Dennis Tan Lip Fong
Singapore
“Yes, Sir. By combining practical experience with advanced analytics, we can transform traditional operational careers in the highly productive technology-enabled professions, ensuring that more high-value decision-making and better paying jobs remain in Singapore.”
“When Singapore officers are deployed at Bukit Chagar in Johor Bahru, Malaysia, do they enjoy the same legal protections and operational autonomy as their Malaysian counterparts enjoy when stationed in Singapore?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Relating to one issue of co-parenting, I would like to ask will the Ministry consider granting foster parents synchronised access to the child's Health Buddy app? Currently, foster parents have no access to the app and require the cooperation of biological parents.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for his reply. Would the Ministry consider a tiered co-payment model for private providers similar to the EIPIC-P scheme where middle-income families can pay a regulated rate for a fixed number of additional private therapy hours to supplement their child's public intervention?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just one clarification for the Senior Minister of State. I thank the Government for acknowledging the gap regarding the software-driven energy degradation and for the commitment to monitor and test when necessary.”
“Yes, just a quick clarification. I thank the Minister of State for the answers and the details. The feedback I receive is pertaining, especially to making appointments, because there have been instances where foster parents experience appointments being cancelled without their knowledge, and then having to arrive at the hospital unnecessa…”
The complete record
Every one of 1,079 lines we hold for Dennis Tan Lip Fong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 22.
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the answer. Just one clarification. Does the Government think that it should increase its resources, to allocate more resources to develop more and better technologies to better assist caregivers in their everyday roles?”
“I call on the MSE to have a multilingual public education campaign to educate Singaporeans on the issue of food waste in individual households, food service, retail and wholesalers. Singapore and Singaporeans must all do our part to step up our efforts to help reach the SDG target of 12.3, of halving food waste by 2030 within the next seven years. Mdm Deputy Speaker, curbing food wastage can go hand-in-hand with curbing food insecurity, especially among lower-income Singaporean households. I applaud many different organisations like Food Bank, Willing Hearts, many lesser known or less formally organised groups and Singaporeans who are already doing that, such as the Red Collective and the many food rescue groups operating in different parts of Singapore, bringing excess food to lower-income Singaporeans, reducing food wastage and helping the food-insecured Singaporeans. Mdm Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I support this Bill and I will repeat my call in my Budget debate speech last year, for mindsets to shift in the way we consume single-use plastic bags and, indeed, all single use plastic products – to only use what we need to use. I also hope that the beverage container return scheme will soon be extended to glass bottles and beverage cartons. Finally, I call on MSE to have a multilingual public education campaign to ensure more Singaporeans will understand the issue of food waste in individual households, food service, retail and wholesalers, so that Singaporeans will double our efforts towards reduction of food waste at all levels.”
“I support the proposed amendments in this Bill for food waste segregation and reporting, which will complement and support global efforts via UNEP and FAO and through the Food Waste Index Report. Naturally, Singapore, Singaporeans and our Government must do our part to support with clear actions the SDG target of 12.3. UNEP has reported that the true scale of food waste and its impacts have not been well-understood, until now. I agree. I would argue that we really should educate Singaporeans of all ages and educational levels on the perils of food waste and how we must reduce food waste and channel produced food resources to better uses in mitigation. While our Government has through its Zero Waste Masterplan and the guides it produced for F&B outlets, supermarkets and food manufacturers to guide and help businesses to reduce food waste – with greater focus on production processes, proper inventory management and effective perishables handling – more must be done to educate domestic households and individuals so that every Singaporean knows about the issue of food wastage and how every Singaporean can consciously minimise food wastage in our daily living habits. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I help out regularly at a food rescue food distribution in Hougang, which focuses primarily on fruits and vegetables. It gives me a frightening glimpse of the potential or actual food wastage at the wholesalers' level on an everyday basis. Mdm Deputy Speaker, to put things in perspective, according to NEA, the total amount of food waste generated in Singapore was 817,000 tonnes in 2021, an increase of 23% from 2020. However, crucially, less than one in six Singaporeans are aware of the problems of food wastage in Singapore.”
“Even in Singapore, where we burn our waste before depositing in landfill, cutting down waste food will also greatly reduce the amount of waste we incinerate and, to some extent, ultimately dumped in landfills. According to NEA, food waste accounts for 12% of our total waste in Singapore by 2021. We need to work on its reduction. Reducing food waste will also be of great help in making our progress towards our climate goals, including our 2030 emission targets. That brings us to why we need to do food waste segregation and reporting. Segregation and reporting are the first step to help us to realise and account for our food waste. A retailer or food service provider can, accordingly, be better guided to take actions to reduce food waste and/or even direct food waste to better mitigation measures. Unsold or unconsumed food can be passed on to food banks and charities for consumption by the less privileged. They can also be converted to composts, animal feed or biofuel gases as they are being done in other countries. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development calls for the halving of per-capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and the reduction of food losses along production and supply chains, otherwise referred to as the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target of 12.3. Achieving this target would have significant implications for the fight against climate change. UNEP's Food Waste Index Report supports the goals of SDG 12.3, with its comprehensive and reliable food waste data collection, analysis and modelling to date; and helping countries to measure food waste at household, food service and retail levels; to track national progress towards 2030 and to report on SDG target of 12.3.”
“Some of us will remember being told by our parents that we have to finish every single grain of rice in our bowl. Why is curbing food waste important? It is important to curb food wastage because other resources have been invested to grow the food ingredients as well as the cooking of the ingredients for consumption. According to the United Nations Environment Programme's (UNEP's) Food Waste Index Report 2021, 17% of our food ends up being wasted in retail and by consumers, particularly in households. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, food that is lost, which accounts for food that is grown, harvested and prepared for consumption right up to just before the retail stage and food that is wasted, which is food wasted at the household, retail or food service stages onwards, could feed up to 1.26 billion hungry people every year. Nearer home, according to a 2019 Singapore Environment Council study, one in three Singaporeans throw away more than 10% of food weekly and this amounts to about $342 million of wasted food a year. Further, food waste has grown by 20% in the past decade in Singapore. According to UNEP's Executive Director, Mr Inger Andersen, each person is said to waste an average of 74 kilogrammes of food every year in all the middle- and high-income countries in the world. Why is cutting food waste important? According to UNEP, 8% to 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions are associated with food that is not consumed. Wasted food meant wasted efforts and resources in producing them, including land, fertilisers, water, packaging, transportation, fuel and so on. Food waste may also be deposited in landfills, increasing the production of methane emissions.”
“I would like to ask the Minister to share with the House, how extensive is the projected availability of the beverage return vending machines. This is important as it complements retail outlets at venues where the beverage containers can be returned. Convenience will certainly enhance greater cooperation and compliance and affect the success of the programme. We are told by NEA and MSE that packaging waste constitutes about one-third of domestic waste disposed of and about 60% of this is plastic waste and that, in 2021, only 6% of plastic waste disposed of was recycled. I hope to see a significant reduction in the volume of such waste being sent to our incinerators after the beverage container return scheme and the plastic bag charge scheme are introduced. I also look forward to the scheme being extended to glass and beverage cartons soon. I would like to ask the Minister, what are the Government's staged plans for further expansion of this beverage container scheme, including the projected time when the scheme will be expanded to glass, as I believe that a lot of glass and even carton waste can be further diverted away from incineration and be recycled, and Singaporeans can be encouraged to work towards this goal. Before I leave this point, and as a follow-up to my COS cut in 2018 on a similar topic, I am also going to ask the Minister for an update on the Government's plans, if any, to reduce the use of styrofoam food and beverage containers, which are still widely used. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I will next touch on the segregation and reporting of food waste, as required under the proposed amendments to the Act. When I was a little boy, I remember being reminded by my parents to finish every bit of food on my plate and being told off for wasting food.”
“Can the Government share its staged plans, if any, to extend the plastic bag charge beyond its current category of retailers of more than $100 million turnover? Mdm Deputy Speaker, this Bill also introduces a beverage container return scheme, which allows a refund of the additional fee imposed when a person buys a beverage in a plastic bottle and metal can. I support this scheme and I think it can significantly reduce the amount of plastic bottles and metal cans, which are currently being disposed of instead of being deliberately recycled via recycling bins and other proper ways. When we are out, there may not always be a recycling bin in sight when we want to dispose of our drink can or bottle after we have consumed the beverage. I can imagine the number of bottles or cans which are thrown into normal rubbish bins every day and taken to our refuse incinerator. Also, although many Singaporeans have developed good recycling habits or practices, many are still not doing so. Singapore is not even at the stage as some first-world countries are where households are required to segregate their waste in different categories, such as general waste, paper, plastic, glass, metal, and so on. We are using one recycling bin for different waste but, sadly, it is a common sight to see general waste and contaminated materials being thrown into recycling bins. Madam, there is still much for us to do to improve our public education efforts. I believe that the beverage return scheme will minimise wrongful disposal, encourage more recycling and inculcate better recycling habits. Like the plastic bag charge, the beverage container return scheme is, sadly, a form of enforced public education. But it will bring certain knowledge to those who are hitherto ignorant or indifferent to recycling.”
“Indeed, while the plastic bag charge will certainly nudge behaviours when people feel the pinch of having to pay for plastic bags, what is more important, I feel, is that we must get all Singaporeans to understand fully: why we are doing this; why we need to reduce plastic bag use; how we can reduce plastic bag production; how we should reduce the number of plastic bags we incinerate every day; and, most of all, to internalise them in our minds so that they instinctively guide our everyday actions. I would like to call on the Government to ramp up on our public messaging to Singaporeans of different age groups. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I am also glad that the Government is encouraging reusable bags. I have been using such bags for supermarket shopping for many years – a habit I first had when I was a student abroad. In my 2021 COS debate cut for MSE, I reiterated the call to use more good quality reusable shopping bags in supermarkets or retail shops. Last year, our Aljunied-Hougang Town Council gave a reusable shopping bag to each of the Housing and Development Board (HDB) households in Aljunied and Hougang Town. I hope it will be a useful reminder to our residents to use more good reusable bags and minimise the use of plastic bags. We have come a long way, even in the last few years, but I hope that, with the plastic bag charge, mindsets will change for those who are used to taking many plastic bags at the supermarket. We need to remind ourselves to only take what we absolutely need. I would like to ask the Government whether it has any plans to increase public education to encourage less use of plastic bags, in conjunction with the imposition of this charge.”
“" She also said that, "There are actually good reasons that single-use plastic bags have to be given or used by the public for bagging their waste. Therefore, the issue is really about excessive use – not that you cannot use plastic bags, but excessive use of plastic bags." I agreed with her, then and now, that plastic bags are needed for the bagging of waste and that the issue is about excessive use of plastic bags. I also thought, then and now, that the fact that we incinerate our rubbish does not remove the need to educate and persuade Singaporeans to try to reduce our plastic bag consumption and to consider greater measures to reduce the use of plastic bags. Hence, my suggestion for a plastic bag charge back in 2018. In 2020, I said in my Budget debate speech that mindsets must shift in the way we consume – to only use what we need to use. For single-use plastic bags, I had asked – can we take or use what we really need? Can we pack more things into each plastic bag? Do we really need to double-bag all our groceries at the checkouts? If we only need to use, say, one or two plastic bags for very few disposals a day, do we need to take 20 bags from the supermarket in a week? We can also reduce the number of single-use plastic bags we need to take for our refuse, by concurrently using good quality reusable shopping bags. We may end up using fewer plastic bags and may still have enough bags for our refuse. In my 2021 COS debate cut for MSE, I reiterated my call for mindsets to shift in the way we consume, to only use what we need to use and called for less use of plastic bags. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would reiterate what I have said previously, on the use of plastic bags.”
“I am also heartened that Senior Minister of State Amy Khor recently cited statistics in Hong Kong, Taiwan and the United Kingdom (UK), where after the introduction of a plastic bag charge in those countries, their usage of plastic carrier bags fell. I quoted the example of the UK in this House five years ago. I am glad that the Government accepted the recommendations of the Citizens' Workgroup on Reducing Excessive Consumption of Disposables to impose a plastic bag charge. The Government has also announced that the charge to be imposed will come into effect in mid-2023 to "nudge consumers to shift towards the use of reusable bags". This nudging is extremely important as we are talking about the long-term habits of individuals. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I have, for the last few years in this House been calling for mindsets to shift in the way we use single-use plastic bags – to only use what we need to use. In 2018, in response to my call for a plastic bag charge in comparison with other countries like Taiwan and the UK, Senior Minister of State Amy Khor said, "Miss Cheng Li Hui and Mr Dennis Tan asked about our efforts to deal with plastic waste and, specifically, whether we will impose a charge or ban on single-use plastic bags. Unlike many of the countries that have imposed a ban or mandatory charge on plastic bags, we do not directly landfill our plastic disposables but incinerate them. Hence, we do not face the land and water pollution issues that plague those countries. Plastic bags are also necessary for responsible and hygienic bagging of waste in our moist, tropical climate. Unbagged household waste attracts pests like cockroaches and rats, creating serious environmental and health problems.”
“Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. This amendment Bill seeks to introduce three main requirements to the Act: (a) introduce a plastic bag charge scheme starting with the larger supermarkets with an annual turnover of more than $100 million; (b) introduce a beverage container return scheme; and (c) require the segregation and treatment of food waste in prescribed buildings with requisite reporting to the authorities. I will start with the plastic bag charge. Mdm Deputy Speaker, back in 2018, when it was declared the Year of Climate Action in Singapore, I had spoken during the COS debate and I asked the Government whether it had any intention to roll out a progressive plan to reduce the use of plastic disposables in Singapore involving either the restriction or the banning of single-use plastic carrier bags, straws and disposable cups, containers and utensils. I had mentioned that Taiwan had just, then, announced a blanket ban in single-use plastics, including straws, cups and shopping bags, by 2030. Prior to that, there was a progressive plan to make people pay for plastic products like plastic bags, straws, disposable food containers and disposable utensils in the interim. Back then, there was already more than 40 countries taxing or limiting the use of plastic bags. The evidence had shown that even modest policy interventions can have significant impact. In Britain, the usage of plastic carrier bags fell by 83% after the introduction of a plastic bag charge. In 2020, the Workers' Party called for the introduction of a single-use plastic bag charge phased-in over five years. I repeated this call in my Budget debate speech in 2021. I, therefore, welcome the imposition of a plastic bag charge to be formally included under today's amendment of the Resource Sustainability Act.”
“I thank the Foreign Minister for his detailed reply. May I join the Foreign Minister in also commending Ms Rena Lee for her leadership in her capacity as President of the United Nations Conference for the BBNJ and her excellent work in facilitating the agreement of many nations for the text for the landmark Treaty on the BBNJ, which I understand is an effort and has taken so many years. I have two supplementary questions. The first is this: the signing of the Treaty is only the beginning; the devil is in the details. And there are a number of details to agree to, in the coming months, if not longer. As we know, in international law, the initial agreement of the Treaty is just a first step. It is important that all countries will also ratify and introduce – in their local laws – in as short as possible a time, so that we can all start reaping the benefits of the Treaty. So, will the Minister share with the House, what he sees as some of the challenges in getting as many countries to sign up and ratify, so that the Treaty can be properly enforced sooner rather than later? This is especially so, given the competitive nature of the world fisheries and mining industries. The second supplementary question: how would the Government encourage or even ensure that Singaporean businesses will only source from sustainable fisheries and undersea mining, in compliance with the requirement of this convention?”
“I thank the Minister of MCCY Mr Edwin Tong and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Mr Baey Yam Keng for their answers. I have one supplementary question for the Minister. The Minister mentioned that there will be regular checks conducted on the premises. Can I just ask how regular will these checks be? And I have two supplementary questions for Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey. One, can the Government encourage more private sector participation to recycle items like sports shoes, like in this case, so that we can minimise the volume of shoes actually being thrown away and being incinerated or in the case of being disposed of overseas, being dumped in landfills? Number two, will the Government consider giving more incentives to companies to attract them to take part in such recycling programmes?”
“We should ask ourselves whether we can do more to preserve this intangible heritage. I applaud the existing efforts of many of our clan associations in the promotion of the use of dialects as well as the customs, practices and culture of our dialect groups despite the modern cultural challenges. While our clan associations do offer dialect classes, offering dialects as a third language option at the MOE Language Centre and our Institutes of Higher Learning can be an option to instill interest and promote knowledge. NUS saw a great demand when they offered dialect modules in 2020. Can the Government do more to enhance the learning and speaking of dialects as well as promoting the knowledge of our customs, practices and culture of our various dialect groups among younger Singaporeans? Will the Government consider lifting the general ban on TV and radio dialect programmes which is in place since 1981 which can signal to many Singaporeans who take the cue from the Government?”
“Mr Chairman, I use dialects routinely when I communicate with many of my residents every day and many of them are middle-aged to elderly residents. But I have also observed that in many families, most young children do not understand dialects. At best, a small number may understand dialects as they hear their grandparents communicate with them in dialects. But many may not speak or speak competently. I am concerned at this rate there may hardly be some any Singaporeans below 50 who will be conversant in our Chinese dialects in another 20 or 30 years. The MCCY has previously affirmed that Chinese dialects are part of the Singapore Chinese culture and heritage. As part of the different Chinese migrant groups coming to Singapore in the early years of Singapore, our forefathers come from different parts of Southern China and brought their different dialects to Singapore, together with the dialect group culture. Our dialect group heritage is part of our Singaporean Chinese cultural heritage. Beyond the speaking of dialect, it is important to preserve knowledge among all Singaporean Chinese of the cultural heritage of our dialect groups, which may include culture, customs and food. How many of our young Singaporeans have good knowledge of the cultural practices of their dialect group? Recently, I asked a 13-year-old student, what is his dialect group. He shrugged his shoulders and said that he did not know. With an ageing population and a younger generation who have a limited exposure to dialect, we are reaching a tipping point. Transferring culture and heritage does not happen overnight and the runway to do so is growing ever shorter. Once this culture and heritage dies off, there is no way of re-building it.”
“I will do that, yes. First, I would like to ask very quickly, does the Government have any plans for alternate renewable energy choices for EV drivers besides natural gas? Related to this, has the Government studied the feasibility of having some of the public chargers be powered by solar panels fitted on the multi-storey car parks (MSCPs), at least in part? My second clarification is whether the Government is concerned with the slower conversion of heavier vehicles and lorries to EVs and will it affect our plans for 2030 and beyond. The third clarification for Senior Minister of State Amy Khor is whether the Government will actively engage logistics companies directly on their plans to convert to EVs to speed up the process. My clarification for Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng – I thank him for the reply on PMDs – I just want to request that the Government continue its enforcement, engagement and public education efforts in respect of PABs as well because it is common to see electric bicycles beating red lights, cycling against traffic, not wearing helmets. I also see many cruising on electric bicycles without having a pedal at all, which is not consistent with the LTA requirement that the motor power can only cut in when the cyclists start to pedal. So, it suggests that there is still a lot of illegal PABs running around.”
“Thank you, Chairman. I have three clarifications for Senior Minister of State Amy Khor and one quick clarification for Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng.”
“Finally, I would like to ask whether any study is being done to establish how the two-year pause in the construction of T5 will affect growth and operations in the coming years and, if so, whether we are also considering any alternative plans to deal with such contingency. Aviation Sector”
“Minister Iswaran said on 5 October 2022 that construction work for Changi Airport T5 has resumed after pausing for two years and T5 is expected to be completed in the mid-2030s. On 9 January 2023, Minister Iswaran also informed the House that the average weekly passenger traffic at Changi Airport has recovered to about 80% of pre-COVID-19 levels and the number of weekly flights had also recovered to nearly 80% of pre-COVID-19 levels. The opening of Chinese borders will, hopefully, lead to resumption of most of our pre-COVID-19 flights with China. As air travel resumes and continues to grow in the coming months, especially with the possibility of Changi returning to pre-COVID-19 level flights, I would like to ask the Minister now for an update on the Government's plans for the building of T5. Minister had said in October that we are retaining the option to increase the capacity to up to 70 mppa in the longer term. May I ask whether we are making any or any significant changes to our earlier plans for T5? I would also like to ask whether there are any lessons we have learnt from the last three years of uncertainty caused by the pandemic which we can and would be applying to our T5 design and plans. May the Minister also share with us the likely schedule and dates for the twin phased opening of T5? May I also ask about the land preparation and drainage works at Changi East and the runway system construction which were said to have started since 2014 and 2016 respectively. Were any of these works halted at any time during the pandemic? What is the status of these works and when are they scheduled for completion? And can the new runway be opened earlier ahead of the projected phased opening of T5?”
“Thank you, Madam. Recently, Minister Iswaran replied to my Parliamentary Question informing that 760 persons were caught using personal mobility devices (PMDs) on footpaths in January to November 2022, down from 1,100 in 2021 and that 170 persons were caught riding PMDs on roads in January to November 2022, as compared to 210 in 2021. While I applaud the enforcement efforts of the LTA officers and I appreciate that we have come a long way from the heyday the e-scooter menace. Many people are still using their e-scooters illegally despite the enforcement and public education efforts. Our Enforcement Officers cannot be at every street, junction or footpath. I still see e-scooters being used almost every day on footpaths or on the roads. I see e-scooters on Park Connectors too. Though allowed, most houses or flats are not directly linked to a Park Connector and how often do we see anyone pushing their e-scooters along footpaths, enroute to Park Connectors? We also read of fires from charging e-scooters which imply continual use. I would like to ask the Minister, beyond existing enforcement and public education efforts, does LTA have any new initiatives to further reduce the illegal use of PMDs? The restrictions on e-scooters led to the rise in the number of electric bikes. E-bikes are not allowed on footpaths, yet many are still being used on footpaths. I have seen them on HDB void decks too. On the roads, it is comments to common to see some e-bike riders —”
“Many residents still cannot accept HDB's explanation of the issue of cost; something which could have been avoided, if HDB had tender out lift upgrading projects consisting of these blocks with problematic designs, together with the bulk of the HDB blocks with no design issues for LUP access. I would like to see an update on HDB's effort in seeking new technical methods to bring down LUP cost for the affected blocks. I hope the HDB will work on this issue expeditiously to bring lift upgrading to all blocks in Singapore lacking lift access, including the remaining six blocks in Hougang so the affected residents can enjoy full lift access soon. Planning Ahead Together”
“Mr Chairman, I speak once more on the issue of lift upgrading for the six blocks of HDB flats in Hougang SMC where there are still certain units which do not have same floor lift access. As this is a very real issue affecting a number of my residents, especially those with mobility needs requiring assistance to assess the stairs outside their units when they need to go out or come home, not to mention inconvenience to ambulances bringing people to the hospital and also additional charges for delivery items. I feel pain when residents told me that their parents or grandparents had to be carried when accessing the stairs next to their unit. First of all, I would like to see an update on the current number of HDB blocks in Singapore with incomplete lift access for all flats. We were last told that there were about 150 such HDB blocks in Singapore. At COS 2021, the Minister said that the lift access housing grant of up to $30,000 was introduced in 2020 to assist residents with urgent mobility or medical needs to move to another flat with direct lift access. 1.45 pm May I ask the Government for an update on the total number of grants given so far, as well as its percentage over the total number of such HDB units without same floor lift access? The Minister also said in COS 2021 in response to my previous calls, therefore blocks where the costs are still too high, it would not be prudent to offer the LUP, but the Government will continue to explore new technical methods to bring down LUP cost. The lift access housing grant is not an option for most residents with whom I have spoken to on this issue so far. As I have mentioned in my Budget debate speech, it is never easy to ask people to shift the different address and it is definitely not an empathetic solution.”
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. Is the Senior Parliamentary Secretary able to advise on what is the likely time range that these lifts will be installed on this overhead bridge? Because there have been calls, appeals to LTA, as LTA would know very well, for a number of years since the previous Member of Parliament of Hougang had been in office. As LTA would have noted by now, there is a large number of seniors as well as young parents and they need the use of this overhead bridge to access the nearby town centre including the MRT station, the bus interchange and the nearby Hougang Polyclinic as well. So, we would be grateful if the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can give an expected time range for my residents.”
“Thank you, Mdm Chairperson. Just a quick question for the Minister. Can I ask the Minister to elaborate more on the three categories of the cases eligible for mandatory mediation?”
“— at the onset that they have not engaged lawyers for assistance in any way. 5.45 pm”
“I propose that we adopt a Court-based mediation where parties first have to go through a Court-led mediation when action is commenced at CDRT. If the matter cannot be resolved amicably, the dispute will continue to be adjudicated under the existing CDRT process. Such process is not new to the Courts and has been around in the State Courts for a number of years. I would also suggest that to encourage a better attitude towards reasonable resolution, the attitude and conduct of parties at the mediation should be noted for purposes of the CDRT procedure. Next, I have a few suggestions in respect of the CDRT process. I urge the Government to review the CDRT process, and see whether the system and procedure can be made more user-friendly for laypeople of different educational backgrounds. While the procedure may already have been streamlined for easier filing and participation by laypeople, as compared to, say, our Court procedure for the State Courts, many are still intimidated by the procedural and the written evidential requirements, including even the demands of the initial claim filing requirements. Are we able to reduce some of these formalities further? Can we also review to see how we can make it less intimidating and more user-friendly for people who are not proficient in English, as well as for our seniors? Finally, while representation by lawyers are not allowed, judges hearing CDRT cases should also be alert for the possibility of one party engaging lawyers to guide them in running their case at CDRT, as this may not be fair to the other party. Perhaps parties should be required to declare —”
“Mdm Chairman, Members of this House will be familiar with residents approaching their Members of Parliament for help to resolve disputes they may have with their neighbours. These may involve frequent loud noises, use of space along common corridors, inhalation of cigarette smoke wafting into a person's flat from a neighbour's flat and so on. For Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats, the first port of call would usually be for HDB to intervene and speak to neighbours involved. However, HDB officers would often engage the neighbours and request for their cooperation and consideration by the resident who is the subject of complaint. This may work for some of the cases, but for many cases, the problems may not be resolved. If HDB is not able to resolve the dispute, it would often advise residents that they can refer the matter for mediation at the Community Mediation Centre (CMC) or even for resolution at the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT). Mdm Chairman, mediation may not always work to resolve disputes even if attended to by both parties to a dispute. However, as mediation at CMC requires the agreed participation of both parties to a dispute, many such disputes do not stand a chance of being resolved by mediation, simply because one of the parties opts out of mediation. Some residents deliberately would not respond to mediation, I heard. While I understand why mediation should be voluntary and while I do understand that mediation may not always be suitable for every dispute, I feel that for a good number of cases, it is a good opportunity wasted for parties to try and resolve their differences during mediation, when parties have the option to opt out.”
“Although I am greatly encouraged by the recent announcement of the appointment of our first Chief of Defence Force from the Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN). Apart from capacity, I would like to ask what preparations are in place to potentially sustain operations at longer distances from our shores. This may be important if we wish to prevent and perhaps minimise any dangers to Singapore and Singaporeans in the event of some major emergency in our region. Some people may well, see such concern as unnecessarily alarmist or dismiss them as remote and unrealistic. But as a nation, we must be prepared and vigilant for issues that may be looming to avoid any unwanted surprises, especially in these uncertain times. Global Defence Spending”
“As a commerce-dependent island, Singapore needs open use of sea lanes, submarine cables and air routes that link us to partners in all of East Asia, across Southeast Asia, South Asia and points West. These could potentially be in jeopardy in the event of a major contingency involving the United States, the PRC and others that may occur around our region. Such an event could also spell political and military pressure on Singapore to provide or deny access to one party involved in a crisis or another in addition to broader disruption. This could also affect trade and communication and even the import of food and energy, not to mention safe passage for the shipping trade and maritime traffic passing through the straits of Singapore going both east and westwards, to near and far shores for which we are so heavily dependent on and possibly also civilian and commercial air traffic in the region. This may prove consequential for not just Singapore's prosperity, but possibly even stability and survival. Such pressure and disruption may take physical even kinetic form and not just be limited to information, cyberspace and political influence. I would like to ask for an update on the efforts of MINDEF and the SAF in building the capacity to withstand military pressure and coercion from actors with significant capabilities and safeguard Singapore's critical access to the air and sea in the event of an emergency, particularly in view of the tensions in the South China Sea and between different countries in the Asia Pacific region. What is being done to enhance such capacity in recent times, noting that much of Singapore investment in our professional military and national service has historically focused on the Army?”
“Mr Chairman, the recent incursion of an alleged PRC surveillance balloon into US airspace and its subsequent shoot down by the US military underscore growing friction between Washington and Beijing. This comes after the large-scale PLA military exercises bracketing Taiwan following the then US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taipei. These actions follow increasing PRC military activity in the East and South China Seas and near Taiwan in recent times, to which other militaries, including those of the United States, are mounting their own activities in response. The Prime Minister, and more recently the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, have noted rising tensions between the United States and the PRC, which play out over a range of issues and wide swathes of territory. Manila recently pointed to the PLA Navy using lasers on the Philippine Navy vessel in the disputed South China Seas waters, supposedly blinding crew on the bridge temporarily. These incidences and growing cleavages do not have anything directly to do with Singapore, at least for the moment. However, they could well affect Singapore and our interest in significant and potentially negative ways. I have little doubt that our professional foreign service officers at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are working very hard to encourage some amicable solutions and searching for means to mitigate risks for Singapore. Through careful diplomacy in the event tensions should further escalate, this reinforces efforts to support international law and accepted rules of the road that have facilitated Singapore's prosperity, safety and stability for so long. Nonetheless, I am mindful of the very real possibility that diplomacy law and institutions sometimes may not be enough.”
“Rather, I am concerned about the potential rise of a view following recent cases that corporate governance standards in Singapore including Government-linked entities may not be what they used to be – and this should not be the case. Following the disappointing outcome on the investigation by CPIB, what steps would the Government take to improve the corporate governance of our companies? Specifically, what are the lessons we learn from how KOM was able to carry out the bribery acts of such magnitude and for so long? What are the measures that Government intend to take to prevent similar cases from happening again? I am referring to the brazen bribery acts as well as the difficulties in prosecuting individuals even though KOM itself admitted liability and paid massive fines to foreign governments. I hope the Government will take steps to improve corporate governance for our companies and I also hope the Government will ensure that Government-linked companies take adequate due diligence before committing on investment on public monies. Reviewing Anti-corruption Laws”
“We learnt that executives at Singapore Press Holdings, now SPH Media Trust, inflated circulation numbers by up to 90,000 daily copies, including by printing and destroying extra copies of newspapers. Not long ago, there was also the bankruptcy of the crypto currency exhange, FDX, due to massive fraud. Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed this House that losses to Singapore's taxpayers' monies from Temasek investment in FDX were limited. But the company's management and owners still allegedly engaged fraud worth several billions of US dollars. Recently, press reports indicated that Temasek may be exposed to companies under the Adnani Group, possibly to the tune of several billion dollars. A shadow of potentially serious financial discrepancies hangs over the Adnani Group. Sir, back in the Committee of Supply debates in 2018, I mentioned a number of measures where we can improve corporate governance for our companies. I said that it is startling that the existence of bribery contracts and payments somehow seem to have escaped the notice of Keppel's senior management, board of directors, audit committees and even the external auditors for 14 years. Could this point to the weaknesses in our company and auditing regime? 4.30 pm Among other suggestions, I had asked for the Government to review and enhance company regulations and suggested that the Government should consider having inspections and subject companies, directors and audit committee members to penalties for any non-compliance, and that the Government should review and enhance the requirements for whistle-blowing policies in companies. Sir, my remarks here today are less about what specific dollar amounts of exposure or loss or whether individuals received particular types of punishment or not.”
“Mr Chairman, five years ago, I spoke in this House about the $422 million price settlement for Keppel Offshore & Marine (KOM) for bribery acts in Brazil conducted through its subsidiary in the United States. This is in part due to the conviction of KOM lawyer Mr Jeffrey Chow in US court for his role in the corruption. Chow is given a one-year probation which he could serve in Singapore and $75,000 fine. That may not be a heavy punishment to some, but it is still a criminal conviction. Almost five years later, in January 2023, CPBI issued stern warnings to six unnamed former KOM senior executives for the same corruption case. Earlier this month, the hon Ms Indranee Rajah told this House that no prosecution was mounted due to the lack of sufficient evidence. What is difficult to understand for many Singaporeans is that while the company has admitted liability and paid massive fines, the CPIB could not find a single person working in the company whom they could charge for complicity in the bribery acts even though about $55 million of KOM's monies were paid out for bribes. How were such moneys allowed to be paid out? And how did they pass through the senior management's and auditors' scrutiny? Will any recovery actions be taken against any employees? Notwithstanding the alleged evidential difficulties, the stern warnings might have inadvertently sent an alarming message that a Singapore-linked company can be involved in a case of serious corruption, but individuals involved may not be dealt with proportionately. This is not good news for the credibility of Singapore Inc, not to mention a GLC which should be leading by example. Then, there are other recent cases where aspects of corporate or investment governance involving our GLCs have some under question.”
“Yes, Deputy Speaker. Just a clarification for the Minister of State. He mentioned about the Coroner's findings. Can I just get the clarification that there will be a Coroner's inquiry held in public for this incident leading to the death of the NSF? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Yes, there will be, as I shared in my answer. It will be revealed to the public and it will be public information. At the same time, we will also share the findings of the BOI. At a certain juncture, once we have completed, we will inform the public.”
“So, may I ask whether the Government has staged plans on the conversion of these heavy vehicles, be they heavier vehicles or logistics vehicles or other types of heavy vehicles, and whether to electric, hydrogen or other fuel types, given the stated challenges? And what is the road map for this? Will this affect our plans for 2030 and beyond? Regardless of the classes of goods and different heavy vehicles, there is, of course, a need to look into the time taken to charge industrial vehicles as the owning companies will be concerned with efficiency. Regular drivers may also be concerned with efficiency and securing a charger for when they most need one. This is not to forget that, at least, certain categories of commercial, or even industrial vehicles, may be sharing charging points with passenger and other types of lighter vehicles. A detailed EV roadmap can also outline pricing, power rating and plug type to enable all EV drivers to plan their charging schedules, including real-time charging updates, which is currently not available on the MyTransport.SG app. Mr Speaker, in closing, I look forward to the replies for the concerns I have raised.”
“For example, given that some 40,000 chargers, of the 60,000 to be rolled out by 2030, will be in public carparks, is it possible to have some of these powered directly from some of the solar panels fitted on top of the multi-storey car parks and what are some of the challenges to doing this? Still on the EV Common Charger Grant, I understand from the EV Charging Bill debate in November last year that the grant pays for half of the various costs involved in installing EV chargers and will be available until 31 December 2023, or when it has co-funded 2,000 chargers. I would like to seek clarification whether the grant will be extended beyond the current deadlines and parameters. Presently, Sembcorp and Shell have faster-charging, solar powered stations but the reach is still limited as Sembcorp's solar powered EV charging hub only caters to their electric trucks and there are still too few stations offering renewable energy options. Minister Iswaran said, in response to my queries at the EV Charging Bill debate in November, that the light goods vehicles segment saw the highest rate of EV adoption last year, at around 28%. This is encouraging indeed. But may I also ask whether there are plans to roll out policies to incentivise more logistics companies to switch from ICE vehicles to EVs? Minister Iswaran also mentioned at the debate that the challenge is with the conversion of the so-called big trucks, with the trade-offs with propulsion and so on, and that hydrogen or related fuel types are being considered quite actively in that regard.”
“The current public network for EV charging of around 3,600 charging points is still limited and inadequate to support any significant immediate increase in EV numbers. Yesterday's announcement of 2,000 EV charging points being slated to be installed in one-third of HDB carparks by the end of the year, is a welcome development. I know Minister Iswaran explained at the EV Charging Bill debate that we are dealing with an evolving space, that the technology is evolving, the adoption rates and, therefore, the consequential demand are also changing and the usage patterns, both in terms of driving and charging habits, have yet to normalise. The Government has, therefore, decided to focus on the 12,000 charging point deployment and that the data from this deployment may inform the Government about the need for adjustment thereafter. I certainly hope this data will be out sooner, and meaningful and adequate adjustments will be made quickly, so that at least we can work towards ramping up on the EV conversion rate sooner. As we move towards active mobility, there may also be a case for allowing charging stations to be more flexible, to be able to charge other mobility devices, such as electric bikes to cover the last mile distance. Since our national grid is still mostly powered by natural gas, I would also like to ask the Minister to elaborate on whether the Government is considering increasing the renewable energy choices for EV drivers. Can the Ministry provide an update on whether the EV Common Charger Grant allows or encourages the building of chargers powered by solar or renewable energy?”
“If, indeed, the Government expects that emissions may peak earlier than 2030, it is even more critical to have an accelerated timeline for our manpower transition. Mr Speaker, I next move to seek some update on the electrification of our vehicular fleet. The passing of the Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Act last year is welcomed, as it helps to establish clear technical and performance standards of all EV chargers. However, I do feel that the Government can still do more to persuade people to make near-term plans to switch from internal combustion engine vehicles to electric vehicles, which is about just 11.7% of all cars registered in 2022. While the vehicular road tax changes for EVs last year, coupled with the increase in petrol prices in Singapore in the last half a year, might have made EVs a little bit more attractive to would-be buyers, it would be helpful to have a detailed roadmap on EV roll-out, so that consumers can make informed choices earlier. In addition to a strategic plan that defines a goal or desired outcome, a roadmap must also include the major steps or milestones needed to reach it. Currently, the EV vision still lacks some more details on the steps and milestones. Some key issues with EVs today include battery reliability, software problems and the lack of local infrastructures for charging EVs. It also remains unclear how fast certain logistics fleets, including but not limited to light goods vehicles, will be switching to EVs entirely and a number of prominent logistics companies have not yet made any plans, or have not announced any plans for EV conversion, or some have made only preliminary plans for limited initial conversion.”
“The management of transition of businesses and workers in carbon-intensive sectors contributes to a just-transition. SkillsFuture Singapore's Skills Demand for the Future Economy (SDFE) Report 2022 identified sustainability skills as one that has high demand and transferability. Yet, between the need to reskill and retrain our workers, and them actually acquiring the skills and applying it to their existing job functions or in new roles, there is a time lag. Understandably, businesses and workers need time to transition and pick up these new sustainability skills and transit to new jobs. I noted in my last Budget Debate speech that there were around 27,000 people employed in this sector in 2020, and I focused on the manpower transition and asked how the Government intends to manage the green transition, specifically in the petrochemicals industry. A year on, this is still a question mark and a concern of mine. Do we have sufficient sustainability-related courses that businesses and workers can afford to attend, both in terms of time and money? How much more time will it take for the learning to be internalised and applied? We must take deliberate steps to help workers transition and we have to do so mindfully, since jobs today still need to be done. But we can and must afford workers the time and resources needed to attend training, make it easier for course providers to provide subsidies, such as SkillsFuture Singapore funding to workers and to be patient as the learning-doing gap is bridged over time. I hope to hear some update on the progress made last year for green transition in the petrochemicals industry, generally, as well as on the issues of manpower transition.”
“Regardless of the Government's intention, I think it sends a discouraging signal to affected working mothers and takes the shine off the originally intended symbolism of this scheme. I am not sure this is the right signal to be sent to our working mothers. Moreover, it is unfair to penalise only mothers who give birth or have children from 2024 onwards. Also, there are many working women who may have married later and/or those who struggle with infertility and some of these already come with additional costs. The change may also inadvertently apply time pressure which is unfair to these women. Let me now move on to our ongoing efforts for green transition. Mr Speaker, I am heartened that Singapore has raised its national climate target to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The Government has said that these for Singapore require catalysing business transformation, investing in low-carbon technologies, pursuing effective international cooperation and adopting low-carbon practices. These key thrusts are indeed necessary to achieve Singapore's net-zero ambition. However, we also need a check on demand. While we adopt low-carbon technologies, such as carbon capture, utilisation and storage and low-carbon hydrogen for industrial heating, we must not feel that this helps to decouple industrial growth from the carbon constraint and that it allows us to continue business-as-usual. We live in an increasingly carbon-constrained world and we must downsize or allow carbon inefficient activities to leave our economy to decarbonise effectively. In order to do this, we need a detailed roadmap for re-training workers in these sectors as Singapore intentionally decarbonises.”
“This issue was also brought up by my colleague Sengkang Member of Parliament Mr Louis Chua not long ago. Next, I would like to touch briefly on the proposed changes in this Budget to the Working Mother's Child Relief from 2024 onwards. At the onset, this relief is meant to encourage working mothers to stay on at work after having children by having a fairly significant tax relief. Under the existing scheme, working mothers are entitled to a fixed percentage of income reliefs for every child. The reliefs are capped at a maximum of 25%. Under the proposed changes announced during the Budget speech last week, the tax reliefs will be changed with effect from 1 January 2024 from a percentage of a working mother's income to a fixed sum for each of the first child, $8,000; second child, $10,000; third and subsequent child, $12,000. Essentially, such a change benefits the lower income earning working mother but for middle income earning working mothers from, say, $4,200 per month possibly onwards, they will experience relatively lower income reliefs from 2024 onwards as compared to what they are entitled to. Essentially, this affects working mothers having a child from January 2024 onwards. It remains to be seen whether and to what extent it may deter middle income earning working mothers from having children or more children under the scheme. Has the Ministry of Finance (MOF) calculated what is the net effect of this scheme on the Budget and whether it is one that significantly saves money? If so, like what the hon member for Sengkang GRC Mr Louis Chua has said, why not just give a motherhood tax rebate to lower income working mothers and if the tax rebates exceed the tax payable, tax credits can be paid out in cash?”
“Will the Government review the effect of the increase in the recent assessment of annual values on seniors' eligibility for medical subsidies? For retired seniors living alone and with no source of income, any increase in medical expenses adds burden and pressure. Even if they can theoretically downgrade to a smaller or cheaper home, this may not always be an appropriate solution and it could be for a variety of reasons including mental health. Some, if not many, may have bought into the notion that their house is an appreciating asset and it cannot be let go. There are seniors in my constituency who have continued to live in the same flats even when mobility issues and lack of lift access meant that they hardly left home or preferred to be physically carried to the next floor for lift access when they had to go out. Telling people to downgrade and/or shift to different home is never as easy and definitely not an empathetic solution. Deputy Prime Minister Wong also said that while nursing homes are suitable for the elderly with high care needs and little to no family support, we cannot rely on this as the mainstream solution. A few years ago, MOH began efforts to ramp up nursing homes. In June last year, we were told that MOH planned to double the number of nursing home beds to more than 31,000 in the next 10 years. May I take this opportunity to ask for an update on the current adequacy of nursing homes, including the adequacy of nursing homes for all and different categories of care? I am reminded of this issue as I recalled being told by a resident last year how his father had to wait for some time to be allocated a nursing home. This was under category 4 care, even though there were beds available for other categories of nursing home care.”
“And when it comes to so-called more specialist areas like mental health, disabled persons who are seniors, the centres should still be the referring centres even if other organisations or sub-units are involved. In this way, seniors living in the cluster will be better served with less confusion and bureaucracy. Centre staff will also have better knowledge of seniors under their care. I would also like to repeat my call in my speech during the Healthier SG debate to the Ministry of Health (MOH) to study how outreach efforts can be made more effectively to seniors who are not active in the AACs, the eldercare centres or stay in touch with the centre staff or even with their neighbours, so that such seniors can better receive the intended care and support under Healthier SG as well as under the cluster support which can be provided by AACs. Deputy Prime Minister Wong also announced that he will top up the Eldercare Fund by $500 million to support means-tested subsidies for seniors who need home-based, centre-based or institutional care. I understand that for purposes of mean-testing, the income of all family members living in the same household is taken into consideration. Specifically, the monthly household income per person is used to determine the amount of subsidy allocated to eligible seniors. However, where households have no income, such as a retired couple or a retired single person, consideration for subsidies take into consideration the annual value of such retired seniors' residence. Recently, some of the seniors in Hougang gave feedback to me that as the Government has increased the annual value of their homes, this has affected the ultimate medical subsidies they get.”
“Mr Speaker, I will be speaking on three issues, First, I would like to speak on certain issues relating to the support for our seniors, followed by the proposed change in the Working Mother's Child Relief and finally, like in my previous years' Budget debate speech, I will continue with the issue of green transition this year as we edged one year nearer to many of our green goals for Singapore. Mr Speaker, the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Mr Lawrence Wong said that the Government will need to review and update our approaches to aged care. Aged care is another area that is close to my heart. Indeed, this topic is part of the everyday conversations I have with my senior residents when I talk to them in my house visits, or at the void decks, coffee shops, neighbourhood parks or the Active Ageing Centres (AACs) in Hougang. Deputy Prime Minister Wong said that as part of the Forward Singapore exercise, the Government is studying how it can enhance the range of care and support options within the community and this includes the operating model of AACs and how it can strengthen and coordinate the providers in the aged care sector which is highly fragmented today. I look forward to this. I must admit having had similar experience when I tried to help some of my Hougang residents navigate their way through the system especially when it comes to different needs or problems. I do agree with the need to review and sharpen how our AACs or eldercare centres can better serve the needs of our seniors in their cluster in a more holistic manner, all the more with Healthier SG coming on. We should work towards centres which cater to different needs of seniors whether social or medical.”
“I thank the Minister for the reply. I have two supplementary questions. First, I would like to ask the Minister what checks were carried out after the allegations were made in the special report in respect of Singaporean companies? And secondly, what measures are put in place by the Government to check on Singaporean companies on a regular basis in respect of their compliance or does the Government only follow up when there is a feedback or complaint on any non-compliance?”
“I thank the Minister of State for the answer. I just have a few supplementary questions. I would like to know whether are there any efforts being made to recruit local MRO professionals or workers who have left the industry during the pandemic? And if so, why efforts have been made to recruit them again? Is there any shortage of local MRO workers and professionals at this point in time?”
“May I also ask the Senior Minister of State whether she can share with the House what are some of the challenges encountered by NEA with the use of cameras, particularly, if such challenges restrict more ready usage of cameras following each complaint and whether there are any plans to increase deployment of cameras to deter high-rise littering, even with the proposed amendments in this Bill we are now looking at? Mr Speaker, notwithstanding my queries and concerns, I support the Bill.”
“The prosecution under the new proposed provisions would envisage not just complaints made by a third party who has witnessed litter being thrown down. NEA would often have installed cameras after receiving feedback and the cameras would have taken down video footages of littering acts. Let me take this opportunity to also ask a few questions about NEA's use of cameras to carry out surveillance. Mr Speaker, I understand that between 2019 and 2021, NEA investigated an average of about 29,700 high-rise littering feedback instances annually, which is an increase of about 77%, compared to the average of 16,800 high-rise littering feedback instances annually from 2016 to 2018. Over the same time period, NEA has also deployed an average of 2,400 cameras annually and conducted about 1,500 enforcement actions annually against persons caught for high-rise littering. I note from the cases I have encountered that NEA may not always install cameras after each complaint. May I ask the Senior Minister of State whether there must be a minimum number of complaints or feedback received on a particular unit or culprit before a camera is installed, or are there also any other criteria before a camera is installed? May I also ask whether cameras will be installed for multiple feedback received on persons who spit in public on a regular basis, for example, spitting along the common corridor or void decks of HDB blocks or from the windows of their unit?”
“A landlord or tenant who was either not at home or even if he was at home, he might be asleep or working and had no idea whether his tenant or even family members had littered. And if he had tried asking and no one wanted to own up, would it be fair for an owner to be made responsible or be punished in such circumstances? Many live-in owners who rent out rooms may be seniors and may not be the best persons to impose themselves on their tenants in this regard. What if an owner or live-in landlord, landlady or tenant has reasons to fear an occupier of the flat? This can be a tenant, a co-tenant or even a family member. The owner may have cause to be concerned that such a person may become abusive or intimidating. What about parents who do not wish to inform on their children? What if two unrelated tenants of a public rental flat are confronted with such a complaint? Unless one owns up readily, one can imagine how such a complaint with the presumption of guilt will cause distress to the household of two. This new law will put such owners or tenants in a spot vis-à-vis other tenants or family members. They may end up taking the blame themselves as passing on the allegation to the other persons may subject him, or her, to some of form of threat or abuse and going to the Police may not always be a desired course of action for a loved one. Will the authorities exercise some form of discretion not to prosecute owners or tenants who might be put in a spot by the new law in the way that I have described? If so, will the Senior Minister of State explain how this may work, so that there will be sufficient clarity, as well as certainty?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, I support the amendments in the Environmental Public Health (Amendment) Bill. However, I do have some concerns with the new proposed section 17A which creates a presumption that the owners or tenants of the property are responsible if any refuse or article is deposited, dropped, placed, thrown, scattered or spilled in or into a public place from a residential flat, for the current section 17(1)(a), (d) and (f), unless they can prove that the act was committed by another person, that the owners or tenants were not present at the flat or they are able to provide the identity of the offender within 14 days. The proposed amendments will also apply to section 17(1)(g) for any ash, hair, feathers, lime, sand, wastepaper or other substances carried by wind in a public place, and also spit or mucus, and that is under section 17A(4). While I can understand the intention of the authorities to make it easier for the enforcement, especially with the rising number of high-rise littering cases and the amendments may well help to make prosecution easier, I am concerned that the presumption of guilt on the part of owners or tenants may place these persons in a difficult position to clear themselves, even if they were not ultimately or directly responsible for the littering, spitting or disposing acts. I would like to give a few examples. Firstly, as regards to the Bill making a live-in landlord or landlady responsible for their adult tenants if the latter were to commit an act of high-rise littering, there is an issue of fairness. Is this really desirable, given that the tenants are grown adults and it may not be practicable to expect a landlord to be able to require the obedience of this adult tenant?”