Methods to Evaluate Contractors who Bid for Green Building Contracts

17 Ms Sun Xueling asked the Minister for National Development what are the processes in place to ensure that (i) design and consultancy fees for building iconic "green" and "sustainable" buildings are fair and appropriate (ii) proper cost and benefit analyses are conducted before going ahead with the construction of such buildings (iii) the tender evaluation body of such contracts is well-versed in the subject and has a sense of the fair costs of design and construction and (iv) the tender evaluation body for such bids does not rely solely on an assessment based on relative bids.

The Second Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Deputy Speaker, in all green building projects, Government agencies will first assess their efficiency requirements, bearing in mind the overall costs and benefits. Thereafter, they will award the project to a proposal that achieves the desired efficiency outcomes at an optimal cost. There are systems, processes and controls in place to achieve this. While consultancy and construction fees are driven by market forces, the public procurement frameworks ensure that agencies pay fair and competitive prices.

In addition, the Centre for Public Project Management (CP2M) compiles norms for construction costs and consultancy fees for agencies’ reference to aid in budgeting for projects. CP2M also works with agencies to review the design of major infrastructure projects to ensure cost effectiveness and value for money.

Based on a study conducted by the Building Construction Authority (BCA), buildings that meet the Green Mark Platinum standard cost up to 5% more compared to buildings that do not meet the required energy efficiency outcomes. However, the additional costs are more than offset by the savings from reduced energy and water consumption. The payback period can range from three to six years, which is well within the typical useful life of the building asset. So, from a cost-benefit perspective, there are good reasons to continue our push for Green Mark buildings including Green Mark public sector buildings.

But beyond cost benefit perspectives, there are also other reasons why we need to push for green buildings. Last September, BCA and the National University of Singapore (NUS) released the results of a joint research study which suggests that Green Mark buildings provide a healthier indoor environment for their occupants. Occupants were also generally more satisfied with their indoor environment and were less likely to experience symptoms of Sick Building Syndrome.

Sir, ultimately the public sector must walk the talk and continue to take the lead in demonstrating our commitment to urban and environmental sustainability. So, the initiative known as the Public Sector Taking the Lead in Environmental Sustainability (PSTLES) was launched in 2006 to improve energy and water efficiency of our public sector buildings and today we reaffirm that commitment.

Ms Sun Xueling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): I thank the Minister. I have three supplementary questions. Could he share what the make-up of the CP2M committee? Who are the members of this committee? Are they largely civil servants or do they include participants from the private sector as well?

My second supplementary question is if there were any issues with asset maintenance arising from the use of green technology.

Thirdly, with rapid changes in technology, has that also resulted in problems in finding parts or in the process of trying to maintain these green buildings?

Mr Desmond Lee: Could the Member repeat the second question, I did not quite catch it.

Ms Sun Xueling: The second question was with regards to whether there were any issues with asset maintenance arising from having green buildings, be it spare parts or something else. The third question was with regards to changes in technology.

Mr Desmond Lee: On the composition of CP2M, I do not have the exact composition and names at this point in time. The second and third questions relate to availability of replacement parts as well as technology?

Ms Sun Xueling: The second question was if there were no changes in technology and we had gone to the same manufacturer or the same construction company, whether there were issues in the replacement of parts.

My third question was if there was a change in green technology, let us say industry wide, and you had to look for a new company to replace parts, will that cause issues?

Mr Desmond Lee: Mr Deputy Speaker, when you look at requirements for a building to achieve Green Mark certification, there is a variety of criteria. Some of them involve the incorporation of technology such as filters to remove particles from the air to make the indoor environment healthier. They involve mechanical parts, they involve technology. Some of them are based on design, for example, making better use of sunlight instead of enclosing the space and then having to use electricity to light up an indoor space in the day time. There are a variety of these measures that go into making a building both water and energy efficient.

As far as it involves technology such as rainwater harvesting technology or solar panels, these are technologies that are available in the market. The developer, whether it is a public sector developer or a private sector developer, working with the consultants would have to assess whether the technology and equipment that they use are sustainable, maintainable and replaceable throughout the life cycle of the building.