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

Clean and Green Living Environment

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mdm Chair, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head L of the Estimates be reduced by $100."

The sweltering temperatures in Malaysia must serve as a warning bell to all of us. In Singapore, the temperatures are also climbing. Should we be blanketed again this year by the transboundary haze, the impact may be even worse than last year, with the rising temperatures.

The transboundary haze is one of the major contributors to climate change. According to estimates released by Guido van der Werf on the Global Fire Emissions Database, there had been nearly 100,000 active fire detections in Indonesia last year.

Since September last year, it has generated emissions exceeding the average daily emissions from all US economic activity, every day. Imagine how severe it is. We have been robbed of our clean and green living environment. This is why I do not understand how some political leaders from a neighbouring country can say that they gave us 11 months of fresh air and then we complain about one month of haze. Not sure if he can survive on 11 months of healthy food and one month of poisonous food. What steps are being taken under the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act to prosecute and deter errant companies which are contributing to the haze?

There is increasing recognition that the root cause of the forest fires in Indonesia is commercially-driven. What measures have the Ministry taken to enhance the accountability of companies? What were the regional and bilateral efforts that Singapore participated or led, in mitigating the causes of the transboundary haze pollution in our region?

Have all the companies that have businesses in Singapore provided detailed maps of all concessions in their supply chain? Of course, we also understand the challenges and limitations that our leaders have been facing, if our neighbouring country does not have the political will to solve the root cause of the problem.

Haze causes climate change which, in turn, causes temperatures to rise; which, in turn, causes mosquitoes to bread faster. To put it simply – haze has caused more dengue cases. The National Environment Agency (NEA) has announced that we may reach a record high in the number of dengue cases this year. Again, we have been robbed of our clean and green living environment, thanks to the haze.

In addition, South Korea and Vietnam had confirmed their first Zika cases recently. There is a very real threat that the Zika virus could enter Singapore. May I know how the Ministry intends to tackle this threat?

I believe, with the havoc created by climate change, we also need to look at our drainage system. To date, we have been coping fairly well, but flash floods continue to disrupt our daily lives, though only occasionally. May I know what is the PUB doing to prepare the drainage system for any extreme weather conditions where you see very heavy continuous rainfall?

On the flip side, as we know, we may also get prolonged dry weather. It may be timely to remind our people of the need to conserve water. May I ask: what is the progress of efforts to encourage water conservation and what are our plans in this area?

While on PUB, can the Minister give the House an update on the ABC Waters Programme? Since its launch in 2006, where are we now? How has this been benefiting Singaporeans? What further plans are there to expand this ABC programme in the next five to 10 years?

Still on clean and green, earlier this year, MOE took a huge step in the right direction by having all students from Primary to Junior College level to participate in daily cleaning activities in their schools. Hopefully, this can nurture the current generation of children into future adults who possess great community ownership.

But in the interim, there are still people who believe that cleaners and conservancy workers will pick up after their mess. These are the culprits who rob their fellow residents of a clean and green living environment. May I ask: what is the progress of efforts to engender greater community ownership to keep the environment clean?

I think more community-based ground-up initiatives will help. In Nee Soon South, I pick litter with residents every month. It was initially difficult to convince the less-receptive residents, but seeing their fellow residents and their Member of Parliament in action had convinced more people to come together and appreciate the importance of taking responsibility.

The prohibition of second-hand smoke is another subject that has been very close to the heart of my residents. The last extension of the smoking ban was in 2013. Does the Ministry intend to further extend the smoking ban to cover more places to safeguard the health of the public against second-hand smoke? Does the Ministry have any plan to roll out designated smoking points, like in Japan and Taiwan?

Now, I would like to turn to food. In our society, hawker centres still hold dear for many Singaporeans and even the tourists. I am pleased to note that 20 new hawker centres are expected to be ready by 2027. However, there have been concerns that it will be difficult to find sufficient hawkers to take up the stalls. Youths interested in F&B tend to favour cafes and restaurants. What plans does the Ministry have to further ensure the vibrancy of our hawker centre culture? How can we make it more appealing to young entrepreneurs? Can we improve the working conditions in hawker centres?

Talking about hawker centres, I would like to thank the Ministry for the new hawker centre in Yishun. I am very happy to see that construction work has started on site. This is a place my residents have been looking forward to, because they know that it is the place to have good food at reasonable prices. And, certainly, we hope that it will be completed on time. Many of my residents, especially those who have good cooking skills, are also looking forward to having stalls in the new hawker centre. So, I hope that NEA can look into this aspect and help everybody.

Question proposed.

Director-General of Environmental Protection

Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan (Nominated Member): Mdm Chair, I note from the Budget Book that the largest share of the Ministry's operating budget for FY2016, which is almost 70%, is dedicated towards NEA. NEA, as we know, aims to promote and sustain a clean and healthy environment in Singapore.

2.30 pm

Since the passage of the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act in September 2014, NEA has a new tool in its arsenal – to hold errant companies responsible for causing or contributing to haze pollution in Singapore, especially through unsustainable land-clearing in Indonesia and elsewhere.

Significantly, this law gives investigative and enforcement powers to the Director-General of Environmental Protection, who is appointed under section 3(1) of the Environmental Protection and Management Act.

Last year, our Pollution Standards Index (PSI) remained at Unhealthy or Very Unhealthy levels for weeks on end due to fires that were started in Sumatra and Central Kalimantan.

Haze pollution affected many of us. The most vulnerable, of course, were the elderly, those with respiratory problems and children. There were also very clear financial costs to corporations here which depended on visitors, especially sports events, hotels and outdoor tourist attractions like the Zoo and the Bird Park.

I am, therefore, encouraged by speeches made at the Committee of Supply (COS) by the Minister for Foreign Affairs indicating that he is committed to combating transboundary haze pollution.

I am also encouraged by the Senior Minister of State for Finance Ms Indranee Rajah's statements in response to a Parliamentary Question that both GIC and Temasek do not support companies that cause haze pollution; that they abide by sustainable business standards.

With all of these in mind, may I ask these questions of the Ministry? Beyond haze subsidies and haze preparedness, what action has the Director-General of Environmental Protection and NEA, as a whole, taken to investigate, address or mitigate transboundary haze pollution under Part III of the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act?

In particular, can we have a status update on the six preventive notices that were issued last year to companies domiciled in Indonesia? Were these notices effective in prompting the companies in question to provide relevant information, desist from their misconduct and take remedial action? If not, has prosecution been recommended by the Director-General or NEA in general?

Apart from prosecution, has NEA sought to work with our homegrown NGOs, such as the People's Movement to Stop Haze Pollution? This is a small group of NUS, NTU and SMU graduates led by Mr Tan Yi Han who mapped hotspots all across Indonesia.

Has NEA consulted the Singapore Stock Exchange (SGX) on whether listed companies which cause or contribute to haze pollution in Singapore will be required to disclose their unsustainable practices and, if not, to explain them?

Finally, would NEA consider inviting perhaps the Law Society of Singapore to have a panel of commercial disputes and corporate lawyers to advise on possible next steps were we to have another sustained incidence of haze pollution? I understand that lawyers from Singapore and foreign Bar counsels in Brunei and Malaysia are currently talking about what they can do.

Climate Change Fund

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mdm Chairperson, climate change and the reality of rising sea levels are upon us. Just a couple of months ago, a friend shared with me a video clip of how far the tide had reached at an area of East Coast beach close to the old Big Splash. Mdm Speaker, with your permission, I would like to show that clip.

The Chairman: Yes, please. [A video clip was shown to hon Members.]

Mr Pritam Singh: Members will notice the waves breaking at the very edge of the foreshore with the backshore inundated with sea water.

In late 2014, it was reported that the new Changi Airport was being built on higher ground to guard against rising sea levels and that it would be able to withstand more than the projected 18-inch or 46-centimetre rise in sea levels. Separately, the minimum level for newly reclaimed land went up in 2011 to 2.25 metres above the highest recorded tide from 1.25 metres. Early this week, it was reported that Nicoll Drive was being elevated by 80 centimetres.

Can the Minister share what are the plans to protect our beaches and mangrove areas and other existing coastal areas from rising sea levels? Can the Minister update the House on the progress of the Government's Coastal Adaptation Study that was announced almost three years ago? Does the Minister foresee the raising of a Climate Change Fund akin to the Changi Airport Terminal 5 Fund, to build a sizeable financial buffer over a few Budgets, so that Singapore can be better ready from a fiscal point of view to address the very real and debilitating effects of climate change?

Impact of Climate Change

Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Experts have warned that Singapore is at risk from rising sea levels due to climate change. May I ask the Ministry for an update on the long-term plans to protect our coastline and the infrastructural costs involved? Would the Ministry also share the progress of the road-raising works on Nicoll Drive in anticipation of rising sea levels? What other parts of Singapore are at risk if the sea level rises by another metre?

As the global climate changes, Singapore is not immune to its effects. We have seen in recent years, periods of extreme weather – more frequent episodes of heavy rain alternating with very hot weather. How will we minimise the incidents of flooding due to the downpours and mitigate the impact of the blazing sun on our population, particularly those engaged in outdoor activities? What can we do to ensure that people whose profession or hobbies require significant outdoor exposure are educated and protected?

With the hotter weather, our energy consumption will also rise as more Singaporeans turn on their air-conditioning. Do we have long-term plans to reduce this dependency on air-conditioning via green building or eco-friendly architecture?

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, you have three cuts, please take them together.

Tackling Climate Change

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Madam. As a small city state on an island, Singapore is not insulated from the impact of climate change. It has been reported that from 1972 to 2014, the annual mean temperature has increased from 26.6°C to 27.7°C. The mean sea level in the Straits of Singapore has also increased at the rate of 1.2mm to 1.7mm per year in the period 1975 to 2009. Rainfall has also become more intense in recent years.

Singapore was supportive of the historic COP21 climate deal last year, declaring its intention to reduce Emissions Intensity by 36% from 2005 levels by 2030 and stabilise emissions with the aim of peaking around 2030. What specific steps will the Government be taking to ensure that we meet these goals? Will the Government be moving beyond its current strategy of improving energy efficiency, towards investments in renewable energy, or reducing our economic reliance on high carbon industries?

Tackling Transboundary Haze – Companies

Tackling Transboundary Haze – Mitigation

Transboundary haze has been a problem in Southeast Asia for the past few decades. Year after year, we face the same problem despite all the efforts in the previous year to ensure that we wipe out this problem. This is also despite the signing of the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution.

With the haze season drawing near and, in fact, we have already caught sight of the haze in the past few weeks, what are the regional and bilateral efforts that Singapore will participate in to mitigate the causes of the transboundary haze in our region?

As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah has mentioned, there is increasing recognition that the root cause of forest fires in Indonesia is commercially-driven. We are also aware that there may be some publicly-traded companies in Singapore who might have a stake in or have played a role in the forest fires in this region. These fires and the resulting haze have not only destroyed the environment and wildlife, but have also resulted in health issues amongst Singaporeans and economic losses in Singapore.

What measures has the Ministry taken to enhance the accountability of such companies and what measures will the Ministry further take to ensure that such companies are brought to task?

Transboundary Haze

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development and Acting Ministers for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Mdm Chair, Singapore was affected by the longest episode of transboundary haze pollution in 2015. It had affected Singaporeans' lives and our economy. Minister Masagos mentioned that the haze in 2015 caused us an estimated $700 million of losses. Can the Minister update the House on the steps taken under the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act to prosecute and deter errant companies which contributed to the haze?

As there is an increasing recognition that the root cause of the forest fires in Indonesia is commercially-driven, what measures has the Ministry taken to enhance the accountability of these companies? What more will the Ministry do to have more effect on these companies' actions that caused the haze? How can we Singaporeans be part of this process?

Vehicular Emissions

Madam, my next cut. The Ministry has set higher standards for air quality benchmarked against guidelines by the World Health Organization. I understand that vehicles are major domestic emitters of pollutants in Singapore. I would like to know where we are compared to other countries in terms of vehicular emissions. What are the Ministry's plans to better address vehicular pollution and to move towards our 2020 Air Quality Targets?

On a related issue, in the past decade, there had been advancements in technology in the production of vehicles where some have arrived on our shores here in Singapore. Some claim to be better for the environment and lower the cost of fuel consumption. While these claims may have been scientifically proven, I would like to ask if the Ministry has conducted any studies to better understand the pollution caused by this new vehicle technology and types of engine, such as diesel engine, within our local context in Singapore.

Dengue

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mdm Chair, I am filing my annual cut on dengue as it continues to plague Singaporeans and my residents in the Serangoon ward of Aljunied GRC.

In February, the Government reported that the number of dengue cases in 2016 may exceed 30,000, higher than the record of 22,170 cases in 2013. The main reasons are the warmer conditions due to El Nino and a change of the main virus serotype from DEN 1 to DEN 2.

History has shown that a change in the predominant dengue virus will cause a spike of cases during the earlier periods. The Aedes mosquito population in our community has also increased since November with NEA's gravitraps and inspection checks showing a 50% increase in Aedes mosquitoes and breeding.

The Ministry's top priority is source eradication and I must convey my residents' gratitude for the tireless NEA officers and contractors who visited estates and homes to do inspections and misting and to provide advice.

At last year's Committee of Supply, we were told that NEA had 850 staff in the regular vector control workforce. To what extent have additional resources been needed this year? Some locations are not accessible for inspection. And since 2014, NEA has been trying out radio-controlled aerial inspection crafts (RAIC) for the surveillance of roof gutter conditions. RAIC is able to deposit Bti larvicides to kill larvae in roof gutters. Has the trial been successful and will it be fully implemented?

The Minister has also said that $3 million is being put aside to develop the Wolbachia bacteria to fight dengue over the next three years. When are we likely to see the results of this?

Finally, concerning the dengue vaccine, several countries, including the Philippines, have registered the use of the Dengvaxia vaccine developed by Sanofi. The vaccine apparently works against all four serotypes, though its efficacy rate is not uniform. Is the Government in a better position now to comment or commit to a dengue vaccine?

Dengue/Zika

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Madam, it is the time of the year again when we need to raise our vigilance against the rising cases of dengue. NEA announced that we are likely to see a higher number of dengue cases compared to last year. This time around, we have the added threat of Zika which could be transmitted by the same mosquitoes.

The key is to reduce the population of mosquitoes through removing the source of breeding. At the community level, the practical response is always to encourage as many of the residents as possible to conduct the "Do the Mozzie Wipeout" exercise. We also need to step up vector control operations and enhance surveillance. What more can we do to tackle this threat?

I read that the Wolbachia technology has been experimented in countries like Australia, Brazil, Vietnam and Indonesia. Can I ask if NEA will be looking into this technology? I understand that there are also some positive developments in the area of vaccine. Is the Ministry also looking into this option as well?

Water Resilience and Conservation

Miss Cheng Li Hui: Singapore's current demand for water is 400 mgd and it is expected to double to 800 mgd by 2061 due to population increases and growing commerce and industry needs. The Linggiu Reservoir in Johor is five times larger than all of Singapore's 17 freshwater reservoirs combined and hence, it is a critical source of water. Our 99-year water agreement with Malaysia will end in 2061. What is our long-term water supply plan to ensure Singapore will continue to have adequate water for her needs in the future?

2.45 pm

Currently, the Linggiu Reservoir's water level is hovering around 43% due the recent dry weather. What plans do the Ministry and PUB have to ensure that our water supply is resilient against increasing occurrences of dry spells and even prolonged drought?

Can we expedite the installation of water retention tanks to collect rainwater during heavy rain and reduce the amount of rainwater flowing into the public drainage system and help reduce flooding?

Water is precious and we need to manage its use carefully. What is the progress of our public education efforts to encourage water conservation? Can we incorporate more water-saving designs and mechanisms in our buildings?

Water Resilience

Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Chair, the prolonged dry season has a devastating impact on the Linggiu Reservoir in Johor which supplies much of our water to us. What measures can we take to reduce the loss of water there?

I would also like to ask the Ministry what are our plans to ensure that we have enough water and ensure our water resilience?

Our current water strategy has three parts: maximise collection, water treatment and desalination. Would the Ministry update us on the development plans to increase our water catchment areas, including our drains, canals and waterways? What new technologies have we adopted or developed to treat used water? Have there been any new advances in our desalination technologies?

Water is precious, as my colleague has said, and we need to minimise wastage and leakage. Would the Minister share how serious is our problem of water wastage and leakage and what is being done to rectify this? Do we have plans to implement stricter criteria for buildings to ensure that they install water-saving devices?

Mr Lee Yi Shyan (East Coast): Mdm Chair, according to experts, Singapore will face severe water supply challenges in 2040 as one of the world's most water-stressed countries.

What is the Ministry's plan to further moderate demand of water usage in the general population? Can the Ministry give us an update on what new measures or smart devices PUB might introduce to help households save on water usage?

On commercial water users, I see on the one hand very effective water-conserving devices being fitted to the taps in public buildings, hotels and shopping malls. On the other hand, I see generous water usage in many manual car-wash service outlets at petrol kiosks. Observations like these suggest that we have very uneven practices in different commercial and industry sectors.

While there is a requirement for commercial water-users consuming more than 60,000 cubic metres of water a year to submit Water Efficiency Management Plan to PUB, would the Ministry consider introducing finer measures which would promote water conservation amongst different industries and establishments, large and small?

Singapore has accumulated substantial expertise in water reclamation, regeneration and consumption management. Many water-related companies based here have grown and are exporting their expertise to the regional markets. Would the Ministry consider leveraging RIE2020 and the Industry Transformation Roadmaps to further strengthen our water industry cluster and, thereby, creating more meaningful jobs for Singaporeans?

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, please take your two cuts together.

Improving Flood Management

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Madam, over the past few decades, we have seen increasingly frequent and more intense rain in Singapore. This has resulted in floods in several areas in Singapore and on numerous occasions.

With the onset of climate change, we can expect to experience more unpredictable and intense rainfall. This will potentially result in more floods despite our recent efforts to mitigate flooding. Can the Ministry further elaborate on its plans to mitigate floods in the face of these challenges?

Increasing Electronic Waste Recycling

Madam, my next cut. Technological advances have led to affordable ownership of personal electronics and this has resulted in more electronic waste being generated by Singaporeans. According to the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources, quite disappointingly, only less than 1% of our e-waste was recycled in 2015.

Electronic and electrical waste, or e-waste, contains small amounts of hazardous substances, which pose health concerns if not disposed of properly. What are the Ministry's plans to ensure the continued safe recycling or disposal of our growing volume of e-waste in Singapore?

iWaste and e-Waste

Dr Chia Shi-Lu (Tanjong Pagar): Mdm Chair, electronic and electrical waste, also known as e-waste, contains small amounts of hazardous substance, which may pose health concerns if not properly disposed of. Substances, such as mercury or cadmium, found in e-waste could also cause long-term environment pollution and degradation. However, e-waste also contains useful materials, such as rubber, plastics, glass, gold and lithium, which can be recycled.

Sixty million kilogrammes of e-waste are produced every year, of which only a small portion is collected by community e-waste recycling programmes. I understand that NEA is looking into the option of having a national system to collect, recycle and handle e-waste. In view of the growing e-waste volume in this iDevice generation, I would like to seek an update on the Ministry's plans to ensure the safe recycling and disposal of electronic and electrical waste.

Food Waste Recycling

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Chair, NEA reported that in 2014, less than 13% of food waste was recycled and over 680,000 tonnes had to be incinerated. This number is only going to grow with our increasing population and given the prosperity of the population and the Singaporean culture of eating out.

Recently, NEA announced the launch of a two-year onsite food waste recycling pilot at two hawker centres in Ang Mo Kio and Tiong Bahru. This is a good move. But for an urgent problem, it is insufficient.

I have two suggestions to accelerate food waste recycling. First, food waste recycling in hawker centres is a low-hanging fruit as NEA is in charge of the space. However, hawker centres do not seem to account for large amounts of food waste. The Ang Mo Kio and Tiong Bahru markets together produce an estimated 1,800 tonnes of food waste a year but the markets occupy a central place in the town centres and NEA could extend the pilot projects to a wider catchment area to cover nearby private coffee shops, food courts and grocery stores. This makes food waste recycling readily accessible at town centres.

In fact, NEA could also experiment with getting the surrounding HDB households to bring down their food waste to the recycling centres. This will gauge the readiness of households to adopt food waste recycling and allow NEA to test different methods to get households to recycle their food waste correctly and cleanly.

Second, NEA should begin simultaneous pilot projects to encourage food waste recycling at clusters of F&B joints, such as those in shophouse rows or shopping malls across the city. This may present more challenges than hawker centres due to diverse stakeholders and configuration of space. Therefore, the pilot should start earlier. There is more time to evaluate and test the recycling methods.

Recycling

Miss Cheng Li Hui: Mdm Chairman, Singapore has long advocated the 3Rs – recycle, reduce, reuse. How prevalent is recycling in both our residential estates and commercial properties? Would the Ministry update us on our progress in the area of public education to get more Singaporeans to recycle consistently and the correct way to recycle to prevent contamination? What percentage of the collection is contaminated?

NEA provides a blue recycling bin at the common area next to every HDB block under the National Recycling Programme (NRP) to encourage more households to recycle. How successful is this programme and what is the average amount of recyclables collected per month island-wide?

The Chairman: Dr Chia Shi-Lu, you have three cuts. Please take them together.

Food Wastage

Dr Chia Shi-Lu: Mdm Chair, waste not, want not. Food is a defining part of our identity as Singaporeans. But unfortunately, as a nation, a great deal of food wastage occurs daily. In 2014, Singapore produced 788,600 tonnes of food waste, which means that each person discarded about 146 kilogrammes of food over the course of a year. Food waste in Singapore has increased by 48% in the past 10 years.

Would the Ministry update us on its plans and public education programmes to reduce food wastage? What can be done to encourage diners to order less and our hawker centres and restaurants to give customers the option of choosing smaller portions? How do we improve our much beloved buffets, which will also help to reduce both wastage and our waist lines?

How can we also incentivise retailers to reduce food wastage, perhaps by selling food near their expiry dates at a discount and donating their unsold food to the needy?

Keeping Singapore Clean

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As exercise is the key to health, hygiene is the assurance of health. If you want to live a healthy life, a clean environment is a prerequisite. Regrettably, in recent years, our cleanliness has not been as good as before. Littering cases have been on the rise every year. This will not only affect the image of our country, but also lead to diseases.

Some say Singapore is no longer a clean city but a cleaned city. We all know that cleaning itself cannot ensure environmental hygiene. Protecting our environment is the responsibility of each one of us. This is a pressing issue. I would like to ask the Minister: what is the effectiveness of our public engagement measures?

Can we run the "Keep Singapore Clean" Campaign again, like before? Why is the current "Clean and Green" initiative not achieving its desired outcomes? How do we educate Singaporeans to have the right hygiene awareness?

I would like to ask the Minister what is the progress of the Community Volunteer Programme and whether Corrective Work Order is effective in punishing the litterbugs?

Rodent and Pest Control

Last cut, in English. Mdm Chair, many estates are, unfortunately, witnessing increasing rodent populations, which are becoming recalcitrant to vermin control measures. Rats are very intelligent and there is evidence that they could learn to avoid traps and even poison.

Recently, there have been several reports of rodent infestation in our heartland estates. In my constituency of Queenstown, despite the concerted efforts of our Town Council, the rodent population seems to be increasing. Improper disposal of food, improper food storage, littering, leftover food from the feeding of strays, all these provide rats with sources of food, allowing the rats to breed and multiply quickly.

In the Ministry's reply to my Parliamentary Question last year, I note that NEA implements an integrated rodent surveillance and vector control programme and that from January 2014 to November 2014, over 35,000 rodent burrows were detected and treated. I also understand that NEA has brought back the Rat Attack programme that is administered in partnership with the Town Councils. Can the Ministry provide an update on further measures to counter this distressing problem and if it could better assist the respective Town Councils in their efforts to control the rodent population?

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, you have two cuts. Please take them together.

Public Cleanliness

Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Mdm Chair, what are the plans to improve our levels of public cleanliness and achieve the kind of standards achieved in Japan and Taiwan? We used to have campaigns to urge Singaporeans and residents not to litter and to cooperate in keeping our public spaces and common areas clean. Since the campaigns stopped, our level of cleanliness has worsened over the years.

We should seriously consider restarting the campaign in four languages. In Taiwan, the tireless public education efforts include ceaseless reminders in public areas not to litter and to keep clean. We can certainly learn from the effectiveness of the Taiwanese.

With the amendment to expand the Community Volunteer (CV) scheme to allow NEA to appoint individuals as CVs, we will have more people to assist with enforcement on the ground. Would the Minister give us an update on the CV scheme?

In addition, how many people have been caught for littering in the past year and what are the profiles of these typical offenders? How many had been fined and how many had to perform corrective work orders? Does the Minister think that corrective work orders and fines have been effective deterrents?

Hawker Centres

Next cut. I would like to ask if the locations of our new hawker centres in Sengkang have been confirmed. Can NEA look into plans to allocate hawker stalls to applicants from low-income groups and train and equip them with the skills to operate and manage the stalls successfully?

Providing Singaporeans who may have no other skills with a way to earn a livelihood and support their families by running a hawker stall was one of our social objectives in the early days of nation building. I think this is a valid and viable social objective today and we should continue to provide this means of earning a living to those who need it.

Miss Cheng Li Hui: Hawker centres are an essential part of heartland living and part of Singapore's unique national heritage. Many Singaporeans enjoy our hawker food, its convenience and affordability. As many of our hawkers are getting older, how can the Ministry help to preserve the hawker trade? How do we ensure that the stall rental prices remain reasonable and the prices of food in our hawker centres remain affordable?

3.00 pm

Mr Liang Eng Hwa: Mdm Chair, two new hawker centres were completed since the Government resumed the building of hawker centres. They were Hougang Ci Yuan Hawker Centre operated by Fei Siong Food Management and Bukit Panjang Hawker Centre run by NTUC Foodfare.

These two hawker centres were run under the new "not-for-profit" model. Can the Minister update how the experience has been and whether there are good learning points to apply for the next 18 new hawker centres?

Building the hawker centres is the relatively easier part. The more difficult challenge is to find enough enterprising hawkers, especially young hawkers. It is important that we groom a new generation of hawkers so that our hawker culture and the good food can carry on.

Would NEA consider further lowering the barrier to entry for young would-be hawkers and have a new hawker assistance scheme or programme to help first-time hawkers? To keep our hawker centres vibrant and lively, would NEA consider studying overseas models and experiences, such as those at the Taipei night markets and Hong Kong street markets, to see if there are any good ideas that can be replicated in Singapore?

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, please take your two cuts together.

Extension of Smoking Prohibition

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Madam, smoking prohibition in Singapore was first introduced in 1970 and has been progressively extended to cover virtually all indoor places and areas where the public congregate. This is to provide a clean, safe and healthy environment for the public and to safeguard their health against the harmful effects of second-hand smoke.

The last extension of the smoking ban was in 2013. The long-term policy goal of the Ministry is to prohibit smoking at all public places, except designated smoking points or areas. NEA's goal is to move the policy from a prohibitive list to a positive list.

While there are recent steps, such as the ban on display at point-of-sale, taken by the Ministry to reduce smoking rates in Singapore, does the Ministry intend to further expand the reach of the smoking ban to cover more places in order to safeguard the health of the public against the harmful and damaging effects of second-hand smoke?

Expanding ABC Waters Programme

The Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters) Programme has been well-received by members of the public. I was at the launch of the ABC Waters @ Siglap Canal in December last year. Having seen the old canal before the implementation of the programme, I can see the amazing transformation it has undergone and how it has turned the area into a community space, which is well-used.

That is the goal of the ABC Waters Programme. "By integrating the drains, canals and reservoirs with the surrounding environment in a holistic way, the ABC Waters Programme aims to create beautiful and clean streams, rivers and lakes with postcard-pretty community spaces for all to enjoy."

We are now in our 10th year of the programme and I understand that over the last 10 years, 32 ABC Waters projects have been completed across the island. Another 54 ABC Waters-certified projects were undertaken by private developers and other public agencies. Can the Ministry elaborate on the plans for the ABC Waters Programme in the next five to 10 years? And I have to add this: if possible, launch one in Nee Soon East.

Creative Use of Canal Space

Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): Madam, we are keenly aware of the scarcity of land in Singapore. Yet, we have to provide space for the increasing and much-needed social programmes and services.

I have received many such appeals. Typically, whenever we need more space, we boringly look to void decks and vacant lands. Yet, we simply do not have enough space to do so. I believe this challenge is not unique to MacPherson alone.

Faced with this reality, I wonder if we could be more creative and build above the canals?

By doing so, we can redesign the concept of space. We will also bridge communities on both sides of the canal and the new space created can be used for eldercare, childcare or for equally meaningful social purposes. With the canal and water flowing through, beneficiaries and residents can learn about water conservation, the surrounding ecosystem, reclamation of drain and, perhaps, even hydro-power. We will also be supporting the "A" in the "ABC", as the activities above and around the canal increase.

One can perhaps draw inspiration from the Lien Foundation project titled "A Different Class: Pre-school Spaces Redefined". Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister if MEWR will favourably consider such an endeavour for constituencies with canals, such as MacPherson.

The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): Mdm Chair, I have asked the Clerk to place an infographic for MEWR COS 2016 on the seats for the sake of Members.

Last year, we celebrated SG50 to reflect on our achievements of the past 50 years. Even in our early years, Mr Lee Kuan Yew was already clear that we needed to address poor sanitation, clean our dirty streets, detoxify our polluted rivers. His vision was of a clean and green Singapore.

It was because of this drive that Singapore became one of the earliest countries in the world to set up a Ministry dedicated to the environment in 1972. Mr Lim Kim San, the first Minister for the Environment summed up our environmental challenges well. He said: "Singapore is getting so urbanised that if we don't take action now to keep our environment clean, it will be too late." So, he got to work, and he and the others that came after him, helped to build our City in a Garden that we see today.

My Ministry conducted a survey in December last year to better understand Singaporeans' perceptions of environmental issues. The survey shows, among other things, that most respondents continue to recognise that it is everyone's responsibility to deal with the environment and that most view aspects of the environment as important parts of Singapore life. That is heartening.

Mdm Chair, with your permission, I would like to show some slides, please.

The Chairman: Yes, please. [Some slides were shown to hon Members.]

Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: When asked what were the top environmental challenges in Singapore, respondents identified air pollution, cleanliness of public areas and vector-borne diseases as the top three, understandably. As you can see, almost three-quarters of the respondents considered air pollution as a top challenge. That is what I will deal with first.

My Ministry, together with the Ministry of National Development, launched the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint (SSB) 2015 with a holistic vision of a Liveable and Endearing Home, a Vibrant and Sustainable City, and an Active and Gracious Community. It brings together all the things we need to do, so that all of us, whether we are Government, business or people, can work together as one towards a Sustainable Singapore.

Under SSB 2015, we have set air quality targets for 2020 and, as Assoc Prof Faishal pointed out, we need to press on with our efforts to reduce local sources of air pollution, as well as carbon, if we are to fulfil our local and international obligations. Studies by the World Health Organization and others have confirmed the harm that air pollution does to our health.

Therefore, we have systematically introduced policies to reduce air pollution from industries and vehicles. Last year, we tightened standards for emissions from industries and extended the Early Turnover Scheme to include Euro II and Euro III diesel commercial vehicles to incentivise the replacement of older and more pollutive commercial vehicles sooner. Emission standards for new motor vehicles are also being tightened – all new petrol motor vehicles will have to be Euro VI – compliant from September 2017 and all new diesel motor vehicles from January 2018. These are the latest international emission standards for petrol and diesel vehicles.

We are taking a step further. Motorcycles are significant contributors to carbon monoxide and ozone. We need to raise their emission standards in step with improvements in technology. We will, therefore, be tightening the emission standards for new motorcycles to the latest Euro IV standards. This will be done in phases: for large motorcycles above 200 cc from 1 January 2018, and for small motorcycles of 200 cc and below from 1 January 2020.

We are also concerned about emissions from diesel vehicles. Amidst their increasing popularity worldwide, there are increasing concerns about their health and environmental impact. In the wake of the recent Volkswagen scandal, regulators around the world are looking closely at the real world emissions of diesel vehicles, which have been shown to deviate significantly from what is measured in laboratory tests. We have to re-look at the widespread use of diesel technology carefully and minimise the public's exposure to risks in the future. To do this, we will conduct a study of pollution from diesel vehicles in Singapore. The results of this study will aid in the review of future vehicular emission policies.

Most Singaporeans are only concerned with air quality during haze episodes, especially the PSI shown on their phone apps or on television screens. There is actually a whole team of NEA officers working behind the scenes to keep tabs on the air we breathe in every day. Those of you who follow my Facebook page would know that since the start of this year, I have been featuring MEWR-family staff under #myMEWRkakis to highlight the work of staff and to show my appreciation to them.

Allow me to highlight two more officers here. Mr Heng Jiarui, a scientific officer, and Ms Fareena Abdul Rahim, a chemical engineer, are both officers in the Pollution Control Department who work closely with their teams to continuously monitor criteria air pollutants from some 22 ambient air quality stations island-wide. They also monitor 200 sources of industrial emissions for different types of toxic discharges and gases. If unusual emissions or discharges occur, a response team will have to investigate and stop the discharge. We can sleep easy at night knowing that these dedicated officers are watching our backs.

While we are on the topic of air quality and PSI, I thought it would be a good moment to talk about the haze. Unfortunately, we are increasingly affected by transboundary haze pollution, as Mr Louis Ng and several Members have highlighted. Last year, we experienced one of the longest haze episodes. There is no easy solution to this complex issue. We need concerted action by all stakeholders to overcome this problem. On the part of the Government, we actively work with our neighbours bilaterally and regionally. Let me give you an update.

First, we will actively promote regional cooperation because haze is a multilateral issue. As the haze is largely due to peatland fires, Singapore has facilitated the development of the ASEAN Guidelines on Peatland Fire Management with contributions from all member states. We also host the ASEAN Specialised Meteorological Centre, which helps to monitor the fire and hotspot situation in the region.

Singapore has led the development of the ASEAN Sub-Regional Haze Monitoring System which aims to increase transparency and accountability of errant companies responsible for the fires. This system will need to be supported by effective information exchange among governments. We will continue to participate actively in ASEAN initiatives to address transboundary haze and urge all member countries to implement their national action plans and work towards realising the Haze Monitoring System.

Second, we will continue to support Indonesia's efforts to tackle haze. Since 2005, we have been offering them assistance to fight fires and will continue to do so. We had also worked with the Muaro-Jambi Regency in Jambi Province on capacity building projects to deal with land and forest fires from 2007 to 2011. We have since offered to renew this collaboration under a proposed Memorandum of Understanding and are awaiting Indonesia's response.

Third, we are addressing the commercial roots of transboundary haze by pursuing errant companies and encouraging the agro-forestry industry to adopt more sustainable practices. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Assoc Prof Faishal and Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan have asked about the steps being taken under the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act (THPA) and other measures to deter errant companies.

Arising from the 2015 haze episodes, NEA sent Preventive Measures Notices under section 9 of the THPA to six companies based in Indonesia, requesting that they take immediate measures to mitigate fires and develop plans to prevent their recurrence. Two of them have responded so far. NEA is corresponding with them and verifying the information provided. In addition, NEA served a Notice under section 10 of the THPA on Asia Pulp & Paper Company Ltd (APPCL)'s office in Singapore to seek information on its subsidiaries in Singapore and Indonesia, as well as measures taken by its Indonesian suppliers to put out fires in their concessions. NEA is currently reviewing some information received from APPCL.

3.15 pm

Of the four companies based in Indonesia that did not respond, NEA has recently served Notices under sections 10 and 11 of the THPA on a foreign Director when he was in Singapore. These Notices require him to provide information and attend an interview in relation to the on-going investigations. In accordance with the law, we will take what steps we can to enforce the THPA, bearing in mind that, outside of Singapore, there are limited possibilities. We will, of course, hold any Singapore-linked persons or entities to account. At the same time, even if the errant company's officers are foreigners, they will have to comply with the laws of the country, including the Notices under the THPA, should they come to Singapore.

Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan has also suggested having settlement agreements and engaging the Law Society for future haze episodes. We could consider these suggestions when we next review the THPA with the experience gained in operationalising it, to see how it can be strengthened to hold errant companies to account – so that people take what we are doing seriously.

Fourth, as consumers, each one of us can influence the agro-forestry industry through our purchasing decisions.

Last October, the Singapore Environment Council (SEC) suspended the Green Label of APP's exclusive distributor in Singapore and partnered with the Consumers Association of Singapore to advocate for sustainable business practices.

Consequently, the larger supermarket chains, such as NTUC FairPrice, Sheng Siong and Prime Supermarket, responded by removing all APP products from their shelves, while the Dairy Farm Group stopped the purchase of all APP products. Our consumers, and consumers all around the world, are rightfully indignant when companies here and abroad blatantly violate their health and well-being with unsustainable practices. They are sending the right signals. These actions demonstrate the significant power of a collective consumer voice.

The Government will do its part as a consumer as well. I am pleased to announce that from third quarter 2016, the Government will take the lead and procure printing paper products that carry the Singapore Green Label, an indication that the supplier practises sustainable forestry management.

Similarly, the Government will be taking the lead in fighting climate change and procure only electrical products that have been certified with high-energy efficiency. We will start with four electrical items − air-conditioners, lamps, televisions and refrigerators – and will gradually extend this to more items.

A silver lining is that civil society and the private sector have stepped up to raise awareness of the sustainability of agroforestry products. We are heartened that WWF-Singapore, PM.Haze and the Singapore Institute of International Affairs jointly organised the "We Breathe What We Buy" campaign to highlight the link between purchasing products made from palm oil from unsustainable sources and the haze episodes. SEC has also announced the expansion of the coverage of the Singapore Green Labelling Scheme to certify products made using sustainable palm oil.

In the financial industry, we saw the Association of Banks in Singapore launching its Responsible Lending Guidelines and the Singapore Exchange moving towards its "Comply or Explain" sustainability reporting regime. These are good steps, some maybe baby steps. I hope to see more and stronger ground-up initiatives that demonstrate the business case to embrace sustainability.

It is the sum of all these: regional and international agreements and cooperation, bilateral support, bringing errant companies to task, consumer action, including Government procurement, civil society advocacy, green financing. These will help us edge closer to years in the future without haze. We must press on with our efforts, not just during the haze season, but consistently throughout the year because this is a serious environmental disaster with wide-ranging impact for us now and for the future.

Irresponsible burning over the years has affected the health of millions of people, impacted regional economies and caused irreversible loss of biodiversity. Singaporeans are, therefore, rightfully outraged because of its health impact; but more than that, the world is rightfully outraged because it also contributes to global warming. As mentioned by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, based on the Global Fire Emissions Database, the fires in Indonesia produced more emissions per day than the entire US economy. The entire US economy − that is not a small number. This massive amount of emissions from a single source is a huge setback in our global efforts to combat climate change.

This is a good juncture to move on to talk about climate change, which Mr Pritam Singh, Mr Louis Ng and Miss Cheng Li Hui have talked about.

Indeed, while our pioneers were concerned with the environmental impact of urbanisation and dense population to health and hygiene, we are now faced with the impact of climate change. Climate change will have far-reaching implications on us and future generations. As an island state, we are most vulnerable.

Our delegation, therefore, worked hard to broker consensus on the Paris Agreement so that all countries will take concrete action for it to be effective. Although Singapore only contributes 0.11% of global emissions, we are no less serious and have an ambitious target to reduce emission intensity.

The Inter-Ministerial Committee on Climate Change, under the leadership of Deputy Prime Minister Teo, is formulating our national response to fight climate change to meet our obligations and prepare for its impact. We have to look systematically at every area while continuing to ensure environmental sustainability, economic competitiveness and energy security. It also means consumers, households and industries, all of us, need to be prepared to make significant adjustments and trade-offs.

To reduce emissions, energy efficiency remains our key strategy − we will enhance existing policies and study the introduction of new measures to improve the energy efficiency of industrial equipment and processes, our buildings and transportation.

Although Singapore has limited alternative energy options, we can do more in terms of adopting solar energy. We have made progress towards increasing the deployment of solar energy to at least 350 megawatt peak by 2020. This will make up 5% of the projected peak electricity demand.

Mdm Chair, climate science is a complex subject that we need to understand more deeply so that we can better prepare ourselves for climate change adequately. We cannot over-build because this will incur cost; nor under-build because this will spell disaster. Therefore, the Meteorological Service Singapore has been building up expertise to understand tropical weather at a higher resolution because Singapore is so small that the results from global models would not be meaningful. We have to pioneer our own studies.

I would like to highlight another #myMEWRkakis at work. Mr Raizan Rahmat, a Senior Research Scientist from the Centre for Climate Research Singapore, and his team worked hard for two years to effectively simulate a hundred years of temperature, rainfall, wind and sea-level projections for Singapore and the region. Drawing on a range of disciplines such as physics, climate science and atmospheric dynamics, the team developed climate scenarios that were used by our agencies to conduct impact risk assessments and make more informed decisions on how we can bolster our climate resilience. I wish to share some projections that these studies have made.

By the last few decades of this century, the sea level is projected to rise by between 0.25 metres and 0.76 metres; temperatures may increase by 1.4 degree celsius to 4.6 degree celsius; and Singapore will experience more intense rainfall.

Mr Pritam Singh made a suggestion about the possibility of setting up a Climate Change Fund. The Government is taking concrete action to prepare for climate change. We have set aside funds for various sectors and agencies to build up capabilities in climate resilience and look at how we can develop more cost-effective solutions. For example, the Government issued a call for proposals, under the Land and Liveability National Innovation Challenge, for researchers to propose innovative solutions to reduce the ambient temperature in residential estates by four degree celsius, and that is not just by air-conditioning. The Government is mindful of the potential fiscal costs of implementing climate change measures. Therefore, we are working with the relevant agencies and MOF to determine the required adaptation plans and financing requirements so that we are well-prepared.

Currently, where it is practical, we have made hard structures to protect our coastline. We are raising a stretch of Changi Coast Road and Nicoll Drive to guard against sea level rise and we expect this to be completed by mid-2016. These are just some examples of the measures we have taken to safeguard Singapore against rising sea levels. We are confident that Singapore is adequately protected from coastal inundation in the immediate future. To prepare for the longer term, the Building and Construction Authority is conducting a coastal adaptation study which will inform us if additional protection will be needed in the future for our coasts.

Mdm Chair, the warmer temperatures are also of concern as they could lead to heat-induced illnesses, among other impacts. Government agencies have SOPs and safety guidelines on how to prevent and mitigate heat injury amongst vulnerable groups, as well as those involved in outdoor activities. The Government is also undertaking studies to see how we can reduce ambient temperature, whether it is through having more urban greenery, the use of different building materials or the design of developments.

As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah mentioned, rising temperatures also pose an increased and significant threat for vector-borne diseases, like dengue and Zika. We have had more than 6,300 cases in the first three months of this year – more than double that for the same period last year. The recent decrease in cases does not mean that we are safe. It is not yet time to celebrate. Similar to past years, cases may increase as we enter the traditional dengue season in June.

As Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Ms Sylvia Lim pointed out, unless immediate measures are taken together, the number of cases this year may exceed 30,000, higher than the record of 22,170 cases in 2013.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa also mentioned the threat of Zika. We have not seen any cases of Zika so far, but as Singapore is an open and globally connected city, Zika can eventually arrive at our shores. MOH and NEA have introduced additional surveillance measures. Zika, like dengue, is transmitted by the Aedes mosquito, so the same control measures that we take for dengue also apply to Zika. Hence, all of us need to step up efforts to eradicate mosquito breeding in our homes and neighbourhoods.

I am glad to see the strong community response in the effort against dengue – we have more than 5,800 Dengue Prevention Volunteers. We need more of them and will train 5,000 more volunteers this year.

Our 850 dengue inspectors have also been hard at work. I highlighted them in my previous posting in myMEWRkakis. In the first three months this year, they carried out about 350,000 inspections island-wide; just the first three months.

3.30 pm

While we step up this effort by engaging another 250 temporary officers this year, we are searching for better ways to tackle dengue. Our trial to pilot Radio-controlled Aerial Inspection Crafts to aid inspections of roof gutters is expected to be completed in the second quarter of 2016.

In the longer term, we will need new tools. NEA is conducting a feasibility study on the use of Wolbachia-carrying male Aedes mosquitoes to suppress the Aedes mosquito population. NEA will conduct a small-scale study involving the release of male Wolbachia-Aedes at the end of the year at a few selected sites. This study will help us understand the behaviour of these mosquitoes in local conditions.

We are not embarking on this lightly. We have studied this for years and have taken all steps to ensure that public health and safety will not be compromised. Our comprehensive risk assessment has concurred with previous findings on the safety of this technology. The release of male Wolbachia-Aedes will not pose any risk of biting nuisance or disease, because they are male mosquitoes. We will engage residents and stakeholders to provide more information on the technology and the study in due course.

Mdm Chair, my personal worry from extreme weather patterns due to climate change is the new challenge it poses to our water sustainability. The drier weather these couple of years saw the water level in Linggiu Reservoir drop to historic lows, from about 80% at the start of 2015 to 36.9% as we speak, and decreasing when there is no rain. This has impacted the reliability of imported water that supplies half our current needs. Fortunately, because we have diversified our water supplies or sources, we have been able to mitigate the impact of the drier weather.

But we cannot be complacent. Last month, the MIT published a study, which cited that one billion more people in Asia may experience severe water stress by 2050 due to economic and population growth, on top of climate change.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Miss Cheng Li Hui have asked about our long-term plans to ensure water sustainability and drought resilience in the face of climate change. We will continue to plan and invest ahead of demand. PUB, the national water agency, has completed its Water Master Plan 2016 review.

Under this Master Plan, PUB will continue to diversify and strengthen our water supply inventory. A second NEWater Factory at Changi will be completed by the end of the year. This will be our fifth NEWater plant and will be able to produce 50 million gallons per day (mgd) of NEWater. PUB will also be building more desalination plants, on top of the existing two plants. Construction of the third plant in Tuas is underway and will be completed in 2017. The fourth plant is planned for in Marina East and, when completed towards the end of 2019, will also strengthen the supply reliability to the city centre. To further enhance resilience, PUB is exploring the development of a fifth desalination plant on Jurong Island.

PUB is also planning to harness more seawater as a resource and will work with companies on Jurong Island to meet cooling demand with seawater instead of freshwater supply. Mr Gan asked about new advances in water treatment technology. This is vital and PUB is working closely with the industry to develop and test low-energy desalination technologies, one of which is a demonstration plant with Evoqua using electrochemical processes to remove salt from water. This technology has the potential to halve the energy requirement for desalination.

While we ensure we have enough water, our drinking water must also be clean and wholesome. This is achieved through multiple treatment and control barriers and a source-to-tap water monitoring system, which is supported by a team of 80 water quality professionals trained in disciplines, such as water treatment, microbiology and water chemistry. Three of #myMEWR kakis are shown – Eunice, Yin Mei and Jia Lin. Each year, PUB conducts over 400,000 tests to ensure that our water is perfectly safe to drink straight from the tap. You do not need to boil nor filter it.

Mdm Chair, on flood management, paradoxically, with weather extremities brought about by climate change, we can expect more frequent but intense rainfall. As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Louis Ng pointed out, this will pose challenges to flood management.

To prepare for this, PUB has been adopting a holistic "Source-Pathway-Receptor" approach. This addresses flood protection at all parts of the drainage system. We have an ongoing islandwide drainage improvement programme to increase the capacity of our "pathway" drains. There are ongoing projects at 101 locations islandwide to be completed in the next three years; and, this year, we start work at another 30 locations.

In addition, PUB requires property developers and owners to implement "source" measures, including detention tanks, to slow down the flow of storm-water run-off into public drains. Developers should also implement "receptor" measures, such as higher platform levels, to protect their developments from flash floods.

While PUB continues to find a balance between minimising flood risks and strengthening drought resilience of our water supply in the face of climate change, we must also minimise leaks and manage our water demand sustainably.

In response to Mr Gan, we are mindful of leakages in our water infrastructure and are required to report to Cabinet periodically on this. PUB has a comprehensive programme to inspect and promptly fix problematic pipes. Through these efforts, Singapore's unaccounted-for-water is maintained at around 5% and our leak rate is at about six leaks per 100 km each year. Both are among the lowest in the world.

More importantly, everyone has a role to play in preventing water wastage. Over the years, we have made some progress in water efficiency. In 2014, we used 150 litres per person per day, down from 165 litres in 2003. However, this rebounded to 151 litres last year. As we strive towards the SSB target of 140 litres by 2030, everyone would need to do our part to adopt more water-saving habits and making use of water-efficient technology.

Er Dr Lee and Mr Lee Yi Shyan asked about our plan to encourage efficient water use. PUB will push for the use of more efficient fittings and appliances. We will implement two measures in early 2017. First, we will introduce a 4-tick rating for washing machines. Today, washing machines are labelled with two or three ticks. The introduction of the 4-tick machines will enable households to select more water-efficient machines from among the current 3-tick models.

Second, we will phase out 0-tick taps and mixers and allow only taps and mixers with 1-tick or more to be sold or supplied. These are part of our plans to eventually phase out less efficient fittings and appliances by 2018. We will be consulting the industry on these plans.

Mr Lee also pointed out that we need to help our commercial water users to use water more efficiently. Singapore's water demand is projected to double by 2060 and the non-domestic sector will account for 70% of future water demand.

From January 2015, we have mandated the submission of Water Efficiency Management Plans (WEMP) by large water users. I am heartened that more than 600 large water users have submitted their plans to improve water efficiency and reduce water consumption. PUB will study the data collected from WEMP. We will develop water efficiency benchmarks and good practice guidelines, beginning with these big companies and, later on, we will move to the smaller companies.

In addition, PUB has been investing in industrial water solutions, such as used water recycling. Since 2006, we have been working with relevant agencies to promote water-related R&D and develop the water industry under the Research Innovation and Enterprise (RIE) plans. We will continue to leverage Government schemes where possible, including the RIE2020 plan and the newly-announced industry transformation roadmaps, to foster industry innovation and growth. Mdm Chair, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Over the past 50 years, our pioneer leaders have transformed Singapore into one of the most admired cities in the world. However, challenges, such as climate change, mean that what has worked in the past may not be sufficient for the next 50 years.

For example, how do we protect our coastal areas in the face of rising sea levels? How do we deal with issues like dengue, which can spread easily in an increasingly hotter climate? Similarly, the issues of flash floods are expected to become more critical, with more intense rainfall expected in the future.

We need to constantly assess how new global trends and actions of others will affect us. We cannot go about our daily lives as if it were business as usual. We have to work with our neighbours and international partners in order to address these problems together. Ultimately, all countries in the world have to ensure that development does not occur at the expense of the environment.

I believe that every Singaporean can, and should, step up to do their part to take care of the environment for the future − where our children can lead better lives because of the actions that we take now.

(In English): Mdm Chair, in conclusion, I would like to assure Members that my Ministry will strive to uphold the high standards of our environment and water resources we have inherited, even as we face new challenges like climate change. We are doing this not only to benefit Singaporeans now, but also provide a better environment for future generations and the world.

For each one of us, this means living out the beliefs and values underpinning our Sustainable Singapore Blueprint: (a) use only what we need and use it well; (b) care for the place we live; (c) leave something good for the future.

Mdm Chair, I now hand over to Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor to address other environmental issues.

The Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan): Mdm Chair, climate change has brought about new threats and challenges. At the same time, it is putting more strain on our already limited resources. It is, therefore, vital going forward that Singapore and Singaporeans embrace greater environmental sustainability.

I would like to first touch on my Ministry's work in waste management. With limited land, waste reduction is critical to prolonging the lifespan of Semakau Landfill and conserve our land for other uses. This is why we have set out a vision of becoming a Zero Waste Nation in the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint.

Part of our strategy in waste management is to increase the potential for the reuse of incineration ash, which will extend the lifespan of Semakau Landfill. To do this, we must first ensure our waste stream contains as little hazardous substances as possible.

Take the example of electronic waste, or e-waste for short. Singapore generates more than 60,000 tonnes of e-waste every year. This will only grow as electronic items become more common. As pointed out by Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Mr Louis Ng, e-waste may contain valuable materials, but also small amounts of hazardous substances which can cause pollution and affect human health.

We have studied the upstream controls of hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment and I would like to update that, from 2017, we will restrict hazardous substances in six types of electrical and electronic equipment. They are mobile phones, mobile computers, refrigerators, air conditioners, panel TVs and washing machines.

I would also like to touch on a specific hazardous substance, mercury. The Minamata Convention on Mercury is a global, legally-binding instrument that seeks to protect human health and the environment from anthropogenic releases of mercury and mercury compounds. In 2013, Singapore signed on to the Minamata Convention.

3.45 pm

While the vast majority of batteries sold in Singapore do not contain mercury, a very small number do. We plan to phase out mercury-added batteries, including button-cell batteries, which contain mercury exceeding five parts per million (ppm) by weight. The manufacture, import and export of all non-compliant mercury-added batteries will be prohibited by 2018. Going forward, we plan to extend the restrictions on mercury content to other products, such as lightings, switches and relays.

Another part of our waste management strategy is to work closely with the community and businesses to consume sustainably and reuse and recycle as much as possible.

Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about the National Recycling Programme (NRP). With the NRP, more than 70% of HDB residents, when asked, said that they practised recycling. However, about 30% to 50% of materials deposited into the recycling bins are not suitable for recycling. We will continue our efforts to educate the public on what can or cannot be deposited.

One area which requires attention is food waste, as pointed out by Dr Chia and Assoc Prof Goh. In 2015, Singapore generated almost 800,000 tonnes of food waste, or 10% of all waste. This is equivalent to two bowls of food per person, per day. This is why we launched a programme last November to encourage everyone to reduce food wastage.

We also want to encourage onsite recycling of food waste. We launched onsite food waste recycling projects in January this year at two of our hawker centres. At Hougang Ci Yuan Hawker Centre, Fei Siong Food Management has also voluntarily installed a food waste recycling machine there. These projects will assess the economic and operational aspects of on-site food waste recycling and, if feasible, we plan to roll this out to more of our hawker centres.

Many premises that generate significant volumes of food waste are already doing food waste recycling. I am heartened that about 30 premises, including Resorts World Sentosa, JEM and Singapore Polytechnic, have installed food waste recycling machines at their premises.

In another upcoming pilot project, we plan to start collecting food waste by the end of this year from multiple premises in the Clementi district, including army camps, schools, restaurant clusters, a hawker centre and a hospital. The food waste will be mixed with used water sludge to enhance energy recovery. If successful, this could be implemented at the future co-located Integrated Waste Management Facility and the Tuas Water Reclamation Plant.

Mdm Chair, I will now move on to talk about how we can ensure a high-quality living environment for Singaporeans, now and in the future.

As mentioned by Minister Masagos earlier, our Pioneers worked hard to realise the vision of a clean and green Singapore. Their efforts have not been in vain. In a recent public survey, 95% of Singapore residents agreed that a clean environment, free from litter, is an important part of Singapore's identity. This is something we should preserve.

Unfortunately, the standard of cleanliness in Singapore continues to be a concern. We spend as much as $120 million every year to keep our public spaces clean. Some places, like Orchard Road, have to be cleaned as often as every two hours.

Over the years, we have stepped up our enforcement against littering. We issued more than 26,000 tickets in 2015 – one-third more than in 2014 – and about 1,300 repeat offenders were issued with Corrective Work Order (CWO). While enforcement officers will continue to take action against such irresponsible behaviour, they cannot be everywhere all the time.

As Er Dr Lee, Mr Gan and Dr Chia have rightly pointed out, keeping Singapore clean requires greater community ownership, such that it becomes part of our local culture.

The very first "Keep Singapore Clean" campaign was launched by Mr Lee Kuan Yew back in 1968. This has continued through the years and eventually evolved into the year-long Clean and Green Singapore (CGS) campaign. The CGS continues to galvanise the community to keep Singapore clean and green, promote the right social values and instil pride in our environment.

I am heartened to see greater community action in keeping our environment clean. One example is the Public Hygiene Council's tie-up with MOE schools for students to spend five to 10 minutes cleaning their school areas daily, as mentioned by Er Dr Lee. This will remind the young to practise consideration and cultivate respect for our cleaners.

Last year, the Public Hygiene Council, with the support of NEA, led the "Operation WE Clean Up!". Ten thousand participants from over 80 community groups came together and picked up more than 7,000 kilogrammes of litter during that single day.

We want to continue this momentum of ground-up initiatives. I am pleased to note that the Public Hygiene Council, with the support of the Singapore Kindness Movement and NEA, will lead "Operation WE Clean Up!" 2016 on Sunday, 8 May.

My Ministry is also very grateful to the volunteers who are passionate about the environment and have stepped forward to help us raise awareness. Mr Gan and Dr Chia asked for an update on the Community Volunteers (CV) programme.

NEA's CV programme was started in 2013 to encourage the public to take greater ownership of the environment. Until recently, only members of a few environment-related NGOs can be part of this programme.

In response to feedback, we have passed a Bill to allow individuals who are not necessarily members of any NGO but meet the stringent selection criteria and fulfil the requisite training, to become a CV. These volunteers will also be able to take part in a broader scope of environmental education beyond anti-littering efforts.

Let me clarify that even with the amended legislation, we will only allow the CVs, like before, to use their authority card to request for the particulars of a non-compliant offender, for NEA's investigations and enforcement. The CV's primary role is to encourage the public to take responsibility for the environment and they do not issue tickets to offenders.

So far, our CVs have engaged more than 2,500 potential offenders and I am pleased to hear that more than 99% of them, in fact, heeded the advice of the CVs.

One of the most common pieces of litter is cigarette butts. Besides contributing to the litter problem, inconsiderate smoking practices also endanger the health of non-smokers through second-hand smoke. To protect non-smokers, we have progressively prohibited smoking in public places since the 1970s. The smoking prohibition was last extended in 2013 and today, there are more than 32,000 premises and locations where smoking is prohibited.

We will continue our work towards a smoke-free Singapore. I am glad to inform Er Dr Lee and Mr Louis Ng that from 1 June 2016, smoking will be prohibited in reservoirs and more than 400 parks, including neighbourhood parks within residential estates and those under JTC. At the same time, the SAF, SPF, SCDF, Prisons, CNB and ICA have, for many years, voluntarily and successfully implemented smoking or smoke prohibition policies within their premises. We will formally include SAF camps and bases and MHA premises to the list of places where smoking is prohibited by law.

Dr Chia spoke about the increased rodent population in many estates. In 2015, about 43,000 rat burrows were found. Some 85% of these were found in housing estates managed by Town Councils. We have also witnessed rat infestations in shopping centres and food establishments.

It remains a challenge for Town Councils in their rodent control efforts, due to the many bin chutes and bin centres and numerous food stalls in the housing estates. NEA has, thus, in late 2015, provided funding to support the Town Councils through a revamped Rat Attack programme.

In areas with multiple stakeholders, actions by one party may displace the rats to another location. Hence, we are taking a more coordinated approach involving multiple stakeholders in a few areas. Early results have shown a reduction of rat burrows and we will continue to monitor the situation.

Ultimately, the key to managing rat infestation is to remove food sources and areas of harbourage. Stakeholders have a responsibility to improve the housekeeping of their premises, such as bin centres and refuse chutes, and to deny rats easy access to food sources. This has to be a consistent and sustained effort by all parties.

Last year, we tightened the enforcement regime for shopping centres and food establishments with stiffer penalties for repeat offenders. I would like to update that, this year, we will also be stepping up enforcement for breaches in Town Council areas.

I will now move on to hawker centres. Looking back at the last 50 years, it is amazing how we have successfully turned some of our public health challenges of yesterday into new opportunities for tomorrow. Take the case of hawker centres. The first hawker centres were built in the 1970s to resettle street hawkers and improve hygiene levels by providing access to amenities, such as clean water and proper waste disposal.

Since 2001, over 100 hawker centres have been upgraded under the Hawker Centres Upgrading Programme (HUP). These second-generation centres came with improved ventilation and exhaust system and more dining seats with wider walking space between them. And they were well-received by both hawkers and customers.

Hawker centres are now associated with clean, affordable food and they have become a part of our culture and daily lives. Our recent survey found that three out of four respondents visit a hawker centre at least once a week.

My Ministry will strive to ensure Singaporeans can continue to have access to a clean environment and affordable food at our hawker centres.

We have announced that we will be building 20 new hawker centres by 2027. I am pleased to note that the hawker centres at Bukit Panjang and Hougang have been completed and the centre at Our Tampines Hub will be ready by the end of this year. Another four hawker centres at Pasir Ris, Woodlands, Yishun and Jurong West will be completed next year.

Mr Gan asked about the locations of new hawker centres in Sengkang. One of them will be located at the site of the old Fernvale Point; the location of the other hawker centre at Sengkang will be announced, once ready.

Miss Cheng highlighted the challenge of ensuring that rental remains reasonable and food prices in our hawker centres remain affordable. My Ministry had conducted a study on the drivers of hawker food prices, which former Second Minister Grace Fu shared at last year's Committee of Supply. Let me reiterate some of the key findings here.

The study looked at 1,000 hawkers and found that rentals made up only 12% of the hawkers' total cost. The larger components were raw materials and manpower at 59% and 17% of total cost respectively. The study also found that food prices are comparable between subsidised stalls and non-subsidised stalls. This implies that rental is not the main driver of food prices.

Nevertheless, we have made several changes to help relieve upward pressures on rentals, such as disallowing subletting. Since removing the reserve rent in 2012, about 45% of tendered cooked food stalls were awarded at below what the reserve rent would have been. Today, more than 85% of our hawkers pay less than $1,500 per month in rent. This is generally lower than those in coffeeshops or food courts in comparable locations.

Beyond rentals, we also want to bring in fresh ideas to ensure the sustainability of hawker centres and affordable food. Hence, we have started pilots on new management models at the two new hawker centres at Bukit Panjang and Hougang by appointing social enterprises to manage the centres on a not-for-profit basis.

We will evaluate the outcomes from these pilots to see how we can further enhance the model to achieve our objectives. Though it is still early days, there are some encouraging takeaways. For example, the managing agent at Hougang Ci Yuan Hawker Centre has introduced measures to improve productivity, such as self-payment kiosks. They have also introduced an entrepreneurship programme where aspiring hawkers would be given on-the-job training to gain the necessary skills and knowledge to run a hawker stall.

Mr Gan also mentioned a previous policy of allocating vacant hawker stalls to those experiencing financial hardship. We had, in the past, offered vacant hawker stalls to people experiencing financial hardship, but the take-up rate was low as most preferred to wait for a vacant stall in popular hawker centres. Due to its limited effectiveness, the policy was ceased in 1990.

4.00 pm

Today, anyone interested and who meets the criteria can bid for vacant stalls. A successful hawker requires both passion and ability and, hence, it is better to let those interested bid for a stall instead of safeguarding them for the low-income. Those who are in financial hardship can be assisted through the various help schemes available, including employment assistance. Mdm Chair, with your permission, I would like to say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] At the Committee of Supply debate last year, my Ministry had announced that the Government would be building 20 new hawker centres by 2027. During a SGfuture dialogue in January this year, Singaporeans shared their views about the continuity of the hawker trade and the vibrancy of the hawker centres. My Ministry has, therefore, formed a Hawker Centre 3.0 Committee. The Committee comprises individuals from the community, businesses and Government who take an interest in preserving our hawker trade. The committee will look at four issues this year.

First, explore various ways to support new entrants, allow them to operate effectively, thus, sustaining our unique hawker trade in Singapore.

Second, propose ideas to improve the productivity in hawker centres to mitigate increases in operating costs and manpower constraints.

Third, suggest initiatives to enhance hawker centres as a social space for community bonding, which could also improve the vibrancy of hawker centres.

Fourth, see how there could be ideas to promote graciousness at hawker centres so that hawkers, cleaners and customers can all benefit.

(In English): The Hawker Centre 3.0 Committee has already met a few times since this January. Er Dr Lee, Mr Liang and Mr Gan asked whether my Ministry is looking to ensure that there are sufficient hawkers equipped with the necessary skills to run the new hawker centres. Indeed, with the median age of cooked food hawkers at 59 years old, we need to do more to attract new entrants and ensure the sustainability of the hawker trade. This is one of the areas that the committee is looking into.

I recently spoke to Mr Fabian Toh, a third-generation hawker who left his previous job after working for 13 years to take over his family business to sell traditional Chinese dessert at the Chinatown Market.

Like many other new entrants, he faced challenges, such as the need to hone his cooking skills and the need to operate during weekends. But many new hawkers also shared that there were some perks, such as having some degree of flexibility in working hours as well as the satisfaction of being commended for their food. We will continue to engage these hawkers to find out their motivation for joining the hawker trade, as well as the challenges they face.

The committee will explore ideas on how we can attract and, more importantly, support new entrants to the hawker trade. One idea is through the provision of structured training programmes. Individuals who decide to enter the hawker trade can be taught how to cook and to maintain proper food hygiene and skills in business management.

This may be complemented by measures to help hawkers improve productivity and mitigate cost increases, for example, through centralised services for dishwashing, or bulk buying and preparation of raw ingredients.

Some of our hawkers already have innovative ways to improve productivity. Mr Tan uses a creative but simple machine to automate the frying of traditional Chinese biscuits or 耳朵饼 at his stall in Smith Street Food Centre.

There have also been some ideas on how to enhance the vibrancy of our hawker centres. One interesting suggestion is to encourage communities to adopt hawker centres and use these spaces for social activities. We will also learn from overseas models and experiences.

Hawker centres have the potential to become great community spaces. As a continuation of the SGfuture conversation, we will be engaging members of the public for their views.

Let me now turn to our drains and canals, where we have seen an amazing transformation over the years. This year marks the 10th year since our ABC Waters Programme was launched. To date, 32 projects have been completed.

Ms Tin asked if we can build above our canals. In fact, we have already done so. An example is the ABC Waters project at Siglap Canal near Kampong Kembangan Community Club, where a 150-metre section of the canal was decked over to increase accessibility to the Community Club (CC) and to provide communal space for social enjoyment. Where there are opportunities, PUB will work with the relevant stakeholders to add value to the community, without compromising the canal's drainage functions.

Er Dr Lee and Mr Louis Ng have asked about our plans moving forward. I am pleased to share that we can look towards the completion of about 20 more projects over the next five years.

These are exciting times as we continue to improve our living environment and transform our urban landscape. While we see new challenges in the water and environmental space, these also bring about new opportunities and possibilities. We have a lot of work ahead of us to build a greener and cleaner Singapore. We will work hand-in-hand with the community and all stakeholders in this journey together.

The Chairman: We have a bit of time for clarifications. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Thank you, Mdm Chair. I have three clarifications, two on haze. I would like to ask the Minister: have all the companies that have businesses in Singapore detailed maps of all concessions in their supply chain? And is there any company which takes the easy way out by exiting their businesses in Singapore? Senior Minister of State mentioned about 20 more ABC Waters projects. Is it time for her to announce where those projects are and is there one in Yishun?

Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: I would like to thank the Member for the clarifications. We get the detailed maps currently from different sources, like from World Resource Institute (WRI), but we cannot proceed on these maps alone. We have to ensure that these maps are official and they delineate where these occur and who owns these concessions.

In the case of one of the companies that we have given the Notice, Asia Pulp & Paper Company Limited (APPCL) particularly, they have published their maps. Therefore, based on where the hotspots were found, and the plumes we calculated that would have gotten to Singapore, we have served them Notices. And because of that, we are working on them. As for the others, we are still working with the Indonesian authorities to make sure what we see on the map, what we see on the satellite, match well with what they have in their records.

Secondly, it does not matter if these companies wrap up and go, because, if they have done something wrong, they will be taken to task. The directors who are named in these companies will be taken to task.

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: From the speeches on the cuts made by the Members, you can see that hawker centres and ABC Waters projects are much coveted. Unfortunately, desires are many but resources are limited.

Having said that, first, let me say that, actually, the 20 projects to be completed in the next five years are already confirmed. Nine are already on-going and there are 10 new upcoming projects. They have been announced over time. Nee Soon has got two ABC Waters projects: the Seletar Family Bay and Yishun Pond. Er Dr Lee probably has more than some others. [Laughter.]

Dr Chia Shi-Lu: Mdm Chair, I have just two clarifications for the Senior Minister of State. The first is concerning food wastage. I appreciate her answer regarding food recycling. But my second point was how do we reduce the wastage of food, perhaps by redistributing the food? I suggested things like incentivising retailers to maybe sell them at a discount or maybe to distribute excess food to charities or similar VWOs. That is the first.

The second was, could I have some idea of the efficacy of the Corrective Work Order programme? I note 1,100 were repeat offenders. Could I find out, of these 1,100, how many actually went into a second repeat? What was the recidivism rate of these CWO offenders?

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. First, regarding excess food or unsold food, our strategy towards food waste, first, is not to produce it in the first place. That is the reason why in November last year, we launched the Food Wastage Reduction Outreach Programme. Under this Food Wastage Reduction Outreach Programme, we were working with many stakeholders to develop good practice guides for food manufacturers, food retail establishments and suppliers to reduce food wastage at source through the supply chain.

We are also working on a set of food safety guidelines for the safe handling and distribution of unsold and excess food. We are very grateful to NGOs, for instance, Food Bank Singapore and Food from the Heart, who collect and distribute these unsold food to the needy. We are coming up with this set of guidelines to support this effort. We also have materials for individuals, to tell them, educate the public that they should only buy or purchase what they can consume. And there are tips and cooking recipes on how to use leftover food.

Regarding CWO, there were 1,300 CWOs in 2015; that was for repeat offenders. Not all the 1,300 recorded in 2015 will tally with the 26,000 because Court orders will take a while so it may be cumulative. Based on what we have, our analysis is that enforcement, as well as CWOs, are effective because the number of repeat offenders from CWO is very, very small.

Ms Sylvia Lim: Madam, I have three clarifications for Minister Masagos – one concerning the haze and two on dengue.

First, concerning the haze, the Minister mentioned that we had this earlier collaboration with Jambi province which has ended and we are waiting, I think, for the last four or five years for it to be renewed. Could the Minister share what is holding this up?

Next, regarding dengue, he touched on Radio-controlled Aerial Inspection Craft (RAIC). Yes, we are aware that the trials are going to end soon. My question is whether there is an intention to deploy this on a wider scale and if he can give some information on that.

Lastly, I do not think the Minister touched on the issue of the dengue vaccine in his speech earlier. This Dengvaxia vaccine, I think, has already been registered in a few countries. Experts deem it as 60% effective. I am not sure what is holding the Government up in clearing this vaccine for use in Singapore. Is it because it is considered, in a sense, a lower priority strategy when compared to vector control?

Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: I thank Ms Sylvia Lim for the questions. Firstly, about the haze, about the MOU that had ended. We are as disappointed that we cannot continue with the MOU. So, it is not our move that terminated the MOU. For some reason, within the Indonesian administration, in fact, the last administration terminated that MOU. Now that we want to resume it, they also have different structures, different people. Despite promises that they will want to resume it, we have yet to hear from them when and in what form.

4.15 pm

On our part, we are very keen to do this because that will put people on the ground, their people on the ground, to be trained in fire mitigation, in reporting the onset of haze. It will help everybody. And if it works well, together with the possibility of even working with our Malaysian counterpart who has successfully suppressed peatland fires, this can be replicated across Indonesia. It is, indeed, unfortunate that as enthusiastic as we are to help out our friends, we are not being well responded to.

On the RAIC, the trial is promising. If it works well, we would be able to deploy it much more widely. I would like to urge property owners to not take this as the solution to solve their problems because many of the designs that I went to see together with my staff require owners to take steps to repair and make good where mosquitoes can breed. And, of course, this may not be able to be seen. Sometimes, we need the RAIC to see them. Just because we can see them and can drop Bti, we should not be doing this every year. We should not be doing this every time, because this, basically, is taxpayers' money. What owners should do is to take ownership of the problem, repair the problem, solve the problem and prevent the mosquitoes from breeding again.

Next, on the dengue vaccine, we have been closely tracking the development, MOH particularly. We need to carefully evaluate whether it is safe. This is new, so we do not know yet whether the quality is what they have promised it to be. In any case, the company responsible for this vaccine must submit a proposal to HSA. So, I think if Members are keen to understand better, best to ask HSA about the vaccine.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh: The Senior Minister of State shared that there will be a new hawker centre to be built in Fernvale, Sengkang. May I know whether it will include a wet market, as requested by the residents there?

She also shared that since the removal of the reserve price, 45% of those who bidded to rent the hawker stalls got the stalls at $1,500 and below per month. I have heard before that some cases got the stalls for single-digit rental; how many of them were there? And two-digit rental, how many of them? Would NEA consider reviving the scheme to allocate hawker stalls to help those in the low-income group who wish to be a hawker to run a hawker stall using all these vacant stalls?

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: With regard to the Sengkang hawker centre, if I remember correctly – and I stand corrected – there may be a wet market, but I will have to check up and confirm.

Regarding the rentals, I said that 45% got the stalls below the reserve-market rent. There are actually stalls with rental of $1 but I do not have the figure of how many are single-digit. So, I can follow up with the Member. But because we have removed the reserve rent, 45% is actually below what it would have been if there was a reserve rent.

Regarding the scheme to help people in financial hardship by safeguarding some stalls, as I have said earlier, we had done this previously. Based on the experience, what happened was that many of them preferred to wait out for a hawker stall in a popular centre. I understand that some could wait for a year, two years or so, and the take-up rate was slow because they only wanted popular locations. So, the scheme was ceased.

Now, anyone who qualifies can bid for a stall, including people who may be interested but are in financial hardship because we have removed the reserve rent. Hence, he could bid according to what he thinks will be viable for him.

The other thing which is important is that we now give very targeted assistance to people in financial hardship and there are counsellors who will counsel them and identify what their talents, interests and skills are and help them with employment assistance. If, indeed, they are keen to take up hawking, this is also something that the Hawker Centre 3.0 Committee could look into in terms of having some kind of structured training for people who are interested. You need to give them the right skills so that they can then go and bid for a stall because hawking is not that simple. It is not just about financial hardship. We do want to help all these people, but we must help them in a targeted manner. It is also about skills, capabilities and business acumen. That is important and I think that is the better way to go. I think these are the three.

I just want to correct an earlier point. About Er Dr Lee's query on new ABC Waters projects. No, Nee Soon does not have one. I said just now there are 20 new projects; nine are ongoing and there are 10 more. We have put it in the media factsheet. So, Members will be able to see it but it has not been publicly announced so I stand to be corrected. Most of them are in the heartlands and there is actually one project which involves rain gardens in schools.

PUB is working with the schools to encourage the schools to have rain gardens to use it for educational purposes, as well as to encourage the students to appreciate water and learn how to measure water quality, about habitat creation and so on. So, the 20 new projects will be: nine on-going, which will be completed over the years; and another 10 new upcoming projects, and one project is the rain garden in schools.

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Two points of clarification. First is that with the smoking prohibition, does it also cover the parks and public housing estates that are managed by NParks and not just those by the Town Councils?

The second clarification is still on ABC Waters. I think the projects you listed are in Nee Soon, but the two are actually not in Nee Soon East. So, I am still hoping the Senior Minister of State will consider Nee Soon East, followed by MacPherson.

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: The vision of ABC Waters projects is to make the concept and design pervasive in Singapore. PUB is also looking at a framework to work with developers, land agencies and so on − a framework of guidelines on the ABC programme design and concepts to encourage private developers, as well as land agencies, to incorporate these designs and concepts into their development. For instance, integrate it with the adjacent water bodies or have these ABC design features within the development in terms of rain gardens and so on.

If the hon Member has any idea as to where he thinks it is feasible to have an ABC Waters project, he can always propose and we can always look at it. Obviously, resources are limited, but we will look at it with an open view.

Regarding smoking prohibition, there are already about 30 parks under NParks where smoking is prohibited. The additional 400-odd parks which will be covered by the extension of the smoking prohibition include neighbourhood parks within Town Council-managed areas, parks under JTC Corp and NParks-managed parks in private residential estates.

The Chairman: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, would you like to withdraw the amendment or do you have more requests to make?

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: More requests; well, clarifications.

The Chairman: This is the last request, please.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: I have two clarifications. Just now, the Senior Minister of State mentioned about Sengkang wet market. I would like to ask is there a change in the policy, because not too long ago, we heard that NEA will not build any more wet markets because people do not go to wet market nowadays, especially the younger generation.

The other clarification is with regard to "no smoking" in the parks. Why is it not extended to all the parks of Singapore? Because it can be very confusing; certain parks, you allow smoking, certain parks, you do not allow smoking.

And, of course, I support Mr Louis Ng's request for an ABC Waters project in Nee Soon East.

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: Regarding parks, we will work with the relevant agencies. For those parks where smoking is already prohibited, there are "No Smoking" signages put up and we will be working with the land agencies, Town Councils and so on to get them to put up the proper signages so that people know that it is a "No Smoking" park.

We will continue to work with relevant stakeholders, land agencies, Town Councils and so on, as well as based on public feedback, to look at progressively extending our smoking prohibition to beyond what we already have, but please remember there are already 32,000 premises plus the additional ones where we will be extending our smoking ban.

Regarding markets, it is true that many existing wet markets, unless they are regional and they serve not just the neighbourhood but the region, do not do well. Cooked food stalls will be the priority. Where there are existing wet markets and we are redeveloping or developing a new one, then there may be a basis for incorporating a wet market to relocate the stalls.

The Chairman: Well, I would also like to request one for my constituency, since a lot of requests are made today. But anyway Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, do you wish to withdraw your amendment?

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: I would like to thank all my parliamentary colleagues who have filed their cuts, either voluntarily or otherwise. [Laughter.] I would like to thank the Minister and everyone in the Ministry for their hard work and their continuous effort in making our living environment cleaner and greener. And with that, Mdm Chair, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,221,826,400 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $704,088,300 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: Order. I propose to take the break now.

Thereupon Mdm Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mdm Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.50 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 4.30 pm until 4.50 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.50 pm

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]