We acknowledge and appreciate the MND and the Urban Redevelopment Authority's (URA) increasingly consultative approach on land-use decisions.

They have shown a willingness to take the views of nature conservationists seriously, as can be seen in the formulation of the Parks and Waterbodies Plan and the decision to shelve a landfill project to save Chek Jawa.

We also understand that it is very difficult to keep all the green areas in Singapore forever green due to the limited supply of available land in the face of increasing development needs.

However, the areas omitted from the URA Master Plan are sites that have been officially identified and designated as nature areas, both in the original Singapore Green Plan and the latest version, which was published last year.

These sites have also been endorsed by the URA Concept Plan Review Focus Group (2000). Their biodiversity value and ecological importance are not in doubt, and their inclusion in the Singapore Green Plan is a reflection of the aspirations of our nation to keep these areas intact.

A tremendous amount of careful planning, consultation and deliberation has gone into the decision-making process behind the Green Plan, involving a broad spectrum of both governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. The results of this great collaborative effort have been endorsed by the larger public through feedback channels.

The final document has also been publicised and disseminated in the United Nations' conferences and other international environmental forums.

It is, therefore, very disturbing that areas which have survived the stringent conditions and criteria that exist in Singapore to become listed in the plan, should subsequently be removed without an equally stringent and consultative approach.

These areas will now not only lack any legal protection but will also be without formal recognition as nature areas with valuable biodiversity worthy of conservation.

Both the Green Plan and the URA Master Plan have stipulated that nature areas should 'remain as they are as long as they are not needed for development'.

We believe that as long as the present Minister for National Development and policy-makers in URA are making the decisions, the phrase 'for as long as possible' is used in good faith and good intention and worth more than empty promises of 'forever' or 'in perpetuity' by persons of lesser credibility.

But ministers change portfolios and civil servants, too, are not in one position forever. How can we be certain that subsequent policy-makers will be as enlightened in their approach to our nature areas?

Our position is that, at this stage, there is no good reason why the above-mentioned sites should have their official status as nature areas dropped or held in abeyance.

The fact that the zones in which they are located fall within the 'reserve' category (marked yellow in the land-use maps) indicates clearly that there are no firm plans for these areas at this stage, at least for the next five to 10 years.

This was confirmed by the National Development Minister when he stated that 'we are not sure if we need these areas in the long term'. Given this situation, they should remain as officially designated nature areas on par with the others.

We are not opposed in principle to the use of designated nature areas to fulfil urgent national needs.

However, such decisions should be made after careful consideration of alternatives, or if that is not possible, to achieve a solution such that biodiversity values need not be completely sacrificed.

We are not clear at this stage as to how the mooted reservoir at Khatib Bongsu is to be constructed.

However, we believe that creative and imaginative planning may allow us to preserve our nature areas at no loss to our national competitiveness, while enhancing our quality of life.

Within the limits of our expertise, we are certainly open to collaboration with the relevant authorities to arrive at win-win solutions to these problems.

Conservationists, too, recognise how valuable and scarce our land is; that is why we wish to play our part in optimising its use for both present and future generations of Singaporeans.

DR GEH MIN
President
Nature Society (Singapore)