1 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what lessons are learnt from the recent exit of UN Women from Singapore after 20 years of operations; (b) whether it is timely to review the 80:20 fundraising rule for charities given the global and interconnected nature of issues confronting societies; and (c) what efforts are being made to promote regional and international philanthropy
\tThe Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Speaker, the closure of the local chapter of UN Women is an internal decision by the board and members of the society.
The 80:20 fund-raising rule under the Charities Act, requires at least 80% of funds raised for foreign charitable purposes be applied towards charitable purposes in Singapore. This is to ensure that donations from our Singapore public are used primarily to benefit locals and to address local needs. The Commissioner of Charities can and does waive this 80:20 rule on a case-by-case basis, such as for fund-raising for immediate disaster relief in other countries.
Ms Ong is right that globalisation and connectivity ties the fortunes of countries together, and many solutions to global issues require collective action from all countries. The Government, through the Economic Development Board, engages and develops a robust eco-system of Non-Profit Organisations (NPOs), including international organisations dedicated to philanthropy. This includes organisations such as the Asia Venture Philanthropy Network (AVPN) and the Asia Philanthropy Circle (APC) – which use Singapore as a venue to convene, share best practices and form partnerships to address global issues.
To support cross-border giving, the International Involvement Hub (I2Hub) was launched in 2013. Comprising the Singapore Institute of International Affairs (SIIA), the Singapore International Foundation (SIF), the Singapore Red Cross Society (SRCS) and family of Temasek Foundations (TF), it provides opportunities for the Singapore community to contribute towards and participate in social, relief and community development initiatives in communities outside Singapore.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Ong.
\tMs Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister for her comprehensive response. I should also declare that I was formerly a board member of UN Women when it was known as UNIFEM. May I know from the Minister if she thinks we should also look into supporting some of the local charities and non-profits that could be ready to go overseas so that we can develop deeper skills and also expand SG Cares' vision beyond our shores?
\tMs Grace Fu Hai Yien: I would like to thank the Member for the supplementary question. I would like to commend her for always being passionate about championing social causes. Indeed, SG Cares wants to develop that as a movement so that Singaporeans feel that they are engaged and involved in issues confronting Singapore.
As to whether we will like to see our local charities moving offshore, we do it in many ways. As I had mentioned in my answer earlier on, if there are charities who are going to be involved in very meaningful causes, such as in disaster relief or in some other purpose that is important of that time, we are prepared to grant exemptions.
Similarly, we have also the structure to support visions such as Ms Ong's. I mentioned in my speech earlier on about how this is a collaboration between various organisations in Singapore, including some of the important and critical NPOs.
Besides just supporting charities, I would also like to give a special mention to the very good work that many of our youths are doing. Even where, without a presence of charities outside Singapore, they have been able to do very good work, helping with local communities in the region.
This is where, I think, we are planting the seeds and we hope that more will think like Ms Ong – interested and prepared to invest their time and resources in social causes that confront us and the region.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Steps to Avoid Discrimination on Basis of Descent for Primary School Admission","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"2 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Education what steps are taken to avoid discrimination on the basis of descent in our Primary school admission system which gives preference to children of alumni, given that Article 16(1)(a) of our Constitution provides that \"there shall be no discrimination against any citizen of Singapore on the grounds only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in the administration of any educational institution maintained by a public authority, and, in particular, the admission of pupils...\".
\tThe Second Minister for Education (Ms Indranee Rajah) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, the Member has referred to the Constitution of Singapore in her question. The Constitution provides that there shall be no discrimination against any Singaporean Citizens on the grounds of race, religion, descent and place of birth for the admission of pupils in national schools.
Hence, all our schools are secular and no school will deny the admission of any Singaporean child due to the factors stated in the Constitution. Our Primary 1 admission system seeks to be as open and fair as possible. But when the number of students applying to a school exceeds the number of available places, we need a system of selection.
Since there are no examination results to look at for P1 admission, we have to consider other factors. These include proximity to the school and siblings already in the school, for the convenience of parents and children, children of alumni who have a strong attachment to the school and wish their children to have a similar experience as they did, members of organisations who set up and still legally own the school, active volunteerism in the school or community and students of the MOE Kindergarten in the Primary school. Admitting students with no prior connections with the school is also an objective, and we reserve places for such students.
These are all valid justifications for some level of priority admission. It is common for MOE to receive arguments from one group on why the other group is less deserving. On our end, MOE seeks to strike a balance. That is a complicated legacy we live with, but where possible, we will take steps to lean towards making schools more open and accessible to students who have no prior connections with the school.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Delinking Childcare Subsidies from Mother's Employment Status","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"3 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry intends to delink the eligibility criteria of childcare subsidies from the mother's employment status and, if no, what is the rationale keeping employment status as a criterion.
\tThe Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, all parents, regardless of their working status, are supported with basic subsidies for childcare for their Singapore Citizen children. As working mothers need childcare while they are at work, the Government provides them with higher basic subsidies, as well as means-tested additional subsidies, if eligible. The mother's working status is thus a criterion for higher subsidies.
Notwithstanding this, the Government does exercise flexibility where the mother is unable to work and yet requires childcare services. ECDA is planning to provide better subsidy support, especially for low-income families and will announce details at MSF's Committee of Supply.
Non-working mothers who do not require full-day childcare can enrol their children in half-day kindergartens, which are shorter and often more affordable than full-day childcare programmes. There is, of course, KiFAS, which does not depend on working mother status. Families with children enrolled in kindergartens run by Anchor Operators and MOE may be eligible for means-tested kindergarten subsidies – as I said, KiFAS – which do not depend on the mother’s working status.
So, I urge the Member to wait another day or two.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Anthea Ong.
\tMs Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister for the response. Could I just ask, especially given that we are celebrating women this month, is there a reason why we only specify and link this eligibility criterion to the mother's employment, and not the father's?
\tMr Desmond Lee: The subsidy was intended to support mothers who go to work. And the way to encourage them to return to the labour market, if they wish; and if they do, then, they can be assured that childcare will be supported.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Resilience of Singapore's Economy and Supply Chain","subTitle":"In light of COVID-19","sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Trade and Industry how resilient is Singapore's economy and supply chain in the face of crises such as the COVID-19 outbreak.
5 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether, as part of economic defence, the Government has considered nurturing a certain amount of domestic manufacturing capacity for critical necessities in product categories like medical disposables.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Chee Hong Tat) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 4 and 5 together?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Thank you, Sir. The COVID-19 outbreak has adversely affected Singapore's economy. It has led to a sharp fall in tourist arrivals and a decline in domestic consumption, which have in turn badly affected our tourism, transport, retail and F&B sectors. The disruption in economic activities in China is also expected to negatively affect export-oriented sectors such as manufacturing and wholesale trade.
Singapore is a small and open economy. The COVID-19 outbreak is a reminder of how unexpected external shocks can have a significant economic impact on us. To improve our resilience to such shocks, a key strategy that the Government pursues is economic diversification. This entails the diversification of our economic structure, our markets and our supply sources.
First, we have diversified our economic structure across different sectors. For example, we kept the manufacturing sector at 20% of the economy and developed a range of clusters within the sector. We have also kept our services sector diversified, growing modern services like information and communications, alongside trade-related ones like wholesale trade.
Hence, even though the COVID-19 outbreak is expected to significantly affect the tourism and transport sectors, other sectors such as construction, and information and communications are projected to continue to grow and support our overall economy.
Second, we have diversified our export markets to enhance our resilience to market-specific shocks and downturns. We have expanded our network of free trade agreements to give our companies access to a wide range of markets. In this way, we are plugged into growth markets, without being overly reliant on any single market for our exports. No single economy accounted for more than 15% of our domestic exports in 2019.
Third, our economic agencies work closely with companies to diversify the sources of supply for materials, manpower and food.
Our companies’ supply chains have been put to the test in recent weeks due to disruptions in China’s industrial activity. While the impact varies from business to business, companies have indicated that they are generally able to cope with the disruptions because they have existing inventories or alternative suppliers. Most companies have also been able to manage the manpower disruptions arising from the travel restrictions and quarantine measures implemented in China and Singapore to contain the spread of the virus.
As for food supplies, we have not seen significant disruptions arising from the situation in China, due to our effort to buy from different sources over the years. The Government also retains some domestic supply of critical necessities to mitigate any overseas supply disruptions. For instance, we stockpile rice, personal protective equipment and pharmaceuticals during peacetime, and we also have local manufacturing capabilities for other items such as noodles and masks.
Overall, our strategy of economic diversification has helped to enhance the resilience of our economy in times of crises, such as right now, during the current COVID-19 outbreak. MTI will continue to work with our businesses to improve the resilience of our supply chains by buying our inputs and essential supplies from different countries, and building up local production capacity where possible and where it makes economic sense.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Tin Pei Ling.
\tMs Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State. I have two questions. Firstly, in the nearer term, we see the COVID-19 expected to be on a more prolonged basis and we see other countries also experiencing runs on some of the essential supplies for their populations. So, even though for now, we are able to cope with the supplies such as groceries, but with the other countries also experiencing it, how will this affect our current supplies?
The second question is that in the longer term, we are looking at diversifying our economy, reducing our dependence on a single-source country – I would think that in this case, it is China – but for many of the products that may have many layers of processing, other countries are still highly dependent on this single-source country. So, as we diversify, how likely are we able to succeed in this endeavour, given that it also depends on the other countries and their responses as well?
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Sir, Ms Tin's first question on supplies, we are looking at all the key essential supplies, making sure that we have sufficient diversity in our supply sources. That is the best way to deal with this situation. We cannot quite control what is happening in other countries.
There is no global shortage of food supplies, for example. There is still enough. In certain places, they do have panic buying that have resulted in some of the situations that the Member has described. But we are confident that if we look at our overall situation – a combination of stockpile of essential items plus diversified supply sources – I think we will be okay.
The main thing is that for our situation domestically, we must also keep calm and do not have panic buying. Because no matter how much you stockpile and how diversified your supply sources are, if there is panic buying, no amount of stockpile will be enough. So, that is one of the key things to be able to deal with this situation. It is to stay calm, buy what you need, but do not panic and there will be enough for everybody.
The second thing we need to do is to make sure that in certain critical areas, we are able to also advise people on the proper usage of the various supplies, for example, masks. Like other countries, WHO, the US, the UK and recently, France as well, the governments and health authorities have advised the population that you only need to wear masks if you are unwell. Otherwise, personal hygiene, especially hand hygiene, is still the most important.
Therefore, by doing this, you are able to prioritise the use of mask for healthcare workers, for patients, for frontline workers, the people who need it most. This is the best way to keep the whole community safe, collectively. So, that is what we have been doing in Singapore as well; consistent with the practices, as advised by WHO and by many of these other jurisdictions.
Ms Tin's second question is about supply chain, and I think if I understand the Member correctly, she is saying that a lot of countries today are linked to certain supply sources like China. So, whether it is directly or indirectly, the supply chains are interconnected.
This is definitely true because we are in a global economy, and no country can be totally isolated when it comes to its supply chains, its market. But it is an issue of to what degree is your exposure. For example, we take tourists. For Singapore, 20% of our tourists come from China. Yes, it is a sizeable group, it is our largest group of tourists. But we are, compared to some other countries, still better off because some of them have 50%, 60% or even higher. So, it is a matter of degree.
I do not think it is possible to be completely delinked from any major economy in the current environment. So, definitely when something happens in one of the major economies – could be China, could be somebody else – there will definitely be an impact on Singapore. But it is how we manage it by having a sufficiently diversified set of supply sources and markets, that will help us to be able to ride through these ups and downs in a more robust and resilient manner.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not sure I have heard the Senior Minister of State answering Question No 5. Could I ask him to answer Question No 5 again?
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Sir, I have answered Question No 5.
Mr Speaker: Mr Seah Kian Peng. Oh, Mr Dennis Tan, would you like to follow-up?
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Could I clarify with the Senior Minister of State, is the Government going to consider nurturing a certain amount of domestic manufacturing capacity for critical necessities in products like medical disposables?
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Sir, as I said, I have answered Question No 5 earlier. I think if Mr Dennis Tan had listened carefully, I did talk about the domestic production capacity for essential items and also stockpile.
Mr Speaker: Mr Seah Kian Peng.
\tMr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Mr Speaker, I will just like ask the Senior Minister of State, whether given the current COVID-19 situation, we recognise that indeed food supplies is something that is very important and very critical. We have our plans for 30-30. I think that is ambitious plan, but given what has happened, my question to the Senior Minister of State is whether the Government should review this 30-30 plan, that maybe it should be a 30-25 plan, for example. In fact, 30-30 is already very ambitious, but in the current COVID-19 situation, as it has borne out, I think the importance of building up some local supplies become even more critical. So, perhaps we should do a review and see in what way we could accelerate the bringing forward of the timeline.
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Sir, I thank Mr Seah for his question. As he correctly pointed out, 30-30 is already a very ambitious vision. It is a stretch target. And we certainly want to work towards that; not so much because we are focused on one number but it is really about resilience. It is really about having diversified sources of supplies, including local production. But I think, Mr Seah being in the retail business would be very familiar, that it is not possible for us to be self-sufficient in many items.
So, in addition to local production, which is one of the strategies, the other important strategy is to be able to diversify our import markets so that we are able to import from a wide range of countries, a wide range of different suppliers.
[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [4th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [3 March 2020], (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\" – [Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Ms Rahayu Mahzam.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): In recent years, there has been greater support for students with special needs in mainstream schools. For one, schools are equipped with allied educators who can provide more specialised support. There are also professional development opportunities for teachers to acquire deeper knowledge and skills in attending to students with different needs.
There are some areas which schools could continue to work on, including helping neuro-typical students understand people with different abilities. This could help with normalising differences, reducing occurrences of discrimination or even bullying. There could also be more extensive support in transitioning students through different milestones in their educational journey by creating an ecosystem and support network with teachers, parents, therapists and people in the community.
Having well-trained staff that truly believe in the cause, is key to the quality of support for students with different needs. Can MOE provide an update as well as more information on how it intends to equip educators in mainstream schools with the capabilities and strategies to better support students with special needs?
Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Sir, we have good schemes such as the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme and the School Meals Programme to help ease some of the financial burden faced by some of our students.
However, I believe that more can be done to ensure that all our children are given a good start in life. In a recent house visit, I saw two boys standing on the kitchen counter-top and another running around and their great grandmother chased him with a cane. The great grandparents in their late 70s are caring for three boys, age eight, nine and 10. The father has left the family and their mother is a Grab driver. She could not afford much time for them. The seniors told me that it has been difficult as the boys get into disciplinary issues in schools and after-school care. How can the UPLIFT programme identify students and families who need help?
Can the Minister provide an update on our UPLIFT efforts, including how MOE is strengthening after-school support and counselling support to tackle the challenges faced by disadvantaged students. What are the efforts to reduce long term absenteeism and drop out numbers, and have the statistics improved over the past five years?
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Sir, recently, I met a PE teacher from a school that participates in the UPLIFT programme. He shared that there were occasions where his students did not attend regular classes but would make the time to attend his soccer training sessions instead. Ordinarily, such students would have been barred from taking part in CCA, but what was done here was different and, in my view, \"uplifting\".
The teacher used the contact time during the training sessions to develop deeper relations with the students and encourage them to improve their class attendance. This changed approach appears to have worked. Quite clearly, though, a lot of effort has to be put in to change the mindset of the students and, on some occasions, their parents too.
May I please ask the hon Minister what are the main problems her colleagues face in the task of ensuring these students under the purview of UPLIFT reach their true potential? What strategies have she and her colleagues identified to overcome these problems? How can we motivate these students to stay the course and how can the rest of the society help?
Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Chairman, there are many ground-up initiatives in the community to support children from underprivileged families. In Jurong, for example, we have stepped up our efforts over the years. Two years ago, we started the Jurong Central Student Assistance Scheme or SAS, that helps students from families that receive financial assistance from the Social Service Office. We provide $40 to $50 vouchers per month for each student when they to join SAS with parental consent.
These students are mentored by trained volunteers in the areas of life skills, social skills and leadership skills. If these students are underperforming in their academic studies, we will provide them with free tuition. To-date, 50 students from more than 30 families have benefited from the scheme for the last 20 months. We have managed to get two donors to donate more than $250,000 over five years. We hope to share and scale this scheme.
This is why I was excited to hear about the UPLIFT Community Pilots started by MOE. My experience working with the SAS recipients has shown me that it is not enough to provide financial assistance to students from disadvantaged families. We need to dive deep and understand the needs of the students and families, and provide necessary support like mentorship, so as to monitor, guide and to encourage the students to be the best persons they can be.
I believe MOE's UPLIFT efforts are also in the same spirit, with the aim of providing support holistically to children and families in need. To do so, it is important for us to strengthen and coordinate our efforts across agencies and community partners for these students.
As more than a year has passed since UPLIFT was first announced, I would like to ask MOE for the progress update. Moving forward, how does MOE plan to link up UPLIFT efforts with community initiatives like SAS, so that we can partner the Government to better help those students in need?
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Mr Chairman, last year, the Ministry announced major structural changes to the education system, including the implementation of Full Subject-based Banding in our Secondary schools by 2024.
MOE's efforts are to reduce the overemphasis on academic grades, and help students build confidence and develop a motivation to learn for life. This is a right move. Education is a team effort involving not just the schools, but also parents, teachers, and the community, so that students can develop to their fullest potential.
MOE has made many changes in recent years to work more closely with the community.
Last year, a set of guidelines for meaningful school-home co-operation was released, so parents and schools can work together to enhance children's development. Interestingly, many of the guidelines encourage more \"hands-off\" parenting. Parents are encouraged to create conducive environments and let their child develop a sense of responsibility, instead of always breaking their fall.
I would like to ask the Minister – have schools noticed a difference after the guidelines were released? If not, what else needs to be done and if yes, what positive signs have we seen? Character building, learning to learn, becoming a better person – all these are much more challenging than scoring straight As.
To take this forward, MOE should build strong partnerships with parents, industry partners, and the community to develop the values, dispositions and skills that will place our students in good stead for the future.
Would the Minister be able to also share details and examples of how we are working closely with our stakeholders to ensure that our students develop the right values, skills and dispositions so that they are future- ready?
Miss Cheng Li Hui: Sir, when we talk about education, we are not merely referring to the teachers and schools, or even exams and subjects. It consists of an interrelated group of key stakeholders comprising of teachers, schools, parents and the wider community, so that together they strive to allow our students to develop holistically to their fullest potential.
I am heartened that MOE has made many good changes in recent years to work more closely with the community and to build stronger partnerships. For example, last year, they built up upgrading opportunities for our ITE graduates. There is also enhanced support for disadvantaged students through community partnerships and after-school support.
Looking ahead, how does MOE intend to build strong partnerships with parents, industry partners and the community to develop the values, dispositions and skills that will place our students in good stead for the future?
The Chairman: Minister Ong Ye Kung.
The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Chairman, Sir, let me start with Ms Denise Phua's question. Ms Phua asked if MOE has a transformation map. Two years ago, we launched something like that. We launched a reform movement of the education system and we called it \"Learn for Life\". But Members are probably not very familiar with it because we did not launch everything we want to do with a big bang, so no big headlines. Instead, we paced out the announcement of each thrust of the movement, adopted multi-year implementation plans, so that schools, parents and students can fully understand the changes and can adapt to these.
Today, let me do three things. One, I will give a short update on what we have done so far. Two, I will talk about the new things we are doing – yes, we are doing some new things. Three, I will tie them altogether.
Let us start with a progress update. We have rolled out four thrusts to improve the system we have today.
The first is nurturing the \"Joy of Learning\". Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Lim Biow Chuan have asked for an update on this.
Joy of learning does not mean schools should be just all fun and games. Joy comes from purposeful learning, from a sense of progress and fulfilment by doing something challenging, hard and meaningful. Then, you feel a sense of accomplishment and you get joy from that.
A major move is the changes we are making to the PSLE scoring system. We will grade students in wider bands, what we call Achievement Levels, as opposed to differentiating them very finely through today's T-scores. We hope this will change the psychology of students and parents towards PSLE and reduce the over-emphasis on academic results.
The new scoring system, its biggest impact, actually, is that it will affect Secondary school postings and parents are naturally anxious. We will help students and parents familiarise themselves with this new system.
Sometime later this year, we will release simulated cut-off points under the new PSLE scoring system for selected Secondary schools. This will be based on last year’s Secondary One Posting Exercise and PSLE results. Next year, we will release another set of simulated cut-off points based on this year’s Secondary One Posting Exercise results. So, two sets of simulated cut-off points before the system goes live in 2021. But please remember these are simulations. It is not that these are definite cut-off points. There can be changes from year to year, as choice patterns change. And when the system goes \"live\", cut-off-points can change further. Notwithstanding this, we hope that by giving parents information early, we can better support them in making Secondary school choices for their children.
Another major move is the reduction of school-based exams. All Primary schools have removed exams for Primary 1 and 2. This year, 60% of Primary schools would have no Primary 3 and 5 mid-year exams. By next year, it will be 100% based on our implementation schedule.
As for Secondary schools, all have removed Secondary 1 mid-year exams. This year, more than 90% will be removing Secondary 3 mid-year exams. By next year, it will be 100% too.
Some schools, such as the School of Science and Technology (SST), have removed mid-year exams for Secondary 1 to 3 in one shot. When I visited the school, the students I spoke to were very happy with the change. They said with the time freed up, they can now do interesting hands-on stuff like coding, designing robots, making prototypes and so on.
With more freed up time, other schools such as Gan Eng Seng Secondary introduced a programme called the Learning Fortnight. Students take up electives, like Universities. They do projects, learn a new sport, attend enrichment activities, and enjoy them.
However, in general – I will be honest – I think the responses have been varied. When I speak with Primary school students, most will say, \"Hooray, fewer exams\", so they are very happy. But many Secondary school students told me they are not happy; they prefer to have mid-year exams. It may surprise you but it is true. They say, \"Now, without the mid-year exams, we have all these continuous mini-assessments throughout the year. That is more stressful!\" So, I told these students that they have gotten used to exams, which is why we have to change.
On the other hand, Primary school students, their learning habits have yet to be formed and, therefore, they welcome the change.
So, I advised the Secondary students that these exams are really part and parcel of learning, and they are really not high-stakes. The mini-assessment is not going to affect your future – not very likely.
So, focus on learning throughout the year, rather than cram your studies and \"mug\" just before exams; that is a less effective learning habit. Along the way, seek your teachers’ help when necessary and schools will do their best to help you progress.
As Mr Lim Biow Chuan pointed out, many students and parents have deep-seated mindsets about exams – not easy to change. But we are trying to change the paradigm. So, instead of tests and exams, the desire and joy of learning should be at the centre of school life.
Indeed, as the Member has said, the stakes of exams are high actually because of admission into the next level of education – from PSLE to Secondary school, Secondary school to Polytechnic or Junior College (JC).
That is why MOE has been very active in reviewing admission systems across levels. We reviewed the Direct School Admission (DSA) system for Secondary school students. We introduced aptitude-based admission systems for our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs). We have done that; the Polytechnics went first. Right now, the Universities are doing it with great rigour.
The different admission systems are still being refined to reduce the over-emphasis on exam results, and more changes will come in the coming years.
Now, the second thrust of \"Learn for Life\" is \"One Secondary Education, Many Subject Bands\".
At last year’s Committee of Supply debate, I announced the phasing out of Secondary school streaming by 2024 and replaced it with Full Subject-Based Banding or Full SBB. Mr Charles Chong and Mr Murali Pillai have asked for an update.
As Members know, this year, 28 Secondary schools are piloting Full SBB. They are implementing the following two changes.
Number one, allowing lower Secondary Normal stream students to take Humanities subjects at a more demanding level. Of all the Secondary 2 students who are offered this option, more than two-thirds took it up, and that is encouraging.
The second change is more interesting – which is that schools are re-organising form classes so that they comprise students from different streams. The form classes take some subjects together, such as Art, PE, CCE and Design & Technology. For other subjects, students will split up into different classes based on their subject bands. Of course, we designed all these before COVID-19 but now we have a situation to manage.
Some schools have organised the form classes by CCAs, others by their \"House\" systems. Most schools just like Deyi Secondary School, placed students in classes to ensure a good balance of stream, gender, race as well as learning needs.
Deyi Secondary held an orientation camp for the Secondary 1 students to get to know one another. The teachers told me that during the camp, they made a point not to look at the background of the students. They did not know what stream the students were from during the camp, so that there would be no pre-conceived notions. They observed the students, identified those with leadership skills and initiative, and after the camp was all over, they appointed them as class leaders. After that, they opened the file and looked at the background of the students. To their great delight, the leaders comprised students from Express, Normal (Academic), and Normal (Technical) streams as well. The character of the students shone through regardless of their streams.
Another teacher at Deyi reflected how Full SBB is changing his subconscious mindset. He spotted a student with long hair. He proceeded to stop the student and asked the three standard questions that he would pose in such a situation.
First question: \"Boy, what is your name?”. The boy told the teacher his name. Let us say his name is Bono.
Second question: “What level are you?” The child said, “Secondary 1, teacher.”
Then, he asked the third question: “Which class are you from?” And Bono said, \"1-Determination.\"
Then, the teacher got stumped. Because in the past, if you know the class, you know the stream of the child. Now \"1-Determination\" told him nothing. He did not know what stream the child is from.
And then he realised all this while, his line of questioning in such a disciplinary situation was to find out the stream of the child. He reflected to himself: why is that relevant? This is not about whether an Express, Normal (Academic) or Normal (Technical) student has broken a school rule. Bono needs a haircut – that is all.
It is possible that some of us may well have this subconscious mindset. But this teacher was really wise, brave and honest to be aware of it, and to acknowledge it.
Important social dynamics are changing in these schools. We will learn from the experiences of the pilot schools and roll out Full SBB nationwide by 2024.
The third thrust is \"Education as an Uplifting Force\". Inequality is an issue every society has to grapple with and education is the best social leveller.
We are doing a lot more to tackle inequality through education, including investing significantly in pre-school education, setting up more student care centres, enhancing bursary schemes, implementing targeted programmes that bring social partners and community partners together. Second Minister Indranee will speak more about this later.
With a good foundation, almost all our students today progress to post-Secondary institutions today. Seventy percent – the large majority – goes to Polytechnics or Autonomous Universities.
Mr Ang Wei Neng was worried about affordability of course fees for the lower income group. That is why at the National Day Rally last year, the Prime Minister announced a significant increase in tertiary education bursary quanta for lower income groups. So, for a student from the lowest income group, he pays $150 in annual course fees in Polytechnic, and $2,000 in annual course fees for a general degree in the Autonomous Universities. If that is still too much, he can take up a tuition loan.
When they graduate, 90% of them who want to join the labour force find work within six months; that is our track record. Starting salaries have also been going up.
By the time they step into the workforce, they would have more or less pressed a reset button that mitigated their childhood disadvantages. This is uplift in action, where all young Singaporeans can access opportunities, because we have a stable country, a growing economy and a good education system.
The fourth thrust is \"Learning Languages for Life\".
Ms Tin Pei Ling and Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked about MOE’s bilingualism effort. I thank Mr Lim for sharing his personal experience in two languages. I will answer the Member in one. The Member lamented that he only realised the importance of Mother Tongue Language (MTL) in adulthood, after he stepped into his professional life.
Unfortunately, some things do not change, and I think many of our students will still feel the same way as Mr Lim when they grow up.
Hence, it is critical to start as young as possible and make students interested in learning MTL.
This requires schools and families to complement each other's efforts. Families can provide an immersive MTL environment at home. Then, schools carry on the work, starting with kindergartens putting stronger emphasis on the teaching of MTLs in pre-schools, which we have started to do.
We have also introduced targeted programmes. In Primary schools, we introduced a Mother Tongue Support Programme for Primary 3 and 4 students who have a weak command of MTL. Last year, 60 pilot schools enlisted 1,100 students. It will be fully rolled out to all schools in 2021.
For students who are strong in MTL, we introduced the Language Elective Programme (LEP) in 15 Secondary schools this year. The Programme supports students to attain a higher level of MTL proficiency and acquire a better understanding of their culture. About 250 students took it up, which is an encouraging start.
It also helps to have specialised schools, like the Special Assistance Plan (SAP) schools and programmes like the Elective Programme in Malay Language for Secondary Schools (EMAS) and the National Elective Tamil Language Programme (NETP).
In other words, let us not shy away from doing what it takes to preserve the use of MTLs. The world is moving towards bilingualism, even multilingualism. We have an advantage because of our ethnic diversity and bilingual abilities. We must not only preserve this advantage, but strengthen it further.
Let me move to the next part of my speech today – the new things MOE plans to do. They have to do with curriculum – what we teach and how we teach.
We need to refresh our curriculum to evolve with the needs and realities of the times. But any changes to curriculum must be very carefully considered. It shapes the values, attitudes, mindsets and competencies of an entire generation. It gives meaning to MOE's mission of \"moulding the future of the nation\".
For example, we introduced Values-in-Action (VIA) in 2012 to foster social responsibility amongst young Singaporeans. Today, you can see its imprint in our young Singaporeans, in the way they look at social issues. I do think it has an imprint.
As Dr Intan and Mr Ang Wei Neng pointed out, events like the COVID-19 outbreak also offer a valuable opportunity in education. Schools today are placing strong emphasis on personal hygiene and on social responsibility. If we keep all these practices up, even after the crisis has blown over, I think we will have a generation of Singaporeans who will be much more resilient to infectious diseases.
Today we face new challenges and realities that necessitate a refreshing of our curriculum. They are in three areas: first, in Character and Citizenship Education (CCE); second, Knowing Asia; third, Digital Literacy.
I will start with CCE. I thank Dr Intan, Mr Zainal Sapari, Mr Ang Wei Neng, Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Mr Yee Chia Hsing for asking about this. There are a few components to our CCE today, such as the teaching of values, National Education, Social and Emotional Learning, and Education and Career Guidance.
In 2016, we started a comprehensive review of the CCE curriculum. The more we progressed in the review, the more we thought it in urgent need of change. Why is that so?
Because the young today are different from previous generations in one major aspect, which is their exposure to technology. For those who follow comics and watch superhero movies, they are like Bruce Wayne, who is also Batman – one day, one night. They have one real world that parents can see and another one online, which they spend a lot of time on, that parents do not see. As adults who have grown up without this duality and without this space, I do not think we fully understand what our young are going through.
The impact of technology on students and on children is complex and multi-faceted. But let me just highlight one of the most significant effects, which is that technology presents children with the influences, choices and decisions previous generations never had to contend with.
In an online world, you can be anonymous and there are no policemen, no editors, no verifiers. A child can choose to be nasty and then get away with it. Whereas in the real world, it is not easy to say something nasty to your friend in the face; a punch can come back. In fact, sometimes there is nothing very social about social media.
More importantly now, with a powerful device in their hands, our children can decide: do I use it to acquire knowledge for learning, or access undesirable materials? Do I use it to keep in touch with family and friends, or get addicted to digital entertainment? Do I use it to record beautiful memories, take pictures with my friends or intrude into the privacy of others, or worse, commit a sexual offence?
How do we ensure that our young make the right choices and survive well in an online world? I think digital world problems require analogue world solutions. It goes back to our values, our morals, our humanity. Values are what distinguish us from computers and machines, and that we cannot abdicate to technology. We apply our moral and values system whether we are offline or we are online. We determine the purpose of technology, we determine the purpose of devices.
Dr Intan said that values are more often caught than taught. I think both are needed. Families play a big part in instilling them in the young, at home. But schools can then work with parents and make a big difference too. We need to update the CCE curriculum to reflect this imperative and reinforce the teaching of values in our children from as young an age as possible. So, we will build on the existing CCE curriculum and strengthen it with the following five changes.
Number one, we will restructure formal CCE lessons to reinforce the teaching of moral values. Today, CCE lessons cover both character and values, and also citizenship. For Primary 1 to 3, we will henceforth devote the bulk of CCE lessons to character and values. As the Chinese saying goes, \"品德在先，学术在后\" – values before academics. We will emphasise respect and care for others, honesty, humility and kindness. They must also learn resilience and courage. Our children need to learn to stand up against discrimination, against bullying – of all kinds and regardless of who the victim is.
Many of these lessons will be taught in MTL from Primary 1 to 6. We will therefore better align the CCE and MTL lessons – ensure that the standard of the language is appropriate and engage students in much more interesting ways. From Primary 4 to 6, we will broaden the existing Form Teacher Guidance Period to include National Education and citizenship topics – values relevant to us as a nation. For these topics, it is more meaningful to have a diverse group of students from all communities and therefore, these classes will continue to be taught in English.
The second change, we will place more emphasis on cyber wellness. We will devote more time and develop more materials to teach this subject, so that students will learn to critically evaluate what they read online, be able to tell genuine news from falsehoods and not rely on social media \"likes\" for validation. They need to be able to say no to bad influences, and protect themselves from cyber bullies and predators.
Several Secondary schools – in fact, 11 – have piloted the new CCE curriculum on cyber wellness. I visited one of them – New Town Secondary – and observed a class on the topic of cyber bullying. This was conducted via a video case study and students were asked at every juncture of the story to vote and decide how the story would unfold. So, they could tell how their decisions affected the outcome of the story. I could tell the situation resonated with them and the students were very engaged.
To me, the lesson that day was quite clear. The lesson is: if you encounter cyber bullying, seek help and support, do not retaliate. That day, the students voted for retaliation, even though I was sitting there! And the ending did not turn out well. This is one way we are using more authentic scenarios, immersive modalities and giving students more voice and agency to bring CCE to life – not just for cyber wellness, but for all aspects of CCE.
The third change, the CCE curriculum will have greater focus on mental wellness, which is closely related to cyber wellness. We already teach students socio-emotional competencies today. The new CCE curriculum will seek to strengthen one important aspect, which is peer support. Second Minister Indranee will speak more on this topic.
Fourth, we will expand our efforts to engage secondary school students more actively on contemporary issues through CCE lessons.
This is already done today. We will explore more topics, find ways to engage students more deeply and increase the frequency of these lessons to at least once a fortnight.
Climate change, as Miss Cheng Li Hui and Mr Yee Chia Hsing suggested, could be one of these issues. Other examples could be Government policies, social inequality, race and religion, online falsehoods and so on and so forth.
Mr Leon Perera suggested including a subject like Theory of Knowledge (TOK) into our school curriculum. MOE is quite reluctant to over-crowd our curriculum. It is already quite a heavy curriculum, especially given that TOK is a pre-university subject for the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme.
Some of these contemporary issues and the discussion of them will help hone the critical thinking skills of our students. They may be sensitive to discuss, but they are important to help our students better understand the complexities of our country and our life. MOE will develop the resources and methodologies. Teachers will guide students to listen attentively, converse respectfully and be open to differing perspectives.
Finally, given the expansion of the CCE curriculum, we will need to have more time to teach it. We will have to, as Miss Cheng Li Hui suggested, further integrate CCE into school lessons and activities, such as CCAs, camps, learning journeys and Values-in-Action.
With these changes, every school experience can be a CCE lesson. Every teacher can be a CCE teacher. And every school a good school, of course. It should become a whole-school approach. This is happening in some schools, but we will implement it system-wide, be more deliberate about CCE and make learning intentional rather than incidental.
The new CCE curriculum will be progressively implemented from 2021 in all Primary and Secondary schools.
The second area of curriculum review is Knowing Asia. Several Members, such as Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Teo Ser Luck, have explained why this is important. Suffice to say that Southeast Asia is one of the fastest growing regions in the world. Together with China, India, Japan and Korea, they all form part of our natural hinterland.
Singapore-based enterprises need to be able to venture out to the region. And Singaporeans must be able to play a part in it. To do so, we need to be equipped with the relevant knowledge, language and cultural skills. But, like all skills, it takes many years, even decades of experience, to become a country or a regional expert. What the education system can do, is to get our students started young and expose them to the region. As a start, we will do this in three ways.
First, through our Humanities curriculum. It must provide students with a deeper appreciation of the geographies, histories, cultures, languages and economies of our regional countries. We will give the study of Asia its due emphasis in Humanities subjects.
For example, in history, students will learn more about the Vietnam War and how developments in Southeast Asia is intertwined with the complexity of the Cold War. In Social Studies, students can learn about the importance of ASEAN centrality.
Second, we will leverage overseas trips. Overseas trips have taken a backseat due to COVID-19 but I am sure, in time, the crisis will blow over.
The younger ones in schools attend student exchanges, cultural enrichment or embark on service learning projects. The older ones in IHLs typically go for overseas internships and immersion programmes in a foreign education institution. These have been effective in building their cross-cultural skills, resourcefulness and resilience. Students generally enjoy overseas trips, but I think their favourite destinations are still New York and London.
We will organise more trips to Asian countries and encourage students to participate in them. Students from the West are flocking here to experience Asia because of the cultural diversity and the exciting economic opportunities. Our students should do so, too. This is our own backyard and, here, we will always have a natural competitive advantage. We will need that mindset shift that Mr Teo Ser Luck talked about.
As announced by Deputy Prime Minister Heng in the Budget Statement, our aspiration is \"70-70\". I would like to assure Mr Saktiandi Supaat that the target includes our ITE students. This means to have 70% of IHL students undergo an overseas stint and with 70% of that going to ASEAN, China or India. Today, the numbers are about \"50-50\". So, it is not an exclusive experience, as Mr Faisal Manap puts it. But there is room to do more.
Third, we can know our region better through the learning of languages. A good start is to learn our Mother Tongue Languages (MTLs) better. Where possible – I keep coming back to learning MTL better – and if the students have the aptitude and interest, we will also encourage the learning of third languages. For most students, this will be at a conversational level and it is not examinable.
So, to Mr Chen Show Mao’s suggestion – I know the Member has been raising this every year – that MOE make the learning of conversational Malay compulsory in Primary school, I think it is better that we continue to emphasise the learning of a student’s own MTL. As it is, many students are already finding that quite challenging. But we have been encouraging students to learn the language of another community at a conversational level. Today, about 60% of Primary schools and 40% of Secondary schools offer Conversational Malay and Chinese. We are encouraging more schools to do so and more schools will do so.
There is also value for our young to learn to converse in regional languages, as Members have suggested. We will pair the learning of conversational ASEAN languages with overseas school trips. MOE will start with Vietnamese and Thai. That way, learning is more meaningful and can be immediately applied and more students can access it.
The third area of curriculum review is digital literacy. Ms Denise Phua, Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, Miss Cheng Li Hui and Mr Ang Wei Neng spoke about this. We all know how digital literacy is important for our young. I do not have to explain this.
But what are the responses? One popular response around the world is \"Let us make coding compulsory in schools!\" But that is too simplistic. Not everyone will grow up to be a coder. Many of us just need to learn how to use technology and software and be comfortable with using them. Further, programming languages will become outdated by the time the students graduate.
Another popular response is, \"Let us give every student a digital device\". It is not a bad idea, but it can do more harm than good if the device becomes another gadget that is a big distraction for the student. So, if we want to do this, we must do it in the right sequence – make sure that the curriculum is rightly designed, teachers are equipped with the suitable pedagogical skills, then use the device to enhance teaching and learning.
We need to think about digital literacy more deeply and holistically, rather than simply implementing immediate things that come to mind. One way is to think of digital literacy like language literacy. There are important similarities between the two.
First, both are generative or seminal skills, allowing a learner, after you have learnt it, to access knowledge in other domains.
Second, both require an immersive learning environment. We do not teach children language just through the formal lessons, but within a holistic and immersive environment. Likewise, we should embed digital literacy within our overall school curriculum and not as a standalone subject.
Third, we can break digital literacy into productive and receptive components – listen and speak, read and write. In Chinese – 听，说，读，写。 We are conscious of how we teach each of these components, how they relate to each other and how they reinforce each other.
We, too, can break digital literacy down into different components. The framework MOE has adopted is: find, think, apply and create. They represent the different and mutually-reinforcing aspects of digital literacy.
Recognising the importance of digital literacy, MOE will launch a National Digital Literacy Programme (NDLP). This is MOE’s contribution to the national effort, with a focus on schools and IHLs. Let me explain what the NDLP entails using the four components I have just mentioned.
The first component is “Find”. It means being able to gather and use information and data from digital resources. Our young have no problem doing that; they are digital natives. Their challenge is how to do it in a constructive, safe, responsible and ethical way. This will be taught through the cyber wellness component of the new CCE curriculum that I spoke about earlier.
The second component is “Think”. This is the ability to manage, analyse, interpret and understand data and then solve problems systematically. These are skills largely found in what we call computational thinking. But we do not need a new subject called computational thinking. The elements are present in existing subjects, especially Mathematics, where there is a strong focus on problem solving already. What schools can do is to explicitly draw out the learning points from Mathematics.
Let us take an example – the teaching of prime numbers. I hope Members remember what prime numbers are. A prime number is one that is not divisible by any other number. Today, teachers typically explain the process to identify prime numbers as follows: for a set of numbers, say one to 100, cross out one, then the teacher will say, \"Then, all the higher multiples of 2, cancel off; then all the higher multiples of 3, cancel off; we skip 4 because it is divisible by 2; and then we go to 5, you skip 6 and go 7 and, finally, what you are left with are prime numbers.\" All of us went through that, right?
In future, to be more explicit about developing computational thinking, teachers can challenge students to write a simple program to follow that same logical sequence. Through such an exercise, students learn various programming structures, such as loops and conditions. One common programming logic is: \"if, then, else\". So, applied to this example, if a number is a multiple of 2, then you take it out, it is not a prime number, or else you retain it as a possible prime number and you loop back and you try with 3 and then 5, 7 and so on. With this, the already renowned Singapore Mathematics curriculum has received another upgrade!
The third and biggest component is \"Apply\". We need to teach students to use software and devices productively to learn to work for daily living across different contexts. A major initiative in this area is the Singapore Student Learning Space (SLS). This is a dynamic online learning portal. Almost the whole of our curriculum is on SLS, complete with animation, interactives, videos, assessments and other resources.
To Mr Chen Show Mao's question, we started building it a few years ago, way before there was COVID-19. The idea is not to make students learn completely online and not have to go to school. The quality and outcomes of e-learning will never be the same as a physical learning environment with teachers, friends, CCAs and a social setting. Neither are we using SLS to make the classroom high-tech and futuristic.
What we want to do is to use SLS to enhance the classroom experience. Let the technology fade into the background, and let the interaction, thinking and discussion come to the fore. Flip the classroom, give students more voice, make learning become collaborative. Then students are more likely to internalise the lessons and achieve better education outcomes.
So, we got eight schools to start a pilot project where teachers conducted lessons using SLS and gave every student a personal learning device to access the SLS portal and we learned many things from this pilot project.
First, teachers cannot teach the traditional way. They need new pedagogies – e-pedagogy. I witnessed some of these lessons. They are nothing like the lessons that I went through as a kid.
At Orchid Park Secondary, I saw how a Mathematics teacher, Mr Marwin Low, used SLS to teach students about angles within a diagram. So, after the students logged on to SLS, they were shown a quadrilateral on screen. The students could drag each of the corners and change the shape and size of the quadrilateral. But no matter how they manipulated the diagram, a display at the side will show that the addition of all the interior angles was always 360 degrees. The concept is presented visually and it is very clear.
They were then presented with various tasks, which they had to solve and use SLS to key in their answers. Students can remain anonymous and give themselves nicknames. They could also see each other's answers, comment on them or pose questions. In this online space, anonymity is put to good use as the students experience a much higher level of psychological safety in learning, as Prof Lim Sun Sun puts it.
The teacher could monitor the answer given by every student in real-time, through a heat map. If the heat map is filled with green dots, it means everyone got the answer right and the lesson carries on. If it is all red dots, it means everyone has got it wrong, and the teacher had better re-teach the concept. If it is mostly green with some red dots, it means that some students need coaching and the teacher will know who they are and can intervene accordingly.
At last year’s Malay Language Anugerah Arif Budiman Teachers’ Award, one of the winners was Cikgu Siti Mariam from Crest Secondary. I asked her how she managed to make her MTL lesson interesting and engaging. She said she used digital technology. In her case, she incorporated her students' interest in photography into the lesson. The students would take photos using their mobile devices, prepare a photo story in Malay and then upload it on an online platform and share it with the rest of their classmates.
There are many ground-up digital lesson plans that teachers have created and uploaded onto the SLS platform to share with their colleagues. So, we are now crowd-sourcing digital lesson plans. And I think we are still just scratching the surface of this very powerful SLS tool.
A second important insight from this pilot is that to conduct e-learning, it is very useful for every student to have a personal learning device. Device sharing makes learning sub-optimal. A device is as essential for e-learning in a digital learning classroom, just as paper and pen are for a traditional classroom.
A third lesson is that having issued a device to every student, there has to be controlled access so that the device is used for education and learning and not other distractions. The pilot schools have effectively addressed this through device usage control. It can access educationally meaningful sites on the Internet, but online games and Korean dramas are out. It will also monitor students’ use of the device and where they have gone to. Some students are naturally disappointed with the limited functionality of their devices, but it is a necessary thing to do. It is consistent with a common school practice where mobile phone usage is disallowed during school hours.
We are now ready to expand the pilot programme. Over the next few years, MOE will progressively roll out this new way of teaching nation-wide, to all Secondary schools.
By 2024, we will equip every school with e-pedagogy capabilities and every single Secondary 1 student with a personal learning device. This could be a tablet, a laptop or a chromebook. By 2028, all Secondary school students will be equipped with a digital device and this will address the concerns of Ms Denise Phua and Dr Intan.
We will make sure that the device is affordable. Given that it is primarily used for learning and education, we do not intend for it to be a high-end device. We will use a bulk tender to lower the price further, probably, I think, to a few hundred dollars.
Students can pay for the device through their Edusave accounts. The Government contributes to it annually. Last year, we raised the Government's annual contribution to the Edusave accounts. We also provided a $150 Bicentennial Bonus top-up for all Primary and Secondary Singaporean students.
This year, and in anticipation of the full roll-out of this initiative, we will provide another $200 top-up to the Edusave accounts of all Singaporean students in Primary and Secondary schools. This will cost $75 million.
We expect most students to have enough balance in their Edusave accounts to pay for the device. Some who have used more of their Edusave funds might have to fork out a bit of cash. But MOE will provide further subsidies for students from lower income household groups and ensure that their out-of-pocket cost is $0.
The last component of the digital literacy framework is \"Create\". It is the productive mode, that is, the ability to code a programme, develop an app, create a website, design a game and collaborate with others in the process.
Many Secondary schools are leveraging Applied Learning Programmes to get students to develop software or programme robots.
We will also expand the number of schools offering \"O\" Level computing, from 22 to 30 schools; and \"A\" Level computing from eight Junior Colleges (JCs) to 10 JCs.
To Ms Denise Phua's question, MOE has also partnered the Special Education (SPED) schools to customise digital literacy to the learning needs of their students. For example, Pathlight School offers \"O\" Level computing. For home-schoolers, they can refer to materials that MOE has made available to the public.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about the efforts at IHLs in pushing digital literacy. IHLs are setting baseline digital competency requirements for all their students. For example, at SMU, students take a module on Introductory Statistics. At Nanyang Polytechnic (NYP), computational thinking is a compulsory Year 1 foundational module.
The IHLs are also upgrading their curriculum for sectors that require more advanced digital skills, such as cybersecurity, finance, manufacturing and logistics.
In the last three years, the Autonomous Universities (AUs) have trained about 1,000 ICT graduates annually. But the AUs know that the industry is hungry for more talent and have been working very hard to expand the capacity of ICT courses. Today, they are taking in a total of 2,800 ICT students a year, almost three times more than before. And we will find ways to ramp up the capacity further if need be.
I have spoken about many changes in the education system. Let me now tie them all together.
The most important common success factor for all the changes we are making is our teachers. I think we have the best teaching force in the world to make our education reforms a success.
Over the years, we have been able to recruit very good teachers. Many are attracted to the noble mission of education, in helping to mould the future of our nation.
Having recruited teachers, we then need to continue to invest in their professional competencies, a point alluded to by Mr Murali Pillai and Miss Cheng Li Hui.
So, MOE surveyed our teachers and asked them, given the changing education landscape, what kind of skills do you need most? So, they provided their inputs and the following are the six competencies that teachers told us they needed.
One, assessment literacy. As we reduce exam load, teachers want to be able to use other assessment tools, such as project work, quizzes and class presentations.
Two, inquiry-based learning. They want to be able to design and conduct a class that encourages active learning, giving students more time to explore, pose questions and find answers.
Three, differentiated instruction, so that in more diverse classrooms, teachers can teach in a way that caters to the different strengths and learning needs of the students.
Four, support for students with special educational needs. About 80% of our students with special educational needs (SEN) are in our mainstream schools today. Teachers want to have a better understanding of their needs and support them better.
Five, e-pedagogy, so that they can use digital technology effectively to enhance learning and especially with the NDLP.
Finally, CCE, number six, so that every school experience can be a CCE lesson and every teacher a CCE teacher.
Some may ask: how will older teachers keep up with all these new demands in education? I think it is a misperception that older teachers, and for that matter, older workers, cannot keep up with changes.
Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat was a guest-of-honour at the Distinguished Chinese Language Teacher Awards Ceremony last year. The most experienced award recipient was Mdm Lee Pick Siew. She has taught Chinese for 24 years at St Joseph's Institution (SJI).
Senior Minister of State Chee spoke to her about education technology. It turns out Mdm Lee is a firm believer in using technology to teach languages. She told Senior Minister of State Chee that technology will not replace teachers, but teachers who know how to use technology will replace those who do not know how to use technology. And that is coming from the most senior teacher that evening.
Others are concerned that with professional development, teachers will have one more thing to worry about, on top of their teaching and administrative duties.
But professional development is not new. Teachers have been doing it for many years.
Our teachers were very forthcoming with their input because they want to learn, be good at what they are doing and grow in their careers. They do not see professional development and teaching duties as a zero-sum game.
But to make sure that the training is useful, it is important that teachers decide for themselves what kind of training they need. This is the essence of professional autonomy – teachers taking ownership of the tools of their craft. It is essential in determining the standards of practice, developing mastery, deepening capabilities and instilling professional pride. If you cannot do that, you are like a chef who just reheats the food that somebody else cooked.
The concept of professional ownership applies to all industries, trades and crafts and, in fact, this is a core philosophy of SkillsFuture.
So, in MOE, when we were thinking how do we name this significant initiative to upgrade the skills of our teaches, we came up with the name \"SkillsFuture for Educators\".
Mr Chairman, Sir, let me conclude and summarise the key thrusts of our reform efforts. With your permission, Sir, may I request that the Clerks distribute a handout to Members, please?
The Chairman: Yes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Ong Ye Kung: As you can tell, it is a MOE designed handout. It is what Second Minister Indranee calls, the \"Tree for Life\".
At the very base, the ground, it represents our mission which is UPLIFT, making sure that every child has opportunities. No child is left behind because of their family backgrounds. Second, the roots represent the cornerstone of our education system which is bilingualism and learning languages for life. Then, the stem and the branches represent significant structural changes that we are making – the first structural change is to nurture the joy of learning, by making changes to the PSLE scoring system, reducing examination load. The second structural change is to phase out streaming and replace it with Full SBB. And then, the leaves and the fruits represent what we are populating the classroom with, which is refreshing our curriculum to prepare our students to be future-ready – in CCE, Knowing Asia and Digital Literacy. The sun represents what is critical for the system to work well – our teachers. And through SkillsFuture for Educators, we are upgrading their skills and professionalism.
Together, these six thrusts form the \"Learn for Life\" movement for schools. It will guide our efforts to raise the school education system to a new level, in the next five to 10 years.
I hope this is the transformation map Ms Denise Phua is asking for. I hope it lives up to her expectation. I hope it is as thoughtful as it is bold.
The constant improvement of our public systems, like education, is a core aspect of our governance approach and our social compact. Technology and globalisation – yes, they bring about great opportunities, but they can also aggravate inequality and stifle social mobility. To tackle these challenges, we should not penalise the schools or the individuals who have done well, for which parent does not want their child to do well and to be the best they can be?
That is why our approach is \"not to cap the top, but lift the bottom\", extend more help to students who need assistance most, devote resources and implement programmes that lift the quality, standards and experience across the board.
When I visited Orchid Park Secondary, one of our pilot schools to implement the use of personal learning devices, I met a Chemistry teacher. His name is Mr Ramesh. He said something that left a very deep impression. He said that the most profound implication of the initiative is not the technology or the new pedagogy. It is that now, every student is similarly equipped in terms of computer resources and learning resources.
And then, with the SLS, he readily hears the voice of every child in class. The teacher can now more easily detect and zoom in to the students who have somehow fallen behind. In other words, this initiative has further levelled the playing field for all students. And that is the most significant outcome of this programme.
And that is also the objective of MOE's other initiatives rolled out over the years, whether it is Applied Learning Programme, Values-In-Action, Outdoor Adventure Learning, Language Elective Programme or the Junior Sports Academy. We are always improving the common experiences of our students.
In many countries, social stratification worsened partly because the national system deteriorated. So, the affluent opt out of the national system and they pay for market-based solutions. Over time, this further entrenched the gap between the rich and the poor, who live in worlds far apart – stratification worsens.
In Singapore, we counter this trend by ensuring that whether it is in healthcare, transport, public housing or education, we deliver a national system of high quality, even world-class quality.
And that is why the education system must always be a work in progress, always be honest in identifying our strengths as well as our gaps and areas for improvement, keep engaging and working with stakeholders to improve it, and doing all these while keeping school fees to a few dollars a month for the great majority of our schools. We will make sure no one is denied a good education because of their family background.
Within these commons, we enable social mobility, we help children from poor families break out of poverty, we build a platform for all Singaporeans to mingle and build bonds. We can fulfil the aspirations and dreams of successive generations.
From Learn for Life to SkillsFuture, we will inculcate the spirit of lifelong learning in our young and ensure that they will be ready for the future. [Applause.]
The Second Minister for Education (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Chairman, the Government is committed to nurturing every Singaporean to their fullest potential. Minister Ong has just shown you our roadmap through the \"Tree for Life\". But even as we transform the education system to help Singaporeans seize opportunities of the future, we will ensure that education remains an uplifting force that provides opportunities for all, regardless of their background or the challenges they face.
One key challenge our youths face today is mental well-being. Many colleagues have asked how we can better support our students’ well-being. Prof Lim Sun Sun spoke about the importance of building positive learning environments; Ms Rahayu Mahzam and Assoc Prof Daniel Goh suggested strengthening mental health education in schools, to equip our students to handle life’s challenges; while Ms Anthea Ong asked if we can increase the number of counsellors and introduce mental health screenings.
Thank you all for your thoughtful speeches and questions. Student well-being is of utmost importance to MOE. Our efforts in this area are guided by three broad questions. First, at the most basic level, how can we create a positive learning environment in our schools? Second, how can we equip our students with the knowledge and skills they need to overcome challenges and setbacks? And finally, how can we support the small group of students with more serious mental health challenges?
So, let me address each of these in turn.
First, creating a positive school learning environment for all students. Our teachers and school leaders play a crucial role in this. In our Singapore Teaching Practice (STP) model, creating a \"positive classroom culture\" is a fundamental teaching process. The STP is covered in pre-service training at NIE, as well as in-service courses by the Academy of Singapore Teachers.
In CCE, positive teacher-student relationships are strongly emphasised. We will also be developing our teachers’ competencies in establishing strong teacher-student relationships, and providing a caring and enabling environment, through the CCE practice area of SkillsFuture for Educators.
As Prof Lim Sun Sun acknowledged, the vast majority of our teachers undertake their roles with professionalism and care. There are times where teachers have to be more strict with students. This is a part of their duty. However, in cases of unprofessional conduct, where the teachers step over the bounds, such as deliberate attacks on students’ self-esteem, schools will take a serious view, and intervene as necessary to safeguard our students’ well-being, and maintain a positive learning environment.
Having laid the foundation of a positive school learning environment, the next step is to build resilience, by equipping our students with the skills and knowledge to overcome setbacks.
To help students face challenges confidently, we will help students develop the resilience mindset of \"I am, I have, I can\". \"I am\" is about helping students to appreciate their strengths and harness positive beliefs about themselves. \"I have\" is about enabling students to tap into their social and emotional resources, like peer and family support. And, \"I can\" emphasises skills that will enable students to cope and thrive, including emotion regulation, problem-solving and managing relationships and conflicts.
\"I have\", which is about tapping on support, including peer support, can be really powerful in schools. Research has shown that having a sense of affiliation among peers, positive vibes and feeling supported by one another, all contribute to positive well-being. Some of our schools have already introduced peer support structures, to good effect. To illustrate, let me share an example from Bukit Merah Secondary School. We have changed the students’ names to protect their privacy.
Last year, Steve from Bukit Merah Secondary started training to be a Peer Support Leader. He buddied up with his classmate Mark, who was frequently absent due to his gaming addiction. Steve encouraged Mark to come to school, and started eating with him during recess and breaks. Steve's friends also joined in, and got to know Mark as well. Whenever he could, Steve met with Mark after school to help him with work that he had missed. Gradually, Mark started coming to school more regularly and more punctually. When we asked Mark what helped him to make the change, he said he felt really encouraged when he asked Steve if anyone missed him when he was absent, and Steve replied simply, \"Have lah, have lah\".
The smallest, simplest gestures can make a difference. Anyone can do it. That is what makes peer support so powerful. Therefore, we will establish peer support structures in every school by 2022 and continue to strengthen the peer support culture in our schools. Our vision is for every student to be a peer supporter, forming a strong network of support in their class, CCA or peer group, where they can look out for each other and seek guidance from teachers or counsellors where necessary. The Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) have also put in place peer support programmes similar to those in schools.
In addition to this, we will include mental health education in the CCE curriculum for Secondary schools,\tto\thelp\tstudents\tto understand common mental health issues and their symptoms, know when and how to seek help for themselves and others, and develop empathy and care towards persons with mental health issues. Similarly, the Polytechnics and ITEs have worked with the Health Promotion Board to develop mental health resources for their students.
The new mental health education in schools will complement our earlier efforts to help our students develop a resilience mindset and to foster peer support cultures. Together, we will equip our students with the knowledge, skills and support networks to better overcome challenges.
But even so, there will be a small number of students who struggle with mental health issues. For these students, additional support by professionals is needed.
We need to identify these students in order to support them. Teachers in schools and class advisors in IHLs are trained to pick up signs of distress, reach out to students facing difficulties, and refer them to a counsellor if necessary. With stronger mental health education and peer support cultures, students will also be able to look out for one another and seek guidance from teachers and counsellors if they notice that a friend is struggling.
Students who require additional support will be referred to the counselling professionals in schools, including counsellors and para-counsellors. Students assessed by counsellors to have more serious mental health issues will then be referred to external professionals for further clinical assessment and intervention. External professionals include the hospitals’ REACH teams – that is Response, Early Intervention and Assessment in Community mental Health – and IMH's Community Health Assessment Team (CHAT).
To Ms Anthea Ong’s suggestion to increase the number of counsellors, MOE will continue to work with our institutions to review this regularly. For example, those with higher needs will be able to hire additional counsellors and are given the funding and the manpower provisions to do so.
But counsellors are just one part of the wider eco-system of support for mental well-being in our schools and IHLs. This eco-system, comprising peer support networks, teachers, counsellors, external professionals, provides a robust and responsive approach to ensuring timely identification and targeted intervention for students with mental health needs.
While there are merits of universal mental health screening, mass screening can also raise complex issues, such as over-medicalising of behaviours in young persons or negative labeling effects. We also need to evaluate the age appropriateness and effectiveness in the school context.
To illustrate how our system of support works, let me share another student’s story with you – we will call him Sam. A few years ago, Sam was suffering from panic attacks. He could not submit his work on time. His teacher referred him to the school counsellor. The counsellor learnt that Sam’s parents were going through a divorce and that was what was causing Sam to struggle with severe anxiety. The school counsellor taught him coping strategies and worked with mental health professionals to address his anxiety condition. However, Sam still found the situation overwhelming and stopped coming to school.
But the school did not give up. They continued working with a Social Service Agency (SSA) to reach out and support Sam and his family. Sam’s classmates and CCA-mates also encouraged him to return to school, offering a listening ear and help in homework. Over time, Sam started to attend school again and re-joined his CCA. Today, Sam is doing much better. In fact, he has become a peer supporter himself and is using his experience to help others who are going through similar difficulties. So, you can see from there it is a whole eco-system.
Support for youth mental well-being is a whole-of-society effort. Outside of MOE, a lot of work is being done by other Government agencies, SSAs, community groups, private organisations and individuals. I agree with Assoc Prof Daniel Goh, our youths themselves should be at the centre of these efforts. Earlier this year, MSF, MOH and MOE, in collaboration with MCCY and the National Youth Council (NYC), issued an open call to anyone interested in improving youth mental well-being. Last week, Minster Desmond announced that we will set up a new Youth Mental Well-Being Network, bringing together more than 700 people who responded to the open call, many of whom are passionate youths. Minister Desmond will share more about the network during MSF’s COS.
To ensure our education system provides opportunities for all, MOE is also committed to supporting students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) to reach their fullest potential.
Over the years, we have increased the variety of high quality educational settings. Today, around 80% of students with SEN learn in mainstream schools, supported by teachers and allied educators with specialised skills. Our Special Education (SPED) schools, which provide customised learning environments, dedicated resources and specialised manpower, support the remaining 20% of students with higher needs. MOE’s funding for SPED schools has increased by about 40% in the last five years.
Ms Denise Phua and Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked about MOE’s plans to support students with SEN. We can, and will do more. For students in SPED schools, we are continually improving affordability and accessibility of education. Since January this year, six SPED schools have lowered their fees by at least 25% for Singapore citizens. We are also working with SSAs to open three new SPED schools. One will support students with moderate-to-severe SEN who have both Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Intellectual Disability, while the other two will support students with moderate SEN who have ASD and can access the National Curriculum.
Finally, we note Ms Denise Phua's suggestion to extend the exit age for SPED schools. While the exit age remains at 18, students offering an academic or vocational national certification may remain in SPED schools until age 21. This will allow them additional time to become work-ready. Of the 422 SPED students aged 18 years old in 2019, 150 remain in their schools this year, when they turn 19. Most will progress to open employment before the age of 21.
For students with SEN in mainstream schools, I am happy to announce two new initiatives. First, MOE has developed a professional development roadmap to enhance SEN training for all educators in mainstream schools. Second, we will provide more financial assistance to students with SEN in IHLs. I believe Ms Phua talked about that.
SEN training for educators. Minister announced earlier that MOE will embark on SkillsFuture for Educators or SFEd.\tSupport for students with SEN is one of the focus areas of SFEd. We have thus developed a new SEN Professional Development Roadmap (PD Roadmap), to better equip our educators in mainstream schools to support students with SEN.
We want every teacher in mainstream schools to become more skilled in supporting students with SEN. MOE will work with NIE to strengthen the inclusion of SEN support strategies in pre-service teacher training. For in-service teachers, MOE will launch bite-sized online learning resources in phases from this year. The SEN PD roadmap will also provide more professional development (PD) opportunities for educators who play a more specialised role in SEN support – namely, our Allied Educators in Learning and Behavioural Support, teachers trained in Special Needs or (TSNs) as well as the school management team. MOE will share more details in the coming months.
Second, MOE will extend the SEN Fund to cater to a wider spectrum of learning needs beyond those with sensory or physical impairments.
The SEN Fund was established in 2014 to help Polytechnic and ITE students with physical or sensory impairment to purchase education-related assistive technology (AT) devices and support services. Feedback on the SEN Fund has been positive. It has helped students to keep up with academic learning and improve day-to-day interaction with peers. Thus far, about $675,000 has been disbursed under the SEN Fund, benefiting more than 120 students.
In my engagements with students with SEN at the Polytechnics and ITE, they told me it would be helpful to extend the SEN Fund beyond physical disabilities, and they are right, as is Ms Denise Phua. Advancement in assistive technology devices have made it easier for students with other types of challenges to access education and prepare for independent work and life.
MOE will thus extend the SEN Fund to Polytechnic and ITE students with language and learning difficulties, as well as social and behavioural difficulties, including conditions like dyslexia, Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). These students will be able to tap on the SEN Fund to purchase assistive technology devices, up to a cap of $5,000, from 1 April 2020. Eligible students can approach their SEN Support Office to apply.
I am also happy to say that the Autonomous Universities will be extending the same support to their students with SEN for the purchase of assistive technology devices.
Besides funding, the SEN Support Offices in our IHLs also provide support to students with SEN from pre-enrolment to graduation.
Before enrolling in an IHL, prospective students can approach the SEN Support Offices in IHLs to find out more about courses that better suit their interests and learning needs. After enrolment, the SEN Support Offices work with the lecturers and tutors to make arrangements to ensure that students with SEN can access the curriculum and assessment tasks.
For students with SEN who require additional support to transition to the workplace as an intern, the IHLs also work with SG Enable and SSAs to identify suitable internship opportunities, prepare the students and ensure that they get the support that they need during internship.
MOE will continue to work with schools and IHLs to strengthen support for students with SEN to ensure that they, like all other students, receive the support they need to maximise their potential.
MOE is also committed to ensuring that financial circumstances are never a barrier to education for Singaporean students.
Students with financial difficulties can tap on a variety of MOE support schemes. In 2019, 52,000 students from lower income families at the Primary to pre-University levels benefited from the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS), SPED Financial Assistance and the Independent School Bursary. Another 72,000 students from low- to middle income families in our IHLs benefited from the government bursaries in academic year 2018.
Last year, we announced changes to make preschool and higher education more affordable. To ensure that education remains affordable at every stage, MOE will enhance financial support for two more groups – students on the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme at Primary, Secondary and pre-University levels as well as full-time NITEC and Higher NITEC students in ITE. The Deputy Prime Minister announced this in the Budget Statement and I will provide more details today. With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerk to distribute a handout to Members please?
The Chairman: Yes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Ms Indranee Rajah: First, we will enhance the MOE FAS, which supports Singaporean students at the Primary, Secondary and pre-University levels. Recognising increased transport costs, from April 2020, we will raise the public transport subsidy from $10 to $15 per month, for Primary up to pre-University levels. For Primary school students who take the school bus, we will also enhance the school bus transport subsidy to 60% of monthly payable fees, up from 50% today. This means that for parents paying a school bus fare of $110, out-of-pocket fees will drop to $45, which is down from $55 today.
Next, we will enhance the school meal subsidies for Secondary school students from April 2020 to $2.90 per school meal, up from $2.50 today. The meal subsidy for Primary school students will remain at $2 per meal.
Finally, to strengthen support for pre-University students, the pre-University bursary will be increased from $900 to $1,000 per year.
These FAS enhancements will be similarly applied to students in the lowest income tier of the MOE Independent School Bursary. MOE will also extend applicable aspects of the FAS enhancements to SPED schools.
Similar to last year, we expect around 52,000 students from the Primary to pre-University levels to benefit from the enhancements. This will cost around $52 million each year, a 20% increase from today.
Second, MOE will increase support for full-time NITEC and Higher NITEC students in ITE, which Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Zainal Sapari asked about.
Today, MOE subsidises over 90% of the total cost of NITEC and Higher NITEC courses. Lower and middle income students can receive further assistance through a cash bursary. MOE will enhance the cash bursary by between $50 and $200.
Beyond this, from April 2020, students from low-income families will also benefit from a full fee subsidy, in addition to an enhanced cash bursary of $1,500. This is for NITEC and Higher NITEC students from families with gross household income of $2,750 and below, or per capita income of $690 and below. We expect around 19,000 students to benefit from the enhanced ITE bursaries.
Students within the top 10% of GCE \"N\" or \"O\" Level entrants in each Higher NITEC and NITEC course receive the Community Development Council/Citizens' Consultative Committee-ITE Scholarship. These scholars currently receive a cash award of $1,600 a year. From April 2020, the scholarship will be enhanced to also cover their fees fully. Around 1,400 NITEC students and 1,200 Higher NITEC students will benefit from this. We will also rename the scholarship to ITE Community Scholarship to better reflect its purpose. It is also easier to remember.
With these enhancements, we will spend around $28 million a year on bursaries and scholarship for full-time NITEC and Higher NITEC students, an increase of around 20% from today.
To ensure that students can easily access financial support schemes, we agree with Mr Lim Biow Chuan that the application process should be simple, without causing any embarrassment. In MOE schools, teachers and staff keep a lookout for students who may require financial assistance. When approaching students, they take care to do so sensitively and discreetly. MOE also partners with Self-Help Groups to support students and families who need additional assistance beyond MOE. In our IHLs, information on financial aid and application processes is readily available online or can be obtained at the institution's financial aid office.
The process is even simpler for families on ComCare assistance. Students in our schools, Polytechnics and ITE, whose families are on ComCare assistance will be automatically granted MOE financial assistance without the need for any more documentation.
Despite our best efforts, we recognise that there are still some students who struggle in our education system. Each of these students has a unique set of challenging circumstances. We believe that these can be overcome with the right support and that is why we set up UPLIFT – the Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce. Mr Murali Pillai, Ms Cheng Li Hui, Mr Charles Chong and Dr Lim Wee Kiak have asked about UPLIFT's work. Let me provide an update.
A key focus area of UPLIFT is strengthening after-school care and support for students. This is done through school-based student care centres (SCCs) in Primary schools and after-school programmes in Secondary schools.
After-school support is especially important for students who do not have conducive home environments to return to after school. Providing these students with a structured and supervised after-school environment gives them the opportunity to develop good habits, routines and skills that will help them to succeed later in life.
Last year, I said MOE would expand our current provisions for after-school support, so I am very happy to announce that we have achieved our target of opening an SCC in all 185 Primary schools this year, up from 170 last year. Since we started expanding school-based SCCs in 2012, we have increased the enrolment from 3,000 to about 27,000 this year. We monitor demand for our SCCs closely and will work with the service providers to expand their capacity, but without compromising programme and service quality.
With more places in SCCs, we are now stepping up efforts to identify, enroll and provide support to students who would most benefit from SCCs. Over the past year, MOE worked closely with the community and MSF to study ground feedback, and walked the journey with these students and their families. We identified the main challenges that these families faced in enrolling their child in a SCC, and together, we developed solutions to address them.
One major challenge is affordability. Today, children from low-income families attending MSF-registered SCCs receive fee subsidies under the ComCare Student Care Fee Assistance (SCFA) scheme. However, some students on MOE's FAS still pay more than $120 per month after SCFA subsidies. Making SCCs more affordable for low-income families is an important step towards getting these students into the SCCs and into the right environment for them to do well. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim will share more about this in his speech for MSF later this week.
Beyond affordability, families face other challenges. For example, some may require their children to head home after school to look after their younger siblings or grandparents. Others may need help with the documentation needed to apply for financial assistance. Such complex challenges can only be surfaced and addressed through deeper, more personal, engagement with these families.
Recognising this, we have developed a more comprehensive, proactive approach to reach out to families and tackle challenges together with them.
First, schools will proactively identify students who would benefit most from the SCC environment and then go the extra mile to engage and build trust with their families, encouraging them to enroll their child in the SCC.
Second, we will engage the community to help address each family's challenges in a holistic and targeted way. Some families are referred to the Social Service Offices or Family Service Centres to help with childcare for their younger children, so that older ones can attend school and SCC, instead of having to look after their younger siblings.
Finally, we will make the enrolment process and application process for SCFA more user-friendly. For example, teachers will walk families through the various documents that they have to submit and guide them through the process, if needed. For families with complex circumstances, schools will exercise judgement and be more facilitative in the enrolment of children into the SCC.
We piloted this outreach approach in a few Primary schools in July last year, because we wanted to see whether it would make a difference. I was struck by the passion I saw in our teachers, who went out of their way to engage families, understand their challenges and work with the community to address them. They visited the students’ homes – multiple times in some cases. They conducted tours of the SCC for the students and induction sessions for parents, because we want to get the parents on-board to make sure the parents send their children to the SCCs. And I am most heartened to announce that we successfully enrolled 87 of the 100 students that we identified for the pilot.
After these students were enrolled, schools brought in community partners to engage them through targeted programmes to strengthen motivational support, resilience and holistic development. And, within the short span of six months, we have already begun to see progress in our students.
In Boon Lay Garden Primary School, our pilot outreach efforts helped four siblings – let us call them Nadia, Adam, Sofia and Danial – to enrol in their school’s SCC. The four siblings received limited support at home, as their mother was busy taking care of three other younger siblings. I think we are all familiar with cases like this. Adam and Danial, in particular, had longstanding difficulties with completing homework on time.
Since joining the school’s structured SCC environment, Adam and Danial have improved their time management skills and now manage their homework more confidently. As the SCC at Boon Lay Garden is run by Big Heart Student Care, a joint venture by the four Self-Help Groups (SHGs), the brothers also enjoyed plug-in programmes run by the SHGs, like the \"Backyard Science Workshops\" run by MENDAKI. The oldest sister, Nadia, also benefited from the SCC staff’s reinforcement of positive values and habits taught by the school. In recognition of her improvement, Nadia was awarded the school’s \"Good Progress Award\" last year.
With Nadia, Adam, Sofia and Danial progressing well in the SCC, their mother no longer needs to worry about them completing their homework when they return home.
Given the positive outcomes such as these, MOE will be implementing this enhanced outreach approach in all Primary schools. This will enable us to support more students from different backgrounds and further strengthen social mobility.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about UPLIFT’s progress in partnering with community initiatives and how such initiatives could link up with UPLIFT. Since the Taskforce was set up, UPLIFT has been supporting collaboration between schools and the community. I am very encouraged by the number of people who have come up to me to say, \"I want to be part of UPLIFT, how can I help?\" It is not just individuals; community organisations and companies have come forward too, approaching the schools directly, or working through the UPLIFT Programme Office.
One such company is Singapore Press Holdings’ Chinese Media Group or CMG. Last year, CMG worked with New Town Primary school and Qihua Primary School to start a Chinese reading programme called \"Reading with You\".
Leveraging their student publication, \"Thumbs Up Junior\", CMG staff including journalists and radio deejays engaged the students in enrichment activities and conversations, with the support of volunteers from the Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC) and Ngee Ann Polytechnic. Apart from immersing students in a Chinese Language-rich environment and improving their fluency and confidence in the language, the journalists also shared about current affairs and their experiences, serving as positive role models for the students.
The students enjoy these interactions with their big brothers and sisters. Over time, we hope such programmes can help students hone\ttheir strengths in their Mother Tongue Languages. As relationships deepen, the volunteers can also play a role in shaping the students’ aspirations. Such mentorship opportunities can be valuable for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, as the mentors inspire them and broaden their worldview in a natural, informal setting.
Another key focus area of UPLIFT is tackling long-term absenteeism. Early upstream intervention is critical to prevent occasional non-attendance from becoming long-term absenteeism.
Earlier, I spoke about upcoming enhancements to SCC provisions for Primary school students. At the Secondary school level, we have set up after-school programmes in over 70 schools under GEAR-UP, benefiting more than 3,000 students. These programmes focus on befriending and mentoring by trusted adults, peer support and interest-based activities to engage the students. We are on track to scale up GEAR-UP to 120 Secondary schools this year.
School-based support in SCCs and GEAR-UP can be complemented by community-based programmes like academic coaching, drop-in services and parenting support. However, schools may not always know about these programmes. Likewise, community organisations may not always know which students and families need help.
To close this coordination gap, UPLIFT has worked closely with MSF to pilot a solution. I am happy to update Members that since January, we have embarked on the UPLIFT Community Pilot, appointing an UPLIFT Town-Level Coordinator in the Social Service Office of three towns – Woodlands, Kreta Ayer and Boon Lay.
The Town-Level Coordinator will help integrate school-based and community-based support. Where students have emerging attendance issues and needs that can be met by community-based programmes, schools will refer them to the coordinator. The coordinator will identify the needs of the students and their families, source for suitable resources and programmes offered by the local community partners, and then connect them to the students and families. By improving coordination, we can set up protective factors around the students and their families faster, and address underlying causes of absenteeism earlier.
The UPLIFT Community Pilot will pool together the collective wisdom and resources of schools and the community, to better support vulnerable families. We estimate that more than 300 students could benefit from this pilot.
Sir, in conclusion, to ensure that education remains an uplifting force for all, regardless of starting point, we will need the collective contribution and conviction of every Singaporean. I hope that what I have shared today will inspire more individuals and organisations to step forward and\tpartner with us. Together, we can ensure that every Singaporean is cared for and supported to become the best that they can be. This is how we will build a society of opportunities for all. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat.
The Senior Minister of State for Education (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Mr Chairman, we started the SkillsFuture movement five years ago. The vision was to provide opportunities for all Singaporeans to develop skills mastery in different areas and fulfil our fullest potential regardless of our starting points in life.
This is what SkillsFuture is about – an inclusive and empowering national movement to enable all Singaporeans to chart our learning journeys. It starts from our schools, where we lay the foundation and passion for learning, followed by continuing education when students graduate and join the workforce. Constantly learning, re-learning and even un-learning. This continues after we retire, as part of active ageing.
Like the inspiring story that Mr Murali Pillai shared, learning is a never-ending endeavour. And as Ms Denise Phua has rightly pointed out, lifelong learning is a key focus for MOE.
SkillsFuture provides the foundations to grow our economy, transform our enterprises, upskill our workers and create good jobs for Singaporeans. It also enriches our lives as we learn new skills and discover new experiences. It is an essential pillar for building a society which is both pro-enterprise and pro-worker, and\twhere\tmultiple\tpathways\tlead\tto\tmultiple peaks\tof excellence.
We had three goals for the initial phase of SkillsFuture: to engender a shift in societal culture towards lifelong learning; to provide greater support for individuals to initiate and take ownership of their learning; to strengthen Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) as the third pillar of our CET ecosystem, complementing employers and private training providers.
We have made good progress so far. About 500,000 individuals and 14,000 enterprises have benefited from SkillsFuture initiatives. Many were able to perform their work better after training, and earned higher salaries.
I agree with Mr Gan Thiam Poh on the need for quality control and risk management. We will continue to\tensure\tthe\tquality\tof\tour\teducation\tand\ttraining ecosystem, to support courses with clear employability outcomes, and raise the quality bar for training providers.
Since last year, SSG has enhanced its capabilities to deal with fraud and abuse. It set up a dedicated Division to focus on this area, and introduced data analytics and machine learning to detect suspicious claims, as well as more traditional methods, such as surprise checks and mystery shoppers.
SSG will come down hard against errant training providers and individuals. Make no mistake – there will be zero tolerance for fraud and abuse. We will also review the legislation to further strengthen our regulatory and enforcement powers.
Sir, while\twe\ttackle\tthe\timmediate\tchallenges\tposed\tby COVID-19, we must remain focused on preparing Singapore for the future, and\tcontinue\tour\tpush\tfor\tlifelong\tlearning\tand\tskills mastery.
Two years ago, Minister Ong assessed that we were about a quarter of the way there. Recently, he said we have achieved close to 50%. An improvement, but this is still only the halfway mark. Advancing on the second half of our journey is what we want to achieve under the Next Bound of SkillsFuture.
We will continue to focus on training that equip our workers with job relevant skills that enhance their employability. In\tparticular,\twe\twant\temployers\tand\tenterprises, especially SMEs, to play a bigger role in supporting lifelong learning and to upgrade the skills of their workers.
At the same time, we will enhance support for individuals to initiate our own learning. This is important for Singaporeans who are self-employed and those who want to pursue a different career or learn a new skill beyond their current industry.
We\talso\twant\tto\tprovide\tmore\thelp\tfor\tmid-career Singaporeans in their 40s and 50s, to give them greater support to reskill and stay employable, whether is it in their current jobs, or if they switch to another company or industry.
The enhancements will be implemented under five areas.
First, we will strengthen our collaborations with intermediaries to help enterprises with transformation and skills training. These go hand-in-hand. The better our skills training, the more assurance we can give to our workers and the\tfaster\twe\tcan\ttransform\tour\tenterprises\tand economy.
Many\tenterprises,\tespecially\tSMEs,\tdo\tnot\thave\tthe resources to conduct their own in-house training. We understand. This is where partnerships with intermediaries, such as trade associations, anchor enterprises and professional firms, can come in handy.
We will work with a group of large anchor enterprises – also known as SkillsFuture Queen Bee companies – to drive enterprise-led training. Ms Foo Mee Har and Dr Intan asked about this. These anchor enterprises are industry leaders with deep sectoral knowledge, resources and extensive business networks.
One example is Singapore Power, which is working with SSG and eight SMEs in its supply chain to build workplace learning capabilities. Singapore Power aims to bring in another 40 SMEs by the end of this year, and eventually to include the rest of the sector. By having companies like Singapore Power train beyond their own needs, they can uplift the capabilities of other enterprises and also other workers in the entire sector. Over the next five years, we aim to partner up to 40 anchor\tenterprises\tto\treach\tout\tto\t4,000\tcompanies, especially SMEs.
To further support their transformation efforts, SMEs can tap on the $10,000 SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit. I spoke about this yesterday at the MTI COS. SMEs can also benefit from many existing grants and subsidies to\timprove\tproductivity,\tredesign\tjobs\tand\ttrain\ttheir workers.
Mr Douglas Foo asked about training of emerging and future skills. SSG has worked with the IHLs to curate the SkillsFuture Series courses focusing on such skills. There are 34 Skills Frameworks which employers can use to plan their talent pipeline for emerging and future jobs.
We will tap on intermediaries such as TACs, anchor enterprises, IHLs and professional firms to provide guidance to employers on emerging skills. For example, SSG has worked with PwC Singapore and Universities like INSEAD and SMU to launch a number of Masterclasses for SME business leaders. These will benefit around 100 individuals this year.
Next, we will intensify efforts to help employers develop stronger workplace training capabilities. The National Centre of Excellence for Workplace Learning (NACE) was launched at Nanyang Polytechnic in 2018. NACE has engaged over 250 companies for which 100 have started to implement workplace learning programmes.
We will expand NACE to two more IHLs over the next few years. The next one will be at the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) later this year. By 2025, we aim to help over 1,200 enterprises build best practices in workplace learning and work-study capabilities.
Sir, these efforts will complement our plans to expand the Work-Study pathway.
We launched the first slate of SkillsFuture Work-Study Programmes in 2015, with close links to the industry. Students can apply what they learnt in school to their workplaces and bring practical experiences and problem statements from their jobs back to the classrooms. Employers welcome the programme as it helps them to attract more young Singaporeans. It is a win-win arrangement. About 5,500 students have benefited from Work-Study Programmes since their launch in 2015 and about 1,400 companies have participated so far.
We will expand the SkillsFuture Work-Study Programmes into a mainstream pathway in the Next Bound of SkillsFuture. We aim to offer this pathway to 12% of each age cohort by 2025, and this translates to about 5,000 intake places, which is an increase from the current 3.5% or 1,600 places.
Work-Study\tProgrammes\tare\tuseful\tto\tprepare\tour students for the workforce. But\tapplied\tlearning\tis\tnot\tconfined\tto\tWork-Study Programmes. Internships are another important avenue.
Mr Faisal Manap suggested having a national level framework to establish common standards in internships and facilitate matching of students to internships.
Sir, such a framework had been put in place since 2015. This was one of the recommendations by the Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE Review (ASPIRE) Committee chaired by Second Minister Indranee Rajah. IHLs would ensure that their students on internships are provided with structured mentorship from the participating companies, with clear learning outcomes. More than 90% of Polytechnic students undergo structured credit-bearing internships in their final year of diploma studies. And these cover a wide range of industries, including culinary, retail, hospitality, healthcare and early childhood education. So, it was not factually accurate for Mr Faisal Manap to say that internships are mostly for technology and finance sectors. It is broader than that.
On the matching of students to internships, a centralised model, as suggested by Mr Faisal Manap, may not produce better outcomes than the current approach. The way companies currently offer internships is through partnerships with our IHLs. The\tIHLs\tknow\ttheir\tstudents\twell\tand\twhat\tindustry opportunities are needed to deepen their learning. So, it is not quite the same as companies filling job vacancies through open recruitment. The two process may appear same-same, but they are different.
Let me now touch on how we are empowering individuals to learn for life.
The SkillsFuture Credit was introduced in 2015 to bring about an important mindset change, that each of us must take charge of our personal learning journey towards skills mastery. We are empowering individuals.
The $500 SkillsFuture Credit has been well-utilised. More than half a million Singaporeans have used their Credit and amongst them, close to 40% have either fully used up their Credit, or are close to doing so. More than 90% of SkillsFuture Credit claims were for work- related and industry-oriented courses. We will provide a top-up of $500 to the SkillsFuture Credit for every Singaporean aged 25 and above this year.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked if some workers could start using the top-up before 1 October. The\tSkillsFuture\tCredit\ttop-up\tis\tdesigned\tto\tsupport individuals with their lifelong learning needs beyond the COVID-19 crisis. That is why the top-up is valid for five years, till 31 December 2025. The original start date was 1 January 2021, but SSG has done what it could to bring it forward to 1 October 2020, while ensuring that the top-ups are administered accurately and used appropriately. SSG will look at the possibility of allowing appeals on a case- by-case basis, for example, for those who are in-between jobs and need to use their Credit for training to get a new job.
For individuals who are currently employed, we encourage their employers to provide them with the training during this period, tapping\ton\tthe\tAbsentee\tPayroll\tand\ttraining\tsubsidies provided by SSG. The employees can then keep their SkillsFuture Credit for use later, within that five-year window.
Mr Png Eng Huat spoke about training support for mature freelancers and he made reference to the Surrogate Employer Programme which Mr Patrick Tay mentioned during Budget debate.
Sir, all Singaporeans and PRs, regardless of employment status, are eligible to receive course fee subsidies for MOE and SSG-funded training courses. Those who are aged 40 and above can receive further subsidies of up to 90% under the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Enhanced Subsidy. It does not matter if they are employees, self-employed or in between jobs. For employees who are sent for training by their companies, their employers will typically cover the post-subsidy course fees. For others, like freelancers, they would pay the 10% co-payment on their own, and they can use their SkillsFuture Credit for the out-of-pocket costs.
So, contrary to what Mr Png said yesterday, self-employed persons and freelancers aged 40 and above will receive up to 90% in course fee subsidy, no different from an employee. And this includes courses for freelance trainers, which Mr Png mentioned in his cut.
Mr Png also made reference to the Surrogate Employer Programme. Mr Patrick Tay had raised this idea in the context of providing a training allowance to self-employed persons while they go for training, to help them during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Yesterday, MOM announced the new SEP Training Support Scheme, where all self-employed persons will be provided with a training allowance over the next three months when they attend courses under the SkillsFuture series and selected sector-specific training programmes. This is different from the SkillsFuture course fee subsidy that I explained earlier, which is not linked to the Surrogate Employer Scheme. The 90% course fee subsidy is one thing, the training allowance is another. Let us not mix up the two.
Sir, SkillsFuture is for all Singaporeans at every stage of our lives. I agree with Ms Foo Mee Har on the need to support individuals in navigating the courses available. We will provide customised recommendations on training options through MySkillsFuture portal, including quality and outcomes ratings of courses. And we hope this will help individuals to decide which courses will be more relevant or have better quality.
For individuals who prefer face-to-face support, we have been working with the libraries, CDCs, e2i and PA, to provide SkillsFuture Advice workshops to help individuals find out about different SkillsFuture initiatives and plan for their training. More than 100,000 individuals have participated in these workshops, and even more will benefit in the years ahead.
We are planning to expand the reach and enhance the training guidance under SkillsFuture Advice\tvia the Career Centres, in collaboration with partners like the unions and career advisors, including private sector entities that provide such services on a commercial basis. And this will supplement the assistance for individuals provided through\tthe portal and our existing SkillsFuture Advice workshops.
Finally, the Next Bound of SkillsFuture will focus on our mid-career workers in their 40s and 50s. We will help them to refresh and rejuvenate their skill-sets, so that they can remain employable and benefit from new opportunities.
Deputy Prime Minister announced a comprehensive set of measures under the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Support Package. The other Ministries – MTI, MCI, MOM – have touched on some of these initiatives yesterday.
MOE will work with MOM and MTI to increase capacity and placements for re-skilling programmes. We\twill\tramp\tup\tthe\tcapacity\tfor\tcareer\ttransition programmes at CET centres, to complement other re-skilling programmes such as Professional Conversion, Place-and-Train and Tech Skills Accelerator Mid-Career Advance for ICT jobs.
Mr Zainal Sapari asked if these career transition programmes could be more targeted at mid-career workers.
Currently, many of the re-skilling programmes are, what we call Place-and-Train, where individuals are first matched with an employer before they start their training. We will add to these by expanding the career transition programmes, as suggested by Dr Lim Wee Kiak. Individuals will be trained before they receive career support services, such as advisory and placement from CET centres. There is less certainty of placement compared to Place-and-Train, but this provides greater flexibility in the eventual choice of job. It also allows us to train more individuals in industry-relevant skills to enhance their employment prospects and offer employers a job-ready candidate at the point of placement. Both types of programmes have their usefulness and their relevance as they serve different groups of Singaporeans. They complement each other.
From 2020, these different re-skilling programmes will collectively increase the placements of Singaporeans in their 40s and 50s. Our aim is to double the numbers in five years.
We will also provide an additional $500 SkillsFuture Credit (Mid-Career Support). In other words, a worker aged 40 to 60 this year will receive a total SkillsFuture Credit top-up of $1,000. If he has not used his first $500 from 2015, he will have a total amount of $1,500.
In the Next Bound of SkillsFuture, we target to benefit a total of 28,000 companies and one million individuals over the next five years. We will need more resources to support these enhancements.
Over the next five years, Government will spend about $1.4 billion on the Next Bound of SkillsFuture. We are investing even more in SkillsFuture compared to the first five years.
At the same time, we have to review our existing initiatives, and reallocate our resources across different areas.
We will review course subsidy rates, together with the Enhanced Subsidy Schemes. We will continue to subsidise up to 90%, with more support for courses that lead to clearer employment outcomes. This is in line with the calls from several Members.
Schemes that have become less relevant over time, such as the SkillsFuture Qualification Awards, will be gradually phased out.
We will also be making some adjustments to Absentee Payroll. The larger enterprises are currently benefiting more from this provision. We will review the rates and set a maximum amount each company can receive so that the funding support can be distributed to more companies.
We were planning to make these changes together with the enhancements under the Next Bound of SkillsFuture. However, with the COVID-19 situation, we will defer these changes to a later date and focus our efforts for now to help businesses and workers to tide through the current challenges.
One recent change that we made was to increase the course fee subsidy to a flat rate of 90% and raise the Absentee Payroll rates to $10 per hour for sectors like tourism and air transport, which are worst-hit by the drop in tourist arrivals. The intent is to help our companies and workers during this difficult period. And as Deputy Prime Minister said, if the situation calls for it, the Government is prepared to do more.
Ms Sylvia Lim asked about the appeal process for PSEA. We had discussed the usage of PSEA in this House in November last year.
Sir, I thank Ms Lim for acknowledging that course quality and relevance are valid factors in deciding which programmes can qualify for PSEA usage. And Ms Lim is right that PSEA monies are not subsidies per se, but they comprise mainly Government top-ups which come from public funds. We have a responsibility to safeguard the interests of all account holders by upholding the quality and relevance of approved courses, to guide Singaporeans on which courses would produce better outcomes for them.
But I understand Ms Lim's point in the case of her resident, due to his unfortunate family situation. I will share her feedback with MOE colleagues to see how we can improve the appeals process for handling exceptional cases. Sir, please allow me to continue in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] SkillsFuture will continue to be a critical enabler for Singapore's next phase of development. It supports skills training and lifelong learning, and it can help enterprises transform and be more competitive.
We have made good progress with SkillsFuture in the past five years, and will be taking it into the next bound.
One of the key initiatives in the Next Bound of SkillsFuture is to enhance support for individuals to pursue lifelong learning through a SkillsFuture Credit top-up of $500 for every Singaporean aged 25 and above this year. The top-up will be valid for five years.
In addition, Singaporean mid-career workers aged 40 to 60 in 2020 will receive an additional SkillsFuture Credit (Mid-Career Support) of $500 for them to access Career Transition Programmes, as part of the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Support Package. This group of workers will receive a total of $1,000 in SkillsFuture Credit top-ups.
We will also be growing the SkillsFuture Work-Study Programmes into a mainstream pathway which will be made available to 12% of each cohort. This will benefit employers and provide more pathways and options for our students.
(In English\t): Mr Chairman, MOE is committed to building a strong foundation for students in schools and also offering a quality education at the IHLs and lifelong learning thereafter. Minister and Second Minister covered the initiatives in schools earlier. Our IHLs have similarly embraced the spirit of recognising aptitudes, skills and experience over qualifications and translated this philosophy into their admission policies, enhancing porosity across the different pathways.
Minister and Second Minister covered the initiatives in schools earlier. Our IHLs have, similarly, embraced the spirit of recognising aptitudes, skills and experience over qualifications, and translated this philosophy into their admissions policies, enhancing porosity across the different pathways.
First, for \"A\" Level students who do not progress to the AUs, we will help them obtain a Polytechnic Diploma within a shorter time. For a third of the Polytechnic diploma courses, they will be able to graduate with a diploma in two years instead of three years.
Second, we will expand aptitude-based admissions at NUS, NTU and SMU. This enables more students to be considered based on non-academic aptitudes and strengths, and broadens holistic recognition of individuals beyond grades.
Third, we will expand pathways for working adults to enrol in full-time diploma courses, including those who have part-time Nitec, Higher Nitec or WSQ diploma qualifications and we will do so by recognising their relevant work experiences and the skills that they have acquired.
These changes in higher education reflect the spirit of SkillsFuture to provide multiple pathways, support continuous learning and deepen our focus on skills.
They are part of MOE’s effort to build a continuum of education and learning opportunities for every Singaporean, starting from young, through our adult and working life, and after we retire, as part of active ageing.
Let us work together to build a nation of lifelong learners with a deep passion for new knowledge and skills; to grow a society that values skills mastery and recognises different peaks of excellence; and to nurture a people who are resilient and resourceful, and who are ready to seize the opportunities that come our way. [Applause.]
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Mr Chairman, as I hear about how we are supporting our people to seize the opportunities of the future, I am reminded of the importance of nurturing well-rounded individuals guided by a strong set of values.
Indeed, MOE remains committed to this cause. That said, I am also reminded how important it is for all of us – parents, teachers, and the community – to work together to bring out the best in our children. Mr Chairman, allow me to first speak in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Over the last few years, many parents have shared with me that being a parent has brought them tremendous joy – but equally, many sleepless nights. As a father of two children, I can relate to this sentiment.
As parents, we want what is best for our children and seek to bring out the best in them. At the same time, we are also responsible for moulding them into responsible individuals with a strong moral compass, a sense of heritage, and as Minister Ong had shared earlier – a strong foundation of values, tools and skills to navigate the world ahead of them.
This is also something that MOE is committed to – even as we embark on the shifts in our education system that my colleagues have spoken about. Ms Cheng Li Hui and Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about our partnerships with parents, community, and industry, and how these would help to nurture the right values, dispositions, and skills in our students.
First, our schools actively reach out to parents, and work closely with them to support our children in pursuing their strengths and interests, and to impart good values and attitudes. Our Guidelines for School-Home Partnerships, which were released last year, were well received by parents and schools, and we have observed some encouraging signs. For example, the focus of conversations between teachers and parents has shifted from an overemphasis on academic achievement, to students’ learning dispositions, physical and mental well-being, and classroom behaviour.
I was very encouraged when Madam Titek Rohani, whose youngest child is now in secondary school, shared how she makes it a point to learn from teachers about her child’s strengths and interests, her child’s relationships with fellow students, and whether her child contributes to his peers’ learning. She also works closely with the school to guide her child as he explores different education pathways.
(In English): Mr Chairman, second, schools and parents work closely to role model good values and attitudes for our students. Values are both caught and taught, and likewise both practised and preached. I am very heartened to hear how parents and teachers are collectively encouraging and galvanising students amidst the COVID-19 virus situation. They are indeed role models for our students.
Our teachers have seized the opportunity to educate our students about the virus and their part to play. They do this through teaching scientific knowledge; inculcating good hygiene practices; as well as facilitating discussions on empathy, resilience, and a sense of community.
Parents too, have volunteered their time and effort to support the school community. For example, Rulang Primary School had sent out a circular to parents to inform them of the extra cleaning measures undertaken to ensure that the premises remained clean. In response, members of the Parent Support Group volunteered to help with cleaning efforts, which reduced the load of frontline support staff. In addition, the parents put together care packages to encourage the staff, cleaners and security officers for their hard work in ensuring that the school premises remained clean and safe.
From both our teachers and parents, our students are learning how they too can be part of the solution: by demonstrating kindness and being socially responsible. Together, they demonstrate the resilient, caring spirit of partnership that binds the nation together in trying times.
Lastly, community and industry partners have a big role to play in developing our students holistically. Our schools have been actively engaging them to provide a richer learning experience for our students and broaden their horizons. Mr Terence Ho asked what our plans were for developing local arts institutions and suggested introducing local composers and compositions as part of our music curriculum.
This is something that we have done. One of MOE's key learning objectives of the Music syllabi is for students to appreciate music across local and global cultures. During music lessons, our students are introduced to traditional and contemporary music and instruments in Singapore through a selection of songs that reflects Singapore's diverse and rich culture.
Some schools have gone further and engaged local artistes to contribute to their programmes. For instance, Boon Lay Secondary School works closely with industry practitioners – such as Ms Melissa Quek, who is the Head of the School of Dance and Theatre at the LaSalle College of the Arts – to plan and deliver dance lessons/workshops under the school’s Learning for Life Programme. This partnership has inspired students to appreciate the arts more deeply, and exposed them to different career possibilities.
MOE and MCCY will continue to closely study plans to develop our local arts institutions, including Mr Ho's suggestion of an arts university, taking into account the evolving arts education landscape and developments in the industry.
Mr Chairman, I would also like to take this chance to reaffirm the Government's commitment to supporting our students. Ms Anthea Ong asked if we would extend subsidies for Primary school students with foreign passports.
All students in our Primary schools benefit from education subsidies, with some differentiation in the amount of subsidy to reflect the benefits of citizenship. Likewise, Singaporean students in MOE-funded schools who need financial support are eligible for financial assistance schemes. Nonetheless, non- citizen students with at least one Singaporean or Permanent Resident parent can approach our schools for assistance. We will assess their situations and exercise flexibility on a case-by-case basis.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap asked if we would extend the Financial Assistance Scheme and Edusave Award to full- time madrasah students. He drew a parallel with the provision of Edusave Contributions (EC) to madrasah students.
This comparison is mistaken. All Singapore Citizens aged seven to 16, regardless of school, receive an annual EC based on their age. This ensures every Singapore Citizen child receives support for secular enrichment activities.
The Edusave Awards, by contrast, is part of the programme in our national schools. They recognise the character, leadership, conduct, learning dispositions, and academic achievements of students enrolled in national schools. Similarly, the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme caters to students in MOE-funded schools. Students in private schools are hence not eligible for the Financial Assistance Scheme or Edusave Awards.
That said, the Government recognises the role that the madrasahs play for the community. Hence, students in madrasahs receive support through the Edusave Contributions. They are also eligible for the Madrasah Student Awards administered by MUIS, which recognise madrasah students' educational excellence.
In addition, MUIS provides assistance for madrasah students from low-income families through the Progress Fund Madrasah Assistance Scheme (PROMAS). Furthermore, PROMAS recipients who perform well in both their religious and secular subjects and exhibit exemplary character are also eligible for the PROMAS Performance Award.
Mr Chairman, in closing, I would like to reiterate that it is only through our collective efforts – with parents, teachers, and the community – that we bring out the best in our children and nurture well-rounded individuals guided by a strong set of values.
While we may play different roles, we can all work together, as MOE’s mission statement proclaims, \"to mould the future of our nation\".
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling): Mr Chairman, Sir, a teacher once told me and, I quote, \"Our job is not to prepare students for something. Our job is to help students prepare themselves for anything.\" And I thought this is really true and this captures the essence of what MOE seeks to do as we enable Singaporeans to \"Learn for Life\", as what Minister Ong Ye Kung has shared in his speech earlier.
Let me give some quick updates on our continual efforts to empower Singaporeans, young and old, with the skills and dispositions to take on the future with confidence.
To put Singaporeans in a good stead for the future, like what Minister Ong said earlier, proficiency in Mother Tongue Languages (MTL) is key, as the age of Asia opens door to greater opportunities. Mr Chairman, Sir, please allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, the learning of our Mother Tongue Languages (MTL) is only natural given our cultural context, and will also help our students grasp the opportunities of a rising Asia. MOE has collaborated with the three Mother Tongue Language Learning Promotion Committees since their formation some 15 years ago. Since then, we have worked closely with the community to encourage the learning of MTL within and beyond schools – be it Chinese, Tamil, or Malay.
Over the last few years, there has been a stronger nexus between the work of the Committees and the formal MTL curriculum, and this has led to a mutually reinforcing relationship between schools and the community. Teachers and students are encouraged to apply lessons from the classroom to their daily lives and creations, to support joyful and authentic MTL learning.
For instance, Members may be familiar with the annual National School \"Xinyao\" Festival. Recently, we introduced a new “Creative” songwriting category where students submit original compositions based on the MTL curriculum taught in secondary school. This was not easy. Instead of just singing a song that is composed by others, students would have to draw inspiration from the textbook and compose a new song. Last year, I attended the finals which lasted for about three hours. It was fascinating and we were deeply impressed by the students’ creativity.
Two sisters composed, performed, and produced a music video for a song titled \"华佗\" (Huatuo), inspired by the tale of a renowned physician in their Chinese textbook. Those of us who read Chinese martial arts novels would be familiar with “Huatuo\". The catchy tune and accessible lyrics of the song allow the story to shine through to the youth and enable a better understanding of not only Huatuo, but also traditional Chinese medicine and the essence of Chinese culture. We will release this video in the near future and I encourage all of you to watch it, and share it with your family and friends.
There are many wonderful examples that can be drawn from this competition. Like the sisters, many of our students’ work have been reproduced as useful lesson materials for our teachers.
We believe that the collective energy and support of schools, families, the media, the entertainment circle, and the larger community, will sustain a vibrant ecosystem to ignite students' interest and love for their MTL, be it Chinese, Tamil, or Malay.
(In English): Mr Chairman, Sir, please allow me to also share examples of the work of our Malay and Tamil Language Learning Promotion Committees in making MTL learning relatable, in making MTL learning enjoyable. Since 2018, the \"Perkasa Warisan\" camp has brought together community partners, as Miss Cheng Li Hui mentioned earlier, to provide immersive experiences, specifically tied to the language and also the cultural components of the Malay language curriculum, such as activities on the art of Malay gastronomy.
Tech-savvy youths from NUS and also the youths from NTU have made learning Tamil fun for Upper Primary students, through a programme called \"Artificial Intelligence and Tamil Language\". This programme allows our students to learn the language in the context of coding application and software and then apply it in novel and also technological settings.
I am confident that the committees will continue to bring together the passion, the creativity and energy of our schools, parents, media and the community to sustain a vibrant eco-system for students to like, to learn and to use their MTL as living languages. Mr Chairman, Sir, apart from reinforcing our bilingual foundations, MOE is also committed to developing the whole child through a broad-based and holistic curriculum. This includes, as Miss Cheng Li Hui suggested, engaging our youths in current issues, like climate change to foster in them traits of active citizenship and a shared concern for Singapore and the world.
We currently integrate the topic of climate change across various subjects at different levels of the national curriculum. Secondary school students, for example, will learn in Geography lessons the effects of climate change on our food supply chain and also the forests. In Science, they will investigate how human activities disrupt the carbon cycle, contribute to climate change and threaten our environment.
As part of the curriculum development process, we also consult MEWR and other relevant authorities to provide our students with the most up-to-date and accurate information on climate change. More importantly, we hone our students' ability in discerning the news and also engage them in inquiry-based learning and discussion so that our students are guided to examine different sources of information critically.
Beyond the classroom, many schools have programmes that partner the community to promote environmental causes and give our students the chance to translate their knowledge into action. For instance, students are trained to become \"Junior Environmental Ambassadors\" in the Green Schools programme by the South West Community Development Council (South West CDC) and NEA. As part of their training, they go through modules on the environment like energy efficiency and climate change, as well as the 4Rs that we are all very familiar with. The 4Rs are to Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, and most recently, to Refuse. This further instils in our students, green practices and mind-sets like waste minimisation.
Many Members are very active on the ground, in the community; you will agree with me that students are our best ambassadors, because when they go back and tell their mummy, daddy or grandparents, \"You forgot to switch off the aircon, you forgot to switch off the lights\", I think the whole family will remember the green practices. So, we are counting on our students to really spread the word for us.
Last year, close to 300 student ambassadors across 49 schools completed their training and went on to champion green initiatives in their schools in the South West district. The other CDCs are also implementing similar green initiatives with the schools in their districts.
Also central to holistic education, is the students' participation in co-curricular activities (CCAs), which allow them to discover their interest and talents, forge friendships with peers of diverse backgrounds, as well as develop character and resilience. We are glad that Miss Cheng Li Hui supports our initiative to pilot the removal of CCA selection trials to help our students develop their passions, regardless of their prior experiences and backgrounds.
As part of our on-going efforts to redefine CCA experiences, MOE is also exploring how to better promote social mixing and inclusivity through CCAs, as advocated by Ms Cheng. Currently, we are piloting combined teams where two schools run a CCA programme together, and where appropriate, send a combined team to participate in the National School Games (NSG) or Singapore Youth Festival Arts Presentation.
As students work together towards a common purpose, there will be plenty of opportunities for them to learn, to appreciate differences, to pick up skills like relationship management. We are starting this with five pairs of schools. In time to come, we believe our CCA experiences will better support our students' holistic growth.
Mr Chairman, to conclude, I recap the educator's quote that I started with, \"Our job is not to prepare students for something. Our job is to help students prepare themselves for anything\". Yes, we should help our students prepare themselves for anything that may come their way. In so doing, we will raise a generation of Singaporeans with a sense of confidence over their lives and their future, no matter what uncertainties a changing world may hold. To this end, MOE will continue to work with stakeholders to nurture our youths to become active citizens with a love to Learn for Life, and willing to act for a better Singapore that we collectively own.
The Chairman: Clarifications. Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: I thank the Minister and Second Minister as well. Just a few questions on Tree for Life. First, on my suggestion to rename or consider the idea of Ministry of Education being the Ministry of Lifelong Learning. Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat just mentioned that MOE is now providing a continuum of learning opportunities for Singaporeans for the entire life. I thought that a new name might reflect better MOE's new vision and mission.
Also, education somehow, smacks of a one-way flow: of I educate you, I teach you; versus the idea of self-driven learning whereby the ownership is put on the people who are learning. That is one question.
My second question is on the transformation map. I do appreciate the Tree for Life. I would like to seek indulgence to help to prune the Tree a little bit and to suggest some modifications. One is the fruit. It will be great, if in this so-called transformation map in the form of a tree, the types of fruit could be articulated better in terms of what kind of students you want to see; what kind of learners; and what kind of desired outcomes, including how we will benchmark – my point which Minister maybe forgot to respond to – benchmark what would be the success of our education system versus the usual ones that we are quite used to – PISA rankings and so forth.
The next is the ground in the graphic of Tree for Life. For the ground, we could specify the foundational principles by which our uniquely Singapore education system should aspire towards. Principles like equal access, and a lot of the things that are already being done in our country, like being inclusive, like being collaborative, like always looking at future-proofing and looking ahead. Those could be the foundational principles that occupy the ground from which this tree grows.
The third is in terms of the branches in the Tree for Life. I thought that many of the things that Ministers, Senior Minister of State and Senior Parliamentary Secretaries have mentioned are to do with enablers. The branches are really the enablers. How we look at the future roles of staff, be they education leaders or educators, the curriculum, the content to teach, the pedagogy by which we teach. These are great enablers that can be considered as the branches.
And then, there is also the weather condition. Beyond the Tree per se – but the conditions on how we are all conditioned to think of as, like a certain way, when we look at education in our country; and some of the driving forces to support what MOE is trying to do —
The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua, can you keep it to clarification, instead of another speech?
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Would Minister consider all of that, and also maybe add an element of innovation in the graphic so that we could consider for example, schools that may not have to go through the PSLE or a Parent Academy.
Chairman, on Special Education Needs. A couple of questions. I think it is great news that the SEN Fund for IHLs has been extended to those who not just have physical disabilities, but also to those with Dyslexia, ADHD and ASD. But the amount given is $5,000, if I heard correctly. In the actual original fund, there is $25,000 for those with hearing and visual impairment. I was wondering why the extension is for $5,000, and not $25,000, why not in between?
There are physical devices but we need therapists, coach services too.
The Chairman: How many supplementary questions are there, Ms Denise Phua? If you can just keep it succinct, please.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Yes. My last question is an appeal to extend the special school years for all of the SPED students – not just those who are currently allowed to study until 21, but for all of them to be able to stay until the age 21. Because they just need that longer runway to enable them to be more independent in daily living and to allow them to perhaps have a better chance to do some supported employment work.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I think the analogy of a tree cannot be pushed too far, but that is always the danger when you use an analogy. Foundational principles – I totally agree with Ms Denise Phua. When we came up with this \"Tree for Life\" and the Learn for Life movement, we were focusing on the deltas. What are the main changes we want to make. One example is UPLIFT, which is something that we are putting a lot more resources to.
But surely, all the principles that the Member mentioned earlier – they continue to be relevant. But this tree is focusing on the delta. As I mentioned in my speech, it will guide us in our actions for the next five to 10 years – the key changes that we want to see in the system.
The Member's points on the branches, on the different kinds of fruits – actually, if we want students of different abilities to have different pathways, one fruit is not enough. You need a whole orchard of different kinds of fruits. So, again, the analogy cannot be taken too far.
But I take all of the Member's points. These are all valid. That is why I say the education system must always be a work in progress. While we say we have a plan for the next five to 10 years, I am sure along the way, there will be new initiatives, new imperatives and we have to change again.
I will leave the Second Minister to answer the question on SEN, but on the renaming to the Ministry for Lifelong Learning – we agree with the essence of what the Member said. I think the essence of what the Member wishes MOE will do, we will do. If we do it well, we achieve what we want to do, and promote lifelong learning the way we want to, at that point in time, maybe we can think about a change of our name.
The Chairman: Ms Indranee Rajah.
Ms Indranee Rajah: I need to respond to Ms Denise Phua's many supplementary questions.
The first clarification Ms Denise Phua had was – how come it is $5,000 for the SEN Fund for those with social and behavioural conditions instead of $25,000? Currently, under the SEN Fund, eligible students with physical impairment can tap up to $5,000 on the SEN Fund. So, it is pegged to that. Eligible students with visual or hearing loss can tap up to $25,000 and that is because for those with visual or hearing loss, the expenses are higher for them in terms of the assistive devices, that is one; as well as the services.
So, for example, for the assistive devices, they may need an assistive learning system, talking calculators, reader pens. Those are generally more expensive than other types of devices. And also, supporting services. For example, hearing loss. You may need somebody to do sign language and then you obviously have to cover that. And for the blind students, sometimes you need note-taking services. So, it is scoped depending on the need and basically, for hearing loss and visual impairment, the cost of the devices and support is higher.
Do not forget, we have just extended the SEN Fund to students with learning and behavioural needs, and this is just a start. So, the high-needs category may not be so applicable to them. But this much I can assure Ms Denise Phua, which is that MOE will continue to work with our IHLs and we will review the SEN Fund periodically. Our ultimate aim is to ensure that the students with SEN are adequately supported with the necessary devices that they need.
Ms Denise Phua also made a passionate plea for us to keep some of the students in the SPED schools for longer, up to age 21. Well, there are two things that we are doing, which will partially address that. But I agree that there is much more that we can look at, to see how we can support those who leave school. So, let me just take them in turn.
The first thing is, MOE has already started in the SPED schools a school-wide process of transition planning for all the SPED students at the Secondary age. The school has developed an individual transition plan for each student, working with the students, the care-givers and the family, and the idea is really to help them to be able to cope when they leave school. So, that is the first thing, and this will apply to all the SPED students, irrespective of whether or not they may be able to go into open employment, or not. So, that is number one – prepare them all for when they leave school.
Number two, we have the School-to-Work Transition Programme in all the SPED schools and that is to offer customised training pathways cum work options for the students, who have diverse disability profiles, who may not benefit from the vocational certification but they are still capable of work. The School-to-Work Transition Programme begins in the student's final year of schooling, when he or she is referred to SG Enable and matched to a suitable employment or training pathway, and the programme continues for one year after he or she graduates, during which he or she is supported by SG Enable. While on the programme, the students receive customised job training, job support from job coaches to prepare them for eventual employment.
That said, I think Ms Denise Phua's concern really is that there may be some who are not able to do open employment and her appeal is, can we keep them in the school system? But even if we did that, even up to age 21, there are still some, who, after age 21, still cannot cope with open employment. I think what Ms Denise Phua wants to do is to sort of lengthen the runway.
So, one step at a time. I think we have spent the last decade or so really ensuring that SPED is strengthened, that we have got good quality in terms of the content as well as the teachers and those who can provide the programmes. And you can see we are now taking the next step, which is helping them to transition beyond school and those who can go to open employment.
So, I think I can say this – we agree that that is certainly an area that has to be looked into, for those who cannot go into open employment. Work in progress, and we will be very happy to partner all the stakeholders in this space to come up and see what is the best thing for them. It may or may not be retaining them in school. It may be something else. But what we really want is that no matter what it is, when you leave SPED school, you also want those with special needs to be able to live lives which are as productive as possible, and which also gives their care-givers a sense of assurance, that their loved ones with special needs are engaged and have something to do, and are in an environment which is conducive for them.
The Chairman: Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har: Thank you, Sir. I have two questions for the Senior Minister of State on SkillsFuture. First, thank you for very much for the range of exciting initiatives on SkillsFuture. The first clarification I have is that I ask the Senior Minister of State how the next phase of SkillsFuture movement will bring about a closer link between the CET courses and employability. I spoke about the challenge amongst the thousands of courses and people needed help to navigate. What do I need to do? What skills do I have to achieve based on the CET courses offered that would link me to a very good employment outcome, especially those 40 to 60 years old, the same group we are trying to help.
The second clarification I have for the Senior Minister of State is on the SkillsFuture Queen Bee initiative. It is a very exciting initiative and there were so very impressive numbers being mentioned, that SMEs are being brought on board. I asked in my speech if the Senior Minister of State can give more details about how this new model works, maybe specifically give some details on the governance, the funding, whether there is any certification involved, so that some of the skills can be portable. So, just really going a bit deeper about if these Queen Bees are going to be schools of the industries, how are they going to be governed, how are they going to be funded, and the quality control about the programmes.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Chairman, I thank Ms Foo Mee Har for her two supplementary questions. For the first, she is right that because we offer so many different kinds of courses, it is useful for people to get some advisory, some guidance. If I take this course, what are some of the pathways that may be open to me? What are some of the outcomes that I can benefit from? This is going to be done through two channels, mainly. The first one, of course, we are going to do it through the portal. So, the portal will be enhanced to be able to provide some of this information based on the individual's profile, needs, and make some recommendations.
But we understand that some Singaporeans will want a more face-to-face interaction, because they are then able to interact with the advisor, they are able to get some guidance to point them in the right direction. So that is why we are going to work through the SkillsFuture Advice. But this time round, we will go beyond the community, which is what we have been doing for the past few years, to work with the career centres. This will be in collaboration with MOM, Workforce Singapore and also with our unions. And as I mentioned earlier, also with private sector entities that can come in and provide some of these advisory services on a commercial basis.
Through this process, we hope to be able to supplement the support that we give to individuals and help them to make those decisions.
The other point that I will just mention briefly is that part of having a closer linkage between training and employability, where we also have to curate the quality of the training courses. And that is also what we will do in the next bound – to further raise the quality of the training providers. That is going to be one of the key priorities too.
Ms Foo Mee Har's second question on Queen Bees. This is work in progress. We have lined up some companies but every sector is different. Some Queen Bees, like in the case of SP Group, are there because they have many links with suppliers and contractors in the sector. So, they are able to then influence what these SMEs do. Because these SMEs, many of them are their suppliers, their contractors. But in some cases, it is not quite like that. The people who are participating and the SMEs may not be direct contractors or suppliers, but they are part of the industry.
So, the model needs to be customised depending on which Queen Bee company we are working with, which sector we are working on. But I think the fundamental principle remains that what we want is to be able to have these Queen Bee companies to take the lead and work with us as partners, to be able to raise the training opportunities and resources available to other companies and workers within the sector.
The Chairman: Prof Lim Sun Sun.
Prof Lim Sun Sun: I thank the Minister's for the various announcements and I also appreciate the attention to level the playing field for students from different family backgrounds.
I first have a clarification. I would like to find out if there will be greater effort to introduce social emotional training for teachers so that there is greater self-awareness on the part of teachers, and that they better understand how they relate not just to their colleagues but also to their students, so as to build a healthier classroom environment.
The second is a comment on the device ownership scheme. I appreciate that there are many virtues to personal device usage in schools, but there are also certain pitfalls that we need to think about. Previous research has shown that device ownership actually involves many components, including device purchase, device maintenance, software maintenance as well as software usage. And families are clearly differently advantaged in being able to provide the guidance. So, I have found in my own research that parents from less well-heeled backgrounds face severe inadequacy and severe anxiety in terms of their inability to support their children in this way.
In other words, unless we have very concerted, very comprehensive support and augmentation within schools for IT support for students from different backgrounds, you may find that some of these introductions of device usage may introduce different kinds of inequalities. So, I hope due attention can be paid to this issue.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Prof Lim Sun Sun talked about microaggression yesterday. I do not think it is widespread. I do not deny that sometimes it can happen, but I do not think it is so widespread that we have to roll out a national training programme for our teachers. Where teachers cannot control their anger or in the rare occasions that it happens, I think they ought to be counselled. Over time, as they gain experience, they will have more patience and have the skills to handle difficult situations as opposed to losing their cool. I think actually all of us need those kind of skills. But it does not mean we get angry all the time.
As for the second question on the device, these are practical issues we really have to look at on the ground, which is why before we roll out any national programme, we always pilot it first. We have piloted in these eight schools and all these issues the Member raised happened, all happened – Wifi kept dropping, all these things happened. But with the experience that we have gained so far, these practical problems can be resolved and we make sure they are resolved before we roll out nationally.
The Chairman: Dr Intan.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: Thank you, Chairman. I seek your kind indulgence for four clarifications.
First, I support the National Digital Literacy programme but, as I mentioned in my speech, Minister, I hope that MOE will consider including information literacy as well because it is not sufficient for students to just learn to develop skills and knowledge to make use of digital tools and platforms but also understand how to navigate the massive amounts of information available that traverses all these various digital tools and platforms. That is one.
Second, for the SkillsFuture for educators, I understand that MOE will be working with NIE as well as private training providers, external training providers, for both in-service and pre-service courses, and which may also include online learning modules. Will this be fully funded by MOE or will teachers have to tap on the SkillsFuture Credit, for example?
Third, I have not spoken it in this Committee of Supply but I have spoken about this before. It is good that we are strengthening the support for students with SEN in our schools. Are there plans to recruit more AED(LBS) because at the moment, there are only one or two AED(LBS) to cater to 80% of our students with special educational needs. My son is one of them. I hope that there will be a lot more AED(LBS) because it will certainly help our students with special education needs in the mainstream schools.
And, last, the expansion of the intake places for Work Study programmes. I must declare that I am from SIT as a faculty member. SIT was the first to start the Work-Study programmes. With the expansion, is it that there will be ramping up of programmes within SIT or will it be ruled out to all the AUs?
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Yes, as I mentioned, the four components of digital literacy simplified – Find, Think, Apply, Create. What the Member has mentioned is under \"Find\". Certainly, we will look at it; I fully agree with the Member.
Second, our SkillsFuture for Educators is fully funded, just as at NIE, our training at the, Academy of Singapore Teachers (AST), they are fully funded for our teachers. It is not just online and courses. One important modality for teachers when they learn is to do so in a professional community, learning from each other. You can make use of online platforms but teachers appreciate that the most, when professionals can come together and learn from each other. We have to fully leverage on that.
On AED(LBS), answer is yes, some schools are doing very interesting initiatives on the ground, beefing up AED(LBS) and also doing things differently. Not ready to talk about it in great detail this time, but certainly we are looking at it.
On Work-Study Programme, certainly, if we want to increase to 12% and become a mainstream pathway of every cohort, we certainly need all hands on deck. SIT being an applied University, surely it is one of our big partners that we hope will roll out more. I hope Dr Intan will push for it back in her institution.
Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, I am very heartened and I also thank both Ministers for their resounding assurances that we are finally introducing mental health education in schools, and also that MOE will be providing more and better trained counsellors to schools. I cannot agree more with Minister Indranee that we need a whole child and whole school and an ecosystem to address students' mental well-being. So, I have two clarifications.
The first one is that a clear big piece within this eco-system in addressing students' well-being, mental well-being, particularly, would be the parents. I am wondering how and when are parents engaged by the schools for a student in distress, and also if we are including parents in the mental health education that we are introducing in some way. I also wonder if one way could be reaching these parents through their employers and that there might be an inter-Ministry initiative with MOM, given the announcement in terms of the Workplace Mental Health Advisory.
The second clarification is, does the Ministry have, or if not, does it intend to have a clear and robust Suicide Prevention strategy in schools, especially given the record number of teenage suicides that we had in 2018 that was announced last year?
Ms Indranee Rajah: I thank the Member for her clarification. The Member is correct that the parents are actually a very important part of this, and our teachers do engage the parents, especially when the teachers find that their child has a mental health issue. So, the plan to engage parents is very much a part of it.
When the Member refers to a suicide prevention strategy, actually, that strategy is the peer support network or the programme that I talked about. Because in my speech, I had outlined how it is actually a whole eco-system.
If a child is depressed, worried, the first people to pick it up will be the friends, the friends are the first ones. And if it is not too big an issue, the friends can provide support, then that is great. But if it needs a little bit more than that, then you would want to bring it to the attention of the teacher. And the teacher can resolve it, that is fine, but if not, you may have to go to the professional counsellor. And then, from the counsellor, you may have to go to specialised external service providers. So, you can see that it is one layer after another layer, but all to have a protective environment around a student who has got mental health issues.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): MOE has done a lot of transformation for the past few years. I would like to thank the Minister and his team for their passion, hard work and determination as well. I have two clarifications for the Ministers.
First, we are glad that MOE is providing generous bursaries for students at the Polytechnic and also Universities. We also note that at the University, especially, the tuition fee has been increasing year after year for the past. I do not know whether MOE is continuing with this policy of increasing the tuition fee every year. If it is so, then will the bursary also increase year after year?
The second clarification is that we are glad that that AUs are taking 2,800 ICT students this academic year. It is about two, three times more compared to the past. Does the Minister have a breakdown of these ICT students by the six Universities? And also, whether the Universities are working with the industrial players to co-create a curriculum, so that the skill-sets acquired by all these students will be matched by the demand of the industry?
Mr Ong Ye Kung: On fees, the Prime Minister actually spoke about this at great length during the National Day Rally. For the cost of ITE education, we fund over 90%. For Polytechnics, the Government fund about 85%. And then, for University, the Government funds about 75%. Today, we are pretty much there for most courses. Some courses are still out of whack, so over time, we may need to adjust. But for most courses, we are pretty much there.
From henceforth, we need to adjust fees from time to time in order to reflect cost inflation. And bursaries, from time to time, also probably have to adjust, so that education remains affordable. Our principle is very clear: no one who gains a place in an IHL should be denied of studying, of education, because of financial circumstances.
As for breakdown of ICT students, I do not have the numbers but a lot are coming from NUS, which has been really beefing up and ramping up their courses. Because the courses, the places, are ramped up so fast, you cannot really get sufficient professors. So, you actually have no choice and, just as well, we rely a lot on practitioners. Indeed, this is very valuable. With their experience, the students gain skills that are very relevant to the market. If you look at their employment results, the ICT students are doing pretty well.
The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua, would you like to withdraw your amendment?
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: I thank the Ministers, Senior Minister of State, Senior Parliament Secretaries and the team behind you, somewhere in the room in Parliament, for providing such a comprehensive and well considered response to the speeches and requests from my fellow parliamentarians and I. As I said, I really want to deeply thank those who have chosen to serve in this sector, whether in mainstream, special education or in the IHLs. And as I said too, your influence is deeply felt even after the students are long gone. So, thank you so much for doing this. With that, Mr Chairman, I now beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $12,861,226,400 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $644,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head L (Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head L, Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head L of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
Climate change is a significant problem. We have witnessed its far-reaching effects in many countries, from droughts and floods to bush fires. We are fortunate that thus far, we have not had to grapple with direct effects of natural disasters caused by climate change. However, being a huge importer of food products, we are at the mercy of the global situation.
The Government established the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) last year to ensure and secure a supply of safe food and it has done good work to improve sustainability of our food sources.
Hygiene and food safety are essential to sustainability of food sources. In recent years, there have been several high-profile instances of food hygiene lapses. I would like to ask how has formation of SFA helped to tackle food hygiene issues? How does SFA balance strengthening the food hygiene regime without causing an rise in business cost? How does SFA ensure that the food industry continue to build a strong food safety culture even as globalisation and technological advancements transform the food landscape.
The battle to reduce plastic usage is essential for environmental sustainability. The Ministry is implementing the mandatory packaging reporting framework this year, with the aim to reduce packaging waste including plastics. This is something new to everyone and, certainly, some companies will require more than a little guidance in the initial stages of implementation.
Does the Ministry have plans to work with the industry to provide support for affected companies? Will the framework be tailored accordingly to different industries? Will it be applied to only local businesses, or also extended to imports, and how will that be implemented?
Packaging is often used for branding and marketing purposes. Some local businesses will likely proclaim the competition to be unfair if the imported goods may maintain their fancy and more aesthetically appealing packaging with little or no penalty.
I also note that with the COVID-19 outbreak, many sanitation products were frequently out of stock. Were F&B businesses and places, where food is served or handled, affected by the shortages, and how did they cope with it? How do we ensure enough supplies especially for hygiene in public toilets?
On the subject of food, food waste remains a significant problem. The Ministry had earlier announced that owners and occupiers of commercial and industrial premises which generate large amounts of food waste will be required to segregate their food waste for treatment from 2024. Can the Ministry share if the scope of affected premises and thresholds have been determined? Are there measures in place to help the industry comply with the requirements? Do hawker centres, coffeeshops, supermarkets fall under this regulation? Will this cause an increase in operation costs?
In the last two years, many people were affected by food poisoning incidents as a result of improper hygiene and cleaning practices at places such as pre-schools and food establishments? How do we foster greater responsibility by businesses and society to raise cleanliness and hygiene standards in Singapore?
Each and every Singaporean must regard environment conservation as our duty. We may be a small dot on the globe, but we are heating up twice as fast as the rest of the world, as a result of the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect. As an island-city, it is inevitable for us to have many urban surfaces like buildings and roads. Heat generated from our large, high-density population gives rise to UHI effect. We need to reduce the rate at which we are heating up.
The Government has been working very hard to increase the amount of greenery on our island, which has offered some relief from the heat. I am grateful to NParks for the intensified greening in Singapore in general and Yishun, in particular. With the increase in number of trees and bushes, the area has become a much cooler and more pleasant environment for the residents.
We are starting to see some new innovative green architecture around the island and I hope some of the existing buildings and infrastructure may soon get a makeover as well. My Nee Soon South CC is being upgraded to become a net-zero energy building. I am very excited about it.
I hope the Government will set bold national goals, to make it mandatory for high green coverage on new buildings or even to make them net-zero energy or energy-positive buildings. Doing so will stimulate even more innovation and creativity in the building industries. I believe our implementation of photovoltaic (PV) systems could be more extensive.
I really like what Khoo Teck Puat Hospital has done with their roof tops, which is an energy-saving, green and sustainable combination of community gardens, farms and PV. Moreover, PVs, with their large, flat surfaces, could be designed for multiple functions, such as providing shelters from the sun and rain aside from collecting energy. They could be designed to complement the aesthetics of the buildings they serve.
Climate change is a crisis but the Chinese term for crisis \"危机\" is also made up by two characters, which means danger and opportunity. There are plenty of opportunities if we set our minds to adopting bold changes and strategies. Climate change is now a major concern for many world leaders. If we can set an example and come up with viable solutions to address climate challenges, Singapore would stand among the world leaders in addressing this major crisis, thus securing our relevance in the globe.
There is clearly a lot of local talent in our country. Since the rise in popularity of green buildings, many of our architects, planners and engineering professionals have risen to the occasion. Their projects combining greenery and unique architecture have captured attention worldwide and even appeal to travellers for their \"Instagram-worthy\" appearances.
There are also many ground-up initiatives, ranging from classes on making your own compost, to roundtable discussions, really free markets to exchange and give away unwanted items and so on. Can we pool their expertise together so there is a more coordinated approach and sharing of resources? In Nee Soon South, I intend to turn our under-utilised multi-storey carpark (MSCP) rooftop into high-tech community farm. I would like to ask the Minister: is there any funding available?
Singaporeans, especially the younger generation, are big on sustainable initiatives. There is also plenty of talent and expertise. The Government must take the lead and strike while the iron is hot. Together, let us make this little red dot a shining example to the world.
And today is World Engineering Day. I would like to take this opportunity pay tribute to all the engineers, including our MEWR Minister, and his team in MEWR for working very hard and come up with very innovative engineering solutions to make this world a better place to live in. And I am also very proud to be an engineer.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Mr Dennis Tan, take your two cuts together.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, it was reported that land in Singapore changed from a net absorber of carbon in 2012 to a net emitter in 2014.
According to NParks, this is due largely to land conversion from forests and other vegetated areas to settlements. This is particularly concerning, as over the past few years, we have seen the prioritisation of development projects over the benefits afforded by sensitive eco-systems due to such projects as the Cross Island Line, the Tengah HDB project and the Mandai project.
Will the Government be committed to securing the inviolability of our nature reserves and greater protection of the little that is left of our more natural green eco-systems in the future? Apart from the forest significant heritage and ecological value, they provide Singapore with carbon sinks, important in our urban environment and helps mitigate the urban island heat effect.
I also understand that Singapore uses satellite images covering all land use classes and the five carbon pools, as defined by the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and have established permanent sampling plots across the nation for the tracking of carbon in relevant land use classes.
I would like to ask the Minister how have or how can such efforts help Singapore improve tree bio-mass growth rates so as to preserve and build more carbon sinks. Will the forest restoration action plan, as announced by NParks in January 2019, help in converting land in Singapore back to a net absorber of carbon?
My next cut. Singapore's energy and chemicals industry sector contributes to about 60% of Singapore's total emissions. Around three-quarters of these industry sectors emissions come from the oil refining and petrochemical sector. The Government has set a carbon tax of $5 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent for five years and plans to review it by 2023 with the intention of raising the carbon text to between $10 and $15 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2030.
Industrial energy efficiency, particularly for large emitters is currently being addressed by the Energy Conservation Act (ECA). Large emitters are required under the ECA to submit annual energy efficiency improvement plans. From 2021, these emitters must also establish facility-wide energy management systems and conduct energy efficiency opportunities assessments which must be submitted to NEA.
I would like to ask the Minister how successful has the ECA been in improving industrial energy efficiency for our energy and chemicals industry and more specifically, for our oil refining Industries in the past five years? Can the public have access to aggregated information on the improvements?
Minister Masago said in his Parliamentary Question reply to me last month that the Government works closely with the oil refining industry to ensure that they achieve high standards of energy efficiency and adopt sustainable practices; and that all three oil refineries in Singapore have set up co-generation plants, which can significantly improve the energy efficiency of the refineries. Has the Government set any projection or targets for emissions reductions for our refining industry in the next five years? And if so, what are these? And if not, will the Government consider doing so?
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, Sir, it has been one year since the carbon tax has come into effect and last Friday, Senior Minister Teo announced the goal of capping Singapore's greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, halving it by 2050, and eventually achieving net-zero emissions. I support this goal.
What we need now is the commitment by Government and businesses to actually reduce emissions and track it. In Australia, carbon neutral certification under the Climate Active Carbon Neutral Standard is an example of how the government supports businesses as they account for and reduce carbon emissions. The Energy Conservation Act currently requires large energy users in the industry and transport sectors to monitor and report energy usage and conduct energy efficiency assessments. A similar framework can be applied to carbon emissions. We should, in the journey to halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, require all Government bodies and large companies to conduct annual carbon auditing.
There are a variety of carbon management services available in the market today. With carbon auditing, organisations can understand their greenhouse inventory, isolate each emission source, and hence, determine and model emission reduction strategies, their payback and viability.
To help ease organisations into this, the Government could implement carbon auditing subsidies for the next 10 years. If companies successfully reduce their carbon emissions year on year, incremental subsidies can incentivise them to continue to do so.
Other ways to encourage a greener report card could be doubling on handouts for low-carbon initiatives and progressive carbon tax relief. In 2019, the UK set a new target of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, with ambitious policies and generous funding to support this. More has to be done and decisively so, or the climate emergency will continue to worsen.
Mr Tan Chuan-Jin: Mr Louis Ng, you can take all your cuts together.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, the Young PAP held a focus group discussion last month with 16 climate activists and drafted 24 recommendations. These included incentivising solar energy, which is the most viable clean energy source in Singapore.
In Nee Soon, 64% of the electricity for municipal fittings is from solar energy. We should all move towards being fully solar powered.
Will MEWR provide incentives to encourage solar deployment on rooftops and also provide consumers with rebates for electricity plans that use solar energy? Will MEWR also deploy more floating solar panels at our reservoirs?
Next, climate change is an existential threat. I am glad we have introduced the carbon tax to fight climate change. However, the current $5 per tonne carbon tax rate is too low. The timeline for reviewing the rate is also too long. The Ministry plans to review the tax only by 2023 and increase it to only $10 to $15 by 2030.
The minimum rate required by 2020 to reach the Paris Agreement temperature target is estimated at $54.
Young PAP and climate activists hope we bring forward the 2023 review and increase the rate to more than $15 per tonne.
Next, MEWR has said that it will not disclose the carbon tax contributions of companies because the tax was meant only as a price signal. But a tool can have multiple uses.
Releasing emissions data by company and facility is not a new idea. The EU publishes the emissions of 15,000 facilities. The UK requires its 2,000 listed companies to declare their emissions. The German Institute of Economic Research has found that such company-level disclosures work, reducing emissions by 17% permanently.
What I am proposing is a carefully targeted measure. We publish only the data of those that pay the tax. This means only the highest emitters will face pressure. It also means they can stop being published by cutting their emissions. A carrot and a stick.
MEWR says the Carbon Pricing Act does not allow release of the data. If that is true, we can amend the Act.
The fight against climate change should be built on transparency. Young PAP and climate activists both agree. Will MEWR study the idea of releasing emissions data on taxable facilities and companies?
Next, it is positive news that we have committed to having a fleet of local public buses that runs on cleaner energy by 2040. It is also good news that we intend to phase out internal combustion engines (ICE) and have vehicles run on cleaner energy by 2040.
But this will take time as we need to expand the charging infrastructure for electric vehicles. In the meantime, we can steer Singapore towards an environmentally-friendly car society by improving the Vehicular Emissions Scheme (VES). Currently, a hybrid car costs more – a lot more. Will the Ministry consider offering higher rebates under the current VES and increasing surcharges for vehicles with higher emissions?
I understand that we are not in the business of making cars cheaper, but we are in the business of protecting our environment. We can do this by urging people and steering them towards purchasing hybrid cars in the next 10 years, again before the charging infrastructure for electric vehicles is ready.
It is also good news that we will be extending the VES to light commercial vehicles. Can MEWR provide more details about this?
Next, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), commonly used in refrigerators and air-conditioners, are greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. NEA has put in place licensing controls for the import, export and manufacture of 18 types of HFCs which took effect from 1 January 2019. However, Singapore has not yet ratified the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol which requires parties to phase-down the production and consumption of HFCs.
Can the Ministry share whether Singapore will ratify the Kigali Amendment and share its plans to further reduce the use and emission of HFCs in Singapore?
Temasek has taken a strong lead in tackling climate change and is urging everyone to join them. As Mdm Ho Ching said a few months ago, \"Some businesses have already planned for 100% renewable energy before or by 2050. Others are setting yearly goals to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. For those of us who have not started, I propose that we take a simple step, to report our electricity and transport usage by next financial year. This is very simple; whether you are big or small, it is a very simple step to take. It is a proxy for our indirect emissions. Once we track and measure, as all businesses know, we can start to scope our solutions to reduce emissions or reduce waste.\"
Can the Ministry follow Temasek and take the very simple step of reporting its electricity, paper, travel and water usage? Can the Public Service also follow Temasek and pledge to go carbon-neutral by this year and, like Temasek, ensure that “Sustainability is not just one of our roles. It is at the core of everything we do.”
Lastly, in Nee Soon East, we have launched our Zero Waste Masterplan. We have saved 39,792 disposables – single-use plates, forks, spoons, bowls and cups – since the launch of our Masterplan in April last year. We no longer use disposables at Nee Soon East CC events. This year, we will expand it to all our RC events.
We have saved so much. At the same time, it is shocking to me that we have used so much in less than a year. If we can save so much in Nee Soon East, imagine how much we can save if more were to join us on this \"Say Yes to Waste Less Journey\". I know that MEWR is already doing this. Will the entire Public Service commit to end the use of all disposables at all Public Service events?
Dr Chia Shi-Lu (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Chairman, high usage of air-conditioning and refrigerators contributes to global warming, and none more so than in Singapore where we love our climate control and air-conditioning. But as a responsible member of the global community, we should do our best to reduce our carbon footprint. Ideally, our cooling appliances should be energy-efficient and operate using refrigerant gas with a lower global warming potential.
Many refrigerants have a global warming potential that can be over 1,000 times as potent as carbon dioxide. The Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol aims to reduce hydrofluorocarbon refrigerants by over 80% over the next 30 years.
I would like to ask to what extent are refrigerators and air-conditioners and other cooling equipment which are both energy-efficient and use refrigerants with low global warming potential available in our market today? How will the Ministry help our consumers make more climate-friendly choices for their household appliances?
Mr Mohamed Irshad (Nominated Member): Chairman, I will be focusing on the two funds created in Budget 2020. Sir, I note that Budget 2020 is creating two pots of money in order to combat climate change – the Coastal and Flood Protection Fund and the SG Eco Fund. My questions are related to these policies and I commend MEWR for taking this step to set up these two funds in its fight against climate change.
On the Coastal and Flood Protection Fund, what immediate investments will be made from the initial $5 billion? Will any funds be allocated towards understanding the pollutive effects of each industry and reducing the levels of pollution? In this regard, are there any plans to incorporate sustainability as a factor in our Industry Transformation Roadmaps?
The next questions on the SG Eco-Fund flow from my concerns regarding the Coastal and Flood Protection Fund. What sort of projects does the Ministry expect to fund using this fund and how does this differ from the Coastal and Flood Protection Fund? What sort of measurable impact does the Ministry expect that this fund will have? Lastly, what plans does the Ministry have to co-create sustainability with Singaporeans? It is very important that we bring Singaporeans onboard this entire journey and process and allow us to help them co-create the future.
Finally, our economy must reflect our priorities. I wonder whether these funds or any funds are available to create \"green\" jobs and equip our fellow Singaporeans with the skills needed to support our paradigm shift in sustainability. Specifically, how will the investments mentioned above support our economy? What steps is the Ministry taking to open up opportunities for industries and our workers in Singapore?
Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Sir, the rise in global sea levels has accelerated in recent decades due to the melting ice sheets. Researchers projected that 13.6% to 15.2% of global beaches will be lost by 2050. As an island state, sea level rise is an existential issue for Singapore. The Prime Minister shared at the 2019 National Day Rally that the UN currently projects that sea levels will rise by up to one metre by the end of this century, or 80 years from now.
It was also shared that Singapore would need $100 billion or more over 100 years to build our coastal defences to protect ourselves. It is thus timely that this Budget introduced the $5 billion Coastal and Flood Protection Fund. Can the Minister provide an update and details of the plans to build up our coastal defences?
And as building coastal defence against sea levels would likely involve multiple agencies and stakeholders, can the Minister also provide details of the Government's strategy to coordinate our coastal protection efforts?
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Since Singapore's Independence in 1965, we have faced two primary water management challenges – scarcity of fresh water and flood risk. As a low-lying country, we faced the threat and damage of inland flooding. At the same time, we need to manage our scarce water resources well.
History shows floods have had a long-running effect on Singapore – national records remind us of the extensive floods in Newton Circus in December 1969, Rochor Canal in November 1973 and Braddell Road in December 1978. We have certainly come a very long way.
From 2013, there have been several flash floods with floodwaters up to half a metre deep. With climate change picking up, Singapore will experience increasingly extreme and unpredictable weather, probably resulting in more frequent and intense storms. What are PUB's future plans to mitigate against inland floods in the face of this challenge?
PUB has undertaken significant infrastructure developments, including the construction of the Stamford Diversion Canal and the Stamford Detention Tank, to protect the Stamford catchment and the Orchard Road area. There was also a $300 million seven-year-long upgrade of the Bukit Timah First Diversion Canal. Have these helped to prevent floods and strengthen Singapore’s flood resilience? Are there any more of such major drainage projects that PUB plans to undertake?
In addition, how do we tackle flood risk and balance this against societal affordability? Could other cost-efficient options, including green infrastructure, green areas that retain rainwater and mangrove restoration, be further reviewed? How is the Government also getting the commercial property developers to do their part for flood mitigation?
Also essential are monitoring and public communication systems that alert populations to flooded areas, such as the ones PUB has developed, to provide early warning of risky, flooded areas. How can we further enhance those systems?
At the National Day Rally in 2019, Prime Minister Lee mentioned that the sea level rise is an \"existential issue\". We have committed at least $100 billion to build up coastal defences. The severity and enormity of the challenge requires us to plan way ahead but execute quickly. What is the progress of the Ministry’s efforts and what are the concrete measures that have already been embarked upon? When can the public expect to see the overall blueprint?
Coastal protection will require balancing of varying needs. For example, protecting our coastlines with sea walls and polders might have permanent ecological impact. It might have impact on shipping lanes, underwater cable infrastructure, maritime security and international relations. It is extensive work that cuts across multiple agencies. Would the Ministry consider setting up a one-stop agency to coordinate Coastal Protection work?
Coastal Protection and Flood Mitigation can also bring about significant economic opportunities for Singaporeans. While we learn extensively from the Dutch experts on, for example, polder work, how are we localising such knowledge? Are we also building up a pipeline of local talent in such work so that it might result in another \"Water Story\" for Singapore? Because of the vast capital needs of such projects, local companies might not be able to participate in this important national project. How is the Ministry ensuring that our local firms can participate and that there is sufficient technology transfer?
The Government expects to spend more than $100 billion. What principle would be used for financing such projects, noting the need to balance inter-generational needs?
Lastly, dengue has become a tropical disease that we have to live with. Because of climate change, Singapore is experiencing warmer temperatures. That might worsen the dengue situation. How does this affect our longer term dengue management strategy?
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): While COVID-19 takes our immediate attention, dengue continues to be a persistent challenge that also deserves significant attention. Indeed, dengue case numbers for the beginning of this year have spiked against the same period last year and there are several live clusters in certain estates in Aljunied GRC. Residents remain concerned even as they appreciate the diligence of NEA teams in the area. The warmer weather in the coming months could lead to an even higher mosquito population.
In an update in January, NEA has noted the threat from the DENV-3 serotype, a strain of dengue not dominant in more than 30 years. Dengue strains have, in the past, switched from DENV-1 and DENV-2, but NEA has noted a recent increase in DENV-3 cases in three large dengue clusters in Singapore. While NEA has stated that it is still too early to say that there had been a switch of the dominant serotype, low herd immunity towards the new strain will leave Singaporeans vulnerable to a large outbreak.
In terms of anti-dengue strategy, there was previous discussion about the prospects of a dengue vaccine. However, recent experience from other countries which have tried a vaccine has cast doubts about its efficacy and highlighted potential health risks.
Controlling the mosquito population may have better and more immediate prospects. Project Wolbachia is a promising technology for vector control, where infected mosquitoes are deployed for sterile breeding. The project has been expanded in Singapore but it is still under study and is not deployed in existing dengue clusters.
Long-term, with climate change and global warming, mosquitoes are poised to breed faster, and the virus replication may also be accelerated.
In the light of these developments, has the Government adjusted its dengue containment strategies, both short-term and long-term? Also, how has NEA coped with the manpower challenges of such outbreaks and leveraged technology to augment its manpower?
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Health and Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin): Warmer temperatures can potentially lead to an increase in mosquito population and spread of vector-borne diseases, including dengue. How will the impact of climate change affect dengue management?
This year, the number of dengue cases is concerning. There is an increasing number of dengue cases of serotype 3. Singapore needs to be vigilant and be on the alert. Can the Ministry share any new plans for dengue management? How does Project Wolbachia fit into these plans?
Dr Chia Shi-Lu: Chairman, even as we battle the COVID-19 outbreak, another health threat is already facing us and it has been facing us for a long while. Since the beginning of the year, the number of dengue infections has been increasing. Last week, NEA reported 110 dengue clusters, of which 25 are at red alert level. Even as I speak, my constituency of Queenstown has three active dengue clusters and one could argue that the dengue problem could pose an even larger and more real threat to Queenstown and to the rest of Singapore than even COVID-19.
Singapore has been seeing warmer temperatures in recent years as a consequence of global warming, punctuated by more frequent showers, which provide fertile grounds for mosquito breeding. How will the impact of climate change affect our dengue management strategies? What are the Ministry’s plans for dengue management in the future and how does Project Wolbachia fit into our national strategy to combat the dengue menace? Will the Ministry please provide an update on the project to date and whether it would be expanded to other areas in Singapore?
In addition, I would like to ask whether the Ministry is satisfied with the results of our public education and campaign to prevent mosquito breeding? And how have industries and households responded to enforcement measures?
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, take your two cuts together.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, Nee Soon East residents have benefited from Project Wolbachia and it has led to a 90% drop in the mosquito population in Nee Soon East. It is good news, but many residents still have concerns about this project.
Many ask me why we are releasing mosquitoes that will bite them. I tell them we are only releasing male mosquitoes and \"Males don’t bite\".
The next concern is that they tell me the males will attract the females who will then bite them. I tell them do not worry, it is the males who look for the females.
Can MEWR share how we will be increasing awareness about this Project and also whether there are further plans to expand this to other parts of Singapore so more people can benefit from it?
Next. Food waste is a serious and growing problem. In 2018, 763,000 tonnes of food was wasted in Singapore, a 30% increase compared to 10 years ago. At the same time, some Singaporeans struggle to have three meals a day.
Both problems can be alleviated if we introduce a Good Samaritan Food Donation Act. This piece of legislation would help encourage companies and organisations to donate healthy food that would otherwise go to waste. It will help both the environment and our people. Will MEWR support a Private Member's Bill for a Good Samaritan Food Donation Act?
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, both cuts, please.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, the COVID-19 crisis highlights the importance of having diverse sources of supply for all our imported goods. Singapore is particularly vulnerable since we are so reliant on imports. It is natural to want to order more from particular trading partners which are reliable and offer good value for money. However, this will consequently reduce the imports from other sources.
Being mindful of the risks of over-dependence on any one particular supplier or region, we must make it a strategic national security decision to diversify our imports, even if it means that it may be less cost-effective. Would the Ministry provide an update on how it ensures a robust import strategy to prevent supply disruptions, price hikes and supply fluctuations?
Next, as we import most of our food, we are vulnerable to external shocks that affect food supplies at their sources. Potential food supply disruptions could come from unexpected or extreme weather conditions, problems with transport routes or delivery modes, export bans, or even crises such as the COVID-19 outbreak. Hence, diversification of our food import sources is critical and in addition, to enhance our food security, we have set for ourselves the \"30-30\" goal to produce 30% of our nutritional needs domestically by 2030. Singapore currently produces less than 10% of her nutritional needs domestically. Would the Ministry share an update on how we could achieve the 30-30 goal and what measures and incentives are available to encourage Singaporeans to seize the new opportunities in our food production sector?
The Chairman: Miss Cheng Li Hui, both cuts, please.
Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Sir, last year the Ministry announced the formation of the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) and our ambitious \"30 by 30\" goal to raise Singapore’s food production level from the current 10% to 30% by the year 2030.
Singapore relies heavily on imported food. About 90% of our food needs come from over 160 countries. As such, Singapore is especially vulnerable to disruptions in the global food supply chain and to price fluctuations.
Deputy Prime Minister shared in his Budget speech that our imported supplies could also come under strain from climate change or geopolitical tensions.
In land-scare Singapore, our approach to realising our \"30 by 30\" goal must be meticulously planned and carefully calibrated. With only 1% of land mass allocated to agriculture, we face a big challenge in growing our own produce. It is, therefore, important that Singapore focus on R&D to harness technological advances to boost local food production.
Can the Minister elaborate on what are the challenges and opportunities for Singapore associated with our goal? Can the Minister also share the progress on our vertical farming and fish farming? How can we reach our 30-30 goal and help our local agri-food sector grow sustainably in the long run?
Next. Sir, the adoption of novel food by Singaporeans has grown recently. Today, Impossible burgers is well received in Singapore. I just heard that we are going to have Impossible gyoza for tea later. As we gravitate toward plant-based foods, SFA has a responsibility to ensure that they are safe for consumption.
A framework is being set up by SFA to look into the safety assessment criteria of novel food. There will also be opportunities for our food industry to grow our presence in this area. Can the Minister share how is SFA facilitating the business opportunities in this area while ensuring food safety is protected?
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, take your two cuts, please.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Sir, in order to reach our 30-30 goal of producing 30% of domestic nutritional needs by 2030, our agri-food sector needs funding and technological support to ramp up production. It is an ambitious goal as we only produce less than 10% locally today. To overcome our land, water and human resource constraints, we need to adopt innovative solutions and tap on technology to optimise productivity. We will continue to need a lot of support from R&D.
As food supply reliability is a fundamental national security issue, we must strengthen our resolve to make the endeavor a success. Can the Ministry provide an update on what the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) is doing to support our local farmers to help them succeed in the face of stiff competition in a free and open market?
Next. The launch of a SG Eco Fund by the Ministry to support partnerships with the community and enterprises in our sustainability efforts is much welcomed. Indeed, Singaporeans are becoming more aware of the importance of sustainability in every aspect of our lives. From renewable energy to reducing plastic and e-waste, conserving our precious water resource to making sustainable food choices, we all hope to contribute in our own ways in the attempt to become a low carbon, low emissions country; and we are all putting in more effort into supporting sustainability efforts. Can the Ministry share more details about the projects which Singaporeans and companies can apply for under this new SG Eco Fund?
Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Sir, zero waste is an effort that members of the public as consumers can be engaged in to great effect. All of us can take action to reduce, reuse, recycle and refuse waste. Twenty-nineteen was designated by the Ministry as the Year towards zero waste to rally Singaporeans to care for our environment and treasure our resources.
May I ask for a review of its results and lessons in view of the goals enumerated in the Zero Waste Master Plan and for an update of the Ministry's efforts in this area.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Sir, with increasing awareness of the importance of recycling, more residents are bringing recyclable items to the blue recycling bins in our housing estates. However, very often, the bins are full and residents end up leaving their items around the bins. The reason these bins fill up so quickly is that many plastic bottles and tins can be quite bulky, such as bleach bottles and Milo tins. Add piles of newspaper and cardboard packaging waste, and the contributed items accumulate very quickly.
Hence, I would like to request that we increase the size of the bins or allocate more bins to each HDB block. I hope that their designs can also be improved to make them more user-friendly. Some big items simply do not fit into the bin slots.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Chairman, I think I have mentioned this many times now, but we are a failure when it comes to domestic recycling, which is stuck at a dismal 21% to 22% rate. Singaporeans are not recycling. We have an attitude of convenience and we depend on the Government to do everything.
Sir, the Government has done what it can to encourage domestic recycling. There is a conspicuous blue bin with simplified images showing what should be recycled at every HDB block and specially marked recycling trucks picking up the recycled thrash regularly. I think it is time we change strategy to turn the National Recycling Programme into community-led recycling.
Experience in Germany, South Korea and Taiwan, which have the highest rates of municipal recycling, show that when urban communities are mobilised to take ownership of recycling programmes, cultures and norms of recycling become entrenched. In Taiwan, waste collection is not an individual throwaway chore but a community ritual and recycling party where piped music from waste collection truck bring out local residents with bags of recyclables and mixed waste, and community volunteers help residents sort out the thrash properly.
In Singapore, we have an urban set-up conducive for community recycling efforts. With blue bins located at each HDB block, local grassroots organisations can take ownership of the bins to monitor the recycling trend of each block, diagnose problems such as low rate of recycling or indiscriminate dumping of thrash, and organise targeted events or campaigns to educate the residents of the block.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Mr Chairman, despite the move towards a greener, zero-waste nation, suppliers of fresh fruits and vegetables, meats and eggs as well as hawkers and cooked food sellers continue to use lots of styrofoam and plastic packaging. Of the 1.6 million tonnes of domestic waste disposed of in 2018, one-third is made up of packaging. More than half of this packaging is made of plastic, but only 4% of plastic waste is recycled.
In COS 2018, citing Taiwan’s ban in single use plastics including straws, cups and shopping bags by 2030, I had asked about the Ministry’s plans to reduce the use of plastic disposables in Singapore involving either the restriction or the banning of single use plastic carrier bags, straws and disposable cups, containers and utensils.
In 2016, the Government also said that it will not ban styrofoam products for food crockery and packaging but will seek to discourage hawkers from using disposable ware.
We still see much styrofoam food crockery and packaging being used at hawker centres, coffee shops and other food outlets. I would like to ask for an update of the rate of use of styrofoam products in food crockery and packaging vis-à-vis other materials since 2016.
Given their harmful effects on the environment, I would also like to ask whether the Government will conduct a review of the use of styrofoam products for food crockery and packaging use, and whether it will set any target to ban such products or if not, what measures it will take to either reduce or to disincentivise such uses in the next five years. I will also like to ask whether the Government will be looking into encouraging alternative single-use products usage, such as bamboo products.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, in response to Fairprice's trial of reducing the use of plastic bags by charging customers 10 or 20 cents per transaction, Prime Minister said: \"It is a sensible approach: to make people conscious of the plastic bags they use, but not to ban plastic bags altogether. Using fewer plastic bags alone will not solve climate change or save the earth, but every bit counts. And making us conscious of our habits, and consider better alternatives, has value in itself.\"
I agree with Prime Minister. I have been calling for a plastic bag charge since 2018. Countries around the world have introduced a plastic bag charge, and it works. In England, there was a 90% reduction. It was estimated that every person was using 10 bags in the most recent year, compared with 140 bags in 2014 before the charge was introduced.
For a start and similar to England, will MEWR consider introducing a single-use bag charge and make it mandatory for large retailers and optional for smaller businesses and waive the charge for single-use bags for fresh food and meat items? This is for all single-use bags, not just plastic bags.
Mr Mohamed Irshad: Chairman, all Members of this Chamber agreed that climate change is an existential threat to our nation. To tackle this, I am heartened that last year, 2019, it was designated as Singapore's \"Zero Waste Year\", and we passed the Resource Sustainability Act (RSA), designed to promote resource sustainability. My following set of questions relates to the reflection of these priorities in Budget 2020.
Firstly, allow me to focus on our implementation of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes. Last year, this House legislated for an EPR scheme for e-waste. It envisioned licensed operators collecting and treating regulated consumer products on behalf of producers. Can the Ministry share the progress on this front? Namely:
One, how many operators have applied for a license thus far and how many have been licensed?
Two, do we have sufficient local recycling capabilities to treat the expected volume collected e-waste? What measures is the Ministry taking to ensure the proper treatment of all e-waste collected?
And three, given our focus on transiting into a circular economy, are there any plans to expand our Producer Responsibility Schemes beyond just e-waste; and by 2025, perhaps, packaging waste?
Four, what sort of progress has been made on the EPR scheme for packaging waste. What should the industry be expecting?
Next, on the topic of packaging waste, I note that the Mandatory Packaging Reporting Framework will kick in on 1 July. What sort of support for affected companies will the Ministry be providing to ensure accurate data? Additionally, the framework merely requires reporting, even if they cross prescribed thresholds. Are there any plans and funds for the Ministry to work with the producers to implement their 3R plans?
Lastly, on the topic of food waste, the Ministry previously announced that owners and occupiers of commercial and industrial premises which generate large amounts of food waste will be required to segregate their food waste for treatment from 2024. Can the Ministry share if the scope of affected premises and thresholds have been determined? Are there measures in place to help the industry comply with the requirements?
The Chairman: Dr Chia Shi-Lu, please take all your three cuts together.
Dr Chia Shi-Lu: Mr Chairman, packaging forms a significant portion of the waste that is generated by domestic sources, which include households and trade premises, such as shophouses. Statistics from NEA show that one-third of our waste is packaging waste and 55% of that packaging waste is plastic. Considering that only 4% of our plastic waste is recycled, there is certainly potential to further reduce packaging and plastic waste.
The Ministry had earlier announced plans to put in place an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework to deal with packaging waste, including plastics, no later than 2025 or, perhaps, even earlier. Under the EPR approach, producers bear the responsibility for the collection and treatment of their products when they reach end-of-life. Would the Ministry share more details about how NEA intends to implement and enforce these plans? Next cut.
I am very happy with the Resource Sustainability Act which was passed last year. It is, I feel, one of the most important pieces of legislation introduced to deal with the increasing amounts of e-waste, food waste and packaging waste, including plastics, due to their quantities and low recycling rates.
The Act will give effect to the EPR scheme for e-waste. The Ministry announced that a Producer Responsibility Scheme (PRS) Operator will be announced to collect and ensure proper treatment of regulated electrical and electronic consumer products on behalf of the producers. For non-consumer products, producers will be required to provide free take-back of all end-of-life commercial, industrial and electrical equipment before consigning them to licensed waste collectors or e-waste recyclers. Would the Ministry share the progress of the scheme's implementation for e-waste?
Last cut. With the introduction of the Resource Sustainability Act last year, the EPR scheme will commence and a PRS operator I alluded to earlier will be appointed to collect and ensure proper disposal of electrical and electronic consumer products. For non-consummable products, producers will have to take back and transfer the equipment to licensed waste collectors or e-waste recyclers.
Singapore generates about 60,000 tonnes of e-waste a year and the amount is expected to grow year on year. I would like to ask whether we have sufficient local recycling capabilities to process the expected volume of e-waste collected under this EPR? What measures will the Ministry implement to ensure the proper treatment and responsible disposal of all this e-waste that is collected?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, high-rise littering is a particularly dangerous offence which can cause serious injury or even result in death. I strongly urge the Ministry to utilise all available tools and technology at its disposal to prevent and deter this anti-social behavior. Rigorous enforcement should be conducted and heavy penalties meted out to offenders.
I would like to ask for the latest available statistics for this offence and whether the trend is improving or worsening. What has been done to curb high-rise littering and whether the Ministry will be deploying more advanced technology or investigative techniques, such as identification through DNA? Could the Ministry also leverage more on the sense of shame, such as by increasing the visibility and duration of the Corrective Work Orders, to punish these high-rise litterbugs?
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Chairman, amidst this COVID-19 outbreak, much has been said about social responsibility and public hygiene. From Town Councils to offices, disinfection and constant cleaning has become the norm. This crisis affords us the opportunity to also reinforce the importance of social norms, such as in our hawker centres.
For a number of years now, we have been promoting the concept of tray returns. Gradually, we have seen better response. Yet, we also see many previous innovations fall into disuse. In many older hawker centres, you see automated tray-return belts that have been switched off; coin-return machines that do not work; tray-return stations becoming manual stacking stations for cleaners.
At the same time, the role of the tray is also very much temporary. Many remove their trays out of habit and place dishes onto tables. There is also a socially irresponsible behavior, such as the spitting of food waste and bones onto table surfaces, not just during COVID-19, but on any other day. This should be discouraged. Cleaners often do not have the adequate tools nor training to properly clean. Often, the same cloth is used. And one does not need to leave much to the imagination that the same food waste spat out onto tables ends up being smeared across the entire table.
I, therefore, ask that MEWR and NEA promote the usage of trays while dining and not remove the tray itself. This way, the tray catches any spillage as well as any food waste or oral fluids. This means that conservancy contractors should also be incentivised to sterilise trays after each use. This reduces the workload of cleaners, promotes a clean hygienic eating environment and reduces the spread of diseases.
To further achieve this, the design of hawker centres will also have to adapt. Some older hawker centres still use round tables, which are not conducive for the use of trays unlike rectangular tables in newer centres. Beyond COVID-19, I hope that this will promote better hygiene and social norms in Singapore.
Mr Amrin Amin: In late 2018, the new management model of hawker centres came under public scrutiny. Key issues raised were high stall rentals and operating costs, including hidden costs, long working hours and harsh contractual obligations.
Several improvements have been made to the Socially-Conscious Enterprise Hawker (SEHC) model to better support hawkers. These include a review of contractual terms between the operators and stallholders, regular hawkers' feedback groups, Productive Hawker Centres grant and a staggered rental scheme with lower initial costs for stallholders.
MEWR previously announced a review of the SEHC model. Can MEWR provide an update on the implementation of these improvements? Have the issues been adequately addressed? Will new hawker centres continue to come under the SEHC model?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, hawker centres are an important and integral part of Singapore life. Not only do they provide affordable, accessible, hygienic and good quality food, they also serve as essential social spaces where Singaporeans and visitors can gather to enjoy a good meal.
In 2011, the Government had announced that it intended to build 20 new hawker centres by 2027. Are we still on track to meet this target? How is the Ministry ensuring that the hawker trade can be sustained and how can productivity in hawker centres be raised in the face of manpower constraints? Would the Ministry also share an update on how well each of the new hawker centres are doing? Does the Ministry have any plans to review and enhance the present schemes for this sector?
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, first of all, I would like to correct my cut title of SCHC. It is supposed to be Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre (SEHC) instead of Social Enterprise Hawker Centre.
Sir, in the last quarter of 2018, there were media reports on hawkers' feedback pertaining to some challenges they faced in operating their food or drinks stalls under the SEHC scheme. Among the feedback were, having to apply for leave in advance if they choose not to open their stalls; not having the freedom to adjust food prices; having to pay penalty fees for terminating their tenancy; and high rentals and auxiliary costs that the hawkers have to bear.
The matter was addressed at length in Parliament in November 2018 with the Ministry sharing details, measures and giving assurances to Members of this House that the Ministry will manage or resolve the matter. It has been about a year and four months since then. Hence, I would like to seek updates on the current situation of the SEHC scheme.
I would like to ask whether the Ministry has received any feedback from stall operators against any SEHC operators in 2019. If yes, what is the number of feedback received and what are among the most common ones. Additionally, I would like to seek updates on the number of SEHC island-wide at the present moment. I also would like to know whether the Ministry has conducted any recent survey or study in finding out the level of succession of stall owners operating under the scheme. If there is any, can the Ministry share the findings?
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Sir, the decision by the Government to resume building hawker centres is perhaps the most tangible boost to safeguard our hawker food culture and a game-changing move to keep community dining affordable.
These new hawker centres have operated under the Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre (SEHC) model since 2015. This is a new approach and, understandably, the model would require continual adjustments and evolve into a viable and sustainable model.
I must credit the Ministry and NEA for daring to try a new approach and taking the earlier criticisms of the model in stride, although not all are really fair criticisms. The model was reviewed in 2018 and there has been a number of finetuning and improvements since taking in the feedback from stakeholders and the public.
From my recent conversations with some of the stallholders at Bukit Panjang Hawker Centre and the residents there that patronised the hawker centre, most had given me positive reviews for the new food centre. I am sure we can continually improve and finesse the model so that it can better serve the stallholders and residents.
As NEA is now building a second hawker in Bukit Panjang town and within my constituency, I would like to seek an update whether there has been further review of the model and what are the further refinements that we can expect. Also, MEWR has set up two hawker workgroups last year. I would be interested to know what are their thoughts and recommendations so far.
On vector control, last year, dengue cases in Singapore surged beyond 16,000. I was one of those infected as well. There were also 20 deaths, unfortunately. Dengue is endemic in Singapore because of the presence of Aedes mosquitoes, which are the vectors for dengue virus transmission.
Hence, our strategy has very much been focused on vector control, in essence, to prevent Aedes mosquito from breeding as far as possible. This is a long-drawn battle and it requires constant vigilance on the part of everyone. Our environmental condition, especially our warm weather, also makes it conducive for such transmission. Singapore has seen warmer weathers in recent years, especially in 2019. It was, I understand, 0.9°C higher than the past average.
Could the relatively warmer weather be the possible reasons for the surge in dengue cases in recent years? And if that is the case, how will the impact of climate change affect our management of dengue prevention?
Recently, Project Wolbachia was rolled out to help reduce the dengue mosquito population. I commend the NEA for pushing the envelope and leveraging new technologies to tackle this serious threat to our public health. Having been a dengue patient myself last year, I know how it is like to live through the illness and, of course, the concern about fatality. We should spare no effort to minimise the cases of dengue in Singapore, not any less than how we manage COVID-19, and continue to seek new strategies to fight this virus.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Sir, part of the Stabilisation and Support Package in this Budget is one month's worth of rental waivers for hawker stalls managed by NEA. This will certainly help to alleviate the difficulties experienced by our hawkers due to the reduction in business from the COVID-19 outbreak. Many of these hawkers are worried about the outbreak deepening and prolonging, especially with the news of the virus spread in other countries. The spread will increase the risk of new imported cases from different sources. Would the Ministry consider providing more reliefs, such as more rental rebates, in the event of the outbreak worsening?
Mr Desmond Choo: The efforts to tackle our environmental changes require significant investment and transformation. We will probably lose some jobs but also create new ones. We will clearly need new skills in diverse areas. Can the Ministry share what are these critical skills needed to support our journey towards a sustainable and climate resilient Singapore?
While we have some expertise, such as environmental engineering in Singapore, this might not be sufficient to fulfil our ambitions. Many of these skills might not be supported by existing education pathways. Furthermore, these are not traditional fields for Singaporean students. How does the Ministry plan to jumpstart and develop this field in our Institutes of Higher Learning? One way is perhaps to attract firms to set up their R&D facilities in Singapore to take advantage of our robust IP framework.
As we move into more recycling, traditional waste management and recycling firms will need to transform. Will the Ministry be able to share what are the new jobs that might be created? What new opportunities will be available to our firms? How would the Ministry support them in their transformation?
Second, the \"30-30\" food security target has excited many Singaporeans. Opportunities can include R&D, production, financing and entrepreneurship. What is the total economic value that we can generate if we reach our target local production? How many and what type of jobs can we expect to create in the Food Story space? How are we preparing our younger Singaporeans in their education towards working in these food-related industries as the target is only 10 years away?
In our journey to be more sustainable, water and food secure, some workers in traditional industries will be adversely affected. How is the Ministry supporting job re-design and helping these workers to find higher-value work in their current industries?
The Chairman: Minister Masagos Zulkifli.
The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): Mr Chairman, firstly, let me wish Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and all the engineers in the House today, Happy Engineer's Day.
The United Nations (UN) has rightfully identified climate change as the defining issue of our time. For Singapore, like many small nations, climate change is an existential challenge. We feel its effects today, such as in rising temperatures and frequent extreme weather events. Even the seasonality of Singapore's rainy and dry months is now difficult to predict.
Scientists in the Centre for Climate Research Singapore have projected that by 2100, end of the century, the mean sea level around Singapore may rise up to one metre. Coupled with the frequent and heavy storms also brought about by climate change, low-lying areas of Singapore such as the East Coast may experience more flooding.
For all countries, climate change also threatens access to essential resources like water, food and energy. These affect the security of our nation too.
With this said, our history of overcoming challenges gives me the confidence that we need not despair when facing climate change. We will create innovative solutions for the hardest challenge, putting Singapore in the unique position we enjoy today. This is Singapore's DNA.
Today, I will update on our plans in three key areas to address the challenges of climate change – first, mitigation strategies to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases or GHGs; second, adaptation plans; and third, how we can work together, in our communities and as a nation, to collectively realise a more sustainable Singapore.
With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I request the Clerks to distribute a document to Members?
The Chairman: Yes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Thank you. First, on mitigation. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement are pivotal multilateral agreements to address the global challenge of climate change. It has spurred many countries, including those who are large emitters, to enact laws and transform their economies to meet their carbon commitments. It is therefore in the interest of small island states like Singapore, to support this multilateral framework of cooperation.
For this framework to stand, every country, large or small, must do its share to reduce GHG emissions. Singapore will also do our part.
Last Friday, Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean announced that Singapore will enhance our 2030 nationally determined contribution to the Paris Agreement later this year. We will also submit our Long-Term Low Emissions Development Strategy, which aspires to halve emissions from our peak to 33 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) by 2050, with a view to achieve net zero emissions as soon as possible in the second half of the century.
Halving our emissions, even 30 years from now, is an ambitious target, because Singapore is naturally constrained in alternative energy. This is an attribute recognised even by the UNFCCC. But we will continue to raise our ambitions to limit and reduce carbon emissions over the long term, knowing well enough that it requires transformational change.
We are already ahead of the pack by implementing the carbon tax last year – the first country in Southeast Asia to do so. This is a clear signal to the whole of industry that Singapore is moving towards a low-carbon economy, as we give no exemption.
Mr Louis Ng and Mr Daniel Goh asked about the carbon tax and emissions reporting. The carbon tax, as I mentioned in the past Parliamentary Question, is meant to provide an economy-wide price signal. Hence, only aggregated information will be released. To achieve emissions reductions, rather than scrutinising individual companies, it would be more useful to know which sectors we should concentrate on. The release of individual data could also be commercially sensitive.
What are the major moves that my Ministry will introduce to further reduce our GHG emissions?
First, we will implement a package of comprehensive measures to reduce the emission of hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs. As Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Mr Louis Ng have pointed out, HFCs can be found as refrigerants in refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment, and could leak during installation, maintenance and disposal. Some forms of HFCs trap a much larger amount of heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide.
Later this year, NEA will launch a training course to train and certify technicians to handle refrigerants properly. From next year, NEA will mandate the proper recovery, reclamation and destruction of spent refrigerants.
With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I display some slides on the screen?
The Chairman: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: NEA will also introduce a voluntary climate-friendly label to help households identify refrigerators and air-conditioners that use alternative refrigerants with lower global warming potential. In addition, NEA will launch a new grant to support companies who want to make an early switch to more climate-friendly commercial water-cooled chillers. From 2022, we intend to restrict the supply of commercial water-cooled chillers and household refrigerators and air-conditioners that use HFCs with high global warming potential.
To Mr Louis Ng's question, MEWR will initiate a review on our ratification of the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol later this year.
Besides HFCs, improving energy efficiency will have a major impact on emissions reduction.
Mr Dennis Tan asked about our progress. We have set an ambitious target to improve our industrial energy efficiency to 1% to 2% every year. Our industries are on track to meet this target, and we will continue to improve our energy efficiency rates.
Last year, NEA announced the Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards, or MEES, for industrial-chilled water cooling systems. MEES will reduce energy consumption in industrial facilities by at least 245 gigawatt hours (GWh) annually – equivalent to taking more than 20,000 cars off the road.
From 2021, energy-intensive companies, including oil-refining companies, will be required to establish facility-wide energy management systems and conduct energy efficiency opportunities assessments.
In MEWR, we also live by our energy efficiency creed. Let me illustrate this.
We are on track to complete the development of Tuas Nexus by 2027. The Tuas Nexus carries out co-digestion of food waste and used water sludge to generate up to three times more biogas than conventional sludge treatment processes. This biogas will be used to generate electricity to power the plant and excess electricity will be exported back into the grid.
In addition, we will ramp up the generation of solar energy within MEWR.
Mr Louis Ng asked if we can deploy more solar panels on reservoirs. This year, PUB will deploy two 1.5 mega-watt peak (MWp) floating solar systems at Bedok and Lower Seletar Reservoirs. Next year, PUB will deploy the world's largest single floating solar system of 60 mega-watt peak at Tengeh Reservoir. The power generated from this system alone is sufficient to meet the energy of all our water treatment plants at local reservoirs. With this, Singapore's waterworks will be one of the few in the world to be 100% green.
PUB is also making strides towards improving the energy efficiency of NEWater and desalinated water production.
Mr Louis Ng also asked if the Government can provide consumers with rebates for using solar energy. Subsidies, such as rebates, distort the energy markets. Pricing energy right will encourage the growth of renewable energy in a commercially viable manner and incentivise consumers to use electricity efficiently, avoiding wasteful consumption.
Instead of rebates, the Government has streamlined regulations and funded research to support higher deployment of solar.
My Ministry also intends to be exemplary in optimising the water-energy-waste nexus. We will set out to generate sufficient energy from waste incineration and solar photovoltaic systems to power all of my Ministry's needs, especially in the production of water and the projected production of food.
In the long run, it is only with groundbreaking technology that we can make huge leaps in climate mitigation. In the horizon are carbon capture, utilisation and storage technologies, and the use of hydrogen as an alternative fuel. We will stay abreast of these developments.
Beyond the Ministry, the Public sector as a whole is doing more. Mr Louis Ng asked about our efforts.
In 2017, we launched the Public Sector Sustainability Plan, which charted out our strategies to reduce electricity and water consumption, and achieve Green Mark standards for 100% of our buildings. Ministries and agencies are working hard, and are on track to meet our 2020 targets.
For example, all air-conditioned Government premises should maintain indoor temperatures of 24 degrees centigrade or higher where feasible. All Ministries have also taken the climate action pledge and committed to reducing their plastic, water and electricity consumption. We are reviewing how to bring our plan to the next level.
The Deputy Prime Minister also announced our vision for all vehicles to run on cleaner energy by 2040. The Government will take the lead. From 2023, all new vehicle purchases for Government-owned fleets will be cleaner and greener where feasible. MINDEF, for example, will replace 400 administrative vehicles with hybrids and later, with electric ones when charging infrastructure is ready in 2040.
Together, with net-zero buildings, food waste management, our Army is \"green\" in more than in their uniforms.
This are but a few examples of what I said earlier in my speech on how the UN Climate Change Framework is shaping climate-conscious behaviours and decisions. We are also reviewing other measures such as the better management of carbon emissions and the use of disposables. More details will be announced later this year.
Mr Chairman, public transport generates up to three times less carbon dioxide than private transport. Hence, our approach is to encourage public transport and green public transport as far as possible. The Land Transport Master Plan 2040 by the Ministry of Transport (MOT) supports this.
This is how Singapore moves to cut GHG emissions – simply drive less. If driving less is, somehow, not an option, motorists can still practise sustainable consumption by choosing cleaner vehicles that emit less GHG and harmful pollutants.
Mr Louis Ng asked about the Vehicular Emissions Scheme (VES). The VES implemented in 2018 has seen positive results and we have since extended the VES until end 2020. This will complement the enhanced incentives and infrastructure to promote the use of electric vehicles announced at the Budget. We aim to refine VES further, taking into account its impact on motorists' purchasing decisions and advancements in technology.
The transport of goods and services is a major economic activity in Singapore. Commercial vehicles, especially Light Goods Vehicles or LGVs, are key emission sources and pollute our air due to their high mileage and reliance on diesel. To support the shift to cleaner commercial vehicles, we will introduce a new Commercial Vehicle Emissions Scheme (CVES) for new LGVs, which form the largest proportion of commercial vehicles.
Under the new CVES, the cleanest LGVs will receive a $30,000 incentive, while the most polluting LGVs will incur a $10,000 surcharge. In terms of Total Cost of Ownership, fleet owners will enjoy overall savings when they purchase EVs as opposed to petrol vehicles and even greater savings as compared to diesel vehicles.
To complement the CVES, we will enhance the Early Turnover Scheme (ETS) from 1 April 2021 until 31 March 2023, including expanding the scheme to cover Euro 4 diesel commercial vehicles. The existing ETS will be extended until 31 March 2021.
I have outlined our climate mitigation efforts. Let me now talk about how we will adapt to climate change.
Climate change will bring about more frequent and intense storms, which may result in major flooding, especially in low-lying parts of Singapore. Mr Desmond Choo asked about PUB's plans to mitigate inland floods.
Since 2011, PUB has spent almost $2 billion on drainage works, including major projects like the Bukit Timah Diversion Canal and Stamford Detention Tank. We will invest another $190 million, with six projects commencing this year, including the construction of a detention tank underneath Syed Alwi Road, which will enhance flood protection in the Little India area. Our investments will be complemented with developments in technology, such as short-range radars, to better predict and manage heavier rainfall.
These efforts, however, will not be sufficient with climate change. With climate change, sea levels will rise faster than its natural cycle and along with heavy rains, will overwhelm drainage systems.
Miss Cheng Li Hui and Mr Desmond Choo asked about our whole-of-nation strategy to coordinate coastal protection efforts. I am pleased to announce that PUB will assume the role of the national Coastal Protection Agency from April.
With this new responsibility, one agency, PUB, will study both coastal and inland flooding holistically and develop models to guide our flood protection response.
The investments to undertake coastal and flood protection could cost $100 billion over the next 50 to 100 years. As announced by Deputy Prime Minister in the Budget speech, a Coastal and Flood Protection Fund will be set up within PUB, with an initial funding of $5 billion. The fund will be used in a fiscally sustainable manner to support the substantial capital outlay.
Mr Mohamed Irshad asked about the immediate investments that will be made. Our near-term efforts will focus on studying our coastal areas to ascertain the type, feasibility and extent of measures required. We will phase efforts and start with the City to East Coast stretch and Jurong Island. The funds will also be used to expand and improve our drainage infrastructure to improve flood resilience.
As we embark on coastal protection, we will also identify new opportunities for urban development. For instance, we could reclaim a series of islands offshore, and even connect these islands up by building barrages to create community spaces for Singaporeans and contribute to water resilience. PUB will partner various stakeholders to explore these possibilities.
Mr Dennis Tan highlighted the importance of preserving and building our carbon sinks. We will preserve our green carbon sinks and identify nature-based solutions. For example, planting mangroves can both stabilise our coastline by preventing erosion, while preserving our green lungs and supporting biodiversity. Minister Desmond Lee will elaborate in his speech on Singapore's greening efforts.
Adaptation efforts also involve securing our water supply. Singapore has developed a robust and diversified supply of water, as a result of our early and consistent investments in water infrastructure and research. Along with local catchment and imported water, we will continue to augment our water supply with weather-resilient sources, namely, NEWater and desalinated water.
With the completion of Marina East and Jurong Island desalination plants this year, we will have five desalination plants. Our NEWater production capacity will also increase over the next five years, with the expansion of the Changi NEWater factory and development of Tuas Nexus.
Good water demand management is equally important in complementing efforts in water supply. PUB's water conservation efforts have shown encouraging results, with household water consumption decreasing to 141 litres from 148 litres per person per day in three years. PUB will begin the deployment of 300,000 smart meters next year, as part of efforts to reduce water consumption further to 130 litres per person per day by 2030.
To inspire Singaporeans to continue efforts in water conservation, I am happy to launch the 2020 water conservation campaign. I cannot do it now like the usual way, because of COVID-19.
Today, PUB will kick off with a new video to remind Singaporeans of how far we have come in our water story. I feel touched and proud of our water story when I previewed the video. So will you, when you watch it tonight. It will encourage us, all Singaporeans, not to take our clean drinking water for granted.
Besides rising sea levels and water resilience, Mr Amrin Amin, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Mr Desmond Choo have rightfully pointed out that warmer temperatures caused by climate change can also affect the everyday lives of Singaporeans, because it leads to an increasing mosquito population. In fact, warmer temperature is one of the factors that led to the surge in dengue cases last year.
Project Wolbachia is a tool which NEA is piloting to manage the mosquito population. Mr Louis Ng conveyed feedback that the initial surge of male Aedes mosquitoes released under Project Wolbachia causes discomfort to residents.
I hope to reassure residents that these male mosquitoes do not bite or transmit diseases – I say this in Parliament – and ask residents to be patient and bear with the initial surge. And I thank Mr Louis Ng for jointly spreading this message with us.
I am pleased to say that the Project Wolbachia trials have achieved up to 90% suppression of the Aedes aegypti population within the Yishun and Tampines test sites. We are considering the expansion of Project Wolbachia to more neighbourhoods, in consultation with NEA's Dengue Expert Advisory Panel.
To do this, NEA has set up a hi-tech mosquito farm which optimises mosquito production, the sorting of male mosquitoes from females and the transportation of mosquitoes for release. We are scaling up the facility's production to five million male mosquitoes a week, over the next few years, to battle dengue. This is a new and important means to future-proof ourselves against the faster breeding of mosquitoes, as a result of higher temperatures brought by climate change.
Just as NEA is establishing mosquito farms, Singapore Food Agency (SFA) is transforming food farms.
Food, like water, is a resource that can be disrupted by climate change. In Asia alone, we expect an additional 250 million mouths to feed by 2030. Yet, the amount of arable land could fall by 5% due to climate change and environmental degradation. Singapore, which currently imports more than 90% of our food, will be vulnerable.
In the face of these changes, we have developed three food baskets to ensure our food security by diversifying food sources, growing food overseas and growing local. We have designated 2020 as the Year of Singapore Food story to focus our national effort and attention.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about the Government's success in food source diversification and its role in mitigating price hikes during supply disruptions.
Today, Singapore's food imports come from over 170 countries and regions. This did not come by chance, but is a result of SFA's continuous efforts. While the Government does our part, we require the industry to also be pro-active in diversifying supply sources to enhance business resiliency. For example, since last year, SFA has introduced requirements for egg importers to adopt plans to mitigate the impact of any supply disruptions.
With a well-diversified food supply, Singapore can reduce the impact of food supply shortages and price changes. However, consumers need to be mindful that the price of any particular food item is determined by a combination of factors, including import prices, exchange rates and profit margins which suppliers can command.
Let me elaborate on our plans to produce food locally, enhance food safety and encourage Singaporeans to support local produce.
Miss Cheng Li Hui and Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about how the Government is helping the local agri-food industry grow. Our vision is to locally produce 30% of Singapore's nutritional needs by 2030, but from less than 10% today.
As a small country with limited space, our land use faces many competing needs. We have dedicated less than 1% of our land for agriculture today. Within such tight land constraints, the \"30 by 30\" vision is highly ambitious, especially if we must achieve it within the same 1%.
Yet, having visited some of our new-tech farms, I am optimistic that it is achievable if we invest in an innovative agri-food sector.
Since 2017, SFA has been awarding agriculture land, through a competitive land tender basis, to agri-food companies with promising technologies. One such company is Green Harvest, a local vegetable farm. The farm uses modern greenhouse growing techniques which mitigates the impact of unfavourable weather conditions. We are helping them to adopt more technology and, with experience, we hope they can produce multiple times more vegetables than average.
This year, SFA will study how the larger Lim Chu Kang agriculture area can be planned and redeveloped to enhance our food production. This study will consider feedback from farmers for centralised facilities and services to reduce the cost of food production. The study will also introduce circular economy principles, so that the by-product of one farm can be used as an input for another. SFA will work with farms, including successful tenders in recent land sales exercises, to work towards an exciting vision for Lim Chu Kang.
SFA's plans for Lim Chu Kang will complement the development of the Agri-Food Innovation Park (AFIP), which we announced last year as a high-tech agri-food cluster in Sungei Kadut. The food production innovations developed in AFIP can scale up in Lim Chu Kang to contribute towards our \"30 by 30\" vision.
SFA will also look to unlock the potential of farming at sea. Last week, I accompanied President Halimah to visit Eco-Ark. Eco-Ark's CEO Mr Leow Ban Tat, who had decades of experience in marine and off-shore engineering, including in Keppel, applied principles of oil rigs construction to that of a floating fish farm. He worked with his team to conceptualise, design and integrate a floating platform with closed-containment aquaculture technologies that treat influent sea water used to cultivate fish. These technologies mitigate the effects of pollution and algae blooms that threaten both farms and our marine environment. Ideas like this is how we will transform fish farming practices so that they are more productive, sustainable and climate-resilient.
Besides the use of technology, SFA will study the expansion of sustainable fish farming, where applicable, in the deeper southern waters of Singapore. We will ensure that such aquaculture is productive and environmentally responsible, such as shown by Barramundi Asia, Singapore's first and only deep-sea fish farm. SFA will work with stakeholders to study this.
We are supporting different modes of fish farming. Where water quality is good, farms can carry out deep sea farming. Where it is not, farms can adopt closed-containment technologies. Where there can be synergies with land-based water and waste systems, land-based aquaculture can be conducted.
Like land, every space at sea can be used for food production but must be judiciously managed.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh also asked how the Government is helping local farms remain competitive. Over the years, our economic agencies have been supporting local farms in their overseas expansion. Growing their businesses overseas allow farms to tap on land and manpower, lower production costs, and break into new markets.
I encourage our farms to take a leaf from the food manufacturing industry, where companies like Tee Yih Jia Food anchor their expertise locally while expanding operations overseas. Some of our farms, like Apollo, have already done so.
These food products produced overseas, while not \"Made in Singapore\", should be marketed as \"Made by Singapore\", since they uphold the same reputation for high quality and standards as those produced domestically.
To complement these efforts, SFA, Enterprise Singapore and the industry will be developing Clean-Green Standards for urban farms which harness resource-efficient technologies to produce food in cleaner environments. They will study ways to incorporate information that more people are concerned about, such as the carbon footprint of food they produce. The standards will serve as a mark of quality assurance that our farms can use to differentiate their products in the market.
Let me move on to incentives and funding. Over the past five years, SFA has committed $38 million from the Agriculture Productivity Fund, or APF, to support more than 100 farms in their productivity-enhancing investments. I am happy to share that the APF will be extended till the end of 2020. Beyond this, we will review how we can expand our support for technology test-bedding, adoption and resource efficiency in our farms.
New innovations to produce food more productively and sustainably are also needed. The first research grant call launched by SFA and A*STAR last December under the $144 million Singapore Food Story R&D Programme will facilitate this.
One theme under this research programme is the production of novel foods, like alternative proteins. Traditional meat production methods are often land and water intensive, and generate high levels of emissions. Today, alternative proteins, such as Impossible and Quorn, are poised to become game-changers. I hope Members will enjoy the alternative protein food items from Tee Yih Jia Food and Empress served at today's tea break after our speeches.
Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about food safety of novel foods. We will ensure that only novel foods that are safe for consumption are introduced in Singapore. Last year, SFA implemented a new regulatory framework to require companies to seek its approval and undergo a scientific pre-market assessment before placing novel foods in the market. This framework facilitates the sale of alternative proteins in Singapore while ensuring their safety. Companies, such as local start-up Shiok Meats, who is looking to produce cell-cultured shrimp, will be able to benefit from this framework.
To support the assessment of novel food, SFA will establish an international expert working group to provide scientific advice on food safety.
Beyond food supply, we must not also forget our fundamental mission, that is to ensure that the food we eat is safe. SFA takes a serious approach towards upholding high food safety and hygiene standards. Since its formation, SFA has conducted more than 5,200 inspections in 2019 and taken more than 1,600 enforcement actions against errant operators.
SFA will be introducing new measures to safeguard food safety. Premises which pose higher food safety risks, such as caterers and central kitchens, will be required to install closed-circuit television cameras. This enables them to monitor food safety performance and provide evidence in the event of food safety allegations.
Enhanced measures will also be targeted at businesses that cater to vulnerable groups. Food businesses catering to preschools, kindergartens and nursing homes will be required to maintain food retention samples, which will facilitate investigations during food-borne outbreaks.
From 2021, SFA will also introduce a single unified framework to license and recognise all food establishments. SFA will award a longer licence duration and a higher recognition to food establishments which uphold high food safety and hygiene standards. This way, SFA can re-prioritise resources to focus on checks to ensure compliance with food safety requirements.
Mr Louis Ng asked about the introduction of a Good Samaritan Food Donation Act.
MEWR is currently working on a legislation to enhance our food safety regime. As part of this, we are looking to introduce a legislation to facilitate food donation.
Any legislation will need to strike a balance between facilitating food donation and ensuring food safety. We will be happy to work with Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Chairman, let me conclude my last section of my speech by touching on the role of all Singaporeans in taking climate action. As the Government, we are providing leadership in tackling climate change. We do this by enhancing our climate pledge under the Paris Agreement and working with the industry to guide their transformation to a low-carbon economy. While the Government can lead on sustainability, the people must champion its cause.
For instance, Singaporeans can make conscious climate-friendly choices in our daily essentials, such as food. Locally-produced food is of high quality, incurs less carbon miles, lasts longer and tastes good. By eating local, Singaporeans are making an environmentally sustainable choice. In the process, we support our farmers by choosing food that is grown in Singapore.
Since 2017, SFA has partnered Singapore Agro-Food Enterprises Federation (SAFEF) to organise farmers' markets to raise awareness of local produce. Last month, I unveiled a new logo which Singapore farmers can soon use to help Singaporeans identify local produce.
The community can also support local production by participating in community farming projects. For example, nearly 80% of NParks' Community in Bloom gardens grow edibles.
There is also potential for companies and the community to engage in commercial urban farming that involves the community. Since the launch of the pilot rooftop farm, Citiponics in Ang Mo Kio, interest from the public – as Er Dr Lee Bee Wah mentioned just now – has increased towards urban farming in community spaces. We will provide more opportunities for urban rooftop farming. In the coming months, SFA will tender 16 rooftop spaces on HDB multi-storey car parks across the island, totalling over 30,000 sqm.
As we grow our agri-sector, let us get involved in growing food in our own backyards.
Now, let us talk about electrical appliances. Take refrigerators. They are amongst the top three highest energy-consuming household appliances today. However, many households continue to purchase 1 to 2 ticks refrigerators, partly due to the higher upfront costs of energy-efficient models, without considering the savings from electricity consumption over the long term. Similarly, showering takes up a significant proportion of water consumption, yet many households are choosing the less water-efficient fittings.
To help households living in 1- to 3-room HDB flats invest in energy and water-efficient models, the Government will introduce a $24.8 million Climate-Friendly Household Package. These households will receive a once-off $150 voucher to purchase refrigerator models approved by NEA that have 3 ticks and above. Not only will this help fight climate change, households can benefit from electricity cost savings of up to $60 annually.
We will also extend the \"Switch and Save – use LED\" programme launched in 2018 to all 3-room HDB flats. In addition, we will give all 1 to 3-room HDB households a $50 voucher to offset the cost of changing their shower fittings to more water-efficient 3-tick models.
If all eligible households make the switch, we can collectively reduce emissions equivalent to taking around 12,600 cars off the road and save up to 400 million gallons of water annually.
Next, let me focus on the ground-up efforts of our youths and citizens to address climate change.
I commend our youths who are channelling their passions into positive change for the environment. During the Year of Climate Action in 2018, more than two climate-related activities per day were conducted, and youths played a big part in them. Recently, a group of 50 youths participated in the Environmental Track of the Youth Action Challenge organised by MCCY, submitting projects ranging from waste reduction to green technologies.
We work together with these youths to deliver some of these ideas into reality. To empower our youths with knowledge and experience on sustainability, my Ministry is working with MOE and the National Youth Council (NYC). We want to introduce more sustainability programmes in schools and community facilities. Even Outward Bound Singapore (OBS) @ Coney will be designed to be a eco-experience for our youths to learn and enjoy.
The Government will work with schools to introduce initiatives which will integrate green infrastructure, sustainability programmes and curriculum design to inculcate positive environmental values in our youths, like ones done in Mee Toh School.
Another group of Singaporeans whose efforts I would like to recognise are those that are willing to share their experiences and ideas on sustainability.
Last year, my Ministry convened our first Citizens' Workgroup on recycling, where 48 participants joined us on a month-long journey of co-creation. We will be setting up two more Citizens' Workgroups this year, focusing on more issues that Singaporeans care about.
One Workgroup will start the conversation on how we can increase demand for local produce. I invite interested members of the public to visit our website at foodstory.sg to find out more about the Workgroup and sign up for it. Another Workgroup on reducing the excessive use of disposables will also be set up.
As we have done with the recycling workgroup, we will carefully consider and work with these workgroups to realise some of their recommendations.
It is our aspiration for Singapore as a nation to practise sustainable development and put sustainability at the centre of the way we live, work and play.
At Budget, the Deputy Prime Minister spoke about the Ministry of National Development's (MND) Green Towns Programme, which injects sustainability into the infrastructure of HDB towns. Beyond the look and feel of housing estates, MEWR will introduce initiatives that will encourage Singaporeans to live and breathe sustainability. Let me elaborate.
We have come far in the last 20 years since the development of Punggol as Singapore's first Eco Town. We have a vision to transform all HDB towns into Eco Towns.
First, as we rejuvenate neighbourhoods, we will create more sustainable community touchpoints. We will build sustainable hawker centres that strive towards zero waste. Second, we will introduce community-based programmes that foster sustainability initiatives on the ground. Third, we will develop indicators for towns to track their progress and benchmark against national sustainability targets in carbon, energy, water and recycling.
This will drive home the message that the effort of each and every Singaporean counts.
I am happy that Tampines, Choa Chu Kang and Nee Soon Towns are coming on board to become Singapore's Eco Towns. Let me share some initial efforts.
In Tampines, we are piloting new sustainability projects which can be replicated in other towns. The first project, \"Sustainability @ Tampines Park\", will be Singapore's first community-based circular eco-system for food production. Residents from 12 HDB blocks will be segregating food waste generated in their homes, to be fed to black soldier fly larvae. The larvae will produce fertiliser for a new vertical vegetable farm, and the larvae will be fed to tilapia cultivated in the Tampines Park pond. Not only will this project reduce food waste, it will simultaneously strengthen the community's food resilience.
The second project in a different part of Tampines is the introduction of \"Eco Boards\". Eco Boards are low-energy digital boards that provide block-level information on water and energy use to residents. Together with Singapore Power and Temasek, we plan to build Eco Boards in several sites across Tampines Town. These Eco Boards will enhance the residents' awareness of their resource usage and illustrate the impact of green infrastructure such as solar panels.
More details on the three Eco Towns will be announced over the coming months. I believe that the success of these Eco Towns will inspire other towns to begin their own journey of transformation towards sustainability.
To build our sustainable Singapore together with Singaporeans, Deputy Prime Minister announced at Budget the establishment of a Singapore Eco Fund. Mr Mohamed Irshad and Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked for details of this fund.
We are happy to announce that the $50 million Singapore Eco Fund will be made available later this year to the people, private and public sector, to support the co-creation of a sustainable Singapore. We welcome project proposals which involve the community and can deliver measurable impacts on our sustainability goals. My Ministry will also set up an SG Eco Office to co-ordinate sustainability projects across Singapore.
Mr Chairman, let me conclude. When we started our journey as a nation, our founding fathers gave us a vision of being the cleanest and greenest city in Southeast Asia. Even for this, we were inspired to do it together. Mr Lee Kuan Yew said in 1968 at the launch of the inaugural \"Keep Singapore Clean\" campaign, \"For only a people with high social and educational standards can maintain a clean and green city\". And he went on to say, \"Only a people proud of their community performance, feeling for the well-being of their fellow citizens, can keep up high personal and public standards of hygiene.\"
We are now on our journey towards a sustainable and climate friendly Singapore. It is a journey that we can only make together.
Prime Minister, at a tree-planting event in 2014, said, \"But we also have to do more than just plant trees; we also have to make the whole of the environment sustainable, friendly to people, and also for Singaporeans to be friendly to the environment\".
It is for this reason that the Government will place sustainability at the core of everything we do. However, only by living and practising sustainability together can we mitigate the impacts of climate change and secure the resources needed to take Singapore into the future. Let us all play our part and work together, as one people, to ensure that Singapore remains a liveable home for our future generations.
Mr Chairman, I will now hand over to Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor to address other strategies that will make Singapore a clean, sustainable and liveable home. [Applause.]
The Senior Minister of State for Health and the Environment and Water Resources (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan): Mr Chairman, as Minister Masagos said earlier, we each have a duty to take climate action and safeguard Singapore for our future generations.
This was why we designated 2019 as Singapore's Year Towards Zero Waste – to mobilise every Singaporean to do their part towards a Zero Waste nation and a circular economy. To Mr Chen Show Mao's question, it has been a busy and successful year. We engaged more than 670,000 Singaporeans and together with our 3P (People, Public and Private) partners, organised almost 2,000 Zero Waste programmes and activities. We supported ground-up initiatives through the \"Towards Zero Waste Grant\" and launched the \"Say YES to Waste Less\" campaign. All these efforts helped to instil in Singaporeans the 3Rs of Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle.
We also made tangible steps to lay the foundation for Singapore's transition to a circular economy. We charted out Singapore's inaugural Zero Waste Masterplan and set ourselves an ambitious target to reduce the amount of waste sent to Semakau Landfill by 30% by 2030.
We can close our resource loops, just as we have done for our Water Story. In fact, we already recycle 99% of\tour\tferrous\tmetal\twaste and\tconstruction\tand demolition waste. As shared in Budget 2020, we are also making good progress turning incineration ash into construction material we proudly call NEWSand. We will begin trials to test potential NEWSand materials in road construction along Tanah Merah Coast Road later this year. Going forward, NEA will launch a Request for Information by mid-2020 for a commercial-scale facility to produce NEWSand.
Achieving our Zero Waste vision is a whole-of-nation effort. Last year, we convened our first ever Citizens' Workgroup to co-create solutions to #RecycleRight. One follow-up project is the redesigning of the blue recycling bin to be more user-friendly. Their ideas include a transparent panel on the bin body, eye-level labels with #RecycleRight information and tailored deposit holes. MEWR and NEA will support the Workgroup members to fine-tune and trial their prototype. Ms Joan Pereira may also be pleased to know that NEA has already successfully trialled the use of bigger recycling bins, which are collected by side-loader trucks. These\twill\tbe\tprogressively\tdeployed across Singapore by end-2022.
As Mr Daniel Goh highlighted, grassroots efforts are also\timportant\tin\tencouraging\thouseholds\tto #RecycleRight. Our Public Waste Collectors work with the grassroots to organise Cash-for-Trash programmes regularly at convenient locations. NEA is also considering a pilot \"recycling bin contamination rate\" competition involving several Residents' Networks.
The private sector has also come on board. F&N Foods partnered NEA in the \"Recycle N Save\" pilot. Eleven Reverse Vending Machines have been rolled out and we will deploy 39 more by mid-2020. I am encouraged by the positive response with over two million containers collected since the launch last October. We will continue to refine the pilot.
Mr Dennis Tan and Mr Louis Ng spoke about reducing disposables through a ban or a charge. We believe that we should take a pragmatic approach and find an inclusive solution that works for Singapore and Singaporeans, taking into account our local context. For example, degradable bags provide little benefits in Singapore as we incinerate all our household waste. On a life cycle basis, single-use paper and degradable bags also consume large amount of resources like water and land. Hence, instead of pursuing a substitution strategy, we should focus on inculcating the right values. Singaporeans' actions could then be motivated by a consciousness to safeguard the environment.
This is why, in the spirit of Singapore Together, NEA will convene a Citizens' Workgroup later this year to address the excessive consumption of all disposables, including Styrofoam and single-use bags. We welcome citizens to deliberate the idea of a nation-wide charge for\tsingle-use bags as well as other measures, such as campaigns and education. We will take the Workgroup's recommendations seriously and work with participants to implement them where feasible. I invite Singaporeans to register for the Workgroup later this month.
Among the supermarkets, FairPrice has taken the lead with their plastic bag charge trial last year, complemented with educational efforts. The trial has shown promising results, with majority of FairPrice's customers receptive towards a plastic bag charge. I commend FairPrice for its leadership and welcome this decision to expand the trial to 25 outlets for one year. I am\theartened that Prime has also implemented a plastic bag charge in four of their outlets. I call on other supermarkets and retailers to also pilot this and urge Singaporeans to support these efforts.
My Ministry is taking the lead to introduce enabling regulations to transit to a circular economy. Last September, we passed the Resource Sustainability Act to address three priority waste streams – packaging waste, e-waste, and food waste.
Packaging waste makes up a third of the total domestic waste disposed of in Singapore. The amount disposed of will only grow as Singaporeans embrace new trends in online shopping and food delivery. We need to find ways to manage packaging waste more sustainably.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Mr Mohamed Irshad asked for our plans on this. This year, we will introduce regulations to mandate the reporting of packaging data and development of 3R plans by producers of packaged products, as well as retailers and supermarkets. This will make companies more aware of their packaging use and encourage them to optimise it, thereby minimising waste and also reducing business costs. Obligated companies will start collecting the data from 1 July this year, for submission to NEA early next year.
As this is the first time we are implementing such a reporting requirement, NEA is partnering the Singapore Manufacturing Federation on a\tjoint capability development programme that will support companies in fulfilling their new obligations. Companies will be offered workshops and training courses to familiarise themselves with the reporting framework. Companies can also exchange best practices in sustainable packaging waste management and prepare themselves for the upcoming Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework.
Under the EPR framework, producers are responsible for collecting and recycling their product packaging. We are bringing forward the EPR for packaging waste by implementing it in phases. In\tthe first phase, we will build upon the reporting framework and the Reverse Vending Machine trials to implement a Deposit Refund Scheme (DRS) for beverage containers by 2022.
In a typical DRS, producers pay for the system to take back used beverage containers. Consumers get a refund when returning empty beverage containers at designated return points. Countries like Norway and Germany have implemented a DRS and achieved high recycling rates of over 80% for beverage containers. We are studying international best practices and will conduct industry consultations and a Request for Information for the DRS later this year.
The DRS is also an idea proposed by the Citizens' Workgroup on #RecycleRight. Workgroup members will partner NEA to work through the DRS implementation, such as co-designing surveys to optimise outcomes of the DRS. Together with our industry stakeholders and Singaporeans, we will design a DRS suitable for Singapore.
The DRS will aggregate post-consumer plastic waste, such as PET beverage bottles. This will supply a steady feedstock to drive demand for local recycling capabilities. With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I display some slides, please.
The Chairman: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: We have been working closely with our economic agencies to\tactively engage interested companies to set up mechanical recycling plants for post-consumer plastic waste here. PET bottles and the like can then be processed locally into plastic pellets, which can in turn be\tused to make new products. We will announce details when ready.
But not all plastic waste is suitable for mechanical recycling, for example, contaminated plastic bags. To treat these, we are also pursuing chemical recycling solutions. Chemical recycling can potentially convert these plastics into higher-value products, like pyrolysis oil, which is a potential feedstock for Singapore's petrochemical sector. If successful, this will move us closer to both our goals of being a Zero Waste nation and a Low-Carbon economy.
We hope that this will become – get ready for this – \"NEWOil\", and strengthen our resource resilience, just as we have done with NEWater and aim to do so with NEWSand. We are working with EDB and industry partners to look into establishing a pilot chemical recycling plant that will contribute to and help anchor the chemical recycling value chain in Singapore within the next few years.
Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Mr Mohamed Irshad asked about our progress to address e-waste, which is our second priority waste stream.
NEA has started registering producers under the e-waste EPR framework, which will take effect next year. Producers have also recently begun collecting data on the\tamount of regulated electrical and electronic products supplied in Singapore, for submission to NEA early next year.
NEA will launch a tender this month to appoint the Producer Responsibility Scheme (PRS) operator, a key stakeholder in the e-waste EPR framework. NEA is now pre-qualifying organisations for the tender, and aims to appoint the PRS operator by the second half of this year. This will give the operator sufficient lead time to establish its collection and treatment network and organise public outreach programmes.
Similar to packaging waste, the e-waste EPR framework will finance and drive local e-waste recycling capabilities. TES-B, a new lithium-ion battery recycling facility will be completed in the coming months. EWR2 and SMC Industrial are also planning to build two recycling facilities dedicated to large household appliances, ICT equipment and batteries. They will be completed by mid-2020 and mid-2022 respectively. Together, the three new facilities will be able to process more than 50,000 tonnes of e-waste per year when fully operational. With these additions, Singapore will be ready to treat our e-waste collected under the EPR system.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Mohamed Irshad spoke about food waste, another major waste stream with high generation tonnage and low recycling rates.
Last year, I announced that from 2024, owners and occupiers of commercial and industrial premises that generate large amounts of food waste will be required to segregate their food waste for treatment. Owners and occupiers of new buildings will also be required to treat their food waste on-site.
These requirements will apply to shopping malls and hotels with more than 3,000 sqm of F&B area, including function area for hotels; as well as industrial premises that either house at least one food manufacturer of more than 750 sqm, or are above 20,000 sqm and have more than 20 food tenants.
NEA is including these thresholds in the Code of Practice on Environmental Health, to ensure that from 2021 onwards, obligated owners and operators will allocate space for on-site food waste treatment systems in their development plans.
To support premises to prepare for the mandatory requirements, NEA is developing a guidebook on best practices and case studies on the implementation of food waste segregation and treatment.
Segregating food waste from the other waste streams will make it easier to maintain cleanliness in premises.
Cleanliness and hygiene is a first line of defence against evolving public health threats. Seventeen years ago, when we were battling SARS, we instituted regular \"spring cleaning\" of our hawker centres to safeguard environmental hygiene and curb the spread of such diseases.
Last month, in response to COVID-19, we launched the SG Clean campaign to rally Singaporeans to keep Singapore clean and to safeguard public health. At\tthe individual level, we call on Singaporeans to practise good personal hygiene and social responsibility through the \"7 Habits of Good Public Hygiene\". Concurrently, NEA is working with Government agencies and business premises to step up public hygiene standards. We want our hawker centres, public transport nodes, schools, retail malls, shops and various premises to receive the \"SG Clean\" quality mark.
SG Clean seeks to turn the current crisis into an opportunity, by uplifting the standards of public hygiene and sustaining them. It is to be a whole-of-nation movement to instill a national \"keep clean culture\" for the long term, beyond the battle with COVID-19. We will need to shift from the current top-down compliance-focused approach towards a more collective approach, where all stakeholders take accountability and ownership to proactively achieve high standards of cleanliness in Singapore.
The SG Clean effort is needed even if our regular surveys indicate that we are mostly doing well in keeping Singapore clean. In the last two years, we witnessed multiple incidents of gastroenteritis linked to contaminated environments, including at pre-schools and nursing homes. These incidents underscore the importance of environmental hygiene. So last August, even before COVID-19, NEA convened an interdisciplinary technical committee to develop a set of national baseline cleaning standards for premises. NEA is currently consulting with stakeholders to further develop sector-specific standards.
To catalyse this transformation, we will amend the Environmental Public Health Act (EPHA) to introduce mandatory baseline cleaning standards later this year. These standards will comprise a regime for proactive and thorough cleaning, as well as disinfection, at prescribed frequencies. This will include the oft-neglected \"back of house\" areas such as bin centres.
As part of the EPHA amendment, we will place greater accountability on premises managers for the cleanliness of their premises. They will be required to appoint a Designated Person to assist them to develop an environmental sanitation programme and advise on measures to remedy any lapses. We will be mindful to calibrate the standards to minimise compliance costs.
We will work with sectoral leads to progressively implement the new requirements from 2021, starting with higher-risk premises with high footfall and immuno-vulnerable occupants, such as childcare centres, schools, eldercare facilities and hawker centres.
We do not know how long COVID-19 will last. We are entering a new situation, a new normal, where enhanced personal hygiene habits and social responsibility will have to be an integral part of our lives. Let us work together to make SG Clean our new way of life.
SG Clean and our fight against dengue go hand-in-hand, as we remove stagnant water and keep our environment clean and litter-free. In 2019, there were nearly 16,000 reported dengue cases, with 20 deaths. This year, the Aedes mosquito population remains high, and indeed we are concerned about the increasing number of cases of the less common dengue virus serotype 3, or DENV-3. We must be careful as Singapore has not seen a DENV-3 outbreak in almost three decades, and population immunity to DENV-3 is low.
Let me assure Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Ms Sylvia Lim that we are addressing these risks through a multi-pronged dengue management approach. First, NEA conducts comprehensive surveillance of the mosquito population via more than 64,000 Gravitraps nation-wide. This allows NEA to target its operations early and prioritise areas with higher mosquito population. Second, NEA leverages technology, such as using drones to aid inspections or apply insecticide in hard-to-reach places. Third, NEA shares data on dengue clusters and areas with higher mosquito population publicly on its website and myENV App. This facilitates early community intervention and pre-emptive measures.
Let me emphasise here, that whatever new approaches we take cannot substitute the need for public vigilance and collective action to suppress mosquito breeding and prevent dengue. I strongly urge all Singaporeans, young and old, to take proactive measures to protect yourselves and your loved ones. Actively practise the \"7 Habits of Good Public Hygiene\" and \"Mozzie Wipe-out\".
I would like to thank all our cleaners who have worked extra hard to keep SG Clean. We can all show our support for the cleaners by playing our part too. At hawker centres for instance, we can do so by eating from our trays and returning them, as Mr Alex Yam has rightly pointed out. We have achieved a tray return rate of 62% on average at our Productive Hawker Centres, double that of other hawker centres. This was achieved through a\tsuite of efforts such as implementing salient reminders, providing strategically-located Automated Tray Return Stations, and ensuring that trays are clean and dry for use. We will continue working with stakeholders to promote tray return at all our hawker centres. This will also alleviate the cleaners’ workload so\tthat they can focus their efforts on maintaining general cleanliness.
As custodians of our much loved hawker culture, we will continue to work closely with stakeholders to ensure that affordable and good hawker food can continue to be a mainstay in Singapore.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Amrin Amin, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap spoke about new hawker centres and the SEHCs. Of the 20 new centres we are planning to build by 2027, seven are already in operation. Ten more are currently in the design or construction stage, and we are working out details for the remaining three. The next centres to open are Bukit Canberra Hawker Centre in end-2020, and Fernvale Hawker Centre and Market in early 2021. NEA will tender out these two centres to socially-conscious enterprise. These operators provide active management to build up clientele and vibrancy at hawker centres, such as through curating food mix and programming.
Currently, there are seven hawker centres under the Socially-Conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre, or SEHC, model, and most have done well. Nonetheless, we will constantly review and improve the model. When evaluating tender proposals for operating future hawker centres, NEA will give greater emphasis to footfall, vibrancy, and sustaining the hawker trade. We will also assess operators' performance in maintaining high footfall and stall occupancy. In the past year, NEA introduced the Staggered Rent Scheme, and extended the Productive Hawker Centre grant to stallholders at SEHCs. NEA also reviewed the contracts between operators and stallholders to better safeguard stallholders' welfare, and required operators to conduct regular Hawkers’ Feedback Groups.
To Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap's\tquestion about stallholders’\tfeedback, these are usually on what more operators can do to improve vibrancy, attract footfall and help stallholders with their operations. All in, these measures serve to ensure that the SEHC model continues to benefit residents, and support stallholders at the same time.
I assure our hawkers that we will always look out for them. As part of the Stabilisation and Support Package announced during Budget 2020, we will provide a one-month rental waiver, with a minimum sum of\t$200,\tto\tall\tstallholders\tin\thawker\tcentres managed by NEA or NEA-appointed operators.\tThis will help them\twith their\toperating costs\tduring the current COVID-19 situation. Stallholders will receive 50% rental waiver this month, and 25% in April and May. This will\tbenefit\tabout\t14,000 cooked food\tand market stallholders. About one third of the stallholders, whose monthly rentals are below $200, will in fact enjoy more than one month of rental waiver. We share Ms Joan Pereira's concern – we will monitor the situation and are prepared to provide further assistance if required.
Nonetheless, I am heartened to see the resilience of our stallholders. At Chinatown Complex Market, the stallholders are working hard to achieve the SG Clean quality mark for their stalls, and are even organising a promotion event this weekend. So do show them your support! It is okay to, you know, gain a few calories or inches.
Last year, we also facilitated the formation of two Workgroups, which Mr Liang Eng Hwa spoke about, to co-create solutions to key issues facing our hawker trade and culture. I am pleased to note that even before the Workgroups submit their recommendations, we are already adopting some of their ideas.
For instance, we have already implemented one of their ideas, the Hawkers' Development Programme (HDP). Classes start next month, and I encourage aspiring hawkers to apply.
The Workgroup also suggested fostering a strong hawkers’ network and facilitating hawker-to-hawker sharing. Following the positive feedback for the inaugural Hawkers' Seminar held last year, we will support the Federation of Merchants’ Associations, Singapore to organise this Hawkers' Seminar as an annual event.
Another Workgroup idea that we are\tworking on is a series of hawker awards to recognise hawkers’ efforts and achievements. We will share details on the awards and nomination process later.
A key challenge that the Workgroup raised was the physically demanding nature of the hawker trade. We had launched the Hawkers' Productivity Grant (HPG) in 2017 to help stallholders adopt kitchen automation equipment. Close to $1.5 million has been disbursed to 526 cooked food stallholders. You might have tried the ayam penyet by Mr Abdul Rahman Bin Suradi. He tapped on the HPG to buy a multi-function food processor to prepare his chilli sauce. Now he needs only a quarter of the time and can ensure the correct consistency and quality. With the time saved, he can serve more customers.
To help more hawkers improve their productivity, I am pleased to announce that we have taken in the Workgroup's suggestion to enhance the HPG. From 9 March 2020, we will expand the HPG to market stalls, and the scope of supportable items will be broadened beyond kitchen automation to include service innovation, such as queue management systems. We will also extend the HPG, which would have ended in October this year, to March 2023. Mr Chairman, in Mandarin please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Hawkers are the heart and soul of our hawker centres. To help our stallholders tide over the COVID-19 situation, we will provide one-month of rental waiver, with the minimum sum of $200, to all stallholders in our hawker centres. Stallholders will receive 50% rental waiver this month and 25% in April and May.
We have also listened to feedback from hawkers and will be enhancing the Hawkers' Productivity Grant to help more hawkers adopt productivity solutions. From the 9 March 2020, market stallholders will also be able to apply for the HPG, and a broader range of items will be supported, such as queue management systems. We will also extend the HPG to March 2023.
(In English): Today, as is fast becoming customary of MEWR's COS, besides Minister's treat of a meatless satay and gyoza from Impossible Meat, I have arranged for some hawker delights to be served in the Members' Room. I urge all of you to tuck into these drool-worthy eats, if you have not done so.
The kentang and sardine epok are from Kalsom Kuih Muih Curry Puff at Yishun Park Hawker Centre, lovingly handmade by Mdm Kalsom Kamis and Mr Zaidi Bin Zainal and are simply sedap! I know because I have tried it.
Also, try the exquisite cakes from The Headless Baker at Ghim Moh Hawker Centre – you might just fall head over heels for them! This is a new Incubation Stall run by Ms Amber Pong, who used to work as a pastry chef in Melbourne.
Building a sustainable and climate-resilient Singapore for ourselves and for future generations is not only about addressing our challenges. As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Mr Mohamed Irshad and Mr Desmond Choo pointed out, it also brings economic opportunities for our companies and creates good jobs for Singaporeans.
Local companies can leverage sustainability as a competitive advantage to export their innovative solutions and grow beyond our shores. An example is Orinno Technology Pte Ltd, one of NEA’s key partners in Project Wolbachia. NEA and Orinno have jointly developed innovative Wolbachia-Aedes solutions, and have even filed five patents! Not only has Orinno played an important role in advancing Singapore’s public health research, they have also gone on to export these solutions, such as to Thailand and Australia.
Through upskilling and technology adoption, more than 45,000 people will benefit from higher value jobs in the environmental services, water and agri-food sectors over the next five to 10 years.
Let me share about Mr Soh Han Hwee, who started 17 years ago as a Site Supervisor in cleaning services company Horsburgh. He believes in constantly upskilling oneself and has completed over 20 courses from\tcleaning, work-at-height, productivity management, risk management, Leadership & People Management courses, and the list goes on! Through his training, Mr Soh has been promoted to become an Operations Manager and now has more than a hundred people under his supervision.
As we move towards a risk-calibrated co-regulation approach,\twe\twill\tsupport\tcompanies\tand\tentire industries to build up their competencies and create higher value jobs. Just as how the Water Efficiency Management Plan created Water Efficiency Manager roles in companies, strengthening our environmental sanitation and food hygiene will also create demand for higher-skilled roles, such as the cross-functional Environmental Control Officers or ECOs, and Food Hygiene Officers (FHOs).
NEA will be enhancing the competencies of ECOs who are currently engaged at construction sites as advisers of good environmental practices. Enhanced vocational training will benefit approximately 2,600 ECOs by equipping them with up-to-date skills to better plan and implement a full array of measures including vector control, environmental sanitation and waste management.
We\twill\tfurther\treview\tthe\tECO\tscheme\tas\ta competency-based vocation and broaden their\twork areas beyond construction sites to more premises types, like shopping malls. In time, ECOs will be valued as certified experts who are well-versed in multiple aspects of environmental management. They are leaders who can drive and raise environmental standards of the premises\tthey\toversee.\tIn some\tways,\tECOs\tare almost as important as CEOs!
As part of SFA’s regular review of the Food Hygiene Officer course curriculum, SFA will enhance the training framework for FHOs. FHOs can look forward to a holistic food safety education to better equip them as food safety guardians at their workplaces.
SFA will also be developing a new Advanced FHO framework, which would allow FHOs to upgrade and progress to Advanced FHOs. Advanced FHOs will be trained to develop and implement internationally recognised Food Safety Management Systems. Over the next 10 years, 9,000 new and existing FHOs and 400 Advanced FHOs will be trained.
Courses under these training frameworks can also be offered as certifiable modules to students in food-related programmes. This enhances their relevant skills and increase their job opportunities.
There will also be exciting jobs created in new growth areas such as the high-tech agri-food sector.
SFA has been working with government agencies, Institutes of Higher Learning and the industry to build competency within the agri-food workforce. This includes developing training programmes at various levels, which will be rolled out at the right time to meet industry needs without creating oversupply.
In the last two years, SFA has collaborated with Temasek and Republic Polytechnics to implement two SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programmes leading to diplomas in Aquaculture and Urban Agricultural Technology respectively. These programmes equip fresh ITE graduates with relevant skillsets to start their careers as Aqua or Agri Technicians.
Thus far, there are seven ITE graduates in the two Earn and Learn programmes. Ms Germaine Chong is one of them. As an Aquaculture Technician at Apollo Aquaculture, Germaine benefited from\tstructured on-the-job training, mentorship and technical training. Recognising Germaine’s good work performance, Apollo Aquaculture has even offered to sponsor her for the full diploma.
This year, SFA will be working with NTU to launch a new Food Science and Technology post-grad certificate programme. This programme will cover contemporary topics on urban agri-technology, such as post-harvest of agriculture produce and novel food such as microalgae and insects. I believe technology will remove the \"yuck\" factor and bring the \"yum\" factor in.
On the Environmental Services side, we have launched the first ever NEA-Industry Scholarship Programme. We will partner the industry to award 20 scholarships to ITE and Polytechnic students in related fields, such as engineering, environmental technology and sciences. The scholarship provides scholars with financial support during their studies and attractive salary and clear progression pathways upon graduation.
In the recycling industry, the three upcoming e-waste recycling facilities are expected to add\tanother 430 jobs. In tandem with the implementation of the Zero Waste Masterplan and Resource Sustainability Act, industry transformation will create more career opportunities requiring engineering, science and environmental management expertise. I therefore want to assure aspiring entrants into these fields that the jobs are exciting, pay well, leverage on new technology, and most importantly, are Planet-saving!
Mr Chairman, I want to end off my speech on an optimistic note. Even as the existential challenge of climate change looms over us, opportunities abound. We have to seize them and find creative solutions to make the most out of them. Just take my blouse as an example. Its designer JJ Chuan named it MusicCloth. Ms Chuan told me that 56 million kg of plastic had been used to make cassette tapes since they were first introduced in 1963. I am not sure how many Members here remember or know what a cassette tape looks like. She gives them a new lease of life by upcycling discarded cassette tapes, weaving them into the \"fabric\" for new products such as this evening bag, and also this prototype houndstooth matching blouse.
By planning ahead and working together as SG United, you can turn the challenges from climate change into opportunities for our companies to innovate and internationalise and create better jobs for Singaporeans. That is really turning trash into treasure. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Clarifications? Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Thank you, Sir. I do not have much to show except this shirt which I have worn for five years. And that is the best to go towards zero waste. I have two clarifications.
One is on the carbon tax. We agree that the climate issue, it is an existential threat and that is why we introduced the carbon tax. But the issue here is that we are going to take too long to review it, which is we have committed to increase it by 2030. So, to tackle this emergency, can we look into reducing the time frame, which means can we at least look into increasing it by 2025, which is five years' time instead of 10 years?
Secondly, with regard to the public disclosure. I am just wondering whether MEWR has done any studies or review into the studies that show that there is a positive effect of public disclosure. The example I raised in my cut is the German Institute of Economic Research that showed that this type of company level disclosure will result in a 17% reduction in carbon emission. So, what is holding us back from doing something that will help to reduce emissions here in Singapore?
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The carbon tax is only one of many measures that we have put in to make sure that we nudge our industry, our transport, our buildings towards meeting our targets. But there is also a reason behind that, like I mentioned in the early part of my speech. It is to make sure that we too will do our part in the United Nations' framework for climate change.
Our emission is barely 0.11% of the world's – about 50 mega tonnes. UK – five hundred mega tonnes, thereabout. China – 10 giga tonnes. So, even if we were to halve or eliminate our total GHG, we would not have moved the needle. It is all these other big emitters that must do their part to make sure that we can save our planet.
But the framework is one where everybody must do their best within the constraints of what they can do. So, our solutions fit ourselves and we believe that with what we have put forth, including the time frame, we will be able to manage to achieve our GHG commitments including the new ones that Senior Minister Teo announced, to reduce it by half in 2050 and to being carbon neutral in the second half of the century.
It is important that in the context of which we look at commitments, it is also to look at the constraints and the context of each country's make-up of how they produce these GHG in the first place.
There was a second question on public disclosure. I do not know how we can draw clear causality between the rules around disclosure and the outcomes around reducing GHG. Surely, there are many other things that have nudged or transform these companies to achieve reduction in the GHG emissions. I am quite sure one of them is the UNFCCC framework itself because it has set a mood in the whole world, that countries, companies, had better moved, had better transformed, whether or not you are going to be transparent or otherwise, because that is where the world is going.
And out of responsibility or even out of marketability of the products, that is how people will move. Whether they will move faster with disclosure or not, I am not so sure. I will say though that our SGX has already made the right moves to require companies to do sustainable reporting and they have to comply or they have to explain, if they do not make sustainability efforts.
The Chairman: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim: Chairman, I have a clarification concerning Project Wolbachia, the mosquito study. The first is that, I think it has gone through a few phases now. And from what I understand to date, it has not been deployed in any dengue clusters. My clarification first is, is there any rationale for not deploying it in dengue clusters thus far?
The second clarification is, earlier Minister Masagos mentioned that there is an intention to expand the project to larger areas. Does he foresee, for example, in the coming months that this will also involve dengue clusters in the expanded project?
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: We are extremely careful in deploying this technology because we are introducing something that is, while natural – Wolbachia is naturally occurring in mosquitoes – we are doing it artificially. We are injecting huge numbers into the community. So, apart from the effectiveness of the technology, we are also mindful, as Mr Louis Ng had mentioned, of the disamenities that residents may suffer from suddenly having millions and millions of mosquitoes in their neighbourhood. So, there is some socialisation that has to take place.
I am happy that where it has been tried out, in Yishun and Tampines, the outcomes have been good – 90% suppression. But the disamenities and the complaints have persisted. When I do my house visits, residents will still say they see a lot of mosquitoes now. Then, when I explain to them it is the Project Wolbachia. They say, \"Yes, I know. What shall do?\" I tell them, \"Do whatever you need to do – spray, hit – do whatever you need to do to make sure you do not suffer from these dis-amenities\".
Therefore, we need time. I think we need time to make sure that as we expand the areas where we deploy the Wolbachia, that the people are also used to this.
But here is the good news. We hope that, as we suppress the mosquito population, we can then introduce fewer male mosquitoes over time. But that is still a hope; that is still something we need to try and we need to validate. Project Wolbachia will take some time but it is going to be a very important tool that we can use in times when climate change brings higher temperatures, which in turn, encourages mosquito breeding. We need to have an arsenal of weapons to deploy.
In the meantime, we must still do what we must do, which is to suppress the breeding of these mosquitoes within our homes. Everyone must do their part. This is not a magic bullet. The Project Wolbachia will not be a magic bullet. We still need to ensure the breeding in our homes is well controlled.
The Chairman: Mr Seah Kian Peng.
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): For Project Wolbachia, I was one of the first few constituencies. The residents liked it quite a lot. So, if you want to bring it back, I volunteer my constituency again.
My clarification for the Minister revolves around food resilience. As I mentioned earlier, our plan to have 30% of our food supplies coming from within local produce by 2030 is an ambitious plan. But as I said, if there is a way to bring this to achieve it earlier, I think we should really go all out to to do it.
But we also know that local produce inevitably comes at a higher cost and therefore, we should also think of ways to help local producers to be better accepted by the consumers here.
I would like to ask the Minister, I know we are doing quite a lot, but what else can we do, because you cannot run away from the fact that local produce is more costly. Many of my business associates in this industry, we want them to succeed but I think we need to do a lot more to get the consumers to accept it. And I am sure Government can think of other ways to promote their products and for consumers to lend their support, not just by words, but by action.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: I thank the Member for the supplementary question, especially on how do we support our local farmers and local production. There are many ways. If you are all familiar with the four Ps of marketing, it is not just about pricing. Pricing is just one point at which we can push products faster. Sometimes, pricing, if it is too cheap, like salt becomes a useless product. It is not something people value.
And therefore, we will be helping our local producers to learn how to market their product better. For example, Red Mart is now marketing the local produce, selling through the electronic means, through Internet. It is achieving some measure of success because they know how to market it properly. It is not just about shelf display and so forth.
Apart from that, we also have achieved some form of scale. This is particularly important for our fish industry. The technologies we have put into our fish industry are quite costly. And if they only do it in Singapore, they will not be able to achieve the scale per unit. Therefore, we are happy that they have now expanded beyond Singapore shores. For example, Apollo has got concessions now in Brunei, Barramundi Asia too, as well as some other of our fish farms. And this will enable them to achieve and spread the cost of their early investments over a larger unit, a larger production. That too will help us to achieve the pricing points that would be attractive to Singaporeans.
But beyond that, I think there is also a segment of our buyers who are looking for sustainable products. The number may not be big but over time, the young will demand that products that they buy are sustainable ones. Therefore, it is important for our local producers to learn how to produce these sustainably.
The Chairman: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Sir, just following up some points I made in my Budget debate speech about the recycling and a charge on plastic bags so as to reduce our waste signature. On that note, I acknowledge the points made by Senior Minister of State on studies done and workgroups to be formed to look into that prospect.
My question relates to point I made in the Budget debate speech about waste in general and the amount of waste that we dispose. I understand last year, MEWR had a target to reduce the amount of waste that is sent to Pulau Semakau by 30%. What is the progress of that? How is that coming along, by 2030, I believe was the timeline?
On that note, what is the Minister's assessment of Pulau Semakau as a continued area where we dispose our waste? Do we not need to reduce our waste signature even further?
Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: We launched the Zero Waste Masterplan last year and one of the key goal, of course, is to reduce the amount of waste that we bring to Semakau by 30% by 2030. The Zero Waste Masterplan lays out in details the initiatives that we will be implementing or are already doing in order to achieve this goal. One of the these would be on the three key waste streams – e-waste, packaging waste and food waste. The Resource Sustainability Act has been passed and it is to enable some of these measures to be put in place. So, extended producer responsibility will be starting next year for e-waste. That will help to reduce the amount of waste, including those that may be trashed to Semakau.
Packaging waste is another one and we are actually bringing part of this EPR framework forward with the Deposit Returns Scheme that we will be implementing in 2022. If we implement the Deposit Return Scheme, post-consumer plastics, like PET bottles and so on, will then not have to be trashed if we can create a demand for this as feedstock.
Then, other ideas, which I have mentioned in my speech, about chemical recycling – again to recycle the contaminated plastics, turn them into \"NEWOil\", for instance.
All these measures will help us to reduce the amount of waste that will go to Semakau landfill. We want to save Semakau. We want to extend the lifespan of Semakau landfill for as long as possible.
The other one, of course, is NEWSand where we are already looking into having a commercial facility for NEWSand to be used as construction materials. Road pavements – we are going to do a study later on, on its effectiveness and impact. If you can use incineration bottom ash, that means instead of filling it up, putting in Semakau landfill, if you can actually use incineration bottom ash as construction material, NEWSand, then you will also reduce the amount of waste that you have to landfill in Semakau.
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: My question is on solar installation at the reservoirs. Was a cost-benefit study done? I was wondering about the recovery of the capital expenditure or capex, compared with so-called the conventional energy. Of course, I am in support of this project to use solar energy, but I just want to understand whether, in the long run, is it something worthwhile to do.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Solar energy costs have gone down all over the world, not just in Singapore. I just came back from Saudi and they are deploying solar panel fields – these are so huge and I am so envious that they have so much land. So, not only do they have energy under the ground, they now have energy above the ground. They have so much energy that they are not using it at all most of the time. They just want to do it because there is the land that they have and they think this is the way to go to be green.
For us, the only large amount of space that is not used would be the reservoirs. On the cost of solar panels alone, it is now low enough for us to benefit from the economic gains.
The Chairman: I can hear all the delicious food calling us. So, would Er Dr Lee Bee Wah do us a favour and withdraw the amendment?
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Minister, Senior Minister of State and the team in MEWR for working very hard for this COS. I am very happy to hear of all the job opportunities. Definitely, I will be the first few who will apply for the SG Eco Fund as I want to make sure that our rooftop, high-tech community farm is up and running by this year. With that, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $1,728,100,500 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $1,243,512,600 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Order. I propose to take a break now.
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.30 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.12 pm until 4.30 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.30 pm
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head T (Ministry of National Development)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head T, Ministry of National Development. Mr Alex Yam.
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
At last year's MND huddle, Minister Lawrence spoke about the importance of partnership. Last year also marked the 60th anniversary of the Ministry. We can all see how much our living environment has changed through the decades of careful planning by MND and its agencies.
In 2019, the MND has similarly achieved much. Home buyers can now plan better, project sites are now half year ahead of schedule. Balloting time has also shortened. For vulnerable families, more options and support from the new Home Ownership Support Team.
Looking ahead, the MND has not just focused on immediate issues but, like it has always been, visioning far head. There is excitement over the future of our city and our home. The Draft Master Plan 2019 offers a glimpse.
Chairman, let us first look at the Budget allocation for MND. This year, MND's budget will grow by 22.2%, or $4.46 billion. Increase is mainly attributed to the public housing development programme and higher spending for SERS and upgrading. Can the Minister provide some details on the new projects to be funded?
In addition, I note that the CONQUAS score for HDB flats in 2019 saw a drop of 3.5% to 88.5%, compared to 2018. Could the Minister share why there was a drop in the mean CONQUAS, and how MND and BCA intend to promote better quality workmanship? In line with that, can we better promote more local talents in the construction industry?
I, and perhaps many Members of this House, have seen fewer cases of residents appealing for flats. Those who do usually have more complex circumstances. It is therefore a reflection of how our housing policy has improved. But there are still some who need more help or better options. What more can MND do to help home-seekers access their flats quicker?
With the open booking of flats, it has afforded Singaporeans who want quicker options to select and book their flats. Could the Ministry update on the take-up rate so far and what has been the feedback received?
I would like to return now to a topic that I have spoken of often – the monetisation schemes and support for our elderly homeowners. I am especially happy that the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) has been extended to all flat types. Last year, MND organised an intense round of outreach across Singapore. Many of these roadshows were led by Minister Lawrence Wong himself. This was to raise awareness on the LBS.
I would first like to ask what has been the sign-up rate for 2019, and if the roadshows have helped to increased understanding and also encouraged more to take it up. Secondly, what more can the Ministry do to make the benefits of LBS and other schemes better known and perhaps more attractive?
Another group that I have spoken about every year has been support for vulnerable families and individuals. I am heartened by the work of the Home Ownership Support Team that Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling announced last year. Can the Ministry perhaps share how many have benefited from the targeted help so that they can achieve home ownership?
For singles, the challenge remains that there are many waiting in line. Supply of 2-room flats for singles are still lagging behind demand. Does the Ministry intend to expand on the supply this year?
For unwed parents and divorcees with children, which my colleague Mr Louis Ng has championed for passionately over the years, can the Ministry also share how it intends to better support them?
For elderly Singaporeans who wish to age in place, some have also indicated that they prefer additional services such as \"assisted-living\" facilities. Minister Lawrence Wong mentioned last year that MND and MOH are in discussion on this. Can the Minister therefore share if there has been progress made and if there are now firmer plans for the Government to undertake such assisted-living projects?
We all know that we are constrained by our physical size in Singapore, but our circumstances have driven us to find innovative and forward-looking solutions to afford us the best use of this limited resource, so that we can maintain a careful balance of responsible and responsive land usage. Amidst a rapidly changing global environment, what are we doing to retain our competitive edge while ensuring that our city remains liveable for our people, even with the changing aspirations?
Our city centre is perhaps our most recognisable and visible skyline. However, it is also the hardest to rejuvenate.
Last year, the CBD Incentive and Strategic Development Incentive Schemes were launched to promote rejuvenation. Can the Ministry provide an update on the progress made to date? I further urge that we continue to ensure that the Central Business District (CBD) and our city centres are not exclusive enclaves, but accessible and open to all Singaporeans.
Another topic that I have been passionate about is how our redevelopment and rejuvenation cannot be at the cost of our heritage. Many of our buildings have been lost over the years in the name of progress and better land use. I applaud the Ministry's efforts in recent years to better protect our built heritage. I would like to urge MND and the National Heritage Board (NHB) to work together to do more to ensure that our heritage as well as the soul of these buildings are not lost.
I return to the Minister's emphasis on partnerships. As we work with professionals and stakeholders to build the future Singapore, our towns, our workplaces, I would like to urge for more community involvement in the plans, so that the very people who live, work and play in these areas have a stake in shaping it.
For estate upgrading, we have seen a successful example in Tampines Central. How will the Ministry better encourage such efforts? The Lively Places Programme, which was a pilot by HDB last year, has seen enthusiastic response. What projects have come out of this initiative? I would like ask the Ministry to expand on this programme throughout all our towns in Singapore.
On a related effort, we are known as a City in a Garden, a vision first expoused by our chief gardener, the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Over the last 50 years, we have made much progress in greening Singapore. We have become a Garden City and then A City in a Garden. What are the Ministry's plans for the next bound of he greening of Singapore? How can Singaporeans also be more involved in this effort?
Many of our multi-storey car park roof decks, for example, are often empty. I therefore urge that NParks will consider a more ambitious programme to green those roofs and promote more community projects.
Related to this, of course, is our national efforts to combat climate change. I welcome the announcement of the Green Towns Programme. Though much of this will apply to new developments, I ask that the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) and HDB look at how we can push such innovations and apply them rapidly to our existing towns, as this is where most energy wastage is likely to occur with older infrastructure. Our new flats and commercial buildings should also be designed to take full advantage of natural air flows so as to reduce the need for reliance on air-conditioning. Especially amidst the lessons of this COVID-19 outbreak, natural ventilation is better than air-conditioning in reducing the chance of spread.
In further light of COVID-19 and the slowing economy, many developers that I have spoken to have found it difficult in the last few months. There have been manpower shortages due to slow return of workers, there have been issues with supply chain and equipment, and all-round uncertainty over the economy. I have further heard from the developers that I spoke to that they project a lean year ahead, with delays in construction as well as potential difficulties in selling their completed projects.
I therefore ask the Ministry to consider revamping the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) temporarily, perhaps to extend the number of years subject to the state of the economy.
I also ask the Ministry to help spur the construction industry, especially for small and medium players, by increasing the number of local rejuvenation projects such as Remaking Our Heartland (ROH), Large-Scale Town-Wide (LSTW) projects, Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) projects.
Mr Chairman, we are not done building Singapore. I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. As we rejuvenate and look towards the future, as we view with excitement the possibilities, we must never lose sight of the purpose of the Ministry of National Development (MND) – to keep to this Government's social contract with Singaporeans, so that every Singaporean will have fair access to affordable homes, accessible workplaces, liveable environments, a future-ready city and ultimately, a better Singapore for all of us and also our future generations. Mr Chairman, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Health and Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin): Municipal issues concern all residents, and so each resident should have a stake in the shared living environment and be able to contribute their unique viewpoints and experiences to shape it. At the same time, the diversity of residents' perspectives and needs should be taken into account.
Could the Municipal Services Office (MSO) share how it is enabling residents, at the individual level and as a community, to have a say in municipal issues?
Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Chairman, since its inception, HDB has played a critical role in ensuring affordable and accessible housing for Singaporeans. It is an institution at the forefront of public housing. No other Government agency in the world can boast that it has provided for over 80% of its people the selection of quality public housing it had, served by comprehensive networks of amenities.
HDB flats are the de facto homes for our newly-weds and many of them will progress to upgrade to bigger units. Those located at town hubs and near Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) stations are especially coveted by home-seekers. However, the waiting time of three to four years for a Built-To-Order (BTO) flat is quite long, particularly so for young families with babies on the way.
Would MND review this and do more to help home buyers access new flats more quickly? In 2019, how many flats were given up by prospective buyers and what were the take-up rates of Sale Of Balance flats? MND launched the open booking of flats last year. How has the take-up been?
It is understandable that HDB has been calibrating the size of flats based on a combination of the size of the family unit and affordability. This has generally resulted in smaller flats being constructed. I have observed at recent Edusave Merit Bursary Awards ceremonies in my constituency that there seems to be more families with more children, that is, three or more. These families usually have a domestic helper or live with grandparents, so extra rooms and more living space are needed. May I request that HDB consider selectively including a higher proportion of bigger units, such as 5-room flats, in new BTO projects in mature estates to support our pro-family policy?
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Chairman, greening and renewing our housing estates is an important initiative to increase our green cover and promote environmental sustainability. I note that community roof gardening and installation of solar panels are also some of the initiatives that the newer housing estates benefit from. However, we must not neglect the older, mature housing estates. Despite the regular upgrading and maintenance projects, the difference between the older and newer estates can be quite stark due to the availability of community amenities, deployment of technology, amongst others.
Safety of the building structure and living areas of the mature estates and flats are very important to ensure that those living in them are safe and sound environmentally, particularly, our elderly Singaporeans.
What are the plans to rejuvenate our older mature estates to keep them vibrant places to live in, and ensure that they remain safe, green and environmentally sustainable? I hope the Minister will also explore the usage of solar panels in all the roofs of mature HDB estates. As rejuvenating all estates would be a massive project, may I suggest assessing the gaps between the infrastructures in comparison to the newer ones, and prioritising estates with a wider disparity?
Second, can HDB work with the existing Residents' Committees, networks and advisers to set up a constituency-based housing safety team, or HOST, made up of residents, HDB and other partners, to gather timely feedback and statistics, and assess the potential wear-and-tear of internal structures of mature flat units before they become dangerous to occupants? HOST can do regular checks of HDB units by block to see if there is a common flat-wide issue that can be rectified before it worsens and affects other residents' safety.
Mr Teo Ser Luck: Chairman, recently I took a drive back to where I grew up in from when I was a baby until I was about 12 years old. It was in Hougang. We used to call it \"Hougang luck kor jiok\" in Teochew, which roughly translates to \"Hougang six pieces of stone\". Basically, when I mentioned that to the elderly folks, there is a certain warmth in that. Because of that, I realised that there are places where I had gone to when I was in Secondary school, such as Farrer Park where we used to play football, which are still being preserved.
Strangely, the place I went back to, which is \"Hougang luck gor jiok\", where I grew up in, the rental unit above a provision shop is still there. It is just that one stretch of provision shops and some of the shops are still there – very old – but everywhere else has changed. So, that preservation was really meaningful to someone like me. I think, for every town, heritage is the identity and soul of the place.
Would the Ministry consider having that as part of its policy when doing town planning for all the major towns to have a certain heritage to exist for a longer time period?
Mr Arasu Duraisamy (Nominated Member): Sir, Singapore has done well in greening over the last 50 years. We have become a Garden City and, now, A City in a Garden and, in the near future, City in Nature. Today, greenery is all around us, with parks and gardens close to our homes and workplace, trees along our roads and vertical greenery on some of our buildings.
But as we develop, there will always be increasing trade-offs between greenery and other infrastructure developments. The next phase of our greening journey must address this challenge. Can we continue to grow as a city while remaining green and liveable? Can the Ministry share its plans on addressing the trade-offs between greenery and infrastructure developments?
At a time when our challenges are becoming more complex, partnering Singaporeans across multiple domains to tap on our diverse strengths is vital and our citizens also have a greater desire to contribute, to be heard and to act.
The Government has done an excellent job of engaging communities in building Singapore. For instance, the public was involved in the Draft Master Plan 2019 process through workshops and exhibitions. The community is also increasingly involved in directly shaping and caring for the areas around them, such as residents managing their community gardens via the Community in Bloom programme. But can we do more?
As we make plans to rejuvenate our city and enter into the next phase of our greening journey, we must get the community involved at an early stage. These engagements will help to foster a greater sense of communal bonding, for the public will also feel a stronger sense of ownership in the space that they have helped to build and, thus, there is a higher chance of better utilisation of these rejuvenated spaces, as they are the outcomes of the community's involvement.
Could the Ministry share how the Government intends to involve the community in rejuvenating our city and in greening Singapore?
Mr Mohamed Irshad (Nominated Member): Deputy Chairman, this cut is on ensuring that our public housing is affordable and accessible. I note that MND increased the household income ceiling for subsidised flats last year. My questions are supply-related and are as follows.
Firstly, what more can MND do to help home seekers access flats more quickly? Related to this, how has the take-up been for the open booking of flats launched by MND?
Secondly, how can MND better support the housing needs of single unwed parents and their children? Two specific questions:
One, will there be a dedicated section in HDB’s website to address housing queries from single unwed parents? Currently, the website merely states that single unwed parents are eligible and asks these applicants to directly contact HDB.
Two, MND announced last year that HDB would conduct a review of the touchpoints which single unwed parents would encounter. Are there any updates on this review?
Mr Png Eng Huat: Sir, it is always exciting to see new BTO developments sprouting up in the middle of an old estate. Such developments will bring in new amenities like rooftop gardens, exercise equipment, playgrounds, eldercare and childcare facilities and eateries to complement the old-world charm of mom-and-pop shops, open void decks and good old-fashioned coffeeshops.
Hougang has welcomed two BTO projects over the years and we will be looking forward to welcoming another one this year. I wish to highlight some design integration issues of such new projects in the hope that future developments will take into consideration these feedback and concerns.
First, I wish to highlight that the void decks of new BTO blocks are no longer functional. Residents living in these new blocks can get lost walking in their own void decks. The number of pillars and walls have literally transformed the new void decks into a maze, forcing residents to use the service road in the estate. This is certainly a safety concern for residents who need to cut across the precinct to get to their destination daily.
Furthermore, due to the maze-like design, void decks, chairs and tables have become hidden in secluded corners in these new BTO blocks. Most of the time, these amenities would end up being misused by noisy drinkers, chain-smokers and rowdy teenagers to hang out in the wee hours of the night, away from prying eyes. Noise and second-hand smoke will ensue and residents will end up suffering as a result.
Next, I wish to highlight that more could be done to better connect the new precincts to the older part of the estate. In the two new BTO precincts in Hougang, the Town Council had to build extra ramps, footpaths and stairs, in addition to the few designated access points, in order to facilitate the safe movement of residents on the ground. Although it is human nature to take shortcuts, the planner should look into providing a more barrier-free integration of the new precinct to the surrounding built-up of areas at the design stage. This will benefit residents on mobility aids or with baby prams, as it is really not easy to navigate the maze-like void deck of new BTO blocks just to use the designated access point.
Sir, town planning is a work-in-progress. It may be a challenge for HDB to design better void deck spaces for now but it is certainly doable to have a truly barrier-free integration of new and old precincts in a mature estate for a start.
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, you can do your three cuts.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Yes. Chairman, recent Built-To-Order (BTO) sales launches had attracted many flat applicants. But for successful applicants, in fact, the three to four years' waiting time is not short. To facilitate better planning for both individual households and HDB, would the Ministry consider allowing HDB to share information at the beginning of each year about the planned BTOs to be launched in the next one to two years? HDB could also allow applicants to register their interest in advance. In addition, the demand and supply information could be made available in real time, enabling applicants to make informed decisions earlier. All these data will also enable HDB to plan ahead to meet demand.
Next. If financial assistance is given to first-time buyers, whether they are families or singles, to buy resale flats is quite generous. Firstly, there is the CPF Housing Grant of up to $50,000. If they live with or near their parents or married child, the Proximity Housing Grant of up to $30,000 will be provided. Thirdly, eligible first-timers can tap on up to $80,000 for the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG).
Yet, some of these buyers cite various challenges finding a suitable resale flat in mature estates. The reasons include both financial and non-financial ones. Would the Ministry share which are the top five obstacles these first-time buyers encounter and what further assistance, such as grants, can be provided to them?
Next. The Lease Buyback Scheme provides a monetisation option for our elderly while allowing them to continue staying in their homes. This is, indeed, 两全其美, a solution which offers the best of both worlds. I would like to ask the Minister what has been the response to this scheme since its launch, especially with the inclusion of 5-room and bigger flats last year. How many households have actually applied for LBS to date? Currently, how many households per room type are under the scheme? Among these flat owners, how many have to use the proceeds from the lease sale to fully discharge their outstanding mortgage loans? Some seniors are worried about outliving their remaining lease. What assurance could the Ministry provide them? Lastly, how will the Ministry increase awareness of the scheme among our seniors?
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Sir, the HDB's Façade Finishes Repairs Co-Payment Scheme allows Town Councils to claim for co-funding on a 50-50 basis for repairs to HDB block façades finished with materials, such as bricks, tiles, cladding boards and so on.
I seek to enquire under what circumstances the HDB will pay in full for such repairs. In my ward of Eunos in Aljunied GRC, there have been repeat episodes of failing block facades in a specific group of blocks at Jalan Tenaga.
The Professional Engineer appointed by the Town Council whose report is available to the Ministry has suggested that the underlying cause of the failing façade is down to shortcomings during the construction phase of the blocks. These blocks were constructed less than 30 years ago. As the façade of similar blocks in the precinct have failed in an identical or almost identical manner over the last few years, should not the HDB, as building owner, undertake to fully cover and reimburse the costs of the façade damage, repair and pre-emptive investigation of other similarly constructed blocks?
The Chairman: Mr Arasu Duraisamy, you can do both your cuts.
Mr Arasu Duraisamy: Sir, last year, MND extended the Lease Buyback Scheme to seniors in 5-room and larger flats. The Minister also shared about efforts to raise public awareness of the scheme.
Can the Minister share how has the take-up rate been since the extension of the Lease Buyback Scheme to the larger flats and what are some of the efforts to raise public awareness of this Lease Buyback Scheme?
The Minister also mentioned that MND and MOH would conduct focus group discussions to seek views on the proposed concept for assisted living in public housing and that Assisted Living Typology flats would be launched in Bukit Batok in 2020. Such assisted living flats would be smaller, but they would have more communal and shared spaces for residents to interact with one another.
Can the Minister share the findings from the focus group discussions that MND and MOH conducted?
Can the Minister also share the kind of features these assisted living flats will have and when will they be launched, the number of units that will be made available and who will be eligible to buy these flats?
Second cut. Over the years, MND has made changes to its housing policies to support diverse housing needs of Singaporeans. With these policies, the Ministry has continued to make efforts to better support single unwed parents who are in genuine need of housing. These include enhancements to frontline communications and the willingness to review every request made by unwed parents, among others.
Sir, today, unwed parents can purchase up to a 2-room flat in the non-mature estates from HDB. However, some may need more space, especially when their children are growing older. Can the Ministry consider reviewing access to bigger HDB flats for unwed parents to better meet their housing needs?
MND has, over the years, increased attention to support rental households towards homeownership. This support has contributed to the steady increase in these households becoming homeowners.
At the 2019 COS, MND announced several initiatives, such as the enhancements to the Step-Up CPF Housing Grant of $15,000. This grant was extended to rental families buying a 2-room or 3-room flat in non-mature estates and the introduction of waiver of rent increases for tenants upon their downpayment for the purchase of a flat.
At the same 2019 COS, the Ministry announced plans to improve physical conditions of rental blocks and flats as well – works to improve the ventilation and lighting of older rental blocks to create more openings along corridors; more partitions in 1-room rental flats to enhance privacy between tenants under the Joint Singles Scheme.
Can MND provide an update on the progress of these initiatives?
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Our perception of families has long revolved around the nuclear family unit comprising two parents and children. But not everyone fits into this mould. We should take a lighter touch on personal matters, such as marriage and life decisions, when making policy.
Currently, single parents who are not married are still under the \"Singles\" category. If they are under 35 years old, they cannot buy apartments. And if they earn more than $1,500, they cannot apply for rental flats. Exceptions are on a case-by-case basis.
The \"case-by-case\" approach allows us to use discretion but there is a lot of uncertainty for this group. Yes, we want to encourage marriages to remain strong and reduce reliance on state resources. This is prudent.
But can we shift our paradigms and include single unwed parents in the composition of what a \"family nucleus\" is.
The need is real. I would like to ask how the Ministry can better support the housing needs of single unwed parents and their children.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Last year, I met Gina (not her real name) who is a divorcee. She originally had sole care and control of her son but it was eventually changed to shared care and control.
She has successfully applied for an HDB flat when she had sole care and control but it was later rejected at the key collection stage as the care and control was changed to a shared one. She was unable to obtain mutual consent from her ex-husband even though he was already staying in a private property and did not need an HDB flat.
It has been years since the divorce and, due to various other circumstances, she is still renting a place to stay in. Her ex-husband continues to stay in the private property.
I feel this is terribly unfair. I thank MND for reaching out to help her and I hope MND will consider waiving the requirement for ex-spousal consent on who can list the children as occupiers in an HDB flat application if the ex-spouse has already purchased a private property or an HDB flat following the divorce.
The Chairman: Mr Ong Teng Koon, you can take both your cuts.
Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, to promote the take-up of Electric Vehicles (EVs), I would like to ask the Minster whether he will consider opening up the carparks that are maintained by URA and HDB to more than one operator so that they may install EV chargers and whether such EV chargers can be opened up to the general public for their use, instead of only restricting it to the operators' own EVs.
Many residents have asked me if they can park their normal conventional cars in the EV lots and they have asked me why BlueSG gets to park in the prime lots right in front of their flats. So, I would like to ask the Minister whether he can consider or he can educate us on how he intends to will allocate prime real estate between supporting EVs and the needs of residents who might have elderly folks or young children.
Sir, on the issue of the lift upgrading programme, I would like to highlight two blocks in my constituency, Block 115 and 119 of Marsiling Rise for the Minister's consideration. I have appealed for Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) for these blocks for many years and I have raised this issue in Parliament since 2012.
The profile of these blocks: the residents are greying, there are many elderly residents, some of them are wheelchair bound, many have mobility issues. To them, having a lift is an existential need, it is not a good to have. They become very vexatious when they see that public money is being spent on a nice garden as part of the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) but not the lift that they have been asking for many years as part of the LUP.
HDB has cited the need for financial prudence in order to maintain cost effectiveness. But I feel that financial prudence should be about not overspending above a projected cost, a certain limit. It cannot be, but HDB has been telling me this and it is not about putting an arbitrary limit on the costs without taking into account our residents' well-being.
I hope there can be a resolution to this issue soon, that the Minister can help my residents at Block 115 and 119 of Marsiling Rise to get lifts. I hope that more than a 150 blocks in the rest of Singapore, the residents will get lifts soon, because I believe that that we need to ensure that everyone gets high quality living regardless of when his flat was built or where his flat was built.
Mr Png Eng Huat: Sir, the $5 billion Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) has ended and there are about 150 existing HDB blocks without direct lift access remaining. Some of us in this House had asked for periodic updates about the fate of the remaining blocks without LUP. I have also asked HDB to look into segregating these blocks into two categories: those with technical constraints and those with cost considerations. I urge the Ministry to share these numbers.
The replies from HDB have been consistent, that is, HDB will continue to study and look for cost effective solutions to extend LUP to these blocks and Singaporeans in urgent need of direct lift access due to medical conditions or mobility issues can approach HDB for possible alternative housing arrangement.
Sir, the wait for a definitive answer for residents living in these non-LUP blocks has to come to a finality soon. These residents have been caught in between the wait for good news or to move out for the longest time. And any housing agent would tell you that it would be tough to offload a flat without direct lift access unless the owner is prepared to take a hit on the market valuation or selling price.
I have asked in this House for HDB to let these residents decide if they are willing to pay a little more for direct lift access since funding per flat has to be fair and equitable. The Ministry had informed this House that the cost of implementing direct lift access for some blocks is not marginal, with some of the costs as good as building a new flat.
Sir, I would like to ask again for the Ministry to further segregate some of these costs as I believe some blocks may only need an additional lift shaft such as Block 363 at Hougang Ave 5. Let these residents decide on the share of the marginal cost.
Finally, for lift upgrading that is going to cost as much as building a new flat, would HDB consider offering the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme to these precincts to resolve this issue then?
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, you can do both your cuts.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, as echoed by hon Member of the Parliament, in fact, out of these 150 HDB blocks, I have a fair share in my constituency that were not able to get this LUP. I just want to find out, since then, has HDB been able to find new solutions to implement LUP for at least some of these blocks or install some interim devices which can help to transfer residents with mobility issues from their floor to the next floor which has lift access? The residents told me they like to age in place and they prefer to stay there.
I would also like to ask how many households in need of direct lift access due to medical or mobility reasons had approached HDB for housing assistance to date? How many of them have been able to move to suitable flats with the assistance of HDB?
Last year, the Ministry set up the Home Ownership Support Team (HST) to guide and support eligible households living in HDB rental flats to move towards home ownership. HST had set the target of helping 1,000 rental households within four or five years of its launch. Is it on track so far? How many families have actually bought their flats with HST's assistance to date?
Due to the numerous hardships experienced by these families, would the Ministry consider providing additional grants or more flexible mortgage payment conditions for them? In addition, can HDB provide further assistance to encourage them to become homeowners by accepting the HDB rentals they have paid cumulatively as the downpayment for their own HDB flat subsequently?
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, in a recent survey conducted by Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, it was estimated that there were about 1,000 homeless people in Singapore. About 40% of the homeless people interviewed stated that they had housing registered under their name and 15% said they had public rental flats.
Last year, I had called on the Government to consider a change in its policies to allow some elderly singles to rent a flat alone on a case-by-case basis. If we do not make adjustment to our policies, where do these elderly singles go? Should we force them to stay with a co-tenant that they do not know? If we do, the risk is that they may quarrel frequently over minor issues. Or they may end up with health issues if either of the tenant suffers from some illness.
There are some seniors who are estranged from their families. They approach me at Meet-the-People Session and say they desperately need a rental flat. When I ask them why are they not staying with their families; the bitterness in the relationship shows in their face.
I have also met seniors who had married a foreign spouse. They cannot rent a flat with a foreign spouse. Then, what do we do for people like them?
I accept HDB's intention of not wanting seniors to live by themselves so that they can help look after one another. I think in a \"CNA Insider\" documentary, there was a story about a senior, 65 years old, who died alone. However, this current policy may have led to some sleeping on the streets or void decks. The situation is untenable and I would urge HDB that we should do more to help these vulnerable seniors. I ask HDB to consider reviewing this policy.
Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): In order to ensure prudent use of our limited land and fiscal resources, MND enforces the rule of the Joint Singles Scheme (JSS). But conflict between co-tenants is a problem more than reported. Many suffer in silence. It is difficult for complete strangers compelled to stay together. Many live miserably with frequent quarrels and even fights. The Community Mediation does not work for them for many reasons. These affect the well-being of many co-tenants, also cause depression in some and others resorting to become rough sleepers.
Does MND screen potential tenants to be free from mental illnesses or medical conditions before putting them together? If not, can there be such assessments for all potential tenants put in place? Can HDB offer more partitioned rental flats under JSS to provide more privacy? Can HDB provide newer models of HDB rental flats with better use of space and cost as well as giving privacy to tenants?
Those that seek rental flats are usually the disadvantaged and more vulnerable members of our society that our Government can assist with more of their housing needs.
I want to urge our Government to review JSS, which had been in existent for the last 30 years. Singapore has progressed in the last 30 years and it is time for Singapore to be more gracious towards the most disadvantaged group in our society, in providing them the basic need of roofs over their heads. It is time to tweak this policy for humane reasons.
Will MND allow flexibility for rental flats tenants to opt for single tenancy, especially for those with no family members to share with, while also giving tenants the flexibility to share with co-tenants for companionship and mutual support if they so choose.
There are many needy families with children living in HDB rental flats. Many of them have lived in rental housing for more than six years and some more than 10 years. Thus, there are signs of entrenchment. What are the schemes in place and the success rate of such schemes, to assist them in looking for better options in their housing needs and to help them get out of their predicaments?
Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Sir, HDB has an occupancy cap for renting out flats and commercial property: a maximum of six occupants in 4- and 3-bedroom HDB flats and four occupants in any smaller flats.
These standards do not apply to the Public Rental Scheme. Under this scheme, only 1- or 2-bedroom flats are available. 2-bedroom flats are available only to families of three or more, with some income. If a family is not earning any income, they are only eligible for a 1-bedroom flat, regardless of the number of family members in that family. This results in families of five or six squeezing into a 1-bedroom flat, or even families of more than 10 in 2-bedroom flats.
Research demonstrates that overcrowding has a deep and adverse impact on both adults and children. There are significant associations between the number of persons per room and an index of psychological health. Family ties erode: the parent's authority over the child diminishes as they are unable to accommodate the child's needs; adult family members prefer to stay outside their home till late; conflict occurs more frequently in the home; children do not have enough space to play, rest and study, which directly impacts their academic performance and overall development.
In light of the above, I have three questions specifically for the Ministry. What is the reason for there not being an occupancy cap for homes under the Public Rental Scheme? How is the act of placing children in 1- or 2-room HDB flats with three to 10 other people in line with Singapore's obligation to primarily consider the best interests of the child under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child? Will the Ministry consider allocating 3-room flats and above to families of five and over under the Public Rental Scheme?
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Chairman, we sometimes wonder why we do not frequently come across people with disabilities and special needs in our community. They surely exist even if they are not the majority in our population. I would imagine like everyone else, they too need a place to live, learn, relax, move about freely and socialise. I believe this may be the wish of some them, but they do face challenges of not being able to do so in a carefree manner.
First, their family. People with disabilities and special needs often require the care of a guardian who can assist with their daily needs. It is natural for their family members to be protective to reduce the likelihood of them being mistreated by strangers who are not aware of their special needs' conditions. To minimise awkward situations, people with special needs are often confined to their home, school or places where they can be fully accompanied.
Second, mental barriers and confidence in own abilities. With lesser exposure to the broader community, there are fewer opportunities for people with special needs to experience and understand how to manage social interactions or overcome some living issues. This has an impact on their self-confidence and their willingness to break the silence in seeking help.
Third, the existing public amenities in the process of being modified to accommodate people with special needs are largely not fully equipped as it was not designed with them in mind at the early stage.
Earlier in the Budget debate, I have raised the need to rally society to be inclusive from young. But, beside the soft aspects, I would like to ask MND what efforts are taken in our living environment to enable people with disabilities and special needs to socialise and engage in the community.
I suggest the following: One, intentional efforts to adapt designs in our common spaces like the neighbourhood playground, the gardens, to enable their outreach in the community and with designated relief areas for people with special needs to have their private moments.
Two, to create the digital apps with information on venues and services that are friendly to people with special needs.
Three, to collaborate or create travel journey tools that shows real live routes which are barrier-free access, wheelchair accessible and leads to reachable areas that are not dead ends.
Further, I want to know whether there are plans to review areas that can improve people with special needs' daily assisted living in the public housing. Familiarity with surroundings and having the right aids in place amongst their living compound are of utmost importance for them. I hope we can look into using design and technology to ease their burden on the long run.
For example within their home, there can be adjustable household fixtures that are designed to accommodate different physical conditions, hoist to facilitate movements in the toilet and bedroom, voice activated or push controls to automate management of the living environment, sensors within the home that are linked to service care centres or family members and robotic enabled devices that can aid daily activities.
Many people with special needs have hopes and goals in life just like any of us. Some of these can be achieved through thoughtful designs aided by technology. We can certainly help to close the gaps in their development journey and enable them to scale new heights, live more independently and fit with greater ease at our shared public spaces.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Sir, before I proceed, I would like to declare my interest as a PE and my involvement in property development and construction.
Many contractors told me that they feel discriminated against in recent field contract awards. In the LTA Jurong Regional Line Projects, for example, four out of seven contracts were awarded to foreign contractors. Another example, LTA awarded N112 tender to a foreign contractor, even though our local contractor submitted the lowest quote. The lowest tenderer is an established homegrown contractor. Why pay $6 million more to a foreign contractor whose company is registered in the Virgin Islands? We have about 140 A1 local contractors who have all built up very strong capabilities. If we do not even support our own contractors, who else will support them? Can we consistently apply the policy of \"Buy Singapore First\"?
Contractors also shared that they always face payment delays, and hence cause cash flow problems. Some of the causes are:
(a) Variation Orders (VO) – the valuation and certification of VOs can drag on for years before they are finally settled;
(b) Liquidated Damages (LD) – contractors are imposed LD even before claims for Extension of Time (EOT) and VOs are assessed; and
(c) Under-certified payment – it could be due to our \"kiasuism\" culture, so, the work done on site is often under certified.
While it is commendable that the Government has taken a long-term view to reducing Singapore's reliance on foreign labour, it should place more emphasis on the quotas of those sectors that Singaporeans would like to work in, which are certainly not in construction or shipyard.
With emphasis on Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA) and Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction (PPVC), we need more S Pass workers than ever before, as they are more skillful. Another problem is that Singapore is no longer attractive to some foreign skilled carpenters and tilers. They choose to go elsewhere. Perhaps BCA can help to investigate the reasons and implement measures to solve this issue. For example, are they finding it too tedious or too expensive to sit for the Core Trade Skills test? With the current push for DFMA and PPVC, are these tests still relevant?
As the COVID-19 situation continues to evolve, the construction industry is facing the full impact of labour shortage, material delays, threat of site lock down and so on, delaying progress of projects. Can the Government do more to help the construction industry? For example, waive the workers' levy during this difficult period.
We also believe that some of the Government policies can be re-examined. The current crisis could be an opportune time to review and tweak the ABSD regime to make it more equitable and effective as the current regime is not calibrated, to some extent, it is a one size fits all. This is not a call for an easing of the cooling measure but an appeal for a temporary relief for the real estate industry to cope with the current situation. The following two changes could be considered: first, a re-instatement of the Practical Completion Period (PCP) to six years. Contractors need more time to complete the projects; and secondly, an extension of the five-year ABSD deadline to say six years. Alternatively, the ABSD penalty to be pro-rated based on the number of unsold units, similar to the QC principle.
In anticipation of the high likelihood in project delays, BCA is urging developers not to penalise contractors. How is this possible if developers are bounded by the five-year ABSD remission deadline which is very punitive?
At the same time, the sale of residential units has slowed down sharply, almost to a stop. I hope MND can understand the challenges faced by property and construction industry and lend a helping hand. Let us show solidarity and Singapore together spirit.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, under the Building Control Act, proposals for building works will need to be submitted to the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) for approval. I understand that the Act will soon be amended to expand the types of projects that require BCA approval, to include major alteration or replacement works to fixed installations.
In assessing whether or not to approve such works, the BCA will examine the certifications and other paperwork of qualified persons (QPs) engaged by the project owners. To what extent does BCA itself verify the soundness of these certifications?
The incident of the PIE Viaduct Collapse in 2017 is illustrative. In that incident, one person was killed and 10 others injured. To date, various professionals associated with the project have been charged and convicted in court. The QP admitted to having engineers with inappropriate experience, failing to check design assumptions and being aware of errors in calculations by the engineers. An accredited checker for the viaduct admitted that he had failed to check the designs or perform calculations for the corbels.
In a Parliamentary answer in July 2018, MND elaborated on its standard procedures when dealing with building projects. The Ministry stated that at the plan submission stage, the BCA performs a sampling check of the plans and design calculations of selected key structural elements, to ascertain that the QP and the Accredited Checker had carried out the design and checks in accordance with building control legislative requirements. MND further stated that at the construction stage, BCA would conduct targeted inspections on structural works.
As these checks by the agencies would presumably have been done on the PIE viaduct project as well, does the collapse of the structure and the facts found by the court indicate any loophole that needs to be plugged? Is there a need for agencies to play a larger role in regulating building projects to ensure public safety?
Mr Ong Teng Koon: Mr Chairman, the BuildSG Transformation Fund has catalysed many productivity innovation projects last year. In the construction sector, there was a focus on offsite prefabrication to improve productivity.
I would like to ask the Minister, how does Singapore compare with other countries in terms of manpower efficiency in our construction sector, and if there are initiatives and schemes to encourage our construction industry to be the best in class.
Sir, with the reduction of S Pass sub-DRC, I would like to ask the Minister if this would affect the local PMET's job. Many of our local PMETs typically take on supervisory roles of the foreign workers. Now, if they have no more foreign workers to supervise, will they still have a job?
Thirdly, I would like to ask the Minister if there are new job opportunities for PMETs in the construction sector. With growth areas such as Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) and Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD), are there more programmes for PMETs who can transit into these jobs?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, our construction sector has difficulty employing Singaporeans to fill many of its jobs, from the most humble manual work to PMET positions. The main challenges are the unattractive salaries, long work hours and difficult work conditions.
However, the current COVID-19 outbreak teaches us the importance of having a good pool of local expertise for self-sufficiency. It is very important that we maintain a critical size of local capabilities for all job scopes at all levels. We should not be too reliant on PRs and foreigners.
I would like to ask the Ministry what it has done and plan to do to encourage Singaporeans to join the construction industry. Will it work with the Ministry of Manpower to implement the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) for construction jobs to ensure good salaries and career outcomes? How is the progress for the Professional Conversion Programmes (PCP) for PMETs in the construction industry?
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Chairman, the Built Environment cluster, comprising industries such as the Security, Construction, Environmental Services, Real Estate and Smart Facilities Management, is one of the newest growth sectors. With the significantly increased demand in related services, particularly smart facilities, environment and security in recent years, it is a sector burgeoning with opportunities and is a potential exportable service we can provide to the world. How is the Ministry creating good jobs in this cluster and supporting locals to take up these jobs?
Singapore companies across the build environment value chain also collaborate on a complete solution for international infrastructure projects. What skill sets would be needed for this sector and how can we encourage greater interest for mid-career switches to this sector?
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, the BCA Green Mark Scheme is a good policy that we should build on. Young PAP and climate activists have proposed that the scheme be reviewed and updated with a more weight given to reducing energy consumption and shifting dependence to greener sources.
The School of Design and Environment Block Four (SDE 4) at NUS is a good example. It has net-zero energy consumption. It uses a hybrid cooling system that combines the use of air-conditioning and ceiling fans to provide thermal comfort to building occupants. YP and climate activists have proposed that such features be propagated to new buildings.
I understand that there already is a Green Mark for Zero Energy buildings. But we should also raise standards for the other Green Mark schemes. Buildings should be held to a higher standard before we can call them \"green\". Will MND consider raising the Green Mark standards for (a) new Government buildings; (b) all commercial buildings; and (c) all private and public residential buildings to encourage sustained reductions in overall energy consumption? Next.
I am glad that NParks have now a 10% increase in height limit for local mixed breed dogs to be re-home under Project ADORE. The weight of the dog will also be removed as a criterion. This good news. There is about 20% more local mixed breed dogs can be re-homed at HDB flats each year. But we can do more. Can MND provide the rationale for not removing the height criterion as well? Many more dogs can finally find a forever home if we remove the height criterion.
I understand that MND's concern is that the smaller dogs are generally considered to be more easily carried and controlled, especially in confined spaces such as lifts. However, size is not a good proxy of the behaviour or temperament of a dog. Researchers have found that larger dogs are perceived as more obedient, less anxious and less aggressive compared to smaller dogs. As the saying goes, \"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.\"
As part of the pilot, will MND consider removing the height criterion so that more dogs can be re-homed?
Lastly, it does not make sense that someone who lives in a condo is allowed to keep a pet cat while someone who lives in a HDB flat is not allowed. Why? HDB has stated that \"[Cats] are generally difficult to contain within the flat. When allowed to roam indiscriminately, they tend to shed fur and defecate or urinate in public areas, and also make caterwauling sounds, which can inconvenience your neighbours.\"
Surely, these concerns apply to people staying in condos as well. Some condo units are even smaller than HDB flats. It also does not make sense that one is allowed to keep a dog, and now a big dog, but not a cat, not even a little kitten. Dogs can also shed fur and defecate or urinate in public areas. What is more, they bark.
HDB's concerns can be easily addressed. We can ensure that pet cats do not roam indiscriminately and are sterilised. Sterilised cats do not make caterwauling sounds. I have seen firsthand how all these simple measures can be taken and people can keep cats in their flats without affecting their neighbours.
So many people are already keeping cats in their flats. Will the Ministry consider taking the step to officially allow people staying in HDB flats to keep cats?
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, Sir, earlier this year, I asked the Minister whether it is timely to consider removing the ban on keeping pet cats in HDB flats and to regulate pet cat keeping to minimise disamenities for neighbours. Minister replied no, citing reasons of irresponsible pet ownership causing inconvenience to neighbours and unhappiness.
I find this line of reasoning inconsistent, as this is applicable to all pets and pet owners. But the ban is only specifically on cats.
Domestic cats are unlikely to cause the dis-amenities that Minister cited. Studies have shown that cats spend 25% of their waking hours cleaning themselves; their natural instinct is to cover up and hide their waste, which can be done in a litter box. Sterilised cats are unlikely to caterwaul and even if they do, some of the reasons could be to alert their owners to outside activity, or they may be in pain or feeling stressed, which are similar reasons why dogs bark too.
The ban is outdated. Today, many younger families and families of all ethnic groups are pet cat owners. Regulating pet cat ownership in HDB flats will be more beneficial than a ban as it may give many stray cats a loving home and allow cat lovers to take care of their cats at home with peace of mind. Regulation can include ensuring domestic cats remain indoors, microchipped and sterilised and a framework to encourage community acceptance and having mediation channels for disputes.
I read with interest the latest news that the dog size limits for HDB have been relaxed so as to allow more local mixed-breed dogs to be rehomed in HDB flats under Project ADORE. I hope cats, no less adorable to many Singaporeans, may be included.
Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, I would like to draw attention to the pet birds trade in Singapore. Back in November 2017, I filed a parliamentary question to ask the MND about the frequency that AVA reviews the reference list of birds available for sale as pets to ensure that species which are becoming endangered or threatened are not sold here.
Minister Lawrence Wong replied that the list is based on the requirements of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). CITES amends its list once every three years and covers species for which it is illegal to trade.
So, in adopting the CITES list, we are saying we will not do anything which is illegal. Frankly, Chairman, I believe that this is too low a benchmark for us to adopt. I would like to suggest that NParks, which took over the animal welfare function of AVA, adopts the IUCN Red List maintained by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.
Moreover, CITES covers high profile larger animal for which extinction is possible. Many tropical bird species, such as the white-rumped shama, which are threatened and may not be on the CITES list but are included in the IUCN Red List. The CITES list is also not as comprehensive when compared to the IUCN Red List especially in covering smaller species such as tropical birds.
Chairman, the tropical pet bird trade is a multi-million dollar trade which threatens native species. The situation is so bad that in many forests in nearby countries, some song birds are already extinct.
On the same topic, I would also like to propose an increase in the amount of fines for the illegal smuggling and trade of pet birds. In August last year, a Malaysian attempted to smuggle in a record 815 birds into Singapore. Some of these birds can trade for a few thousand dollars each so the maximum fine of $10,000 is relatively low compared to the potential profits. Assuming a \"street value\" of $500 per bird, the total value of birds from this smuggling attempt was more than $400,000. The fine only forms 2.5% of the total value, which is hardly a deterrence for smugglers.
Chairman, I really hope that Singapore can show leadership in the conservation of native species and not do what is just the minimum. The right place for a bird is on a tree branch and not a cage Hopefully, when our grandchildren walk through a forest, there will still be birds chirping and it would not be a silent forest.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the Ministers for Culture, Community and Youth and Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Mr Chairman, the Municipal Services Office (MSO) was set up to coordinate between agencies and Town Councils to improve the delivery of municipal services.
One key initiative has been the set-up of OneService app. I have tried it a few times and found it easy to use and more importantly, effective. Behind the convenience at my fingertip, I am sure there is a lot of work done behind the scene to make sure the right agency receives the feedback and takes necessary action in time. On behalf of the public, I thank the good men and women at MSO.
Some municipal issues are complex and require various agencies to work hand-in-hand. Sometimes, other non-governmental stakeholders are involved. Let me use the example of community cats.
In Tampines, we do have many cases relating to community cats that have been difficult to resolve. These could be cats roaming at corridors, defecating, scratching cars, caterwauling, irresponsible cat feeding and so on. Some residents are bothered by what the cats do, some are just afraid of cats, while others just do not like them. On the other hand, there are many cat lovers who spend their own money to buy cat food and go around the estate feeding them every night.
To many residents, they just turn to the Town Council to solve such issues on the ground. The Town Council has to work with HDB which regulates that cats are not allowed to be kept within flats, and NEA, which can go after cat feeders who leave the cat food as litter. However, the current practice has also been to work with the Cat Welfare Society (CWS) as a first call.
I have met some staff and volunteers at CWS. They are all very passionate and dedicated people who love and care for cats. They have deep knowledge of how cats behave. At our last meeting, they recommended sonic repellents to help deter cats from venturing into certain areas. Tampines Town Council has bought some and we will be trying them out.
However, CWS has very thin resources and are not able to follow up fully on all cases. They also do not have authority over cat lovers, cat feeders or pet owners, some of whom may not be very cooperative. So, in some cases, CWS has admitted that they would not be able to do anything.
Sir, instead of letting a voluntary group bear the responsibility, should a Government agency take ownership? Would it be HDB, NEA or maybe AVS or maybe NParks? For such issues, could the MSO play the role to coordinate and help set up a sustainable working system to handle such cases?
Mr Ong Teng Koon: Chairman, the work of MSO as part of the Smart Nation Movement has tangibly improved the lives of many Singaporeans. Improvements through the Municipal Services Productivity Fund include Parking.sg, and this has increased convenience to drivers and reduce litter and waste generated by paper coupons. And many drivers given the feedback that they appreciate the refunds being to them if they end their parking sessions early.
Sir, it was good to hear last year that the Municipal Services Productivity Fund was going to be extended with more funds for more agencies to tap into. One such project was the use of drones by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) for the early detection of maintenance issues, and also a trial deployment of compactor litter bins by NEA for more efficient waste collection.
I would like to ask the Minister to share an update on the progress of these projects and if there are any other technology-enabled services that the Municipal Services Productivity Fund is currently looking at.
I would also like to ask the Minister whether she can consider the use of smart locks that can be remotely controlled. These could be used in our shared common spaces like badminton courts and basketball courts. While some residents enjoy the use of these facilities, I have also got many residents who will complain to me because of the dis-amenities late into the night.
I would like to ask if we could leverage on technology to better manage our common space.
The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.
The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Chairman, as our country battles the COVID-19 outbreak, I would first start by conveying our appreciation towards all cleaners and workers in municipal services for working hard to keep COVID-19 at bay.
Municipal issues concern all of us as residents and, as Mr Baey Yam Keng said, can be complex and involve multiple parties to resolve. We have made good progress coordinating across Government agencies, Town Councils and other non-government stakeholders, to offer residents services that are prompt, practical and personal.
With the OneService app, residents can access services on-the-go. We now have more than 200,000 app users who, collectively, submitted over 460,000 feedback cases. The use of Artificial Intelligence or AI, enables our integrated systems to route most of these cases automatically to the right agency for prompt action, with 89% accuracy. This saves about 175 man-days a month, freeing up resources for agencies to focus on rectifying ground issues.
To address complex issues, MSO first clarifies the roles of stakeholders involved. Ninety percent of cases involving multiple stakeholders found the case owner within seven days, and since 2015, the average time taken has fallen from eight-and-a-half to six days. MSO then works with stakeholders to develop collaborations that tap on their respective areas of expertise. Mr Baey cited cat-related nuisance. NParks is the first point-of-contact for the public for animal-related feedback. We are tightening the collaboration to manage this and monitoring to ensure that case resolution times and outcomes improve.
Addressing residents' concerns about complex issues often goes beyond coordination, so we emphasise services that carry greater personal engagement. I recall a case where residents at Pending Road were troubled by unpleasant smells from a nearby flat. HDB found the flat severely hoarded and infested with pests. HDB worked with Holland-Bukit Panjang Town Council, MSF, PA, IMH, Thye Hua Kwan and Covenant Evangelical Free Church to address the case holistically. They worked over weekends to clean the flat, obtained financial aid for repairs and provided emotional and counselling support – all to afford long-term self-care to the flat owner and a sustainable solution to other residents.
This is the empathy and resident-centric service we champion. Today, nearly 60% of our OneService app cases have post poll ratings of 4- and 5-stars. We aim to raise this to 70% by end-2020. MSO will go further, beyond coordinating, to forge meaningful connections with, and among residents.
Mr Ong Teng Koon asked about MSO's progress in harnessing technology to deliver service improvements to residents. The projects undertaken by SLA and NEA under the Municipal Services Productivity Fund are progressing well. In 2019, we awarded funding for HDB and PUB to trial a smart lock system that Mr Ong has asked, that automates access to maintenance areas in HDB estates, such as rooftops. We will explore the potential for this system to be adapted to other spaces, together with other solutions, such as encouraging residents to be more considerate, as Mr Ong has requested, to address the root cause of community noise.
We are making other technological improvements to better connect residents to services that meet their needs.
First, we are integrating services from agencies and Town Councils into the OneService app, to develop the \"Book Facilities\" feature for residents to have a single, simple touchpoint to find and book community spaces, such as function rooms, barbecue pits and sports facilities. In addition, we will introduce new reporting categories, such as \"smoking\" and \"high-rise littering\", for residents to highlight specific concerns for investigation.
Second, we are improving accessibility to services, by bringing our mainstay reporting function to where residents are. With OneService Lite, which involves QR codes posted at places where residents frequent, such as HDB lift landings, users can easily report a case by scanning the QR codes in just two taps, without having to pre-install the OneService app. Soon, residents can also submit cases via popular social messaging apps like WhatsApp and Telegram, guided by an AI-powered chatbot.
Third, we are constantly innovating to kick-start future-ready solutions. Since January, we have been trialling Municipal 360. Routine feedback submitted through the OneService app will be routed directly to agencies' contractors for speedier resolution. Residents will be updated with photographs of work done directly by the municipal worker.
Last November, MSO hosted the OneService-Industry eXchange for public and private organisations to share ideas and co-develop solutions for municipal operations. With more collaboration and experimentation, residents can look forward to smarter, more customised service improvements.
Even as we expand technological connectivity, we want to connect residents with each other to co-create a better living environment for all. We agree with Mr Amrin's suggestion to consider the diverse views of residents. Certainly, as part of SG Together, we will enable each and every one to have a say and exercise collective choices that will impact their living environment.
For a start, we have included new OneService app features to activate our community to make the changes they want to see. Residents will be able to poll on local improvement works through \"What Say You?\" surveys and use the \"Community Challenge\" feature to take bite-size, meaningful actions that help address issues that concern them.
We must also augment hardware with \"heartware\", by nurturing more community participation and partnership. During a pilot in Yio Chu Kang to reduce high-rise littering and pigeon issues, the dedication of the Residents' Committee community leaders to educate residents personally was critical in tackling the root cause – human behaviour. Post-pilot, we saw an 80% reduction in related feedback. We have formalised a programme to equip community leaders and Town Councils in all towns with advice and resources to tackle these issues.
We welcome residents to come on board in a variety of ways – as individuals, to inject their unique perspectives, and as a community, to build consensus amid diverse views. For example, MSO is partnering MCCY in the \"Love Our 'Hood\" initiative that test-beds various resident participation models to co-create solutions for municipal issues in their neighbourhoods. Through these projects, we will develop resources that other community groups can use when launching future ground-up initiatives.
To sum up, there are many good ideas, diverse talents and new solution possibilities across the community, industry and agencies. We want to harness these to achieve our common goal of improving our living environment, the SG Together way. In 2020, we will remain steadfast in our goal to deliver connected services for a connected community.
Mr Chairman: Mr Desmond Lee.
The Second Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Chairman, we want to build a Singapore where the next generation can enjoy a better life than the one before. That is why my colleague Minister Lawrence Wong had said some time ago that \"we are not done building Singapore.\" This spirit also motivates our push to make Singapore a City in Nature and our efforts to transform our city centre. So, I will focus on these two aspects today.
Sir, the lush urban greenery we have today is the outcome of dedicated and sustained efforts where successive generations of Singaporeans have been planting trees, year after year, over the past 60 years. Today, we are a City in a Garden and, according to an MIT study, one of the world's greenest cities.
Mr Arasu Duraisamy asked about the Government's plans for the next bound of greening Singapore. We want to transform Singapore into a City in Nature to provide Singaporeans with a better quality of life while co-existing with flora and fauna on this island. Indeed, with climate change, more extreme weather conditions and increased urbanisation, we must do more on this front.
With your permission, Chairman, may I just display some slides on the screen to better elaborate what I am going to say?
The Chairman: Yes. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
Mr Desmond Lee: Sir, our key strategy is to enhance and extend our natural capital across the island. Let me outline four key moves over the next 10 years.
First, we will extend our nature park network. Today, we have more than 350 hectares of nature parks, which act as complementary habitats and buffers to our nature reserves to protect them from the impact of urbanisation. This is important as the nature reserves are the richest sources of our natural capital. They contain our primary and secondary rainforests and core habitats for our native biodiversity and wildlife.
In all, we will dedicate another 200 hectares of nature parks by 2030. This is two-and-a-half times the size of the Singapore Botanic Gardens. Singaporeans can look forward to more places, such as the Rifle Range Nature Park for nature-based recreation, such as hiking and bird watching in future.
Khatib Bongsu is a rich mangrove and mudflat habitat on the north-eastern coast of Singapore. I have kayaked there with NParks and our nature community volunteers a number of years ago. It is one of the few good mangrove habitats left in Singapore and I am happy to announce that NParks will also be establishing a 40-hectare nature park there.
Next, we will intensify nature and the greenery in our gardens and parks.
First, we will incorporate natural designs and plantings in our new and redeveloped parks. You can expect to see a greater variety of vegetation that resembles the look and feel of natural forests and also benefit from the positive effects of nature on your health and well-being. You can look forward to the addition of another 140 hectares of such parks and gardens over the next five years.
Second, we will naturalise more waterways and water bodies in our gardens and parks. We have done this in Bishan-Ang Mo Kio Park and Lakeside Garden, where we transformed concrete canals into natural rivers. We will incorporate such designs in all our coastal and riverine parks. This will also help to protect against sea-level rise and flooding.
Lastly, we will conserve important native plants and animal species. Some of our world's most unique biodiversity call our tropical island home. Singaporeans would have encountered rare native species, such as the Singapore Kopsia, on the left, and tiger orchid, on the right, and this is because of our restoration efforts. In fact, the tiger orchid is the largest orchid in the world. It can weigh a few tonnes each.
We will partner nature groups and the community to carry out recovery plans for over 70 more animal and plant species and enhance 30 hectares of forest, marine and coastal habitats by 2030.
Sir, our third strategy is to restore nature into our urban areas to bring greenery closer to our everyday lives, so that Singaporeans benefit from greenery at their doorstep. We aim to nearly double the skyrise greenery footprint in our buildings and infrastructure to 200 hectares by 2030. We will focus on greening our industrial estates. These are amongst some of the hottest areas on the island – hottest in terms of temperature. Over the next 10 years, we will plant 100,000 more trees in industrial estates, such as the Tuas Industrial Estate and Seletar Aerospace Park. These efforts will cool the environment, improve air quality and beautify the surroundings in those industrial estates.
Lastly, we will strengthen the connectivity between our green spaces. It is not enough to intensify greenery in isolated pockets. So, we will plant native trees and plants in a multi-tiered structure and create green corridors along roads called Nature Ways.
These can be further integrated with pedestrian and cycling paths to form lush and natural park connectors. In fact, we have been planting Nature Ways since 2013 and, by 2030, we aim to have 300 km of Nature Ways and 500 km of park connectors. With these, all households will be within a 10-minute walk from a park and, over the long term, where feasible, we aim to make every road a Nature Way.
During a recent dialogue with friends from the nature community, they shared that the work of greening Singapore cannot be done by MND alone and they are quite right. The transformation of Singapore into a City in Nature – a qualitative change – requires close collaboration with other agencies and we will infuse this into our planning and development systems.
But Government efforts alone will not be sufficient. Various Members also asked how Singaporeans can be more involved in the greening of Singapore. We want a whole new generation of Singaporeans to carry on this responsibility to keep planting and nurturing trees for the benefit of future Singaporeans.
Mr Lee Kuan Yew sowed the seeds of Singapore's greening movement with the planting of a Mempat Tree in 1963 at a time when the Government was also grappling with serious challenges of unemployment, public health, illiteracy and so on. But greening, to our pioneers, was serious business back then, and it remains a key priority of national development right till today.
A few years ago, I organised a Nature Way planting in Jurong West. I was standing next to an elderly lady, who was there with her grandson, and they were participating with neighbours and friends in planting the Nature Way. It was along one of the roads. After they had shovelled soil around their sapling, I could not help but overhear this elderly lady asking someone to help her take a photograph of her and her grandson next to the sapling. She told her grandson in Mandarin, \"Boy, let us take a photo. Remember where we planted this tree. Next time, when Ah Ma is gone, come and visit the tree with your family. It will surely be a lot taller by then. You can remember me by that tree.\"
This story stuck deep in me about how our greenery can bind Singaporeans and families in Singapore together, and how one generation takes it upon itself to plant trees for the next generation to enjoy. Literally planting trees for the next generation but also figuratively taking responsibility for the long term, not just for ourselves, but for the future.
We want this DNA to run deep in our future generations. So, we will continue this legacy with a new movement – the One Million Trees movement.
Today, we plant around the order of 50,000 trees a year. We will double the pace and plant one million trees over the next 10 years. We will do so along our roads, in our parks, estates and green areas, and along some of our coastal areas, we will plant mangrove trees. We may lose some streetscape greenery due to developmental needs, but we will plant back what is lost and more.
I recently met with a number of partners, who are passionate about greening, to discuss how this One Million Trees movement can galvanise the length and breadth of Singapore, and bring on-board a broad spectrum of Singapore, especially the next generation, to have a stake in greening Singapore, to have a stake in making sure this place remains liveable, not just for themselves but for the next generation.
We will involve schools, communities, corporate organisations and many more. In fact, more than 200 stakeholders have already pledged their support to plant more than 120,000 trees. This includes companies on Jurong Island, Keppel Corporation, the National University of Singapore, OCBC, Shimizu Corporation, United Parcel Service (UPS) and many other community groups, organisations and individuals. I am encouraged to see that everyone is doing their part to keep Singapore green.
We also want Singaporeans to be more actively involved in the design, development and programming of our parks. Over the next five years, Singaporeans can join in the designing, building and management of 50 new and redeveloped parks, as my colleague Minister Lawrence Wong had announced recently. This includes signage design or promoting park etiquette, and partnering our gardeners to do landscape planting. It is one thing for a park to be built near you; it is another for a park to be built near you in which you have had a hand in designing, conceptualising, building and literally knocking the nails into some of the furniture for the park and planting the trees. It also gives a sense of ownership, custodianship and stewardship of the green spaces around you.
We will also step up efforts to build awareness amongst Singaporeans so that we can live harmoniously with nature. To have 48,000 NParks volunteers working closely and passionately with us today is something we are very proud of, and we hope to grow this number to some 70,000 over the next 10 years. We invite you to join in our efforts, forge closer bonds with fellow Singaporeans and strengthen our sense of ownership of our environment.
Sir, even as we enhance the quality of our green spaces, we will energise and rejuvenate our city.
Various Members asked about on-going efforts to rejuvenate our CBD and the city and progress of MND's work over the year.
We aspire to be amongst the leading cities in the world, where people want to live, work and visit. We have introduced the CBD Incentive Scheme for this purpose. A successful CBD must have a good mix of office spaces, a lively street life, with diverse offerings. To encourage the development of different neighbourhoods in the CBD, we introduced incentives for the conversion of older office buildings into residences and hotels. Interest and take-up have been encouraging and URA planners are working with interested building owners on this.
We have also introduced the Strategic Development Incentive Scheme to encourage commercial building owners to partner neighbours to comprehensively redevelop a few plots, where transformation is not limited to one building but a whole area along the street or precinct for the public to enjoy.
URA is in dialogue with several building owners who are keen with potential to rejuvenate different parts of our city.
But a leading city is nothing without its people and its soul – not just about buildings and shops, but one that reflects the Singaporean attitude of innovation, openness, daring and verve. Deputy Prime Minister Heng spoke about the spirit of partnership at the launch of the Singapore Together movement last year. At MND we embrace it and will do more to partner Singaporeans. Members have asked how we intend to do so.
We have private sector partners from 10 precincts all across Singapore on the pilot Business Improvement District programme (BID). The pilot BID programmes are making good progress. These stakeholders seek to take a people-centred approach in creating spaces that will draw people into them. For example, we saw The Lawn next to The Sail and Marina Bay Financial Centre being activated for the first time during the Marina Bay Singapore Countdown, and so expect many more such new initiatives in the coming year and months.
Community feedback was key throughout the Draft Master Plan 2019 process. This is another example of how Singaporeans get involved in rejuvenating our city. We exhibited the plan in March 2019 after rounds of consultation, and gazetted it eight months later. We assessed each public feedback thoroughly, and incorporated ideas and suggestions where appropriate. I am confident that the plan has been made better because of our collective efforts and because Singaporeans cared and participated.
Members asked about heritage and conservation of buildings to maintain the character of a city. As a city-state, we have to meet the national physical needs while retaining links to our past, retaining links to our national collective memory. And to-date, after a 30-year journey, we have conserved close to 7,200 buildings across our island, with some in the heartlands. Recent additions include the former Bukit Timah Fire Station, former Railway Station Staff Quarters and SCGS campus at Emerald Hill. In our conservation efforts, partnerships are key. And in the case of SCGS, a group of alumnae worked with stakeholders and the public to garner support for conservation.
We also engage industry partners and the stakeholders in determining which building to conserve, and how we can sustain the built heritage of places.
Sir, in the next bound of greening Singapore and energising our city, it is partnerships that are key – the commitment by Singaporeans across all walks of life to work together with us to imagine the next Singapore, to work hand-in-hand to keep our city green, to keep our city lively and buzzing.
Apart from partnerships, we also have to thank many of our colleagues and officers who work assiduously behind the scenes to make this a reality. For example, the aborists, conservationists, botanists, scientists in NParks and Gardens by the Bay who dream of a yet more green Singapore and the city planners and innovators who think of ways to energise community partnerships in order to make our city that much more vibrant and exciting. We look forward to continued partnership with Members of this House as well. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Mr Zaqy Mohamad.
The Minister of State for National Development (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Chairman, may I show some slides at appropriate junctures, please?
The Chairman: Yes. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
The Minister of State for National Development (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): As we continue to remake our city, we must ensure that our firms and our workers in the Built Environment sector keep pace with technological advancements, improve their capabilities and seize upcoming opportunities.
In 2017, we developed the Construction Industry Transformation Map or ITM, with the industry, the unions, and IHLs.
We have made good progress in our three ITM transformation areas, namely, Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA), Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD) and Green Buildings. Allow me to elaborate.
Firstly, we are fundamentally changing the way that we build through DfMA. DfMA allows us to move on-site construction work into a more controlled working environment off-site, to prefabricate building components for on-site assembly. This way, construction becomes faster, cleaner, quieter, and of higher quality.
For example, Teambuild, a local builder, achieved close to 37% site productivity gains for its Valley Spring @Yishun, a HDB BTO project by adopting Prefabricated Pre-finished Volumetric Construction (PPVC). Here, you can see a module being lifted, to be assembled just like Lego blocks, with the furnishings already fitted inside. This enabled Teambuild significant time savings, and we hope to drive greater adoption in the near future.
We are on track to meet our DfMA adoption target of 40% this year, and we aim to achieve an even higher rate of 70% by 2025. Now, this is an ambitious target but I think that we can achieve this by working together with the industry. We aim to make DfMA our default way of building.
Mr Ong Teng Koon asked how our construction productivity compares with other countries. Site productivity data is not available for all countries. However, our site productivity has improved by over 17% in the last decade, which is significant.
To boost DfMA adoption, we enhanced our Buildability Framework last year, raising standards for larger residential developments and allowing outcome-based solutions to encourage building designs that can be constructed more productively.
We will further enhance the framework this year, by progressively requiring higher buildability standards for other development types, including commercial and institutional buildings. We will also re-structure the framework to encourage the industry to incorporate DfMA technology into the structural, architectural and Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing designs for buildings.
The public sector will also continue to generate lead demand for DfMA. To this end, we will set aside $120 million under the Public Sector Construction Productivity Fund for more public sector projects to adopt DfMA, for projects launched by 2021.
Next on IDD. The digitalisation of the construction process will facilitate wider deployment of DfMA technologies. Building Information Modelling, or BIM technology, will allow our architects and engineers to design and build in a virtual setting first. This improves the accuracy of construction plans and reduces abortive works downstream. Now IDD takes this further, by leveraging technology to facilitate better collaboration amongst project parties across the building life-cycle, to coordinate production and supply chains, to build more efficiently, to improve building quality and to optimise operations and maintenance.
For example, Guan Ho, a home-grown construction firm, has been using digital technology to track building components as they are fabricated, delivered and installed at Punggol Town Hub. This has reduced time spent on project management by up to 30%. We want more local firms to use IDD to build smarter and more efficiently.
To help our local SMEs with IDD, BCA, IMDA and SkillsFuture Singapore have developed the Construction and Facilities Management Industry Digital Plan. We will set aside $19 million to fund SMEs to adopt digital solutions that complement basic BIM software. SMEs will be guided to assess their level of digital readiness, and identify digital solutions that can benefit businesses. For example, site management platforms to plan and monitor construction activities, and facilities management software for operations and maintenance. SMEs can receive up to 70% funding for pre-approved solutions. SMEs can also use the Digital Roadmap on Training to identify digitalisation courses for employees.
Moving on to green buildings. Our industry transformation efforts are not limited to improving productivity. As Deputy Prime Minister emphasised during the Budget, we must remake our city to meet the challenges of climate change. Buildings account for over 20% of our emissions. Green buildings are hence an important part of Singapore’s climate change mitigation strategy. Since the launch of BCA’s Green Mark scheme in 2005, we have greened more than 40% of our buildings by GFA. We are on track to meet our target of 80% by 2030. We also launched the Super Low Energy buildings programme in 2018, which goes beyond Green Mark Platinum standards.
To share an example – Keppel Land and BCA are working together to transform the Keppel Bay Tower into a Super Low Energy building. The building uses innovative technologies, including a high-efficiency air distribution system and autonomous lighting control, to reduce energy consumption by about 20%. This is a good example of how existing buildings can achieve Super Low Energy standards. Keppel Bay Tower will be the first commercial building fully powered by renewable energy.
We can do more. Over the next few months, BCA will co-create the Singapore Green Building Masterplan 2020 with our stakeholders, as we push the boundaries for Green Buildings.
We are considering a few initiatives. First, to push for more energy efficient buildings, we intend to raise the minimum energy performance standards. This will lower emissions, and also benefit building owners over the building life-cycle. Concurrently, we will review our Green Mark certification standards, as highlighted by Mr Louis Ng. BCA will engage stakeholders to develop shared aspirations for sustainability standards in the Built Environment, and we need to work out how to get there in partnership.
Next, we want to enable greater transparency in building energy performance. Today, close to 80% of commercial building owners voluntarily opt to disclose their buildings' names and addresses along with their energy performance data, which is published by BCA annually. We intend to identify all buildings when publishing the data henceforth, so that the best performing buildings will serve as role models to encourage others to improve their own energy efficiency. We will share more details by this year.
We call on stakeholders to co-create the Singapore Green Building Masterplan 2020 with us over the next few months.
Beyond improving firms’ capabilities, transforming the construction sector is also about creating more opportunities for our people, as Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Ong Teng Koon mentioned.
The adoption of new technologies and digitalisation has created new, higher-skilled jobs in better working environments in the construction sector, and generally they will command higher salaries. For example, with DfMA, we will need more production managers, quality assurance personnel, and logistics and supply chain planners at automated production facilities. Tech-savvy local PMETs can also take on exciting jobs such as digital delivery specialists along with the others in the IDD value chain that I mentioned earlier.
Our sector should be anchored by a skilled and competent local workforce and our firms must also do their part. The share of local PMETs in construction has fallen over the past decade, even though our total local PMET population has increased.
To rebalance the share of local PMETs in construction, Deputy Prime Minister has announced a reduction in the construction S Pass sub-DRC from 20% currently to 18% in January 2021, and subsequently to 15% in January 2023.
To help firms build up a strong local core, we are strengthening measures to ensure an adequate pipeline of skilled local PMETs for the industry. BCA and IHLs continually update the curricula of Built Environment courses to meet the industry's evolving needs. BCA also co-sponsors scholarship and sponsorship programmes with the industry to attract students to pursue relevant courses in our IHLs.
We will also progressively introduce new Professional Conversion Programmes or PCPs, to prepare mid-career entrants to join the sector. For example, a PMET from manufacturing could be re-skilled as a production manager in a DfMA facility. Hence, we will develop PCPs for prefabrication job roles. Teambuild is developing a firm-level PCP, which will be open for applications later this year.
I have also heard feedback about the shortage of BIM modellers, but firms have not been keen to take in mid-career converts before they are trained. Under the current BIM PCP, participants are trained in BIM while concurrently undergoing on-the-job-training with their firms. But some firms prefer BIM modellers who can contribute immediately upon hiring. To address this, we will allow participants to complete their full-time training first, before continuing with on-the-job training with their firms. So, on a full-time basis; they could be ready within three months instead of six or 12 months if they were doing it part-time. We hope that more firms will take up the enhanced BIM PCP, which will start later this year. For the participants, they will receive an allowance of up to 80% of their drawn salary is, during their full-time training.
To Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's and Mr Ong Teng Koon's points on the S Pass sub-DRC cuts, our transformation efforts have created attractive jobs for locals. The S Pass tightening helps level the playing field, and will allow more Polytechnic and ITE graduates to access these jobs, including supervisory roles. Our local PMETs will still be able to take on supervisory roles, so long as they are open to re-skilling themselves.
As we push ahead with our transformation efforts, we aim to create more of these attractive jobs that I shared earlier, for our local PMETs. I encourage firms to take advantage of our good pipeline of infrastructure projects in the years ahead and attract more local PMETs to join our sector.
A good example is Kimly Construction. Since 2015, Kimly has sponsored 15 undergraduates with BCA, and introduced them to fulfilling careers in the Built Environment sector. Kimly has also groomed three mid-career BIM modellers under the BIM PCP since 2018. Kimly paced out the on-the-job-training for these employees to smoothen their transition into the firm, and they are now keen to pick up even more advanced BIM skills, such as 4D/5D BIM simulation.
We have also developed a Skills Framework (SFw) for the Built Environment sector, to map out skillsets required at various levels for key job roles in the construction and facilities management sectors, and their career progression pathways. More details will be announced later this year.
Moving on to other cuts. Ms Sylvia Lim asked about ensuring the safety of building works.
For any development, the Qualified Person or QP has a duty to ensure that building and structural plans comply with the building control regulations. In addition, all major building works must be independently reviewed by an Accredited Checker or AC to ensure that the key structural elements are adequately designed.
While the responsibility of ensuring structural safety rests with the QP and AC, BCA conducts sampling checks for each plan submission. Where BCA finds non-compliance with legislative requirements, BCA will take enforcement action. Penalties could include a fine, or imprisonment, or both.
BCA regularly reviews the Building Control regime to ensure that it is sufficiently robust. BCA has introduced additional requirements since 2017, after the Tampines viaduct incident that Ms Lim mentioned, to raise our standards of building safety. BCA now requires the QPs and builders of higher risk projects to provide additional detailed assessments on the stability of the structure.
Together with the Institution of Engineers Singapore or IES, and the Association of Consulting Engineers Singapore or ACES, BCA has issued two circulars in 2019 to provide QPs and ACs with guidelines and good practices for plan submissions and supervision. This will help QPs and ACs to improve the quality of their design calculations and ensure that all key structural elements of the project are identified, as well as improve the quality of the QPs' supervision. So, measures have been in place since then and we hope that this will improve the safety record of builders, moving forward.
Er Dr Lee also spoke about supporting local contractors. Singapore cannot discriminate against foreign firms, in line with our WTO obligations. Indeed, we have been helping local firms to build capabilities as well as strengthen their competitiveness. One way we have done so is by parcelling large Government projects, such as MRT lines, into smaller contracts, so that our local firms are able to take up projects while the Government mitigates its risk.
In recent years, I am also pleased to see more local firms winning large infrastructure projects. For example, Woh Hup won a $1 billion contract to develop an Integrated Business Park at Punggol Digital District. Straits Construction, another local builder, was part of a joint venture that won the $537 million contract for the Singapore Institute of Technology.
Er Dr Lee also spoke about payment delays due to Variation Orders, or VOs. BCA and MOF have encouraged GPEs to process VOs progressively and expeditiously, to ensure timely payments to contractors.
We empathise with the current situation and will certainly help where needed. For example, agencies can process VOs based on indicative scope and costs. At the same time, contractors should include the necessary documentation to support speedy processing of claims. More recently, we have revised the Security of Payment Act or SOPA, which aims to also help claims for private sector projects.
If Er Dr Lee can share more details with us, including the treatment of Liquidated Damages (LDs) and progress payments, BCA will look into these specific cases.
Let me conclude by addressing concerns from the construction sector arising from COVID-19. BCA has advised government agencies to take a sympathetic view when considering Extension of Time or EOT requests, for project delays due to COVID-19. We have also sought REDAS' support for private sector developers to do likewise. We will continue to monitor the situation. If delays are prolonged, we will consider whether additional measures are necessary.
To ease cashflow concerns from delays due to COVID-19, main contractors can also submit progress payment claims fortnightly instead of monthly, for public sector projects. So, we are trying to help firms with their cashflow too.
For on-going PPVC projects affected by delays to the supply of construction materials from China, BCA has adopted a facilitative approach so far. We have allowed 13 projects to install partially completed PPVC modules on-site first, and install the finishing works subsequently when the delayed materials arrive. So, we have also provided some flexibility in some of our projects.
Some firms with more PRC workers may also face manpower pressure in the short term due to COVID-19. These firms may consider hiring workers from other firms with excess foreign manpower. Firms can search for eligible workers for transfer via the Foreign Construction Workers Directory System or FCWDS, online.
Built Environment firms can also tap on the support packages announced by Deputy Prime Minister earlier, such as the SME Working Capital Loan under the Enhanced Enterprise Financing Scheme, and the Jobs Support Scheme.
Er Dr Lee also suggested measures to help developers and contractors cope with COVID-19. On foreign worker levies, the Minister for Manpower already said during the Budget debate last week that we are waiving levies for employers with eligible foreign workers serving quarantine leave of absence or stay home notices.
However, we have not done so for all foreign workers in general. As much as we want to help the sector or businesses deal with the short-term fall-out, this should not negate longer term efforts for companies to restructure and become less reliant on foreign manpower. Levy waivers would run counter to these objectives.
Er Dr Lee and Mr Alex Yam also asked about the Project Completion Period and the ABSD remission timelines. The Government is monitoring the construction industry and the property market closely. We will adjust our policies as necessary to ensure a stable and sustainable property market. We have selectively allowed extensions of the completion period for individual projects because of extenuating circumstances, and would be prepared to consider doing so on a case-by-case basis.
But to assure the industry, we have seen just a few appeals, so it is not a big impact thus far. We will continue to monitor the situation and see how it goes.
Even as we deal with the immediate challenges posed by COVID-19, we should not lose sight of our longer term transformation agenda. I strongly encourage firms to tap on the schemes available under our $780 million BuildSG Transformation Fund, so that we can all emerge stronger and better prepared for the future.
In closing, we have made good progress, but there is certainly much more that we can do. We will accelerate our efforts to build more productively, create more opportunities for our firms and good jobs for our people.
The Chairman: Ms Sun Xueling.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking all Members who have spoken up about animal health and welfare. Kindly allow me to share how we will continue to work closely with the community on these issues.
First, one of our key strategies is to reduce the stray animal population and re-home as many as possible, where they will have shelter, food, and adequate care.
I am happy to say that we have made good progress with the Trap-Neuter-Release-Manage (TNRM) programme. Launched in partnership with 11 Animal Welfare Groups (AWGs), it involves catching and sterilising stray dogs, or Singapore Specials, as we call them, to sustainably and humanely manage their population. We will then rehome as many of the sterilised dogs as possible, while the remaining dogs will be released at suitable locations to live out their lives naturally.
Since the programme was launched, NParks and the AWGs have worked closely with the community as well as land owners on the ground to trap about 1,000 dogs. Thus far, we have managed to rehome or foster over half of the dogs trapped under TNRM, and we hope to rehome even more Singapore Specials in the coming years.
Eight years ago, we worked with our AWG partners to launch Project ADORE to do this. Given the good progress, NParks has recently reviewed the size limits for Project ADORE. I thank Mr Louis Ng for his proposal to further re-look the height limit for Project ADORE. NParks will work closely with our AWG partners to successfully implement the latest revision first before we review the project again. It bears mentioning that Project ADORE has been successful largely because of careful, sensitive and gradual implementation. NParks has to balance the objective of rehoming more dogs with the concerns that some residents have over larger dogs in HDB flats.
In addition, I would like to share that public feedback on stray dogs has decreased by more than 50% since the launch of TNRM. This is the result of the hard work by our AWGs and NParks officers in terms of outreach on the ground.
The second thrust of our work is on increased education and outreach efforts. NParks, in collaboration with our AWGs and pet businesses, launched the Pets’ Day Out series in August 2019. It has provided NParks more opportunities to reach out to and educate pet owners or those interested to own pets.
We will continue to identify other suitable platforms, such as community events, to reach out to diverse audience groups and garner stronger support from the community.
Third, NParks embarked on a review to raise standards in the pet sector. As part of the review, NParks has engaged key stakeholders and the wider public through focus group discussions as well as an online survey.
There was general consensus that more needs to be done to raise the standards of pet breeders and boarders to safeguard the health and welfare of the animals involved. Based on the feedback received, NParks intends to take a balanced, risk-based approach to regulating these businesses. Currently, only commercial breeders and boarders on farmland are licensed.
For a start, NParks will focus on improving practices at existing commercial breeding facilities on farmland as the breeding sector deals with young and pregnant animals that require specialised care. This will be done by strengthening the licence conditions in areas such as housing and management, healthcare, and traceability of the animals.
Concurrently, NParks will step up its enforcement efforts against those who operate a commercial breeding facility without a licence, outside of farmland.
NParks also intends to license commercial pet boarding facilities based on the scale of their operations, which will depend on factors such as the number of animals handled and the frequency of transactions. Those who help board animals for family and friends, or do it infrequently, will not be subject to licensing.
Regardless, all pet service providers, including pet boarders and breeders, have a duty of care towards the animals they handle and they should abide by the Code of Animal Welfare for the Pet Industry. Beyond the Code of Animal Welfare, NParks can take enforcement action against pet service providers under the Animals and Birds Act for failing in this duty of care, or for animal cruelty. NParks will work through the revised regulatory framework with stakeholders and share more details later this year.
Mr Yee Chia Hsing spoke about using the IUCN Red List to regulate the pet bird trade. Let me clarify that the IUCN list is already part of our considerations. This is because we regulate wildlife trade according to the requirements of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which uses IUCN conservation status as one of the criteria for categorising species.
Furthermore, the penalties for illegal smuggling under the Animals and Birds Act apply per animal or bird, and not per shipment. This means that a smuggler may be liable on conviction to a fine of up to $10,000 or 12 months’ jail or both for each smuggled bird, which should be a sufficient deterrent.
NParks' public consultations on the pet sector review also surfaced the need to enhance the traceability of animals. A robust animal traceability system is critical in protecting public and animal health. In the event a pet is diagnosed with an infectious disease, especially one which can be transmitted to humans, such as rabies, it is important to be able to trace its whereabouts and health status.
Pet licensing is one of the measures that enables NParks to do so quickly. To make it more convenient for pet owners, NParks will introduce a one-time licensing for sterilised dogs by the end of the year. With one-time licensing, owners of sterilised dogs only need to apply to NParks for a licence once, instead of having to repeatedly renew their licence upon expiry. The licence, with a one-time fee of $35, will be valid throughout the life of the dog. This means that if you sterilise your dog and opt for a one-time licence instead of an annual licence, you could save over $800 in licence fees over 10 years. We hope that this will encourage more owners to sterilise and license their pet dogs. For existing owners with three-year licences for sterilised dogs, you will be happy to hear that your licences will automatically be changed to a one-time licence.
As part of its pet sector review, NParks is also looking into measures to enhance cat traceability to protect public health.
We are also looking into raising the standards of the veterinary industry. Our veterinarians play an important role in providing animals with high standards of care and ensuring animal health. They also play a critical role in safeguarding public health as they can help detect the outbreak of diseases that may be transmitted to humans. NParks will begin engaging key stakeholders on this issue in April this year.
These are just some of the areas that we have been working on in a relatively short span of time. And there are many other areas that the community has raised, which we are continuing to study and finding ways to balance the needs of the community. For instance, the issue of cat ownership in HDB flats, which Assoc Prof Daniel Goh and Mr Louis Ng have raised.
We recognise that there are residents who are cat lovers and who would like to keep cats in their flats. We are continuing to have conversations around how to best strike a balance between residents who are pet lovers, those who are not and those who are concerned about disamenities. HDB will work with NParks to take a holistic and balanced approach in reviewing and updating its pet ownership policies.
Let me now speak about our efforts to help low-income and rental households.
Last year, I shared about our plans to improve the natural lighting and ventilation in older rental blocks, by removing some flats on each floor to create more openings along the corridors.
This year, HDB will commence the improvement works at Chai Chee and Telok Blangah. At these four blocks, all tenants who are living in the units identified for removal can relocate within the same block, if they prefer. HDB and local social organisations are closely supporting their transition. HDB will study where else they can implement similar improvements in future, considering feedback from residents.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Dr Lily Neo asked about reviewing the Joint Singles Scheme (JSS). Most JSS tenants are prepared to share a flat. More than 90% of flat-sharing tenants surveyed did not experience conflicts or difficulties living with their flatmate. Nevertheless, HDB will facilitate requests from tenants who wish to transfer to another flat with a different flatmate. For those with extenuating circumstances or medical grounds, HDB is also prepared to consider their requests to rent alone.
Further, HDB has also been installing partitions in 1-room rental flats for JSS tenants, to provide more privacy for each individual. Some of these are also installed such that there are internal doors to each sleeping area.
HDB currently has about 1,100 rental flats with partitions. About half of these are vacant and available to JSS households.
While most of the flats were fitted with partitions while vacant, about 50 flats had partitions installed in-situ, at the request of tenants who are already living there. This in-situ installation was a new offer we rolled out last year. Interested tenants can contact their local HDB branch to request for partitions.
Apart from physical enhancements, we have also enhanced the support for tenants to become homeowners.
Last year, I announced that HDB will waive any subsequent rent increase for tenants who have made a downpayment for a new flat.
Since the implementation of this waiver on 1 June 2019, close to 200 rental households have benefited. The median amount of rent saved by these families is about $150 per month, which they can put towards their upcoming new home, or other needs.
On Mr Gan Thiam Poh's suggestion to treat the rent paid as instalments for a future flat purchase, we have not done so as it is similar to giving the tenant a housing grant, which we already do through various schemes. Grants are also more equitable as the amount of subsidy would not vary with the tenants' length of stay in rental housing. Our rental rates are tiered progressively based on income, to ensure that subsidies are allocated fairly, and targeted at those who need them most.
To mitigate the cliff effect at each tier, on a case-by-case basis, HDB waives the rent increase at tenancy renewal if it is a significant part of the household's increase in income. In the last three years, about 5,500 households have benefited from these waivers, which are intended to encourage households to continue increasing their income.
Beyond providing financial help, we have also intensified our efforts in other ways. We formed the Home ownership Support Team (HST) last year, to work closely with families towards home ownership. The team is advising nearly 280 families and will guide them through when they are ready for home ownership.
In the last three years, about 3,200 rental households have moved into their own homes. Another 2,000 have booked a flat and are awaiting the completion of their new homes.
While these numbers may not seem large, the progress has been steady over the last few years. As the Malay saying goes, \"sikit-sikit, lama-lama jadi bukit.\" This means \"bit by bit, and over time, a little becomes a lot\". Every family is important to us and we will continue to support our tenants towards home ownership.
The Chairman: Minister Lawrence Wong.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Chairman, as we tackle the on-going COVID-19 outbreak and its economic fallout, we are reminded once again of how small and vulnerable Singapore is and how exposed we are to external forces beyond our control.
But I am confident that Singaporeans will rise to the occasion. We are a resilient people, we have always faced tough odds, and we have confronted many difficult challenges before, in our nation's short history. And each time, the Government and the citizens rally together; we deal with the issues head-on; and we emerge stronger and surer of what we can achieve together.
Take housing as an example. Sixty years ago, this was one of the most pressing issues on the Government’s agenda. We had a major housing crisis. Many Singaporeans lived in overcrowded slums, and the living conditions were appalling. The British could not solve the problem. They said it was not possible to build so many flats in such a short period of time. But we proved them wrong.
HDB was formed in 1960. It quickly ramped up the building of flats and addressed the acute housing shortage.
My family is a beneficiary – my grandfather was a fisherman who lived in a kampong in Tanjong Rhu in the 1950s, and later when his children grew up and married, many were able to move out and purchase their own HDB flats, like my parents who got their flat in Marine Parade in the 1970s. Likewise, many in my generation have benefited and now, I see the next generation, my nieces and nephews, getting married and purchasing their own HDB flats. One just managed to get a flat in Bidadari and he is very happy.
Singaporeans all over the island will be able to share similar stories. Through home ownership, we have a tangible stake in our country and a share in our nation's progress. Through public housing, we all grow up together, regardless of backgrounds, and we forge a stronger sense of community and common identity.
Today, HDB flats are an integral part of our Singaporean way of life. There are now more than one million HDB flats, home to about 80% of our resident households. And of these, nine in 10 own their homes.
Enabling home ownership through HDB has been one of our most successful social policies. Many have called it one of the most successful public housing programmes enacted anywhere in the world.
For this we have to thank generations of MND and HDB officers, past and present, who have worked hard to make all this happen. So, we have much to be grateful for when we look back at what we have achieved together. But we must never be complacent, and that is why we are always looking for ways to make HDB living even better. So, let me touch on three areas.
First, it is our evergreen mission to keep public housing affordable and accessible, so that every Singaporean household can have a home to call their own. That is why we continue to sell HDB flats at heavily subsidised prices and provide generous housing grants on top of that. In particular, with the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG) introduced last year, first-timer families can enjoy a grant of up to $80,000 for a new flat. If they buy a resale flat, they can get up to double the amount, or $160,000, in grants.
These considerable subsidies keep HDB flats affordable. Today, HDB flat prices remain at less than five times of median household income. You cannot find such affordable housing in any other major city in the world. The ratio, the house price to income ratio, is nearly 10 times in London, Los Angeles and Sydney. In Hong Kong, it is more than 20 times.
Our affordability benchmark goes beyond the median income. Take the example of a first-timer couple with monthly income of $5,000, which is near the 30th percentile of resident household income. They can buy a 4-room flat in a non-mature estate at a subsidised price of $330,000 and they will receive $45,000 in grants. So, inclusive of grants, the flat will cost less than five times their annual income.
The grants can be used to pay the down-payment. So, effectively, they need zero upfront cash. Then, they take a 25-year housing loan and their monthly mortgage is paid largely with their CPF savings, with little or zero cash outlay.
That is our basic commitment to every generation of Singaporeans. It is a housing commitment not just to the higher or middle income groups but we will also ensure that lower income Singaporeans benefit. Like the example I gave just now, even first-timers at the 30th percentile of household income, can purchase a new 4-room flat in a non-mature estate and service their housing loan with zero or very little cash outlay.
So, for the vast majority of first-timers, the Singapore dream of being able to own your own home remains secure. We will make sure of that both now and in the future.
Of course, we also want to have more affordable flats in the mature estates and a wider range of flat options to choose from, and Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Chong Kee Hiong both spoke about this. But it is more challenging to do so in mature estates, due to the limited space for new flats in these estates. In some prime locations, the prices of resale HDB flats are beyond the reach of many young couples just starting out in life.
And if this trend continues, it will mean that certain public housing estates can potentially become exclusive areas that only a few can afford and then this will lead to greater social stratification. So, we do have to do something about this. We cannot resolve this issue through our existing model of HDB flats.
And that is why I have shared earlier that MND is working on a new model for BTO flats in prime locations. The basic idea is to sell these flats at more affordable prices, but the flats will come with tighter conditions imposed. This is a major change which we are studying and thinking through very carefully, as it will also have an impact on the resale market. We will continue to review it and we will share more details in the coming year when we are ready.
Besides affordability, we will also help Singaporeans to access their flats more quickly. Several Members like Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Mohamed Irshad spoke about this.
We will continually review and improve our sales processes to achieve this. For new BTO flats, we give priority for those looking for their first home. That is why virtually all first-timer families have been successful within their first three tries for a BTO flat in a non-mature estate. We have also introduced BTO flats with shorter waiting times of two to three years, because we bring forward the construction.
Since last year, we have started sharing information on upcoming BTO sites six months in advance instead of just three months. We will try to do more, as suggested by Mr Gan Thiam Poh, but I am afraid it is not so easy to project forward for more than six months. It will be challenging to share this information too far in advance because there may well be unexpected changes along the way.
Some households may need a flat more urgently. That is why we also offer balance flats for sale, many of which are completed or near completion. Today, we have the Sale of Balance Flats (SBF) and, if there are still unselected flats after the SBF, we pool all of them together and we release them through what we call the Re-Offer of Balance Flats (ROF) exercises.
The initial take-up of the ROF flats has been positive. But we have received feedback and requests for the ROF to be done more frequently instead of just twice a year. So, last year, we tried putting out some of these unselected flats on an open booking system for people to apply all year round.
Now that we have some experience with this open booking system, we are ready to extend it further. So, we will do away with the standalone ROF exercises and, instead, the unselected SBF flats, after the SBF exercise, will be pooled and offered directly for open booking right away, without going through another round of balloting. This will enable home-seekers with urgent needs to access flats more quickly.
Effectively, with this change, there will be three main ways of applying for an HDB flat. With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I display some slides on the screen?
The Chairman: Yes. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
Mr Lawrence Wong: So, you can go for BTO flats – new flats which will be released four times a year, you can apply for a balance flat which will be put out twice a year, or you can go for open booking and apply online at almost any time of the year. So, that is our first priority to ensure affordability and accessibility of flats.
Second, we also support the diverse housing needs of different segments of Singaporeans. For needy households without other housing options or family support, we continue to provide them with public rental housing. Over the years, HDB has steadily increased the public rental supply. The waiting time is now less than two months for applicants who are not particular about location. For those who want specific locations, the waiting time may be longer, depending on availability of units in that particular area.
Several Members, including Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Dr Lily Neo, asked for bigger rental units and dedicated units for single tenants, and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling has also explained our thinking on this matter. We would, in fact, very much like to accommodate all of these requests. The key constraint we have is one of land supply.
We have to ensure that demand for both new rental and new sold flats in Singapore can be met on a sustainable basis, not just today, but over the coming decade and beyond. That is actually getting harder and harder to do as our island gets more built up. So, we do need to take a pragmatic approach.
For single tenants, as Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun has said just now, most are prepared to share and are able to live in a rental flat together. For the few with medical conditions, we are prepared to consider their requests on an exceptional basis and allow them to stay in a rental flat by themselves.
For families, especially with children, the majority already live in our 2-room rental flats and, for very large families, we do our best to accommodate them. For example, for multi-nuclear families, we can offer them two rental units in the same block. On a case-by-case basis, we will be prepared to offer larger families a 3-room rental flat.
Ms Anthea Ong made the point about occupancy caps and I should clarify that these are caps imposed on HDB owners renting out their flats and the tenants who are renting these flats. The occupancy caps do not apply to family members living together, be it in their own flat or a public rental flat.
At the same time, we will continue to support public rental tenants towards home ownership. Several Members also spoke about this, including Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Arasu Duraisamy and Dr Lily Neo. We have announced several measures on this last year and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has shared the progress on these initiatives.
For divorcees, we understand and recognise that their housing transitions can be stressful. To ease this process, we now allow divorcees to apply for flats earlier, once their Interim Judgment has settled matters concerning the children and matrimonial flat. But some concerns still remain. For example, Mr Louis Ng spoke about divorcees who are awarded shared care and control of a single child but are unable to agree on who can list the child in their flat application. We understand that such agreement is not always possible, especially if the divorce was acrimonious. When this happens, HDB will be prepared to consider waiving the mutual agreement requirement, if there is clear evidence that one party has already moved on.
Another group is unwed parents. Several Members also spoke about this, including Mr Seah Kian Peng, Mr Arasu Duraisamy and Mr Mohamed Irshad. We do want to ensure that their children have a stable home to grow up in. So, we will assist all unwed parents who approach HDB with their housing needs. For such cases, HDB will assess their situation holistically because their circumstances vary.
Some Members did raise the point that such a case-by-case approach may cause more uncertainty amongst the applicants because they do not know whether their applications will be successful. So, let me clarify the approach that HDB takes. Essentially, there are two broad approaches.
First, for those who are in stable employment and who can afford to buy a flat, then HDB will allow them to buy a flat – not just a new 2-room flat but also a larger 3-room flat in a non-mature estate. Next, for those who have insufficient finances and need a place to stay, then we will continue to consider them for public rental if this is in their child's best interests, taking into account inputs from social workers, if necessary.
Yet another group that we support is our seniors. Many of them have their own homes but they are concerned about retirement savings. So, we will try to help them unlock the value of their flat if they need to in several ways. They can rent out their flat or spare bedrooms, they can right-size to a smaller flat, or they can sell a part of their lease to HDB under the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS).
We recognise that more needs to be done to help Singaporeans understand these different options, especially LBS, because it is relatively new and also because we have just recently extended the scheme to 5-room and larger flats, something that Mr Alex Yam, Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Arasu Duraisamy highlighted. That is why we have been stepping up our public dialogues and engagements and I am glad to note that LBS take-up has doubled from 800 households in 2018 to 1,600 last year.
Through these engagements, we also receive feedback and ideas on how our schemes can be improved. One feedback is that the schemes can be quite complex and we can simplify them further. This is particularly the case for the Silver Housing Bonus (SHB), which comes with several conditions. So, having studied the matter, we have decided to simplify and enhance the SHB in three ways.
First, we will remove the requirement that seniors must sell a larger flat and buy a smaller flat. Regardless of the type of flat they sell, seniors can apply for the SHB as long as they buy a 3-room or smaller flat and get some proceeds from the move. So, effectively, someone staying in a 3-room flat in a mature estate who wishes to move to a 3-room flat in a non-mature estate, and can get some proceeds from that move, will still be eligible for an SHB. A lateral move but because they are moving from a mature estate to a non-mature estate, they can unlock some proceeds and they will still be eligible for SHB.
Next, to receive the SHB, seniors must top up some proceeds from their move into their CPF Retirement Account. This is to ensure that they have adequate savings for retirement. The top-up required today depends on their net sales proceeds and we will simplify this such that seniors only need to top up the first $60,000 of their proceeds.
Thirdly, we will increase the maximum cash bonus by 50%, from $20,000 to $30,000. So, seniors will receive $1 in cash bonus for every $2 topped up to their CPF Retirement Account. So, if you have sales proceeds, you top up $60,000, you will get $30,000 in Silver Housing Bonus.
In line with this increase, we will also increase the maximum Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) bonus across all flat types. This means that owners of 3-room or smaller, 4-room, and 5-room or larger flats will get a larger bonus. The maximum cash bonus will be $30,000, $15,000 and $7,500 respectively.
We are also looking at alternative housing options for seniors. Last year, we shared that MND is working with MOH to pilot assisted living, which allows seniors to buy a flat along with care services. Mr Arasu Duraisamy asked about the status of this project.
Both Ministries have held several focus group discussions on the assisted living models. They were generally very well received by seniors, particularly singles and those whose children have moved out. Seniors were especially attracted to the idea of community living.
We have incorporated the feedback into our pilot. For example, this new pilot that we will be rolling out will have large communal spaces on every floor, not just on the void deck, but on every floor, where residents can gather and interact. The flats will be sized at 32 sqm, with senior-friendly features like larger bathrooms and a layout that can be easily configured for mobility needs.
We will launch the pilot with about 160 units in Bukit Batok in May this year. More details will be shared in the coming weeks, including the sales conditions, indicative flat prices and the payment options.
We also want to make public housing more inclusive, especially for persons with disabilities and mobility issues, something which Miss Cheryl Chan highlighted. We have made progress in this area in creating barrier-free access for all our HDB estates, but certainly more can be done. As Miss Cheryl Chan said, technology may well open up new possibilities. We thank her for her ideas and the Government will continue to study this issue.
One area when it comes to barrier-free access is having lift access on every floor. Several Members have asked about this – Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Ong Teng Koon, and Mr Png Eng Huat. As Members are aware, there are still about 150 blocks that are not eligible for the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP).
To set things in context, we have managed to provide direct lift access for flats in the vast majority of HDB blocks. We have done so by using innovative technical solutions and by exercising flexibility for some blocks even when they exceed the cost cap of $30,000 per household. But for the remaining 150 blocks, for some of them, LUP is just not technically feasible, regardless of the cost. For many others, the costs are very high. So, it is not just about having some flexibility above the cost cap but we are talking about costs that can be more than $200,000 per household in some cases. As Mr Png Eng Huat said – enough to buy another HDB flat.
So, we will continue to explore new technical methods to bring down the LUP cost, but it will not be so easy to make progress on this front. In the meantime, we know that some residents may urgently need direct lift access due to medical or mobility issues. And really, it is more cost-effective to help them move to another flat. Mr Png Eng Huat asked for SERS. I do not think we need to SERS the entire block. But what we will do is to offer a new Lift access Housing Grant of up to $30,000 to help those with medical or mobility issues buy a new or resale HDB flat with direct lift access. So, if anyone is in need and they need direct lift access, they do not want to wait, and the grant is available for them to move to a new place which will have direct lift access.
A third priority for us is to continue to rejuvenate our HDB towns and keep them vibrant for generations to come, and we have many upgrading programmes. Let me start at the block-level.
Town Councils are generally responsible for regular and cyclical maintenance of common property, including building façades, and the Government supports the Town Councils for such work, so that the costs are not just borne by the Town Councils from their collections of service and conservancy charges (S&CCs).
For example, MND has provided additional grants to help Town Councils with their operating needs and long-term capital expenditure requirements, including for lift maintenance and lift replacement.
On the issue of façade repairs, which Mr Pritam Singh asked about, HDB will bear half of the costs. But if the damages are clearly due to design or construction issues, HDB will cover 100% of the costs. On the specific case that Mr Pritam Singh asked about, we will get back to him quite soon, based on the PE's assessment of what the damages were due to.
Beyond the work of the Town Councils, there is Government upgrading through the Home Improvement Programme (HIP). We have finished selecting all flats built up to 1986 for Home Improvement. We are now ready to move on to the flats built between 1987 and 1997. There are 230,000 of such flats. This year, we will start with almost one quarter of that or 55,000 flats. We are starting with a bigger number to also help support the construction industry during this period. Town Councils have submitted their nominations for this next phase of HIP, and we will inform the Town Councils of the selected projects later this week and then work can get started as soon as we can. We are prioritising the selection by age, so that the older flats go first, and most flats should be able to get the upgrading when they are about 30 years old.
It will take around 10 years to finish the HIP for this series of blocks built between 1987 and 1997. At around that time, our oldest HDB blocks will be about 60 years old and, if our Budget permits then, as we have said, we will initiate the second round of HIP, or HIPII, for these older flats. So, we will, almost every year be continuing with upgrading works.
Besides block-level programmes, at the precinct-level, we will refresh older precincts with new amenities through the on-going Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) and we will be selecting 20 NRP projects for implementation this year. In the past, we used to do about 14. Again, we have raised it to 20 projects, partly to support the construction sector.
If there are new in-fill developments within an old precinct, then HDB, as the developer, will also provide for facilities to link up the old and new precincts, which is something that Mr Png has asked for. He expressed some disappointment with HDB design. I should say that HDB blocks are designed by a range of architects, not all by HDB. Many are designed by private sector architects. There are some by HDB. The architects take great pride in their work. We will let them know how Mr Png feels about their void decks which are maze-like and confusing. But I am sure they will want to take in feedback and continue to work on these designs to do better.
Finally, at the town-level, we will renew existing towns through the Remaking Our Heartland programme (ROH). We have selected nine towns and estates for ROH so far. This year, we will select another four towns for ROH. They are Bukit Merah, Queenstown, Choa Chu Kang and Ang Mo Kio. The remaking works that can be explored include refreshing of the town and neighbourhood centres, and enhancing of greenery and community spaces in parks or even areas under viaducts.
And we will do all of this refreshing and rejuvenating while strengthening the distinctive heritage and identity of our individual housing estates, something which Mr Teo Ser Luck and many others have highlighted. We will want to preserve and even strengthen their distinctive heritage and identity, even as we put in new features and rejuvenate these towns. We will also engage and work with residents closely in this endeavour so that we can remake our heartlands together.
HIP, NRP and ROH are our key upgrading programmes which we will continue to press forward with. At some point, as our flats and estates get older, we will need to more systematically redevelop and renew these older estates. That is why we have said that we will be introducing a new programme called the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS). We expect to roll out the first VERS project sometime after 2030. This is a major programme and we will need to work through the details. We will take some time to do so and we will share that with Singaporeans when we are ready.
In the meantime, we will make our towns greener and more sustainable. Several Members have asked about our plans for this. Tengah, our newest and greenest HDB town, offers a glimpse of what we can do and aim to do. Tengah will be equipped with the latest sustainable features, including a centralised cooling system. It will have dedicated walking and cycling paths and lots of community green spaces.
So, as we push the boundaries in our new towns, we will do likewise in our older towns. That is why we will be launching the new HDB Green Towns programme. It is a 10-year plan to make existing HDB towns more environmentally sustainable and more liveable.
Let me highlight some of the key initiatives under this programme:
First, we will work with Town Councils to introduce smart LED lighting in all our HDB estates. Using sensors, the system dims to provide just enough ambient lighting when common areas are unoccupied, then brightens again before residents enter an area. It is motion sensors but they are enhanced motion sensors, much better than what you have seen so far. It uses up to 60% less energy than normal LED lighting.
We will also harness more renewable energy to power common services in HDB estates. We are already installing solar panels on the rooftops of close to 50% of HDB blocks. You do not seen that very often because very few people see HDB blocks from the sky. But half of our HDB blocks today will have HDB panels on their rooftops. We will increase this to 70% by 2030. We will also deploy more efficient solar panels and aim to more than double the total solar power capacity on HDB rooftops, from 220 megawatt-peak (MWp) today to 540 MWp by 2030. So, this will provide clean energy for our common services in our HDB estates and, in turn, benefit our residents.
Second, we will recycle rain water and mitigate flood risks. To do that, we will pilot a new underground water detention system. Rainwater collected can be used for non-potable purposes, like washing of the void decks and watering of plants.
Third, to help cool our HDB estates, we will deploy a new type of paint, called \"cool paint\", that can reduce the heat absorbed by buildings. Our preliminary studies suggest that such \"cool paint\" may be able to reduce ambient temperatures in HDB estates by up to two degrees. So, we will test this across several neighbourhoods to confirm its effectiveness before rolling it out across all estates.
Finally, we will also work with Town Councils and the community to convert the top decks of suitable multi-storey carparks into urban farms, community gardens or rooftop greenery. This increases green cover and provides more green spaces for all the residents to enjoy.
With the Green Towns programme, we aim to reduce energy consumption in HDB towns by 15% from today’s levels. This is a major effort and the Government, Town Councils and our residents will all need to do our part. Only then can we build greener and more sustainable HDB towns for our next generation.
Our efforts to green Singapore do not stop with our HDB towns. We will also push ahead with our efforts to build our future city.
One of Singapore’s defining features is our lush greenery and we will be doubling down on our greening strategy, as Second Minister Desmond Lee has elaborated just now.
Our green strategy also covers our urban infrastructure and buildings. We have made good progress in greening our buildings and we will continue to accelerate this effort, as Minister of State Zaqy explained.
Transport infrastructure is also key. We have set bold targets to move towards cleaner vehicles, including electric vehicles. On our part, MND will expand the necessary charging infrastructure. We will work with private companies to introduce more charging points at selected public carparks, taking into account the geographical spread of EV chargers, carpark usage, space availability for electrical upgrades and estate upgrading plans. Mr Ong asked for some details on this but we are still working through the detailed plans and we will share more in the coming months.
There are many other exciting areas where technology can make a difference in our urban transformation and improve our quality of life. That is why we are committing close to $1 billion in Urban Solutions and Sustainability research to build a more liveable, sustainable and resilient city.
We will also continue with our longer term plans to rebuild and remake our city for the future. Over the next 10 to 15 years, we will continue developing new growth centres outside the city centre to enhance Singapore’s economic infrastructure. We have plans in the East, in the West and in the North-East around Changi Airport; in the West around Jurong Innovation District and Jurong Lake District; and in the North with the Punggol Digital District as well as Sungei Kadut. In the longer term, beyond the next 10 to 15 years, we have major sites for redevelopment, as Members would be aware, including the Paya Lebar Airbase when the military airbase moves out and the Greater Southern Waterfront. These are ambitious, major long-term plans which will take several decades to realise. So, it is an opportunity for all of us to start imagining what a future Singapore can be and to work towards realising it.
Of course, we all recognise that the best-laid plans of Man do not always come to pass. The future is not preordained. There will be unexpected challenges along the way. At the start of this year, no one could have predicted that we would be dealing with a virus outbreak today and that this virus outbreak would be potentially escalating into a global problem. It reminds me of what our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, used to say. He said this twice, on two occasions during his birthday dinners. He said, and I quote: \"Only a people who are willing to face up to their problems and be prepared to work with their leaders to overcome unexpected hardships with courage and resolution deserve to thrive and prosper.\"
And that is why the theme of the Budget this year is \"Unity\". With a united purpose, we can overcome our current challenges. We can continue to plan for tomorrow and we can continue to work together to build a better city and home.
The Chairman: Clarifications. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Thank you, Sir. I am glad to hear from the Minister that, this round, there will be many more homes selected for HIP and, certainly, the older part of Nee Soon South built in 1987 should be among the first batch.
I have five supplementary questions for Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad and one question for Minister Grace Fu.
The first question: just now Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad mentioned that there should be no discrimination against foreign contractors. That one we fully understand. But I think the Minister of State has missed my point. I said local contractors felt that they were being discriminated against, not the foreign contractor. Why? Because they submitted the lowest tender, they did not get the job, they had been doing LTA projects. So, why do we pay $6 million to a foreign contractor which is registered in Virgin Islands and BCA, being the agency championing —
The Chairman: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, I think you should make your clarification rather than repeat your speech.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Okay. So, the first question is, can the Minister of State look into the discrimination of the local contractor. Second question, I mentioned about the contractor saying that the carpenters and tilers are no longer coming to Singapore. Can BCA look into this so that they can continue to have workers? And the third question is that, it is good that BCA has asked developers to help contractors, but then developers they have tight practical completion period and ABSD to comply with. Instead of just case-by-case basis that BCA will consider, is it possible to review these for this period so that they do not feel so much stress during this period.
And the fourth question, ABSD, can it be pro-rated? Currently, even if one unit is not sold, you have to pay up to 25% of the land cost.
And the last question, I would like to ask how many Polytechnic graduates currently join the construction sector. Because if I understood Minister of State correctly, he mentioned that they will be groomed to replace as S Pass holders. But as far as we understood, many of them, immediately upon graduation, they go overseas or head to a local University to get a degree instead of entering the workforce.
My question to Minister Grace Fu is that, it seems that there is a very efficient, high rate of solving the problems reported to MSO. I would like to know how is this being monitored. The feedback that I got from residents is that MSO is very keen to close the case very fast. And I tried that myself. So, in January, I took one photograph. I sent to MSO. Straightaway, they replied me, \"Thank you for your report to MSO. We will revert to the relevant work unit\". They consider that closed. I asked them a question, \"Can you take a photograph when the work is done so that I know that it is closed.\" And then, no further reply. So, I think many of my residents have similar experience. That is why the feedback to me that MSO is very keen to close the case though the end result is not what we want.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I am honoured to get five questions from Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
First, I just want to assure Er Dr Lee Bee Wah that the tender methods we use today follow the Price-Quality Method or PQM, so, it is not always guaranteed that the lowest price wins. It has to be on merit, based on the quality matrices. Unfortunately, specific to the tender, I cannot comment on LTA's evaluation because I do not have access to that particular tender. But rest assured, our approach has been about building our local firms' capabilities and giving them that chance. As I have said, you have seen more and more local firms accessing larger projects either on their own or through joint ventures. That is where you also pick up new capabilities, new skills and new technologies that you can use and apply to meet the kind of requirements that we have. For some of these projects, such as LTA tenders, I do understand. Some of these involving trains do have specific requirements. So, there could be certain technical requirements that were evaluated.
But do not give up. Certainly, these are areas in which you have seen more and more local firms coming through; and certainly, we are giving more opportunities.
If I could just share that between 2017 and 2019, local firms have been awarded a higher proportion of contracts, in terms of the smaller contracts between $3 million and $85 million. You can see about 90% of such contracted awarded to local firms. This enables local firms to build their track record.
And you can also see that more are also being awarded larger public sector contracts over $85 million too. A decade ago, we used to have only a 40% proportion. Today, local firms have about 50% proportion. These are larger projects above $85 million. So, to some extent, we have seen progress. And I think it is good to see more local firms, as I have mentioned in my examples earlier, being able to take on these opportunities.
On carpenters and tilers, we looked into this. It is not easy to get foreign workers sometimes, especially with some skill-sets because it is not just about our environment here but also the environment there. Contractors tell me too, that in the past they could get ready access to Chinese workers; but as China develops, they are paying their workers more over there, and there is less impetus for them to come here. When more and more countries develop, there will be opportunities out there. Our carpenters and tilers are typically from Malaysia, and you will probably find younger Malaysians being more educated too. So, supply may come down.To some extent, it is more than just our local environment that causes some of these dynamics.
The Member asked earlier on about the Project Completion period. As I have mentioned, we will monitor this. So far, there are just a few appeals. Let us talk to the industry again and see how we can manage this better. And certainly for now, it is on case-by-case basis but we will continue to monitor the situation.
On pro-rating the ABSD, or the extension of remission timelines today, I think we can still discuss and negotiate. We understand the current situation. To some extent, we do not have to shift the whole mechanism or the whole system. But I think right now, the approach that we are taking is really on a case-by-case basis. If developers have difficulty meeting their ABSD obligations, we will take it on a case-by-case basis. Let us monitor and see how best we can help developers and builders cope with the current COVID-19 situation.
It is not in our interest to make life difficult for our developers and builders. It is a growing sector and we do have long-term pipelines of projects that are being rolled out, not just in the public sector but also in the private sector. We want our local companies to be able to address them. We will help them as much as we can.
On Polytechnic graduates, I do not have the numbers. Perhaps the Member would like to file a Parliamentary Question because what she is asking for is specific in terms of pipeline and graduates. So, maybe file a Parliamentary Question in due course.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Mr Chairman, I would like to address Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's question. I thank her for the question. MSO does monitor the time taken to close the case because it is our objective to ensure that we deliver good Public Service, good public municipal services in an effective and timely way. We look at the time taken and we pay particular attention to cases that take longer than usual.
Having said that, we do not stipulate the service standards for each of the agencies because the nature of cases can be different. Some cases can be cleared quite easily. If there is litter that is not cleaned, someone can clean it up quite quickly. But if there is a request for public lighting to be installed, then obviously, the cases would take longer.
We do recognise that even though service standards are not prescribed, public officers, knowing that MSO is watching, tend to want to do the right thing and try to close the cases as quickly as possible. In many of these cases, it is about giving a better reply. In cases where it is expected to take longer, such as doing maintenance in time, when we are doing a cyclical maintenance in three months' time or six months' time, we do want to go back and give the appropriate answer to the resident. If we give the appropriate reply, I think we can manage the expectations of the residents better.
With that in mind, we have stipulated, what we call a post-case poll. If you have received a reply from agencies but you are not satisfied with the reply, or if you do not think that your case or feedback has been satisfactorily addressed, you can indicate it through the poll rating and you can also follow up with subsequent submission on the same issue.
We are paying attention to how we are closing the cases and we want to see that not only do we do it efficiently, we are also doing it effectively and from the residents' point of view, we are addressing their concern appropriately.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of a Sitting","subTitle":"Business motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. Pursuant to Standing Order No 91(3)(d), I propose to extend the time of this day's Committee sitting for a period of up to 30 minutes. Mr Yee Chia Hsing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head T (Ministry of National Development)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Debate in Committee of Supply resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Yee Chia Hsing: Chairman, I would like to thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for her answer. In terms of the regulation of the pet animal trade, I feel that the past few years have focused a lot on the cats and the dogs, but the pet bird trade has largely been forgotten. The same pet bird shop looks exactly the same as 30 years ago.
In terms of traceability, I think for pet birds, currently, there is possibly no traceability which is why someone is confident that they can distribute 800 birds by illegally smuggling them in. I hope that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can step up enforcement of the pet bird as well.
The Chairman: Ms Sun.
Ms Sun Xueling: I am sorry. I am not quite sure if that was a question or a point.
Mr Yee Chia Hsing: It is actually a request that NParks do not forget about the pet bird trade when stepping up the enforcement on the regulations.
Ms Sun Xueling: Yes. Indeed, NParks has not forgotten about birds. That is why, with the efforts of ICA together with NParks, they had seized the shipment of 815 birds that the Member mentioned. And I would just like to share that if you look at the number of illegal bird smuggling cases, it has been coming down over the years. In 2016, it was eight cases; in 2019, it was two cases, one of which was cited by Mr Yee. So, I just like to give him the assurance that we have not forgotten about birds.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Thank you, Sir. I am very happy that the person that is sitting on the chair I used to sit on also now asks animal-related questions.
But if I could bring the topic back to cats. Can I just ask Senior Parliamentary Secretary that the current rule is that you are not allowed to keep a cat in a HDB flat. So, how and when does HDB enforce this ruling, because a lot of the residents I see, most of the time is because they complained against a neighbour and the neighbour, then realises, \"Oh. You have a cat there. Now, I complain about the cat.\" And the cat becomes a sort of collateral and then, they are forced to remove the cat.
Let me repeat – when does HDB enforce the current rule of a resident not allowed to keep a cat in an HDB flat.
The second clarification is back to the divorcees with shared care and control. I am very thankful that we will exercise flexibility for those where one party has already has private housing. But could I ask further whether we can waive the mutual consent if both parties that have shared care and control are low income, meaning that both cannot really afford to buy from the open market and would need subsidised HDB flats?
The Chairman: Ms Sun.
Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for his question. The HDB will investigate if the feedback is related to pet-related disamenities, and it is not that a cat is a collateral in bad relations between neighbours. HDB will investigate that the feedback is related to pet-related disamenities. And if really there is irresponsible cat ownership and this is found to be the reason, then HDB would advise the owner accordingly with the assistance of relevant agencies where necessary.
The Chairman: Mr Ong Teng Koon. Sorry. Minister Lawrence Wong.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chairman, the short answer is yes, we are very reasonable people and we want the best for the child. So, in a case where indeed, both have divorced, they have one child, it is shared care and control and each individual wants subsidised housing, today, the rule does not allow the child's name to be together with both parents. But if they both need subsidised housing, on a case-by-case basis, if they are indeed lower income, they cannot afford to buy a home themselves, we will look at these cases and we will see what we can do to extend flexibility to them.
The Chairman: Mr Ong Teng Koon.
Mr Ong Teng Koon: Mr Chairman. I wish to thank the Minister, on behalf of the residents of Blocks 115 and 119 of Marsiling Rise for his kind and compassionate consideration of the situation with the introduction of the Lift Access Grant. I wish to ask the Minister whether such grant will be available to flat owners who have purchased the flat prior to the announcement today or will be available to subsequent owners as well. And if the granting of the Lift Access Grant will automatically enable them to buy a flat from the HDB or would they have to buy from the resale market? Can they sell the flat to the HDB or must they sell to the resale market; in which case, will future owners also be eligible for this grant?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chairman, the grant will be made available to all HDB owners with immediate effect, once this has been announced. So, anyone who owns a HDB flat, regardless of whether you are first-timer, second-timer, nth-timer, but you are the owner of a flat and your flat does not lift access, and you have mobility issues, that is the condition. Then, we will help you get a new flat or a resale flat where there is lift access. And the grant will be extended to that owner to facilitate that transaction.
How to go about doing it? There are various ways. If the person wants a flat very urgently, then getting it from the resale market makes a lot of sense. If they want a new BTO flat nearby and if there are balance flats, HDB could consider allocating one, if there is a balance flat. But that depends on whether there is availability of such a balance flat nearby. So, it depends.
On the sale of their present flat, we will require them to sell the flat before making the new transaction. We will try our best to help them but, in the first instance, it is the responsibility of the homeowner to engage an agent and look at whether or not they can sell the flat in order to make the purchase, whether it is new or resale. If they do face difficulties, then I will ask them to approach the HDB branch and we will see whether we can find ways to help them.
The Chairman: Dr Lily Neo.
Dr Lily Neo: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Earlier in my speech, I asked whether there are assessments by HDB for applicants of Joint Singles Scheme (JSS) to ensure that they are free from mental illnesses and medical conditions before compelling them to stay together. May I ask Minister Wong whether he will look into the JSS for those who have no family members to share with. Because I also noticed that HDB always gives applicants a list of names for them to call themselves to choose their own tenants to share with. And that is really very difficult.
So, as Minister Wong earlier said, we have been improving our HDB policies to facilitate Singaporeans in their housing needs. JSS has been around for the last 30 years. So, why can we not tweak this to facilitate just the most vulnerable group in our society? Would he consider?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chairman, I thank Dr Neo for the suggestion. In fact, it has been tweaked, it has been evolving. JSS today is different from what it used to be, because now we have partitions, we provide more privacy, we give flexibility and anyone that comes with medical conditions with a reason that they need to stay alone, we are prepared to consider, we are prepared to be flexible and allow them to stay on their own. So, it is not a blanket no. We do provide flexibility for those with medical conditions and with exceptional circumstances to stay on their own.
The reason why we cannot depart from this and say, \"Everyone live on their own now\", is the real constraint which I mentioned earlier. If we are going to double, triple the number of rental units that we have in order to accommodate them, because every JSS tenant wants to split up, we do not have land. That is a real constraint. So, there is no land available to build more. We have got to build new flats, we have got to build new rental flats.
I hope Members understand. We are not trying to be hard-hearted about this. There is just not enough space to build so many more new housing units. We try to optimise where we can and as the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said just now, when we did a survey of JSS tenants, the majority of them do get along and are okay. We are dealing with a minority and we can manage that if they do not get along, if there are medical conditions. If they do not get along in the first instance, let us try to find ways to pair you up with somebody else. If you have medical conditions, then we will look at your case, and we will consider allowing you to stay on your own, if there is a need to.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, I will allow your question if it is not about cats. You have already asked a question about cats.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: It is about cats.
The Chairman: Okay, it better be a new one.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: It is a confirmation, actually. I just want to confirm with the Senior Parliamentary Secretary that when HDB receives a complaint, they go down and investigate. If the cat is not causing any disamenities, the resident will not be asked to remove the cat. Am I correct to say that?
Ms Sun Xueling: Yes, you are correct to say that.
The Chairman: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, your last question. You have asked six already.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: It is not about cats, Sir. I would like to ask the Minister of State two questions. Just now the Minister of State mentioned that due to the change in their own country, that is why the carpenters and the tilers are not coming. That could be part of the reason but what we heard from the industry is that they are not coming to Singapore but they go to some other countries. That is why I urge BCA to study and see what is the reason they do not come to Singapore, so that we do not suffer if we do not tackle this problem now.
The next question is about cutting of the S Pass. We need the S Pass holders for DfMA, for PPVC, more so because they are more skillful. If the Polytechnic graduates do not join the industry, by cutting the S Pass, really, will give our construction industry a double-whammy. I hope you will really look into this.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Just to make it clear to the Member as well, I did say we will study this. I was just saying, some examples provided were that the supply is also changing, as well as demographics. But of course, if they go to other countries, then, basically, it could also mean that we do not pay well enough and other countries are also paying better. There are different reasons, but I do agree – let us not come to conclusions. Let us do our study, which I said we will do.
The second one on the S Pass reduction, certainly we have put in place various programmes, as I shared earlier. Apart from the IHLs, we are also putting on stream PCPs. As we have shared in many of our speeches earlier, even MOM in the Budget, that the Government is putting a bit of focus into mature workers to see how we can transform and move along. As I have also shared, in terms of those coming from the manufacturing sector, for example, they can move to DfMA. There are different skills required beyond just the Polytechnic graduates; mid-careers can also shift into such sectors.
We do see some slowdown in certain sectors such as process and marine, but these are areas in which we can also look to see how some of the workers can be moved into construction as we build. What I hope is that we continue to attract our Polytechnic and ITE graduates. Yes, some of the Polytechnic graduates may move on to University and ITE graduates move to Diploma too. We need to continually build that pathway for them, so that a career in construction also becomes more attractive.
We are looking at all levels, not just on the IDD, BIM or DfMA side. Even for the lift too, we have put in the PWM to ensure that our steady stream of workers coming through from ITE also get better-paying jobs, so that they do not either get substituted by cheaper foreign labour or have to go elsewhere for better-paying jobs.
These are some of the efforts that we are putting in place, whether it is PCP, BIM, attracting mid-careers, as well as those coming in from the University, Polytechnics and ITEs. It is a whole slew of measures.
At the same time, we recognise that there are some jobs at the work permit level that we need to continually depend on our foreign workforce for. Therefore, you do not see us cutting the whole Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC), it is just the sub-DRC. The grunt work of construction is still being provided for, so that we continue to grow and build our infrastructure.
Mr Alex Yam: Chairman, I thank the 22 fellow Members who filed a diverse range of cuts, and Minister Lawrence, Second Minister Desmond Lee and Minister Grace, Minister of State Zaqy and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling for their comprehensive replies. We are reasonable people, so I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $3,009,534,100 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $9,992,249,700 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply Reporting Progress","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Chairman, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow?
The Chairman: I give my consent.
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow.\" – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2020/2021, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.
Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn to 10.00 am tomorrow.\" – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 7.40 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Consideration to Incentivise Fathers to Take Government-Paid Paternity Leave","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will consider incentivising fathers to take their Government-Paid Paternity Leave (GPPL) by providing additional leave to couples which can be used by either the mother or father where the father has consumed his full entitlement of GPPL.
Mrs Josephine Teo (for the Prime Minister): Fathers play an important role in their children's care and development. As more fathers play an active role in raising their children, the take-up rate of paternity leave has risen from 25% when it was first introduced in 2013, to 53% for recent cohorts.
As mentioned in a recent response to Mr Louis Ng's Parliamentary Question on barriers to fathers taking paternity leave, our research showed that fathers' utilisation of paternity leave is dependent on workplace support, especially from supervisors and colleagues. As such, giving fathers additional leave may not help to raise the take-up rate of paternity leave. Instead, it is especially important for us to work together to shape more supportive workplace norms and culture for parents.
When considering further enhancements to leave schemes, we also have to balance support for parents with employers’ concerns over manpower needs at the workplace. This is especially so in times of business uncertainty.
Beyond leave provisions, the Government encourages employers to adopt the Tripartite Standards on Flexible Work Arrangements (FWAs) and Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs. The Ministry of Manpower's Work-Life Grant also provides funding support for employers to implement FWAs. These practices are helpful to parents in caring for their children and make for a more family-friendly workplace. We will continue to work with tripartite partners to encourage companies to better support parents in managing their work and family responsibilities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Conduct Independent Environmental Assessments and Release Regular Reports to Public during Construction of Cross Island MRT Line","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will conduct independent environmental assessments and release regular reports to the public on the implementation and effectiveness of mitigation measures during the construction of the Cross Island MRT Line within and around the Central Catchment Nature Reserve.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: LTA will require its appointed contractor, who will construct the Cross Island Line (CRL) in the vicinity of the Central Catchment Nature Reserve (CCNR), to engage an environmental consultant. The consultant's role is to strictly implement the mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Monitoring and Management Plan (EMMP). The EMMP is part of the gazetted Environmental Impact Assessment report for the CRL alignment in the vicinity of the CCNR. It was formulated in close consultation with stakeholders, such as nature groups.
LTA will also invite key representatives of nature groups to be part of the implementation process, which includes jointly reviewing these mitigation measures.
In addition, LTA will engage a group of experts to form an Environmental Advisory Panel (EAP). The EAP's role is to review and provide an independent assessment of the environmental consultant's implementation of the EMMP.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Applications Made under Guardianship of Infants Acts in Last Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Law in the last five years (a) how many applications have been made under the Guardianship of Infants Act; (b) how many applications have been made to assign guardianship to a person not biologically related to the child; and (c) under what circumstances are applications to assign guardianship to a person not biologically related generally approved.
Mr K Shanmugam: The number of applications made under the Guardianship of Infants Act (Cap 122) (\"GIA\") from 2015 to 2019 is as follows:
These applications include those for guardianship and other types of applications relating to infants such as maintenance, custody, care, and control under the GIA.
We do not track the cases where the guardian appointed under the GIA is not biologically related to the infant.
Applications to appoint a guardian under the GIA must first fall within one of the applicable provisions of the GIA.
Under section 6 of the GIA, the court may appoint a guardian where:
(a) Either the infant's father or mother has passed on and no guardian had been appointed by that father or mother. The court may appoint a guardian to act jointly with the surviving parent.
(b) The infant has no parent, no guardian, and no person having parental rights with respect to him.
Under section 10, the court may remove and replace an infant's guardian. Testamentary guardians may be appointed by parents by deed or will under section 7.
The appointment of the proposed guardian must also be in the best interest of the infant, as the welfare of the infant is the first and paramount consideration in such applications.
There is no requirement for the proposed guardian to share a biological relationship with the infant.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Consideration to Formulate Regulations Binding on Artificial Intelligence Systems Deployed Locally","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether the Government is considering formulating regulations binding on artificial intelligence (AI) systems deployed locally so as to ensure the ethical and safe use of AI.
Mr S Iswaran: As AI technology is still nascent, MCI does not have immediate plans to introduce new laws to regulate AI.
However, MCI has launched several initiatives to ensure the safe and ethical use of AI, and to promote consumer trust and innovation. These include:
(a) A Model AI Governance Framework (\"Model Framework\") which translates ethical AI principles into practical steps to guide organisations' responsible adoption of AI;
(b) An Advisory Council on the Ethical Use of AI and Data, which provides guidance to manage legal, ethical and sustainability risks; and
(c) A Research Programme on the Governance of AI and Data Use, which examines ethical and legal issues arising from the development and use of AI.
The Personal Data Protection Commission (\"PDPC\") also works with sectoral regulators such as MAS on sector-specific guidance (i.e. MAS' Fairness, Ethics, Accountability and Transparency (\"FEAT\") principles)1 that is in line with PDPC's Model Framework.
Organisations are also required to comply with relevant laws and regulations when deploying AI technology such as those pertaining to safety, data protection and fair competition.
MCI and PDPC will continue to monitor global developments, and ensure that our regulatory approach safeguards individuals' interests and preserves public confidence in AI, while enabling data-driven innovation to thrive in the Digital Economy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : MAS FEAT principles provide guidance to firms offering financial products and services on the responsible use of AI and data analytics."],"footNoteQuestions":["4"],"questionNo":"4"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Assist Self-Employed Tourist Excursion Bus Owners Impacted by COVID-19","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether there are any measures to assist the self-employed tourist excursion bus owners who are directly impacted by the COVID-19 outbreak and whether the Point-to-Point Support Package can also be extended to them in some form.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The $4 billion Stabilisation and Support Package announced in Budget 2020 provides broad-based as well as targeted support for workers and enterprises affected by COVID-19 outbreak.
Tourist bus owners, including sole proprietors (i.e. self-employed tourist excursion bus owners), are eligible to apply for the Temporary Bridging Loan Programme (TBLP). TBLP provides additional cash flow support, allowing eligible enterprises to borrow up to $1 million, with the interest rate capped at 5% p.a. from participating financial institutions. Those that hire local workers are also eligible for manpower support, such as the Jobs Support Scheme. We have received feedback that self-employed private hire bus owners which cater to tourist groups may require additional support, and are studying how we can help them.
6 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in respect of the target of 28,000 charging points for electric vehicles, whether the Ministry is evaluating battery-swapping as an alternative to charging.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Yes, the Ministry is exploring battery swapping as a complement to charging. The efficacy of battery swapping, along with technological progress in electric vehicles (EVs) and the charging infrastructure, will influence the final design of the EV charging network.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentages of Public Sector Buildings Certified as BCA Green Mark Gold Plus and BCA Green Mark Gold","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development what percentages of public sector buildings, excluding schools, with air-conditioned floor areas of (i) at least 10,000 sqm and (ii) at least 5,000 sqm and less than 10,000 sqm, are respectively certified as BCA Green Mark Gold Plus and BCA Green Mark Gold.
Mr Lawrence Wong: As of December 2019, close to 70% of public sector buildings with air-conditioned floor area of 10,000 square metres or more, excluding schools, have attained the Green Mark Gold Plus certification. 60% of public sector buildings with gross floor area exceeding 5,000 square metres but with air-conditioned floor area below 10,000 square metres, excluding schools, have attained the Green Mark Gold certification.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Steps Taken to Encourage Schools and Centralised Institutes to Achieve at Least BCA Green Mark Gold Certification","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development what steps will the Ministry take to encourage more primary schools, secondary schools, mixed-level schools, junior colleges and centralised institutes to achieve at least the BCA Green Mark Gold certification.
Mr Lawrence Wong: MOE and BCA have been working together on many infrastructural improvements and upgrades over the years for more Government and Government-Aided schools to meet Green Mark Gold standards. Of 332 such schools, 115 have attained at least a Green Mark Gold certification to date. The aim is to have the remaining schools achieve this certification by early 2025.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Consideration to Create a Singapore Carbon Agreement","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources whether the Ministry will consider creating a Singapore Carbon Agreement to facilitate the exchange of best practices for emission reductions across the 23 major sectors of Singapore's economy following the model of tripartite collaborations like the Singapore Packaging Agreement.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Singapore's Climate Action Plan outlines our climate mitigation strategies across key sectors – namely, the power, industry, transport, buildings, households, and waste and water sectors. Improving energy efficiency is a key strategy that not only contributes to emission reductions, but also enhances companies' long-term business competitiveness.
The Energy Efficiency National Partnership (EENP) launched by the National Environment Agency (NEA) in 2010, aims to support companies in their energy efficiency efforts. The EENP is a voluntary, industry-focused programme, in partnership with the NEA, the Economic Development Board and the Energy Market Authority. As of January 2020, 302 companies have joined the programme. As part of the EENP's learning network, NEA organises the biennial National Energy Efficiency Conference. Companies, organisations and individuals are also recognised for their achievements in energy management through the annual EENP Awards. These platforms allow companies to share best practices and promote the adoption of energy efficient technologies.
The Government also works closely with industry-led work groups such as the Singapore Chemical Industry Council Industry Sustainability Committee, the Biopharmaceutical Manufacturers Advisory Committee and the Food Manufacturing Energy Efficiency Committee to support companies in energy efficiency improvement.
The manufacturing sector in particular is heterogeneous, with varied manufacturing processes and bespoke equipment and systems. In addition to setting energy efficiency standards for common industrial systems and equipment, NEA analyses the energy performance of systems and equipment of more than 180 energy-intensive companies regulated under the Energy Conservation Act and shares the findings with individual companies, as benchmarked against others in their respective manufacturing sub-sectors.
Climate action requires collective action from all stakeholders. We have been working with our 3P (People, Private and Public) partners to co-create and co-deliver solutions for our environmental challenges. My Ministry will continue to work closely with all stakeholders to build a more sustainable and climate-resilient future.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts Made to Investigate Open Cases against Four Companies under Transboundary Haze Pollution Act Initiated in 2015","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) whether, and to what extent, efforts are still being made to investigate the open cases against four companies under the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act initiated in 2015; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider giving whistleblowers some financial incentives to provide information leading to successful investigation and prosecution.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Singapore enacted the Transboundary Haze Pollution Act (THPA) in 2014 to send a strong signal that we will not tolerate the irresponsible actions of errant companies, whether Singapore-based or otherwise, that harm our environment. In 2015, NEA issued legal notices under the THPA to six companies to take immediate measures to stop the fires that caused haze that affected Singapore. Two of the companies responded and explained that they were no longer associated with the affected lands. Upon further investigation, NEA accepted their explanation and closed these two cases. The cases against the other four companies are still open. If the directors of the relevant companies enter Singapore, they will be required to assist in our investigations. Action will also be taken against one of the directors who has an outstanding court warrant against him.
The THPA is not a panacea or the only tool to fight transboundary haze. Although none of the investigated companies has been prosecuted yet, the THPA has nevertheless put added pressure on companies to behave responsibly. We have no plans to offer financial incentives to whistle blowers at this moment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Foreign Domestic Workers Repatriated Back to Their Home Countries before Finishing a Two-Year Contract","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Manpower in each year of the last three years (a) how many foreign domestic workers have been repatriated back to their home countries before finishing a two-year contract; (b) what are the top three reasons for their repatriation; and (c) how many of those repatriated are hired by an employer in Singapore within six months of their repatriation.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Over the past three years, about 20% of foreign domestic workers (FDWs), or 49,000 FDWs, in Singapore return home without completing their contract each year. Of these FDWs, about 20% return to Singapore to work as an FDW within six months.
The common reasons for FDWs to return to their home countries before the end of contract include: (i) family exigencies back home; (ii) employer found the FDW not suitable for the household; and (iii) FDW did not wish to continue working in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Arrangements to Ensure Workers Subjected to Stay-Home Notices are Effectively Segregated in Dormitories","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many of the 30,000 or so Chinese workers returning to work in Singapore are in dormitory accommodation; and (b) what arrangements are in place to ensure that workers who are subject to Stay-Home Notices are effectively segregated from other workers who are not subject to the Notice, be it in their assigned rooms or in the use of common facilities in the dormitories such as bathrooms, canteens, shops, or recreational or open areas.
Mrs Josephine Teo: A big majority of the Chinese work pass holders who travelled to China over the new year period have yet to return to Singapore. This is because of MOM's strict requirement for their employers to seek prior approval, to ensure an orderly flow and enable effective enforcement of the Stay-Home Notices (SHN) upon arrival. An average of 220 applications have been approved daily. Upon their return, all the workers are expected to serve the SHN. Those found to have wilfully flouted the SHN have had their work passes revoked and permanently banned from working in Singapore. Employers who were non-compliant have also had their work pass privileges suspended.
Among those who have not returned, an estimated 25% stay in HDB units while 75% stay in other accommodation including dormitories and private residences.
In line with the advice from the public health professionals, persons who are on SHN need not be segregated. Nevertheless, MOM informed dormitory operators to take additional precautionary measures to minimise contact between persons on SHN and their other residents. Residents on SHN would thus reside in a section of the dormitory that is separate from the other residents. Food and daily necessities are provided so that there is no need for them to leave their room, except to seek medical attention.
Apart from specific measures for residents on SHN, MOM has also advised dormitory operators to cease mass activities, stagger the use of common facilities, and manage residents who have mild flu-like symptoms by isolating them and seeking medical attention immediately.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Children Aged Below Seven with Developmental Needs to Secure Preschool Placements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development since the shift of early intervention services from MSF Disability Office to Early Childhood Development Agency (a) how many children aged below 7 with developmental needs have been (i) declined for enrolments or (ii) expelled by preschools; and (b) how is the Early Childhood Development Agency supporting families with children with developmental needs secure preschool placements.
Mr Desmond Lee: Today, many young children with developmental needs are enrolled in a preschool. Three-quarters of children aged five to six who are enrolled in the Early Intervention Programme for Infants & Children (EIPIC) are also enrolled in preschools.
There is a range of support available within preschools for children with developmental needs. For example, about 550 preschools offer the Learning Support and Development Support programmes, which cater to children with learning and mild developmental needs respectively.
However, some preschools may find it challenging to cater to a child with moderate to severe developmental needs. The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) receives feedback on a few such cases per year. Where needed, ECDA works with parents and stakeholders such as SG Enable, EIPIC centres and preschools to find a solution that meets the needs of the child. This includes engaging the parents and the preschools to better understand the child's needs, and arranging for the preschools to work with EIPIC centres to adopt appropriate strategies to support the child. ECDA may also refer the child to suitable preschools which are better placed to support the child’s development.
The Government is continuing to enhance support for children with developmental needs in preschools. For example, we introduced the Development Support-Plus (DS-Plus) programme last year to cater to children who have made sufficient progress under EIPIC and are able to transit to receiving intervention in a preschool setting with added support. Under DS-Plus, early intervention professionals from EIPIC centres work with the child in his or her preschool up to twice a week, co-teaching the child alongside the preschool teacher. We have also set up the Inclusive Preschool Workgroup, which will develop recommendations on how to better support children with moderate to severe developmental needs in preschools.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":3832,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Chee Hong Tat","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200304/vernacular-Chee Hong Tat MOE 4March 2020-Chinese (moe).doc.pdf","fileName":"Chee Hong Tat MOE 4March 2020-Chinese (moe).doc.pdf"},{"vernacularID":3833,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200304/vernacular-4 Mar 2020 - SPS Faishal Ibrahim - Reply to MOE cuts (Approved by MOE).pdf","fileName":"4 Mar 2020 - SPS Faishal Ibrahim - Reply to MOE cuts (Approved by MOE).pdf"},{"vernacularID":3834,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Low Yen Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200304/vernacular-Low Yen Ling MOE 4March2020-Chinese (moe).pdf","fileName":"Low Yen Ling MOE 4March2020-Chinese (moe).pdf"},{"vernacularID":3835,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200304/vernacular-Amy Khor MEWR 4March2020-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Amy Khor MEWR 4March2020-Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}