Masagos Zulkifli B M M
Singapore
“Coordination between Early Intervention (EI) centres, families and preschools is important for the continuity of support for children with developmental needs.”
“The Taxi Subsidy Scheme supports persons with disabilities (PwDs) who are unable to take public transport, by providing means-tested subsidies to offset the cost of taxi travel to school, work and employment-related training supported by SG Enable.”
“The Skills and Salary Guidelines published by the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) guides social service agencies (SSAs) to pay their employees fair and competitive remuneration and maintain the sector's attractiveness. The Guidelines are adjusted so that salaries remain competitive with comparable roles in competing markets.”
“Staff turnover rates vary across social service agencies (SSAs). An individual's decision to leave an organisation is influenced by a myriad of factors, of which pay is only one.”
“Beyond the requirement of a structured daily programme, community-based SCFA administrators have the flexibility to offer programmes and additional enrichment activities that meet the needs of their students. MSF does not track staff salaries and turnover of SCCs in general nor those that administer SCFA.”
“Male preschool educators comprised about 1% of the early childhood workforce in each of the last five years. The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has not issued guidelines pertaining to the rules set by preschool centres specific to the conduct of male preschool educators.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,489 lines we hold for Masagos Zulkifli B M M, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 38 of 50.
“Choa Chu Kang is one of the towns identified for a new hawker centre by 2027. My Ministry is at the early stages of planning for this centre and we will provide more details of the location and timeline when the plans are ready.”
“NEA and the Institution of Engineers also administer the Singapore Certified Energy Manager Professional Level programme. Individuals who wish to pursue a career in energy management, including those making mid-career switches, can apply for this programme. There are currently 622 certified energy managers. Many of them take on energy management roles in about 230 energy-intensive industrial facilities that are regulated under ECA. To conclude, the amendments to this Bill are an important step forward not only in encouraging industry and consumers to play their part in addressing climate change, but also in preparing us for a carbon-constrained global economy. Therefore, I call on Members of the House to give their support to this Bill.”
“Mr Louis Ng also asked for details of the EE Financing Programme and Investment Allowance Scheme for EE administered by the Economic Development Board (EDB). The EE Financing Programme is in the pilot stage. Essentially, companies which are not able to afford the upfront costs of EE projects can apply for loans through a third-party financier. The potential benefits of such a scheme include an off balance sheet solution, where industrial facilities are not required to pay for the upfront costs of the EE projects, but still enjoy part of the energy savings. The Investment Allowance Scheme for EE is a tax incentive that allows up to an additional 30% investment allowance against taxable income on capital expenditure related to eligible projects by companies. These two schemes provide alternative financing options for companies which want to pursue EE efforts but need more financial support. As the EE Financing Programme is still in the pilot stage, more updates will be provided in due course. Aside from financial support, we will study how we can improve the supporting EE ecosystem. This includes enabling more sharing of best practices amongst companies, building up the capabilities of energy managers to identify EE opportunities, and developing the energy services sub-sector, such as consultancies for specialised industry processes. We will also continue to leverage research and technology to improve EE and are open to working with interested partners and stakeholders. Lastly, developing talent in this sector is important, too. As Er Dr Lee highlighted, local polytechnics and the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) offer diploma programmes related to energy management. The annual intake for these programmes is about 350 students.”
“Er Dr Lee and Mr Leon Perera raised the issue of compliance costs. In the short term, companies under ECA will face an increase in compliance costs. However, in the long run, these enhanced EE measures will help companies reap lifetime energy and cost savings. We are also not imposing any standards. Many of these big companies already have inhouse systems and standards and the reporting systems that we can rely on, and we will use this first. Hopefully, this can be used for our verification purposes and not impose standards that will be too onerous. Hence, companies need to adopt a long-term view as these measures will put them on a stronger footing to compete in the carbon-constrained world that we will be operating in. In my dialogues with the companies, some of them sought funding support to implement related EE-measures and asked whether the Government can help to improve the supporting EE ecosystem. I would like to thank Er Dr Lee and Mr Louis Ng for highlighting NEA's E2F. NEA decided to review and consolidate the existing EE grants into the E2F, given the low take-up rates noted by Mr Louis Ng and in response to feedback from companies on the need to improve the financial support and accessibility to the grants. Under E2F, companies no longer have to navigate through different incentive schemes to find one that suits their needs. The grant application process has also been streamlined to minimise paperwork. E2F will place greater emphasis on SMEs and there will be 50% support given to eligible companies to co-fund design reviews and energy audits. E2F will be launched today and I encourage companies to tap on it.”
“For example, in 2016, Singapore embarked on the world's largest floating solar testbed at Tengeh Reservoir. Under the SolarNova programme, solar systems will be pervasively installed on the rooftops of about 6,000 Government buildings, such as public housing, schools, army camps and utilities, by 2020. All these initiatives open up new business opportunities for our companies. To keep pace with the growing share of solar energy in Singapore's electricity generation mix, we are also taking proactive steps to address the issue of intermittency and to ensure grid stability. In May 2016, the Energy Market Authority (EMA) and Singapore Power embarked on the national Energy Storage System testbed (ESS testbed), to evaluate the performance of grid-level energy storage systems for different power applications. Er Dr Lee asked for an update of the project. There was strong interest from consortiums comprising notable local and international companies when the Request for Proposal (RFP) closed in August 2016. An international evaluation panel, comprising Singapore Power, relevant Government agencies and technical experts, is currently reviewing the various proposals. A decision on the eventual award winners will likely be made by end 2017. Given the challenges we face with renewable energy today, improving our EE thus remains a key strategy for Singapore. I would like to assure Members of the House that we have had extensive consultations with the industry on these enhancements and have taken on board the companies' feedback to ensure that the measures are not overly onerous, but without compromising on ambition. Companies understand the need for EE improvement and are generally agreeable with our proposals. I am heartened by their commitment to keep working at improving EE.”
“Singapore has a strong international reputation to uphold and, as a responsible global citizen, we are committed to fulfilling the pledge. To achieve this, we will have to implement tough mitigation measures in all key sectors, not just in the industrial sector, but also in the transport, building, power and household sectors. Everyone will have to make adjustments. Er Dr Lee also asked for insights from the Energy Use Reports reported under ECA. In addition to companies having low ambition, we found that the majority of companies − 60% − did not have EE improvement plans beyond the first two years. A significant proportion of the common utility systems, such as boilers, chillers and compressed air systems, were operating inefficiently. Hence, the enhancements in this Bill aim to help companies improve their energy practices and raise the bar for EE performance standards in Singapore, starting with motors. To illustrate, motors collectively account for 80% of the total electricity consumed by the industry. With the introduction of MEPS for motors, we expect to achieve annual savings of 1,100 GWh (gigawatt hours) or around 2% of Singapore's electricity consumption by 2035, as companies replace their less efficient motors. Collectively, the enhancements in this Bill are expected to contribute to at least 7% of our greenhouse gas emissions reductions. Let me now move on to the issue of helping businesses to seize new growth opportunities in clean energy and energy management. Unfortunately, Singapore is an alternative energy disadvantaged country because of our physical size. Solar energy remains our best option, but even this is not without its challenges. We have been exploring innovative ways to overcome our constraints.”
“Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Members of this House for their support and comments on this Bill. Globally, we see a shift towards a carbon-constrained economy. This momentum is partly driven by countries working towards meeting their commitments under the Paris Agreement. But there is also an increasing realisation that we all, as individuals and corporations alike, cannot continue with business as usual. Climate change is happening. The impacts can be devastating as some countries and cities are already feeling this impact. So, even as we strengthen our resilience to deal with the unexpected, we all have a responsibility to take action now to reduce our carbon footprint. The challenge then is whether we are prepared to make decisive moves, to take difficult decisions today and seize new opportunities as they arise, so that our nation can continue to grow and prosper in a very carbon-constrained world. Status quo is, therefore, not an option, if we are not to be left behind. As mentioned in my speech, China is making big moves in renewables. They will be investing 2.5 trillion yuan, about S$506 billion, into renewable power generation by 2020 as they set their eye on becoming a green energy superpower. Global companies, such as Apple and Unilever, have also set ambitious goals to "green" their practices. These are just a few of the many developments around the world. We must not delude ourselves into thinking that we can stay where we are. To maintain Singapore's international competitiveness in the long run, we need to ready ourselves for a carbon-light future. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked what will happen if we do not meet our Paris Agreement commitments.”
“I encourage all stakeholders to work with us on efforts to conserve energy, as we seek a sustainable future together. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“Large industrial emitters will be required to submit a monitoring plan and an enhanced greenhouse gas emissions report based on the approved monitoring plan. Companies will also have to compute their emissions data according to standard methodologies determined by the National Environment Agency (NEA). These will bring our M&R standards in line with international best practices and ensure accurate and robust accounting of their emissions. This will also help companies to better understand and manage their emissions. The third set of revisions to ECA concerns the VES. As I have announced during the recent Committee of Supply (COS) debate, VES will replace the current CEVS. Under CEVS, only carbon dioxide is taken into consideration in determining the emissions level in a vehicle. VES, which replaces it, will now consider other harmful pollutant emissions in addition to carbon dioxide. Any label on any motor vehicle model displayed for sale-end related promotional materials and advertisements must now include information of the vehicular emissions of the motor vehicle, including information on the fuel economy of the motor vehicle. The EC Bill proposes to amend the ECA to extend the labelling and information disclosure requirements related to VES and to make the relevant amendments to the Road Traffic Act to give effect to the new scheme. Mdm Speaker, let me conclude. The proposed enhancements to the ECA are forward-looking and aim to guide how we view and conserve precious energy resources. The ECA provides a framework to shape positive choices in the industry, transport and household sectors to achieve a carbon-efficient and sustainable future. It will also catalyse demand for EE and clean energy services, which could become the seeds of future growth.”
“Thus far, ECA data also showed that many companies have focused on harvesting "low-hanging fruits", or EE measures that have short pay-back periods that provide only low energy savings. Undertaking EE improvements for larger systems, such as boilers, chillers and compressed air systems, would significantly enhance the savings reaped. The data also showed much room for improvement in the EE of common industrial equipment like motors. Hence, the Bill will aim to increase the adoption of more energy-efficient commonly used industrial equipment and systems. An existing measure under ECA is the Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS). MEPS currently covers household appliances and has been successful in raising the EE of these household products. We will revise and extend MEPS to industrial equipment and systems, starting with motors in 2018. We expect MEPS for motors to translate to some 0.4 megatonnes in carbon abatement by 2030. Mdm Speaker, as a result of these enhancements, we will be raising penalties for several non-compliances to reflect the higher value of industrial goods and to bring them in line with other legislation. However, I would like to point out that the overall benefits of the ECA measures to companies are by far more attractive, including helping them to achieve long-term cost savings and increased competitiveness. The second set of enhancements that will be made to ECA concerns the reporting of greenhouse gas emissions. These enhancements aim to strengthen the Quality Assurance and Quality Control processes within our Measurement and Reporting (M&R) requirements, to provide a robust foundation for the future carbon pricing regime.”
“EnMS institutes a "plan, do, check, act" framework for companies to constantly re-examine and improve their EE efforts. Senior management will be responsible for setting energy policy and targets, evaluating them and developing action plans. Studies have shown that having a structured EnMS can help companies achieve energy savings of at least 10% to 15% in the first few years. Countries like Japan and those in the EU have already incorporated this practice in their regulations. With this amendment, companies will be required to put in place an EnMS by 2021 or 2022, depending on the size of their facility's energy consumption. ECA companies will also be required to conduct regular Energy Efficiency Opportunities Assessments (EEOAs). Also known as energy audits, EEOAs involve systematic assessments of energy consumption and the identification and quantification of potential improvement opportunities. Large companies in the EU, South Korea and India are already required to conduct such assessments regularly. Under the enhanced ECA, companies will be required to submit their first EEOA by 2021. Many companies have given feedback that the lifespan of industrial equipment can be very long of 30 years or more. Thus, it is challenging to introduce new technologies midway as it disrupts their operations. Instead, it is better to identify and incorporate EE opportunities at the start of the project. With this in mind, from 2018, we will require new industrial facilities and major expansion projects to undergo design reviews to incorporate EE measures. The three key enhancements that I have just detailed are intended to help ingrain good EE practices among companies.”
“Under ECA, 180 energy-intensive companies, accounting for the lion's share of industrial energy use, are required to implement basic energy management practices, such as regular monitoring of energy use and to appoint qualified energy managers, to oversee EE improvements. I am happy to report that the preliminary results are encouraging. ECA companies have reported an overall EE improvement rate of 0.4% and 0.6% in 2014 and 2015 respectively. This upward trend is in the right direction. However, in order to meet our climate pledge, we need to double or triple the current improvement rates and achieve 1% to 2% annually, similar to that attained by leading jurisdictions, such as Belgium and the Netherlands. It is timely to bring our efforts to the next level. The EC Bill that my Ministry is proposing aims to introduce three sets of enhancements to the original ECA. The first, and where the bulk of enhancements are, is on measures to improve our industrial EE. The second set seeks to improve greenhouse gas emissions reporting, and the third deals with the new Vehicular Emissions Scheme (VES). Let me elaborate. We will introduce three enhancements to strengthen EE practices among ECA companies. They are: one, the adoption of structured Energy Management Systems (EnMSs); two, to conduct regular EE opportunities assessments; and three, to conduct design reviews. Our analysis of ECA data in 2014 and 2015 showed several areas for improvement. In particular, we found that many companies did not adopt a structured framework to manage their energy use and guide their EE efforts. In addition, EE ambition amongst companies continued to be low. The proposed amendments to the EC Bill will thus require ECA companies to adopt a structured EnMS.”
“One such example was a wind turbine that could capture wind energy produced by cars travelling along a highway. While innovative technologies can supplement our energy needs, Singapore will still have to depend on imported energy, primarily natural gas, which is cleaner than oil and coal, to meet the bulk of our demand. Our energy demand is projected to increase at a compounded annual growth rate of between 1.2% and 1.8% over the next decade. Given our limited land space, we are disadvantaged in our ability to use alternative energy. Nonetheless, we are committed to do our part to protect the environment and have pledged to improve our emissions intensity by 36% from 2005 levels in 2030, and to peak around the same time under the Paris Agreement. Mdm Speaker, the Climate Action Plan, which was launched last year, lays out four key strategies to fulfil this commitment, namely: (a) improving energy and carbon efficiency; (b) reducing emissions from power generation; (c) developing and deploying low-carbon technology; and (d) encouraging collective climate action. In Singapore, the industry sector is the largest energy user, consuming about two-thirds of our total energy consumption and contributing about 60% of our carbon emissions in 2014. Improving energy efficiency (EE) in the industrial sector is thus key to achieving our climate change goals. In 2012, we introduced the Energy Conservation Act (ECA). Our main objective was to put in place the building blocks to help the industry develop its capabilities in EE.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Energy Conservation (Amendment) Bill (EC Bill) seeks to introduce a new set of initiatives to improve industrial energy efficiency, enhance our greenhouse gas reporting requirements and revise the Carbon Emissions-based Vehicle Scheme (CEVS). Mdm Speaker, the Paris Agreement came into force last year, less than a year after it was concluded. This was a significant milestone in our global fight against climate change and for all who seek a sustainable future for our children. To date, 134 countries accounting for over 80% of the world's total greenhouse gas emissions have ratified the Agreement. When we strip away its legalities, the heart of this pact is really about energy use and conservation. The International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook 2016 projected in its "main scenario" that global energy demand would rise by 30% from now to 2040, with accompanying increases in greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing energy use is thus key to address global warming. Faced with an increasingly carbon-constrained future, countries and businesses have no choice but to transform the way we produce and use energy. At the same time, this has given rise to new opportunities to grow a greener and more sustainable economy. For example, China is embracing renewables in a big way, while India plans to have nearly 60% of its electricity capacity come from non-fossil fuels by 2027. Leading companies have also come on board. Google has committed to power 100% of its operations with renewables. I visited Shell's "Make the Future" exhibition last month which showcased innovative ideas to harness energy without emitting more carbon.”
“I empathise with the pleading of our Member. I think we may stand to lose something which is very important or memorable for some of us. But then, again, we also have to balance this with the needs of our country and to be fair to the many, many other hawkers who have moved on, gone to markets. And for those who need to peddle their wares occasionally, they have also been able to do well in trade fairs where they pay for the rents and are well-managed so that the disamenities mentioned do not exist. So, if the question is: are there alternatives? There are alternatives. But should we put up another site like this which is deemed to be like Sungei Road but not at Sungei Road, I do not think this is something we want to dwell on further.”
“So, the time has come and we have engaged enough and I think to meet them again is to almost promise that we will change our stance and that redevelopment would not start.”
“For the first question, Mdm Speaker, NEA will be the lead agency to coordinate with the other agencies, the Mayors, and also ask other Advisers who may be the Advisers in the constituencies where these hawkers live, so that if they approach them, they will know where to refer them to. For this, the lead agency will be NEA. For the second question, I think we have to note that SRHZ does have a long history, from the 1930s. And for some Singaporeans, they hold strong memories. But, again, we must recognise there were really many places that have moved on and where street hawking was quite popular and even a common sight in the past. Over the years, in the 1970s and 1980s, many of them have moved on. They are now housed in our hawker centres as well as markets and I believe many of them have also done well. Despite all these, we have retained SRHZ so that the original 31 rag-and-bone permit holders can continue their trade. But over the years, we have seen a fair number of others who have come to SRHZ. They were not the original 31. In fact, after so many years, only 11 are still operating there. Now, despite all the disamenities and even the residents accommodating the hawkers for these many, many years, for example, the obstruction of public roads, storage of goods in public places, sometimes people sleeping around in the residential estates, we have continued to accommodate these until such time when the place would be required for development. I am surprised that the Association for the Recycling of Second Hand Goods is surprised that we are moving on because we have been engaging everybody since 2012. We have already told them that when the time comes, notice would be given and we have to move on.”
“Mdm Speaker, the site where the Sungei Road Hawking Zone (SRHZ) is located will be used for ground preparation works to facilitate future residential development, and the last day of operation of the SRHZ will be 10 July 2017. When the Government resettled street hawkers into markets and hawker centres in the early years, 31 rag-and-bone men were excluded from the resettlement due to their trade and were issued with permits to continue operating at the Sungei Road site. Of these 31 original permit holders, only 11 operate at SRHZ today. My Ministry has offered the 11 original permit holders the option of operating lock-up stalls at selected hawker centres in the city area at subsidised rental rates after the closure of SRHZ. Rental will be waived for the first year and a 50% rebate off the subsidised rent will be given for the second year on a goodwill basis. Five of them have so far indicated interest to take up the offer. The Social Service Offices (SSOs) and Workforce Singapore (WSG) have also offered to facilitate financial assistance and provide employment services to the 11 original permit holders should they wish to exit the trade. So far, one of them has been granted financial assistance. Further engagements between the SSOs and some of the remaining permit holders are ongoing. The Government will also reach out to the other users at SRHZ who are not original permit holders in the coming months to share information on the financial and employment assistance available under existing Government schemes, as well as channels through which they can continue their trade should they wish to do so.”
“Mdm Speaker, as part of the maintenance of hawker centres, cyclical repairs and redecorations (R&R) works are carried out by the National Environment Agency (NEA) or the respective Town Councils every five to seven years. During such works, the centres may be closed for up to three months. Stallholders who are unable to operate their stalls due to the closure of the centres are usually granted rental remission for the duration of the closure due to the R&R works. Stallholders who wish to take the opportunity to attend training can apply for courses and training grants through SkillsFuture Singapore. Those who wish to explore temporary employment may also visit Workforce Singapore's career centres or its online job matching portal, Jobs Bank, for employment assistance. NEA will set up a one-stop Information and Service Centre for hawkers in the second half of this year. The centre will, among other services, provide information on training courses on the hawker trade. Hawkers and their hawker assistants who are interested in attending such courses may visit the centre to obtain more information.”
“The VES first takes into consideration what we think will be the choices made by consumers. We hope that, at the end of the day, it is either revenue-neutral, at the very least, and that consumers, with this VES incentive or disincentive, will make the right choice. It is not meant to subsidise or make ownership of cars cheaper. It is meant to incentivise and we think $20,000 will be enough for them to make the right choices. For the second question, there is already labelling by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) which encourages big sellers and buyers to comply with sustainable palm oil production. Most buyers and sellers are in this consortium to make sure they comply. I think this is currently the best one we have. To make sure that everybody or compel them to buy only RSPO label products would not be productive nor possible.”
“I thank Mr Singh for the questions. For the first question, PUB will be replacing those 1- and 2-room households, rental flats which do not qualify under the HIP at the moment, to accelerate the change of their systems from the nine-litre ones to the more water-saving four-litre ones. For those who are already undergoing HIP, there is a programme for them, in time, to be replaced. For the second question on the water volume devices used for the shower fixtures, these are still new and we want to see how consumers would behave and study them. So, we have decided to do this in new homes because then there is no need for fixtures to be put on by the residents themselves, it can be done by the contractors; study them and, hopefully, it will encourage and motivate them to save water.”
“Third, NEA's data shows that a substantial proportion of common industrial equipment is inefficient. Hence, Minimum Energy Performance Standards will be introduced, first, for motors, and then other systems and equipment progressively. These practices are in line with that of leading jurisdictions and will help companies to adopt more efficient equipment, conserve energy and enjoy life cycle cost savings. To pave the way for a robust carbon tax regime, we need to have a sound Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system. The ECA will thus be amended to require larger industrial emitters to improve the quality of measurement and reporting processes for their greenhouse gas emissions. This will help companies to better understand and manage their emissions. My Ministry will continue to work closely with the NCCS and MTI to consult the affected companies on how to best achieve this. 3.30 pm We have also received feedback on the need to improve the current incentive schemes. NEA will be consolidating their existing energy efficiency incentive schemes into a single fund called the Energy Efficiency Fund (E2F). NEA will redesign the E2F to better support companies to identify and undertake energy efficiency retrofits. We will, especially, help our SMEs by co-funding up to 30% of their investments in energy-efficient technologies. Further details will be released by NEA. We need a sustainable way to grow our economy. It is even more important if the world becomes increasingly carbon-constrained.”
“Murata Electronics Singapore, which manufactures electronic components, is becoming an early adopter of efficient motors. Murata is replacing 50 motors with higher efficiency ones. This will save Murata some 160 MWh of electricity each year. These annual savings of $21,000 in energy costs will last throughout the 15-year lifespan of the motors. Murata is a good example of how industrial energy efficiency measures can benefit the environment as well as the company's bottom line, but, for the industry sector as a whole, there is clearly more to be done. Data collected shows that our companies achieved an annual energy efficiency improvement rate of 0.6% in 2015, a slight improvement over 0.4% in 2014. This is still low. To meet our 2030 pledge, we need to work towards the 1% to 2% improvement rates achieved by leading countries, such as Belgium and the Netherlands. On a positive note, companies that I spoke to at a recent consultation session recognised the importance of improving their energy efficiency. They, however, mentioned that they faced operational and capability constraints. Some also asked for best practices and useful data to be shared with them. We are studying their feedback and, for a start, we will amend the Energy Conservation Act to introduce a new set of initiatives to help companies improve their energy efficiency. First, all ECA-registered companies will now be required to implement structured energy management systems and conduct regular energy efficiency opportunity assessments. Second, companies expanding their facilities will need to factor energy efficiency into their designs upfront, as well as measure and report energy usage for key energy-consuming systems.”
“As a responsible member of the international community, Singapore is committed to fulfilling our pledge under the Paris Agreement to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Both households and industry play a role in this, as Mr Gan Thiam Poh has noted. Industry, however, contributes the lion's share − 60% − of Singapore's greenhouse gas emissions. We, therefore, need to focus our efforts here. The upcoming carbon tax to be imposed on large emitters, as announced by the Minister for Finance, will help send the right price signal to industries to reduce their emissions when and where it makes the most business sense. The carbon tax, however, is not a panacea for achieving our 2030 emissions pledge. We will need other measures to complement the tax. That is why we introduced the Energy Conservation Act (ECA) in 2013, to put in place measures, such as mandatory energy management, and encourage companies to enhance their energy efficiency. I am pleased to report that we have made progress on this front since then. Let me give an example. Mdm Chairman, with your permission, I would like to show some slides please.”
“The environment has been at the top of our minds this Budget. I thank everyone who has spoken about the need to protect our resources for future generations. Singapore is not alone. Many other countries are paying closer attention to the environment, even as they grow their economies. We have a plan called the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint (SSB). This plan brings together all that we are doing, in pursuit of a Liveable and Endearing Home, a Vibrant and Sustainable City, and an Active and Gracious Community. I am glad to say that we have made progress over the course of 2016 and remain on track to meet the SSB targets progressively by 2030. A strong commitment to sustainability remains critical as we build our future economy. As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Ms K Thanaletchimi have highlighted, it will take not only Government support but also the collective effort of every individual to realise this SSB vision. That is why we launched the Sustainable Singapore Movement in July last year to galvanise the community to action. Climate change. While we stand on solid footing, the road ahead is uncertain. A major concern for us is climate change, a far-reaching threat that we can already see and feel today. Our Meteorological Service recorded 2016 as the hottest year since 1929, when we started keeping temperature records. In recent years, our water managers, too, have had a foretaste of the looming challenge of coping with extended dry spells on the one hand and higher intensity rainfall on the other. Singapore has to plan ahead to deal with climate change impacts. We will not only need to protect our buildings, coasts and infrastructure, but also foster greater awareness, so that we are a resilient people.”
“With your permission, Mdm Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the infographics for MEWR COS 2017?”
“In Singapore, there are credible organisations like SEC, which even the Government has taken the signals from in their purchases. In fact, from last year onwards, we have been purchasing paper based on SGLS issued by SEC. Therefore, I urge consumers to use the same credible bodies in making their choices.”
“We are encouraged by the increasing awareness of eco-labels among consumers in recent years. Eco-labels are one form of environmental performance certification which can be useful in helping consumers make informed decisions when purchasing environmentally friendly products. There are several internationally well-established organisations, such as the International Organisation for Standardisation, which establish guiding principles and procedures for the development of eco-labelling programmes to identify products which are environmentally preferable. Taking guidance from them locally are the Singapore Green Labelling Scheme (SGLS), which is administered by the Singapore Environment Council (SEC) and the Singapore Green Building Product Labeling Scheme, which is administered by the Singapore Green Building Council. My Ministry will continue to encourage the administrators of other eco-labels to take reference from these international guidelines to build public confidence in the credibility of their labels with a view to move more people towards environmentally sustainable purchasing practices.”
“Thank you. For rationing, we have been asked by many Members, as well as the public, to try and put this rationing regime into a yearly exercise for everybody. There are many reasons why we should do it and there are also problems when we want to do it. Therefore, what we have decided to do is to start small in schools, and we started last year. Ten schools participated. This year, more schools – 11 schools – are participating and preschools are also participating. That is addressing part of the problem. Hopefully, we will never have to go into rationing when we are ready with our desalination plants and our NEWater plants. I think to press the point about how precious water is by making it difficult through rationing may not always be productive.”
“If I may, Mdm Speaker. I thought it is odd for me to respond during the clarification of my Ministry's COS.”
“If I recall correctly, it was in 1997 when we decided to price water correctly. At that time, it was not only not priced correctly, the structure of the tariff was also very difficult to encourage conservation, conserving of water, to charge water according to its value. It was only in 1997 when we looked at really what we need to do to get that next drop of water, given the situation we were facing with our neighbours, given the expiry of the water agreement by 2060, that we consciously decided that we have to start thinking around how to make sure people understand the value of water. So, from 1997 onwards, we revised the water tariff and structure to reflect the cost of producing that water, LRMC, and, therefore, to make sure users know the price of what they use.”
“Continue to price it properly to reflect the scarcity value of water and, with that, hopefully, we achieve a DNA of always wanting to conserve the use of water.”
“The price of water, as it stands today, that we have proposed to increase, is LRMC, which is the price of producing the next drop of water. And, therefore, for whatever reason, the next drop of water that we need to draw will be coming from desalination as well as NEWater. So, it is already priced in. The problem is not the price. The problem is what will we do, what can we do, to prevent that from happening. Because it is not just an issue of supply; it is a very complicated issue should that situation ever occur to us. Finally, on savings and water rationing, whether we can give a rebate to people who save water, it is a bit counter-intuitive because, in the first place, we want to make sure people pay for the cost of producing the water, which is LRMC. And to give back that cost means we are subsidising the use of water. Any way we change the structure of water that we have today either involves cost or will be counter-intuitive to trying to promote conservation of water. I think what we have today is achieving its objectives, and I am glad that everywhere I go, water is one of the things that Singaporeans are very aware of. In fact, during the 93.8Live discussion on water, there was a caller who was very upset because one of his colleagues was using water in the shower after work. It was given for free for, I do not know, half an hour, or for a very long time. And he got very upset because you do not do this at home, why you do this over here? Because it is free? This is the right DNA for Singaporeans − even though it is free, we cannot bear to see water wasted. And I think that is how we should move forward.”
“So, we do not want to do something adversely affecting our yield of the reservoir by doing something which looks intuitive. I have asked our experts to study this further. They are still in the midst of studying this, but, right now, the prospect is not fantastic, unfortunately. The fourth question which the Member asked is about whether we can directly send NEWater to our homes. Theoretically, we can, but we do not have to right now. Certainly, when we need to, we will have to put the right processes to ensure this can be done, because we must ensure that it is safe for our house to drink from end to end. There was also a question on Linggiu Reservoir. May I clarify, is it "if Linggiu fails"?”
“I thank the Member for asking these questions. On the issue of the books in PUB, I think it is very complicated for me to attempt to simplify what the numbers really mean. Our books are in accruals and our budget is in cash, and we have to reconcile them. What we will do is I will ask the Minister for Finance to look at the whole-of-Government approach in funding our water infrastructure. I think that makes more sense. Because there are some parts which are Government-funded and some parts which are PUB-funded, and it does not add up, if we look at each book separately. On the desalination plant, why do we choose NEWater versus desalination? Desalination, as I have mentioned just now, is more costly than NEWater. But as you reclaim more of this used water to be processed, the concentration, as I have mentioned to you, becomes even more difficult to process and, therefore, more costly. There is a tipping point between when it is better to have a desalination plant, which is easier to convey the sea water to, and a NEWater plant where we have to convey the used water to. So, all these cost considerations give us a way to basically evaluate the best cost-effective model and also to spread our risks across technologies. There was a question on whether we can deepen our reservoirs. In fact, that was the first question I asked when I joined the Ministry. It is very intuitive. Why can we not just deepen our reservoirs? Unfortunately, the answer is not as simple as the question. We have done studies and, currently, the studies show that there is a particular yield from the reservoir if you leave it as it is, and there is a risk this yield can be reduced if you start disturbing the bottom of the reservoir.”
“Indeed, it is because of our obsessive focus on water and the collective determination of the earlier generations and, of course, our PUB officers, that we were able to manage our vulnerabilities. If we take this same approach, we will secure our water future for ourselves and our children, and that, I think Members will agree, is well worth doing. [Applause.]”
“The rest would experience an increase of between $2 to $11 per month. But this is still within 1% of their monthly household income. So, we should see this 30% increase in the right context, which is to raise the awareness of the importance of water to Singaporeans, to our country. But we should also see the context in terms of the increase and its impact towards our daily expenditure. (In English): Despite our investments in desalination and NEWater plants, the truth is this: we are still a water-stressed nation. Singapore was ranked first among countries with the greatest risk of water stress in 2040, according to the World Resources Institute. It is not a description of what we do. It is a description of who we are. We hope that through right pricing, everyone will cultivate the habit of water saving as part of our deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), Singapore's DNA, whether we are a household or business. Just this morning, I attended a water rationing exercise at Woodgrove Secondary School. Many schools are participating this year to raise awareness of the value of water and the importance of water conservation among our young ones. Even during the prolonged dry spell in 2014, we did not face serious shortages because we had NEWater and desalination plants. There was no water rationing. But water conservation was something earlier generations of Singaporeans had imbibed. Singaporeans back then knew that every now and then, elements in Malaysia were threatening to turn off the taps. So, they bore with water rationing, supported water saving campaigns and even paid the cost of cleaning up rivers and their catchment areas.”
“For households, the Government has provided additional U-Save rebates. One- and 2-room HDB households will not experience any increase in their bills. For other HDB flat types, monthly water bills will go up by $2 to $11 per month. Overall, water will still be affordable because it will remain at about 1% of household income. So, that is what 30% price revision translates to, $1 a day for 75% of our businesses, and still within 1% of household income for water expenses. Mdm Speaker, in Malay. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] It is clear that people were taken aback by the 30% water price hike. This has caused a lot of discussion on the price of water and, at the same time, the importance of water in the context of its scarcity in Singapore. The issue of water is highly crucial. It is a very strategic issue. Therefore, this discussion about the increase in the price of water is good because it raises people's awareness about the price and value of water to us. But eventually, what is the real impact of the 30% increase? Do we need to scare people about the impact of the 30% increase? For businesses, 75% of them will be seeing an increase of less than $25 a month, which is less than $1 a day. I am happy that many businesses have come forward to assure the people that they would not raise their sale prices just because of this water price hike. I had coffee at Al-Azhar just now. I called up Al-Azhar's owner, "Have the prices of beverages gone up? Will the price of beverages go up?" He said, "It won't increase." So, if there are coffee shops that increase the price of beverages, have your drink at Al-Azhar. For households living in 1- to 2-room flats, they would not be experiencing an increase, on average.”
“And in the future, when climate change effects become more pronounced, it would be more severe. As Members are also aware, Johor is also drawing water from the Johor River, and Singapore is discussing this with Malaysia to ensure that Johor's actions do not compromise our ability to draw the 250 million gallons per day that Singapore is entitled to from the Johor River under the 1962 Water Agreement. What is clear is that Linggiu is operating today at a level way below what we are comfortable with and it will take years to build up to a reliable capacity again. Taking all these together, there is, therefore, urgency to have our policies, including right pricing, in place so that we can moderate demand by both businesses and households while also building the infrastructure we need to have a secure water supply. It is the job of my Ministry and PUB to plan and build the infrastructure, which we will do. But it is only through right pricing that we can have everyone valuing water as a strategic resource and consciously conserving it. With the 30% increase that we have announced, the price will be close to, though slightly lower than, the price of the next drop, or LRMC, today. This is the best way to emphasise the scarcity value of water. Members have expressed concerns over the magnitude of 30%. Clearly, this 30% increase has generated a lot of discussion on water. I hope it also raises awareness of its scarcity, its strategic value where water is concerned. But in reality, what does 30% translate to? For businesses, 75% will see an increase of less than $25 per month in their water bills. This is less than a dollar a day. Indeed, I am heartened that some businesses have taken this increase in context and have explicitly said that they would not increase prices.”
“Looking at the first year of desalination, for instance, while the first-year price for our first plant, SingSpring Desalination Plant, was $0.78 per cubic metre, the first-year price of our latest plant at Marina East was $1.08 per cubic metre, some 40% increase. For conveyance costs, we now tunnel below the road to lay pipelines. This minimises inconvenience to road users and the public, but it costs two-and-a-half times as much as conventional pipe laying techniques. As our pipelines age, PUB will have to more than double the rate of renewal of old pipelines from the current 20 kilometres per year to 50 kilometres per year to minimise pipe leaks and disruptions. All these point to the need to update LRMC which the 30% price increase has reflected. We are unable to provide details of its computation because of commercial sensitivities. We still need to build more desalination plants and NEWater plants; and as more desalination, NEWater and water reclamation plants are yet to be built or expanded, revealing the specifics of LRMC could prejudice future bids. But rest assured that LRMC reflects the best the market can offer. Mr Pritam Singh asked whether technology is taken into account in the computation of LRMC. My answer is a definite yes. It has always been and is also the case for this review. Technologically, we have squeezed everything we can from the current water processing technology. It will take several more years to achieve the next breakthrough and bring it to a deployable scale. I also thank Members for reminding the House that we have had a serious problem in the depletion of the Linggiu Reservoir in recent years. It is not clear whether the current situation is due to climate change, but we cannot discount the possibility of the dry weather to persist.”
“But desalination then was very expensive, $3 to $3.50, through what we call multi-stage flash (MSF) distillation. This number did not even include the cost of pipelines. There was no way for the Government then to move the water price to the true cost of the next litre, the price of desalination. So, it moved instead in steps, over the period of 1997 to 2000, to today's water price. Since then, water technology has progressed steadily. The Public Utilities Board (PUB) itself invested in R&D. This resulted in NEWater, which was much cheaper than desalination. Desalination technology has improved from MSF to membranes. As a result, we have been able to keep our costs down, the cost of water, and hold water prices unchanged for 17 years. But costs have gone up gradually over the years. At some point, a price revision became essential. Let me give a few examples of how costs have risen in the recent review. Firstly, LRMC is a mix of NEWater and desalination costs. In the blend with NEWater and desalination, we have depended more on desalination for the next litre as water demand increases. There is also a limit to recycling used water in our NEWater plants. Therefore, to increase our water supply further, we must build more desalination plants. Indeed, we are building three desalination plants within the next three years. Secondly, as we increase the proportion of water reclaimed for NEWater, effluent becomes more concentrated and, indeed, more difficult and more costly to process. Thirdly, Singapore is becoming more urbanised, so it is costing us more to build new and replacement pipes to deliver water. Here are some figures from our recent expenditures which can give an indication of how it will be in the future.”
“Mdm Speaker, thank you for giving me the chance to speak. I would like to respond to the points raised by Members, particularly on the issue of the water price revision. In Singapore, water is unlike any other ordinary commodity. We subsidise housing, healthcare, education, but not water consumption. Water is a strategic issue. It is a national security. We must price water fully. Even as we give targeted assistance to households, such as U-Save vouchers, to help them pay for their utilities bills, we must price water correctly. The consumer must feel the price of water. Consumers must realise how valuable water is to us in Singapore, every time he or she turns on the tap, right from the first drop. Let me take us back to the time when the Government last revised the price of water, which was in 1997. We had not revised water prices for some time then. Elements in Malaysia were threatening to block our water supply from Johor. We were embarking on desalination to secure our water supply. We needed to register with Singaporeans the strategic importance of water and the importance of saving every drop possible. The Government, therefore, decided to revise the water price substantially, to reflect water's true scarcity value. If we needed any additional water, where would it come from? How much would that additional litre cost? That is what we call LRMC. That is the cost which consumers must see. At that time and even today, the Johor supply was fixed. Local reservoirs had been almost fully developed, maybe except for Marina Reservoir. NEWater was not even invented in 1997. It came way later in 2002. Apart from conventional methods of collecting water or rainwater, the only proven technology then was to produce water through desalination.”
“These plans help companies identify ways to reduce consumption. In 2016, more than 600 large water users have submitted their plans. With the data collected from WEMP, PUB will develop water efficiency benchmarks and good practice guidelines for water-intensive sectors to help them further identify opportunities to improve water efficiency.”
“In raising the water price to ensure sustainability in water supply, the Government will be providing assistance to help lower-income households manage the price increase. Details on the revisions in water prices and measures to assist households, will be announced by the Minister for Finance in the Budget Statement on 20 February 2017. Members have asked about water consumption by households and businesses. Currently, 45% of water demand is from the domestic sector, while 55% is from the non-domestic sector, which covers industries and commercial buildings. Today, the national average water consumption for households is 17 cubic metres of water per month, down from 19 cubic metres 10 years ago. About 40% of households consume more water than the national average today, as was the case 10 years ago. For more details on the monthly average water consumption by dwelling type, Members may refer to the SP Services website. If we look at per capita usage, households' water consumption in Singapore is 148 litres per capita per day (LPCD). This is lower than that of Melbourne (159), London (155), New York City (476), Tokyo (220) and Hong Kong (211). But we should not be complacent. We must continue to learn from other cities, such as Copenhagen and Amsterdam, which have achieved lower LPCD levels of 101 and 136 respectively. Notwithstanding contextual differences, such as climate, we can still save more water by adopting more water-saving habits and making use of more water-efficient appliances in our households. As for the non-domestic sector, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) has since 2015 required the submission of Water Efficiency Management Plans (WEMP) for large water users that consume 60,000 cubic metres or more a year, equivalent to 24 Olympic-sized swimming pools.”
“The NEA and the PHC, together with partners, such as the Singapore Kindness Movement, have also worked with the Ministry of Education to encourage students to undertake daily cleaning in their schools, to inculcate a sense of responsibility among the students. The problem of littering cannot be solved just by enforcement or by the Government alone. Everyone has to take greater care of our environment and play a part in keeping Singapore clean.”
“A survey commissioned by the National Environment Agency (NEA) in 2010 found that around a third of Singaporeans would litter if they think they can get away with it. In addition, the survey found that while people realise that littering is an anti-social act, many still hold the false perception that throwing small items, such as tissue papers and plastic wrappers, does not constitute littering. To tackle the littering problem, NEA has stepped up enforcement against littering. Last year, NEA issued more than 31,000 tickets to littering offenders, about 18% more than in 2015. We have also enhanced the penalties for litterbugs. In April 2014, the Environmental Public Health Act (EPHA) was amended to double the maximum fines for littering to $2,000 for the first Court conviction, $4,000 for the second conviction and $10,000 for the third and subsequent convictions. Repeat offenders would also be issued Corrective Work Orders. In 2013, NEA launched a Community Volunteer (CV) programme to foster greater ownership of the environment by engaging volunteers to encourage members of the public to bin their litter. More than 330 individuals have come on board the CV programme and engaged over 3,700 litterbugs. We have also been working with stakeholders, such as the Public Hygiene Council (PHC), to encourage everyone to keep Singapore clean and inculcate a sense of responsibility towards our environment. The annual "Operation WE Clean Up!" is one such activity by the PHC which aims to galvanise the community through litter-picking activities across the island.”
“The People's Movement to Stop Haze, a local NGO, has also produced a "Haze-Free Cooking Oil" Guide for local consumers and businesses to encourage them to make the switch to cooking oil from CSPO sources. Contrary to general perception, the price of CSPO cooking oil can be comparable to that of non-CSPO cooking oil. Together, we can work towards the vision of CSPO becoming the norm in Singapore and internationally.”
“The Ministry supports efforts by industries and non-government organisations to promote the use of certified sustainable palm oil (CSPO). Uncontrolled burning for land preparation is not permitted in the production of CSPO. Wider adoption of CSPO would help to reduce the likelihood of haze pollution in Southeast Asia where nearly 90% of the world's palm oil is produced. Globally, the availability of CSPO is limited. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), an internationally recognised certification body for sustainable palm oil, certifies only about 17% of the total palm oil produced globally. Emerging markets, such as China and India, account for nearly half of the global palm oil imports. We hope that greater awareness of the impact of unsustainable farming practices in the palm oil sector will encourage consumers to demand more CSPO. This is already happening in Europe, where companies and governments have started to harmonise initiatives across countries to green the palm oil supply chain. The Ministry is pleased to see ground-up efforts in Singapore, by industries and NGOs, to promote the adoption of CSPO. We support the mission of the Singapore Alliance on Sustainable Palm Oil, founded by the World Wide Fund Singapore, Unilever, Danone, Ayam Brand, IKEA and Wildlife Reserves Singapore. In addition, the Singapore Environment Council has launched a new product category for products that contain palm oil under its Singapore Green Labelling Scheme (SGLS). Consumers can play a part by purchasing products with either the RSPO label or, in future, the SGLS label. We are heartened that Singapore's biggest supermarket chain, the National Trades Union Congress' FairPrice, carries CSPO products.”
“Through public education programmes in schools and at grassroots events, my Ministry and the National Environment Agency strongly encourage everyone to contribute to our recycling efforts and to ensure that only items which are suitable for recycling are deposited in the co-mingled recycling bins.”
“Under the National Recycling Programme (NRP), Public Waste Collectors (PWCs) are required to provide a blue co-mingled recycling bin at every Housing and Development Board block and for all landed residential premises. Recycling receptacles must also be provided in condominium developments. This co-mingled recycling bin system under NRP makes it convenient for residents as they do not have to spend additional time and effort to segregate the different types of recyclables (that is, paper, metal, plastic and glass) nor set aside space in their homes to store different types of recyclables separately. While much effort has been put into encouraging domestic recycling, our domestic recycling rate was only 19% in 2015. We need to work harder to achieve our target of a domestic recycling rate of 30% by 2030. This includes inculcating responsible recycling habits, such as preventing the contamination of recyclables in the co-mingled recycling bins, by placing only items which can be recycled in such bins. According to the PWCs, about 40% of items found in the recycling bins have to be disposed of as they cannot be recycled. Some of the common non-recyclable items found deposited in recycling bins include soft toys and old shoes. Food waste found mixed with recyclables is another problem. Recyclables contaminated with food waste cannot be recycled and also create pest and odour problems. All co-mingled recycling bins in the NRP have clear labels that indicate what items can be recycled, such as clean paper, plastics, metal cans, glass and old clothing.”