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

Sir, Singapore was affected by its worst episode of transboundary haze pollution in 2013 with a record high PSI of 401. Recent news show that we may potentially be affected by the increase in hotspots from Sumatra. What are the Ministry's efforts to mitigate the recurrence of haze episodes and the regional resolutions to alleviate the impact?

There is increasing recognition that the root cause of the forest fires in Indonesia is commercially driven. The widespread slash-and-burn forest clearing in Sumatra last year has sent pollutions soaring to our highest record level.

In June last year, there had been claims that the Sumatra forest fires were caused by Malaysian and Singaporean palm oil companies. Our Ministries have

Page: 159

issued a challenge to name and shame these companies. Has there been any follow-up or news regarding this issue? What measures have the Ministry taken to enhance the accountability and traceability of these companies?

At the 23rd ASEAN Summit on 9 October 2013, the ASEAN leaders have agreed to the adoption of the ASEAN Sub-Regional Haze Monitoring System (AHMS) as a joint haze monitoring system among Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand.

The initiative includes high resolution satellite images to track the hotspots to identify and apprehend the culprits of the forest fire. However, it was commented in the House recently that the AHMS is yet to be implemented as the other parties have not agreed on its implementation. Can the Minister elaborate on this stalemate, such as details regarding the progress of the implementation of the AHMS and the constraints of the other parties?

It is also noted that we intend to renew the Letter of Intent (LOI) to render technical assistance to Indonesia on the capabilities of monitoring air and weather. How will this initiative assist in the mitigation or alleviate the impact of the haze?

Thank you, Mr Chairman. In August 2012, NEA announced that it would be adopting the World Health Organization (WHO) Air Quality Guidelines (AQG) for particulate matter with diameter smaller than 10 microns (PM10), Nitrogen Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide and Ozone, and the WHO AQG's interim targets for particulate matter with diameter smaller than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) and Sulphur Dioxide.

From the middle of last year, NEA implemented several measures to achieve the WHO AQG including mandating the supply of near-sulphur free diesel (NSFD) for diesel vehicles and cleaner petrol for petrol vehicles. The refineries and power stations which contribute almost all of Singapore's sulphur dioxide emissions are also required to reduce their SO² output. Could the Minister please tell us if the abatement measures which have been implemented have had the desired effect and if we are anywhere closer to meeting the WHO Air Quality Guidelines, particularly, with respect to PM2.5 and sulphur dioxide figures?

In line with this, new vehicle emission standards have also been mandated from this year. New diesel vehicles, since January, are required to comply with Euro 5 standards. New petrol vehicles will need to be Euro 4 compliant from April, and new motorcycles and scooters will need to comply with Euro 3 from October.

This is well and good for domestic vehicles on our roads. But there are also a significant number of foreign vehicles on our roads, and I am thinking, in particular, of the buses and large foreign trailers and trucks which we often see transporting people and goods here, and also motorcycles.

Clearly, our adoption of more stringent Euro Emission Standards is a move in the right direction but foreign vehicles entering Singapore may not be obliged where the laws of their home countries comply with these same standards. Could the Minister please let us know how MEWR has addressed the issue of foreign vehicles' emissions on our roads.

While on the topic of foreign pollutants, the Minister is no doubt well aware that the haze has returned. It is hard to miss. All four speakers who spoke before me have already addressed the haze problem. So, Mr Chairman, I will not try

Page: 163

and test your patience by repeating what has already been said, other than to support what was said by the four speakers before me, and to add that our proposed transboundary haze solution legislation is a positive development and will indicate to those parties responsible for contributing to the haze that their practices are in no way condoned by Singapore.

Could the Minister please let us know whether the Indonesian government has indicated if any Singaporean companies are behind some of the forest fires and, if so, how quickly prosecutions are expected to be brought under the new legislation if it is passed into law?

Sir, my cut on dengue, from 1 January to 7 March this year, there were over 3,000 reported cases of dengue fever in Singapore. In 2013, there were seven dengue-related deaths; and in mid June last year, 842 dengue cases were reported to the Ministry, a number which has far exceeded maximum weekly number of reported cases up to that date.

Dengue clearly remains a cause of concern among Singaporeans, and the current outbreak is the most severe and prolonged that we have seen. Could the Minister please provide an update on the latest situation with respect to the number of reported cases and the number of dengue clusters?

In the inspections conducted by NEA, what are the most common mosquito breeding grounds identified and are the sites mostly located in residential or industrial premises, or in construction sites? Is the current prolonged dry spell helping the situation, as there would not have been any rainwater collecting in leaves or receptacles for some time? Also, could the Minister let us know if any dengue sites have been identified on state land or premises? If so, what the consequences have been for the various agencies concerned? While there has been significant public education effort to stem the spread of dengue, this seems to have had very limited impact, as most people would carry on their usual lives without having regard to the mozzie wipeout. Is the Minister optimistic that we would soon turn the corner on this outbreak? If it is, what is the additional push we need to get there?

Mr Chairman, I would like to check with the Ministry about the current dengue situation and ask about the

Page: 164

steps taken to safeguard the health of Singaporeans against dengue.

Last year, we suffered the worst dengue epidemic in our history. Since then, we have had more than 22,000 cases. In January this year, dengue was on the rise again. I would like to ask why we continue to have problems bringing the number of cases down despite having additional inspections of private and public premises for possible breeding sites and grounds. In June last year, NEA announced its plan to recruit 300 more inspection officers to augment the 850 full-time officers. How effective are these inspections? Has the increased number of checks identified more breeding sites and grounds? Would the Ministry share with us how cooperative and compliant are property owners? What are the measures available to the agency if access cannot be gained or granted to suspect properties? In addition, how regularly are our public drains inspected and cleaned to reduce breeding ground?

Sir, the clarifications that I seek are even more significant in view of the report in The Straits Times a few days ago that a disused underpass near Shenton Way on land that belongs to SLA had been waterlogged and may be breeding the aedes mosquitoes. So, my questions are: what is SLA's standard procedure for dengue and mosquito breeding prevention in general and supervision with regard to non-residential areas that are under the jurisdiction of other Government agencies, in particular how regular are the site checks that NEA conducts? What are the penalties and how does it ensure compliance and enforcement? How many summonses have been issued to other agencies over, say, the last year? Due to the prolonged period without rain, which we are experiencing now, how does NEA ensure that covered sewers not being flushed does not lead to an increase in mosquito breeding? And have the Town Councils and estate committees been proactive in this regard?

Sir, I would like to commend NEA officers on their tireless door-to-door efforts and their work with local agencies to break the chains of dengue transmission and sources of mosquito breeding. Though it may be too early yet to celebrate, the drop in cases below the 200 mark in the last two weeks is a hopeful sign the latest and worst round of dengue epidemic may be abating.

Page: 165

However, mosquito population and vector control is not a viable long-term solution. This method is not practised everywhere and we are an open global city vulnerable to transmission of the disease by visitors travelling from dengue-infected spots. Furthermore, this method is labour-intensive and prone to local lapses.

I note that the spate of good news on progress in dengue treatment and vaccine development rose and peaked with the outbreak in the latter half of last year. Perhaps the most hopeful was the discovery in August of a new vaccine strategy by a research consortium supported by Singapore STOP Dengue Translational and Clinical Research Programme. I believe the Ministry's Environmental Health Institute is involved in the STOP Dengue programme.

The last dengue epidemic in 2005 killed 25 people and the current outbreak has already claimed six or seven lives. I note that the STOP Dengue programme received $25 million in funding over five years since 2008. Is this level of support satisfactory, given the prevalence of the disease here and its sometimes deadly effects? Will the Government be providing more research support to dengue vaccine development?

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]

Sir, today, we are facing the longest dry spell in the region, which includes Singapore. According to the NEA, February 2014 is the driest month since 1869, breaking the past record set in February 2010.

I have two main questions on the actions taken by the Ministry regarding the dry spell we are currently facing. How are we encouraging greater water conservation and our plans to manage water demand in the non-domestic sector?

We are conscious about the significant progress made to manage domestic water consumption. I have met Singaporeans who shared that we should not worry about our water supply. They are happy that our efforts to enhance our water supply are indeed bearing fruit. However, on the other end, a few Singaporeans shared with me that they are concerned about our complacency and we may lose sight on water conservation effort. I understand that the PUB aims to achieve 147 litres per day by 2020 and 140 litres per day by 2030.

Page: 166

Besides the current initiatives, what is the Ministry doing to encourage greater water conservation and that we are not complacent and lose sight of our efforts over the last few decades?

As the proportion of water demand by the non-domestic sector grows, there is a need to continuously manage water demand in this sector. Can the Minister share on the outcome of initiatives, such as the Water Efficient Building (WEB) on the usage of water in non-domestic sector? What other initiatives is the Ministry taking to manage water demand in this sector?

Sir, this is indeed a strange time to speak about floods – in the middle of the longest dry season in more than 100 years. But perhaps it is also the best time – in droughts, we plan for floods; and in floods, we ought to remember and be patient, because rain is also good news for Singapore.

Singapore is a paradox because, although we get some of the highest rainfall anywhere in the world, we are also extremely water stressed. This is because we are so small, we do not have any space for large reservoirs. So, PUB is also a somewhat paradoxical agency – there are people who are trying to get rid of water – the drainage section – and there are people who are trying to save water or create new sources of water.

In truth, of course, PUB is one of the most admirable and under-appreciated agencies in Singapore. They integrated the water cycle in a way few other countries in the world can. Through the demographic changes, the rise in population, all the stresses we have seen in infrastructure – in transport, health and housing – these have not appeared in water. We have not experienced a drop in supply, or water rationing, or even indeed, any drop in water pressure. For this, I salute the engineers and water managers in PUB.

It has been two years since PUB accepted the recommendations of the Expert Panel on Drainage Design and Flood Protection Measures to improve Singapore's flood management approach. I would like to ask what is the progress of PUB's work to address flash floods and improve Singapore's flood protection?

Page: 167

Has our planning parameters changed taking into account that global warming is upon us, as evidenced by extreme weather conditions that many countries and cities are experiencing in recent years?

We in Singapore also have our fair share of such extreme conditions: from heavy and intense rainfalls, cool and dry weather and even hailstones falling here. The frequency of such freak weather is also higher these days. Can the Minister tell us about the preparation against these?

Sir, my next cut. How is our public sector responding to improve energy efficiency in the various public buildings and offices? I have spoken on these for several years – from suggesting a change in attire to regulating the temperature of the air-conditioning in this House.

I drove past the MOE building at about 9.30 pm last week. The lights were all ablaze. So, I guess the officers were hard at work preparing for the Budget, but I certainly hope that these lights are not on every night.

In fact, I would like to have motion sensors in all public buildings and staircases, and even HDB blocks. Each time I drive around at night, I am amazed at the beauty of our flats and then dismayed that there are so many lights switched on for no good reason.

Sir, I know that there are many test-bedding efforts for energy savings. Can the Minister please update and give us a holistic picture?

Mr Chairman, Sir, hawker food is central to Singaporean culture. We must also not forget that hawker food is the means to affordable daily meals for many Singaporeans and helps to keep our costs of living low. I therefore welcome the restarting of the Hawker Centre Building programme in 2011 after 26 years of not building any new centres.

Instead of the tried and tested approach of directly managing hawker centres, the Ministry is seeking to appoint social enterprises to run centres on a not-for-profit basis. However, the not-for-profit approach does not mean that social enterprises will not seek high revenues so as to channel surpluses to its

Page: 168

social projects.

NTUC FairPrice, for example, has a net profit margin of 10.9%, or over $270 million in 2012. Yes, the profit is returned to the Central Co-Operative Fund to benefit workers. But this also means that $270 million were not put to use to keep the costs of groceries lower.

We have already seen a social enterprise-run private hawker centre failing only after one year, at Simpang Bedok. High rentals, low quality food, expensive dishes and cleanliness problems kept customers away.

Recently, the Minister announced that NEA is considering proposals by 12 social enterprises to manage four older hawker centres. What are the criteria being used by NEA to evaluate the social enterprise proposals? How will NEA ensure rentals do not shoot through the roof? How will NEA ensure the outcomes will always be affordable food?

Mr Chairman, NEA is piloting a new model to manage hawker centres on a not-for-profit basis. I support this new approach and agree that it will help keep hawker centre food affordable.

We have seen the undesirable outcomes from the commercial eateries such as coffeeshops and food courts where rising rentals have been one of the key contributing factors to higher food prices for consumers. Both the stallholders and consumers are worse off. Faced with rising rentals, stallholders have to pass on the costs of higher rentals to their customers and this resulted in lesser business for the stallholders. Consumers ultimately bore the rising costs from the pass-on effects of higher rentals.

It is frightening to read in some of the press reports that some of the coffeeshops sales are transacting at very high prices, with at least one beyond $20 million. We need some safeguards that these high prices will not be translated into higher cooked food prices at the stall level. Hawker centres certainly can play that role.

I would like to ask the Minister where we are now in terms of the operating model to run a not-for-profit hawker centre. How would this policy potentially

Page: 169

benefit the public? What are the safeguards to protect the interest of stallholders?

With more hawker centres to be rebuilt in the coming years, the challenge would be to find more Singaporeans to "step up to the plate", so to speak. We are at this stage where increasingly the Pioneer Generation hawkers are mostly nearing retirement and many are having difficulties finding successors for their business.

The new model should aim to keep the barrier to entry low, so as to attract more and younger Singaporeans to be hawker entrepreneurs. The new model should also help keep hawkers' heritage and our unique food culture alive. In many cities, some of the food streets come about by chance, by circumstances and survive many decades, and many continue to thrive till today. One common characteristic is that the intrinsic value is not being loaded into the ecosystem and the stallholders need not pay the land premium. It has become a positive externality, both socially and economically.

Mr Chairman, I know that there are high expectations for this new model and indeed, it is a tall order. But we should be prepared to try a range of variations and different approaches as long as they meet our objectives. Even if they do not work, we can always go back to the NEA model to run the hawker centres.

One of the suggestions given by the Hawker Centre Public Consultation Panel is to outsource the running of some hawker centres to social enterprises, so that disadvantaged individuals can set up F&B stalls at a low cost and risk. At the present moment, there are no social enterprises in Singapore with deep expertise in managing hawker centres. I would like to know how NEA will help these social enterprises to do this.

I would also like to know what are some of the possible safeguards that NEA will put in place to ensure the viability of such hawker centres and also how will the interest of the stallholders in these centres be better protected.

Next, the shortage of dishwashing and collection staff at the hawker centres has resulted in used cutlery and plates being left all over the tables. This has also led to a deterioration of the general public hygiene and cleanliness in the hawker centres. The increased level of rats and the related problems in markets and food centres have further compounded this problem. How would NEA

Page: 170

ensure that the hygiene and cleanliness standards of hawker centres are maintained?

To manage the problem of low productivity and lack of dishwashers, there are proposals to centralise the dishwashing of hawker centres. Some hawkers however are reluctant to adopt the centralised dishwashing method because of the additional cost and the need to replace all their existing plates and cutleries with the standard ones. Would NEA consider some incentives to help all these hawker centres to adopt a better way of dishwashing, so as to solve all these problems that have been mentioned?

Next, annually, Singapore produces almost approximately 700,000 tonnes of food wastage. Despite efforts to increase the awareness of recycling food waste, the rate of food waste recycling in Singapore still remains at about 12%. More can be done to increase the level of food waste recycling in Singapore. I would like to know whether NEA will implement more measures and explore more ways to recycle food waste in Singapore. In Mandarin, Sir.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Chairman, up till now, there are still many elderly hawkers who have no clue to the future plans and management policies for the new hawker centres. They told me that before it was the Government who sang, "will you still love me tomorrow"; now it is their turn to sing to NEA, "will you still love me tomorrow".

The hawkers want to know whether there is light at the end of the tunnel. The Government must ensure that these elderly hawkers would still have a bright future. More importantly, many people who are interested to become a hawker would like to know whether there are enough opportunities for them to share the new sunshine.

Sir, table-top cleaning. Patrons at hawker centres sometimes face tables uncleared for long periods. Some table-top cleaning contractors are not able to clear tables efficiently, leaving patrons frustrated and presenting public health issues.

For hawker centres in HDB estates, NEA leaves it to the Hawkers Associations to appoint and manage these table-cleaning contractors. As

Page: 171

indicated in this House previously, this is not ideal as the Hawkers Association may not be able to manage the contractors. They also do not have economies of scale, especially if they do not enjoy the support of all hawkers, who may not join the contract arrangements made by the Associations. On the other hand, NEA manages table-top cleaning at 25 Ministry-owned hawker centres and has wide economies of scale and enforcement powers.

The Ministry had previously indicated in Parliament that it would look into table-top cleaning in hawker centres at HDB estates. As the problem persists today, how will NEA improve the situation?

Next, cleaning of private estates. Sir, I have received regular feedback from residents of private estates in my division that they are dissatisfied with the cleaning of the roads in their estates by NEA cleaning contractors. They say that, often times, leaves and other debris on the roads are not properly removed, especially at the side of the kerb of cul-de-sac and narrower roads where parking is allowed either on one side or both sides of the road. I hasten to add that the residents by and large do not blame the workers, but believe that the inability to be effective is due to the constraints of the physical infrastructure and cleaning methods used.

I understand that since around 2009, NEA cleaning contractors utilise mechanised roadsweepers to clean the roads in private estates, with the relative absence of manual sweepers. However, in narrower roads with roadside parking, the service vehicles may not be able to clean effectively and may not even be able to pass through the roads safely. Trucks sometimes have to stop at the beginning of a road and require their staff to run down the road to collect trash bins to empty them onto the trucks.

One long-term solution to the problem would be for MEWR to work with LTA and MND to redesign roads and kerbs in upgrading works. The kerbs could be level with the road or at a gentler gradient, for parking bays to be inset in the verge; this will allow more freedom of passage for moving service vehicles. Other options include using smaller cleaning vehicles or deploying sweepers on mini mobile vehicles to aid in the manual sweeping, subject to cost considerations. I urge the Ministry to review the situation.

Sir, for the past few years, I have lamented about the unsatisfactory level of cleanliness within the private estates

Page: 172

in Mountbatten. Last month, I made a house visit to the Tanjong Katong area and I have received feedback from residents that they do not see cleaners regularly clearing the litters at their drains or the common areas. Bottles, empty drink packets, plastic bags and even cat food were left uncleared for weeks. Just walk along any public drains and you will be able to see litter along the drains which have not been cleared. Sir, this is not acceptable. In fact, my residents asked me to come regularly so that I can witness for myself the debris that is on the roads.

Just last month, we debated in Parliament on the need for cleaning companies to implement a progressive wage plan to pay their cleaners fair wages for their work. However, even as the cleaning companies pay their workers more, surely we expect the cleaning companies not to cut back on the number of cleaners. They must do more to keep the estates clean and to do so regularly.

May I ask the Minister what plans the Government has to ensure that cleaning companies are more diligent in cleaning the private estates? Although the Government is already arranging accredited cleaning companies, how does the Department of Public Cleanliness monitor the performance of these accredited cleaning companies? Will there be any penalties imposed if the cleaning companies are found to have neglected their duties? How else can they motivate the cleaners to take pride in their work and to ensure that the area for which they are responsible, remain clean and free of litter?

We may debate and argue in Parliament for more cleaning work to be done in the constituency. However, all the time which we spend here will be futile unless the residents can see improvements in their living environment. I also urge NEA to carry out more enforcement against litterbugs because that is the cause of the litter problem in the first place.

Chairman, last month, during the debate on the Environmental Public Health (Amendment) Bill, the Minister shared with this House that between 2010 and 2013, the number of complaints received for littering had increased by almost 50%. This is a staggering increase, and in fact a very disappointing trend. Singapore has long had a reputation for being a clean and green city and yet, maintaining public cleanliness is becoming more difficult, despite measures over the decades to motivate and enable

Page: 173

residents to keep our environment clean and penalise those who do not.

I face similar problems in my constituency too. I agree with the Minister that we are more of a "cleaned" rather than "clean" city. Would the Minister share with us what progress has been made in the Ministry's efforts to get more people to keep our environment clean? May I also ask if the Ministry has data or statistics of the offenders such as their gender, level of education, income and nationality? I am sure with detailed information, we can formulate more targeted measures to address this problem at its roots.

May I also suggest that we take a leaf from schools in Japan and Taiwan where students have to clean their schools as part of their routine? Not only will they learn life skills, it will also ingrain in them the importance and challenges of taking care of one's environment. I understand that Marsiling Primary School will be doing this. The school's effort is highly commendable and timely as we strive towards building citizens of good character and values. If all schools practise this, we will nurture a whole new generation of civic-minded Singaporeans who respect the environment and the work of cleaners.

I would also like to ask how surveillance can be stepped up to deter the minority who persist in littering, particularly the killer litter, vandalising and other ways of dirtying and polluting the environment. What plans does the Ministry have to strengthen enforcement and penalties?

Mr Chairman, Sir, the Smoking (Prohibition in Certain Places) Act 1970 has now been extended to cover all indoor places and some common areas where public are likely to congregate. The Act has largely been successful in curbing smoking in the indoor premises, where it is required by law for managers of these premises to enforce the smoking prohibition rules. Enforcing the Act in the common area, however, still remains as a challenge.

I would like to ask if NEA has plans to step up their enforcement to ensure that our common space remains healthy and free from the harmful effect of second-hand smoke. What is the long-term direction of the Ministry to further protect people from harmful effect of second-hand smoke? Would the Minister limit smoking in only designated smoking areas or zones?

During my house visit, quite a number of residents gave feedback that their neighbours smoke at the window near the kitchen. What is worse is that these

Page: 174

neighbours would sometimes just dispose off their cigarette butts by throwing them out of the window and these butts have left burnt marks on the residents' laundry. I would like to know whether the Ministry will look into setting a channel to allow residents to seek redress against such un-neighbourliness behaviours.

Chairman, Sir, the Minister has just heard from many Members' reports and feedback on so many problems. For a change, I bring in something beautiful.

According to information on the website, over the years, Singapore has gradually developed a pervasive network of some 8,000 km of waterways and 17 reservoirs for our water supply; and to realise the full potential of this infrastructure, the PUB has launched the Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters) Programme back in 2006.

By integrating the infrastructures like drains, canals and reservoirs with the surrounding environment, this programme creates not only clean and beautiful streams, rivers and spaces, but also more importantly allow the public access into these areas, and they can make use of them for recreation and improve on the quality of life.

I fully support this very meaningful programme. I would like to ask MEWR for an update on the status and progress of this programme, and also on how many more projects are slated to be implemented in this coming financial year under the programme. As Whampoa also has a stretch of river, I have also been asking it to be included under the programme. May I also ask whether we can be included this year?

I am afraid my cut will bring us back to alert and caution. Last year, when the air in Singapore got hazy, we got dizzy – dizzy with heated debates, health scares, buying frenzy and profiteering. When the dust settled, we learnt that some of this frenzy could have been

Page: 175

avoided if people received correct information in a more timely manner.

In the 2006 tsunami, a little Scandinavian girl standing on the beach of Phuket noticed the sea swelling. She remembered what her teacher taught her about the tsunami. Using that knowledge, she saved her family. In the Tohoku tsunami, the Japanese calm and resilience shone through, mutual help and self help got victims back on their feet again. They were taught disaster protocols since young.

Climatic wild cards like droughts and floods are all clear and present dangers closer to home than ever before. Instead of waiting for disaster to strike and cause chaos, we should learn emergency preparedness specific to the various situations, so that we can "keep calm and carry on".

What the public fear most is uncertainty. What the public need most is assurance – which can come in the form of knowledge, habits and emergency protocols. Does the Ministry's workplan include public readiness? I searched the website but to no avail. How does the Minister intend to ready the nation on the social front?

On to my next cut on Sustainable Singapore Blueprint (SSB), the Ministry is embarking on a review of the SSB. Can the Minister give a status update of SSB 2009, especially on the fourth thrust on fostering community action? Sir, do we really know what it takes to mobilise the community to support our SSB goals? Perhaps we need insights into human behaviour.

Canada realised that urban cycling could help address the first and last mile problem of urban transport modes. In 2011, McGill University studied how personal factors affect cycling decisions, and how space affects route choices. The results were then incorporated into infrastructure planning, resulting in less traffic jams and definitely a greener earth.

In Singapore, we can invest into social big data to better understand our people, so we could develop appropriate social infrastructure and movements. And, in fact, there have been some of these in the sharing economy and urban farming that are being started by individuals, community groups as well as the private sector. Could we study more of this to try to incentivise more individuals

Page: 176

and companies to take personal responsibility in shaping a more sustainable future?

Mr Chairman, the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint was announced in 2009 to make Singapore a city which is durable, lively and well-loved by its citizens and visitors.

A four-pronged strategy namely: one, boosting our resource efficiency; two, enhancing our urban environment; three, building our capabilities; and four, fostering community action, were put forward, setting targets for each thrust.

Sir, five years have passed and I wish to ask the Minister to update the House on the achievements made so far and whether the Ministry will review the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint in view of the rising aspirations of Singaporeans and the changing landscape of our economy and climate conditions.

Sir, what are the desired outcomes of sustainable development in Singapore? In my view, we must aim for three desired outcomes.

One, a green living environment where Singaporeans can live, work and play together; two, a green business operating environment where businesses practise sustainable practices; and three, a green lifestyle amongst Singaporeans and visitors in Singapore.

Green living environment. Sir, the scarcity of land and an increasing population has made it challenging to continue providing a green living environment. The high-rise and high density built environment will have adverse impact on the quality of spaces, air and water thus affecting the liveability of our environment.

Sir, how can we facilitate the greening of our built environment? First, we should expedite the accreditation of Greenmark for all existing buildings. Many old buildings are not eco-friendly and thus consume lots of energy and resources. Unfortunately, many building owners do not have any sense of urgency or incentives to upgrade their buildings. As a result, these old buildings are not resource-efficient and contribute to the carbon emissions in our built environment.

Sir, I would urge the Government to incentivise existing building owners to upgrade or redevelop their buildings. Alternatively, the Government should

Page: 177

consider imposing pollution tax or inefficient resource consumption levy on these buildings.

Green business practices. Sir, as business activities contribute much to the overall consumption of resources and the pollution of the environment, we should promote green business practices. More support should be given to businesses to adopt the 3Rs, that is, reduce, reuse and recycle sustainable practices. Resource efficient technologies should be encouraged to help companies save resources. More sharing of sustainable business practices should be facilitated to promote green practices amongst businesses. I would urge the Ministry to set up a website to share green business practices.

Green lifestyle. Sir, adopting green living habits amongst Singaporeans will contribute towards attaining the sustainable development targets in Singapore. Singaporeans can play a more active role to practise the 3Rs in our daily lives. Despite much effort, the recycling rate in domestic premises is low. The recent introduction of integrated recycling bin for every HDB block is another attempt by NEA to encourage recycling. But the yield of such recycling will be low due to high contamination. We need a better approach to segregate the recyclables.

Sir, more concerted efforts are required to nurture green values amongst our people especially young Singaporeans. Schools and education institutions must play a more active role to educate our students to lead a green lifestyle. Every school and community should be a training centre to teach all Singaporeans to adopt green living habits.

In this regard, I would propose to the Ministry to implement a sustainable green education programme in schools and community.