?

Miss Penny Low: Sir, I was delighted to hear during one of the briefings for the GPC for MITA, that they have an Arts Everywhere programme. I was delighted because the Arts Everywhere programme means that it will enable everyone to appreciate and to partake in the process of enjoying the arts itself. However, I would like to also ask whether it is just arts everywhere, or is it arts everywhere, arts everyone and arts every time as well.

Sir, to inculcate a nation that breathes and lives art, the art and heritage initiatives have to permeate every strata of the society, making its presence felt everywhere, lives in everyone and present every time. To quote Prime Minister Goh in his National Day Rally speech last year, he said:

'In new Singapore, there will be abundant opportunities for Singaporeans and global talent to work and do well. New Singapore will be one of the world's finest most livable cities. Arts, theatres, museum, music and sports will flourish.'

To quote him again:

'Our city will not only have that, but also the richness of diversity. But above all, Singapore will be a home for Singaporeans.'

As such, I would like to ask MITA if they would consider extending their Arts Everywhere programme on a faster scale, as well as beyond a few centralised locations, beyond that of arts that is appreciated only by the elite, and expand beyond just a few major events like the Arts Festival or the Womad. What initiatives are there to bring arts and culture to the heartlands, and what funds are available for community-in-partnership programmes? I hope there will be more initiatives and at a quick pace that could be generated within the next year.

Ms Indranee Rajah (Tanjong Pagar): Sir, I was very much encouraged to read in the newspapers the other day that MITA is pursuing the concept of cultural capital, ie, the synergy between arts and enterprise. I really do think that this is long overdue, because for too long, the arts have been regarded as the poor cousin to sciences in Singapore. When we were a developing country, we could understand the need to push science and technology. But I think that concept, in the present changing global economy, is a little outdated, because the arts does have a tremendous economic value. In this regard, I really think that the budget for MITA should be increased.

I see arts not just as something for arts sake. I am a firm believer in arts for arts sake, but the problem is that I do not think that artists can live off talent and fresh air alone. They obviously need funding. They obviously need a demand for the arts and the creative sciences.

I was wondering if the Ministry could comment on whether it sees Singapore as a potential design centre for the region, because there is a big demand for design in furniture, handphones, computers. The Scandinavians are especially good at this, but we do not have a reputation for this in Southeast Asia. So, I was wondering whether Singapore could be developed as a design centre.

The second area is in fashion. Fashion, obviously, is often regarded as frivolous - girls' stuff. But the thing is that it is actually a multi-billion dollar industry. And I do not think that, in Singapore, we have actually fully tapped into this. New York, London, Paris, Milan are fashion capitals of the world, but not a lot of the manufacturing goes on there. Their value is actually as a design centre for fashion and, of course, they outsource the manufacturing. I was wondering whether it would be possible to develop Singapore as a fashion centre of the East, something which Thailand is aiming to do, but perhaps we can pip them to it. And whether, possibly, we could have something like a weekend fashion street to allow young designers to display their designs and sell them. The reason why I say this is because we should not put them in shopping centres where the rents are high. Let them go to somewhere where the rents are relatively low. They can sell their designs and the acid test of whether their design is good or not is whether people will actually buy it. And this is something where tourists can go as well, because the demand is not always for branded goods, but sometimes for street fashion - things which are considered as edgy and funky.

Finally, I would like to ask the Ministry what are the plans to develop Singapore as a cultural hub, certainly in terms of concerts and performances. Again, this has an economic reason behind it. If we want to attract MNCs and expatriates to Singapore, one of the reasons why they might choose Singapore over another country is when they look at lifestyle. If they had to make a choice between Singapore and Hong Kong, if all else remains equal, if we are able to offer a better lifestyle in terms of arts, performances, concerts, we might have an edge. Sir, I would be very grateful if the Minister could answer that.

The Acting Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (Mr David T. E. Lim): Sir, may I first thank Mr Seng Han Thong and all the other Members who have just spoken for their enthusiastic support for the arts, especially for the call for more money. Perhaps they could repeat that another day when the Minister for Finance is in the House.

Sir, Members have pointed out that the arts has economic value. Indeed, our economy has changed, and we are now restructuring the economy and, likewise, the arts is at a turning point. What I would like to do, before I answer the specific suggestions that have been raised, is to sketch out MITA's new vision for the arts. To get the most value out of the arts, we need to have a new way of looking at the arts. But this is a difficult task to do, because many of us look at the arts as something of an indulgence, something that is for the well-heeled, the rich and those who have the time to spend. 2.45 pm

Sir, to help me illustrate this point, I brought along a piece of unusual art. If I may, I will hold it up for Members to see. At first glance, this is a very ordinary picture. It is a picture of rows of flower baskets. But this is no ordinary picture. This is a stereogram. Stereograms were all the rage several years ago, all over the world. You see, Sir, within this picture, there is a hidden picture, and this is a picture that you can only see if you have the technique to look at it. It is a special technique. But if you know how, you will see that within this picture, right in the middle of it, is one big heart of flowers.

Sir, the problem is most of us are very frustrated when we look at this and do not see the heart. The problem is that we have been taught our whole lives, when we look at a picture, to focus on the picture. But we can only see this heart if we do not focus on this picture, but that we focus in front of it. I can cross my eyes like that [indicating] or focus my ends behind it. Like, if I held it up, I look at you while looking at the picture.

Sir, this is a fusion of arts and technology. But I bring up this illustration because unless we take a different way of looking at the arts, unless we move away from our notion that the arts is only for the well-to-do or is an indulgence, then we would not begin to see the potential that the arts has for the economy.

Now, let me share MITA's vision. Today, the arts plays three roles.

Firstly, the arts keeps alive our traditions and culture. Whether it is gamelan music, or Teochew opera, the arts connects us with our heritage, one of the "Cs" that Ms Penny Low brought up. We may not understand the opera, but watching it somehow gives us a sense of identity and belonging. Or as Ms Penny Low also said, the arts provides the "social glue" that keeps us together, and I think most of us accept this view of the arts.

Secondly, the arts is also important for the sheer enjoyment and wonder that it brings. It arouses our emotions, and stimulates our minds, and it makes us feel alive. The arts reminds us that there are some things that money cannot buy. It lifts our human spirit. It affirms our humanity. I think most of us would also agree with the second view.

Thirdly, even though the arts is important in and of itself, we can leverage on the power of the arts and especially the fusion of arts, business and technology to spur the growth of a creative economy and to make Singapore a vibrant city. The arts has economic value, but here, I think, is when not everybody agrees. It is true that artists are often driven solely by their passion. They may create images or play music only because they want to express their innermost thoughts and feelings. But whatever their motivations, their performances add life and zest to our community, and create economic benefits perhaps in more ways than they intend.

Here, let me expand on some of the ways that the arts can and do create economic value.

Firstly, as Dr Teo pointed out, the arts attracts tourists. This creates jobs for Singaporeans. For every dollar that a tourist spends on the arts, Singapore Tourism Board estimates that $1.80 is spent on other things, like food and accommodation. Can we do more? Yes, we can and will. NAC and STB collaborate closely to make the arts one of the attractions for tourists. The NAC estimates that up to 5% of the people who attended the Singapore Arts Festival last year were tourists. But that is just 5%, at most, a mere 8,000 people. So there is clearly potential here to do more. Our new performing arts centre - the Esplanade - Theatres on the Bay - which will be a world-class performing centre, will give us a big boost in this direction.

Secondly, the arts creates economic value because it makes talented people want to live in Singapore. And we all know that talents create jobs. Our first priority is to develop and retain our own home-grown talent. Offering them good jobs is one thing. But we also need to offer them interesting, exciting and fulfilling lifestyles. If through the arts, we can make Singapore the preferred choice of our own home-grown talents, then, I think we also have the chance of attracting international talents.

Thirdly, as many of the Members have said, the arts is also an industry. In developed economies, like the US and the UK, the creative and copyright industries, that is, activities such as advertising, film production, music, fashion and design, account for between 5-7% of the economy, and they are growing more rapidly than the total economy.

We should therefore build up our applied arts industry, as Mr Seng has urged. MITA, together with our economic and educational partners, will launch a new design initiative to develop our design capabilities. We would include fashion, as suggested by Ms Indranee, but we also want to go beyond fashion to exploit the value of design across all sectors of the economy. Media and content creation are also good industries to promote. We have a good chance of turning them into a new growth area if we can leverage on our strength in digital technologies such as animation and multi-media, and promote more companies to set up pre- and post-production facilities in Singapore. Perhaps, one day, we can get Harry Potter or Gandalf, or Yoda, to make a movie in Singapore, and to conjure the magic here. Or perhaps it will be a combination of Mulan and Lara Croft fighting the toy soldiers. The possibilities, of course, are endless.

Finally, the arts helps to make us a more creative economy. The arts shapes the way we think. It challenges us to think out-of-the-box, and develops new habits of looking at things from unusual perspectives. If we practise these new habits, then, over time we develop a more curious spirit and a more probing mind. Such a change will help promote original and critical thinking in every sector across the economy, so that creativity becomes our natural response to challenges.

Sir, the arts and culture have always been an essential part of our society, enhancing the quality of our lives and shaping the character of our communities. But, today, in a globally and sharply competitive world, the arts plays an important economic role.

So this, then, is our new vision for the arts:

That it adds vim and vitality to our city, drawing tourists, and keeping talents.

That it drives new industries and creates new jobs, and opens up new employment opportunities for Singaporeans.

Most of all, that it makes us a more creative people, equipped and energised to drive a creative economy.

Now, Sir, let me move on to address a number of specific issues Members have raised.

Mr Loh Meng See raises a pertinent point when he calls for the conservation of certain old buildings, like the Capitol Cinema, to retain our heritage. Such projects require the concerted effort of various agencies, such as the URA, STB and NHB, and also the private sector. I assure Mr Loh that these agencies will work actively to identify suitable uses for old buildings, including the ones owned by the Government.

Mr Zainudin wanted to know whether the money spent on the arts has brought the sought after benefits. Over the past two years, additional funds under the Renaissance City Project (or RCP) have enabled MITA to support more artistes and to bring the arts to wider audiences. Let me cite a few examples.

In FY 2000 and FY 2001, about $7.5 million and $8.3 million were disbursed through NAC's grant schemes respectively. This higher funding enabled our artistes to develop new works and also to perform overseas to gain wider exposure.

The funds also provide 31 individuals and 66 arts groups with affordable space to practise their art under the NAC's Arts Housing Programme.

Last year, Singapore hosted more than 4,500 art events - so on any one day, you've got more than 10 things you can do - attended by about 940,000 people at ticketed events - these are the highest figures we have ever seen in our local arts scene. Compared to 1997, the number of events has increased about 60% while audiences have grown 25%. This is not explosive growth, but it shows a steady and sustained interest in the arts. So we have made progress.

Mr Loh Meng See suggested that we work more closely with university and polytechnic students to tap them, both as audiences and artistes. I agree, but the process of exposure should start earlier. This is the aim of the joint MITA-MOE Arts Education Programme, which reaches out to primary, secondary, JC and ITE students.

Mr Seng Han Thong expressed his hope that everyone will develop an appreciation for the arts. I agree. To achieve this, we need to change people's perception that the arts is only for the rich or well-educated. We can only do this by giving more people a first-hand experience of the arts. Some arts groups are already doing quite a bit of this. The SSO performed in Tampines earlier this year, attracting about 2,000 people. Last month, STB's performance at West Coast Park drew 3,000 people.

But we can and will do more, and it will not plateau, as Mr Loh Meng See fears. MITA will launch an "Arts Everywhere" movement to bring the arts to everyone, every time, to make the arts a part of our everyday environment. We will partner agencies like HDB, CDCs and grassroots organisations, to bring more performances to neighbourhood parks and community halls. We will also develop mobile exhibits that can travel to the heartlands. Mr Seng will be glad to hear that many of these performances and programmes will be free. But if you want to buy a painting, you have to pay for it.

But, Sir, nothing is really for free. Ms Penny Low asked, given our new vision for the arts, and the contribution of the arts to the economy, whether we have set aside sufficient funds to promote and develop the arts.

The RCP funds have given the arts a boost, and helped to make Singapore a more "happening" place, indeed, a more funky place, as Ms Indranee said. With our new vision for the arts, and with the support of hon. Members of this House, MITA will continue to make a case for higher Government funding and for the arts to develop a creative economy, both in good times and bad.

But, at the same time, we need the continuing support of the private sector. The private sector has been supportive. But MITA will continue to develop new programmes to create a stronger partnership with them, to unlock the value of the arts in business, and to bring about mutual benefits.

Sir, quite a few Members have asked how we can measure the impact of the arts on our society and economy. We can measure the impact of the arts on our economy from the number of tourists, or the output of the creative and copyright industries, or the number of talented people who will make Singapore their home.

But we cannot measure in dollars and cents how the arts contributes to our social bonding. What value can we place on the Singapore heartbeat, or the happiness that we feel after listening to an orchestra play, or the sense of pride that beats within us when others speak well of our communities and our nation? These are priceless.

We need a new mindset towards the arts. Like seeing the big heart in that stereogram, this is easier said than done. But once you see it [indicating], once you are able to see the heart within the picture, you always see it. If we succeed, if we are able to have a paradigm shift in the minds of all Singaporeans, then Singaporeans will see that the arts contributes to the well-being of our society, as well as to the creation of new jobs, and greater competitiveness of our economy.

Then the arts will no longer be something that we have got to push people to support. But like the air it breathes, it will become an essential part of us. That is the vision of the arts that MITA will work towards.

The Chairman: Order. I propose to take the break now.

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.20 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 3.00 pm until 3.20 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.20 pm

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head Q (cont.) -

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang (Aljunied): Sir, MITA's vision is to develop Singapore into a global city for information, communication and the arts, while enhancing our Singaporean identity and multicultural heritage. I read from the Straits Times Life! section on 10th May that the Ministry has an interesting approach, that is, arts plus business plus technology provide the catalyst through cultural capital to build a creative and connected Singapore.

Sir, one of the key goals of the Ministry is to develop Singapore into a global media city. I must commend the Ministry for making significant progress in this area. Today, major media names, like BBC, Dow Jones and satellite broadcasters, like HBO, Walt Disney, ESPN and Discovery, all have facilities in Singapore. I would like to ask two questions. First, what is the Ministry's assessment of the progress of Singapore's development as a media city? Is the Ministry monitoring closely the developments in other countries? I am particularly impressed by the rapid growth of Dubai as a media hub in the Middle East. It launched a hi-tech, multimillion dollar Media City in January last year, as part of the plan to make Dubai the region's information and IT capital. Is there anything that the Ministry can learn from Dubai's rapid growth as a media hub?

Second, the issue of censorship. Does our censorship policy hinder our growth as a media hub? Let me cite one example. We have been trying to develop Singapore's film industry. Over the years, we have had hits like "Money No Enough" and "I Not Stupid". We also had some other misses. Recently, there was a critically acclaimed film "Lan Yu" that was shown at the Singapore International Film Festival. Granted that the film may not be seen by a wide audience here due to our censorship guidelines, my question is: can such films, however, be produced here for foreign audiences?

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, the partial liberalisation of the media industry has resulted in some form of competition. Some may argue that, as a result, the consumers have benefited. The choices for local newspapers, TV and radio have increased. Furthermore, with the availability of cable TV, we are all spoilt for choice.

My concern is the quality and standards of the local media. After all, the dust has settled. Can we really say that the partial liberalisation has achieved its objectives and, in turn, increased the standards and quality for the general benefit of the public?

Sir, Singapore aspires to be a media hub for the region. But, on the other hand, we also exercise a cautious and strict control over the media industry. I would like to ask the Minister to give his position on standards and highlight the regulations that are in place to ensure our media companies are not controlled by foreigners.

I totally agree with the Minister that there is a vast potential for content development and production. This area needs enhancement and boost. I would just like to cite an example. A few days ago, we were fortunate to welcome the delegates from Iran. We asked them how they managed to grow their film industry and the kind of statistics that they cited to us was quite impressive for a country, like Iran. It produces 60 to 70 films a year and about 2,000-3,000 amateur films per year. They have also attained international recognition and won several international awards. Just recently a country like Bosnia, which is stricken by war and trouble in the country, managed to win the international foreign award at the Academy. So these are the examples that we can see. For a country like Singapore, we can learn from countries which are having difficulties and yet they are able to grow their film industry. So I would like to ask what are the plans of MITA to boost this area.

Mr David Lim: Sir, Mr Zainudin has asked whether competition in print and TV media has improved the quality of these media. And Mr Yeo Guat Kwang has asked for a progress report on the development of the media industry. When we introduced competition in the print and TV media in June 2000, we hoped that this would give viewers and readers more media choices, higher quality content, including better news. We also wanted to make our media companies stronger, and better positioned to compete in a multimedia world.

After two years, viewers and readers have more choices. There are two more English language papers and a net increase of one free-to-air channel. There are more news and current affairs programmes on television. TV viewership and newspaper readership are up about 6-8 percentage points. And I am glad to say that the Programmes and Publications Advisory Committees have observed that the overall quality of both print and broadcast media has been maintained.

Competition has also brought about innovations. New formats have been introduced for TV news, some channels leveraging their presentations off their pool of print journalists. The main local newspapers have introduced new features and offer more in-depth analysis and discussion of issues. The media companies have also started to link and cross-promote their contents across different media, such as TV, newspapers and the Internet.

Take one example, Channel NewsAsia is increasingly recognised as a reliable and credible information source with a distinct Asian voice, especially in the wake of the September 11 incident. It not only provides Singaporeans with excellent news coverage, but now reaches more than 10 million homes across 15 countries in the region. So overall, we can say that competition has given consumers in Singapore more choices and we are beginning to see some of the sought after benefits in the industry.

Competition for free-to-air television and newspapers is currently between two media groups, each dominant in one field of media. So far, competition, while keen, has not been dysfunctional. However, our local media plays an important social role, and we must therefore ensure that social goals are not compromised as a result of competition. For example, we want to ensure that a certain amount of local programming is available during prime time on television. And we do not want our newspapers to compete for readers by sensationalising the news, or publishing sleazy articles. To ensure that neither group abuses its dominant position, and that quality does not decline, MITA is planning to implement a competition code later this year for the media sector. A draft code prepared by MITA's consultants has been circulated to the media industry for comments.

Sir, as to Mr Zainudin's point and concern about foreign influence, I think he need not be concerned about this, as this is adequately taken care of by the existing rules under the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act, as well as the Singapore Broadcasting Authority Act. 3.30 pm

From a broader perspective, the media industry goes beyond free-to-air television and newspapers to include all types of content creation and content delivery formats. This is a rapidly changing industry that offers new opportunities for growth, from film production to animation, to multimedia services, to video-on-demand and, soon to come, 3G multimedia messaging. Companies are merging so that they can leverage their capabilities across different technology platforms and market segments.

As Mr Yeo Guat Kwang has noted that others, like Dubai, and Mr Zainudin has also noted Iran, have recognised the economic value of this industry and are aggressively promoting it. What can we learn from them? We must, at least, be equally aggressive.

To give focus to the media industry, we will merge Singapore Broadcasting Authority (SBA), the Films and Publications Department (FPD) and the Singapore Films Commission (SFC) into a single statutory body which will be called the Media Development Authority (MDA). MDA will promote the growth of the media industry, working closely with EDB and other agencies, to attract investments to Singapore and to develop our local content creation capabilities.

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang wanted to know if our censorship regime would stifle the growth of the media industry. I do not think so. Because of our multi-racial and multi-religious society, we set guidelines for contents that are targetted at Singaporeans. But we do not impose our standards on others. Media businesses are welcomed to operate here within the laws of the land. The formation of the MDA will bring together the various content regulatory bodies, to ensure that all our content regulations are well coordinated across different media and correctly balanced to promote social harmony while encouraging industry growth.

With the competition code in place and the formation of MDA, we expect to see renewed vigour in the media industry and the creation of new job opportunities for Singaporeans in the years ahead.

Mr Sin Boon Ann (Tampines): Sir, last year, in the Committee of Supply, I raised the possibility of us having a Freedom of Information Act. My argument, if you recall, is that governments these days are expected to be transparent and accountable. Freeing up information will also be consistent with our desire to become a knowledge economy. I believe that, with information, people can make better informed choices than they otherwise would have been able to do.

While I can understand there is a need to consider issues of national security in deciding whether or not to release information, there could be other types of information where such concerns are not pressing. In this area, perhaps the Government can be more liberal and open in providing.

Sir, I did say then that the Freedom of Information legislation serves two purposes. If I could recap, first, it imposes an obligation on the part of the Government to allow non-security, non-sensitive information to be made available to citizens where such information affects their rights. Often, information about a person may be gathered which has an effect on the way the Government decides on matters affecting the person which may not be accurate and which does not lend itself to being challenged by the interested party. Subject only to requirements of national security, I cannot see why such information may not be made available to the person concerned after, perhaps, an appropriate period of time.

Secondly, the availability of information to interested persons, as of right, may have a salutary effect on civil servants. As a civil servant, if he knows that his record will be subject to public scrutiny at some point of time, he will be more careful perhaps in the way in which he documents his record. This will have a positive effect on maintaining and, perhaps, raising the level of conduct of civil servants.

Sir, in his reply to my query last year, my parliamentary colleague, Mr Yatiman Yusof, said that our National Heritage Board Act allows for declassification of Government documents after a period of time, and from time to time. I had a look at the Act and would add that it falls far short of what we are trying to achieve here for the following reasons. First, the Act does not set out any comprehensive framework for the declassification of information within a certain timeframe. Secondly, it does not confer upon a person a statutory right to ask for information that may be relevant to him. There are many more reasons but, for now, these two are sufficient.

Sir, we have come a long way to feel that we are mature enough to consider such a legislation as the Freedom of Information Act. To be sure, we are not the first to look at this, as many countries in the west, such as the UK and the USA, have already done so. And if we want to move towards the developed standards elsewhere, it is about time that we seriously consider enacting such a legislation as I have suggested.

On this note, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government could consider such a legislation.

The Chairman: Mr Arthur Fong is not here. Mr Zainudin.

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, with the rapid advancement of technology in the info-communications arena, the challenges faced for control are approaching impossible. In this respect, I would like to ask the Minister to choose more education over control on the issue of Internet.

Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung (Sembawang): Sir, the right to be left alone or to keep information about ourselves to ourselves is a right that I believe everyone would value. Informational privacy has become one of the most significant forms of this right in the last decade, because of the advances made in technology and the everyday use of the Internet. Perhaps, in recognition of this, the IDA is charged with the specific duty and given the power to establish, maintain and promote data protection, standards and codes relating to privacy.

The technology to make it easier for us to surf the Internet also presents risks to informational privacy. Everyone knows what cookies are. Those who have yet to surf the Net probably think that they are biscuits. Children are more familiar with the cookie monster. But, for those who surf the Net, they know cookies as software devices that are used by server connections to store and retrieve information about the user. It is intended to make life easier for the user, because the user preferences are then stored and become known to the server. But, increasingly, these cookies are becoming cookie monsters. They are used by many service providers to collect information, which is then sold commercially, usually to mass marketing agencies. The users suddenly find themselves bombarded with thousands of messages advertising all sorts of products. I am sure the experience is not unique to anybody, and it is a common one. I myself have had advertisements for flowers, chocolates, even pregnancy kits which, of course, I do not think I need. Obviously, many see this trend as a severe infringement of personal privacy. And the US legislature has recognised this by considering a Bill on online personal privacy, which has just secured the approval of the US Senate Commerce Committee. The general view is that good privacy practices mean good business. Consumer confidence will increase and more will use the Net for their purchases.

Sir, recently, a number of letters have surfaced in the Forum Page of the Straits Times, lamenting the lack of such laws in Singapore. Singapore has so far preferred the self-regulating solution for both the private and public sectors. However, this is generally now regarded as insufficient for a number of reasons. Firstly, companies may set out having a good privacy policy but may actually change in due course without the users' consent after collecting information. Secondly, there are many cases of companies facing bankruptcy and selling their databases as a means of keeping afloat and yet others, of course, may deliberately use cookies to surreptitiously collect information for commercial reasons. Such companies are unlikely to abide by any self-regulating code without teeth.

Sir, to promote consumer confidence is to promote electronic commerce. Promoting consumer confidence requires serious attention to be paid to the protection of personal data. Only legislation can lay down the baseline of personal privacy protection. Self-regulation has not been a success so far. This is recognised in the United States and other countries, such as the EU, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Japan. We must not be lagging behind if we see ourselves in the forefront of electronic commerce. I would, therefore, like to ask the Minister to consider the following measures:

One, ask IDA to seriously explore the legislative option for providing a baseline of protection for informational privacy;

Two, advise and direct all websites or content providers in Singapore to make available a privacy policy that is couched in simple language and not legalese; and

Three, to encourage the use of IBM's free technology solution to privacy, the Tivoli programme, that will, amazingly, translate all written privacy policies into electronic format and apply the whole new rules to the website of the content provider.

Sir, in consumer law, there is a general rule called caveat emptor or "buyers beware". This rule has increasingly been supplanted by legislation protecting the rights of consumers to physical goods. In the case of the Internet, as far as personal privacy is concerned, it is still the situation of "Surfers beware. Cookie monsters are everywhere."

Sir, it is time to act to protect informational privacy in a meaningful manner and, I hope, the Minister will take note of that.

The Chairman: Mr Steve Chia, you have two cuts. You can take them together.

Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, the Government had legislated on regulating the Internet and requiring all sites with political contents to be registered with the SBA. This has caused fear and unease to some of the website operators. As we have read in the papers, some of these active civil society members, like Dr Tan Chong Kee of Sintercom, would rather close down the website than to have it registered with the SBA.

If we want Singaporeans to take on and compete in the global arena, we cannot continue to restrict them to grow up in a closed and protected environment. If Singaporeans cannot be trusted to judge issues for themselves, how will they ever learn? Such requirement for political control is not helpful to the nurturing and growth of the Singapore societies. Will the Minister look into freeing up more space for Singaporeans to own and operate discussions on the Internet without the feeling that Big Brother is watching and coming to catch them? I hope the Minister will remove political societies and websites with political contents from this registration requirement.

Moving on to my second cut, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister regarding the application of a printing permit for a political party newsletter, what is the reason for requiring all the CEC members of a party to apply for this printing permit. It is not possible for the whole CEC to sit on the editorial board to edit every article of the newsletter. Should not the onus and licence requirement responsibility from the Editorial Board alone be sufficient? This will help to simplify requirements and also be a lot more meaningful. Can the Minister kindly explain why all the CEC members in a political party that applies for such a printing permit also be required to declare their personal assets? Is this requirement also enforced upon the PAP publication, Petir? And that all the PAP CEC members also have to declare their personal assets to MITA when they apply for this printing permit. I am not sure, but I do not think so. Therefore, is such a requirement a veiled threat to the opposition political parties and a means to suppress their freedom of publication? Can the Minister kindly clarify?

Mr David Lim: Sir, Members have raised a number of issues relating to the management of information in our society, namely, censorship, data protection and access to information. These are fundamental issues to the way nations are governed and to the way societies function. Each community has to decide for itself what these rules should be. While these issues are not new, our environment has changed, and we cannot duck these changes. We are a global city and, therefore, open to influences from everywhere, and we must adjust and adapt to them.

One challenge is the Internet. The Internet has become a vital tool for business and personal growth. But, at the same time, it is also a source of all kinds of undesirable content, including pornographic content and hate materials. Filtering software, offered by the Internet Service Providers (ISPs), can help to keep out some of these materials. But regulations alone cannot prevent the naive and curious from being tricked or lured to undesirable sites. 3.45 pm

I therefore agree with Mr Zainudin that we should educate the public and in particular, parents, so that they can take their own preventive actions to avoid such materials. Last February, SBA established a $5 million Internet Public Education Fund. To-date, $1.2 million has been used to support eight on-line safety projects. The fund has benefited organisations like the Parents' Advisory Group for the Internet (PAGi). PAGi was formed two years ago, and has trained more than 23,000 parents to provide guidance to their children on the safe use of the Internet.

Mr Chairman, we also need to provide safeguards against another kind of abuse over the Internet, and that is the spurious use of the Internet to spread false information or to inflame emotions, causing hurt to affected parties and harm to society. This is why the Government has imposed certain registration requirements for political and religious websites, and political party websites.

Mr Steve Chia claimed that this rule was the reason why the Sintercom website closed down. This claim is unfounded and his suggestion to waive the rule is unwise. Sintercom need not have closed down because of these rules. Registration does not impose any extra rule on content providers and websites. Nor does it disallow open discussion or criticism of Government policies. Yes, indeed, the public is free to access these sites and to judge for themselves the contents. These sites are bound by the class licence rules of the Internet, and by the laws of the land. Registration is a reasonable and prudent measure to establish accountability, and to deter irresponsible persons from using the cloak of anonymity to create mischief and harm.

Mr Steve Chia also asked why it is necessary for the CEC members of political parties to be named as the publishers of party websites and newspapers, and to declare their assets.

Sir, in politics, it is only too easy to run down political opponents or to stir up trouble under the cloak of anonymity. This is why it is necessary to remove this cover. It is reasonable and fair to expect CEC members, as the highest decision making body of a party, to stand by their views openly, and to take responsibility for what is published on their website or in the newspapers. Also, requiring CEC members to declare their assets when they apply for a newspaper permit ensures that they are people of substance who have not tried to avoid their responsibilities by appointing proxies to represent them on the CEC, and to be the fall guys should they run into trouble with the law.

Mr Chia has also asked if this rule applies to Petir and to the PAP. Yes, it does. But PAP CEC members declare their assets to the Prime Minister and SBA accepts that declaration as fulfilment of this requirement.

Now, let me turn to the issue of data protection which was raised by Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung, who has informed me that, owing to an urgent personal matter, he is unable to be present for the response. The ability to store and move tremendous amounts of data and the open structure of the Internet make all of us vulnerable to information misuse or abuse.

The Government is mindful of this. Apart from basic legislation, like the Computer Misuse Act, we have enacted sector-specific legislation, like the Private Hospitals and Medical Clinics Act, the Banking Act and the Income Tax Act, to protect sensitive personal data like medical and financial records.

Sector-specific legislation, however, may not cover all types of information that an individual may want to keep private. However, a wide and sweeping legislation on data protection may also not be the best way to move forward or to make things better. This is because such a law could deny companies' access to information that they need to come up with better ways to tailor products and services to customers. It would hinder innovations, and customers would miss out on useful and convenient services. After all, not all of us reject cookies. Some of us do like the taste of some of those cookies. And we accept the cookies because we want to get to those sites. Also, complying with a broadly-based law could raise significantly business costs, and this would affect small businesses and start-ups the most.

These benefits apply both to the private and the public sectors. Indeed, through e-Government, many new and convenient services have been delivered to the public. The Government's approach to data protection is, therefore, to set in place rules and processes that would safeguard privacy, without incurring high costs or stifling innovation.

The civil service has its own internal guidelines, administered by the Ministry of Finance, that guard against misuse of information. The Second Minister for Finance elaborated on this in this House last week, so I shall not go into that further.

Concurrently, we are working with the private sector to strengthen industry self-regulation. The industry-led National Trust Council is currently conducting public consultation on a Data Protection Code for the private sector. The draft code is modelled on international standards, and I would encourage Members to give their views to the Council as well.

Finally, let me touch on free access to information. Mr Sin Boon Ann has argued that Singapore should have a Freedom of Information Act. He has raised this before. He feels that it is appropriate, in an information-oriented society like ours, that individuals should have free access to information held by the Government, and that this would make the Government more careful in the way it manages its information resources.

Sir, it is natural as we become more and more of an information society, that the public will want to have great access to information that are important to them, and that affect their daily lives. To-date, Government information is available through a variety of channels, for example, mass media, governmental publications, the Government websites of which there are many, and the National Archives. Parliament is also a source of information where MPs regularly file questions to get specific answers.

But legislating information access rights, as suggested, also has its pros and cons. Yes, it might improve transparency, but it will also shift more public resources to addressing individual demands, rather than collective benefits. It may also impose rigidities on the way information must be kept and managed in order to be made available for public scrutiny. And like data protection, a legislated approach to information access can raise costs and hinder innovation within the Government.

The question is whether the public today is denied information they need, except for information that could compromise our security or national interests. Is there a practical need that is not met? In practical terms, we have more access to information than we really can use. But if there are specific needs that are not addressed, then we should take a look at them.

The system we have today is working well. Instead of a Freedom of Information Act, there may be more practical value at this time to take a needs-based approach and cultivate greater civic awareness and involvement around specific issues that can benefit the community.

Sir, the issues that the Members have raised on information management are fundamental to the development of our society, whether it is data protection, freedom of information access or censorship. Our society is neither static nor closed, and we will review our policies in these areas from time to time to keep pace with our economic and social development.

I thank the Members for making these important issues as part of this debate.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I just want to seek some clarification from the Acting Minister. Just now, he said that the particulars of assets of the members of the CEC of the PAP are handed to the Prime Minister. If I am not mistaken, the PAP is a private political party, just like any other political party in Singapore. I believe also that Petir is a publication of a private organisation. It is not a Government publication. How is the law being complied with when it is required that all the CEC members must submit their assets to SBA, but in this case, it was submitted to the Prime Minister?

Another clarification. When the details of assets are submitted to the Prime Minister, is it submitted to the Prime Minister as Prime Minister, or is it submitted to the Prime Minister as the head of the PAP?

Mr David Lim: The PAP is not just a private political party. It is the ruling party. It is the Government. It forms the Government. When office-holders declare their assets to the Prime Minister, they declare to the Prime Minister as the Prime Minister. The purpose of having this rule, as I gave Mr Steve Chia in my reply, was to ensure that the CEC members are people of substance and that they do not put proxies on board the CEC so that these proxies can be the fall guys for them should they run into trouble. This objective is achieved by the declaration that the CEC members make to the Prime Minister in their duties as office -holders.

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, Infocomm Vision 21 aims to achieve e-Government, e-business and e-lifestyle in Singapore in five years' time. To-date, many Singaporeans understand the benefits of IT, but many are still experiencing difficulty in acquiring necessary IT skills, especially the senior citizens.

Increasing IT skills and awareness is important. But what is more important is to make sure that those who have learnt IT know how to apply the IT skills to better their lives. We need a more structured and quality approach to achieve our Infocomm Vision 21.

I would like to ask the Minister the following questions:

(1) What is the outreach programme for increasing the IT skills of Singaporeans? How effective is the programme in imparting IT skills to these Singaporeans?

(2) Can more resources be channelled to the Community Development Councils (CDCs) to help to run some of these IT programmes, in collaboration with other civic or private organisations?

(3) What are the plans to help lower-income families to own PCs?

Dr Tan Boon Wan: Sir, since the unveiling of the Infocomm 21 Plan, the dot-com bust had occurred, and euphoria for a networked world has ameliorated. The landscape has changed.

I wonder if the Minister could share his views on the following. How have the dot-com bust and related developments affected the Infocomm

21 Vision, if any? What is the progress with the bringing of broadband connectivity into homes and offices? How many homes and offices have subscribed to broadband services? Is the Minister satisfied with the broadband adoption? What are the causes for resistance to broadband access? Is price a deterrent? If so, what is being done to bring it down, and when can we see this happening? 4.00 pm

Thirdly, what is the status of the digital divide in Singapore? What progress have we achieved to review this divide? Has it in the meantime widened? What further plans are being considered to fight this digital divide?

Mr Loh Meng See: Sir, the world telecommunication industry is in the midst of a financial melt-down. There is over-capacity. I just want to find out from the Minister, what is the situation in Singapore? Has it the same effect? Do we have over-capacity? Do we have the critical mass and the economy of scale to enable these networks to survive?

And, also Sir, the consumers of bandwidth do not see the prices falling, even though telecommunications has liberalised and we see more competition. We read recently that Starhub is going to acquire SCV and I am concerned about the role of content providers and systems integrators. By allowing the two large groups remaining, will there be a role for content providers? I think one of the great issues with regard to telecommunications is really the role of content providers, the variety of them, the access and provision of content and how the systems could be integrated.

Similarly, with my colleague before me who has spoken, I see that the percentage of the workforce which is competent in infocomm, has only risen marginally from 43% to 45%. So what steps are we taking to improve the competency level of Singaporeans in infocomm, especially for older workers? When do we see the day that we have 100% competency in infocomm. Are we producing enough talent in this area, because as we want to grow this industry, obviously, what will hold back would be the human capital? Can the Minister give us an assessment?

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, the burst of the dot-com bubble has been a painful lesson for many. I would like to caution the Minister on the hype and hoo-ha of the 3G technology. It is all good and well to anticipate and project the possible growth and earnings from this technology. There are still many uncertainties and technologically speaking, there are many hurdles to overcome and bugs to cure.

We could learn from the experience of the European countries that had inadvertently thrown their telecommunication companies into battle for the coveted 3G licence, even before any concrete system or services could be rolled out. Is this a good thing to do?

Sir, I would like to caution the Minister against putting a high premium on the 3G licence, because in the end, it is the consumer who is going to pay for these services, and worse still, it could hinder the growth rather than help it to develop to its full potential.

The Senior Minister of State for Information, Communications and the Arts (Mr Khaw Boon Wan): Sir, first let me thank the four Members who spoke up on various aspects of infocomm development in Singapore. As this is the first Budget in which ICT comes under the purview of MITA, allow me to briefly sketch out MITA's view on this sector, even as I reply to the specific queries of the Members.

The ICT sector in Singapore has come a long way since 1981 when we formed the National Computer Board. The early pioneers have gone on with age. Some have moved to take on new responsibilities, like Mr Philip Yeo, who is now leading the charge of growing another new industry for Singapore - the life sciences. Another notable pioneer is Minister Lim Swee Say, who is now championing the cause of clean environment and NEWater.

We have these and many other pioneers to thank for the significant progress that we have achieved. They helped lay not only a strong foundation, but a nimble culture, which has allowed us to move in tandem with global market and technology trends. Over the years, we see NCB moving from Mindef to MOF, to MTI and then to MCIT to merge with TAS to become IDA. And now IDA has moved into MITA's stable to help us push the ICT sector to a new height as we position Singapore for the next wave of convergences between IT, telecoms and broadcasting.

So after 20 years, the ICT sector has grown to become a very significant contributor to our GDP. Its value-add contributes about 5.5%, which is significant. The total industry revenue is about $26 billion, and growing strongly. Right through the Asian financial crisis, the ICT sector continued its strong and robust growth.

The progress we have made in the sector does not happen naturally. It is the result of proactive planning and timely policy interventions. On the policy side, let me just highlight three major initiatives, which have particularly positioned us well.

First, the Government's decision to fully liberalise the telco sector in April 2000. Competition has brought down prices, and increased the range of service offerings to all Singaporeans, young and old. Many of us have personally benefited from this. My daughters certainly do. One of them told me the other night that she sends 700 SMS messages a month. She assured me that she is not among the heaviest users in her class.

Second, the Government's decision to bring about a world-class infocomm infrastructure. Our IT 2000 Masterplan transformed Singapore into an Intelligent Island. We now have 1 million homes in Singapore, all of which have the options to effect broadband connection, either via ADSL, the copper wire, or SCV cable. And, increasingly, some homes will also have a third "wire", which is wireless.

Dr Tan Boon Wan asked about progress in broadband adoption in homes and offices, which Mr Loh Meng See asked as well. We had a recent survey and it showed nearly 1 million broadband users in Singapore. This means that 1 in 3 Singaporeans, above the age of 10, are broadband users. More significantly, more than half of them took up broadband only last year. So clearly, the big bang in telco liberalisation has contributed to this growth, by bringing down prices. As far as I know, the cheapest broadband access package in town is only $38 per month, for unlimited usage.

Third, the Government's initiative to actively cultivate sophisticated demand. We have, as Dr Tan put it, gone beyond the IT awareness stage to cultivate savvy usage of this very important medium. The public sector is leading on this. Its $1.5 billion e-Government Action Plan seeks to transform the civil service into a leading e-Government in the world. Two-thirds of all Government services that can be offered online are already being delivered electronically. But, we will push towards 100%. So, similarly, our private sector should actively review their business processes to see how they can further exploit ICT to attract, to retain, and to delight their customers.

Mr Chairman, after 20 years of strong growth, the ICT sector remains in a dynamic, creative and developing phase. Technology will continue to surprise. Broadband, wireless, 3G, web services, digital media, next generation Internet, and who knows what, will open up many new opportunities. In particular, the merger of ICT with media should throw up exciting opportunities. For example, in the digital media content industry, many industry analysts expect it to grow from US$100 billion to possibly US$350 billion by 2004. This is an exciting field where arts, business and technology intersect. Winners will go to those with a good dose of creativity and imagination. Those who can provide the consumers with a differentiated experience will win. It is a wide field, including animation, computer games, music, entertainment, film and print media using digital technology for both content creation and distribution. Our Singapore companies should seriously consider how they can ride on this wave.

Dr Tan Boon Wan was correct to highlight the boom and bust of dot-coms. He asked if the bust should lead us to review our Infocomm 21 Vision. Many dot-coms have crashed, but the effects of the Internet Revolution in changing the way we live, work and play, are permanent. Industries and companies continue to be transformed by ICT. Technology continues to make progress. So we are reviewing, or more correctly, updating our Infocomm 21 Vision, not so much in response to the bust of the dot-coms, but to take into account the continuing progress in technology.

But there is one key difference in our approach going forward. In the last 20 years, the Government's role in championing the industry, jumpstarting the development, investing in capabilities and infrastructure, have laid a strong foundation. It has been largely supply-driven, policy-driven and domestic focus. Going forward for the sector to achieve its next breakthrough, the efforts will have to be more demand-driven, industry-driven and export-oriented. It means leadership in exploiting ICT for strategic advantage. It means the ability to extract maximum value from our commanding lead, to go beyond Singapore to penetrate the market overseas.

I chair the Economic Review Committee's Services Industry Sub-Committee. We have identified several service sectors which we think Singapore can excel in, and the ICT sector is a clear candidate. Given our 20 years of head-start and investments in capabilities, we are bullish about its continuing growth.

A completely industry-driven ICT Working Group, led by Mr Wilson Tan of the Singapore IT Federation, has been busily working with more than 100 industry players to help us draw up the strategy going forward. They will complete their work and submit their recommendations in due course.

One strong advantage of Singapore in the ICT sector is that young Singaporeans are not shy of new technology or new gadgets. Our parents may seem to be shy of ICT, but I do not think it is because they are shy of new technology. The lower usage of ICT among the older Singaporeans is often due to other factors.

For example, I personally dislike SMS (I do not mean my neighbours in this Chamber), because I cannot stand the tiny screen of the mobile phone and my thumb seems too big for the keys. Likewise, many older Singaporeans are "digitally-divided" because the working language on the Internet is still largely English, and many do not know how to type. So understanding these barriers is important if we are to further bridge the digital divide.

IDA's various initiatives have produced meaningful results. I will just name a few. For example, through its collaboration with the Ministry of Manpower under the National IT Literacy Programme, we have trained more than 80,000 Singaporeans. The One Learning Place at Toa Payoh Community Library has trained more than 100,000 Singaporeans in the use of broadband. My mother-in-law attended one of the courses in a neighbourhood community centre and she now enjoys her real-time mahjong session on Yahoo.com, playing with players from all over the world, whom she never met. I watched her play the other day. She could not take part in the cyber-chat which always accompanies such games because she does not understand English. So she just concentrates on the game, and therefore she wins all the time.

Mr Loh Meng See talked about the upcoming merger between Starhub and SCV. As the former Chairman of SCV, I played a small part in that merger process, which is on-going. And it has a specific objective, which is to create a fixed-line infrastructure in Singapore as an alternative to SingTel. Just now I talked about the three wires - the SingTel wire, the SCV wire, and a future "wireless". But by creating this alternative fixed-line infrastructure we bring about greater competition on domestic fixed-line, which I think will further reduce the prices of telephony, as we know it today. 4.15 pm

I agree with Mr Zainudin that we should not be too romantic about 3Gs, and its hype. Fortunately for us, we are not too much ahead of the curve. The Europeans were ahead of it. So with huge auction prices, it now caused a big problem to the industry. That is why sometimes, it does not pay to be the early bird because you may end up the early worm. In certain cases, you have to be the early bird, but I think, in this case, it is better to see what has been done elsewhere. And so when we took our 3G auctions, it was many months later. As you can see, the bid prices are quite different. I read the Financial Times last week about the 3G development in Europe where there are great concerns. We are watching this whole development very closely so that we can learn from it.

Dr Teo Ho Pin talked about greater use of the Internet so as to bring this application to the whole community, young and old, IT-literate or otherwise, creating, for example, e-communities. I totally agree. This is a very powerful medium and a very effective mass communication tool. The fact is we are under-utilising it. I agree with him that CDCs, Town Councils and Singaporeans individually should think creatively on how much more they can exploit this medium. IDA (with a $25 million budget) will be happy to facilitate and to cheer them on.

Clearly, contents and applications are the key drivers. Once I got my mother-in-law to play mahjong, my problem becomes one of how to get her off the screen. My youngest daughter is addicted to Neopets.com and according to her, her entire class too. This is a US website, which reaches out to teenagers, allowing them to set up cyber shops to sell virtual goods to one another. It is absolutely cool, and along the way, a whole e-community is created globally. But she learns a thing or two about setting prices, how to take part in auctions and market competition, and that, for example, a price war is fundamentally crazy. Only the other day, she asked me why a particular player was selling her ware at a price way below her cost. She lost a customer as a result. She could have gone on a price war but she decided against it. I thought to myself, when she grows up, she may join PSA.