Committee of Supply – Head L (Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources)

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]

Some have even gone a step further to create a business out of a potential solution. In January this year, a new service was launched in Singapore, partnering with F&B outlets to switch disposable containers and cutlery for takeaways with reusables made of stainless steel or glass. Customers would pay a fee for these items and get their money back when they return them at a nearby location. This is a novel idea; it frees businesses from the labour cost of hiring dish washers and resolves the problem of facilitating take-outs without using disposables. Does the Government incentivise such businesses and work with them to refine their ideas for mass-uptake?

On the other hand, this possibly leads to a dilemma. These cutlery and containers would have to be washed, so water consumption goes up. Essentially, when we reuse something, we usually must maintain its cleanliness. How do we balance the effort to reduce plastic disposables with our need to save water?

While on this subject, I am aware that our PUB has always been putting in a lot of effort on technology and R&D to secure our water supply. What are new developments in the water sector that we can look forward to? In what ways can technology be used to optimise the way in which the Ministry and PUB operates?

In recent weeks, we have heard the price of water being mentioned again and again by one of our old suppliers. We have also launched a water conservation campaign at home. Research by the National University of Singapore has shown that when it comes to saving water, normative incentives work as well as economic ones. Hence, campaign messages can motivate households to save as much as 4.9 litres a day per person, or about 3% of demand. This is not an insignificant amount.

As a small, low-lying island state, we need to be aware of how climate change impacts us. We have experienced more frequent and more extreme weather events. We have had our share of flash floods and scorching hot sun. To effectively tackle climate change, it is necessary for us to work with other countries. How are we doing in terms of regional and international engagement? There are also several tropical island states that could face similar challenges. Are we working with them on a solution?

What about the myriad of tiny islets that belong to our nation? We are made up of 63 islands altogether. How are we protecting them from climate change?

We designated last year as the Year of Climate Action, how will the Ministry continue the efforts from the Year of the Climate Action? What are the key climate-related initiatives that we can look forward to this year and beyond?

In 2013, the Ministry established the Centre for Climate Research to develop climate projections for Singapore. Its findings will guide us towards prioritising our key challenges and building up our resilience.

What more will the Ministry do to continue to build up our climate science capabilities to ensure that we are well-prepared against climate changes? What are we doing to nurture an adequate local talent pool to implement the relevant technology and research programmes?

Sir, Singapore has always been vulnerable because of its size and lack of resources, but we have prosper and succeeded because of forward planning and collective action. Let us all do our part so that our nation will not be submerged in water in years to come.

*Question proposed.*

Sir, in preparation for this cut, I did some research and was troubled to learn of the extent of our food waste. According to information from NEA and other related websites, Singaporean generated about 810,000 tonnes of food waste in 2017. Every day, we are throwing away, on average, more than 2,000 tonnes of food.

Food waste constitutes about 10% of the total waste generated, but only 16% is recycled. The rest of the food waste are disposed of at incineration plants.

Over the past 10 years, NEA noted that food waste generated in Singapore has increased by about 40% and is projected to increase with our growing population and economic activity.

Food waste is a concern because food that we throw away, in essence, also amount to wasting the resources used in its production as well as the treatment and disposal. Besides wasting money, it also has negative environmental impact.

There have been on-going efforts to collect and dispose food waste. By and large, there are four major strategies adopted by NEA. Firstly, Prevent and Reduce Food Wastage at Source. Secondly, Redistribute Unsold/Excess Food. Thirdly, Recycle/Treat Food Waste. Fourthly, Recover Energy from Waste.

On the strategy of redistributing unsold and excess food, I feel that there are scope to do more. We could involve more of the community groups to redistribute unsold or excess food to help needy families. In my constituency, for example, our Zhenghua Indian Activity Executive Committee (IAEC) do that every month – collecting food from wholesale market and redistributing it to needy residents at our estates. By so doing, food unsold is not wasted and it can make a difference to low-income families.

Can I ask the Minister to update on the current state of food waste in Singapore? What policies and initiatives do the Ministry have in mind to increase the recycling rate of the 810,000 tonnes of food waste generated every year?

Sir, the Zero Waste Masterplan will be a huge step forward in the environmental protection movement in Singapore. It signals the Government’s strong commitment towards protecting our environment and ensuring that we have sustainable practices.

I hope that the main emphasis of the Masterplan is on reducing our consumption rather than on recycling what we have used.

We need to focus on the root of the problem and address our throw away culture. If we do not reduce our consumption and instead focus mainly on recycling, our efforts will be futile.

Equally important is public ownership of the Masterplan. People need to have a stake in it and we can achieve this by ensuring that people’s views and ideas – from green groups as well as the general public – are heard.

Can the Minister share if the Masterplan is already completed? If not, will there be plans to consult the public, and when will they take place?

Sir, I spoke about my love for gorillas during the Films (Amendment) Bill and little did I know that I have been unknowingly contributing to their demise. Quite simply, because I use a mobile phone and a laptop.

As recently as last month, a media report highlighted that "The critically endangered Grauer’s gorilla has lost 77% of its population in the last 20 years, partly due to the mining of minerals used to make cellphones." The mineral extracted and used is coltan. The report also stressed that, "Participating in cellphone recycling programmes helps reduce the demand for mining in gorilla habitat".

I have spoken up about the recycling of e-waste for several years and I am glad that we are making progress and will be introducing the Extended Producer Responsibility approach to managing e-waste by 2021.

Can the Minister share more details about this, whether it can be brought forward and also whether this can include the recycling of mobile phones and, in particular, the mineral coltan?

A few months ago, I delivered an Adjournment Motion, calling for us to move Towards a Plastic-Lite Singapore. In that speech, I shared that a recent study found 1.8 trillion pieces of plastic, weighing a total of 80,000 tonnes, currently floating in a stretch of ocean between California and Hawaii. If we do not do anything about it, there will be more plastics than fish in our ocean by 2050. Part of the problem is packaging waste and this clearly needs to be addressed.

I am glad that we will mandate that businesses report on the type and amount of packaging, including plastics, they put on the market and their plans for reduction. It is even better news that this has been brought forward from 2021 to 2020, next year.

Can Minister share more details about this: whether there will be mandatory reduction targets set and whether there will be any measures to ensure that businesses have significant plans for reduction?

One of the places where a lot of disposables are used is at our hawker centres. A lot of people takeaway their food and disposables are used since it is still rare that people bring their own containers.

We need to tackle this issue but what we should tackle first is the use of disposables for dining in. For new hawker centres, we have already disallowed the use of disposables for dining in. This has clearly resulted in a significant drop in the amount of waste generated.

Since 2019 has been designated as the year towards Zero Waste in Singapore, will Minister consider extending the ban on the use of disposables for dining in to all hawker centres? If not, will MEWR consider providing incentives or subsidies for hawkers who choose not to use disposables for dining ins?

I do understand that disposables are used, as it is more convenient and maybe cheaper. As such, providing such incentives might encourage hawkers to make this change.

Sir, last month, Temasek CEO Mdm Ho Ching urged businesses to fulfil their obligation to ensure a liveable and sustainable planet for all. It is a call to action that I fully support. It is also a call to action that the public service, the biggest employer in Singapore, should support.

Public agencies currently follow the procurement principles of fairness, transparency and value-for-money. Can environmental sustainability also be included in these principles? Even with a healthy economy, there will be no future if we do not have a healthy environment.

In the words of Mdm Ho Ching, "There is, as you know, no Plan B for us, because there is no Planet B."

Chairman, it is great to hear that the Zero Waste Master Plan will be launched towards the end of this year, and will specifically target the problem area of food waste, e-waste and packaging waste. I believe the focus will be on upstream solutions. The Minister of Finance has exhorted Singaporeans as individuals to change our way of life and practise the 3Rs – to Reduce consumption, Recycle and Reuse.

But I would like to warn against neglecting what may be seen as downstream issues. The 3Rs are not simply linked to individual ways of life that could be easily changed. Ways of life are bound up with social norms, cultural beliefs and urban systems. Change must come about through collective action.

On recycling, our domestic recycling rate has been stuck at 21%. The blue bins at each block of flats have hit a green ceiling. Public education is still relevant. Single-use plastics remains a major problem. A survey by the Singapore Environment Council found that we use at least 1.76 billion plastic items a year, of which less than 20% is recycled. SEC also reported that seven in 10 people do not know what plastics to recycle. We need to double-down on green education. On reducing, we have to tackle head-on the rise of new patterns of retail and consumption. The rise of home delivery and online shopping means packaging waste will only get higher. On this front, MEWR will have to work closely with online retailers to minimise packaging and may well have to legislate or impose a packaging tax to compel reduction.

On reusing, many countries are now promoting the reusing of waste for building and construction. Is MEWR working with BCA on this front to promote the reusing of waste by our construction companies for their projects?

Sure. Sir, 2019 is designated to be Singapore's Year Towards Zero Waste; a campaign to raise Singaporeans' awareness on waste issues. For Singapore to achieve our vision of becoming a zero waste nation, Singaporeans have to reduce our consumption and also adopt a zero‐waste attitude in their day‐to‐day life; such as stop using single‐use plastic. Getting our recycling habits right is another way – we have to increase our household recycling rate.

In my MOE cuts, I stressed the importance of inculcating our younger generation with green habits and lifestyle. After a discussion on Semakau Landfill, a young man went back to pick up the brochure he got when he visited Semakau as a student 10 years ago. To his shock, he saw that in this brochure, it shows that Semakau Landfill is expected to meet Singapore's needs for landfill space beyond the year 2045 but today's estimate is 2035 – 10 years ahead. The trip made him more environmentally cautious, but it did not manage to make him feel the urgency to recycle or reduce waste!

Everyone of us has to take zero waste and green lifestyle more seriously as a nation. Semakau is our only landfill. We need to work together to extend the lifespan of the landfill, we must cut down our waste. Can the Minister shares what happens after 2035 when the landfill is filled? This brochure also showed that the first space of Semakau Landfill cost $610,0000 and four years to complete. It is a very costly project. So, it is important that we have a Zero Waste Masterplan.

I would like to ask the Minister how can the public and other interested stakeholders share their suggestions and ideas on how we can move towards on a zero waste nation together.

E‐waste management is another important aspect as only 6% of our estimated 30,000 tonnes e‐waste goes into recycling. Two years from now, we will have a management framework based on the Extended Producer Responsibility where among other things, producers have to ensure that their products are properly recycled at the end of life.

Can the Minister share more details on how we intend to implement the framework?

Sir, as we know, solar energy is the most promising renewable energy in Singapore due to our location. However, we are physically small with limited amount of land to install solar panels. Singapore is surrounded by water and we also have reservoirs.

Last year, it was reported that the HDB is exploring having floating solar panels in the open sea and that it is studying if such panels are suitable for our coastal marine conditions. This year, we have a huge floating solar panel system coming up on our northern shores.

Can the Minister provide an update on our floating solar plans? Are there plans for PUB to deploy more solar panels at our reservoirs in the future?

Sir, air pollution is a problem even for highly developed countries like Singapore. Deloitte and InnoEnergy estimate that poor air quality in the EU could cost €775 billion by 2020, based on premature deaths, healthcare costs and lower productivity.

While we are all affected by regional air pollution from the haze, we may not realise that vehicle emissions also significantly affect local air quality. Conversion of our vehicle fleet to electric will reduce emissions, even after accounting for the fact that our electricity is generated by fossil fuels.

Electrification of private cars will be challenging because there is little charging infrastructure. In any case, the best way to reduce emissions is to go car-lite. However, public service vehicles such as our nearly 6,000 public buses could be electrified. We just heard that MOT has a plan to convert the public bus fleet to clean energy by 2040.

Could the Ministry support this plan to electrify the Government public service fleet by examining: (a) the impacts of particulates and other emissions from the vehicle fleet on health, quality of life, and economic output; (b) the experiences of commercial providers of zero emissions transport such as HDT or Blue SG to understand barriers to widespread adoption; and (c) the related tax and subsidy policies needed to electrify major private vehicle fleets, such as private buses and taxis.

Mr Chairman, Sir it was announced last year that Singaporeans will have three new after-death facilities in the near future to meaningfully send off their loved ones. A new facility for the scattering of ashes at sea without having to travel by boat is being built at Tanah Merah. It was reported that there will be four pavilions accommodating seven people each and a shelter for 28 people.

I would like to ask when will this facility be ready and whether the facility is big enough to accommodate big family groups wanting to send off their loved ones?

I have similar questions for the in-land ash scattering facilities at Choa Chu Kang Cemetery Complex and the Mandai Crematorium and Columbarium Complex. It was reported that these would be ready in 2020 and 2021 respectively. Is the construction of the facilities on track for completion in the next two years?

We have been given some general information about the facilities being open to all faiths and set in a beautiful, tranquil and respectful environment. But there are very few details about the facilities. Will the Minister please share what the public can expect from the facilities?

Unlike the keeping of ashes in an urn in the Columbarium, the scattering of ashes is the last ceremony for family members to pay their last respects to the remains of their loved ones. As such, it is important that the design of the facilities should be properly thought out and the facilities planning takes into account the comfort and privacy of grieving family members as well as accommodating ritual requirement of different faith.

I hope the Ministry will share more information on the planned facilities and perhaps conduct a public consultation?

Thank you, Mr Chairman. In November 2018, I filed an oral Parliamentary Question (PQ) for the Minister for Environment and Water Resources in respect of the supply of 8,600 quartz niches, instead of marble ones, when the niches were relocated from Mount Vernon Columbarium. Specifically, I had asked: (a) whether NEA had verified that all contractual requirements have been fulfilled by the contractors during delivery and installation; (b) what punitive action will be taken against the contractors; and (c) whether the contractors are required to provide refunds or compensation where affected families do not accept a marble replacement.

The Minister has told me in his PQ answer that the contractor will bear the costs required to make good on what should have been delivered, that NEA has withheld payments to the contractor, and NEA will also be claiming against the contractor for any difference in price between the quartz and marble plaques.

However, to date, we have not yet been told any explanation given by the contractor for their supply of the 8,600 quartz plaques out of 20,000 total number of plaques. So, it is more than one third of the contracted quantity. Can the Minister clarify what was the explanation given by the contractor? Was it a deliberate attempt o the part of the contractor? Or was it an attempt to deceive? There was no mention of police report or police investigation in the PQ answer.

I would like to know whether NEA had made any police report, and if no police report was made, why did NEA not do so.

If a police report was made, when was it made and whether any investigation was carried out or is being carried out by the police or CAD. What is the outcome of the investigation?

Finally, I would like to know whether any further action will be taken by NEA in this connection besides what was stated in the PQ reply and whether the supplier will be blacklisted from future contracts.

Sir, our hawker centres – our ubiquitous community dining rooms – are the heart of Singapore life. Here are where we can get our three daily meals, or six, if you include brunch, tea and supper, from professionals offering cuisines from east to west at affordable prices. It is from our vibrant and unique hawker culture that the world’s first Michelin-starred street food stall emerged – "Hong Kong Soya Chicken Rice and Noodle" run by chef-owner Chan Hon Meng. I am sure that we will have more champions like Mr Chan in the future. This is because we have many hawker stalls which serve up delicious food reflecting our diverse cultural heritage and innovative fusions which can only be found here in Singapore. Our hawker centres are an important and intrinsic part of our history. Government, community and stakeholders must work together to ensure that this living legacy will continue to flourish. How is our nomination of Singapore’s Hawker Culture for UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity progressing? What more can Singaporeans do to lend support?

Selling food is a tough and competitive business, even more so for hawkers. The work is physically demanding and the hours are long. Many Singaporeans are concerned that selling hawker food might become a dying trade with fewer younger people taking it up as a career. Will the Ministry review and implement further measures to sustain our hawker trade and culture?

Part of the reason the younger generation is not so attracted to running hawker stalls is the availability of other food sale alternatives. Those passionate about making food can choose to work for food courts run by chains, restaurants, hotels and catering firms. They can earn decent salaries in better environments. They can even operate their own eateries or restaurants with financial backers. However, this also means that good, affordable food may not be so widely available in the future. To ensure that we have a steady stream of younger hawkers, more has to be done to ensure a decent livelihood for our hawkers while keeping hawker food affordable for Singaporeans. Will the Ministry share a progress report on its mentorship programme and Incubation Stall Programme which train interested cooks and teach them how to manage a hawker stall?

They are some hawkers who, despite having spent years in this trade, are less successful or who are even struggling. Are there counsellors at the Ministry which they can turn to for feedback and suggestions on how to turn their businesses around? What are the success factors of hawkers doing well and how could these information and insights be shared with this group?

Last but not least, our hawker centres need the cooperation of all customers to stay clean and pleasant for dining. Unfortunately, a minority of diners are not so neat when they eat and leave a mess of bones or unwanted food pieces on the tables. How can we educate our people to be more considerate and hygienic? How can we improve our dining etiquette as a nation? In view of the labour shortage for cleaning staff, Singaporeans have to get used to returning our own trays or even better, like the Japanese, wipe and clean up our tables before we leave. What further measures will the Ministry take to ensure the success of tray returns programme?

Sir, the Ministry had announced various measures in November 2018 to address issues pertaining to the socially-conscious enterprise hawker centres (SEHC) model.

Firstly, the Ministry had committed to better support stallholders to manage costs. Currently, the Ministry have put in place measures to ensure that rentals are reasonable and not speculative. For existing centres, the reserve rent has been removed as well as subletting and assignment have been disallowed. For new centres, the tender evaluation favoured tenderers who offer lower total rental and operating costs, and prohibit any increases in rentals or operating costs for the duration of the tenancy. In this way, the interests of the hawkers are well protected.

In addition, I am glad that the Productive Hawker Centre (PHC) grants have been extended for two years with effect from January 2019. This shall help the SEHC stallholders manage their costs. This means that the stallholders at the hawker centres can enjoy 50% reduction in their centralised dishwashing costs for the first year and 30% for the second year.

The productivity solutions such as centralised dishwashing and automated tray return systems are steps in the right direction and a help to ease our tight manpower situation.

I can see that the Ministry had attempted to strike a balance between the soft touch regulatory approach towards SEHC operators and to exercise better oversight to protect hawkers' welfare. To that end, I welcome NEA's review of the key contractual terms between the SEHC operators and stallholders to provide more flexibility, while ensuring proper management.

For example, operators will be more flexible on the stallholders’ operating hours and days of work required. Operators will also now not require a notice period of two months to terminate their tenancies or require security deposits exceeding two months.

To attract more to enter the hawker trade, we not only need to lower the barrier to entry but the barrier to exist as well. Does the Ministry have updates on whether those measures have been effective?

Thank you. Sir, in food paradise Singapore where food of very conceivable cuisine and price are easily found, food security is hardly a heady Singaporean topic. Even the Economist Intelligence Unit Global Food Security Index seems to agree. We are rated as the most food secure in the world. We are even ahead of large agricultural nations such as the US and Canada. But are we really food secure?

According to the same Index, we are top chiefly because of affordability. Globally, we spend the lowest on food as a percentage of our household expenditure after United States. But there was a red flag. We import nearly 90% of what we eat. That makes us extremely susceptible to trade and supply chain disruptions from climate and political events. This vulnerability is beyond just food cost but also our survival.

Food crisis are not so distant in history. The last global food crisis was a decade ago. In 2014 where Malaysian eggs were found to have salmonella, egg prices rose quickly. Clearly, food resilience must be a core national focus.

Can the Minister share what are the key trait and supply risk that Singapore face? How have we been strengthening our food supplies in the face of geo-political and economic development?

By 2050, the world's population is expected to hit 10 billion from the current 7.3 billion. If we do not increase our agricultural yields massively over the next 30 years, the world will simply be in an economic growth-driven famine. Singapore's competition for food will only be more keen. How can we safeguard our future? It is mission critical to increase the local content of our food supplies. We have diversified our food sources to manage our risk and food cost. But only local production can protect us from short-term shocks and provide a measure of self-sufficiency. What is the Ministry's target of local production to imported food supplies over the next 10 to 30 years? We are way in meeting this target?

In the 1960s, agricultural accounted for 3% of our GDP. Today, it no longer has a category of its own and accounts for less than 0.02% of our GDP. Has the Ministry set a target GDP rate?

For us to succeed in this national mission, both businesses and consumers play critical roles. Locally produced food will generally cost more than imported ones. This is no different from a higher cost water produced by distillation. Yet if we do not see the value of food self-sufficiency as a national imperative, then there is no future for local production. For once, we have to literally drink and eat our way to security or disaster.

Over the years, Fairprice has made it a critical mission to build an eco-system to support local producers beyond moderating costs of food. First, it has committed to buying local. I understand that Fairprice carries close to 5,000 locally-produced items, accounting for about 20% of its total sales. In fact, 40% of eggs sold are from our local farms. Buying "local" also meant that Fairprice has a stronger control over quality and safety from farms to dining table. This is good for consumers.

They also started an SME development and support programme to help 400 small companies and start-ups with the cash flow and development. It has committed to monthly "Made in Singapore" campaigns at its own costs.

Fairprice cannot do it alone. It is the Government, other companies and consumers to join in enhancing ed of food security. How can the Ministry support the efforts of companies such as Fairprice to build on local production capacity? The quality of soil and climate used to determine agricultural yield. Now, a technologically-driven eco-system can level the playing field.

For example, the Netherlands is small and densely populated. It does not have most of the resources necessary for large scale agriculture. Yet, it is the globe's number two exporter of food measured by value, second only to the United States. For a sense of its achievements, the US is 270 times its land mass. What Silicon Valley has done for the US' IT industry, Food Valley has achieved the same for Dutch agriculture. Wageningen University and Research (WUR) is a crucible of innovative re-cultural developments, not unlike what MIT Alumni has done in the IT world.

While we might not be able to go to such a scale as the Dutch, we can be the crucible of change in development in our region. Its areas include R&D and logistics, urban farming, agricultural and eco-culture, finance and insurance. We have done this water challenge. Our ambitions must now match urgency and the novelty of Singapore's food security challenge. If we can grow the industry, this will mean tremendous opportunities for economy. While it is a total economic value you can generate if we reach our target local production, how many and what types of jobs can we expect to create?

We can only grow our agriculture industry if we have the right capital and political will. Viable businesses ultimately determine the sustainability of the industry. How can the Ministry ensure that there is sufficient capital and skilled manpower in the system to drive the growth of start-ups? Netherlands, WUR and its impact on agricultural innovation suggests that we need to invest in our local academia. We need to marry the science and the market. How does the Ministry plan to jump start and develop this field in the Institutes of Higher Learning?

Even as we go to local content of production, our legislation must be kept market-friendly without compromising our food safety. The supply chain is fraught with risks. From cultivation and harvesting, things can easily go wrong. How does the Ministry ensure that food safety is maintained throughout the supply chain and that effective co-chain is in place? How does it also ensure they monitor compliance cost keenly to minimise regulatory costs?

Thank you, Chairman. The formation of the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) will bring together the food-related functions of the Agri-Food and AVA, NEA and the Health Sciences Authority (HSA). Without a doubt, this consolidation of regulatory oversight for food safety and security under a single agency will be more efficient. The streamlining of processes and the sharing of facilities and technology will enable all the various teams to communicate more effectively, reduce red tape, and avoid duplication and work more productively.

But for all the work behind the scenes, what are the benefits for Singaporeans and companies from this consolidation? Would the Minister share some examples of how these changes translate to, for example, the ability to conduct more accurate tests and frequent checks, or shorten approval times for certain applications, among others?

As with any transition, there will be unexpected issues which will crop up. With less than a month to go before the start of SFA on 1 April, what are some of the challenges, if any, which the agencies involved encounter and how are these problems being solved?

Rising temperatures pose a particular threat to food safety in Singapore, for example, as our wet markets and hawker centres are not air-conditioned, exposing all food to higher risks of spoilage. What is the Ministry's view on this problem?

With climate change, we can expect more unpredictable and intense rainfall. What are some of PUB's plans to mitigate flood risks in the face of this challenge?

Would the Ministry share some updates, starting with the progress of the various drainage improvement works, canals, retention and any new detention tanks around our island? How many and where are these works being done and what are the expected dates of completion? I understand that last year alone, the Ministry received about 500 submissions for plans to build retention tanks. But as of February 2018, only 158 have been completed. What is the status now for these projects?

Besides these constructions, the maintenance of our drains is equally important. From the regular inspections, what common problems were detected and how can members of the public assist to keep obstructions out of the drains?

And lastly, as I also called for last year, would the Ministry be considering the use of innovative porous materials such as durable permeable concrete on our roads and walkways to facilitate drainage?

Water conservation is key to ensuring sustainability of our water supply.

A study by the Water Resources Institute in 2015 found that Singapore was a country most likely to be water-stressed in 2040, amid climate change and increasing water demand.

Even so, a recent focus group study by PUB and REACH observed that younger Singaporeans and permanent residents appear to be less concerned about the sustainability of Singapore's water supply. The study also found that even amongst those willing to conserve water, many said that they did not have the means to manage water consumption effectively.

Given that being able to meet our country's growing water demand is critical to Singapore's future developments, what initiatives will the Ministry and PUB introduce to help households achieve the target of lowering household water demand to 130 litres per capita per day by 2030?

The non-domestic sector is expected to contribute significantly to our water demand growth. So, what are the initiatives to assist businesses in managing their water demand and increasing water efficiency?

As a small island state, Singapore's survival and success is a miracle. We have too little land to cultivate food meaningfully, no natural resources to enrich ourselves and remain one of the most water-stressed countries in the world.

We must never forget that the 1961 and 1962 Water Agreements ensured a supply of water from Johor to meet Singapore's needs, and were so sacrosanct that they were guaranteed by both Singapore and Malaysia in the Separation Agreement. Sacrosanct to this day. Yet, we were determined to build a successful, thriving and liveable home and by pursuing sustainable development from the word "go". We overcame our challenges through two key approaches.

First, long-term planning. Even as the Government tackled current problems, it scanned the horizon for threats and opportunities and planned decades ahead, decades, not years.

Second, the ability to implement policies and plans effectively. Faced with a challenge, we start small; learn from others; harness technology; invest in R&D. Keep on trying, until we get it right. Then, we take our solutions and scale up to benefit the whole nation.

In doing so, we also grow our enterprises and create good jobs for Singaporeans.

This is the essence of our Water Story. We now welcome the Singapore Food Agency into our MEWR family. It is with the same understanding that food security is an existential issue, just like water, that we are writing our Singapore Food Story.

But first, Mr Chairman, let me dwell on our Water Story. Since Independence, there has been the perception that water could be used as leverage against Singapore. Indeed, there have been threats to cut off our water supply.

It was against this backdrop of needing to ensure the security and resilience of Singapore's water supply that we set out to create drinking water from used water. We started pilot testing in the 1970s. It took us more than two decades before we were ready to scale up production of NEWater. We built a demonstration plant, started water quality measurement programmes, and rallied the entire nation's support.

It is a feat to be proud of that we have integrated our used water into the water system into a closed loop, safely and reliably. Drugs disposed of, in sinks or toilets will be substantially removed through the water reclamation process. Our NEWater technology is so reliable that the Reverse Osmosis process will effectively remove any remaining pharmaceutical compounds, when treated used water is channelled into the NEWater production.

PUB's constant monitoring showed that pharmaceutical compounds were not detected in our drinking water. I hope that will put to rest Ms Irene Quay's concerns about PUB's treatment capabilities in removing drugs from used water.

Every time I describe to an international audience how we, as a nation, drink and use water from this system with full confidence of its safety and hygiene, I cannot help but beam with pride. Today, NEWater is a national tap that is recognised internationally for its high quality and sustainability.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked about new developments in the water sector. PUB is not done with R&D. We are pushing on. The Research, Innovation and Enterprise Council (RIEC) allocated PUB $200 million for R&D, which includes pursuing breakthrough technologies. We will pose what we call "Big Hairy Audacious Goals" (BHAGs) to scientists, such as producing desalinated water with energy use of 1 kWh/m3 (kilo Watt hour per metre cube) at the system level. We already have the electro-deionisation technology that can potentially halve the energy required today in conventional reverse osmosis desalination. We are ready to scale up and deploy this technology at one of the process trains in PUB's Tuas Desalination Plant from 2020.

The gains from R&D go beyond solving our water problems. Over the years, we have developed a thriving water industry, with over 200 companies and more than 25 R&D centres. Our investments in the past decade have created some 14,400 good jobs and economic value-add of over $2.2 billion annually, far more than our 2006 target of 11,000 jobs and $1.5 billion value-add. Singapore is now one of the best and busiest hydrohubs, where companies come to prove their patents and scalability in a live water system.

Our R&D efforts also allow PUB to grow our local enterprises when it partners the industry to develop innovative solutions. One example is EnvironSens. PUB worked with them to develop an early warning system that detects illegal discharge of heavy metals into the sewerage system. EnvironSens has already attracted investments to manufacture and market their products in countries such as the US, China, and India.

We have come a long way in our Water Story, but we cannot rest on our laurels. Climate change is bringing new and wicked problems. It is no coincidence that we are building more desalination and NEWater plants – we need to produce water almost at will, regardless of whether the rains will come.

On the other hand, climate change also brings more frequent intense storms, which could mean more floods, as noted by Dr Chia Shi-Lu. As a low-lying island, Singapore is particularly vulnerable to sea level rise that can exacerbate flooding problems. You may have seen the Straits Times' interactive graphic that shows "Singapore Underwater". That is already a reality in the Pacific Ocean where at least eight islands have disappeared under the sea.

To enhance our flood resilience, we completed the Stamford Diversion Canal and Stamford Detention Tank last year. Upgrading works at two major waterways, the Bukit Timah First Diversion Canal and Sungei Pandan Kechil, will be completed this year. We will commence drainage upgrading works at another 16 locations this year.

As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah noted, climate change must be tackled at regional and global platforms. In the meantime, we must press on to transform our economy towards a low carbon future and do our part for the planet. This year, the carbon tax takes effect. The Government is prepared to spend more than $1 billion to be collected over the next five years in tax revenues, to help companies become more energy-efficient.

We will step up solar adoption, as highlighted by Miss Cheng Li Hui. PUB is studying the deployment of floating solar Photo Voltaic (PV) systems at four reservoirs – Bedok, Lower Seletar, Upper Peirce and Tengeh. EDB is also exploring the possibility of a commercial floating solar system at Kranji Reservoir. Together, these systems potentially have a capacity to power 40,000 four-room HDB households each year – about half the size of Tampines.

It gets more exciting. We are also exploring such floating PV systems off Singapore's coast, as well as integrating solar PV into our building facades to maximise solar energy generation.

Promoting sustainable transport and managing vehicular emissions are also key. Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked about our plans to manage transport emissions. We promote cleaner vehicles through emissions standards and encourage the early replacement of older and more pollutive vehicles, such as through the Early Turnover Scheme. More than 40,000 commercial diesel vehicles have switched to cleaner vehicles under this scheme.

We also work with MOT to encourage adoption of cleaner vehicles, and regularly engage the industry, such as commercial electric vehicle fleet owners like HDT and BlueSG, on their plans. As one of my colleagues, a Minister of Environment, quipped, "There is a link between carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. You aim for cleaner vehicles to solve pollution, you will also solve greenhouse gases that will help with climate change."

The preceding examples are what we all call climate mitigation. But that is not enough. The Government is also planning ahead to protect Singapore against climate change impacts. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked about our initiatives to build climate resilience. My colleagues in MND spoke at length on this. To guide our policies though, in fortifying Singapore against climate change, we must build up our knowledge of climate science. Indeed, because there is limited literature on climate change effects in the tropics, we can lead.

This is why we set up the Centre for Climate Research Singapore (CCRS) in 2013. We are stepping up investment to build capability in CCRS and the local scientific community. This year, CCRS will embark on the National Sea Level Programme to better understand sea levels around Singapore so that we can develop robust projections and plans for the long term.

Mr Chairman, we will also press on to ensure water security. When Marina East and Jurong Island Desalination Plants are completed next year, we will have a total of five desalination plants. Work on the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System Phase 2 (DTSS2) is on track. We will continue to build up our desalination and NEWater capacities, to ensure that our water supply is secure and resilient in the long term. Water security is an existential issue for Singapore. We will continue to do what it takes to ensure it.

Members would be aware that, earlier this week, PUB issued a Default Notice to Tuaspring Pte Ltd (TPL), the Hyflux subsidiary that owns and operates the Tuaspring Integrated Water and Power Plant. As updated previously in this House, we have been closely monitoring developments and will not allow our water security to be compromised. We are concerned that TPL has been unable to fulfil various contractual obligations, in particular, by failing to keep the plant reliably operational as required.

In addition, TPL has not been able to produce financial evidence to demonstrate its ability to keep the plant running for the next six months. Hence, PUB has decided to exercise its rights under its contract with TPL and initiate the necessary proceedings to safeguard the continued operations of the plant. This action is to safeguard our water security.

Over the past five decades, we have worked hard to diversify our water resources and build up our four national taps. We saw how the Linggiu Reservoir stock level plummeted to 20% in 2016. It has yet to recover fully even after more than two years. While stock levels had gradually increased to 72% by end 2018, after just two months this year, it has dropped again to 64%. That is why our weather-resilient NEWater and desalination taps are integral to our water security.

Mr Chairman, even as we secure our water supply, we cannot ignore water conservation. Over-consumption is a challenge in many countries. In Qatar, where water is provided for free, daily consumption is around 500 litres per person. In Singapore, we have worked hard to embed water conservation in our national DNA. Our domestic water consumption decreased from 148 litres per capita per day in 2016, to 141 litres in 2018. But we agree with Mr Amrin Amin that we must do more, to reach our goal of 130 litres by 2030.

To this end, we will help consumers make more informed purchasing decisions, such as through the Mandatory Water Efficiency Labelling Scheme. Similarly, for the non-domestic sector, PUB is working with the Singapore Environment Council to develop a Green Labelling Scheme for commercial equipment, such as commercial dishwashers. PUB also supports businesses through its Water Efficiency Fund. One beneficiary is Hoya Electronics Singapore, which reduced its NEWater consumption by 75%.

Last weekend, President Halimah officiated Singapore World Water Day, marking the start of a year-long conservation campaign. PUB is launching the inaugural #GoBlue4SG movement, to rally the community and celebrate our collective actions to conserve water. One of the highlights – City Turns Blue – will see more than 20 buildings light up Singapore's skyline on 22 March. I am heartened that over 150 schools will undertake water rationing exercises to drive home the value of water. I encourage all of us to "Make Every Drop Count".

The impact of climate change goes beyond water. Indeed, the destinies of two other agencies under my Ministry – environment and food – are also tied to the impacts of climate change, like water. Resource scarcity is set to become the new normal. And with it, cascading impacts, such as disruptions to supply chains that fuel our economies, and increased risk of global conflict. We must, therefore, apply a strategic lens to Singapore's resource resilience.

As I mentioned in my opening remarks, to meet this new challenge of securing our food and other resources, we can apply the lessons from our Water Story. Singapore designated 2019 as the Year Towards Zero Waste. We want to break away from the linear economy, where we take, make, use and toss without a second thought, because this is not sustainable. Therefore, we must make a paradigm shift towards circular economy approaches.

Beyond protecting the planet, circular economy approaches can enable Singapore to overcome resource constraints and strengthen overall resilience. Many may not realise this, but NEWater embodies the circular economy. We use a resource, in this case water, for as long as possible, and ensure that what can be reused is put back into the system.

This shirt, which I received recently at the Special ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Marine Debris this week, is another good example of the circular economy. It says there this polo shirt is recycled from 12 bottles, pet bottles that all of us use. But I would encourage most of us to use reuseable bottles instead. It is made from these upcycled materials. In essence, what they have done is try to keep using what we have within our systems and not toss it away, in this case, into the sea.

This same thinking applies to every other resource. For example, lithium-ion batteries found in almost all our electronics – handphones, laptops and even electric vehicles. Global demand is soaring, but mineral sources for lithium, cobalt and coltan are finite and costly to mine. Continuously exploiting these minerals may harm the gorillas that Mr Louis Ng was talking about. But we can collect these used uncontaminated e-wastes in meaningful amounts, and apply R&D and new technologies to extract the precious minerals.

This will increase our resource resilience and avoid harming the environment. Businesses are alive to the opportunities of the circular economy. Among them is our own home-grown e-waste recycling company, TES. TES recovers treasures from trash, extracting gold, silver and palladium from e-waste. TES has plans to expand its lithium-ion battery treatment process facility. Recyclers like TES are important as they ensure that heavy metals from e-waste do not contaminate our environment, but are instead recovered as valuable resources to power our economy.

Let me focus on how we will recreate our Water Story in the environmental sector. Our vision is to close the waste loop through circular economy approaches and turn trash into treasure. This will also help to extend the lifespan of Semakau Landfill, as Miss Cheng Li Hui highlighted. To do so, we need to invest in R&D in close partnership with industry and research institutions, just like how we have grown our water industry and research eco-system to tackle our water challenge. This will allow us to overcome technological barriers in our drive towards a zero waste nation.

NEA set aside $45 million under the “Closing the Waste Loop” R&D Initiative to fund projects adopting circular economy approaches. Promising projects include Singapore Polytechnic’s development of green chemistry technology to recover precious metals in e-waste, and Nanyang Technological University’s method to rapidly convert food waste into high grade bio-fertilisers. The result of such R&D means more opportunities for our enterprises and, consequently, more jobs for Singaporeans.

Take Singapore Polytechnic, which after developing a recycling process for solar panels that can potentially recover up to 90% of useful materials, signed a memorandum of collaboration with SembCorp Industries to develop a pilot recycling plant for used PV panels.

Another company that has seized such opportunities is Westcom Solutions. Westcom got its researchers to help improve processes, to scale up and transition from being a company that distributes food waste digesters to one that manufactures them. I look forward to the day when our stores carry home food digesters that are compact, economical and easy to use, something we can put in our own homes, to convert our food waste into compost to grow plants and even food at home.

This also reduces the need to transport food waste across the island, and keep our waste system free from pests! As R&D powers our enterprises and creates new opportunities for them, it will also create new jobs for Singaporeans. We need engineers to develop standards for waste management and recycling operations; scientists to study micro-organisms for efficient food waste processing; and analysts to study the data created and create strategies for scaling up.

We will also partner with other agencies and the industry to turn trash into treasure through circular economy strategies. JTC, in consultation with NEA, is developing the Multi-Storey Recycling Facility (MSRF) which is expected to be ready in 2021. The facilities will house multiple recyclers, and be located close to other industries. This will present opportunities to reuse waste materials and other industrial by-products, thereby closing resource loops at the local level.

Today, we already have NEWater. We are working on creating NEWSand! We are studying how we can turn incineration ash into construction materials, instead of landfilling it. NEA is leading the effort and has developed draft standards for the use of treated ash, such as for building roads. NEA has appointed industry players to demonstrate their technologies, with plans to start field trials next year.

We will take careful steps though, as two-thirds of Singapore is water catchment that must remain free from pollution.

Building a circular economy also requires international cooperation, as value chains are inter-connected. Singapore will play a constructive role in this process.

We supported the Special ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Marine Debris two days ago, where ASEAN countries agreed to advance concrete actions on the circular economy, the same conference where Thailand gave delegates this T-shirt to demonstrate the potential of the circular economy. We will continue cooperating with our partners in the region to work towards zero waste.

Mr Chairman, let me now turn to food, another essential resource. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates widespread declines in crop yields of up to 25% by 2050 due to climate change. Singapore is also exposed to the volatilities of the global food market, because we import over 90% of our food. Just last year, Malaysia announced that it was considering limiting exports of eggs.

Dr Chia Shi-Lu asked how the SFA's formation will benefit Singaporeans and companies. SFA’s mission is to ensure and secure a supply of safe food for Singapore. As the lead agency to strengthen food safety and security, SFA will have regulatory oversight across the entire food chain, from farm-to-fork. It will also partner businesses to transform our agri-food industry and create, again, good jobs for Singaporeans.

Mr Desmond Choo asked about SFA’s plans to strengthen our food security. SFA will pursue three broad strategies called the three food baskets – "Diversify Import Sources"; "Grow Local" and "Grow Overseas" – which I talked about during the Second Reading of the SFA Bill.

Today, I would like to focus on our "Grow Local" strategy. Local production will reduce our reliance on imports, and buffer the impact of overseas supply disruptions. That is, to locally produce 30% of Singapore's nutritional needs by 2030 – "30% by 30" or "30 by 30 vision". This is an ambitious multi-fold increase to our current production. Remember, we import over 90% of our food?

To get to the "30 by 30 vision" will require our agri-food industry to adopt new solutions to raise productivity, apply R&D, strengthen climate resilience and overcome our resource constraints. We need new paradigms in the agri-food industry.

Supporting our existing farms to innovate and increase productivity is a key pillar of the "Grow Local" strategy. Many of these farms are household names which produce eggs, vegetables and fish. For example, vegetable farms Kok Fah and Ho Ka Clean have been feeding Singapore for over 20 years.

The Agriculture Productivity Fund (APF) has supported them to integrate climate control and automation into their operations, thereby raising their capacity and productivity.

We will similarly work with our existing coastal fish farms. Singapore Aquaculture Technologies was one of the first coastal fish farms to adopt closed containment aquaculture systems.  This protects fish production from sea-borne threats, such as algae blooms or oil spills. More than 90 farms have benefited from the APF, and I encourage all our farms to tap on it.

We will also expand production in state-of-the-art indoor farms. Farms, such as Sustenir and Panasonic, optimise plant growth and increase yield exponentially through high-tech solutions like LED lighting and climate control. By controlling growing variables, these farms are climate-resilient, and can maintain high quality. We expect to see more such farms as successful tenderers in the recent agricultural land tender exercises begin production and scale up. Farmers of the future will operate computerised control systems in a pleasant environment.

SFA will also support the growing interest in urban farming, such as on rooftops. This brings the community together, and attunes Singaporeans to food security, by involving them directly in food production. Such farms can also be used to test-bed innovative technologies for growing food.

We are working with SLA, MOH and ECDA to pilot this concept, re-purposing the former Henderson Secondary School into an integrated space comprising an urban farm, a childcare centre, a nursing home and a dialysis centre.

Our plans to "Grow Local" also extend to productive and sustainable fish farming. Our vision is to develop Singapore into a tropical aquaculture hub, much like how we have the hydrohub.

One area we are studying is deep sea fish farming, which can contribute significantly to local production. A local first mover is Barramundi Asia, which uses large sea cages to culture Asian seabass in the deep waters off Pulau Semakau, our landfill. I recently visited them and was impressed by their fish vaccination process. Using technology, Barramundi Asia can vaccinate 9,000 fish in one hour, compared to just 600 manually. SFA will work with agencies and industry to open up more sites for deep sea farming with deep technology.

Thus, R&D will be the key driver, again, to help us achieve our "30 by 30" vision, grow our enterprises and, consequently, create good jobs. We will grow an ecosystem of R&D players to support agri- and aquaculture industry developments.

SFA’s Marine Aquaculture Centre will contribute to this effort by sharing its expertise and providing facilities for R&D. The RIEC has also set aside $144 million for us to write the Singapore Food Story.

Mr Desmond Choo asked how we will prepare Singaporeans for the growing opportunities in the agri-food sector. The agri-food industry will require a workforce with good understanding of urban food production processes and business models, and multi-disciplinary expertise in science, engineering, info-communications and more.

To this end, we have worked with Republic Polytechnic and Temasek Polytechnic to launch SkillsFuture Earn-&-Learn Programmes (ELP) for fresh ITE graduates, leading to diplomas in Urban Agricultural Technology and Aquaculture.

The ELP will emplace ITE graduates in industry and equip them with the knowledge and skills to become agriculture and aquaculture technicians. We will also partner universities to groom agri- and aqua-technologists and culturists, urban farming specialists and researchers to meet future needs.

Like every sector in Singapore, the agri-food sector must embrace sustainability. Some of our farms are already employing circular economy principles. Indoor farm Sustenir is using carbon dioxide, a by-product from the petrochemical industry, to enhance vegetable yields. N&N, a layer egg farm, carries out bio-digestion using poultry waste to produce energy. This is then used to dry by-products from the food manufacturing industry to produce chicken feed.

These examples show that what we see as waste in one sector can be feedstock for another. We will do more to find synergies across different systems, such as food, water, energy and waste, and then scale them up for commercial viability. We will apply the circular economy approach across systems to achieve zero waste and to lower use of resources. This requires an ambitious R&D programme, integrated upfront planning and design and close collaboration with the industry. This is the future economy, and the Government will invest significant resources to enable Singaporeans to thrive in it.

In total, the Government will spend almost $400 million under RIE 2020 towards research and innovation in water, circular economy and climate change and food. These significant investments will help us to explore greater possibilities across the food-water-energy-waste nexus, achieve new results, and scale up.

One early success is NEA and PUB’s successful trial at Ulu Pandan Water Reclamation Plant. It has proven that co-digesting food waste and used water sludge can triple biogas yield, compared to treating the used water sludge alone – triple. The biogas is used to generate energy for the facility. This co-digestion technology illustrates the potential in exploiting synergies in the food-water-energy-waste nexus. We are preparing to scale this technology up and adopt it for the new Tuas Nexus, which will be operational in 2025.

Mr Chairman, the plans we have for the water, food and environmental sectors will open up a variety of exciting opportunities for our enterprises and jobs in our industries. We hope to produce more of the likes of EnvironSens, ES, Sustenir and Barramundi Asia. We will also need many people with diverse interests and skills to help us tackle our challenges.

Let me introduce some of the young Singaporeans who have already stepped up in our water, food and environmental sectors. Mr Ahmad Zaki Bin Salleh and Ms Rajakumar Amritha are at the forefront of our efforts to enhance food resilience and ensure water security. Ahmad Zaki, a senior engineer with PUB, oversaw the planning and construction of the Stamford Detention Tank, while Amritha contributes to the smooth operations at Woodleigh Waterworks.

Ms Marie Tan and Mr Lee Yuan Hao are part of our growing agri-food sector to strengthen food security. Marie oversees fish health at Barramundi Asia’s nursery while Yuan Hao founded Ding He Agriculture, a vertical indoor agri-farming.

Ms Jade Loh and Mr Heng Kim Soon are contributing to our Zero Waste Cause. Jade and her team at Plaspulp Union Pte Ltd explore recycling solutions for complex waste materials, while Kim Soon conducts R&D on uses for incineration ash.

Together with their colleagues in the water, food and environmental sectors, these young people will see our plans through in the decades to come.

Mr Chairman, climate change will bring new existential threats, but also exciting opportunities. We must do as our forefathers did; stay alert and nimble, and continue to plan and prepare for the long term. It took us more than two decades to create NEWater. Likewise, the vision of a reservoir in the heart of the city was only realised many years after our Founding Prime Minister mooted the idea. We have ambitious plans for our water, waste and food sectors, but the road ahead is long and winding. We will persevere, for we are not done building a sustainable Singapore. I now hand over to the Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor. [Applause.]

Mr Chairman, in 2018, which was designated the Year of Climate Action, we rallied individuals and organisations and received more than 340,000 climate action pledges. Collectively, our people, public and private (3P) partners initiated and organised more than 800 climate action events. That is more than two events a day! It shows the far-reaching impact of consultation and partnership.

To build on this momentum, we designated 2019 as the Year Towards Zero Waste. We will adopt a circular economy approach to conserve resources for a sustainable Singapore.

We will release the inaugural Zero Waste Masterplan later this year. The Masterplan will cover our three priority waste streams of e-waste, packaging waste, including plastics, and food waste. We hope that it will align the 3P sectors and the research and development community towards a common vision of a Zero Waste Nation.

The Masterplan brings together our collective efforts over several years. Last year alone, NEA consulted more than 250 companies on measures to address our priority waste streams. NEA has also approved two Environmental Services Regulatory Sandbox applications since it was launched in July 2018. These efforts help us to co-create our regulations with the industry, ensuring we minimise business costs and enhance sustainable economic growth.

To effect our plans, we will be introducing the Resource Sustainability Bill this year to cover management of the three priority waste streams. The Bill also aims to support economic opportunities in innovative circular business models and the rising demand for resource recovery in Singapore and the region.

I will speak on e-waste first. It is critical that we manage our e-waste properly. First, to avoid contaminating our landfill and water catchment with toxic substances. Second, to protect the health of workers who handle these discarded products. And third, to extract valuable materials that can be recycled into new products. We will do so through the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework, which makes producers financially and physically responsible for the end-of-life collection and treatment of their products.

Mr Louis Ng and Miss Cheng Li Hui asked for details of the framework, which will come into effect in 2021. We have no plans to bring the start date forward. Industry feedback has highlighted that both producers and recyclers need sufficient time to adjust.

The framework will apply to electrical and electronic equipment, or what we call "triple E" (EEE), which are categorised as Information and Communication Technology (ICT) equipment, batteries, lamps, solar panels and large appliances. Large appliances will now include electric mobility devices like e-scooters and power-assisted bicycles. Almost 90% of e-waste in Singapore will be covered.

Arising from industry feedback, NEA will appoint a single Producer Responsibility Organisation (PRO) to reap economies of scale. Producers of EEE for the consumer market, such as laptops and mobile phones, will be required to finance the PRO. We will exempt small producers from financing the PRO to avoid imposing disproportionately high costs on them.

The PRO will collect and send the e-waste for recycling. NEA will impose collection targets on the PRO. But as a transitional measure, penalties for missing collection targets will not be enforced in the first three years.

All producers of non-consumer EEE will be required to take back all end-of-life products for free upon request. This covers commercial and industrial equipment, such as solar panels and data servers. We will not require them to finance a PRO, as they have existing take-back processes.

Retailers must also offer free one-to-one takeback services during delivery; for example, to take away the old refrigerator when delivering a new one. Further, retailers with a EEE sales area of more than 300 sqm must provide in-store collection points. This provides consumers with convenient avenues for recycling e-waste.

Many retailers and partners already provide such collection points voluntarily. For example, NEA partnered StarHub, DHL and TES to bring the RENEW programme to Best Denki, Courts, Gain City and Harvey Norman. They have collected more than 3,200 kg of e-waste across 20 outlets since June last year. Altogether, there are currently about 500 e-waste recycling bins island-wide, which can be located via myENV app. I encourage everyone to take advantage of these convenient channels to recycle your e-waste, including rechargeable lithium-ion batteries from our mobile phones.

Mr Chairman, with your permission, I would like to show some slides.

The framework will include new recycling requirements to ensure that all collected e-waste is properly treated to facilitate the recovery of resources, such as gold, and the removal of harmful substances. We note Mr Ng's suggestion on the recovery of coltan. We are still consulting the industry on the recycling requirements.

To support this framework, NEA will actively develop the e-waste industry, such as the skills and capabilities of our local recyclers. This will create more good job opportunities for Singaporeans, including opportunities in the PRO, supply chain management and e-waste recycling.

Packaging waste, including plastics, is another priority for my Ministry. Packaging waste comprised one-third of domestic waste disposed of in 2018.

Mr Ng asked for more details on the mandatory packaging reporting framework for businesses, to be introduced in 2020. We will require producers of packaging and packaged products to report to NEA how much packaging they put-to-market annually. They must also submit their plans to reduce, reuse or recycle packaging waste. For a start, we will exempt micro and small enterprises with an annual turnover of $10 million or less.

NEA will monitor the companies’ packaging data and 3R plans over the next few years and explore with them ways to reduce packaging waste. NEA will also engage companies to simplify reporting procedures and minimise compliance costs.

Mandatory reporting is the first step in our plan to introduce an EPR framework for managing packaging waste, including plastics, by 2025. Similar to e-waste, we are studying how producers can assume responsibility in collecting and treating packaging waste. An EPR framework would incentivise upstream reductions in packaging, an outcome similar to what Mr Ng envisaged through setting mandatory reduction targets.

EPR is a more holistic way of addressing packaging waste, including single-use plastics. For example, by voluntarily changing the packaging design and optimising production practices, Nestlé Singapore has saved 2,000 tonnes of packaging used for its MILO® products. This is not only good for the environment; it also reduces business costs.

We will continue to engage the 3P sector as we develop this EPR framework. Even as we study EPR, we are working with the industry on new initiatives to collect back packaging waste, such as PET bottles and aluminium cans. For instance, we are collaborating with partners to tap on the Towards Zero Waste Grant to roll out 50 reverse vending machines in major malls and the community later this year.

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh suggested a need to address packaging due to the rise in online shopping and home delivery. Supermarkets, which usually offer online retail services and home deliveries, will be covered under the mandatory packaging reporting requirements.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked what the current state of food waste and our measures to manage this. In 2018, we generated 763,000 tonnes of food waste. Of this, only 17% was recycled.

We conducted a food waste segregation pilot at Tampines Greenlace estate in August last year. The residents participated actively, with one in three households depositing food waste in dedicated bins at least once a week.

Over three months, more than 4,000 kg of food waste from Tampines Greenlace was recycled into fertiliser. The residents were delighted to receive packets of the fertiliser, a very tangible symbol of their efforts in closing the food waste loop.

The pilot, which was due to end in October last year, has been extended at the request of the residents. We are encouraged by their enthusiasm and are working with Zero Waste SG to explore how we can enhance involvement and ownership by the community.

I am also glad that with the support of NEA's 3R Fund, on-site food waste treatment systems have been installed in 23 premises.

We are now ready to expand food waste segregation, starting with larger food waste generators. NEA has started consulting the industry on requirements for food waste segregation for treatment.

From 2024, we will require commercial and industrial premises that generate large amounts of food waste to segregate it for treatment. Premises include hotels and malls, and industrial developments housing food manufacturers, caterers and food storage warehouses. Existing premises can choose the treatment solution that best suits their operations, including off-site treatment at the upcoming Tuas Nexus.

Unlike existing premises, new premises can plan for on-site food waste treatment in their building design. We will require developers of new developments where large amounts of food waste are expected to be generated to cater for on-site food waste treatment to be implemented. These must be included in the building plans submitted from 2021. We will continue to provide support for premises and invite interested parties to implement on-site food waste treatment before the mandatory requirements take effect. Premises can tap on funding support, such as the 3R Fund.

My Ministry will also work with owners of large public sector buildings with food and beverage (F&B) outlets to segregate food waste for treatment from 2021. We are exploring doing so under the Public Sector Taking the Lead in Environmental Sustainability (PSTLES) initiative.

PSTLES already builds environmental sustainability into our Government procurement, which Mr Ng asked about. Public sector agencies must purchase Energy Star-certified ICT equipment, eco-labelled printing paper and energy-efficient appliances.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked if we proactively identify companies with greater potential to reduce waste. Since 2014, owners and managers of large hotels and malls have been reporting their general waste data and waste reduction plans to NEA. This focuses attention on waste generation by premises and the potential for reduction and recycling. More than 90% of covered hotels and malls have now adopted recycling programmes.

From 2020, we will extend the mandatory waste reporting scheme to other large waste generators. These are factories, warehouses and convention and exhibition centres above a certain gross floor area.

Er Dr Lee also spoke about the dilemma of replacing disposables with reusables which require washing. NEA's life-cycle assessment on the environmental impact of carrier bags and food containers showed that reusables had a lower overall environmental impact than disposables. Hence, opting for reusables is better for the environment.

Mr Ng asked about the use of disposables for dining-in at hawker centres, which is already disallowed in new hawker centres. Since September last year, disposables are also no longer permitted for dine-in when new cooked food stallholders operate at existing NEA-managed centres, that means for new stallholders, for new tenancies. NEA will continue to work with existing stallholders to not use disposables for dine-in.

Assoc Prof Goh asked about promoting the reuse of construction and demolition (C&D) waste. Singapore recycles 99% of our C&D waste. For instance, waste concrete is mostly processed to produce recycled aggregates. This is a good example of the circular economy in action! The Building and Construction Authority has published a Sustainable Construction Guide with useful information on recycled construction materials and their applications.

Ms Irene Quay raised the issue of medication waste. I agree it is important to curb over-prescription of medicine. By not over-buying medication that will be wasted, patients also save money. Some hospitals limit prescriptions to no more than three months’ supply of normal medicine and no more than six months’ supply for chronic illnesses. Certain pharmacies put additional labelling on drug packaging to inform patients to return unused drugs. Pharmacists also counsel patients and review their medication supply to ensure that patients do not take more medication than needed.

Generally, household drugs can be safely disposed of together with household waste. All our household waste is collected and safely incinerated before the ash is landfilled in Semakau Landfill.

Some people may not know this, but my Ministry also oversees the planning of after-death facilities and services, which some may view as a morbid endeavour. Nonetheless, someone has to do it. And, indeed, it is – pardon the pun – a deadly serious matter that has to be handled sensitively.

Mr Low Thia Khiang asked for an update on the provision of the Inland Ash Scattering (IAS) facilities and the proposed post-death rites facility at Tanah Merah. IAS services are on track to be available at Choa Chu Kang Cemetery by 2020 and Mandai Crematorium and Columbarium Complex by 2021. NEA is working on the designs to incorporate suggestions from consultations with funeral service providers, religious leaders and members of the public. When completed, these secular facilities will be an additional option for bereaved families to lay their loved ones to rest in a dignified and respectful environment.

The Environmental Impact Study commissioned for the proposed post-death rites facility at Tanah Merah is in progress. We will consider the results of the study and public feedback before arriving at a final decision.

Mr Dennis Tan asked about actions taken against the contractor who had provided quartz instead of marble plaques when relocating niches from Mount Vernon Columbarium Complex. There was no evidence from NEA’s investigation to suggest that the contractor had deliberately provided a different material with the intention to cheat. NEA’s checks also showed that the marble and quartz plaque prices were comparable.

NEA has required the contractor to remedy the breach of contractual requirements. The contractor has undertaken remedial measures to replace the quartz plaques with new marble ones and will be bearing all additional costs incurred. As a further penalty, the contractor will also bear additional manpower costs incurred by NEA to oversee the niche replacement works. NEA will continue to monitor the replacement works closely. So far, there have been no anomalies detected during laboratory tests and visual inspections.

I will now move on to hawker centres. Our hawker centres serve important social objectives of providing affordable food in a hygienic environment for patrons, enabling hawkers to earn a decent livelihood and creating vibrant social spaces to bond our communities.

However, hawkers face many challenges today, from changing demographics and customer preferences, to new models of competition, such as central kitchens and food delivery services. It can be even more difficult for hawkers in new hawker centres. They face competition from other F&B options in the vicinity and need time to build up their clientele. This is why my Ministry piloted the Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre (SEHC) model to help hawkers compete better as a Centre.

As Mr Liang Eng Hwa said, last year, NEA addressed concerns on contractual terms, such as opening hours and termination notice periods. I visited all seven SEHCs to get feedback from the stallholders on the changes made and am pleased that the majority of stallholders have welcomed them. We will continue to improve the model based on feedback from hawkers and other stakeholders.

One area of concern is attracting and supporting new entrants to the hawker trade. Without new hawkers, future generations would not be able to enjoy hawker food. It is, therefore, critical that we imbue new hawkers with key skills to succeed. This is why NEA set up the Incubation Stall Programme (ISP) and worked with the People's Association (PA) and ITE to set up hawker training programmes that cover business management and operation, marketing and culinary skills.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked for an update on the ISP. I am pleased that six new stallholders will be joining NEA's ISP, bringing the total number of incubation stalls in operation to 10. We are also enhancing the ISP based on experience and feedback from our incubation stallholders. To provide greater support for them, NEA has extended the six-month tenure at 50% discount off rental rates to nine months. This is to address feedback that more time is needed to establish their business.

We are also piloting the extension of NEA's ISP to SEHCs who can provide guidance to hawkers under the ISP. This leverages their experience and success in supporting hawkers under their own incubation stall programmes, including the provision of mentors for the hawkers.

One new hawker joining NEA's ISP is Mr Jim Yeow, who will operate his incubation stall – Mr Louis Ng may be pleased to know – at Yishun Park Hawker Centre, an SEHC, and receive mentorship support from its operator, Timbre. I have tasted his wanton noodles, which are quite exceptional. So, please do try it when the stall opens.

Indeed, I have gone around to meet many young aspiring hawkers and am inspired by their entrepreneurship, passion and resilience. Many offer their own brand of tasty hawker food. So, I urge Members of this House and all Singaporeans to support them.

Today, I had specially arranged for Cheng Tng from XX Dessert and Min Jiang Kueh or pancakes with fillings like Thai Milk Tea and Belgian chocolate besides the classic peanut filling from Munchi Delights to be served at the Members Room. Both stalls are located at Yishun Park Hawker Centre. In particular, XX Dessert is run by Yishun Park Hawker Centre's youngest hawker, 23-year-old Mr Peh Zixuan. He started out under Timbre's incubation stall programme after completing his National Service. So, you could say he truly turned from "Ah Boy to Man". I hope you had a chance to enjoy these during the teabreak. I heard that the Min Jiang Kueh literally flew off the trays!

In November last year, I had a dialogue with some members of the Hawker Centre 3.0 Committee and other stakeholders, including hawkers. It was suggested that we set up ground-up workgroups to look at issues related to the hawker trade and culture. We are, therefore, facilitating the formation of two workgroups – one to explore ideas to attract and support new entrants to the hawker trade, and another to look at encouraging graciousness and tray return, issues that were also raised by Mr Gan. The two workgroups will comprise hawkers, food advocates and members from various fields.

As part of our productivity efforts, we want to encourage existing hawker centres to adopt measures, such as automated tray return stations integrated with centralised dish washing (CDW) services. At Block 163 Bukit Merah Central, hawkers and cleaners enjoy a reduced workload and a 40% reduction in water bills due to the productivity measures.

Currently, stallholders at existing hawker centres receive two years of subsidies under the Productive Hawker Centre Grant to ease the transition to such productivity measures. These will help hawkers realise manpower and cost savings in the longer term.

Stallholders have raised concerns about the increase to the full costs of CDW at the end of two years. To help them, as well as encourage more centres to take up the CDW, I am pleased to announce that we will provide an additional two years of subsidies at a stepped down rate of 50% and 30% in the third and fourth year respectively.

To ensure Singaporeans have continued access to affordable food at hawker centres, we are building 20 new hawker centres by 2027. So far, we have completed seven.

I am pleased to announce the site of the Bukit Batok Hawker Centre. It will be co-located with the MND-MOH assisted living residential flats pilot in Bukit Batok Town bounded by Bukit Batok West Avenues 6 and 9 and Bukit Batok Street 41. When completed, this new hawker centre will provide an affordable food option to residents in the area.

We welcome the newly-minted Singapore Food Agency (SFA) to the MEWR family come April, and look forward to working with the agri-food industry to help forge a great future for the industry from farm-to-fork.

Mr Desmond Choo asked what we will do to ensure market-friendly regulations without compromising on food safety. These two objectives are mutually-reinforcing as food safety is key to developing a thriving agri-food industry. The industry has been supportive of the formation of SFA and has given feedback on how SFA can partner them to support both objectives.

One suggestion was the harmonising of licensing standards and streamlining licensing conditions for food businesses along the food value chain. For example, we are looking at how premises carrying out both central kitchen and catering operations can obtain a single licence instead of two.

To further develop our agri-food industry, we need to transform it. We will be reaching out to stakeholders in a visioning exercise in the coming months to co-create the future of the agri-food industry together.

A better understanding of the emerging challenges facing it will allow us to identify opportunities for collaboration among stakeholders. There are also opportunities in areas, such as digitalisation of food tracing using block chain technologies, and innovations in the production of new foods.

Mr Chairman, there is an African proverb: "If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together." Realising the ambitions of our Zero Waste Masterplan to build a sustainable Singapore will require strong partnerships to co-create and implement new solutions.

I will conclude with a call to action in two areas for the Year Towards Zero Waste.

First, I urge everyone to participate in the public consultations for the Zero Waste Masterplan which Mr Ng and Miss Cheng asked about. Waste and resource management are issues which will impact everyone, and your views matter. We have just launched our online consultations on the Masterplan. We will jointly organise focus group discussions in April with Zero Waste SG and LepakInSG. These will form the final phase of our ongoing consultations on the Masterplan.

Last month, I also met more than 20 green groups. Many are driven by young and passionate environmentalists, such as those from Ground-Up Initiative and Foodscape Collective, who have been championing for the environment and promoting sustainable living.

They see the urgency of changing mindsets and rallying everyone to do his or her part for the environment. Many of these are eco-champions and they are brimming with ideas and keen to work together to achieve our vision of a Zero Waste Nation.

Even what I am wearing today is a product of our eco-champions' passion and innovation. This dress is created by The Fashion Pulpit for the Fashion 3R initiative, which promotes sustainable fashion. It is upcycled from two different second-hand dresses to give them a brand new lease of life.

Second, in conjunction with the #RecycleRight Movement, I invite interested individuals and organisations to partner us to better educate Singaporeans and others, including domestic helpers, on recycling properly.

This is not merely about consulting or conducting focus group discussions. We want to co-create effective recycling solutions together.

So, let us start our journey of co-creation to reduce the contamination of our recycling bins, including possibly co-creating legislation. Today, 40% of what is placed in our blue bins cannot be recycled or are contaminated with food waste. Let us aim to reduce this to 30%, 20% or even 10%.

Mr Chairman, as Minister Masagos said earlier, "We are not done building a sustainable Singapore". We will need everyone to play their part, to conserve our resources, embrace the 3Rs and adopt a circular economy approach so that we can continue to build a sustainable Singapore for Singaporeans. [Applause.]

Sir, I have one clarification for the Minister. Two days ago, PUB issued a default notice to Tuaspring Private Limited, a subsidiary of Hyflux, for being unable to fulfil contractual obligations, in particular, failing to keep the plant reliably operational. Can the Minister elaborate more on this, and will it affect our drinking water supply and water security?

I thank the Member for the question. Indeed, we are not privy to what is happening to the company because the company is, of course, exposed to many other factors that may affect its performance. As Mr Ong Ye Kung mentioned in his reply to a parliamentary question recently, the financial performance of a company depends on many factors, such as the global business conditions, competition, performance of specific projects and also its own business decisions.

So, we are not privy to this. But we are privy to how it is performing in the plant, which is that we are worried about its operational viability and we also know that it does not have the financial ability to finance six months of its operation. And, therefore, those are among the factors which, flagged out, are worries for us, that it will not be tenable for TPL to continue its obligation. Therefore, we have served the default notice in order to preserve our water security.

I have a clarification for Senior Minister of State Amy Khor. I think she mentioned that the public service does do some procurement which are very environmentally sustainable. But could I ask whether we can specifically include this into the procurement principles, not just based on fairness, transparency and value-for-money, but put it in writing that it should also be based on environmental sustainability.

The second clarification is on whether we can provide incentives or subsidies to the hawkers so that they will not use disposables for dine-ins. I know we are not using it in our new hawker centres and new stalls in old hawkers, but can we just move it to all hawker centres and maybe provide some incentives to nudge the behavioural change?

As I have said under the Public Sector taking The Lead for Environmental Sustainability (PSTLES), they are already practising procurement taking into account environmental sustainability. So, that is why procuring energy-efficient appliances, equipment, sustainability sourced paper, are all part of PSTLES.

Government procurement is for everything. Government procurement principles will be general and the procurement principles are really about transparency, that you need to tender out and so on and so forth. So, these are general principles.

But for environmental sustainability, the public sector has already taken the lead by drafting these guidelines on procuring and taking the lead in terms of environmental sustainability, not just in procurement, but also in other areas.

With regard to the question about incentivising hawkers to use disposables, we do not have any intention to do that at this present moment, but what we have done is to look at encouraging the existing hawkers to not use disposables for dine-ins.

In the case of hawker centres that are already on our Productive Hawker Centres programme – which means they use centralised dishwashing and tray return – they already will not be allowed to use disposables for dine-in. What we are hoping to do now is to work with the Hawkers Association and with the ground to encourage the hawkers to try and get them onto the Productivity Hawker Centre programme. In fact, earlier I just announced that we will be extending the subsidies for adopting CDW in the existing hawker centres by another two years, 50% and 30%. That really is to encourage more to come on-board. Those that come on-board will then not use disposables for dine-in. So, we are looking at how we can encourage more to come on-board.

I have three clarifications for the Minister of State. First, is the Tanah Merah facility for sea burial confirmed to be built? Or does it depend on the outcome of the environmental impact studies?

The second clarification is on the two Inland Ash Scattering sites. Can I take it that they are confirmed to be built? Or are they again waiting for some studies?

Lastly, I understand that the Ministry has been in the design phase of the two sites. I asked the same question since last year. How long more will it take for the design and the consultation to be completed? And when can the public expect some information or more information on the sites?

With regard to the Tanah Merah site for the post-death rites facilities, as I have noted, the environmental impact studies are still in progress. Once the study is completed, NEA will consider the findings, taking into account the public feedback and suggestions as well. We will also look at the concerns of parents, the water sportsmen, as well as some members of the public. So, we will take all these into account before coming to decision on the proposed post-death rites facilities. So, this is not confirmed yet. We are still looking into it.

For the two IAS sites – Choa Chu Kang as well as the Mandai Columbarium and Complex – they are confirmed. That is why I said that they are on track. The facilities will be completed by 2020 and 2021, but we are still in the design and planning stage because we have already undertaken the consultation and we are taking this on-board in the design of the facilities. So, once they are ready, we will share with the public.

I have two clarifications for Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor. The first is: when she shared about the disposal drugs, that they can be safely disposed and trashed, can I confirm if she was referring to all drugs, including cytotoxics and antibiotics? I understand that NEA does have guidelines on the special handling of drugs such as cytotoxics and antibiotics.

My second concern, as mentioned in my speech, is not just about safe disposal, but it is also about the risk of accidental ingestion as well as diversion for illicit use. So, would NEA be keen to still explore take-back programmes?

Regarding the drugs, if they are toxic, they will have to be disposed of by the specialised industrial waste collectors.

Regarding recycling, we will need to work with MOH on this, because obviously there are issues of safety and so on with regard to the drugs, for instance, once they are opened, are there issues and so on. So, I think this is something that NEA will have to work closely with MOH.

Two clarifications for the Minister. This is regarding the Tuaspring case. Reports have said that if the defaults are not managed properly and the restructuring is going to fail, Hyflux is going to basically close shop. If that happens, would it affect the other operations of Hyflux in Singspring Desalination Plant, Bedok NEWater and Jurong Membrane Bioreactor Plant? Would it affect the operations there and would that therefore affect the water supply?

The second clarification is: does this whole episode regarding Tuaspring say something about the viability of public-private partnership in areas that are existential to us? Would the Government reconsider its position to make sure that these things do not happen anymore?

I would like to thank Assoc Prof Daniel Goh for his questions. Firstly, on whether the default taking place will affect the other water supply systems, it will not. Just like TPL, PUB has been onsite, in all the plants, we have been monitoring, we always monitor. We look at the operational readiness of these plants and then we also see whether they can key up to the capacities that they are designed for and if they should default, the same step-in rights can be invoked.

But more importantly, this PPP model, the large part of our water system is under PUB. So, this is not a huge part of what we have. In adopting the PPP model, we get many advantages, we are able to not invest in capital, pay only for what we need. We also can build the local capabilities of our enterprises, who can also then bring these for export purposes. At the same time, we also know there are risks involved, and therefore we have put enough measures to be able to take over the plant or own it in the event that these PPP partners are not viable anymore. And this is exactly what we are doing now where TPL is concerned.

A clarification for the Minister. Is there a timeline for zero emissions for the public vehicle fleet? We heard a bit about MOT's plans for the bus fleet, but there are other large public vehicle fleets – police vehicles, civil defence and so on. So, perhaps, would the Ministry have any plans they can elaborate on for this?

I thank Assoc Prof Walter Theseira. When we took steps to reduce the number of diesel vehicles, it is really to enhance and increase the quality of our air. And this is not just through the diesel tax that we increased recently. We have others. We have the VES under the COE scheme where we incentivise or disincentivise the use of pollutive or non-pollutive vehicles. We also have the Early Turnover Scheme (ETS) which encourages diesel owners or companies to turn over their old vehicles into new vehicles. And this is important because heavy goods vehicles under the Euro VI standard, are 20 times cleaner than the older ones or the oldest ones that are under the Euro I standards. At the same time, it is also more fuel efficient.

The outcome of this slew of measures for the last few years, I would like to report, for example, from 2013 to 2018, 40,000 diesel vehicles or about 26% of commercial goods and buses have actually switched to these cleaner vehicles. Taxis, for examples. Proportion of diesel taxis decreased from 86% in 2016 to 73% in 2018. In fact, zero new diesel taxis were registered in 2018. I think that is great news; it shows that all these three measures are taking effect.

More importantly, the sum of all these, including the decrease of the number of diesel vehicles on the road, from these classes of vehicles have actually contributed to the decreasing trend of PM2.5, which is very important. WHO's Advisory tells us that PM2.5 is carcinogenic, it can cause cancer. That is part of what diesel does. The tightened industrial emission, together with these, have seen contribution of PM2.5 reducing over the years. But the bad news is, we are still above the WHO standards, therefore we still have to do more.

Can we do away totally with diesel vehicles? Once a more viable vehicle type that can go towards zero emission or when totally zero emission for the heavy vehicles category is in the market and is accessible and affordable, we will go for it. But for the moment, let us do this slowly, and help the industry transform and at the same time make sure that all of us breathe clean air.

Thank you, Chairman. I will like to ask Minister to provide the response that I had suggested – whether the Ministry will be considering a Climate Change Bill?

We have a Climate Action Plan, and I think this has been very comprehensive, looking at various sectors. The things that the Government must do, people must do, and legislation that contribute towards the the climate action, including energy efficiency, through the Energy Conservation Act as well as the Carbon Tax Act. It is really an omnibus of various legislation that if you put together, we could call it a Climate Change Bill. In the absence of which, it is sufficient now, for what we have. With the measures that we have put in place, we believe that we will be able, in the first instance, to meet our nationally determined contribution for reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by 36% by 2030, and then levelling after that. I think that is most important. Getting the industries on-board at the same time, transforming them to be more energy efficient and contribute towards the solution.