Baey Yam Keng
Singapore
“Our next generation will have far greater opportunities to make their mark here. The Government will also guide them into the transport sector through scholarships, training and career development pathways, so that they can put their talents to good use and contribute to society.”
“I would say that the greening of bus stop roofs may not be something that is practical across all bus stops. I do not have the exact figures, but I am sure we must have tens of thousands of bus stops in Singapore. So, there is a cost element.”
“Based on earlier trials conducted by the Land Transport Authority (LTA), fans have a limited impact on the ambient temperature in an exposed bus stop environment. Commuter feedback from the trials was also unfavourable. Most bus stops are also shaded by surrounding buildings and trees, reducing the effectiveness of solar installations.”
“Certainly. Members would remember that over the years and decades, our bus stop designs have evolved. We have to take into consideration various factors, not just the comfort of commuters who are waiting there but also the practicality of sighting of buses coming ahead as well as maintenance, safety and different factors like that.”
“I thank Ms Gho for her concern for the arts and the artists. Indeed, it is part of our commitment to provide affordable, accessible spaces for artists and arts groups. We have announced last year that we are doing a study on how the arts spaces provision can be better improved and the study is ongoing.”
“Speaker, the median and maximum waiting time for pedestrians at signalised junctions are 120 seconds and 140 seconds respectively. Wait times for pedestrians depend on the nature of road, junction size and configuration, as well as prevailing traffic volume.”
The complete record
Every one of 912 lines we hold for Baey Yam Keng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 19.
“Sir, LTA has enhanced enforcement operations. In particular, for retailer operations, the number of operations mounted over the years has increased; in fact, it has increased four-folds, in 2022 compared to 2024. So, we will continue our efforts. The challenge is with online retailers. As the Member has rightly pointed out, it is difficult for us to go after or to track what people are selling or buying online. However, we will be introducing regulations for online marketplace platforms and shops, in respect of non-compliant devices. We will share more later this year and we hope that this would help us in our efforts against sale, purchase and use of non-compliant devices.”
“Mr Speaker, we adopt a multi-pronged approach in the enforcement against non-compliant active mobility devices (AMDs). First, we work closely with Singapore Customs, and the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) to curb the inflow of non-compliant AMDs into Singapore. Second, our enforcement officers conduct operations daily to enforce against non-compliant devices on paths, as well as retailers selling non-compliant devices. Our officers undergo regular training to be updated on the latest violation trends, and are equipped with a variety of detection tools. Most recently, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) conducted an ambush operation in Punggol and seized four non-compliant AMDs. We will continue to conduct regular and targeted enforcement operations. Third, we require e-scooters, which are required to be registered for use, to undergo inspections every two years to ensure compliance with regulations. Fourth, we impose significant penalties on illegal modifications of AMDs for deterrence, given the risks they pose. All offenders, including first-time offenders, will be taken to court. Individuals who are first-time offenders are liable for a fine of up to $20,000 or an imprisonment term of up to 24 months, or both, while retailers who are first-time offenders are liable for fines up to $40,000. Repeat offenders are liable for higher fines and/or imprisonment terms. We will continue to review regulations relating to AMDs, to enhance fire safety and deter the sale, purchase and use of non-compliant devices.”
“Yes, for surveillance cameras to catch high-rise littering, the cameras are typically deployed at the ground level with the camera projected upwards, to try to catch the littering act. So, by counting the floors and which window, which level, the littering act is caught and we are able to take enforcement action. In those pictures that Mr Louis Ng has shown, those are in rare cases or exceptional places where we are not able to mount cameras on the ground, because by pointing a camera into the windows of a home for suspected littering offences, it really goes into the privacy of the house owner. We do not think it is something that our residents would appreciate because it could be a suspect household. It need not be a confirmed smoker causing the nuisance to neighbours. So, it is about this privacy invasion that we are not sure that we should roll it out as a way to catch smoking at windows and balconies. I do seek the Member's understanding.”
“I thank Ms Hany Soh for her suggestions. She would be aware that for the surveillance cameras to catch high-rise littering, in fact, we have already increased the number of deployments and each of these requires the equipment, the set-up and the checking as well as the analysis of the footages. So, it does require resources. The reason why we are extending the deployment period is because these areas tend to be a problem of recalcitrant litterbugs. So, they are habitual litterbugs. We hope that with 28 days, four weeks, they will be caught, during this period. And when they are caught, they will be subject to penalties. If I am not wrong, they will be issued Court orders; you need to go to Court. So, the penalties and the punishment, we hope they will teach them a lesson, that they will change this habit forever. That is the objective of it. As we know, there are so many different HDB blocks in Singapore. It will not be possible to deploy such surveillance systems on a permanent basis. I seek the Member's understanding on this. As for the grants to extend beyond coffee shops, the reason why we are focusing on coffee shop toilets now is because, based on surveys over many years, coffee shop toilets have fared consistently at the lowest level of cleanliness. So, we want to tackle this. If we dilute our resources to cover other public toilets, then I think the impact will not be significant and it will not address the issue that we are facing at hand. So, I hope that we will have the support to roll this out and get the onboarding of coffee shop operators as well as the cooperation of users and other stakeholders so that we can have cleaner public toilets at coffee shops.”
“Mr Chairman, I can always count on Mr Chua to continue his crusade. Oh, Mr Ng. Sorry, sorry. Yes, I got smoked already. [Laughter.] Well, indeed. Smoking, as I said, our current surveillance technology does not allow us to do that. So, if we have a law, the public or complainants will expect the Government to take action, and we do not have credible, efficient technologies that we are able to do that. So, we will disappoint the public. In fact, Mr Louis Ng will also disappoint his residents because we are not able to take enforcement action. I do not like to compare smoking with going around naked at home. I suppose, for streakers at home, probably it is their neighbours who may complain or will try to take pictures and get the authorities to take action. I think it is not entirely apple-for-apple kind of comparison. But I assure Mr Ng and all those concerned about smoking at home causing disamenity, which I also receive similar feedback from my residents, that we recognise the disamenity. And as soon as we are able to find a way with the right technology to be able to do surveillance and detect smoking at private spaces, at windows and balconies, we will do something.”
“Through our initiatives, we will partner and enable them to be effective pathfinders of our present and their future. Fellow Singaporeans can play a part as well. Join our Coastal Conversations to shape the future of our coastal areas, participate in the annual Go Green SG from 16 May to 29 June 2025 and practise green habits to support our sustainable cooling movement. There is a lot more that we can do together. In conclusion, Mr Chairman, a clean, green and resilient Singapore is not by chance. MSE will continue to partner all segments of society to make a difference. Together, we can achieve sustainability, resilience and a better everyday life for all.”
“Post-campaign, CDAC continued its partnership with NEA to promote a sustainable lifestyle among its beneficiaries and volunteers. Assoc Prof Razwana Begum asked about community engagement and action. This year, as we celebrate SG60, we will provide more opportunities for everyone to co-create a sustainable Singapore together. Since the launch of the SG Eco Fund in 2020, more than $13 million in funding has empowered over 300 individuals, groups and organisations to initiate projects that involve the community to advance environmental sustainability. To catalyse more community-led projects, we have raised the maximum grant for the SG Eco Fund's Sprout category, which is the entry tier, from $8,000 to $30,000 for all successful applications received this year. I encourage interested parties to step forward in the spirit of SG60 and the SG Eco Fund, to play your special part and make a difference together. Connecting like-minded partners, including our youths, strengthen our collective ability to tackle sustainability and climate change issues. Last year, I talked about how the #GreenHacks Youth Panel lets interested youths contribute to policymaking and other green efforts. The Panel has since submitted its recommendations to address low domestic recycling rates. This year, we will forge on with the Climate Youth Development Programme. Over the last two years, we have equipped 80 youths with relevant knowledge so that they can contribute purposefully towards sustainability and climate change issues. Some of them have since amplified their learnings to other stakeholders and started ground-up projects to encourage community action. We are inspired by our youths' dedication to a cleaner, greener Singapore.”
“Finally, NEA will strengthen community ownership by collaborating with community leaders and partners to reinforce and sustain proactive citizenry without over-reliance on enforcement. A new initiative, called the Community Action for Cleanliness, will complement operations at identified hotspots with engagement of local stakeholders to address community pain points more holistically and effectively. To Ms Poh Li San and Ms Nadia Samdin's queries, technology is also being leveraged in other parts of the MSE Family to improve productivity and deliver better public services. Since February 2024, PUB has implemented an AI-enabled video analytics solution to inspect drainage inlets along 7,000 kilometres of roadside drains. The technology provides for speedier and more accurate detection of defects, allowing PUB to respond in a timelier manner. In 2022, SFA introduced a mobile lab for onsite testing during food safety incidents. This allows SFA to quickly identify potential food safety risks onsite at large-scale events. SFA is now developing a second-generation mobile lab that can handle substantially higher testing volume with faster results. Mr Chairman, we received strong support from the community in the Year of Public Hygiene. Over 1,700 activities were co-organised by NEA and community partners to promote good cleanliness and hygiene practices. Many partners will continue these initiatives in 2025 and beyond. For example, the Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC), ran a campaign titled "Clean Districts, Amazing Communities" in partnership with NEA, seven Town Councils, and susGain. Over 120 litter-picking activities and 620 zero-waste activities were completed by the various CDAC centres islandwide from June to September 2024.”
“00 pm As the Chinese saying goes, "己所不欲勿施于人", which means "extending to others the courtesy you would like in return", I urge smokers to exercise the same consideration to their neighbours. Close your door and windows if you do smoke at home. Otherwise, go downstairs and smoke away from your block in a non-smoking prohibited area, such as open spaces and unsheltered carparks. We can work together as a community to engender a more gracious society as we shape social norms on acceptable smoking behaviour. MSE and NEA will work together with stakeholders to develop ground-up solutions and promote socially responsible behaviour. Mr Chairman, the Year of Public Hygiene has empowered the community and stakeholders to explore new ways to achieve better public health outcomes. To consolidate these gains, NEA will introduce a new concept of operations. Called "Cleaner Neighbourhood", this aims to strengthen community involvement. NEA will adopt an integrated operations and outreach approach to tackle hotspots with cleanliness, refuse management and congregation problems. NEA will also seek to address the issues upstream, with broader community involvement and greater use of technology. This will include upskilling NEA officers to be more effective at managing multifaceted public hygiene issues. NEA will embrace greater use of video analytics and AI to enhance surveillance and enforcement capabilities, with data used to identify hotspots that require greater intervention. Surveillance data will also be shared with stakeholders, such as Town Councils, trade premises and dormitory operators, to better support their preventive and corrective measures.”
“Anyone, even if not a customer of the coffee shop, can still use the toilets there. This is a public service that coffee shop operators provide to the community, and it is especially important in an ageing society. Therefore, the Government will provide grants to coffee shop operators to encourage them to adopt good toilet designs and conduct regular deep cleaning of toilets, enabling the public to access better and cleaner toilets. MSE will allocate $10 million to launch the Coffee Shop Toilet Renovation Grant and Coffee Shop Toilet Deep Cleaning Grant. Cleaners from successful applicants will also receive free on-site cleaning training to help improve toilet cleanliness. NEA will provide more details about the grants. Improving public toilet hygiene requires continuous effort from both toilet operators and users. Clean toilets benefit everyone. (In English): Finally, Mr Louis Ng asked about legislating a smoking ban at windows and balconies. Expanding smoking restrictions to cover private homes and spaces must be carefully considered as this infringes the privacy of people in their own homes. Even with legislation, we need enforcement for restrictions to be effective. The challenge is that current technologies do not allow the detection of smoking activities at home without infringing privacy. However, I urge smokers to exercise social responsibility to minimise the impact that smoking has on the well-being of others, including their neighbours. I know that some smokers choose to smoke at windows and balconies so that their family members are not exposed to second-hand tobacco smoke. 5.”
“More information will be provided to coffee shops to help them understand the recommended design features, the adoption of which is a criterion for the renovation grant. Successful grant applicants will also receive complimentary onsite training for their in-house cleaners to improve their cleaning effectiveness and efficiency. However, grants alone are not enough. Toilet users and community volunteers can also contribute to cleaner toilets. To cultivate shared responsibility for public toilet cleanliness, we endorse the Taskforce’s recommendation to refresh the Happy Toilet Programme by the Restroom Association Singapore and expand the Neighbourhood Toilets Community Group programme by the Public Hygiene Council. Leveraging technology, such as feedback systems, can facilitate timely feedback, and contribute to public toilet cleanliness. With the Taskforce’s support, the ReportLah! solution is now trialled at over 10 coffee shops in Singapore. Furthermore, we will continue to enforce against errant operators, including suspensions where necessary. In 2024, NEA and SFA stepped up inspections on public toilet cleanliness. Close to 19,000 inspections were carried out, with about 1,300 enforcement actions taken against premises owners and managers. I am heartened that premises have taken action to rectify lapses and encourage them to sustain their efforts to ensure cleaner toilets for all. Over time, we hope that these measures will break the cycle of dirty coffee shop toilets, so that we all can enjoy better and cleaner toilets. Mr Chairman, I will now say a few words in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Gathering and chatting with neighbours at coffee shops is part of our Singapore culture.”
“After almost a year of engagement and discussions, the Taskforce, which I co-chaired with Mr Andrew Khng, the Chairman of Public Hygiene Council, submitted our recommendations to Minister Grace Fu recently. The Minister has shared that MSE endorses the Taskforce’s recommendations, namely, to "Build Well, Clean Well, and Use Well". Let me elaborate on MSE’s response. First, to achieve cleaner public toilets, good toilet design is important as it facilitates easy maintenance. To this end, we welcome the Taskforce’s list of recommended toilet design features. Deep cleaning and providing better training support for cleaners are also critical to improve toilet cleanliness. The Taskforce also recommended grants to support coffee shop operators in toilet upgrading or deep cleaning. Mr Chairman, coffee shops are privately-operated commercial premises. However, they keep their toilets accessible to patrons and non-patrons, providing a public service to the community. This is particularly important in an ageing population, as seniors may have more difficulties in managing bladder and bowel control. Instead of building public toilets in the community, the Government could tap on the Singapore culture of coffee shops being natural gathering points for residents. I am happy to announce that MSE will set aside $5 million each for a Coffeeshop Toilet Renovation Grant and a Coffeeshop Toilet Deep Cleaning Grant. Coffee shop operators can apply to NEA for funding of up to 95% of their toilet renovation costs, capped at $50,000 per coffee shop. They can also apply for up to 95% funding of their two-year deep cleaning contract cost, capped at $25,000 per coffee shop.”
“In 2024, intensified enforcements by NEA and SFA saw more than 1,000 enforcement actions, almost twice the number in 2023, taken against premises owners or occupiers for rat-related lapses. From 1 April 2025, NEA will tighten its enforcement regime, including for poor refuse management and housekeeping. Shifting to mosquito control, community vigilance and innovations like Project Wolbachia have helped us avoid major dengue surges in 2023 and 2024. Going forward, we will scale up Project Wolbachia. The expansion to Jurong East since February and Jurong West in April this year will increase Project Wolbachia’s coverage to 580,000 households. By the end of 2026, 800,000 households, or about 50% of all Singaporean households, will benefit from Project Wolbachia. I assure Mr Gan Thiam Poh that we will announce details on future expansion when ready. NEA will also be conducting pilots to understand the technology’s ability to disrupt dengue clusters. To address Mr Eric Chua's residents’ concerns on Wolbachia-Aedes releases, NEA will respond promptly to feedback to assure residents on the temporary nature of the increased mosquito presence. Over time, with the community’s support, we can maintain low mosquito population, which will lead to fewer releases. Even as we leverage technology, stakeholders and residents must continue to take action to prevent mosquito breeding. Community vigilance is needed to keep dengue at bay. Several Members have asked about public toilet cleanliness and the Public Toilets Taskforce’s recommendations. The Taskforce focused on public toilets that consistently fare poorly in cleanliness surveys, including that conducted by Singapore Management University students.”
“Other technologies are used as well. Ms Hany Soh and Ms Nadia Samdin will be glad to hear that data analytics have allowed NEA to prioritise camera deployments and shorten the investigation process, leading to more timely enforcement actions. In the coming months, NEA will also extend camera surveillance duration from the current 14 days, to up to 28 days, to improve the chances of capturing high-rise littering incidents. Reducing the incidence of vector-borne diseases remains a priority. Ms Hany Soh and Mr Eric Chua asked about MSE’s pest control efforts. In 2024, NEA worked with stakeholders on upstream measures to improve their housekeeping and refuse management. This is to deny rats access to habitats and food sources, especially food waste. In addition, NEA also provided training and practical resources, such as guidelines and cleaning and maintenance sample contract specifications, to help stakeholders manage rat-related issues holistically. Ms Nadia Samdin may be interested to hear that NEA also uses technology to enhance rat surveillance for more targeted interventions. One example is the implementation of thermal imaging technology which complements existing ones, such as infrared cameras, with clearer data on potential food sources for rats, their congregation areas and the pathways. As rats multiply quickly, keeping their population low requires sustained efforts from everyone. To this end, NEA shares surveillance data with stakeholders, such as Town Councils and premises owners, so that they can implement measures to prevent rat infestations, including denying the access to habitats and food sources. Enforcement will continue to play a key role.”
“Mr Chairman, "Our Sustainability, Our Resilience, Our Everyday" represents MSE’s unwavering commitment to a clean, green and resilient Singapore. Over the last six decades, we have made significant progress in ensuring high levels of public health as our way of life. To reinforce good hygiene practices for collective well-being, MSE designated 2024 as the Year of Public Hygiene. I will update on our efforts in addressing persistent challenges, such as littering hotspots, rat infestations and public toilet cleanliness. Our community is generally civic-minded, but littering remains a concern due to the inconsiderate actions of some people. Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about NEA’s efforts in improving cleanliness at littering hotspots. In 2024, NEA increased littering enforcement, conducting about 130 blitzes, a six-fold increase from 2023. NEA’s camera surveillance capabilities were also strengthened, allowing up to 1,000 CCTV deployments a year, compared to 250 in 2023. Last year, CCTVs were deployed 300 times at 13 identified littering hotspots, enhancing operational effectiveness leading to a 36% reduction in litter count between May and December 2024. Thanks to the collective efforts by premises owners, cleaners and members of the public, Causeway Point, Chinatown Complex, Jurong Point and Vista Point are on track to be exited from the list of littering hotspots. NEA will continue to tackle the remaining hotspots through appropriate interventions, including public education and enforcement. On high-rise littering, we share Ms Hany Soh’s concern. High-rise littering is a serious offence, as it poses a danger to the public and dirties the environment. To address it, NEA has leveraged camera surveillance and the presumption clause in the Environmental Public Health Act.”
“For the industrial sectors, since 2017, JTC has installed the Solar Roof Programme and that aims to accelerate the installation of solar panels on industrial properties' rooftops. This programme commenced with the solarisation of JTC's own building rooftops and has since expanded to encompass non-JTC buildings, with a focus on privately leased industrial properties since 2021. This programme requires zero upfront capital outlay and operational costs from the industrialists, making solar adoption easy and accessible. MSE will continue to work with our other industries and agencies to promote the use of cleaner energy. As for the private residential sector, currently, there are no plans for demand aggregation. On Mr Ang's point about the impact on global efforts to contain emissions with the new term of the Trump administration, indeed, we are observing. We do see challenges ahead, but Singapore will continue to work with like-minded countries and persevere with these targets and efforts to curb global emissions. It is something where we look forward to the public's and the industries' support to do their part. With that, we can then encourage more countries to adhere to our commitments.”
“I thank Mr Ong for the specific feedback. Let us work on this offline. Thank you very much.”
“Mr Speaker, as in my earlier reply, the types of information displayed are largely similar. Depending on the make of the train and the design of the LCD screens – some come in two panels, some come in one panel. So, when it is the one-panel design, there will be rotating pieces of information that are displayed on the screen, but the frequency of display would suffice to allow commuters to read the information, interpret and react to the information within the space of travel between stations. But if there are specific requests that the Member would like to make of LTA, I would be happy to follow up with him subsequently, so that we can look into enhancing the experience of all commuters.”
“Thank you. The various train models across different Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) lines are fitted with liquid crystal display (LCD) screens above the train doors, with some variation in the layout of information displayed. They all provide similar information to help commuters in their wayfinding, such as the route map of the line, the direction of travel, current and upcoming stations, as well as the opening side of doors at the next station. In addition to the LCD screens located above the doors, commuters are provided with travel information, such as the current and next station, through in-train announcements and ceiling level displays in the middle of train cabins. Since 2023, feedback on the clarity of information on the LCD displays across the entire MRT network made up less than 1% of the total feedback received by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and the operators, with no specific line receiving substantially more feedback. LTA will continue to monitor public feedback and make further enhancements to our wayfinding features as appropriate.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I also answer Question No 17, together with Question No 16?”
“Such companies may write in to NEA, which will then work with them to understand their challenges, assess the request on a case-by-case basis and, where appropriate, grant time extensions or conditional waivers. I hope that these clarifications help Members better appreciate these prescriptions and regulations under ECA, which were intended to build essential capabilities within companies for better energy management, while having room to exercise discretion where needed. Mr Speaker, Sir, the EC Bill was first introduced in this House in 2012 to help our industrial facilities become more energy efficient. This is an important lever for Singapore to reduce our industrial greenhouse gas emissions. Over recent years, we have made significant strides towards a more sustainable future and enhanced our climate targets. Our ambitious net zero goal by 2050 requires a major energy transition. Enhancing our industrial energy efficiency today, is a necessary step to prepare Singapore for a sustainable tomorrow. So, I call on all Members of the House to give your support to this Bill. With this, Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. 6.11 pm”
“NEA is working with BCA to ensure that companies which have new ventures will be able to complete their EEOA obligations without any delay to the construction of these new ventures. NEA is engaging the companies at the early planning stages of their new ventures to help them understand the process and requirements of the EEOA. Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked about the registration process of new "registrable relevant persons", which represent the companies required to comply with MEES. Registration is done on the Emissions Data Monitoring and Analysis portal that companies who have facilities regulated under the ECA are already familiar with. They would have used it for past registrations and submissions of their energy use reports. NEA will support new companies to familiarise them with the various administrative processes, if needed. Finally, let me touch on how the ECA will be administered, including providing flexibility for companies that might have genuine difficulties in meeting certain requirements. The ECA empowers the Director-General to enforce the MEES, including directing companies to carry out necessary measures to ensure that the prescribed system can meet the prescribed standards. The NEA Director-General exercises these powers fairly and transparently across the facilities regulated under the ECA. NEA has also developed Standard Operating Procedures to ensure that the ECA is implemented consistently and fairly across companies. There are also flexibility provisions for companies that face genuine constraints in meeting the requirements of the ECA, which Mr Yip Hon Weng spoke about. Under section 31B, NEA has the power to exercise flexibility to help companies that are unable to meet the ECA requirements due to extenuating circumstances.”
“While company directors do not have specific responsibilities under the ECA, the Energy Conservation (Energy Management Practices) Regulations do prescribe specific responsibilities for the Chief Executive of the company. Under the Regulations, the Chief Executive is the person principally responsible for the management and conduct of the business of the corporation. The Chief Executive is required to endorse the corporation's annual submissions to NEA, such as the annual energy use report, energy efficiency improvement plans and energy efficiency opportunities assessment report. In addition, the Chief Executive is required to provide a signed statement assuring the completeness and accuracy of information submitted for the status of registration of his corporation. Mr Louis Ng also asked about the timeline for industrial facilities that are not regulated under the ECA to conform to MEES. As mentioned in my opening speech, this would fall under the third phase of MEES for chilled water systems, where we have catered for a longer lead time for this group of less energy intensive facilities to prepare for compliance by 1 December 2029. As such, there are no plans to stagger the timeline of report submission over the next five years. Mr Yip Hon Weng sought clarifications on the energy efficiency reporting requirements for small companies that fall under the revised definition of "new venture" under the ECA. The submission of EEOA reports for new ventures is streamlined under the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA's) CORENET X platform, which is also used for the submission of their building plans.”
“The process of preparing the reports enables companies to get facility-level insights, such as its energy performance and potential for energy efficiency improvement. NEA also provides support by reviewing each company's energy consumption and their energy efficiency improvement plans, ensuring that these plans are forward-looking, span the next one to five years and include at least one planned energy efficiency measure. Second, at the industry-level. As I mentioned earlier, aggregated data from the reports is used to form the industry average on energy efficiency performance, which is then shared with companies to help them benchmark their own energy efficiency performance. NEA is also better able to assess the challenges faced by the industry in improving energy efficiency and assess whether current measures are translating into concrete energy efficiency improvement efforts. Third, at the national level. NEA also has an interest in tracking the overall effectiveness of our energy efficiency measures, as Mr Yip alluded to. Insights from the energy use reports, together with the EEOA and MEES reports, inform the next bound of policymaking on further energy efficiency gains in industrial facilities. For instance, as I shared in my opening speech, the reports highlighted that the majority of the chilled water systems in industrial facilities were inefficient, which led to the introduction of MEES for chilled water systems. Moving forward, we are also gathering input on the feasibility of applying MEES to other common industrial energy-consuming systems. Next, I will address questions on key responsibilities and processes under the ECA. Mr Louis Ng asked about the duties of company directors under the ECA.”
“To illustrate, an SME that taps on the EEG to retrofit a chilled water system with a cooling load of 1,000 refrigeration tons would be able to reduce the investment's payback period by about 20% to two years. Thereafter, the SME will stand to enjoy savings of around $1 million every year from this more energy-efficient system. Mr Louis Ng and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about efforts to engage the industry on the requirements under the ECA. Indeed, NEA has engaged the industry on energy efficiency improvements through multiple channels. This includes working with trade associations and chambers to reach out to companies, particularly SMEs, to raise awareness of how they can make energy efficiency improvements and access funding support through schemes, such as the EEG. NEA also organises regular industry engagement sessions and puts out circulars to update the industry on the latest developments and upcoming regulatory requirements, ahead of their compliance timelines. NEA adopts a targeted approach through one-on-one engagements with companies to help them understand their performance and identify areas for improvements. NEA shares the analysis of how the company's energy efficiency journey compares against the industrial average and encourages companies to adopt industry best practices. Together, these efforts support companies to take concrete steps to raise their energy efficiency and reduce business costs in the long run. Third, on energy reports. Mr Louis Ng is right that the energy reports submitted by companies can help to spur energy efficiency improvement at various levels. First, at the company-level.”
“Another example is Watson EP Industries Pte Ltd, a small manufacturing company which worked with EETC to assess their machinery performance and energy consumption more accurately and to identify energy efficiency improvement opportunities, such as upgrading their inefficient air conditioning units. This helps Watson save about 63,000 kWh annually, which translates to about $20,000 cost savings per year. This brings me to my second point, on how the Government is supporting and engaging companies to enhance their energy efficiency. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about the funding support that is available to smaller companies, which may have limited resources. As mentioned in my opening speech, the Government has introduced funding support schemes to help big and small companies undertake energy efficiency improvement projects. The EEG helps companies by co-funding investment in energy-efficient equipment. The EEG provides two tiers of support – a base tier to support up to $30,000 for pre-approved energy efficient equipment; and an advanced tier to support companies for larger investments that drive greater energy efficiency. SMEs receive a higher tier of support of up to 70%, capped at $350,000 under the EEG Advanced Tier. Mr Yip asked if MEES requirements would result in higher costs for small companies. In most cases, it would not. In fact, companies stand to reap significant cost savings from energy efficiency improvements, especially with the Government's funding support. With the EEG, small companies can achieve a shorter payback period on their investments through the reduced capital costs and enjoy considerable cost savings from lower energy use during the lifespan of the equipment.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Louis Ng and Mr Yip Hon Weng for their comments and support for the Bill. Let me address the issues that they have raised. First, on capacity-building efforts for the industry. Mr Yip Hong Weng asked if small companies have access to capability-building programmes and services that could help them in the energy efficiency improvement efforts. I am pleased to share that there are several programmes available today that small companies can access. One example is the Singapore Certified Energy Manager programme, which is co-administered by NEA and the Institution of Engineers Singapore. Since its introduction in 2008, this programme has equipped over 1,500 energy professionals with the technical skills and competencies to manage energy services within their organisation. Another example is the Energy Efficiency Technology Centre (EETC), which is a collaboration between NEA and the Singapore Institute of Technology. Since its introduction in 2020, it has upskilled engineering students and existing practitioners in industrial energy efficiency. By providing low-cost energy assessment services, EETC also supports energy efficiency improvements at SMEs. To date, over 40 SMEs and close to 500 professionals and students have benefited from EETC's services and programmes. For example, EETC has helped Fuisland Offset Printing (S) Pte Ltd, a printing company, to identify opportunities to reduce idle power usage and to address the inefficiencies of their printers. This saved Fuisland 24,000 kilowatt hour (kWh) annually. Fuisland is currently implementing other recommendations across the enterprise to enhance their overall energy efficiency.”
“As announced earlier this year, the FSSB will bring together food safety and security legislation from eight existing Acts into one single Act and provide an overarching framework to ensure coherence across the entire food value chain. We are currently engaging and consulting relevant stakeholders on FSSB. Given that similar food safety risks exist in both sale and donation of food, we intend to extend food safety requirements in the FSSB to cover food donation and distribution activities beyond the sale of food. For example, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim and Mr Yip Hon Weng spoke about the importance of clear and accurate labels on donated food, containing information such as the presence of cooked food and allergens. These are current requirements for food that is sold, which we are looking to extend to all food, whether sold or donated, under the FSSB. The Good Samaritan Food Donation Bill will complement the upcoming FSSB by requiring food donors and food distribution organisations to comply with prevailing food safety requirements before protection from criminal and civil liability can apply. To conclude, the Good Samaritan Food Donation Bill will help encourage donation of surplus food and contribute to reducing food waste. Importantly, this will be conducted in a manner that does not compromise food safety and consumer health. It also provides assurance to food donation recipients that reasonable measures have been taken to ensure food safety. On that note, my Ministry and I support the Bill.”
“Assoc Prof Jamus Lim also enquired on what would happen when donors do not follow safety guidelines. In the event of food safety incidents, SFA will continue to conduct investigations to determine the facts of the case and take appropriate measures to manage the risk to food donation recipients. The Director General (Food Administration) can issue directions to suspend food donation or distribution activities until appropriate rectification has been done. Miss Rachel Ong asked whether intermediary food rescue groups would be held liable if food was found to be unsuitable and unsafe. The Bill covers all food donors, including food distribution organisations such as food charities, which distribute food donated by others for charitable purpose. If the donor or food distribution organisation is found to have donated or distributed unsafe or unsuitable food or did not take reasonable measures to ensure food safety, they would not be protected from liability under the GSFD Bill as they would have failed to meet the conditions stipulated in the Bill. SFA will continue to be judicious in its investigations and will only take action against the errant party. For example, if a food distribution organisation had done its due diligence to ensure the food was safe and suitable when it left its possession, but unknowingly passed on erroneous information from the food donor, the donor would be held responsible while the food distribution organisation will continue to enjoy the protection under the Bill. To better assure food safety in food donation activities, MSE and SFA will be strengthening SFA's regulatory powers through the upcoming Food Safety and Security Bill (FSSB).”
“Second, the food donor should have informed the recipient of any food handling requirements to ensure that the donated food remained safe and suitable. Third, the food donor should have informed the recipient of any time beyond which the food would no longer have remained safe and suitable. Last, the food donor should have taken all reasonably practicable measures to comply with any applicable requirement under any written law related to food safety and hygiene when handling the food to be donated. These conditions provide clarity to donors on the requirements that they should meet in order to be eligible for protection from any criminal or civil liability arising from food safety incidents. To address Ms Ng Ling Ling's query on whether MSE would be the authority to revoke the waiver of liability if food safety breaches occur, the Bill does not warrant the need for revocation of waiver as food donors would automatically forfeit their protection under the Bill if they failed to meet any of the four conditions. The conditions thus provide assurance to food donation recipients that donors would have taken necessary measures to safeguard the safety of the food they provide. Recipients of donated food also have a part to play to ensure food safety. They should exercise due diligence and take responsibility in noting the information provided by donors or food distribution organisations so that the donated food remains safe and suitable to consume. While the Bill facilitates food donation, it does not impede SFA's responsibilities as a regulator or its ability to investigate food safety lapses and take action against non-compliance with food safety directions. Ms Joan Pereira and Ms Ng Ling Ling asked about MSE and SFA's enforcement and investigation processes.”
“These guidelines are refreshed periodically to ensure their continued relevance to food donors and food distribution organisations, and they are available online. Mr Don Wee, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Zhulkarnain and Ms Ng Ling Ling also mentioned other measures to ensure that food donors maintain proper food safety standards, such as the need for training of staff and volunteers, maintaining records for accountability and tracing, and regular inspections. These are good food safety practices which SFA will continue to raise awareness of and educate the food industry, food distribution organisations and consumers on. Where feedback is received and preliminary checks suggest food safety lapses, SFA will also utilise its levers, including inspection, sampling and testing, to investigate and take action. Food donors and food distribution organisations continue to have a responsibility to ensure the safety of the food they are donating or distributing. For example, premises and equipment for food preparation and distribution should be kept clean and well-maintained, and employees and volunteers handling the food should adopt good hygiene practices. Recipients should also be advised by food donors and food distribution organisations on measures they could take to ensure food safety, such as checking the condition of food upon receipt and consuming it within the recommended timeline. To this end, MSE and SFA support the inclusion of the four conditions in the GSFD Bill that food donors must comply with, before the protection from criminal and civil liability can apply. First, the food should not have been unsafe and not unsuitable at the time it left possession and control of the food donor.”
“The GSFD Bill thus complements existing efforts to reduce food waste by facilitating food donation which would then avoid the need for food waste treatment and its associated operational costs. Ms Hazel Poa, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Ms Jean See, Miss Rachel Ong and Ms Joan Pereira suggested further measures to encourage food waste reduction through food donations. We thank the Members for their suggestions and will study them further together with MSF as they continue to look at ways to strengthen efforts in the food support space. As we facilitate and support measures that reduce food waste, we must also ensure that the donated food is safe and suitable for our consumption. Mr Don Wee and Mr Gan Thiam Poh spoke about food safety risks and the importance of ensuring that donors with ill intentions do not misuse the protection accorded by the GSFD Bill. The Bill aligns with MSE and SFA's approach to assure food safety and strikes a balance of roles and responsibilities among various parties. It makes clear that the safety of donated food is a joint responsibility of the Government, food donors, intermediaries, such food distribution organisations, and consumers. MSE and SFA are responsible for establishing the regulatory framework for food safety and providing an enabling environment for the food industry. Mr Don Wee, Ms Hany Soh and Mr Edward Chia mentioned the need for clear guidelines and standards to guide food donors. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about how we could ensure that food donors are well-informed and fully compliant with existing food safety and hygiene regulations. Since 2021, SFA has published a set of guidelines for food safety practices during the preparation, delivery, storage and distribution of food for charitable causes.”
“Sir, MSE supports food waste reduction, whilst ensuring supply of safe food for Singapore. Reducing food waste helps us realise our vision of a zero-waste nation. The total amount of food waste generated in Singapore in 2023 was 755,000 tonnes, which accounted for about 11% of the total waste generated in Singapore. We support the GSFD Bill as we believe it will help reduce food waste by facilitating the donation of surplus food to beneficiaries. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about my Ministry's broader goals in managing food waste. Mr Speaker, food waste is a priority waste stream under the Zero Waste Masterplan and we have implemented a range of efforts under the Masterplan. We have set out regulatory measures in the Resource Sustainability Act that progressively require, from 2024, large commercial and industrial food waste generators to segregate food waste for treatment or conversion into useful products and to submit annual food waste reports. Concurrently, we are building up our food waste treatment capacity through the construction of the upcoming Food Waste Treatment Facility, which will produce biogas and boost electricity generation. The preferred way to manage food waste is to avoid food production in excess of consumption at the onset. We encourage all food establishments, including manufacturers, caterers and retailers, to review processes and practices, to reduce the incidence of excessive food production upstream. Stakeholders may consult the food waste minimisation guidebooks available on the NEA and SFA websites. Where there is unsold or excess food, we support food donation as a possible avenue to reduce wastage.”
“There was a publicised case recently, which based on reports, we understand that the renovation company offered to compensate the family to move out of their flat to give them a temporary accommodation. And in the end, the family eventually hired movers to dismantle and reinstate the affected furniture.”
“There was a publicised case recently, which based on reports, we understand there was agreement in the end where the renovation company actually compensated the family to move out of their flat to give them a temporary accommodation. And in the end, there was some sort of court case or legal demand for them to dismantle and reinstate the affected furniture. [Please refer to "Complaints Leading to Ban on Formaldehyde in Paints for Interior of Buildings and Proposal for Similar Ban on Paints for Furniture", Official Report, 6 August 2024, Vol 95, Issue 138, Oral Answers to Questions section.] [(proc text) Written statement by Mr Baey Yam Keng circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)] I wish to make the following factual correction to my reply to the supplementary question from Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye during the Sitting on 6 August 2024. My reply should read as follows:”
“Sir, as mentioned in my reply, apart from paints, we are reviewing how the law could also apply to other products such as composite wood products and adhesives which also contain formaldehyde. Consumers or people undertaking renovation works should discuss with their contractors to demand that the products used meet these requirements. Also, if they are personally more concerned with such content, they should specify for products that do not contain formaldehyde. There was a publicised case recently, which based on reports, we understand there was agreement in the end where the renovation company actually compensated the family to move out of their flat to give them a temporary accommodation. And in the end, there was some sort of court case or legal demand for them to dismantle and reinstate the affected furniture. So, these can be settled commercially. [Please refer to "Clarification by Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment", Official Report, 6 August 2024, Vol 95, Issue 138, Correction By Written Statement section.]”
“In the case of "formaldehyde in paints", there are already paint products available in the market that do not contain any formaldehyde. This would be something that consumers can easily check by looking at the details about the paint content. They should also question their renovation contractors or painters about what type of paint is being used. Based on the 19 feedback cases I mentioned earlier, a lot mainly dealt with cases of smell nuisance. When the home owners or in some cases employees in offices, they may find out and they will give the feedback, and usually, it is settled between themselves and the renovation companies. In cases where people find the smell to be noticeable, the formaldehyde content will get diluted over time. So, it is quite common, like in newly renovated spaces, the smell would be more obvious, but with proper ventilation, the smell, which is also a proxy for the formaldehyde level within the product or paint, will get diluted to a level that will be more acceptable by the occupants of the premises. The advice is to ventilate and allow some time after renovation works are completed before the occupants move in on a permanent basis.”
“Yes, okay. We will work with the various industry associations, those in the renovation or furniture supply sectors, to raise awareness amongst consumers. But when the law is implemented for "formaldehyde in paints", for example, that will be a law that does not allow the sale of such products. I urge consumers and the public to do more research, do some homework, especially when they are concerned with such products used in their home furnishings.”
“Sir, as mentioned, we are reviewing what is being done in overseas jurisdictions. We are taking reference from them, learning from them to see how we can adopt these in Singapore. Like what we did for the formaldehyde controls in paints, we strike a balance between protecting public health as well as how the industry is able to adapt to the new requirements, because any changes may affect the industry and ultimately, consumers if they are not able to respond accordingly. Sorry, what was the second supplementary question?”
“The Alliance for Action on Sustainable Spaces, jointly formed by the Singapore Business Federation, Singapore Furniture Industries Council (SFIC) and Singapore Green Building Council (SGBC) developed and launched a set of industry guidelines and recommendations to improve indoor air quality last year. Among other things, these guidelines recommend formaldehyde emission limits for products and furnishing used indoors. We encourage the public to use products that are certified with the Singapore Green Labelling Scheme (SGLS) administered by the Singapore Environment Council, or the Singapore Green Building Product (SGBP) Certification Scheme administered by the SGBC. For wood products bearing these green labels, the formaldehyde levels are certified to be low or non-detectable, while interior paints certified with these labels are required to have no formaldehyde. The SFIC’s website also lists its member companies that have pledged to supply or adopt low or no formaldehyde products and solutions. If products containing formaldehyde are installed in indoor spaces, occupants are advised to improve ventilation and promote air circulation by opening doors and windows where possible, as well as utilising fans and ventilation systems, which can help dilute the concentration of formaldehyde in those areas.”
“Sir, my Ministry has been monitoring the issue of formaldehyde levels in indoor premises. Since 2020, the National Environment Agency (NEA) has received 19 feedback cases on formaldehyde levels arising from renovation works. We announced at the Committee of Supply 2024 that we will introduce regulations on formaldehyde in interior paints. From 1 January 2026, interior paints with formaldehyde will not be allowed for sale in Singapore. "Formaldehyde in Paint" will be regulated as a hazardous substance under the Environmental Protection and Management Act (EPMA). Companies found importing, manufacturing, possessing for the purpose of selling or offering for sale in Singapore, interior paints with formaldehyde levels equal to or exceeding 0.01% weight in weight, are, upon conviction, liable to a fine of up to $50,000 or imprisonment for a term up to two years or both. NEA will carry out market surveillance and take appropriate enforcement action. This implementation timeline strikes a balance between safeguarding public health and giving the industry sufficient time to adapt to the new requirements based on its feedback. In the meantime, interior paints with no added formaldehyde are already available in the Singapore market. We recognise that apart from interior paints, there are products such as composite wood products and adhesives which may emit formaldehyde. NEA is actively studying this issue, including the review of international best practices, guidelines and regulatory requirements. The furniture industry has made an effort to lower formaldehyde emissions.”
“How have the VCs been able to reach out to this group of potential volunteers? In each town, there will also be businesses and corporates, both big and small, where their staff could be encouraged to volunteer, too. Can MCCY share its plans in encouraging corporates to join the SG Cares movement? SG Partnerships Office Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong launched the Singapore Government Partnerships Office (SGPO) in January to strengthen the Government's partnerships and engagements with citizens. Can MCCY share how SGPO will drive Government-citizen partnerships? The Partners Portal has a useful listing of all partnership receptacles, grants and volunteering networks available in the public sector. I think this is a good starting point as citizens can sometimes be confused and do not know the existing resources available. Getting help in navigating to the right agency and contacts can accelerate the process and help to put good intentions to actions quickly. One area that this portal can help is in areas where a proposal might cut across portfolios of different Government agencies but yet become an orphan in a way that it might not feature too highly in any one agencies' agenda. Then there is also the policy of no double-dipping. A proposal may not receive funding from more than one Government grant or scheme. Can MCCY share how citizens will be supported to materialise their proposals, especially those that may fall between the cracks? As all new initiatives will have some teething issues, I wish SGPO all the very best in its journey to forge a closer partnership between citizens and the Government.”
“SG Care Volunteer Centres (VCs) are now set up across all 24 towns in Singapore to support needs on the ground by matching the needs with volunteers and resources. The concept is great. As these centres are operated by organisations based in the community, they know the needs in the respective communities better, are better connected to resources and can broker supply and demand at the town level more effectively. This initiative started in 2018 in a few towns, and it has been two years since all 24 VCs were established. Can MCCY share the impact VCs have had in building a culture of care and how this impact will be sustained? What have been the challenges and experiences gained over the years? I know there have been some changes of operators in some towns. What are the reasons for these changes and how has MCCY been managing the disruption? The needs in each town are varied and span across a spectrum. Besides social service agencies and charities, there are Government agencies, such as Silver Generation Office, requiring volunteers, too. At the same time, while there could be some town-specific demographic characteristics that require VCs to have different focus areas and strategies, there will be some commonalities as the Singapore population is generally ageing and the importance of mental health applies across all age groups. Can MCCY share how it will strengthen the VCs' capabilities to attract, engage and sustain volunteers more effectively in meeting the diverse needs? How do the VCs cross-share and cross-learn from one another? It is expected that many volunteers are retirees or people who do not work full time as they would have more time to spare. However, there are specific skills and networks that working professionals can bring to the table.”
“But really, this is a difficult balance because we need to allow the contractors to be able to have expedited progress in its works; otherwise, the project will be prolonged and extended, and that will even cause residents an extended period of inconveniences. So, I do thank the residents of the area, and all areas affected by the works, for their understanding and patience as we work towards its completion. The works around Avenue 6 is a road tunnel and that is expected to be completed in 2029. But the level of work will be in different phases and not all works will be as noisy as it is. And we also appreciate the Member, Mr Yip Hon Weng, for always speaking up for his residents. He has had held many meetings with authorities, like LTA, the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) and NEA, to look at ways to minimise the inconveniences. So, we thank him and thank his residents for their understanding. When the works are completed, residents can look forward that the street level of Avenue 6 can be repurposed, to give priority to different purposes, like walking, cycling, public transport and community spaces. We look forward to working with residents to look at how we can repurpose the new space that has been created from the NSC. 10.55 am”
“Sir, NEA has strict regulations on noise from construction sites and other areas that affect the comfort and well-being of residents and other stakeholders around the construction site. So, besides fines, if there are contractors who are caught for repeated exceedances of noise limits, NEA will issue a notice to restrict the working hours for the activity, to prevent the contractors from re-offending. And for violations of the no-work rule, that means there are periods where no work or no noisy work should be conducted and if there are violations, NEA will require the owner or the occupier of the construction sites that have violated this no-work rule, to install an electronic video surveillance at their construction site. And NEA will have access to the surveillance system to monitor the activities at these sites and take necessary strict enforcement for further violation. I would like to mention that these particular works at Ang Mo Kio Avenue 6 is a very special one. It is part of the NSC, which the Member would be familiar with that it is a major land transport construction project, spanning 21.5 kilometres. It is special, not just because of the scale, but because of its proximity to many residential areas, as well as the very challenging soil conditions that the contractors must work within. Therefore, the authorities have been taking many measures on the contractors, NEA has been monitoring very closely the disturbances and the inconveniences impacting the residents around the area. We will take all necessary measures and impose on the contractors to put in necessary measures to mitigate the noise.”
“It is an offence to illegally modify, sell or use such devices on public paths and roads. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) conducts enforcement on paths and roads, and operations against retailers. From January 2020 to December 2023, LTA detected about 5,100 offences involving non-compliant devices on paths and roads.”
“It is an offence to illegally modify, sell or use such devices on public paths. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) conducts enforcement on paths and operations against retailers. From January 2020 to December 2023, LTA detected about 5,100 offences involving non-compliant devices on paths. [Please refer to "Enforcement against Retailers and Distributors of Batteries for Non-original Active Mobility Devices", Official Report, 5 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Oral Answers to Questions section.] [(proc text) Written statement by Mr Baey Yam Keng circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)] I wish to make the following factual correction to my reply given during the Sitting of 5 March 2024. My statement should read as follows:”
“Just to say that that is why we are promoting the gracious path-sharing culture. That is more important.”
“When bicycles and PMAs are allowed on footpaths, we have the dimension restrictions. As mentioned earlier, PMAs cannot be wider than 70 centimetres in width. That would allow, technically, even on a 1.5-metre-wide footpath, two PMAs to cross, to use it at the same time, side by side. Where possible, we will look at improving the infrastructure. So, as mentioned, the target of 1,300 kilometres of cycling paths, that would be even more useful as it can separate the different users. At the same time, we also need all users to be gracious and look out for one another – cyclists, riders and pedestrians. I think it was Mr Giam who talked about having to look out, even pedestrians, to make sure that they do not just keep on looking at their mobile devices while walking. This is where everyone can play a part so that our public paths are safe for all users. 6.00 pm On the Member's second question about the audio announcements, we play these at MRT stations and the 2,000 buses with speakers. For the buses especially, it is not something that is on the loop, playing every few minutes. For those with specific messages to encourage commuters to give way to wheelchair-bound passengers or to give way when there is an elderly boarding the bus. When the Bus Captain sees a vulnerable commuter boarding the bus, that is when the Bus Captain will play the audio announcement, so it will be timely and a reminder to fellow commuters to look out for others.”
“Two years ago, we announced that we are reviewing the use of PMAs. With the acceptance of the AMAP recommendations today, we are saying that the rules will come in force only next year, because the rules need changes to the Active Mobility Act. All in all, there will be three years for users, would-be users and retailers to understand the new rules and to make the changes. For now, users of PMAs, based on current guidelines, need not do anything. They do not have to stop using, they do not have to replace their PMAs. There are, of course, clear violators of PMAs. For example, as mentioned, PMAs should have only one seat. Those multi-seater devices, they are not PMAs, they are technically PMDs. They need to get registration, they need to pass a test, they need to go for the online mandatory test, for example. So, there are these differences. The key is that there is another year before the new regulations come into force and the public should have enough time to understand. We take the Member's reminder that we should use vernacular languages to ensure that as many people as possible understand. And not just people who need them, but also the children or family members who will know how to advise them better.”