Debated in Parliament on 6 Aug 2019.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources in the last five years, how many companies have been prosecuted for illegal discharge of wastewater into our public sewage system and how many of these have been second-time offenders and multiple repeat offenders.
Under the Sewerage and Drainage Act, companies have to obtain Written Approvals from PUB before they can discharge industrial used water or trade effluent into the sewers. Any discharge has to comply with stipulated quality requirements.
PUB has a comprehensive programme in place to tackle discharge which do not comply with quality requirements. This consists of online sensors in the public sewerage system for effective monitoring and early detection, periodic inspections of premises as well as engagement of companies to comply with the quality requirements. These efforts complement the penalty framework that PUB has in place.
While most companies abide by the quality requirements, PUB has prosecuted 119 companies since 2014 for illegal discharge of trade effluent into the sewers, where the discharge did not comply with stipulations. Of these, 21 companies are second-time offenders and another 23 companies committed the offences more than two times.
Repeat offenders will face harsher penalties and be subjected to more frequent inspections by PUB. PUB may also suspend or revoke the Written Approval granted to the company for the discharge of trade effluent into the sewers. For severe cases where the discharge contains toxic, dangerous or hazardous substances, PUB will issue an immediate stop-order notice to prevent the company from further discharging trade effluent into the public sewers. The order will be lifted only when the company has implemented remedial measures.
We take a serious view of illegal discharge of trade effluent into our sewers. We will not hesitate to take enforcement action against companies that threaten the quality of our water supply.
I thank the Senior Minister of State. I have three supplementary questions regarding the levers that PUB has to use against errant companies. The first is, regarding repeat offenders with multiple occasions of doing this illegal discharge, there is a very popular bakery that was charged in 2014, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Does constant surveillance actually act as a deterrent for these companies? The companies do not seem to be caring for the reputational damage, even when the names are released to the public. So, is constant surveillance a deterrent at all?
The second question is, when would approval to discharge the trade effluent be suspended or revoked for repeat offenders? So, how many times and what kind considerations does PUB have in revoking the approval?
The third question is, regarding the fines, are they adequate? Under the law, offenders can be fined up to $100,000. But the fines for repeat offenders do not seem to exceed $20,000 so far, as reported in the press.
Regarding the first question about repeat offenders with multiple offences, let me first say that Written Approvals for companies to discharge trade effluent into our public sewers, currently, have been given to about 5,000 premises or companies. As I have said earlier, majority actually comply with the requirements under which they can discharge trade effluent into the public sewers. But from time to time, there are some who do not comply.
PUB takes this very, very seriously. PUB manages about 3,500 km of sewers and used water is a resource. PUB needs to ensure that every drop of used water that goes into our water reclamation plants, does not disrupt the water reclamation process. Of course, it also takes seriously the potential impact on the environment as well as harm, for instance, to the staff managing the water reclamation plants. And therefore, stringent enforcement is carried out, together with a suite of measures.
In the context of the 5,000 Written Approvals, as well as the fact that there are 3,500 km of sewers, the suite of measures, as I have said, include online sensors for early detection and unannounced onsite surveillance visits.
For repeat offenders, we would increase the on-site surveillance visits to as often as even twice a month, if need be. Some of them may be required to put in, install their own online water quality monitoring sensors, for instance. For some of these repeat offenders, we also engage them closely to try and ensure that these do not happen again. It may happen for various reasons. Enhancements to the enforcement regime and penalty regime have also been made. So, they are not just liable to a fine of up to $50,000 or $100,000 if they discharge hazardous, toxic substances into our public sewers. They are also liable to imprisonment, or both.
As for the second question, I think I have answered it, which relates to when Written Approvals will be revoked. Written Approval will be revoked, for instance, when they discharge a dangerous or hazardous toxic substances. First of all, we may issue an immediate stop order, so that they do not discharge dangerous toxic effluent. And then, if they are very egregious, we will revoke the Written Approval, which means that if they want to continue business, they will have to engage the services of a licensed toxic industrial waste collector.
PAPERCUTS