Lam Pin Min
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Transport, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time". This Bill, together with the Active Mobility (Amendment No.”
“It is timely for us to put in place a regulatory framework to ensure that active mobility devices being brought into and used in Singapore are safe. This is a key step in helping us put in place a safe and sustainable active mobility landscape in Singapore. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 1.55 pm”
“Clause 6 facilitates the transfer to and vesting in the financial security provider of a seafarer's rights against a shipowner as a result of any liability arising from the shipowner's obligation to repatriate the seafarer. For example, the liability to pay the seafarer's wages and entitlements.”
“Mr Speaker, to ensure a safe and high-quality blood supply for our patients in Singapore, pre-donation interviews are conducted to screen blood donors for risk factors and blood donations are also tested for blood-borne infections. However, infections can only be detected some time after the blood donors have been infected.”
“I thank the Member for that clarification. As far as I know, not all mental conditions will be excluded from blood donation. In fact, we have checked with HSA. There is a wide spectrum of mental illnesses – from very mild mental conditions to very severe conditions.”
“I think we must be cognisant that the reason why they are inmates is because of certain things that have happened, prior to that. That actually pre-disposes them to some high-risk behaviours.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,050 lines we hold for Lam Pin Min, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 21.
“I would like to thank Mr Murali Pillai for those supplementary questions. Indeed, it is of great concern to LTA and MOT when we read of the statistics for PMD-related fires. Like he rightly mentioned, in 2018, we had 52 cases and just in the first half of this year, we had 49 cases. But if you look at the same period, that is, comparing the first half of 2019 with the first half of 2018, it is actually a three-fold increase. This can likely be attributed to the increase in the population of PMDs in Singapore. When we first started one or two years ago, our rough estimate was about maybe 20,000 to 30,000 devices in Singapore. This has increased to 90,000 since we implemented the mandatory registration requirement. As to the 90% of the non-compliant PMDs, we will, like I have mentioned before, encourage owners to quickly change out to the UL2272-certified PMDs as soon as possible. If not, then we will want to remind PMD owners on some of the safe practices when it comes to the charging of the non UL2272-certified devices, which I had already elaborated on earlier. Will there be a secondary market for non-compliant PMDs? I hope not, as least not in Singapore. The use of non UL2272-certified devices on public paths will be illegal from 1 July 2020. If we do find anyone using such non-compliant devices, they will be taken to task.”
“I encourage owners of such unregistered devices either to quickly register them or, if not, they should dispose of these devices in a safe and responsible manner. As to mandatory education on safe riding, we have also asked ourselves whether we should make it mandatory for all PMD users. But we concluded that at this point in time, it may not be necessary to do so. Instead, like I mentioned in my reply to Dr Teo Ho Pin, we encourage all riders to go through SRP. We have even fully subsidised SRP for all users if they want to take part in this process, up to December 2019. We will continue to work with all the various interest groups to encourage people to take part in SRP. We have also published a Code of Conduct for PMD users and this was actually suggested by AMAP. This provides PMD users with some guidelines on some of the things that they should do when riding a PMD responsibly. I also reckon that, sometimes, many of our elderly residents may not be aware of some of these rules and etiquette when using a public path. Therefore, we have also engaged the community to help us in this public education effort, through the Active Mobility Patrol (AMP) teams that are currently present in more than 60 constituencies. I also want to encourage constituencies which do not have an AMP to please sign up for AMP. LTA will work closely with Members to educate PMD users as well as your residents on the safe use of PMDs and pathways.”
“I would like to thank the Member for those very pertinent questions. Maybe just allow me to answer the Member's Parliamentary Questions on PMD-sharing in private premises. Under the Parking Places Act, operators are required to obtain a licence to offer dockless PMD-sharing services if users of PMDs may end PMD rentals in a public space, meaning, outside private premises. This is to prevent indiscriminate parking of shared devices. However, the licensing regime currently does not cover PMD-sharing operators who deploy their devices solely on private land. At present, PMDs belonging to commercial shared services operating from private land are allowed to travel on public paths so long as the rental does not end in a public place. We are watching this very closely, especially for PMD-sharing operators who flout this rule, and we will take action against them. From 1 July 2019, it is an offence under the Active Mobility Act for companies to sell or lease non UL2272-certified PMDs for use on public paths. This even includes operators who offer PMD-sharing services from private premises. What this means is that all rental PMDs must be UL2272-certified, with no exception. Our licensing regime under the Parking Places Act requires PMD sharing licensees to procure as well as maintain third-party liability insurance. This does not apply to those operating solely on private land. I hope this answers the two Parliamentary Questions that the Member had filed. The Member also asked about whether we have any information on the number of devices that are not registered so far. Unfortunately, we do not have the information even though registration has been mandatory since 1 July this year. As long as they are not registered, e-scooters cannot be used on public paths.”
“Whether this is going to be a one-off inspection or a periodic inspection, currently, we are discussing internally. If Members understand the lifespan of a PMD, it is probably going to just last about two to three years. If we do have a regular inspection regime, whether that is going to be, first of all, necessary; secondly, whether it is going to be cost-effective. Having said that, like I have shared, we are still discussing internally and, if necessary, we may put this as a requirement. On the last clarification on the crowded covered linkways and whether we are able to use the $50 million fund that will be set up, the answer is yes. We will work with local Advisors to identify some of these hotspots and make the necessary infrastructural enhancements.”
“First of all, let me just thank Er Dr Lee Bee Wah for supporting us in this effort. In fact, I must give credit to Er Dr Lee Bee Wah for the idea of POZs in town centres and neighbourhood centres. I visited Khatib Town Centre together with Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and she showed me some of the challenges on the ground. Through some of the feedback from Er Dr Lee as well as residents and other Town Council Chairmen and Advisors, we have, therefore, decided to implement and introduce these trials of POZs at the five selected town and neighbourhood centres. But, of course, if it proves to be very useful and if we receive very good feedback from Advisors as well as residents, we will implement the POZs island-wide to other town areas which Advisors have identified as potential hotspots. As to her clarification on the number of non-compliant PMDs, to date, we have 90,000 PMDs registered in our database, of which 10% have been declared to be UL2272-certified. So, we are looking at 90% of these devices that are non-compliant at this point in time. Therefore, it is one of the reasons why we have decided to bring forward the deadline for UL2272-certified devices to be used on the ground by only six months, rather than immediately. This is necessary for the retailers to have sufficient time to bring in the certified devices for the replacement. At the same time, we are also implementing this mandatory inspection regime from 1 April 2020. This will allow us, first of all, to verify that, indeed, some of these so-called self-declared certified PMDs are really certified to the UL2272 standard. Subsequently, what happens is that only PMDs that have been certified by our authorised inspection centres to be compliant will be allowed to be registered.”
“In fact, LTA has stepped up enforcement actions to the extent that, almost on a daily basis, you will see that LTA has been putting up postings on its Facebook about some of these errant riders being summoned and some of these non-compliant devices being impounded. At the same time, we will also see how we can harness technology in our enforcement efforts, one of which I have explained in my Statement, which is piloting the use of mobile CCTVs at certain hotspots and see how we can use video analytics for the enforcement actions. As to the Member's second clarification on errant retailers, yes, indeed, I share the same sentiment that we should really get tough on some of these irresponsible retailers. Like I mentioned in my previous reply, we will not hesitate to take very stiff actions against some of these errant retailers.”
“I thank Mr Seah Kian Peng for those two supplementary questions. The first one is on the small group of irresponsible users. I totally agree with him that the majority of PMD users are responsible. Right now, we have 90,000 people who have registered PMDs in our database, and we know that only a small number of them are irresponsible. How can we then enhance our enforcement actions against this small group of people? Having said that, we do not want to ban the use of PMD just because of this small group of irresponsible users, while affecting the rest who are responsible. LTA has started what we call a "crowdsourcing application". I think Members would have read in the papers about the "Report PMD/PAB Incident" function within the MyTransport.SG application. This will allow any Singaporean to take a picture of any errant riders that they may encounter. I understand its limitations. We will review and monitor the reports that are received from this application. Whenever possible, we will take enforcement action against the errant rider. At the same time, we also understand that sometimes it may be difficult to identify the irresponsible user just through a picture taken using the app. But this will also give us good information on some of these areas that are potentially hotspots and then we can step up enforcement actions, whether physically or otherwise, at these places. I have also mentioned in my Ministerial Statement that we will be increasing the number of enforcement officers (AMEOs), up to about 200 by the end of this year. And I believe, with more manpower, we will be able to do more.”
“After discussing with the Town Council chairmen, we have decided to bring it down to three months because we want to know its effectiveness more quickly. And if it is proven to be effective, we will extend it to all the different towns island-wide where necessary.”
“I would like to thank Dr Teo Ho Pin for those supplementary questions. In fact, we have started the mandatory registration of PMDs, and we have only started that recently. So, I would urge everyone to give it some time for it to take effect. At the same time, we also strongly encourage all riders to go through the Safe Riding Programme (SRP) which I have mentioned earlier. To date, we have more than 57,000 individuals who have already attended SRP. To encourage the take up of SRP, we have made it completely free of charge. It is fully subsidised for the first two years till December 2019. So, if you know of anyone who has not gone for the course, please encourage them to do so while it is free of charge. We will continue to also work with active mobility interest groups, schools, companies, especially food-delivery companies, to encourage all their cyclists and PMD riders to attend SRP. As to the speed limit of devices on various paths, AMAP has recently recommended to MOT to reduce the speed limit of active mobility devices, including bicycles, on footpaths from 15 km per hour (h) to 10 km/h, and 25 km/h along shared paths. So far, we have received some feedback similar to what Dr Teo Ho Pin has shared as to whether these could be reduced further. I have asked Assoc Prof Faishal Ibrahim, together with his AMAP team, to look at some of these suggestions. Hopefully, they will be able to come back with some recommendations by the end of this year. As to the five trial sites, I would like to thank Dr Teo Ho Pin for agreeing to coordinate the efforts of implementing the trials in the five selected Town Councils. In fact, initially, we wanted to hold this trial over six months.”
“But I think we debated in the House during the introduction of the Active Mobility Bill that, taking all things into consideration, PMDs still have a role to play in providing active mobility options as well as providing first- and last-mile connectivity. And if we had banned PMD use on pathways, what it actually means is that we would have just pushed PMDs onto the roads, which would likely lead to more fatalities because of the higher speed of buses, cars and lorries travelling on the same road. Instead, what we have done is to implement a very comprehensive regime to ensure that PMDs are used in a safe and responsible manner. With that, I want to urge Singaporeans to continue to work with us in making active mobility a safe and relevant option for everyone. With regard to the Member's questions on enforcement on some of these errant retailers who are irresponsibly selling devices that are non-compliant, LTA will definitely take a very close watch and will not hesitate to take tough actions against them. Also, with regard to the question on the Park Connector Network (PCN) shared paths, currently, we are working with all the relevant agencies to see how we can enhance safety of PMD use on shared paths. We will also be working with local advisers to see how we can have infrastructure enhancement to tackle some of these issues on the ground.”
“I would like to thank Mr Lim Biow Chuan for the many supplementary questions. In fact, we had various discussions on these issues on PMD safety over the past one to two years. And MOT really appreciates all the feedback given by Members of the House. And if we look at some of these measures that we have come up with, it shows that we are listening, we know the concerns on the ground and we will not hesitate to take necessary action whenever appropriate. But I would also like to remind all Members that the reason why we promote active mobility is because we believe that it is good for Singaporeans and Singapore. And that it helps with our vision of a car-lite society. As with the introduction of any new technology, our regulatory regime has to be nimble and responsive, like I mentioned in my Ministerial Statement, and that we will have to evolve with the needs according to the situation and feedback on the ground. And I also would like to reiterate that safety is of paramount importance and we will take all feedback seriously. Thus far, Singapore remains the only country that has implemented the UL2272 standard for e-scooters and this had been a bold and decisive move in September 2018 to deal with the potential issues of fire safety. We are also the first country to introduce a mandatory registration as well as, soon, a mandatory inspection regime for PMDs with regard to the weight, width, motorised speed as well as the UL2272 requirements. The Member has also rightly pointed out that we could have banned PMD use right from the beginning or even at this point in time until all the infrastructure is ready. We could have taken the path of least resistance at the beginning to completely ban PMDs on pavements and shared paths.”
“We should avoid illegally modifying the devices and also avoid tampering with the electrical components or leaving the devices unattended when charging. If possible, please do not leave your PMD to charge overnight because there is a tendency for the device to overheat if you overcharge it excessively beyond what is required. Owners should also check that the batteries are in good condition, look for any damages or deformities that may give an indication that the battery may not be safe to continue to be used. And we should also make sure that original power adapters affixed with the Enterprise Singapore Safety Mark are used to charge the devices. So, these are some of the practical advice I would give Singaporeans while we await the implementation of the new deadline.”
“I would like to thank Mr Sitoh Yih Pin for the clarification and also for his continual support as Chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Transport. MOT is very mindful of the fire safety concerns about PMDs and we have studied this issue very, very carefully and consulted various stakeholders for the decision to bring forward the deadline for complying with the UL2272 standard by six months as well as for the mandatory inspection regime from 1 April 2020. We understand that many Singaporeans rely on PMDs for their livelihoods and their commuting needs, such as the stories of Mr Hafidz and Mr Low that I have shared. And we understand that if we were to ban non UL2272-certified devices immediately, that would definitely impose a lot of hardship and inconvenience to many Singaporeans. Our discussions with some of the PMD retailers, especially with the PMD Retailers Association of Singapore, has also confirmed that 1 July 2020 is a reasonable timeline as it gives retailers sufficient time to bring in UL2272-certified devices so that you can have a smooth replacement scheme. So, in the meantime, what we can do is that we will continue to encourage non UL2272-certified device owners to switch to compliant ones as soon as possible. At the same time, we also understand that many of the causes of PMD-related fires can be attributed to other factors, such as improper charging practices, the use of incompatible chargers or adapters. As such, LTA will be working very closely with SCDF to step up fire safety education on PMDs. Just to remind Members of the House as well as all Singaporeans, we can actually minimise the risk of fire by avoiding overcharging the batteries, like I mentioned before.”
“But the experience has helped us to review our regulatory measures and to see how they can be tightened to further enhance safety. As with any new technology, our regulatory regime has to be nimble and responsive. We will get the new measures in place quickly. And we will continue to monitor their effectiveness. And we remain ready to introduce new or better measures, if necessary. Safety is always our paramount concern. And we will not fail Singaporeans in safeguarding their lives and welfare. Singapore is actually not alone in having to grapple with PMDs. I thank Members of this House for their suggestions and continued support. I am also grateful to AMAP for their wise counsel and unceasing efforts. Above all, I seek Singaporeans' support and understanding that we are committed to doing our utmost. I am confident that we will be able to make active mobility safe and relevant for Singaporeans.”
“Meanwhile, major food delivery companies like Deliveroo and GrabFood are already providing third-party liability insurance for their riders. FoodPanda also announced this morning that they will be doing so starting from next month. AMAP and LTA are also working together with insurance companies to come up with more affordable products for individuals and encouraging individuals to purchase insurance. Finally, we will keep up the intensity of our educational efforts. LTA has brought the Safe Riding Programme (SRP) to local communities and schools, with about 600 sessions conducted over the last three months alone. As of June 2019, over 57,000 people have participated in SRP. We will continue to work with the community to develop a gracious and safe path sharing culture. This includes over 1,000 volunteers who regularly patrol and share safe riding practices with their community. Such educational efforts are key to a fundamental shift in how all path users behave and will help us to maximise the usage of our paths in a safe manner. Mr Speaker, we promote active mobility because it is good for Singaporeans. As our population ages, it is important to promote active ageing. Regular exercise is an important part of active ageing. This is why we promote Walk, Cycle, Ride as a preferred mode of transport for short distances within our residential estates. For some Singaporeans, motorised PMDs offer an added option. We hope Singaporeans will be able to accept their usage on our footpaths. But this requires PMD users to behave themselves. It is for their own safety as well as the safety of others. We have had a year of experience regulating PMDs. It has not been all smooth sailing and we did not expect any new tool’s introduction to be a rosy journey.”
“Currently, our enforcement efforts are manpower-intensive. We are, therefore, leveraging technology to expand our enforcement reach. LTA has just started on an 18-month trial of mobile closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras at hotspot locations to determine the effectiveness of video analytics software and radar technology in detecting offences, such as speeding. This provides an additional layer of deterrence. We take a tough stance against retailers who display or sell non-compliant devices, as well as those who provide illegal device modification services. To date, LTA has taken action against 12 PMD retailers. It is essential to tackle non-compliant devices at the source. We will not tolerate such behaviour and we will deal with them firmly and with the full brunt of the law. Some Members also asked whether our penalties are adequate. The laws allow for a range of penalties, ranging from composition sums, forfeiture of non-compliant devices, to fine and jail terms for serious cases. This ensures that the punishment is proportionate to the crime. In February 2019, the Courts ruled in a landmark case, sentencing a reckless PMD rider to seven weeks' jail for knocking down a pedestrian and causing grievous hurt. This will serve as a precedent for future cases. We are closely monitoring whether our penalty regime is effective at deterring errant riding behaviour. We will enhance penalties if necessary. I have also asked Assoc Prof Faishal Ibrahim and AMAP to study the issue of insurance and compensation in the event of active mobility-related incidents. AMAP will submit its recommendations to the Government later this year after consulting the relevant stakeholders. We will likely start off by requiring PMD-sharing operators to have third-party liability insurance.”
“To ensure a safe and well-connected network of cycling paths, we will reclaim road space to build the cycling paths at these four stretches. This will be done by reducing the width of roads or taking back an entire road lane. This is necessary for safety and connectivity. The works at AMK will be completed over the next three years. We will progressively implement similar plans in other HDB towns, and I seek Members' and fellow Singaporeans’ patience and support. At the national level, there are now 440 km of cycling paths in Singapore. This is not enough to support first-mile-last-mile commutes. We will expand the cycling path network to 750 km by 2025 and triple our cycling network by 2030. This will require us to reclaim some existing car lanes. In new precincts, such as Kampong Bugis, Tengah and Woodlands North Coast, LTA plans to build cycling paths on both sides of the road. New cycling paths may also be added to private residential estates and industrial estates. Infrastructure alone is not enough. We also need to have a comprehensive enforcement and education strategy to encourage responsible riding and deter errant riding. Let me share what we are doing by way of enforcement. LTA has significantly stepped up enforcement against errant riders. Since May 2019, we have more than doubled our enforcement resources. We will continue to ramp up and will enlarge the enforcement team to about 200 by the end of this year. This will be supplemented by crowdsource feedback through LTA's recently-launched "Report PMD/power-assisted bicycles (PAB) Incident" function in the MyTransport.SG app. Since May 2018, LTA officers have detected over 4,900 active mobility offences and impounded over 2,100 non-compliant devices.”
“We will try out POZs at the town centres in Ang Mo Kio, Bedok, Bukit Batok and Khatib, and at a neighbourhood centre in Tampines. So, we are actually selecting five trial sites. We will consult the local MP on the specific details. If the concept of the POZ proves useful, we will roll it out to other towns island-wide. As a further step, LTA has also started a trial to implement School Zone markings along footpaths outside some schools. These include speed regulating strips, “SLOW” markings and enhanced visual cues on the ground to remind PMD users to slow down and watch out for other path users, especially young children. We have completed works at the first trial site at Fern Green Primary School. We will expand this to four other schools which include Fengshan Primary, Jiemin Primary, Rivervale Primary and Yishun Secondary School by next month. Apart from localised infrastructure enhancements, we work closely with the local MP to develop active mobility infrastructure at the township level. Ang Mo Kio (AMK) is an example of what every town can look forward to. AMK is our first “Walking and Cycling Town”. When the cycling-path network is completed in 2022, it will span 20 kilometres (km), connecting homes safely and seamlessly to the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station, bus interchange and AMK Hub. These cycling paths will be located along almost all of the main roads in AMK. They will have pedestrian and cyclist friendly features, such as pedestrian-priority zones near bus stops, a distinctive red colouring for the cycling paths, and cycling ramps. There are four stretches where it is necessary to build cycling paths for connectivity, but where the sidewalks are not wide enough. These four stretches are at AMK Streets 22, 41, 43 and 61.”
“We expect the number to grow as more Singaporeans take up the opportunities afforded by this new mobility option. To meet growing needs, we will expand our active mobility infrastructure improvement plans and expedite them in hotspots where accidents often occur. We are setting aside a fund to tackle such hotspots, by making appropriate improvements, such as widening footpaths, installing clear warning signs, and installing speed regulating strips on the paths to slow down PMD users. These efforts are estimated to cost us $50 million to implement over the next few years. We will work with local Members of Parliament (MPs) and residents to identify the infrastructure improvements to tackle specific hotspots in each of your constituency. Two months ago, we had a discussion in this House on whether PMDs should be banned from HDB void decks and corridors, where there are many blind spots which cannot be overcome through infrastructure improvements. At that time, I said that Town Councils could set and enforce their own rules on PMD usage at void decks. After further discussions, 15 Town Councils have decided to ban the usage of PMDs in void decks and common corridors. In addition, some Town Councils have also told us about the high accident risk at crowded town centres and neighbourhood centres where the paths are lined with shops. As pedestrians can walk in all different directions, there is a potentially higher risk of accidents, compared to a linear footpath. To address this risk, LTA will work with the relevant Town Councils to conduct a three-month trial to designate pedestrian-only zones (POZs) where riders must dismount and push their PMDs.”
“I wish to remind PMD users that UL2272-certified PMDs come with electrical system safety features to reduce the risk of fires. UL2272 automatically cuts off battery charging once the battery is fully charged, thus avoiding overcharging which is a cause of fire. For this reason, modifying the electrical system of a UL2272-certified device will invalidate the certification. Users should not try to modify devices which are already UL2272-certified or add battery packs, as this could affect the circuitry and device safety. Device owners should instead approach their retailer or an authorised agent who is familiar with the approved battery model for that device model for battery replacements, so as not to void the UL2272 certification. While UL2272 is a rigorous standard, users still have a part to play by adopting safe charging practices. They should avoid charging already-full batteries and regularly check batteries for damage or deformity. They should only use original power adaptors, which should be affixed with Enterprise Singapore’s Safety Mark. Users should never leave their devices unattended when charging. In particular, devices should not be left to charge overnight. LTA will work with the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) to strengthen educational campaigns and outreach programmes on UL2272 certification and safe charging practices for residential, industrial and commercial buildings. We will also crack down on illegal modifications of PMDs. Individuals caught doing so will be liable for a fine and/or jail term. Let me now address path safety. Our strategy covers infrastructure enhancement, enforcement and education. The first aspect pertains to infrastructure. Today, we have 90,000 registered e-scooters.”
“LTA will be scheduling all e-scooters which were earlier registered and self-declared UL2272-certified for inspection. LTA will, henceforth, require all new e-scooters to pass inspections for UL2272 certification and width, weight and device speed before they can be registered. Some PMD users are concerned about the costs of switching out their non UL2272-certified devices. While I understand their worries, we seek their understanding and support for this necessary move. AMAP Chairman Assoc Prof Faishal Ibrahim and I recently met with food delivery riders to see how they will be impacted by these proposed new measures and how we can help cushion the impact on them. The food delivery companies have tied up with PMD operators to offer PMD rentals for food delivery riders. They have also announced their commitment to help their riders convert to, or rent, UL2272-certified devices. LTA will work with food delivery companies to offer more attractive rates for PMD rentals. From LTA’s engagement with retailers, we are also aware that they will bring in more UL2272-certified PMDs with higher capacity and longer range very soon. I strongly encourage and urge all users and owners of the non UL2272-certified PMDs to switch them out as soon as possible. They can be a fire risk if you still keep and charge them at home. These devices should be properly and safely disposed of as soon as possible. We will provide support to PMD users who come forth to dispose of their non UL2272-certified PMDs. We are studying ways to encourage Singaporeans to come forth and dispose of their non UL2272-certified devices early. More details will be announced later. LTA is also working with NEA to ensure safe and convenient disposal of non UL2272-certified devices.”
“The UL2272 standard improves safety against fire and electrical hazards significantly, by requiring the devices to pass a stringent set of tests conducted by accredited testing centres under extreme physical conditions. To date, we are still the only country in the world to impose such a rigorous fire safety requirement for e-scooters. Thus far, all PMD-related fire incidents have involved non-UL2272 certified devices and may have involved inappropriate charging practices, such as the use of incompatible chargers, overloading of sockets or charging near flammable materials. We could have simply banned non-UL2272 certified PMDs. But retailers and users who had just bought such PMDs pleaded for some grace period. That is why we imposed the requirement for PMD retailers to sell only UL2272-certified devices from 1 July 2019, while users could only ride certified devices from 1 January 2021 onwards. Even with this grace period, many retailers complained bitterly about the adverse impact on their businesses. Users were also unhappy about having to give up devices that were still usable and having to pay significantly more for a UL2272-certified PMD. These negative sentiments were widely covered in the media. However, given the recent spate of PMD-related fires, LTA will take two further steps to address the situation. We will bring forward by six months, the deadline for compliance with the UL2272 requirement, to 1 July 2020. As many Singaporeans rely on PMDs for their livelihoods and their commuting needs, we think this is the earliest reasonable deadline. This will also give retailers time to bring in a sufficient stock of UL2272-certified devices. We will also introduce a mandatory inspection regime for registered e-scooters from 1 April 2020 onwards.”
“Members wisely emphasised the need for regulations, enforcement, public education and, wherever suitable, infrastructure enhancement. Upon AMAP’s recommendation, we put in place a comprehensive framework of regulations on device criteria and user behaviour through the Active Mobility Act. The Act commenced on 1 May 2018. Mr Speaker, we now have a year of experience regulating PMDs. The risks and disamenities have become clearer. There have been 228 reported accidents involving PMDs on public paths in 2017 and 2018. There were 52 PMD-related fires reported in 2018. The number was 49 in the first half of this year. The growing number of fires is, indeed, worrying. I have often asked myself whether we would be better off banning PMDs whenever I read of accidents involving PMDs. However, I remember the call to ban bicycles from footpaths several years ago. After intensive public education efforts and infrastructure improvements, there is now a greater acceptance of bicycles in Singapore. Similarly, a PMD is just a machine. It is the rider who decides whether it is beneficial or detrimental to lives. I am confident that Singaporeans can be taught to use PMDs responsibly, as they have with bicycles. I am confident that we can bring about the safe sharing of paths with PMDs. But with the hindsight of experience, we should add new regulatory measures to enhance safety. I will focus on two key areas – fire safety and path safety. First, how can we further enhance fire safety? In September 2018, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) announced UL2272 as a mandatory requirement for PMDs.”
“He uses his e-scooter to run errands near his home in Sengkang, do weekend patrols with the Waterways Watch Society where he volunteers, and even visit his brother in Bedok. For Mr Low, his e-scooter helps him stay active and connected and has since become a way of life for him. There are also thousands of Singaporeans who use PMDs to improve their livelihoods. Mr Hafidz is one of them. He had to give up his earlier job due to health reasons and doing food delivery is now his lifeline. As the eldest son in his family, working as a food delivery PMD rider allows Mr Hafidz to provide for himself and his elderly parents, who are no longer working. When I met him last week at a dialogue session, he shared with me that his goal is simply to ride safely with his loved ones in mind. Mr Low and Mr Hafidz are only two of the many Singaporeans who have benefited from the introduction of PMDs. Even Singaporeans who do not ride PMDs benefit from the convenient services provided by riders who use PMDs to deliver food to their doorsteps. Because we were aware of the potential negative effects and also benefits, we conducted an extensive public consultation exercise to solicit views from a wide range of key stakeholders back in 2015 and 2016. It was led by Senior Parliamentary Secretary Assoc Prof Faishal Ibrahim and his Active Mobility Advisory Panel (AMAP). Members of the House will remember our thorough debate on all these issues when the Active Mobility Bill was tabled in January 2017. On balance, the House decided to allow PMDs to enter Singapore as they are fundamentally a cheap, convenient and environmentally friendly alternative to cars and motorcycles for short trips. They can play an important role in our vision for a car-lite society.”
“Mr Speaker, we, in the Ministry of Transport (MOT), are deeply concerned about the risks posed by motorised personal mobility devices (PMDs). We are aware that this is a hot topic on the ground. We hear it from our residents; we hear it from many Members of this House. All have expressed concern over the irresponsible use of PMDs, which have caused a lot of trouble. Reckless PMD riders have become a menace on the ground, causing alarm on our public paths. People are worried about whether our elderly parents or young children will be able to avoid speeding PMD users. Speedsters have also illegally modified their devices to travel at very high speed, without fear for their own lives and the danger they put others in. Residents are also worried that their houses would be affected should their neighbour’s PMD catch fire. Such irresponsible behaviour is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated. At the same time, we are mindful that tens of thousands of Singaporeans have adopted PMDs and benefited daily from their usage. The vast majority of them use PMDs responsibly. Through the course of my various engagements, fellow Singaporeans have related to me stories of Singaporeans who have saved time and costs by using PMDs as a transport option, older Singaporeans with mobility challenges who have found newfound freedom with personal mobility aids, and Singaporeans who have improved their livelihoods through new employment opportunities. Let me just share with Members the story of Mr Low Joo Kek, who is 62 years old this year. Mr Low used to get around on a bicycle. But with age, this has become a bit more challenging for him. Two years ago, Mr Low started riding an e-scooter, which he finds is a convenient way to travel.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to deliver this Statement on behalf of the Minister for Transport?”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 1 to 16 in a Ministerial Statement later?”
“At the same time, we will also put in place enhanced detection and disruption systems to be able to immobilise or prevent these drones from causing mayhem in the airspace as well as posing a danger to flights. At the same time, CAAS has also been judiciously managing the air traffic operations in Changi to ensure minimal disruptions to the flight operations. This can be done through risk-based approaches, in terms of planning for departures and arrivals. These are some measures we are looking at. As I have replied to Mr Dennis Tan's questions, in addition to working with the other agencies, CAAS and CAG are also beefing up their own internal capabilities so that we will be able to manage these incidents more effectively.”
“I would like to thank Mr Lim Biow Chuan for those supplementary questions. Indeed, when I gave the reply in January this year, we did have the capability to detect and disrupt errant drone users. We have also taken a very coordinated approach in managing the current incident. In fact, after the incidents in Gatwick Airport, we have worked out the standard operating procedure and conducted table-top exercises to run through the operational plans so that we would be able to cope with similar incidents within our own airspace. I would want to thank all the agencies that had been working day in and day out 24/7 to manage the incidents that had happened at Changi Airport. As a result, we have been able to keep it under control. We have managed to keep disruption to the runway and airport operations to the minimum. I would also want to take this opportunity to remind all drone users that it is a very, very serious offence to operate unauthorised drones within five km of the airports or military bases, or at altitudes above 200 feet. Any errant operators of drones will not only pose a danger to aviation, but also to the personal safety of others. Anyone caught flouting this law will face a fine of up to $20,000 or a jail term of up to 12 months or both. We are currently looking at increasing the penalty framework for such offences. What are the strategies that we have put in place to prevent similar occurrences? Well, I would say that our priority right now is to beef up our existing capabilities to detect these drone intrusions as quickly as possible, very promptly, and to ensure that our air traffic operations continue to function safely with minimal disruptions.”
“I would like to thank the Member for those supplementary questions. In fact, the Member is correct to say that there are certain solutions like geofencing technology to disallow the operation of certain drones into restricted areas. However, this will only be possible if the user is using a drone that is fitted with that kind of capability. For example, if the users were to use DJI drones, these will be equipped with geofencing capability where the drones will not be allowed to operate in certain restricted areas. Unfortunately, in this particular case, we are of the assessment that such a capability has been disabled so that the geofencing solutions will not be capable of preventing these intrusions. As to the Member's second question of the capabilities of CAAS and CAG, MOT and CAAS are working with the various agencies to continue to tap on the security agencies' assets whenever possible or whenever necessary, without compromising their own operational needs. But in the medium term, CAAS and CAG will also be enhancing their own capability to detect and counter drones on an expedited basis. So, the answer in short is that CAG, together with CAAS, will have their own internal capabilities as soon as possible.”
“Picking up the activities of drones can be very challenging because the drones are basically quite small in size. Of course, the ideal situation will be to be able to detect the activities of drones on a 24/7 basis. But having said that, I think we need to look at the modus operandi of these drone users. Like I have mentioned before, there are cooperative UAS users and, in those cases, the central flight management system will be very useful in identifying exactly where these drone users are operating and the activities of these drones. Should there be situations where there are accidental intrusions into some of these restricted areas, the central flight management system will be able to quickly identify these users and inform them about the accidental intrusions. However, we are now dealing with illegal, unauthorised malicious, deliberate activities by UAS users. In these cases, we need to have a risk-stratified approach where certain areas will be given priority in terms of assessing the activities and detecting where they are operating. One example will be near aerodromes, such as the Changi Airport area, where we will have the capability to detect as well as disrupt these activities in the shortest possible time.”
“I would like to share with Mr Ang Wei Neng that, currently, the incidents are being investigated by the Police. It will be too early to prejudge whether these are committed by foreigners or locals, or the profile of the perpetrators. So, I would urge Mr Ang Wei Neng to give us some time to complete the investigation before we are able to make the necessary announcements.”
“I would like to thank the Member for those two supplementary questions. On the first query on the timeline for the mandatory registration, we have set up the UAS Advisory Panel in May 2019, who will be looking into some of these issues, including the suggestion to mandate the registration of UAS and we hope to be able to do so by the end of this year. We are urging the Advisory Panel to double up their efforts so that we can bring the timeline earlier. As to the Member's suggestion of some form of central flight management system, I had, in a previous Parliamentary Sitting announced that we are currently looking into this concept of a central flight management system, whereby registered UAS will be monitored for their activities and where they are operating. However, this is only useful for UAS operators who are cooperative. As for UAS operators who are uncooperative, with the intention of performing malicious activities, relying on our existing sensors to pick up these illegal activities will be of the utmost importance.”
“Meanwhile, we have strengthened our counter-drone capabilities at the airport. We stand ready to invest in and deploy additional capabilities to monitor and enforce the safety of our airspace.”
“Our laws governing the use of drones prohibit their use within five kilometres (km) of an aerodrome, unless a permit has been granted by the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS). We have assessed this no-fly zone prohibition to be sufficient. However, there will be a few selfish and irresponsible persons who operate in flagrant disregard of the law as well as the needs and concerns of others. We will, therefore, tighten the approach to regulating drone uses and dealing with errant drone users through the following measures. First, we will introduce a mandatory registration regime for all drones operating in Singapore as well as a licensing framework for pilots of large or more capable drones. This will ensure that drone operators are made aware of their responsibilities and undertake to conduct their activities in a responsible manner. Second, there will be stricter enforcement actions against errant drone operators. Last week, two persons who operated a drone close to an aerodrome were charged. This morning, a company pleaded guilty to a charge of operating a drone without a permit. The company was fined $9,000. Further, there is one other case being investigated for breaching the existing drone regulations. If convicted, they could face fines of up to $20,000. In conjunction with this, the Government is also looking into increasing the penalties for errant drone users. As with other forms of new technology, finding the right balance in terms of regulations will take time, particularly since drone technology continues to evolve very quickly. This is why CAAS established the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Advisory Panel earlier this year to help review and recommend enhancements to the regulatory framework.”
“The recent drone intrusions are the first confirmed intrusions into Changi Airport that we have encountered. They disrupted airport operations and led to 55 flight delays and eight diversions over two nights on 18 and 24 June 2019. Although the impact of the recent drone intrusions has been moderate, these intrusions can have severe impact on airport operations. At Gatwick Airport, for example, drone intrusions shut down the entire airport for three days, affecting approximately 1,000 flights. Police investigations into the drone intrusions are ongoing. We have learnt from the experiences of other airports that identifying the perpetrators can be challenging and will take time. Meanwhile, our priority is to detect the drones promptly and prevent them from affecting air traffic and endangering public safety. We have taken a multi-agency approach and deployed national resources towards ensuring the safety of Changi Airport operations. The drone intrusions have caused some to suggest that we should ban the use of drones. There are many beneficial uses of drones. Besides commercial applications, such as drone deliveries and inspections, there are also many recreational users in Singapore. Our schools and institutes of higher learning use drones to teach Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM), including robotics and programming. It is, therefore, important that we continue to take a balanced approach. By and large, the community of drone enthusiasts fly their drones responsibly and are sensitive to the needs and concerns of other users that they share public space with in our crowded urban environment.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 5 to 11 together?”
“We expect the stock of losartan as well as other ARBs to stabilise from 1 July onwards. This is based on the current concept of operation whereby affected patients will be restricted to only one-month supply, and gradually increasing to two or even three months of supply, which is the regular practice, from 1 July onwards. We would like to reassure all patients that we have sufficient stocks of alternatives, as well as losartan stocks that are not contaminated with the nitrosamines. Things should go back to normalcy from July onwards.”
“The institutions also deployed additional staff to operate the hotlines for patient queries and set up service touchpoints to help patients switch their medicines. These actions went beyond what most other countries had done. As of 28 April, we have helped more than half of the affected patients switch to alternative medicines. For all patients whose appointments are on or after 1 July, public healthcare institutions have already reached out to all of them to offer earlier appointments. We are on schedule to complete the exercise by end June this year. Since the recall, HSA has also been working with suppliers and international regulatory agencies to determine the cause of contamination, and to formulate measures to eliminate the nitrosamines in the medium to longer term. HSA will continue to monitor the quality and safety of these medicines to safeguard public health.”
“On 28 March 2019, HSA recalled three brands of medicines which belong to the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) class of blood pressure medication and contain the ingredient losartan. Following the recall of several losartan medicines in the US due to the presence of a nitrosamine impurity, N-nitroso-N-methyl-4-aminobutyric acid (NMBA), HSA tested the suspected losartan medicines and they were found to contain trace amounts of NMBA which are above the acceptable limit. The routine tests required of the manufacturers are based on known impurities that may be generated during the manufacturing process, as it is not practical to exhaustively test for all types of impurities. In the case of the recalled losartan medicines, testing for nitrosamines like NMBA was not previously part of the testing parameters of ARB medicines as NMBA was not expected to be generated in the manufacturing process. This approach is similar to that adopted in other countries, including the US, Canada and the European Union. As the short-term risk of taking the medicine was low, the advisory to affected patients was to continue taking their medicines until they are provided with suitable alternatives. Sudden stopping of their medication could pose greater and more immediate risk to patients’ health. Meanwhile, HSA and our public healthcare family worked together to reach out to affected patients to facilitate a switch to alternative medicines. HSA tested all locally marketed ARB medicines to ensure that these alternatives do not contain NMBA. Public healthcare institutions then scheduled appointments for affected patients to switch to alternative medicines.”
“The Health Sciences Authority (HSA) sets stringent standards on the quality and safety of medicines sold in Singapore. Before being approved for sale, the medicines are evaluated to ensure that they meet the required international standards of quality, safety and efficacy. HSA conducts in-depth technical assessments of the scientific data from clinical studies, as well as the manufacturing and quality control processes. In addition, HSA checks that the manufacturers conform to international standards of Good Manufacturing Practice. After approval, HSA conducts post-market surveillance which includes monitoring of global developments and risk-based product sampling and testing for compliance to quality and safety specifications. Products found to be deficient in quality will be withdrawn from the market. Manufacturers are also required to test all batches of medicines to be sold in Singapore, including the levels of specific impurities, to ensure that they comply with stipulated standards. Generic medicines are subject to the same strict regime of regulatory controls to ensure their safety, efficacy and quality. The standards, checks and processes adopted by HSA are similar to those adopted by regulatory counterparts in other jurisdictions, such as Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan and the United States (US). HSA’s Pharmaceutical Laboratory is also accredited to international standards, such as the International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission 17025 standard for testing laboratories. It is also a World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Medicines Quality Assurance.”
“I would like to thank Er Dr Lee Bee Wah for those comments and I also understand where she is coming from. On the part of LTA, in order for us to make the footpaths safer for both pedestrians as well as PMD users, she may be aware that we have already reduced the speed limit of the devices on footpaths from 15 km/h to 10 km/h. The reason we reduced the speed limit is so that we can enhance the safety by increasing the amount of time for PMD users as well as pedestrians to react to unforeseen circumstances. With this lowered speed limit, we also hope that the severity of injuries, should they occur, would be much lower. Of course, we do not hope for accidents to occur, but we hope that with the lower speed limit, we have enough reaction time to react to any unforeseen circumstances. As to the kind of advice that we give to pedestrians, whether it is the elderly or the young, as well as to the PMD users, I think we just have to exercise graciousness, caution as well as to act responsibly when we share the use of common spaces, such as footpaths and in shared paths. We also have to exercise alertness whenever there are any PMD users approaching us. For the PMD users, they are advised to ride carefully within the speed limit allowed, as well as to slow down when faced with a crowd in front of them. These are some commonsense practices that PMD users should exercise.”
“This is my last question on personal mobility devices (PMDs). Mr Speaker, we will continue to study other countries' and cities' e-scooter regulations. There is a wide range of practices across jurisdictions. For example, Paris will ban the use of e-scooters on footpaths, while Berlin will allow them but limits them to a device speed limit of 12 kilometres per hour (km/h). Queensland in Australia allows e-scooters on footpaths but sets a higher device speed limit of 25 km/h. We have to tailor our approach to our local context and the needs of Singaporeans. In Singapore, such active mobility devices are useful for short journeys within towns and as first- and last-mile options. In 2015, after an extensive public consultation, the Active Mobility Advisory Panel recommended that e-scooters be allowed on footpaths, but with a clear set of rules and code of conduct to ensure their safe use. We are mindful of the safety concerns expressed by Members as well as the general public. However, the solution is not to ban them, but to cultivate the right culture where users ride safely and responsibly and only at the allowed places. We will continue our public education efforts. We have also put in place a comprehensive set of regulations, with regular enforcement by Land Transport Authority (LTA) enforcement officers at hotspots. To date, more than 1,630 individuals have been caught for e-scooter-related offences. We have also introduced a mandatory e-scooter registration regime to facilitate identification of errant riders. We encourage members of public as well as the vast majority of responsible PMD users to help spot and report errant riders to LTA. Collectively, we can encourage safe riding and considerate behaviour on our shared paths.”
“I would like to thank Er Dr Lee Bee Wah for the clarification. I do not have the exact figures. But based on what I have shared in previous Parliamentary sessions, there is, indeed, an increase in the number of feedback received as well as the number of accidents over the past six months. Therefore, we are stepping up our effort in public education, stepping up enforcement action as well as implementing the registration regime for e-scooters. The mandatory e-scooter registration regime will be in force from 1 July 2019.”
“Mr Speaker, I understand the Member's concern about safety of pedestrians, especially of her residents. I do share the same concern as well. If Members take a step back and look at the entire landscape, footpaths form a significant part of our connectivity network, connecting from point A to point B, from homes to places of work, places of schooling as well as recreation. And if we do disallow active mobility devices on footpaths, basically, what it means is that active mobility users would have to operate on roads. That actually poses more risks to both the active mobility users and other vehicles, including motorbikes, cars, lorries, trucks or even buses. We all understand that the severity of injuries should an accident happen on the roads can be even more serious and fatalities more likely. This is the reason why the Active Mobility Advisory Panel, after extensive public and stakeholders' consultation, had recommended to allow active mobility devices to be used on footpaths. Banning the use of active mobility devices on footpaths is actually not the solution. We do agree that active mobility plays an important role in our vision to making Singapore a car-lite society. We should instead cultivate a culture of graciousness, responsibility and respect in sharing the use of our common space.”
“Mr Speaker, members of the public have been providing feedback on near misses or reckless behaviour of active mobility device users to the Land Transport Authority (LTA) through phone hotlines, online feedback forms, social media and mobile apps like MyTransport.SG or OneService. LTA also receives feedback from Members of Parliament as well as community and industry stakeholders. Persons involved in such accidents should immediately file a report with the Police. LTA carefully assesses all feedback to determine the follow-up actions required. LTA also uses such information to enhance its enforcement, public education and engagement efforts. For example, such feedback helps LTA to identify the hotspots to determine the appropriate enforcement efforts. LTA also shares the information with the relevant Active Mobility Patrol teams so that they can patrol the area more frequently to engage the community and distribute educational materials.”
“I thank Mr Murali Pillai for the clarification. I understand that the companies already have avenues for reporting unsafe riding behaviour of their riders that members of public can use. At the same time, I believe there is an avenue for members of the public to file claims through the same avenue. If that is not available, we will be willing to discuss with the food delivery companies to allow that to happen.”
“Mr Speaker, in August 2018, the Active Mobility Advisory Panel (AMAP) recommended that the Government work with key stakeholders to encourage the uptake of third-party liability insurance. Since then, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has been engaging with major food delivery companies and two of them, Deliveroo and GrabFood, have purchased third-party liability insurance for their e-scooter riders. Meanwhile, AMAP is considering stronger measures to ensure that food delivery riders will be covered by third-party liability insurance when riding for work. LTA has also engaged the food delivery companies to educate their riders on safe riding practices and to promote rider awareness on regulations. The companies will disseminate safety messages and reminders via their phone applications and during their onboarding sessions for new riders. Their riders will also be encouraged to attend the Safe Riding Programme. In October 2018, LTA, the Ministry of Manpower and the Traffic Police jointly issued a circular, calling for the food delivery companies to ensure the safety and health of their delivery riders by providing sufficient instruction, training and supervision. The circular also calls for companies to provide avenues for the reporting of unsafe riding by members of public.”
“I would like to thank the Member for the clarification. Like I have mentioned before, I think the configuration of void decks differs from one place to another. Depending on the needs of the Town Council, we allow Town Councils to exercise the flexibility whether to ban or not to ban. But I think at the end of the day, we are cognisant of the fact that safety is paramount. If the Town Council feels that the banning of PMD use at void decks is necessary, it can be done under the Town Council by-laws.”
“I would like to thank Er Dr Lee Bee Wah for the supplementary question. Just two points of clarification. If the Town Councils were to decide the void deck is to be banned from PMD use, then the Town Council can exercise the enforcement action on PMD users. But in areas outside the void deck which are exempted from the Active Mobility Act, yes, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah is correct to say that Town Council employees are not able to carry out enforcement today. The current Active Mobility Act actually does not allow Town Council employees to be appointed as public path wardens to enforce the Active Mobility Act in the areas that Er Dr Lee Bee Wah had mentioned. We have taken that into consideration and we are currently discussing with the Land Transport Authority and the Attorney-General's Chamber to see if the law can be amended to allow for Town Council officers to enforce active mobility offences in such areas.”