Debated in Parliament on 2 Jul 2024.
Mr Speaker, Members have filed a total of 40 Parliamentary Questions (PQs) on the oil spill incident that occurred on 14 June. Minister for Sustainability and the Environment Ms Grace Fu, Minister for National Development Mr Desmond Lee and I will be making Ministerial Statements to address the issues raised. Our Statements will address Question Nos 1 to 27 for oral answer and Question Nos 65 to 67 for written answer, in today’s Order Paper, as well as related questions that have been filed for subsequent Sittings.
Sir, the quick response to the oil spill which occurred in our waters on 14 June demonstrated the close coordination and collaboration among our agencies, industry partners and volunteers. They worked well together and responded effectively to mitigate the impact of the oil spill.
We have completed the first phase of the clean-up operations, including the operations at sea. Since 18 June, no oil slicks have been observed along East Coast and Changi, including the waters off Changi Naval Base. We have now moved to the next phase, which involves more focused cleaning of difficult-to-reach areas. The removal of the remaining fuel oil from the damaged vessel is ongoing.
Let me provide Members with a chronology of the incident and the steps taken.
The allision between the vessels Vox Maxima and Marine Honour happened on 14 June at 2.18 pm. The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) was notified at 2.22 pm and its first patrol craft arrived at the incident site 11 minutes later at 2.33 pm.
Upon confirming that a significant amount of oil had spilled into the water, the patrol craft sprayed dispersantd in the surrounding areas. This needs to be done quickly, so that the dispersantd can start to break down the oil, which will facilitate subsequent cleaning operations at sea and on land. Otherwise, the oil will harden over time and become more difficult to remove.
Besides the initial patrol vessel, 11 more vessels from MPA and their contractors were deployed to perform different roles during the initial phase of the response on 14 June.
MPA also checked the damaged vessel to ensure that it would not sink, the crew were safe and there was no further spillage of oil.
MPA then activated T&T Salvage Asia to lay heavy-duty containment booms around the damaged vessel. T&T’s vessel arrived at the incident location at 9.41 pm on 14 June, as it took a few hours to load the vessel with the heavy equipment and another few hours to sail to the incident site.
Despite the challenges of working at night and under bad weather conditions, T&T did well to deploy 200 metres of oil booms around the damaged vessel by working through the night. The deployment of the oil booms was completed at 5.15 am on 15 June.
Some have asked why MPA did not immediately deploy the containment booms onboard its patrol vessel while waiting for T&T’s vessel to arrive. Sir, the booms onboard the MPA patrol vessel are lightweight oil containment booms which are suitable for dealing quickly with small-scale and localised oil spills, such as oil leakages during bunkering operations. These lightweight booms were assessed to be unsuitable for dealing with the oil spill incident on 14 June, which was a more serious spill involving the sudden discharge of an estimated 400 tonnes of oil into the sea.
For such spills, the patrol vessel will focus on spraying dispersants and deploy contractors to lay heavy-duty oil containment booms around the damaged vessel as a preventive measure in case there is further spillage of oil from the vessel.
Sir, this is the established procedure, which is in line with international practices for dealing with oil spills, and the MPA response team on the patrol vessel followed the procedure correctly.
I had explained during last week’s joint press conference that the main purpose of the containment booms around the damaged vessel was not to “fence in” all the spilled oil. When there is a sudden discharge of a large amount of oil, like what happened on 14 June, the spilled oil will not remain stationary at the incident site. It will be carried by tidal currents and waves to other locations. The containment booms were therefore intended as a preventive measure in case there was further oil spillage from the damaged vessel.
The containment boomd can also help to catch some of the oil spill which remained in the vicinity of the incident location and did not float elsewhere. But this is not 100% foolproof, because the tidal currents and waves can carry the oil to go below or above the booms.
In addition to laying containment booms around the damaged vessel, we also deployed oil skimmers. Based on guidance from industry experts such as the ITOPF, oil skimmers are most effective against large and thick patches of oil.
Hence, before deploying the skimmers, MPA and its contractors had to first confirm the location of the large oil patches. This task was challenging for a number of reasons.
First, due to thundery showers on 14 June afternoon, visibility was poor and the vessels from MPA and their contractors were not able to spot large patches of oil in the sea in the first few hours after the incident.
Second, as the density of the spilled oil in this case is very close to that of seawater, the oil slicks might have gone below the water surface, making detection harder.
When night fell, the reduced visibility made it even more difficult for MPA and its contractors to locate the spilled oil.
Throughout its response, MPA used a multi-pronged approach involving drones, satellite imagery and sightings from ships at sea and personnel on the ground to confirm the location of large oil patches.
In the morning of 15 June, when large oil patches were located, MPA deployed oil skimmers to skim the oil from the sea.
MPA and its contractors also carried out the targeted deployment of booms along our coastlines and waterfronts to facilitate clean-up operations. This approach ensures the booms are placed where they can be most effective. In response to Mr Louis Chua’s question, MPA did not prioritise oil collection in certain areas before deploying booms to contain the spill.
Preventive measures were also implemented at biodiversity sensitive areas such as the Chek Jawa Wetlands at Pulau Ubin, given the potential environmental impact.
We have deployed a total of around 4,000 metres of oil containment booms. To Mr Christopher de Souza’s question, our contractors also used absorbent booms with hydrophobic content.
Our clean-up methods and operations are guided by international experts from ITOPF, and our agencies work closely with specialised companies and contractors who have strong track records in responding to oil spills. We work with them on the deployment of assets to ensure optimal outcomes, taking into account factors such as the geography of the area, weather conditions, prevailing winds and tidal conditions.
Sir, some Members have asked about the timeliness of our communications to the public. Our agencies had provided regular updates from the day of the incident on 14 June. Our approach is to push out relevant information to the public as soon as possible, such as information on air and water quality, while we continue with the operations at sea and on land to deal with an evolving situation. Minister Grace Fu, Minister Desmond Lee and I also provided updates on the management and impact of the oil spill in the days following the incident. Please allow me to elaborate on the communications timeline.
On the afternoon of 14 June, MPA informed the other agencies of the oil spillage. After being alerted, the agencies mobilised their staff to actively monitor the situation and stood ready to respond.
At 6.03 pm that day, MPA notified the public of the allision and oil spill through a media release while it continued to assess and respond to the developing situation.
At around 9.20 pm, the Sentosa Development Corporation (SDC) began to cordon off affected parts of Palawan beach, when they first sighted oil on the beach. Early next morning on 15 June at about 7.00 am, SDC observed the further spread of oil in waters at Palawan, Siloso and Tanjong beaches, cordoned off affected areas and deployed workers to commence clean-up. At 10.59 am, SDC published a post on their Facebook page and website to inform the public that the waters of Tanjong, Palawan and Siloso Beach on Sentosa were closed for clean-up operations, but the three beaches remained open.
At 1.44 pm, MPA notified the public via a media statement that patches of oil and light sheens were observed off Pasir Panjang terminal and along Sentosa beaches. The National Environment Agency (NEA) started clean-up operations at about 10.00 am at Labrador Nature Reserve and around 4.00 pm at East Coast Park, after oil was observed along the shorelines.
Later that day, at 7.33 pm, a joint media statement was issued by the agencies to inform the public that oil had also landed along shorelines in other areas and that affected beaches would be closed to facilitate clean-up operations. The statement highlighted that the agencies were taking action to mitigate the effects of the oil spill.
MPA and our agencies had issued five media statements in the first four days of the incident to keep the public informed of the management of the incident and to address key concerns they might have. These media statements and other updates were also posted on the social media platforms of the agencies.
Mr Speaker, investigations into the incident are ongoing and preliminary findings showed that the allision was caused by the dredger experiencing sudden loss of engine and steering controls.
Some Members have asked about possible measures to prevent oil spills in future. Over the years, we have taken steps to enhance the safety of vessels and bunkering operations to minimise the risks of accidents and oil spills in our waters. We have also put in place practices such as mandatory safety training and shipboard drills for vessel crew on incident response as well as inspections for vessels in our port to ensure compliance with international safety conventions.
While we do our best to reduce the risks, oil spills may still happen in our waters or in the region. It is not possible to completely eliminate this risk. Therefore, we have prepared for and maintained our readiness to respond in a prompt, coordinated and effective manner when such incidents occur.
We have worked with industry partners to develop a contingency plan, which we rehearse and refine every two years during our inter-agency exercises for oil spills. Our standard operating procedures (SOPs) were enhanced along the way and they helped us to respond to this incident effectively. We will continue to update and improve our SOPs and contingency plans with learning points from this incident and prepare our teams to deal with oil spills effectively through training and regular inter-agency exercises.
Sir, before I conclude, I would like to, once again, express my appreciation to our agencies, our industry partners and our volunteers for their hard work and the good progress made so far. There is more work ahead to complete the next phase of the clean-up operations and to mitigate the impact of the oil spill. Let us continue to work closely together, so that we can return to normalcy as soon as possible.
Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will respond to any clarifications which Members may have, after my colleagues have made their Statements.
Minister Grace Fu and Minister Desmond Lee will be making related Ministerial Statements. So, I will allow Members to raise their points of clarification on all three Statements after the third Statement. I call on the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment, Ms Grace Fu.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will address the progress of our land-based clean-ups, the challenges involved, our emphasis on protecting the health and well-being of our workers and the public, the impact to the businesses and our efforts in monitoring any impact on the safety of our food, air and water quality.
We have made good progress in cleaning up the oil spill. As of 30 June, over 1,200 tonnes of oil-soaked sand and debris have been collected and much of the oil slicks on our beachfronts has been removed. The bulk of oil-soaked sand has been removed and sent to toxic waste treatment facilities for safe treatment and disposal. Booms have also been deployed to prevent oil from being washed ashore or into our inland canals.
This operation will not have been possible without the tireless and coordinated efforts from multiple agencies and many service providers. Several Members have raised questions about the welfare and safety of our workers. I would like to assure Members that the well-being of our workers is our priority. We have been taking many steps to ensure their safety and well-being.
First, on air quality. As part of its air quality monitoring regime, NEA monitors ambient levels of volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, through our network of 24/7 ambient air monitoring stations at various locations in Singapore. One of the monitoring stations is located on Sentosa and there is also one at the eastern-end of East Coast Park. The monitoring stations did not detect any anomalies over this period of time, including for benzene, toluene and xylene, or BTX, that are commonly associated with bunkering fuels and other petrochemicals.
When the oil slick reached stretches of our coastline on 15 June, NEA began conducting daily air quality tests using mobile detectors at affected areas of East Coast Park, Sentosa and Labrador Nature Reserve to ensure the safety of the public and clean-up personnel. The VOCs detected, including for BTX, have been well within safe limits.
Miss Rachel Ong1 asked if there were health and safety concerns from breathing in the oil fumes. I have explained that the air quality at affected areas is safe, based on both measurements from our 24/7 ambient air monitoring stations as well as localised daily testing using mobile detectors. While members of the public near the beachfront or shoreline may experience odour from time to time, especially in the early days of the oil spill, it is safe to be around these areas.
Second, as part of the SOP, service providers are involved in our oil spill response in many critical functions. Many of them are specialised contractors involved in the laying of booms and in cleaning of difficult-to-clean areas, such as rock bunds. Others are general cleaning contractors involved in clearing the beaches of oily sand and debris. These service providers participate in our regular oil spill exercises and are familiar with their roles and processes. Before deployment, personnel are briefed on their tasks and workplace safety.
Agencies and their contractors are regularly reminded to ensure that sufficient rest breaks and rehydration are provided. We have also reminded cleaning contractors to ensure that workers receive rest days and consider rotating workers, where possible. Workers who feel unwell should approach their employer for support and assistance.
Third, on protective equipment. Mr Louis Ng, Ms He Ting Ru, Mr Melvin Yong and Miss Rachel Ong2 asked about the provision of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for our workers. As is the case for any work carried out in Singapore, employers, including the contractors, are responsible for assessing the site conditions, nature of tasks and risks when deploying and equipping their workers.
In the immediate few days after the oil spill, when a sizeable amount of oil was washed up on shore, NEA issued a general advisory for personnel involved in the clean-up effort to include masks, goggles, rubber gloves and high waterproof boots as part of their PPE. This was done as an additional precaution even though the air quality was well within safe levels. After the bulk of the oil was removed, NEA updated the advisory to no longer require masks and goggles.
The first phase of the clean-up focused on removing the oil slicks and contaminated sand from the surface of affected beaches and deploying booms to avoid further contamination. All the remaining affected areas have entered the second phase of the clean-up response, which focuses on difficult to clean areas like rock bunds, breakwaters and oil trapped deeper in the sand. Members of the public may notice a scaling down of general cleaning at the beaches, as more specialised teams are deployed to clean these difficult areas. General cleaning of the beaches may still be required, as oil remnants may continue to be washed ashore.
The cleaning methods for the second phase have been decided jointly between the oil spill consultants and the cleaning contractors. These methods may be refined along the way as the shoreline of each affected area may be different. For ecologically-sensitive locations, the National Parks Board (NParks) is consulted on the methods to be deployed.
Once the second phase of cleaning operation is completed, we will move to the final phase where we remove tar balls from the beaches and inspect affected areas for any remaining oil stains.
We expect the clean-up to take around three months, but these will vary for each area, depending on the extent they are affected. ONE°15 Marina and the Marina at Keppel Bay have reopened as clean-up efforts continue to progress. The cordoned-off area of the beaches at Sentosa, along East Coast Park and Southern Islands will progressively open for land-based activities. We will test the water quality to ensure that it is back to normal and stable for at least a week before resuming swimming and other primary-contact sea activities.
Agencies have been monitoring the situation carefully and closely. We understand the frustration and inconvenience that businesses have experienced due to the oil spill. That is why SDC, which manages Sentosa and businesses on the Southern Islands, and other agencies, such as NParks, that collectively manage the beachfront along East Coast Park, have been proactively reaching out to their tenants.
The agencies are developing rental deferral measures to help affected businesses with their cash flow on a case-by-case basis. SDC will also look to promote a return of footfall through marketing and social media support.
As mentioned by the Ministry of Transport (MOT) during last week's joint press conference, the economic losses resulting from the oil spill can be accessed for claims. Contact details of the insurer have been made available to the public.
Many volunteers have stepped forward to offer their assistance in the clean-up operations. Volunteers have not been directly involved in the beach clean-up actions, due to the complexity of the tasks and for their personal safety.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked how citizens can be involved in our clean-up efforts. We are considering mobilising volunteers for the final phase of the clean-up, where remnant oil deposits hardened and mixed with sand in the form of tar balls will need to be sieved and separated for removal. This process is labour-intensive and if we have more hands to help, we can relieve the cleaners and accelerate the reopening of the beaches.
If and when volunteers are mobilised, we will tap on those who have registered with NParks as well as many volunteer groups who have contacted me personally and the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) through social media and WhatsApp after assessing that it is safe to do so. The Public Hygiene Council will help to train, equip and coordinate with volunteers for this effort. This would be a safe and meaningful way for Singaporeans to contribute to the reopening of our beaches.
I will now address questions on food safety and water quality, which Miss Cheryl Chan, Miss Rachel Ong and Mr Xie Yao Quan have raised. To date, our fish farms remain unaffected by the oil spill. Nonetheless, as a precautionary measure, the Singapore Food Agency has been taking seafood samples from coastal fish farms in the East Johor Strait for food safety tests. We are also monitoring the quality of imported fish and seafood. The test results continue to indicate that our local fish and imported fish are safe for consumption.
Miss Rachel Ong3 asked if real-time data from the Marine Environment Sensing Network (MESN) buoys can be made available on an hourly basis to fish farms and relevant non-governmental organisations' communities. I understand that MESN currently deploys one buoy at St John's Island and real-time data that has been assessed to be of high confidence is publicly accessible on MESN's online data platform.
There has been no impact to our water supply. Sensors at our five desalination plants, including at the Jurong Island Desalination Plant closest to the oil spill location, continue to show no abnormalities in the quality of seawater. In the event that any plant in Singapore's water supply system is disrupted, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) will step up production capacity in our remaining plants. Mr Speaker, allow me to speak in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We have made good progress in cleaning up the oil pollution. We have collected over 1,200 tonnes of oil-soaked sand and effectively, most of the oil slicks at the beachfront have been removed. We have also deployed booms to prevent oil leaks from reaching the shore or flowing inland.
Here, I would like to express sincere gratitude to various Government agencies and cleaning contractors. Thanks to their close coordination and relentless efforts, the cleanup work has proceeded smoothly.
To ensure public safety and the safety of cleaning personnel, we have implemented a series of measures. In the areas affected by oil pollution, we have conducted air quality tests to ensure the personal safety of nearby residents, tourists and clean-up personnel. The air quality has remained at safe levels.
Before commencing the clean-up work, we briefed the personnel on the work scope and safety measures, and provided them with appropriate personal protective equipment. We also ensured that the personnel have sufficient rest time and regularly replenish their fluids.
The entire clean-up work is expected to take about three months. The beaches at Sentosa, East Coast Park and the Southern Islands will be gradually reopened to the public for land-based activities. We will conduct water quality tests to ensure that water quality is restored to normal and remain stable for at least one week before allowing swimming and water activities.
We are also considering mobilising volunteers to participate in the final phase of the clean-up work, to lighten the burden on the cleaning personnel and expedite the reopening of beaches.
Relevant authorities have been closely monitoring the situation. We understand that the oil spill incident has caused inconvenience to some businesses. Affected businesses and relevant parties can file claims with the vessel owners’ insurance agents.
The agencies are developing rental deferral measures to help affected businesses with their cash flow, on a case-by-case basis. Sentosa Development Corporation will also look to promote a return of footfall through marketing and social media support. In terms of food safety and water supply, our fish farms have not been affected by the oil spill incident. Nevertheless, SFA has been monitoring the quality of imported seafood and implementing preventive measures to ensure food safety. Our water supply has also not been affected.
(In English): Mr Speaker, in conclusion, as we are now in the second phase of the clean-up operations, some of the precautionary measures adopted in the first phase, such as daily air monitoring at affected beaches and water quality monitoring for our fish farms, have become less pressing. Given that the conditions have stabilised, we will gradually step down measures that are no longer required so that agencies can focus on the current demands.
Our agencies will continue to press on with cleaning operations and monitor the quality of our air, food and water, as well as the impact on affected stakeholders. I would like to thank the many cleaning personnel, supervisors and Public Officers who have worked tirelessly in the clean-up operations. I am also thankful for the support from service partners, volunteers and the public.
We look forward to the next and final phase of operations, where we would be inviting volunteers to help with the clean-up, so that we can nurse our cherished environment back to health as soon as possible.
Minister for National Development.
Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment have given an update on the progress of the seaward and shoreline clean-up operations.
I will now elaborate on the efforts taken by agencies and the community to contain and mitigate the immediate impacts of the oil spill on our coastal and marine wildlife, the impact thus far and the potential longer-term impact on biodiversity and habitats, as well as our action plans in the months to come.
From the onset of the incident, agencies worked together and moved quickly to contain and mitigate the immediate effects and impact of the oil spill on our coastal and marine biodiversity and habitats.
Affected beaches and shorelines were closed off to safeguard public health and safety, and frontline workers were deployed to clean up affected areas, such as the East Coast Park, Labrador Nature Reserve, Sentosa, as well as St John's, Lazarus and Kusu Islands.
NParks deployed over 1.5 kilometres of oil-absorbent booms to protect biodiversity-sensitive coastal and marine areas, including Berlayer Creek and the Rocky Shore along Labrador Nature Reserve. These booms contained the spread of the oil and facilitated clean-up operations along affected beaches and shorelines.
As some oil was detected off Changi on 17 June, agencies also preemptively deployed booms around biodiversity-sensitive areas, such as at Chek Jawa Wetlands at Pulau Ubin, Coney Island and Pasir Ris Park as preventive measures.
To ascertain the immediate impact on our marine biodiversity, agency representatives, scientists, as well as volunteers from the Friends of Marine Park and S.E.A. Aquarium had conducted preliminary surveys at St John's Island, Sentosa, Labrador Nature Reserve, Sisters' Island Marine Park, as well as the site of the second Marine Park at the Southern part of Lazarus Island and the reef off Kusu Island, between 16 and 25 June.
Based on the visual surveys thus far, oil was sighted along the upper intertidal zones of biodiversity-sensitive sites at Labrador rocky shore, Tanjong Rimau and Serapong at Sentosa, Bendera Bay at St John's Island, Eagle Bay at Lazarus Island, as well as the outer mangrove fringes at the mouth of Berlayer Creek near Labrador Nature Reserve. However, the intertidal zones at other biodiversity-sensitive areas, such as Sisters' Islands Marine Park, the other Southern islands, Changi Beach Park, Pasir Ris Park and Chek Jawa Wetlands at Pulau Ubin appear to be largely unaffected. Similarly, the mangroves at West Coast Park and Pasir Ris Park also appear to be largely unaffected. Notwithstanding this, we will continue to monitor these sites closely.
As of end-June, NParks and animal welfare groups, such as ACRES, have rescued four collared kingfishers from the oil spill, two of which were received by NParks' Centre for Wildlife Rehabilitation. Despite prompt veterinary care, two kingfishers unfortunately died, but the other two appear to have stabilised and we are monitoring their condition closely.
While no significant impact on our marine biodiversity and wildlife has been observed thus far, the situation remains dynamic and there could be a time-lag between the oil spill and its effects on our biodiversity and habitats.
Some of the impact on our marine and coastal ecosystems may only show up weeks or even months later, such as during spawning periods. Assessments of the environmental impact of the oil spill on our offshore islands are therefore, also still ongoing.
Based on our experience with the oil spill that affected the intertidal and seagrass habitats at Tanah Merah back in 2010, as well as the oil spill that affected Chek Jawa Wetlands at Pulau Ubin and Changi Beach Park in 2017, while our ecosystems are resilient, they will take time to recover from such external stressors.
At Tanah Merah, the intertidal and seagrass habitats started to recover after a year and they no longer show any signs of impact from the 2010 oil spill today. At Changi Beach Park, long-term biodiversity surveys have shown no discernible changes to the intertidal fauna before and after the oil spill in 2017.
We will closely monitor the impact of and recovery of our marine habitats and biodiversity including seagrasses, corals and aquatic wildlife, through intertidal and subtidal biodiversity surveys. NParks will also undertake rescue and rehabilitative efforts for affected wildlife where necessary.
Over the past few weeks, we are heartened by the public's response and support. More than 1,500 individuals have signed up to help with oil spill management efforts. An additional 2,000 have registered their interest to be kept updated on ongoing efforts and future volunteering opportunities.
As of 1 July, we have deployed over 700 volunteers, including volunteers from the Public Hygiene Council (PHC), and Friends of Marine Park. Organisations, such as the Singapore Veterinary Association, World Wildlife Fund for Nature (Singapore), Singapore Canoe Federation and many more, have stepped forward to offer help in their own ways.
These volunteers have been involved in a wide range of efforts. Some joined NParks to patrol East Coast Park and West Coast Park, advising members of the public to stay away from affected beaches and areas, as well as reporting sightings of oil stains and oil-slicked wildlife for rescue and rehabilitation, if needed. Members of the public can contact NParks' 24-hour Animal Response Centre hotline, if they encounter an oil-slicked animal.
As I shared briefly earlier, marine experts and volunteers from the Friends of Marine Park have also been carrying out surveys with NParks on St John's Island and Lazarus Island, to track the impact on biodiversity on these islands.
We are very grateful to our volunteers for their strong support, and to members of the public, nature groups and other organisations for coming together alongside our frontline workers and colleagues to mitigate the impacts of the oil spill.
As we move into our next phase of managing the impact of the oil spill, we will work closely with our partners from the nature and community groups, organisations and Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), and tap on their knowledge and expertise to implement an action plan to manage the impacts more effectively.
During a recent consultation with these partners, some suggestions were raised, which will be incorporated into actionable plans.
First, we will work with various stakeholder networks to disseminate information to keep the public updated on the progress of recovery efforts. Through our partners, we hope to share information on the recovery and response operations, that can be translated into advisories and information guides for members of the public. For instance, Otter Watch and the Bird Society of Singapore will work with us to share tips with members of the public, on the dos and don'ts when spotting oil-slicked wildlife.
Second, we will involve the wider community for coastal clean-ups and citizen patrols. In the next six months and beyond, once NEA has assessed the affected areas to be safe for public access, we will work with our partners on recovery efforts, such as coastal clean-ups and beach patrols and surveys. In fact, community beach clean-up groups, such as Stridy and the International Coastal Cleanup Singapore (ICCS), have already started to coordinate their respective networks, so that they can organise beach clean-ups, once we can do so.
Third, we will work with partners to tap on their expertise and skills to support wildlife rescue and recovery efforts. Partners from Mandai Wildlife Group, Singapore Veterinary Association, ACRES and S.E.A. Aquarium, with their own pool of veterinarians, have offered to support wildlife rescue and rehabilitation efforts, where needed.
Fourth, we will continue to undertake impact assessments and sustained post-incident biodiversity impact monitoring, surveys and research, in collaboration with the nature community and volunteers, scientific community and our IHLs. These efforts will inform subsequent ecological recovery action plans.
Fifth, we will conduct scientific research with the scientific community to better understand the longer-term impacts of the oil spill on biodiversity. We have already started surveys at the Southern Islands and Labrador Nature Reserve, as well as Serapong and Tanjong Rimau in Sentosa.
Sir, to conclude, while the impact of the oil spill on our marine biodiversity and habitats have not been observed to be significant as of now, we will remain vigilant and keep a close watch on the longer-term impacts.
Once again, we would like to extend our gratitude to our many partners and community volunteers who have leaned forward and worked hand in hand with our colleagues in our agencies to manage the oil spill. With your help, we will be able to ensure that our ecosystems remain resilient.
The incident is not over yet, but we have made some good progress and we will continue to work with the community and our partners to safeguard our natural marine habitats.
There are 23 Members who have filed PQs on this topic. You will be given priority if you have clarifications. But before I call on hon Members for clarifications, I wish to point out Standing Order 23. Members may seek clarifications on the Ministerial Statements on this Pasir Panjang Terminal Oil Spill Incident on 14 June 2024, but no debate shall be allowed thereon. Members can seek clarifications by way of asking questions.
So, again, because there is a lot of interest in it, I would seek Members' understanding to keep your clarifications clear and concise so that we can cover as many questions as possible and, at the same time, to ask the Ministers to also keep your answers short so that you can also answer as many clarifications as possible. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Speaker, given the extremely heavy traffic in our surrounding waters and the significant environmental consequences of oil spillage accidents, I am wondering if it makes economic sense to have in-house oil spillage containment capacity rather than to contract this out to outfits such as T&T Salvage Asia. After all, my understanding is that the best practice response time is closer to something like two to four hours rather than the six or so hours that we engaged in.
Finally, if I could ask for the response to one of the original PQs I submitted on whether there will be, in fact, any after-action review, given the importance of a proper post-mortem.
Mr Speaker, first of all, I would like to point out that it is not the case that the capabilities and the assets have all been outsourced. MPA does have quite a bit of in-house capabilities, too. The patrol vessel, the first to arrive on the scene, was an MPA patrol vessel. MPA also has its own vessels that it has deployed. But given the nature of oil spills and that it could happen not just in Singapore waters but also in the waters in our region, we do want to do two things.
The first is to have good collaborations with our neighbours so that in case there is an incident, there is a coordinated response, there is collaboration. We deal with it in a coordinated manner because the oil could flow from our waters to their shores or from their waters to our shores. So, this is part one of how we deal with the oil spills.
Part two is that we also want to work with the industry because some of these contractors are specialised experts. Some of them specialise in laying booms, some of them specialise in skimming the oil, and some of them specialise in other areas. So, it is important for us to not see this as a binary kind of situation, that everything has to be in-house or everything has to be outsourced. We need both. We do need to have some in-house capabilities and we do have them.
The second thing is about the scale of the oil spill. It is not a small oil spill because we have an estimated 400 tonnes of oil spilled into the sea in a sudden discharge. This is considered, I would say, on the scale, it is not the largest oil spill, but it is considered quite a serious oil spill.
All three Ministers have spoken about this point in our Ministerial Statements, about the learning points from this incident and how we can then incorporate the learning points into our SOPs, our processes, just as we have done with previous incidents. Every two years, we will do an oil spill exercise, together with the industry. It is alternate years – every two years, we will also do one for chemicals. These exercises help us to be ready in case there is a chemical spill or there is an oil spill.
Mr Alex Yam.
Mr Speaker, in reference to my Question No 2, I may have missed a bit of the detail.
Mr Speaker, the clean-up operations have just progressed to the start of phase 2. So, it is too early for us to confirm what the cost will be. But what we can say in response to Mr Yam's question, in terms of who will bear the cost, is that after the operations are over, we will tally up the total cost for the clean-up and we will submit these claims to the insurer of the bunker vessel.
Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Speaker, I would like to declare that I am a practising shipping lawyer in a maritime law firm. I have two supplementary questions.
One, it has been reported that T&T Salvage Asia was mobilised on the same day of the collision at about 2.55 pm and it took them just over 14 hours before they were mobilised and finished laying the 200-metre booms around the Marine Honour.
MPA reported on 16 June, at least, that Oil Spill Response Limited (OSRL), the largest international industry-funded cooperative providing oil spill response services, was supporting the clean-up efforts. Given OSRL's resources and expertise at hand, may I ask the Minister for Transport why was OSRL not mobilised concurrently with T&T Salvage Asia immediately after the collision to deploy the containment booms around the Marine Honour, especially with a view to reducing the deployment time and to reduce the subsequent spread of the oil spill?
My second question, bearing in mind the time required for T&T Salvage Asia to mobilise for the deployment of booms and, in particular, around the Marine Honour, would MPA consider reviewing the storage, loading and mobilisation processes of all equipment, including required containment booms, to ensure that mobilisation time can be reduced? In particular, will the Government consider requiring shipping terminals at locations like Pasir Panjang, Pulau Bukom, Pulau Sebarok and Jurong Island to have containment booms within easy reach of rescue vessels for quick deployment?
Mr Speaker, can I ask one more supplementary question?
Go ahead.
Thank you. My third question, has MPA contracted with T&T Salvage Asia for salvage services or for ad hoc oil spill response and recovery work? If so, would MPA consider engaging a term contractor providing oil spill response and recovery work to deal with oil spill response and recovery work instead, to facilitate better and quicker response and mobilisation?
Mr Speaker, if I understood Mr Dennis Tan's questions correctly, there is a certain underlying assumption, which is that T&T Salvage Asia had been slow and had not been doing its work properly, if I understood the Member correctly. I think that is not the case. Let me explain.
T&T Salvage Asia was not the only contractor engaged by MPA. MPA has, as I mentioned earlier, in response to Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, in-house capabilities as well as a group of contractors that they work with in the industry and these are experts with many years of experience dealing with oil spills.
For T&T Salvage Asia, Captain Anuj, who is the boss of the company, was informed by his staff who were notified by MPA on the afternoon of 14 June. He was informed at 2.55 pm. I think he explained this in a media interview that upon being informed about this oil spill, he then had to mobilise to load up the heavy equipment.
Sir, Mr Dennis Tan is a maritime lawyer. I am sure he understands these are not lightweight, simple equipment. These are heavy equipment that will require time to load up onto the vessel. That is what T&T Salvage Asia did in the first instance. So, that process to load up the equipment took some time. Then, they had to sail from Marina South Wharves because that is the wharf that is designed to load vessels like the T&T Salvage Asia vessel to be able to deal with incidents like oil spills. There is a reason why we chose Marina South Wharves, because if you think about the entire anchorage in the southern part of Singapore, you have from Tuas to Pasir Panjang and all the way to the eastern anchorages. So, if you were to put your loading point in the western part or in the eastern part, it may not be as centralised as Marina South Wharves.
They arrived at the incident site at 9.41 pm. As Captain Anuj explained during his media interview, it was at night. The weather was bad. So, he and his crew did their best to deploy the heavy containment boom as quickly as they can. But it took them till the next morning before they could fully deploy them.
Sir, there is also an important point of clarification that I need to raise in response to Mr Dennis Tan's question because there is this assumption that the arrival of T&T Salvage Asia and laying out the booms could contain and fence in the oil that has been spilled around the vessel. Sir, I think that is not the correct understanding.
The oil that has been spilled, especially when it is in a large amount, estimated 400 tonnes, sudden discharge into the sea, it will not stay there. There will be tidal currents, there will be waves and these will carry the oil and it will float elsewhere. So, the purpose of deploying T&T Salvage Asia is not to try and "fence in" the oil. It is to try and have a preventive measure around the damaged vessel because, let us not forget, there is still a lot of oil inside the damaged vessel that has not been released and spilled into the sea. So, we wanted to make sure that in case there is further spillage, there is a preventive measure around the damaged vessel to deal with that scenario.
The next thing that has to be done is MPA and the contractors, together with our agencies, would have to try and locate where the oil patches, the spilled oil, are floating to, because you need to be able to locate it, then you can deal with it through the skimmers and the laying of booms to try and deal with the oil at sea. That is the process. So, I think it is important for us, as we discuss this matter and as we assess the response, of whether it is MPA or its contractor, in this case T&T Salvage Asia, to bear that in mind. I would say, given the weather conditions, nightfall and the amount of work that is required to lay out the booms, I think T&T Salvage Asia did their best and the response time was in line with industry practices internationally.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Please do allow me to ask two supplementary questions or clarifications to the Ministers.
First, I would like to thank the Ministers and the various Ministries for coming out very fast in terms of communications and also the various groups that have helped to quickly come out with the ongoing works to clean up the beaches and the waters around Singapore.
I have two clarifications. I think Minister mentioned just now a very important thing. In regard to the oil spill, it may not be localised and it could be coming from outside the region. I am aware that there is an ASEAN cooperation mechanism for joint oil spills. I am wondering whether Minister can share a bit about that, including how the Revolving Fund Committee works, in terms of allocation of responsibilities if it happens abroad. As we know, Singapore is a maritime hub. Any oil spills slightly out of Singapore's waters could actually come in and affects Sisters Island and even Chek Jawa and other parts of Singapore.
Second, it is in regard to my original PQ which is about the penalties under the Act. Member Alex Yam mentioned about the cost, but
Mr Speaker, I would take the second question first on penalties. We are still doing the investigation, so I think we let the investigations be completed before we look at what are the appropriate penalties. But what remains quite clear is that with or without the penalties under the law, which is subject to the findings of the investigations, the bunker vessel in this case has strict liability. So, the insurer, British Marine, which is the insurer of the damaged bunker vessel, will have to respond to claims from parties who are affected by this incident. If the findings of the investigation later turn out that it is not the fault of the bunker vessel, then the bunker vessel owners can have the right to then submit their own claims against the other party, which caused the allision. So, that is the second part of Mr Saktiandi's question.
The first part, indeed, as I mentioned earlier in my response to Assoc Prof James Lim, we recognise that this is not something that Singapore can deal with or our neighbours can deal with alone, because the oil can float from one part of the sea to another part of the sea across the boundaries.
That is why we have, when we were notified of this oil spill, alerted our Malaysian and Indonesian counterparts, and we also provided updates to them along the way and offered our assistance. I think this is a process that has worked well over the years. Likewise, when there is an oil spill in their waters, they will also do the same to help us to be able to respond effectively.
And we are part of the Revolving Fund Committee where the three littoral states can request and provide support for oil spills and clean-up operations in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. This mechanism that we have, together with the cooperation that we have built up with the industry, remains a very important part of our overall preparedness.
Because as I mentioned in my Statement earlier, it is not possible to completely eliminate the risk of oil spills and therefore we have to be ready that if it occurs, and it will occur from time to time, we are able to respond effectively.
Mr Louis Chua.
Thank you, Speaker. Two supplementary questions from me.
The first is For example, just like how for us National Servicemen, there are different kind of requirements in terms of the manning, depending on the operational demands of the different units.
Second, have the current operators performed to required response time and effectiveness standards in the twice-yearly oil spill response exercise? Are they stress-tested, and will the Minister consider tightening the standards and conducting such exercises annually in light of this incident?
Mr Speaker, I think we have covered these points earlier. The learning points from this incident, certainly I think as I mentioned earlier, we will take on board and see how we can further enhance our processes, our SOPs, and we will also factor this in in the regular exercises that we conduct. The next exercise for the oil spill will be in October this year.
As for standards, it is difficult to have a precise single number. And I hope Mr Chua can appreciate why, because every oil spill is different, depending on the scale, depending on the nature, depending on the geography, the time to respond to the oil spill can vary from oil spill to oil spill. In some instances, the oil may not float very far away. In some instances, it may float further away. In some instances, like I mentioned, the oil density makes it easier to detect because it floats on the surface. In this case, it was an added challenge because this oil has similar density as the seawater, so it could go below the surface. So, because of all those factors, there is not a single number that you can say, "Oh, did you meet this X hours?" It is not quite like that.
But if we look at the overall response, including the deployment of the MPA patrol vessel arriving 11 minutes, started to spray dispersants, which is very important, I think in the initial period before the oil starts to harden. And then subsequently, the deployment of the vessels to keep track of the oil and then to start cleaning it up. We have received positive responses from industry experts from different parts of the world who commented that Singapore's response in this particular incident, and I am sure they are comparing based on their years of experience with other incidents around the world, our response, in their words, was "extremely fast".
Mr Xie Yao Quan, you raised your hand earlier? Mr Xie Yao Quan.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. And I thank the Ministers for their comprehensive statements about our timely, competent and coordinated response so far. But just to build on Minister Chee's point about not all oil spills being the same, and at the same time, this oil spill was significant. It is not the largest in our history.
And to my question that I filed earlier about our contingency plans, I would like to ask the Minister if our contingency plans are sized for a much larger oil spill that is a lot closer to our shoreline, making a full frontal impact on our shoreline? Do we have the assets and the methods that are needed to deal with an oil spill of such a scale and with a full frontal impact on our shoreline?
Mr Speaker, we have the assets that is required within MPA, but more importantly, I think we also have a network of industry partners that we can call upon who have their own assets but also, I think importantly, expertise and capabilities in dealing with different parts of the incident. And of course, as I mentioned earlier, the partnership with our neighbours. So, I think if there is a very major oil spill, whether it is very near to our shores or further away, closer to our neighbours or in international waters, I think this is the response that will be most effective. Not relying only on one single party, but tapping on the resources and the assets of all the different partners within the ecosystem and rehearsing this regularly. Keeping the links warm, keeping the SOPs well run so that everyone knows their roles and their responsibilities. That is part of our emergency preparedness.
Mr Gerald Giam.
Sir, I join the Ministers in thanking the officials, workers and volunteers who helped in the oil spill recovery. I have some supplementary questions for the Minister for Transport.
Sir, it took almost 15 hours to complete deploying the containment booms after 400 metric tonnes of oil began spilling into the sea. I note the Minister's earlier reply that booms cannot contain 100% of the oil and he feels the contractors performed to par. But how much oil had already dispersed beyond the collision site by the time the booms were deployed 15 hours after the collision? And could the oil slick have been better contained if the booms were deployed earlier?
Sir, many countries, including the US, have regulations which require containment booms to be readily available in the event of an unexpected oil spill. Does Singapore have any such regulations and if not, are there any plans to enact them?
And lastly, I do not think the Minister has fully answered my Question No 14 for Oral Answer and Question No 67 for Written Answer, which he said he would cover in the Ministerial Statement.
Mr Speaker, I think I have explained earlier in my response to Mr Dennis Tan that it is not the right way of understanding the purpose of the containment boom around the damaged vessel. But since Mr Giam raised it again, let me try to make another attempt to explain.
Sir, the purpose of the containment boom around the damaged vessel is not meant to try and catch the oil that has already been spilled into the sea. Because even if you talk about a shorter response, because the weather was good and it was not at night and the contractor, the vessel, was able to deploy the booms fully in a quicker way, it would still take several hours at least.
By that time, the tidal currents and the waves would have already carried the oil that has been spilled into the sea further away from the incident site.
So, it is therefore not the correct response to try and use the containment booms to "fence in" the oil. The purpose of the containment booms around the damaged vessel is as a preventive measure to prevent the further oil spillage from coming out from the damaged vessel. Because as I explained earlier, there is still a lot of oil left that we are now in the process of safely removing from the damaged vessel. So, I think this is an important point to clarify, so that we are on the same page.
And as I explained earlier, then what do you do with the oil that has been spilled and is floating away? The operations are then mounted to try and track and confirm the location of these large oil patches, so that you can then send out other types of vessels, the skimmers, to try and remove this oil, collect this oil. And then also to lay booms in certain areas to try and soak up this oil.
But you first need to know where these oil patches are, where it is floating to and MPA deployed a multi-pronged approach using a variety of information sources. They used drones, they used satellite imagery, they also used visual sighting from ships, they alerted the ships in our anchorages to try and look out for where the oil patches may be floating to and then they tried to piece together the different information to confirm where is the location of the oil. And when they saw the oil patches on the 15 of June morning, they deployed the oil skimmers to deal with these oil patches.
So, that is how the oil spill response is done, not just in Singapore, but internationally. The US requirement that Mr Giam mentioned is not something which is done in major ports. There was an earlier media article which quoted someone – they did not give the name, they called this person Captain A from the industry, who asked if we could put booms around the vessels in our anchorages. The article also mentioned that this was done in the Netherlands.
But when we checked with the Port of Rotterdam, which is also a major port, they said no, they do not have this practice of requiring booms to be placed around vessels. Because we have so many ships in our anchorages and they are not just static, they are also coming in and going out, it is just not practical and feasible to take that approach. So, I hope that answers the two questions that Mr Gerald Giam raised.
Mr Gerald Giam also said that he has some further questions. I was just flipping through earlier and I saw that one of them – just to seek Mr Gerald Giam's confirmation, is the Member asking about the height of the booms, freeboard and skirt? Is that one of the questions that you want me to answer?
That is one of the questions, as well as Question No 67 for Written Answer.
Thank you, Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Speaker, for this particular incident, the freeboard and skirt of the boom measured 0.36 metres and 0.43 metres. The wave height at the time was between 0.1 metres and 0.3 metres and the tidal current was 1.7 knots. We deployed 200 metres of booms.
On Mr Giam's question for written answer, for storage tanks, we have sufficient storage tank capacity for the operations, because the storage tanks, when you put it on the vessel, when you go out to sea and you skim the oil, collect the oil, you do have enough capacity, but if the volume in the tanks were to increase, you can come back to shore and use a new tank, replace with a new tank and then you go out again.
We do have sufficient spare capacity. This was not a constraint in this particular response. It was not due to lack of storage tank capacity. What was challenging, and I explained this in my Ministerial Statement, was it took some time to locate where the oil patches, this is the estimated 400 tonnes that floated away. It took us some time to be able to confirm the location of these large oil patches that floated away due to a variety of reasons that I have explained earlier – bad weather in the initial period and after that nightfall, and in this particular case, because the density of the oil was quite similar to seawater, it could go below the water surface, which then makes detection more difficult.
For these variety of reasons, we only managed to identify the location of the large oil patches on the morning of 15 June 2024. And when that is identified and confirmed, MPA then sent out the skimmers to collect this oil.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Our cleaners, very often, work under trying conditions and it is heartening to know that safety measures and SOPs have been put in place to ensure their safety and well-being.
Arguably, the cleaning up of oil spills would mean even more challenging conditions such as blistering heat, humid weather and the constant fight against time to contain and to remove the spill. Does MSE have measures put in place to ensure that all our cleaning workers are provided with ample rest and whether certain groups of workers are excluded from the strenuous clean-up deployments, such as workers with pre-existing health conditions?
Thank you very much. I would like to thank the Member for the clarification and for her concern for the well-being of our workers. We would like to remind all our service providers to adhere to the recommendations from the various agencies that are looking at workplace safety and to pay extra attention to the well-being of the workers.
Personally, I met some of them when I was visiting the affected beaches. I never fail to ask them, "Are you given rest? Are you given time out to have your hydration?" And the answer has been, "Yes".
So, I think that is something that is of priority and I would like to assure Members that we are always work with our contractors to make sure that their workers' well-being is also looked after.
Ms He Ting Ru.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. In response to part of my PQ on what recourse workers have should they have or are suspected to be suffering from ill effects due to exposure, while I acknowledge the Minister's earlier points about no anomalies being detected during air quality monitoring, can the Minister clarify whether there were any reports received about health concerns from our workers and now our volunteers given that they have started to be deployed and what recourse do they have should they suffer from or are suspected to be suffering from ill effects due to both dermal and inhalation exposure?
Secondly, how many who were involved in the main coastal clean-up were foreign workers and to what extent have they been trained for this sort of work, especially as the 1,500 volunteers who signed up to volunteer were deemed to be lacking the special skills in the initial phases?
I have a couple of clarifications for the Minister for National Development. First, I do not think I heard the answer to part of my question about whether the oil spill has affected plans for a second marine park in the Southern Islands. Secondly, how much are the various studies and research projects to study the impact on the biodiversity implications on our various natural ecosystems? How much is the total cost expected to be for these studies and research projects?
Thank you, Mr Speaker. In response to questions from the Member, we have not received any feedback on workers nor volunteers suffering from the ill effects of inhalation.
On workers who are involved in cleaning, I will clarify that there are mainly two categories of workers who are involved. One is general cleaners and they are involved in very basic but back-breaking work at the foreshore of the beaches, basically to clean up the oil leaks as well as the contaminated sand. The ratio, I would imagine that they would conform to the foreign workers ratio of general cleaners. They would be supervised as usual and, as I mentioned in my speech earlier on, contractors, their employers have been advised to adhere to giving them the adequate and appropriate protective equipment. There is also another type who are involved in specialised cleaning. Those will come from contractors who are engaged to handle such cleaning of the hard-to-reach places and they would have gone through their own internal training programme.
I have spoken to some of them. Some of them are actually our local workers with experience in the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) and Singapore Police Force (SPF). They have now joined this contractor, basically handling emergency responses, such as oil spill and other incidents and crises. They are very, very competent, very experienced, putting their experience from SCDF and SPF to good use and they are obviously very mindful and aware, high degree of awareness of the environment that they are working in. So, they are supervised with a high degree of competency and experiences.
And of course, I think we want them all to work under very safe condition, but it is really hard work, so we would like to really urge the public when it is time for us to volunteer that we would step forward to volunteer with the more laborious type of cleaning, where specialised skills is less involved so that we can actually relieve them of some of the work ahead of us.
Mr Speaker, Sir, we are carrying out habitat and environmental surveys of the affected areas, including the Southern Islands, both those that were affected as well as those that are not affected, and we are monitoring the long-term impacts.
So, the answer to the first question is at this point in time, we continue to assess the impact of the oil spill. There is no impact on our plans for a second marine park in Southern Lazarus and Eastern Kusu.
And secondly, in terms of the total cost of monitoring and research, we are still working out the research questions and methodology, processes and locations of these works. The exact figure will be worked out in due course.
Ms Nadia Samdin.
Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Ministers for their Statements as well. Just two points. Beyond the workers and specialised professionals who have been really hard at work, I think we have also been able to engage some of the researchers who have specialised skills. For example, Minister Desmond Lee mentioned Friends of Marine Park, who went out, I think, maybe the day or two, really soon after, to engage in the work and there are many more volunteers, as the Ministers have pointed out, who are really interested to come forward, whether those who kayak out at sea or those who do beach clean-ups. I think they are looking forward to maybe when the next phase might be so, that they can really galvanise and come together. Is there a rough indication how long more this will take?
And will there be any sort of maybe training or briefing at a very high level to be able to equip them with the information on how they can best help with the clean-up?
The second is, beyond the wanting to help. I think many also want accountability in due course to be able to hear more as to how the collision happened and whether the parties responsible or the parties involved will be taking accountability.
Mr Speaker, I am very heartened – and I think I speak also on behalf of my other colleagues – we are very heartened by the strong support and interest that the ordinary Singaporeans have shown towards protecting our environment. We would very much like to involve all Singaporeans who are willing to help us rehabilitate our beautiful beaches. But we do just want to put a word of caution here, because we are dealing with petrochemicals and we do want to make sure that it is safe to do so. We are monitoring the situation closely. We hope to give some update maybe in a week or two's time so that we can prepare for further general cleaning of the beaches.
Please be assured that when we do so, when we mobilise the volunteers, we will think through, we will put through procedures that involve training as well as briefing, as well as resourcing with adequate protective equipment, so that we can all do so safely.
Sir, if I may supplement what Minister Grace Fu had said. The incident happened on 14 June. By 16 June, some of the Friends of Marine Park had already been galvanised to do a survey of some of the Southern Islands. They helped us monitor impact and to identify shorelines and habitats that have been affected.
Of the 1,500 volunteers who stepped forward, as I said earlier in my answer, that some 700 volunteers have been called upon to help with coastal patrols, to advise members of the public, to help us keep an eye out for impacted areas. Some have been mobilised for more specialised works pertaining to the environment, habitats, biodiversity and wildlife.
The incident happened on 14 June. And on 21 June, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng and I met many members of the community, green groups, environmental groups, IHLs, researchers, organisations, who wanted to support. We had a closed-door session to discuss areas where we could collaborate more closely on.
And as I said earlier in my answer, there were five broad areas that we decided to embark on, ranging from wildlife rescue to habitat monitoring to coastal clean-up surveys, as well as research into scientific questions on the impact of oil spills. These are all areas where we engage stakeholders, including those who are more specialised with skills that they can offer. And we work very closely with them to ensure that in carrying out these operations, this is all done safely and securely.
In response to the Member's second question on accountability, as Minister Chee Hong Tat had mentioned earlier in his answer, investigations are ongoing, even as operations to clean-up are in their second phase. There is some more work to be done, so allow the investigation to run its course before we address the broader issue of accountability in different aspects.
Mr Melvin Yong.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two questions for Minister Chee.
First, I would like to ask how effective was the predictive modelling used by MPA when trying to predict where the oil spill would move, based on tidal predictions and real-time weather data, which would then have informed and guided their decisions on where to deploy the skimmers and the oil booms.
My second question is regarding one of my PQs, which asked whether the whole-of-Government response is coordinated with those of the non-governmental organisations (NGOs), including the volunteer groups. I think the Minister mentioned that there are regular oil spill exercises and the next one being in October this year. My question is, are these NGOs invited to participate in the exercises, including the volunteer groups; and if not, would they be invited to do so?
Mr Speaker, the modelling is one of the sources of information that MPA will use to try and locate where the oil that has been spilled will float to. But, as I mentioned earlier, we do not rely only on one source, because this is a highly fluid situation. Pardon the pun. It is evolving.
It is not something that, I think, any single source of information will give you the full picture. What MPA has done is to use a multi-pronged approach from drones, satellite imagery, modelling is one of the sources of info and the old-fashioned way, which is visual sighting by personnel at sea and also by our personnel who are on land, looking out for signs of the oil.
Can we further enhance the modelling? Certainly. I think that is one area where it is a continuous improvement process. We will be happy to work with researchers, with scientists, to see how we can take on board the learning points and further finetune our modelling.
The whole-of-Government approach and involving our industry partners that we do regularly, every two years, oil spill exercise; every two years, chemical spill exercise. That one, so far, has been more Government agencies plus industry players. The reason is because, it is dealing with the response out at sea; and also dealing with the use of different sources of information, running through different processes, looking at the different assets, the different kinds of vessels that you can use.
Do we want to involve the volunteers who would not likely go out to sea but more likely will be helping on land? I think that is something which we will be happy to take a look at together with the Ministry of National Development and MSE colleagues.
I think I have covered all those Members who have filed PQs on this. I will now move to the other Members. Ms Hazel Poa.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. There are many businesses that have been affected adversely by this oil spill incident. I am glad to hear from the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment that rental assistance is currently being discussed.
Apart from rental costs, businesses face other costs as well, for example, wages for their employees. Is the Government looking into possibly helping the small businesses further, for example, in seeking compensation and providing some financial schemes, like, bridging loans on preferential terms, to tie them over until they have received their compensation?
Thank you very much for the supplementary question. Here I am speaking, really, as the Minister-in-charge of Trade Relations, overseeing SDC as well as our tourism business. I would encourage businesses that have been affected, first of all, to start compiling the numbers, so that they can form a basis of claim. As I mentioned earlier in my speech, the person to contact, I think you can find it as public information.
Those that have agencies, whether it is NParks or SDC, as your landlords, I am sure they have already reached out to you. If you belong to a category that is affected and, yet, do not have a very strong land-based business on the affected beaches, I would suggest that you get in touch with SDC or the Singapore Tourism Board, so that we can look at your cases individually.
Different businesses are affected to different extents. Some of the businesses are completely unable to operate because they were operating sea-based activities, while others that are operating on the back shore of the beaches, they have been able to resume. Some of them have very much resumed to pre-spill days, some of them have not. So, I think we cannot take a standard approach or one-standard-solution for the businesses. Government agencies will be very prepared to listen to the plight of the businesses and see how we can best help them.
As Ms Hazel Poa has mentioned herself, there is always a solution, there is always the option of making a claim. We will see how we can help the businesses to bridge that cash flow problem in the interim process.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Thank you, Sir. I just want to follow on the question from the business side of things.
Minister Chee mentioned that there will always be lessons learned from each incident and I am sure post the incident, there will be further step-up measures. So, can I ask whether as the Transport Minister or the Minister-in-charge of Trade Relations, whether post the oil spill incident, would we see increase in the cost for shipping and in the maritime sectors in Singapore and hence any wider implications to the economy?
My second question is for the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment, whether the oil spill incident will have a bearing on our push to decarbonise the maritime sector? Whether, as the industry moves toward hydrogen and ammonia-powered ships, are we gearing up our capabilities to prevent as well as potentially deal with, the effects of allisions or collisions of such ships?
Mr Speaker, I will answer both questions.
The first question, the point that is important for us to bear in mind is: yes, there are some learning points that we can certainly look at incorporating into our processes and SOPs. That is something that we do after every incident, so that we benefit from the process of deriving the learning points that will enable us to deal with future incidents with greater confidence. Having said that, I think it is important for us to bear in mind that the overall response by our agencies, industry partners and volunteers to this oil spill on 14 June was a prompt and effective one.
Mr Liang asked about shipping costs. This is something which, precisely because our response to the oil spill was swift and effective, I think it did not damage our reputation as an international hub port and maritime centre.
First, MPA very quickly ensured that port and shipping operations were not affected on 14 June, soon after the allision occurred. So that ships could still come to our anchorages, call at our ports; cargo could still be loaded and unloaded; ships could still continue to have their supplies. So, port operations continued.
I do not think this incident will lead to an increase in shipping costs, because it is affecting two vessels in this case and not something that is structural or systemic. Unlike, for example, what is happening at the Red Sea, where that kind of incident, yes, that will affect global shipping costs, because ships have to then detour and go a longer distance.
So, in response to Mr Liang's question, I think we cannot 100% eliminate the risk of oil spills happening. But how we respond to the oil spills, I think that is how can differentiate Singapore from other ports around the world.
Mr Liang's second question is about the future, because we do have a plan to decarbonise our maritime sector. There are two parts to this. The harbour craft, which are the vessels that ply within our port waters, this can be done through a mix of electrification and also the use of biofuels. But if you talk about the larger ocean-going vessels – container ships, tankers – those, they cannot run on batteries. The alternatives that people are looking at would include liquefied natural gas (LNG) and newer types of fuels, like methanol, ammonia and, perhaps, even hydrogen.
I state in that order, because that is the level of readiness at this point in time for the global shipping industry. They have done some tests. With LNG, of course, it is the most well-established amongst all these different alternatives. Methanol, they have done some tests, but it is not quite ready for large-scale commercial deployment. We have done some tests as well with some of the industry players. Ammonia as well, we have done some initial pilots and tests.
Why we are doing all these tests and pilots, is because we need to confirm and understand the risks involved. Then, we can develop our safety protocols that, in the future, you have more ships now using ammonia or more ships now using methanol. How do we deal with those kinds of different types of fuel? Because the risks are quite different from a traditional oil spill.
Take ammonia, for example. If you have an ammonia leak, it will not be going into the water like an oil spill and then floating away, carried by tidal currents and waves. It may potentially go into the air and you have a plume cloud. And this is a very different kind of risk compared to how we deal with the conventional oil spills.
So, Mr Speaker, a more elaborate answer, but I think it is an important point to clarify because we remain committed to looking at how we can bring on board these newer fuels, because decarbonising the maritime industry remains our goal. But we want to find a way to do it safely, so that we are able to make progress.
Mr Gerald Giam.
Thank you, Sir, for your indulgence. Can I confirm that the Minister said just now, in response to my supplementary question, that the purpose of the containment boom around the damaged vessel is not meant to try to catch the oil that has already been spilt into the sea and that it is not the correct response to try and use the containment booms to fence in the oil around the damaged vessel? If so, what is the purpose of deploying containment booms?
The Minister said that, how we respond to oil spills can make a difference to our reputation around the world. Does the Minister not agree that the earlier the booms are deployed, the better? Because even if the booms cannot completely fence in the oil, they can prevent a large amount of the oil from spreading faster and this would reduce the amount and cost of the clean-up needed. So, are we looking to increasing our capacity for faster boom deployment in future oil spills?
Mr Speaker, I think we are having this exchange, but it is not my view versus Mr Giam's view. What I am sharing with Mr Giam is the international practice and the industry's response to oil spills. So, these are methods and processes that have been developed over the years by experts and this is how it is done internationally, not just in Singapore but also in other parts of the world. So, this is not an opinion that we are debating over. What I am sharing is the international practice.
But allow me to come back to the concern that Mr Giam raised, which is, the sooner you deploy, the better. There is no disagreement that faster is better. However, knowing that boom deployment requires time, even if you are able to do it very quickly – because the weather was good, it was daytime, you were able to do it more quickly – it is still going to have a time lag. And I hope Mr Giam understands that. From the point of the allision and the oil spilling in a large amount into the sea, by the time the booms are fully deployed, even under the best circumstances, there will be a gap. During this time, the oil would have floated away.
That is why the international industry practice is not to try and "fence in" the oil, because it is not practical. The oil would have floated away. It is to deal with what is remaining in the vessel, to prevent further spillage, in case it comes out, because there is no guarantee that the oil will stay inside the damaged vessel. It could spill again and, if in that scenario, when your boom is up, then, yes, you will be able to contain that amount of oil, the subsequent spillage, better.
But for the oil that has floated away, the international practice is to, as quickly as possible, try and locate where the oil is and then to be able to scoop it up, collect it. So, that was what was done. But as I explained earlier, it took some time before MPA and the contractors were able to confirm the location of the large oil patches.
They were only able to do so the next morning, on 15 June, due to bad weather on the first day, the initial part, and then subsequently because of nightfall. Various reasons made it more challenging. But when they discovered where the oil was, they very quickly deployed the oil skimmers to deal with it.
So, there is no disagreement with Mr Giam, that speed is important and faster is better. But I also hope that Mr Giam understands that, even under the best circumstances, some tasks are just not possible, not practical. In this case, it is not possible to try and "fence in" the oil around the damaged vessel because it has already been spilled and it will be carried by the currents and the waves away from the location side.
Alright, we have spent almost an hour on clarifications and I do not see any more hands being raised.
Order. End of Ministerial Statements. Introduction of Government Bills. Minister for Home Affairs.
PAPERCUTS