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

The Chairman: Head L, Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment. Ms Poh Li San.

7.00 pm

National Adaptation Plan

Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Mr Chairman, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head L of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

The climate is a two-faced problem, global commons but local impact. In the latter, Singapore stands out in the world for being prepared to commit public funds today, to ensure the homes and jobs of tomorrow.

Let me start off with Terminal 5 at Changi Airport as an example. T5 will be built on land topped up to 5.5 metres above main sea level, higher than the rest of Singapore. Meanwhile off Pulau Tekong, we have reclaimed a space the size of two Toa Payoh towns for military use. The Tekong Polder is 1.2 metres below sea level and protected by six metres seawalls.

And to remind ourselves what long-term planning means, the "Long Island" project was first mooted in the 1991 concept plan 30 years ago as an integrated plan to protect the East Coast with an integrated mix of projects to ensure coastal flood protection, rainwater harvesting and land supply.

These are all novel ideas, underwritten by billions in Government commitment to protect our low-lying areas and ensure Singapore's continued place in a changing climatic world.

I must stress that I support our spending on these long-term problems because the time to build and prepare for the future, is now and today. The problems are real and urgent even as they are long-term and appear distant and far away.

As human beings, we are all subject to the bias of long-term discounting. How can people care about long-term plans if we do not have enough for our daily lives now? Spending on the National Adaptation Plan can feel disconnected with our needs today. Put bluntly, many of us simply do not care about these plans.

Hence, I would like to ask the Ministry how it intends to engage the public on the need for such adaptation infrastructure? How will the National Adaptation Plan build climate literacy and awareness within the community to foster a culture of climate resilience?

Second, we implement these policies based on best current knowledge. I have also said that the Government has adopted novel solutions. Here, I would like to ask on the progress on Climate Science. What partnerships has the Ministry established with international climate research institutions to strengthen Singapore's climate science capabilities? How is Singapore enhancing its climate monitoring and forecasting capabilities to better understand local climate impacts and inform adaptation decisions?

Climate change will impact us in many ways. How about underground spaces? If rainfall becomes too heavy, will our current drainage, crest and pump system still suffice to keep out rainwater and floodwater out? Do we expect building owners to do more to reinforce their infrastructure, like the case of Coastal Protection?

Mr Chairman, I have spoken about the need to spend today for tomorrow and to convince Singaporeans that this is as a matter of national and fiscal responsibility. I have also asked for a holistic consideration of how science and evidence is brought to our service. Together, these will help Singaporeans like me, who want to support climate spending, to understand how and why we are doing so, and the careful consideration that goes into spending every dollar, of the billions in public monies committed for the future.

Question proposed.

Island Systems Resilience

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, as an island nation, Singapore's safety and sustainability is closely linked to the health of our coastal, water and marine ecosystems. Climate change places going pressure on these interconnected systems. Rising sea levels affect coastal protection. More intense rainfall test flood resilience and warming seas affect aquaculture stability.

I would like to seek the Ministry's views in two main areas. First, on flood resilience.

We have observed increased in average annual rainfall and the frequency of heavy rainfall with annual rainfall rising about 83 millimetre per decade since 1980. Whilst Singapore has progressively upgraded drainage infrastructure, it is neither practical nor cost effective to size drains for the most extreme storm events only. As rainfall intensities are projected to increase, some residual flood risks may need to be managed at community level during extreme events. Could the Ministry share how Singapore strengthening community flood resilience, including public preparedness and local response capabilities in flood-prone areas? Will the Ministry consider a map perhaps, or improved alert system?

Secondly, on climate resilience, agricultural and food resilience. As of 2023, Singapore had 98 sea-based and 33 land-based seafood farms. Most farms are concentrated in near shore coastal waters, where sea space and environmental conditions impact farm viability. Could the Ministry provide an update on recent trends in the number of aquacultural farms, including any consolidation or exit and what the trend might indicate about the sustainability of the sector. These coastal farms are highly sensitive to surrounding marine conditions and have experienced environmental stresses. Could the Ministry share how aquacultural farms are transitioning towards climate resilience systems, such as hybrid or re-circulating agricultural technologies as well as the take-up rates of support schemes, the extent of transition across the sector and any key challenges in scaling the adoption of such technologies.

Beyond productivity improvements, sustained demand for local produce matters. To boost local demand amidst import competition, I understand the Ministry work with industry partners to establish an industry level supply and demand aggregator. Could the Ministry provide an assessment of its effectiveness in strengthening demand for local produce and plans to further support market development? How else can the public be engaged?

Climate pressures across our water do not operate in silos. As risks intensify, adaptation will become more complex and costly. If our island city state is to be resilient, we must strengthen the integrity of our systems from infrastructure to industry to individuals.

Climate Adaptation Capability Building

Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi (Nee Soon): Chairman, climate change poses a serious and undeniable challenge for Singapore, carrying profound consequences for both present and future generations. As stewards of today's resources, we bear the responsibility of ensuring a sustainable and habitable environment for future Singaporeans.

Singapore's Third Climate Change Study (V3) provides climate projections for Singapore and the region, attempting to cover the present till the end of the century. Even as we take a science-based approach to climate adaptation, informed by climate projections, there will surely be some margin of error and a range of uncertainty for these projections. Among other factors, they are contingent on the world's carbon emissions. Given the uneven pace of emissions reductions globally, we could indeed face adverse climate impacts earlier than projected, and with more devastating and extreme effects than initially anticipated.

Therefore, we must continue to adapt. A key part to this adaptation is to build our capabilities today to be climate resilient, in order to safeguard our country and our people.

First, how is Singapore enhancing its climate monitoring and forecasting capabilities so that we can have more accurate projections, as well as anticipate the effects of climate change, such as extreme weather events before they occur? How would the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) harness the latest technologies to support our efforts? Has the Ministry explored leveraging on AI to enhance Singapore's climate resilience initiatives to sharpen our projections?

I imagine that the work of climate monitoring and forecasting depends on a multitude of factors that can have many permutations and combinations, with potentially extreme consequences if we do not read the forecast right. I imagine that the time is ripe for AI to be included in such work and there is much to be harnessed in this regard.

Second, the immediate impacts of climate change are indeed already felt by the public and these have implications on further outcomes, such as health and well-being. For example, undertaking prolonged outdoor activities, such as outdoor work or school physical education lessons when there is high heat stress, could increase the risk of heat-related injuries. As we enhance our weather forecasting capabilities, how can we better equip the public with timely information to make proactive and informed decisions on their daily activities, in an effort that protect their well-being against the backdrop of extreme weather changes?

Heat Resilience

Mr Ng Shi Xuan (Sembawang): Chairman, heat resilience is not just an environmental issue. It is a public health, productivity and infrastructure issue.

Agencies have already taken practical steps. The Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) Workplace Safety and Health Council has strengthened heat stress management guidelines for outdoor workers. The Ministry of National Development (MND) has piloted cool coatings and incorporated urban design measures to enhance airflow and reduce heat build-up in estates. MSE is advancing long-term adaptation through measures such as coastal protection.

These are important efforts. But rising temperatures cut across Ministries, sectors and systems. We should now move towards a more coordinated framework.

In the battery industry, every additional degree of operating temperature reduces performance and lifespan. Similarly, higher ambient heat can accelerate infrastructure wear, increase cooling loads and reduce workers' productivity across sectors.

I suggest three areas for a coordinated approach.

First, anchor a cross-Ministry heat resilience framework that aligns workplace heat stress guidelines with building design standards, estate planning and industrial operations. MOM, MSE, MND and the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) should move in step, so that worker safety, urban design and economic productivity are treated as part of the same system. Second, scale passive cooling as a baseline strategy. Third, strengthen digital heat monitoring.

To operationalise this, we can pilot a heat-resilient industrial precinct or campus. Within one defined zone, we integrate heat stress guidelines, passive cooling design, airflow planning and sensor-based monitoring. Importantly, we measure not just workers' productivity outcomes, but also infrastructure durability, maintenance frequency and energy consumption. This allows us to quantify the economic impact of adaptation, not just the environmental benefits.

Coastal protection safeguards our long-term national assets and heat resilience will safeguard both our people and our economic systems. A coordinated, cross-Ministry approach will ensure we adapt systematically and not in silos.

Heat Resilience for Vulnerable Groups

Mr David Hoe (Jurong East-Bukit Batok): Chairman, I would like to speak on heat resilience, with a specific focus on vulnerable groups. While the weather for the past two months has been generally cool and pleasant, we must acknowledge that for the majority of the year and for the foreseeable future, heat will continue to be an issue.

For many Singaporeans, hot weather will continue to be our daily lived reality, but the burden is not evenly shared. Children, seniors, residents living in smaller flats with less ventilation or households without air-conditioning will feel the impact of high heat temperatures more severely. Outdoor workers, including Singaporeans and migrant workers in construction, landscaping and also food delivery roles, will face prolonged exposure to heat and rain as part of their livelihoods.

In building a heat resilient Singapore for our vulnerable groups, I have three suggestions.

First, on public guidance. The good news is this. We already have heat stress advisories and that is a good foundation. But the guidance can be made more accessible and more targeted.

The question we must ask ourselves is this – who is vulnerable to heat, and do they know about such advisories? Knowing is one thing. Are they able to digest the information? This is especially important for children and also the elderly, who may experience health impacts at lower heat thresholds than healthy adults. In particular, we must also ask ourselves whether these advisories are age-appropriate and are they easy to act on? For example, if a child or a senior were to look and to read them, would they be able to say, "Oh, I know when to do what and what I should do?"

Accessibility and awareness also depend on language and channels of communication. We should translate key guidance into major languages and given the target profile that I mentioned, it should not be too wordy or technical. Such information should be placed in places where it is visible, for example, our schools, community touchpoints, common areas, lift lobbies and hawker centres.

Given that our young, seniors and also migrant workers spend time on social media, we should also disseminate relevant information on such channels. This is especially important because in the period of April to July, because that is where heat is the most intense in Singapore.

Second, allow me to move to household vulnerability. Heat resilience plans should clearly prioritise those with few coping options. So, one practical way is to prioritise micro-interventions to reduce heat exposure in places that people actually spend time. This could include sheltered and ventilated linkways, cooler waiting areas near common facilities and heat mitigation for common corridors and lift lobbies where residents gather.

7.15 pm

I would also ask MSE and the National Environment Agency (NEA) to consider working together with the Housing and Development Board (HDB) and Town Council to identify what I call “hotspot blocks” using simple indicators. For example, blocks with poor cross-ventilation, blocks where there are few or no air-conditioned areas such as Community Centres, libraries or shopping malls within a short walk and implement micro-interventions.

Third, we need better data to target interventions where risk is highest. It would be useful to publish more information on heat exposure and heat-related incidents. In particular, our outdoor workers deserve attention. Many outdoor workers cannot choose to avoid peak heat hours.

If we are able to develop a baseline estimate of outdoor heat exposure across sectors, this would help us to strengthen our support for those who are facing higher heat risks. This could include sector-specific guidelines, more enforcement in construction sites, or practical resources such as having rest areas, hydration access and work-rest protocols that account for real operating conditions.

Heat and Water Resiliency

Ms Valerie Lee (Pasir Ris-Changi): I would like to first declare that I have been an employee for an energy and utilities company that operates industrial wastewater and NEWater assets. Chairman, heat and water shapes our national conversation. One presses upon us daily. The other sustains us silently.

Heat shapes how our children play, how seniors exercise and how workers commute. Water underpins every household, hawker centre, hospital and industry. These are not abstract matters and these are daily realities affecting comfort, health and economic resilience.

The Government has done well through the National Heat Resilience Strategy which manifests in country-wide manuals like the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) Draft Master Plan 2025 to tackle urban heat, and mandatory water recycling for water intensive projects from 2024 to enhance water resiliency. But more can be done and I will first speak on heat resiliency, then water resiliency.

Singapore's mean surface air temperature has risen about 0.25°C per decade between 1948 and 2024, roughly double the rate of global warming. We now face days constantly above 34°C and warmer nights. Heat affects sleep, productivity and long-term health. Children dehydrate faster and regulate body temperature less effectively. Seniors face risks of heat stress, cardiovascular strain and hospitalisation. This is not merely discomfort. It is a liveability issue.

I would like to ask how the Ministry is working with MND, the Ministry of Transport (MOT) and other agencies to strengthen the whole-of-Government heat adaptation plan. What novel solutions is the Ministry studying? Is the Government focused on cool pavements, reflective materials and putting data-driven heat mapping for vulnerable estates to good use?

I would like to offer a proposal. First, extend covered walkways from high-density residential or commuter points to transport nodes, working towards a 100% coverage. Second, we should provide fundings to ensure all playgrounds and fitness stations, including existing ones, have overhead canopy shelter using heat safe materials such as tensile fabric membranes. Outdoor play for children and active ageing for seniors can then be an achievable national reality.

If heat is our daily pressure, water is our strategic safeguard, and I have a soft spot for any topic related to water, having begun my first full-time job as an industrial wastewater plant engineer and witnessing the opening of the first large-scale NEWater plant in Changi East more than 16 years ago.

My career journey reminds me how innovative we have been as a nation with our water strategy despite limited land and no natural aquifers. Much has been said about the Four National Taps, but may I ask the Ministry to update this House on our latest water strategy, considering climate change? Has dependency among the Four Taps shifted? What proportion of water comes from each source today, compared with 10 years ago?

Also, we often discuss how we obtain water, but less about how much we lose. May I ask what Singapore's recorded water loss rate is over the past two years, and how it compares internationally? I have received reports from the Management Corporations Strata Title (MCSTs) I care for about burst pipes, suspected to be linked to nearby national construction projects. What safeguards has the Ministry done to prevent infrastructure damage and reduce non-revenue water loss? Water resiliency is not only about diversifying supply. It is also about protecting every drop that we produce.

Chairman, heat resilience requires upstream design. Water resilience requires upstream planning. Both demand anticipation and coordination. By planning ahead for cooler neighbourhoods and secure water systems, we protect our children, seniors and our future. Singapore has thrived by preparing early. So let us continue that tradition with clarity and with resolve.

Reliable Long-term Recycling Operations

Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik (Sengkang): Sir, our recycling rates fell to their lowest point in 2024. As we launched the Beverage Container Return Scheme this year, we have a critical opportunity to harmonise and strengthen our entire recycling infrastructure. The challenges run deeper than contamination alone. While construction and demolition waste achieved 99% recycling rates, household recycling rates tells a different story.

According to NEA's 2024 statistics, only 5% of plastic is recycled and 8% of glass. Much of what enters our blue bins is incinerated or exported rather than truly recycled. We need a multifaceted approach.

First, leverage Government procurement power to create guarantee demand for recycled materials. Expanding our existing green procurement frameworks to mandate minimum recycled content in construction materials, packaging and office supplies would provide the certainty recycling operators need for investment. This market signal would ripple across the private sector.

Second, I welcome NEA's exploration of extending Extended Producer Responsibility to broader packaging waste, particularly plastics, which constitute a third of our domestic waste. Paired with mandated recycle content requirements, this would address the economic barriers that currently make only 5% plastic recycling viable.

Third, upgrade our blue bin system progressively through pilots in new estates. Introducing organic waste segregation first supported by smart bins with contamination sensors. Singapore's zero waste ambition requires recycling that actually recycles. Our citizens deserve a system with environmental integrity and economic viability.

Collection of Recyclables by Public Waste Collectors

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): After years of public education on the importance of recycling, more Singaporean families now make it a point to decontaminate and sort their recyclables before depositing them at the blue recycling bins located near their HDB blocks. However, some practical problems persist for housing estates where the smaller 660-litre recycling bins on wheels are deployed.

Appointed waste collectors already undertake collections three times a week. For the estates where the larger side loading recycling bins are located, collection is scheduled for twice a week. These larger bins fill up quickly, even outside the festive season. This is partly driven by the growth of online shopping and the increased disposal of packaging material from online purchases. When bins overflow and recyclables are left exposed for longer, the prospects for recyclable contamination increases. What were perfectly recyclable items in and around the bin at the point of disposal, can be rendered unrecyclable.

As an ecosystem, such developments can undermine the very recycling behaviour we have worked hard to cultivate. What metrics does NEA use to determine whether appointed public waste collectors should increase collection frequency for the larger bins? While I understand that NEA can mandate additional collections on an ad hoc basis, does the Ministry not agree that more frequent collection must keep pace with improved and more widespread recycling habits among residents?

Moving the Needle for Our Greener Future

Ms Lee Hui Ying (Nee Soon): Mr Chair, over the past months, my residents and fellow Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) Members of Parliament (MPs) have taught me that sustainability is not just a policy goal: it is a way of life.

From our Nee Soon Green Fest to our zero-waste initiatives, we see what is possible when people take ownership. Nationally, the upcoming National Adaptation Plan will push this agenda even further. But feedback from the ground is clear: we can and must do better.

Our recycling rates are improving, but yet contamination of blue bins, especially with food waste, remains a persistent problem. Too many recyclables end up as trash. With Semakau Island filling up, every avoidable bag of waste is not just trash. It is a countdown to the day we run out of space. So upstream waste reduction is critical.

I have the following questions.

First, will the Ministry consider widening the Resource Sustainability Act and the Good Samaritan Food Donation Act's scope to introduce stronger upstream waste reduction obligations and improve data reporting requirements to better support circular outcomes? Are there plans to set mandatory packaging waste reduction targets, rather than relying mainly on recycling rates?

Second, what are the public consultation plans for the National Adaptation Plan and what measurable indicators will assess impact at the community level?

Third, we celebrate businesses that cut emissions for quick wins, but too often, adaptation, the very investments that would shield us from floods, heatwaves and other climate shocks, is ignored. Why? Because the returns are long-term, less visible and harder to measure. How will the private sector be incentivised to invest meaningfully in the adaptation measures?

If we do not rebalance mitigation and adaptation, we risk building a future that looks good on paper but falters under real climate stress.

Overcoming Plastics Recycling Challenges

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Singapore's overall recycling rate remains above 50%, but this figure is stabilised by industrial waste streams that are almost fully recycled. Beyond that headline, the picture weakens quickly. Plastics are now the largest waste stream by volume, yet our plastic recycling rate has fallen significantly from 11% in 2013 to a mere 4.6% in 2024.

It is estimated that the manufacturing of plastics consumes the same amount of fossil fuel as the entire aviation industry, and at the same time used plastics. Used plastics can hold a high economic value if recycled. Why manufacture new plastics and increase our carbon footprint when we can reuse recycled ones? With the climate warming and Semakau expected to be full by 2035, our margin for error is narrow.

This gap between headline performance and material outcomes points to a deeper structural issue. A study by Singapore Environmental Council found that waste managers see it as economically challenging to recycle plastics because there is no local demand for it. They concluded that plastics recycling rates will not change unless the demand for recycled plastic increases. At the same time, Singapore's recycling system is highly exposed to global market conditions.

When demand for recycled materials weakens, when freight costs rise, or when importing countries tighten contamination rules, exporting recyclables become expensive or unavailable. This was most evident following China's national salt policy and similar measures elsewhere. In such conditions, market actors respond rationally by choosing the cheapest available option, which is often incineration.

Incineration reduces landfill volume, but plastics are fossil fuel-based and their combustion releases fossil carbon into the atmosphere. Because these emissions are accounted for as waste disposal, rather than climate impact, poor plastics recovery can be offset rhetorically by energy recovery. The material outcome, however, is the destruction of recyclable plastics and a continued reliance on new manufactured plastics.

This creates a risk that incineration is presented as environmental performance when the outcome is that more fossil fuel may be consumed while sustaining a reality where incentives to improve recycling remain weak.

If we truly want to transit to a circular economy as laid out by the Singapore Green Plan, it is imperative that we build an ecosystem that sustains recycling even when external market conditions deteriorate.

We must continue to find ways to reduce our reliance on incineration when plastics recycling ceases to be commercially viable.

We can consider expanding extended producer responsibility beyond beverage containers to cover all packaging, including e-commerce mailers and food delivery containers, building on mandatory packaging reporting. This would shift costs upstream, improve packaging design and fund the collection and sorting capacity needed for meaningful recycling.

To create demand for recycled plastics, the Government can also mandate that plastic bottles, packaging and goods must contain a minimum percentage of recycled plastics. Such a practice has been mandated by the European Union, as well as the state of California. The Government can also use public procurement as a market anchor. Schools, hospitals and agencies can build demand by only purchasing plastic bins, road barriers, pipes and park furniture made from recycled plastic.

For example, Switzerland's Swiss Plastic Pipe Recycling Initiative is working to establish a take-back and recycling system for plastic pipes used in civil engineering and building construction. There is strong potential for recycled plastics to become a strategic material —

7.30 pm

The Chairman: Ms Hany Soh.

Support Green Sustainable Lifestyle

Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Chairman, as we navigate the challenges of climate change, it is imperative that we, as a community, take collective action to build a more resilient and eco-conscious Singapore. Our efforts today are directed towards securing a livable environment for our future generations.

Before Budget 2026, as part of our regular People's Action Party Climate Action Group outreach engagements, my GPC Parliamentary colleagues, Ms Poh Li San, Mr David Hoe and I jointly organised an event based on the theme "Sustainability Living: Creating Zero Waste and a Circular Economy". It was a robust discussion session with over 30 climate activists, community leaders and stakeholders who came together to discover existing measures as well as new ways for us to foster sustainability in our daily lives.

From the lively discussions and brainstorming, what we have gleaned is this: to convince Singaporeans to adopt green habits that minimise generation of waste, energy consumption, and water usage, three key pillars must undergird our efforts and policies. One, increasing education; two, improving infrastructure; and three, enhancing incentives.

While sustainability is a global mission, the Singapore way has to be one that is “Made to Measure” and “Measure to Manage," for our unique urban context, with clear metrics to track progress and refine our approaches as we continue on this unceasing sustainability journey. We need targeted and a range of policies that would in aggregate resonate with and manage everyday Singaporeans.

Against this backdrop, I raise several questions for MSE’s response today. First, on the effectiveness of the Disposable Carrier Bag Charge (DCBC). Introduced in mid-2023 at larger supermarkets, this initiative has already shown promising results, with at least large supermarket operators having reported a reduction in bag usage by up to 80%. This nudge has encouraged many to bring reusable bags, cutting down on plastic waste that clog our landfills and oceans. However, as we approach the three-year anniversary of the DCBC, I would like to ask the Ministry: What is the latest data on the scheme's overall effectiveness in reducing disposable bag consumption across Singapore? What lessons can we apply to broader waste reduction efforts?

Second, regarding climate vouchers under the Climate Friendly Households Programme. This scheme has been a valuable tool, providing vouchers for energy and water efficient appliances, and it was recently enhanced with an additional $100, bringing the total to $400 per eligible household and extended to private properties until 31 December 2027.

It is heartening to see such incentives making sustainable choices more accessible. Drawing inspiration from innovative local programmes like the Northwest CDC’s Green Homes at Northwest, which rewards residents with up to $500 in e-vouchers for adopting eco-friendly practices such as using climate vouchers for high-efficiency appliances, I propose MSE considers how we can build on this momentum.

Can the Ministry share whether the climate vouchers scheme will continue beyond 2027, or if a nationwide version akin to Green Homes at Northwest,perhaps with tiered rewards for multiple green actions, could be rolled out to amplify incentivisation and education across all districts in Singapore?

Third, the upcoming Beverage Container Return Scheme (BCRS) set to launch on 1 April 2026. This deposit-refund system for plastic and metal beverage containers, managed by BCRS Ltd, promises to boost recycling rates with a 10-cent refund per container returned at over 1,000 reverse vending machines islandwide at launch, aiming to double that within the first year.

By making producers responsible and consumers active participants, it addresses waste at its source while improving recycling infrastructure. To ensure its success, can the Ministry provide more details on how the scheme will be operationalised, including management of unredeemed deposits and strategies to garner widespread support from Singaporeans through education campaigns and accessible return points?

The BCRS may only be as successful with the public’s support. However, as we have heard the views of affected proprietors and feedback from consumers, the greatest challenge that needs to be overcome is in my opinion getting everybody on board.

Finally, as we mark the 6th anniversary of the SG Eco Fund this year, launched in 2020 with $50 million to back community-driven sustainability projects, the fund has empowered numerous initiatives, from small-scale "Sprout" grants now permanently capped at $30,000 to larger endeavours.

This milestone is a testament to ground-up action. Does the Ministry have plans to expand the fund's scope, perhaps by increasing overall funding, introducing new categories for climate adaptation, or partnering with more sectors to spur even greater participation across all segments of society?

In closing, embracing a green sustainable lifestyle is not just about policies – it is about empowering every Singaporean to make a difference. By prioritising education, bolstering infrastructure and enhancing incentives, we can measure our progress and manage our resources wisely.

Food Security, Resilience and Safety

Ms Poh Li San: Mr Chairman, thank you for allowing me to speak on this important topic. First, we note that Singapore has shifted from "30 by 30" to Food Story 2.0. It is no great stretch of reasoning to surmise that this is because the original goal is thought to be out of reach – to fail to reach a target, by itself, is not a great failure. In policy making, as it is in sports, and in life, stretched targets are important.

At the same time, there are two important differences. First, benchmarking. 30% of our food needs by 2030, cannot have been a target based on a simple gimmick of two numbers. It must have been made based on some policy assumptions. Can the Minister tell us what among its initial assumptions failed? These include – first, what lessons are learnt from the failures of businesses in big-scale urban farms and plant proteins? What can MSE do differently now to step up local produce?

Second, the new food targets are different compared to the past in that they are more targeted to specific food types. For example by 2035, for us to produce 20% of our fibre needs and 30% of our proteins. Can the Minister explain how these targets have emerged. For example, are they due to the specifics of Singapore’s land size and our comparative advantages? Again, targets must be set based on specific and objective assumptions, and it would be useful to hear from the Minister what these are.

Last, even as we strive towards these new targets, we must remember that most of our food remains imports. Can I ask the Minister about our food source diversification and global partnerships? Fresh, air-flown food has become increasingly expensive. While those with deep pockets will continue to enjoy a wide variety of fresh foods, the average Singaporean may have to restrict themselves and change their diets. We do not need to ensure that everyone has asparagus and truffles, but we do want to make sure that fresh fish and vegetables are not out of reach for most homes. How would MSE address this issue?

Last, while almost all the food in Singapore is imported and people are complaining about high food cost, Singapore produces more than 800,000 tonnes of food waste every year. When I say “produce”, I mean we waste the food that we have bought, cooked and flown halfway across the world on very expensive trade routes. This is an expensive irony. Even as MSE works out a strategy to procure more food, we must at the same time, waste less. Can the Minister tell us of plans and efforts to reduce food waste?

Food Security

Mr Ng Shi Xuan (Sembawang): Chairman, I would like to speak on three of the four pillars of our Singapore Food Story 2.0, diversifying imports, global partnerships and growing local. I would also like to declare my interest as someone on a plant-based diet.

First, I would like to seek clarification on how diversifying our imports and global partnerships differ in practice. Diversification spreads sourcing risk across multiple countries and suppliers. Global partnerships appear to go deeper, involving structured agreements, upstream cooperation and mechanisms that can be activated during disruptions.

The Minister has cited examples such as the rice MOUs with Vietnam and Thailand, and the Brunei-Singapore Agri-Tech Food Zone, which will strengthen trade assurance beyond normal commercial transactions. This reminds me of my days as a junior officer in Enterprise Singapore working on the Singapore-Sino Jilin Food Zone. We successfully brought Jilin rice into Singapore. However, replicating similar structured flows across other food categories proved more complex.

This raises two practical questions. First, how do we assess whether a global partnership extends beyond a single category of products? If a partnership secures supply for one staple commodity, does it meaningfully support diversification efforts across other food types such as protein, fresh produce or processed foods?

Second, what threshold qualifies an arrangement as a “global partnership”? Clarifying this will help us understand whether our partnerships are commodity-specific arrangements, or broader strategic platforms that can support food resilience across multiple segments.

On growing local, we have focused largely on eggs and fish. These remain important. But I would also encourage us to continue strengthening our position in plant-based and alternative proteins. Global investment in this sector has slowed and adoption has been uneven. However, from a food resilience perspective, plant-based and alternative proteins remain strategically relevant. Controlled-environment fermentation and novel protein production require limited land and are less exposed to climate variability. This allows us to move from grow local to produce local even within our land constraints.

Food resilience is not only about having enough food in terms of quantity. It is also about nutritional stability, particularly the reliability of our protein supply. If we clarify how diversification and global partnerships work together, and continue to invest in future protein capability, we can strengthen both immediate supply resilience and long-term strategic depth.

Singapore Food Story – Are We on Track?

Ms Lee Hui Ying: Mr Chair, in November last year, it is with a measure of regret that we note the "30 by 30" goal – producing 30% of our nutritional needs by 2030 – has been replaced with revised targets for 2035. We understand the pragmatism behind this decision. Our local agri-food sector has faced severe headwinds. We have seen high-tech farms shut down and a quarter of our sea-based farms exit the industry in 2024 due to rising costs. The statistics are sobering: in 2024, we produced only 8% of our fibre and 26% of our protein.

However, while the timeline has shifted, the urgency has not. We face a global environment where supply chains are increasingly vulnerable to disruption. In this context, strengthening our local food capabilities is not just an economic ambition – it is a strategic necessity for our survival.

I have three questions to the Minister.

First, beyond the feasibility study on the new multi-tenant facility, how will the Ministry further support our existing local food producers to succeed even in spite of high costs? Are there plans to help them access better financing or technology to ensure both survival and ability to scale?

Second, I understand 11 agencies are currently required to approve a plan for commercial farming. Will the Minister also consider allocating resources towards engagement of food producers to provide them with support to meet regulatory guidelines and requirements? Will there be a review to identify if it would be possible to streamline regulatory processes?

Third, achieving our food security goals requires an "all-hands-on-deck" approach. By setting aside more community spaces into community plots and growing public interest in community farming, we can not only supplement our food supply but also strengthen our "we first" Singapore spirit, engaging our citizens directly in stewardship of our food security.

The Story behind Singapore Food Story

Mr Cai Yinzhou (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Before 1940s, Teochew-run kelongs accounted for nearly half of almost 400 sea farms. Today, this heritage is at a crossroads. Between 2023 and 2024 alone, we lost a quarter of open cage fish farms and 74 remain. As a Teochew-Nang and all of us as residents of Pulau Ujong, or what some call Mainland Singapore, the nautical way of life is close to our nation’s heart.

Recently, I visited open cage fish farmers offshore with fellow PAP MP Valerie Lee. Farmers shared that while they can meet production targets, they struggle to compete with cheaper imports.

To ensure our farms thrive and as follow up to Parliamentary Questions I have filed, I have three suggestions.

7.45 pm

The first, in supporting public accessibility, I note that visits to sea-farms are "not encouraged" due to biosecurity concerns. Will the Government provide technical and financial support to help farms meet these standards? Managed public access is a vital tool for education and brand-building.

Second is tracking the aquaculture talent pipeline. Aquaculture programmes are in ITE, Temasek Polytechnic, Republic Polytechnic, Nanyang Polytechnic and James Cook University (JCU). But Singapore Food Agency (SFA) currently does not collect data on the proportion or age of local sea-farm workers from relevant Institutes of Higher Learning (IHL) or continuing education and training (CET) programmes. I ask the Ministry to reconsider. Without this data, we cannot address the long-term manpower resilience of the sector.

Third, will the Ministry partner with Singapore Tourism Board (STB) and National Heritage Board (NHB) to integrate sea farms into heritage and tourism products? Telling the story behind our food can drive local demand necessary for food security.

Chairman, if sea-based farming is a pillar of our resilience, we must protect its viability. In 10 years, will open-cage fish farming remain part of our food story or merely our history?

Singapore Hawker and Food Story 2.0

Mr Foo Cexiang (Tanjong Pagar): Chairman, I declare my interest working in the supply chain sector.

In November 2025, Minister Grace Fu unveiled the Singapore Food Story 2.0. She highlighted how MSE will enhance Singapore's food security through the four pillars of diversifying imports, growing local, stockpiling and forming global partnerships. I was encouraged by the refreshed strategy. It is hard-nosed and practical. However, I believe for these strategies to be to be successful, we will need to forge a strong alliance between our food and supply chain logistics sectors. Let me explain.

First, we have to go beyond diversified imports to diversified imports with integrated logistics. Our efforts to diversify our food sources will only be as successful as our ability to transport them safely to Singapore. For many products, a new source is useless if the cold chain breaks. Therefore, I suggest that the Government support the set-up of shared digital platforms where importers and logistics providers are able to track "source contamination risks", work out alternative sources and transport pathways to Singapore, in real-time.

Second, going beyond growing local to growing local costs effectively through shared infrastructure. To make our high-tech farms commercially viable, we will need shared plug-and-play logistics hubs that consolidate cold storage and first-mile, last-mile distribution. This will help to bring down distribution cost for producers and make our local produce much more cost competitive.

Third, going beyond stockpiling to innovative stockpiling. Our strategic stockpiling of rice and proteins relies on the ability of the supply chain partners because they are the guardians of the reserves. We should encourage our food producers, retailers and supply chain partners to work together, to develop innovative technologies and strategies that enable our food to last longer, while also generating less waste.

And finally, going beyond developing global partnerships to transforming Singapore into the regional distribution centre for high-value food. We should leverage our world class port-infrastructure and invite food firms to use Singapore as their re-export base, where products are processed, certified by SFAs standards and redistributed across the region. This will give us strategic leverage and early-access visibility to global food flows that others lack.

Mr Chair, as we develop Our Food Story 2.0, I believe it is time to build our hawker story too.

Sir, while not highlighted as much as for public housing and public transport, much of our food in our public hawker centres is supported by the Government, through rental policies and productivity grants. The Government also invests significantly to build and upgrade hawker centres, without recovering the costs from Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres (SEHC) operators or stall owners.

Our pioneer hawkers, who currently still make up around 30% of cooked food stallholders, pay heavily subsidised rent at about $300 per month. This is part of the social compact between the Government and our people, and our hawker centres and culture have become a central part of our national identity.

Sir, this House debated hawker culture in Singapore extensively in 2024. I was not in the House then. But I would like to raise two points that I believe will influence our hawker culture in the decade to come.

First, while our pioneer hawkers still make up 30% of cooked food stallholders, this proportion will drop sharply over the next decade as they age. There will be a cliff effect. Many of them are already operating their stalls with the help of their family members, relatives or stall assistants.

In 2024, then-Senior Minister of State for MSE Mr Koh Poh Koon said that the stalls of our pioneer hawkers can be transferred to immediate family members at the same low rent of about $300 per month. I would like to clarify if this low rent will be extended to subsequent renewals by the family member, or if subsequent three-yearly renewals will be subjected to the market rent, for which the median rent is around $1,250? If it is the latter, then it must follow that the average or mean rent of our hawker stalls will go up over the next decade, because 30% of stalls is a substantive proportion, and the jump from $300 to $1,250 is more than a four-fold increase.

Sir, I have several pioneer hawkers in my constituency of Tanjong Pagar-Tiong Bahru. Their children, who are now also in their 50s to 60s, have come to me. They want to take over the stalls from their parents but are worried of the rental spike when they do so.

I understand that it is not realistic or practical to expect the rents of these stalls to be retained at $300 in perpetuity. However, I would like to seek MSE's consideration to stretch out the rental increase over a much longer period. For example, rather than a sharp jump from $300 to $1,250 in three years, could we stretch it out over 12 years instead?

Second, manpower. Since 2025, National Environment Agency (NEA) has allowed hawkers to hire long-term visit pass (LTVP) and LTVP+ holders.

Mr Chair, I appreciate the expansion of the pool of stall assistants. However, my view is that as long as the head of the stall is a Singaporean, physically present daily at the stall and producing familiar hawker food, it does not matter as much the nationality of his or her stall assistant.

Hence, to further support our long-serving hawkers manage their manpower needs and costs, I urge MSE to re-consider allowing work permit holders to work as stall assistants in our hawker centres, for stalls that have been operating for more than 10 years. Ultimately, the familiarity that all Singaporeans seek most in our hawker centres is the food, not the stall assistant.

Improving Hawker Food Affordability

Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, earlier this year, the Government announced that participation in the budget meal programme by HDB coffeeshops would no longer be mandatory, citing feedback from patrons and hawkers. I believe this is a step in the right direction, amidst rising operational costs and long working hours, providing budget meals, eat away at the already thin profit margins of our hawkers, who often have to compromise budget meals' nutritional value to compensate for their diminished profit margins.

Nonetheless, stallholders in SEHCs continue to offer such value meals as centre operators are required to ensure the availability of affordable meal options. It was also revealed last year that stallholders at Bukit Canberra were contractually bound to provide free meals for low-income residents at their expense, although this was subsequently scrapped. Further, the discounts offered to Pioneer Generation (PG), Merdeka Generation and certain CHAS cardholders are absorbed by the hawkers themselves.

Although many Singaporeans feel the pinch of rising hawker food prices, it is unfair for our hawkers to shoulder the direct responsibility for providing affordable meals. As I have shared in my speech on the hawker Motion in 2024, the Government could provide discounts for lower-income Singaporeans based on their CHAS card type. As it is, cardholders who present their CHAS card at the participating eatery would be able to receive a discount on their food, the quantum of which corresponds to the colour of their CHAS card, whether it is blue, orange or green.

Importantly, the cost of this discount should not be imposed on the hawkers, but on the Government instead. Rather than subsidise high net worth individuals who, like low-income households, all receive the same CDC vouchers, the subsidy will be better directed to those who need it the most.

With this, the responsibility of ensuring the affordability of well-balanced and nutritional meals will be shared in a much more equitable fashion across stakeholders, a point which I have shared in a Parliamentary Question in 2025. By enhancing governmental support to ensure affordable meals, while securing the livelihoods of our hawkers, younger players could come in and rejuvenate the hawker scene, while sparking the trend of a rising number of veteran hawkers calling it quits and retire.

MSE as Aggregator for Pest Control

Mr David Hoe: Chairman, I would like to speak on a very practical aspect of a liveable environment and that is pest control, and this is a case for MSE and NEA to play a stronger role as a national aggregator. Many residents experience pest issues daily and lead to frustration, including things rodents and cockroaches and, if left unchecked, these problems can become a public health. I am sure many of u here have received feedback from our residents in this regard.

So, I want to suggest that MSE and NEA can do more as a national aggregator for pest control so that we can build a more liveable environment. To be clear, I am not advocating for the agencies to take over the municipal responsibilities from Town Councils. But what it means is using the strengths as the national agency to raise baseline standards.

First, MSE and NEA can set clearer common service standards. These would address questions, for example, what should the expected response time be when there is a high-risk hotspot, what constitute an adequate follow-up; and also, what is an acceptable recurrence rate? If we define these standards clearly, it becomes easier for all of us to hold vendors accountable and to assure residents that you get the same basic level of service applied regardless of constituency.

Second, there is a case to pool demand and provide shared capabilities because some Town Councils might not have the ability or scale to be able to maintain specialised teams or a surged capacity when a sudden outbreak happens. So, a national aggregator can allow for specialised teams, better diagnostics and faster mobilisation when multiple estates are affected.

Third, this can be operationalised through a whole-of-Government (WOG) demand aggregation contracts with standard key performance indicators and outcomes. If we measure these outcomes consistently, we can compare performance, learn what works and raise standards across all board.

A case in point to why a demand aggregation might be useful is a case of catching chickens. From my research, one Town Council may effectively be paying $200 to catch one chicken and another Town Council pays $400 to catch another one chicken for a similar outcome. So, by having a demand aggregation, we can reduce cost variance and achieve similar outcomes.

Finally, the public-facing side as well. Advisories for food operators and residents in relation to pest control should remain current, multilingual and practical. Education and enforcement on waste management, food handling practices and environmental cleanliness. should be targeted and sustained.

In summary, if MSE and NEA can coordinate standards, pool demand and strengthen shared capabilities, we can reduce the unevenness across estates and deliver a more consistent baseline of public health and liveability for residents across Singapore.

Shared Spaces, Shared Responsibility

Ms Lee Hui Ying: Chair, Budget 2026 raises tobacco tax to discourage smoking, but the real victims are those trapped at home – children and non-smoking family members exposed to second-hand smoke.

This topic has been brought up in this House multiple times. But we must continue to place attention on this silent killer. From The Global Burden of Disease 2023 study, at least one person in Singapore dies that is attributed to second-hand smoke and the numbers are climbing.

It is time to move beyond taxation. It is time to act decisively to protect Singaporeans from second-hand smoke. It is time to legislate and ban smoking at windows and balconies. To be clear, it is not to police what happens inside homes, but to stop smoke from drifting into neighbours' units and harming our young and old. There is a need for stronger enforcement powers and smarter surveillance. How effective are current measures in addressing complaints on second-hand smoke and also high-rise littering?

We now face a technological stalemate. Catching offenders in the act is difficult and existing cameras are limited by angles and privacy constraints within homes. As a result, recalcitrant offenders act with a sense of immunity, and many complaints reach a dead end for lack of evidence.

MSE is already using AI video analytics for rat surveillance and drainage inspections. It is time we apply this strategic advantage to protect our residents' health, safety and living environment.

Will MSE commission a sandbox pilot for AI-enabled enforcement cameras? This pilot using smart cameras could first, automatically and instantly mask the interiors of units and the faces of residents to ensure privacy; two, strictly detect specific motions, specifically the trajectory of an object being thrown or the lighting of a cigarette at the window interface.

With this, we can overcome the privacy hurdle that currently prevents enforcement.

More Designated Fishing Spots

Mr Cai Yinzhou: Did you know Singapore has 8,000 kilometres of ABC waterways, 17 reservoirs and yet, only 15 designated fishing spots?

We lament that our children are addicted to screens and thus must do more. To encourage them to spend time outdoors, children and youths I have met in Toa Payoh turn to fishing to manage stress and connect with nature. However, with no designated fishing spots in close proximity, they resort to fishing in unauthorised and often more dangerous areas, areas with high human traffic, fast water currents or precarious physical barriers. Often, youths fishing illegally are met with negative public sentiment or disproportioned aggression.

8.00 pm

If we want our youths to be the stewards of our environment and their outdoor safety, we must first allow access to legal and safe interactions. I ask the Ministry to consider opening more designated fishing spots within our reservoirs and waterways by providing convenient and legal access, move away from culture — Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr Lee Hong Chuang.

Support Initiatives Beyond Shores

Mr Lee Hong Chuang (Jurong East-Bukit Batok): Chairman, with 30% of Singapore barely above sea level, climate change threatens our home. Beyond enhancing our infrastructure, we must recognise the vital role of civic society and youth in climate resiliency.

Groups like SeaKeepers Society Singapore lead youth driven marine initiatives from biodiversity conservations and ocean clean ups to reducing plastic and engaging communities in science. Their work strengthens coastal defence, builds regional stewardship and raises public awareness. I urge structured support through co-funding, grants and mentorship so young advocates can actively contribute to national planning.

Coastal protection is more than engineering; it is a whole of nation effort. Let us empower our youth, together safeguard our seas and our future.

(In Mandarin): Let us empower our youth and together safeguard our seas and our future.

Debate resumed.

The Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Chairman, my family welcomed a new member, my granddaughter Ning, this year with great delight.

Her arrival has made me think differently about the future – her future and the future of the world she will live in. She has moved my life goals. I now want to be fit enough to play with her. I hope to live to see her graduate from college, and she brings new meaning to my work in the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment.

Numbers like net-zero at 2050, mean sea level rise by up to 1.15 metres in 2100, no longer seem so abstract. Ning will be 24 in 2050. What kind of world will she live in? Will she enjoy bliss and stability, or will she confront chaos, losses and disasters regularly in the prime years of her life?

You see, we are confronting two powerful and interconnected challenges. First, the intensifying effects of climate change. Records are being broken in recent years – the hottest year, most intense rainfall, heaviest snowstorm, longest wildfires. Climate hazards are projected to cause economic loss of over a trillion dollars by 2050. Disruptions in food production and water supply may become frequent occurrences.

Second, global climate action is under strain. Economic instability and geopolitical contestation, like the latest conflict in the Middle East, are clouding our focus on protecting our environment. Major emitters may backslide on their climate obligations as they grapple with the global tensions on security, energy, trade and investments. In such uncertain times, the environment becomes an inevitable casualty, and our planet will face the impacts of climate change more severely and sooner.

Singapore will not be spared from these impacts. Our water and food security will be threatened by more frequent supply disruptions and shortages. Rising sea levels, coupled with high tides and extreme weather events, threaten to submerge a significant part of our country by the end of this century, potentially causing major losses in property, our economy and human lives.

Our businesses will likewise face climate risks such as damaged infrastructure, reduced productivity and supply chain disruptions. Businesses that have invested in other parts of the world will face similar risks. Our people are already feeling the effects. Intensifying heat not only makes daily life uncomfortable, but affects our health, safety and even our way of life. This is not a pretty world to bring Ning into.

But as Prime Minister Wong said, we are not mere passive bystanders. You and I have agency. Businesses have agency. And Singapore has agency. In an increasingly volatile world, we must prioritise building a climate-ready Singapore now. We must prepare our infrastructure, businesses and people today to be resilient in a climate-impaired future.

As Ms Poh Li San and Ms Nadia Samdin have pointed out, strengthening our resilience requires collective action of all segments of society. The Government will lead in our national climate adaptation by identifying climate risks and developing long-term adaptation strategies. Where necessary, we will invest in infrastructure protection. Through GreenGov.SG, we will spearhead adaptation efforts and encourage the private sector to follow.

The private sector will include climate adaptation as part of their core business strategy. By conducting climate risk assessments, protecting workers, investing in infrastructure, diversifying supply chains and insuring against climate hazards, companies can protect themselves from larger losses and reassure their investors. Businesses must be able to ride through extreme whether events and resume operations as quickly as possible. Those who innovate and adapt will thrive in the future.

All segments of the community will build climate resilience. Schools can adapt their students' attire and activities and their classrooms to the heat. Sports organisations can adjust training schedules and enhance their facilities for safety during extreme weather. Grassroots groups can organise emergency preparedness drills for heatwaves, haze, or floods to strengthen community resilience.

Each of us can build resilience in ourselves and in our family – look out for our neighbours in times of haze, manage our household's food and water supply with contingency and familiarise ourselves with emergency response plans. Together, we must keep Singapore going as much as possible in step with the changing climate and recover as quickly as possible in the face of extreme weather events.

We will designate 2026 as the Year of Climate Adaptation to galvanise this collective effort on adaptation. It involves a comprehensive review of our adaptation measures across key domains such as heat resilience, coastal and flood resilience, and water & food resilience. Together with citizens, businesses and civil society, we will formulate Singapore's first National Adaptation Plan, our long-term strategy to build a climate-ready nation.

Let me elaborate on the key domains of the plan.

First, heat resilience. We will strengthen and coordinate heat resilience efforts across the Whole of Government. We will invest more in research and development (R&D) to deepen our understanding of heat impacts, develop innovative cooling solutions and identify effective behavioural changes. Senior Minister of State Janil will share more details.

Next, flood resilience. Ms Poh asked whether our drainage infrastructure will still be sufficient if rainfall gets heavier in the future. We regularly review the adequacy of our drainage infrastructure, taking into account the latest drainage design standards and climate projections. Several projects are in the pipeline.

For example, we will be carrying out drainage improvement works to Bedok First Subsidiary Drain and Sungei Serangoon Eastern and Western subsidiary drains to reduce flood risks. We will also complete drainage improvements to 900 metres of the Bukit Timah Canal between Rifle Range Road and Jalan Kampong Chantek this year. Besides drainage improvements, building shared responsibility and fostering community resilience will remain key flood resilience strategies. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary will share more later.

Third, coastal resilience. To protect our coastlines from rising seas, we will build a continuous line of defence around Singapore. We are pleased to share that we have now completed conceptual studies for the North-west Coast from Tuas to Lim Chu Kang. The studies recommended replacing tidal gates and raising the dykes that are protecting our western reservoirs – a significant source of our water supply. Site-specific studies for Sentosa and the Southwest Coast will commence this year.

This week marks an important step forward in our coastal protection journey. We will table the Coastal Protection Bill in Parliament for Second Reading, which, when passed, will give us the legislation and regulatory powers to implement our coastal protection plan.

As we reshape our coastlines for the future, we will work hand-in-hand with stakeholders to co-create solutions that not only protect our shores and preserve the spaces and features we value most but provide opportunities to create new spaces.

Lastly, water and food resilience. We will continue to innovate and take collective action to ensure Singapore's basic needs are met even in times of disruption. Senior Minister of State Zaqy and Senioe Minister of State Janil will elaborate.

We have touched on the "why" and "what" of adaptation. Now on the "how". A holistic adaptation plan needs to be grounded in and guided by science.

Members asked how we are enhancing climate monitoring and forecasting capabilities, including through international partnerships. Last September, we established the Climate and Weather Research Alliance Singapore (CAWRAS) to advance tropical climate and weather research for Singapore and Southeast Asia.

CAWRAS is implementing a $25 million Weather Science Research Programme, which will raise our capability in weather forecasts and climate projections. Of the programme's projects, one covers the use of AI to enhance predictions of heavy rainfall and strong winds, improving our ability to forecast weather phenomena like Sumatra squalls. Another will develop a high-resolution historical weather record, allowing Singapore and Southeast Asia to identify trends and provide insights into regional climate dynamics. These efforts position Singapore as a regional leader in climate and weather science through AI-powered forecasting capabilities that enable evidence-based policy-making.

We have forged partnerships with leading climate and weather science institutes. NEA is a core partner in the multilateral Momentum Partnership, a consortium of major operational weather centres and climate research centres.

NEA also has bilateral agreements with major research organisations in Australia, the UK and the US. These partnerships allow us to exchange scientific knowledge and collaborate on climate science research.

We are expanding our heat stress sensor network from nine sensors in 2023 to 20 today and will install more sensors island-wide. This will augment our climate and weather monitoring capabilities and give the public more accurate heat stress alerts through the myENV app, enabling everyone to protect ourselves from heat.

Together, these advancements will help us make more timely and better decisions from early warning of climate hazards, our food diversification strategy to our long-term adaptation plan.

As climate change affects everyone, it is important for all Singaporeans to have the opportunity to shape our National Adaptation Plan. Ms Poh and Ms Lee Hui Ying asked how we plan to engage communities on this. This year, the Government will conduct a series of engagements, including focus group discussions and a public exhibition. We will discuss why climate adaptation is important to all of us and why we need to prepare now.

We hope people can share their experiences dealing with the impacts of climate change, and their ideas on how they can also play a part in Singapore's adaptation efforts. By tapping on the collective minds of citizens, businesses and civil society, we will enhance our nation's climate resilience to safeguard our way of life, including those with more needs – the elderly, the young and the lower-income households.

For businesses, we will engage and partner our industries in developing adaptation strategies that are tailored to their business needs. We will provide more details later this year and welcome Singaporeans' active participation.

8.15 pm

The Government is fully aware that there are many community stakeholders who are passionate about climate action and have innovative ideas on adaptation. To encourage ground-up initiatives, the SG Eco Fund will broaden its funding scope to include adaptation. Let me share an inspiring example.

Anak, a local design agency, realised that there is a huge gap in how we dress for the heat. So, they brought together artists from around the world for a showcase on climate-adaptive fashion. They ran workshops, raising awareness about urban heat challenges and teaching participants how to create their own heat-mitigating accessories, turning awareness into action and inspiring new ways of living in a warming world.

I am wearing one of their pieces today, the Ultra Sarong. This scarf, adapted from the Sarong, changes colour from yellow to orange when exposed to the sun, giving you a visual alert to UV exposure. We welcome more of such brilliant ideas from the community. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary will share more about how the Government will support. Mr Chairman, in Chinese, please.

(In Mandarin): MSE has designated this year as the Year of Climate Adaptation. Our work ahead is substantial. No single Ministry, agency or sector can do this alone. Businesses must innovate, communities must support one another and researchers must push boundaries.

Most importantly, we need active public participation. Whether in exploring ways to better manage heat, how to be prepared for flash floods or how we can implement measures while preserving recreational spaces and biodiversity at our coastlines, public participation will determine the effectiveness of our long-term plans.

Inputs from members of the public will shape our first National Adaptation Plan (NAP), which we will publish in 2027 and implement in the years to come.

Chairman, as a new grandmother, I hope that my granddaughter can grow up in a peaceful and stable environment. However, even though our country does its utmost to protect the environment, environmental changes occurring elsewhere will still affect us.

In this world full of uncertainties, I hope that my granddaughter can grow up with resilience and confidence to meet the challenges ahead of her. Climate adaptation is not merely about building sea walls along our coasts. It is also about enhancing the mental preparedness and response capabilities of our people and communities, so that our nation can remain calm and steadfast when facing increasingly volatile and extreme weather events.

(In English): I want to show Ning that as in the first 60 years of our nation building, we can, in the next 60 years and beyond, beat the odds by our collective will, sheer determination and the fighting spirit to never be constrained by our small size in our climate action. Most of all, as a Singaporean, I would like our generation to be a source of pride for the future generations of Singaporeans, that we have done right by them, that with gumption and courage, we have the foresight to make the right strategic decisions to build a strong foundation for climate resilience for their future.

I call on all Members of this House and all citizens, businesses and civil society to participate fully in the formulation of our National Adaption Plan in the Year of Climate Adaptation. This is the time to act. [Applause.]

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Dr Janil Puthucheary.

The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Janil Puthucheary): Mr Chairman, we are experiencing the effects of climate change today. We must therefore take decisive action to adapt to the new realities we face. Hence, we designated 2026 as the Year of Climate Adaptation. This requires a multi-pronged approach, which includes enhancing water resilience, heat resilience and resource resilience.

At the heart of all our adaptation efforts is the importance of collective action. Government agencies, businesses, community groups and individuals, all of us have a part to play.

Ms Valerie Lee asked about our water resilience efforts. Our water story is an inspiring one. We are a small island nation with limited natural water resources. Through strong national determination, long-term planning and innovation, we have built a robust and diversified supply of water over decades with our four national taps: local catchment water, imported water, NEWater and desalinated water.

A recent UN report has declared that the planet has entered global water bankruptcy, with long-term water withdrawals exceeding renewable inflows in many regions across the world. It is crucial that Singapore continues to plan ahead and invest in water infrastructure, so that our water needs continue to be met. We have made good progress.

The second phase of the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System (DTSS 2) will expand the conveyance of used water, which becomes feedstock for NEWater production. Construction of DTSS 2 has progressed well, with the deep tunnels substantially completed. At its terminus, the Tuas Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) and Tuas NEWater Factory are scheduled to commission in phases from 2027. When completed, the DTSS will also free up 150 hectares of land for other uses.

We have commenced construction of Changi NEWater Factory 3 and expect works to be completed in 2028. PUB is also carrying out a feasibility study of a potential sixth desalination plant. With climate change, NEWater and desalinated water are key weather-resilient sources that especially strengthen our water resilience.

Our water distribution network also remains one of the most efficient in the world, with water losses at about 8%. The Public Utilities Board (PUB) achieves this with regular maintenance and technology, such as sensors to detect and respond to pipe leaks early.

As we invest in building and maintaining our water infrastructure, we should also persist with our water conservation efforts to moderate the growth in water demand. We will continue to work closely with stakeholders, from households to businesses, to shape behaviours and promote sustainable water use.

To address rising temperatures, we have developed a science-based, multi-pronged heat resilience strategy. As mentioned by Ms Valerie Lee, this is a whole-of-nation effort – academia, Government agencies and the community, must come together so that Singapore continues to be a vibrant, liveable and dynamic city.

Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked how we will harmonise standards and share best practices across existing heat resilience efforts. Tackling heat has been an ongoing work of the Government. For example, MSE has been enhancing public awareness on heat stress prevention through the Heat Stress Advisory and communication campaigns and MND has been incorporating cooling strategies into our city's urban planning and building design, such as wind corridors to optimise wind flow and trees to provide shade along key pedestrian routes and public spaces. We had also prepared the national heatwave response plan involving over 30 Government agencies and Ministries.

As climate change impacts intensify and heat continues to affect all segments of the society, we need to tighten whole-of-Government coordination and enhance our heat resilience strategy so that we holistically address all impacts of heat, including those to the economy and society.

We are happy to announce that MSE has established a new Heat Resilience Policy Office. The new Heat Resilience Policy Office will bring together efforts across various agencies, including MND, MOH, MOM and MSF, to chart the way forward for our heat resilience efforts. We will do so in three main ways: coordinate action, oversee research and represent us internationally.

The Office will develop a Heat Resilience Action Plan across the infrastructure, health, economic and social sectors. The Action Plan will identify priority areas and develop measures to address them, including by extending proven solutions to other sectors. This will also prevent duplicative efforts and ensure that our principles are aligned, while working with individual agencies leading the various initiatives. Some issues that we will need to deal with include, which areas, sectors or population segments are most at risk and how can we further support these groups? What additional research is needed for sectors to develop effective, tailored measures? How do we balance the need for additional cooling against the need to meet our emission targets?

The Office will work with Government agencies to engage businesses and communities on these important issues and explore how we can build heat resilience in our local spaces and communities together. I thank Mr Ng Shi Xuan, Ms Valerie Lee and Mr David Hoe for their suggestions. They are practical and worth taking a closer look together with the relevant agencies and we will take these onboard as we engage our stakeholders and develop our Action Plan.

Coordinated oversight of our research and technology efforts for heat resilience is also needed so that we continue to build capabilities and deepen our knowledge. This ensures that the measures under the Action Plan are backed by science.

We will launch the RIE2030 Heat Resilience R&D Programme, to advance capabilities and investments in heat resilience research through two complementary pillars – one focusing on infrastructure interventions and the other on understanding and managing impacts of heat on society. As part of this programme, we will launch a $40 million Adapting to Heat Impacts Funding Initiative, which will step up research in emerging areas, such as heat impacts and community heat resilience.

Mr David Hoe asked how our heat resilience plans will cater to vulnerable groups. This will be a key area of our research under the new Funding Initiative. We will devote more resources to study and protect those who are more vulnerable to heat, such as the elderly and the very young and those who are more exposed to heat, such as outdoor workers. We aim to better understand how heat affects us all and develop tailored guidelines and solutions to help everyone thrive in a warming world.

This new bound of research builds on work that we have done over the years, bringing together researchers and agencies to co-create innovative solutions. For example, under the Cooling Singapore 2.0 project, researchers have worked with Government agencies to develop an islandwide Digital Urban Climate Twin to simulate Singapore's urban climate and assess the effectiveness of various cooling strategies. This will guide agencies in testing and implementing heat mitigation strategies.

As we chart out our next bound of research efforts under the RIE2030 Heat Resilience R&D Programme, we call for researchers and industry to join us on this journey.

The Office will also lead international engagements and collaborations on heat resilience. We will share our efforts and learn from other countries' best practices. This is not new, but will now be more coordinated. For instance, following the success of the Digital Urban Climate Twin by the Singapore-ETH Centre, local authorities in Brazil are piloting the tool to simulate city- and district-level climate change scenarios.

This heat resilience strategy also works alongside existing efforts, such as the Go25 national movement. Launched last year, Go25 encourages behavioural change by getting residents to set the indoor air-conditioning temperature at 25 degrees in their homes, offices and buildings where possible. The aim is to tackle overcooling and reduce energy use, without sacrificing thermal comfort.

The campaign in 2025 saw strong participation from around 200 industry partners who committed to reduce over-cooling, adopt sustainable practices and build long-term heat resilience. The energy efficiency pledges will translate to at least $6.4 million in annual savings.

A win for the environment and long-term cost savings, without compromising on thermal comfort. I encourage Members to visit the common spaces of our integrated hubs, such as Our Tampines Hub and Wisma Geylang Serai, as well as our community clubs, such as Yuhua Community Centre and Kebun Baru Community Centre. They have pledged to Go 25 and installed hybrid cooling systems, which include a combination of fans and air-conditioning, to keep our shared spaces comfortable.

As we adapt to climate change, we must also work to mitigate our impact on the environment. For households, residents can use vouchers under the Climate Friendly Households Programme (CFHP) to purchase energy and water efficient household appliances. Ms Hany Soh asked about our plans for this programme. Next month, we will expand its eligibility to include five-tick clothes dryers and induction stoves.

Creating a circular economy is another key enabler of climate mitigation. By shifting towards mindful consumption and sustainable habits of reducing, reusing and recycling, we can minimise the amount of waste disposed of.

8.30 pm

I thank Mr Abdul Muhaimin, Ms Lee Hui Ying, Ms Poh Li San and Mr Pritam Singh for their interest in waste reduction and recycling. Since launching the Zero Waste Masterplan in 2019, we have introduced segregated recycling to complement mixed recycling through the blue bins.

For example, we introduced Singapore’s first Extended Producer Responsibility scheme in 2021 to ensure proper end-of-life management and the recycling of e-waste. For food waste, the Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, which commenced in 2025, will facilitate the donation of surplus food to beneficiaries. In addition, under the Resource Sustainability Act, new commercial and industrial buildings that generate large amount of food waste are required to segregate them for treatment and reporting.

One waste stream that deserves particular attention is packaging waste, of which plastics is a significant component. The amount of packaging waste generated in Singapore forms one third of our domestic waste generated. Our overall recycling rate is low, and for plastics, it is only around 5%.

This is why we are strengthening circularity for packaging. Ms Hany Soh and Ms Lee Hui Ying asked about our efforts to tackle this waste stream. In July 2023, we implemented the Disposable Carrier Bag Charge. Since then, participating supermarkets have reported a 70% to 80% reduction in the number of bags issued at checkout.

Mr Dennis Tan also asked if we will expand our Extended Producer Responsibility scheme to enhance producer accountability in managing waste. We had recently discussed in the House our second EPR, the Beverage Container Return Scheme (BCRS). In a few weeks, the scheme will launch with the tagline “Return Right”.

Return Right began as a recommendation by a Recycle Right Citizens’ Workgroup in 2019. The House supported legislative changes to enact the scheme in 2023. Subsequently, a consortium of producers came together to form BCRS Ltd to operationalise the scheme. With the scheme, we expect to recover over 16,000 tonnes of material every year for recycling.

Through Return Right, we hope that Singaporeans will also become more mindful of the packaging they consume, dispose of waste properly to keep our shared spaces clean and practise good recycling habits, which will reduce the contamination in our blue recycling bins.

Return Right would require all of us to make some adjustments – producers, retailers, consumers, food shops and more. Based on the experiences in other countries, it will take time for the scheme to settle into a steady cadence.

While the scheme starts in April, containers bearing the scheme’s deposit mark will gradually enter the market over the transition period, with widespread availability by August and September this year. This will give everyone some time to transit to a new way of recycling. In the coming weeks, we will expand outreach efforts with partners, scale up online publicity and see materials at stores explaining how the scheme works and where to recycle.

Major supermarket operators have come together to provide greater clarity in price displays for consumers. They have collectively decided to display beverage prices on shelves without including the 10-cent deposit, and reflect that the deposit will be charged at checkout. We will continue to work closely with the industry to ensure transparent pricing for consumers.

We are also working with BCRS Ltd to make recycling as practical as possible, while keeping the cost of operations reasonable. Efforts are underway to deploy over 1,000 Return Right reverse vending machines (RVMs) by 1 April, where consumers can get their 10-cent deposit refunded via SimplyGo EZ-Link cards and concession cards and DBS PayLah!. At launch, there will be roving ambassadors to assist consumers in the use of the RVMs.

We will progressively increase the RVMs deployed to 2,000 within the first year as more containers with the 10-cent deposit mark enter circulation. Some of these additional RVM locations have already been identified, and the remaining ones will be located based on return patterns, and feedback from the community and other stakeholders.

We recognise that some seniors and persons with disabilities may require additional support to adapt to the scheme. We will therefore work with community partners such as TOUCH Community Services, Tzu-Chi Foundation (Singapore) and the Singapore Environment Council to reach out to these groups, to better help them understand the scheme and address any challenges they may face in returning their beverage containers. We are also working with SG Enable to improve the return experience.

I have spoken about purchasing beverages from the supermarket or a retail shop and returning them at the RVMs. But what happens when we order a beverage while dining outside in a restaurant? The F&B landscape in Singapore is very diverse, with different settings and operating models. To address this, we have identified two main typologies, which will be clearly differentiated for consumers’ ease.

Some restaurants and food shops have indicated that they plan to collect back the containers of beverages consumed during dining-in and hence they will not charge their customers the 10-cent deposit. These establishments will be known as Return Right F&B outlets. So because they will take care of the beverage containers, they are taking on the responsibility, so they will not transfer that responsibility on to their customers, they will not be charging their customers the 10-cent deposit when you are dining in. They will either serve the beverages in cups or glasses without containers, or serve the drinks with the containers, with the understanding that customers leave them behind or at the tray return point after consumption for collection by the outlet. To help diners easily identify these outlets, they will display signages and decals prominently.

For the customer, this arrangement is similar to the current dining experience. However, it will require additional effort and some operational adjustments for F&B operators. We will therefore provide a one-time support of $500 per food shop on application.

For restaurants and food shops not participating in the Return Right F&B scheme, the default arrangement will apply – beverage containers will be sold with the 10-cent deposit. In short, the 10-cent deposit follows the container and the responsibility then to deal with the container and recycle it. This default arrangement is also more suitable for certain settings, such as hawker centres and most coffeeshops. In these settings, takeback arrangements could be quite challenging due to the porous nature of the dining areas and the presence of multiple drink stalls within the same area in the case of hawker centres.

Most HDB coffeeshops will be within a five minute walk from an RVM. For hawker centres, which serve as high-footfall community gathering points, an RVM will be placed either within the premises or nearby once the RVMs are fully deployed.

Recycling is a shared responsibility, and everyone has a role to play. We can each do our part in making beverage container return work. This does require some adjustments. But every small effort counts, and together, we can build a greener and more sustainable Singapore.

The spirit of shared responsibility and collective action must extend to how we take care of our common spaces. I thank Mr David Hoe and Ms Lee Hui Ying for raising the topics of high-rise littering, second-hand smoke and pest management as these are important issues that require everyone to play their part.

To address persistent feedback on high-rise littering, NEA is piloting an enhanced partnership with Town Councils. Under this initiative, each Town Council is provided with two surveillance camera deployments per month to enable faster and more targeted intervention for high-rise littering cases. Since the pilot started in October 2025, 39 cameras have been deployed with a 30% catch-rate, an encouraging result from our closer collaboration.

To reduce public exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke, NEA has progressively expanded smoking prohibitions to over 49,000 public places across Singapore, up from 32,000 in 2021. These measures are supplemented by targeted enforcement, including more than 900 thermal camera deployments in HDB common areas with persistent feedback since 2019. These cameras effectively detected smoking offences in about 44% of deployments.

On vector control, NEA has tightened its enforcement against rat-related lapses. About 1,200 enforcement actions were taken by NEA and SFA against premises owners and managers for rat-related lapses in 2025, of which about 560 were for refuse management lapses. NEA will also continue to support effective vector control, working with stakeholders to raise service standards and enhancing capabilities through training and information sharing.

To suppress the mosquito population, NEA has also expanded Project Wolbachia, which will cover 740,000 households by March 2026, up from 580,000 households in April 2025.

Relying on regulations and enforcement alone is not enough. Collective effort by the community remains critical in helping us safeguard public health. Smokers should be considerate of those around them when they smoke. Premises owners and residents have a responsibility to prevent mosquito breeding and rat infestation.

Mr Chairman, climate adaptation requires a collective effort. As we chart our next-bound efforts in strengthening our water, heat and resource resilience, everyone can play their part. This is a vision for today and for the future. There is no time to waste. Everyone, from Government to industry to the community, can help build a liveable Singapore today and for many years to come.

The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.