Gripes about noise fall; NEA to raise cap for Quieter Construction Fund, extend it to 2018

The number of complaints about noise dropped from 16,600 in 2013 to 14,900 last year, new figures from the National Environment Agency (NEA) reveal.

One of the reasons for the fall, said the NEA, is the Quieter Construction Fund (QCF), which will be extended until 2018 and have its funding cap increased.

The QCF was introduced two years ago by the NEA to encourage firms to adopt innovative technology to reduce construction noise. Since its inception, 41 applications have been approved, with grants totalling more than $1.3 million disbursed. It has also helped to reduce the number of violations of noise limits from 483 in 2013 to 330 last year.

The higher cap will benefit firms buying equipment such as the silent piler, which costs about $550,000 more than conventional ones.

“If you are on a site where a contractor has applied for QCF and has already put in place solutions, you will experience a drastic drop and feel the noise level has improved,” said NEA director of pollution control Fong Peng Keong.

From next month, the funding cap for buying quieter equipment will be raised from $50,000 to $150,000 per item. The average grant given to date is $32,000.

NEA chief executive Ronnie Tay said: “We are aware the costs of quieter construction technology and noise-mitigating measures have remained high, and the industry welcomes more funding assistance.”

MA Builders has benefited from the QCF. The firm had more than 20 complaints and was fined while working on a development in Jurong in 2013.

Since successfully applying for a $40,000 grant to buy an $80,000 noise control barrier, which has been installed at a River Valley construction site, it has received fewer than 10 complaints and has not breached the legal noise limits.

“It’s almost impossible to meet the limits in residential areas, where our construction site is only 30m away from other buildings,” said its manager, Mr Kent Ang. “The QCF complements productivity because work will not be stopped for noise violations and there will be no monetary loss through fines.”

domteojy@sph.com.sg

This article was first published on March 24, 2016.
Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories.

Complaints against misleading online ads and those that are offensive doubled last year

The number of complaints and queries about online advertisements doubled last year, as did the figure for adverts that consumers found derogatory.

The Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore (Asas) released its 2015 figures yesterday, showing that it received 272 overall complaints, just one fewer than in 2014 and down from 307 in 2013.

There were 91 complaints about online advertisements last year, up from 45 in 2014.

Some consumers were misled by discounts and rates that turned out to be not as attractive as advertised, while other ads falsely depicted or made questionable claims about certain products.

Asas is now drafting guidelines for digital and social media advertising. It has conducted a public consultation exercise and will finalise the guidelines by the second quarter of this year.

Asas chairman Tan Sze Wee said some retailers hold the mistaken belief that the Singapore Code of Advertising Practice does not apply to their online advertisements and that they are free from the restrictions of traditional media.

“Asas would like to highlight that (the code) applies to advertisements in all media, including electronic communications and websites,” Professor Tan said.

“The key premise of (the code) is that all advertisements must be legal, decent, truthful and honest.”

He added that the spike in such feedback may have been due to consumers spending more time on their mobile devices.

There are also more advertisements on websites, social media channels and e-mail, as more businesses venture online.

Last year, there were 13 complaints about derogatory advertisements, up from six in 2014.

They included an ad put up by eatery OverEasy Orchard at Liat Towers in Orchard Road that featured three scantily clad women exposing their buttocks and the tagline: “Seriously sexy buns. Two are better than one. Smack that.”

Asas received four complaints saying that the advert was sexist, and ordered it to be taken down.

Other feedback that Asas received involved imagery and depictions that people felt were derogatory towards their own ethnic groups.

Meanwhile, the beauty, hair and slimming industries received the most flak for their ads, followed by the food and beverage, health, finance, and travel industries.

Besides getting businesses to take down or amend ads, Asas can ask media owners, such as Singapore Press Holdings and the Association of Media Owners (Singapore), which sit on the Asas council, to withhold advertising space from those that repeatedly engage in unethical advertising.

mellinjm@sph.com.sg

This article was first published on March 24, 2016.
Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories.

Security has been beefed up at Changi Airport and other Singapore checkpoints, following Tuesday’s blasts at Brussels Airport and a city metro station that killed 31 people and wounded 270.

The authorities here have also stepped up checks and patrols at key transport nodes, a Ministry of Home Affairs spokesman told The Straits Times yesterday. “We will calibrate security measures according to the threat environment,” he said. No further details about the improved security were provided.

Mr Christopher de Souza, Government Parliamentary Committee chairman for Home Affairs and Law, said: “Heightened security at land, sea and air checkpoints must be expected. We must mentally prepare ourselves with a ‘when’ mindset and discard the comfortable ‘if’ mindset.” He was echoing a point made last Friday by Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam, who announced a major ramp-up of counter-terrorism measures.

Speaking at an event in Yishun yesterday, Mr Shanmugam said the threat of a terror attack has evolved significantly into “a serious monster”. “Brussels was in a heightened state of alert and yet the attack took place,” he said. “We have to prepare ourselves, and I think every major city has got to prepare itself. There are measures in place, but I again emphasise that unless you turn the entire city into a prison, it’s not going to be possible to counter every possible attack.”

Singapore will strengthen its security, such as by installing more closed-circuit television cameras in public places and training emergency response teams to react swiftly to attacks. There is also a need for building owners and event organisers to impose stringent security measures.

One measure suggested in the wake of Tuesday’s attacks is screening all passengers and visitors before they enter airports. However, experts say this is unnecessary and would cause congestion.

They also ruled out measures used in other countries. At major Indian airports, for example, only travellers are allowed to enter terminals, while in Israel, checks are carried out as early as along approach roads to the airport.

Mr H.R. Mohandas, head of the diploma in aviation management programme at Republic Polytechnic, said: “Adequate steps are in place at Changi Airport with security patrols in the public areas, as well as checks on passengers before they enter the restricted areas.”

Singapore Management University Assistant Professor Terence Fan, who specialises in transport, said keeping people away goes against efforts to market the airport as a shopping and dining haven.

Professor Rohan Gunaratna, who heads the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research, said youth and other vulnerable people should be encouraged to take up roles in youth or community groups, to give them a stake in the country’s security.

karam@sph.com.sg
calyang@sph.com.sg

Additional reporting by Ng Huiwen

This article was first published on March 24, 2016.
Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories.