Here’s a template that can be customised to your respective situations when writing to your MP on residential secondhand smoke: 

Paragraph 1: Introduction and acknowledgement

Start by introducing yourself as a constituent of xxx SMC/GRC and some demographics like a father/mother of yy children. It is worthwhile to acknowledge your MP’s work and contributions in your constituency.

Paragraph 2: Describe how neighbour’s secondhand smoke has affected you

Tell your MP how many smoker neighbours you have on your floor and/or upstairs and/or downstairs, how often their smoke drifts into your home, how the smoke has impacted your family’s physical and mental health (eg. anxiety in rushing to close windows). Better yet, attach a log of smoke drift documented by date, time, location.

Paragraph 3: How you have tried to resolve the smoke problem to no avail

Tell your MP if you have tried speaking to your smoker neighbour(s) and how that turned out (eg. smokers claim their right to smoke whenever they want since it is not against the law to smoke at home, it has led to retaliation etc), if you have feedback to NEA/HDB/Town Council/MCST and how that turned out, whether you have tried applying for mediation via CMC but neighbour failed to show up as it is voluntary.

Paragraph 4: Appeal for MP to support deterrence against smoke drift in homes

Former Health Minister Gan Kim Yong acknowledged that “there is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure according to the World Health Organisation.” And that there are no air filters that can effectively remove toxic substances in cigarette smoke.  

Tell your MP that you are disappointed with existing policies that are “pro-smoking” and anti-health as they fail to protect non-smokers from neighbour’s toxic secondhand smoke. Point to the tray return at food centres legislation as proof that only laws can result in behavioural change.

It is erroneous to state that regulating smoking in homes is “highly intrusive and ignores smokers’ right to do what they want within the privacy of their homes." as there is no right to smoke in any international human rights laws while the right to a healthy environment and other rights to protection from exposure to tobacco smoke are found in numerous international human rights laws (WHO).  

Double standards are also applied here. Why is prohibition of smoking by balconies and windows considered "highly intrusive" while deadly secondhand smoke discharge into our homes isn’t?

Ending paragraph: Count on your MP to speak up in Parliament

Tell your MP that you voted for him/her at the last election and count on him/her to speak up in Parliament to safeguard the health of millions of non-smokers in Singapore, numbering almost 90%, according to the 2020 smoking rate of 10.1%.