下午 1:49

徐芳达（交通部长）先生：议长先生，议员们就6月14日发生的漏油事件提出了总共40项国会问题 (PQ)。永续发展与环境部长傅海燕女士、国家发展部长李智陞先生和我将发表部长声明来回答提出的问题。我们的声明将针对今天的议事日程中的第1至27个问题（需要口头答复）和第65至67个问题（需要书面答复），以及已提交后续会议的相关问题。

议长先生，对6月14日发生在我国水域的漏油事故的快速反应，表明了我国各机构、行业合作伙伴和志愿者之间的密切协调与合作。他们配合默契，应对高效，减轻了漏油事件的影响。

我们已经完成了第一阶段的清理行动，包括海上行动。自 6 月 18 日以来，在东海岸和樟宜沿岸（包括樟宜海军基地附近水域），没有发现任何浮油。我们现已进入下一阶段，即更专注于对难以到达的区域进行清理。从受损船只上清除剩余燃油的工作正在进行中。

请允许我按时间顺序，向各位介绍这起事故和已采取的步骤。

Vox Maxima 号 和 Marine Honour 号两艘船于6月14日下午2 时18分相撞。海事及港务管理局（MPA）于下午2 时22分接到通知，其第一艘巡逻艇于11分钟后在下午2时33分抵达事故地点。

在确认有大量燃油泄漏到水中后，巡逻艇向周围地区喷洒了消油剂。喷洒工作必须迅速进行，以便消油剂开始分解油污，从而便于随后在海上和陆地进行清理工作。否则，油污会随着时间的推移而变硬，更难清除。

除了最初的巡逻艇外，海事及港务管理局（MPA）及其承包商还部署了另外11艘船只，在6月14日的响应初期发挥不同的作用。

海事及港务管理局（MPA）还检查了受损船只，以确保其不会沉没、船员安全，并且不会再发生漏油。

随后，海事及港务管理局（MPA）要求承包商之一T&T Salvage Asia公司在受损船只周围铺设重型防油浮栅（heavy-duty containment booms）。T&T 的船只于 6 月 14 日晚上 9 点 41 分抵达事故地点，因为需要几个小时才能将重型设备装载到船上，而驶往事发地点又需要几个小时。 

尽管面临夜间工作和恶劣天气条件的挑战，但T&T公司是通过通宵作业，在受损船只周围铺设了 200 米长的围油浮栅（boom），做得很好。6 月 15 日凌晨 5 时 15 分，围油栏铺设完毕。 

有人问，在等待T&T的船只到达时，为什么海事及港务管理局（MPA）没有立即在其巡逻艇上部署围油浮栅？议长先生，海事及港务管理局（MPA）巡逻艇上的围油浮栅是轻型围油浮栅，适合快速处理小规模和局部漏油，例如加油作业期间的漏油。这些轻型围油浮栅经评估不适合处理 6 月 14 日的漏油事件，该事件是一次更严重的漏油事件，估计有 400 吨燃油突然排入海中。

对于此类漏油事件，巡逻艇将重点喷洒消油剂，并指派承包商在受损船只周围铺设重型围油浮栅，以防船只进一步漏油。

议长先生，这是既定程序，符合处理漏油的国际惯例，巡逻艇上的海事及港务管理局（MPA）响应小组正确遵循了这一程序。

我在上周的联合新闻发布会上已经解释过，在受损船只周围设置围油浮栅的主要目的并不是为了“围住 ”所有溢油。当大量燃油突然泄漏时，如 6 月 14 日发生的那样，漏油不会停留在事发地点。它们会被潮汐和海浪带到其他地方。因此，围油浮栅的作用是作为一种预防措施，以防受损船只发生进一步的漏油事故。

围油栏还可以帮助拦截部分留在事发地点附近而没有漂浮到其他地方的溢油。但这并非百分之百万无一失，因为潮汐和海浪可能会将油带到围油浮栅下方或上方。

除了在受损船只周围铺设围油浮栅，我们还部署了撇油器（oil skimmers）。根据国际油轮船东污染联合会（ITOPF）等行业专家的指导，撇油器（oil skimmers）能最有效地清除大面积、厚重的油斑。

因此，在部署撇油器之前，海事及港务管理局（MPA）及其承包商必须首先确认大片油污的位置。由于多种原因，这项任务极具挑战性。

首先，由于 6 月 14 日下午有雷阵雨，能见度很差，海事及港务管理局（MPA）及其承包商的船只在事故发生后的最初几个小时内无法发现海面上的大面积油斑。

其次，在这种情况下，由于溢油的密度与海水的密度非常接近，浮油可能会沉入水面以下，从而增加了发现的难度。

当夜幕降临时，能见度降低使海事及港务管理局（MPA）及其承包商更难找到溢油的位置。 

在整个应对过程中，海事及港务管理局（MPA）采用了多管齐下的方法，包括使用无人机、卫星图像以及海上船只和地面人员的观察情况，来确认大面积油斑的位置。 

6 月 15 日上午，当发现大片油污时，海事及港务管理局（MPA）部署了撇油器从海中撇取油污。

海事及港务管理局（MPA）及其承包商还在我们的海岸线和海滨有针对性地部署了围油浮栅，以方便清理作业。这种方法确保围油浮栅被放置在最有效的地方。在此回答蔡庆威议员的问题，海事及港务管理局（MPA）在部署围油栏控制泄漏之前，并未优先考虑在某些区域收集油污。

考虑到潜在的环境影响，我们还在生物多样性敏感地区（如乌敏岛的 Chek Jawa 湿地）实施了预防措施。

我们部署了总长约 4,000 米的围油浮栅。在此回答迪舒沙议员的问题，我们的承包商还使用了含有疏水成分的吸油围油浮栅。

我们的清理方法和作业由国际油轮船东污染联合会（ITOPF）的国际专家指导，我们的机构与在应对漏油事故方面有着良好记录的专业公司和承包商密切合作。并与他们合作调遣设备，以确保取得最佳效果，同时考虑到该地区的地理位置、天气条件、盛行风和潮汐条件等因素。

议长先生，一些议员询问了我们与公众沟通的及时性。自 6月14日事故发生之日起，我们的机构就定期提供最新消息。我们的做法是尽快向公众发布相关信息，例如有关空气和水质的信息，同时我们继续在海上和陆地开展行动，以应对不断变化的局势。傅海燕部长、李智陞部长和我还在事故发生后的几天内提供了有关漏油管理和影响的最新信息。请允许我详细说明沟通的时间表。

6 月 14 日下午，海事及港务管理局（MPA）向其他机构通报了漏油事件。接到警报后，各机构动员工作人员积极监测情况，随时准备应对。

当天下午 6 点 03 分，海事及港务管理局（MPA）在继续评估和应对事态发展的同时，通过新闻发布会向公众通报了碰撞和漏油事故。

晚上 9 点 20 分左右，圣淘沙开发公司 (SDC) 开始封锁巴拉湾海滩受影响的部分，因为他们首次发现海滩上有油污。第二天早上 6 月 15 日，大约 7 点，圣淘沙开发公司 (SDC) 发现巴拉湾、西乐索和丹戎海滩的水域油污进一步扩散，封锁了受影响区域并派遣工人开始清理。上午 10 点 59 分，圣淘沙开发公司 (SDC)  在其 Facebook 页面和网站上发布了一篇文章，告知公众，圣淘沙的丹戎、巴拉湾和西乐索海滩水域因清理工作而关闭，但三个海滩仍然开放。

下午 1:44，海事及港务管理局（MPA）通过一份媒体声明通知公众，在巴西班让码头附近和圣淘沙海滩发现了油斑和薄薄的油膜。在海岸线发现油污后，国家环境局 (NEA) 于上午 10:00 左右在拉柏多自然保护区和下午 4:00 左右在东海岸公园开始清理行动。

当天晚些时候，即晚上 7:33，两家机构发布了一份联合媒体声明，告知公众，其他地区的海岸线上也发现了油污，受影响的海滩将关闭以方便清理工作。声明强调，两家机构正在采取行动减轻漏油的影响。

在事件发生的头四天里，海事及港务管理局（MPA）和我们的机构发布了五份媒体声明，让公众了解事件的管理情况，并解决他们可能关心的主要问题。这些媒体声明和其他最新消息也发布在这些机构的社交媒体平台上。

议长先生，事故原因正在调查中，初步显示，事故是由于挖泥船突然失去动力和转向控制而引起的。

有议员问及未来可能采取的防止漏油措施。多年来，我们已采取措施加强船舶和加油作业的安全性，以最大限度地降低我国水域发生事故和漏油的风险。我们还采取了一些措施，例如对船员进行强制性安全培训和船上演习，以应对事故，并对港口内的船只进行检查，以确保遵守国际安全公约。

虽然我们尽最大努力降低风险，但我国水域或本地区仍可能发生漏油事件，不可能完全消除这种风险。因此，我们已做好准备，并随时准备在发生此类事件时迅速、协同、有效地做出反应。

我们与行业合作伙伴合作制定了应急计划，并在每两年一次跨机构漏油演习中演练和改进。我们的标准操作程序 (SOP) 在此过程中得到了完善，这有助于我们有效地应对了此次事件。我们将继续更新和完善我们的标准操作程序和应急计划，从这次事件中吸取教训，并通过培训和定期的跨机构演习，让我们的团队做好准备，有效处理漏油事故。

议长先生，在结束之前，我想再次感谢我们的机构、我们的行业合作伙伴和我们的志愿者的辛勤工作和迄今为止取得的良好进展。为了完成下一阶段的清理工作并减轻漏油的影响，还有更多的工作要做。让我们继续密切合作，以便尽快恢复正常。

议长先生，如果您允许，我将在我的同事发表完声明后，对议员们可能提出的任何澄清做出回应。

1.49 pm

The Minister for Transport (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Mr Speaker, Members have filed a total of 40 Parliamentary Questions (PQs) on the oil spill incident that occurred on 14 June. Minister for Sustainability and the Environment Ms Grace Fu, Minister for National Development Mr Desmond Lee and I will be making Ministerial Statements to address the issues raised. Our Statements will address Question Nos 1 to 27 for oral answer and Question Nos 65 to 67 for written answer, in today’s Order Paper, as well as related questions that have been filed for subsequent Sittings.  

Sir, the quick response to the oil spill which occurred in our waters on 14 June demonstrated the close coordination and collaboration among our agencies, industry partners and volunteers. They worked well together and responded effectively to mitigate the impact of the oil spill.

We have completed the first phase of the clean-up operations, including the operations at sea. Since 18 June, no oil slicks have been observed along East Coast and Changi, including the waters off Changi Naval Base. We have now moved to the next phase, which involves more focused cleaning of difficult-to-reach areas. The removal of the remaining fuel oil from the damaged vessel is ongoing.

Let me provide Members with a chronology of the incident and the steps taken. 

The allision between the vessels Vox Maxima and Marine Honour happened on 14 June at 2.18 pm. The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) was notified at 2.22 pm and its first patrol craft arrived at the incident site 11 minutes later at 2.33 pm. 

Upon confirming that a significant amount of oil had spilled into the water, the patrol craft sprayed dispersantd in the surrounding areas. This needs to be done quickly, so that the dispersantd can start to break down the oil, which will facilitate subsequent cleaning operations at sea and on land. Otherwise, the oil will harden over time and become more difficult to remove.  

Besides the initial patrol vessel, 11 more vessels from MPA and their contractors were deployed to perform different roles during the initial phase of the response on 14 June.  

MPA also checked the damaged vessel to ensure that it would not sink, the crew were safe and there was no further spillage of oil.

MPA then activated T&T Salvage Asia to lay heavy-duty containment booms around the damaged vessel. T&T’s vessel arrived at the incident location at 9.41 pm on 14 June, as it took a few hours to load the vessel with the heavy equipment and another few hours to sail to the incident site.  

Despite the challenges of working at night and under bad weather conditions, T&T did well to deploy 200 metres of oil booms around the damaged vessel by working through the night. The deployment of the oil booms was completed at 5.15 am on 15 June.  

Some have asked why MPA did not immediately deploy the containment booms onboard its patrol vessel while waiting for T&T’s vessel to arrive. Sir, the booms onboard the MPA patrol vessel are lightweight oil containment booms which are suitable for dealing quickly with small-scale and localised oil spills, such as oil leakages during bunkering operations. These lightweight booms were assessed to be unsuitable for dealing with the oil spill incident on 14 June, which was a more serious spill involving the sudden discharge of an estimated 400 tonnes of oil into the sea.

For such spills, the patrol vessel will focus on spraying dispersants and deploy contractors to lay heavy-duty oil containment booms around the damaged vessel as a preventive measure in case there is further spillage of oil from the vessel.  

Sir, this is the established procedure, which is in line with international practices for dealing with oil spills, and the MPA response team on the patrol vessel followed the procedure correctly.  

I had explained during last week’s joint press conference that the main purpose of the containment booms around the damaged vessel was not to “fence in” all the spilled oil. When there is a sudden discharge of a large amount of oil, like what happened on 14 June, the spilled oil will not remain stationary at the incident site. It will be carried by tidal currents and waves to other locations. The containment booms were therefore intended as a preventive measure in case there was further oil spillage from the damaged vessel.

The containment boomd can also help to catch some of the oil spill which remained in the vicinity of the incident location and did not float elsewhere. But this is not 100% foolproof, because the tidal currents and waves can carry the oil to go below or above the booms.

In addition to laying containment booms around the damaged vessel, we also deployed oil skimmers. Based on guidance from industry experts such as the ITOPF, oil skimmers are most effective against large and thick patches of oil.

Hence, before deploying the skimmers, MPA and its contractors had to first confirm the location of the large oil patches. This task was challenging for a number of reasons.  

First, due to thundery showers on 14 June afternoon, visibility was poor and the vessels from MPA and their contractors were not able to spot large patches of oil in the sea in the first few hours after the incident.

Second, as the density of the spilled oil in this case is very close to that of seawater, the oil slicks might have gone below the water surface, making detection harder.

When night fell, the reduced visibility made it even more difficult for MPA and its contractors to locate the spilled oil.  

Throughout its response, MPA used a multi-pronged approach involving drones, satellite imagery and sightings from ships at sea and personnel on the ground to confirm the location of large oil patches.  

In the morning of 15 June, when large oil patches were located, MPA deployed oil skimmers to skim the oil from the sea.  

MPA and its contractors also carried out the targeted deployment of booms along our coastlines and waterfronts to facilitate clean-up operations. This approach ensures the booms are placed where they can be most effective. In response to Mr Louis Chua’s question, MPA did not prioritise oil collection in certain areas before deploying booms to contain the spill.  

Preventive measures were also implemented at biodiversity sensitive areas such as the Chek Jawa Wetlands at Pulau Ubin, given the potential environmental impact.

We have deployed a total of around 4,000 metres of oil containment booms. To Mr Christopher de Souza’s question, our contractors also used absorbent booms with hydrophobic content.  

Our clean-up methods and operations are guided by international experts from ITOPF, and our agencies work closely with specialised companies and contractors who have strong track records in responding to oil spills. We work with them on the deployment of assets to ensure optimal outcomes, taking into account factors such as the geography of the area, weather conditions, prevailing winds and tidal conditions.

Sir, some Members have asked about the timeliness of our communications to the public. Our agencies had provided regular updates from the day of the incident on 14 June. Our approach is to push out relevant information to the public as soon as possible, such as information on air and water quality, while we continue with the operations at sea and on land to deal with an evolving situation. Minister Grace Fu, Minister Desmond Lee and I also provided updates on the management and impact of the oil spill in the days following the incident. Please allow me to elaborate on the communications timeline.

On the afternoon of 14 June, MPA informed the other agencies of the oil spillage. After being alerted, the agencies mobilised their staff to actively monitor the situation and stood ready to respond.  

At 6.03 pm that day, MPA notified the public of the allision and oil spill through a media release while it continued to assess and respond to the developing situation.  

At around 9.20 pm, the Sentosa Development Corporation (SDC) began to cordon off affected parts of Palawan beach, when they first sighted oil on the beach. Early next morning on 15 June at about 7.00 am, SDC observed the further spread of oil in waters at Palawan, Siloso and Tanjong beaches, cordoned off affected areas and deployed workers to commence clean-up. At 10.59 am, SDC published a post on their Facebook page and website to inform the public that the waters of Tanjong, Palawan and Siloso Beach on Sentosa were closed for clean-up operations, but the three beaches remained open.

At 1.44 pm, MPA notified the public via a media statement that patches of oil and light sheens were observed off Pasir Panjang terminal and along Sentosa beaches. The National Environment Agency (NEA) started clean-up operations at about 10.00 am at Labrador Nature Reserve and around 4.00 pm at East Coast Park, after oil was observed along the shorelines.

Later that day, at 7.33 pm, a joint media statement was issued by the agencies to inform the public that oil had also landed along shorelines in other areas and that affected beaches would be closed to facilitate clean-up operations. The statement highlighted that the agencies were taking action to mitigate the effects of the oil spill.

MPA and our agencies had issued five media statements in the first four days of the incident to keep the public informed of the management of the incident and to address key concerns they might have. These media statements and other updates were also posted on the social media platforms of the agencies.

Mr Speaker, investigations into the incident are ongoing and preliminary findings showed that the allision was caused by the dredger experiencing sudden loss of engine and steering controls.

Some Members have asked about possible measures to prevent oil spills in future. Over the years, we have taken steps to enhance the safety of vessels and bunkering operations to minimise the risks of accidents and oil spills in our waters. We have also put in place practices such as mandatory safety training and shipboard drills for vessel crew on incident response as well as inspections for vessels in our port to ensure compliance with international safety conventions.

While we do our best to reduce the risks, oil spills may still happen in our waters or in the region. It is not possible to completely eliminate this risk. Therefore, we have prepared for and maintained our readiness to respond in a prompt, coordinated and effective manner when such incidents occur.

We have worked with industry partners to develop a contingency plan, which we rehearse and refine every two years during our inter-agency exercises for oil spills. Our standard operating procedures (SOPs) were enhanced along the way and they helped us to respond to this incident effectively. We will continue to update and improve our SOPs and contingency plans with learning points from this incident and prepare our teams to deal with oil spills effectively through training and regular inter-agency exercises.

Sir, before I conclude, I would like to, once again, express my appreciation to our agencies, our industry partners and our volunteers for their hard work and the good progress made so far. There is more work ahead to complete the next phase of the clean-up operations and to mitigate the impact of the oil spill. Let us continue to work closely together, so that we can return to normalcy as soon as possible.

Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will respond to any clarifications which Members may have, after my colleagues have made their Statements.