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

Cleaner and Greener Living Environment

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

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the global energy intensity − the amount of energy used per unit of gross domestic product (GDP) − improved by 1.8% in 2015. This surpassed the 1.5% gain seen in 2014 and triples the annual rate of 0.6% seen in the previous decade, according to the IEA Energy Efficiency Market Report for 2016. But the report added that and I quote: "However, global progress on energy intensity is still too slow, falling short of putting the world onto a sustainable pathway toward a decarbonised energy system. IEA analysis shows that annual energy intensity improvements need to rise immediately to at least 2.6% in a trajectory consistent with our climate goals."

I would like to ask the Minister how is our performance in industrial energy efficiency efforts compared with other countries? What is the feedback from industries on the obstacles they are facing and what can the Ministry do to address these concerns? How are we to fulfil our commitment to the Paris Agreement? Are there any new plans to improve on our industrial energy efficiency?

Our city state has done well in managing the air quality from vehicle emissions. Unlike the days before year 2000, certainly we hardly see smoky vehicles on our roads, except some from across the causeway. Even the public can report to NEA if they see any smoky vehicles on our roads.

NEA requires periodic checks for buses and diesel vehicles and we strive to reduce domestic emissions to meet the 2020 air quality targets benchmarked against WHO standards. We have been successful and there are lessons to be learnt from what is happening in China, India and France where smoke from vehicle emissions had created havoc on the ambient air quality. The toll can be very serious as we can see how the haze has impacted the health of the people.

WHO has pointed out that air pollution poses one of the biggest environmental health risks, especially for heart diseases. Can the Minister update the House on what is the strategy to achieve these targets and what has been done so far to improve the air quality in Singapore?

Diesel vehicles are found to be the major culprit in polluting the air. In December 2016, four of the world's largest and most polluted cities have decided to ban diesel cars and trucks from their streets by 2025.

Diesel engines emit particulates into the air at ground level, as well as emit nitrogen oxides. Nitrogen oxides can help form ground-level ozone, which can lead to breathing difficulties for those suffering from respiratory problems. According to WHO, seven million deaths every year are linked to exposure to outdoor air pollution.

At the last COS debate, we were told that a study on diesel vehicles would be undertaken by SUTD. I understand that it has recently submitted a report on alternative technologies to the Ministry. Can the Minister share with the House the outcome of this study? What next after this?

There are some older commercial vehicles retained by their owners which do not meet current day emission standards. What are the Ministry's plans to address these old commercial vehicles? Will the ETS be extended? Apart from this, what are plans to curb emissions from petrol cars and motorcycles?

Next, I would like to briefly point out that there is much that can be done to improve the waste collection system. Frequently, we can see cleaners manually hauling refuse to the bin centres from the chutes at the HDB blocks. This gives rise to complaints from residents about the odour and the spread of pests when this exercise is not done properly. Are there any plans for the Ministry to improve on this waste disposal by cleaners?

I note that the cost of water supply has risen over the years and the Government is raising prices by 30% in two phases from this July. I think what we need to do is to share with Singaporeans what the Government is doing to meet future demand and make our country resilient against any supply disruption, especially in the current uncertain weather conditions. This would, I feel, at least make the people understand and appreciate the big picture behind the price increase.

On climate change, I would like to ask the Minister what are PUB's plans to cope with the unpredictable and intense rainfall that we may encounter in this age of weather turbulence. I know there were drainage works carried out to alleviate flooding, but as the past months have shown, there are many pockets in our midst where more work is required.

2.45 pm

I hope the Minister can update the House on the work done so far on the Stamford Diversion Canal, Stamford Detention Tank and the Bukit Timah First Diversion Canal. Has any of these been completed and if so, how have they helped to prevent flooding in key areas?

On PUB, I would like to ask if the Minister can update us on the Active, Beautiful and Clean Waters Programme which was launched a decade ago. Where are we now? What more can we expect of ABC Waters for this financial year?

Recently, the NEA has designated smoking areas in busy downtown Orchard Road. I do not know if this is after taking a cue from Nee Soon South, where we have successfully put up 42 Designated Smoking Points (DSPs) and eight more in progress; a total of 50 DSPs. I hope the Orchard Road experience is positive. May I ask what plans are there to further expand this to other parts of Singapore and protect the public from inhaling second-hand cigarette smoke?

Question proposed.

Preserving the Environment

Ms K Thanaletchimi (Nominated Member): Madam, regarding the recent announcement on carbon tax, though it is in the right direction to reduce carbon emissions it will, however, have an impact on the industries' financial sustainability and, ultimately the workers and consumers. Are there other measures that we can put in place to incentivise the individual firms to be prudent and compel them to use alternative sources of energy?

With this tax, are we on track to meeting our commitment to lower carbon emissions? Has the Ministry explored other initiatives, considering the level of carbon emitted in our day-to-day life may have compounded the problem? Perhaps, the Ministry can consider further reviewing the following. One, creating greater awareness of the importance of addressing climate change and its implication on Singapore and its people. This can be done through schools, at workplaces and in public places with educational posters and documentary films, extensively promoting recycling, reducing or replacing the usage of plastics. This can be done by providing greater access and incentives for one to exchange empty bottles for coins − a practice found in Sweden. Pushing for consumers to bring their recyclable bags and not providing the alternative of plastic carrier bags could also be considered. It is the age-old culture that we need to reignite.

About 19% of carbon emission comes from transportation. Can we do more in getting electric vehicles instead of petroleum cars to ply our roads if our effort to make Singaporeans switch to public transport remains a challenge? Can we better incentivise companies and individuals to encourage such efforts?

The food we eat is what we are and what the environmental impact will be. It is important to educate Singaporeans on food that poses a negative impact on the environment. "The biggest intervention people could make towards reducing their carbon footprints is to eat significantly less red meat," said Prof Tim Benton at the University of Leeds.

A research, led by scientists at the Oxford Martin School, found that shifting to a mostly vegetarian diet, or even simply cutting down meat consumption to within accepted health guidelines, would make a large dent in greenhouse gases. Adhering to health guidelines on meat consumption could cut global food-related emissions by nearly a third by 2050, while widespread adoption of a vegetarian diet would bring down emissions by 63%.

Lastly, the eco-friendly award is a timely reminder —

The Chairman: Ms Thanaletchimi, your time is up. Can you please conclude?

Ms K Thanaletchimi: — of what we need to do and that protecting the environment is everybody's duty. Thank you, Madam.

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

Prevention of Dengue

Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): At the beginning of this year, NEA warned that we could see an increase in the number of dengue cases towards the middle of the year. The agency had detected 60% more Aedes aegypti mosquitoes the previous month over last October in its Gravitrap surveillance system. This is, indeed, very worrying. I am especially concerned about the impact of the disease on our elderly whose immune systems are weaker.

Can the Ministry provide an update on the study of the male Aedes aegypti mosquitoes carrying the Wolbachia bacteria? Initial studies have suggested that these released male mosquitoes have successfully mated with the urban females whose eggs do not hatch. Does the Ministry detect a fall in the number of dengue cases in the estates where these studies were conducted? In how many more estates will these male mosquitoes be released in the future?

The high diversity of circulating dengue serotypes is also worrying as immunity for one strain does not offer protection against other strains. Although the world's first dengue vaccine, Dengvaxia, is now commercially available here, it is much less effective against two of our most common strains, Den 1 and Den 2. Nonetheless, since the vaccine reduces severe dengue by 84%, I hope that the Ministry will help publicise the availability of this vaccine to increase awareness.

I would also like to ask how successful our public education programme on the prevention of mosquito breeding has been. Are industries and residents more aware of the dangers and being more cooperative now?

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The industry sector, as the largest emitter of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, plays an important role in reducing our emissions. Consumers can also help by using more energy-efficient appliances. What plans does the Ministry have to improve industrial and household energy efficiency and thus reduce GHG emissions? How will these contribute towards Singapore's pledge to reduce our emissions under the Paris Agreement on climate change?

Air Quality in Singapore

Dr Chia Shi-Lu (Tanjong Pagar): Madam, the Ministry announced air quality targets under the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint in 2015. Unfortunately, we are not on track to achieve our air quality targets by 2020. For the last two years, we have not been able to meet our targets for pollutants, such as fine particulate matter (PM2.5), particulate matter (PM10) and ozone. I would like to request an update from the Ministry on its plans to achieve these targets.

For pollutants that are carried here by the winds from neighbouring countries, what is the progress of our collaborations with these nations to cut down on activities which produce haze?

On to the carbon tax. The carbon tax will affect between 30 and 40 direct emitters, such as power stations, should it start in 2019. How much improvement in air quality resulting from this tax does the Ministry expect and will the reduction be in time for us to reach the 2020 deadline?

Will the Ministry consider giving much more attractive rebates for cars which emit less pollutants to convince more buyers to switch to these cars while increasing the surcharges for more polluting vehicles?

Lastly, I hope the Ministry will look at measures to improve the quality of air in our estates by restricting indiscriminate burning for religious offerings and installing more accessible burners to encourage responsible usage. Can the Ministry also commission studies to improve the design of these burners?

Diesel Emissions

Next cut, please. At last year's COS, the Ministry announced that it would undertake a study on diesel vehicles. Commercial vehicles, such as vans and lorries, are mostly diesel-driven and account for nearly 60% of our total pollution from vehicles although they make up only about 30% of vehicles on the roads.

I understand that SUTD has recently submitted its report on alternative technologies to the Ministry.

Diesel emissions are an area of concern. In 2016, some major cities around the world have taken actions to curb diesel vehicles which are known to emit higher levels of Particulate Matter (PM) and Nitrogen Oxides (NOx). For example, to improve air quality, Paris, Mexico City, Madrid and Athens have recently announced that they will ban the use of all diesel vehicles by 2025. I hope our Government will consider incentives, such as road tax exemptions and other rebates, for petrol-electric hybrid commercial vehicles or, even better, perhaps to follow in the footsteps of the above countries. May I know how MEWR's study is progressing and what are the likely findings and recommendations that they will make?

Curbing Roadside Pollution

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Madam, in September 2016, a research scientist from the Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (Smart) found that commuters who wait at bus stops could suffer more from the pollution of the toxic ultrafine particles emitted by vehicles. His research showed that a two-way bus journey five days a week could lead to a commuter inhaling about 3.5 times more tiny pollutant particles than at ambient level.

The Singapore Air Quality Data, provided by the NEA, only measures up to PM2.5. However, the particles found in vehicle emissions are 100 times smaller and thus are not currently captured in our air quality indices. Also, in many cities around the world, curbside pollution along main trunk routes is included in air quality indices. We should develop our own roadside index as part of our slew of air quality indices. Other than the informational function, the roadside air quality index will serve an educational purpose and as a progress tracking instrument in our fight against this specific pollution.

Vehicular emission control is the ultimate solution to this problem. But even as we make progress on this front, would the Ministry work with the relevant agencies to promote technological and design innovations to mitigate the effects of curbside pollution on bus commuters?

Recently, the experimental next-generation bus stop in Jurong made the news. Equipped with a swing, rooftop garden, artwork, library books and broadcast screens, the bus stop makes waiting productive and may even encourage more waiting. But this is actually a dangerous proposition given curbside pollution. I hope such experimental bus stops would also test technologies and designs to mitigate curbside pollution.

Enforcement against Noisy Motorbikes

Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Mdm Chairman, the motorcycle traffic jams at both the Woodlands and Tuas checkpoints are a daily common occurrence. Anyone who has crossed the causeway can see the long line of motorcycles entering and leaving Singapore.

Many motorbikes entering Singapore from Malaysia for work during dawn and rush back by night, often riding fast to beat the jams. Some of these motorcycles, with modified engines and exhaust, tend to emit loud noises, which cause a nuisance.

I have received several feedback from residents who stay along the PIE leading to the Tuas checkpoint about this noise pollution. I would like to ask the Ministry if enforcement measures against noisy motorbikes can be implemented or stepped up.

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

Incentivising the Sale of Hybrid Cars

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Madam. One way you we can fight climate change is by promoting the use of hybrid cars or cars with lower emission. This can also contribute to cleaner air. Can the Ministry look into providing more incentives for buying vehicles with cleaner emissions, as well as introducing tighter emission standards for new vehicles.

Ultimately, we need to make sure that hybrid cars cost cheaper, at least slightly than high emission cars, so that more people will buy them.

Procurement of Sustainable Palm Oil

My next cut. The haze pollution in 2016 was much less severe than in 2015. Did the Ministry's effort in naming the companies who may have contributed to the haze help? I am sure the Government's decision to buy only green label paper helps significantly as well.

As such, will the Government now look into procuring only sustainable palm oil, considering that it has announced support for the roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil recently? Lastly, what are the Ministry's expectations for the haze situation in 2017?

Promoting a Haze-free ASEAN

A haze-free ASEAN is only possible if all ASEAN states work together to resolve this longstanding problem. What is the progress of the Ministry's effort on the regional front to achieve a haze-free ASEAN? Specifically, how will Singapore be working with Indonesia and assist in the effort to prevent and clamp down on forest fires? What role can businesses and the general public play in contributing to this vision?

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, take your two cuts together.

Water Supply and Resilience

Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Madam, the Linggiu Reservoir in Johor, Malaysia, is an essential source of our water supply. Its size is five times, larger than all of our 17 freshwater reservoirs combined. Our entitlement draw of 250 million gallons per day (mgd) of water from Linggiu meets over 60% of our current demand for 430 mgd of water.

Hence, the drastic drop in its water level over the past few years, from 84% to the lowest recorded level of 20% last October, is a matter of grave concern. How will the water supply in Singapore be affected if Linggiu reservoir runs dry? How we can build our water resilience against contingencies, such as weather uncertainties and supply disruptions?

Our demand for water is expected to rise to 800 mgd by 2061 as a result of growing population, commercial and industrial needs. In the same year, our 99-year water agreement with Malaysia will expire. How will our water supply be affected if Malaysia decides not to extend our water agreement? What plans do the Ministry and PUB have to ensure that our water supply is adequate in meeting future demand?

We have been experiencing more instances of extreme weather conditions, from prolonged dry weather to intense downpours resulting in flooding. More recently, we have lots of rain in the afternoons. Is the Ministry working on a long-term infrastructural solution to collect water during the heavy rains while mitigating the problems of flooding?

3.00 pm

It is just as important for us to minimise water wastage. How efficient is our system of inspection to detect, prevent and minimise water wastage and leaks?

For many years, most of us have taken the flow of clean water from our taps for granted. We must step up our efforts to increase public awareness of our water conservation. How has the progress of our public education efforts been? Can the Minister share updates on water saving designs and installations in our buildings? Next cut.

Water Price Increase

Would the Ministry elaborate on the Government's expenditure, investments and subsidies for water made to ensure sufficient and reliable water supply for Singapore? How does the Government reach the figure of 30% for the increase of water price?

Given the current poor economic climate, businesses, in general, will find it difficult to stomach the water price increases. Is it possible for the Ministry to defer the price increase or stagger it over the next five years with smaller annual adjustments?

Our individual households play an important role in water conservation as they account for 45% of the water demand. What are the plans the Ministry has to help and encourage Singaporeans to practise water conservation and adopt water saving measures at home? What are the available technologies families can tap on to reduce their water bills?

Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Madam, the water price increase is applied across-the-board to all households and businesses. However, industries that use large amounts of water, such as food, paper and chemicals, may be more adversely affected. As water is a basic cost for these industries, this cost may then be transferred to consumers. Can the Ministry consider a "Tiered Pricing System" to help those industries which are more reliant on water?

Fair and Equitable Water Pricing

Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Madam, household size matters. Each person in a household may be trying their best, saving water, reducing their water consumption. But it adds up if you have many people at home in a big household. Progressive water taxation calculated at a per-household level does not distinguish between big or small families. This may end up having a regressive effect on large families living in the same home at the same address, some of whom may be lower-income families. Has the Ministry studied the possibility of per capita consumption as a new measure, if not for now, then for the future, as our technology improves? Some other agencies already consider per capita measures for forms of financial assistance and subsidy.

Water Tariffs

Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim (Nee Soon): Mdm Chairman, Singaporeans were informed that water tariffs will go up by about 30% by 2018 in two steps − one in July this year and, the second, on 1 July 2018. As a Singaporean, I am grateful for the efforts made by Minister Masagos and other Ministers and Members of Parliament, agencies and fellow Singaporeans as well, helping to clarify and give a clearer picture about this move.

These clarifications, via parliamentary debates, media coverage and ground engagement, have given some Singaporeans an accurate picture on issues relating to water and the recent proposed initiatives to increase water tariffs. I, myself, have attended and carried out my own engagement with my residents and fellow Singaporeans. I realised that we need a lot of explanation, sometimes argument, and, finally, most importantly, many get the accurate picture. And there were a few comments made by them after the engagement. For example, one person I met, who after speaking to him for a while, told me, "Why didn't you tell me this earlier?" Another one I met, who was very concerned about needy Singaporeans, shared with me and said that, "Fortunately, I met you this morning. I have a better perspective about the issue now. But you must help needy Singaporeans." And another one shared with me that he has read this post which shows that the water price will increase by more than 30%. He said, "The social media is a dangerous place. I got all my facts and figures wrong."

So, I feel that without our efforts and clarifications, I fear that many Singaporeans will get the wrong information and may be misguided. Still, there are residents whom I met who were concerned about the increase in water tariffs. I would like to ask the Minister: with the price hike in water, is water still affordable to Singaporeans, especially to the low- and middle-income households?

Increase in Cost of Water

Dr Chia Shi-Lu: Thank you, Mdm Chairman. I think many of my comments echo the previous Members'. For the first time in 17 years, our water price will increase, with the first 15% in July this year and another 15% in July next year. Many residents that I have spoken with understand and do support the rationale for this increase, considering the enormous sums of money that we have to continue spending on our water infrastructure in order to achieve water self-sufficiency in the long term. However, many of them have made suggestions. First, is it possible to perhaps stagger the increase even further, perhaps, say, 10% over three years, instead of 15% over two years? Another question is: what are the Ministry's plans to mitigate future increases in the price of water down the road?

It has also been reassuring to hear over the last few days in this House, the help which lower and middle income families will get to manage this increase. After subsidies, households in 1-room and 2-room flats will hardly see any increase in their bills, and 75% of our HDB households can expect less than a $12 increment in their bills per month. Nonetheless, I am still concerned about some financially vulnerable households which may still be coping or struggling with utilities arrears, despite the subsidies. How will the Ministry assist this group of low-income households cope?

Hawker Centre

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Madam, hawker centres are an integral part of Singaporeans' everyday life. It is also an important part of Singapore's social landscape where Singaporeans from all walks of lifes and all backgrounds come together to enjoy a good meal and at an affordable price.

We must retain and strengthen this unique identity of ours and keep the culture of hawker centres alive and well. This is why, like many Members here in this House, I have always pushed for more hawker centres in Parliament as well as during my engagements with the Ministers and Ministries during GPC meetings. Hence, it was with great joy and satisfaction for me personally when the Government finally announced to resume the building of new hawker centres in 2011, and, in total, 20 centres by 2027, which I thought is not an ambitious timeline. We should do it faster.

I am glad that the Ministry commissioned a Hawker Centre 3.0 Committee, chaired by Senior Minister of State Amy Khor, to look into how we can make improvements to the overall offerings of hawker centres, making them more vibrant and to sustain the hawker business.

The report, with a list of recommendations, was released last month. I would like to use this opportunity of the COS to seek the Ministry's response to the recommendations put up by the Committee. In particular, I have four specific questions.

Firstly, on sustaining the hawker trade, what training programmes would the Government be introducing that are different from the existing culinary courses?

Secondly, productivity initiatives usually have cost implications, such as requiring upfront costs. Are there any measures to address the cost implications of productivity initiatives on the hawkers?

Thirdly, what plans does the Government have to increase the vibrancy of hawker centres?

And fourthly, NEA has been advocating tray-return with varied levels of success. What more will the Government do to improve tray-return rates in existing centres?

Littering and Tray Return Initiatives

Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Madam, when the tray return initiative was launched in 2012, it was briefly touted as a success in the early days, but with a caveat − the high return rates came only when volunteers were around to encourage patrons to return trays. Back then, NEA acknowledged that the tray return initiative had still some way to go before the practice takes root.

It has been more than four years since the return tray initiative was launched. I am not sure if my experience and observation at hawker centres is an outlier, but the practice has not taken root and the initiative does not seem to be achieving its objective. Tables at hawker centres and food outlets continue to be cluttered with leftover food, dishes and trays, regardless of peak or off-peak hours.

I seek an update from the Minister on the progress of the roll-out of the return tray facilities in all hawker centres and the effort NEA intends to take to make this initiative work. Without a sustained effort to promote this facility, which costs an average of $11,000 per hawker centre, it will not be money well spent.

Next, I wish to seek an update from NEA on its anti-littering campaigns. The 2010 campaign "Do The Right Thing. Let's Bin It!" was rather a mouthful and forgettable as the message was not sustained as well. Littering remains a problem in our city state despite the many years of effort to educate the public on the anti-social behaviour.

As a first-world country, we are certainly not living like one in the area of cleanliness. Madam, the success of the tray return initiative and anti-littering campaign is an important part of the equation in our effort to keep bird nuisance and rodent infestation at bay. I urge the Ministry not to let up in its effort to imbue the public with social responsibility for the good of the country.

Fair Rentals for Hawkers

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Madam, it has been three years since the social enterprise model for managing hawker centres was piloted. Recently, in December 2016, NEA announced that it was moving forward with the next phase with two components.

The first component is the call for social enterprises to tender for the management of two new hawker centres at Yishun and Jurong West. The second component is the appointment of NTUC Foodfare to manage what NEA calls a "pilot group" of two new hawker centres in Woodlands and Pasir Ris, and five existing hawker centres in Toa Payoh, Old Airport Road, Whampoa and Chong Pang. NEA believes this would offer NTUC Foodfare economies of scale and greater flexibility to experiment with new ideas and operational processes.

I have several questions. Concerning the "pilot group", given the geographical spread of the hawker centres, how are economies of scale achieved? Why is there a need, in the first place, for economies of scale? Is the operator under cost pressures and what are these? Have rental rates at the Bedok Interchange Hawker Centre gone up in the last three years? Similarly, have the prices of the food there gone up in the last three years?

For the two new hawker centres in the group, will there be a mix of subsidised and non-subsidised stallholders paying market rentals?

The same question applies to the two new hawker centres being tendered out for social enterprise management. Also, would NTUC Foodfare be excluded, in the interest of allowing for a diversity of operators, to experiment with new ideas and operational processes and to develop expertise? If NTUC Foodfare requires economies of scale, then what about the new operators?

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, please take your two cuts together.

Corrective Work Order

Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Thank you, Madam. Littering tickets issued by NEA rose 18% last year to reach 31,000 tickets. This is despite years of ongoing public education and enhanced fines for litterbugs. Would the Ministry share how many repeat offenders were issued Corrective Work Orders (CWOs) in the last three years and does it think that they have been effective? Will there be changes to how the CWO is conducted to increase their effectiveness?

Mobile Surveillance Camera

High-rise littering is such a hazard. All of us know that it is called "killer litter". But it is difficult to apprehend the culprits. The Ministry has been deploying mobile surveillance cameras to catch such residents in the act. Can the Ministry provide an update on the effectiveness of these cameras in deterring high-rise littering? How many cameras are in use and how many litterbugs have been caught in the last year?

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, you have two cuts. Please take them together.

Expanding the Smoking Ban

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Thank you, Madam. Can NEA provide an update on the effectiveness of the designated smoking areas and points in Orchard Road and Nee Soon South? What are the Government's further plans to protect the general public from the harmful effects of second-hand smoke? Will it be moving towards only allowing smoking at designated areas, instead of having a list of prohibited areas? Will the Ministry consider expanding the ban on smoking outside designated areas to other busy streets, such as the Central Business District and the Civic District, as done in other cities like Tokyo and Kyoto?

Safe Removal of Harmful Refrigerant Gas

Singapore is currently the second largest producer of e-waste per person in Asia. I am encouraged by NEA's intention to implement a regulated national system to collect and recycle e-waste and would like to ask the Minister for an update about this.

In the meantime, we still face the problem of appliances, such as fridges and air-conditioners which contain refrigerant gas, such as HCFCs, a gas which is extremely harmful to the environment and to human health. It seems that, currently, there are insufficient facilities and industry incentives for proper disposal of these appliances and many are not properly discarded. In the US, the venting of HCFCs is illegal. And Hong Kong and Australia have also set guidelines. I understand that NEA will phase out the import of these fridges with HCFCs by 2030. But what is our interim solution? What facilities are currently available in Singapore for the venting of HCFCs, and has the Ministry set any industry guidelines? Would the Ministry consider setting up a national facility for the proper removal of HCFCs from appliances before they are incinerated?

3.15 pm

Management of E-waste

Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Mdm Chairman, there is an urgent need for a national plan for managing e-waste. As the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources has explained in his responses to some Parliamentary Questions over the last few months, 60,000 tonnes of e-waste are generated annually in Singapore. This is not a small amount for our size. According to a 2013 article published in the journal, Waste Management, 500 million computers became obsolete in the United States between 1997 and 2007. China generated 1.11 million tonnes of e-waste annually. While I should point out that precise comparisons are difficult because of differences in definitions and time period considered, we should not delay making strong moves to address what will certainly turn out to be a growing problem for our environment.

Because we have limited space and disposal options, any accumulation over time will be more difficult for us to manage later. Also, the scale of the e-waste challenge in Asia is unclear but, by all accounts, growing, adding to the concern. The lack of a visible nature of e-waste at present appears to suggest that the problem is obscure. As e-waste accumulates, without a comprehensive management scheme, the problem, including the requirements for specialised methods of dealing with toxic materials, will grow. A national management plan should include the capability for tracking e-waste production and address improper disposal.

Waste Collection

Dr Chia Shi-Lu: Madam, I think we all agree that there is much room for improvement of waste collection in Singapore. In HDB estates under my care, I frequently see cleaners manually hauling refuse to the bin centres from the chutes. I also get complaints from residents on the odour and pests when these activities are not done properly or when the bin centres are not properly secured. How does the Ministry plan to improve waste collection in our housing estates and hawker centres? And will the Ministry act to upgrade the older bin centres in some of our estates?

I would also like to suggest that we improve the way that waste is disposed of in the first place. For example, food waste is the primary culprit for causing odour and attracting pests. The Eco-Wiz's EcoDigester breaks down food to produce water that can be reused for cleaning or landscaping. This system, as I understand it, is already installed at around 30 hotels, restaurants and schools and at the Ang Mo Kio market. Each digester can process about one tonne of waste per day. Can this system be studied further and, perhaps, be installed at each precinct so that we can involve residents to dispose of their food waste in an environmentally-friendly way and also generate some water along the way?

The Chairman: Assoc Prof Dr Faishal Ibrahim. You have two cuts. Take them together, please.

Rising Affluence and Waste Management

Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Mdm Chairman, as Singapore becomes a more affluent country and as our population grows, we generate more waste. Further, the waste that is generated is more complex to process. For example, many residents replace their mobile phones or computers once every two to three years and electronic goods would come in several layers of packaging.

Could the Ministry share what it sees as key waste streams and outline its broad plans to handle the waste in the upcoming years?

Recycling

The domestic recycling rates in Singapore seem to have stagnated at around 19%-20% for many years. As a result, the amount of refuse being burnt and buried at the Semakau landfill has been steadily increasing with the growing population and economic activity. This is not sustainable as Singapore has limited land and sea space for landfills.

What is the Ministry's plan to improve domestic recycling rates to 30% by 2030 under the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint?

Food Waste Recycling

Mr Liang Eng Hwa: Mdm Chairman, the public may not know this but we generate a tremendous amount of waste each year. As I understand from the Ministry, in 2015, an estimated 785,500 tonnes of food waste were generated, a 40% increase from the amount generated in 2005. So, a 40% increase over 10 years. Besides efforts to reduce waste, we should also look at how we could better recycle waste.

I understand that NEA has already worked with the private sector to treat food waste, for example, in hawker centres. Many large F&B operators have also installed their own on-site food waste digesters. May I seek an update on the progress of these initiatives?

While these are commendable, these premises only treat the waste they generate. There are benefits to adopt a district-level approach to treat food waste from various premises, such as economies of scale and avoiding the need for individual premises to set aside space for their own digester. Last year, the Ministry announced a project to collect food waste from various premises in Clementi for treatment at a centralised facility. Can the Minister provide an update on the project?

The Chairman: Miss Cheng Li Hui, you have three cuts. Please take them together.

Miss Cheng Li Hui: Madam, Singapore generates 140 kg of food waste per person each year but combustion of food waste is inefficient.

At Our Tampines Hub, we have an Eco-digester Centre. Every month, the hub generates about 10 tonnes of food waste. From this, we are able to derive approximately 100 kg of fertilizer, 1,000 litres of non-portable water and 600 litres of liquid nutrients. The water is used for general cleaning of the Eco-digester centre and the nutrients are used for landscapes in our hub.

In 2016, the Ministry announced its plans for a district-level food waste recycling pilot. Could the Ministry give an update on its plans to promote food waste recycling on a larger scale? And will we involve more children in these programmes to raise their awareness of food wastage?

Improving Recycling

The domestic recycling rates in Singapore have stagnated at around 19% to 20% for many years and our contamination rate is high. This is possibly because the rubbish chutes in our housing estates are so convenient. What is the plan to tackle this problem going forward and how can we encourage more people to recycle?

Waste Management

There is much potential to improve waste collection in Singapore. I frequently see cleaners manually moving garbage from the chutes to the bin centre. Sometimes, we get complaints from residents about the smell and the pests when these activities are not properly carried out. What is the Ministry's plan to improve waste collection?

As Singapore becomes more affluent and as our population grows, we also generate more waste. Furthermore, waste is getting more complex to process, and many residents replace household electronic items that come in different packaging. How can we educate the public on better ways of disposal? Could the Ministry share the plans to handle waste in future?

The Chairman: Minister Masagos.

The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): With your permission, Mdm Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the infographics for MEWR COS 2017?

The Chairman: Yes, please. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]

Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The environment has been at the top of our minds this Budget. I thank everyone who has spoken about the need to protect our resources for future generations. Singapore is not alone. Many other countries are paying closer attention to the environment, even as they grow their economies.

We have a plan called the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint (SSB). This plan brings together all that we are doing, in pursuit of a Liveable and Endearing Home, a Vibrant and Sustainable City, and an Active and Gracious Community.

I am glad to say that we have made progress over the course of 2016 and remain on track to meet the SSB targets progressively by 2030. A strong commitment to sustainability remains critical as we build our future economy. As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Ms K Thanaletchimi have highlighted, it will take not only Government support but also the collective effort of every individual to realise this SSB vision. That is why we launched the Sustainable Singapore Movement in July last year to galvanise the community to action.

Climate change. While we stand on solid footing, the road ahead is uncertain. A major concern for us is climate change, a far-reaching threat that we can already see and feel today. Our Meteorological Service recorded 2016 as the hottest year since 1929, when we started keeping temperature records. In recent years, our water managers, too, have had a foretaste of the looming challenge of coping with extended dry spells on the one hand and higher intensity rainfall on the other. Singapore has to plan ahead to deal with climate change impacts. We will not only need to protect our buildings, coasts and infrastructure, but also foster greater awareness, so that we are a resilient people.

As a responsible member of the international community, Singapore is committed to fulfilling our pledge under the Paris Agreement to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Both households and industry play a role in this, as Mr Gan Thiam Poh has noted. Industry, however, contributes the lion's share − 60% − of Singapore's greenhouse gas emissions. We, therefore, need to focus our efforts here.

The upcoming carbon tax to be imposed on large emitters, as announced by the Minister for Finance, will help send the right price signal to industries to reduce their emissions when and where it makes the most business sense.

The carbon tax, however, is not a panacea for achieving our 2030 emissions pledge. We will need other measures to complement the tax. That is why we introduced the Energy Conservation Act (ECA) in 2013, to put in place measures, such as mandatory energy management, and encourage companies to enhance their energy efficiency. I am pleased to report that we have made progress on this front since then.

Let me give an example. Mdm Chairman, with your permission, I would like to show some slides please.

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

Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Murata Electronics Singapore, which manufactures electronic components, is becoming an early adopter of efficient motors. Murata is replacing 50 motors with higher efficiency ones. This will save Murata some 160 MWh of electricity each year. These annual savings of $21,000 in energy costs will last throughout the 15-year lifespan of the motors.

Murata is a good example of how industrial energy efficiency measures can benefit the environment as well as the company's bottom line, but, for the industry sector as a whole, there is clearly more to be done.

Data collected shows that our companies achieved an annual energy efficiency improvement rate of 0.6% in 2015, a slight improvement over 0.4% in 2014. This is still low. To meet our 2030 pledge, we need to work towards the 1% to 2% improvement rates achieved by leading countries, such as Belgium and the Netherlands.

On a positive note, companies that I spoke to at a recent consultation session recognised the importance of improving their energy efficiency. They, however, mentioned that they faced operational and capability constraints. Some also asked for best practices and useful data to be shared with them.

We are studying their feedback and, for a start, we will amend the Energy Conservation Act to introduce a new set of initiatives to help companies improve their energy efficiency.

First, all ECA-registered companies will now be required to implement structured energy management systems and conduct regular energy efficiency opportunity assessments.

Second, companies expanding their facilities will need to factor energy efficiency into their designs upfront, as well as measure and report energy usage for key energy-consuming systems.

Third, NEA's data shows that a substantial proportion of common industrial equipment is inefficient. Hence, Minimum Energy Performance Standards will be introduced, first, for motors, and then other systems and equipment progressively. These practices are in line with that of leading jurisdictions and will help companies to adopt more efficient equipment, conserve energy and enjoy life cycle cost savings.

To pave the way for a robust carbon tax regime, we need to have a sound Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system. The ECA will thus be amended to require larger industrial emitters to improve the quality of measurement and reporting processes for their greenhouse gas emissions. This will help companies to better understand and manage their emissions.

My Ministry will continue to work closely with the NCCS and MTI to consult the affected companies on how to best achieve this.

3.30 pm

We have also received feedback on the need to improve the current incentive schemes. NEA will be consolidating their existing energy efficiency incentive schemes into a single fund called the Energy Efficiency Fund (E2F). NEA will redesign the E2F to better support companies to identify and undertake energy efficiency retrofits. We will, especially, help our SMEs by co-funding up to 30% of their investments in energy-efficient technologies. Further details will be released by NEA.

We need a sustainable way to grow our economy. It is even more important if the world becomes increasingly carbon-constrained.

Mdm Chairman, let me move on to another key priority of the SSB: ensuring good air quality, which Dr Chia Shi-Lu, Assoc Prof Daniel Goh and other Members have spoken about. Indeed, just this week, the World Health Organization reported that, worldwide, more than 0.5 million children die every year, due to air pollution.

Over the years, we have taken steps to improve Singapore's air quality, all to safeguard the health of our population. Measures include tightening industrial emission standards, updating emission standards for new vehicles and introducing schemes to turn over older, more polluting vehicles. Just last year, we tightened the emission standards for new motorcycles to the latest Euro 4 standards. These measures have made a difference. NEA's studies show that the amount of pollutants emitted by vehicles have fallen by between 20% and 35% over the last decade. However, we have still some way to go to meet our SSB targets.

I announced last year that my Ministry would conduct a review on the diesel vehicle landscape, given rising global concerns over the health and environmental impact of diesel emissions.

Diesel vehicles are a major source of local air pollution, especially particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). Studies have found that PM can penetrate the lungs and contribute to heart attacks, strokes and even dementia; while NOx becomes ground level ozone, which can result in respiratory problems. It is not surprising that many cities around the world have taken drastic steps to limit diesel vehicles within their city centres.

Given these concerns, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Dr Chia Shi-Lu have asked for an update on our progress. As part of our review, we commissioned Asst Prof Lynette Cheah from the Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) to study the impact of diesel vehicles and the availability of alternative technologies. The study found that there are, indeed, cleaner alternatives for certain classes of vehicles. At the same time, we recognise these alternatives also have limitations and may require infrastructure that is not widely available today. Nevertheless, my Ministry will explore ways with other agencies to encourage the adoption of viable alternatives to diesel vehicles.

The volumetric diesel duty, which the Minister for Finance introduced two weeks ago, is in line with our plans. A usage-based tax better accounts for the harmful effects of each litre of diesel fuel used. We hope that this will encourage individuals and companies to optimise their use of diesel fuel and even switch to alternative technologies with lower emissions.

Apart from this, we will continue with our three-pronged approach in managing vehicular emissions.

Firstly, we encourage the purchase of cleaner vehicles, such as low emission hybrid cars, which Mr Louis Ng spoke about. The Carbon Emissions-based Vehicle Scheme (CEVS) was first designed to nudge consumers towards vehicles with lower carbon emissions. This remains important as vehicles contribute the second largest share of Singapore's greenhouse gas emissions, after industries.

However, we now need to revise CEVS to include tailpipe emissions of harmful air pollutants, on top of carbon dioxide. The revised CEVS will be renamed as the Vehicular Emissions Scheme (VES). To incentivise the purchase of car and taxi models which are more environmentally friendly overall, the VES rebate or surcharge will be determined by the worst performing pollutant. This incentive framework has worked well in the past and we will continue to review its effectiveness.

Secondly, we inspect vehicles already on the road to minimise harmful emissions from them. The in-use emission standard for diesel vehicles was already tightened in January 2014. We will now introduce new in-use emission standards for petrol vehicles and motorcycles, similar to those already in place in Europe and Japan. These standards are designed to be easily met by properly maintained vehicles. The new standards will take effect on 1 April 2018 and will help minimise excessive emissions due to vehicle defects or poor maintenance.

Thirdly, we encourage the removal of older and more polluting vehicles. To incentivise this, we will revise the Early Turnover Scheme (ETS). The ETS has been successful, with over 27,000 older diesel vehicles being replaced by newer ones, resulting in significant reductions in NOx and PM. We will extend the scheme for Euro II and III diesel commercial vehicles that switch over to Euro 6 and equivalent models, for two years from August 2017.

Given industry feedback, as well as the findings that Light Goods Vehicles (LGVs) remain a major contributor of diesel pollution due to their large population, the scheme will also be enhanced by increasing the COE bonus for LGVs from 13% to 35%. We hope that through this, more diesel commercial vehicles and buses will switch to Euro 6 models or cleaner electric hybrids or petrol alternatives.

Transboundary haze − as a small city-state, clean air is not just a local issue. Forest and peatland fires in the region can produce haze which affects us. Transboundary haze is not only detrimental to the social and economic well-being of Southeast Asian nations, it represents a major setback to the global effort to fight climate change. A scientific study has shown that the 2015 fires in Indonesia released nearly 1 gigaton of greenhouse gases. Daily emissions during that haze period were even higher than that of the entire European Union.

Fortunately, the relatively wet southwest monsoon season in 2016 and active efforts by the Indonesian government have prevented a repeat of the 2015 haze. However, as we approach the next dry season, we appreciate the recent commitment by the Indonesian government to take action to prevent fires. In fact, as we speak, the Riau province is under emergency alert for potential fires.

It is important that we continue to send a strong deterrent message to errant companies responsible for these fires, that they must change their ways. That is why we enacted the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act (THPA) in 2014. We will continue to take all steps necessary to enforce the THPA, while ensuring that we operate within the ambit of international law.

Businesses and the general public can play their part, too. Large companies should especially ensure that sustainable practices extend throughout their entire supply chain. I am glad that, last year, WWF-Singapore, together with Unilever, Danone, Ayam Brand, IKEA and Wildlife Reserves Singapore, launched the Singapore Alliance for Sustainable Palm Oil. This alliance aims to transform the palm oil industry by increasing the availability and usage of Certified Sustainable Palm Oil (CSPO) in the region.

At the same time, the Singapore Environment Council has enhanced the criteria for the Singapore Green Label for pulp and paper products to take into account the companies' efforts to prevent fires on their plantations and manage their plantations on peatland. With the enhanced label, consumers will be better able to identify paper companies with sustainable business practices and make their choices accordingly.

As Mr Louis Ng has pointed out, regional cooperation remains essential to tackle the haze problem. Last year, ASEAN member states came together to develop the Roadmap on ASEAN Cooperation towards Transboundary Haze Pollution Control. This is a laudable development and underscores the region's commitment to realise the vision of a Haze-free ASEAN by 2020. We all look forward to the completion of the ASEAN study on the social, health and economic impacts of the 2015 haze crisis, which will consolidate the case for the ASEAN member states to strengthen efforts to prevent the recurrence of haze.

Mdm Chairman, I have laid out our plans to secure clean energy and clean air. Let me turn to clean water. Firstly, I appreciate all who have given their comments on the water price revision over the past week and during the COS, and the many Ministers who have responded. I would like to revisit our water story. To do this, let me begin with "the tale of two countries" − the Netherlands and Singapore.

Both our countries face acute water problems. However, the Dutch have a different problem from us − that of too much water. They have plenty of water from rivers and much of the country lies below sea level and is prone to flooding. The massive flood of 1953, in which thousands perished, is etched in their national memory.

A few months ago, I visited the small town of Zuidplas, the lowest point of the Netherlands and all of Europe. Can Members see the man standing there, below the marker which says 7.8 metres below sea level? This marker shows that people in Zuidplas live 7.8 metres below sea level and are actually hardly aware of it. Even so, people all over the Netherlands are always reminded that the rivers could overflow anytime, inundating their homes and destroying their livelihoods. Thus, to adapt, the Dutch, over time, built a complex system of dykes, pumps and water storage capabilities across the country.

This was possible because each household contributed its share of water taxes, establishing the world's first and only water bank which could finance large investments. In fact, this bank was instrumental in the recovery and the aftermath of the 1953 floods. Today, the Dutch continue to pour over EUR$400 million into flood protection each year. Climate change threatens catastrophes if they do not. This capability has turned into a great advantage. They have attracted water-intensive industries to invest and their expertise is exported globally. Even Singapore is now learning how to construct a polder at Pulau Tekong with their help.

We know that the Singapore Story is at the other extreme. We do not have enough water. But we must take the same determined approach as the Dutch. We have strived relentlessly to secure a reliable and good quality water supply through innovation, sound management and a national awareness of our unique situation.

Our strategy involves not just long-term planning, but also right-pricing and water conservation measures. All these levers work in tandem.

Let me touch on planning. Planning and investing in water resources ahead of time is in our DNA. This is even more critical in the face of looming challenges of climate change to water security, and this applies around the world. We have only to look at Linggiu Reservoir, which is about a third full now and can dry up if current extractions continue and prolonged dry weather returns, unpredicted.

It has always worried us because a dry Linggiu Reservoir will be disastrous for both Singapore and Johor in many ways. The Dutch will recall they did not pay heed to the 1928 and 1934 studies, which repeatedly warned that their dykes were inadequate. Even when high water in 1943 reached the dykes, only simple repairs were made, because they were distracted even after World War II was over. The fact is nobody felt like spending a vast amount of money on raising the dykes. After all, there were no floods for years. So, when the storm surge of 1953 happened, water broke through the dykes and claimed 1,800 lives.

For us, because we were adequately prepared in 2014, the prolonged dry weather in Singapore did not cost us dearly. But low rainfall continued to take a toll on Linggiu in 2015 and 2016, leaving it at its lowest level of 20% in October 2016.

For PUB, it is always about ensuring resilience in our water supply so that disruptions do not occur to our businesses and no Singaporeans will die of thirst.

3.45 pm

How have we done this? Last year, PUB completed its latest review of the Water Master Plan, a strategic blueprint for our water till 2060. The plan provides for development of NEWater and desalination plants to meet up to 85% of our water demand by 2060, as well as new pipelines for drinking water and used water. We are making good progress on the plans. Singapore's fifth NEWater plant, located at Changi, officially opened in January this year.

The third desalination plant in Tuas will be completed this year, and the fourth and fifth desalination plants in Marina East and Jurong Island are underway. Phase 2 of the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System (DTSS), which includes the new water reclamation plant at Tuas, is on track for completion by 2025.

All these have now become critical so that we have a resilient water supply when the weather does not favour us. The Dutch have taken a leaf from the lesson of history and likewise planned ahead and built storm barriers, one of which is the largest moving structures on earth, to defend against exceptional storm surges and the new climate predictions.

We also need to maintain and upgrade our existing water assets, as the Dutch have done with their dykes. As our infrastructure ages, PUB will accelerate renewal plans to minimise pipe leakages and supply interruptions. Our unaccounted-for water losses, which include leakages from our supply network, are around 5%. This is among the lowest worldwide. In London, leakage is about one-fifth of water demand. We cannot afford that. It equates to losing all the water produced by two or three desalination plants.

That brings me to water conservation, another key lever in our system, which Mr Gan spoke about. My Ministry and PUB have a suite of measures, in addition to right-pricing, to promote greater water savings for households and businesses.

In 2016, households used 148 litres of water per capita per day, down significantly from a decade ago. We still have some way to go to reach our SSB target of 140 litres by 2030, not to mention trying to achieve even lower levels, as seen in cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen. If each of us can save 10 litres of water per day, that is almost half a desalination plant.

Over the past weeks, I have been inspired by the many stories of people who have gone the extra mile to conserve water. Some save the rinsed water discharged from washing machines for toilet flushing, while others used the water from washing rice to water their plants. HDB residents are now used to having their corridors washed every four weeks rather than two weeks. This is the right spirit. We should do more together.

To help water saving initiatives, PUB will introduce several new measures. As part of our plans to phase out less water-efficient products, PUB will raise the minimum standards to two-tick rating for the sale, supply and installation of water fittings from April 2019. PUB will also extend labelling requirements to dishwashers from October 2018.

PUB will also introduce two new water conservation programmes for households.

First, PUB will roll out a community project for lower income households to replace their existing nine-litre water closets with more efficient ones. This can help them save up to 10% in their monthly water bills.

Second, PUB will be installing smart shower devices for 10,000 new homes as a demonstration project. The smart shower device provides real-time information on water consumption during showers. An earlier small scale study found that a person could save up to five litres a day using these devices. If the positive effects are validated in the demonstration project, PUB may roll out the devices to even more households.

As for businesses, we will continue to work with them to optimise water use. For large users, PUB has, since 2015, required the submission of Water Efficiency Management Plans (WEMP), which help companies better understand to manage their water consumption. At a recent consultation, some companies, including SSMC, a wafer fabrication facility, said that they invest in water-saving measures as a matter of principle, even though water formed only a small part of their costs. I am heartened that, for these companies, they are driven as much by water conservation DNA as company profit and loss (P&L). I hope many more businesses will follow suit.

Let me now turn to drainage. As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah pointed out, climate change will pose challenges to flood management as well. PUB will continue with its island-wide programme to rehabilitate and upgrade our drains to higher design standards. This year, we will start work at another 27 locations.

The Stamford Detention Tank will be ready this year, while the Stamford Diversion Canal and the Bukit Timah First Diversion Canal will be completed in 2018. These works, when ready, will enhance flood protection for the catchments.

Our water bodies are critical assets, but we have to make them accessible. Just over a decade ago, we launched the Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters) Programme, to allow Singaporeans to own and enjoy our water resources.

I am pleased to share that 34 ABC Waters projects have been opened to the community to date. This year, we can expect the opening of four new ABC Waters projects across the island, including Pang Sua Pond and Siglap Canal, which should be opened later this month. Another four projects at Sungei Tampines (Tampines Ave 7 to TPE), Chestnut Drive Outlet Drain, Sungei Simpang Kanan and Alexandra Sub-drain A will commence construction this year. I hope this serves as a constant reminder of our precious asset.

Mdm Chairman, I have touched on our approach to water to ensure that we do not have too little and to help us manage when there is too much. Many of us are familiar with the Singapore Water Story. Perhaps there is a risk of over-familiarity, a certain jadedness from one too many social studies lessons. Just like water flowing from taps everywhere, it can become invisible, overlooked, undervalued, just like the people in Zuidplas who are not aware that they live 7.8 metres below sea level.

This month, we celebrate World Water Day, to highlight the importance of water sustainability. It is a timely reminder that even today, 663 million people around the world do not have access to clean water. It is in this context that we should relive and encounter afresh our Water Story, the story of what it takes for our people to remain free.

Our Water Story is not concluded; it is not history. Instead, the Water Story is a living story and continues to be written by all Singaporeans today, whether in producing it or conserving it. Sometimes, it is in the larger things, in PUB continuously investing for water supply and their unceasing effort to discover new technologies. Sometimes, it is the smaller things, like when we use a mug to brush our teeth or when the coffeeshop downstairs installs automated cup washing machines that use less water. These are all stories that make our Water Story.

Mdm Chairman, I hand over now to Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor to address our other strategies to make Singapore a sustainable and liveable home.

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Dr Khor.

3.54 pm

The Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan): Mdm Chairman, may I have your permission to display some slides and a video on the LED screen?

The Chairman: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Member.]

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: Thank you. Mdm Chairman, the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew once said, "After Independence, I searched for some dramatic way to distinguish ourselves from other Third World countries. I settled for a clean and green Singapore". Thus, Mr Lee, together with the Pioneer generation of Singaporeans, embarked on an unprecedented journey to transform Singapore from a slum into a Garden City.

Today, as we work towards further enhancing Singapore's liveability, we, too, need to think and act boldly on matters relating to the environment, as Mr Lee did. All the more so, as we face huge challenges, such as manpower constraints, an ageing population and acute land scarcity.

Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim and Miss Cheng Li Hui raised relevant points on waste management. Let me first outline my Ministry's overall strategy and priorities in managing waste. There are three key waste streams of greatest concern to us.

The first is electrical and electronic waste, or e-waste for short. As Assoc Prof Randolph Tan and Mr Louis Ng have highlighted, about 60,000 tonnes of e-waste are generated annually. Currently, consumers can participate in e-waste recycling programmes which industry stakeholders voluntarily provide. For example, StarHub provides e-waste recycling bins at almost 280 convenient locations, such as shopping malls and community centres, through its RENEW programme. The e-waste collected is sent to recyclers, such as Tes-Amm, where resources, such as copper, aluminium and gold are extracted for reuse.

We are currently consulting industry stakeholders on an enhanced national e-waste management system, which would cover both the collection and disposal of e-waste. Some countries, such as Germany and South Korea, have implemented similar systems. We will take into account our local context, such as product coverage and the physical and financial responsibilities of key stakeholders, when developing the system. More details will be released later this year.

Mr Louis Ng spoke about HCFCs. Singapore is a party to the Montreal Protocol and will phase out the use of HCFCs by 2030. We have put in place measures to help us achieve this, such as controls on the import of HCFCs for local use. Apart from regulatory control, we encourage the recycling of refrigerants recovered from refrigeration and air-conditioning systems. Local recycling facilities, such as Vemac Services Pte Ltd, recover refrigerants from decommissioned industrial and commercial systems. We will monitor developments in this area and assess the feasibility of implementing a management framework for HCFCs, taking into consideration the risk to human health, technical limitations and the potential compliance costs which businesses would have to bear.

The second concern is packaging waste, which makes up around one-third of our domestic waste. Since the launch of our voluntary Singapore Packaging Agreement in 2007, we have achieved a cumulative reduction of more than 32,000 tonnes of packaging waste, but more can be done. We are exploring possible regulations for businesses, such as mandatory reporting of packaging placed on the local market and the submission of packaging waste reduction plans, over the next two to four years. We will study the issues and announce the details when ready.

The third concern is food waste, which Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Miss Cheng Li Hui have raised. My Ministry has been pursuing several initiatives on this front.

We are encouraging more on-site food waste initiatives in individual entities, such as hotels, shopping malls, educational institutions and hawker centres.

Mr Liang asked for an update on the district-level food waste treatment pilot in Clementi. Since the end of last year, source-segregated food waste from nine sites, including schools, army camps and a food court, has been transported to a demonstration facility in the Ulu Pandan Water Reclamation Plant. About three tonnes of food waste are collected daily, but we aim to increase this to 15 tonnes a day. If successful, this process will allow us to recover energy from food waste more efficiently.

Good practices start from young and our schools have always been an enthusiastic partner in our recycling efforts. As part of these efforts, we will be launching food waste digesters in 10 schools in the second quarter of this year.

Under the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint (SSB), we have set an overall recycling target of 70% by 2030. Over the last few years, our overall recycling rate has been around 60%. The non-domestic sector comprising industries and commercial premises have achieved a recycling rate of 77%. However, our domestic recycling rates have stagnated at around 20% in recent years. More needs to be done to put recycling at the heart of our culture.

Referring to Assoc Prof Faishal Ibrahim nd Miss Cheng Li Hui's queries, we will be reshaping the infrastructure of our physical environment to make recycling more convenient for households. We hope this will bring us closer to our domestic recycling rate of 30% by 2030. Since January 2014, all new HDB Build-to-Order (BTO) flats have installed recycling chutes adjacent to centralised refuse chutes at every level. Studies have shown that households living in apartments with dual chute systems recycle up to three times more than those in apartments which do not have such facilities. We are now ready to widen the adoption of such systems.

4.00 pm

The provision of recycling chutes will be extended to private residential developments. Buildings taller than four storeys in all new non-landed private residential developments will be required to install dual chutes for refuse and recyclables. This measure will apply to all new non-landed residential development applications submitted from 1 April 2018.

Regarding Miss Cheng Li Hui's query on plans to reduce contamination rates of recyclables, education remains key. Through continued public education programmes in schools and at grassroots events, we encourage everyone to practise responsible recycling habits and ensure that only items which are suitable for recycling are deposited in the recycling bins and recycling chutes.

As Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Miss Cheng Li Hui have observed, our current methods of manual waste collection in the older flats are manpower-intensive and unsustainable. Moving forward, we will transform our waste collection system into a more efficient, manpower-light one.

The Pneumatic Waste Conveyance System (PWCS) is an automated system which transports waste by air suction through a network of pipes to a central collection station. This reduces our reliance on manpower to collect refuse. The whole system will be enclosed and residents will enjoy a more liveable environment, with a reduction in pest nuisance, odours and exposed waste.

There is increasing adoption of PWCS in Singapore. In the public sector, HDB piloted the PWCS at Yuhua estate in Jurong under the HDB Greenprint Programme and will be installing PWCS in new HDB areas, such as Tampines North and Bidadari. Private developers, such as City Developments Limited and CapitaLand, have done likewise. To date, more than 100 condominium developments, such as the Palette at Pasir Ris and Sky Habitat at Bishan, have installed the PWCS.

Therefore, to improve the efficiency and hygiene of waste collection, all new non-landed private residential developments with at least 500 dwelling units will need to be installed with PWCS. This measure will apply to all new non-landed residential development applications submitted from 1 April 2018.

We have consulted extensively with industry players, including the Real Estate Developers' Association of Singapore (REDAS), and have taken their feedback into account in determining the threshold limits and the implementation date. We will also work closely with managing agents and community partners to educate residents on the correct use of the PWCS.

To reap greater economies of scale, my Ministry is studying the feasibility of implementing PWCS at the district level, where different developments can be connected to the same network. An automated and enclosed network of district-level PWCS will bring us even closer to our vision of a manpower-efficient waste collection system in a liveable environment.

Next, I turn to smoking. As Mr Ng highlighted, our long-term goal is to prohibit smoking in all public spaces except at designated areas. Last year, we extended smoking prohibition to areas around reservoirs and more than 400 parks. With this, more than 32,000 premises are now smoke-free in Singapore. We will look into progressively extending the smoking prohibition in other areas.

We recently set up five Designated Smoking Areas (DSAs) in Orchard Road to study the effectiveness of DSAs in reducing smoking in a commercial area. We hope this will encourage smokers to be considerate by smoking only at the DSAs. This study, when completed at the end of the year, will inform us on the public's reception towards DSAs and give us insight into the location and design considerations of DSAs. We will take into consideration the results of this study before we consider extending the implementation of DSAs to other locations.

On public cleanliness, we have stepped up enforcement against littering. NEA issued more than 31,000 tickets to litterbugs last year. This is almost 18% more than 2015 and the highest since 2009. To Mr Gan Thiam Poh's question about the effectiveness of CWOs, over the past five years, less than 6% of litterbugs who have undergone CWOs have been caught for littering again.

Mr Gan also asked about the effectiveness of cameras against high-rise littering. NEA adopted the use of surveillance cameras in August 2012 and has since made more than 4,100 deployments and taken more than 3,300 enforcement actions against high-rise litterbugs. These cameras create an effective deterrent effect, as only about 1% of high-rise litterbugs are caught offending again.

But beyond enforcement, the most effective and sustainable way to have a litter-free environment is to inculcate the right social values, so that the responsibility for keeping Singapore clean and caring for our environment is part of everyone's DNA.

Madam, our hawker centres are a unique and integral part of Singapore's identity. Not only do they serve an important function of providing affordable food in a clean environment, they are key social spaces where people from all walks of life can enjoy a meal together.

The Government had previously announced that 20 new hawker centres will be ready by 2027. This will add about 800 more cooked food stalls across the island. I am pleased to update that three new hawker centres have been completed so far, with the latest being at Our Tampines Hub, which commenced operations in November last year.

As highlighted by Assoc Prof Daniel Goh, NEA has been exploring alternative management models by engaging socially-conscious operators, such as NTUC Foodfare, Fei Siong and OTMH, as managing agents for our hawker centres. The feedback from both hawkers and patrons of these centres has been largely positive. NFC, in particular, is an established socially-conscious operator and has been managing the existing Bedok Interchange Hawker Centre since 2014. Rentals at these centres have remained unchanged and food prices have been kept largely stable. Besides monitoring food prices for affordability and ensuring that any price revision is justified, these operators have put in place initiatives like offering bulk purchase of ingredients to help hawkers reduce their cost, or putting in place productivity measures, such as centralised dish washing, to help hawkers address their manpower constraints.

Given the encouraging outcomes of these initial efforts, we have extended this approach to other hawker centres. We have appointed NFC to manage a group of five existing centres with incumbent stallholders and two new centres. Allowing NFC to manage a bundle of hawker centres will enable them to have the necessary scale to enhance the vibrancy and hygiene standards across more hawker centres, as well as the flexibility to experiment with new ideas and processes, to benefit patrons and hawkers. This is the first expanded pilot and we would need to evaluate the results of this approach before we decide on the next steps.

We are calling for tenders for the two new centres in Yishun and Jurong West. The tenders are open to all socially-conscious operators who are interested to manage the centres. We will select the best tender proposal to ensure that our hawker centres continue to fulfil the fundamental objective of providing affordable food in a hygienic environment while allowing our hawkers to make a decent livelihood.

To Assoc Prof Daniel Goh's query on subsidised rent in new centres, subsidised rents were offered to encourage street hawkers to relocate to hawker centres in the 1970s and early 1980s. Some hawkers were also allowed to operate stalls at subsidised rents under the previous hardship scheme, which was discontinued in 1990. Since then, all new hawkers are required to pay rental at market rate. Hence, there are no subsidised rents in all our new centres.

Last year, I announced the formation of a Hawker Centre 3.0 Committee to review and make recommendations to improve the management of hawker centres and ensure the sustainability of the hawker trade to benefit Singaporeans.

Following a year of extensive consultations with many stakeholders, including hawkers, patrons, cleaning service providers and members of the public, the Committee submitted the recommendations to the Minister in February this year.

Mr Liang asked about the response to the Hawker Centre 3.0 Committee's recommendations. I am pleased to announce that the Ministry has accepted all the recommendations. We will, therefore, work together with relevant stakeholders to implement them. Let me highlight a few plans that we will put in place in the coming months.

First, one key recommendation is for the Government to provide training opportunities and pathways for aspiring hawkers − young or the not-so-young. For a start, we are working with the People's Association to develop a "Hawker Fare" series of culinary classes, starting in May. Members of the public can learn how to cook hawker dishes, like chicken rice, yong tau foo and mee goreng from the veteran hawkers themselves. While not all trainees will eventually become hawkers, such courses will also help to generate interest in hawker food and culture among Singaporeans and contribute to sustaining the hawker trade in the long run.

There are a handful of culinary certification courses in the market today. However, these courses are largely not tailored for the hawker trade. Hence, in addition to the Hawker Fare series that focuses on culinary skills, we are working with ITE to develop a separate short course to teach aspiring hawkers relevant business management skills, like basic profit and loss analysis and how to tender for a stall, to help them set up and manage a hawker business. More details will be released later in the year. We welcome other interested parties, such as training providers, to work with us to provide appropriate training to aspiring hawkers.

In the second half of this year, we will set up a one-stop information and service centre, which will provide useful information to both existing and aspiring hawkers, like how to tender for a stall, where to go for courses on food hygiene and the hawker trade, and the range of kitchen automation equipment available.

During the second half of the year, we will also be launching an incubation stall programme, where some hawker stalls at several hawker centres will be pre-fitted by NEA to let eligible aspiring hawkers try out being a hawker for a period of, say, six months. This will allow them to decide if they are cut out for the trade without putting in heavy investments.

Mdm Chairman, with your permission, I would like to say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Committee's second recommendation focuses on improving productivity of the hawker centres. The Committee recommended that the Government implement productivity measures in the hawker centres to help hawkers reduce their workload and address the manpower challenges that hawkers are facing.

In fact, productivity initiatives, such as centralised dishwashing and cashless payment, are already a requirement in the new hawker centres. Some stallholders in existing centres have also voluntarily subscribed to centralised dishwashing services, such as those at Boon Lay Place Market and Food Centre.

The Government will set aside $90 million to facilitate the adoption of productivity initiatives, which will help lighten the workload of hawkers and address manpower constraints. This will include some funding to increase the adoption of centre-level productivity initiatives, like centralised dishwashing and stall-level productivity initiatives like the purchase of kitchen automation equipment.

(In English): We recognise that hawkers are concerned about the cost of productivity initiatives. Hence, as noted earlier, to alleviate these cost concerns, the Government will set aside about $90 million to facilitate the adoption of productivity initiatives in hawker centres. The funding will support the progressive reconfiguration of up to 25 existing centres over the next few years to facilitate the rolling out of centre-level productivity initiatives, such as centralised dishwashing integrated with tray return, and cashless payment solutions similar to those seen at the hawker centre in Our Tampines Hub or Ci Yuan Hawker Centre. We will also co-fund up to 70% of the operating cost of such initiatives for hawkers in these centres for a period of time. This will help lower the initial cost of adoption of productivity measures that will help realise manpower and cost savings in the long term.

To promote stall-level productivity, we will set up a Hawkers' Productivity Grant to co-fund the purchase of suitable kitchen automation equipment for cooked food stallholders. Each stallholder can claim 80% of the qualifying cost of the equipment on a reimbursement basis, up to a total of $5,000 within three years. Hawkers can start applying for this grant in the third quarter of this year.

Some hawkers are already using kitchen automation equipment. When I visited Smith Street Food Centre recently, I came across a cooked food stallholder who sells steamed yam cakes. She uses an automated stirrer to mix ingredients which reduces a lot of manual labour. Through the Hawkers' Productivity Grant, we hope to encourage a greater adoption of such labour-saving equipment.

Third, more than just dining spaces, hawker centres are places where Singaporeans of all walks of life can interact. In response to the Committee's recommendation to encourage regular organised activities at hawker centres in a sustainable manner, I am happy to announce that we will be providing funding support of $2,000 per event to adopters of hawker centres, up to an annual cap of $10,000 for each adopter, to organise events to enhance the vibrancy of hawker centres. Such events can enhance patrons' dining experience at hawker centres, while increasing footfall and benefiting hawkers.

4.15 pm

Fourth, on graciousness in hawker centres, people recognise that the act of tray-return is a kind and considerate behaviour to be cultivated. To Mr Png Eng Huat's question, we introduced tray-return to hawker centres in 2012 and, since 2015, tray-return facilities have been implemented in all hawker centres. The tray-return rates vary, with the highest tray-return rates at Tiong Bahru Market, Blk 157 Tampines Street 11 and Our Tampines Hub. We have also been working on making tray-return stations more visible, prominent and accessible, as seen in the newer hawker centres.

To study how to further improve tray return rates, we are also currently running a pilot involving the use of specially designed tray decals and working with our cleaning contractor at Zion Riverside Food Centre to train the cleaners to encourage patrons to clear their trays after their meals.

These initiatives that we are rolling out are part of our efforts to ensure the sustainability and viability of the hawker trade. They should help to support both existing and aspiring hawkers. This, in turn, will allow Singaporeans to continue enjoying affordable food in a clean and hygienic environment.

Lastly, let me give an update on our dengue cases. Despite earlier concerns that warmer weather would contribute to a spike in dengue cases to beyond 30,000 last year, we managed to bring the situation under control. There were instead 13,000 dengue cases last year. The World Health Organization has also commended our efforts in managing the Zika outbreak. However, we cannot be complacent and should remain vigilant by doing the five-step Mozzie Wipeout.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked for an update on the small-scale field studies of Wolbachia-Aedes mosquitoes that commenced last year. We have seen encouraging results so far. About half of the Aedes aegypti eggs collected from a trial site were unable to hatch. Our panel of international experts recently affirmed the good progress and expressed their support for NEA's plan to move to the next phase of the suppression trial later this year.

Mdm Chairman, in conclusion, everyone must take responsibility for the environment. To achieve the vision of a liveable and sustainable Singapore, as laid out in our Sustainable Singapore Blueprint, everyone needs to be part of the solution. The little things that we do, like throwing away our trash properly, recycling our waste responsibly and returning our trays with the crockery properly, can make a big difference. With the support of this House, Singaporeans can rise up and do this together.

The Chairman: We have a bit of time for clarification. Mr Png Eng Huat.

Mr Png Eng Huat: Thank you, Madam. This is a question for the Senior Minister of State. With regard to the Pneumatic Waste Conveyance System (PWCS), will it be rolled out to existing HDB estates as well, the older estates, the ones with a lot of bin chutes?

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: The plan now is to roll it out to the new HDB estates because, to put in the infrastructure, greenfield, will be much easier and more cost-effective to do. But in Yuhua, we have implemented the PWCS for an existing estate. We will have to phase this out but, currently, the plan is for the new HDB estates.

Mr Yee Chia Hsing: I would like to ask, currently, do we have enforcement teams stationed near the two checkpoints just looking at the noise pollution from the Malaysian motorbikes?

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I will have to check if we, indeed, do have this. I know that we have enforcement officers there to check for smoky vehicles. In fact, I suppose our enforcement officers can also check for noise pollution.

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Mdm Chairman. Just two quick questions for the Minister pertaining to the handout under Water Efficiency and Conservation. Can I ask the Minister to give us more details on the community project to replace the nine-litre water closets in low-income households?

The second question pertains to the Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee mentioning that 70,000 flats are still eligible for HIP, in MND's COS yesterday. HIP involves the renovation of toilets, spalling concrete and so forth. Would the Ministry consider bringing forward the installation of some of the smart shower devices and these water-efficient water closets under the HIP umbrella, because that may accelerate the Ministry's water conservancy efforts?

Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: I thank Mr Singh for the questions. For the first question, PUB will be replacing those 1- and 2-room households, rental flats which do not qualify under the HIP at the moment, to accelerate the change of their systems from the nine-litre ones to the more water-saving four-litre ones. For those who are already undergoing HIP, there is a programme for them, in time, to be replaced.

For the second question on the water volume devices used for the shower fixtures, these are still new and we want to see how consumers would behave and study them. So, we have decided to do this in new homes because then there is no need for fixtures to be put on by the residents themselves, it can be done by the contractors; study them and, hopefully, it will encourage and motivate them to save water.

Dr Chia Shi-Lu:Thank you. Just a quick clarification for the Senior Minister of State. With regard to waste collection, the PWCS is a very good system. I was just wondering about the existing households and estates now and the state of all the bin centres. Are there measures that we can do to improve the situation for the existing households?

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I thank the Member for the question. As I have said, really, we can only do so much, and education and outreach must go hand in hand. It is key for the National Recycling Programme, where there are recycling bins at every HDB block, one of the issues, of course, is contamination. We need to continually go out, do outreach, put up signages about proper recycling habits as well as to educate residents on proper recycling habits. Even with the dual-chute system, we will still need to reach out and educate residents as to how they use these chutes properly.

That experience is the same even in the private residential developments. There is no shortcut. We need to go out and reach out. I want to encourage all Members in this House to work together with us, rally our grassroots and volunteers to reach out regarding, not just imbuing proper recycling habits, but socially-gracious behaviour like not littering, for instance.

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Just two clarifications. Looking at the handout for the Vehicular Emissions Scheme (VES) that will replace the Carbon Emissions-Based Vehicle Scheme (CEVS), it looks like we are reducing the rebate from $30,000 to $20,000 and also reducing the surcharge from the current $30,000 to $20,000. Can the Minister clarify this because it looks like we are taking a step back?

Second, can the Minister clarify if the Government will look into procuring only sustainable palm oil?

Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The VES first takes into consideration what we think will be the choices made by consumers. We hope that, at the end of the day, it is either revenue-neutral, at the very least, and that consumers, with this VES incentive or disincentive, will make the right choice. It is not meant to subsidise or make ownership of cars cheaper. It is meant to incentivise and we think $20,000 will be enough for them to make the right choices.

For the second question, there is already labelling by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) which encourages big sellers and buyers to comply with sustainable palm oil production. Most buyers and sellers are in this consortium to make sure they comply. I think this is currently the best one we have. To make sure that everybody or compel them to buy only RSPO label products would not be productive nor possible.

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: Thank you, Madam. I just wanted to make a further clarification about the PWCS. What we are doing is to make it mandatory for private non-landed residential developments with 500 units or more to have PWCS. But that does not preclude anybody else with less than 500 units to put in a PWCS system if they wish. In fact, there are already private residential developments with less than 500 dwelling units where they have already implemented PWCS.

When I talked about HDB dwelling units, what I am saying is that HDB has announced that they will be implementing PWCS in some of the new estates. Of course, they have done one at Yuhua, which is an existing estate. It will depend on HDB's plans, going forward, where else they will be implementing the PWCS system.

The Chairman: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, please withdraw your amendment.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Mdm Chairman, I would like to thank my Parliamentary colleagues for giving their precious time to MEWR; every minute counts. I would like to thank the Minister, Senior Minister of State and all staff in MEWR for working very hard, not just for the Committee of Supply but planning ahead to meet the needs of Singapore. I am sure, together, we will have a liveable and sustainable Singapore. Mdm Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,284,472,100 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $1,559,636,100 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 propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.50 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 4.28 pm until 4.50 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.50 pm

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]