Measures to Reduce Incidence of Mass Food Poisoning

Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what are the causes of the spate of mass food poisoning incidents in November 2018; and (b) what will the Government do to heighten awareness of and compliance to safe food handling standards.

Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what is the Ministry doing to step up enforcement on food and beverage outlets to ensure that they adhere strictly to hygiene practices; and (b) what guidance is the Ministry providing to these outlets to make improvements.

Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) whether there is an assessment on whether the current measures and penalties in place have been efficient in improving food safety; (b) what is the total number of food establishments and caterers whose licences have been suspended for failing a hygiene inspection in the past five years and the breakdown of the number for each year; and (c) whether technology has been adopted to equip inspectors in carrying out their jobs more efficiently and effectively.

Thank you. In October, November and December 2018, there were five reported food poisoning incidents involving Team Catering Pte Ltd, Tung Lok Catering, FoodTalks Caterer & Manufacturer, Spize Restaurant at River Valley and Mandarin Orchard Hotel.

The joint investigations by the Ministry of Health, the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) and the National Environment Agency (NEA) confirmed that there were no links among the incidents. In the case of Spize Restaurant, it was a Salmonellosis outbreak of unusual severity which suggests that the food was heavily contaminated. There was strong evidence of poor personal hygiene and food handling practices by food handlers leading to contamination of ready-to-eat food and the environment. The operator was also found to have seven unregistered food handlers and preparing food outside of the licensed premises.

In the case of Team Catering Pte Ltd, a number of possible commonly found pathogens were identified from the human stool samples, including Clostridium Perfringens and enteropathogenic E coli, and several hygiene lapses as well as poor kitchen habits were identified, including improper storage of knives and poor housekeeping.

In the case of FoodTalks Caterer & Manufacturer and Tung Lok Millennium Pte Ltd, while the causative pathogen could not be identified for both outbreaks, several food hygiene lapses were found at their premises, for example, no proper segregation between raw and ready-to-eat food in the same chiller compartment, no provision of handwashing facilities, and cockroach infestation.

For the case at Mandarin Orchard Hotel, the outbreak was caused by environmental contamination of the Grand Ballroom with norovirus, a common virus that causes gastroenteritis, which was propagated by poor environmental and personal hygiene practices, such as improper cleaning of vomitus and banquet servers continuing to work while ill.

NEA has taken tough actions against the food operators who have violated the law. The operating licence of Spize Restaurant at River Valley Road was terminated and NEA will also press charges against the operator in Court. The operating licences of Tung Lok, as well as the ballroom and affected kitchen in Mandarin Hotel, will remain suspended until the operators have complied with the requirements imposed by NEA, which include sanitising the affected areas, reviewing the processes and rectifying the lapses. For the lapses found at FoodTalks, NEA will be issuing summonses to the operator. For selling food that is found unfit for human consumption, operators may face a penalty of up to $10,000 for the first offence and, in the case of repeat offenders, a fine of $20,000, or imprisonment of three months, or both.

NEA and AVA have stepped up surveillance and engagement of all food operators. Advisories were issued to remind all food operators to adhere to good food hygiene and safety practices. NEA conducts regular inspections on food caterers, and, in 2018, NEA conducted more than 2,400 checks. On top of these routine checks, over 900 additional inspections have been conducted since last month on food operators that provide catering services or that have substantial catering operations. NEA also conducted face-to-face engagement with key representatives from the Association of Catering Professionals Singapore as well as the Restaurant Association of Singapore to further reinforce the importance of food hygiene and safety.

In addition, from 21 December 2018 onwards, staff appointed as Food Hygiene Officers (FHOs) at premises suspended by NEA are required to go for training to be recertified for the Workforce Skills Qualifications' (WSQ's) Conduct Food and Beverage Hygiene Audit qualification. The FHOs of the suspended food establishments must be properly trained and recertified before they can recommence operations. An average of about 110 food establishments has been suspended annually in the past five years due to hygiene lapses.

NEA and AVA have also been working to strengthen the overall regulatory framework for food operators in the lead up to the formation of the Singapore Food Agency. For instance, the penalty regime for food operators involved in significant food poisoning incidents will be tightened. The total composition amounts will be increased and those who commit serious hygiene offences will be prosecuted in Court. In appropriate cases, NEA will also press for deterrent sentences to be imposed by the Court.

Even as we operate a stringent regulatory regime, food operators must bear the ultimate responsibility to serve safe and clean food to their customers. They must ensure that their premises are kept clean, food handlers practise good hygiene, and the food is prepared in a safe way for consumption. I urge all food operators to train their staff on proper hygiene practices and put in place adequate food safety measures, including ways to better monitor kitchen operations, such as using closed-circuit television or conducting more regular checks to ensure good hygiene practices. NEA will continue to monitor the food operators closely and we are prepared to tighten the enforcement further if necessary.

NEA has leveraged technology to equip officers with tablets and mobile workforce solutions, allowing them to access the licensees’ information on the go, plan inspections efficiently and be alerted to food-related incidents quickly for swift response. We will also enhance NEA's website and the myENV app to make it easier for consumers to check the food hygiene records of the operators. We are also looking into measures to better notify the public about a food operator's licence suspension. Consumers are urged to engage only licensed caterers and consume catered food within the stipulated "consume by" time period. Consumers who come across poor hygiene practices in food establishments should provide feedback to the authorities for further investigation.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for the answer. I have a few clarifications to make. One, I would like to ask, for caterers, there is a food delivery portion. So, in terms of the delivery, sometimes they may outsource to a logistics company, for example. Does that compliance come under the purview of the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources and NEA? If so, what are the steps being taken to ensure that food safety at the highest standards is still being complied with?

Second, now and then, with all these incidents, I believe that there might be tightening of measures to ensure compliance and safety. How do we ensure that, apart from putting up on the websites, the latest changes or updates are being communicated effectively to the entire chain? So, whether it is those who are preparing at the restaurants or those who are then in charge of the delivery itself, what is NEA doing to ensure this?

The licence will be issued to the food caterer to ensure that they prepare food in a safe way for consumption and, of course, until delivery, because even at delivery, when the food is put out for consumption, there is also a time stamp and they are to ensure that the food is safe for consumption and it must be consumed by a certain period. So, for the logistics, whether they outsource or they use their own transportation, they need to ensure that it is done in a safe manner and that the food will not be contaminated along the way.

I take note of the Member's question that, increasingly, more deliveries might be outsourced and this is something that we continue to look at to see how we can strengthen our overall regulatory framework for the food caterers. As I have noted earlier, in the lead-up to the formation of the Singapore Food Agency, we are already looking at how we can strengthen the overall regulatory framework for food operators. This includes various things, not just reviewing the composition fines, that is, raising the composition fines, which means that, subsequently, the Court fines will also be increased. We are also adopting a stricter stance in the administration of enforcement actions, too, so sending more of the food operators who infringe and have serious lapses to Court and pressing for deterrent sentences. But as the Member has also rightly pointed out, how can we ensure greater visibility of food operators who had been suspended, as well as accessibility to this information? So, one of the things we are looking at is having a quick link on our website so that you can easily access the information on the caterers who have been suspended, and even having a "push" notification, through the myENV App, of caterers who would have been suspended. We are also looking at other ways of strengthening this regime.

I have one supplementary question. I note that regular checks are conducted on outlets. What I would like to know is whether surprise checks are also conducted in addition to such regular checks because, for regular checks, probably the operators would know when NEA might be coming. I am not sure, but if there are no surprise checks being conducted, I hope that this can be done.

We do unannounced checks and, just to let Members know, we actually adopt a risk-based approach to inspections. As I have said for last year, for food caterers, we have actually done 2,400 inspections, in addition to 900 inspections since last month, and this is actually not all. For the whole of 2018, they have actually done 77,000 inspections, not just for licence renewal, but unannounced inspections. And it is risk-based, as in those operators who have a higher risk. For instance, food caterers who cater to a large number of people and a big volume of food as well as variety, there will be more frequent checks for such operators.

I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for the answer. Actually, I am quite shocked at the incident at Spize, where there were unregistered food handlers and a total disregard for basic safety. I understand from news reports that eggs that were meant to be discarded were sent to another outlet. I am very happy to note that NEA is increasing the penalties. Currently, the penalties only allow for fines at the first offence. Can I ask, with the revised penalties, is there a jail sentence even for such incidents, for first offence, where it is a total disregard for basic food safety?

When there are very serious lapses, for instance, food poisoning leading to death, we are going to Court to press for a deterrent sentence, in addition to fines.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for the comprehensive answer. I just wanted to ask, in particular, in relation to the assessment on the effectiveness of the measures that we have put in place. I think in the food industry, some of the difficulties faced include the high turnover of staff who are handing the food and working in the restaurants. I am wondering if we are also looking at the assessment of how the food preparation is done and where are the specific areas where there are lapses, especially in terms of training. When staff members leave, they need to retrain and make sure that consistent standards are held. And I am wondering if there are efforts in looking at the food preparation process in the different food establishments, to see whether we can improve on training and in making sure that the consistency is maintained in the whole course of the restaurant's lifespan when they are running the business.

I thank the Member for her questions. Indeed, with regard to training, all food handlers have to undertake and complete the basic food hygiene course, and then to be registered before they can be allowed to handle food at these licensed premises. So, we take a very serious view of unregistered food handlers under the demerit point system. Under the system, such an offence would be considered a very serious lapse.

We are looking at reviewing the training curriculum for food handlers under the basic food hygiene course. But in addition to that, we require, for instance, establishments which are also allowed to cater food, that means, they have a licence to, in addition, cater food. We require them to have a food hygiene officer, as well as implement a food safety management system. That is the reason why from 21 December 2018, we require any licensed premises that are suspended to get their FHOs to train again and be recertified under the WSQ course. That really is to ensure that there is also good supervision. When they are suspended, they have to review and resubmit their food safety management system to us for approval again to be recertified.