HEAD L - MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Column: 1844

Head L - Ministry of the Environment

The Chairman: Head L - Ministry of the Environment. Dr Teo.

Green Plan 2012

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, I beg to move,

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

Sir, the Singapore Green Plan 2012 has laid out its vision to make Singapore an "Enduring Singapore". It has set out ambitious targets to achieve in eight areas, namely, waste management, conserving nature, clean air, water supply, public health, community partnership, international collaboration and innovation. The Green Plan will chart the key directions and direct our efforts towards sustainable development. While it is important to have a plan, what is more crucial is the implementation of the plan to achieve its desired outcomes.

To attain sustainable development requires the joint efforts of all stakeholders in our society. There must be mutual understanding among the public, private and people sectors. All parties must share the same aspirations for the environment. If not, the outcome will not be a win-win situation for all. This requires a change of mindsets among the different stakeholders.

As a regulator, the Ministry can only provide a supportive framework to encourage the relevant stakeholders to exercise responsibility. Although much talk has been focused on sustainable development, not many countries have the political will to implement their plans. Some had encountered complex problems, resulting in irreversible damage to the environment.

Column: 1845

In Singapore, we are fortunate that our Government has strong political will to walk the talk. Over the years, the Government has attained commendable achievements in keeping our environment clean and green. Our consistent approach in planning, monitoring and enforcement has produced results which are the envy of many countries. Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions:

(1) What is the status of achievement of the Green Plan 2012?

(2) Are there short-term targets and progress monitoring mechanisms for the Green Plan?

(3) In what ways has the Green Plan improved the quality of life of Singaporeans?

Sustainable City

To make Singapore a sustainable city, we need to have a sustainable plan where sustainable policies are implemented. In addition, all stakeholders of the society, namely, the public, private and people sectors must adopt sustainable practices. The Singapore Green Plan 2012 provides a good framework to make Singapore a sustainable city.

As a small country with a small land area, Singapore faces tremendous challenges in achieving sustainable development. We must plan and develop our limited land area to meet the needs of the present population without compromising the needs of future generations. We are faced with the challenges to make our water supply sustainable. We must balance our ecosystem to provide a good living environment. At the same time, we have to keep our air, water and land clean, so as to improve our quality of life.

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

Column: 1846

(1) How sustainable is Singapore in terms of clean air, water and land?

(2) What is the level of participation and effectiveness of our 3P projects?

(3) What disaster management plans are in place to handle public health outbreaks, such as vector-borne disease, rodent-borne disease and food-borne disease?

Environmental Performance

**Mr: Othman Haron Eusofe ** : Sir, I would like to ask the Minister the following questions. How does our environmental performance measure up to the standards in the other major cities in the world? For instance, for air quality, are we among the cleanest city in the world? Are we effectively reducing carbon dioxide emissions? I would also like to know what are the Ministry's programmes to promote greater use of green cars and clean energy.

Sir, recently, several areas in the east, and particularly in my constituency, were affected by floods. They include the Sims Avenue area, Paya Lebar, Geylang, and also in Marine Drive in the Marine Parade constituency. Businesses were disrupted, cars were damaged and goods destroyed. At the recent Environment press briefing, it was reported that the Government has invested $1.5 billion to improve Singapore's drainage system over several years. My question is: why is our drainage system unable to prevent the recent floods? And it was also reported that next week, from 21st to 23rd March, there will be exceptionally high tide again, and that there may be a recurrence of floods in the affected areas. So, I would like to know what measures the Ministry of the Environment and the PUB will take to advise the public and to get them to prepare, in case floods occur, and what would be the flood prevention measures that would be implemented.

Column: 1847

Air Quality

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, studies by the NUS and US have shown that indoor air quality has an effect on the health and productivity of occupants in buildings. Common problems, such as Legionnaire disease, respiratory problems and impaired performance, were encountered by people working in sick buildings. A study in the US shows that about 70% of US workers, ie, approximately 89 million persons, are employed in non-industrial and non-agricultural indoor settings.

Sir, data have shown that improving the indoor environmental conditions may benefit more than 15 million of the 89 million indoor workers in the US, resulting in economic benefits of between US$5 billion and US$75 billion annually. These findings are of grave concern, especially as our workforce gets older and becomes more vulnerable to infection. The quality of air in indoor environment will pose new challenges to the health of Singaporeans and our economy.

Sir, many Singaporeans spend lots of time indoors while at work or at home. Therefore, it is crucial that the quality of air within our buildings is safe. If we were to look around in our workplace and homes, we can see that many people do not maintain and clean their air-conditioning systems. Some have decorated their indoor environment with a wide variety of furnishings and materials which emit gases or encourage bacterial growth. This poses serious health hazards to its occupants.

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

(1) What is the quality of indoor air in Singapore?

(2) Can the Ministry consider developing a Pollutant Standard Index (PSI) for indoor air?

Column: 1848

(3) What are the efforts undertaken by the Ministry to improve the quality of indoor air?

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: Sir, last year, the Minister gave a very colourful account of our environment and noted that the sky is generally a healthy blue. However, recently, some residents in Jurong have expressed concern about the air quality in their area. In fact, it appears that many Singaporeans prefer to live in the east, as they feel that the air in the east is fresher than in the west, because the latter is heavily industrialised.

I would like to ask the Minister if there is any difference in air quality between the eastern and western parts of Singapore and, if so, what has been or will be done to ensure that the air quality in the west is within the healthy range.

Recently, it was reported that there has been a dramatic increase in the number of children who have asthma, which is a sickness related to air quality and air pollution. Of course, we know that severe asthma can lead to death. I would thus like to ask the Minister:

(1) How does our air quality compare to international standards?

(2) Are we still one of the cleanest cities in terms of air quality and, if so, why are more of our children becoming prone to asthma?

(3) Are there any other areas of concern regarding our air quality in the medium and long term, as Singapore continues to urbanise and our vehicle population increases?

Further, I note that the NEA, together with other relevant agencies, has launched the use of some green taxis and buses in a bid to reduce pollution and ensure that there will always be clean air.

Column: 1849

I would like to ask the Minister what has and would be done to promote greater use of green vehicles and clean energy to ensure that Singaporeans will always enjoy clean air.

Mdm Cynthia Phua: Sir, first of all, I would like to congratulate NEA for effectively controlling the air quality in Singapore. Last year, we noticed a significant improvement in the number of days of good air quality in Singapore. This is definitely due to the proactive revision of the emission standards and measures undertaken and implemented by the authorities, with the cooperation of the industry operators.

I share the same concern with Dr Amy Khor, because I also notice an increasing number of our young children who are susceptible to asthma. In fact, my two young children are also suffering from asthma and other

respiratory diseases. This is a disturbing trend. I know that air quality is a clear source which triggers such respiratory conditions.

I have a few questions for the Minister with regard to air quality in Singapore. Can the Minister give an assessment of the level of air quality in Singapore? Have we met the air quality standards set by the World Health Organisation? How is our air quality as compared to other developed cities in the US and Europe?

Last year, we have also notably seen the number of hazy days reduced. Can the Minister give an update on the haze situation, transboundry between our immediate neighbours - Malaysia and Indonesia? What is the latest in the haze action plan by the ASEAN Ministers?

Singapore is an urban city and we expect the number of motorised vehicles to increase with the years despite the COE system. I share the same concern as Dr Amy Khor and I would like to ask what is the status of the greater use of green

Column: 1850

cars and clean energy, as these are major contributors of emission to the environment. Would the Minister give us an update on this?

Mr Ang Mong Seng: (In Mandarin) : In this world, nothing is for free, except for the air in our atmosphere. However, when we breathe in dirty air, our health will be affected, and we have to spend a lot on our medical treatment. I think it is not worth it.

I would like to ask the Minister how the Ministry of the Environment will ensure that our quality of air has attained international standard. Secondly, in Singapore, very often, with heavy wind, our clean air could be blown away, and dirty air and even haze would be blown here from the neighbouring countries. Does the Ministry of the Environment have any measure to prevent this? Thirdly, compared to the other major cities like New York, London and Tokyo, what is the standard of our air quality? Fourthly, in most of our commercial buildings, all the windows are shut and our people are working and living in this type of enclosed environment. How do we ensure that our indoor air quality is good?

Mr S Iswaran (West Coast): Sir, my question pertains to the quality of air in the western part of Singapore as well. Sir, many residents have approached me with the question whether the air quality in the western part is safe for general inhalation, especially at certain times, because of the concentration of petrochemicals and chemical industries in that part of the island.

In particular, Sir, the question also arises as to how the Ministry is monitoring the air quality since the PSI that it announces is the average for the whole island, whereas the question is whether there may be variations across the island in terms of air quality in any particular point in time. The questions I have for the Minister are these:

Column: 1851

The first is whether there is, in fact, any variation in air quality across the island, based on the various monitoring stations that are positioned by the National Environment Agency.

The second question I have is regarding the Pollution Standard Index itself, which I believe takes into account both particulate matter and certain types of gases in the air in arriving at an index. The question is whether for areas where there are petrochemical or chemical industries, in particular, residents find that there is a dissonance when they are told that the air quality is good but they can detect certain odours or other sorts of interference in the air. The question is whether there needs to be some kind of modification or augmentation of the PSI for areas around the petrochemical or chemical industries.

The third question, which is quite simple, is: is the air in west coast good?

[Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Chew Heng Ching) in the Chair]

4.22 pm

Air Pollution

Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay: Sir, I am going to talk about air pollution derived from diesel-driven vehicles.

Sir, diesel engine driven trucks, taxis and buses are more energey efficient than similar vehicles powered by petrol engines. The diesel-driven vehicles running on Singapore roads help our nation in saving millions of dollars, in terms of the import of fuel every year. This is because diesel engines burn less quantity of fuel.

The trouble with diesel vehicles is the particulate matter in its emission, in particular, the particulate matter, PM 2.5,

Column: 1852

which is classified as a carcinogen. It is a particulate which is smaller than 2.5 micron. In the current vehicle emission standards, there is no control of such matter. Ideally, this PM 2.5 could be easily removed by a particulate trap. In my view, we should push for a higher standard to protect our people against such a carcinogen.

By implementing such a new requirement, it means an increase in the cost of vehicles and also an increase in transportation cost in doing business in Singapore. One of the ways to strike a good balance between the cost of transportation and a good clean environment is to push for a higher standard but exempt the taxes on anti-pollution and energy efficient equipment on the vehicles. We would not only want to achieve a world-class economic standard, we also aim to achieve world-class air quality standards.

I urge the Government to increase the vehicle emission standards and exempt the tax on all the anti-pollution equipment to make Singapore a cleaner place and that the cost of transportation even more affordable.

Diesel Engines

Mr Ong Kian Min (Tampines: ): I share Prof. Low's concerns. Except for taxis and goods vehicles, we rarely, if ever, see diesel-powered passenger cars on our roads today. By contrast, in Europe, diesel vehicles, from trucks to vans to motorcars, are a common sight. Diesel-powered cars are fast gaining popularity in western Europe, although the strictest envrionmental conditions are imposed. Many top-tier car manufacturers, including BMW, Audi, Mercedes-Benz offer diesel counterparts to their petrol-powered cars.

I believe that in recent years, such technological advances have been made with the refinement of diesel engines and

Column: 1853

in the quality of the fuel itself that it warrants a serious relook at diesel as an alternative to petroleum.

One major advance in diesel engine design is that the injection of the fuel directly into the cylinders has produced engines that offer demonstrable exhaust emissions and fuel economy gains as well as substantial noise and vibration improvements.

I have been told that aside from the price of diesel being lower than petrol by volume, diesel engines can deliver on the average up to 30% better fuel economy than their petroleum counterparts. With less fuel being consumed, there is also lower carbon dioxide emission.

Since 2001, vehicles registered for use in Singapore have had to comply with Euro 2 emission standards. This and our stringent regulations on the proper maintenance of vehicles in Singapore have resulted in a reduction in smoke emission from diesel-powered vehicles. In the year 2002, the Ministry of the Environment indicated that it would look into introducing Euro 3 emission standards at the appropriate time. However, in the region, Hong Kong and Thailand are already one step ahead, complying with the Euro 3 emission standards today. Next year, the European Union will adopt Euro 4 emission standards.

I would like to ask the Minister if it is possible for Singapore to leap-frog to Euro 4 standards and, if so, when. Under the Euro 4 emission standards, diesel will have sulphur level of not more than 50 parts per million as compared to Euro 2 standards of 500 parts per million. Euro 4 standards will therefore reduce drastically the level of sulphur dioxide and particulate emissions from diesel-powered vehicles. Adoption of the Euro 4 standards for diesel, coupled with the use of particulate

Column: 1854

filters and stricter standards of vehicle maintenance, will make the case for diesel much stronger than ever before.

A comparison of the cost of petrol and the cost of diesel, not taking into account the excise duties, clearly shows that diesel is significantly cheaper than petrol. This being the case, switching to diesel can translate to significantly lower foreign exchange payments for national fuel imports.

However, car owners in Singapore face a major obstacle if they wish to purchase a diesel-powered car. In addition to road tax, diesel cars, other than taxis, are levied a prohibitive diesel tax of six times the road tax of an equivalent petrol-driven car. For taxis, the diesel tax is $4,700 per year. Such a high tax deters ownership of a diesel car in spite of the economy offered. I believe the reasons for the high diesel tax are two-fold. One, to contain smoke emissions, which will be significantly improved with the adoption of Euro 4 standards and high vehicle maintenance standards that we have. Two, as diesel does not attract any duty, unlike petrol, to equalise the operating cost of the car.

I understand from my discussions with the other Government agencies that the second point is not so much a problem as taxes and duties can be adjusted and fine-tuned. The main concern is in relation to pollution. I hope the Ministry can bring forward the adoption of Euro 4 standards, and with that, make changes to the tax and duty structure to allow vehicle owners a more balanced choice between petrol and diesel-powered cars.

Mr Ng Ser Miang (Nominated Member): Sir, I would like to continue from what Prof. Low Seow Chay and Mr Ong Kian Min have said about diesel engine vehicles, in particular, diesel engine cars.

Column: 1855

In the report of the Office of Transportation Technologies, US Department of Energy, it was stated that modern diesel engine produces a lower amount of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons. Emission of reactive nitrogen compounds and particulate matters which Prof. Low has said, has actually been reduced by 90% from diesel engine since the 1980s because of advances in technology.

Diesel engines are already more efficient than gasoline cars - 40% of efficiency versus 30%, and with further advances in technology, there is a possibility of efficiency of diesel energy going up to 55%-63%.

Sir, in Singapore a litre of petrol costs $1.40 and diesel costs $0.73. So obviously, it is cheaper to operate diesel engine cars. In terms of travelability, there was a study done on a vehicle, Volkswagen Gulf GT1, comparing gas engine and diesel engine of similar capacity. There is no difference in terms of maximum vehicle speed acceleration and fuel consumption is 30% lower. I think this would result in both savings to car owners as well as to Singapore.

There are about 50% of passenger cars sold in Europe that are all diesel engine cars. Brands like Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Volkswagen are some of the big names that are selling diesel engine cars. Diesel engine cars will now appear to be more environment-friendly than gasoline engine cars or, what we call, petrol engine cars.

I would urge the Minister to consider making it easier for Singaporeans to own diesel cars by removing the diesel tax.

Column: 1856

Recycling

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: Since the National Waste Recycling Programme was launched in 2001 to encourage recycling among households, the recycling rate for residents in public and private housing estates has increased. I understand it is now 45%, up from 15% when the programme was first launched. For condominiums alone, the recycling rate increased from 4% in 2002 to 20% in 2003. These are indeed very commendable results.

4.30 pm

I would like to ask the Minister what new initiatives would be launched to further improve household recycling rates, especially in condominiums since the recycling rate of 20% is still low compared to public housing. Would the Minister also consider implementing schemes which encourage households to actually reduce waste

instead of just encouraging more recycling? For instance, would the Ministry be looking at, say, giving rebates to HDB precincts, condominiums and households in private estates which generate waste below various threshold levels to encourage residents to look at waste minimisation? As all habits die hard, and it is difficult to teach old dogs new tricks, it would be better to teach our young the value of waste minimisation and recycling. I would like to ask the Minister to give us his assessment of how successful the Ministry has been in reaching out to our young to inculcate in them greater environmental awareness, and what other new initiatives would the Ministry be implementing.

Mdm Cynthia Phua: Singapore faces a challenging task of dealing with the increasing amount of waste generated by its population. High building and operational cost of incineration plants and the lack of space for landfills have given rise to the need for waste minimisation and recycling. NEA has been encouraging the

Column: 1857

community to practise the 3Rs - Reduce, Reuse and Recycle at schools, workplaces and homes. In view of this background, I have a few questions for the Minister. Can the Minister give an update on Singapore's effort to promote the 3Rs? Are we achieving our objectives? What is the long-term plan of the Ministry? Are we just going to move towards zero landfill and why not zero landfill now or, even better still, zero waste?

I have found that the majority in the community still could not relate their recycling efforts to the environment. Would the Ministry conduct visits for residents to visit our Semakau landfill to allow our people to see the volume of waste the people are dumping daily and how soon it will be filled up? Many households are able to relate directly the recycling of paper as the karung guni man has done a good job for many years. However, for the other products such as wood waste, plastic bottles and glass, many residents could not understand the recycling process, the end products and the impact on the environment. Would NEA put in the effort in improving the public's understanding of these recycling processes for wood waste, plastic and glass so that Singaporeans would be encouraged to recycle more?

The Minister for the Environment (Mr Lim Swee Say): Sir, first, I would like to thank Dr Teo Ho Pin, Chairman of the GPC as well as the Members for raising issues that are very pertinent to the future development of the Singapore environment.

Sir, Dr Teo Ho Pin asked what is the status of the environment today. Mr Othman Haron asked what are the indicators and how are we doing in terms of environmental performance. Sir, the environmental performance of Singapore has been good in the year 2003. I say so based on four performance indicators.

Column: 1858

Firstly, the colour of the sky is still blue and the smell of our air is still fresh. According to the NEA, in terms of PSI, 93% of the days in 2003 were in the good range and 7% in the moderate range. In fact, in terms of air quality, 2003 was one of the best years in the history of Singapore. There was no unhealthy day, not a single day. One obvious reason is that we were not affected much by the regional haze last year. It was just modest. But, Sir, I want to emphasise the point that while regional haze is an important factor, we should not overstate that factor. The fact is that the quality of the air in Singapore depends a lot on what we do in Singapore.

Over the last 20 years, through careful planning and pollution control, we reduced the amount of lead in the air by more than 90%, and this did not happen by chance. At the same time, we reduced the amount of sulphur dioxide by more than 70%. Again, this did not happen by chance. Sir, the point I want to make here is that, as long as we work together to manage air pollution, Singapore can indeed continue to enjoy quality air for some time to come.

Sir, Mr Iswaran and Dr Amy Khor asked if there is a difference between the air quality in the western area versus eastern area. Mr Iswaran said that the PSI is an average across Singapore. Sir, I want to clarify that this is not the case. The way we measure PSI in Singapore is that we have 14 stations spread all over Singapore and we take the worst reading of these 14 stations in the compilation of our PSI. In other words, when I say that last year we had 93% of good PSI days and 7% of moderate PSI days, that applies to the whole of Singapore, whether you live in the west, east, north or south, since the compilation of PSI is based on worst reading across Singapore. Therefore, I want to assure Dr Amy Khor and Mr Iswaran that the air in the west is clean, fresh and safe.

Column: 1859

Sir, Mdm Cynthia Phua asked for an update on the haze agreement. I am happy to report that the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution was ratified by six countries as of 25th November last year. What this means is that the Haze Agreement can now come into force under the ASEAN framework because we need to have six countries to ratify the agreement. We can now go ahead to consolidate and strengthen our regional collaboration in the areas of prevention, monitoring, and mitigation of land and forest fires. Sir, the first meeting of the ASEAN Regional Haze Agreement will take place on 28th and 29th of April in Malaysia and ASEAN members will discuss the implementation mechanism and decide on the location of the ASEAN Coordinating Centre which will harness, mobilise and coordinate existing resources. Hopefully, by working together as one region, we can minimise the potential impact of haze on ASEAN.

Sir, the second indicator is the colour of the land, and again I am happy to say that it is still green and clean. Every day, 6,900 tons of wastes were collected in a very timely manner. 90% of this waste is incinerated in our incineration plants, with the remaining 10%, which are non-incinerable, disposed directly at Pulau Semakau as landfill. The number of illegal dumping has also come down, from 160 in year 2000 to 32 last year. But, Sir, one point worth noting is that every day, here in Singapore, we still need to deploy 6,700 cleaning workers, coming from town councils, NEA and NParks. They have to clean our streets, housing estates, parks, public amenities and public places. One of the reasons why Singapore is clean today is not because we are litter-free, but rather because every day we have these 6,700 workers to keep cleaning away our litter. I think this is something Singaporeans ought to reflect on.

Column: 1860

Sir, the third indicator is the colour of the water. Again, I am happy to say that it is still clear and safe. Every day, the PUB supplies 300 million gallons of water and every drop of used water is being treated to international standard before it is discharged to the sea. The amount of "brown" water, ie, the "flooding situation", has also improved over the years. Sir, Mr Othman Haron asked about last week's flood. The total size of flood-prone areas in Singapore, over the years, has continued to come down. Thirty years ago, there were 3,200 hectares of flood-prone areas in Singapore, equivalent to 8-9 Sentosa Islands. By the end of last year, it has come down to 158 hectares, which is less than half the size of Sentosa Island. These flood-prone areas are pockets of low-lying areas. Whenever there is a heavy rain coinciding with high tide, we will have minor floods from time to time. There were 10 in the year 2000, six in 2003. Last week, the floods that we had were not minor floods. In fact, they were fairly extensive.

On 8th March, in the Bukit Timah and Thomson Road areas, the flood was about 0.3 metre deep, lasted less than one hour, but covered an area of 11 hectares. That is why I said it was a fairly extensive flood. Three days later, on 11th March, in the Paya Lebar and Katong areas, again, the flood was about 0.3 metre deep, less than one hour long, but again, the area covered was quite extensive, about five hectares. So I can understand why Mr Othman Haron is concerned about the flood that took place last week.

There are basically two reasons. First, the intensity of the storm last week was so heavy that it happens, on the average, once in 10 years. Secondly, it happened at a time when the tide was exceptionally high, more than three metres. These two factors, coming together, caused a fairly extensive flood. Some of you may wonder that since we are able to reduce the flood-prone areas

Column: 1861

from 8-9 Sentosas to less than half, why do we not remove the problem of flooding completely?

Sir, let me explain. Lorong Buangkok is a place off Yio Chu Kang. According to PUB, that place is flooded, on the average, three times in a year. One reason is that the area is just slightly above the high tide level. As a result, whenever there is a heavy downpour, the place would flood. I asked PUB if we can do something to alleviate the flood situation there. PUB said, yes, it can be done. With today's technology, they can always put in place a pump to pump out the rain water whenever it rains heavily. However, it will cost us $10 million to put in place a solution, and that $10 million will go to benefit 28 households living in that area. Sir, Members will agree with me that it is just not cost effective. It does not make sense for us to spend $10 million to solve the flood problem for 28 households. So I asked PUB if it means that that area will forever have to suffer from flood. PUB said that realistically the practical approach would be to use some sand and earth to raise the ground level when the area is due for redevelopment.

Sir, I want to assure the House that wherever cost effective, we do undertake projects to reduce flooding. Take, for example, the one that is on-going at the Alexandra and Lower Delta area. We have widened and deepened the canal, and the project will be completed by the end of this year. Last week, even though the rain was heavy and the tide was high, that area was not flooded. We are beginning to see the benefits of widening and deepening the canal there.

Sir, the other flood prone area is a cluster around the central district area. For example, in the Jalan Besar area - some of the shophouses and roads are often flooded during heavy downpours

Column: 1862

and high tides. The older parts of the city - Chinatown is also flood prone. Boat Quay, Rochor Road, Farrer Park, and so on are areas that are below the high tide level. The remaining area would be the ones mentioned by Mr Othman Haron - Geylang, Paya Lebar, Sims Avenue, Marine Drive, and so on. These are parts of the Geylang river system. Sir, I am happy to inform the House that, by the time the proposed Marina Barrage is put in place by the year 2007, most of these flood problems would go away, or at least be reduced by a very large extent. Sir, as mentioned by Mr Othman Haron, over the last 20 years we have spent $1.5 billion to reduce the floor-prone areas to 158 hectares now. Over the next 3-4 years, we will continue this effort. We aim to reduce the flood-prone areas from 158 hectares to less than 100 hectares, which is about one-quarter the size of Sentosa by 2007.

Mr Othman Haron asked what kind of measures we can put in place today to reduce and minimise the impact of flooding on the residents. Sir, there are a few measures taken by PUB. Firstly, working with the NEA, we provide information on high tide to the residents in advance because we are able to forecast ahead which are the days we are likely to see exceptional high tides. Because the information is provided to the residents a few months ahead, the residents may have forgotten about our advisory note when the time comes. So starting from next week, PUB will provide reminders three days ahead of the high tide. Hopefully, this would better remind the residents. At the same time, PUB is working with the seven CCCs to provide flood advisories to residents living in the affected areas. PUB is also working with the radio to issue radio alert to keep the public informed in a very timely manner. Last, but not least, for those who want to find out more, they can always contact the PUB call centre, starting from last week, for any latest flood updates.

Column: 1863

4.45 pm

Sir, the fourth indicator is the colour of public health. And, here I am happy to say that public health is still pink.

Last year, we had two major challenges. First, the outbreak of SARS. I am happy to say that our public health infrastructure and overall response system were put to the test and it shows that we are functioning well.

Some Members may remember that there was a concern about whether SARS could spread through the sewer system. In the case of Singapore, we have water seals that will not only trap smell but also SARS. More importantly, the people responded in a very united manner. Hence from the public health angle, we did well.

The second challenge last year was the outbreak of dengue in our region. Dengue is endemic in more than 100 countries. According to the WHO, 50 million people are infected every year, and 22,000 people - most of them are children - die every year from dengue. So this is something not to be taken lightly.

We are located in a region where dengue is endemic. We are affected by the outbreak of dengue over the last two years. The number of dengue cases in Singapore went up, from 2,300 in 2001 to 4,000 in 2002, to 4,800 last year. We are not spared from the dengue outbreak.

However, I am happy to say that we managed to keep the dengue outbreak situation under control. As some Members intend to touch on this subject, I will respond later when we come to them.

Sir, Dr Teo Ho Pin asked whether we have any disaster management plans in place to cope with public health outbreaks. The answer is yes. Firstly, PUB

Column: 1864

and NEA both have quick response teams in place all the time. These quick response teams were put to the test in the SARS outbreak and I think they responded very well when activated.

Secondly, we work very closely with the pest control contractors so that when needed, we are able to activate them to conduct search and destroy operations.

Lastly, most importantly, we network strongly with the grassroots organisations. In times of need, we will be able to mobilise the grassroots as well.

In the case of food-borne disease outbreaks, again, we have the system in place. Should there be an outbreak, we will be able to close the food shops concerned, seize and destroy food items, clean and disinfect the food shops.

Sir, based on these four indicators, I am happy to say that 2003 was a good year, as far as environmental performance is concerned.

Dr Teo asked how sustainable is the good environmental performance. He also asked about the monitoring mechanism for 2012 and the progress of our 3P efforts. Sir, for a fast-moving, growing and open city like Singapore, none of these environmental performance achievements happened by chance. They did not come easy but it can be done as long as we work together to avoid environmental disaster. To ensure that we can continue to enjoy good environmental performance over the long term, we have, firstly, put in place very clear targets for the next 10 years under the Singapore Green Plan 2012, as mentioned by Dr Teo, in eight areas.

Secondly, we have put in place a mechanism to review these targets every three years. This is very important because of the changing environment. So

Column: 1865

we make sure that our 10-year targets are up to date once every three years.

Last, but not least, we have translated all these 3-year and 10-year targets into a series of action programmes. As of now, there are six action programme committees formed by the 3P partners, and they have formulated 155 action programmes for implementation over the next three years. This shows how serious we are in translating our targets on paper into real action on the ground.

However, Sir, I want to emphasise that how far we can go and how fast we can move towards the Singapore Green Plan 2012 depends on one thing: not so much the target or strategy or action plan, but very much our ability to transform our 3P partnership into 3P ownership. Some Members may wonder what is the difference between 3P partnership and 3P ownership.

I discussed this with my colleagues at the ENV, NEA and PUB. I told them that when we talk about 3P partnership, it is like having three persons on the same ship. I said that as we move from 3P partnership to 3P ownership, we should now have three owners and not three partners on the same ship. In other words, there are three captains to steer and direct the ship.

In response, my Senior Parliamentary Secretary Maidin said, "Mr Lim, I don't think so. From my limited knowledge about how a captain runs a ship, I don't think it is possible for three captains to direct one ship. I don't think that is a good illustration."

The CEO of PUB, Khoo Teng Chye, said, "Instead of ship, why don't we use Jumbo aircraft instead?" In a SIA Jumbo, they have co-pilots. So, you can have more than one pilot to fly the plane.

Column: 1866

Then, my Director-General of Public Health, Daniel Wang, said, "Yes, better still, if we do not stop with the co-pilot concept, but towards auto-pilot too." That, basically, is to make protecting the environment second nature to the 3P partners. The CEO of NEA, BG Lum Joon Khoi, then added what, in my view, is the best reason for moving from ship to Jumbo Jet. He said, "In the case of a ship, even if you are a captain of the ship, you can still jump ship, even though you are the last one to jump. But in the case of the Jumbo, when the three co-pilots are in the same plane, there is no way that they can jump off the plane." In other words, all of us will be committed to the same destination in managing our environment.

Sir, this indeed is the new mindset in the ENV, NEA and PUB. When we talk about sustaining the good performance of the environment, we no longer adopt the old mindset of looking at ENV as the captain of this environmental ship. Instead, we now look at our 3P partners as co-pilots. We are now three co-owners and we have to work together to go into auto-pilot mode, so that everybody in Singapore, whether you are in private sector, public sector or people sector, will look at protecting our environment as second nature to us.

Sir, some Members may wonder whether all this talk about transforming 3P partnership into 3P ownership is just talk and no action. I want to assure the House that we are putting action and money where our mouth is. The NEA, started two years ago, has established a 3P partnership fund. They drew on the resources from the various programmes, put them together, to support various 3P programmes. Last year, we had a fund size of $750,000. For this year, NEA intends to increase it to $1 million. We use these resources to work with our 3P owners in various areas. eg, in Little India, there is now a Little India Environment

Column: 1867

Watch. In the case of public toilets, there is a programme launched by the Restroom Association of Singapore known as "Happy Toilets". These are just examples of what we are doing now with our 3P owners.

Another example - in our schools, we talk about students with straight As. In ENV, we talk about food courts with straight As. In the past, we went to a food court and we certified hygiene standard stall by stall - A, B or C. Now, we have a self-regulating programme. The food courts can self-regulate, take measures to improve their hygiene so that the entire food court can qualify for A grading. Food Junction now has 14 food courts with straight As grading. Another one is Banquet: its eight food courts are all straight As. This is a result of 3P ownership. Instead of us checking on them, they now regulate and check themselves, and they introduce necessary measures themselves.

In the case of the Singapore Environmental Council, likewise, we are working with them to introduce the concept of a pro-environment club, bringing together business organisations that want to support environmental programmes. Of course, the most significant 3P ownership programme that was undertaken last year was the launch of the Singapore's OK for the community. We now work with a few thousand grassroots leaders and volunteers in making sure that Singapore's OK is being permeated to the ground.

As we move from partnership to ownership, it is very important to recognise that we are in this together - because we live in the same Singapore, we breathe the same air, we drink the same water, and we live in the same safe and healthy environment. We must all recognise that there is no easy way out

Column: 1868

towards environmental sustainability. We have to make it happen, by working together.

Dr Teo Ho Pin pointed out the importance of strengthening mutual understanding among the 3P partners. Sir, I agree with him fully. As we move from 3P partnership to 3P ownership, the key issue is whether we are able to bring the level of public education to a higher plane. If the members of the public do not understand what we are trying to do and what needs to be done to strengthen our environmental sustainability, then many of the plans that we have under the SGP 2012 cannot come true. This is the reason why we have decided to launch Singapore Clean Report. Members of the House who have the chance to flip through this Report will notice that this Report is written in a very simple to understand manner. Some Members may wonder why it is so simple. After all, this is not meant just for primary school kids, but for the members of the public.

Here, I want to relate a real situation. I was told that when the World Trade Centre building was first built, they put in the fastest lifts they could find at that time. But within a few days, many of those who went to the top of the World Trade Centre came down with a common complaint that the lifts were too slow. The engineers could not understand why. They said, "Look, this is the fastest lift we can get in the market, but the people still complain that it is too slow. What more can we do?" The building management asked the engineers to design an even faster lift than the fastest lift. The engineers said, "It cannot be done, because this will compromise the safety standard."

Then, out of the blue, a person who knew nothing about engineering but knew a lot about human psychology said, "Maybe the problem is not the speed of the lift because, after all, we know that

Column: 1869

this is the fastest lift". He felt the problem was more to do with human psychology. When you are with a group of strangers in a confined space, you do not know where to put your eyes. If you look at the other person, the person does not like it. You stare at the ceiling, there is nothing to see. So they feel very awkward in the lift, and every second seems like a long time.

He said, "Why don't we do this? We put mirrors on the four walls inside the lift, so that they can look at themselves and see whether their hair is all right, etc." That was what they did. It was such a simple solution and it solved the problem. After they installed the lifts with mirrors, there was not a single complaint that the lifts were too slow.

What has this got to do with the Singapore clean card? When we talk about sustainability, we have to talk about public education. We need members of the public to understand not just what are we trying to do, but more importantly, why we are trying to do all these. If we are not able to explain things in simple terms, if we are not able to do our best to KISS - keep it short and simple - then we are going to confuse the public. There is a Chinese saying, zhi qi ran, pu zhi qi suoyi ran . They say, "You want me to recycle, but why is it so important to recycle? You tell them that in the future, we may have to tighten our emission standard and save energy, and they wonder why." Through this Singapore Clean Report, we are actually adopting a human psychological angle now. We are not trying to give instructions to the members of the public, because the harder we try to enforce, the harder we try to instruct, I think the more they will resist. Instead, we try to explain and help members of the public understand why the threat of environmental disaster is real

and it is important that we do what is necessary.

Column: 1870

5.00 pm

Sir, Members can see that we use simple graphic and user-friendly language in this Report. We hope that, in time to come, members of the public will understand much more about environmental performance and environmental sustainability. Hopefully, the day will come when we talk about the environment, we will not be talking about "The Environment", but "Our Environment". This would be the day when we can truly say that we have all taken ownership of the environment. Sir, this is also why I am thinking of changing the name of our Ministry - from the Ministry of the Environment to the Ministry of Our Environment.

Sir, let me move on to address some of the specific issues raised by the Members regarding how sustainable is the Singapore environment. Mr Othman Haron asked whether our air quality is one of the cleanest in the world. Mdm Cynthia Phua and Dr Amy Khor asked how does it compare with international standards and what are the new areas of concern. They talked about the rising trend of asthma and asked whether this has to do with the air quality. Mr Ang Mong Seng asked what strategy we have to improve air quality.

Sir, the air quality in Singapore today is certainly one of the best in the world. All the major pollutants - sulphur dioxide, particulate matter 10, nitrogen oxide, ozone, carbon monoxide, and so on, are all within the international standards. Certainly, we have one of the best air quality in the world. However, for us to continue to enjoy this good quality of air, there are two things we need to do. Firstly, we have to keep the level of the established air pollutants to within the international standards, just like what we have done up to now. At the same time, we must continue to identify new

Column: 1871

pollutants and make sure that these new pollutants are brought within the international standards. In this regard, one of such new pollutants which is attracting a lot of attention from Members of the House is PM 2.5 which stands for particulate matter 2.5.

Sir, PM 2.5 is a very small particle, just the size of 1/20th of the diameter of our hair. Various studies have shown that PM 2.5 can be harmful to our health if we are exposed to unhealthy level. For example, it could lead to bronchitis or asthma. Therefore, it is important for us to make sure that the emission of PM 2.5 is under control in Singapore. PM 2.5 is a newly identified pollutant. At this moment, there are still no international standards. The WHO has not defined a standard for PM 2.5 yet. But the US-EPA, about six years ago, had already identified and defined the standards for major cities in USA. In line with the spirit of observing best practices, we have decided to observe the same standards as well. As of now, most of the major cities in the USA are still not able to meet this standard of PM 2.5. Singapore too.

Members of the House may wonder where does PM 2.5 come from. Sir, PM 2.5 comes from three sources. Firstly, from power generation and industry, and they account for 30% of the PM 2.5 in our air. Secondly, background sources - these are particles from natural sources, nothing much we can do, and they account for 20%. And the remaining 50% of PM 2.5 in our air comes from vehicles, and in particular, diesel vehicles. Today, the emission standard in Singapore is Euro II. Diesel in Singapore is used mainly for taxis, commercial vehicles and buses. Collectively, they account for almost all the PM 2.5 in our air as far as vehicular emission is concerned. In other words, 50% of the PM 2.5 comes from the taxis, commercial vehicles and buses.

Column: 1872

Prof. Low Seow Chay and several Members commented that we should do something to tighten emission standard. Mr Ong Kian Min asked when we can move to Euro III and suggested that we might want to leapfrog to Euro IV. Sir, it is true that, in 2001, we introduced the Euro II as an emission standard for all vehicles, including diesel vehicles. At that point in time, we gave the industries two years advanced notice. The intention at that point was to follow-up with the introduction of Euro III following Euro II. However, because of slow economic growth in the past few years, we did not want to add to the burden of the industries and businesses. Since our air quality was still within the international standards, we decided to defer the implementation of Euro III. But, now that we have decided to tackle the issue of PM 2.5, we have made a reassessment. If we were to move from Euro II to Euro III, we will not be able to bring the level of PM 2.5 to within the standards set by US-EPA because Euro III vehicles still emit a certain amount of PM 2.5. The only way for us to meet the standard for PM 2.5 is for us, as recommended by Mr Ong Kian Min, to leapfrog from Euro II to Euro IV. However, we are fully aware, as pointed out by Prof. Low Seow Chay, that this would have cost implication, in terms of cost on public transport, cost of business, and so on. We therefore have to be mindful and introduce whatever measures possible to minimise the cost impact on the transportation industry and on members of the public.

Sir, I wish to inform the House that the ENV has decided to adopt Euro IV as its next move to sustain clean air in Singapore. However, Euro IV will not come into effect immediately, but only in October 2006. We are giving the industries 2½ years of lead time ahead of implementation. Over the next 2½ years, there are two things we need to do. On the part of the industry, they can plan for compliance and phase in Euro IV vehicles.

Column: 1873

But, more importantly, we have to find ways to introduce new options for the fleet owners to satisfy this Euro IV standard. Today, fleet owners in Singapore can obviously go for Euro IV diesel vehicles when Euro IV comes into effect. Various Members have described the advances in diesel vehicles. That is true. So Euro IV diesel vehicles that use ultra low sulphur diesel are obviously a solution.

However, there is another solution, which is to make use of CNG vehicles. A CNG vehicle, in fact, emits almost no PM 2.5. It is even cleaner compared to Euro IV diesel since it does not emit PM 2.5 at all. We feel it is very important that we try to put in place the infrastructure for both options, so that by the time Euro IV comes into effect in October 2006, the industries, the fleet owners, the taxi owners, the bus owners, and so on, will have two options. They could either go for Euro IV diesel or go for CNG vehicles. Today, CNG is not an option yet. Because if you were to go for CNG vehicles, there is no refueling station. The infrastructure is not in place. So we are caught in a situation where the gas suppliers are not keen to roll out the CNG refueling network because there are no vehicles and no demand.

On the part of the fleet owners, they are not able to move into CNG cars because there is no refueling network. The only way to solve this problem is to jump-start CNG vehicles in Singapore over the next 2½ years so that by the time Euro IV comes into operation in October 2006, the two alternatives will be in place.

Sir, between now and October 2006, potentially, there are 5,000 taxis which are due for replacement. If we can put in place the incentives to enable these taxi operators to replace their Euro II diesel taxis with CNG taxis over the next 2½ years, we would have about 5,000 CNG

Column: 1874

taxis by October 2006. This is indeed our intention. The Government has therefore decided to offer incentive support for CNG taxis during this transitional period between now and October 2006, so that CNG taxis can take off and compete with Euro IV diesel taxis in the open market by the year 2006.

The tax incentive support, firstly, would include the green vehicle rebate. CNG taxis registered between now and end 2005 will enjoy the ARF rebate of 20% of the OMV and, on top of that, they will be exempted from special tax in the years 2004 and 2005. In addition, the Government has decided to offer an additional ARF rebate of equivalent to 80% of the OMV. What this means is that the taxi fleet owners, if they were to replace their Euro II diesel taxis with the CNG taxis, will be able to enjoy ARF rebate of up to 100% of the OMV, together with the exemption of special tax. With this, the life cycle cost of a CNG taxi will not be more than a Euro II diesel taxi, if registered between now and October 2006. In fact, it will be slightly lower. I want to emphasise that this incentive support is only applicable during this transitional period between now and October 2006 so that we can see the setting up of natural gas refueling infrastructure as well as achieving a base of CNG taxis. After October 2006, there will be two viable options of CNG taxis and Euro IV diesel taxis. Both will have to compete in the open market.

Sir, the NEA and LTA will brief the taxi and the bus operators and the gas suppliers on why we need to move towards Euro IV and details of the tax rebate and exemption of the special tax at a separate session. I hope that the taxi operators will take advantage of this tax rebate during this transitional period so that, hopefully, we will see the first batch of CNG vehicles operating in Singapore by the end of this year. This will mark a new beginning of green cars here in Singapore,

Column: 1875

to enable us to bring the air quality in Singapore to come within the standard of PM 2.5 well before 2012.

Mr Othman Haron asked whether we are effectively reducing carbon dioxide emission. Sir, the answer is yes. CNG and Euro IV will help to slow down the increase in green house gas emission. If we look at CO2 emission on a per capita basis, Singapore was ranked 18th highest in the world. This is unavoidable because we are a city state and an export oriented economy. As a result, much of the CO2 is emitted by factories producing goods for export, and the emission is counted against Singapore. This has made us the 18th highest, in terms of CO2 per capita emission. However, a fairer way to look at CO2 emission efficiency is CO2 per GDP dollar. We think that is a more relevant way of measuring CO2 emission efficiency. In that regard, I am happy to say that we are ranked 49th in the world, fairly low down.

With CNG vehicles coming on stream in conjunction with the introduction of Euro IV standard, this will come down further. These CNG vehicles will emit 10-30% less CO2 compared to Euro II diesel vehicles. Together with proper maintenance of all vehicles as well as our campaign to save electricity in households and factories, and our efforts to promote the greater use of clean energy, I believe that we can collectively reduce CO2 emission on per GDP dollar basis, progressively in a sustainable manner.

Sir, allow me to move on to indoor air quality. Dr Teo Ho Pin asked what is the indoor air quality in Singapore today, whether it is possible to have an index for indoor air quality. Mr Ang Mong Seng asked whether we have any strategy to improve indoor air quality. Sir, I agree with the Members that good indoor air quality is important because many of us

Column: 1876

spend a lot of time indoors. I am happy to say that the indoor air quality in Singapore is generally good and safe. In 1996, the Ministry of the Environment published the guidelines for good indoor air quality in office premises. We stipulate the acceptable limits for indoor air pollutants, eg, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, suspended particles, total bacteria and fungal counts, and so on.

5.15 pm

Sir, Members may wonder why we publish only a guideline and not regulation for enforcement. To the best of our knowledge, this is an international practice, where the government authority will provide the guidelines as it is the responsibility of the building owners and management to ensure that the best practices are being adopted. We will continue to promote these best practices, so that these guidelines can be observed and the indoor air quality can remain good.

Sir, Dr Teo Ho Pin touched on poor maintenance of air-conditioning and ventilation system. I do not disagree with him. From time to time, we do come across buildings where maintenance procedures can be further enhanced. This is the reason why the Singapore Environmental Institute conducts training for the building management personnel, so that they can learn how to abide by the specifications for ventilation systems under the Singapore standard code of practices for mechanical ventilation and air-conditioning in buildings.

Sir, to further enhance indoor air quality, NEA is now studying the possibility of drawing up a series of code of practices to supplement the guidelines. This series of code of practices will touch on more specific measures for various types of indoor environment and take into consideration the duration of stay, such as shopping malls versus offices. These

Column: 1877

specific measures for different kinds of environment can become a more formal instrument. In time to come, if there is a need to regulate some practices in the code, we are prepared to do so, but not at this juncture.

Sir, last but not least, I want to assure the House that, from time to time, we will not hesitate to enact legislation to address a public health concern when necessary. For example, three years ago, in 2001, we enacted the Environmental Public Health Act on the cooling towers and water fountains. The outcome was that we managed to reduce the Legionnaire cases by one third over three years, from 65 in 2000, to 45 last year.

Sir, allow me to move on to solid waste management. Several Members asked whether clean land in Singapore today is sustainable. Dr Amy Khor asked about the progress we have made in recycling and whether there is enough landfill in the long term. Mdm Cynthia Phua also asked about the progress and what is new in recycling. Let me emphasise here again that managing solid wastes is a global challenge. What do New York City, Tokyo and Singapore have in common? All three cities are short of landfill sites. New York City solves the problem by transporting rubbish as far as 480 kilometres away for landfill. In the case of Tokyo, it is reported that the City will run out of landfill capacity very soon. They are looking for new solutions as well.

In the case of Singapore, I would like to reiterate that there is no more landfill site left on the main island. Pulau Semakau is the one we are using today, and it can last for 25 years. Even if we were to double the size of Pulau Semakau, in time to come, it will last for 50 years at the most. Beyond that, what do we do? In the past, from 1970 onwards, we solved our solid waste challenge mainly through volume

Column: 1878

reduction. We sent the waste for burning and, in the process, reduce the volume of the waste by up to 90%. That was how we addressed our solid waste problem. If we keep on doing that, firstly, we need to build quite a number of incineration plants to burn all the rubbish. Secondly, we will still run out of landfill sites one day, because the bottom ash from incineration will still need to be landfill. This is the reason why we moved beyond incineration towards recycling about 10 years ago, so that we can reduce incineration and reduce the demand for landfill.

Today, I am happy to say that our environment industry is becoming more capable and innovative in the area of waste recycling. For example, we now have the capability to recycle electronic waste into precious metals, wood waste into compost, horticultural waste into charcoal, construction and demolition waste into secondary aggregates. The list goes on. In fact, 94% of the construction and demolition waste in Singapore was recycled last year. This is just one illustration of how far we have come in recycling.

But what is even more exciting, as mentioned by several Members here, is that we have expanded the recycling culture beyond the industries to include the households as well. The national recycling programme for households started in 2001. We are happy to see that 45% of our households in Singapore are now taking part in recycling. We hope to achieve 55% by the end of this year. Together, the industries and households have been able to increase our overall recycling rate in terms of tonnage from 40% three years ago to 47% last year. This is a very significant improvement.

What is even more exciting is that we are beginning to see the fruits of our recycling effort. Last year, we - industries and households together - produced 10% less waste, compared to 2000. We

Column: 1879

are seeing a reverse trend now in waste generation. At this rate, Pulau Semakau will be able to last another 10 years longer. So, instead of 25 years, it will be 35 years. At the same time, we will be able to save on the construction of three incineration plants every 40 years. Even though this is very good, we do not think it is good enough. We must continue to recycle more waste streams - incineration bottom ash, food waste and more. We must continue to promote recycling by the households. One area of emphasis this year will be the condominiums because, as of now, only 20% of the condominiums are taking part in recycling. We hope more will come on board. Hopefully, we will achieve 35% by the end of this year. At the same time, in public places, we will put more public bins, up from 4,500 last year, to 5,500 this year. This will help reinforce the recycling message on a day-to-day basis to members of the public.

Dr Amy Khor asked whether we could do more to educate the young. The answer is yes. In fact, we now have a recycling programme targeting at the schools. We hope more schools will come on board. Mdm Cynthia Phua suggested that we should bring more members of the public to visit our landfill sites, recycling plants, and other facilities. This is an excellent idea and is something we will do more in future. At the end of the day, we hope all these efforts will help us resolve our landfill problem as we move towards zero landfill.

Sir, Mdm Cynthia Phua asked what is new in recycling, beyond what has been said today. Dr Amy Khor suggested that we go one step further towards waste reduction. Again, I fully agree. Basically, if we look at the life cycle of solid wastes, what we are doing in incineration and landfill are downstream activities. The waste is already there. We just burn them

Column: 1880

to reduce volume, and landfill them so that they are out of sight. As we move towards recycling, reuse and recovery, we are moving from downstream to midstream, avoiding the generation of waste by turning waste into useful materials. But I think it is now time for us to move upstream, towards waste reduction by avoiding the generation of waste in the first instance.

Just last year, the global community involved with solid waste management met at a world congress. We have many world congresses, and there was one on solid waste management. This world congress was held in Melbourne in November last year, and I was there to take part in the deliberations. Sustainability in solid waste management is today the key word in the global community. Singapore, New York and Tokyo are not the only cities in the world facing challenges in solid waste management and problem of shortage of landfill sites. In fact, more and more countries and cities are facing the same problem.

At that world congress, there was a discussion on how the global community can move towards the concept of zero waste. The idea of zero waste is basically this: can we not, for example, reduce packaging? Every year, come Christmas, we buy gifts for our loved ones. Some shops would have three layers of packaging. They wrap the gifts, put them in a box, put another layer of paper outside and, in some cases, put on a ribbon, etc. There is a lot of over-packaging being practised in the marketplace. Hence, the question is: can we not do something to reduce packaging? Even as we reduce packaging, can we not use packaging materials that are more eco-friendly and biodegradable? Hopefully, on the one hand, we can avoid the generation of the waste and, on the other hand, whatever minimum amount of waste we have to produce, there is an

Column: 1881

easier way to recycle and dispose of the waste.

This means we have now reached a stage whereby we need the concerted effort of everyone throughout the whole value chain of waste management - from the point of production, ie, the manufacturers; to the point of distribution, ie, the wholesalers and the logistics handlers; to the point of sales, ie, the retailers and members of the public.

Sir, indeed, this is the next move for NEA in the management of solid waste. We want to explore the next frontier in solid waste management - towards zero waste.

Recreational Use of Reservoirs

Mdm Cynthia Phua: Sir, although Singapore is an island, there are not many water sports that Singaporeans could enjoy. With our neighbours close by and the high traffic shipping lines near to our shores, there are limited sea areas for offshore fishing, sailing, boating and skiing activities. In addition, with most of our shorelines being reclaimed, and with their high embankment of stone walls, there are also very few beaching and safe and clean swimming areas. However, with limited land, we need to increase and be innovative in our use of the limited resources that we have. We needed and built beautiful reservoirs, but we are not maximising the beautiful landscape that we have. We only use them to store our water supply and not fully utilise the potential of our reservoirs for recreational activities. With appropriate measures and increasing civic-mindedness of our people, and the awareness of having important clean water sources, I would like to urge the authorities to be innovative and creative in maximising the use of the reservoirs that we have.

Recently, while working on a GRC project, I took a walk at Bedok Reservoir.

Column: 1882

I was simply charmed by the night scene. The surroundings of the reservoir were not lighted up but, as a group, I was not concerned of the darkness and security. The ripples of the water, the wind and the expanse of the water give one the feeling of the spaciousness that one does not normally find in a crowded Singapore. I would like to urge the Ministry to allow for more forms of recreational activities at the reservoir parks. We understand that the Lower Seletar Reservoir has, with the cooperation of the Seletar Country Club, introduced sailing in the reservoir. We should encourage our educational institutions, eg, the polytechnics, secondary and primary schools, to introduce more sailing activities in our other reservoirs. The water activities could expand into boating, canoeing and paddle-boating for recreational use. Most of these educational institutions have always complained that they do not have the facilities for their students, especially for CCA.

There have already been fishing activities in some of the reservoirs, but not all the reservoirs allow such activities. As mentioned earlier, although Singapore is an island, we do not have many fishing spots. This is due to the sloping and high embankment walls which do not allow throwing of fishing lines from the shores. Being a fishing enthusiast myself, I would like to urge PUB to allow more fishing spots in our reservoirs, not one or two in each reservoir, but as many as PUB could allow, to ensure that there is sufficient space for other users. The surrounding areas of the reservoirs, which are also situated mostly among the green lungs of Singapore, should provide the facilities for walks, jogging, nature trails, bicycle trails at night, and even camping overnight. This would mean that night lighting facilities should be provided.

With the introduction of some open spaces, controlled aero-modelling, remote control cars and even kite flying could be introduced, as these open spaces would

Column: 1883

have the unobstructed flow of the natural wind, due to the wide expanse of water. Some reservoirs, like the Bedok Reservoir, are near to the commercial neighbourhood centres. The commercial, social and recreational use of the reservoir could be integrated,

for example, to provide outside cafe, or open restaurants, like what NParks has done with success in Pasir Ris Park. The Ministry and agencies should work together more to make our limited landscape and resources attractive and provide for our hardworking and stressed Singaporeans the opportunity to relax and enjoy life's giving.

Water Policy

5.30 pm

Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay: Sir, I would like to talk about untreated water. The cost of the treatment of water is high and it would be a mere loss of money if the treated water is being used for places where treatment of the water is not needed. The obvious examples of this would be cleaning of the floor and common areas by the Town Councils, other applications such as fish farming, aquariums, watering of plants and used as animal feeds. In my view, if the application is suitable using untreated water of high volume, it will save cost for the industries and also save all the resources of the Government for doing the unnecessary water treatment. There are many sources where untreated water could be made available. The simplest one is collection of rainwater. The other will be to pump water from the open water courses, like the river, " long kang " or canal.

However, the present rules of the PUB restrict people from taking water from the abovementioned sources. The reasons, announced in the press, were that the water belongs to PUB. If every one of us

Column: 1884

taps water from the river and collects rainwater, we will end up with no water in the reservoir.

Sir, in my view, it is a good idea for the Government to open up the use of untreated water for big water users. It saves companies, as well as Town Councils, huge amounts of money and also save the national resources used to do the unnecessary work of treating the water which does not need to be treated. Ultimately, it helps to bring down the operating costs of doing business in Singapore and make Singapore a much more competitive place for business. I hope the Government would review the use of untreated water from rain water and the rivers.

Rain Water

Mr Andy Gan Lai Chiang (Marine Parade): I share the same concern of Prof. Low Seow Chay about saving money on untreated water.

Before the advent of today's modern water treatment facilities, many people rely solely on the collection of rain water for households, landscape and agricultural uses. In water-scarce Singapore, Singapore's abundant rainfall of about 1,700 millimetres is a natural source of precious water. Instead of allowing the rain water to run off into the rivers, we should allow Singaporeans to collect it where possible.

Resident living in private homes will find it relatively easy to collect rainwater for non-drinking purposes, while HDB dwellers can rely on their Town Councils to collect water in certain areas, such as markets and car parks, for general cleaning purposes.

Rain water collection and harvesting can simply be described as channelling the rain water collected in gutters through a sediment filter and, finally, into a storage tank for later use. Harvested rain

Column: 1885

water can be used to wash cars, water plants and cleaning purposes. In some parts of the world, people still depend on rain water collection to meet most of their water needs. Even in those communities where many residents are supplied with public water for drinking, home owners and businesses are turning to rain water collection systems to meet non-potable water needs, such as landscape watering especially in the dry regions of the US.

The advantages of self-collection are two-fold. Firstly, from the nation's point of view, more water can be stored for human consumption, instead of wasting treated water for cleaning. Secondly, consumers in the private estate will be saving money by spending less on their water bills while Town Councils will spend less on cleaning the common areas.

Rain water harvesting is gaining popularity as people learn more about the advantages of collecting water in its natural state. As a precaution against possible contamination of the public's piped water, we can legislate that families collecting rain water install proper equipment, and require that the rain water system does not contribute to mosquito breeding by having an uncovered system.

Future Water Supply

Mr Othman Haron Eusofe (Marine Parade): Sir, I just like to ask the Minister the following questions on our future water supply.

Firstly, are we on track to make up for the 1961 Water Agreement when it expires in 2011? And as we turn to NEWater and desalination, can the Minister explain the impact of the costs of these new sources on our industries, the commercial sector and also on our households?

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed (Aljunied): Sir, we agree with Minister Lim Swee Say that when it comes to our “OK”

Column: 1886

environment, we are all in it together. We will drink to that, and for that, we need more water.

Singapore has already announced its new strategies of four taps, including NEWater and desalination, adding a new sense of confidence and fluidity. Although there seems to be a new wind of friendship blowing across the Causeway, after Datuk Abdullah Badawi took over as Malaysia’s Prime Minister, we have only seven years before the first Water Agreement in Malaysia expires in 2011. While we hope for the best, we must prepare for the worst. Are plans on track to make up for it if no solution to the Gordian Knot was forthcoming?

Sir, what are the chances of resolving the Malaysian Water Agreement? Is the installation of our water supply system under a Water Agreement with Indonesia still on the cards? Even with NEWater and desalination, do we still need to increase the storage capacity of reservoirs within Singapore for strategic reasons? Should the use of underground space for storing water be pursued? What would ENV do to ensure that the waterworks will be kept in good working order to achieve the lowest costs, and thus keeping it competitive? Will NEWater and desalination drive up the cost of PUB water supplied to industries, commercial sectors and households?

Finally, Sir, many industries located on Jurong Island require high-grade water and at the moment, I was told that there is only one private supplier of such high-grade water in Jurong Island. This results in a privatised monopoly. These private industries are eagerly waiting for PUB to supply NEWater to Jurong Island so as to provide cost-competitiveness and avoid a situation where the industries have no choice but to buy high-grade water from only one privatised source. Can the Ministry clarify whether PUB will supply NEWater to Jurong Island so as to ensure

Column: 1887

that Singapore remains cost-competitive and to ensure that there is no privatised monopoly for such NEWater of high-grade quality?

Water Conservation and Supply

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, to be self-sufficient in water, Singapore has explored more innovative ways to increase its water supply. Today, we are getting water supplies from four key sources: (1) rainwater; (2) water purchased from Johore; (3) NEWater; and (4) desalination water. But, in order not to impose too much cost burden on Singaporeans and our businesses, we must adopt an appropriate portfolio of water supply from different sources.

Therefore, we must analyse the lifecycle costs of the respective water supply sources or facilities and explore innovative ways to adopt more cost-effective solutions. The key guiding principle in adopting a portfolio of water supply sources is the ability to control and provide sustainable water supply in Singapore. Both NEWater and desalination provide a sustainable solution to make Singapore self-sufficient in water.

Besides managing water supply, we must also adopt sustainable practices in the use of water. Conservation, reuse and recycling of water should be encouraged among users in the industrial, commercial and residential sectors. More public education is needed to instill good water conservation habits among Singaporeans. To further encourage water conservation, the Ministry should provide legislation to ensure that water saving devices are installed in buildings.

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

Column: 1888

(1) Are plans to make Singapore more self-sufficient in water on track?

(2) What are the plans to promote water conservation in Singapore?

(3) Will the Ministry consider legislation to encourage water conservation in buildings?

NEWater

Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay: The main objective of developing and promoting the concept of recycled water, named NEWater, is meeting the water needs of Singapore. Looking at the world shortage of potable water, like the recently announced shortage of water for 2008 Olympics in Beijing, it means that the re-creation of water after use would be a technology likely to resolve some of the water shortage problems in different parts of the world.

In short, NEWater is a marketable business. We could export the technology know-how, the empirical expertise and the product to water shortage countries, using our strong local track records in NEWater as reference. Our local business could capture a part of the worldwide lucrative new business. At this moment, most of the products applied in this technology are from the west. Our local business could only supply products dealing with the front end of the process treatment, which is only on the lower level of the technology for the whole NEWater system.

We should take advantage of owning such a large scale NEWater treatment plant to further develop Singapore's technology. We should offer opportunities to more local businesses to be involved and help them move up their ability in dealing with the product and technology currently controlled by the foreign firm. By doing so, if the local company is successful, it will provide long-term

Column: 1889

security to the PUB in the continuous supply of the key components, especially in case of emergency.

On the other hand, the world market, characterised by the market size and the wide variety of the affluent type, will strengthen our capability in the production of better products in meeting the needs of our NEWater system. I suggest that PUB's facilities should be made more open and more accessible by our local environmental companies. They should be allowed to put up their test system, using the water from the sewerage treatment plants for testing and development of their own products. Hopefully, in the not in a very distant future, Singapore companies could master the whole NEWater technology, in particular, the products in the high-end, and make Singapore to be one of the key players in the supply of the NEWater system worldwide.

Sewerage System

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, the deep tunnel sewerage system aims to provide an infrastructure for waste management in Singapore. It will free up land from the present sewerage treatment plants for future development. At the same time, it will provide the conduit for our recycling of waste water for NEWater.

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

(1) What is the status of development of the deep tunnel sewerage system?

(2) What are the plans to phase out the existing sewerage treatment plants?

(3) Will the deep tunnel sewerage system increase the waste disposal fees for consumers?

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment (Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M): Sir, I will respond

Column: 1890

to the comments made by Mdm Cynthia Phua on our reservoirs, Prof. Low Seow Chay and Mr Andy Gan on river and canal water.

Sir, first, may I touch on the questions of private collection of rain water. Since October last year, the PUB has allowed buildings and house owners to collect rain water within their premises for non-potable uses, including toilet flushing, general washing and watering of plants.

5.45 pm

This change in policy was conveyed on 29th October last year at a briefing to the relevant associations, including the Singapore Institute of Architects, the Real Estate Developers Association of Singapore

and the Singapore Contractors Association Limited. The new policy is also explained on PUB's website.

Sir, under the new policy, developers can build rain water collection systems and storage tanks in their developments. But, for public health reasons, however, they are also to comply with the National Environment Agency's guideline to prevent mosquito breeding in the rain water collection system, as well as the underground tanks. Used rain water that is discharged into the sewers requires treatment at PUB's plants, followed with proper disposal. Therefore, water-borne fees will be levied. But this will only affect customers that collect rain water in large quantities, and they are primarily non-domestic users. For tank sizes of less than 20 cubic metres, roughly 5 by 2 by 2 metres in depth, water-borne fees will be waived. In other words, private homes would fall under this category.

Assoc. Prof. Low also asked about the pumping of water from rivers and canals. Sir, under the Sewerage and Drainage Act, the construction of any work to intercept water from any place, including rivers and canals, requires the approval of

Column: 1891

the Public Utilities Board. And, as a general rule, the PUB does not allow the pumping of water from rivers and canals, as many of these water courses channel rain water into our reservoirs and are part of the nation's water supply system. Unless you can get approval from PUB for certain specific reasons, they may allow. But, generally, the answer is no.

Mdm Cynthia Phua asked if PUB could open up its reservoirs for more water-based recreational activities for the public. Sir, we are mindful of the recreational needs of the public and we recognise that our reservoirs, the reservoir parks, and the central water catchment reserves are valuable assets to Singaporeans, not only as water resources, but also as recreational resources. Many of our reservoirs have, in fact, been opened up for water-based recreational activities, such as boating and fishing, as mentioned by the Member. PUB welcomes any organised groups or interested agencies and the Singapore Sports Council to work with them, to introduce more water-based recreational activities in our reservoirs. But, Sir, public safety and pollution control measures must be in place to ensure that the safety of the participants is assured and that the water quality is not being affected by these activities.

Mdm Phua also suggested that more amenities and facilities be provided for the public to enjoy the open spaces around the reservoirs. She expressed concern about some of the developments in these areas. Sir, there are many amenities and facilities that are currently being made available in many of our reservoir parks for public enjoyment. And, in addition to our idyllic parks, jogging tracks, fishing grounds, public golf courses, and even driving ranges, PUB has also been working closely with the National Parks Board - because some of the parks are under NParks rather than PUB - to introduce

Column: 1892

boardwalks as well as forest trails at MacRitchie and Lower Pierce Reservoir catchment areas. At the Bedok Reservoir, as mentioned by the Member, there is also a jogging track that is well within the reservoir park, and also a track around the reservoir, which, as the Member probably knows, is used by the PUB for its inspection of the reservoir and for carrying out various other activities.

Sir, in these areas and others, the PUB will continue to work with the relevant agencies to explore ways to provide more amenities for our reservoir parks. This will make the parks more attractive, for families to spend leisurely outings at these scenic locations.

Mr Lim Swee Say: Sir, of the two water agreements with Malaysia, the one signed in 1961 will expire in 2011. This is less than 10 years away. Several Members, Mr Othman Haron, Mr Zainul Abidin and Dr Teo Ho Pin, asked whether we are on track to increase our local supply to make up for the provision under the 1961 Agreement. Sir, the answer is yes. In the last few years, we have taken various actions. First, to enlarge our local catchment areas. The Marina Barrage will be completed by 2007-2008. The Seletar/Serangoon Reservoir Scheme, Phase I, is on schedule. Likewise, the integration of reservoirs to increase yield is also underway. Sir, well before 2011, we would have increased our local supply sufficiently to make up for the loss of the water supply under the 1961 Agreement.

Enlarging the local catchment areas is just one of the three strategies. The other one is NEWater. Sir, at this moment, three plants are already up and running at Bedok, Kranji and Seletar. The fourth one is on the way, to be built in Ulu Pandan. NEWater would also add to our water supply.

The third strategy is desalination. The desalination plant is done on a Design,

Column: 1893

Build, Own and Operate (DBOO) basis. Groundbreaking was done in January and the plant should be ready by the end of next year. Together, these three strategies of enlarging our local catchment areas, NEWater and desalination will provide additional capacity more than enough to make up for the quantity provided for in the 1961 Agreement. What this means is that water supply will not be affected by the expiry of the 1961 Agreement in 2011. Our 4-Tap strategy, with three now in place and one more to come, will make us become more self-sufficient in future, and at the same time make our water supply system more reliable, resilient and sustainable.

Sir, several Members asked whether the introduction of desalination and NEWater would lead to higher cost of water in the future. Let me explain it this way. In 1997, when we were looking at desalination as a reliable source of future water supply, the cost at that point in time was about $2 per cubic metre. This was in 1997. Today, the good news is that desalination does not cost that much. In fact, under the DBOO contract, the company, Hyflux, selected through an open tender, is going to supply desalinated water to the PUB with a starting price fixed at 78 cents per cubic metre in 2005. This is significantly below the $2 projected in 1997. Of course, this purchase price of 78 cents is not static. The pricing formula takes into account fluctuation in the cost of energy, inflation and so on. The price of 78 cents covers only the production cost. PUB will have to incur additional cost in terms of transmission, storage, distribution and so on. However, the point here is that, with open competition and with advances in technology, we are now able to tap on water supply from one of the most cost competitive desalination plants in the world.

Sir, even better news is that NEWater will cost even less than desalination. We

Column: 1894

have been supplying NEWater to the industry for over a year now. Today, eight wafer fab plants in Singapore are using NEWater. There are 22 other customers, including major companies like Seagate, 3M and Senoko. Collectively, these customers consume about 10 million gallons of NEWater a day. By using NEWater, instead of PUB water, these companies are now able to save more than $3 million a year because NEWater supplied to them is cheaper than PUB water. This is because NEWater does not attract water conservation tax given its tremendous supply potential. We are aiming to enable more industries and companies to benefit from this lower cost of NEWater as PUB expands the reticulation network of NEWater. I mentioned earlier that we will have four NEWater plants. Each of the four NEWater plants will be supported by a reticulation network. The one in Ulu Pandan will be supported by a network in the western and central region. Bedok will be supported by a reticulation network in the east. The one at Seletar by one in the northeast, and the one in Kranji will be supported by a network in the northwest. With these four plants supported by four reticulation networks, industries and commercial buildings all over Singapore will be able to draw on the NEWater in time to come.

Sir, Mr Zainul asked whether the monopoly for the supply of high grade water on Jurong Island will be terminated. Sir, it is useful for me to clarify that the role of the PUB is to supply water of potable standard. PUB is not in the business of supplying high grade water. For example, on the Jurong Island today, companies can take industrial water or PUB water from PUB, and process it into high grade water for petrochemical plants that require water quality which is cleaner than the PUB water. PUB has no intention of going into that business because the job of PUB is to provide water supply of potable standards and it will leave to the

Column: 1895

industry to do the value-add. Of course, Mr Zainul may then ask: is NEWater not high grade water? The answer is yes. Because with reverse osmosis, NEWater is almost as good as high grade water. But I want to emphasise that supplying high grade water is really not the core business of PUB. In the case of Jurong Island, PUB will continue to supply PUB water and if there is a market demand, a company can go on to provide the high grade water. I do not rule out the possibility of extending the supply of NEWater to Jurong Island one day. It all depends on whether it will fit into our overall strategy of replacing PUB water with NEWater for non-potable use.

Sir, having said that the cost of desalination is a lot lower than what we expected in the year 1997 and that NEWater is cheaper than desalinated water, I want to point out that this does not mean that we will not see any increase in the cost of PUB water in the future. What it does mean is that we need not increase water tariffs so soon, and by so much, as compared to the situation we were in in 1997.

Sir, Mr Zainul Abidin and Dr Teo Ho Pin asked, beyond this 4-Tap Strategy, whether we are looking at other sources of supply. As far as the PUB is concerned, PUB basically has two functions: firstly, to ensure that water supply will always be sufficient to meet our needs today and in the future; secondly, to keep the cost of water supply to our industry and households as affordable as possible. Having put together a 4-Tap Strategy - water from Johore, local catchments water, desalination and NEWater - we now have a workable solution. But, of course, at any point in time, if we are able to identify new sources that can supply water on a long term basis, not just for the next 5-10 years but the next 50-100 years, which is able to further enhance

Column: 1896

the reliability of supply as well as the affordability of supply, PUB is always open to those ideas. But the important point is that we do have a workable solution today and that Singapore can be assured of having sufficient water supply post-2011, and post-2061 too because we can be self-sufficient, if need be, in the long term.

Sir, Prof. Low Seow Chay asked whether more can be done to create local entrepreneurship in our water industry. He asked whether it is possible for us to find ways to upgrade the technology in the industry by allowing the water industry to test out new ideas, new concepts, new technology, new processes, using the PUB facilities. Sir, the answer is yes. The PUB and the NEA, together with the EDB, have launched the Environmental Test-bedding Initiative (ETI). Under the ETI, companies in the industry are encouraged to try out their innovations, new processes and new technology at some of our public facilities. Together, between PUB, NEA and the industry, we can jointly explore the new frontiers in technology and innovation. Sir, we have started and we will continue to do more.

6.00 pm

Sir, allow me to move on to the area of water conservation. Dr Teo Ho Pin asked whether PUB will step up plans to promote water conservation. Sir, this is a very important point.

Even though we have formulated workable solutions for our long-term water supply, we must continue to recognise that every drop of water is precious. For the last five years, we have done very well. On a per person basis, each Singaporean, on the average, consumed 165 litres of water per day, compared to 203 litres in Hong Kong, 254 litres in Sydney. We are one of the lower water consuming people among major cities. This is very good.

Column: 1897

However, we can do better. Just imagine if each one of us is able to reduce our water consumption by 3%, we will be able to reduce our daily consumption from 165 litres per person to 160 litres per person. This is the new target for PUB. We hope to be able to reach out to more businesses, industries, households and the community as we continue to conserve water.

As at the end of last year, about 100,000 households in Singapore are fitted with water saving devices. As a result, they are able to save on water consumption, about 3-5%. In some cases, as high as 8-10%. This year, we hope that more will do so. The target of PUB is to reach out to another 200,000 households this year for the installation of water saving devices.

Dr Teo asked if we can enact legislation to require water conservation. Sir, to some extent, we do have some regulations in place. For example, water flow in toilets in non-domestic premises has to be less than six litres per minute. But yet at the same time, PUB is talking to these building management people to see if they can go below the approved limit of six litres per minute. I was told that more than 200 buildings have responded so far. Some of them are now going for as low as two litres per minute of flow rate. Of course, we do not require buildings to observe that ultra low flow rate. We encourage but leave it to them to decide. The key consideration is to keep the flow rate as low as possible without affecting the effectiveness of these devices.

As for factories and businesses, they are recyling more too. One interesting development with NEWater is that some commercial buildings are now using NEWater for aircon cooling towers. We asked the building management how do they find NEWater. We expect them to tell us that NEWater is good because it

Column: 1898

costs 15% less. But, surprisingly, they told us that not only NEWater is cost competitiveness, they are also able to reduce water consumption by up to another 20% because of the high quality of NEWater. These buildings are now able to save not just 15% of lower cost but also another 20% due to lower water consumption. As we roll out NEWater, more and more buildings will be able to recycle more using NEWater due to the extra pureness of NEWater.

At the same time, we will continue to work with the water industry to encourage faster pace of innovation, as mentioned by Prof. Low Seow Chay earlier.

Dr Teo Ho Pin asked about the status of the DTSS - Deep Tunnel Sewerage System; when do we phase out the existing plants and whether this would increase waste water treatment fees. Sir, treatment cost of waste water is likely to go up in the future for two reasons. Firstly, the removal of solid, bacteria and smell from waste water is land intensive, energy intensive and capital intensive. Over time, as land cost goes up, as energy cost goes up, as capital cost goes up, the cost of treatment is likely to go up too. It is also useful to remind the House that even though water-borne fees were last adjusted in 2000 to the current level of 30 cents per cubic metre for the domestic sector and 60 cents per cubic metre for the non-domestic sector, these rates still do not reflect the full cost of waste water treatment.

What PUB is doing is to slow down the cost of increase through the implementation of DTSS. Dr Teo asked whether we have to pay more because of DTSS. Sir, it is the reverse. Over the next 40 years, we basically have two options. One option is for us to upgrade and expand existing water reclamation plants - we have six of them. PUB projected that over the next 40 years, it will cost

Column: 1899

PUB $8.6 billion to upgrade and expand existing water reclamation plants to cater for the increase in water consumption and thereby a higher volume of waste water to be treated. That is one option.

The second option which PUB is doing now is to build the DTSS. By building the DTSS, because of economies of scale, we are able to bring the cost of development from $8.6 billion down to $5.9 billion. This will result in a saving of $2.7 billion. As I mentioned, it is basically due to economies of scale in the building of waste treatment plants. With DTSS, eventually, we need only two waste treatment plants - one in Changi and the other in Jurong. The economies of scale enable us to bring down the cost of development.

Sir, the DTSS is on schedule. It will be completed by the year 2008 and start receiving and treating waste water from the northern region and eastern region. Existing plants will be phased out progressively, from the year 2007.

Sir, I wish to emphasise again that PUB is doing its best to keep cost down. There is now a new mindset in PUB. Since the new CEO of PUB, Mr Khoo Teng Chye - Members of the House may remember that he spent some time with PSA, and he is quite used to market competition - came on board late last year, he is inculcating a new mindset in PUB - away from cost plus, towards price minus. He has set up 12 price-minus teams in PUB. The challenge of these price-minus teams in PUB is to look for ways to reduce the cost of water treatment through the use of new technology, more innovative processes as well as better management of the assets. At the same time, we need members of the public to play their part too, because every drop does count. And, remember, every drop saved will mean saving not just the cost of producing the

Column: 1900

drop, but the cost of treating that drop of waste water as well.

Sir, in conclusion, the affordability of water supply depends a lot on supply efficiency and demand conservation. For supply efficiency, we believe that by adopting the best sourcing approach, by optimising our assets, by exploiting advances in technology, we can bring supply efficiency to as high a level as possible. At the same time, we need to count on the support of the members of the public, the industry and the commercial sector to help derive maximum effect in the area of water conservation. Only when everyone plays his part, can Singaporeans be assured of always having enough water, and always finding our water supply affordable.

The Chairman: Mdm Cynthia Phua, you may take both cuts together.

"Singapore's OK" Programme

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Sir, Singapore's OK programme has indeed brought a significant change in our living environment, as this programme calls for shared ownership and responsibility, and to promote the widespread adoption of good hygiene practices. This is amidst the background of the SARS threat.

As Chairman of the Make Singapore Sparkle Committee 2003, and in support of the Singapore's OK campaign, we have persuaded all the PAP Town Councils to participate in the equivalent of Singapore's OK label, ie, the Town Councils Sparkle Block Label. We are pleased to announce that, with the support of all the PAP Town Councils, the two Ministries and NEA are proud to say that we have awarded 1,700 HDB blocks with the Sparkle Block Label. This is about 16% of the total HDB blocks in Singapore.

Our Committee's target for this year is to achieve 50% of the total number of

Column: 1901

blocks to have this Sparkle Block Label Award. With this background, can the Minister highlight and update the House whether Singapore is really more OK now? What more can be done to make Singapore even more OK, especially on the cooperation and support from the private organisations?

There are two areas that I feel the Ministry should put in more effort to seek the cooperation of the private sector, ie, the HDB estates' eating houses as well as the industrial estates for indiscriminate dumping.

Dengue

On dengue, I would like to congratulate NEA in roping over 600 volunteers around Singapore who are actively involved in educating their fellow residents in their estates on how to prevent the Aedes mosquitoes from breeding, and give feedback on places where breeding is likely to take place. They belong to the dengue prevention volunteer groups led by NEA. More volunteers could be roped in, considering the number of cases tripled to nearly 4,800 people for the whole of 2003.

Based on the Ministry of the Environment's press release on 14th February on the figures last month, I am concerned over the statistics. The figure is alarming, despite the huge effort put in by NEA for the past years, eg, the preventive inspection of houses and flats, warning letters, hefty fines and post-fogging of areas.

I have a few questions for the Minister. What measures can we take to address the dengue problem? Although the Ministry is aware of the five-year cycle, this recent cycle had seen six deaths. What preventive measures does the Ministry of the Environment have to prevent this five-year cycle? Can the Minister give an update on how NEA is

Column: 1902

tackling this problem in the light of the severity of the outbreak in Indonesia? Is there any risk of the strain of mosquito in Indonesia being transported here through airplanes or on board ships?

The third concern I have is the breeding grounds found in roof gutters of private houses and properties. Many are due to the inherent design and installation, which have not taken into account the threat of dengue fever in the past. Many of these defective designs are potential breeding grounds awaiting for an outbreak. I have highlighted in this House previously and asked NEA, being the lead agency on dengue, to seek the cooperation of the Building Control Authority and the residents in resolving this issue. It has been some months and I have yet to receive any updates, as I volunteer to work on this issue.

There is a part of the private estate in Hillside, Yio Chu Kang, which is under my management. There is a constant threat of a dengue outbreak any time if the existing unreachable gutters are not removed. The Ministry should continuously work with the various Government agencies in eradicating these breeding grounds permanently, instead of using biological levicide to control breeding in roof gutters. I understand that this biological control agent from USA is a special formulation of bacteria which, I feel, is again a temporary measure, as it lasts only for three months.

6.15 pm

Mr Othman Haron Eusofe: Sir, I share Mdm Cynthia Phua's concern about the increase in the number of dengue cases. In fact, in my constituency, in January this year, there were some 20 cases, and these were found in the HDB estates as well as landed properties. The good sign is that we have got a good group of volunteers in the dengue task force. They go around with NEA officers to check. But

Column: 1903

still the Aedes mosquitoes seem to be very elusive. I am not so sure how we can prevent them but obviously we cannot take things for granted and have to be alert and vigilant.

Fortunately, the numbers came down in February. But I think additional measures and new initiatives need to be taken to check buildings for Aedes mosquitoes. Perhaps, we should continue to work together, the community and NEA, so that we will have a more effective vector control programme. Could I get the Minister's views on this?

Mr Iswaran: Sir, as the preceding speakers have mentioned, the dengue problem was raised again last year, and I think it was higher than the previous year, as the Minister mentioned earlier in his speech. In addition to that, we heard the news of a particularly severe outbreak in Indonesia and the possibility that this is a new strain. The concern here really, Sir, is that the Minister said it is endemic, which we all know, but how much can we contain the problem through the combination of public education and enforcement to minimise its incidence in Singapore. When I think in terms of the breeding areas in the public, in particular, private housing, surely we can do more to minimise the availability of such breeding grounds for the Aedes mosquitoes. I would like to know from the Minister what is the status of our enforcement measures and education campaigns in order to contain the problem.

Pest Control

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, despite concerted efforts by the Ministry, pests, such as crows, rats, flies, mosquitoes and cockroaches, are still commonly seen in our living environment. These pests can create much nuisance, and pose health hazards to Singaporeans. While the authorities have been diligently conducting enforcement action, these efforts have

Column: 1904

not produced a sustainable solution to resolve the problem.

Sir, we need to adopt new approaches to tackle our pest problems. There must be joint responsibility from all stakeholders to maintain a clean and hygienic environment. We need to adopt building designs which do not facilitate the breeding of pests. There must be good housekeeping and maintenance efforts to eliminate pests.

Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions: (1) What are the pest control measures by the Ministry and how effective are they? (2) How does the Ministry engage all stakeholders to be involved in its pest control efforts?

Hawker Centres

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed: Sir, markets and hawker centres have a special place in the hearts of Singaporeans. The HDB and the Environment Ministry should ensure that there will be minimum possible headaches when it comes to market and hawker centre upgrading and development. The old marketplace and hawker centre at Bedok Reservoir Road would soon be redeveloped and, once ready, it will be converted into a kind of a harmony hub. The HDB has been very helpful, similarly the Aljunied Town Council and NEA. My question to the Minister is: what is the progress of the Hawker Centre Upgrading Programme in Singapore? I believe it makes sense for the Environment Ministry and NEA to take over the management of hawker centres and wet markets. Are there plans to place them under one agency?

Wet Markets/Hawker Centres

Mr Ang Mong Seng: (In Mandarin) : Sir, in last year’s debate, I suggested that the Ministry of the Environment should have a centralised control of all the wet markets and food centres, so as not to cause

Column: 1905

confusion among the stallholders. From what I know, the Ministry of the Environment has taken over from HDB the control of all the wet markets and food centres. I would like to ask whether the authority will also take over from the town councils, the control of their hawker centres and food centres, so as to have a better management of all wet markets and hawkers centres in Singapore.

Sir, I have also suggested that there should be more wet markets in the new HDB housing estates. This was met with enthusiastic feedback from many residents. The residents still enjoy going to the wet market to buy their fresh food. The price is reasonable and the food is fresh. As such, I would like to ask the Minister whether his Ministry has plans to build more wet markets in the HDB estates and the new towns for the benefit of the residents.

Mr Wee Siew Kim: Sir, we are uniquely Singaporeans. Going to the hawker centre and fresh market is part of our habit. Many of my generation grew up with it. For many in the older generation, these trips mark the start of their day. I used "fresh market" because of the environmentally unhygienic connotation of wet market. You may ask: why push for wet markets (fresh markets) and hawker centres? Simply because after hearing pleas from my constituents, I believe people want fresh markets. It means that fresh produce usually comes without the trappings that signal high price. It is the place where they go and meet their friends. The market stalls are to many what Starbucks is to the young. The markets and hawker centres are themselves the centre of the town. It is itself the heart of the heartlands. One cannot underestimate the rapport between the market stallholders and their customers. Much as we talk about customer service, or the lack of it, in our retail sector last week, it is certainly not what is happening in our markets and hawker centres. A

Column: 1906

relationship with your friendly neighbourhood fishmonger could mean the difference between whether he keeps the fish head for you or not.

As we seek modernity, this is the social habit that we should not change. The impersonal and selfish attitude that high-rise flat living has engendered could be mitigated by a thriving market in every town. Can I ask the Minister to consider stepping up the building of more markets and hawker centres, especially for the residents of Anchorvale and Fernvale?

Public Toilets

Mr Ang Mong Seng: (In Mandarin) : Sir, every year, in our Budget debate, we hear complaints about public toilets. I would like to know whether the public toilet upgrading programme has been completed and the problem of unsightly public toilets resolved, so that next year we do not have to talk about it anymore.

I would like to ask the Minister what is the progress of the upgrading of public toilets, whether our hygienic standard has already reached international standard, as in Japan and Korea. And how many of them have been given the Singapore's OK labels? Is the Minister happy with this progress?

The Minister also mentioned in last year's budget debate that Singapore had then more than 800 coffeeshops where the toilets were waiting to be upgraded. How many of these have already been upgraded? How much have we spent on the upgrading programme, how many more public toilets need to be upgraded, and when can we expect the entire upgrading programme to be completed?

Industry Development

Mr Iswaran: Sir, on industry development, I have two aspects that I would like to raise with the Minister. Clearly, the

Column: 1907

environmental sector is an area for opportunity for industry development in our part of the world. I would like to know what measures the Ministry has undertaken to promote the sector as a business, using Singapore as a launch pad for the region and beyond.

The second pertains more specifically to installation plants. I recall that the Ministry had undertaken some steps previously to privatise the plants, in total, including the assets and the operation. There is this particular industry that has two aspects to it which are important considerations when deciding on privatisation strategy. The first is that it is an extremely asset heavy and, in particular, because capacity is being determined by the Ministry. The impact on the private operator, if there were to be any, on planning for capacity would be quite substantial. The second is that measures like the recycling policy of the Ministry will also have an impact on the operations and the viability of such businesses. I think this has a substantial bearing on whether there should be privatisation and, if so, what modality it should take. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for the status on the Ministry’s privatisation plans for the installation plants, and what approach they would be taking in this regard.

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

Job Creation

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Sir, I will take my time to finish the last two cuts. Traditionally, the environment industry offers low-paying jobs and employ many unskilled workers. This situation has changed as the industry evolves to be more innovative and explore new technologies. Although some environmental jobs are still labour

Column: 1908

intensive, such as sweeping and mopping, there is room to redesign and add values to these jobs. Mechanisation has provided a new image to the environment industry. Today, a wide range of equipment and machines are used for different types of environmental jobs. The skills requirement of our workers have also increased, thus improving the image and salary package of our workers.

With more emphasis on keeping our environment okay, we should expand the scope of our environmental services. More specialists should be trained in areas, such as pest control, disease outbreak management, disaster and emergency management. Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions: (1) What is the progress of the "1,000 for 1,000" initiative? (2) Are there plans to create more jobs in the environment industry? (3) Is there any work redesign initiative to make environmental jobs more attractive to Singaporeans?

International Collaboration

Sir, I go on to my next cut. Environmental issues and problems are always borderless and may affect neighbouring countries. The haze from Indonesia is a good example as to how air quality in Singapore can be affected. The recent outbreak of SARS also shows that disease can cross boundary through human carriers. As such, the need for international cooperation to manage environmental problems has become more pertinent. Besides establishing systems and communication channels, there must be more concerted efforts to garner political view to address environmental issues.

Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions: (1) How is the Ministry leveraging on international cooperation to improve environmental performance in Singapore? (2) How is the ASEAN environmentally sustainable cities programme coming along?

Column: 1909

The Chairman: We have two minutes. Mr Mohamad Maidin, do you want to respond? If not, we can continue tomorrow.

Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M: Yes, tomorrow.

The Chairman: It is almost 6.30 pm.

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

Mr Lim Swee Say: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of

Column: 1910

Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2004/2005, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.