By MP for Hougang SMC, Png Eng Huat
[Delivered in Parliament on 17 Feb 2014]
I support the bill but I have some concerns I hope the ministry can address.
Mdm Speaker, I like to first address the new licensing requirements in the Environmental Public Health (Amendment) Bill.
According to NEA, the new licensing regime for the cleaning industry will “incentivize businesses to improve standards and productivity, and also help to enhance the professionalism and image of the cleaning industry.”
In its current state, without the new licensing regime, almost 82 per cent of the population is enjoying a clean environment as reported by the last Town Council Management Report (TCMR). All town councils received a green mark in the area of cleanliness. Even without a 100 per cent trained workforce today, the cleaning companies servicing a large part of Singapore are doing a decent job according to the TCMR.
Is there any study done or proof that by imposing a 100 per cent training compliance licensing requirement in the cleaning industry, standard and productivity will improve?
I am thus concern that the government may be adding a lot more administrative burden on an industry which is already known for cheap-sourcing practices, low wages, limited productivity gain, and high turnover. The focus on getting all workers trained at each licence renewal cycle may take centre stage at the expense of further wage increase and productivity gain.
The new 100 per cent training compliance licensing requirement will increase business cost for cleaning companies. It is costly to get all workers, local and foreign, trained under the Environment Cleaning WSQ (EC WSQ) certification. The training grant for local cleaners is welcome but the bulk of the cost pressure will come from training foreign workers under the new licensing regime. Will Assessment Only Pathway (AOP) be extended to foreign cleaners as well? How much will AOP cost per session per worker? Will the foreign workers be classified as technically skilled after going through EC WSQ? Will the company then enjoy lower levy payment now that its foreign workers are technically skilled after going through EC WSQ?
It is also difficult to maintain a 100 per cent trained workforce in an industry known for high attrition of workers. Local cleaners come and go in this industry. How would a cleaning company ensure all its workers are trained at any one time? If a company were to hire a group of local cleaners prior to renewing their licence, is there enough time to get these workers trained to meet the 100 per cent training compliance requirement? Is NEA going to make AOP readily available to help such companies on short notice?
Looking at these scenarios, I have a few proposals for NEA to consider.
First, I propose to NEA to allow a company with new local hires of less than 3 months to be given a grace period to be trained at the point of renewing its licence. This will not only give the company more time to comply with the training requirement, it will also give the company more time to assess if these new hires are suitable for the job and vice versa. This is to acknowledge the high attrition of cleaners in the industry.
Second, I propose to NEA to exempt part-timers from the 100 per cent training compliance requirement. A cleaning company is in breach of licensing conditions any time it hires untrained part-timers for urgent jobs. This is not a technical breach but a material breach and the company may risk having to pay a fine and having its licence suspended or revoked.
Last, I also notice that the new licensing regime seems to have taken a leaf out of the Clean Mark Accreditation Scheme (CMAS). And for some unknown reason, the new licensing regime not only subsumes the gist of the CMAS, it now makes the scheme compulsory for all companies who wish to acquire the new licence. Does it mean a company now has to go through 2 assessment processes to comply with the new licence conditions?
I would thus propose that companies who have enrolled in the voluntary Enhanced Clean Mark Accreditation Scheme be exempted from the licensing requirement. This scheme is reported to be jointly developed by multi agencies in consultation with industry representatives and Unions. The scheme is comprehensive right down to paying resident cleaners progressive wages and more. Surely any company who volunteers for this scheme is more than qualified to be in the cleaning industry.
There are many unanswered questions in this piece of legislation. I hope the Minister can shed more light on this new licensing regime and provide more clarity for companies in the cleaning industry to move forward.
Next, I support the move to enhance the investigative power given to a police officer or an authorized officer to gather information from any occupier or owner of a flat which may aid in the identification of the alleged offender in cases involving littering from a residential flat.
Littering from a residential flat is beyond just an anti-social behavior, it poses a danger to lives and properties as well. Recently, I have a resident who was a victim of a reckless act committed by his neighbour which thankfully did not result in any serious fire in his house. And the cause of it all was a tiny cigarette butt.
Littering from a residential flat is hard to eradicate and even harder to prosecute due to the great difficulties in acquiring the necessary evidence to prosecute the alleged offender. Many a times, residents, town councils, and even MCSTs are at a loss on how to eradicate such anti-social behavior. I hope this enhancement to the investigative powers of a police officer or authorized officer in cases involving littering from a residential flat will aid the collective effort by all stakeholders to make our living environment safer for all flat dwellers.
In conclusion, the Minister has said we are becoming like a ‘cleaned’ society rather than a ‘clean’ society. So the problems confronting our cleaning industry lie beyond raising standards and productivity. The ministry must embark on a sustained and comprehensive campaign to keep Singapore clean so that our hardworking cleaners will not be overworked and taken advantage of in our clean city.