Likelihood of Ban on Single-use Plastics for Singapore

My Ministry and the National Environment Agency (NEA) take a keen interest in how other countries manage their disposables. We will continue to study their policies and implementation outcomes and how they may fit into our local context. Our approach has been to reduce the excessive use of all types of disposables, not just single-use plastics, and to promote the use of reusables. We do not target plastics alone. NEA conducted a life-cycle assessment of single-use carrier bags and disposables and found that substituting plastics with other types of single-use packaging materials is not necessarily better for the environment. As such, our focus is to promote the use of reusables.

NEA launched the "Say YES to Waste Less" campaign last month as part of the Year Towards Zero Waste movement to drive awareness of the impact of excessive consumption of disposables and the need for reduction. Some 1,600 premises, ranging from retailers, food and beverage establishments, supermarkets, hotels, Community Development Councils, grassroots organisations, schools and non-governmental organisations have come forward to partner NEA in this nation-wide endeavour. Partners commit to actions, such as prompting customers to bring along reusables, encouraging them to decline disposable cutlery with online orders and displaying campaign visuals at cashier points. NEA has also launched the "Towards Zero Waste Grant" to support individuals, interest groups, non-governmental organisations, grassroots organisations and corporations to initiate or scale up waste reduction and recycling initiatives.

Moving upstream next year, NEA will require brand owners, manufacturers and importers of packaged goods, as well as supermarkets with an annual turnover exceeding $10 million to report information on the packaging they place on the market and their plans for reducing, reusing or recycling this packaging annually. This will increase companies’ awareness of the potential for waste reduction in their business operations. Companies should take action to reduce the amount of packaging used and minimise waste generation at source. This will also lay the foundation of an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework for managing packaging waste, including plastic waste, which NEA will put in place no later than 2025.

Besides reducing waste, we are also taking actions to increase our recycling rate. For example, we are working with the industry to tap on the Towards Zero Waste Grant to roll out 50 reverse vending machines this year. Through this initiative, we hope to engage the public to consciously recycle used PET bottles and aluminium cans.

At the same time, we are developing the local recycling industry. Where possible, we want to better extract resources from waste and close the waste loop domestically. NEA is currently studying recycling solutions and technologies and assessing their suitability for adoption in Singapore. This may include mechanical recycling to turn plastic waste into plastic pellets for manufacturing new products, or chemical recycling to turn plastic waste into chemical feedstock or fuel. The Government will work with industry stakeholders to explore how these technologies can be applied to Singapore, such that it is both environmentally and economically sustainable. These are efforts which could help grow local enterprises and create good jobs for Singaporeans.

Everyone needs to play our part to reduce packaging waste, including single-use plastics. We can do this in different ways. For example, we can opt out of receiving disposable cutlery when ordering food for takeaway or delivery, or we can bring our own reusable bags and containers and take only the plastic bags we need and use. The support of the public, businesses and the community is key to successfully reducing our packaging waste.

Sir, I would like to commend MEWR for the various efforts on recycling, reducing and reusing and so on. But there is one common topic that I always hear being discussed by my residents, especially when they come back from overseas. They say that even Bangkok is charging for the use of plastic bags. Even Malacca is charging for the use of plastic bags and they were asking why is it that, in Singapore, we are so reluctant to charge for the use of plastic bags. Perhaps, the Senior Minister of State can share with us.

First, I must say that, coming from Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, this is pretty good news – commending MEWR for our work as well as giving me feedback that the residents are asking why we are not charging for plastic bags. As I have said earlier in my reply, we are interested and are closely monitoring developments on this front, such as how other countries are managing their disposables. We will study their policies and implementation outcome and see how they fit into our local context. But, currently, instead of just singling out single-use plastics – pardon the pun – we are focusing on reducing the excessive consumption of all types of disposables. We think this is a more sustainable approach for various reasons. Let me just highlight a few or reiterate some.

Firstly, we incinerate all our waste, including plastic waste. Therefore, we do not face the challenges faced by many other countries which are more reliant on direct land-filling of their waste.

We also have use, for instance, for single-use plastic bags. Majority of Singaporeans live in high-rise public housing with the refuse chute and we have worked hard for years, to inculcate this habit of bagging your rubbish before you dispose it, to maintain good public hygiene. I think we do not want to undo such efforts. Irresponsible disposal is going to lead to public hygiene issues like pest infestation, for instance.

Thirdly, our life cycle assessment study has actually shown that replacing single-use plastic bags, for instance, with other types of disposables, does not necessarily lead to a better environmental outcome because all types of disposables have environmental impacts. In fact, the British government has estimated that a cotton tote bag would have to be used for 173 times before its greenhouse gas emission impact improves beyond that of the plastic bags that we use to line our bins. So, we are actually focusing on reducing all types of disposables and doing it upfront, for instance.

Finally, let me also say that we have a very strict anti-littering regime. We also have a very comprehensive and integrated waste collection and disposal system, and we have measures in place to address the issue, for instance, of marine litter pollution and micro-plastics, because we have litter traps to trap the waste or litter that may get into the oceans. We have beach, coastal and underwater clean-ups, and we have flotsam removal craft that we use regularly. And therefore, we are moving upstream. As I have said, we have strengthened our efforts on this front in various ways to the "Say YES to Waste Less" campaign as well as the mandatory reporting and EPR framework in future. And in fact, for the "Say YES to Waste Less" campaign, what we are really doing is to work with our partners and get our partners to come up with ground-up programmes to discourage the use of disposables and encourage the use of reusables, either by incentivising consumers or charging for single-use plastic bags, as some had done, or not using plastic bags at all.

I also join Er Dr Lee to congratulate MEWR for the good work you are doing, but, I think we are not saying to ban plastic bags or replace plastic bags. We are calling for the plastic bag charge so that we can reduce the use of plastic bags, so that we do not over-consume it. I think if we focus on this, then the "Say YES to Waste Less" campaign will go a lot faster. The Senior Minister of State mentioned about other countries. In the UK, where they have introduced the plastic bag charge, it resulted an over 80% decline in the use of plastic bags. So, it is not about replacing but about reducing.

I thank the Member for his comments. Not to repeat myself again, let me say that we are taking into account our own local unique context. And for the various reasons that I have listed earlier and shared, we are taking the approach of actually not singling out single-use plastics. Charging for single-use plastic bags will be singling out just plastics. Therefore, we are looking at how we can reduce excessive consumption of all types of disposables, including plastics, of course.

A few months back when Mr Louis Ng moved the Adjournment Motion on reducing the use of plastic bags, I thought he made a lot of sense. I do not see why MEWR is so resistant to imposing charges for plastic bags. When I go overseas, and when they tell me, "You have to pay five cents or ten cents if you want a plastic bag", the general attitude of most consumers is that, "I must as well cut on it". That helps to reduce the use of plastic bags. I would urge MEWR to reconsider the Motion moved by Mr Louis Ng again, because I really think that it will help reduce the use of plastic bags.

Let me thank the Member for his comments. As I have said, we will continue to monitor developments on this front. We have just strengthened our efforts in terms of the campaign as well as we are going to put in place mandatory reporting upstream to remove packaging waste upstream – to remove the amount of packaging used and packaging waste generated – and then implement an EPR framework, latest by 2025.

So, let us look at how these policies and measures will pan out in terms of effectiveness of reducing the amount of disposables.

I would like to say that we will continue to monitor reception, for instance, to ideas about charging for plastic bags. Firms, supermarkets, retailers etc can already do this on their own volition, and we will support them.

Our feedback has not been as if it is overwhelmingly that charging for plastic bags is the way to go. In fact, every time when there is an issue on this, there will always be views from both sides of the camp. And when we look at this, as I have said, there are actually good reasons that single-use plastic bags have to be given, for instance, or used by the public for bagging their waste and so on. And therefore, the issue is really about excessive use; not that you cannot use plastic bags but excessive use of plastic bags.

Mr Speaker, just one supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. The Senior Minister of State alluded to studies that show that one has to use reusable packaging or reusable bags a certain of times before you improve on the carbon emissions, vis-a-vis using single-use plastics. I think such data has been cited also previously. Would the Government consider making public the studies that it is using that lead to such data, the methodology behind those studies, the limitations of those studies and to put that into the public domain, if it has not done so already.

We have actually shared a life cycle assessment study at various opportunities. The one that I have just quoted is a British government study, which is also available publicly.

Mr Speaker, just one quick supplementary question. I believe there is a factsheet online from NEA on the findings of the life cycle assessment study on carrier bags and food packaging. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State, following up from what Mr Perera asked: can the full study be made available by the Government on the NEA website?

I think what we have put up is what is useful to the public, not some of the details. But obviously, we can share with you some of the methodologies. This is actually commissioned by NEA.