Debated in Parliament on 6 May 2026.
Mr Shawn Loh asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry will conduct a study on the negative health impact of sustained exposure to second-hand smoke from neighbouring HDB units particularly on children and the elderly; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider issuing official guidelines on such negative health impact to inform future policies on regulating smoking out of windows in HDB flats.
Mr Speaker, the health harms of second-hand smoke are well established in the scientific literature, where sustained exposure has been associated with health conditions such as respiratory illness, cardiovascular diseases and cancers, such as breast and lung cancer.
The health effects of prolonged exposure to second-hand smoke was previously addressed in the Ministry of Health's (MOH's) answer to oral Question No 12 during Parliamentary Sitting on 2 October 2018. There are currently no plans to issue official guidelines on the negative health impact of second-hand smoke. Nonetheless, MOH has been working closely with the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) and the National Environment Agency (NEA) to address smoking related public health concerns.
MSE and NEA have progressively prohibited smoking at more than 49,000 public places, including most common areas of residential buildings, such as common corridors and void decks, to reduce the public's exposure to second-hand smoke.
Mr Loh.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her reply. In my view, second-hand smoke is a scourge in our heartlands. I note that the last time the Ministry replied on this matter was in 2018 and there was a review done then. I do not believe the issue has improved and I was wondering why there are no plans to do so again. Both sides of the House actually have raised this issue in the House very recently. When I looked into the issue a bit more, we were asking about whether we could do more in our HDB flats, but we had not yet confirmed what threshold would lead to a public health concern, including what a threshold of duration qualifies as prolonged.
So, could MOH reconsider whether it is then timely to make a clear statement on the threshold of how much second-hand smoke is bad enough, and how long the exposure should be before it is bad enough – so that we can then make good policies in our heartlands?
I thank Member for the question and I appreciate his concerns because I also face similar complaints at the Meet-the-People Session and when I meet my residents. I do agree that it is an issue that we do want to address meaningfully, because we do still see some smokers in the residential estates and people who are living in the flats still trapped.
I do want to state, though, that in as far as the scientific or the medical opinion on the matter is concerned, we are very clear. The negative health impact of second-hand smoke is very well established. It is something we do not want and exposure is bad. So, it is really a function of how we then translate it and operationalise it into protecting our people.
Because the Member's question is not about us not doing anything about it; the question is about issuing guidelines. And in respect of guidelines, while there are no official guidelines and there are no plans to issue official guidelines, we already take into consideration this health impact as we are rolling out policies. And our policies come in multiple forms, including how we issue advisories or how we support with the I Quit Programmes, how we also address these matters in our health promotion activities.
But when we are developing these policies, we also have to work together with other partners, including MSE and NEA. And so, I think this is something that we probably have to look at collectively. Translating and enforcing it in the spaces may not directly lie within the purview of MOH's remit. I note that the next Parliamentary Question is to MSE. Perhaps you can also explore further what can be done.
PAPERCUTS