Hansard Explorer

ADJOURNMENT MOTION

The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I move, "That Parliament do now adjourn."

Question proposed.

Strengthening Singapore’s Role in Regional Clean Air Amid Transboundary Haze

Mr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.

7.53 pm

Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, for the last two months, Singapore has experienced the worst haze seen in over a decade. Like with previous haze episodes, this is not just natural phenomena. The haze this year was caused by slash-and-burn clearance and peatland fires, as was the case with many previous haze episodes. Exacerbating these conditions is a super El Nino phase, ultimately made worse by human-caused climate change.

Like everyone on this island, Sengkang residents experienced weeks of choking smoke-filled air. Some needed medical treatment for airway issues and infections.

Haze was thus, unsurprisingly, the dominant topic on Saturday during our Sengkang Conversations Town Hall, under much missed blue skies, participants openly shared their thoughts. And one thing that struck me was how many of our residents spoke about commonality. They emphasised that we were all fellow inhabitants of the region, that Indonesians and Malaysians too were badly affected, and that they felt that pointing fingers and stirring up anger against one another would yield limited results.

While accountability is important, residents believed that it would be more helpful to look at shared responsibility and benefits across an interconnected region when tackling fires and the haze they create.

Another thread that came up was who bears the burden of the haze and whether we learn from it. Our residents felt strongly that resilience must be equitable, remembered and not feel reactive each time we are hit by a crisis. How then can those of us in the region better build lasting systems to prevent and mitigate this long-standing problem, rather than focus on measures to relieve suffering in the short term and hope for favourable wind directions?

After all this year, conditions were decidedly not favourable to us. A preliminary assessment by Eco-Business suggests that the haze will cost us between $3.2 billion and $3.9 billion this year, up to twice the $1.8 billion cost from 2015. This works out to a lower bound figure of approximately $750 for each Singapore resident.

The haze exacts other costs, such as a lasting effect on health. I struggled to find data on the years of healthy life lost here due to the haze but saw that the Ministry of Health recently refuted a study which estimated that haze from 2015 caused 100,000 premature deaths across the region. A Finnish study estimated that toxic fire smoke caused 3,560 deaths in Indonesia last September. Kommentarian Keselhatan Indonesia reported more than 280,000 cases of acute respiratory infections in fire and haze affected provinces.

Local experts interviewed by CNA were clear in their views that the health impact is there. They noted air pollution is a major cause of mortality, with a correlation between seasonal short-term fluctuations in PM2.5 levels to mortality. Academic research further indicates that out of hospital, cardiac arrests are more frequent during periods of seasonal haze exposure, while in the elderly, the risk of cardiovascular death is up to twice as high after exposure to severe haze episodes.

Such effects are worse for those who work outdoors and other vulnerable groups.

Transboundary haze is no ordinary policy challenge. It involves highly entrenched issues ranging from economic incentives, climate vulnerabilities and political sensitivities. These are complex, but that is not a reason to shy away. We can do more by: first, renewing our international efforts to solve the problem; second, expanding our current approach to supply chains; and third, improving our preparedness for future haze events with an eye on vulnerable groups.

Since my Adjournment Motion was filed in the middle of last month, the Government has held a widely publicised session with senior executives from companies linked to burning land in Kalimantan. It seeks to introduce urgent legislation to amend the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act. I intend to participate in the debate tomorrow.

Mr Speaker, central to our efforts to tackle haze should be working via the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to prevent fire at source through sustainable land management and effective enforcement. ASEAN members signed the ASEAN Agreement on Transnational Haze Pollution in 2002. ASEAN's Haze Free Roadmap, 2023 to 2030, delineate science-based strategies, targets and progress indicators that lay out how we can achieve our haze prevention targets.

We also have the complimentary ASEAN Peatland Management Rest Strategy, 2023 to 2030. Last month, the ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights called on ASEAN members to strengthen cooperation to safeguard ASEAN citizens' right to a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment. We should use the upcoming ASEAN meetings in November, as well as our 2027 ASEAN chairmanship to work on operationalising the strategies laid out in the already agreed upon road maps and strategies.

This could involve exploring how to work with those on the ground to deliver on specific strategies that have been proven difficult to implement. As Minister Grace Fu said earlier, Singapore will be seeking ratification of an agreement to establish a coordinating centre in Indonesia and working with Jakarta on a joint task force to probe firms linked to the fires. That is a start.

International work can also be done in Singapore, leveraging our strengths. For instance, ASEAN Specialised Meteorological Centre is already hosted here under the Meteorological Service Singapore. But capabilities can be beefed up, and governmental institutions should consider boosting support for more accurate accounting for the health and social cost of haze, which tend to be harder to calculate than the economic costs.

In Malaysia, the Federation of Malaysian Manufacturing's commissioned research modelled the short-term exposure to fine particles from the fires contributed to an estimated 1,700 premature deaths there. Given the preponderance of pre-eminent research institutions here, we should use these to provide a more granular account for other ASEAN countries, as well as offer other social, health and economic data that can inform how we all respond to haze events.

We should work together to develop a standard framework for measuring haze-related health effects, building a better understanding of how haze pollution impacts our people and the effectiveness of our mitigation efforts.

In additional to ASEAN, Singapore should work bilaterally with our neighbours whom the fires and haze most affect – notably Indonesia and Malaysia – but others, such as Timor Leste and Brunei as well.

Turning to corporate and consumer behaviour, it would be remiss not to leverage our corporate and financial frameworks and historical experience in supply chain management. Having many smallholders working the land adjacent to large plantations with vaguely defined boundaries undoubtedly makes the problem more complex but also provides a tempting target group to blame.

We will no doubt be discussing this in fuller detail tomorrow, but having worked previously in a listed company which owned the agri-commodity assets through the entire value supply chain with assets in the region, I know that there is no need to re-invent the wheel.

There have been efforts made over the years to tackle traceability and supply chain transparency and sustainability in industries, such as cocoa, natural rubber, pulp and also palm oil.

In Ghana, the cocoa regulator's traceability system has mapped over 40,000 farms and registered more than 20,000 farmers in its pilot, with women making up 40% of participants, and has trained the clerks, depot of keepers and transporters who handle the beans. In Indonesia, rubber smallholders use a mobile app to map their plantations and register transactions with the data linked to physical shipments so that the buyers can verify compliance. For palm oil, companies are now able to trace fruit down to individual smallholder plots, because fruit passing through collectors and intermediaries becomes harder to trace at every stage.

Singapore, as a commodities hub, should develop this type of plot-level transparency across the supply chains that run through our companies, banks and markets. Some of these approaches have already been initiated by environmental non-governmental organisations, sometimes with industry, and can be improved upon by states, including Singapore.

Traceability is a first step by making fires visible and attributable; and thus, improving our ability to attach consequences and incentives.

We should also use our financial system to build in incentives and traceability conditions as a first step towards our efforts to stop the problem at source. We should use our financial institutions through disclosure rules, covenants and information undertakings to ensure that financing through syndicated loans or money market instruments are only made available to responsible businesses and set the standards here in Singapore.

Mr Speaker, residents have also raised comments about our role as consumers who may be indirectly contributing to the haze crisis. While we have the Singapore Green Labelling scheme, which requires palm oil products to be active members of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, alongside other requirements, awareness of the Singapore Green Labelling scheme appears to remain low, based on anecdotal observations.

Given the difficulty in ensuring visibility of the scheme amidst other green claims and even greenwashing by corporates, could the Government work with supermarkets and other retail outlets to ensure the offering of Singapore Green Labelling scheme products becomes progressively mandatory? Palm oil products are a clear example of where this could be expanded too.

The Government should ensure that its agencies and affiliated institutions prioritise the purchase of Singapore Green Labelling scheme products to increase manufacturers' awareness and interest in the scheme. After all, it has already done so by only procuring paper products certified under the Singapore Green Labelling scheme.

Companies appear to respond to the Singapore Green Labelling scheme certification to some extent. For instance, with Asia Pulp & Papers' response to media queries recently that it is working to fulfil reporting requirements. But lack of certification must have financial consequences for companies, since bottom lines and shareholders' value seems to be the most understood language.

Our sovereign wealth funds and Government-linked companies, too, can exert further pressure by stopping investment in firms whose actions directly or indirectly through subsidiaries or intermediaries create fires and haze, and use their shareholdings to demand direct accounting from such firms.

For example, the Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), Norway's Sovereign wealth fund, clearly lays out eight core expectations on its website, with additional expectation documents, which it applies to inform its ownership activities. Having been on the opposite end of the table receiving a request from NBIM for a direct meeting with company leaders to discuss concerns, I can confirm that it is a way to direct executives' attention to the issues being brought up.

Putting public monies into firms that are ultimately harming Singaporeans makes little sense. Firms involved in forestry activities with influential people on their boards may seek to frame discussions about policies and their implementation. Such lobbying should be made public information, given that it can enable certain groups to have disproportionate voice opportunities. Lobbying is not inherently wrong. It happens everywhere but should be made transparent through regular, open reporting so that the public can at least be duly informed.

Finally, while we address some of these issues earlier today during Question Time, the topic bears repeating, as we have to protect our people and most vulnerable groups. We do so with both knowledge from our neighbours and lessons learned domestically. Sharing knowledge should facilitate better prevention, preparation and mitigation on the ground for future haze episodes, particularly the inequities that arise from its adverse effects. Domestic lessons learned can also inform regional efforts and standards.

Starting with our youngest, many have voiced worries about haze-related school closures as well as how schools are ensuring haze exposure is limited. While the logistics of school closures are complex, we have a responsibility to minimise our children's exposure to the haze, as the science is clear that children with developing immune systems and lungs and higher rates of respiration are more adversely affected by bad air. What are our own studies and data telling us about how our children are affected by such prolonged and severe haze episodes?

The health of workers amid the haze also brings up inequities. Office workers are largely shielded while those doing outdoor work will be hit harder. The Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) inspection of worksites found that about a quarter of employers fell short of standards. How will employers be required to carry out remedial action?

While employers may be charged under the Workplace Safety and Health Act, enforcement must be more active as the protection of our workers is non-negotiable.

Construction workers also contend with air pollution generated at the worksite. Yet, the MOM guidelines seem to rule out "Stop Work" orders even at hazardous Pollutant Standards Index (PSI) levels. Would the Government consider "Stop Work" measures at predetermined hazardous levels?

While we were told earlier that employers who suspend operations due to the haze are advised to bear the cost instead of deducting from the workers' salary, could this be made mandatory? If not, what considerations hinder it?

This also affects cleaners, many of whom are elderly, and other outdoor workers. Food delivery workers, whose income depends on trips taken, sometimes end up having to make choices that weigh up their health versus their livelihoods. We need more data about the haze's impact on this group and evaluate measures, such as requiring platform operators to factor the health hazard into riders' payouts.

Interestingly, China's law requires that gig riders receive a monthly allowance in the event of extreme heat. This is especially important as demand for take-out and delivery spikes during episodes of bad weather, including haze.

The haze has also affected outdoor businesses. Echoing data shared earlier in this House, hawkers at Buangkok Hawker Centre shared with me that they observed a drop in footfall in the last two months, due to diners opting to stay home due to the haze. Other freelancers who work in outdoor conditions, such as some sports coaches, have also raised their struggles with me. What is our assessment of the economic impact on these businesses? Quantifying this would help us understand why or whether additional support should be rolled out.

There are also some within our community, such as the elderly and rental flat residents, who lack easy access to a haze shelter or whose homes are not equipped with air-conditioning, and air purifiers were snapped up everywhere. Some haze shelters were activated but not all were open, according to site visits conducted by CNA. Others might be inconvenient to reach for those with mobility difficulties. How thus can we better leverage existing infrastructure and the lessons learned from COVID-19 to ensure that our most vulnerable groups are not the ones bearing the brunt of the haze?

Moreover, we should take a leaf out of the good work of organisations, such as the Red Cross, who deliver air purifiers to senior citizens by looking to see how we can ensure that vulnerable households have access to one. One suggestion during our town hall was to explore some kind of leasing scheme, especially as air purifiers were sold out island-wide during the height of the crisis.

Also, given the amount of time that has lapsed, is there a reason why we retain PSI as a measurement as international health guidelines now focus more on PM2.5, and to a lesser extent PM10, which describe the tiny particle of matter that penetrates deep into our lungs and bloodstream.

When haze comes calling, Singaporeans like myself, who are not technical experts, are presented with three numbers: a PSI forecast, a 24 hour-PSI and a one-hour PM2.5 reading, all of which appear to measure slightly different things. Many have shared with me that this is confusing, especially when the numbers sometimes seem to tell a different story than what we here directly experience and particularly when there are other readings of other internationally prevalent indicators published publicly. This is made psychologically worse and confusing when these other websites log that Singapore earns yet another, this time, unenviable first of being the world's most polluted city.

Could there be a better way to explain to Singaporeans what we are breathing?

First, when were our PSI and PM2.5 bands last reviewed against the World Health Organization's Global Air Quality Guidelines, and what was the outcome? Why do we call 55 micrograms of PM2.5 per cubic metre moderate, when this is more than three times of the WHO's guidelines?

Second, will the Government revise these indicators and explain where we rely on indicators that differ from international norms?

Third, will the Government consider consolidating its haze advisories into clearer and actionable messages so that Singaporeans can more easily go about their daily lives?

Mr Speaker, we may not have full control over many matters, but we have it within our power to make certain choices, whether it be improving the transparency of our palm oil and paper supply chain, working with our ASEAN counterparts to boost bilateral cooperation or to protect the lives and livelihoods of our vulnerable. Yet, people, both here and beyond our shores, have to repeatedly bear with the haze and the massive effect it has on our lives, communities and economies.

Climate change is surely an accelerant to this problem and like with other challenges put forth by the climate emergency, we must act quickly and with impact. We cannot wait until the next time we feel wishful for a day with precious blue skies, where we can go out and breathe clean air.

Mr Speaker: Senior Minister of State Janil.

8.11 pm

The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Janil Puthucheary): Mr Speaker, I thank Ms He Ting Ru for her interest in this important matter and for bringing to light and discussing these experiences and making some very important suggestions. I hope her residents that she described are improving in their health and they are able to now go out and do some exercise and enjoy our hawker centres.

Certainly, these are things that my residents in Punggol were also concerned about, and I hope all of us in Singapore are now feeling a little bit at ease as the haze has improved, and the PSI and PM2.5 and the other measurements that she described have continued to improve.

Ms He, in summary, asked us to continue to build on our international efforts, to work on supply chains and financial measures, to try to deal with both the cause as well as the underlying structures that have led to this, as well as to make sure that we service the vulnerable groups, protect them and support them in these circumstances. She made some specific suggestions about the measurements and advisories, and certainly, the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) and the other Government agencies will be studying the effectiveness of what we have done, the communications and the way in which we use the science and public education to drive the right behaviour.

We will continue to strive to be a responsible and constructive neighbour and regional partner. We will continue to protect the public health of our people, especially the more vulnerable families, and we will hold those who are responsible accountable.

Ms He has made some suggestions around international efforts, such as exercising our legal, regulatory and economic levers decisively, but also carefully. We agree with all of this, and we agree with the framing that she has made.

We will continue to uphold Singapore's reputation as a financial and corporate hub with effective laws and regulations. Indeed, we are exploring all the things that she has described and paying close attention to these matters, including, for example, her suggestions about working through ASEAN platforms, leveraging the expertise that we have in our meteorological services and research institutions, and developing standardised frameworks about how we might measure the impact, working on a multilateral basis as well as a bilateral basis.

She has talked about increasing traceability and sustainability of the supply chains, and the visibility and accountability of the fires and the businesses that are responsible. We agree, and these are indeed things that we are going to work on, including the use of financial rules to shift corporate and consumer behaviour.

Ms He also mentioned green labelling and investment behaviours, and again, we think these are important levers in order to then shape the outcome.

Minister Grace Fu and several other political office holders responded to a variety of questions and suggestions this morning, including those involving the protection of Singaporeans and support for the vulnerable, regional coordination, and indeed, many of the issues that Ms He has brought up.

We do agree that cooperation is more important to be constructive and productive, and Singapore and Indonesia have agreed in-principle to establish a joint task force with Indonesia to tackle haze, and this will complement our efforts under the Transboundary Haze Prevention Act to hold errant companies accountable. We appreciate Indonesia's efforts to tackle the fires on the ground and support their efforts to investigate companies and hold them accountable. Strengthening accountability is also important. And as I have said, this will influence corporate behaviour in the correct direction, holding entities accountable. And tomorrow, we will be debating amendments proposed to the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act. Minister Grace Fu will set out the various Government proposals and I am sure Ms He will participate in that debate as well.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn."

Mr Speaker: Pursuant to Standing Order 2(3)(a), I wish to inform hon Members that the Sitting tomorrow will commence at 10.30 am. Order. Order.

Adjourned accordingly at 8.16 pm.