Feedback participants ask why Budget 2008 exclude disabled, green issues

Channel NewsAsia 20 Feb 08;

SINGAPORE : Participants at a feedback session on Tuesday questioned why there are no major announcements on environmental issues in this year's Budget.

But Minister of State for Finance and Transport Lim Hwee Hua said this does not imply that the government has little interest on this topic.

Mrs Lim made this point at an internet dialogue on the Budget which involved 33 participants consisting of students, professionals and businessmen aged 16 to 68.

She highlighted the work of the recently-formed inter-ministerial committee as a platform for green issues.

During the e-Townhall, some participants also talked about the cost of daily expenses and how monetary handouts are being assessed.

Some asked why the type of housing is being used. But the Vice-Chairman of REACH, Dr Mohamad Maliki Osman, who co-chaired the event, pointed out that besides the type of housing, assessment is also made using the size of income.

Others wanted to know why the handicap seemed to be left out during the Budget announcement.

But Mrs Lim pointed out that different ministries are looking after different issues affecting the disabled, including education and transport matters.

And this is because the handicap or elderly do not belong to any one particular ministry.

Mrs Lim said: "The fact that certain topics are not included in any particular year's Budget does not mean that they are forgotten or they are of lesser importance. They will continue to be reviewed and when there are substantive tax changes or policy changes or incentives to be provided, then they would be included in the Budget. So the Budget is just one point in the whole timeline in any ministries' works." - CNA/de

A green way round rising costs
Do more to encourage energy-efficient practices, urges business community
Sheralyn Tay and Cheow Xin Yi, Today Online 21 Feb 08;

BUDGET 2008 may mean different things to different people. But for some in the business community, it is noted for its silence on the green front.

Several panellists at a seminar to analyse the Budget's impact on businesses here expressed disappointment that it failed to even mention the word "green".

One, Mr Phillip Overmyer, said that simple measures — such as providing tax incentives for companies remodelling or building new facilities to install equipment and fixtures that are energy efficient — would have made for a good start towards a greener Budget.

Mr Overmyer, chief executive of the Singapore International Chamber of Commerce, was among the five speakers who took part in a panel discussion at the seminar organised by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC).

PwC tax partner David Sandison added: "I think Singapore has possibly missed an opportunity in the wake of the Bali conference on climate change to come out with something world-leading because it's one of the highest consumers of energy per capita in the world."

At a post-Budget Internet dialogue on Tuesday, Minister of State for Finance and Transport Lim Hwee Hua said the lack of green incentives in the Budget did not imply that the Government had little interest in the area.

Indeed, in recent years, much progress has been made to put green issues — especially energy efficiency — on the national agenda.

The slew of green initiatives that have been introduced includes the Green Mark, a scheme that recognises buildings for environmental sustainability. However, there are also those who believe that Singapore could go much further in its attempts to embrace green energy in a big way.

For example, Singapore may want to consider feed-in tariffs (FITs) as a means of promoting the use of green energy, said Mr Stefan Mueller, managing director of Conergy Asia Pacific in Singapore, the regional headquarters for the German-based company that specialises in renewable energy solutions.

Countries which promote FITs have laws that require utilities companies to buy green energy back from households, companies or organisations that generate it — at a higher market rate to help offset the investment costs. In other words, by installing a renewable energy solution to a house or a commercial building, the owner not only saves money but also stands to make some — always a great way to promote a new initiative.

According to Mr Mueller, some 40 countries, including Germany, South Korea and Spain, have benefited from FITs.

In response to Today's queries, the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) noted that the FIT scheme has several drawbacks. It may distort "the playing field" between the various energy options, and homeowners may face higher electricity bills.

According to a white paper by the World Future Council, a non-governmental organisation, FITs help accelerate the switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy by making the latter more economically viable.

For example, solar-derived electricity is currently two to three times more expensive than electricity tariffs for households in Singapore. But the more people adopt renewable energy solutions, the cheaper the technology is likely to be.

According to Mr Mueller, since 1990, Germany's FIT structure has created 214,000 jobs and saved 97 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions in 2006 and at a cost of about US$2 ($2.80) more per household per month.

"Looking at green energy regulations and incentives that have been implemented elsewhere, perhaps this is one area in which Singapore is falling behind," Mr Mueller said.

For example, more needs to be done to encourage the use of Photovoltaic (PV) technology — systems that generate electricity from sunlight, Mr Mueller said. In tropical Singapore, PV is the most viable renewable energy option, compared to wind or water.

The few PV systems here are a "recent occurrence", said the Building and Construction Authority (BCA). They have been installed in several educational institutions as well as the BCA Academy and Biopolis.

Mr Howard Shaw, executive director of the Singapore Environment Council, also believes the FIT system could be a "good addition" to the country's overall renewable energy infrastructure.

"The idea is that a home that generates any access energy can sell it back to the grid essentially means that your electricity meter could move backwards or run slower," he said.

But while the FIT energy model may have worked well in several countries, the Government "has chosen not to adopt FIT currently" because of several drawbacks, said the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI).

"By acting as an implicit subsidy, FIT for solar power essentially distorts the playing field among the various energy options and could possibly result in a sub-optimal allocation of resources," said an MTI spokesperson. "Unless there are clear signs of market failure, we do not think it is desirable for the Government to subsidise one energy source over another."

The MTI also added that FITs result in higher electricity prices as the FIT premium used to cross-subsidise renewable energy will have to be borne by all consumers, households and businesses alike.

"In some cases, FIT rates could end up being as much as two to three times higher than the electricity tariffs generated through conventional means," the spokesperson said.

But the MTI stressed that the Government is not dismissing solar power.