Desmond Lee
Singapore
“The Leadership, Enrichment, Achievement, Participation and Service (LEAPS) 2.0 is a framework for recognising student participation and achievement in secondary school co-curricular programmes.”
“The Ministry of Education (MOE) is mindful of the impact that rising temperatures may have on our students, teachers and officials taking part in the National School Games. Matches are scheduled only after students have had the time to train and become progressively more heat acclimatised.”
“As shared in Parliament in March 2026, the proportion of students with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools has remained stable, at around 7% of the overall student population. This stability is observed across both primary and secondary schools.”
“The Ministry recruits and assesses applicants based on merit and suitability for the teaching profession, regardless of gender. We look for individuals with a passion for teaching, a belief in the potential of every child, and who possess the values and character to make a positive difference in students' lives.”
“Over the past five years, an average of 750 teachers resigned from the Education Service annually, representing a resignation rate of around 2%.”
“MOE has also progressively strengthened open access within the Primary 1 Registration Framework through Phase 2C, which is open to students regardless of whether they have prior connections to the school. MOE had increased the number of reserved Phase 2C places from zero to 20 in 2014; and from 20 to 40 in 2022.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,698 lines we hold for Desmond Lee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 66 of 74.
“I thank the hon Member for her clarification. On behalf of all the officers who work in social agencies, we will continue to work hard. And for those cases, we will follow up on them. Thank you.”
“Madam, I would just like to seek a clarification. Yesterday evening, those of us who were in this Chamber were very moved by Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin's speech, a heartfelt one about how much heart we need to put in to help people in need. As I reflected through the night, I thought I would like to clarify with her, in respect of the divorcee she mentioned with two children earning $1,600 seeking rental housing and other forms of social support. The first clarification is: is this an individual whom she could put us in touch with so that we can look at what happened and see how best we can assist her? Even as cases do fall through the cracks, it is important for us, as a Public Service, to make sure we pick up on all these cases and assist them. The second clarification is: some people may take away from the speech the impression − perhaps wrongly − that the Public Service has lost heart. I am asking for this clarification on behalf of the officers who work at the rental department, the Social Support Offices, the Family Service Centres and the many other social service agencies across the Public Service who are Singaporeans and who care.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That notwithstanding Standing Order No 26(1) and No 89(3), the Second Reading of the Patents (Amendment) Bill, Architects (Amendment) Bill and Early Childhood Development Centres Bill be taken before today's resumption of Debate on the FY 2017/2018 Budget Statement". Madam, Standing Order No 26(1) states that once an order is made for Bills to be taken after the conclusion of proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for Financial Year (FY) 2017/2018, as made to the House by the respective Ministers in charge of the aforementioned Bills after their First Reading on 6 February 2017, such an order cannot be moved earlier but only later. As the Debate on the FY 2017/2018 Budget Statement is a Business of Supply, and Standing Order 89(3) requires that Supply business must be the first order of the day on the allotted days, no businesses can precede the Debate on the Budget Statement. The agreement of the House is, therefore, sought to suspend both these Standing Orders to allow the aforementioned Bills to be read for the Second time before the resumption of Debate on the FY 2017/2018 Budget Statement. This is in view of the total number of Bills that need to be read in this House during this period of Sittings. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] Resolved, "That, notwithstanding Standing Order No 26(1) and No 89(3), the Second Reading of the Patents (Amendment) Bill, Architects (Amendment) Bill and Early Childhood Development Centres Bill be taken before the resumption of Debate on the FY 2017/2018 Budget Statement on 28 February 2017." − [Mr Desmond Lee]”
“Madam, for the first question, I do not have specific figures for each type of animal that the Member mentioned but I am aware that the total budget for animal management operations for 2016 was $800,000. The second question is about how AVA does the assessment. AVA officers will conduct the assessment. They will look at the nature of the complaint or feedback and verify the facts. Surveillance, whether by AVA officers or by the deployment of cameras, is also often used. Information on the population of animals, their activities, proximity to human habitation and interactions with humans factor into these assessments. Taken together, this information informs AVA's responses. As for the Member's third question about whether AVA expects expenditure to increase in the coming years, I do not think we are able to project. It depends on the risks and whether human-animal conflicts rise or fall, and whether public education helps mitigate that, along with the animal welfare groups' efforts in working with us to rehome animals.”
“We also need the community to do their part in helping to reduce potential animal-human conflicts in our society. For example, if everyone practises responsible pet ownership and refrains from feeding strays, the number of stray animals will fall and present a much smaller problem. AVA has been and will continue to work with various animal welfare groups on public education for responsible pet ownership.”
“Madam, the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) takes a multi-pronged approach, involving various stakeholders, to manage the animal population and mitigate health and safety concerns. It first undertakes a professional assessment of potential threats that animals might pose to public health and safety. If there are no significant public health and safety concerns, AVA will work with the public to mitigate any potential nuisance issues. If there are significant health and safety concerns, then AVA will have to act. Where feasible, it will work with stakeholders, including the animal welfare groups and organisations like the Wildlife Reserves Singapore, to relocate or rehome these animals. Culling is used only as a last resort, a point which my colleague Minister of State Koh Poh Koon had made at the last Sitting. AVA does not track the expenditure it incurs on culling animals as this is only a very small part of AVA's overall work. AVA will continue to conduct relevant studies and research to inform its policies and facilitate a science-based approach to animal management. For example, AVA engaged a team of local and overseas academics in November 2015 to start a three-year stray dog study. This study will estimate the stray dog population in Singapore, look at the ecological and biological aspects of stray dogs, and determine the efficacy of various population management options like sterilisation. AVA has also been carrying out similar studies on birds, as well as conducting trials to test the effectiveness of various bird deterrent methods. Our animal welfare groups are also pitching in, for example, in conducting sterilisation on Pulau Ubin as well as Jurong Island.”
“Once they have put that in place, then, looking at the question of insurance, that is something that AVA is actively looking at. It is not a straightforward matter because you need to have an adequate risk pool and insurers need to be assured that the farmers take appropriate self-help measures to reduce the risks. But certainly, that is something that is being actively looked at.”
“I thank the Member for his three supplementary questions. For the first, I do not have the details as to who did not avail themselves of help. AVA, in the aftermath of both events, went out to all the farms and reached out to all the affected farms. As far as the oil spill is concerned, they went to all the farms in the eastern area and offered absorbent pads and canvas to help them screen off their stock. I am not sure if we are in a position to know who needed help and did not ask for it, and why they did not request for assistance. But AVA proactively offered help. If the Member is aware of any farmer who did not seek assistance but requires it, please let us know. The second question was on vertical farming of fish. If the Member would be interested to know, there is a Tropical Marine Science Institute (TMSI) on St John's Island under the National University of Singapore and they work with AVA to explore various technologies and innovations that can help our fish farming industry progress and be more productive. I do not know specifically for a fact whether vertical fish farming is being contemplated. But AVA is exploring with TMSI and other relevant institutes and agencies to explore various options for fish farmers to enhance their productivity. On the third question of insurance, a couple of years back, I did visit some fish farms and they did raise the issue of insurance to protect their stock. I think we start from measures that the fish farmers can put in place to protect their stock and these measures need to be seen in light of what AVA offers, for example, closed containment of cultured systems and other measures to help them protect their stock, out at sea, for instance.”
“Third, AVA has used the Co-Innovation Partnership Programme to co-fund the development and adoption of new farming technologies like closed containment aquaculture systems. These technologies reduce the vulnerability of fish stocks to environmental risks. Several farms have already adopted these systems and AVA continues to share these technologies with the rest of the industry through briefings and workshops.”
“Mdm Speaker, plankton blooms and the recent oil spill have impacted some local fish farmers. However, these events have not detracted from our push to achieve 15% local production. Local fish production increased from 4,205 tonnes in 2014 or 8% of local consumption, to 4,851 tonnes in 2016 or 10% of local consumption. Having said that, I would add that the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) is currently reviewing the longer-term targets for local food production and working with industry and various stakeholders to develop concepts towards transforming the local farming industry. The Government assisted the affected farms following these plankton bloom and oil spill events. After the plankton blooms in 2014 and 2015, AVA extended subsidies to help affected farms to restock their fish. During the oil spill, AVA deployed oil absorbent pads and canvas to protect our farms. AVA is now assisting affected farmers with their claims against the ship's insurers. AVA has put in place several measures to help our farmers manage longer-term environmental risks. First, AVA has developed a real-time online water quality monitoring system that our farmers can access through their mobile phones. This helps them monitor water quality information like plankton counts and dissolved oxygen. AVA also provides short message service alerts to farmers when adverse conditions are detected so that precautionary measures can be taken. Second, AVA continues to assist farmers in tailoring individual contingency plans. To date, almost 50 farms have worked with AVA to develop customised contingency plans to mitigate adverse conditions.”
“Mdm Speaker, in my earlier reply, I said that HDB uses modelling. Certainly, in the design of the new estates, including some of those that front, say, expressways, these are taken into account to ensure as much noise-buffering as possible. Apart from appropriate planting, there is also the need for proper buffering and distance away from major transport pathways, and also the design and facing of buildings. For example, as far as possible, we try to put the end of the block to face some of these. But we continually look at these plans and try to ensure that, as far as possible, in a very dense and highly built-up environment in Singapore, where land is very scarce, we try to design both the units but also the estate in a way that takes into account the comfort of residents. 3.00 pm”
“Mdm Speaker, as I said earlier, HDB does modelling in order to determine the design and layout of blocks and also the design and layout of individual units. I will take back the Member's suggestion on the placement of louvres to improve cross ventilation, though I believe the building engineers may already have considered some of these suggestions. The other question that the Member raised was regarding noise impact between floors. I am sure all of us in this House will, from time to time, get feedback about neighbours or neighbours' children on the upper floors jumping around or playing certain kinds of games that may cause noise to be transmitted below. So, this is one of the common challenges that can impact the quality of living in built-up urban environments and high-rise living. So, mitigating noise issues, such as these, is an essential part of HDB's ongoing efforts to provide a better living environment for the comfort of residents. With advancements in building technologies as well as in materials science, HDB has been tapping on these advancements in the market. HDB has also reached out to Institutes of Higher Learning and research institutes to work collaboratively on solutions that could reduce noise transmission between floors. So, it is design and also materials science.”
“To mitigate noise impact in buildings, advanced noise modelling is used to guide the orientation of HDB blocks and the placement of physical barriers to enhance aural comfort. Greenery features deployed at strategic locations identified through solar irradiance analysis help to reduce ambient temperatures as well as reflected heat and glare. The placement of communal facilities is also similarly optimised by locating them in areas which tend to be shaded. HDB will continue to enhance its macro scale simulations to improve the planning and urban design for all new towns and estates. HDB will also continue to tap on advances in building technology and materials and work collaboratively with various institutes of higher learning and research institutes to develop even more environmentally sustainable and cost-effective solutions for our HDB developments.”
“Mdm Speaker, over the years, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) has enhanced the building performance and liveability of our housing estates by leveraging on technology during the development of our HDB flats. To enhance a building's structural performance, HDB keeps abreast of improvements in concrete technology and introduces new materials after they have been tested for performance and cost effectiveness. For example, we have been continually improving the grade of concrete used in HDB developments. The higher performance concrete is denser and more impermeable to water, thereby mitigating problems of water leakage and spalling concrete. About a decade ago, HDB also started installing structural health monitoring sensors in key structural columns of new HDB developments. These sensors help engineers better understand the behaviour of building structures through its life cycle and continually monitor their structural integrity. Separately, over the years HDB has been developing in-house expertise in urban environmental modelling (UEM) to better take into account urban environmental parameters, such as wind flow, solar irradiance, shading and noise, at the planning and urban design stage. HDB started using UEM some years back in the planning and design of the Build-To-Order (BTO) development known as Punggol Treelodge, and is now using UEM on a much wider scale in BTO projects in Bidadari and Tengah. Through model simulations, we are able to better understand how different housing typologies, building layouts and orientation, greenery provisions and road networks affect wind flow, solar heat gain and noise level, enabling us to refine our plans to improve liveability.”
“I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. I have earlier articulated in my reply that efforts put in by the Police to engage directly the foreign guest population who congregate around the area, as well as with the security guards in the malls around which these workers congregate. Beyond that, the Ministry of Manpower has its outreach to workers in foreign dormitories to encourage them to understand and abide by our laws. There are also Auxiliary Police Officers on the ground. Supplementing the Police efforts are also PolCams that help to keep an eye over large crowds of people. Certainly, we will be prepared to engage the hon Member on further measures if she thinks they are necessary to manage the situation on the ground.”
“Mdm Speaker, the vicinity of Paya Lebar is popular among foreign workers, especially on Sundays. They tend to gather around the Paya Lebar Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station and nearby shopping malls, such as City Plaza, 1KM Mall and Tanjong Katong Complex. The Police patrol these areas to engage the foreign workers on crime prevention messages and also advise them to abide by the law. Police closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras (PolCams) are deployed at public areas to deter crime and help Police detect and respond to incidents. The foreigners are generally law-abiding and orderly. To manage social disamenities, the Police also deploy Auxiliary Police Officers (APOs) to conduct daily high visibility patrols in the vicinity of Paya Lebar MRT, Tanjong Katong Complex and City Plaza, particularly in the evenings. The APOs take enforcement action against littering, urinating in public and smoking in prohibited places. The Police also regularly engage the security guards at Paya Lebar Square, 1KM Mall and City Plaza. The security guards are advised to look out for suspicious behavior and highlight any issues to the Police immediately. The Police will continue to monitor closely the congregation of crowds in the vicinity of Paya Lebar.”
“I thank the Member for his concern. It is not regulated per se, but under common law, if an invasive procedure were to be carried out, and some of these involve the use of tattooing machines, then there are requirements to obtain appropriate consent from a person, who is competent, to give that consent. This is already existing common law. Having said that, beyond just the common law and the Police, there is also the role of the family and the schools in helping young people find their identity, including on issues, such as applying of body tattoos which become permanent features on the body.”
“Mdm Speaker, while some people apply body tattoos to show their affiliations to unlawful gangs, many others do so for reasons that are non-gang related, such as for beauty, fashion and self-expression. There is no indication from the Police that applying body tattoos lead individuals to join gangs. Given the many valid reasons why people choose to apply body tattoos, it may not be feasible to regulate the tattoo industry. The Ministry of Home Affairs also does not track the number of tattoo shops in Singapore. Nonetheless, the Police will continue to take a tough enforcement stance against unlawful gangs.”
“That does not preclude us ‒ indeed, we are continuing to consult with the nature groups, we are using science and technology – to see whether other areas should also be included as national parks. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Desmond Lee]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“I thank the Member for his suggestions on the scope of the protections. As I have said earlier, we are but three years into managing a marine park. It involves protecting biodiversity. It involves protecting different forms of habitats, both terrestrial, intertidal as well as marine. It involves managing the needs, wants and concerns of different stakeholders − people who go there for recreation, people who are boatmen, people who like to dive, people who are passionate about biodiversity. We have amended this Act in order to allow us to confer the protection on the Marine Park that we feel it needs from the last three years of experience. Putting it into a subsidiary legislation allows us to adjust along the way. As we encounter new situations, we can amend the legislation in order to quickly confer those protections that are necessary. As far as signalling is concerned, apart from this legislative amendment, in 2014, we emphasised the importance of the Marine Park, how valuable it is, the publicity, the outreach surrounding it, the developments, the investments on Sisters' Islands and St John's Island to create a living classroom, a research haven and a place for the conservation of marine biodiversity. It is a tremendous signal in and of itself and we should celebrate that together. As for the scale, as I have said earlier, using agent-based modelling but also through the assiduous work of our civil society, nature society and other marine groups, such as Wild Singapore, confirming that the Sisters' Islands Marine Park or the areas that we have gazetted, are the richest in terms of coral larvae. They are the source, so it has to be protected.”
“Madam, I thank the Member for raising these concerns. We have taken all this feedback into consideration and will announce at an appropriate juncture. Having said that, land is scarce in Singapore. The overall land available for nurseries may not be as much as is available currently. Some areas may have to be used for other needs and, therefore, we need to do a comprehensive study and will announce at the appropriate juncture.”
“It is also internationally renowned. A recent study by MIT named Singapore as the world's greenest city. The Government, civil society and many members of the public are committed to ensuring that Singapore remains a lush and verdant City in a Garden. Mdm Speaker, Members have provided useful suggestions for future reviews of our greenery legislation. As I have said at the start, we will continually review and update the Act so that our City in a Garden endures. I thank all Members on both sides of the House for their support.”
“In fact, if you take the time to meet our young conservationists, they are passionate about celebrating, studying and educating others about Singapore's rich biodiversity and our natural heritage. There is this young man, an undergraduate, Mr Shawn Yap, some of you may have heard about him. He used the Pokemon game and the Pokemon craze as an opportunity to excite young people who are normally stuck with their iPhones, to excite them and to show them the beauty of what there is in our reserves and why it is important to protect it. I would also like to assure Members that NParks is adopting sustainable landscape practices to ensure that our greenery remains maintainable, such as through the use of drought-tolerant native plants. NParks is leveraging on technology to enhance productivity, including increased mechanisation in maintenance operations and the use of GIS-enabled mobile devices, for tree inspections. Mr Alex Yam also voiced concerns on behalf of nursery operators about their leases and about uncertainty of their leases. NParks has spent the last three years engaging and visiting nursery operators to understand their needs. Based on their feedback, NParks will be tendering out nursery lands on three, plus three, plus three leases since this model allows some nurseries to pay monthly rentals rather than upfront land premiums. But we also recognise that a one-size-fits-all solution may not be applicable to all businesses, including some who have a model that involves more investment. Hence, NParks is also studying the feasibility of leasing selected areas for much longer tenures, for example, 10, plus 10, or some other arrangement. Mdm Speaker, our City in a Garden initiative is one that is well-supported by many Singaporeans.”
“Not just keeping it away at arms' length through legislation and prohibitions, but to educate, excite and enthuse people about how to care for the plants and animal species that make us a very special place. So, I think that approach should address Mr Leon Perera's concern about what if native animals escape from the nature reserves, what should people do. I think as custodians and stewards, we need to call NParks, call the necessary authorities, call ACRES, and they will know how to re-introduce the animal, rehabilitate it and bring it back into the wild. Capturing of wild animals is an offence under the Wild Animals and Birds Act and appropriate action will be taken. Lastly, I thank Mr Henry Kwek for his encouraging words for NParks officers. Many of them work silently in the background. They work assiduously and very hard, often behind the scenes. And your encouragement, I think, goes a long way to bring up their spirits. NParks works closely with MOE through its Community-in-Nature initiatives, as well as programmes, such as Every Child A Seed and Nature Cares. Information of our natural heritage has been incorporated into the curriculum, through textbooks and learning journeys to the Singapore Botanic Gardens, our nature reserves and parks. NParks organises around 2,400 educational programmes annually, including guided tours to the Botanic Gardens and nature reserves. These initiatives inculcate the love for nature. And as suggested by Mr Kwek, we will continue to look at ways to engage the younger generation, including the use of digital platforms to reach out to the increasingly tech-savvy student population. This includes gamification, augmented reality and push notifications on flora and fauna.”
“So, we share Mr Leon Perera's concern about the integrity of the ecology of our nature reserves. In fact, Singapore is a biophilic city. A former colleague of mine from NParks coined a new term called the "biophilial" city. If you look at other countries around the world, big countries with Taman Negara, with national parks, nature reserves, vast areas that they can protect or at least attempt to protect by the letter of the law, the conception is very different. There you prohibit a whole series of activities and try to tell people, "please do not go there, minimise contact, keep a distance, let nature thrive." In Singapore, we are different. In other countries, the environment, the greenery and nature envelop cities and their concern is about sprawl, it is about human intervention. In Singapore, it is the converse. We are a City in a Garden where our city envelops our nature reserves, nature parks and our biodiversity. And we have a tremendous amount of biodiversity in Singapore. In 2004, Dr Geh Min, the former President of the Nature Society, at the Second Reading of the Parks and Trees (Amendment) Bill, apart from articulating a desire for a marine park − so, 10 years on after that, we have established it − she also said that, in fact, some of our nature reserves have more species in plants and animals than, say, the whole of the North American continent. So, that is to be celebrated and cherished, and education is critical. In Singapore, we have to be biophilic and, that means, communities. As stakeholders, we have to be good custodians and stewards of our biodiversity.”
“In fact, I said earlier that we are looking to form, very shortly, a Friends of the Sisters' Island Marine Park and, just like the Friends of Sungei Buloh Wetlands Reserve, Chestnut Nature Park and elsewhere, we bring together the nature fraternity and those who love arts, music, exercise and sports, all the stakeholders, people who are passionate about our greenery, to come together and to help us energise, activate and programme our parks, including the Marine Park. Mr Leon Perera also spoke about developments along the fringes of nature reserves, such as Bukit Timah and Central Catchment Nature Reserves, and is concerned about whether invasive plant species as well as pets that are not native to Singapore might then enter our nature reserves and cause ecological damage. We are always concerned about invasive species and that, really, is the genesis of that clause in the Bill that allows us to prohibit the release of animals into water bodies that lead to nature reserves. But suffice to say that around our nature reserves, we have buffers. In addition to green buffers, we also have established buffer parks, like the soon-to-be-established Thomson Nature Park that Mr Henry Kwek talked about and other buffer parks around nature reserves. These buffers, as well as buffer parks and nature parks, help to shield the core of the nature reserve from urban life. They help protect the nature reserve from the desiccating effects of buildings, concrete and traffic. But they also give NParks the opportunity to go into these buffers to remove alien plant species, conduct animal species surveys and to remove invasive species that have been deliberately or accidentally released from these developments into the nature reserves.”
“In fact, SBG was 53 hectares in 2015 and, today, it is 82 hectares, with the inclusion of 11 hectares at the Bukit Timah core, 10 hectares from the Tyersall Learning Forest and eight hectares from Gallop extension. So, SBG has, indeed, grown even as we took a bit of the frontage for the MRT exit or entrance. Mr Leon Perera also asked about Auxiliary Police Officers (APOs) and why they are needed. NParks, as with many agencies, will always have to prioritise manpower. Manpower is always a challenge, with growing workload and increasing public expectation but tight constraints on manpower. Deployment of technology – but also maximising manpower by leveraging on trained professionals, such as APOs, such as private security, to help us at the penumbra of regulation, enforcement and monitoring – allows NParks officers to focus and use their deep knowledge in botany and their understanding of the biological sciences to enrich and enhance our parks, nature reserves and so on. I missed this point: Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked about whether this new clause in the Bill will be the harbinger of turning of the Marine Park into Disneyland or something like that. I think that is certainly not at all on the plans. The formation of the Marine Park was not just formed by NParks. It was done in consultation with some of the authors of the Blue Plan and many members of the blue fraternity. I think they will be very distraught to hear any suggestion of that and I hope that Assoc Prof Daniel Goh will explain that this was just a concern and not cause alarm.”
“But NParks shares its expertise and provides professional training in plant and maintenance topics for Town Councils or Managing Agents administering landscape contracts. Regardless of which entity is responsible for the greenery, residents can easily report greenery matters through the Municipal Services Office's OneService App. The feedback will be channelled to the appropriate entity. NParks works closely with the relevant entities to resolve greenery-related issues. There were some other points that were raised. Mr Leon Perera asked about consultation and gave many ideas about how consultation could be weaved into planting programmes and schedules. I have explained in my Parliamentary Question reply not too long ago that in big projects, like in the Jurong Lake region, but also where there is opportunity to rejuvenate estates, NParks takes the opportunity to consult and get the community involved. Mr Leon Perera came up with many ideas about consultation. We are fully in support of consultation. We are fully in support of residents and members of the public taking a proactive part, being passionate about things like greenery. This is entirely consonant with our concept of City in a Garden and we will certainly look into how consultation can be enhanced at every stage where possible. Mr Leon Perera also talked about land reduction at Singapore Botanic Gardens (SBG). He saw it in the Schedule. This is due to the MRT station opening at Bukit Timah. So, we took a bit of the frontage to have the opening for the MRT station that brings Singaporeans from around the island to the Singapore Botanic Gardens.”
“But NParks does train workers to adhere to appropriate noise protection levels as required by the Workplace Safety and Health regime under MOM. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah also asked if NParks would intervene in other cases of nuisance involving private greenery and remove roadside trees that cause disamenity. Madam, NParks may act when the condition of any tree threatens public safety or obstructs pedestrian use of footpaths or the clear view of road users. For neighbourly disputes arising from nuisance from trees, such as the shedding of leaves, NParks will continue to direct them to existing community dispute resolution channels. Nparks will only issue advisories to occupiers to prune trees to minimise disamenity, if necessary. As Mr Darryl David rightfully pointed out, neighbours should try to work things out between themselves first. Relying on legal and regulatory action often leads to long-term deep-seated resentment and erodes community bonds. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef asked about the pruning schedules of trees. Trees are pruned regularly. The frequency varies according to location, species, age and the condition of the trees. But it generally ranges between 12 and 24 months. That said, there could be higher frequencies of six months in some localities, for instance, where there is heavy pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Mr Darryl David asked if NParks could manage more public greenery. MND, together with NParks, had conducted a centralisation of greenery maintenance exercise last year. Following this, the greenery in most state lands is now managed by NParks. But some areas are not managed by NParks. For example, Town Councils are responsible for managing common areas, such as parks, playgrounds and open spaces within public housing estates.”
“An animal that has been abandoned is one which the owner has deliberately and permanently given up care and control over and typically leaves it in a public place. An animal which has strayed is one that has wandered off or is lost, often due to the owner's neglect. NParks will investigate and work with agencies like AVA to ascertain if there are any identifying factors, such as microchips, to trace the owners. NParks also works with relevant agencies to ensure that the welfare of the animal is not compromised. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef asked if more areas can be designated as heritage roads. I believe she mentioned Upper Aljunied Road. We will certainly study the feasibility of doing so. Next, let me move on to the maintenance of greenery which several Members spoke about. Mr Saktiandi Supaat suggested that NParks intervene when trees are "inappropriately" located in private homes or when noisy grass-cutting occurs. He also asked whether residents can contact NParks for issues caused by plants, such as large cacti. Mr Darryl David, Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked what constitutes "danger" from trees. Madam, let me clarify that the new power of entry in the Bill is intended for NParks to ensure that public safety is not compromised by potentially dangerous greenery that may fall. Such greenery, usually trees, often show signs of structural weakness or poor health. For example, they may have severe diseases or pest infestations, or bare crowns with branches overhanging property. To determine if the condition of a tree is dangerous, qualified arborists from NParks will use their technical expertise and judgement to assess the tree and its structural integrity. As for noisy grass-cutting, regulation of noise technically comes under NEA.”
“For example, some Asian Arowana, which is an aquarium fish that is not native to Singapore, have been released by members of the public in very sensitive freshwater habitats like Nee Soon Swamp Forest. The Arowanas then gorge themselves on our highly threatened native fish and crustacean species, and caused ecological damage. Other less hardy species that are released are unlikely to survive and very often die a slow and painful death. They are often unable to cope with the new environment and That is why NParks will continue to work with relevant agencies and community groups on "Operation No Release", which spreads awareness on the harm caused by this behaviour. This year's campaign is expected to take place in May. We can certainly study the feasibility of Mr Louis Ng's suggestion, but, for now, NParks will ramp up public education to increase public awareness about the impact of such behaviour. Mr Alex Yam also asked about how we would mitigate any negative impact on the Kranji Marshes, or I believe Sungei Buloh, arising from major developments across the Straits. We will certainly protect Sungei Buloh Wetlands Nature Reserve by continuing our efforts in habitat restoration/enhancement and we have a very active Friends of the Sungei Buloh Wetlands Reserve, comprising very passionate members of the nature fraternity and other stakeholders, who help us keep an eye and continue to enhance the richness of Sungei Buloh. Members also asked about how NParks would be able to distinguish between animals that have strayed and those that have been abandoned and also asked about measures taken to return stray animals to their owners.”
“Hence, the areas highlighted by Mr Louis Ng are already protected as nature reserves or public parks under the current Parks and Trees Act and Regulations. Mr Louis Ng also mentioned that NParks has been reporting misdemeanours to Maritime Port Authority (MPA) even though NParks issued a Notice stating that Chek Jawa is protected under the Parks and Trees Act. I would like to clarify that having checked with my NParks colleagues, NParks has not made any such report since the Notice was issued. NParks will stop unauthorised activities that it comes across, but will seek the assistance of MPA where it is necessary to supplement its efforts in enforcement. We will look into stepping up enforcement at Chek Jawa. But simply relying on enforcement will not be 100% effective, as no one can be on patrol everywhere and all the time, even though opportunities for technology to come into play are being explored. Public education is equally important. In this regard, we will work closely with our environmental community and our Friends of the Park Communities, including a soon-to-be established Friends of the Sisters' Islands Marine Park, and continue to share with the fishing and recreational boating communities on the Dos and Don'ts at Chek Jawa and other coastal areas. On this note, I would like to address Mr Louis Ng's query on whether we can restrict the release of animals everywhere, instead of just within the reserves and in watercourses leading to the reserves. Mr Alex Yam also spoke against the release of animals like terrapins into the wild, into the open. Indeed, the release of such invasive species has adverse effects on our native ecosystems.”
“Madam, the designation of a marine park is based on species richness and habitats at the site. The importance of the site as a source of coral larvae for dispersal is another important consideration. For example, the Sisters' Islands are important natural refugia for corals, from which larvae are dispersed to enrich other sites in the southern islands. The suggestion to gazette the Sisters' Islands Marine Park in the Blue Plan was validated by NParks' use of modern technology, such as agent-based modelling. For those who have interest in this area, please let me know and I will get my colleagues to demonstrate to you what agent-based modelling is. It shows that the Sisters' Islands and the area that we have gazetted are about the richest source of coral larvae in our southern waters, and, from there, as a source of coral larvae, populating other islands in the area. So, we have to start off with the Sisters' Islands Marine Park. It is a rich haven of marine life, both coastal and sea life. And we will continue to work with the authors of the Blue Plan. We will continue to work with our marine conservation community, with academics interested in the topic, as well as relevant stakeholders, to identify whether there are other areas that are rich or equally rich in biodiversity and which would need that kind of protection. In response to Mr Louis Ng's question, NParks' management currently covers the foreshore or intertidal areas at Chek Jawa, Sungei Buloh Wetlands Reserve and Labrador Nature Reserve. For the other coastal parks, for example, East Coast Park, NParks' management extends up to the high water mark, the high tide mark.”
“Mr Darryl David asked if the Marine Park could be developed into a leisure and education destination. While Sisters' Islands Marine Park is a marine sanctuary, we also want it to be a living classroom for marine conservation. NParks set up a public gallery on St John's Island in 2015 as an educational resource for visitors. It has also worked with marine nature groups on guided intertidal walks and dive trips at the Marine Park. We have further plans to develop a boardwalk, intertidal pools and a floating pontoon at Big Sister's Island. These facilities will offer the public more opportunities for encounters with marine and terrestrial biodiversity. Small Sister's Island will serve as a dedicated site for marine conservation, promoting species recovery and habitat enhancement. Programmes will be conducted to facilitate visits for schools, institutions and organisations. Indeed, even as we want to confer protection on the Marine Park, make it a sanctuary, we also have to bring people to the Marine Park. Allow them opportunity to come up close with marine life, so they see how valuable and precious this biodiversity is not only for them, but also for their children and grandchildren. If you keep them away, if you say, "you can't do this; you can't do that, you can't go to the Marine Park, it's off limits", I am not sure that mindshare and support will be there in the community. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef asked about the criteria for an area to be considered a "marine park" and Mr Louis Ng asked if we could bring the coastal areas of nature reserves and parks under the Parks and Trees Act. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked about the scale of Sisters' Islands Marine Park, asking why it does not encompass all the areas covered under the Blue Plan.”
“To clarify, we are amending the Act to make clear that the marine and foreshore areas of the Sisters' Islands Marine Park are a type of "public park". Hence, they are under the jurisdiction of the Act. These areas are described in Part III of the revised Schedule. The terrestrial areas of the Marine Park are already protected as public parks. The rules governing these public parks are laid out in the subsidiary legislation of the Parks and Trees Act, namely, the Parks and Trees Regulations. They include prohibitions against littering, causing death or injury to animals and restrictions against fishing or collection of organisms, such as corals, without the approval of the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation. NParks will make new rules that are specific to marine parks in due course. These will include restrictions on diving, movement of vessels and the dropping of anchors. We will work closely with our marine conservation community, recreational fishing community, boat operators and other relevant stakeholders to develop these new rules. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh spoke about the concern on the scope of protections offered to Sisters' Islands Marine Park. As I have said earlier in my speech and as I have just reiterated a moment ago, this Marine Park came into being in 2014. We have taken the last few years, NParks managing our Marine Park, and we have now the confidence to make these amendments, but given ourselves the flexibility to make comprehensive rules – made in consultation with the blue fraternity, the marine conservation fraternity and, indeed, the authors of the Blue Plan ‒ to come up with these rules, together with stakeholders like boat operators and our recreational fishing community. So, the protections will be there.”
“Mdm Speaker, I thank all Members for speaking in support of this Bill and, in particular, the protections provided to the Sisters' Islands Marine Park. Members have asked questions that broadly encompass two areas. First, the protection of greenery and biodiversity, and, second, the maintenance of such. So, let me try to address some of these questions. Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked whether NParks could monitor construction damage to ensure that trees are not damaged in the course of works. There are existing legislative levers in the Act to ensure that trees are not indiscriminately damaged. For trees that are specifically protected, like those in heritage road green buffers and road verges, as well as mature trees in tree conservation areas and vacant lands, NParks works closely with site arborists, contractors and developers to ensure that no damage is caused. Residents can also inform NParks if they see trees being damaged during construction. The helpline is 1800-4717300. So, please let the residents know. Mr Darryl David, Mr Louis Ng, Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef and Assoc Prof Daniel Goh spoke about the Sisters' Islands Marine Park. I thank them for their support. But there were several questions about the definition, scope, scale and of how the Marine Park will be protected. Mdm Speaker, with your permission, may I display a map of the Marine Park, just for the purpose of answering some of the questions raised by Members, including Mr Louis Ng?”
“Secondly, for the animal species and the organisms within the parks, will they come under the jurisdiction of NParks, AVA or any other agencies? Thirdly, for trees found in any premises and are deemed to pose an immediate threat to life and property, it is known that NParks can intervene and take necessary action. Can I get clarification on the definition of this threat to life and property? Some of the issues that we tend we face on the ground may include trees bearing fruits which drop and accidentally hit persons or even vehicles parked in the vicinity, to cracks and damages to paths and pavements due to the expanding root systems. Some clarification will be useful as this is a practical problem. Fourthly, for trees found on our roadside within residential areas and estates, can I check if there are regular timelines or intervals for pruning and trimming? From the numerous observations I have made, it seems to be carried out only when we activate NParks or the relevant agencies or in situations when the trees are overgrown, are encasing street lamps, or are attracting numerous birds. Therefore, it will be good to also have some idea on the timeline for pruning. Finally, on heritage roads, can I check with the Senior Minister of State if Upper Aljunied Road, running alongside the Bidadari vicinity, can be included and also designated as a Heritage Road with its numerous very large and mature trees flanking the roads on both sides, creating a pleasant green ambience and also a canopy? Barring all these, Madam, I will support the Bill. 3.34 pm”
“Reading the two amendments together, defining the marine park as a public park and allowing other entities to manage public parks, I fear that the marine park will be taken down the road to become an eco-tourist theme park one day. This will definitely subvert the aim of conserving our marine biodiversity. I hope the Senior Minister of State can state, categorically, that this is not the direction it will take the marine park towards. The marine park represents to us our hope for the future, the legacies we leave behind for our children, an unrivalled lesson in good stewardship and the values we cherish as a cosmopolitan island nation embracing the world. We should deepen the scope and expand the scale of protecting our marine biodiversity. We should not turn what should be a nature reserve into an eco-tourist theme park. Mdm Speaker, I call for this Bill to be the first step to deepen the scope and expand the scale of protecting our marine biodiversity and not for turning the marine park into a theme park. With this hope, I support the Bill. 3.32 pm Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade):Mdm Speaker, I have a few clarifications pertaining to the Bill. Firstly, the focus and emphasis on marine parks, as it is relatively new in Singapore, is a welcome one and it establishes a safe haven for ecologically sensitive flora and fauna. With the definition of marine park given in section 2, Part 3, are there other parks or areas that are under consideration, besides the Sister's Islands and its vicinity, which have been stipulated in the Bill, and how actively are we working with other expert groups to see if there are other suggested areas that can be incorporated into this?”
“Instead of limiting the green network to the corridor from Labrador Park and Mount Faber to Pulau Brani, we should think outside the terrestrial green box to a great national park that integrates Labrador Nature Reserve and its green corridor with the blue network of coral reefs of the Southern Islands. I have a third point to add to the two disappointments concerning the scope and scale of protecting our marine biodiversity. This third point is the fear the amendments in this Bill will shift the evolution of the marine park in an undesirable direction. Clause 4 of the Bill inserts a new section 6A to allow the Minister to designate any entity to manage a public park. Will this lead to the commercialisation of our public parks? Will this lead to the parcelling out of our 300-plus public parks to diverse organisations to turn them into spaces to carry out their agenda that may undermine or dilute the open character and recreational purpose of our public parks? Will this promote unhealthy competition and turf wars between entities, such as Residents Committees, non-profit groups and even Statutory Boards? I hope the Senior Minister of State will clarify the intention of this amendment. With respect to the marine park being defined as a public park, rather than a national park or natural reserve, this new section means that the management of the marine park could be assigned to another entity other than NParks. This is a dangerous proposition, as the marine park needs to be managed by an entity equipped with the right scientific and conservation expertise. NParks is the only entity that is properly equipped to manage the marine park.”
“Kusu Island presents us with the opportunity to integrate an area of cultural significance into the marine park, to enhance it as a place of natural and cultural heritage. There is also the need to create buffer zones in between the conserved areas. The marine park, as it is designated now, is not a contiguous zone of protection, but split into three parts off Sisters' Islands, St John's and Pulau Tekukor. Unrestricted shipping poses a threat to the separated pockets of marine biodiversity. Just last year, in August, a collision between a Very Large Crude Carrier and a container ship close to the Sisters' Island brought on fears of an oil spill that would have been disastrous for the marine park. Buffer zones providing for secondary protection, not unlike the proposed amendment to create a new offence of releasing animals into a reserve through waterways outside the reserve, would mitigate the risks. I am fully aware that the shipping traffic is the lifeline of our economy. However, the relocation of the port from Keppel and Pasir Panjang to Tuas presents us with an excellent opportunity. The URA has invited Singaporeans to imagine and envision how the planned redevelopment of the coastline for the Greater Southern Waterfront after 2030 can take shape. I believe we should not stop at the creation of a continuous waterfront from Labrador to Marina South and we should creatively and courageously imagine the inclusion of an expanded Southern Islands Marine Park as the Greater Southern Waterfront's premium green space.”
“Designating the marine park as a nature reserve, and not just any public park, will signal to visitors to give due respect to the marine biodiversity. There is one more reason why the marine park needs the protection of a nature reserve, even more so than a terrestrial nature reserve. The boundaries of a terrestrial nature reserve, such as Sungei Buloh, could be carefully guarded against human intrusions using well-designed fences, walls, roads, hedges, waterways or secondary forests. However, the marine park is by nature a very open space given its location in the open seas. As our marine park gathers fame, our marine biodiversity could become a target of unscrupulous poachers and collectors. One major threat to coral reefs and reef fishes is poaching for the aquarium hobby market. We need to empower the custodian, NParks, to guard the marine park against this threat. My second disappointment is with the scale of the protection. The marine park covers 40 hectares around Sisters' Island and the reefs off the western coasts of Pulau Tekukor and St John's Island. The Blue Plan had a far more extensive list of areas with high marine biodiversity, which included many islands and reefs adjacent to the marine park, such as Pulau Hantu, Pulau Semakau, Pulau Biola, the Cyrene Reefs and Kusu Island. Expanding the marine park to cover these areas with submerged reefs would greatly enhance and deepen the protection of our marine biodiversity. Kusu Island is also a cherished place for thousands of Singaporeans travelling there for religious pilgrimages. The legend behind the island about a tortoise turning itself into an island to save two shipwrecked sailors, a Malay and a Chinese, and the Chinese temple and kramat shrines located there represent our multiracial harmony.”
“And there are four nature reserves: the Central Catchment Nature Reserve, Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Labrador Nature Reserve and Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve. These areas are set aside for conservation of our natural heritage, scientific research, outreach and dissemination of knowledge and educational purposes. These are exactly aligned with the purposes of the marine park, to serve as a platform for conservation, research, outreach and education on our marine biodiversity. So, why is our only and very unique marine park not placed with our national parks and nature reserves, but lumped with over 300 public parks? This is not just a question of bad categorisation. The protections that are afforded to national parks and nature reserves should be given to our marine park, for the simple reason that our marine park was established to protect our unique and endangered marine biodiversity. Under sections 8 and 9 of the Act, persons are restricted from collecting, capturing and displacing any plants and animals; from disturbing the land This is more urgent, given that intertidal guided walks are being conducted and the diving trail and other planned trails will bring more visitors to experience the marine biodiversity up close. I understand that in any nature conservation effort, outreach and education are important to get public support. The intertidal walks, the trails, the planned boardwalk and the floating pontoon at Big Sister's Island complement the conservation effort. However, they do expose the fragile marine eco-system to human footfalls and the natural temptation to touch and collect. Furthermore, as a public park, the marine park is exposed to visitors in private boats who could swim and snorkel freely among the reefs.”
“Various local NGOs and institutions worked with NParks during the International Year of the Reef in 2008 to develop the Plan, which was submitted to the Government. As a result, the Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey was launched, led by NParks and involved the Universities, many NGOs and many more volunteers. In the five years, the Survey has discovered possibly 100 new species, which is, in itself, a major accomplishment and contribution to the global commons. The Government's move to establish the marine park is a ringing endorsement of civil society's initiative. It shows what non-governmental organisations and social clubs can achieve by pooling their creative energies and what can be accomplished for the national good when the Government listens and allows the creative energies to be channelled through to policy and law. I have been looking forward to this Bill to formalise the legal status of the marine park and I am disappointed. I am disappointed with two things. Both disappointments are related to the objective of protecting our coral reefs. The first is the scope of protection and the second is the scale of protection. Let us begin with the scope of protection. The Bill defines "marine park" as "any area of the sea or seabed that is set aside for conservation of marine organisms and is designated in Part III of the Schedule". So far so good, as the marine park seems to take on the characteristics of "national park" and "nature reserve", being set aside for conservation and designated with its own Part in the Schedule. However, the "marine park" is then parked, forgive the pun, under the definition of "public park". There are two national parks: Fort Canning Park and the UNESCO World Heritage-listed Singapore Botanic Gardens.”
“If the Neighbourhood Committee was asked to mediate, their neighbour may even refuse to answer the door! This has made the residents feel rather helpless. Now, the Government is amending the law to allow NParks to direct property owners to trim trees that could pose a danger to others. This would give the residents peace of mind. However, I would like to ask the Minister: what is the definition of "posing a danger to others"? As for the trees that cause dispute, can NParks have the trees cut down? This is because there are a lot of trees and flowers planted along the roadside. (In English): Mdm Speaker, these clarifications notwithstanding, I support the Bill. 3.22 pm Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Speaker, I recall reading with delight back in 2014 about the initiative to establish our country's first marine park at Sisters' Island. The objective to protect Singapore's coral reefs, which are home to rare and endangered marine life, is lofty and praiseworthy. The plans for the marine park to serve as a platform for conservation, research, outreach and education on our marine biodiversity are ambitious and worthy of support. We will be protecting what is leftover of our natural heritage after the incessant urban development and redevelopment, not for ourselves, but for our children and for the world. In the face of warming waters of climate change, protecting our tiny coral reefs is a statement of defiant sustainability. This is a shout-out to everyone that we need to conserve our common future, no matter how small the contribution and how slim the chances. There is also a promising social aspect leading to the establishment of the marine park. It was born from the proposal by civil society called the Singapore Blue Plan 2009.”
“I have received feedback from residents who complained that their neighbours did not maintain their trees properly and, as a result, the trees are leaning over, or the leaves fall into their garden, or the roots are uprooting the boundary wall. These residents are at a dilemma because not all neighbours are so understanding and cooperative. They view that as long as it is on their land, they can do what they want. The overgrown trees may tilt or drop leaves into the next house but it is not their problem. For the ones at the receiving end, there is no redress. There is no one that they can turn to. Can the Minister advise, in such cases, what can the neighbours do? Do not ask them to go for mediation as they will not turn up and do not ask them to go and look for the neighbourhood committee members because neighbourhood committee can keep knocking at the door, they would not open the door. Of course, if there is a danger of human lives, then this amendment would be helpful as NParks can now step in. I would like to ask: how do you define danger? Is the dropping of leaves into the neighbour's house that may clog up drains and cause mosquito breeding and dengue or Zika a danger? Or the leaves fall into the neighbour's house cause the neighbour to have sleepless nights and subsequently have depression − is this danger? Since there is already a lot of roadside planting, can NParks order to remove trees that cause dispute or concern? Mdm Speaker, in Chinese please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Many residents in private estates would tell me that their neighbour's tree was "leaning over". As a result, the leaves would fall into their garden, or the tree looked so precarious that they would feel afraid every day.”
“It also allows the Commissioner to modify or waive these dimensions where necessary or appropriate. Finally, the Bill makes related amendments to the National Parks Board Act to further encourage the development of the landscape industry. This industry, comprising landscape designers, maintenance workers, arborists and nursery operators, is crucial to the development and maintenance of our City in a Garden. Since 2007, NParks has rolled out industry training programmes and best practice guides. In 2013, NParks launched the Landscape Productivity Grant to help companies mechanise. In 2016, NParks worked with NTUC and MOM to launch a Progressive Wage Model for landscape workers. In this regard, clause 24 defines the landscape industry and NParks' role in helping to manage, promote and strengthen the industry. In particular, the clause empowers NParks to manage and optimise State land safeguarded for nurseries. This land will be tendered out in phases from mid-2018 to provide options for nurseries affected by redevelopment plans. Madam, in conclusion, these amendments will enhance the protection, management and development of greenery in Singapore. They underscore our determination to ensure that our greenery and natural heritage will endure. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 3.18 pm Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. The campaign to green Singapore has, indeed, been very successful and despite the demand for housing and other infrastructure we are indeed maintaining our image as a garden city. However, the success of our policy has also brought on some ugly issues between neighbours in some private estates. The recent case highlighted in the media between two private homeowners is an example.”
“This brings the regulatory treatment for both Heritage Road green buffers as well as Tree Conservation Areas into alignment. Sixth, the Bill enhances public safety by ensuring that occupiers of private property maintain the greenery in their premises. This includes trees grown on roof tops and balcony gardens. These trees need to be properly maintained or they might constitute a danger to occupiers and bystanders alike. Clause 14 will also allow NParks officers to enter premises to ascertain the condition of trees and plants to safeguard public safety. Maintenance notices may be issued to occupiers if the trees or plants pose a danger to persons or property. These notices may require the occupier to engage an arborist to conduct detailed inspections or to carry out pruning. Non-compliance will be an offence. Let me emphasise to Members that NParks' first recourse is usually to engage the occupier to better understand the situation and persuade him to rectify the situation. These powers will only be exercised as a last resort, if the occupier is uncooperative. Seventh, the Bill restructures the Parks and Trees Act to better enable NParks to respond more quickly and dynamically to new trends in greenery development. Presently, very technical specifications, such as the dimensions of planting areas that surround buildings, are set out in the Parks and Trees Act. These requirements cannot be modified or waived even by the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation. Sometimes, this hinders the adoption of innovative greenery proposals like vertical planting. Clause 11 will give NParks more flexibility. It transfers the prescription of dimensions of planting areas from the Parks and Trees Act to subsidiary legislation.”
“Clause 2(d) also brings these parks under the protection of the Parks and Trees Act, while clause 3(b) further allows the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation to delegate certain enforcement powers to selected employees of these entities. In short, GB Co employees can now rely on the Parks and Trees Act's provisions to protect the greenery and biodiversity of Gardens by the Bay. For example, park wardens who are GB Co employees will now be able to take enforcement action against illegal cutting of trees and plants at Gardens by the Bay. Fourth, the Bill provides NParks with more effective regulatory and enforcement powers. Under clause 3, the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation may delegate certain powers of enforcement to public officers, NParks employees, as well as the Auxiliary Police officers. He can also appoint public officers, NParks employees, an employee of a management body designated under section 6A, as well as licensed security officers as park rangers. These officers will receive proper enforcement training and work closely with NParks officers. In addition, NParks officers will now have more effective powers to investigate offences under the Act. For instance, they may interview offenders and record statements. Fifth, the Bill empowers NParks to require greenery to be reinstated, in cases where it has been illegally removed. So, let me elaborate. Currently, when greenery along Heritage Road green buffers are removed, offenders will not only face a fine, they may also be ordered to reinstate the greenery. However, those who commit illegal tree-felling in Tree Conservation Areas and vacant land are currently only subject to fines. Clause 10 now allows NParks to order those responsible to also reinstate the greenery.”
“By adding a definition of "marine park" in clause 2(a) and adding it as a type of public park in clause 2(c), we make it clear that the protection of the Parks and Trees Act applies to the designated foreshore as well as marine areas in the Sisters' Islands Marine Park. For instance, it will be an offence to fish, collect corals or moor boats without NParks' approval. The Bill will also enable NParks to make new subsidiary rules to regulate human activities in the Marine Park, in order to keep it as a sanctuary for marine life. For example, NParks can restrict diving and dropping of anchors at ecologically sensitive Let me next move on to provisions that enhance protection of biodiversity in our nature reserves. Section 9(3)(a) of the Act restricts the bringing in or releasing of animals in a nature reserve. This prevents the introduction of invasive species which may threaten the survival of our native animals in the reserves. However, the law currently does not cover cases where unwanted aquatic pets like exotic fish and terrapins are abandoned in streams or drains that lead into the reserves. So, clause 5 now makes it an offence for any person to release or abandon animals into watercourses outside of our nature reserves, if the person knows or ought to know that these watercourses flow into the reserves. To make this clear, NParks will put up signage at key watercourses and continue to strengthen its public education efforts. Third, the Bill gives greater protection to public parks and gardens that are not managed by NParks. Gardens by the Bay is independently managed by Gardens by the Bay Company (GB Co). Clause 4 of the Bill now allows the Minister to designate entities like GB Co as managers of public parks.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Parks and Trees Act empowers NParks to manage and protect our greenery and biodiversity in our nature reserves, national parks, heritage road buffers and tree conservation areas. But we need to continually review and update this piece of legislation as our City in a Garden continues to transform and grow. Mdm Speaker, let me introduce the main provisions of this Bill. First, the Bill enhances NParks' ability to protect the Sisters' Islands Marine Park, or SIMP. The Marine Park was established in 2014, after many years of hard work by NParks colleagues and passionate members of our marine conservation community. They include representatives from the Nature Society Singapore, Wild Singapore, the academic community and many other committed individuals. In particular, I would like to thank Mr Francis Lee, the lead for the Blue Plan, Prof Chou Loke Ming, a luminary in the field of marine biology, Mr Leong Kwok Peng, Vice President of Nature Society Singapore and Ms Ria Tan, Singapore's passionate naturalist and many, many more. The coastal areas and waters in the Marine Park teem with life and are rich in local biodiversity, such as coral, anemones, seahorses, fish and other creatures. It is amazing that our waters, which lie within some of the busiest commercial sea lanes in the world, are home to over a third of the world's total coral species. So, protecting the reefs at the Sisters' Island Marine Park is crucial to our coral conservation efforts.”