Yeo Cheow Tong
Singapore
“Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Minister for Health in light of the recent report on fungal corneal infections (a) whether those who contracted the contact lens related fungal corneal infections will suffer permanent damage to their eyes; and (b) how long will his Ministry take to conclude its investigations into the causes of these contact le…”
“My Ministry performs a regulatory role and what we do is that we try to ensure that we have a conducive regulatory environment for the growth of this industry in Singapore. Let me tell him what we are doing in some areas.”
“Sir, on her two questions, whether we are satisfied that the school buses are collecting fares during the school holidays, as I mentioned just now, the school bus service is a contractual service between the parents and the service provider. It is therefore up to them to work out the terms and to abide by the terms.”
“Sir, on the first question, whether there is any abuse by owners of buses while using the 50% rebate, the answer is no, because LTA monitors very closely.”
“Sir, I have to repeat my answer. We are not responsible for regulating school buses and therefore will not be involved. SCHOOL BUSES (Installation of seat belts) 5. Assoc. Prof.”
“Ong Soh Khim asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) if his Ministry will increase the cap of $10,000 per disabled person over their lifetime for the Assistive Technology Fund scheme; and (b) if not, whether there will be a flexibility to adjust the funding cap for this scheme based on the applicant's need, as j…”
The complete record
Every one of 1,964 lines we hold for Yeo Cheow Tong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 40.
“And the Government will fund the public sector hospitals according to the number of patients treated in each Casemix category or the technical term which is used is Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG). In the Government White Paper on Affordable Health Care, Casemix was mentioned as one mechanism that can be used to control balance billing in private hospitals. Casemix information will enable us to set the limit on the total amount a private hospital can bill a patient for a particular DRG if he is using Medisave to pay for part of his hospital bill. This limit will be regardless of the length of stay, the type of tests or medications ordered. The control of balance billing will be implemented in three to five years' time. My Ministry has already started to engage the private sector in discussions. We will encourage and help the private sector to actively pursue the use of Casemix. Sir, many Members have spoken on issues related to the elderly and the Report that was released by the Inter-Ministerial Committee on the healthcare needs of the elderly. I will take them altogether and address them according to the issues. First, let me thank Members who have expressed their views and concerns on the Report of the IMC and also for their strong support. As many have stated, Singapore faces a very serious challenge in the 21st century as a result of the rapid ageing of our population. As Mr Goh Choon Kang mentioned, the number of elderly persons above the age of 65 will climb from 225,000 today to over 800,000 by the Year 2030. Clearly, a four-fold increase in the number of elderly persons in our society over the next 30 years will impose immense pressures on the healthcare system. We must, as a nation, start preparing now for the transition.”
“The remaining key recommendation that has yet to be fully implemented is Casemix which is an important tool to help contain future increases in healthcare costs and at the same time enhance quality of care. MOH will introduce the Casemix system in all public hospitals by the end of this year. We will, within the next three to five years, expand the Casemix system to private sector hospitals to control charges by private doctors and hospitals to patients who use Medisave to help pay part of their medical bills. So with the introduction of Casemix, all the key elements contained in the White Paper would have been implemented. Next, let me move on to the points raised by Mr Chen on Casemix itself. Sir, let me take this opportunity to first briefly explain to Members what is Casemix. Casemix is a system that allows hospitals to group patients according to their medical conditions and the level of resources needed to treat them. Casemix offers two important benefits: firstly, it will enable the hospitals to better understand and better manage the resources needed for a particular medical condition; secondly, it will encourage performance monitoring, benchmarking and best practices, leading to better quality of care of our patients. Implementation of Casemix, as mentioned by Mr Chen, was piloted at two sites in May last year. This was extended to cover the remaining Government-owned acute hospitals six months later in October 1998. All the hospitals now have systems to capture information required under Casemix. By the end of this year, these hospitals will receive subvention based on Casemix.”
“First, let me thank the Members, who have spoken, for their comments and suggestions. Let me first reply to the points made by Mr Bernard Chen. Sir, the White Paper on Affordable Healthcare identified four strategies to ensure that healthcare remains affordable: (1) to maintain a basic medical care package which all Singaporeans can have access to; (2) to regulate the supply and type of doctors and hospitals; (3) support for medical R&D, education and training; and (4) have sound healthcare financing policies to support the objectives laid out in the White Paper. Last year, my Ministry took stock of the implementation of the White Paper recommendations. I am happy to inform Members that at the time of the stock take, most of the targets, as set out in the White Paper, have already been met. Let me elaborate. While MOH has maintained the basic medical care package, we also regularly review the package to take into account new technologies and treatment procedures. We have also taken steps to strengthen the regulatory role of the Ministry and reviewed our legislation and policies to ensure that we continue to maintain a high standard of medical care and medical practice in Singapore. The White Paper had recommended the setting up of key national medical centres. I am happy to report the National Centres for Skin, Eye and Heart are already operational, while the remaining two, the National Cancer Centre and the National Neuroscience Institute, will begin operations this year. In the area of research, MOH established the National Medical Research Council in December 1993, and we have allocated $280 million to fund medical research for the period FY94 to FY2001. So far the research interest and results have been very encouraging.”
“Dr Lee Tsao Yuan asked the Minister for Communications what is the take-up rate for Magix, the telephone line (IDSN) access to Singapore ONE.”
“My Ministry has been reviewing the redevelopment plans of Kwong Wai Shiu Hospital with the hospital management and URA. As the project is currently only in the concept planning phase, MOH will work with Kwong Wai Shiu Hospital on the detailed plans and design to ensure that it meets our overall requirements for nursing homes. MOH will only be able to decide on the funding support when such details are finalised. Kwong Wai Shiu Hospital currently has about 500 beds of which only 350 are in use due to its staff constraints. MOH will assist the hospital to activate the unused beds as soon as possible. My Ministry is currently working with 12 other voluntary welfare organisations to build nursing homes. These are now at various advanced stages of development. We expect the number of nursing home beds to increase from 4592 at the end of last year, to 6423 by the end of 2001. This will significantly reduce the shortfall in nursing beds. In addition, we are working with VWOs to help the elderly live in their own homes for as long as possible. Institutionalisation should only be a last resort. CABLE TELEVISION 3. Dr Lee Tsao Yuan asked the Minister for Information and the Arts what is the take-up rate for cable television for households living in (i) Housing and Development Board flats, (ii) private condominiums and (iii) landed property for which the hook-up fees are about (a) $2,000 and (b) $6,000. BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: The cable television take-up rate as of 31st January 1999 is 18.5% or 148,000 households. The take-up rates are highest for private condominiums, followed by HDB homes and landed property. The Member may wish to take up with SCV if she requires a further break-down of the take-up rates, as this is trade information of commercial value. MAGIX 4.”
“As a regional hospital, AH is an important component of the national healthcare system. The Government has spent $36.5 million since 1991 to renovate physical facilities, including wards, operating theatres, intensive care units and the A&E Department, and to upgrade specialist outpatient services at AH. These improvements have resulted in better patient care, service delivery and efficiency. AH offers a sufficiently wide range of specialities - general medicine, general surgery, orthopaedic surgery, anaesthesia and A&E - to cater to the needs of most patients. Since April 1995, these services have been augmented by NUS clinicians providing specialised outpatient consultations in a range of medical and surgical subspecialities, laboratory medicine and radiology. AH also has a special niche in providing geriatric care for Singaporeans in the western part of Singapore. AH operates a Geriatric Day Hospital and a Geriatric Ward, and runs programmes on various aspects of geriatric care, including rehabilitation training, managing geriatric-orthopaedic cases and training care-givers in geriatric care. The existing range of medical services is already quite comprehensive and is serving patients well. The Ministry has no plans at this time to introduce any additional special medical services in AH. IMPACT OF SELETAR EXPRESSWAY ON THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC ALONG LENTOR AVENUE 43. Dr Tan Boon Wan asked the Minister for Communications what has been the impact of the Seletar Expressway on the flow of traffic along Lentor Avenue, and whether his Ministry has further plans to alleviate the pressure of heavy traffic along Lentor Avenue.”
“A committee was formed last year, comprising representatives from the Ministries of Manpower, Home Affairs, Health and Environment, to study the problem of noise-induced deafness in discotheques. The committee drew up a set of guidelines, recommending that the music level in discos should not exceed 85 dBA over 8 hours and 140 dBA at any time. The guidelines were issued to the music entertainment industry in July 1998, with the help of the Association of Entertainment Organisations. My Ministry, together with Ministry of Manpower, also conducted a survey among young discotheque patrons. The survey showed that while almost all of those surveyed knew of the danger of prolonged exposure to loud noise, about 10% chose not to believe it. We are therefore planning to launch a public education programme to reinforce public awareness of this danger. SAVINGS IN THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND FOR PERSONS ABOVE 55 YEARS 20. Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh asked the Minister for Manpower if he has figures on the total number of persons above 55 years old who have no savings in the Central Provident Fund.”
“MOE will certainly assist in such studies if we are requested to do so. SAFETY LIMITS FOR SOUND LEVELS IN DISCOTHEQUES 19. Dr Lily Neo asked the Minister for the Environment (a) for an update on the specifications and permissible safety limits for sound levels in discotheques; and (b) whether there were any public education programmes initiated to inform the young about this type of deafness.”
“RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Malay Students Have Done Well Educationally Malay students have made considerable progress in academic achievement over the years. This is evidenced by their results in major national examinations, the higher Malay participation in post-secondary education, and their performance in international studies: (a) In terms of national examinations - The percentage of the Malay P1 cohort passing Mathematics at `O' level, has increased almost three-fold in the last 18 years, from 10% in 1980 to 39% in 1997, while the pass rate in Science has risen by three times in the same period, from 12% to 36%; (b) In terms of participation rate in post-secondary education - The percentage of Malay students who have gone on to post-secondary education - ie, either pre-university, polytechnics or ITE - has risen from 42% in 1988 to 75% in 1998. (c) In terms of international comparisons - Our Malay students fared better in Mathematics at the P3, P4, Secondary 1 and Secondary 2 levels, than students in countries such as the US, Canada, England, New Zealand in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. The academic indicators show that our Malay students have made significant strides. These improvements show that the efforts made by MOE, the Malay/Muslim self-help groups and other community-based organisations have achieved a measure of success in addressing the educational issues facing the Malay/Muslim community. Of course, there is always room for improvement. The Malay/Muslim self-help groups have been very pro-active in studying such issues. Indeed, on 29th January 1999, the Minister in charge of Muslim Affairs, Mr Abdullah Tarmugi announced an initiative to study how the Malay/Muslim community should respond to the challenges of a knowledge-based economy.”
“The influenza A/Sydney (H3N2) virus has been isolated in Singapore since the end of 1997. It is the predominant strain circulating during the current season from November 1998 to January/February 1999 and is associated with the present influenza outbreak in Singapore. This virus strain is similar to the strain of influenza virus responsible for the influenza outbreak in Hong Kong. In Singapore, influenza A (H3N2 and H1N1 sub-types) and Influenza B viruses are detected throughout the year. Influenza is an acute viral disease of the respiratory tract. The disease is self-limiting and patients usually recover within a week. As influenza may occur throughout the year in tropical countries, influenza vaccination is generally not introduced in any tropical country as a routine basis for prevention. In temperate countries when epidemics occur during cold winter seasons, the elderly and young children with chronic medical conditions like heart and lung disease, who are at high risk of having serious complications are advised to have influenza vaccination as a preventive measure. The Ministry of Health has taken the necessary action to ensure that influenza vaccine is available to those who wish to be vaccinated. Influenza vaccination is available at Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Changi General Hospital, and many private clinics. PROBLEMS CONFRONTING MALAY FAMILIES AND STUDENTS 16. Mr Zulkifli bin Baharudin asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry will consider carrying out a comprehensive survey to determine the various problems confronting Malay families and students and to determine appropriate programmes to help the community cope with these problems.”
“In 1997, our public hospitals saw 80,000 hospital admissions involving Singaporeans and PRs aged 55 and above. The hospitals do not track whether patients have savings in the Central Provident Fund. About 38% of them used their own Medisave savings to pay at least part of the hospital bill. Another 50% of patients used the Medisave of their immediate family members. Some patients were covered by employer medical benefits and therefore need not draw on Medisave. Figures on Medifund assistance allow us to estimate the number of patients who, despite Government subsidies, Medisave and MediShield, remain unable to meet their medical expenses. Medifund is the safety net of last resort for needy and indigent Singaporeans. Applications are considered by Hospital Medifund Committees, and approval rates have always been higher than 97%. In Financial Year 1997, Medifund assisted 5,600 cases out of the 61,000 admissions of patients older than 55 into B2 and C class wards. They received $5.4 million of financial help. Medifund is not the only avenue open to those who need financial assistance. Inpatients can also apply for Medisave overdraft. Our public hospitals are also prepared to help patients with genuine financial difficulties by offering an instalment plan to pay their bills. Singaporeans can rest assured that they will not be denied essential healthcare because of the inability to pay. PRESENT INFLUENZA EPIDEMIC 15. Dr Lily Neo asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the present influenza epidemic is due to Sydney H5N2 as in Hong Kong and (b) whether his Ministry has vaccines available against the virus.”
“Thirdly, because of the additional amount of water and grit that the system has to handle, our sewerage system would have to be expanded at a tremendous cost. The figure mentioned by Mr Heng for the DTSS is between $6 - $7 billion. To modify the system to take the food waste, we just increase it by another 30%, that is, over $2 billion. The current system works very well and it is better that we work with it. What about the experience of this system in other countries? I have asked that same question when I went to ENV two years ago. When I travel, I see that system is available in many other countries. Why do we not have it here? My staff sought the views and comments of some of the municipal authorities in other countries on their experience. Sydney and Israel, for example, have informed us that, on hindsight, it was not wise to allow its use. Why? High water consumption. When populations are small, it is not a problem. When populations increase and water resources get scarce, this becomes an unnecessary demand on their water resources, and secondly, the high organic loading of the food waste. They regret it, but the system is in place, and they cannot do anything about it. I thank Mr Ong for his inputs but this system is not appropriate for us. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Yeo Cheow Tong]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“What we have done is that we have moved the regulations into the main body of the Bill. Does it mean that do-it-yourself jobs would no longer be possible? Sir, nothing will change because, as I said, these are existing regulations and we would still follow the current practice. The intention is not to prevent simple repair jobs. What we are concerned about is work involving the main system, whether it is the main sanitation system or the main plumbing system, because work to those main systems has an impact on the overall system and therefore we want to be sure that only qualified people are allowed to make any alterations or repairs which can be quite major. Mr Ong Kian Min talked about food waste disposals or food waste grinders and asked why we are so far behind in not allowing them to be used. I think it is important to understand how this system works and why we cannot allow them to be used in Singapore. The food waste grinders dispose the food waste through the sewerage system by first grinding the solid food into tiny bits, as Mr Ong has mentioned, or to put it more appropriately, it liquefies them. The question is how do we liquefy solid food? You liquefy them by not just grinding the food but using a lot of water to liquefy and to sweep the food particles away. As Members know, water in Singapore is a very precious resource. We should not be using a lot of water to just grind up food particles and then disposing of them. Secondly, our sewerage system is really not designed with the necessary gradient to take the large amount of grit which the grinders would produce. To do that, we have to also modify the existing sewerage system because otherwise, without the necessary gradient, the food particles would coagulate and choke up the system.”
“So I can assure Mr Heng that his point is well taken and we will keep that in mind. On the issue of covering of drains in the housing estates, Mr Heng is suggesting that we should go back to the old system where the drains are covered. Sir, basically, the covering of drains involves two objectives. One objective is how do you ensure that the immediate problem of breeding of Aedes mosquitoes and dengue fever can be addressed properly. The other objective is how do we make sure that litter does not get into our water systems. The problem is that while we can cope with the litter problem by covering up the drains, most of the Town Councils have found that covered drains are a problem in terms of cleaning. This is because most drains in housing estates have got very shallow gradients and water does not flow fast enough for the debris to be swept away. Is there a solution to this? I would ask my officials to look into it to see whether some middle ground can be found whereby the bigger part of the drain can be covered up and leaving some other parts open to facilitate cleaning. At the end of the day, the responsibility will really have to fall on the town councils to ensure that those parts that are covered up can be cleaned properly. We are prepared to be flexible but the onus for maintaining the place mosquito-free falls on the town councils. We leave that flexibility to the town councils and we hope that they will use that flexibility wisely. Mr Heng next talked about clauses 37 and 38. These are new clauses relating to the registration and work of plumbers. While these two clauses are new, the registration and definition of work of plumbers are not new. These currently exist under regulations.”
“The plant will be commissioned and operational in mid-2000 and after which we will carry out a two-year study to look into the product of that plant and see whether the output can also be used as part of our supply of raw water into our reservoirs and other potable systems. He has also asked whether the Government intends to treat the DTSS like the MRT, ie, as part of the national infrastructure. Sir, the current sewerage system consists of the waste water conveyance system and the waste water treatment facilities. What we are doing now is that the operating cost of the sewerage system and the cost of building the treatment facilities are recovered but the cost of building the conveyance system is not recovered, ie, the sewers themselves are considered to be part of the national infrastructure and not recovered. With the building of the DTSS, the same procedure will be adopted, ie, the deep tunnel will be considered to be part of the national infrastructure and therefore we will not seek to recover the cost from consumers. We will only seek to recover the operating cost and the waste treatment facility costs. Mr Heng has brought up clause 5(7) which provides for the Government to resort to the courts in the case of a dispute, and he has asked that perhaps we should examine other avenues of solving the problems before going to the courts. Sir, this clause is not new. It is an existing clause. I can assure the Member that in all the years that it has been operational in the existing Act, we have not had to resort to the courts. Our approach is to resolve the issue of how much cost we have to pay directly with the parties involved and, if necessary, we will seek mediation. We would only resort to the courts as a last resort.”
“Sir, first, let me thank both Members for their support and comments. Sir, let me first address the points raised by Mr Heng Chiang Meng. He commented about the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System. Sir, this is going to be a very important part of our sewerage infrastructure in the coming years and we would like to ensure that the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System (DTSS) is optimised in terms of its usage and capacity. Sir, he has asked whether or not the Ministry should be using the opportunity of the DTSS to separate domestic waste water from industrial waste water because domestic waste water is free of heavy metal and other toxins. The intention of Mr Heng's suggestion is that technology is developing in some parts of the world now where waste water can now be treated to such a level that it can be recycled for use in our water system. Sir, we have also been looking into this. In terms of whether there is a need for us to separate industrial waste water from domestic waste water, our conclusion is that there is no need to. What we are doing now is that we are controlling the pollution at source. We require companies that are producing waste water to ensure that if the waste water contains contaminants which will damage the system they should pre-treat the waste water before discharging into our sewerage system. In any case, the DTSS would have two treatment plants, one in Changi area and the other in Tuas area. The Changi DTSS system would serve mainly domestic premises and therefore the water from that treatment plant would be water which can be recycled if the technology proves feasible. Sir, PUB and my Ministry will be jointly building a 10,000 cubic metre per day water reclamation pilot plant to try out the concept that Mr Heng has just mentioned.”
“Clauses 45 and 46 give authorised officers power of entry. These again are similar to the powers in the EPC Bill and facilitate ENV in investigating into cases of infringements against the provisions of the Bill. Miscellaneous Provisions (Part IX) Clause 71 provides for offences under the Bill to be compounded for a sum not exceeding $5,000. Conclusion Sir, the Bill will enable my Ministry to provide efficient and effective sewerage and drainage systems, and safeguard their integrity once constructed. The Water Pollution Control and Drainage Act (Chapter 348) will be repealed with the enactment of this Bill. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“Clauses 24 and 25 require any person who intends to construct, alter or carry out works that affect any drainage system to obtain a clearance certificate or approval from the Ministry. If he fails to do so, the Ministry may require him to demolish or make good the drainage system to its original condition or carry out such work as may be necessary. This permits ENV to ensure that drains are properly designed and constructed and obstructions to smooth flows are removed. Under clause 31, it will be an offence to cause any damage to any drainage system. Again, this will ensure that due diligence is taken when working close to drains, eg, during construction works. Registration, Codes of Practice and Certificate or Approval for Works (Part VI) Sir, at present, ENV checks plans and approves construction proposals using powers under the Building Control Act. Part VI of the S&D Bill regulates works affecting the sewerage and drainage systems. Clause 33 empowers ENV to establish specifications for both sewerage and drainage works and issue codes of practice for professionals engaged in the design and construction of such works. Clause 34 states that a clearance certificate or approval is required for any sewerage or drainage work. Clause 35 specifies that any work that requires a clearance certificate shall not be carried out, except under the supervision of a qualified person. Clause 36 spells out the responsibilities of the qualified person for the proper construction and inspection of the work. These clauses are similar to provisions in the Building Control Act, under which these requirements are currently being carried out. Enforcement (Part VII) Clauses 39, 40 and 41 give authorised officers powers of investigation and arrest.”
“Clauses 12 and 15 require any person who intends to construct or alter any sewerage system or sanitary facilities, or erect building or structure over, across or adjacent to any sewer, to obtain a clearance certificate or approval from the Ministry. If he fails to do so, the Ministry may require him to demolish the sewerage system or building, or reinstate the sewer as the case may be. Clause 14 empowers ENV to enter upon any premises to inspect any sewerage system and open the ground if necessary. Full compensation will be made for any damage done due to such inspection. Under clause 19, it will be an offence for any person to discharge any sewage, waste matter or effluent into any public sewer improperly or without the written approval of the Ministry. In particular, this will deter the illegal discharge of waste matter into the sewers, eg, from tankers of waste collectors, by simply opening a manhole or an inspection chamber. Clause 20 disallows the disposal of any matter or substance that is likely to damage the sewer, including sand, earth, cement, brick, wood, and others. Under clause 21, it will be an offence for any person to damage any public sewer or do any act to render any public sewer to be dangerous or injurious to health or cause a nuisance. This is to ensure that due diligence is exercised when working close to sewers, eg, in construction works. These clauses enable ENV to safeguard the integrity of the sewerage system and ensure that it is maintained well and functioning properly. Drainage (Part IV) Part IV of the Bill relates to ENV's powers to construct, maintain and improve drainage systems.”
“But they play an important part in keeping Singapore clean and free of infectious diseases. The existing Act provides my Ministry with the necessary powers to put the elaborate infrastructures in place, maintain, operate and improve them when necessary. The Sewerage and Drainage Bill (S&DB) will consist mainly of provisions from its predecessor. It will regulate the construction, maintenance and improvement of sewerage systems and land drainage systems, the discharge of sewage and trade effluent and other related matters. New powers are introduced to prevent damage to or interference with our sewerage and drainage systems and to provide for requirements now specified under some other Act, for example, the Building Control Act. Sir, I shall now highlight the major new provisions that are being introduced in the Bill. Sewerage (Part III) Part III of the Bill relates to ENV's powers to construct, maintain, improve and control sewerage systems. Clause 5 empowers ENV to lay pipes in, under or over any premises, street or building. ENV can require the owner or supplier of any gas, electricity, water or telecommunication services to divert or remove their wire, cable, duct, structure, etc, in the way of any public sewerage system. ENV can also require the owners or occupiers of premises to remove similar obstructions. The cost and expenses of such removal and diversion will be borne by the Government. The clause will facilitate the construction of deep tunnel sewers and allow ENV to serve notices on owners and suppliers of utilities which are now private companies.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The existing Water Pollution Control and Drainage Act (WPCDA) has provisions for effectual drainage of inland areas, water pollution control and the proper collection, treatment and disposal of sewage. Provisions for the control of water pollution have been incorporated in the Environmental Pollution Control Act. The Sewerage and Drainage Bill seeks to, firstly, incorporate updated and strengthened provisions on sewerage and drainage matters from the WPCDA; and secondly, to introduce new provisions for better management and maintenance of sewerage and land drainage systems. The Bill will repeal the Water Pollution Control and Drainage Act (Chapter 348). Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore is one of the few countries that provides their entire population with modern sanitation. We have an elaborate system of sewers transporting wastewater to several treatment works. The works treat the wastewater to internationally-accepted standards before the final effluent is discharged into the sea. We are therefore able to keep our water resources clean and free of contamination. The result is that Singaporeans now enjoy a high standard of environmental public health. At the same time, my Ministry is responsible for constructing and maintaining an elaborate network of drains that collect and convey rainwater quickly to the sea and reservoirs. As a result, we have eradicated floods from Singapore except for a few small low-lying areas. These areas may still flood when very heavy rains coincide with high tides. Our sewerage and most drainage infrastructure are buried underground or kept well-blended into the surroundings. They are often not noticed but instead taken for granted.”
“Sir, we will apply the standards of the day. For example, if in two years' time, a factory owner applies to convert his site into a recreational site, the standards of the day must then apply. It cannot be the standard when he first bought the site. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Yeo Cheow Tong]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment, read a Third time and passed. EXEMPTED BUSINESS (Motion) Resolved, That the proceedings on the remaining items on the Order Paper for today be exempted at this day's sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1. - [Dr Lee Boon Yang].”
“Sir, the intention is to apply clause 20 to industrial land which is being rezoned for other uses. So when the landowner is seeking to rezone, the application must also involve the Ministry of the Environment and we would then be able to inspect and require the landowner to carry out an assessment of the state of the land. If the assessment shows that certain parts of the land have been contaminated, we can require that either the owner or the occupier would have to make good that land before approval for converting that land to other use is allowed. He asked whether clause 18 is meant to create a Superfund. Sir, it is not the intention for clause 18 to become a Superfund. The clause does not provide for the setting up of a fund to deal with contaminated sites. Clause 18 empowers the Ministry of the Environment to require any person who has discharged or caused or permitted to be discharged or spilled any toxic substance or any other polluting matters onto any land or into any drain or sea for such persons to remove and clean up such substances within a specified time. Let me give the Member some background. From time to time, the Ministry of the Environment encounters contaminated sites, drains, etc., where we really cannot pinpoint exactly who is the polluter. To do that, we need to be on hand to spot him discharging the pollutant. We now have that presumption clause that unless you can prove otherwise, because this is your site, you shall be responsible for the clean up. So this clause allows us to do that. We do not just presume but we also require them to clean up the site.”
“Sir, Mr Heng has hit the right point. I agree with him that whilst we have standards in terms of noise levels - these are technical standards - there are some shortcomings which we will need to address. The noise standards refer to average sound levels over a certain number of hours, together with certain 5-minute peaks. The sound we heard is a very instantaneous noise and therefore when you average out over five minutes, and worse over several hours, that sound escapes the standard. I have pointed it out to my officials and they are looking into it. I must apologise that I was too busy reading the Bill when Mr Tay was making his speech and I must have missed the two points that he raised. First, on clause 20 which is the clause governing the remediation of contaminated land. This is a new clause. Sir, could he repeat his point on clause 20?”
“However, from time to time, we do get feedback from either the industry or the public or from interested parties with suggestions and proposals. And where those feedback are valid, we normally do note them and we would not hesitate to include them in future amendments to the Bill when the opportunity arises. Sir, I believe I have answered most of the points.”
“He talked about clause 15 and whether it applies to industrial and non-industrial land and whether it also applies to fertilisers. I believe the clause does apply to other than industrial land. On the issue of fertilisers, definitely, yes, we do control the use of fertilisers. We make sure that our water catchment areas and the land around the reservoirs use fertilisers which are approved by both ENV and PUB, because ultimately PUB is the agency responsible for safeguarding the quality of our water. He mentioned that the figure of $5,000 is not adequate. I have looked at the clause that he mentioned. The $5,000 fine refers to people who failed to inform ENV about the incidence of pollution. It is not for the act of polluting, but for not informing us. Yes, I am correct. It says, "shall immediately inform" and if he does not immediately inform, there is a fine of $5,000. For pollution to inland waters, the maximum fine, as I mentioned in my Second Reading speech, is actually $100,000. This is a large sum because we need to safeguard our water supplies.. Sir, I think I missed out an important point made by Mr Heng Chiang Meng, ie, to refer the Bill to a Select Committee. I understand Mr Heng's concerns because the passing of environmental control Bills would be momentous in most countries, except that in Singapore we are actually ahead of most countries. We started on environmental controls many, many years ago and therefore this Bill is not a brand new Bill containing brand new provisions. Many of the provisions here are provisions which have been in existence for 25-30 years. Therefore, there is no need for us to send this Bill to a Select Committee.”
“So the macro planning is the key point where all inputs are taken in, as well as from members of the public. By the time when a specific project proposal is received, we are not really looking at the macro issues any more. We are really looking at the micro issues, what sort of pollutants, what sort of process, what is the level of pollution, what are our standards. These are highly technical issues. We have, over the years, built up a tremendous pool of expertise in the Government departments and where the expertise is still lacking, because maybe it is a new pollutant, for example, then what we do is that we will take in technical experts from either Singapore or from abroad to advise us. So by the time ENV gets involved in these issues, these are highly technical issues rather than a systemic broad-based type of issue, and we are very focused in dealing with them. He talked about clause 37, on self-monitoring equipment, and that we should help companies to upgrade by providing some incentives. The incentives are there. Mr Heng Chiang Meng mentioned that too. Let me explain very briefly. For ISO 14001, for example, we already have a scheme which is administered by the Productivity and Standards Board that offers financial grants of up to 70% of the cost of the consultancy, subject to a maximum of $40,000. And an additional grant of 50% of the one-time cost for obtaining ISO 14001 certification. My Ministry itself administers a scheme called the Accelerated Depreciation Allowance Scheme to encourage companies to use not just energy efficient equipment but also more efficient pollution control equipment. So this scheme is already in place. There are various schemes which are available and those in the industry are quite familiar with them.”
“Next, he said that we should not impose controls after the fact, ie, having the self-monitoring devices is good but the pollution is already there. It is after the fact, and that we should do it before the fact. We actually do that. Whenever a project proposal is received by the EDB and the various Government departments that has a pollution element in it, that project is referred to us and we will work with the company very early in the project planning stage to make sure that they understand what are our requirements and that they build that capability to achieve our requirements into the process, because that is the most cost effective way. So our requirements become an integral part of their routine production process, which is why despite our very high requirements, I think no company has come back to tell us that our standards are not achievable. He has also asked that we assure him that the inter-Ministry coordination work continues. Sir, that has been an ongoing process. There is very close inter-Ministry coordination and we will continue with that, both in terms of pollution control and land use. Whenever the Master Plan Committee reviews the Master Plan, ENV is involved, as are many other Government agencies. He talked about clauses 26 and 36 and that these are akin to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and that we should get public involvement in them. At this point, I think it is useful to explain the whole process. We have to start from the Master Plan stage. In drawing up the Master Plan, the URA already got all the inputs from both the Government agencies as well as members of the public, because the URA would normally proceed to hold public dialogues when they release their draft development guide plans and the Master Plan.”
“I remember growing up where, during Chinese New Year's eve, we were playing around with firecrackers, half the night not being able to sleep but I still enjoyed it. But we still had to intervene because there was a public health concern. In the case of bak kua, I do not think having that stall there is a tradition. Eating bak kua, I believe, for some people is very important, and we have not stopped this. You can still buy bak kua freely in Chinatown and in many of the supermarkets. I can assure Members that it is not our intention to stop the production and sale of bak kua. Mr Simon Tay talked about standards and I have already replied to him. Next, he went on to talk about best practices and methods of production. I want to assure him that we do work closely with EDB and with the other Ministries and agencies to ensure that whatever we do, we are able to adopt the best practices available, but it must be a best practice that is also economical. We do not believe in going for the ideal approach, because I think that would totally make us uncompetitive. I agree with him that we must be investment friendly while at the same time safeguarding our environment. He also talked about the breadth of legislation and that we do not go far enough in tackling pollution from abroad. This topic has cropped up periodically and I think we have to be realistic. There is really no meaning to having a provision in our legislation which we cannot enforce. And if it is pollution from a neigbouring country, it is very difficult for us to go to that neighbouring country and enforce our law if they themselves are unable to enforce their own laws. So, I think we have to be realistic and tackle this problem from another angle.”
“And this is the problem. It is not the smoke pollution. In fact, in announcing this move, ENV had made sure that both the Chinese press and the English press and the other media carried the explanation quite clearly that it was a public health concern, not smoke. If it is smoke, that is really not an issue. The lack of hygiene at these makeshift stalls can lead to serious outbreaks of food borne diseases, not unlike those that had been experienced recently in some other countries. I will give you some examples. The recent outbreak of Avian flu in Hongkong resulted in six deaths and the E-coli outbreak in Japan, well-known for very clean food conditions, it broke out very quickly, killed seven people before it stopped. These are very recent examples of how such food borne diseases can quickly appear from nowhere and then pose a tremendous danger to the population. As far as bak kua is concerned, there are proper places for the food to be produced and bought and, in fact, if you walk down Chinatown, one would see many bak kua stalls. The key thing is that because the shops and stalls are licensed, the public can be assured of the proper food standards. We are dealing with a genuine public health concern and I think it is best that we stick to it. He has also talked about the need not to break traditions. Sir, I agree with him. We would also like to keep as many of our traditions as possible, but we think that we have to realise that over time, some of the traditional practices may have to change, for good reasons, and we should not change them unless there are good reasons. Firecrackers were a very strong traditional practice.”
“Mr Tay Beng Chuan is worried that with this Bill, the Ministry will nitpick and enforce in a very tough manner. Let me first explain that this Bill is not a totally new Bill. It is a compilation of parts from different existing Acts and compiled into one Bill that handles the entire spectrum of pollution. Many of the clauses are therefore existing provisions and already operational. Some of them have been operational since 1971, so they are well-tried and well-proven. The few clauses which are new are actually provisions which are already operational also but they are carried out administratively. What we have done is to now formalise this by converting those administrative requirements into law. I can assure Mr Tay that the enactment of this Bill will not in any way change the administration of pollution control in Singapore. Next, he went on quite a fair bit about bak kua and asked why has ENV proceeded to ban the outdoor barbecuing of bak kua, especially during the Chinese New Year season. Sir, this issue is one which we have been discussing with the bak kua manufacturers for some time already. In fact, I think as early as about 1 1/2 years ago, they were pre-alerted, and about a year ago, after the last Chinese New Year, we proceeded to hold fairly detailed discussions with the bak kua operators to explain to them. The barbecuing of bak kua on street pavements has been in place for a long time, as Mr Tay has mentioned. And every Chinese New Year, you see them sprouting around all over Singapore, Chinatown and elsewhere. These street and pavement stalls are not licensed and they are not housed in licensed premises either. They spring up, operate for a few weeks and they disappear and we are not even sure where they obtain their raw meat and meat patty from.”
“He has also asked about people who trade in hazardous substances and who are collecting such waste and whether such persons must have adequate treatment facilities before a licence is issued. For companies or persons who wish to go into the business of collecting hazardous waste, we will require them to have the necessary treatment facilities. He brought up the case of a company who collected waste wood and had a big pile of waste wood which was subsequently burnt. Sir, he was not a hazardous waste collector. He was a waste wood recycler and therefore the circumstances were quite different. He had a recycling facility except I do not think he ran his facility very well and because of that, he had some problems and a fire broke out. The Government put out the fire and the cost of putting out the fire and the clean up was indeed charged to the company. Prof. Low also talked about the use of CFC 11 and CFC 113. CFC 11 has been prohibited in Singapore and is therefore no longer used today in the production of styrofoam. I believe they use another gas which is approved. As to the import of CFC 113, it has been banned since January 1996. However, under the Montreal Protocol, remnant stocks are allowed to be used up. So what you see in Singapore that is being used are really the remnant stocks which would be used up in the near future. He has asked how the qualified persons and registered inspectors are chosen. My Ministry conducts training courses on how to vet plans and do site inspections, and those professionals, architects and engineers who have gone through that training course would then qualify to be registered inspector. And we are looking into how to increase the number of training programmes so that we can enlarge the pool of registered inspectors.”
“If their proposal is a very rational one, we would be very happy to accept their proposal. It is not our purpose to run their business for them. Our interest is to ensure that the systems are in place and the systems are reasonable and that they are well structured technically and capable of coping with accidents. So we leave it to them. But if we find that the proposal is far below the minimum standards, then the Director would have to impose certain requirements, and these requirements would not be something which is taken out from the air because much of the business is already available in Singapore and therefore we can use the current practices and equipment as a standard for the new company. He has asked about cleaning up. If there is a discharge of pollutants, then who bears the cost of the clean up? I think it is quite clear. He who pollutes must pay. The company that discharges the pollutants must pay for the clean up. Quite often, time is of essence and the Ministry may then have to arrange for the clean-up straightaway, in which case the cost of the clean up is then charged to the company. Prof. Low asked about smell pollution and he said that the Bill does not seem to address odours. Odours are catered for under the Environmental Public Health Act and it has been quite adequate. He gave the example of Beecham, a factory in the Boon Lay area, that used to emit very strong smell. Arising from feedback from the residents and people passing by, officers from ENV went to the factory involved and worked with the factory to address the sources of that smell and how to control it. I am glad to say that if he drives past that area today, I do not think he will have that problem anymore.”
“We should not go for ideal standards which will of course require very heavy investment, much heavier than is necessary. Here, I want to tie this in to what Mr Simon Tay has asked on what sort of standards we are using. We are basing our standards on those of the developed countries. For example, for air quality, our basic standard is the World Health Organisation's long-term goals for air quality. Many of the developing countries are not close to that yet, but we have already adopted that standard as our standard, and this is supplemented by the US Environmental Protection Agency's primary air quality standards as well. In fact, these are well-researched standards of a very high level but attainable level, and we have adopted this as our standard. I may as well answer the rest of the questions on this issue. For trade effluent, we use the standards of countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Japan, the USA and Europe. In ensuring that these standards are achievable, we have also looked at the ability to comply with these standards, what sort of investment is needed, and our assessment has been that these standards are reasonable and the investments are not overwhelming. Prof. Low has asked whether the burning of wood is covered under the Bill. Yes, the burning of wood is covered in clause 14 of the Bill. He has gone on to ask about the transportation and storage of toxic and polluting substances and who determines. What system do we use? The procedure is a very well-established one. When a company applies for permission to handle, store, or sell hazardous substances, we will first ask them for their proposal, which should include storage system, handling system, pollution control system if an accident happens, and based on their proposal, we will then review.”
“Sir, my Ministry is now looking into the concept of an environmental control officer. We should look into various environmental aspects relating to work sites, such as breeding of mosquitoes. I will ask my officers to see whether one of the duties could also be to monitor the noise level. But we want to be careful not to overburden the construction sites with all kinds of requirements. The thinking is that, at the present moment, the environmental control officer can also double up as a safety officer. Therefore, it is not a requirement for an additional person to be employed but really to broaden the role of the safety officer who is already working there. We will look into his suggestion. Prof. Low Seow Chay has cautioned against exempting the Director from personal liability and with this exemption provision, it may encourage the Director to make a wrong or easy decision at the expense of the company. Sir, I can assure him that, with or without the exemption provision, Government officials take their job very seriously and they always make decisions in good faith. The Environmental Pollution Control Bill has got very broad and serious implications. I can assure him that the Director is definitely a person who would take his job very seriously and would ensure that the decisions are made in a very balanced manner. The first priority must be of course to safeguard the health and safety of Singaporeans. It may be an expensive control measure, but if the pollutant is death threatening, we cannot take the easy way out and say, "Well, let us use a cheaper equipment and let them pollute the air." We will always have to make sure that the first priority is to safeguard the health of our people and to ensure that the standards are reasonable standards.”
“Sir, there is no need for that stipulation because even when the Director makes an important order, that order normally would have to be cleared by the Minister before it is finally issued. He has also asked about punishment for persons or companies that submit fraudulent data. Yes, we have the self-monitoring equipment and we are supposed to check. What is there to prevent the companies from tinkering with the data and then submitting false data? Sir, the companies are required to submit the data from the self-monitoring equipment to the Ministry for certain operating periods. If they go and doctor those data, they will be guilty of committing a crime and we would definitely take action against them. I must say that, so far, my Ministry has not encountered any company that has submitted doctored data to us. Mr Ang Mong Seng talked about noise and he made three points that for work sites near homes, the work should be constrained after 8.00 pm and that after 8.00 pm, no work which emits loud noise should be allowed. Sir, in fact, we do have a requirement that after 7.00 pm, the noise level from work sites would have to be greatly reduced. So, in fact, we have gone one step further than what Mr Ang has asked for. He has also asked that the noise be measured at an appropriate level rather than just on the ground level as in certain circumstances, the ground floor may be fairly quiet, but if you go to the upper floors, it may be very noisy. Sir, I take his point and I will ask my officers to look into that. He has also asked that since most work sites will have a safety officer, we should perhaps make the safety officer also responsible for looking into the noise level emitted from the work site.”
“It is not just motor vehicles because down the road, there could be other sources of pollution which we will be looking at. This description gives us maximum flexibility. But in ensuring that the message goes through very clearly, I have spent quite some time describing why diesel particulates are dangerous to health, and this is going to be one of the key points that we are going to focus on in terms of pollution control on motor vehicles. He has asked whether the Bill applies to sea pollution. Sir, the Bill applies to pollutants discharged into drains and the definition of "drains" would be watercourses and rivers as well as the sea shore, in essence. So land-based discharge of pollutants into the watercourses that end up in the sea would still be caught within the ambit of this Bill. But pollution from ships is not covered by this Bill. Pollution from ships would be covered under another Act, which is the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea Act and this is administered and enforced by MPA. Mr Heng talked about noise pollution. Again, because of the varying circumstances and locations where noise pollution is emitted, there should be a varying standard applicable to each situation. Sir, indeed that is the case. We have different permissible noise levels for different locations. For example, areas near to the homes for the aged and hospitals would have a much lower permissible noise level than, for example, a site that is in the middle of nowhere. Mr Heng also expressed concern that since there is a provision that is very much akin to the environmental impact assessment study requirement, the power to order the carrying out of such a study should be vested in the Minister rather than the Director.”
“Sir, let me first start by thanking all Members who have spoken and very strongly supported the Bill. Let me first reply to Mr Heng Chiang Meng. Mr Heng has asked that in tackling the pollution problem, we should start at source, and one good way is to start by educating the young and having the adults set the example. Sir, I totally agree with him, which is why we have a very active programme of involving the schools in environmental issues. In fact, many of the schools now have environmental clubs and we will continue to encourage those which do not have such clubs to form them. Sir, he has commented that the Bill sounds like a punishment Bill. The Bill stipulates what the owners and occupiers must do, but it does not really provide any incentives to help them comply with the requirements. Sir, he is right. This is a Bill to control pollution, which is why it stipulates all the requirements, in terms of pollution control. There are incentives. But the incentives are contained in other legislation and I will go into them afterwards. Mr Heng asked that we should differentiate the punishments because the range of polluters is so huge and the circumstances of the pollution are also very varied. Sir, indeed, we will do that. The law stipulates the maximum in which the punishment can be levied. But in levying the punishment, we will take into consideration the circumstances and the sort of polluter. This is something which has been in practice and will continue. He has asked why the Bill did not include specifically things like motor vehicles since the pollution from motor vehicles is quite significant. Sir, in drafting the clause, we opted to give a broader description.”
“They may also require the production of records and documents and take photographs where necessary. Compensation, Damages and Costs (Part XII) Clauses 51 to 64 relate to the recovery of compensation, damages and costs payable under the Bill. Clause 51 provides for the determination of the apportionment of the amount and the question of liability of any compensation, damages, fees and costs under the Bill by a court in case of dispute. Clause 53 imposes a charge on the premises for the recovery of costs and expenses incurred by the Government under the Bill which are payable by the owner of those premises. Miscellaneous Provisions (Part XIII) Clauses 65 to 78 contain miscellaneous provisions. Clause 72 provides for offences under the Bill to be compounded for a sum not exceeding $5,000. Conclusion This Bill will enable my Ministry to deal with new challenges that can threaten the good living environment we enjoy today. With its passage, my Ministry will have the necessary powers to ensure that Singaporeans will continue to enjoy a clean and pollution free environment. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“Clause 39 empowers the Minister to order premises which emit or discharge air impurities, trade effluent or hazardous substances which are likely to cause pollution of the environment or be injurious to public health or safety to:- (a) cease the process which causes such emission or discharge; (b) cease such emission or discharge; or (c) carry out measures to collect, store and treat such emission or discharge to specified requirements. The penalty for not complying with such an order is a fine not exceeding $100,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 3 months or both and a further fine of $2,000 for every day during which the offence is continued after conviction. Enforcement (Part XI) Clauses 41 to 50 contain provisions which confer on ENV powers which are necessary for the enforcement of the Bill. Clauses 43 to 45 give authorised officers powers of investigation and arrest. Such officers can interview and take the statement of a suspected offender or a witness of an offence under the Bill. If such suspected offender or witness fails to appear before the authorised officer as required, a warrant may be issued by a Magistrate to secure his attendance. Authorised officers can also arrest and detain a person who is suspected to have committed an offence under the Bill until his name and address can be correctly ascertained. However, he shall not be detained longer than is necessary for bringing him before a court. Clauses 47 and 48 give authorised officers power of entry. Clause 50 empowers authorised officers to search any premises suspected of storing or dealing with hazardous substances or emitting air impurities or discharging trade effluent without permission, and to seize, seal or take samples of substances found in the premises.”
“Clause 35 introduces a presumption that the main contractor of a construction site is deemed to have permitted the discharge of pollutants from the site or the open burning of construction debris on the site if such incidents happen. He will be liable to the same punishment as the person who actually commits the offence, unless he can show proof that he has exercised due diligence to prevent the offence from taking place. This will ensure that the main contractor exercises proper control over the construction site and his workers and agents. Clause 36 empowers ENV to require any person intending to carry out any activity that is likely to cause substantial pollution of the environment to carry out a study on environmental pollution control and implement such necessary preventive measures. Clause 37 empowers ENV to require the owner or occupier of any premises from which pollutants are emitted to install monitoring equipment and suitable devices or systems to prevent or reduce the emission or discharge of such pollutants to the standard prescribed in the regulations. This again is to instill discipline and self-regulation in the industries. Clause 38 empowers the Minister to make regulations to require any industrial or trade premises or person who deals with hazardous substances to take out and maintain insurance against environmental risks.”
“ENV will be empowered to issue stop-work orders to construction sites and workplaces which generate excessive and loud noise and fail to comply with a noise control notice issued by ENV. Any person who contravenes a stop-work order is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 for every day during which the order is not complied with, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months or both. The strong measures are necessary to ensure that construction sites and workplaces take practical and reasonable care to minimize noise nuisance to nearby residents, after ENV has advised them to do so. Licences and Industrial Plant Works (Part IX) Clauses 31 to 34 contain provisions on licences and industrial plant works. Currently, a person requires separate licences, permits and approvals to carry out various activities, such as discharging trade effluent, occupying and using scheduled premises, importing and selling hazardous substances, etc. Under clause 31, he may apply for a single licence to carry out these activities. This will greatly simplify administrative and paper work, and improve efficiency. Under clause 33, qualified persons are required to submit building plans of industrial plant works to ENV for the issue of clearance certificates before such works can be carried out. Clause 33 also allows for such works to be inspected and certified by professional architects or engineers registered by ENV for such purposes. Environmental Pollution Control Measures (Part X) Clauses 35 to 40 contain provisions relating to measures for the control of environmental pollution.”
“Hazardous Substances Control (Part VII) Clauses 21 to 27 deal with the control of hazardous substances. Clause 22 makes it an offence for any person to import, possess to sell, sell or offer for sale any hazardous substances without a licence. Such substances are specified in the Second Schedule. Clause 25 empowers ENV to require any person keeping any hazardous substance stored or kept in a premises that is likely to threaten the health or safety of any person or cause pollution to the environment to remove the hazardous substance for disposal in a proper facility. Currently, this is enforced through licensing control. Clause 26 empowers ENV to require the owner or occupier of installations that store, use or handle hazardous substances in bulk quantities to carry out impact analysis studies. The studies will identify and quantify the risks of handling such hazardous substances in the installations and recommend measures to minimise or prevent such risks. The clause also empowers ENV to require such installations to review and audit their existing measures for the safe management of hazardous substances. Noise Control (Part VIII) Clauses 28 to 30 deal with the control of noise from construction activities and other works. Clause 28 empowers ENV to impose requirements on the way in which certain construction or other works are to be carried out in order to control the level of noise emitted from those works. Clause 29 empowers ENV to prohibit any owner or occupier of any workplace from carrying out or permitting any specified activities which may cause noise to be emitted exceeding a specified level.”
“Clause 18 empowers ENV to require any person who had discharged any toxic or hazardous substance or other polluting matter onto any land or into any drain or sea to remove and clean up such substance or matter within a specified time. Clause 19 empowers ENV to require any person to take measures to prevent water pollution due to the storage or transportation of toxic substances or other polluting matters. Currently, these requirements are enforced administratively. Land Pollution Control (Part VI) Sir, clause 20 empowers the Minister to make regulations to control the pollution of land. These would include regulations to require remedial measures to be taken on contaminated sites. Control of land contamination In land scarce Singapore, land use is reviewed regularly to ensure optimal use. Changes in land-use zoning may result in industrial sites being re-zoned for residential, recreational or other developments. Such land-use conversions have not posed any problems so far. In some developed countries, there have been occasions when industrial land had been converted to residential use, and subsequently found to have been contaminated only after the adverse effects on the health of the residents showed up many years later. By that time, it was a bit too late. Currently, owners of industrial land, such as JTC and the Land Office, require their tenants to carry out soil studies and clean up contaminated land before the lands are returned to them. This is done administratively. My Ministry would advise JTC and the Land Office the procedure and standard for soil studies and clean up. This Bill will empower the Minister to make regulations to require that land found to be contaminated will have to be made good before change of use is allowed.”
“Clause 12 provides for the introduction of caps on total emissions of air impurities. Any emission in excess of such caps will be an offence. Clause 12 also allows the Minister to make regulations to control or prohibit emission of air impurities from any other source, eg, motor vehicles. Water Pollution Control (Part V) Part V of the Bill deals with water pollution control and these are covered under clauses 15 to 19. Under clause 15, any person who intends to discharge trade effluent, oil, chemical, sewage or other polluting substances into any drain or land has to obtain a licence. This clause has been strengthened to incorporate the presumption that if there is evidence of any discharge of trade effluent, oil, chemical, sewage or other polluting matters from a premises into a drain or land without a licence, the occupier of the premises shall be guilty of the offence unless he can prove otherwise. Clause 16 requires any occupier to treat such trade effluent before it is discharged. Clause 17 prohibits the discharge of any toxic or hazardous substance into any inland water. Any person who contravenes this provision is liable on the first conviction to a fine not exceeding $50,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both, and on a second or subsequent conviction, to a fine not exceeding $100,000 and imprisonment for a term of not less than 1 month and not more than 12 months. The heavy penalties, including mandatory jail sentence for the second and subsequent convictions, are necessary as any discharge of toxic or hazardous substance into our inland water will not only contaminate our limited water resource, but also endanger the health and lives of our people.”
“My Ministry will continue to step up enforcement action against smoky vehicles in Singapore. This Bill will result in my Ministry taking over from the LTA the responsibility for enforcement against smoky vehicles. The Bill will extend my Ministry's controls over noise from construction sites and other sources. It will empower my Ministry to order construction sites and workplaces that generate excessive noise affecting residential neighbourhoods to stop work if they fail to comply with a notice to take appropriate measures to control noise. My Ministry vets building plans for compliance with pollution control requirements and gives its clearance to the Building Control Division which then issues approval under the Building Control Act. The Bill will include provisions requiring the direct submission of building plans to ENV for pollution control purposes. Major provisions of the EPC Bill Sir, I shall now highlight the major provisions that are being introduced in this Bill. Use of Scheduled Premises (Part III) Scheduled premises are specified in the First Schedule. They are industrial premises which store bulk quantities of hazardous substances or carry out activities that may cause serious air pollution. Clauses 6 to 9 require such premises to be licensed before they can be occupied or used. ENV will impose appropriate conditions in the licence to prevent and control pollution of the environment and to ensure that the hazardous substances are properly managed and controlled. Air Pollution Control (Part IV) Clauses 10 to 14 of the Bill deal with the control of air pollution. Clause 10 requires the occupier of any industrial or trade premises to maintain and efficiently operate any fuel burning equipment and any air pollution control equipment installed in the premises.”
“Putting existing practices into law At present, before major projects such as oil refineries, petrochemical plants and land reclamation are implemented, my Ministry will ask the developer to submit details of pollution control measures and, if necessary, risk assessment studies. We also require installations using hazardous substances to carry out regular safety audits on the safe handling and management of such substances. Industrial premises discharging air pollutants into the atmosphere or trade effluent into the water-course or sewer are required to monitor such discharges, treating them first, where necessary. All these administrative requirements will now be provided for in the EPC Bill and thus, be legally enforceable. The Bill will enable the Ministry to control air pollution from sources other than industrial and commercial premises, such as smoky vehicles. The particulates emitted by diesel-driven vehicles are very fine and a large proportion of them are less than 2.5 micron in size (and these are commonly referred to as PM2.5). Our studies indicate that diesel particulates make up more than 50% of the PM2.5 in our air. Studies in the US and other countries have linked PM2.5 to an increase in respiratory diseases and increased mortality. The studies indicate that it is prudent to keep PM2.5 levels as low as possible in order to protect the health of the population. Poorly-maintained diesel-driven vehicles give off excessive amount of particulates. My Ministry has worked closely with the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and the Traffic Police to take enforcement action against smoky vehicles. Although the proportion of smoky diesel-driven vehicles has gradually reduced over the years, the number has nonetheless remained high.”
“Capping of Emissions of Pollutants from Industries Singapore's industrial landscape has changed significantly over the past 40 years. Today, most of our manufacturing operations are of a world-scale. Many of them handle and discharge chemicals which, if not controlled properly, can pose serious threats to our environment as well as to the health and safety of our people. While the total pollutants emitted into the air today are within safe limits, the amount of pollutants will increase with the continued expansion and growth of our industrial sector in the years ahead. We therefore cannot afford to be complacent, and must ensure that we have adequate and appropriate regulatory powers to deal with any new environmental development. Over the years, my Ministry has tackled pollution problems through regulations made under various Acts. For example, we introduced the Poisons (Hazardous Substances) Rules, 1986 under the Poisons Act and the Environmental Public Health (Control of Noise at Construction Sites) Regulations, 1990 under the Environmental Public Health Act. Such controls will now be consolidated into the EPC Bill. This Bill will also give my Ministry additional powers to control or prohibit the emission of any particular air pollutant from any industrial or trade premises. Engagement of registered inspectors to check completed developments Sir, currently, ENV officers carry out inspections of completed developments to ensure compliance with environmental requirements. To encourage self-regulation, the Bill will provide for the engagement of registered inspectors who are professional architects or engineers to undertake such checks.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The control of environmental pollution is now dealt with under the Clean Air Act (which was enacted in 1971), the Water Pollution Control and Drainage Act (which was enacted in 1975), certain provisions of the Poisons Act and Part VI of the Environmental Public Health Act. To meet new environmental challenges as our economy continues to develop and move up the technology chain, we need to update and consolidate these laws. This will allow us to legislate certain pollution control requirements and practices which are now specified administratively, and add new provisions. The Environmental Pollution Control (EPC) Bill, when passed, will repeal the Clean Air Act (Chapter 45) and Part VI of the Environmental Public Health Act (Chapter 95), with some consequential amendments to the Poisons Act (Chapter 234) and the Medicine (Advertisement and Sale) Act (Chapter 177). Mr Speaker, Sir, in many developing countries, industrialisation is often achieved with little thought for the environment. In actual fact, it is not the environment which is the only victim. Ultimately, the population suffers too, through the ill effects of a polluted environment. In Singapore, the Government has not allowed industry to compromise our environmental standards. We have regulated the emission of pollutants from the various industries, and instituted proper handling procedures for hazardous substances. We require companies to incorporate adequate pollution control facilities in the design and construction of their manufacturing facilities, and monitor to ensure that these are properly operated and maintained.”
“Sir, a survey conducted in 1998 in five Government and Government restructured hospitals showed that there were 27 elderly patients aged 65 years and above, who overstayed for more than a month at the time of the survey. 66% of those who overstayed claimed that family members were unable to or unwilling to look after them at home, and 21% claimed they were staying alone and were unable to look after themselves.”