FIRE SAFETY (AMENDMENT) BILL

Column: 333

FIRE SAFETY (AMENDMENT) BILL: Order for Second Reading read.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Column: 334

The Fire Safety Act was last amended in 2000. Since then, the threat from terrorism has required us to put regulatory control on flammable materials under the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF). Building designers have also requested that more flexibility be given to them to design fire safety solutions. The SCDF has introduced new operating procedures, which require the delegation of more powers to their junior officers.

To achieve this, MHA is now proposing several key amendments to the Act to enable:

(a) the adoption of a performance-based approach towards fire safety;

(b) extension of regulatory control to flammable materials, including petroleum; and

(c) provision for other changes relating to fire safety in buildings and the extension of SCDF powers.

Performance-based approach to fire safety

I shall first touch on the proposed performance-based approach to fire safety.

The Fire Safety Act provides for the fire safety regulations and effective enforcement of fire safety standards. Currently, fire safety standards for buildings in Singapore are governed by the Code of Practice for Fire Precautions in Buildings, commonly known as the "Fire Code". The Fire Code, first introduced in 1974 and last revised in 2002, prescribes specific fire safety requirements and measures without stating the intention or desired outcome.

The prescriptive approach is rigid and restricts flexibility in building designs, as requirements specified in the Fire Code have to be strictly adhered to. For example, the types of construction

Column: 335

materials and fire protection systems to be used are specified in the Fire Code and the Qualified Person, who is the registered architect or professional engineer, has to follow these specifications strictly.

Such rigid requirements have led to feedback and requests from building designers and owners for more flexibility. In fact, some have hired Qualified Persons to propose alternative solutions that still meet the fire safety standards, and sought waivers from compliance with the Fire Code requirements. Examples of buildings where performance-based solutions have been used include the Singapore Expo and the Esplanade.

In recent years, the trend overseas is towards adopting a performance-based approach towards fire safety. Countries that have adopted the performance-based approach include New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, USA, UK and Japan.

In view of the feedback and developments in other countries, SCDF consulted the relevant professional bodies, such as the Singapore Institute of Architects and the Institute of Engineers, Singapore, as well as the academia, and has recommended the adoption of a performance-based approach towards fire safety in Singapore.

The Fire Code will be amended to incorporate the performance provisions, which would specify the desired fire safety objectives. It would then be up to the fire safety engineers to devise fire safety solutions that meet these objectives. The proposed fire safety engineering approach will not compromise the current high standards and levels of fire safety, and is in line with the Government's approach to reducing over-regulation and be business-friendly. In some instances, there could be cost savings as well.

Sir, I would like to emphasise that the

Column: 336

prescriptive measures will be maintained in the Fire Code because it will still be used in designing buildings that have less scope for design flexibility, eg, residential houses, apartments and offices. Developers who do not wish to incur extra costs in engaging fire safety engineers can also follow the prescriptive measures in the Fire Code.

I shall now elaborate on the amendments required to introduce the performance-based approach.

Duties and responsibilities of Fire Safety Engineers

Clause 9 specifies that only Qualified Persons trained in fire safety engineering may design performance-based fire safety solutions. A Qualified Person who is not a fire safety engineer must be supervised by a fire safety engineer in the preparation of the plans.

Clause 9 also requires the appointment of a peer reviewer. The job of the peer reviewer is to assess whether the performance-based solution proposed by the fire safety engineer satisfies the requirements of the Fire Code. This review by an independent and competent party acts as a safeguard to ensure that the fire safety standards are maintained. This peer review system is similar to the Building and Construction Authority's accredited checker system, where an accredited checker would check the calculations done by the structural engineer and conduct a separate analysis to verify if the structural design is sound before the structural plans are submitted to BCA. To ensure the integrity of the independent review, the peer reviewer must not have any professional or financial interest in the fire safety works he reviews.

Registration of Fire Safety Engineers

Clause 9 provides that a person with

Column: 337

the necessary educational qualifications in the field of fire safety engineering and has at least five years of practical experience in the design of fire safety works can be registered as fire safety engineers. These criteria would be prescribed in the regulations.

Formation of the Investigation Committee

Clause 9 also empowers the Commissioner SCDF to take disciplinary actions against a fire safety engineer should a complaint be received against him. To ensure professionalism and independence in the investigation process, the Commissioner SCDF may form an Investigation Committee. Members of this committee will be drawn from the Fire Safety Engineers Discipline Panel, which the Minister will appoint, and comprise fire safety engineers and officers of the SCDF. For consistency, clause 5 amends the existing appointing authority or persons on the Inquiry Panel for registered inspectors from the Commissioner SCDF to the Minister.

Amendments to extend regulatory control to flammable materials

Sir, I will now move on to other amendments. The Act currently regulates the transportation and storage of petroleum-based flammables but does not include non-petroleum flammable materials, eg, magnesium and hydrogen. Presently, there are more than 2,000 companies handling hazardous materials, or Hazmat, in Singapore. This number is expected to increase with the rapid growth of our petrochemical, pharmaceutical and specialty chemicals industries on Jurong Island and other parts of Singapore. The rise of international terrorism has added a further dimension to the Hazmat threat. Terrorists could hijack vehicles transporting flammable materials for use as improvised weapons of mass

Column: 338

destruction. It is, therefore, necessary to address this threat arising from this fast-growing industry.

To better deal with these threats, MHA proposes to extend its regulatory control to encompass other flammable materials. Clause 16 repeals and re-enacts section 35 with two new sections 35A and 35B to extend the regulation of transport and storage of petroleum to import, transport and storage of petroleum and flammable materials. The new section 35 disallows any person to store any flammable material unless the premises are licensed and the quantities stored are in accordance with the prescribed conditions in the licence.

Section 35A requires a person importing any class of petroleum or any flammable material to hold a valid licence to import petroleum or flammable material. To ensure that Hazmat transportation drivers are security cleared and trained in handling emergencies while on the road, section 35B requires the drivers of road vehicles transporting any class of petroleum or flammable materials to hold a valid licence to transport such materials and a permit to drive the vehicle. It also requires the vehicles used to transport the petroleum or flammable materials to be licensed by the Commissioner SCDF.

The Petroleum Act will be repealed consequentially as a result of these proposed amendments. It is obsolete as most of its provisions are already covered under the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore Act.

Extension of Fire Certificate scheme

Sir, I will now move on to the amendments concerning fire safety in buildings. The Act currently requires offices and other commercial buildings to engage a Professional Engineer to certify that the fire safety systems in their

Column: 339

buildings are in good working condition before Fire Certificates can be issued. This requirement currently does not extend to industrial buildings.

Fires in industrial buildings have increased over the years. In 1998, 34 cases of fires were reported. It doubled in 1999 and 2000, reaching a high of 130 cases. For the year 2003, there were 93 cases. These industrial fires since 1998 have resulted in four deaths and 66 injuries. Therefore, there is a need to ensure that the fire systems in industrial buildings are functioning properly, so that life and property are not put at risk. For this reason, MHA proposes that the Act be amended

to extend the Fire Safety Certificate scheme to industrial buildings to ensure that the owners carry out regular performance testing of all fire safety components within their buildings. Although it means an additional business cost to owners, it is a small price to pay to ensure that the fire safety systems in these industrial buildings are in good working condition.

Fire safety requirements in Government-owned buildings

MHA is also amending the Act to cover the fire safety works in Government-owned buildings. Currently, the Act requires plans to be submitted to SCDF for fire safety works done in any building, except those owned or occupied by the Government. Although Government-owned and occupied buildings submit plans of fire safety work, SCDF is not empowered to take action against the Qualified Persons engaged for Government-owned buildings if they fail to comply with the fire safety requirements or do not build according to the approved plans. To plug this loophole, the proposed amendment makes it clear that any building that is wholly or partially owned or occupied by the Government is also subject to the provisions of the Act and empowers the

Column: 340

SCDF to take action against Qualified Persons or fire safety engineers who do not comply with the fire safety requirements.

Extension of powers

Sir, the Act currently empowers any authorised SCDF officer ranked Second Lieutenant and above, with other members under his command, to take necessary action in the event of a fire, for example, entering or breaking into premises to prevent the spread of fire.

The employment of advanced and more mobile fire fighting equipment by the SCDF, for example, its two-men fire bike teams, means that junior officers may arrive at the scene of the fire ahead of the main team and the senior officers. As quick action can make a difference in life and death situations, it is important to empower them to be able to take quick action at the scene of the fire. The proposed amendment empowers all SCDF officers to take the necessary actions in the event of a fire.

Likewise, the Act empowers any authorised SCDF officer ranked Second Lieutenant and above to arrest without warrant, any persons whom he suspects to have committed an offence under the Act, for example, obstructing any SCDF officer from carrying out his duty in fighting fires. Such powers of arrests are necessary as calling for Police assistance may unnecessarily slow down the fire fighters in the performance of their duties. The perpetrator may also escape before the arrival of the Police. The proposed amendments will extend the powers of arrest to SCDF officers holding the rank of Warrant Officers and above.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the proposals that I have presented today are necessary to ensure that the Act remains relevant to our needs. They will enable us to maintain our high fire safety standards

Column: 341

while offering design flexibility in buildings. The amendments will also allow us to maintain a high level of security by preventing flammable goods from being misused by terrorists.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung: Sir, this is an important piece of legislation for the safety of the public from fire and chemical hazards. From that perspective, it is to be particularly welcomed.

The important issue, however, is to convince the public that the costs, which will be necessarily incurred, as referred to by the Minister, will need to be made. He said that it was a small cost to improve the safety of the public. But I think it has to be demonstrated that this scheme will definitely be necessary to upgrade the safety of institutions and buildings in Singapore.

Sir, my questions, therefore, on the Bill, relate to the measures to be taken to implement these provisions, rather than the policies behind the Bill. One preliminary question is whether existing industrial buildings, which hitherto were not subject to fire regulations, may require to satisfy the new regulations under the Fire Safety Bill once enacted. That is my first preliminary question, ie, will the existing industrial buildings be subject to the new regulation and, if so, when will they have to satisfy such regulations?

Secondly, the Bill provides for the setting up of a body of fire safety engineers. As I understand it, this is not a type of engineer that has hitherto been recognised. There is a new body of fire safety engineers to be put in place. The Minister has referred to some of the qualifications necessary for such

Column: 342

engineers, to be called fire safety engineers. But I wonder whether there are actually enough fire safety engineers in Singapore to carry out the purposes of the Bill.

Thirdly, SCDF is now to take over the regulation of storage, transport and import of flammable materials. Does that mean that SCDF has the overall authority to prescribe conditions and give licences for such activities? And if so, what is the extent of this new regulatory scheme? For example, does this mean that even delivery vans of cooking gas cylinders will be subject to licensing by SCDF? If this is the case, does that really mean that more paperwork and more licensing authorities to go to, because such operators will now have to go to both LTA and SCDF to get such certification and licensing?

Finally, the Minister mentioned that there will be extended powers of arrest without warrant extended to all SCDF Warrant Officers. What are the reasons for this? Will there be prescribed procedures to make sure that such powers of arrest, which are very wide, should be used with circumspection?

Sir, I support the Bill.

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang): Sir, I have something to clarify. I refer to new section 22A of the Bill, which deals with fire safety engineers, and how to ensure the integrity and independence of the peer reviewer appointed to review or assess whether any alternative solutions to satisfy any fire performance requirements. In subsection (7)(b) of this section, it states that "in the case of a husband and wife living together, the interest of one spouse shall, if known to the other, be deemed to be also an interest to the other." Sir, I wonder why the Bill specifically states a husband and wife living together. Is there a special meaning to it, or does it mean that if they are husband and wife, but not living together,

Column: 343

it does not fall within this section if there is a conflict of interest or whatever? I would like the Minister to clarify.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, the question of cost, of course, is always a big concern among our building owners and others who may have to spend money to improve or provide for fire safety. I think the cost should be justifiable, because we are talking about saving lives. Whatever measure that is needed to prevent a fire is a necessary measure that will prevent harm being done to unsuspecting individuals who may be victims of fire caused by whatever reasons. We have to take that into account when we talk about saving lives.

Regarding industrial buildings that are already there now, the question is whether we immediately require them to put in all these fire safety measures or not. Through a period of inspections, I am sure our SCDF officers will visit industrial buildings to ensure that they have good fire safety measures in place. But we will not apply the Act retroactively to require all building owners to comply immediately. But, over time, through inspections we will give advice and require industrial building owners to comply with the new measures in protecting lives in their buildings.

Prof. Chin said that the fire safety engineers is a new term. But actually it is not new. It is new perhaps to Singapore. In other countries, they have fire safety engineering courses. The SCDF has been working in conjunction with the University of Western Sydney to prepare for our people to take such a course. So far, 40 fire safety engineers have been trained and they have received their Masters degree from the University of Western Sydney. Another 21 have just taken their examinations and awaiting the results. Another 18 are on the first-year course and 18 on the second-year course. In November this year, they are going to

Column: 344

have the next intake of another 20 students. Taking into account the need for fire safety engineers to deal with performance-based fire safety regulations, this should be adequate, because we expect the number of building plans that will use the performance-based fire safety approach will be a small one. We are talking about complex buildings, difficult to design buildings, etc. From our calculations, based on past plans, it is about 5% of the plans submitted. The number of engineers should be adequate to meet this demand. Over time, more will be trained and also others who have gone to courses overseas on their own and have returned, they will also form part of the pool of expertise.

As regards the SCDF's extension of powers to regulate flammable materials, we are not extending to all kinds of vehicles. The Member was talking about the gas cylinders used for domestic cooking. Currently, these are already licensed under the Fire Safety Petroleum Regulations. It is not part of the new extended measures under this amendment Bill. It is also not practical to control small quantities of flammable materials or petroleum. We talk about reasonable bounds beyond a certain quantity that will be subject to these new prescriptions. I think there is no need to worry about the SCDF chasing all vehicles to make sure that they comply. But for those that convey LPG for home domestic uses or to our hawker centres, etc, they are already subject to regulation.

As to whether we should make it easier and convenient for people so that there will not be too many places to apply for licences, currently there are only two authorities inspecting vehicles. One is done by the SCDF for vehicles that carry Hazmat and one is by LTA on the vehicle itself. We will work with LTA to see whether both inspections can be carried out at the same time.

Column: 345

As regards the powers of the officers, I have explained in my speech that, with the two-men operation on fire bikes, most of the time, that will be adequate to deal with some situations, particularly the HDB flat fires or HDB rubbish chute fires. There is no need to have a big turnout of fire-fighters. But in case there is a fire in a flat and the SCDF fire bikes are the first to approach and they cannot get access to it because the officers are too junior and do not have the powers to enter, that is the precise reason why we are providing for this measure so that they can do their duties before the arrival of the senior team. It is for the good of the flat owner who is affected because many a time, we find that the more junior officers are the first to arrive.

On the powers of arrest, I have mentioned in my speech that only Warrant Officers and above are empowered to do the arrest. This is not different from equivalent levels of ranks in the other uniformed services, like the Police. We need to give them the powers because right now, it is only granted to the Lieutenant. That is an extension to enable more officers to exercise their powers, just in case in the performance of their duties, our more junior officers are obstructed by people who want to prevent them from doing their job.

I missed Mr Low's first point on section 22A. Can he please repeat?

Mr Low Thia Khiang: It is in page 8 of the Bill, new subsection (7)(b).

Mr Wong Kan Seng: It says, "In the case of husband and wife living together, the interest of one spouse shall if known to the other be deemed to be also an interest of the other." My explanation on this is subject to clarification. Sometimes, we may have a situation where the husband denies that the wife knows

Column: 346

about it. So we have to deem that they know what the other party knows.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Does it mean that if the husband and wife are not living together, it is all right to claim that they do not know what happened?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I would presume that should be the case.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Is that the purpose of the Bill?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I would presume that should be the case.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng].

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