Sand ban 'won't have big impact on construction or economy'

The Straits Times, February 13, 2007


SINGAPORE on Monday made plain that it could not understand Indonesia's decision to ban sand exports, but also made clear it was not about to be overcome by the setback.

Responding to Indonesian claims that sand mining affects its maritime boundaries, Foreign Minister George Yeo said it was not clear how the mining of either land or sea sand would do so.

Land sand, such as the sort exported to Singapore for construction, came from inland areas far from Indonesia's island borders.

As for sea sand mining, Indonesia fully controlled such operations. In any case, it barred exports of sea sand from Feb 2003, and Singapore has not used any for land reclamation since then.

Said Mr Yeo: 'It is not at all clear how the mining of sea sand in the seas off the outer islands of Indonesia could have an impact on the maritime boundary between our two countries.'

As for the impact of the sand ban on Singapore, National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan painted a picture of the construction sector going about its business as usual one week after the ban.

Indonesia's decision last week to ban land sand exports was a hot topic in Parliament, with nine MPs quizzing the two ministers on the issue.

Mr Yeo noted that sea boundaries between Indonesia and Singapore were settled under a 1973 agreement.

With Malaysia, existing boundaries were settled by a 1995 agreement 'to delimit precisely the territorial waters boundary in accordance with the Straits Settlements and Johor Territorial Waters Agreement 1927'.

Added Mr Yeo: ' Our reclamation works which are conducted within Singapore's territorial waters cannot affect these two agreements in the demarcated boundaries.'

As for Indonesia's claim that environmental concerns were a reason for the sand ban, Mr Mah said: 'We have already expressed our willingness to cooperate and work with them to see how we can further address these concerns. However, this offer was not taken up and obviously we're still prepared to do so.'

MP Irene Ng noted that 'some quarters' in Indonesia had linked the land sand ban to ongoing talks on border and extradition treaty issues, and asked if Indonesia was using sand as a 'pressure point' in negotiations.

Mr Yeo referred to a Jakarta Post article on Feb 3, which had quoted chief executive of the Indonesian Maritime Security Coordinating Board Vice-Admiral Djoko Sumaryano on the issue, and said: 'Such a linkage, if true, would be unfortunate and counter-productive.

'Our border limitation talks are complicated enough and if there's an additional linkage, it will only make the talks more difficult.'

MP Ho Geok Choo asked if 'politics of envy' was a factor in Indonesia's ban, to which Mr Yeo said: 'It is not for us to comment on the domestic politics of countries in the region.

'But our policy - and it is a steadfast one - is to have good relations with them and to build those relations on the basis of mutual benefit.'

Asked how the construction industry was responding to the sand ban, Mr Mah said it was coping well.

Since Feb 1, the Government has released sand from its stockpile to stabilise supply. Alternative sources are also available, and several shipments have arrived.

Higher sand cost will add about 1 to 3 per cent to construction cost, which works out to a 'manageable' rise of about 1 per cent in the cost of the total development.

The industry has more incentive now to switch to methods using steel, dry walls, glass and metal claddings, which cut land sand use by 60 to 70 per cent.

Noting that 'critical projects' like the integrated resorts, public housing and infrastructure works are all going on, Mr Mah said:

'I am confident that with the cooperation of the industry, we will successfully implement these measures, so that the Indonesian ban on land sand export will not have any significant impact on our construction activities and our economy.'